Cox and email revisited

On Sat, 2004-01-31 at 13:35, ec wrote:
> As far as service, Fastq ranks among the best. Yes,
> they do not have 24/7 onsite, but one of the techs
> lives very nearby and sorta is on call for real
> emergencies with the network 24/7 so to speak.
>
> I currently don't use them and that is a personal
> reason, nothing to do with performance. I found dialup
> to be VERY dependable from them when I had it. Connect
> first time way in excess of 99%.
---
You missed my point - it wasn't about FastQ

Consider the following Q & A's

Q - I am having trouble configuring sendmail to accept email for my
domain.
A - Don't use sendmail - use postfix

Q - I am having trouble with getting my monitor to give me 1024x768 on
Redhat 8
A - Don't use red hat, use SuSE

Q - I am having no luck configuring IPSEC
A - Don't use ipsec - use cipe, it's easier

Q - I'm having problems getting my Intel eePro100 working.
A - Don't use Intel NIC's - suggest you use 3Com or Linksys

Q - I'm having problems with mail getting rejected via my Cox
connection.
A - Don't use Cox, use FastQ

It's not that these are terrible suggestions, but they don't lend
themselves to solving the problems either.

Craig