Grant said today:
-Original Message-
From: Grant Ridder [mailto:shortdudey...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 11:25 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Stuxnet
Hi Everyone,
I realize most people already know the history of Stuxnet but i figured i
would pass along an IEEE article th
Juniper dynamic application awareness does a decent job and so does the cisco
counterpart
saves buying more hw
From: Erik Muller [er...@buh.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 10:21 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Rate shaping in Active E FTTx networks
On 7/26/12 12:45 , Jason Lixfeld wrote:
Hi all,
I'm trying to gauge what operators are doing to handle per-subscriber
> Internet access PIR bandwidth in Active E FTTx networks.
I presume operators would want to limit the each subscriber to a
certain PIR, but within that limit, do things like
In message , Michael J Wise writ
es:
>
> On Jul 26, 2012, at 6:34 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> > In message , Michael J =
> Wise writ
> > es:
> >>=20
> >> On Jul 26, 2012, at 1:35 AM, Lou Katz wrote:
> >>=20
> >>> The domain is cookephoto.com
> >>=20
> >> Why does mail.metron.com have MX records?
On Jul 26, 2012, at 6:34 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message , Michael J Wise
> writ
> es:
>>
>> On Jul 26, 2012, at 1:35 AM, Lou Katz wrote:
>>
>>> The domain is cookephoto.com
>>
>> Why does mail.metron.com have MX records?
>
> Why do you care? There is nothing wrong with having explict
In message , Michael J Wise writ
es:
>
> On Jul 26, 2012, at 1:35 AM, Lou Katz wrote:
>
> > The domain is cookephoto.com
>
> Why does mail.metron.com have MX records?
Why do you care? There is nothing wrong with having explict MX
records and they generally take up less room in a DNS cache the
BGP Update Report
Interval: 21-Jul-12 -to- 25-Jul-12 (4 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS840231474 1.4% 17.8 -- CORBINA-AS OJSC "Vimpelcom"
2 - AS163730729 1.4
This report has been generated at Fri Jul 27 00:13:01 2012 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
Hi all,
I'm trying to gauge what operators are doing to handle per-subscriber Internet
access PIR bandwidth in Active E FTTx networks.
I presume operators would want to limit the each subscriber to a certain PIR,
but within that limit, do things like perform preferential treatment of
interac
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 09:05:55AM -0500, Ryan Rawdon wrote:
>
> On Jul 26, 2012, at 2:14 AM, Lou Katz wrote:
>
> > One of my users has reported incoming mail failures, which I finally
> > tracked down. It turned out that Hotmail has seen fit to send the mail
> > to his domain's A record machine,
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 04:48:48AM +, Tina TSOU wrote:
> Do u mean I am a cow? I stop breast feeding this year.
>
> Tina
ROGFLOL This is the best thing I have read yet this morning. Thanks for
the laugh.
>
> On Jul 25, 2012, at 9:47 PM, "Randy Bush" wrote:
>
> >> I'm responsible for IPv6
> From: Ryan Rawdon
> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 7:06 AM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Is Hotmail in the habit of ignoring MX records?
> No solution to the issue was found in the various forks of that thread,
> however one individual afflicted by this issue (the OP) seems to have
> res
On Jul 26, 2012, at 2:21 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> If the MX records are not responsive / timing out, they might be falling
> back to the A record.
>
Per RFC2821 (and later RFC5321):
If one or more MX RRs are found for a given name, SMTP systems MUST
NOT utilize any address RR
On Jul 26, 2012, at 2:14 AM, Lou Katz wrote:
> One of my users has reported incoming mail failures, which I finally
> tracked down. It turned out that Hotmail has seen fit to send the mail
> to his domain's A record machine, despite the fact that he has valid MX
> records.
>
> The A record poin
On Jul 26, 2012, at 1:35 AM, Lou Katz wrote:
> The domain is cookephoto.com
Why does mail.metron.com have MX records?
And they're different.
$ host cookephoto.com
cookephoto.com has address 192.160.193.89
cookephoto.com mail is handled by 10 mail.metron.com.
cook
On Jul 25, 2012, at 10:16 PM, Geoff Huston wrote:
>
> On 21/07/2012, at 6:40 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 20, 2012, at 4:30 PM, Ron Broersma wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 20, 2012, at 1:04 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 05:10:41 +1000, Routing Analysis Role
On 26/07/12 20:35, Lou Katz wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 02:38:31AM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote:
>> On 7/26/12, Lou Katz wrote:
>>> One of my users has reported incoming mail failures, which I finally
>>> tracked down. It turned out that Hotmail has seen fit to send the mail
>>> to his domain's A
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 02:38:31AM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> On 7/26/12, Lou Katz wrote:
> > One of my users has reported incoming mail failures, which I finally
> > tracked down. It turned out that Hotmail has seen fit to send the mail
> > to his domain's A record machine, despite the fact that
On 7/26/12, Lou Katz wrote:
> One of my users has reported incoming mail failures, which I finally
> tracked down. It turned out that Hotmail has seen fit to send the mail
> to his domain's A record machine, despite the fact that he has valid MX
> records.
You looked in the mail headers and saw h
If the MX records are not responsive / timing out, they might be falling
back to the A record.
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Lou Katz wrote:
> One of my users has reported incoming mail failures, which I finally
> tracked down. It turned out that Hotmail has seen fit to send the mail
> to hi
One of my users has reported incoming mail failures, which I finally
tracked down. It turned out that Hotmail has seen fit to send the mail
to his domain's A record machine, despite the fact that he has valid MX records.
The A record points to my webserver, which does not normally accept mail
for
22 matches
Mail list logo
