Re: mh (RE: OMB: IPv6 by June 2008)

On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 10:24:22PM +0100, Sean Doran wrote: > On 7 Jul, 2005, at 21:10, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > >Real firewalls pass inbound traffic because a > >state table entry exists. NATs do the same thing, with nasty > >side-effects. There is no added security from the header-mangling.

Re: London incidents

On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 08:49:47PM -0400, Sean Donelan wrote: > On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Hannigan, Martin wrote: > > > All this while I was trying unsuccessfully to use my > > > mobile to ring the office. > > > > Some cell relays were temporarily shut to prevent a remote > > detonation of additional e

Re: London incidents

On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 06:11:09PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 09:26:33 +1200, Mark Foster said: > > "Using phone company records, researchers assessed phone use immediately > > before the crash. > > They found a third of calls in the 10 minutes before the crash were made

Re: Is there a "alternative" way of doing kvm-over-IP

On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 04:53:36PM -0400, Drew Weaver wrote: > Buying the hardware boxes sounds pretty attractive, but I > wondered if any industrious open sourcers have come up with anything > that any NANOG-ers have come across that would do something similar to > what the Dell 2161DS box

Re: compromized host list available

On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 04:32:09PM -0700, Rick Wesson wrote: > Folks, > > I've developed a tool to pull together a bunch of information from > DNSRBLs and mix it with a BGP feed, the result is that upon request I > can generate a report of all the compromised hosts on your network as > seen by

Re: compromized host list available

On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 12:31:13PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote: ... > Unless I'm mistaken (and my first report hasn't arrived yet, so maybe I > am) this is more of a "heads up! the following addresses within your > network are listed on DNSBLs" than anything else. > > I can't see why you'd add a dis

Re: compromized host list available

On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 12:48:27PM -0400, John Payne wrote: ... > I don't see why the reliability/reputation of a dnsbl changes the > trueness > of "this host is listed in this dnsbl". That is, of course, all that the report says [per the announcement]. But who knows how it might be interpreted,

Re: compromized host list available

On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 10:10:27AM -0700, Charles Cala wrote: ... > More tools and information are a good thing, > but how/where you chose to use a sawzall is up to you. > http://www.milwaukeetool.com/us/en/news.nsf/vwFeaturedProducts/4CBA61C6E299F75D86256FEB0072211D?OpenDocument Yes, but I usua

Re: MCI billing fraud ... again

On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 03:31:53PM -0700, Dan Hollis wrote: > We're being hit up by MCI's billing fraud again. You'd think after the > multiple settlements, the $4 billion accounting fraud and Ebbers' > 25 year prison sentence that MCI would have learned something, but > apparently not. > > Any

Re: open source tools help (contract) in DC area?

On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 04:30:14PM +0200, Brad Knowles wrote: ... > I'm honestly trying to understand what is an on-topic post and > what is not, and it seems to me that this is pretty clearly off-topic. > > So what is on-topic? I've got a question that I've been thinking > about f

Re: NANOG List Server on several BlockLists

On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 06:10:23PM -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote: > On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 18:00 -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote: > > On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 16:49 -0500, John Palmer wrote: > > > FYI: The IP address of the mail server that sends out NANOG list > > > messages > > > (198.108.1.26) is once agai

Re: Cisco cover up

On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 04:14:30PM -0500, Olsen, Jason wrote: > From: James Baldwin > > This had _nothing_ to do with the source code that was > > stolen. I have dealt with Lynn professionally on many > > occasions and he has shown himself to have more than a fair > > share of integrity. It is

Re: Cisco cover up

On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 02:04:28PM -0400, James Baldwin wrote: > On Jul 28, 2005, at 1:50 PM, Joseph S D Yao wrote: > > >Given that it was clear that Lynn had NDA access to the Cisco source > >code already, it seems pretty clear that the original poster wasn't > &g

Re: "Cisco gate" and "Meet the Fed" at Defcon....

On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 10:49:38AM +0100, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, Bill Woodcock wrote: ... > > If you feel like keeping 2500s in service, rather than replacing them with > > something that holds NM-32As, the flash problem is easily resolved for less > > than US$50: > > > >

Re: /8 end user assignment?

On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 03:49:48PM -0700, Steve Feldman wrote: ... > - None of our transit providers appear to provide IPv6 transit. > Or if they do, they keep it pretty quiet. (Does UUNET?) ... ISTM that one of their incarnations briefed this to us as a product, years ago. [Chris?] -- Joe

Re: fcc ruling on dsl providers' access to infrastructure

On Sun, Aug 07, 2005 at 11:22:23AM -1000, Randy Bush wrote: > Yes there is a major concern that the government has > just ellminated every isp that is currently permitted > to use another carriers dsl lines to provide > service's. > >>> will the ilec's start offering competitiv

Re: Real-time WHOIS for .COM

On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 09:11:10AM -0700, william(at)elan.net wrote: ... > Best you can get is to do query using whois.completewhois.com since by > default our server will do both whois query to internic and dns query to > find current deligated dns servers. ... Fedora core test page? Ah - you

Re: Real-time WHOIS for .COM

On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 06:33:16PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Joseph S D Yao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > william(at)elan.net wrote: > [...] > >> Best you can get is to do query using whois.completewhois.com since > >> by default our server w

Re: now it's really serious in New Orleans

On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 12:38:24AM -0500, Andrew D Kirch wrote: ... > While we're off topic, the Red Cross needs blood donations. It wont > keep networks up, but hopefully it will keep people in need alive. For > more information/ to locate the nearest Red Cross. Please visit > https://www.give

Re: now it's really serious in New Orleans

On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 01:13:48PM -0400, Christopher Woodfield wrote: > While I'm not in a position to do this myself, as much as I would > like to, I'm wondering if any of the relief organizations that are > mobilizing down there are in need of volunteer IT/networking clue and > hands sett

Re: Sprint LD routing affected by Katrina?

On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 02:44:07PM -0400, Jon Lewis wrote: > I've encountered several toll free numbers (like the BellSouth DSG) which > can no longer be dialed from Gainesville, FL roughly coinciding with > Katrina slamming the Gulf Coast. I finally called BellSouth (the local > ILEC) and ask

Re: OT: Yahoo- apparently now an extension of the Chinese govt secret police....

On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 10:54:03AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote: > However, clearly, companies doing business in China under this set of > rules are placing profits ahead of human rights. I, for one, will avoid > patronizing any organization I know to be engaged in such practices. > > Owen There h

Re: OT: Yahoo- apparently now an extension of the Chinese govt secret police....

On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 04:05:48PM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > On Sep 7, 2005, at 3:59 PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote: > >On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 03:10:12PM +0100, > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >>Every company has to obey the laws of the jurisdictions > >>in which they do business, and for i

Re: 3 men die in weekend crashes

On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:54:21AM -0400, Justin M. Streiner wrote: > On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > >3 men die in weekend crashes > > > > While tragic, how is this even *remotely* on-topic for this list? > > jms Look at the headers

Re: OT: Yahoo- apparently now an extension of the Chinese govt secret police....

On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 12:07:41AM +0200, Gadi Evron wrote: > >Personally, I see doing business in China about as logical as, say, giving > >430 6th graders laptops with Internet access, and expecting them to pay > >attention in the classroom... Oh, and cutting the sports programs to > >afford th

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 07:23:33AM -0700, william(at)elan.net wrote: ... > Which indeed means they have no MX servers listed and that MAY be a > problem for some mail servers (though normally mail servers are supposed > to send email based on A record then). > > Obviously not having MX record i

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:15:29PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > At 03:50 PM 13/09/2005, Joseph S D Yao wrote: > > >Oh, and also ... please consider that some firewalls try to discern > >whether the connection on port 25 is from a mail server or from Telnet. > >While I

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:28:41PM -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: ... > Telnet options, and for that matter speed, happen after the 3-way > handshake. We're not getting that far. > > --Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb Steve, I defer to your expertise, as alwa

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:56:58PM -0400, Joseph S D Yao wrote: > On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:28:41PM -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > ... > > Telnet options, and for that matter speed, happen after the 3-way > > handshake. We're not getting that far. > > > &g

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

OBTW, this discussion of how SEF tells the difference between SMTP and telnet is rather beside the point. Most of what I wrote was, read RFC 2821. It's a little different from the RFC 821 that some of us have always cited, but I believe the points I noted are the same. AND it's a bit more OT, I

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 05:54:03PM -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph S D Yao writes > : > >On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:56:58PM -0400, Joseph S D Yao wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:28:41PM -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wr

Re: mail service with no mx (was - Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?)

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:31:05PM -0700, william(at)elan.net wrote: > On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Roy Badami wrote: > > > william(at)elan> Could you elaborate on how firewall will > > william(at)elan> determine if the connection is from mail server > > william(at)elan> or from telnet on port 25?

Re: mail service with no mx (was - Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?)

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 11:09:54PM -0700, Dave Crocker wrote: > >>Application layer firewalls have existed for at least 6 years. > >> > >Make that 15 > > I suspect that claiming to that they existed farther back than 1990 would > require careful debate about the functionality. > > Taking it

Re: mail service with no mx (was - Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?)

On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 08:26:54PM -0400, Robert E.Seastrom wrote: ... > When ARPA and MILNET were segmented in 1984, there were > (Fuzzball-based IIRC) mail gateways between the two networks. ... I hadn't thought back to that. From what I remember of the intent, and the little I knew about the

Re: MCI refusing to turn up OC-3 due to katrina relief efforts?

On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 04:30:32PM -0400, Drew Weaver wrote: > Howdy, has anyone heard of MCI putting orders on hold in order to help > with the Katrina relief effort? We ordered an OC-3 from them about 2 > months ago and they've missed the install deadline 4 times now. The > reseller we're workin

Re: Corruption and Monopoly is the real Issue (was Re: Turkey has switched Root-Servers)

On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 10:33:43PM -0500, John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote: ... > to operate our businesses. We have a right to operate our TLDs and ... Why? "I say so" is not a response. Use of the word "deserve" in a response will get it deleted without a response. I am violently sick every ti

Re: Turkey has switched Root-Servers

On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 09:28:03AM +0200, Peter Dambier wrote: ... > E.g. NAZI sites and propaganda are prohibited in germany. They are welcome > in the u.s. That delivers a pseudo excuse for corrupt german politician to ... Without comment on the rest of this, I feel I must note that to most peo

Re: IPv6 news

On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 09:56:27PM -0600, Sean Figgins wrote: ... > Our jobs, as network designers and operators will be make it seemless to > the consumer without forcing them to shell out a thousand or more dollars > on new Windows software, and the hardware that will be required to run it > on.

Re: IPv6 news

On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 09:28:19AM -0700, Crist Clark wrote: ... > While I do not necessarily disagree with this point of view (as I work > for a company who uses allocated space in such a manner), others may > argue that addresses that are assigned through the Internet Assigned > Numbers Authorit

Re: classful routes redux

On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 09:57:14AM -0500, Joe Abley wrote: > On 4-Nov-2005, at 09:07, Russ White wrote: > > >- -- BGP is currently moving to a 2^32 space for AS numbers. That's > >odd, > >if there's only 18,044 origins in the current table, and it won't ever > >grow to much more--how'd we lose

Re: Networking Pearl Harbor in the Making

On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 11:01:23AM -0700, Sam Crooks wrote: > I agree... Harvard architecture anyone? Ah, yes ... split I & D [instruction & data] space ... in its purest form, COMPLETELY split. Apparently named for the Aiken Mark I, but also where Unix V6 split I&D was developed [on the PDP-11

Re: classful routes redux

On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 09:33:30PM +0100, Henk Uijterwaal wrote: > At 11:57 07/11/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> What about those that are assigned and used but not [currently] visible > >> on the public Internet [i.e., are on other internets]? > > > >Indeed! > > > >On Henk's slide number 5 h

Re: Networking Pearl Harbor in the Making

On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 02:43:54PM -0600, Robert Bonomi wrote: ... > Most exploits (be it IOS or some other target) require multiple things to > occur > before the "desired effect" is achieved. > > "buffer overflow" exploits. in general. involve a minimum of two things: > 1) "smash

Re: classful routes redux

On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 04:29:18PM +0100, Per Heldal wrote: ... > ... which is why I specifically said "no intention to ever connect to, > or communicates with nodes on, the global network". In which case > overlaps in adressblocks are irrelevant, as are any mention of NAT and > firewalls as there

Re: Sober

On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 09:06:57PM +, Christopher L. Morrow wrote: > On Fri, 2 Dec 2005, Dennis Dayman wrote: > > Interested, but I see many Sober postings and outages on other lists and not > > here...has anyone been having issues? I know the ISP's are fighting the > > living out of the virus

Re: Let's talk about ICANN

On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 09:03:59AM -0500, Hannigan, Martin wrote: ... > I would think that ICANN is off topic for NANOG? ... (a) Why would you think that? I would have thought it spot on. (b) Would that prevent discussion here? ;-) -- Joe Yao -

Re: Compromised machines liable for damage?

On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 09:38:11AM -0500, Jason Frisvold wrote: ... > So what if Microsoft put a warning label on all copies of Windows that > said something to the tune of "Not intended for use without firewall > and anti-virus software installed" ? :) Isn't the consumer at least > partially re

Re: live chat with other nanog'ers

On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 10:47:01AM +, Alexander Harrowell wrote: > Cracking analogy, Valdis. I'll use that..now can we put this frankly > soporific thread down like an unwanted kitten? I object. I'll take that kitten. (And ask my sister the kitten-nurser to drive down and take it away befor

Re: live chat with other nanog'ers

On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 02:05:16PM -1000, Randy Bush wrote: > here's the real challenge. i would like to chat to a couple of > dead nanog users. > > randy Unless you have a prayer, you haven't got a prayer. -- Joe Yao ---

Re: do bogon filters still help?

On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 04:08:00AM +0100, Daniel Roesen wrote: ... > > Otherwise, packets tend to get dropped by filters. > > By which ones? Folks with too much time feeding their paranoia, or is > there any actual realistic attack to prevent by filtering packets with > source 192.88.99.1? ...

Re: Is my router owned? How would I know?

On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 03:29:15AM +, Christopher L. Morrow wrote: ... > Some vendors have asked and received this sort of thing, does huwei (which > I butchered the spelling of) want one? (or need one?) how about netgear > and their lovely NTP issue? or checkpoint or ... there are quite a few

Re: AW: Odd policy question.

On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 04:44:02PM -0500, Jeffrey I. Schiller wrote: ... > As an engineer, I believe we would need a protocol that would permit > someone to query an IP address to ask what DNS domains it may be an NS > for. A simple client server response protocol. Lack of a response would > mean

Re: The Backhoe: A Real Cyberthreat?

On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 10:05:57AM -0600, Dennis Dayman wrote: > > "In 2004, Department of Homeland Security officials became fearful that > terrorists might start using accidental dig-ups as a road map for deliberate > attacks, and convinced the FCC to begin locking up previously public data on

Re: is this like a peering war somehow?

On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 11:41:20AM -0500, Joe Abley wrote: ... > As far as sports go, there is no timely coverage of rugby in North > America anyway, I can't imagine why anybody would waste their time > watching inferior games like football, hockey, baseball or basketball > at all, never min

Re: Italy orders ISPs to block sites

On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 09:13:21AM +0100, tom wrote: > > Hi Folks across the ocean.. > > I understand, that from an American point of view this kind of restriction > looks strange and is against your act of freedom, however here in Europe > gambling is a state controlled business that supports t

Re: DNS Amplification Attacks

On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 11:30:46PM +0200, Gadi Evron wrote: ... > Where did that come from? I respect you but please, let's have a > technical discussion. This is important enough for us all to avoid the > flame-wars for now. Don't move this thread to politics or lunacies. ... Then leave gover

Re: DNS Amplification Attacks

On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 07:09:49AM +, Andy Davidson wrote: > Joseph S D Yao wrote: > [...] > >service except perhaps to their own population, than against what can > >you compare the DNS service that you are getting, to see whether it is > >giving you what &quo

Re: DNS Amplification Attacks

On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 08:33:55PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Peter Dambier: ... > > How about alternative roots? ICANN does censor "XN--55QX5D.", "XN--FIQS8S." > > and "XN--IO0A7I." already. You must use alternative roots to exchange emails > > with people living in those domains. > > Unfo

Re: DNS Amplification Attacks

On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 09:35:34AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > DNS looking glasses, in much the same way that we use web-form based > > > BGP or traceroute looking glasses today. > > > > Open resolvers are far better then looking glasses to assess the state > > of DNS, and we are campai

Re: DNS Amplification Attacks

hat this is in fact believed by both to be contrary to that frame of reality. Or maybe that's just my own warped way of seeing it. But, no, I'm sorry but I didn't realize it was a joke. ;-) > Joseph S D Yao wrote: > > > >"You keep using that word. I do n

Re: Problem with IANA blackhole servers

On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 09:34:59PM +0200, Sebastian Wiesinger wrote: ... > The resolver is used by customers who sometimes leak RFC1918 requests > to our resolver. I already told them to resolve that network > internally, but still the IANA server is not working correctly IMHO. > > I'm also think

Re: Proxy/Caching Servers

squid Symantec Enterprise Firewall [formerly Raptor], if they're still selling it Sidewinder G2 (The G2 stands for what parts of NAI Gauntl

Re: Proxy/Caching Servers

On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 04:41:26PM -0400, Alain Hebert wrote: >Hummm squid. > >With a touch of haproxy... (Or for those with money ServerIron's) ... Do Foundry ServerIrons proxy and cache, or just switch? -- Joe Yao ---

Re: Open Letter to D-Link about their NTP vandalism

On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 02:04:39AM -0400, Alain Hebert wrote: > Paul Vixie wrote: > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Simon Lyall) writes: > >>I've said in other forums the only solution for this sort of software is > >>to return the wrong time (by several months). The owner might actually > >>notice then and f

Re: Is your ISP Influenza-ready?

On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 10:53:33AM -0700, David W. Hankins wrote: ... > It's like someone intentionally optimized this function specifically to > be the most pessimal. ... If you know the word "pessimal" [malus, pejor, pessimus = bad, worse, worst], you should know that "most pessimal" is redund

Re: data center space

On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 09:34:41AM -0700, Philip Lavine wrote: > > Can someone tell me if I am out of luck. I am trying to get a 10x10 cage in > New Jersey (Jersey City area) but it seems everybody is at capacity. What > happened? My guess (this being NJ) is an aftereffect of the 9/11/2001 d

Re: Is your ISP Influenza-ready?

On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 08:29:10PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote: > > According to the wikipedia's quote of WHO the weighted average > mortality rate, which would be across 50 human cases, is 66% in 2006, > and 56% across all 194 cases reported since 2004. > > http://en.wikipedia.or

Re: Is your ISP Influenza-ready?

On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 07:51:06AM -0700, Etaoin Shrdlu wrote: > Joseph S D Yao wrote: (stuff) ... > where it took off. I don't mean to add to the hysteria, but I also would > prefer that you not discount it. Much will depend on your local area, on > whether people are tight

Re: Is your ISP Influenza-ready?

On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 08:06:25AM -0700, Jay Hennigan wrote: > Joseph S D Yao wrote: > >On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 10:53:33AM -0700, David W. Hankins wrote: > >... > >>It's like someone intentionally optimized this function specifically to > >>be the most p

Re: AOL 421 errors

On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 10:20:33AM +0100, Simon Waters wrote: ... > That just creates Chinese whispers. ... This is a new term of which I had previously been unaware. What is it, please, and how does it relate to the Chinese country or people? Thanks. -- Joe Yao ---

Re: AOL 421 errors

I need no more references to Wikipaedia, thank you all. I had already looked it up, but after I sent my note. I need no more notes telling me that Chinese people talk funny, either. I had really never noticed that. -- Joe Yao --

Re: private ip addresses from ISP

Folks are sounding as if they'd never 'traceroute'd THROUGH a set of unroutable IP addresses. I have seen cases where my 'traceroute' looked like this [when I've had the patience to not hit Interrupt at the first sign of stars]: 1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms router.here 2 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms router.ther

Re: private ip addresses from ISP

On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 04:22:26PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... > Does NANOG have a role in developing some best > practices text that could be easily imcorporated > into peering agreements and service contracts? ... RFC 2267 -> RFC 2827 == Best Current Practice (BCP) 38 RFC 3013 == BCP

Re: private ip addresses from ISP

On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 11:55:56AM -0400, Joe Maimon wrote: ... > Its also quite annoying to wait for each hop to timeout. Well, yes. ;-} But as someone hinted, that's purely a problem with my own psyche, which I do [to some degree] control. OBTW, the 'ad hominem' attacks starting up in this

Re: Fwd: 41/8 announcement

On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 07:44:04AM -0700, william(at)elan.net wrote: > > > On Fri, 26 May 2006, Bill Woodcock wrote: > > > On Fri, 26 May 2006, Mikisa Richard wrote: > > > Can't be sure what they did, but I received an e-mail asking me to > > check > > > on my connectivity to them an

Re: Phantom packet loss is being shown when using pathping in connection with asynchronous routing - although there is no real loss.

On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 05:19:33PM +0200, Gunther Stammwitz wrote: > > Hallo colleagues, > > Maybe someone of you can help me to understand the phenomenon of pack loss > when using asynchronous routing? > > I have customers who are complaining about packet loss and they are > providing me with

Re: Phantom packet loss is being shown when using pathping in connection with asynchronous routing - although there is no real loss.

On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 12:49:04PM -0700, Joe Abley wrote: > On 7-Jun-2006, at 12:35, Joseph S D Yao wrote: > > >I can't tell you what is going on. But I can ask, (a) why are you > >doing > >asymmetrical routing in the first place? > > For any non-trivial

Re: Zebra/linux device production networking?

On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 09:31:51PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > > On 6/7/06, Nick Burke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >First, a little background.. > >My CTO made my stomach curdle today when he announced that he wanted to > >do away with all our cisco [routers] and instead use Linux/zeb

Re: 2006.06.06 NANOG-NOTES CC1 ENUM LLC update

On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 01:12:25PM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > > On Jun 8, 2006, at 10:04 AM, Matthew Petach wrote: > > >(sorry these are coming out delayed, I had to deal with an internal > >routing challenge > >for much of yesterday afternoon. --Matt) > > I think I speak for the whole

Re: a fun hijack: 1/8, 2/8, 3/8, 4/8, 5/8, 7/8, 8/8, 12/8 briefly announced by AS 23520 (today)

It may not matter a lot, but a number of those prefixes are marked Reserved to IANA. Nobody should be advertising them. Which is worse - the ones nobody should be advertising or the ones somebody else should be advertising? That depends partly on the "why". -- Joe Yao ---

Re: 2006.06.07 NANOG-NOTES Lightning talk notes

On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 03:49:50PM -0700, Matthew Petach wrote: > > (I think these were the toughest to take notes on, since they went > by so fast; took the most cleaning up afterwards. But they were also > the best talks of the 3 days. I wish we could have flipped, and taken > more time on Tu

Re: Day tickets

Moving to nanog-futures. Or trying, anyway. On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 04:45:30PM +0200, Henk Uijterwaal wrote: > > > On the DLV thread, but not responding to anybody in particular. > > As soon as you allow people to attend 1 talk for free, then you opened the > door for people attending without

Re: wrt joao damas' DLV talk on wednesday

On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 11:37:08AM -0700, Randy Bush wrote: ... > can you say "does not scale?" ... ... I think ISC very clearly already said that. They do not WANT it to scale. They _WANT_ DNSSEC to succeed and take over. This is a bootstrap mechanism to get DNSSEC rolling. -- Joe Yao --

OT!!! Re: wrt joao damas' DLV talk on wednesday

On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 03:21:23PM -0700, Gregory Hicks wrote: > > From: Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 15:16:50 -0700 > > To: Paul Vixie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: nanog@merit.edu > > Subject: Re: wrt joao damas' DLV talk on wednesday > > > > > therefore registrars (

Re: DNS Based Load Balancers

F5 BigIP appears quite good. If you add their 3DNS software, you get wide-IP's as well. -- Joe Yao --- This message is not an official statement of OSIS Center policies.

Re: NANOG Spam?

On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 01:32:11PM +0200, Sabri Berisha wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 05, 2006 at 05:20:04PM -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote: > > Hi, > > > Finally, we crawled the archives of the big lists and have come > > up with a list of subscribers who haven't posted in over 9 months, we > > plan to

Re: CFP: DA Workshop - ISOI

On Sat, Jul 08, 2006 at 09:37:02AM -0500, Gadi Evron wrote: > > This is a call for papers for a DA Workshop (ISOTF/TISF DA). Its name is: > Internet Security Operations and Intelligence Workshop or ISOI for short. > > DA stands for Drone Armies (botnets), which is the main subject of this > work

Re: mitigating botnet C&Cs has become useless

On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:25:40AM +0200, Peter Dambier wrote: ... > Let me try to become Gadi. First of all block port 80 (http) :) > Next block port 53 udp (dns). > > Now you have got rid of amplification attacks because spoofing does > no longer work and you have got rid of all those silly use

Re: New Laptop Polices

Do modern laptops have disk drives that are that hard to remove? -- Joe Yao --- This message is not an official statement of OSIS Center policies.

Re: New Laptop Polices

On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 02:28:33AM +, Christopher L. Morrow wrote: > On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Joseph S D Yao wrote: > > > Do modern laptops have disk drives that are that hard to remove? > > one screw and 'pop' out comes all dell laptop harddrives... or boot from >

Re: New Laptop Polices

On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 09:31:52PM -0500, Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote: > > Joseph S D Yao wrote: > > >Do modern laptops have disk drives that are that hard to remove? > > Let us say "No, they are not that hard to remove." > > Now what? (Recall that

Re: Wherefore art thou Qwest

On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 11:51:34AM -0400, J. Oquendo wrote: > > Can someone from Qwest shoot me an email. I have a PSTN carrier routing > VoIP now and they're telling me your routing tables became corrupt or > something. Calls have been "a" dropping. > > ===

Re: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?

On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 12:18:59PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote: ... > Even if you assume that allocations made by ARIN are not property, it's > hard to argue that pre-ARIN allocations are not. They're not subject to > revocation and their grant wasn't conditioned on compliance with policies.

Re: 365 Main reason for outage report published

On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 04:50:04PM -0400, J. Oquendo wrote: > Sean Donelan wrote: > > > > > >The 365 Main San Francisco data center has published its report > >concerning the outage on July 24 after a utility problem. > > > >http://www.365main.com/status_update.html > > > >Other data centers usin

Re: EU Official: IP Is Personal

On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 05:26:09PM +, Paul Vixie wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hank Nussbacher) writes: > > > http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g08qkYTaNhLlscXKMnS3V8dkc-WwD8UAGH900 > > they say it's personally identifiable information, not personal property. > EU's concern is the privacy

Re: EU Official: IP Is Personal

On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 10:49:48AM +0200, Hank Nussbacher wrote: ... > I wouldn't be suprised if in a few years some EU/US law mandates IP number > portability, just like people have with their cellphones. Imagine what > that will do to the routing tables. How many /32s can we get into the >

Re: Removal of my name

On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 11:14:27AM -0700, Bill Woodcock wrote: > > On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > something in HTML that i can not parse... > > care to repost in a format that is readable? > > Bill, it's really time for you to upgrade from UCB Mail

Re: Removal of my name

On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 02:59:47PM -0400, Derek J. Balling wrote: > An e-mail message *can* in fact, be HTML, as HTML is a text payload > like any other. Yes, and for those, one may use: /etc/mailcap:text/html; lynx %s; print=lynx -dump %s | lp But for some reason, that particular message fa

Re: Removal of my brain

On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 05:04:53PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:23:46 EDT, Todd Vierling said: > > > Which is just one of the reasons that the MIME type > > "multipart/alternative" exists. Sane MUAs that wish to send HTML also > > send a text/plain alternative segment

Re: Removal of my name

On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 09:38:15AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > > at least a rather updated version of ucb mail, that also does imap / > pop / ssl / smtp + auth etc > > "heirloom mailx" aka "nail" - http://nail.sourceforge.net Try: . Moved

  1   2   >