This report has been generated at Fri Mar 4 21:11:55 2011 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date
BGP Update Report
Interval: 24-Feb-11 -to- 03-Mar-11 (7 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS982918263 1.2% 14.3 -- BSNL-NIB National Internet
Backbone
2 - AS65031
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, AusNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, LacNOG,
CaribNOG and the RIPE Routing Working Group.
Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net
On Mar 4, 2011, at 12:20 PM, Craig Labovitz wrote:
>
>
> http://monkey.org/~labovit/images/march4_libya.pdf
I also saw this
http://www.renesys.com/blog/
Do you know if this is all of Libya (including the "liberated" East, e.g.,
Cyrenaica), or just Tripolitania (the part under gov. control)
http://monkey.org/~labovit/images/march4_libya.pdf
- Craig
On Mar 4, 2011, at 11:42 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
> Does anyone have evidence that the Internet is up to Libya today ?
>
> The Google "transparency report" is showing flatlines after about mid-day
> yesterday.
>
> http://www.goog
On 3/4/2011 10:35 AM, John Peach wrote:
> Common phishing scam; we see them all the time, nearly always from
> accounts which have been compromised by others who respond to the same
> scam.
I thought this might be the case.
Any particular hints on spam filters that can catch this type of thing?
I
Does anyone have evidence that the Internet is up to Libya today ?
The Google "transparency report" is showing flatlines after about mid-day
yesterday.
http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/traffic/?r=LY&l=WEBSEARCH&csd=1298650426153&ced=1299255226153
Regards
Marshall
Common phishing scam; we see them all the time, nearly always from
accounts which have been compromised by others who respond to the same
scam.
On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 10:30:53 -0600
imNet Administrator wrote:
> Is anyone else getting spam similar to this:
> I started getting this (albeit in Englis
Is anyone else getting spam similar to this:
I started getting this (albeit in English) a month or two ago, and it
went away about the same time I turned on the CBL/XBL filters on
postfix. It appears it's back again.
Note, I have absolutely zero connection with "baosteel.com" before these
started
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, Simon Perreault wrote:
On 2011-03-04 08:32, Francois Tigeot wrote:
http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca/
What about its integration in upstream software ?
None of it is integrated yet.
but I've not
seen any real information for the nat part in pf or iptables.
Pf has changed a
This has nothing to do with Vonage and likes that market to consumer - their
devices are locked so the consumer is locked into the services that
Vonage/MagicJack/etc provides. They are not the companies that are going to
eat lunch of cable companies and old school telcos as their business model
One issue with this is that distributions like RHEL don't open DHCPv6 in the
default firewall policy.
On Mar 4, 2011 7:17 AM, "Jay Cornwall" wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 00:24:48 + (UTC), Bernhard Schmidt wrote:
>
>> Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>>
>>> On a more serious note, I can on my Ubuntu
On 2011-03-04 08:32, Francois Tigeot wrote:
>> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca/
>
> What about its integration in upstream software ?
None of it is integrated yet.
> The dns64 part is integrated in the newly released Bind 9.8
That's not our code. ISC made their own DNS64 implementation for Bind 9.8.
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 08:25:15AM -0500, Simon Perreault wrote:
> On 2011-03-03 15:31, Elliot Finley wrote:
> > So as not to re-invent the wheel - if you are currently doing NAT64 in
> > production and are willing to share:
> >
> > What software/hardware are you using?
>
> http://ecdysis.viageni
Hello,
I've heard a rumour that Hetzner datacenter is leasing Netdirekt's
bandwidth, could anyone confirm please?
By tracerouting hetzner.de, netdirekt.de, and two servers (one placed
in Netdirekt and another in Hetzner) I can't find anything similar
(except russian gateways):
kai@zuze:~> lf
On 2011-03-03 15:31, Elliot Finley wrote:
> So as not to re-invent the wheel - if you are currently doing NAT64 in
> production and are willing to share:
>
> What software/hardware are you using?
http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca/
> Why?
Dogfooding.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eating_your_own_dog_foo
> is it spring vaccation in the states, when the children are loosed upon
> the net?
not yet, in two weeks. this may be from Jeff Williams boot camp.
-J
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 00:24:48 + (UTC), Bernhard Schmidt wrote:
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On a more serious note, I can on my Ubuntu machine just "apt-get
install
wide-dhcpv6-client" and I get dhcpv6, it'll properly put stuff in
resolv.conf for dns-over-ipv6 transport, even though the conne
Apologies, was thinking 6over4 ... And I still think we could have done
better at naming these (DSTM, anyone?)
Thanks, TJ's Droid2
On Mar 4, 2011 2:40 AM, "Owen DeLong" wrote:
> He is mistaken... HE Tunnels are an example of 6in4 and it is not
deprecated,
> but, some original mechanisms for 6in4
On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 15:34:11 +0100
Alfa Telecom wrote:
> On 03/03/2011 03:25 PM, Brandon Ross wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Mar 2011, Alfa Telecom wrote:
> >
> >> Both ranges are from RIPE region and couldn't be announced from
> >> ARIN ASN at all.
> >
> > Your premise is incorrect. Any block from any RI
On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 09:03:18 -0500
Leon Kaiser wrote:
> This is the man who poisoned DroneBL. He is a bad man. Keep your
> children safe.
> http://raged.tittybang.org/
How, exactly, has kunwon1 poisoned DroneBL when he has had no RPC key
for over a year?
William
Can someone who's a mail admin at Fasthosts Ltd. in the UK/AS15148 contact this
customer off list? Messagelabs is rejecting random e-mail from one of your SMTP
boxes (error 553: Spam, exchange-out-45.livemail.co.uk/213.171.216.45). Your
phone number goes to people who don't know what a postmaste
That's as cluebie an answer as it gets.
ps: man iptables on restricting / allowing by uid.
cheers
srs
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Joshua William Klubi
wrote:
> Then like Robert Suggest he should implement step 2
> and it would solve his problem asap
--
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.li...
Hi Randy,
I don't advocate for 6to4. I'm for dual-stack, even with IPv4 private
addresses and NAT, which is what we have today.
However, we like it or not 6to4 is there in many platforms, and the best
we can do is to deploy 6to4 relays in both sides, ISPs and content
providers. That will minimise
> 6to4 is an automatic transition mechanism
^ non-
which allows an end site to have horrible v6 pseudo-connectivity over a
provider who has not deployed ipv6
randy
> 1) All routing data must be present at the RIPE DB.
pure bull
> 2) RIPE IP Usage policy don't allow to route RIPE IPs from non-RIPE
> region.
pure bull
randy
> No, don't speak up. Please don't pollute NANOG any further than it
> already is, and please don't encourage others to do so.
is it spring vaccation in the states, when the children are loosed upon
the net?
randy
On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 16:33 -0700, Elliot Finley wrote:
> You are correct. I'm talking about the NAT64 portion of NAT64/DNS64.
>
> Elliot
Andrews & Arnold (http://aaisp.net.uk) have a NAT64 gateway which is
operated by a Firebrick 6202, IIRC.
As an ISP this is really for a handful of IPv6-only
28 matches
Mail list logo
