Re: How to catch a cracker in the US?

2014-03-17 Thread Larry Sheldon
On 3/17/2014 9:10 PM, shawn wilson wrote: The point is that 'computer security' involves innovation as much as is done at hacker spaces (which can be geared to hardware or computer security or whatever). I think the difference you're trying to argue is the legality and not the task or process. I

Re: How to catch a cracker in the US?

2014-03-17 Thread shawn wilson
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Sholes, Joshua wrote: > On 3/13/14, 7:35 PM, "Larry Sheldon" wrote: > >>Not sure I can agree with that. I have been in this game for a very >>long time, but for most of it in places where the world's population >>cleaved neatly into two parts: "Authorized Users"

Re: pay.gov and IPv6

2014-03-17 Thread Arturo Servin
HE should work then, perhaps another problem + IPv6. -as On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Matthew Kaufman wrote: > Windows 8 running Google Chrome as the browser. > > Matthew Kaufman > > > On 3/17/2014 11:46 AM, Arturo Servin wrote: > > > No Happy Eyeballs? > > Perhaps also time to ditch XP

Re: pay.gov and IPv6

2014-03-17 Thread Matthew Kaufman
It was reachable by hand-typed URL, but the machines trying to follow a redirect from the FCC site during payment flow failed. Had to be brought back online, so once it was determined that turning v6 off was sufficient, that was the end if the debugging. Matthew Kaufman (Sent from my iPhone)

Re: pay.gov and IPv6

2014-03-17 Thread Jared Mauch
One more (498?) set(s) of data points: I used RIPE ATLAS probes to check the SSL certificate over IPv6 (a nice way to check reachability).. Measurement# 1584700 You can look through the data to determine where it's not reachable from, but it seems to be "generally reachable" without issue from

Re: pay.gov and IPv6

2014-03-17 Thread Marco Paesani
Hi Matthew, in Italy I see the site pay.gov in IPv6, as you can see: [image: Immagine in linea 1] Regards, Marco 2014-03-17 19:43 GMT+01:00 Matthew Kaufman : > Random IPv6 complaint of the day: redirects from FCC.gov to pay.gov fail > when clients have IPv6 enabled. Work fine if IPv6 is off.

Re: pay.gov and IPv6

2014-03-17 Thread Jared Mauch
No issues for me over IPv6 on Comcast. Perhaps some local network issue? Any reported issues if you try to visit http://www.test-ipv6.com/ ? - Jared On Mar 17, 2014, at 2:55 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote: > Windows 8 running Google Chrome as the browser. > > Matthew Kaufman > > On 3/17/2014 11

Re: pay.gov and IPv6

2014-03-17 Thread Matthew Kaufman
Windows 8 running Google Chrome as the browser. Matthew Kaufman On 3/17/2014 11:46 AM, Arturo Servin wrote: No Happy Eyeballs? Perhaps also time to ditch XP and IE for something new as well. -as On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Matthew Kaufman > wrote: R

Re: pay.gov and IPv6

2014-03-17 Thread Arturo Servin
No Happy Eyeballs? Perhaps also time to ditch XP and IE for something new as well. -as On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Matthew Kaufman wrote: > Random IPv6 complaint of the day: redirects from FCC.gov to pay.gov fail > when clients have IPv6 enabled. Work fine if IPv6 is off. One more set

pay.gov and IPv6

2014-03-17 Thread Matthew Kaufman
Random IPv6 complaint of the day: redirects from FCC.gov to pay.gov fail when clients have IPv6 enabled. Work fine if IPv6 is off. One more set of client computers that should be dual-stacked are now relegated to IPv4-only until someone remembers to turn it back on for each of them... sigh. M

Last Call and Draft program for RIPE 68

2014-03-17 Thread Filiz Yilmaz
Dear Colleagues, A list of currently accepted RIPE 68 presentations is now published at: https://ripe68.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/draft/ There are still few slots remaining for a final RIPE 68 programme and RIPE Programme Committee will accept new proposals until 6 April 2014. This is ou

Re: [dns-wg] Global Vs local node data in www.root-servers.org

2014-03-17 Thread bmanning
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:11:40AM -0400, Joe Abley wrote: > > On 17 Mar 2014, at 10:27, manning bill wrote: > > > alas, our service predates Joe’s marvelous text. > > > > “B” provides its services locally to its upstream ISPs. > > We don’t play routing tricks, impose routing policy, or attempt

Re: [dns-wg] Global Vs local node data in www.root-servers.org

2014-03-17 Thread Joe Abley
On 17 Mar 2014, at 10:27, manning bill wrote: > alas, our service predates Joe’s marvelous text. > > “B” provides its services locally to its upstream ISPs. > We don’t play routing tricks, impose routing policy, or attempt to > influence prefix announcement. In the taxonomy I just shared, tha

Re: [dns-wg] Global Vs local node data in www.root-servers.org

2014-03-17 Thread manning bill
alas, our service predates Joe’s marvelous text. “B” provides its services locally to its upstream ISPs. We don’t play routing tricks, impose routing policy, or attempt to influence prefix announcement. /bill Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoscet. On 17March2014Monday, at 7:17, Joe Abley wrote:

Re: How to catch a cracker in the US?

2014-03-17 Thread Sholes, Joshua
On 3/13/14, 7:35 PM, "Larry Sheldon" wrote: >Not sure I can agree with that. I have been in this game for a very >long time, but for most of it in places where the world's population >cleaved neatly into two parts: "Authorized Users" who could be >identified by the facts that they had ID cards,

Re: [dns-wg] Global Vs local node data in www.root-servers.org

2014-03-17 Thread Joe Abley
On 17 Mar 2014, at 7:39, John Bond wrote: > Global and Local nodes are very loosely defined terms. However general > consensus of a local node is one that has a desired routing policy which > does not allow the service supernets to propagate globally. As we impose > no policy we mark all nodes