Re: Blocking social networking facilities
- From: Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 10:22:14 +0100
f/fgeorge wrote:
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 21:08:33 +0100, Philip Herlihy
<thiswillbounceback@xxxxxxx> wrote:
f/fgeorge wrote:Many, many companies have LOADS of ip addresses to let more people onOn Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:52:16 +0100, Philip Herlihy[snip]
<thiswillbounceback@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Don't see anything there on the subnet, and when I use nslookup (command line) it suggests there are loads of possible IP addresses, although results vary, and the current two aren't the same as the one suggested by samspade.Where could I find definitive information on the subnet an organisation owns?Thsi website www.samspade.org will give you that, but here is the
bebo.com info:
http://samspade.org/whois/nq3bwssslwtexap6wueqxtx53y
Confused of London....
at the same time. Comcast, for instance, has hundreds of thousands!
Just so. What would be nice would be a way of figuring out the minimum set to block!
Phil
.
- References:
- Re: Blocking social networking facilities
- From: Meinolf Weber
- Re: Blocking social networking facilities
- From: Philip Herlihy
- Re: Blocking social networking facilities
- From: Phillip Windell
- Re: Blocking social networking facilities
- From: Philip Herlihy
- Re: Blocking social networking facilities
- From: Phillip Windell
- Re: Blocking social networking facilities
- From: Philip Herlihy
- Re: Blocking social networking facilities
- From: Philip Herlihy
- Re: Blocking social networking facilities
- Prev by Date: Re: Blocking social networking facilities
- Next by Date: Slow PCs
- Previous by thread: Re: Blocking social networking facilities
- Next by thread: Re: Blocking social networking facilities
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|