Everyone got BIND updated?
http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/08/exploits-start-against-flaw-that-could-hamstring-huge-swaths-of-internet/
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 10:03:33AM -0400,
Jay Ashworth wrote
a message of 6 lines which said:
> Everyone got BIND updated?
For instance by replacing it with NSD or Unbound?
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 10:03:33AM -0400,
> Jay Ashworth wrote
> a message of 6 lines which said:
>
>> Everyone got BIND updated?
>
> For instance by replacing it with NSD or Unbound?
always great to jump ship from one platform to a
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 10:03:33AM -0400,
> Jay Ashworth wrote
> a message of 6 lines which said:
>
> > Everyone got BIND updated?
>
> For instance by replacing it with NSD or Unbound?
Or doing something better like not just replacing one evil with another,
and instead moving to a heteroge
So, you guys recommend replace Bind for another option ?
-Mensagem original-
De: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] Em nome de Joe Greco
Enviada em: terça-feira, 4 de agosto de 2015 12:01
Para: Stephane Bortzmeyer
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Assunto: Re: Exploits start against flaw that could
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Leonardo Oliveira Ortiz
wrote:
> So, you guys recommend replace Bind for another option ?
The humorous thing is that the security researcher who showed the
recent bind9 error (note: it isn't a vulnerability or a hack, it's
just a way to remotely crash named), well
> So, you guys recommend replace Bind for another option ?
No. Replacing one occasionally faulty product with another occasionally
faulty product is foolish. There's no particular reason to think that
another product will be impervious to code bugs. What I was suggesting
was to use several diff
With the (large) caveat that heterogenous networks are more subject to
human error in many cases.
On Aug 4, 2015 9:25 AM, "Joe Greco" wrote:
> > So, you guys recommend replace Bind for another option ?
>
> No. Replacing one occasionally faulty product with another occasionally
> faulty product i
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
> With the (large) caveat that heterogenous networks are more subject to
> human error in many cases.
automate!
> On Aug 4, 2015 9:25 AM, "Joe Greco" wrote:
>
>> > So, you guys recommend replace Bind for another option ?
>>
>> No. Replacing o
On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:06:36 -, Leonardo Oliveira Ortiz said:
> So, you guys recommend replace Bind for another option ?
The *good* recommendation is to get some onboard security clue, and
learn procedures to mitigate the inevitable exploits against flaws in
infrastructure software.
pgproCq1
Automation just means your mistake goes many more places more quickly.
On Aug 4, 2015 9:38 AM, "Christopher Morrow"
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
> > With the (large) caveat that heterogenous networks are more subject to
> > human error in many cases.
>
> automate!
I recommend using DNSDIST to balance traffic at a protocol level as you can
have implementation diversity on the backside.
I can send an example config out later for people. You can balance to bind NSD
and others all at the same time :-) just move your SPoF
Jared Mauch
> On Aug 4, 2015, at 10
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
> Automation just means your mistake goes many more places more quickly.
>
and letting people keep poking at things that computers should be
doing is... much worse. people do not have reliability and
repeat-ability over time.
If you fear 'many
> With the (large) caveat that heterogenous networks are more subject to
> human error in many cases.
Indeed. Everything comes with tradeoffs. More intimate familiarity
with the product and a uniformity of deployment strategy has made it
more practical here to stick with BIND; an update is a sim
In message <9c2aca5a-755d-4fcf-8491-745a1f911...@puck.nether.net>, Jared Mauch
writes:
> I recommend using DNSDIST to balance traffic at a protocol level as you can h=
> ave implementation diversity on the backside.=20
>
> I can send an example config out later for people. You can balance to bin
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <9c2aca5a-755d-4fcf-8491-745a1f911...@puck.nether.net>, Jared
> Mauch writes:
> > I recommend using DNSDIST to balance traffic at a protocol level as you
> can h=
> > ave implementation diversity on the backside.=20
> >
> > I can se
On 4 August 2015 at 18:48, Joe Greco wrote:
> However, the original point was that switching from BIND to Unbound
> or other options is silly, because you're just trading one codebase
> for another, and they all have bugs.
It is equally silly to assume that all codebase are the same quality and
- Original Message -
> From: "Scott Helms"
> On Aug 4, 2015 9:38 AM, "Christopher Morrow"
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Scott Helms
> > wrote:
> > > With the (large) caveat that heterogenous networks are more
> > > subject to human error in many cases.
> >
> > automat
I don't disagree, but automation usually protects against typing errors, it
doesn't protect against incorrect configurations. Using multiple vendors
or server software means that your people have to know all of the systems.
There are many cases where, for example, a Cisco like CLI will make a
netw
> On Aug 3, 2015, at 10:09, Matthew Black wrote:
>
> I ran a few Google searches and came across a trove of complaints against
> Frontier. Seems they are far worse than GTE/Verizon. On the few occasions I
> have called for FIOS support, always reached someone knowledgeable and
> helpful. Not
On 4 Aug 2015, at 23:21, Christopher Morrow wrote:
and letting people keep poking at things that computers should be
doing is... much worse. people do not have reliability and
repeat-ability over time.
I've personally never come across an accidental route hijack (of the
subset of which I lea
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Baldur Norddahl
wrote:
> On 4 August 2015 at 18:48, Joe Greco wrote:
>
>> However, the original point was that switching from BIND to Unbound
>> or other options is silly, because you're just trading one codebase
>> for another, and they all have bugs.
>
>
> It is
hi ya
> >> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
> >> > With the (large) caveat that heterogenous networks are more subject to
> >> > human error in many cases.
> >>
> >> automate!
> >>
...
On 08/04/15 at 12:21pm, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Scott
Hi Jared,
On 4 Aug 2015, at 12:00, Jared Mauch wrote:
I recommend using DNSDIST to balance traffic at a protocol level as
you can have implementation diversity on the backside.
I can send an example config out later for people. You can balance to
bind NSD and others all at the same time :-)
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 02:39:18AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> In message <9c2aca5a-755d-4fcf-8491-745a1f911...@puck.nether.net>, Jared
> Mauch writes:
> > I recommend using DNSDIST to balance traffic at a protocol level as you can
> > h=
> > ave implementation diversity on the backside.=20
>
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 01:48:56PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
> Hi Jared,
>
> On 4 Aug 2015, at 12:00, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> >I recommend using DNSDIST to balance traffic at a protocol level as you
> >can have implementation diversity on the backside.
> >
> >I can send an example config out later f
Wow this thread went off-track in nanoseconds.
So which bind versions are ok?
-b
On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:54:53 -0400, Barry Shein said:
>
> Wow this thread went off-track in nanoseconds.
>
> So which bind versions are ok?
This week's.
pgpakL0r72_lt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
So, obviously, MPTCP can cause problems with Stateful Firewalls (as in
asymmetric routing, out of state packets, etc.). Cisco's take on how to deal
with MPTCP is just as interesting as MPTCP itself is.
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ip/transmission-control-protocol-tcp/116519-technot
On 4 Aug 2015, at 15:54, Barry Shein wrote:
Wow this thread went off-track in nanoseconds.
So which bind versions are ok?
9.10.2-P3 is marked "current stable", and 9.9.7-P2 is marked
"current-stable ESV" at:
https://www.isc.org/downloads/
The bind-users is probably a place where this ki
"Darden, Patrick" writes:
> So, obviously, MPTCP can cause problems with Stateful Firewalls (as
> in asymmetric routing, out of state packets, etc.). Cisco's take on
> how to deal with MPTCP is just as interesting as MPTCP itself is.
...
It's not so much the statefulness of the firewall that's
Den 04/08/2015 19.18 skrev "Christopher Morrow" :
>
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Baldur Norddahl
> wrote:
> > On 4 August 2015 at 18:48, Joe Greco wrote:
> >
> >> However, the original point was that switching from BIND to Unbound
> >> or other options is silly, because you're just trading
I can attest to the quality of the Flexbox. It is fantastic! All of our
employees have Mac's and they work great.
Originally you had to use Java in FireFox to make it work, but they now
have a "Chrome app" that works in Chrome which is even easier (don't have
to get the right Java version loaded
Anyone from dropbox please contact
n...@fiberinternetcenter.com
Multiple peering session - peering sessions are up/established - prefixes
are received - but no website and customers complaining to us.
Thank You
Bob Evans
CTO
I don't live in a new suburban community with modern utilities. Well, the 50
year-old water main on my street was replaced about 10 years ago. We haven't
suffered major flooding like UCLA experienced last year. My house was built in
1930. Much of that telco copper is pushing 70 years old or more
I can also suggest you the Multi-Fiber-Tool from Solid Optics:
http://www.solid-optics.com/tools/multi-fiber-tool/so-multi-fiber-tool-id1768.html
Works great but I've never tested it with an Mac ... MacOS is at least listed
as supported.
Best regards
Jürgen Jaritsch
Head of Network & Infrastr
> As someone who once hosted TLD zones in a way that a query to a
> particular nameserver could be answered by either NSD or BIND9, my
> advice would be "don't do that". You're setting yourself up for
> troubleshooting hell.
for some folk, complexity is a career. i worked for circuitzilla
for
>> Automation just means your mistake goes many more places more
>> quickly.
> and letting people keep poking at things that computers should be
> doing is... much worse. people do not have reliability and
> repeat-ability over time.
i love the devops movement; operators discover that those comput
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
> i love the devops movement; operators discover that those computers can
> be programmed. wowzers!
>
Maybe we can give them a new title. I'm thinking, "System Programmer."
On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 12:00:32PM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:
> I recommend using DNSDIST to balance traffic at a protocol level as you can
> have implementation diversity on the backside.
>
Here's an example dnsdist config you might find helpful:
This sends queries to the first two serv
40 matches
Mail list logo
