jcdill.li...@gmail.com (JC Dill) wrote:
> Why do they "watch" and "monitor" rather than proactively go
> out and say "watch out, there's an unmarked cable here" and keep them
> from cutting the cable in the first place?
*snicker*
You ever been to a construction site?
Hi,
I have not been following this thread too closely, but I spotted the last
poster talking about a database backend to DNS.
There are some interesting thoughts on the matter in a Nominet Blog Post here :
http://blog.nominet.org.uk/tech/2008/06/02/nameservers-and-very-large-zones/
Once upon a time, whilst working for a fairly well-known UK domain
registration company, I put together a system built on an early version
of the BIND-DLZ patchset against BIND 9.2.5 (If I recall correctly).
It used MySQL as the backend database (because that's what the
registration system used fo
Randy Bush writes:
>> ... a few battalions of B's and C's, if wisely deployed, could bridge
>> that gap.
>
> there is a reason Bs and Cs have spare round-tuits.
>
> fred brooks was no fool. os/360 taught some of us some lessons.
> batallions work in the infantry, or so i am told. this is rocke
HI,
As far as I understand CX300 does not support vpls (only
point-to-point PWE3). I don't think that's even on the road map.
kind regards
Pshem
2009/5/29 Jack Kohn :
> Guys,
>
> Anybody any experience with VPLS on Huawei cx300?
>
> Jack
>
Charles Wyble wrote:
> I do feel this might be the last post from Mr Pooser. :)
>
> Your on to them it seems. ;)
>
> A very interesting idea. I imagine it wouldn't be hard for foreign
> actors to get access to the data feed of construction, observe for signs
> of a cut and then splice in a tap.
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Charles Wyble wrote:
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/30/AR2009053002114_pf.html
>
> Not sure if I fully believe the article. Responding to a fiber cut in
> seconds?
>
> I suppose it's possible if $TLA had people monitoring the const
On Jun 2, 2009, at 9:19 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Charles Wyble
wrote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/30/AR2009053002114_pf.html
Not sure if I fully believe the article. Responding to a fiber cut in
seconds?
I suppose it's p
Elmar K. Bins wrote:
jcdill.li...@gmail.com (JC Dill) wrote:
Why do they "watch" and "monitor" rather than proactively go
out and say "watch out, there's an unmarked cable here" and keep them
from cutting the cable in the first place?
*snicker*
You ever been to a construction site?
In my experience they are required not only to mark the line, but to
identify it with the initials of the owner.
On Jun 2, 2009, at 10:44 AM, JC Dill wrote:
Elmar K. Bins wrote:
jcdill.li...@gmail.com (JC Dill) wrote:
Why do they "watch" and "monitor" rather than proactively go out
and
They usually hand out tin foil hats to the dig crew. A clear give away
and easy to spot too.
Next?
On 6/2/09, JC Dill wrote:
> Elmar K. Bins wrote:
>> jcdill.li...@gmail.com (JC Dill) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Why do they "watch" and "monitor" rather than proactively go
>>> out and say "watch out, there'
They usually hand out tin foil hats to the dig crew. A clear give away
and easy to spot too.
Next?
On 6/2/09, JC Dill wrote:
> Elmar K. Bins wrote:
>> jcdill.li...@gmail.com (JC Dill) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Why do they "watch" and "monitor" rather than proactively go
>>> out and say "watch out, there'
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009, JC Dill wrote:
Why do they "watch" and "monitor" rather than proactively go out and say
"watch out, there's an unmarked cable here" and keep them from cutting the
cable in the first place?
Because if they DON'T hit the line, it is still a secret.
Then again, if they DO
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 11:19 AM, Peter Beckman wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Jun 2009, JC Dill wrote:
>
Why do they "watch" and "monitor" rather than proactively go out and say
"watch out, there's an unmarked cable here" and keep them from cutting the
cable in the first place?
>
> Because if
sro...@fattoc.com (Shane Ronan) wrote:
> In my experience they are required not only to mark the line, but to
> identify it with the initials of the owner.
Hell yeah - but that's not the point I wanted to make.
For any given construction project, the main goal is to
build something without des
> -Original Message-
> From: Charles Wyble [mailto:char...@thewybles.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 7:10 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Fiber cut - response in seconds?
>
>
>
> Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> > It's pretty trivial if know where all the construction projects on your
>
> No. And here's why: If you're a naughty foreign intelligence team, and
> you know your stuff, you already know where some of the cables you'd
> really like a tap on are buried. When you hear of a construction
> project
> that might damage one, you set up your innocuous white panel truck
> somewhe
It would also be cheaper to add an additional layer of security with
encryption vs. roving teams of gun toting manhole watchers.
YMMV,
Best!
Marty
On 6/2/09, Deepak Jain wrote:
>> No. And here's why: If you're a naughty foreign intelligence team, and
>> you know your stuff, you already know
Cheaper?
To quote sneakers were the united states govt. we don't do that sort
of thing.
Martin Hannigan wrote:
It would also be cheaper to add an additional layer of security with
encryption vs. roving teams of gun toting manhole watchers.
YMMV,
Best!
Marty
On 6/2/09, Deepak Jain w
On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 13:54:44 EDT, Martin Hannigan said:
> It would also be cheaper to add an additional layer of security with
> encryption vs. roving teams of gun toting manhole watchers.
Even if encrypted, you can probably do an amazing amount of traffic
analysis to tell when something is afoot.
Encryption is insufficient - if you let someone have physical access for a long
enough period, they'll eventually crack anything. Encryption makes the period
of time longer, but let them try?
As regards "roving," we are talking about Tyson's Corner here: that's pretty
close (< 5km) to major o
link-layer encryption for sonet/atm quite resistant to traffic
analysis... The pipe is full of pdus whether you're using them or not.
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 13:54:44 EDT, Martin Hannigan said:
>> It would also be cheaper to add an additional layer of security with
>>
David Barak wrote:
Encryption is insufficient - if you let someone have physical access for a long enough period, they'll eventually crack anything.
Really? I don't think so. I imagine it would be much more dependent on
the amount of computing power the attacker has access to. More encrypted
--- On Tue, 6/2/09, Charles Wyble wrote:
> David Barak wrote:
> > Encryption is insufficient - if you let someone have
> physical access for a long enough period, they'll eventually
> crack anything.
>
> Really? I don't think so. I imagine it would be much more
> dependent on the amount of co
>
> Really? I don't think so. I imagine it would be much more dependent on
> the amount of computing power the attacker has access to. More
> encrypted
> blobs won't help. If that was the case then the various encryption
> schemes in wide use today would be cracked already. Bad guys can setup
> ne
David Barak wrote:
Paranoia 101 teaches us that any given encryption approach will eventually fall before a brute-force onslaught of sufficient power and duration[1].
Of course. Hence my comment bout the likely hood of success depending on
how much computing power they have access to. How
On Jun 2, 2009, at 3:41 PM, Charles Wyble wrote:
David Barak wrote:
Paranoia 101 teaches us that any given encryption approach will
eventually fall before a brute-force onslaught of sufficient power
and duration[1].
Of course. Hence my comment bout the likely hood of success
depending
Granted the US govt has there own (classified) encryption algorithms
and as such that can't be replicated in a lab environment and requires
access to the physical medium carrying traffic encrypted by said
algorithms.
Which is why they do things like this :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera
> Really? The US Military uses a whole lot of wireless (satellite, ground
> baed, surface to air) links. Those links can be sniffed (by people with
> sufficient motivation/funding/gear to do so). They rely on encryption
> to
> protect them.
Which is why, if you have a satellite, you often positi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Colleagues,
On behalf of PIR Technical Support I would like to announce that as of
today, 2009-06-02, at 16:00 UTC .ORG is DNSSEC signed.
The following KSK is now valid for .ORG
org.IN DNSKEY 257 3 7 (
about time. congrats
-j
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Dave Knight wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Colleagues,
>
> On behalf of PIR Technical Support I would like to announce that as of
> today, 2009-06-02, at 16:00 UTC .ORG is DNSSEC signed.
Once upon a time, Deepak Jain said:
> Which is why, if you have a satellite, you often position DIRECTLY
> over the antenna you are sending to
Unless your target is on the equator, you don't position a satellite
directly over anything.
--
Chris Adams
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 7:50 AM, Dave Wilson wrote:
> No. And here's why: If you're a naughty foreign intelligence team, and
> you know your stuff, you already know where some of the cables you'd
> really like a tap on are buried. When you hear of a construction project
> that might damage one, you
Sounds like a lot of work to me. Wouldn't it be easier to just find the carrier
neutral colo facilities where all the peering/transit between major networks
happens, and pay them money to put up a fake wall that you can colo your
optical taps behind?
Yeah it's not like that's ever gonna h
> Once upon a time, Deepak Jain said:
> > Which is why, if you have a satellite, you often position DIRECTLY
> > over the antenna you are sending to
>
> Unless your target is on the equator, you don't position a satellite
> directly over anything.
>
I promise you that that is not the case for a
Once upon a time, Deepak Jain said:
> I promise you that that is not the case for all applications.
> Geosynchronous satellites can be anywhere. For the applications you
> are considering (communications mostly), equatorial orbit is the most
> advantageous.
Geosynchronous are only over a particu
Ok, while this is off-topic, let's just point people to Wikipedia:
Other satellites (which are NOT in the same position at all times from
the prospective of a spot on earth):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geosynchronous_orbit
TV, and other fixed positioned (relative to the earth are
geostationa
I do 250 mbits on 21 transponders :)
- Original Message -
From: John van Oppen
To: Chris Adams ; Deepak Jain
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Tue Jun 02 14:51:59 2009
Subject: RE: Fiber cut - response in seconds?
Ok, while this is off-topic, let's just point people to Wikipedia:
Other satell
Got me beat.. I'm only doing 13 Mbps across 2 transponders. But
that's also customer specific and not general Internet access. But
one of the antennas that I'm using is inflatable. Seriously. Most
people think I'm kidding about the inflatable part.
On Jun 2, 2009, at 5:54 PM, Warren Ba
On May 27, 2009, at 10:35 AM, David Hubbard wrote:
Just wondering if anyone can tell me their
opinion on Savvis bandwidth/company preferably
from a web host perspective. Considering a
connection.
I wouldn't touch them with a 10g pole. They were the first and only
provider we have dropped f
Jo Rhett wrote:
> On May 27, 2009, at 10:35 AM, David Hubbard wrote:
>> Just wondering if anyone can tell me their
>> opinion on Savvis bandwidth/company preferably
>> from a web host perspective. Considering a
>> connection.
>
>
> I wouldn't touch them with a 10g pole. They were the first and
This is quite similar to experiences we have had with them. Again the only
carrier we have dropped for technical reasons.
Blake Dunlap
> -Original Message-
> From: Jo Rhett [mailto:jrh...@netconsonance.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 9:59 PM
> To: David Hubbard
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
42 matches
Mail list logo
