On Thu, 31 May 2007, Larry J. Blunk wrote:
> Chris L. Morrow wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 29 May 2007, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> >
> >> # traceroute6 www.nanog.org
> >> traceroute6: hostname nor servname provided, or not known
> >>
> >> That would be a start... It took years to get the IETF to ea
On 5/31/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One of my virtual web host servers have been getting multiple probes to
TCP port 1080 (socks) every day for months from AOL IP addresses.
Is AOL known to be doing something relatively innocuous on that port? I
ask because I have portse
On 1/06/2007, at 2:24 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In perfect time, this was published yesterday, to answer that very
question:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hoagland-v6ops-
teredosecconcerns-00.txt
Unfortunately, he doesn't say much in the way of solut
Thanks :-)
I will be happy to organize it again, of course, considering all the
suggestions, for the next NANOG/ARIN meeting.
As soon as we plan for it, more people could participate and provide new
ideas about what they will like to have.
Regards,
Jordi
De: "William B. Norton" <[EMAIL PRO
Larry J. Blunk wrote:
[..]
> A v6 server is now up at www.ipv6.nanog.org. As a bonus
> incentive, you get to see the Merit mascot (no, it's not a dancing
> turtle).Unfortunately, there's some unresolved issues with
> the secure registration server, so we can't add an record
> for www
My .02 - I *really* liked Jordi's hands-on ipv6 tutorial at the nanog 35 in
Los Angeles. There are some suggestions on improving it in the survey forms:
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0510/surveys/
which shows that folks care enough to want to add stuff in. I think we
should try and get the same thing
We also organize frequently non-for-profit IPv6 workshops at different
venues, including ARIN meetings and also dedicated workshops for customers
all around the world where there is a demand for it.
Regards,
Jordi
> De: "William F. Maton Sotomayor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Responder a: <[EMAIL P
David W. Hankins wrote:
> ...
>
> Obligatory operational content: Stock up on coal. If someone
> asks if you're a God, say "Yes."
>
>
You have put your finger on the problem. Someone crossed the ipv4 and
ipv6 streams and the Operator was sent back to the interdimensional
vastness from which
>If you're concerned about hosts at your site getting
>to the world using Teredo, you can simply block 3544/UDP to prevent
>hosts bootstrapping - I'm not sure if already-bootstrapped hosts
>would continue to function, I'm guessing that they would.
No, if you block 3544/UDP, the bubble packets ar
Agree, and indeed one of the issues for the transition is to make sure that
border firewalls and other security stuff get updated.
Regards,
Jordi
> De: Adrian Chadd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Responder a: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Fecha: Thu, 31 May 2007 21:12:49 +0800
> Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[E
On Thu, May 31, 2007, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
>
> In windows, you have IPv6 firewall, so even if Teredo traverses the "IPv4
> security", there is still something there.
>
> A good description of all this is available at:
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/network/ipv6/teredo.mspx
I've read
In windows, you have IPv6 firewall, so even if Teredo traverses the "IPv4
security", there is still something there.
A good description of all this is available at:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/network/ipv6/teredo.mspx
Regards,
Jordi
> De: Adrian Chadd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Responder a:
Hi Sean,
Most of the access providers, can't quickly move to dual-stack. It may be a
problem of existing equipment or even L2 technology (as the cable/DOCSIS 2.0
case).
The bigger issue is upgrading the CPEs. Lack of plans in the last years,
didn't helped the low cost vendors to deliver them wit
> > Isn't his point that y! could offer IPv6 e-mail in parallel to the
> > existing IPv4 service, putting the IPv6 machines in a subdomain
> > ipv6.yahoo.com, so that end users and networks who want to
> do it can
> > do so without bothering the others?
>
> This doesn't sound at all like a tr
One of my virtual web host servers have been getting multiple probes to
TCP port 1080 (socks) every day for months from AOL IP addresses.
Is AOL known to be doing something relatively innocuous on that port? I
ask because I have portsentry null routing IP addresses that make probes
like this.
On 31/05/2007, at 11:41 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On Thu, May 31, 2007, Sean Siler wrote:
Nathan,
While these are really good questions, I'm afraid I don't have
really good answers to them yet. We haven't made the bits
available for customers to install their own Teredo Servers/Relays
On 31/05/2007, at 11:27 PM, Sean Siler wrote:
While these are really good questions, I'm afraid I don't have
really good answers to them yet. We haven't made the bits
available for customers to install their own Teredo Servers/Relays
at this point, and because we haven't, we also don't ha
On Thu, May 31, 2007, Sean Siler wrote:
>
> Nathan,
>
> While these are really good questions, I'm afraid I don't have really good
> answers to them yet. We haven't made the bits available for customers to
> install their own Teredo Servers/Relays at this point, and because we
> haven't, we
On 29 May 2007, at 14:49, Alexander Harrowell wrote:
Isn't his point that y! could offer IPv6 e-mail in parallel to the
existing IPv4 service, putting the IPv6 machines in a subdomain
ipv6.yahoo.com, so that end users and networks who want to do it can
do so without bothering the others?
Thi
Nathan,
While these are really good questions, I'm afraid I don't have really good
answers to them yet. We haven't made the bits available for customers to
install their own Teredo Servers/Relays at this point, and because we haven't,
we also don't have good deployment guidance to go along wi
20 matches
Mail list logo
