Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Cluster\s+network\s+update\s+\-\s+was\:\s+Reverse\s+Beacon\s+Network\-\s+too\s+much\s+success\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Cluster\s+network\s+update\s+\-\s+was\:\s+Reverse\s+Beacon\s+Network\-\s+too\s+much\s+success\?\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] Cluster network update - was: Reverse Beacon Network- too much success? (score: 1): Author: "K1TTT" <K1TTT@ARRL.NET>; Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:59:44 +0000; A central server system has been discussed in the past, but has always been rejected as being a single point of failure, removing local control, relying on someone to provide the service for a long p; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-03/msg00080.html (13,886 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Cluster network update - was: Reverse Beacon Network- too much success? (score: 1): Author: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>; Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 11:19:52 -0600; While everything you say may be true, it has absolutely no impact on securing the system from anonymous abuse. As simple as it is for DNS to be controlled by root servers and replicated worldwide, a; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-03/msg00089.html (17,064 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]