[ale] OT: reading email with the blackberry gmail app

[Brian Stanaland]

Would you look at that? My pearl 8100 won't scroll down past the last
IP address either. Weird!

On 11/10/08, Greg Freemyer <greg.freemyer at gmail.com> wrote:
> FYI: This is just a gripe, I don't expect a solution.
>
> I got a blackberry a week or two ago.  I don't like having it beep at
> me all the time, so I installed the mobile app google provides to read
> gmail via the blackberry.
>
> <gripe>
> I've really liked it, but Chris's email below exposed a bug.  I can't
> scroll down past all the IPs because the app switches from text
> scrolling mode to link jumping mode automatically based on some
> heuristic (think hitting the tab key on a normal browser) .  Once in
> link jumping mode I can't seem to get back to text scrolling.
>
> Oh, well I just have to live with not reading all of Chris's post via
> my blackberry.
>
> </gripe>
>
> Greg
>
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Chris Fowler
> <cfowler at outpostsentinel.com> wrote:
>> I'm in the process of moving to our vendor's new color facility.  They
>> are currently moving out of QTS  and we either must move with them
>> or go somewhere else.
>>
>> I've received this email from them
>>
>> *>From our Network Administrator:
>> We're doing a NAT'd VLAN for Outpostsentinal.com, so their systems will
>> need
>> to be set with the following IP range:
>> 10.1.1.2-17, with a gateway of 10.1.1.1.
>> Their public IPs are 65.254.217.210-225 in the same order (ie:
>> 65.254.217.210 goes to 10.1.1.2, 65.254.217.211 goes to 10.1.1.3, etc)*
>>
>>
>> Is this something that should concern me?  At QTS we have public
>> IPs on each of our servers.
>>
>> I'm running Asterisk on one of the machines as a PBX for all our remote
>> users and I know that Asterisk and NAT do not mix very well.  To solve
>> my NAT issues I've had to set most of the phones to register often to
>> fix the issue of "dumb NAT box".  The firewall forgetting about the phone
>> and its communication back to the PBX.
>>
>> Most of our other services should work fine being setup like this.  One
>> issue is that in public DNS our server will be pointed to 65.X.X.X.  If
>> one
>> of the boxes on 10.X.X.X tries to communicate with a box by name that
>> points to 65.X.X.X will that work?  I've know in the past using Linux
>> Masquerading that this did not work for me.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Chris
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Chris Fowler
>> OutPost Sentinel, LLC
>> Support @ SIP/support at pbx.opsdc.com
>>  or 678-804-8193
>> Email Support @ support at outpostsentinel.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ale mailing list
>> Ale at ale.org
>> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Greg Freemyer
> Litigation Triage Solutions Specialist
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/gregfreemyer
> First 99 Days Litigation White Paper -
> http://www.norcrossgroup.com/forms/whitepapers/99%20Days%20whitepaper.pdf
>
> The Norcross Group
> The Intersection of Evidence & Technology
> http://www.norcrossgroup.com
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device