On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 23:10:52 -0500
Jimmy Hess wrote:
> It should be relatively safe to drop (non-fragment) packets to/from
> port 0.
[...]
Some UDP applications will use zero as a source port when they do not
expect a response, which is how many one-way UDP-based apps operate,
though not all.
On 7/18/12 6:24 PM, Andrey Khomyakov wrote:
So some "comments" on the intertubes claim that DoD ok'd use of it's
unadvertized space on private networks. Is there any official reference
that may support this statement that anyone of you have seen out there?
The arpanet prefix(10/8) was returned to
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 8:43 AM, John Kristoff wrote:
> Some UDP applications will use zero as a source port when they do not
> expect a response, which is how many one-way UDP-based apps operate,
> though not all. This behavior is spelled out in the IETF RFC 768:
That would only be applicable
Can netflow _properly_ "capture" whether a packet is a fragment or not? If
not, does IPFIX address this?
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Jimmy Hess [mailto:mysi...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 12:08 AM
To: Roland Dobbins
Cc: Frank Bulk; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: DDoS usin
On Jul 25, 2012, at 9:52 PM, Joel Maslak wrote:
> In addition to the fragments, these packets might also be non-TCP/UDP (ICMP,
> GRE, 6to4 and other IP-IP, etc).
NetFlow will report the correct protocol number.
---
Roland Dobb
On Jul 25, 2012, at 10:27 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
> Can netflow _properly_ "capture" whether a packet is a fragment or not?
No.
> If not, does IPFIX address this?
Yes.
But this is all a distraction. We are now down in the weeds.
Your customers were victims of a DNS reflection/amplification a
Any DTAG engineers on list? We are having a serious problem with them at
present.
Cheers,
James.
n...@telekom.de
cip-p...@nmc-m.dtag.de for bgp related
On 2012-07-25, at 12:59 PM, James Bensley wrote:
> Any DTAG engineers on list? We are having a serious problem with them at
> present.
>
> Cheers,
> James.
http://video.v6.labs.lacnic.net/jw/
Server can not be found since yesterday. Has the URL been changed?
Tina
408-859-4996
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Tina TSOU wrote:
> http://video.v6.labs.lacnic.net/jw/
> Server can not be found since yesterday. Has the URL been changed?
>
>
did you mean to email the lacnic folks?
We got offline after discussion in NANOG in May. This IPv6 only streaming video
worked well until recently. We use it in my enterprise network.
I just could not find his contact in my mailbox. So I hope he can find me again.
Does the link accessible from your IPv6 host?
Tina
@ 2001:db8:1::e8
Oh!
We had it as a test service. We didn't know that it was been used by
more people, so probably somebody turn it off.
I will look around to restart it.
Thanks!
as
On 25 Jul 2012, at 15:37, Tina TSOU wrote:
> We got offline after discussion in NANOG in May. This IPv6
The licence expired.
We will see if we can get another one.
Cheers,
as
On 25 Jul 2012, at 15:58, Arturo Servin wrote:
>
> Oh!
>
> We had it as a test service. We didn't know that it was been used by
> more people, so probably somebody turn it off.
>
> I wi
Dear all,
If you know there is any testing or commercial IPv6 only streaming video we can
access, let me know.
Thank you.
Tina
> -Original Message-
> From: Arturo Servin [mailto:aser...@lacnic.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 12:14 PM
> To: Tina TSOU
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Tina TSOU wrote:
> Dear all,
> If you know there is any testing or commercial IPv6 only streaming video we
> can access, let me know.
> Thank you.
youtube will stream at you over ipv6 ... did you just need some thing
to stream at you over ipv6?
I think you can ev
My enterprise users need to turn off IPv4 on their hosts to experience YouTube
IPv6 only streaming video. Courtesy to Owen.
It is an enterprise network here, I can't dictate for everyone. Some people
prefer dual stack host, some people prefer IPv6 only host.
Youtube works in our IPv6 only host a
Another nice "emerging" tool [I say emerging because it's been around forever
but nobody implements it] to deal with this is Flowspec, using flowspec you can
instruct your Upstream to block traffic with much more granular characteristics.
Instead of dropping all traffic to the IP address, you ca
In message
, Joel
Maslak writes:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 8:43 AM, John Kristoff wrote:
>
> > Some UDP applications will use zero as a source port when they do not
> > expect a response, which is how many one-way UDP-based apps operate,
> > though not all. This behavior is spelled out in the
> My enterprise users
it is generally best if vendors do not speak for users and vice versa
randy
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Tina TSOU wrote:
> My enterprise users need to turn off IPv4 on their hosts to experience
> YouTube IPv6 only streaming video. Courtesy to Owen.
I think if you have a dual-stack host you'll just get the v6 version
of stream... I suppose there are happy-eyeball ca
On 21/07/2012, at 6:40 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> On Jul 20, 2012, at 4:30 PM, Ron Broersma wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 20, 2012, at 1:04 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 05:10:41 +1000, Routing Analysis Role Account said:
BGP routing table entries examined:
Dear Randy,
I'm responsible for IPv6 deployment in my enterprise network, the users are my
colleagues.
In this context, I'm not vendor, not operator.
Tina
On Jul 25, 2012, at 5:20 PM, "Randy Bush" wrote:
>> My enterprise users
>
> it is generally best if vendors do not speak for users and vic
On 7/25/12 13:15 , Tina TSOU wrote:
> Dear all,
> If you know there is any testing or commercial IPv6 only streaming video we
> can access, let me know.
> Thank you.
speaking as a content provider, ipv6-only service requests are misguided.
> Tina
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Artu
On Jul 26, 2012, at 5:13 AM, Drew Weaver wrote:
> Another nice "emerging" tool [I say emerging because it's been around forever
> but nobody implements it] to deal with this is Flowspec, using flowspec you
> can instruct your Upstream to block traffic with much more granular
> characteristics.
On Jul 19, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Måns Nilsson wrote:
> No, reusing somebody's prefix is A Very Bad Idea.
Concur 100%. There is no security value to doing this whatsoever - quite the
opposite, given the possible negative consequences to reachability and, thus,
availability.
--
Dear Joel,
Who requests IPv6 only service?
Tina
On Jul 25, 2012, at 8:48 PM, "Joel jaeggli" wrote:
> On 7/25/12 13:15 , Tina TSOU wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> If you know there is any testing or commercial IPv6 only streaming video we
>> can access, let me know.
>> Thank you.
>
> speaking as a cont
> I'm responsible for IPv6 deployment in my enterprise network, the
> users are my colleagues. In this context, I'm not vendor, not
> operator.
i smell cows
On 7/25/12 21:43 , Tina TSOU wrote:
> Dear Joel,
> Who requests IPv6 only service?
you did... check the title of this thread.
> Tina
>
> On Jul 25, 2012, at 8:48 PM, "Joel jaeggli" wrote:
>
>> On 7/25/12 13:15 , Tina TSOU wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>> If you know there is any testing or commercial
Do u mean I am a cow? I stop breast feeding this year.
Tina
On Jul 25, 2012, at 9:47 PM, "Randy Bush" wrote:
>> I'm responsible for IPv6 deployment in my enterprise network, the
>> users are my colleagues. In this context, I'm not vendor, not
>> operator.
>
> i smell cows
Oh I did not, because we have been using http://video.v6.labs.lacnic.net/jw/,
and it stopped working recently, and I could not find the contact any more, so
I came back to NANOG list which we were connected.
Tina
On Jul 25, 2012, at 9:48 PM, "Joel jaeggli"
mailto:joe...@bogus.com>> wrote:
On
On 7/25/12 21:59 , Tina TSOU wrote:
> Oh I did not, because we have been
> using http://video.v6.labs.lacnic.net/jw/, and it stopped working
> recently, and I could not find the contact any more, so I came back to
> NANOG list which we were connected.
I think you'll find content providers have lit
31 matches
Mail list logo
