Anyone currently aware of a Qwest outage? My qwest sites are down, even
qwest.com
daniel
Yea. it came back up right after I sent that e mail. My sites are now up
again as well.
On Jan 19, 2008 11:15 PM, Jeff Shultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Daniel wrote:
> > Anyone currently aware of a Qwest outage? My qwest sites are down, even
> > qwest.com <http://q
qwest/perfRptIndex.jsp
> http://stat.qwest.net/index_flash.html
>
> Frank
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Jeff
> Shultz
> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 12:16 AM
> To: Daniel; nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: Re: qwest out
ngle carrier for global regional connectivity, and in
country/regional carriers for all local offices that funnel back to regional
aggregation points.
Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks, Daniel
You are most correct, it is definitely a double edged sword. Let's say
you try to reverse DNS on an address who's nameserver is down or
otherwise unreachable, what then? Some admins I know deliberately do run
reverse DNS as they view it as system cracker tool, or they feel it is
an unwarranted lo
Have someone any operative contact in Teleglobe for a Peering issues with
AS8297 in Spain. I try the noc@ peering@ and I dont't have any response.
PD: Sorry for the offtopic.
Regards,
Daniel
Intelideas
Spain
Well, considering that Ron works for AOL, I would think he's all over "wierd
applications" and "odd protocols" :)
- Daniel Golding
>
>
>
> On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Ron da Silva wrote:
>
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 03:04:00PM +, Christ
this (DARPA), a tip of the hat to a defense-oriented goal would have been
smart.
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Alan Hannan
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 12:14 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subje
They aren't the only ones
http://www.washtech.com/news/telecom/15783-1.html
Aleron, new owner of Telia USA aka AGIS, has also filed for Chapter 11.
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
> Behalf Of Alla
Hmm. There is alot of speculation that their network is largely subsidized
by their Yellow Pages franchise. Let your fingers do the walking, et al.
- Dan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Shawn Solomon
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 7:24 PM
Does anyone know off hand how to configure a cisco router to respond to SNMP v1/v2
requests on a udp port other than 161 (default)
Thanks - Dan
every day. While Qwest may not have the
greatest customer service, it's not like you were actually down or had a
qwest originated routing issue. If that were the case, my sympathy would be
greater.
- Daniel Golding
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
s usually a customer
misconfiguration or misunderstanding.
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: Gregory Urban [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 11:14 AM
> To: Daniel Golding; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Qwest Support
>
>
>
>
getting this pushed out (maybe the script died?)
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Andy Dills
> Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 2:28 PM
> To: Chris Woodfield
> Cc: Daniel Golding; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
&g
And here we go, down the rabbit hole... (see below)
> Steve Naslund Said...
>
>
>
> I would have to disagree on a lot of these points. See below.
>
> Steven Naslund
>
> > Daniel Golding Said...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I suppose. E
Even better...the anonymous trolls!
- Dan
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 12:30 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Best provider to use ?
>
>
>
But, are they a Tier I? And if so, are they the Best Tier I?
:)
- Dan
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
> Behalf Of Mark Kent
> Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 11:52 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Anyone eve
Hmm. Cogent does require some semi-strict traffic ratios to get the
really good deals. If it's not violating an NDA, is Qwest asking for
similar ones, these days?
- Dan
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
> Behalf Of Alex Rubenstein
> Sent: Satu
of ACLs, which can cause downtime. I suspect the best practice,
at this point, is autogeneration of ACLs using IRR database entries, and
tools like RTConfig or their homegrown equivalent.
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
, and many other people suffer
for it.
-----
Daniel Senie[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Amaranth Networks Inc.http://www.amaranth.com
UUNET support says that the outage relates to a train derailment in the
northeast that occured this morning. master ticket no. 562655.
dan
> Anyone else seeing routing instability through UUNET or have any more
> details? I saw a significant drop in my inbound and outbound traffic to
> them
I suppose the moral of the story is, if you get into a billing dispute with
an upstream, be cognizant of what's on the line, including issues like IP
space, circuit term liability, etc.
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
be such a good idea.
- Daniel Golding
> Ralph Doncaster angrily ruminated
>
> What it tells me is I should have wasted enough space to consume 8 /24s
> long ago, so I could get a /20 directly from ARIN. I assign IPs to
> customers very conservatively. Multiple DSL customers with stat
pefully this will be soon.
- Daniel Golding
> todd glassey Says...
>
>
>
> PAIX is a division of MFN (Metropolitan Fiber Networks) as Above.NET is as
> well. That means they share MFN's connectivity and peering
> agreements and as
> such are incredibly rich environments
ur network.
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
> Behalf Of Ralph Doncaster
> Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2002 10:29 AM
> To: Majdi S. Abbas
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: PAIX (was Re: Interconnects)
>
&
been the lowest common denominator "network engineer",
who has no basic knowledge of the principles that underlie the profession,
but instead rely upon rote memorization or quick fixes. That's not to say
that I haven't met a few very good engineers without degrees - I just think
t
amics, thermodynamics, fluids)
- And then some actual network engineering stuff like routing protocols,
wireless, microwave, optics, LAN technologies, etc
Finally, like most modern engineering programs, it would be heavily design
based, and include numerous design projects and a capstone project.
- Daniel Go
Gee. I've know some CCIE's who seemed a little sexually ambiguous, but I'm
not sure that a sweeping generalization is appropriate... :)
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Alexei Roudnev
> S
I am consistently seeing a host from within nuvox.net trying
to send spam through one of my mail servers. Anybody have a contact name, etc.
for them? The abuse auto-reply is obviously less than helpful.
-dan
Hi People,
Here from Intelideas (AS12359) we are ready for hosting ccTLDs in our
network. We are present in Espanix, Linx, Catnix and diverse upstreams.
Our contact data:
DNS: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DNS Master: Enrique Iglesias Rodriguez. (+34 917882517)
regards,
Daniel
Intelideas
On
Yes Neil,
It should be interesting to know the 'official' requirements/recommendations
for ccTLD's hosting
For example: diversity geographical, network needs, security needs, building
environment., etc
Regards,
Daniel
Intelideas
On Thursday 06 June 2002 15:59, Neil J. M
Yes, but there is problem about the transit for the network of the IXP
In my experience, some big providers only have the commercial view of
internet.
Really, if all the IXP members give some transit to the IXP for essential
services, internet will be more robust.
Daniel
Intelideas
On
ath MTU discovery.
Some folks find the private address space specified in RFC 1918 convenient,
but ignore the stipulations on use contained in the same document.
-
Daniel Senie[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Amaranth Networks Inc.http://www.amaranth.com
abases. That's the only
way the data ever has a chance of getting clean.
Anyone trying to use such databases to build filters is going to have major
trouble.
-
Daniel Senie[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Amaranth Networks Inc.http://www.amaranth.com
Andy,
At a larger ISP, you typically need a couple folks for peering.
- One or more peering coordinators (one is more normal) to interface with
their counterparts. These folks generally need both network engineering and
contract administration tools. If they have one skill set, but not the
othe
build our network over diverse companys with diverse path
in their fiber network. I see ok, that all companys that operate basic
services do it and they will have backup and emergency plans.
Regards,
Daniel
Intelideas
On Sun, 16 Jun 2002, blitz wrote:
>
> The Spanish ministry of science and
Uops ...
I don't see that this was a quote from other email ;)
Happy sunday ;)
Daniel
On Sun, 16 Jun 2002, Daniel Concepcion wrote:
>
>
> Hi blitz,
>
[Delete]
server operators to would,
IMO, help.
>--
>I suppose I could set up a bogus reverse for him, but, feh...
Either you set up something, or you can make your server not care about
reverse, or lose the customer.
-----
Daniel Senie
At 05:29 PM 6/18/02, Stephen Griffin wrote:
>In the referenced message, Daniel Senie said:
> >
> > At 02:30 PM 6/18/02, Lou Katz wrote:
>
> > >Is this common?
> >
> > I have a CDPD card which has a fixed address. It's from Verizon Wireless.
> &
, so an outage
there may effect your operations.
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Christopher J. Wolff
> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 3:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: How important is
We've had pretty good luck using SmartBITS to generate traffic on our 10/100/1000 as
well as Frame Relay and OC3 links in our test labs.
Dan Holmes
-Original Message-
From: Alan Sato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 11:03 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Testi
nough, I'm sure they would love
to peer with you. Remember - peering that first 50% of your traffic is not
that hard, if you have the resources, contacts and knowledge. It's that last
bit that hurts.
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[E
's traffic on your
network (although it does let people cold-potato route your traffic on THEIR
networks.)
Another valid approach for doing this sort of thing is setting your MEDs to
be the same as your IGP metrics to the next hops of the BGP routes - there
are "shortcut" comman
going
to interfere with the normal market processes, doing so through heavyhanded
government regulation, is normally the worst way to go about it.
A vague sense of unfairness or unhappyness is the worst of reasons to
regulate an industry.
- Daniel Golding
>
>
>
> > Usually the pain f
oing, most
can recognize a peering opportunity for what it is, and the effect it will
have on their business. If they were only so good at truthfully reporting
their accounting data...Oh well.
- Daniel Golding
>
>
>
> > when this situation has existed in other industries, gov'
networks fall into any of these categories? It's not like we are
going to overfish our BGP sessions or crash routers into things.
- Daniel Golding
> Paul Vixie Said...
> so, the reason i am puzzled is that while some of those could be argued by
> some people, they _are_not_being_argued_abou
, please be my guest, but it would
be a bit of a stretch.
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Richard Irving
> Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 1:15 PM
> To: Daniel Golding
> Cc: Paul Vixie; [EMAIL PROTEC
RFC1546.
Really, anycast is a bad name for it. "nearcast" or "closecast" might be
better. Anycast just has a nice ring...
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Marshall Eubanks
> Sen
r platform would
be greatly dependent on customer requirements.
Thanks,
- Daniel Golding
> Phil Rosenthal Said
> Yes, I don't think we need it 'right now'. My concern is that at this
> point many companies are still buying routers that as of today have no
> support
Actually, the reverse would be useful, as well. Voice Networking/SS7 stuff
for us IP weenies. (i.e. not voice over IP, just straight voice)
- Dan
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Sean Donelan
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 3:09 PM
Hi
I Could confirm that the AS286 is dead in Spain (286 2845249 754590
00 1d17hActive)
The national AS2134 appears to be live but announce only 14 prefix. They
announce to us 100 prefix before of their financial crash.
Regards,
Daniel
On Sunday 14 July 2002 02:48
with them, unless they change
their ways.
3) You can pay Verio to accept your routes.
4) You can live with it.
May I suggest #4?
I'm not a big fan of Verio's filtering policies, but as long as you announce
the /20 as an aggregate, you'll be fine.
- Daniel Golding
> -Original
already authoritative reverse delegations. (i.e. AS to IP block mapping)
- Daniel Golding
> > On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
> >
> > > And your suggestion has technical deficiencies as well. I
> have a leased
> > > line between Toronto and Ottawa,
circuits 64k - 155M OC3 |
>http://www.enterzone.net/ | Virtual, Dedicated, Colocation|
-
Daniel Senie[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Amaranth Networks Inc.http://www.amaranth.com
inging
loopbacks (yes, I know, there are many customers who can't tell the
difference).
Regards
Daniel
ough routes to break
BGP on a customer's 3640 will generate a support call, while causing
reachability problems to people who lack clue to properly advertise their
routes will also generate support calls.
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[E
(SNIP)
> > Currently, RIR's will issue an AS and will allow the issuance
> of a /24 to a
> > multihomed enterprise, simply on the basis of being multihomed.
> From this
> > point of view, it's easy to make the case that the proper "RIR-approved"
> > boundary for prefix filtering should be at the
Perhaps they have perfected the Cone of Silence?
http://www.cinerhama.com/getsmart/innovations.html
- Dan
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Scott Granados
> Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 4:09 PM
> To: Al Rowland
> Cc: [EMAIL PROT
es without any interuption of current or light level.
- Daniel Golding
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Scott Granados
> Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 11:36 PM
> To: David Lesher
> Cc: nanog list
> Subject: Re: $4
At 04:00 PM 7/5/2005, you wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 09:42 -1000, Randy Bush wrote:
> > Should undeliverable email (5.1.1, User unknown) be directed
> > to /dev/null rather than responded to?
>
> one current fashion is to try to catch it as early in the smtp
> receipt process as possible and
worth the investment required.
- Daniel Golding
On 7/6/05 11:41 AM, "Scott McGrath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> You do make some good points as IPv6 does not address routing scalability
> or multi-homing which would indeed make a contribution to lower OPEX
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 12:34:53AM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> But it certainly looks like a small DFZ table and portable address
> space are fundamentally incompatible.
At least if you want all the advantages that real BGP multihoming has.
Not surprising. :-)
Best regards,
? $5? $10? I doubt the big ISPs that burn millions of addresses per
> year will be interested in that. Suddenly the transition to IPv6 (or
> recursive NAT...) is going to look very attractive.
>
> So basically the tradeoffs between market forces and regular
> reclaming are similar: e
is starting to become available).
Regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
over because
of RAM depletion and fragmentation over time.
Regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
sider me embarassed. :-(
BEst regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
At 03:51 PM 7/7/2005, David Andersen wrote:
On Jul 7, 2005, at 3:41 PM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
>
I'd have to counter with "the assumption that NATs are going
away with v6 is a rather risky assumption." Or perhaps I
misunderstood your point...
There is one thi
There are a couple possibilities.
Mice and Men and INS both make software that can "front-end" BIND servers
via a secure web interface. You can also utilize a secure DNS appliance to
serve your customer DNS - Infoblox, Bluecat, and INS all make these. They
generally have a pretty rich multi-user
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 01:57:06AM +, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
> Someone's been listening:
>
> http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=165702734
The only interesting bit in this article is the complete ignorance
regarding Europe.
Regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-
At 09:06 PM 7/18/2005, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
http://www.advancedippipeline.com/166400372
Interesting. No ability to opt-out, and no signup option. So will
they use the customer's billing address, attempt to determine
location based on IP address or some other voodoo? It'll be
inte
At 02:48 AM 7/19/2005, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Daniel Senie wrote:
use the customer's billing address, attempt to determine location
based on IP address or some other voodoo? It'll be interesting to see if they
If you look at the webpage of telecomsyst
Since the talk was actually delivered - does anyone have a transcript or a
torrent for audio/video?
- Dan
On 7/27/05 8:10 PM, "Jeff Kell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Cisco's response thus far:
>
>http://www.cisco.com/en/US/about/security/intelligence/MySDN_CiscoIOS.html
>
> Jeff
organisation were making the right
choice ;-)
This suggests a much simpler solution to this whole problem: Give all the
people in the office cell phones for intra-organisational calling.
Lacks some call management features, and certainly lacks geek satisfaction,
but costs very little to implement...
Daniel
PR point of view, they probably should
have let things ride and allowed the Blackhat talk to occur. They look like
bullies now, which is never good. Hindsight is 20/20, though.
That being said, their policy of offering free updates for certain bug fixes
to those who don't pay them for support is generous. See that hand feeding
you? Don't bite it.
--
Daniel Golding
is listed on the quote for pretty much every new piece of
gear you buy from a vendor.
Take it from Ice-T - "don't hate the player, hate the game". Words to live
by.
[snip]
> Geo.
>
> George Roettger
> Netlink Services
Daniel Golding
On 7/29/05 12:56 PM, "John C. A. Bambenek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Remind me why I bother with information security when industry and the
> government seems to want to ensure things can be pwn3d as easily as
> possible...
>
If the "digital pearl harbor" does come to pass, this won't
s questions
and start to prepare deployment scenarios.
Daniel
At 10:51 AM 7/31/2005, Joe Abley wrote:
On 31 Jul 2005, at 01:23, Robert Boyle wrote:
I agree that implementation sooner rather than later is a good
idea, but all of us already have a 2-Byte AS so although we care in
theory and believe it is a good idea, we don't _really_ care as
much as t
On 31.07 17:20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> we did that (move a root) in the CIDR /8 experiment.
> we could do it for this too :)
one root name server: yes
the root name servers: no, definitely not
Daniel
PS: Ony as soon as implementations are available of course ! ;-(
I suspect the problem is not the operation aspects of the discussion, but
rather the nasty and sometimes personal invectives flying around. They were
particularly prevalent in the "Cisco gate" thread, and generally absent in
the other threads.
Just my 2 cents. YMMV
- Dan
On 8/2/05 11:28 AM, "[
traffic
I saw towards a virgin /21 (1 GByte per day).
Regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
nted but was then pointed at
> 73.0.0.0/9, 73.128.0.0/10 which is Comcast assigned in April. I'm
> surprised none of these assignemtns have shown up on mailing lists..
Why should they? Business as usual. :-)
I hope that more ISPs stop doing NAT/RFC1918 and just request whatever
they need
IP space within the next couple of years. Their IPv6 allocation
pretty nicely aligns to their subscriber count btw. According to
HD-Ratio you'll need (IIRC) >5.5 million customers or so for a /20.
Perhaps some Softbank folks want to provide some insight in the plans
surrounding this chunk of IPv4 address space?
Regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
On 8/4/05 4:46 PM, "Daniel Roesen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Famous last words when driving down a long road towards a firm wall of
> concrete. You want to rush then? Do you wait for the pain to fully
> extend? I prefer orderly, planned, concious migrations, not
On 8/4/05 6:49 PM, "Steve Feldman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I meant to ask this at a nanog or this IETF... why don't some of the
>> larger content providers (google, msn, yahoo, to name 3 examples) put
>> records in for their maint content pieces? why don't they get v6
>> connecti
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 06:25:00PM +0100, Brandon Butterworth wrote:
> But we could trade putting content on V6 for them if they make their
> network do multicast for us.
>
> Deal?
IPv6 multicast with embedded RP? Deal!
Regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTE
On 8/7/05 4:54 PM, "Christopher L. Morrow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Sun, 7 Aug 2005, William Warren wrote:
>
>>
>> I think i did not make myself clear. The corrections off-list are
>> valid..:) However the modems are accessed by the providers using
>> RFC1918 space and not public IP
At 09:46 AM 8/10/2005, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 10-aug-2005, at 15:06, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
Well, if you want to be really environmentally conscious, do away
with that /126 too and just use link-locals, with a single global
address per router for management and the generation of
Think twice (and look at some expense
figures for such software first). :-)
Regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
On 8/15/05 4:46 PM, "Randy Bush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
I'm not nearly confident enough to decide on behalf of almost
billion other people how they should benefit from the Internet
and how not to.
>>> thanks for that!
>> Indeed. Also see
>> http://www.iab.org/documents/doc
At 12:46 AM 8/16/2005, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005, Gadi Evron wrote:
>
> Randy Bush wrote:
> I'm not nearly confident enough to decide on behalf of almost
> billion other people how they should benefit from the Internet
> and how not to.
> >>>
> >>>thanks for
At 11:18 AM 8/17/2005, William Warren wrote:
I may be off base here. Can't an ips look at the traffic; say on
443 and figure out whether the traffic is malicious or not?
Well, your particular example is perhaps not the best one. 443 is
SSL, and looking within the encrypted traffic is not so
to keep asking questions, Abhishek. Just remember that the
inmates of this particular asylum get testy now and again :)
Thanks,
Daniel Golding
(*There are additional questions on where you should do this blocking.
That's an entirely separate can of worms)
On 8/18/05 6:38 AM, "Abhish
At 12:41 PM 8/22/2005, Aaron Glenn wrote:
On 8/22/05, Simon Hamilton-Wilkes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> They support P/S2 / USB / Sun and serial - though are a very expensive
> way to do serial.
And (last time I looked, at least) they required an expensive,
proprietary, Windows-only authent
At 05:45 PM 8/23/2005, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 23-aug-2005, at 23:24, Richard Z wrote:
US is trailing other industrial countries in broadband penetration
I'm not sure that's the case, AFAIK the US holds its own.
because no carrier is interested in investing and building
an infrastr
ptions in
> the specification. It can also uncover a broken design, but I hope
> and believe this is relatively rare. (And it's not like a broken
> design is automatically unimplementable, so implementation is
> certainly not guaranteed to bring out design problems.)
small number. Contrast that with the US
where the population is far more spread out.
This is an issue of both distribution and density, not just density.
>
> Not that this necessarily means anything, but I thought your
> sentiments above could do with some numbers. I don't see a strong
> correlation between broadband penetration and population density here.
>
>
> Joe
>
--
Daniel Golding
attacks have
really occurred, so we must act without that knowledge.
This is a great book for two audiences: enterprise network engineers who are
getting asked if their new MPLS VPN is secure (for some definition of
secure) and carrier network engineers trying to answer that question.
- Daniel Gold
At 07:55 PM 9/6/2005, Andrew - Supernews wrote:
> "william" == william(at)elan net <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
william> The above line is as clear as it gets (if the other two
william> mentions that data is to be made available to public is not
william> enough), so there this argument t
Getting back on-topic - how can this be? I thought only service providers
(with downstream customers) could get PI v6 space. Isn't this what policy
proposal 2005-1 is about? Can someone (from ARIN?) explain the current
policy?
- Daniel Golding
On 9/9/05 2:16 PM, "Steven J. Sobo
1 - 100 of 639 matches
Mail list logo
