Hi all
I use the CentOS4.4 with ISPConfigVersion: 2.2.24
Sometimes my server network card deactivated.
How to fix this problem.
My BIND 9.2.4 how to update.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ Batbaatar Tuya
Phone: 976 99076364 tbatbaatar@yahoo.com www.BIIRBEH.MN
T. Batbaatar wrote:
Hi all
I use the CentOS4.4 with *ISPConfig**Version:* 2.2.24
ISPConfig is not a CentOS 4 package as far as I know, so I dunno what significance this has in regards to the rest of your questions.
Sometimes my server network card deactivated.
How to fix this problem.
nowheres near enough information to answer this. this could be a hardware problem with the server, it could be a network problem with the local area network, it could be a configuration problem, its very hard to say based only on whats given here.
My BIND 9.2.4 how to update.
# yum update bind
will fetch the latest bind supported on CentOS 4. Actually, you probably should run...
# yum update
as there are quite a few other critical system updates since 4.4 was released.
Hi Again,
It's not your ISPConfig software that giving trouble it's your hardware drivers or your network card it self check them both.
Regards, Sadaruwan
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 1:37 PM, John R Pierce pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
T. Batbaatar wrote:
Hi all
I use the CentOS4.4 with *ISPConfig**Version:* 2.2.24
ISPConfig is not a CentOS 4 package as far as I know, so I dunno what significance this has in regards to the rest of your questions.
Sometimes my server network card deactivated.
How to fix this problem.
nowheres near enough information to answer this. this could be a hardware problem with the server, it could be a network problem with the local area network, it could be a configuration problem, its very hard to say based only on whats given here.
My BIND 9.2.4 how to update.
# yum update bind
will fetch the latest bind supported on CentOS 4. Actually, you probably should run...
# yum update
as there are quite a few other critical system updates since 4.4 was released.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Hi, I think you need to get the proper device drivers not the generic ones that comes with the CentOS. Try updating your drivers or sometimes when you install a vendor driver or any other driver after a kernel update or a full system update you've to reinstall the drivers, It can recompile tt self to mach the new kernel. So try updating or getting a new driver from the vendor.
Regards, Sadaruwan
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 12:54 PM, T. Batbaatar tbatbaatar@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi all
I use the CentOS4.4 with *ISPConfig**Version:* 2.2.24
Sometimes my server network card deactivated.
How to fix this problem.
My BIND 9.2.4 how to update.
Batbaatar Tuya
Phone: 976 99076364 tbatbaatar@yahoo.com www.BIIRBEH.MN
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 13:39 +0530, Sadaruwan Samaraweera wrote:
Hi, I think you need to get the proper device drivers not the generic ones that comes with the CentOS. Try updating your drivers or sometimes when you install a vendor driver or any other driver after a kernel update or a full system update you've to reinstall the drivers, It can recompile tt self to mach the new kernel. So try updating or getting a new driver from the vendor.
Without more information on the specific issue, the advice you just gave regarding using vendor drivers can be extraordinarily dangerous. I would recommend:
1. OP giving more info (like, for example, specifics on the problem, hw config, etc...) 2. Patching CentOS
before offering any solutions that can lead one down a painful path... as an example, many vendors defer to the network drivers offered in the kernel and have deprecated their own. Nvidia, for one, comes to mind...
-I
Hi,
Mr. Ian, Yes I know what I've said might be little dangerous but I got same kind of problem in my CentOS system and it was nothing to do with the ISPConfig or anything but it was my net drivers but after installing the proper once I didn't got that problem ever again. So that's why I gave him this solution. And the other thing if you know more or a better way just tall him don't try to correct others ok.
Regards, Sadaruwan
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Ian Forde ian@duckland.org wrote:
On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 13:39 +0530, Sadaruwan Samaraweera wrote:
Hi, I think you need to get the proper device drivers not the generic ones that comes with the CentOS. Try updating your drivers or sometimes when you install a vendor driver or any other driver after a kernel update or a full system update you've to reinstall the drivers, It can recompile tt self to mach the new kernel. So try updating or getting a new driver from the vendor.
Without more information on the specific issue, the advice you just gave regarding using vendor drivers can be extraordinarily dangerous. I would recommend:
- OP giving more info (like, for example, specifics on the problem, hw
config, etc...) 2. Patching CentOS
before offering any solutions that can lead one down a painful path... as an example, many vendors defer to the network drivers offered in the kernel and have deprecated their own. Nvidia, for one, comes to mind...
-I
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
ISPConfig or anything but it was my net drivers but after installing the proper once I didn't got that problem ever again. So that's why I gave him this solution. And the other thing if you know more or a better way just tall him don't try to correct others ok.
Because your solution was likely for a specific network card, which incidentally you didn't inform us as to what that was. Neither did the OP give any indication as to what his network card is, so your recommendation based on the information given, was wrong and dangerous.
The correct thing to do is not give the guy rubbish answers, but to ask him more questions so that we can make a reasonable assessment of what is actually happening before we can determine what is wrong.
Perhaps his card is not plugged in right. Perhaps he has a loose cable. Perhaps there's a port on his switch that's intermittently failing, perhaps there's a cron job to shut down the network card. Perhaps some firewall rules are being activated or disabled stopping a service from running. Perhaps SELinux is blocking something. Perhaps any number of other things.
Is the network card actually being deactivated, or is he just not able to talk to a service? We don't know. He hasn't given us enough info yet.
Hi,
Yes I know what your saying ok! I didn't ask him any descent question but I gave a solution based on my experience. So why hell r u guy's coming after me and as you said in the world of IT there are lot of perhaps OK buddy.
Regards, Sadaruwan
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Spiro Harvey, Knossos Networks Ltd < spiro@knossos.net.nz> wrote:
ISPConfig or anything but it was my net drivers but after installing the
proper once I didn't got that problem ever again. So that's why I gave him this solution. And the other thing if you know more or a better way just tall him don't try to correct others ok.
Because your solution was likely for a specific network card, which incidentally you didn't inform us as to what that was. Neither did the OP give any indication as to what his network card is, so your recommendation based on the information given, was wrong and dangerous.
The correct thing to do is not give the guy rubbish answers, but to ask him more questions so that we can make a reasonable assessment of what is actually happening before we can determine what is wrong.
Perhaps his card is not plugged in right. Perhaps he has a loose cable. Perhaps there's a port on his switch that's intermittently failing, perhaps there's a cron job to shut down the network card. Perhaps some firewall rules are being activated or disabled stopping a service from running. Perhaps SELinux is blocking something. Perhaps any number of other things.
Is the network card actually being deactivated, or is he just not able to talk to a service? We don't know. He hasn't given us enough info yet.
-- Spiro Harvey Knossos Networks Ltd 021-295-1923 www.knossos.net.nz
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Wed, 2008-08-27 at 12:00 +0530, Sadaruwan Samaraweera wrote:
Hi,
Yes I know what your saying ok! I didn't ask him any descent question but I gave a solution based on my experience. So why hell r u guy's coming after me and as you said in the world of IT there are lot of perhaps OK buddy.
Yeesh. Look - I'm not starting to start a flamewar here. I'm just saying that given the little information that was given, it would be prudent to have the OP give more before catch-all answers are given. I understand that your solution worked for you, but how would any of us know that they're experiencing the same problem as you did?
Oh - and incidentally, the proper "Red Hat" way to do this (trust me on this one - I used to work for Red Hat, have two RHCE certs, and have been a sysadmin for over 15 years) would be to get more info before changing out network drivers. Replacing stock parts of the OS is the *FASTEST* way to have RH support say "we don't support you". Now, knowing that this is CentOS, things don't quite work that way here. But the general case still applies. Stick with stock as much as you can until you can demonstrably prove that it's broken and put in a workaround until the "correct" solution is found. That's the easiest way to get help on this list. (And, I suspect, many others...) Just look at the recent discussions on CPAN (shudder) and how it can really crap up a system based upon RPMs...
-I
On Wed, 2008-08-27 at 12:00 +0530, Sadaruwan Samaraweera wrote:
Hi,
Yes I know what your saying ok! I didn't ask him any descent question but I gave a solution based on my experience. So why hell r u guy's coming after me
First, don't get offended. If you've been on any/many lists for awhile, you'll know that time is at a premium for many of the participants and they tend to give short answers. *And* when someone gives "definitive" answers based on (possibly incorrect) assumptions (like the problem is similar to yours, equipment similar to yours, net setup similar, ...) they are quick to jump in because those answers may lead to severe damage to the recipient. Sometimes immediate harm, sometimes longer-term difficulty.
Because of those risks, it is important to try to fully understand (to a *reasonable* extent, for the time expended) the nature of a problem, its operational environment, various constraints that may be in place, etc., before offering solutions that may be tried. That is why, if you follow the lists on *good* sites like CentOS, you will often see (I'll exaggerate now) "My network card doesn't work! Help" followed by various types of responses saying, essentially, something like "We need more information" and those responses may ask specific questions.
Solving many technical problems can be difficult even in a hands-on situation, it's inordinately more difficult to do remotely. As with *any* resolution process, the first step is to identify the *problem*, *not* the *symptoms*. Symptoms are clues pointing to the problem. Ergo, sufficient, but *not* excessive information is a necessity.
*Experienced* people know this and will quickly try to help *educate* those who don't seem to know this, whether is is the person with the problem or one responding to the OP.
That's why we are "coming after you". The problem is not "we are coming after you", the problem is that both the OP and you seem to have been extremely casual in the problem resolution process and that engenders a high degree of risk to the OP and none for you. Further it wastes the valuable time of those who might try to help, both in reading the original request for help (and then having to ask for even the most basic pertinent information) and in reading replies that may be offered that pose excessive risk to those who might use the offered solutions. So, "education" is in order so that *all* may benefit, including the OP, the folks who reply and even just those who have to wade through som many useless posts (and post of the type being discussed ar, at best, useless).
As long as no one is completely crude, rude and unattractive in their replies (not always the case), you should take no offense.
My suggestion is you thicken your skin, contribute as you can and desire to, with *due* *care*, and learn from others as we *all* learn from others on this list.
and as you said in the world of IT there are lot of perhaps OK buddy.
I don't know what you mean by this.
Regards, Sadaruwan
I won't even mention top posting or failure to snip text not needed. ;-)
<snip>
Hi, thx every much trying to get me on to the right track and I apologize for being such an ass. Sorry again yes I made a big mistake. I was under lot of pressure in my private life so I think that might have come over me. Regards Sadaruwan Samaraweera
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 10:19 PM, William L. Maltby < CentOS4Bill@triad.rr.com> wrote:
On Wed, 2008-08-27 at 12:00 +0530, Sadaruwan Samaraweera wrote:
Hi,
Yes I know what your saying ok! I didn't ask him any descent question but I gave a solution based on my experience. So why hell r u guy's coming after me
First, don't get offended. If you've been on any/many lists for awhile, you'll know that time is at a premium for many of the participants and they tend to give short answers. *And* when someone gives "definitive" answers based on (possibly incorrect) assumptions (like the problem is similar to yours, equipment similar to yours, net setup similar, ...) they are quick to jump in because those answers may lead to severe damage to the recipient. Sometimes immediate harm, sometimes longer-term difficulty.
Because of those risks, it is important to try to fully understand (to a *reasonable* extent, for the time expended) the nature of a problem, its operational environment, various constraints that may be in place, etc., before offering solutions that may be tried. That is why, if you follow the lists on *good* sites like CentOS, you will often see (I'll exaggerate now) "My network card doesn't work! Help" followed by various types of responses saying, essentially, something like "We need more information" and those responses may ask specific questions.
Solving many technical problems can be difficult even in a hands-on situation, it's inordinately more difficult to do remotely. As with *any* resolution process, the first step is to identify the *problem*, *not* the *symptoms*. Symptoms are clues pointing to the problem. Ergo, sufficient, but *not* excessive information is a necessity.
*Experienced* people know this and will quickly try to help *educate* those who don't seem to know this, whether is is the person with the problem or one responding to the OP.
That's why we are "coming after you". The problem is not "we are coming after you", the problem is that both the OP and you seem to have been extremely casual in the problem resolution process and that engenders a high degree of risk to the OP and none for you. Further it wastes the valuable time of those who might try to help, both in reading the original request for help (and then having to ask for even the most basic pertinent information) and in reading replies that may be offered that pose excessive risk to those who might use the offered solutions. So, "education" is in order so that *all* may benefit, including the OP, the folks who reply and even just those who have to wade through som many useless posts (and post of the type being discussed ar, at best, useless).
As long as no one is completely crude, rude and unattractive in their replies (not always the case), you should take no offense.
My suggestion is you thicken your skin, contribute as you can and desire to, with *due* *care*, and learn from others as we *all* learn from others on this list.
and as you said in the world of IT there are lot of perhaps OK buddy.
I don't know what you mean by this.
Regards, Sadaruwan
I won't even mention top posting or failure to snip text not needed. ;-)
<snip>
-- Bill
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 1:58 AM, Sadaruwan Samaraweera slinuxworld@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, thx every much trying to get me on to the right track and I apologize for being such an ass. Sorry again yes I made a big mistake. I was under lot of pressure in my private life so I think that might have come over me.
Well, now that the pressure's off, or lightened, how about editing your posts, and also NOT top posting?
Thanks.
mhr
also NOT top posting? - Wht do u mean by this I don't get u.
On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 1:54 AM, MHR mhullrich@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 1:58 AM, Sadaruwan Samaraweera slinuxworld@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, thx every much trying to get me on to the right track and I apologize for being such an ass. Sorry again yes I made a big mistake. I was under lot
of
pressure in my private life so I think that might have come over me.
Well, now that the pressure's off, or lightened, how about editing your posts, and also NOT top posting?
Thanks.
mhr _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Aug 31, 2008, at 11:17 PM, Sadaruwan Samaraweera wrote:
also NOT top posting? - Wht do u mean by this I don't get u.
On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 1:54 AM, MHR mhullrich@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 1:58 AM, Sadaruwan Samaraweera slinuxworld@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, thx every much trying to get me on to the right track and I
apologize for
being such an ass. Sorry again yes I made a big mistake. I was
under lot of
pressure in my private life so I think that might have come over me.
Well, now that the pressure's off, or lightened, how about editing your posts, and also NOT top posting?
he means what you did just here, and in your other posts. :) you put your response above the quoted message you were replying to, rather than below it. please don't do this; it makes it difficult to follow the conversation, and thus it decreases the likelihood that you will get the responses you want.
also, when i just now did a google search for "top posting", the entire first page of hits were all links that explained what he was talking about.
-steve --- If this were played upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction. - Fabian, Twelfth Night, III,v
At 11:01 PM 8/31/2008, you wrote:
On Aug 31, 2008, at 11:17 PM, Sadaruwan Samaraweera wrote:
also NOT top posting? - Wht do u mean by this I don't get u.
On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 1:54 AM, MHR mhullrich@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 1:58 AM, Sadaruwan Samaraweera slinuxworld@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, thx every much trying to get me on to the right track and I
apologize for
being such an ass. Sorry again yes I made a big mistake. I was
under lot of
pressure in my private life so I think that might have come over me.
Well, now that the pressure's off, or lightened, how about editing your posts, and also NOT top posting?
he means what you did just here, and in your other posts. :) you put your response above the quoted message you were replying to, rather than below it. please don't do this; it makes it difficult to follow the conversation, and thus it decreases the likelihood that you will get the responses you want.
also, when i just now did a google search for "top posting", the entire first page of hits were all links that explained what he was talking about.
-steve
While I know that the practice won't, and shouldn't change for me, I would just like to say that for some of us, top posting is more useful. I am a blind computer user, and top posting is easier to handle. I can read the response, and continue reading if I need context, more information etc.
Unix/Linux people tend to be pretty black and white, and the world should be a certain way ... but remember, others of us may have a good reason for wanting a different world!
Dave
On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 9:53 AM, David Andrews dandrews@visi.com wrote:
At 11:01 PM 8/31/2008, you wrote:
On Aug 31, 2008, at 11:17 PM, Sadaruwan Samaraweera wrote:
also NOT top posting? - Wht do u mean by this I don't get u.
On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 1:54 AM, MHR mhullrich@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 1:58 AM, Sadaruwan Samaraweera slinuxworld@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, thx every much trying to get me on to the right track and I
apologize for
being such an ass. Sorry again yes I made a big mistake. I was
under lot of
pressure in my private life so I think that might have come over me.
Well, now that the pressure's off, or lightened, how about editing your posts, and also NOT top posting?
he means what you did just here, and in your other posts. :) you put your response above the quoted message you were replying to, rather than below it. please don't do this; it makes it difficult to follow the conversation, and thus it decreases the likelihood that you will get the responses you want.
also, when i just now did a google search for "top posting", the entire first page of hits were all links that explained what he was talking about.
-steve
While I know that the practice won't, and shouldn't change for me, I would just like to say that for some of us, top posting is more useful. I am a blind computer user, and top posting is easier to handle. I can read the response, and continue reading if I need context, more information etc.
Unix/Linux people tend to be pretty black and white, and the world should be a certain way ... but remember, others of us may have a good reason for wanting a different world!
Dave
Sorry, Guys I was not doing it intentionally I'm using Gmail so the thing is when ever I click on reply it goes to top so as a habit I do top posting. So sorry for any difficulties.
Regards Sadaruwan Samaraweera
Top posting is when you put your reply on top of the original message, the way I'm doing. Apparently some people prefer that for some reason which dates back to the days of newsgroups. Some people also don't understand that not all clients support bottom posting.
Interestingly enough, we use top posting 99% of the time at work, even though it takes extra effort to do so in thunderbird. We had a new employee that started with us, and used bottom posting on some of her replies, and most people thought that her replies were empty.
Food for thought, I guess.
Russ Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message----- From: "Sadaruwan Samaraweera" slinuxworld@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 08:47:21 To: CentOS mailing listcentos@centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] Help me
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 04:05:37 +0000 russ@vshift.com wrote:
Food for thought, I guess.
Not really.
Top posting is generally used in direct business or personal correspondence. I send you a message, you put your reply on top of that and send it back to me. The theory is that you and I already know what we're talking about.
In newsgroup and mailing list postings, on the other hand, the convention is to put your reply at the bottom or in-line with the original message (and the original message is ideally trimmed to the minimum required to keep the flow of the "conversation" going. The idea here is that posts are intended to be read and comprehended by people other than the ones who are directly involved in the exchange. Accordingly, it makes the most sense to create a message that can be read from the top to the bottom in chronological order.
Frank Cox wrote:
In newsgroup and mailing list postings, on the other hand, the convention is to put your reply at the bottom or in-line with the original message (and the original message is ideally trimmed to the minimum required to keep the flow of the "conversation" going.
I think *this* point cannot be stressed enough. I frankly do not care if you top post or bottom post - without editing anything out of the mail you reply to it's just the same mess. From this point of view bottom posting is even *worse*, as I have to wade through kilobytes of unedited stuff which I have read before, then read what you (nothing personal!) wrote, and then still have to figure out which part of the mail that you completely quoted you were answering to.
So people: TRIM YOUR MAILS!
Ralph
Ewwwwww! Loooooonnnnngggggg lines! :-)
On Mon, 2008-09-01 at 04:05 +0000, russ@vshift.com wrote:
Top posting is when you put your reply on top of the original message, the way I'm doing. Apparently some people prefer that for some reason which dates back to the days of newsgroups. Some people also don't understand that not all clients support bottom posting.
Interestingly enough, we use top posting 99% of the time at work, even though it takes extra effort to do so in thunderbird. We had a new employee that started with us, and used bottom posting on some of her replies, and most people thought that her replies were empty.
ISTR that T'bird has preferences for this. Not so? I use it and have NP interspersing my responses with the quoted text.
BTW, I don't think "bottom" posting is as good as interspersed text, but it is less labor-intensive (for the *poster*) to just do top or bottom.
<snip>
on 8-31-2008 9:05 PM russ@vshift.com spake the following:
Top posting is when you put your reply on top of the original message, the way I'm doing. Apparently some people prefer that for some reason which dates back to the days of newsgroups. Some people also don't understand that not all clients support bottom posting.
Interestingly enough, we use top posting 99% of the time at work, even though it takes extra effort to do so in thunderbird. We had a new employee that started with us, and used bottom posting on some of her replies, and most people thought that her replies were empty.
Food for thought, I guess.
I follow the principle of "when in Rome, do as the Roman's do". Just because this list and others ask for bottom posting, you don't need to change your entire message world. It isn't that hard to remember where you are and what they ask, especially if you get *chastised* a few times.
I say do as you want to do, but you will take the chance that the only response to your plea for help might be a public spanking. If that is OK for you, then take your chances. If you want to be sure you get help when you need it, then follow the rules of the list you are on.
We have freedom to do what we want, but others also have freedom to deal with it in whatever manner they see fit.
Freedom of speech also gives freedom to ignore it!
on 8-31-2008 9:05 PM russ@vshift.com spake the following:
Interestingly enough, we use top posting 99% of the time at work, even though it takes extra effort to do so in thunderbird. We had a new employee that started with us, and used bottom posting on some of her replies, and most people thought that her replies were empty. Food for thought, I guess.
In thunderbird, it's very easy to change.
Tools>Accounts>Composition>Automatically Start My Reply ABOVE/BELOW The Quote.
:)
Andy
Top is preferred, it's a standard just like it's a standard to put: " -- [signature here] "
I would recommend top posting.
On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 17:12:11 +0100 andylockran andy@zrmt.com wrote:
on 8-31-2008 9:05 PM russ@vshift.com spake the following:
Interestingly enough, we use top posting 99% of the time at work, even though it takes extra effort to do so in thunderbird. We had a new employee that started with us, and used bottom posting on some of her replies, and most people thought that her replies were empty. Food for thought, I guess.
In thunderbird, it's very easy to change.
Tools>Accounts>Composition>Automatically Start My Reply ABOVE/BELOW The Quote.
:)
Andy _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Sep 1, 2008, at 1:36 PM, Martyn Hare wrote:
I would recommend top posting.
that's great, but please don't do so here.
the CentOS website asks that you bottom post:
http://www.centos.org/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=16
and this issue was done to death just a few months ago:
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2008-May/056578.html
please don't start again.
-steve
--- If this were played upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction. - Fabian, Twelfth Night, III,v
on 9-1-2008 10:36 AM Martyn Hare spake the following:
Top is preferred, it's a standard just like it's a standard to put: " -- [signature here] "
And which "standard" is that? Is it in the RFC's?
I would "prefer" to *not* give a quarter of my income to the government, but then they would exercise their power to put me in jail. So I "choose" to do what is required, even though I would rather keep it!.
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 06:36:45PM +0100, Martyn Hare wrote:
Top is preferred, it's a standard just like it's a standard to put:
Its possible you have only been exposed to a very narrow slice of Internet life. Please see the IETF document RFC-1855 Section 3 " 3.0 One-to-Many Communication "
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html
I would recommend top posting.
So would I - BUT --> ONLY FOR emails between yourself an another person, NOT a technical email list.
The appropriate solution has already been settled on, and has been in place for 30 years, as seen in the RFC above.
Keep in mind that technical emails lists are different than one to one email dialogs and affect hundreds (and sometimes K's) of other people every time you send an email. Top posting to a technical email list is very very bad form.
Of course, so is failing to trim the email! :-)
Jeff Kinz
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 6:16 AM, Jeff Kinz jkinz@kinz.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 06:36:45PM +0100, Martyn Hare wrote:
Top is preferred, it's a standard just like it's a standard to put:
:
I would recommend top posting.
:
The appropriate solution has already been settled on, and has been in place for 30 years, as seen in the RFC above.
Keep in mind that technical emails lists are different than one to one email dialogs and affect hundreds (and sometimes K's) of other people every time you send an email. Top posting to a technical email list is very very bad form.
Of course, so is failing to trim the email! :-)
When someone joins an email list, especially one like this one, they agree to abide by the terms of the list. The three I see Martyn (specifically, and in this case - there are others - hoo boy are there!) failing in on this thread are:
1) Meaningful subject line (the OP did this - I can't remember who that was and there were 1310 hits on "help me," which, in and of itself, was not helpful...). 2) Bottom post. 3) Trim replies to the relevant parts.
One thing they do NOT do is come in and argue that the list conventions are wrong because the new person doesn't like them. In general, if you went to someone else's party, would you tell them how to run it?
I started off top posting (and in html) out of habit. When this was brought to my attention, it was not at all hard to change, and amazingly, the threads make more sense (and are more legible) this way (imagine that!!!).
When in Rome,...
mhr
andylockran wrote:
In thunderbird, it's very easy to change.
Tools>Accounts>Composition>Automatically Start My Reply ABOVE/BELOW The Quote.
While talking about Thunderbird, some of you might also want to look at : https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/thunderbird/addon/347
Karanbir Singh wrote:
andylockran wrote:
In thunderbird, it's very easy to change.
Tools>Accounts>Composition>Automatically Start My Reply ABOVE/BELOW The Quote.
While talking about Thunderbird, some of you might also want to look at : https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/thunderbird/addon/347
Thanks Karanbir.. good link.
andylockran
-
andylockran -
David Andrews -
Frank Cox -
Ian Forde -
Jeff Kinz -
John R Pierce -
Karanbir Singh -
Martyn Hare -
MHR -
Ralph Angenendt -
russ＠vshift.com -
Sadaruwan Samaraweera -
Scott Silva -
Spiro Harvey, Knossos Networks Ltd -
Steve Huff -
T. Batbaatar -
William L. Maltby