X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 256E99DD66B;
	Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:21:50 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 00622-07; Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:21:47 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-
Received: from tetra.ehpg.net (tetra2.ehpg.net [65.19.161.8])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5876E9DD444;
	Wed, 30 Nov 2005 12:54:07 -0400 (AST)
Received: from adsl-67-127-175-219.dsl.irvnca.pacbell.net ([67.127.175.219]
	helo=[172.16.1.36]) by tetra.ehpg.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.54)
	id 1EhVDZ-0007kx-BM; Wed, 30 Nov 2005 08:54:06 -0800
In-Reply-To: 
 <E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4E7E542@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk>
References: 
 <E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4E7E542@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <00FC7393-19C6-4BE6-B29C-3C6FDB68F249@ehpg.net>
Cc: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>,
	"Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net>, <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "Gavin M. Roy" <gmr@ehpg.net>
Subject: Re: svr2/unionfs
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 08:53:34 -0800
To: "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 required=5 tests=[none]
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200511/205
X-Sequence-Number: 8919

Sure, or keep it... That netblock is about 80% unused.  Just let me  
know what you want to do with it, when all is said and done.  :)

Gavin

On Nov 30, 2005, at 8:50 AM, Dave Page wrote:

>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Gavin M. Roy [mailto:gmr@ehpg.net]
>> Sent: 29 November 2005 17:38
>> To: Dave Page
>> Cc: Marc G. Fournier; Magnus Hagander; pgsql-www@postgresql.org
>> Subject: Re: svr2/unionfs
>>
>> Of course.  I believe this is on the same subnet:
>>
>> 65.19.161.70/255.255.255.128/gw 65.191.61.1
>>
>
> Thanks Gavin - as you've probably seen on-list we're now looking to
> rebuild the VM. Once done, I'll give the old address back if that's  
> OK?
>
> Regards, Dave.