nanog mailing list archives
Re: identity theft != spam
From: Bill Woodcock <woody () pch net>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 22:13:55 -0700 (PDT)
On Thu, 15 May 2003, Bill Woodcock wrote: > Well, the issues are perhaps a little more complex than you're portraying > them. J.I. and I spent the better part of two years working on the ^^^ Sorry, J.D., as in Falk. It's very early here. -Bill
Current thread:
- Re: identity theft != spam, (continued)
- Re: identity theft != spam John Payne (May 15)
- Re: identity theft != spam Daniel Golding (May 15)
- Re: identity theft != spam Chris Horry (May 15)
- Re: identity theft != spam Randy Bush (May 15)
- Re: identity theft != spam Chris Woodfield (May 15)
- Re: identity theft != spam Charles Sprickman (May 15)
- Re: identity theft != spam Vadim Antonov (May 15)
- Re: identity theft != spam Peter Galbavy (May 16)
- Re: identity theft != spam steve uurtamo (May 16)
- Re: identity theft != spam Charles Sprickman (May 15)
- Re: identity theft != spam John Payne (May 15)
- Re: identity theft != spam Bill Woodcock (May 15)
- Re: identity theft != spam Bill Woodcock (May 15)
- Re: identity theft != spam Steven M. Bellovin (May 15)