From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GB1Hr-0005Dq-8Z for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:32:47 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k7A3TRBa004033; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:29:27 GMT Received: from mail.netspace.net.au (thunder.netspace.net.au [203.10.110.71]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k7A3N7En000487 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:23:08 GMT Received: from orpheus (unknown [150.101.6.82]) by mail.netspace.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id B46BD41FD1 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2006 13:23:05 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] IP Masquerading hardware, crossover versus hub From: Iain Buchanan To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 12:52:52 +0930 Message-Id: <1155180172.8191.0.camel@orpheus> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 5429fa74-8747-4301-a068-96a5b5f9780a X-Archives-Hash: 9dc811582766924deb9c73af039b5b9b On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 03:08 +0100, THUFIR HAWAT wrote: > I like that of the two replies, one was "hub" and one was "no hub" :) Go not to gentoo-user for council, for they will say both hub and no hub. ;) -- Iain Buchanan Indifference will certainly be the downfall of mankind, but who cares? -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list