Hi
>Something you may want to consider is to put ACLs as far upstream as possible
>from your SBCs and only allow through what you need to the SBCs. For example,
>apply a filter only permitting UDP 5060 and your RTP port range to your SBCs
>and then blocking everything else. This is free and s
https://twit.tv/shows/security-now/episodes/837?autostart=false
It looks like Security Now covered this yesterday. They claimed that, "There is
currently no provider of large pipe VoIP protocol DDoS protection."
Are any of the cloud DDoS mitigation services offering a service like this.
Yes there are. I was about to message Steve about the correction. Corero and
path.net are options. There are others.
Ray Orsini
Chief Executive Officer
OIT, LLC
305.967.6756 x1009 | 305.571.6272
r...@oit.co | www.oit.co
oit.co/ray
How are we doing? We'd love
Owen DeLong wrote:
As mergers of ASes increases the number of announcements and IPv4
addresses were allocated a lot earlier than those of IPv6,
comparing the current numbers of announcements is not meaningful.
Mergers of ASes does not increase announcements in IPv4 nearly as
much as slow-start
Hello all -
I am a researcher at Colgate University, working with colleagues at the
University of Wisconsin and Boston University on studying aspects of the DNS.
We're wondering if anyone here would be willing to share some insight into an
apparent IP address management practice we have observe
Does anyone have a technical contacts for QVC? Our customers are getting
Access Denied across our entire /20. We need to get this resolved and I
am looking for anyone that has some contacts as calling their phone number
and leaving messages as well as emailing their noc has resulted in
crickets
Hi Joel,
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:12:26AM -0400, Joel Sommers wrote:
> Besides the common "reserved" keyword in the FQDN, we also see
> names like "not-in-use.example.tld", again with quite a few
> addresses all mapped to that one name.
I assume you are seeing this by resolving the reverse DNS
Fail2Ban and give ourselves a pat on the back..
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 9:12 AM Mike Hammett wrote:
> https://twit.tv/shows/security-now/episodes/837?autostart=false
>
>
> It looks like Security Now covered this yesterday. They claimed that,
> "There is currently no provider of large pipe
Fail2Ban on a couple of dozen servers may not be sufficient to address 400 gigs
of traffic.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com
- Original Message -
From: "Terrance Devor"
To: "Mike Hammett"
Cc: "NA
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 11:15 AM Andy Smith wrote:
> Hi Joel,
>
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:12:26AM -0400, Joel Sommers wrote:
> > Besides the common "reserved" keyword in the FQDN, we also see
> > names like "not-in-use.example.tld", again with quite a few
> > addresses all mapped to that one n
FYI, UTRS (Unwanted Traffic Removal Service
https://team-cymru.com/community-services/utrs/) from Team Cymru is a free
service where you can send a blackhole advertisement (sacrificing the one IP
that’s under attack to save the rest of the network) and they will propagate
that via BGP to hundre
A few of the buildings that my firm represents have the local telco's fiber
distribution and/or repeater equipment located on the premises. My
understanding is that when one of these links go down, (we've occasionally
had to interrupt circuit power to do maintenance in a building for one
reason or
Fiber in a building adds 8% to the value of that building. Half-penny pinching
“mah powah” landlords are especially annoying in a cosmic sense - and just make
me want to replace them.
The telecommunications act of 1934 permits telcos to enter a building with
their equipment.
I’d upgrade the
On 2021-09-19 09:20, Masataka Ohta wrote:
John Levine wrote:
Unless their infrastructure runs significantly on hardware and
software pre-2004 (unlikely), so does the cost of adding IPv6 to
their content servers. Especially if they’re using a CDN such as
Akamai.
I wasn't talking about switches
Does anyone have technical contacts for QVC? Our customers are getting
Access Denied across all of our subnets. We need to get this resolved and
I am looking for anyone that has some contacts as calling their phone
number and leaving messages as well as emailing their noc has resulted in
crick
It gives them the right to enter the building, but the building can charge “a
reasonable fee” for things like power/space/cooling.
Shane Ronan
> On Sep 22, 2021, at 12:45 PM, Lady Benjamin Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE
> wrote:
>
> Fiber in a building adds 8% to the value of that building. Half-p
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 9:29 AM wrote:
> A few of the buildings that my firm represents have the local telco’s fiber
> distribution and/or repeater equipment located on the premises. My
> understanding is that when one of these links go down, (we’ve occasionally
> had to interrupt circuit power
The building owner has no obligation to the provider. If it provides no
value, call them and tell them to remove the equipment if you don't want
it in your building.
Aaron
On 9/22/2021 11:23 AM, jra...@gmail.com wrote:
A few of the buildings that my firm represents have the local telco’s
On 9/22/21 10:45 AM, Lady Benjamin Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE wrote:
Half-penny pinching “mah powah” landlords are especially annoying in a
cosmic sense
I know someone who had a bit of a different experience.
Someone, purportedly the telco but I'm not sure who, had telco equipment
in a building
This one is always a bit tricky.
For example, if you have an apartment building with say 8 apartments, the
provider can install a larger MDU in a centralized location and potentially
utilized existing internal cabling in the building to get to each apartment
that would like service. It's a
If they're regularly sending people out to maintain the gear, and saying
it's part of a "ring" that means it's probably part of their
infrastructure and not just a local customer edge device for the building.
If you opt to bill them and they decide to pull out, they're still "on-net"
meaning at any
Everything is negotiable. The building owner/representative can negotiate
with the telco any terms they wish.
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 9:30 AM wrote:
> A few of the buildings that my firm represents have the local telco’s
> fiber distribution and/or repeater equipment located on the premises. M
Forgive the top post...
This issue /can/ be complicated, but I have some direct
experience with a lot of variations on this.
It sounds like this particular situation might involve
equipment that is part of a Metro ring. This is pretty nice because it
might mean there is redundanc
I'm going to be reaching out to both of the organizations you listed, but I
don't see any of their documentation mentioning SIP, RTP, or any of the
"normal" VOIP protocols or use cases.
Scott Helms
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 9:18 AM Ray Orsini wrote:
> Yes there are. I was about to message Steve
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 11:27 AM Mike Hammett wrote:
> Fail2Ban on a couple of dozen servers may not be sufficient to address 400
> gigs of traffic.
>
>
Also, also.. keep in mind that 'fail2ban' does some processing on the log
messages to which it MAY take action.
It's taking, essentially, untr
The problem with this approach, and with scrubbing centers more generally,
is that while the cure might be better than the disease it doesn't result
in usable VOIP. Voice customers don't care if things are _better_ but
their MOS scores are still below 2.
Scott Helms
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 11:
On Wed, 22 Sept 2021 at 16:48, Masataka Ohta <
mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
> Today, as /24 can afford hundreds of thousands of subscribers
> by NAT, only very large retail ISPs need more than one
> announcement for IPv4.
>
You can only have about 200-300 subscribers per IPv4 address
Appreciate everyone’s comments here. Lots of good responses. I think the client
isn’t really looking to squeeze the equipment owner here, more so just looking
for a formal agreement that codifies responsibility, insurance, points of
contact for notifications, etc… (the leaking battery example is
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 14:47:32 -0500
wrote:
> Whatever it is, the owner comes running when the local maintenance
> apprentice unplugs it…. He tells me they show up within 30-45 minutes.
We've attempted to address this problem by having plastic tags
on the power cords that basically say "do
Those, as well as cable and label tags with the NOC nunber, are worth their
weight in gold to be honest.
Almost any telco should give you a Right of Entry agreement that codified
things like insurance, etc. It’s “our gear” so of course we are responsible
for it, but you should codify it in an
Register Now for NANOG 83
*NANOG 83 is only five short weeks away. Get ready for a jam-packed
schedule of incredible programming that is sure to educate + inspire our
community. Our first hybrid meeting will take place in person in
Minneapolis + virtually (stream + interact live) Nov. 1-3.
Where does this "You can only have about 200-300 subscribers per IPv4
address on a CGN." limit come from? I have seen several apartment
complexes run on a single static IPv4 address using a Mikrotik with
NAT.
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 2:49 PM Baldur Norddahl
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, 22 Sept 2021 at 1
On 23/9/21 3:01 am, Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote:
> On 9/22/21 10:45 AM, Lady Benjamin Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE wrote:
>> Half-penny pinching “mah powah” landlords are especially annoying in a
>> cosmic sense
>
> I know someone who had a bit of a different experience.
>
> Someone, purportedly t
Yes that’s correct, however the definition of “reasonable” appears to have been
decided to be “what they charge the other carriers, if anything”
Ms. Lady Benjamin PD Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE
6x7 Networks & 6x7 Telecom, LLC
CEO
l...@6by7.net
"The only fully end-to-end encrypted global telecommuni
And how many apartments where covered by that single IP address? Was this
where there is a restriction on other providers so the occupants had no
choice of wireline ISP?
> On 23 Sep 2021, at 09:38, Colton Conor wrote:
>
> Where does this "You can only have about 200-300 subscribers per IPv4
> ad
If someone were to make us remove a redundant DWDM node, we’d charge them list
price to ever consider putting it back*, plus a deposit, plus our costs for the
removal in the first place. Bad move. Enjoy the $8million, it could cost more
than that to undo this mistake.
*you’d actually never ev
> On Sep 22, 2021, at 07:47 , Masataka Ohta
> wrote:
>
> Owen DeLong wrote:
>
>>> As mergers of ASes increases the number of announcements and IPv4
>>> addresses were allocated a lot earlier than those of IPv6,
>>> comparing the current numbers of announcements is not meaningful.
>> Mergers
Many organizations will use their in-addr.arpa zone(s) as an alternative form
of poor-man’s IPAM.
It looks like you’ve come across some such organizations.
Likely those are simply the free (unassigned) addresses within the
organization. Likely there are other similar host names in other /24s in
On 9/22/21 6:12 PM, Lady Benjamin Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE wrote:
If someone were to make us remove a redundant DWDM node, we’d charge them list
price to ever consider putting it back*, plus a deposit, plus our costs for the
removal in the first place. Bad move. Enjoy the $8million, it could c
39 matches
Mail list logo
