On Sun, 10 Apr 2016, Damian Menscher via NANOG wrote:
Sorry to hear your legitimate users are impacted by captchas when trying to
use Google web search. This can happen when you have significant amounts
of abuse coming from your network. If switching to IPv4 means having more
users share IPs,
On 10 April 2016 at 12:33, wrote:
> Who cares what his motivations are unless he asks for help with that
> underlying problem?
See Also: http://xyproblem.info/
--
Eitan Adler
On 10 April 2016 at 14:48, Jon Lewis wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016, Max Tulyev wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I need to stop IPv6 web traffic going from our customers to Google
>> without touching all other IPv6 and without blackhole IPv6 Google
>> network (this case my customers are complaining on long
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 14:03 , Rubens Kuhl wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 5:56 PM, Ricky Beam wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 20:09:04 -0400, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
>>
>>> If your users are seeing captchas, one or a few or them are likely to be
>>> infected to the point of generating too much
On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 17:03:02 -0400, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
If that were the case, they'd be seeing the same via IPv4. And
apparently,
they aren't.
Nope. If you have both A and IP addresses in DNS responses and have
both IPv4 and IPv6 connectivity, IPv6 will be preferred, with even a bit
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 5:56 PM, Ricky Beam wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 20:09:04 -0400, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
>
>> If your users are seeing captchas, one or a few or them are likely to be
>> infected to the point of generating too much requests to Google.
>>
>
> If that were the case, they'd be se
On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 20:09:04 -0400, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
If your users are seeing captchas, one or a few or them are likely to be
infected to the point of generating too much requests to Google.
If that were the case, they'd be seeing the same via IPv4. And apparently,
they aren't.
This also po
b...@theworld.com writes:
> It seems like every technical list is over-run with
> meta-conversations, how do I (blah), WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO (blah)?!?!
It is reasonable to expect anyone asking for help to describe the
process leading up to the situation where they are stuck. I'd say it is
rare t
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Max Tulyev wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I need to stop IPv6 web traffic going from our customers to Google
> without touching all other IPv6 and without blackhole IPv6 Google
> network (this case my customers are complaining on long timeouts).
>
> What can you advice for
On Sun, 10 Apr 2016, Max Tulyev wrote:
Hi All,
I need to stop IPv6 web traffic going from our customers to Google
without touching all other IPv6 and without blackhole IPv6 Google
network (this case my customers are complaining on long timeouts).
What can you advice for that?
Just use Cogent
I don't think it's "groupthink" so much as it is "the mark of
experienced tech people who are good at their job".
At $DAYJOB, a HUGE part of my time is spent as a "technical firewall" --
stopping the company from blindly implementing something based on
incomplete information. When someone com
On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 15:33:43 -0400, b...@theworld.com said:
>
>
>
> Ya know, this is the problem with this kind of list groupthink.
>
> Who cares what his motivations are unless he asks for help with that
> underlying problem?
Because when people apply band-aid solutions rather than fixing the *r
On 10 April 2016 at 21:33, wrote:
>
>
>
> Ya know, this is the problem with this kind of list groupthink.
>
> Who cares what his motivations are unless he asks for help with that
> underlying problem?
>
But you are clearly wrong. Because he got asked and then told us what the
underlying problem
On the flip side of things instead of putting a bandaid on the burn it is
better to stop putting your hand in the fire. Nothing wrong with some
discussion.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 3:33 PM, wrote:
>
Ya know, this is the problem with this kind of list groupthink.
Who cares what his motivations are unless he asks for help with that
underlying problem?
Do you (plural, whoever is replying) know the answer to his question
or where to find the answer or not?
It seems like every technical list
t;>> What is broken that you're trying to fix by blackholing them?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -
> >>> Mike Hammett
> >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >>> http://www.ics-il.com
(Sorry about formatting - posting on my phone)
Other things might need to make sure of is reverse DNS to differentiate between
customers if at all possible, accurate Whois and separate Whois records for
static assigned blocks, etc.
No guarantees of a fix, but general good practices when this st
That's the problem. Nobody want to say which customer (IP) violates
which policy.
On 10.04.16 18:31, a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
> give clients their own bigger blocks - or identify the clients violating
> policy (what the policy
> they are violating?) - you'll probably find the ones getting t
Hi,
> The problem is IPv6-enabled customers complaints see captcha, and Google
> NOC refuses to help solve it saying like find out some of your customer
> violating some of our policy. As you can imagine, this is not possible.
your customers are getting addresses when looking up google addres
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>>
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>>
>>> From: "Max Tuly
Thank you! I think it is what I need now ;)
On 10.04.16 17:50, Niels Bakker wrote:
> You can add a reject route at your borders rather than nullroute. That
> will cause ICMP Unreachables to be sent by your routers back to your
> customers so their applications will know immediately to retry using
* na...@ics-il.net (Mike Hammett) [Sun 10 Apr 2016, 16:53 CEST]:
That is the problem with some of these companies. They've gotten
just as cocky and arrogant as the incumbent telco providers and
won't actually tell you what you're doing wrong, but will punish you
for doing wrong.
I'm happy wit
On 10 April 2016 at 10:36, Filip Hruska wrote:
> If I'm not mistaken, when there is some "abuse",
> Google typically shows captcha for the single IPs, not for whole provider,
> so only the customers who actually do something nefarious should get
> flagged.
>
You are mistaken. Google flags entire
/www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com
- Original Message -
From: "Max Tulyev"
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2016 9:27:53 AM
Subject: Re: Stop IPv6 Google traffic
The problem is IPv6-enabled customers complaints see captcha
* max...@netassist.ua (Max Tulyev) [Sun 10 Apr 2016, 15:30 CEST]:
I need to stop IPv6 web traffic going from our customers to Google
without touching all other IPv6 and without blackhole IPv6 Google
network (this case my customers are complaining on long timeouts).
What can you advice for that?
t; http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>>
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>>
>>> From: "Max Tulyev"
>>> To: nanog@nanog.org
&
Original Message -
From: "Max Tulyev"
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2016 9:07:47 AM
Subject: Re: Stop IPv6 Google traffic
Customers see timeouts if I blackhole Google network. I looking for
alternatives (other than stop providing IPv6 to customers at all).
On 10.04.16 16:5
>
> > -
> > Mike Hammett
> > Intelligent Computing Solutions
> > http://www.ics-il.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Midwest Internet Exchange
> > http://www.midwest-ix.com
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> >
> >
He works for cogent :p ?
Regards,
Dovid
-Original Message-
From: Pavel Odintsov
Sender: "NANOG" Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 09:18:56
To: Filip Hruska
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Stop IPv6 Google traffic
Hello!
Same question from my side. What's original issue with
yev"
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2016 9:07:47 AM
> Subject: Re: Stop IPv6 Google traffic
>
> Customers see timeouts if I blackhole Google network. I looking for
> alternatives (other than stop providing IPv6 to customers at all).
>
> On 10.04.
Hello!
Same question from my side. What's original issue with IPv6 and Google?
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Filip Hruska wrote:
> Why do you want to prevent IPv6 access to Google?
> What's the point?
>
>
> On 04/10/2016 04:07 PM, Max Tulyev wrote:
>>
>> Customers see timeouts if I blackhole
ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com
- Original Message -
From: "Max Tulyev"
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2016 9:07:47 AM
Subject: Re: Stop IPv6 Google traffic
Customers see timeouts if I blackhole Google network. I looking for
alte
On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:07:47 +0300, Max Tulyev said:
> Customers see timeouts if I blackhole Google network. I looking for
> alternatives (other than stop providing IPv6 to customers at all).
"Doctor, it hurts when I do this.." "Then don't do that..."
Why are you blackholing Google?
pgpnTylRPm4
Why do you want to prevent IPv6 access to Google?
What's the point?
On 04/10/2016 04:07 PM, Max Tulyev wrote:
Customers see timeouts if I blackhole Google network. I looking for
alternatives (other than stop providing IPv6 to customers at all).
On 10.04.16 16:50, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
Customers see timeouts if I blackhole Google network. I looking for
alternatives (other than stop providing IPv6 to customers at all).
On 10.04.16 16:50, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 16:29:39 +0300, Max Tulyev said:
>
>> I need to stop IPv6 web traffic going from our custo
I don't understand the motive here. You want to provide a partial view of the
IPv6 table, but sans Google?
Do you as a network do the same for v4? If not, you really need to consider
having congruent implementations.
- jared
> On Apr 10, 2016, at 9:29 AM, Max Tulyev wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
>
On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 16:29:39 +0300, Max Tulyev said:
> I need to stop IPv6 web traffic going from our customers to Google
> without touching all other IPv6 and without blackhole IPv6 Google
> network (this case my customers are complaining on long timeouts).
>
> What can you advice for that?
Umm.
37 matches
Mail list logo
