Hope this helps
http://www.superroot.net/downloads.html
Curtis Maurand wrote:
>
>Anyone know where I can obtain the latest and greatest? I just tried
>ftp.icann.org to no avail (host not found.) which is where I used to get
>them.
>Thanks in advance
>Curtis
>
>
>
whoops..my mistake..:)
Bruce Robertson wrote:
>>http://www.superroot.net/downloads.html
>>
>
>Yeah, right.
>
>--
>Bruce Robertson, President/CEO +1-775-348-7299
>Great Basin Internet Services, Inc.fax: +1-775-348-9412
>http://www.greatbasin.net
>
That was a mistake..i was not trying to deceive anyone..i apologize for
the errant information.
David Ulevitch wrote:
>Nanog,
>
>Friday, April 26, 2002, 4:19:52 PM, William Warren wrote:
>
>
>WW> Hope this helps
>WW> http://www.superroot.net/downloads.html
>
&
you can get to the contact information two ways:
first from the netsol.com site
goto netsol.com..then click the manage account tab..then click on the contact
manager link right below it(after the page loads)...then continue onwards.
or you can just hit this link directly:
https://www.netsol.com
you can get to the contact information two ways:
first from the netsol.com site
goto netsol.com..then click the manage account tab..then click on the
contact manager link right below it(after the page loads)...then
continue onwards.
or you can just hit this link directly:
https://www.netsol.c
Microsoft has shown itself time and time again it thinks it can get away
with something like that and going by Microsoft's past behaviorsdo
not be surprised to see Microsoft try this exact scheme later on down
the road...as it builds support with many other monopolistic
parties(mainly the
StarOffice to the rescue.
David Howe wrote:
>at Monday, August 12, 2002 2:17 AM, David Schwartz
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was seen to say:
>
>
>>Microsoft can have whatever vision of the future they want and can
>>use any resources at their disposal to bring their vision to light.
>>Everybody has
a little bit of humor never hurt anything..not even nanog will be destroyed..
Sam Hayes Merritt, III wrote:
does this belong on nanog?
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, William Warren wrote:
Microsoft has shown itself time and time again it thinks it can get away
with something like that
turns out netscape does not honor domain specific htm/text settings as i
ahve been informned many times that html is sitll appearing...i have
switched clients to OE for nanog in plain text...:)
William Warren
May God Bless you and everything you touch.
My "foundation" verse:
Isia
Actually the cable modems and Dsl modems usually have a 10.x address
they are used by the ISP's to access their internal firware. Also on
traces that I have done on both cable and dsl the first hop is
invariably a RFC1918 address.
Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
t>,
either save address space in general or save the costs
associated with the additional address space they would consume if they
did not use the RFC1918 space.
William Warren wrote:
Actually the cable modems and Dsl modems usually have a 10.x address
they are used by the ISP's to access
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? If so then let
it filter it. I know IPS's aren't perfect, but, i would prefer this
router be taken, if available and sensible including network outage or
DDOS, than
actually godaddy has been quite reponsive for me @ 3am before.
Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine wrote:
Howdy Perry,
Alexis Rosen of Panix was on the phone earlier today with the company
attorney for melbourneit -- reputedly he was informed that even if the
police called, they would not do a
If the UN wants control of the INET WE invented. Let them build
their own.
Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
My favorite quote(s) from this very brief article:
"Right now, the most recognizable Internet governance
body is a California-based non-profit company, the
International Corporation for Assig
In my case it would be because my isp's has several of its own smtp server
on many black hole lists for bring open relays. Luckily i have another
domain i have access to but if i had to i would run a local SMTP server if i
had no other opiton.
actually with the merger of At&t and comcast most cable inet customers
will be through them.
Joseph Barnhart wrote:
Not really
On Sun, 27 Oct 2002, Matthew S. Hallacy wrote:
On Sun, Oct 27, 2002 at 02:35:23PM -0500, Eric M. Carroll wrote:
Sean,
At Home's policy was that servers were admin
Microsoft has been ahving problems with their entire .Net system lately.
This is just the latest wrinkle..:)
Christian Nielsen wrote:
From the page:
http://messenger.microsoft.com/support/status.asp
The service is temporarily unavailable. More information will be posted
here as it becomes a
Most DSL providers want an MTU of 1492..also there are some issues with
older firmwares and some DSL providers. You may want to also check for
an updated firmware on the Linksys site.
Ray Burkholder wrote:
This might be an MTU setting issue. If pppoe, then on my Cisco stuff,
an MTU of 1492 (I
If the MTU is not helping then go get the latest firmware. Also you
cannot use port forwarding in most linksys routers with DHCP enabled.
For those routers you have to set everyone statically and turn of DHCP
for port forwarding to work.
Mark J. Scheller wrote:
The Linksys does have an MTU s
Went to Nic.com and got this:
OrgName:RIPE Network Coordination Centre
OrgID: RIPE
Address:Singel 258
Address:1016 AB
City: Amsterdam
StateProv:
PostalCode:
Country:NL
NetRange: 195.0.0.0 - 195.255.255.255
CIDR: 195.0.0.0/8
NetName:RIPE-CBLK3
NetHandle: NET
It seems that it would be in the isp's interests then to not get itself
into those restrictive contracts. If the customer does not like it they
can go elsewhere.
Mike Damm wrote:
Do these figures take into account the number of calls you will get from
sales when they realize you lost the prof
really? wow then according to their press release none of their
Deepsight customers were compromised because of this early warning? I
bet that can be debunked fairly quickly. Let's se what falls out of the
busy once it is shaken a bit.
Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
I saw this mentioned in an ar
Give it time..i bet Symantec will get some serious egg on its
face...either they are really stretching the truth or the are outright
lying.
Sean Donelan wrote:
According to Wired, Symantec is now saying they sent out an alert to their
paying customers about 30 minutes (9pm PST) before the SQL
Even the main Akamai.com site is not responding..
Joseph Nuara wrote:
Any idea on the cause or the ETA to restoration of service?
On Mon, 24 May 2004, Jon Lewis wrote:
Ok...who turned off Akamai? :)
Sites that use Akamai for serving their images all seem to be pretty much
broken this morning. Fr
one of those members is comcast..the #1 source of spam for a
while running..ironic isn't it?
Hank Nussbacher wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/06/22/tech.spam.reut/index.html
"Consumers who allow their infected computers to send out millions of
"spam" messages could be unplugged from t
coolwebsearch has become more and more sneaky..so bad that
development of cws shredder has been abandoned by its
developerEither serious lock down you ie(which with CWS is
not going to help) or use something other than ie.
Edward B. Dreger wrote:
RKJ> Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 01:43:50 -0300
R
not all the variants are that easy..how about doing a google on
coolwebsearch..scumware.com has a good writeup as well as
spywareinfo.com...the newer variants are not that easy
Gregh wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Michel Py" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Gregh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <
LOL..not a problem..:)
Michel Py wrote:
I just realized that I incorrectly quoted William Warren instead of
Brian Battle in my previous post. Sorry guys, cut/paste casualty.
Sean Donelan wrote:
Could this be a Joe job by someone who doesn't like the
owners of Cool Web Search? The owners o
they have a large stake yes..:)
Patrick W Gilmore wrote:
On Jul 13, 2004, at 10:09 PM, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
"Leucadia National Corp., a New York buyout firm, has expressed interest
in acquiring a controlling stake in MCI Inc., raising new questions
about
the telecommunications giant's f
Is there a way to block html mail at the edge using a proxy ro something?
Scott Francis wrote:
On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 08:21:52AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Jack Bates Wrote:
In the US, the pipe is limited in any number of ways in attempts to
limit how many people share their broadb
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20010823.html
Pendergrass, Greg wrote:
Neither do we. Could you include some more details?
-Greg
-Original Message-
From: Austad, Jay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 29 August 2003 17:08
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: dry pair
Does anyone know
I have noticed suddenly my virus filter catching more of those exact
same messages here in the last 24 hours.
David Lesher wrote:
I'm suddenly getting 3-4x the "M$ patch" and "bounced mail"
virus attacks as compared to 2-3 days ago.
Is this perhaps a result of VeriSlime's actions?
[Note I'm ta
For those you want to kill the various p2p programs..there is a
promising project at the following address:
http://www.lowth.com/p2pwall/ftwall/
William
--
May God Bless you and everything you touch.
My "foundation" verse:
Isaiah 54:17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and
ev
this is part of the autodiag software installed by the VZ cdyou will
need to go through your remotes and uninstall that stuffe..
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone else seeing this, it started up a few weeks ago.
We have a number of home users that VPN to our corporate network who are
using Ve
I have already claled VZ about htis issue as i see it tons here
too..their response:
We only provide connectivity and we do not take actions in terms of port
filtering or blocking.
Wayne Gustavus (nanog) wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Beh
it has gotten to the point for me that i am looking for a whitelisting
option on my firewall/a-v gateway instead of a blacklisting one for
attachments.
Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
Erm is it me or are the writers of Bagle and Netsky determined to keep morphing
their code to outwit the virus scanne
no issues here
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone else seeing an error getting to www.cisco.com?
403 Forbidden
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /
on this server.
Additionally, a 403 Forbidden
error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
Apache/1
no issues here..loads quickly.
Todd Mitchell - lists wrote:
| Behalf Of Jay Hennigan
| Sent: March 15, 2004 3:19 PM
|
| Is it just me that they don't like?
All fixed now, but load times are hella slow:
phoenix:~# curl -I cisco.com
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 20:40:53 GMT
Server: Apac
could this be taken offlist please?
Dave Howe wrote:
Joshua Brady wrote:
The "Child" you speak of caused destruction over a network, the same
applied for the 2 hackers here who were sent over without even
questioning the UK. If the US Government is Satan then I suppose I am
going to hell, becaus
Texas.
Sincerely,
William Warren
--
My "Foundation" verse:
Isa 54:17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and
every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt
condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their
righteousness is of me, saith the LORD.
Heck feed it from spamkarma 2 or askimet. I use spamkarma 2 and it
routinely nails tons of blog spammers..:)
Alexander Harrowell wrote:
Gadi, if your HTTP spam DNSBL gets working, we would certainly be
interested in feeding our spam filter from it. It is my experience so
far that comments sp
41 matches
Mail list logo
