Abha Ahuja, 2001

2011-10-19 Thread Phil Regnauld
Abha passed away 10 years ago today. Time flies.

Re: Facebook insecure by design

2011-10-19 Thread Murtaza
Going back to the initial security problem identified by Williams, I also experienced something today. I guess he is right about that. I am behind a proxy and I just disabled the proxy for "Secure Web" which means HTTPS. Now guess what I was still able to access facebook while I was not able to acc

Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes

2011-10-19 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:21:27 +0800, "Nathanael C. Cariaga" said: > Thanks for the prompt response. Actually our requirement is to find a > webhosting provider whose routes are widely advertised locally and > regionally. That's different from who the provider peers with. We (AS1312) don't peer

Re: 4.2.2.2 acting up? or is it just me?

2011-10-19 Thread Jay Ashworth
- Original Message - > From: "Jay Ashworth" > But understand that all 6 of GTEI's anycast customer resolver nameservers > are really intended for customers of whatever tha company is called these > days, and they've been known to block ingress to various ones of them at > random times, ju

Re: 4.2.2.2 acting up? or is it just me?

2011-10-19 Thread Jay Ashworth
- Original Message - > From: "Lorell Hathcock" > I am experiencing trouble with reaching 4.2.2.2 right now from my > netblock. ASN 23077. > > Is it just me or are others experiencing the same thing? Well, it's presently reachable from Tampa: HOST: elphaba.baylink.com Loss% Sn

Re: Outsourcing DDOS

2011-10-19 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 9:13 AM, wrote: > We are considering using Prolexic to 'defend' our Internet-facing network > from DDOS attacks.  Anyone have any known issues or word of warnings before > we proceed? > you appear to be an ATT customer (and qwest) ATT has a dos-mitigation solution, it w

Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes

2011-10-19 Thread bmanning
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 01:20:42PM -0500, Jack Bates wrote: > On 10/19/2011 12:48 PM, Jared Mauch wrote: > > > >On Oct 19, 2011, at 3:00 AM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote: > > > >>Dont mix up peering and transit connections! > > > >I've nearly given up on this. I've heard many a small provider say they

Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes

2011-10-19 Thread Jack Bates
On 10/19/2011 12:48 PM, Jared Mauch wrote: On Oct 19, 2011, at 3:00 AM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote: Dont mix up peering and transit connections! I've nearly given up on this. I've heard many a small provider say they are "Peering" with level3 when they mean "we are buying transit from Level3

Re: 4.2.2.2 acting up? or is it just me?

2011-10-19 Thread Matt Taber
Outages mailing list narrowed it down to something Level3 in Dallas -- anycast IPs, etc. On 10/19/2011 1:45 PM, Paul wrote: No packet loss but I'm seeing some fairly variable performance on the penultimate hop, reaching it both from Timewarner in Hawaii and HE's fremont location: ae-31-80.

Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes

2011-10-19 Thread Jared Mauch
On Oct 19, 2011, at 3:00 AM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote: > Dont mix up peering and transit connections! I've nearly given up on this. I've heard many a small provider say they are "Peering" with level3 when they mean "we are buying transit from Level3". Many people equate having BGP up with the

Re: 4.2.2.2 acting up? or is it just me?

2011-10-19 Thread Paul
No packet loss but I'm seeing some fairly variable performance on the penultimate hop, reaching it both from Timewarner in Hawaii and HE's fremont location: ae-31-80.car1.SanJose1.Level3.net Last: 56.2 Average:74.6 Best: 56.1 Worst: 259.3 StDev: 47.4 Paul On 10/19/2011 07:15 AM, Lorell H

Re: 4.2.2.2 acting up? or is it just me?

2011-10-19 Thread brian nikell
Packet loss from AS4323 On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Brandon Grant wrote: > I can also hit it from ASN 40409 and 26499. > > -Original Message- > From: Keegan Holley [mailto:keegan.hol...@sungard.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 1:29 PM > To: brian nikell > Cc: nanog@nanog.org

Re: 4.2.2.2 acting up? or is it just me?

2011-10-19 Thread Keegan Holley
I can hit it from home (comcast) and from my company's network. 2011/10/19 brian nikell > same > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Lorell Hathcock >wrote: > > > All: > > > > > > > > I am experiencing trouble with reaching 4.2.2.2 right now from my > netblock. > > ASN 23077. > > > > > > > > I

Re: 4.2.2.2 acting up? or is it just me?

2011-10-19 Thread brian nikell
same On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Lorell Hathcock wrote: > All: > > > > I am experiencing trouble with reaching 4.2.2.2 right now from my netblock. > ASN 23077. > > > > Is it just me or are others experiencing the same thing? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Lorell > > > > > > -- -B

4.2.2.2 acting up? or is it just me?

2011-10-19 Thread Lorell Hathcock
All: I am experiencing trouble with reaching 4.2.2.2 right now from my netblock. ASN 23077. Is it just me or are others experiencing the same thing? Thanks, Lorell

Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes

2011-10-19 Thread Bill Woodcock
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Oct 18, 2011, at 11:46 PM, Nathanael C. Cariaga wrote: > Is it safe to conclude that the web hosting provider's available routes would > would depend on the peers who are advertising their AS / network? (i.e if > web hosting provider claims th

Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes

2011-10-19 Thread Randy Bush
> Ok. Thanks for the information :) So that would mean that to answer my > question, I would need to determine the web hosting provider who has > the most number of peers and most number of transit providers? if i was choosing a hosting provider, many other considerations would come before this r

Re: Outsourcing DDOS

2011-10-19 Thread Vlad Galu
On Oct 19, 2011, at 3:13 PM, wrote: > We are considering using Prolexic to 'defend' our Internet-facing network > from DDOS attacks. Anyone have any known issues or word of warnings before > we proceed? > They say that "When an attack is detected, our protection services are implemented

Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes

2011-10-19 Thread William Herrin
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 2:46 AM, Nathanael C. Cariaga wrote: > In this regard,  I would like to ask for your idea regarding this.  Is it > safe to conclude that the web hosting provider's available routes would > would depend on the peers who are advertising their AS / network?  (i.e if > web host

Outsourcing DDOS

2011-10-19 Thread samuel.cunningham
We are considering using Prolexic to 'defend' our Internet-facing network from DDOS attacks. Anyone have any known issues or word of warnings before we proceed? Chris Cunningham Network Engineering Secure Connectivity 704-427-3557 (Desk) 704-701-6924 (Cell) samuel.cunning...@wellsfargo.com

Re: Weekly Routing Table Report

2011-10-19 Thread Philip Smith
Hi Leo, Leo Vegoda said the following on 18/10/11 00:31 : >> >>> 128.0.87.0/2430977 JSC "Yugra-Telecom" > > This one seems to be an error. 128.0.80/21 appears to have been allocated on > 5 October, nine days before the report was generated. The report is as good as what is in the R

Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes

2011-10-19 Thread Thilo Bangert
On Wednesday, October 19, 2011 09:35:04 AM Nathanael C. Cariaga wrote: > Ok. Thanks for the information :) So that would mean that to answer my > question, I would need to determine the web hosting provider who has the > most number of peers and most number of transit providers? > what i found u

Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes

2011-10-19 Thread Raymond Dijkxhoorn
Hi! Ok. Thanks for the information :) So that would mean that to answer my question, I would need to determine the web hosting provider who has the most number of peers and most number of transit providers? You wont see those local peerings unless all those providers have looking glasses. S

Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes

2011-10-19 Thread Nathanael C. Cariaga
Ok. Thanks for the information :) So that would mean that to answer my question, I would need to determine the web hosting provider who has the most number of peers and most number of transit providers? -nathan On 10/19/2011 3:20 PM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote: Hi! You wont see those local pe

Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes

2011-10-19 Thread Raymond Dijkxhoorn
Hi! You wont see those local peerings unless all those providers have looking glasses. So thats not gonna work out in this case. You will only see who they transit with... Thanks, Raymond Dijkxhoorn, Prolocation Op 19 okt. 2011 om 09:21 heeft "Nathanael C. Cariaga" het volgende geschreven:

Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes

2011-10-19 Thread Nathanael C. Cariaga
Hi. Thanks for the prompt response. Actually our requirement is to find a webhosting provider whose routes are widely advertised locally and regionally. This is why I thought of using bgp as a basis studying the availability of routes of the hosting provider. -nathan On 10/19/2011 3:00 P

Re: BGP Peers as basis of available routes

2011-10-19 Thread Raymond Dijkxhoorn
Hi! Dont mix up peering and transit connections! That you dont see that route on a lookingglass doesnt mean much. Only Could tell you they dont transit there. Its all depending what you definiëren with available routes. If i peer with all ISP's in a specific area and your looking glass isnt li