Re: PfSense + ubiquity

Top Page
Message as email
+ (text/plain)
+ (text/html)
+ (text/plain)
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss
To: Main PLUG discussion list
CC: Michael Butash
Subject: Re: PfSense + ubiquity
Kind of a funny read, made me think of this Cox discussion. As usual, even
when you pay for unlimited, it's not really, and if you piss off a random
top-talker metric, you get smacked. Actually get what you pay for? Nah.

I don't buy the FUD about the "downgrade the whole neighborhood", unless
the neighborhood is just overused/saturated as it is, in which case Cox
needs to fix it with a node split per normal direction. They won't
police/shape a whole neighborhood like that, rather they'd just
decommission or lower the bandwidth on the offenders modem usually, ala
this guy.

May be a bit different if an actual Cox fiber/pon site, , but these seem
still rare like hens teeth, and only was deployed as buzz during Google
Fiber threatening them. Cox doing fiber to the home I think died with
Google Fiber.


On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 9:32 AM Michael Butash <> wrote:

> I'll agree with the CL being saturated comment - pretty sure it doesn't
> matter whether DSL or Fiber, their peering and aggregation is the same per
> region, and really it's where they converge that is the problem, which is
> where said saturation occurs. CL just *feels* saturated in use, where I
> didn't get that with Cox. Everything loads a little slower, you can just
> sort of tell after using long enough. Cox would periodically too, but they
> tended to already be working on a fix by the time I'd hit up someone I knew
> there to complain. CL I have no such faith in.
> I'm paying almost half my Cox bill with CL however, and no random overage
> charges, so I'm willing to live with it honestly, and it's never been *that
> bad*. If I download something, it downloads quickly, be it http or
> torrents. Just random viewing of pages in quick succession, ala scanning
> news just always seems a bit slow to start. That usually feels like
> buffers are blown out somewhere inline.
> -mb
> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 8:34 PM Thomas Scott via PLUG-discuss <
> > wrote:
>> They are welcome to, but node splits are a 6 month minimum last I checked
>> 😁 - granted we're getting faster with how many we're doing. In the next 5
>> years, most cable operators will implement some sort of aggressive node
>> splitting to keep up with demand. Current employer not excluded.
>> I've had CLink on fiber - they're upstream nodes are a little more
>> saturated, but they do peer locally in the valley. Current employer does
>> have peering with FAANG and a couple other heavy hitters in the valley (not
>> any proprietary information here, any trace route from the valley to those
>> sites will show it terminating in 2 or 3 hops), but if I recall correctly
>> 70% of CLink traffic hits their DCs in Phoenix. Granted it's all best
>> effort past that, but if you don't have a heavily saturated node, you'll do
>> all right. GPON fiber is GPON fiber, regardless of Service Provider. It's
>> just a question of how many other subscribers are on your PON port and how
>> big the upstream links are.
>> - Thomas Scott | <>
>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:04 PM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss <
>> > wrote:
>>> This last bit is interesting. I have Cox Fiber (no data cap for
>>> Gigablast fiber yet) and Century Link just announced a competing service in
>>> my area. For about half the cost. For the same Gigabit Fiber (or 940mbps as
>>> they are calling it).
>>> Anyone with any experience with them on residential fiber?
>>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 5:59 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
>>> > wrote:
>>>> So Cox subs can reach out to you when we're having saturation issues?
>>>> :)
>>>> Having been around for the beginnings of cable modem tech at @home
>>>> networks in the 90's dealing with almost every big MSO (Cox, Comcast, ATT,
>>>> Intermedia, etc), I like to talk about the tech as a bit proud where it's
>>>> gone. I liked Cox as one of the last decent hold-outs for things like
>>>> keeping Usenet around longer than they should, not killing customers for
>>>> mpaa/riaa abuse complaints, and keeping data caps off when the industry was
>>>> moving in that direction, so I think they're better than the rest, but
>>>> eventually they hopped on the money train with data caps too. And now
>>>> they're paying for their pro-pirate stance as well with lawsuits
>>>> against them winning
>>>> <>,
>>>> probably using that extra cap revenue to pay the trolls.
>>>> Would I go back? Not as long as they have data caps, and someone else
>>>> around me doesn't, but yes - much better network. I don't like random
>>>> overages in my bill, I get that enough with power. If I thought the covid
>>>> restrictions to remove caps would hold, I'd probably switch back now, but
>>>> I'm sure they'll find a reason to reimplement them asap as that's lost
>>>> revenue on your rsu's.
>>>> It's always good to hear from other docsis speakers, welcome back!
>>>> -mb
>>>> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 6:54 PM Thomas Scott <>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Day job is for a certain ISP HQ in Atlanta that supplies internet for
>>>>> a lot of the valley - I work in Network Operations first in Phoenix and now
>>>>> in Atlanta, and was surprised to see so much of what I talk about everyday
>>>>> in PLUG!
>>>>> CLink trying to play FTTN as FTTH, nothing new there. I live in a
>>>>> neighborhood outside of Atlanta that had some AT&T brownfield development
>>>>> for FTTH, and I've had no regrets (300 up 300 down!) Cox is moving towards
>>>>> "10G" with DOCSIS 4.0 and they are getting fiber closer to the home with
>>>>> their node splits. If you find that you all off a sudden have an extra hop
>>>>> in your path, that might be the seen you've been on one of those nodes that
>>>>> have been lit and split. The amount of bandwidth going up and down will go
>>>>> up dramatically.
>>>>> @Michael - yeah I don't think the caps are going anywhere, the
>>>>> industry as a whole (driven by big red) has moved that direction, but I
>>>>> think you'll see speeds and caps rise as N+0 goes to full duplex DOCSIS. I
>>>>> do know they've been relaxed with the COVID-19 FCC initiatives, but how
>>>>> long that lasts, I'm not sure.
>>>>> @Mac - the cox supplied modems are almost all going to "Panoramic
>>>>> Wi-Fi" and the number of holes found in DOCSIS devices is... disturbing to
>>>>> say the least. It was designed to be operated on a shared RF medium, and
>>>>> like other "trusting" protocols (i.e. BGP) has a lot of issues. The more
>>>>> virtualized it becomes, I think we'll see more of those go away - the
>>>>> smaller the broadcast domains, and the smaller the first upstream router,
>>>>> the better those will be able to be maintained and automated. Looking at
>>>>> the road maps, it will be interesting what comes next.
>>>>> - Thomas Scott |
>>>>> <>
>>>>> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 3:54 PM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> Oddly enough, the model number of your router stuck in my head, the
>>>>>> C3000Z, and I realized I used the same thing, but for my 150mbps dsl
>>>>>> modem. You sure you have actual gig fiber? They tend to misrepresent
>>>>>> their actual products in sales. Ask me how I know.
>>>>>> <tldr>
>>>>>> I say this because I called CL before going to them, and asked if I
>>>>>> could get fiber in the network. They said yes. Hmm, I knew damn well they
>>>>>> did not, as no one wants to build fiber into old peoria neighborhoods such
>>>>>> as mine. After some conversation and calling him out, he explained that
>>>>>> "oh, it's a gigabit network", just not fiber to your house. I could get
>>>>>> dual-band DSL, which means 75mbps x2, for a total of 150mbps, delivered by
>>>>>> a gigabit network! I sort of facepalmed, but ordered it anyways as it was
>>>>>> significantly more than I had with cox (80mbps at the time I think),
>>>>>> significantly cheaper, and no bandwidth cap.
>>>>>> If there is anything other than fiber directly in your modem, I'd
>>>>>> call bullocks, but FTTH is a myth to me.
>>>>>> Crappier service, but I'll take the (usually) cheap and fast. It is
>>>>>> most certainly not gigabit fiber to my house, even though that's what they
>>>>>> tried to sell me I was getting. Only new house/community builds get fiber,
>>>>>> and if even that. Cox did the same to compete with Google fiber, and as
>>>>>> soon as Google Fiber died, so did Cox ever mentioning fiber again. Truth
>>>>>> is Cox doesn't need it, shielded coax can deliver soon 10g over it just
>>>>>> fine with new modulation schemas and docsis improvements. Centurylink's
>>>>>> 100 year old 2-8 wire infrastructure cannot, all they can do is build new
>>>>>> with fiber, but they probably won't being decrepit.
>>>>>> I hear friends of mine mention they have fiber, and wonder just if
>>>>>> they really do. This is why Google Fiber folded, it was unrealistic unless
>>>>>> a net-new community build. Google fiber retrofits were a disaster
>>>>>> <>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> Fun-fact: Oddly enough the guy that built Google Fiber, Milo Medin,
>>>>>> is the same guy that started @Home Networks back in late 90's for Cable
>>>>>> Modem services, and pioneered current industry standards in use today
>>>>>> globally to deliver cable internet. The last-mile regional MSO providers
>>>>>> snuffed him/company back then, took it over themselves, and then they
>>>>>> snuffed him out again as he tried the same incursion with Google Fiber, and
>>>>>> realized it just cost too damn much to compete. Cable Monopolies, flawless
>>>>>> victory.
>>>>>> Next I expect he'll team up with Elon or Bezos to try again via
>>>>>> terrestrial.
>>>>>> -mb
>>>>>> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 10:32 AM Michael Butash <>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I tend to find the CL network a bit wonky, having moved to DSL from
>>>>>>> Cox (damn bandwidth caps). I find the general performance is worse than
>>>>>>> cox, where I suspect they simply don't manage the bandwidth and are far too
>>>>>>> oversubscribed as it feels like the internet buffers at times, literally.
>>>>>>> Cox would occasionally get that way too, and it was easy to see in an
>>>>>>> ongoing MTR when their peering in LA would get slammed and latency would
>>>>>>> jump (not to mention I know the guys that manage that bandwidth, telling
>>>>>>> them often got it fixed). Oddly Using MTR with CL, they filter icmp/udp
>>>>>>> specifically that seems to hide responses to track well. Go figure, truth
>>>>>>> hurts, so hide it.
>>>>>>> Having worked for service providers numerous times over the years,
>>>>>>> working in and building them, routers are always an issue in a metro city
>>>>>>> or even interstate networks. No two platforms are ever the same, whether
>>>>>>> buying all Cisco, Juniper, Nokia, or any combo of all and more, which as
>>>>>>> you said, many do. Hardest part is usually capacity planning, particularly
>>>>>>> with something like covid, every isp took a kick in the groin at the same
>>>>>>> time to augment their networks, suddenly by some magnitude, when everyone
>>>>>>> else in the world is doing the same. Slowness in networking can often be
>>>>>>> attributed to those not having enough capacity, though they'll never admit
>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>> I'm on the 150mbps dsl, and a speed test can provide that for sure,
>>>>>>> but general usage, which I use a lot of tabs and apps, tends to bring
>>>>>>> things to a crawl often. I'd even go back to cox if they got rid of the
>>>>>>> bandwidth cap. CL might as well be government, and they're run by unions,
>>>>>>> so nothing happens fast, including capacity augments.
>>>>>>> Re: mac limits, having been around Cox both as a customer and
>>>>>>> network engineer working there early 2000's, the mac security was more
>>>>>>> about limiting the amount of hosts behind a modem that could be allowed to
>>>>>>> a single mac and IP address. Back Circa 1998 I had my first Cox modem,
>>>>>>> and there were no routers, you just got yourself a phat 10baset switch from
>>>>>>> computer city and connected up your family on public ip addresses, each
>>>>>>> with their own mac and ip's. With no limits or filters that led to
>>>>>>> security issues (hey, I see my neighbor's c drive shared!), Cox and others
>>>>>>> then pushed people to then buy a router, which by then around 2002, you
>>>>>>> could buy a cheap wrt54g linksys. The advent of docsis also allowed to
>>>>>>> both filter and restrict the macs by default, also let them reduce to now
>>>>>>> 1:1 IP to User ratio, which was good for ip management, the abuse
>>>>>>> departments, and fbi warrants from legal. You used to be able to buy
>>>>>>> another ip, they'd push a new docsis config with mac-alowed=2, but not
>>>>>>> anymore.
>>>>>>> Same reasons they're just building in the router functions now, it
>>>>>>> ensures they can offer some basic customer security, plus lets them run
>>>>>>> whatever spyware in their embedded router os they want. Better off buying
>>>>>>> your own standalone modem and router combo, one you ideally trust.
>>>>>>> -mb
>>>>>>> On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:07 PM Donald Mac McCarthy via PLUG-discuss
>>>>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Putting a CL modem into a bridge mode where it only handles the
>>>>>>>> PPPoE connection is simply checking a radial select button and hitting
>>>>>>>> apply. If your firewall supports PPoE, even better, as you no longer need
>>>>>>>> their Modem and router in the mix. But, that is just my experience, and it
>>>>>>>> is limited. I have a CL fiber to the door drop, and they gave me a Zyxel
>>>>>>>> C3000Z device for connection. I promptly ripped it out and allowed pfSense
>>>>>>>> to maintain the PPPoE connection. I had to call support for packet loss one
>>>>>>>> time, and they refused to help me. So goes it rolling your own I guess.
>>>>>>>> Turns out a day later we had a several hour outage due to one of the
>>>>>>>> multiplexing cards used to distribute the 40Gb/s core fiber to the GPON
>>>>>>>> devices failed. Seems like that was a likely culprit for some of the packet
>>>>>>>> loss the previous day.
>>>>>>>> Having just gotten off a call in which the Senior Director of
>>>>>>>> Security Architecture and Engineering (a friend of mine from Atlanta) for
>>>>>>>> Cox was a participant, before he hung up I asked him about the typical Cox
>>>>>>>> supplied modems. Very, very few of them are purely bridge devices -
>>>>>>>> especially with the push to "Panoramic WiFi". A member of CentryLink who
>>>>>>>> was also on the call (ISP InfoSec sharing/working group) mentioned how
>>>>>>>> painful it was to support the number of company issued
>>>>>>>> modems/gateway/router models there are for different infrastructure and
>>>>>>>> connections - let alone ones that customers buy and bring to the party.
>>>>>>>> BTW, the MAC address thing is because they do actually use a MAC locking
>>>>>>>> like feature for security. Apparently it is bad for the network if you just
>>>>>>>> go plug your modem in at several houses in the neighborhood due to the way
>>>>>>>> DOCSIS works. I still have to dig into that and ask some more questions on
>>>>>>>> that one.
>>>>>>>> There was a collective groan among the engineers when another ISP
>>>>>>>> spoke up about the number of critical flaws they find in their DOCIS
>>>>>>>> devices each year.
>>>>>>>> With the amount of consolidation which has happened in the past 20
>>>>>>>> years in the broadband market, the landscape is riddled with legacy bits
>>>>>>>> and pieces of this provider and that provider somehow being coerced into
>>>>>>>> working together to accomplish passing traffic. One of the ISPs mentioned
>>>>>>>> they had no less than 350 different models of core switching equipment made
>>>>>>>> by more than a dozen manufacturers in their network. They have a team of 40
>>>>>>>> (really 5 teams of 8) that simply monitor and ensure that the OSPF
>>>>>>>> functions properly among the various models and brands to make sure that
>>>>>>>> the network properly heals/manages congestion.
>>>>>>>> Anyway, just throwing it out so that people can see and understand
>>>>>>>> the picture at a higher level. The final comment on the call was from an
>>>>>>>> engineer at a midwestern rural provider and one that I am sure many of us
>>>>>>>> can relate to. She said she spends all day pulling her hair out trying to
>>>>>>>> keep the network functioning at the highest of levels. The first words out
>>>>>>>> of her kids' mouths when she gets home are "Mom, the WiFi seems slow today."
>>>>>>>> I talked with Alexander this afternoon, and it looks like he has a
>>>>>>>> functioning network again. The APs were reluctant to give up their old
>>>>>>>> configuration, so a factory reset and new DHCP leases seem to have done the
>>>>>>>> trick.
>>>>>>>> Hopefully this sheds a bit of light on something for a few people.
>>>>>>>> Mac
>>>>>>>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/4/20 4:59 PM:
>>>>>>>> Ideally when you plug into a cable modem, it comes up, and passes
>>>>>>>> your ethernet to the cmts in a bridge, lets one mac address dhcp/arp, and
>>>>>>>> things work. It learns that one ip/mac, and disallows any other mac. No
>>>>>>>> security, nat, nothing, just real dumb dhcp + default routing with a public
>>>>>>>> ip. Routers/firewalls try to NAT you, thus double NAT if using a router
>>>>>>>> behind it.
>>>>>>>> CL sells you a dsl modem/router that does your local security
>>>>>>>> whether you want it or not, full router/nat/firewall, and probably
>>>>>>>> spyware. Making it a modem is possible, but takes work, and your firewall
>>>>>>>> has to support PPPoE (not all can/do). Last time I touched a combo Cox
>>>>>>>> router/modem, I didn't see any way to do so. I told them to buy a real
>>>>>>>> modem, and that worked with their belkin/cisco/linksys/netgear they had.
>>>>>>>> If your "modem" mentions wifi, it's a router/firewall, not a
>>>>>>>> modem. Not all are clear about this, as they dumb it down for consumers,
>>>>>>>> but an important point.
>>>>>>>> -mb
>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:53 PM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss <
>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I Owned a Nighthawk Router/Modem combo, The way that Netgear
>>>>>>>>> handled that is that the modem was hard-wired to a bridge on the router
>>>>>>>>> side. and technically you could see it as a separate device in the router
>>>>>>>>> configs if you rooted around enough. but the modem side was just a modem.
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:03 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss <
>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Cox modems *are* bridges first and foremost typically, unless you
>>>>>>>>>> get a bundled router/modem, which is only what CenturyLink sells. If you
>>>>>>>>>> got a "router/modem" combo, just buy a modem-only device for a dumb bridge
>>>>>>>>>> and simple ethernet for a public ip. I recommend staying with an arris
>>>>>>>>>> cable modem, originally motorola, they basically developed cable modem
>>>>>>>>>> docsis, and are always the best.
>>>>>>>>>> I moved from Cox to CL when Cox started adding a usage cap, and
>>>>>>>>>> that was new to me to get my Fortinet firewall online with CL and their DSL
>>>>>>>>>> doing PPPOE. I've seen the router/cable modem combo boxes later, but never
>>>>>>>>>> owned one as I always have my own router/firewall.
>>>>>>>>>> -mb
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 8:36 AM Donald Mac McCarthy <
>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Will Cox allow for a bridge/virtual bridge mode? Xfinity does,
>>>>>>>>>>> which allows you to put in a firewall, and use the modem only as a gateway,
>>>>>>>>>>> therefore preventing a double NAT situation. Never lived in a Cox area
>>>>>>>>>>> before, and currently ride CL fiber.
>>>>>>>>>>> Mac
>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/3/20 2:00 PM:
>>>>>>>>>>> Cox modems will learn and allow only 1 mac at a time (unless
>>>>>>>>>>> business is set to allow more, but not on residential). If switching out
>>>>>>>>>>> firewalls, I 99% of time reboot the modem first and foremost.
>>>>>>>>>>> -mb
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 12:08 PM Snyder, Alexander J via
>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss <> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I got it working.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I assigned the SFP+ port as my LAN and assigned it the
>>>>>>>>>>>> 10.x.x.x/16 network. Then I had to call COX and list the WAN Mac address
>>>>>>>>>>>> with them. Upon doing so I was able to reach external sites, and all
>>>>>>>>>>>> downstream devices started coming alive!
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for all the suggestions and help!
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexander
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my Galaxy S10+
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020, 03:14 Herminio Hernandez, Jr. via
>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss <> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you login to the FW via the LAN interface? Can you ping
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the FW LAN interface? Check the routing and NAT policy on the FW. All
>>>>>>>>>>>>> outbound traffic should NAT to the FW WAN interface and there should be a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> default ( route to the internet.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 7:27 PM Seabass via PLUG-discuss <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm with Mac, I think it is not the firewall, but if you have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ability to plug it into a display with a keyboard, you can use that for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> configuration and modify a different device at the same time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Makes it easier to troubleshoot by giving you the ability to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> configure your pfSense ports at the same time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Message: 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Sat, 2 May 2020 09:04:35 -0700
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Donald Mac McCarthy <>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: "Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: pfSense + Ubiquity
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Message-ID: <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can help - but I am unavailable to do so until tomorrow.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Make sure there are not any thing other than default VLANs on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interfaces to start with. Ubiquiti is famous for not havinght
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eSFP+
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ports active in the default configuration, and I believe the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> switch has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all the ports to shutdown on default config as well.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it is the switch not passing traffic through - no the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> firewall.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mac
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/2/20 8:53 AM:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Does anyone out there have experience with pfSence and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ubiquity switches?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I have zero with either but that didn't stop me from buying
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> both ....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > how hard could it be?! LOL.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I bought a Negate XG-1537-1U. I bought a Unifi Pro 24 PoE
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> switch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I can configure the FW immediately after
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > firstboot/restore-default-configs, but only if i set the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LAN interface
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > to be the cable that goes directly to my laptop. That's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great, but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > that does shit for the downstream switch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I have a 10GB SFP+ Port that I want to configure as the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> downstream
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > port to ubiquity, but any configuration other than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentioned above
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > fails .... and I'm now on my 12th "Reset To Factory
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Defaults" ... any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > help on this would be greatly appreciated!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Alexander
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Sent from my Galaxy S10+
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Open Source Context
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> URL: <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> End of PLUG-discuss Digest, Vol 179, Issue 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ********************************************
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy
>>>>>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations
>>>>>>>>>>> Open Source Context
>>>>>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445
>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you
>>>>>>>>> from rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button.
>>>>>>>>> Stephen
>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy
>>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations
>>>>>>>> Open Source Context
>>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>> --
>>> A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from
>>> rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button.
>>> Stephen
>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:

PLUG-discuss mailing list -
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: