Hi There,
Are there any Yahoo! e-mail admins on the list? We're having some issues at
times delivering e-mail to yahoo.co.uk and sometimes some of the other yahoo
networks.
Thanks,
Paul
Paul Kelly
Technical Director
Blacknight Internet Solutions ltd
Hosting, Colocation, Dedicated servers
IP T
Hi all
When I ping the ip, I get the duplicate
I check the ip is just one. Why it happens?
Thank you
64 bytes from 192.168.0.95: icmp_seq=1 ttl=63 time=0.344 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.95: icmp_seq=1 ttl=63 time=0.401 ms (DUP!)
64 bytes from 192.168.0.95: icmp_seq=2 ttl=63 time=0.296 ms
64 byt
Mark Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 5 Sep 2008, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>>
>> We don't allow most of our residential customer base to speak SMTP
>> TCP/25 to anywhere at all (and we have millions of them). Wish more
>> ISPs would do the same.
>>
>
> Probably fair enough, if you as
* chloe K.:
> When I ping the ip, I get the duplicate
>
> I check the ip is just one. Why it happens?
Are the source and target on the same subnet? Have you checked the
source MAC address of the response?
--
Florian Weimer<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
BFK edv-consulting GmbH http:
Check your ARP tables, local and on intervening switches/routers. Make sure
there are no duplicate entries for that IP. If you note the response time, the
second packet is always higher which might be indicative. I would also check
for a botched MITM a la C&A.
Even if there is no obvious AR
> -Original Message-
> From: chloe K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 6:46 AM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: duplicate packet
>
> Hi all
>
> When I ping the ip, I get the duplicate
>
> I check the ip is just one. Why it happens?
>
> Thank you
>
> 64 bytes fr
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, chloe K wrote:
When I ping the ip, I get the duplicate
I check the ip is just one. Why it happens?
64 bytes from 192.168.0.95: icmp_seq=1 ttl=63 time=0.344 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.95: icmp_seq=1 ttl=63 time=0.401 ms (DUP!)
Not enough information has been given.
Just
Instead, dispute the bill and then when they won't credit you for not giving
you what you ordered, open a complaint with the state public utilities
commission. It may get you some movement on the issue.
--
Tim Sanderson, network administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From:
* chloe K wrote:
> When I ping the ip, I get the duplicate
>
> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.95: icmp_seq=1 ttl=63 time=0.344 ms
> 64 bytes from 192.168.0.95: icmp_seq=1 ttl=63 time=0.401 ms (DUP!)
What's your netmask? Is 192.168.0.95 your net's broadcast address?
sebasti
Sebastian Abt wrote:
* chloe K wrote:
When I ping the ip, I get the duplicate
64 bytes from 192.168.0.95: icmp_seq=1 ttl=63 time=0.344 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.0.95: icmp_seq=1 ttl=63 time=0.401 ms (DUP!)
What's your netmask? Is 192.168.0.95 your net's broadcast
On 9/10/08, Paul Kelly :: Blacknight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi There,
>
> Are there any Yahoo! e-mail admins on the list? We're having some issues at
> times delivering e-mail to yahoo.co.uk and sometimes some of the other yahoo
> networks.
>
Probably not--but folks can probably get the m
I am completely convinced that abuse@ in most big providers is a
black hole with an autoresponder hung off it, and nothing ever
gets done with complaints. NO HUMAN ever sees them, and even if
they did, most of the humans at these outfits wouldn't recognize
a Received: header if it bit them in the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
This is to confirm that the IANA has allocated one 2-byte ASN block
to the RIPE NCC:
48128-49151 Assigned by RIPE NCC whois.ripe.net
2008-09-09
A note of the allocation has been made at:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/as-numbers/as-num
We started getting a flood of autobot spam to our listed abuse mailbox
about an hour ago out of Teleglobe. Trying to find someone to shut
this down has found that
1. Teleglobe has no listed abuse contacts for any of their netblocks
2. The few of their records which have listed e-mail address
Try reach them at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cheers,
---
Nuno Vieira
nfsi telecom, lda.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel. (+351) 21 949 2300 - Fax (+351) 21 949 2301
http://www.nfsi.pt/
- "Jo Rhett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We started getting a flood of autobot spam to our listed abuse mailbox
>
> abou
On Sep 10, 2008, at 3:51 PM, Nuno Vieira - nfsi telecom wrote:
Try reach them at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes - all my teleglobe contacts went over to Tata email addresses
during the summer.
Regards
Marshall
cheers,
---
Nuno Vieira
nfsi telecom, lda.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel. (+351) 21 949 230
I see in http://www.onesc.net/communities/as3356/ that L3 doesn't permit
customers to multihome the 4/8 space that they inherited from BBN, via
GTE, etc, ad nauseum...
and I'm curious whether anyone knows why? It sounds like something there
might be an interesting story in...
Off-list is fine; I
Hello,
I was wondering if anybody could put me in touch (perhaps they are
already listening) with a contact point for Comcast Cable Comm. As part
of some research work we are doing, we identified some issues in their
network (in particular AS33657) and would love to confirm them. I did
email the
---
[Message envoyé a partir d'un mobile]
Bruno VAZ
Ipercast Operations
40, Rue de PARIS / 92100 Boulogne-Billancourt
Tel +33 1 72 77 70 87
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:59:40
To:
Subject: NANOG Digest, Vol 8, Issue 38
---
[Message envoyé a partir d'un mobile]
Bruno VAZ
Ipercast Operations
40, Rue de PARIS / 92100 Boulogne-Billancourt
Tel +33 1 72 77 70 87
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:59:40
To:
Subject: NANOG Digest, Vol 8, Issue 38
Jo Rhett wrote:
> We started getting a flood of autobot spam to our listed abuse mailbox
> about an hour ago out of Teleglobe. Trying to find someone to shut this
> down has found that
>
> 1. Teleglobe has no listed abuse contacts for any of their netblocks
> 2. The few of their records which hav
Randy Bush wrote:
Jo Rhett wrote:
We started getting a flood of autobot spam to our listed abuse mailbox
about an hour ago out of Teleglobe. Trying to find someone to shut this
down has found that
1. Teleglobe has no listed abuse contacts for any of their netblocks
2. The few of their records
Because they don't have oil.
On 9/10/08, Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jo Rhett wrote:
>> We started getting a flood of autobot spam to our listed abuse mailbox
>> about an hour ago out of Teleglobe. Trying to find someone to shut this
>> down has found that
>>
>> 1. Teleglobe has no
Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 12:58:53PM -0400, Nicholas Suan wrote:
>> On Sep 3, 2008, at 12:49 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
>>> You're forgetting that 587 *is authenticated, always*.
>> I'm not sure how that makes much of a difference since the usual spam
>> vector is malware t
On 9/10/08, Jo Rhett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We started getting a flood of autobot spam to our listed abuse mailbox about
> an hour ago out of Teleglobe. Trying to find someone to shut this down has
> found that
>
> 1. Teleglobe has no listed abuse contacts for any of their netblocks
> 2. T
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, at 21:23, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On 9/10/08, Jo Rhett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > We started getting a flood of autobot spam to our listed abuse mailbox about
> > an hour ago out of Teleglobe. Trying to find someone to shut this down has
> > found that
> >
> > 1. Tel
26 matches
Mail list logo
