On 1 March 02 cox@home switched their services from infrastructure hosted
on hardware by Excite to "native" hardware. All @home.com addresses are
now invalid. Grepping through the source for these invalid addresses
produced the following:
drivers/net/de4x5.c [email protected]
drivers/scsi/megaraid.c [email protected]
drivers/scsi/ppa.h [email protected]
drivers/scsi/imm.h [email protected]
drivers/sound/aci.c [email protected]
drivers/media/video/bttv-cards.c [email protected]
Most addresses for home.com users simply switched to cox.net addresses.
However, email to the above users at cox.net bounced in four out of five
cases. I am posting here in hopes that theses users are still on the
mailing list and will respond. If no response is received I would like to
submit a patch adding comments to the source code indicating the addresses
are no longer valid and no new email addresses are known.
Note: The above addresses also exist in the 2.5 tree. I also intend to
submit a patch for the comments in the 2.5 tree. Following is a patch to
correct my email address in the 2.4 tree. This patch is against 2.4.18.
diff -urN linux.old/CREDITS linux.new/CREDITS
--- linux.old/CREDITS Sat Mar 2 21:33:52 2002
+++ linux.new/CREDITS Sat Mar 2 22:51:09 2002
@@ -2113,7 +2113,7 @@
S: Germany
N: Thomas Molina
-E: [email protected]
+E: [email protected]
D: bug fixes, documentation, minor hackery
N: David Mosberger-Tang
diff -urN linux.old/Documentation/sound/PAS16 linux.new/Documentation/sound/PAS16
--- linux.old/Documentation/sound/PAS16 Wed Apr 11 20:02:27 2001
+++ linux.new/Documentation/sound/PAS16 Sat Mar 2 22:52:11 2002
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
Pro Audio Spectrum 16 for 2.3.99 and later
=========================================
-by Thomas Molina ([email protected])
-last modified 3 Mar 2001
+by Thomas Molina ([email protected])
+last modified 2 Mar 2002
Acknowledgement to Axel Boldt ([email protected]) for stuff taken
from Configure.help, Riccardo Facchetti for stuff from README.OSS,
and others whose names I could not find.
On Sat, 2 Mar 2002, Thomas Molina wrote:
> On 1 March 02 cox@home switched their services from infrastructure hosted
> on hardware by Excite to "native" hardware. All @home.com addresses are
> now invalid. Grepping through the source for these invalid addresses
> produced the following:
>
> drivers/net/de4x5.c [email protected]
> drivers/scsi/megaraid.c [email protected]
> drivers/scsi/ppa.h [email protected]
> drivers/scsi/imm.h [email protected]
> drivers/sound/aci.c [email protected]
> drivers/media/video/bttv-cards.c [email protected]
>
> Most addresses for home.com users simply switched to cox.net addresses.
/s/cox.net/your_local_cable_provider.whatever.
> However, email to the above users at cox.net bounced in four out of five
> cases. I am posting here in hopes that theses users are still on the
> mailing list and will respond. If no response is received I would like to
> submit a patch adding comments to the source code indicating the addresses
> are no longer valid and no new email addresses are known.
Cox cable switched to cox.net. Comcast switched to comcast.net and so forth.
Unless you know that persons local cable provider there is no way to know
their new address without input from them or someone that knows them.
Excite was responsible for ALL of the @home addresses for the various
MSO's that had contracts with them.
HTH,
--
......Tom CLUELESSNESS: There Are No Stupid Questions, But
[email protected] There Are LOTS of Inquisitive Idiots. :-)
Thomas Molina wrote:
> Most addresses for home.com users simply switched to cox.net addresses.
Uh, no. I think (but am not sure) that more @home.com addresses became
@attbi.com than @cox.net. Even if I'm wrong about that, I'm almost certain
that more became @attbi.com + @rogers.ca + @shaw.ca + @charterpipeline.com
+ @comcast.net + ... than @cox.net. (It's possible that I made errors in
the past sentence, perhaps confusing .com and .net stuff or the like, but
even in the face of such errors I think my point still stands.)
> However, email to the above users at cox.net bounced in four out of five
> cases.
I wouldn't be surprised if four out of five weren't with Cox in the first
place.
-Barry K. Nathan <[email protected]>
On March 3, 2002 07:20 pm, Barry K. Nathan wrote:
> Thomas Molina wrote:
> > Most addresses for home.com users simply switched to cox.net addresses.
>
> Uh, no. I think (but am not sure) that more @home.com addresses became
> @attbi.com than @cox.net. Even if I'm wrong about that, I'm almost certain
> that more became @attbi.com + @rogers.ca + @shaw.ca + @charterpipeline.com
> + @comcast.net + ... than @cox.net. (It's possible that I made errors in
> the past sentence, perhaps confusing .com and .net stuff or the like, but
> even in the face of such errors I think my point still stands.)
FYI it's @rogers.com not @rogers.ca, if anyone cares.
>
> > However, email to the above users at cox.net bounced in four out of five
> > cases.
>
> I wouldn't be surprised if four out of five weren't with Cox in the first
> place.
>
> -Barry K. Nathan <[email protected]>
Mark
In the Seattle area, all of these addresses were moved to the attbi.com
domain.
In fact, I never heard anything about cox.com, didn't AT&T buy @home? I know
they have since sold it but my email address hasn't changed again.
--Buddy
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Thomas Molina
Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 9:18 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Invalid @home email addresses
On 1 March 02 cox@home switched their services from infrastructure hosted
on hardware by Excite to "native" hardware. All @home.com addresses are
now invalid. Grepping through the source for these invalid addresses
produced the following:
drivers/net/de4x5.c [email protected]
drivers/scsi/megaraid.c [email protected]
drivers/scsi/ppa.h [email protected]
drivers/scsi/imm.h [email protected]
drivers/sound/aci.c [email protected]
drivers/media/video/bttv-cards.c [email protected]
Most addresses for home.com users simply switched to cox.net addresses.
However, email to the above users at cox.net bounced in four out of five
cases. I am posting here in hopes that theses users are still on the
mailing list and will respond. If no response is received I would like to
submit a patch adding comments to the source code indicating the addresses
are no longer valid and no new email addresses are known.
Note: The above addresses also exist in the 2.5 tree. I also intend to
submit a patch for the comments in the 2.5 tree. Following is a patch to
correct my email address in the 2.4 tree. This patch is against 2.4.18.
diff -urN linux.old/CREDITS linux.new/CREDITS
--- linux.old/CREDITS Sat Mar 2 21:33:52 2002
+++ linux.new/CREDITS Sat Mar 2 22:51:09 2002
@@ -2113,7 +2113,7 @@
S: Germany
N: Thomas Molina
-E: [email protected]
+E: [email protected]
D: bug fixes, documentation, minor hackery
N: David Mosberger-Tang
diff -urN linux.old/Documentation/sound/PAS16
linux.new/Documentation/sound/PAS16
--- linux.old/Documentation/sound/PAS16 Wed Apr 11 20:02:27 2001
+++ linux.new/Documentation/sound/PAS16 Sat Mar 2 22:52:11 2002
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
Pro Audio Spectrum 16 for 2.3.99 and later
=========================================
-by Thomas Molina ([email protected])
-last modified 3 Mar 2001
+by Thomas Molina ([email protected])
+last modified 2 Mar 2002
Acknowledgement to Axel Boldt ([email protected]) for stuff taken
from Configure.help, Riccardo Facchetti for stuff from README.OSS,
and others whose names I could not find.
("[OT]" added to subject line, as I think this may be beginning to drift
off topic now.)
Buddy Lumpkin wrote:
> In fact, I never heard anything about cox.com
cox.net, you mean -- that's the domain name for e-mail accounts on Cox
High-Speed Internet (which replaced Cox@Home).
> didn't AT&T buy @home?
I don't remember the exact details; I think AT&T tried to buy it but the
@Home bondholders managed to kill the deal with their legal manuverings,
or something to that effect. So, AT&T never got to buy @Home.
> I know they have since sold it
No, it was liquidated at the beginning of the month -- AT&T never owned
it.
> but my email address hasn't changed again.
Because you're on AT&T's own network now, the same way that Thomas Molina
and I are on Cox's own network, etc.
-Barry K. Nathan <[email protected]>