"You have to let your customer's services contain death threats against
the owner of your company or we'll blacklist you" is the wildest take of
2021 yet.
Blocking Amazon because of who they allow to remain a customer is
something I wholeheartedly encourage my competitors to do.
On 1/12/21 9
The list has public archives. Draw your own conclusions on the policy.
https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/
On 1/18/21 2:40 PM, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote:
Not under that impression at all. That's very different from "what is
the policy" - at least in the groups I run, if the policy is
On 6/30/21 2:56 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
Just because you can know (fsvo "know") that a call is allowed to
assert a number doesn't change anything unless other actions are
taken. With DKIM which is far simpler than STIR it would require
reputation systems that don't seem to have been deploye
On 7/1/21 3:53 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
And this is why this problem will not be solved. The "open relay" is making money from processing
the calls, and the end carrier is making money for terminating them. Until fine(s) -- hopefully millions of
them, one for each improperly terminated call,
Fun part is that just because it's a telnyx number with a checkmark, it
doesn't mean the call came from Telnyx, just that the call came from a
carrier that gave the call attestation A. As the carrier, we can see who
signed the call (it's an x509 certificate, signed by the STI-PA, with
the carri
It's okay though, because we freed up UDP/53 by moving DNS to TCP/443,
so then we can move HTTPS to UDP/53.
On 2/21/20 6:37 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
First we moved the entire internet to TCP/443.
Now we propose moving it all to UDP/53.
What’s next? Why not simply eliminate port numbers altogeth
A *LOT* goes through at least one TDM transition (so you can kiss that
identity header goodbye). None of the big names in long distance
termination support STIR/SHAKEN. There's about 4-5 that will do
STIR/SHAKEN outside of testbed connectivity (my employer is one). One
big name is still using a
My backyard is private. It offers no privacy with its chain link fence
against a major street.
On 9/16/20 4:38 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
Privacy != encryption.
cleartext == privacy * 0
cleartext * complexity == privacy * 0
randy
On 9/17/20 1:51 PM, Douglas Fischer wrote:
But 30 Seconds for an IXP? It does not make any sense!
Those packets are stealing CPU cycles of the Control Plane of any
router in the LAN.
Especially given how some exchanges lock the mac address of
participants. You could probably get away with ARP
On 9/21/20 6:16 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
yes, privacy is one aspect of security. and, as mpls vns are not
private sans encryption, they are not secure.
randy
As my backyard is not surrounded by a cement enclosure with acoustic
baffling and white noise generators inside, it's not really private
On 3/31/22 11:38, Laura Smith via NANOG wrote:
However, perhaps someone would care to elaborate (either on or off-list) what
the deal is with the requirement to sign NDAs with Cogent before they'll
discuss things like why they still charge for BGP, or indeed any other
technical or pricing matt
How many times have I seen an installer only download the parts it needs
vs just reinstall the next version right over top of the existing
version? I know stuff like xplane seems to do a comparison of file
signatures and only downloads the changed parts for the updates between
whatever version
Your rights under the ICA are dead. Since 2002 you were only able to
order it if one end was in a tier 3 wirecenter, and it was killed in
2021 as an orderable product.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/08/2020-25254/modernizing-unbundling-and-resale-requirements-in-an-era-of-ne
I guarantee you that if carriers were made civilly or criminally liable
for allowing robodialers to operate on their network, this sort of issue
would end practically overnight. Robodialer calling patterns are
obvious, and I'd imagine any tech could give you a criteria to search
for in the CDR
Chris it would be trivial for this to be fixed, nearly overnight, by
creating some liability on the part of carriers for illicit use of
caller ID data on behalf of their customers.
But the carriers don't want that, so now we have to create tons of
technical half solutions to solve a problem th
Pretty simply - Sending caller ID to commit fraud. It's literally
already illegal. The legislature has already defined it for us, even.
47 USC 227
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/227
(B)
to initiate any telephone call to any residential telephone line using
an artificial or prereco
uld just be one more risk we'd take into account.
-Paul
On 7/11/19 3:04 PM, Peter Beckman wrote:
"with the intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of
value"
Kind of a huge hole that, unless you record all calls which opens other
liability, is hard to prove.
Be
And after 75 messages, nobody has asked the obvious question. When is
ARDC going to acquire IPv6 resources on our behalf? Instead being all
worried about legacy resources we're highly underutilizing.
Ham Radio is supposed to be about pushing the art forward. Let's do that.
-KC8QAY
On 7/22/19
They are obviously not running full tables on their 3640. I'd imagine a
raspberry pi would have more BGP capability and throughput than a 3640,
though I don't recommend doing that even as a joke. But an ERR would be
fine if they're expecting nothing more than a slightly faster 3640 with
maybe s
On 12/19/19 6:11 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote:
They should be fining the telcos, they're making a lot of money on
these calls.
And if you believe otherwise (e.g., that it's like email spam) you've
been duped by telco PR.
Unlike spam when was the last time a telco failed to bill you for a
billabl
On 12/20/19 9:00 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
I can't imagine many telcos are making a lot of money from voice anymore.
We are. Not as much as the olden days, but we are. And a lot of
companies charge surcharges to customers who have tons of short duration
calls. Do the math on why, and who they'r
Everstream has a pretty vast network in Ohio. Worth looking into.
> On Dec 31, 2018, at 7:50 PM, Mitchell Lewis wrote:
>
> Good Evening All,
> I am working on project that may involve building points of presence in
> Cleveland & Cincinnati. Any suggestions as to which colocation facility in
>
Those days are alive and well. And of course, it hasn't improved any.
On 03/07/2018 12:25 PM, chris wrote:
reminds me of the days when you were forced to colo gear in the phone
company's CO to get access to their cable plant and got gouged on power and
the interconnection between the CO and the
On Jan 9, 2014, at 2:38 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
>>
>>
>> Looking to "heat chart" where fraudelent calls are going.
>
> So you want to be able to feed "NPANXX Count" to something that will map
> the call counts on a US map.
>
> You have anything that does NPANXX
David Conrad wrote:
On Apr 28, 2010, at 2:38 PM, Carl Rosevear wrote:
I don't understand why anyone thinks NAT should be a fundamental part of the v6 internet
Perhaps the ability to change service providers without having to renumber?
Number your internal network on ULA, and put public
David Conrad wrote:
Paul,
On Apr 29, 2010, at 8:29 AM, Paul Timmins wrote:
If you change ISPs, send out an RA with the new addresses, wait a bit, then
send out an RA with lifetime 0 on the old address.
Even if this works (and I know a lot of applications that use the socket() API
Caleb Tennis wrote:
We had a lightning strike nearby yesterday that looks to have come inside our facility via a feeder circuit that goes outdoors underground to our facility's gate.
What's interesting is that various POE switches throughout the entire building
seemed to be affected in that s
GBLX was great with native IPv6 setup.
VZB was nearly impossible to get them to set it up, and I'm tunneled to
a router halfway across the country. The router I was going to had
serious PMTU issues that they recently cleared up, so now it's working
satisfactorily.
-Paul
Brielle Bruns wrote:
I think the last dell business notebook I had my hands on has a bios
setting that enables usb power when the laptop is off and plugged into
the AC adapter.
It's not on by default.
If you have one, you may want to check.
-Paul
Matthias Flittner wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash:
Hah, given the number of times people I have worked with have said "oh,
I'll just use apnic space if we run out of IPs, i don't need to talk to
them anyway", I think it's humorous that someone in China felt the same
way about ARIN space. :)
-Paul
On 06/16/2010 09:01 PM, Jon Lewis wrote:
I jus
Sorry for the top post, but as a crazy thought here, why not throw out
an RA, and if answered, go into transparent bridge mode? Let the
sophisticated users who want routed behavior override it manually.
Jack Bates wrote:
Joe Greco wrote:
Now, the question is, if you're sending all these prefi
I hope at least some SPs make this commitment back in the states. I
can't find any tier-1s that can provide us with native v6. Our tier-1
upstream has a best effort test program in place that uses ipv6ip
tunnels. The other upstream says that they aren't making any public
IPv6 plans yet.
Fred Baker wrote:
On Aug 24, 2009, at 9:17 AM, Luke Marrott wrote:
What are your thoughts on what the definition of Broadband should be
going
forward? I would assume this will be the standard definition for a
number of
years to come.
Historically, narrowband was circuit switched (ISDN etc
Leo Bicknell wrote:
If you have to reach someone 20km from the CO, the cost of running
the ditch-wich down the road in a rural area is not the dominate
cost over the next 20 years. It's equipment. If the copper plant
takes 4 repeaters to do the job, that's 4 bits of equipment that
can fail, and
You too, huh?
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 10:05 -1000, Antonio Querubin wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>
> > traceroute6 to the ISC's v6 allocation(s) for f-root ... (from inside
> > 701) oh, not working...
> > traceroute6 to ipv6.google.com from inside 701, oh... not working e
6 packet too big somehow, so
the packet just disappears into thin air.
-Paul
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 13:48 -1000, Antonio Querubin wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Paul Timmins wrote:
>
> > You too, huh?
>
> Is your IPv6 tunnel with vzb using GRE or 6-in-4 encapsulation?
>
> Antonio Querubin
> whois: AQ7-ARIN
Zaid Ali wrote:
I don't consider IPv6 a popularity contest. It's about the motivation and the willingness to. Technical issues can be resolved if you and people around you are motivated to do so. I think there are some hard facts that need to be addressed when it comes to IPv6. Facts like
1. How
John Schnizlein wrote:
On 2009Feb4, at 8:56 PM, TJ wrote:
However, many do not "have" DHCPv6 ... WinXP, MacOS, etc. are not
capable.
Maybe upgrades, service packs and updates will make them capable of
using DHCPv6 for useful functions such as finding the address of an
available name serve
Jared Mauch wrote:
The University of Michigan Hospitals have a guestnet wireless that is ghetto
and blocks
IMAP over SSL. Attempts to get them to correct this have fallen on deaf ears.
I can't even
VPN out to work around the sillyness, which typically works in other
hotel/guestnet scenarios.
Barry Shein wrote:
The obvious change RIRs could make would be to make sure the contracts
they allocate resources under give them the latitude to cancel those
contracts if certain boundaries of behavior are breached.
YES I REALIZE EASIER SAID THAN DONE.
But just as allocation of resources is no
Jérôme Fleury wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 17:14, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Jan 13, 2010, at 2:05 AM, Stefan Fouant wrote:
I for one would be really happy to see them follow through with this. I was
very disappointed when they agreed to censor search results, although I can
unde
Scott Weeks wrote:
If they see all of us saying we won't buy from them when they do idiotic things
like spamming nanog folks (I can't think of too many groups it world be worse
to spam... ;-) they will realize that doing this will not only not generate
sales, it will actually prevent future s
John R. Levine wrote:
I have told a hotel they need to install equipment that supports RA
guard as I've checked out. This was a hotel that only offered IPv4.
Hotels ask for feedback on their services. If you see a fault report
it in writing.
Sure. Bet you ten bucks that no hotel in North Am
Matthew Kaufman wrote:
On 2/5/2011 8:15 PM, Paul Timmins wrote:
OR just upgrade your gear, and while you're at it, you can now safely
enable IPv6 anyway.
Well, enable IPv6. Safely? I don't see how upgrading your gear
magically makes the various security threats -- including t
Derek J. Balling wrote:
On Feb 5, 2011, at 11:15 PM, Paul Timmins wrote:
I know a hospital in Metro Detroit that was offering it on their patient and
guest WiFi in 2009. Of course, neither they, nor the individual running the
rogue IPv6 router knew that, but as a person running an IPv6
On 02/08/2011 11:01 AM, Neil Harris wrote:
They did indeed, but they did it by centrally precomputing and then
downloading centrally-built routing tables to each exchange, with
added statically-configured routing between telco provider domains,
and then doing step-by-step call setup, with add
Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
Is 127.0.0.1 / ::1 the Internet version of "555"? Or will "I hurt myself, so now
I'm going to sue you" mean we can't even use that?
It'd be nice if TV producers even knew that not all of 555 was to be
used for television shows*, let alone that there's an internet
On 05/20/2011 03:34 PM, Paul Graydon wrote:
On 05/20/2011 08:53 AM, Brett Frankenberger wrote:
Even if those problems were solved, you'd need (on average) just as
many bits to represent which digit of pi to start with as you'd need to
represent the original message.
-- Brett
Not quite sur
On 05/24/2011 11:12 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Lou Katz wrote:
An "elegant" idea, done in by changing technology. *sigh*
As USENIX director I sponsored and sheparded this project, called "Stargate".
We at least got bits into the blanking in
49 matches
Mail list logo
