Outages mailing list

I thought about cutting and pasting verbatim the
notification I got from
InterNAP, but then noticed the "The contents of this
email message are
confidential and proprietary" blurb at the end, and
thought better of it,
even though they weren't to blame...

Rick

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Scott Weeks wrote:

> 
> ----- Original Message Follows -----
> From: virendra rode // <virendra.rodegmail.com>
> 
> > Ideally (if I have better luck) I would like to
get
> > providers to direct outage notices to this list.
All that
> 
> 
> That's not going to happen.  Providers don't want that
stuff
> public.  Makes 'em look bad...
> 
> scott
> 

That's another debate entirely.  Last I checked, the mail I
get in my 
inbox I consider mine and thus, I will do as I please with
it. 
Including re-posting if I want. :>

Hmm.. I say forward it along!

Rick Kunkel wroteth on 9/29/2006 1:45 PM:
> I thought about cutting and pasting verbatim the
notification I got from
> InterNAP, but then noticed the "The contents of
this email message are
> confidential and proprietary" blurb at the end,
and thought better of it,
> even though they weren't to blame...
> 
> Rick
> 
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Scott Weeks wrote:
> 
>> ----- Original Message Follows -----
>> From: virendra rode // <virendra.rodegmail.com>
>>
>>> Ideally (if I have better luck) I would like to
get
>>> providers to direct outage notices to this
list. All that
>>
>> That's not going to happen.  Providers don't want
that stuff
>> public.  Makes 'em look bad...
>>
>> scott
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Rick Kunkel wrote:
> I thought about cutting and pasting verbatim the
notification I got from
> InterNAP, but then noticed the "The contents of
this email message are
> confidential and proprietary" blurb at the end,
and thought better of it,
> even though they weren't to blame...

Somebody actually reads those???





NOTICE:  This communication may contain confidential and/or
privileged
information.  If you are not the intended recipient, or
believe that you
have received this communication in error, you are obligated
to kill
yourself and anyone else who may have read it.  So there. 
My disclaimer
is scarier than yours.  Nyaah.  You started this silly
nonsense.  Knock
it off and I will too, ok?  It's worthless from a legal
standpoint, 
makes you look really clueless, and is a waste of CPU
cycles.  Nobody
reads it anyway.  You're not actually reading this, are you?
 I didn't
think so.

-- 
Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Administration - jaywest.net
NetLojix Communications, Inc.  -  http://www.netlojix.com/
WestNet:  Connecting you to the planet.  805 884-6323 -
WB6RDV

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 14:24:43 -0700, Jay Hennigan <jaywest.net> wrote:

> 
> Rick Kunkel wrote:
> > I thought about cutting and pasting verbatim the
notification I got from
> > InterNAP, but then noticed the "The contents
of this email message are
> > confidential and proprietary" blurb at the
end, and thought better of it,
> > even though they weren't to blame...
> 
> Somebody actually reads those???
> 
While in general I agree with your point, this case may be
different -- it
may be governed by the contract Rick has with InterNAP.

		--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbi
a.edu/~smb

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Jay Hennigan wrote:

> Rick Kunkel wrote:
> > I thought about cutting and pasting verbatim the
notification I got from
> > InterNAP, but then noticed the "The contents
of this email message are
> > confidential and proprietary" blurb at the
end, and thought better of it,
> > even though they weren't to blame...
> 
> Somebody actually reads those???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NOTICE:  This communication may contain confidential
and/or privileged
> information.  If you are not the intended recipient, or
believe that you
> have received this communication in error, you are
obligated to kill
> yourself and anyone else who may have read it.  So
there.  My disclaimer
> is scarier than yours.  Nyaah.  You started this silly
nonsense.  Knock
> it off and I will too, ok?  It's worthless from a legal
standpoint, 
> makes you look really clueless, and is a waste of CPU
cycles.  Nobody
> reads it anyway.  You're not actually reading this, are
you?  I didn't
> think so.
> 
> -- 
> Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Administration -
jaywest.net
> NetLojix Communications, Inc.  -  http://www.netlojix.com/
> WestNet:  Connecting you to the planet.  805 884-6323 -
WB6RDV
> 

I generally don't pay too much attention...  In this case, I
hadn't even
seen one.  But, for whatever reason, after the email was
composed, I
suddenly thought maybe I should check.  The last thing I
wanted to be
responsible was somehow violating a contract or something. 
Who knows, 
maybe it's in the blasted 9 billion page agreement that
management types 
sign when we get service from people.

In any case, InterNAP's was a far cry from the kind that you
parody 
below.  It really only was that one sentence....

"The contents of this email message are confidential
and proprietary."

Nevertheless, maybe I should post it anyhow.  It's not like
it shows them 
in a bad light.  On the contrary, they've been the most
in-touch and 
seemingly truthful amongst the providers we've had.

--Rick

On 9/29/06, Rick Kunkel <kunkelw-link.net> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Jay Hennigan wrote:
>
> > Rick Kunkel wrote:
> > > I thought about cutting and pasting verbatim
the notification I got from
> > > InterNAP, but then noticed the "The
contents of this email message are
> > > confidential and proprietary" blurb at
the end, and thought better of it,
> > > even though they weren't to blame...
> >
> > Somebody actually reads those???
> >
> >

> I generally don't pay too much attention...  In this
case, I hadn't even
> seen one.  But, for whatever reason, after the email
was composed, I
> suddenly thought maybe I should check.  The last thing
I wanted to be
> responsible was somehow violating a contract or
something.  Who knows,
> maybe it's in the blasted 9 billion page agreement that
management types
> sign when we get service from people.
>
> In any case, InterNAP's was a far cry from the kind
that you parody
> below.  It really only was that one sentence....
>
> "The contents of this email message are
confidential and proprietary."
>
> Nevertheless, maybe I should post it anyhow.  It's not
like it shows them
> in a bad light.  On the contrary, they've been the most
in-touch and
> seemingly truthful amongst the providers we've had.
>
> --Rick
>
>

It wouldn't be the first time INAP's e-mails have been
posted.  But
really it doesn't say anymore than what's already been said
on this
list thus far.  Fiber cut, some routing horkage on the West
Coast with
gblx and maybe some other providers, people working on it,
no ETR,
yadda, yadda, yadda.

--chip

-- 
Just my $.02, your mileage may vary,  batteries not
included, etc....

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, chip wrote:

> On 9/29/06, Rick Kunkel <kunkelw-link.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Jay Hennigan wrote:
> >
> > > Rick Kunkel wrote:
> > > > I thought about cutting and pasting
verbatim the notification I got from
> > > > InterNAP, but then noticed the "The
contents of this email message are
> > > > confidential and proprietary" blurb
at the end, and thought better of it,
> > > > even though they weren't to blame...
> > >
> > > Somebody actually reads those???
> > >
> > >
> 
> > I generally don't pay too much attention...  In
this case, I hadn't even
> > seen one.  But, for whatever reason, after the
email was composed, I
> > suddenly thought maybe I should check.  The last
thing I wanted to be
> > responsible was somehow violating a contract or
something.  Who knows,
> > maybe it's in the blasted 9 billion page agreement
that management types
> > sign when we get service from people.
> >
> > In any case, InterNAP's was a far cry from the
kind that you parody
> > below.  It really only was that one sentence....
> >
> > "The contents of this email message are
confidential and proprietary."
> >
> > Nevertheless, maybe I should post it anyhow.  It's
not like it shows them
> > in a bad light.  On the contrary, they've been the
most in-touch and
> > seemingly truthful amongst the providers we've
had.
> >
> > --Rick
> >
> >
> 
> It wouldn't be the first time INAP's e-mails have been
posted.  But
> really it doesn't say anymore than what's already been
said on this
> list thus far.  Fiber cut, some routing horkage on the
West Coast with
> gblx and maybe some other providers, people working on
it, no ETR,
> yadda, yadda, yadda.
> 
> --chip
> 
> -- 
> Just my $.02, your mileage may vary,  batteries not
included, etc....
> 

Actually, an InterNAP Support Engineer on this list just
said it was fine 
to quote the notification since it was a widescale issue. 
But, as Chip 
says, it's kind of old news at this point.  If people want
to see it 
though, I can post.  (Actually, there were two.)

Thanks,

Rick
sigless