On Mon, 20 Jul 2020, Brock Tice wrote:
We have been having issues delivering email to [...]
You should probably join the mailop list.
We have repeatedly requested removal of our subnet from their block list
and it has not worked.
You will eventually be conversing with a person if you persi
On Fri, 29 May 2020, Justin Wilson (Lists) wrote:
One of the companies I work for recently had an issue with AS 2
(University of Delaware) hijacking a prefix.
Sounds like a misconfigured prepend, someone thinking the value to
provide is the number of prepends instead of the ASN to prepend.
On Fri, 29 May 2020, John Sage wrote:
Each one of ping, traceroute, dig and host returns
Host usbank . com not found: 2(SERVFAIL)
Could be a DNSSEC issue. When it happens check <http://dnsviz.net/> or
<https://dnssec-debugger.verisignlabs.com/> to see if that's th
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020, Grant Taylor wrote:
On 3/17/20 11:35 AM, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
But I dont expect me to go to my desk any time since now in one month to
press the button on the phone to set the voicemail active.
My office had problems with multiple workstations needing someone to kic
On Fri, 10 Jan 2020, Octolus Development wrote:
I run a VPN Business dedicated to protecting clients from DDoS Attacks
that happens "all day long" on PlayStation Network. We need our VPN to
work on PSN, all our customers uses their service.
They are still investigating the problem, let's see
On Mon, 30 Dec 2019, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
I'm not saying that maybe one day we won't need 25Mb/s to a hand-held
device, but hologram telephone calling, Netflixing and even video
calling, are not the use-cases, IMHO.
Actually you went on to say that future innovations shouldn't exist
becaus
On Thu, 19 Dec 2019, Keith Medcalf wrote:
You should ALWAYS talk to the call center behind the robocaller. The
robocaller (the one playing the message) is relatively local and the
cost of that call is minimal. When you select to talk to the
robocaller, that generates an international handoff
On Tuesday 2019-12-10 06:58, Matt Harris wrote:
On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 8:51 AM Bottiger wrote:
I sent an email to noc at gtt.net from 2 different emails and both got a
reply saying:
5.1.0 - Unknown address error 550-'5.4.1 Recipient address rejected:
Access denied [HE1EUR01FT058.eop-EUR01.p
On Tuesday 2019-11-26 00:13, Sabri Berisha wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating against IPv6 deployment; on the
contrary. But it is not that simple in the real corporate world. Execs
have bonus targets. IPv6 is not yet important enough to become part of
that bonus target: there is no
On Friday 2019-10-25 01:22, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 01:21:12PM -0700, Mark Milhollan wrote:
My experience says that: their system has learned that your system(s)
continued to send messages that their user (yes you, but they don't
know that) did not want [and no
On Wednesday 2019-10-23 17:18, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
I use my own personal domain name for various UNIX stuff, including sending
log-related things to myself out of cron, which end up in my own Gmail.com
account, either directly, or through forwarding (w/o SRS). (I do not use G
Suite fo
On Tue, 9 Jul 2019, Mike O'Connor wrote:
:How do you deal with QoS for Office365, since the IPs are subject to changes ?
How often is the data in:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/office365/enterprise/urls-and-ip-address-ranges
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/office365/enterprise/office-365-i
On Fri, 14 Jun 2019, Gary E. Miller wrote:
Is it no longer required to monitor the postmaster@ ?
Did RFC 822 and RFC 5321 get repealed? Or is M$ more special than the
rest of us?
It is monitored just not by humans and you did receive a response that
could be useful though you didn't like it
On Mon, 13 May 2019, Stephen Satchell wrote:
On 5/13/19 12:11 PM, dan...@pyranah.com wrote:
Does anyone have contacts at Charter (Spectrum) and Cox? For some reason,
our IP has been blocked by them and our customers are unable to send email
via their charter/cox accounts. Thanks
Would you be
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote:
Just ran into packetstream.io:
How can this not be a violation of the ToS of just about every major provider?
Sounds like a "paid" TOR. Is TOR a ToS violation too -- the EFF would
probably like to hear of it if so. Or just the aspect of
On Thu, 11 Apr 2019, Tore Anderson wrote:
We've been wanting to replace our all of our ad-hoc OOB links with a
standardised setup based on LTE connectivity to an embedded
login/console server at each PoP. IPv6 would be perfect due to no
CGNAT and infinitesimal levels of background scanning.
Unf
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018, Dovid Bender wrote:
>I finally got around to setting up a cellular backup device in our new POP.
>When SSH'ing in remotely the connection seems rather slow.
Perhaps using MOSH can help make the interactive CLI session less
annoying.
>Verizon they charge $500.00 just to get
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, David H wrote:
>Hey all, was curious if anyone knows of a website monitoring service
>that has the option to incorporate a human component into the decision
>and escalation tree?
Isn't this merely a matter of escalation, since either alerts someone
and it is just a matter
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018, Job Snijders wrote:
>We really need to bring it back down to "apt install rpki-cache-validator"
You say this as if no packager has a way to display and perhaps require
approval of the license nor any way to fetch something remote as part of
the installation process, e.g., t
Seems to me that another logical way to work on cleaning-up invalids
would be for those that want to perform validation to contact their
direct peers with invalids, though even those contacts can become stale
there will be some that are still valid and usually involve those
intimately intereste
One can analyze the calling frequency, but even that's problematic as it
can penalize a successful customer that isn't scamming. Besides as HAL
wrote many of these calls are not originating in NA. If digital
residential lines hadn't died they might make the original source
visible making it e
Sounds like the Juniper is leaking a "default" BPDU as it resets the
various internal chip configurations, which the Cisco receives thus
triggering the err-disable.
/mark
On Thu, 29 Mar 2018, Seth Mattinen wrote:
>I'm lazy and have been using 9.9.9.9 at home.
nameserver 1.1
/mark
On Sun, 25 Sep 2016, Stephen Satchell wrote:
>Yeah, right. I looked at BCP38.info, and there is very little concrete
>information.
Yeah, it's pretty naked. But how-to isn't the usual stumbling block, as
has been pointed out in this thread there needs to be the will to spend
resources settin
On Mon, 20 Jun 2016, Jared Mauch wrote:
>On Jun 20, 2016, at 1:30 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>On Jun 17, 2016, at 10:10 , Mark Milhollan wrote:
>>>This (open by default vs closed) has been discussed before, with plenty
>>>of people on either side.
>>I'm una
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016, Owen DeLong wrote:
>On Jun 14, 2016, at 11:57 , Ricky Beam wrote:
>>I've seen many "IPv6 Capable" CPEs that apply ZERO security to IPv6 traffic.
>
>Those are by definition poorly designed CPE.
This (open by default vs closed) has been discussed before, with plenty
of peop
On Thu, 13 Nov 2015, John Levine wrote:
>At this point very few client resolvers check DNSSEC, so something
>that stripped off all the DNSSEC stuff and inserted lies where
>required would "work" for most clients. At least until they realized
>they couldn't get to PokerStars and switched their DNS
On Wed, 30 Sep 2015, Hugo Slabbert wrote:
>On Wed 2015-Sep-30 17:43:40 -0400, Robert Webb wrote:
>>https://ipinfo.io/AS393742
>
>...I'm so behind the times; my response would have been:
>
> $ finger 393...@peeringdb.com
Whois is often useful as well, not for peering info of course but that
isn'
On Thu, 10 Sep 2015, Matthew Petach wrote:
>Just wanted to clear one point up...
>
>The web is *not* a "push" model; it's a "pull" model.
Mostly true, yet there's that little bit that makes it not total truth.
HTTP/2 has push, where instead of waiting for a browser to decide which
elements to f
On Sat, 11 Jul 2015, Harlan Stenn wrote:
>I'm kinda stunned that folks are running such ancient
>versions of NTP.
This is not surprising at all, nor should you be surprised to find xntp3
still in use because of the even older software on decrepit but still
functional hardware. I.e., in additio
On Wed, 17 Jun 2015, Maqbool Hashim wrote:
>Finally I don't see how it could be, but be interested to hear peoples
>thoughts, no legitimate application could be generating this traffic
>could it? I mean I don't see what use an application could make of
>such a TCP conversation. Discarding net
On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, Notify Me wrote:
>According to the auditors, "trusted" means
>
>1. Universities or Research facilities (nuclear/atomic facilities,
>space research (such as NASA) etc.)
>2. Main country internet/telecom providers
>3. Government departments
>4. Satellites (using GPS module)
>
>Wh
32 matches
Mail list logo
