On 05/30/2018 01:13 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
> Can anyone recommend software that sends faxes over SIP?
No. Just NO. The problem is that all the modulation methods that FAX
transmission use requires time stability in the analog channel, and
there is no way that SIP is going to be that stable.
On 06/01/2018 05:24 AM, niels=na...@bakker.net wrote:
> * h...@efes.iucc.ac.il (Hank Nussbacher) [Fri 01 Jun 2018, 06:56 CEST]:
>> The entire whois debacle will only get resolved when some hackers attack
>> www.eugdpr.org, ec.europa.eu and some other key .eu sites. When the
>> response they get wi
On 06/01/2018 09:37 AM, McBride, Mack wrote:
> For routing whois information there aren't going to be many individuals and
> it would seem
> that the corporations who employee individuals should be the ones protecting
> those individuals
> work emails by providing a generic contact email forward.
On 06/12/2018 08:26 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>> emacs!
> vim!
ed!
>>> TECO!
>> cat
> IBM 029.
Youngster. IBM 026.
On 06/24/2018 07:52 AM, Lee Howard wrote:
> Randy said "at&t business 1g fiber going into an Arris"
> As fiber, it'll be PON. If it were a traditional cable company, I'd
> guess DPOE (DOCSIS Provisioning Over Ethernet).
AT&T fiber goes into a PON, and then into an Arris BGW210.
(Yes, I have busi
On 07/20/2018 11:22 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
> Oops, failure to communicate... They folks on the
> eyeball end have consumer grade satellite internet
> with VSATs in their yard. Thus my CDN in the
> satellite joke.
That idea would work better with a constellation of LEO satellites, as
opposed to
On 07/26/2018 09:48 AM, Rod Beck wrote:
> Unfortunately, the science community disagrees with Rob and you.
You mean the community that lives or dies on whether they get grant
money? And the way to get grant money is to justify why they could be
fed MORE money. Can you imagine how the "science co
On 07/26/2018 10:31 AM, Chris Boyd wrote:
> 162.400
> 162.425
> 162.450
> 162.475
> 162.500
> 162.525
> 162.550
>
> That’s about 1.85 meter wavelength, so a quarter wave antenna would
> be pretty large. I’m sure the RF engineers can come up with a way to
> listen effectively without a huge antenn
On 07/26/2018 10:48 AM, William Herrin wrote:
> Submarine cable is needed for deeper water (higher pressures) with
> more armor against damage since it's just laying on the seafloor
> exposed to everything that happens by.
Let's be specific: everything with teeth that happens by.
On 11/08/2018 07:50 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Signatures are no longer required for chip card transactions in the US,
> except I think for transactions where the auth is done on the amount
> before an added tip (restaurants).
Signatures are required for chip card transactions above a certain
dollar
On 11/21/2018 07:32 PM, Ross Tajvar wrote:
> I'd argue that's just content (though admittedly a lot of it). You can't
> cache, e.g., a SIP trunk, and offices which need to connect to each other
> can't cache one another in a CDN either.
I would further argue that you can't cache active Web conten
On 12/12/18 10:51 AM, William Herrin wrote:
> The AV lab gets screwed. You're running the coax they need through the
> noisy electrical riser because you didn't build dedicated comms risers
> and closets. Naturally nobody checked with them so you don't yet
> realize they can't do what they need to
On 12/15/18 7:48 AM, Colton Conor wrote:
> How much compute and network resources does it take for a NMS to:
>
> 1. ICMP ping a device every second
> 2. Record these results.
> 3. Report an alarm after so many seconds of missed pings.
>
> We are looking for a system to in near real-time monitor i
On 12/15/18 12:03 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 at 18:52, Stephen Satchell wrote:
>
>> Short answer: about 1500 bits of bandwidth, and the CPU loading on the
>
> I can't parse this.
>
> 1000 hosts at 1 pps would be 672kbps on ethernetII encapulati
On 12/16/18 12:07 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 at 00:48, Stephen Satchell wrote:
>
>> The 1500 bits are for each ping. So 1000 hosts would be 1,500,000 bits
>
> Why? Why did you choose 1500b(it) ping, instead of minimum size or
> 1500B(ytes) IP packets?
On 12/28/18 3:23 PM, Yang Yu wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 12:05 AM Stephane Bortzmeyer
> wrote:
>> Is this problem also responsible for the 911 outage? If so, the
>> post-mortem analysis is not useful only for CenturyLink customers but
>> for everyone on the west coast.
>
> Looks like most t
The telephone companies (I'm looking at YOU Verizon!) are bringing this
situation onto the community. I can see the FCC NPRM now:
"What percentage of E911 terminations is being serviced over VoIP with
carrier-based network switching, or third-party network switching,
interfaced to the PSTN?
"How
On 12/29/18 6:51 AM, Matthew Huff wrote:
> We have two stratum-1 servers synced with GPS and a PTP feed from a provider
> that also provides PTP to market data systems, but we still have to monitor
> drift between system time and NIST time. Don't ask for the logic behind it,
> it's a regulation,
On 1/8/19 9:31 AM, Töma Gavrichenkov wrote:
> 8 Jan. 2019 г., 20:19 :
>> In the real world, doing the correct thing
>
> — such as writing RFC compliant code —
>
>> is often harder than doing
>> an incorrect thing, yes.
>
> Evidently, yes.
I "grew up" during the early days of PPP. As a member o
On 1/13/19 8:01 PM, Brian Kantor wrote:
> Clearly, editing inclusions is a lost art.
No, it isn't a lost art. As you can see, there are some of us who know
perfectly well how to edit, and have e-mail tools that make this easy.
(Using Thunderbird here.) Smartphone mail programs make excerpting a
On 1/14/19 7:14 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
> Please experience the wonders of the top-quote. See your local psychedelic
> distributor if you are somehow not "experiencing" anything ...
I experience a savings in time with non-edited top quoting. If I don't
see meaningful new content within the fir
On 1/14/19 9:40 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> I'm not away of any languages or writing systems that work from
> bottom to top, so that's pretty much everybody.
Typography for at least one pictograph-based language allows for, um,
interesting stunts one can pull to spice up gray matter. Sta
On 1/15/19 12:19 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> And everyone has a gmail account anyway, so why bother with outside
> email?
Two words: "search warrants." I'm a US citizen, and I do NOT like the
idea of power-hungry people being able to paw through my mail. Having
my own mail server, residing in my ho
On 1/15/19 8:03 AM, Tom Beecher wrote:
> No disrespect intended to anyone at all, but the pissing and moaning about
> it is a massive waste of time and energy.
But, but, but...most water-cooler conversation is about sports, the
opposite sex, and pissing and moaning about what you don't like. Sure
On 1/23/19 8:44 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> and they your firewalls don’t block well formed DNS queries (lots of
> them do by default).
My edge routers block *all* inbound DNS requests -- I was being hit by a
ton of them at one point. Cavaet: I don't run a DNS server that is a
domain zone master --
On 1/24/19 11:46 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>On 25 Jan 2019, at 2:14 am, Stephen Satchell wrote:
>> My edge routers block *all* inbound DNS requests -- I was being hit by a
>> ton of them at one point. Cavaet: I don't run a DNS server that is a
>> domain zone master -- I
After reading through the thread, this reminds me of the Y2K flap, that
turned into a non-event. My checks of authoritative DNS servers for my
domains show no issues now.
On 2/1/19 1:23 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> Google has started their rollout.
So has Red Hat (RHEL and Centos). I woke up to a rather large update
this morning.
On 2/18/19 9:37 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
> Not me. No way. Never. ;)
Then why is Mr. Murphy tapping you on the shoulder? Didn't your Mom and
Dad ever tell you to never say "never"?
On 2/22/19 11:27 AM, b...@theworld.com wrote:
> I don't know the high-water mark for the number of IMPs or more
> specifically how many existed on the NCP->TCP flag day but I'm pretty
> sure the theoretical maximum was 256 tho no doubt someone had a way to
> extend that. But, w/o extensive changes,
On 3/3/19 1:04 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> There are lots of IDIOTS out there that BLOCK ALL ICMP. That blocks PTB
> getting
> back to the TCP servers.
For those of us who are in the dark, "PTB" appears to refer to "Packet
Too Big" responses in ICMPv6.
Yes, some admins don't have fine-enough grai
On 3/5/19 2:54 AM, Thomas Bellman wrote:
> Out of curiosity, which operating systems put anything useful (for use
> in ECMP) into the flow label of IPv6 packets? At the moment, I only
> have access to CentOS 6 and CentOS 7 machines, and both of them set the
> flow label to zero for all traffic.
D
On 3/7/19 8:10 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> So why not disable ICMP Echo and UDP traceroute, those kids using
> network diagnostics don't need them.
>
> For clue constrained audience fear will always be the most compelling
> argument.
OK, OK, so I will continue to rate-limit both, to reasonably high l
So far as I can tell with NTP, there was no issue with time sources
becoming false-tickers, including my local GPS appliance. FWIW.
On 12/1/23 5:27 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
It would be better to keep the government out of it altogether, but that has
little chance of happening.
I agree. But I do have a question: is there a Best Practices RFC for
setting buffer sizes in the existing corpus? The Internet community has
bee
On 2/12/24 11:07 PM, Dave Taht wrote:
if I could use the controversy to talk to why it has been so hard to
deploy ipv6 to the edge and how to fix that problem instead rather
than triggering people, it would be helpful.
1. My provider, AT&T, keeps saying "we don't support IPv6." I've
written
On 2/14/24 9:30 AM, Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote:
That experiment already failed with the original v6 adoption process.
It’s been more than 20 years and all we have proven is that as long as
people can have an excuse to avoid v6 deployment, they will continue to
do so.
Giving them another 20 year
On 2/14/24 4:23 PM, Tom Samplonius wrote:
The best option is what is happening right now: you can’t get new IPv4
addresses, so you have to either buy them, or use IPv6. The free market
is solving the problem right now. Another solution isn’t needed.
Really? How many mail servers are up on
Several people in NANOG have opined that there are a number of mail
servers on the Internet operating with IPv6 addresses. OK. I have a
mail server, which has been on the Internet for decades. On IPv4.
For the last four years, every attempt to get a PTR record in ip6.arpa
from my ISP has be
On 2/15/24 9:40 PM, Justin Streiner wrote:
The Internet edge and core portion of deploying IPv6 - dual-stack or
otherwise - is fairly easy. I led efforts to do this at a large .edu
starting in 2010/11. The biggest hurdles are/were/might still be:
1. Coming up with a good address plan that will d
On 2/17/24 10:22 AM, Justin Streiner wrote:
Getting back to the recently revised topic of this thread - IPv6 uptake -
what have peoples' experiences been related to crafting sane v6 firewall
rulesets in recent products from the major firewall players (Palo Alto,
Cisco, Fortinet, etc)? On the las
Get the MIBS of the devices you want to monitor, then build SNMP sense
programs to pull the information you need. The NAGIOS manuals should
describe how to do this.
On 05/19/2017 11:08 AM, bas wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> Does anyone have a ready to use nagios/icinga plugin for hardware health
> and
> https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10616167661646/satchell.answers2questions.NPRM.17-108.pdf
Warning: this is 63 pages long, and dull as dishwater.
It does have a few color pictures, though. And one comic strip.
Summary: fix the statutes (thank you Sen. Stevens, for the junk!) and
apply Title II o
On 06/17/2017 02:10 PM, Jeremy Austin wrote:
> I appreciate that a target of 35,000 per county or "county equivalent"
> (parish, borough?) is just a number — but I believe I would prefer a metric
> keyed to actual geographic population density rather than to political or
> municipal boundaries qua
On 06/21/2017 12:56 AM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
> I see no valid reason for such long AS paths. Time to update filters
> here. I'm tempted to set the cutoff at 30 - can anybody see a good
> reason to permit longer AS paths?
>
Well, as I mentioned in my Net Neutrality filing to the FCC, a TTL of
On 06/22/2017 04:27 AM, Jon Lewis wrote:
>
> You do have to wonder, what was the thought process that resulted in 35
> being the right number of prepends "accomplish" whatever TE they were
> shooting for?
>
> AS path: 10026 9498 55644 55644 55644 55644 55644 55644 55644 55644 55644
> 55644 55644
On 09/23/2017 07:47 AM, Ca By wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 7:13 AM Colton Conor wrote:
>> Just not sure why big vendors like Alcatel and Comtrend would have them
>> enabled by default if they do more harm than good?
> Turns out vendors focus on building and selling gear but are not
> experienc
I'm trying to resolve an issue with their network blocking Secure IMAP,
port 993/TCP. Is there any contact available?
I'm trying to resolve an issue with their network blocking Secure IMAP, port
993/TCP. Is there any contact available?
Problem resolved. If anyone wants the gruesome details, ask off-list.
On 12/04/2017 02:06 PM, Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote:
Namely, when I ran my server at home, it took a search warrant to
legally enter my house to access the server, which I would be
immediately made aware of. I can't say the same with the same degree of
certainty for a server located in a co-l
On 12/04/2017 06:47 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
Last week we found out that Helpscout sends email from AWS servers.
Thank you, Helpscout, for forcing me to lift the AWS blocks on my incoming
MTAs, that were cutting down my incoming spam scanning load by a factor of two.
At least.
If I may m
On 12/05/2017 02:59 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 07:38:18PM -0500, Eric Tykwinski wrote:
Main point I think is mailops comes with a learning curve, and it happens...
"Current Peeve: The mindset that the Internet is some sort of
school for novice sysadmins an
On 12/05/2017 06:38 AM, Edwin Pers wrote:
You'd think so, yes. Somehow Google and DO and most other hosting
companies manage to do it. Feels like AWS truly doesn't care about
it.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by
stupidity, ignorance, or negligence." --based on Ha
http://docs.aws.amazon.com/ses/latest/DeveloperGuide/manage-sending-limits.html
On 12/05/2017 10:16 AM, Gordon Ewasiuk via NANOG wrote:
AWS imposes "email sending limitations", by default, on all EC2
accounts. Anyone who wants those limitations removed has to fill out a
form and make a use case
On 12/06/2017 09:27 AM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
On 12/6/17 09:16, Nate Metheny wrote:
I've always been more than willing to share knowledge and skill training
with those who show interest and talent; the more qualified and
interested
people involved, the better, in my opinion. Making the club
"ex
On 12/29/2017 09:05 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
the good thing about these long threads, which have ZERO new
information, is having a KillThread command in one's mail user agent.
get a life!
I no longer use KillThread. Instead, I sort my inbox by subject, and
use the Delete key liberally. NANOG is
On 01/03/2018 09:46 PM, Tim Burke wrote:
AS12876 is online.net... home of the €2.99 physical server, perfect
for all of your favorite illegitimate activity. I’m curious how much
traffic originates from that ASN that is actually legitimate...
probably close to none.
SETI at home?
Bitcoin mining?
On 01/04/2018 01:02 PM, Dan Hollis wrote:
when the first tier incompetence stops, the direct contacts will stop too.
But, but, but...when the first tier support person gets the training to
not be incompetent, he is promoted to the second tier and the vacuum is
filled with another incompetent
On 01/05/2018 11:38 AM, Dovid Bender wrote:
I may have to take back what I said. Yes the attacks stopped from what IP
but they magically started again from another IP of theirs in a different.
Range. seems like the attacker picked up where they left off just from a
new UP. Almost as if they told
On 02/26/2018 03:25 PM, Christian Kuhtz via NANOG wrote:
A little difficult to say what this without knowing what 13.67.59.89 actually
is. If this is an Azure deployment, ReverseFqdn needs to be populated on the
Public IP address resource. Please take a look
herehttps://docs.microsoft.com/e
Testing on a recently-load VM of CentOS 7.3:
[root@localhost odd]# netstat -tan | grep 11211
[root@localhost odd]# netstat -uan | grep 11211
[root@localhost odd]# yum install memcached
[root@localhost odd]# systemctl start memcached.service
[root@localhost odd]# netstat -tan | grep 11211
tcp
On 03/01/2018 02:55 PM, Royce Williams wrote:
pstream, until two days ago, the default was to listen on all interfaces.
https://github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki/ReleaseNotes156
The package maintainers were (thankfully) injecting additional sanity.
Yes, they did, in commit dbb7a8af. Here i
On 03/07/2018 10:31 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
Frankly, I don't know why there are trays full of hundreds of pairs instead of
each cage having a patch panel and a 144 or some such trunk to another patch
panel elsewhere. Seems like there's a lot of extra work being done.
Because it's a capital ou
On 03/09/2018 01:23 PM, Trey Nolen wrote:
We are having issues with domains hosted on prodigy.net email servers
including att.net, bellsouth.net, and scbglobal.net.
We are being rejected for bad reverse DNS, but DNS is setup correctly.
The error we are receiving is:
Remote host said: 550 5.7.1 C
On 03/12/2018 10:44 AM, Sam Kretchmer wrote:
specifically http://tierii.iema.state.il.us/TIER2MANAGER/Account/Login.aspx
andhttps://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/.
Wireshark? It could be a problem with the sides having an infinite
referral loop. It doesn't necessarily have to be a network pro
On 03/17/2018 02:04 PM, Chris wrote:
Stephen Satchell wrote:
(I know in my consulting practice I strongly discourage having ANY
other significant services on DNS servers. RADIUS and DHCP, ok, but
not mail or web. For CPanel and PLESK web boxes, have the NS records
point to a pair of DNS
Two DNS servers hosted on one box (or VM object), even with two
addresses, is easily compromised by DDoS amplification attacks. That's
the norm for a number of "web control panel" systems like Plesk and CPanel.
It depends on the scale of your operations. Last time I was in that
situation, I
rles Bronson
To: nanog@nanog.org
If this isn't pertinent to the list, feel free to answer privately. How
did you implement the server that got rid of ARP storms?
Charles Bronson
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Satchell
Sent: Mo
In regards to: spoofing DNS to 8.8.8.8 et al
On 03/29/2018 09:26 AM, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
Running your own resolver will not work.
Why won't it work? I run a Linux box with BIND 9 set up as a recursive
resolver. Are you saying that the rogues will also capture requests to
the root DNS se
On 04/01/2018 08:18 AM, Matt Hoppes wrote:
Why not just implement recursive cache severs on end user routers?
Why does an end user CPE need to query one or two specific DNS
servers?
Recursive lookups take bandwidth and wall time. The closer you can get
your recursive DNS server to the core of
On 04/01/2018 01:03 PM, Paul Ebersman wrote:
And yes, running your own resolver is more private. So is running your
own home linux server instead of antique consumer OSs on consumer grade
gear and using VPNs. But how many folks can do that?
I gave up on Microsoft desktop products more than 15
On 04/02/2018 11:58 AM, Rhys Williams wrote:
Yep, Because you should have been setting up your networks correctly in the
first place. There's plenty of private space assigned, use it.
Regards,
Rhys Williams
April 2, 2018 4:54 PM, "Simon Lockhart" wrote:
and now suddenly it's our responsibil
On 04/14/2018 10:24 AM, DaKnOb wrote:
As far as IP Addresses go (and domains too), currently GDPR recognizes the
rights of individuals, not companies, which means that a company can be in the
whois query, since it does not have the right to privacy.
My understanding is that this will only affe
On 04/14/2018 02:46 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote:
So why not just have a checkmark at domain registration which asks
whether you believe yourself to be within the EU's jurisdiction and,
if so, no WHOIS publication for you, or very limited.
FWIW, I've been reading quite a bit of (unverified) info
On 08/10/2014 08:19 AM, Gabriel Marais wrote:
> Hi Nanog
>
> I'm curious.
>
> I have been receiving some major ssh brute-force attacks coming from random
> hosts in the 116.8.0.0 - 116.11.255.255 network. I have sent a complaint to
> the e-mail addresses obtained from a whois query on one of the
qotd17/udp quote
You're not blocking small services outbound at the edge?
On 08/26/2014 05:18 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Roland Dobbins wrote:
>> On Aug 26, 2014, at 6:48 PM, Miles Fidelman
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Immediate issue is dealt with (at least for us, target seems to be
This just keeps getting better and better:
"Yahoo Logo
Will be right back...
Thank you for your patience.
Our engineers are working quickly to resolve the issue."
My upstream is Charter Business...
On 08/28/2014 04:05 AM, Chris Garrett wrote:
> I believe this is what is commonly referred to in
On 09/02/2014 04:35 PM, Eric A Louie wrote:
> Does anyone have recommendations for Colocation space in any of those 4
> cities?
>
> thanks
> Eric
>
Co-location in Reno is a shrinking proposition. The only place I know
about, and have toured, is:
Roller Networks
Seth Mattinen, CTO
3545 Airway
On 09/28/2014 11:14 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
> I thought all of the RFC-descriptions of protocols were taken to be
> statements that "if you do it this way, we think we can inter-operate"
> but at no time to be taken as "right" or "wrong".
Correct. That gave birth to the original "interop" confer
On 09/29/2014 05:23 AM, Leif Nixon wrote:
> Please guys,
>
> If everybody could patch their perfsonar boxen against shellshock LIKE
> RIGHT NOW, or preferably LAST WEEK, or alternatively put the machines
> out of their misery with a shotgun, that would be great.
>
> Thank you,
>
>From the perfS
On 10/07/2014 11:36 AM, Khurram Khan wrote:
> Hi Group,
>
> We have a couple of circuits , internet facing with Level 3 and from
> our edge in San Diego, seeing some packet loss when trying a ping to
> 4.2.2.4, sourcing from 63.214.184.3. anyone seeing a similar issue ?
>
> Packet sent with a sou
What happens when you send plain-text mail, instead of HTML mail?
On 10/10/2014 11:27 AM, goe...@anime.net wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Oct 2014, Tom Hill wrote:
>> On 10/10/14 19:01, Alistair Mackenzie wrote:
>>> Gmail gave me a warning about this email too so that may be your
>>> problem.
>> Yeah, my pro
On 10/19/2014 06:20 AM, Joe Greco wrote:
> But given the choice between rationality and insanity, usually the
> process seems to prefer insanity.
Or, alternatively, inertia. I would be like renumbering, only worse,
because so many links would need to be found and updated.
On 10/20/2014 07:20 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 05:58:01 -0400, shawn wilson said:
>
>> Bad idea. I'm betting we'd find half of gov web sites down due to not being
>> able to reboot and issues in old coldfusion and IIS and the like (and
>> needing to fix static links a
On 10/22/2014 04:04 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> I've seen similar tactical mistakes when developers insist that
> information *must* be stored in a relational database -- even though
> plain old ordinary text files are perfectly adequate for the task,
> are easier to debug, are easier to fix, and ea
On 10/22/2014 02:43 PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> A Leatherman pocket multitool is highly useful: I've had one for years.
> It's great. Until you need two screwdrivers at the same time...at which
> point it becomes obvious why serious mechanics/craftsmen carry around a
> toolbox with dozens of tools
On 10/22/2014 08:20 PM, Simon Lyall wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>> And maybe, you should check out some of the upstream bug reports re.
>> systemd interactions with NTP.
>
> If you think the current situation is all good then maybe you should
> look at other bugs for ntp. e
On 10/23/2014 10:43 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> Wouldn't it be more 'do one thing well' if you had a 'super' inetd
> setup that can start services in a better way than with individually
> packaged (by different packagers in most cases) shell scripts that are
> going to run as root?
inetd versus xine
On 10/25/2014 08:12 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> If all of the scripts are cut'n'paste copes of each other, wouldn't it
> be better to figure out a way to stop cutting and pasting? I can't
> count the number of times I've run into problems with my code because
> of that, never mind how many times it
On 11/02/2014 03:56 PM, Colton Conor wrote:
> Some of the show interface commands are fairly
> basic, but others like on a DSL port show much more information like sync
> rate, signal loss, etc.
Yes, the information in SNMP is pretty well spread out, because a SNMP
get request returns a single val
On 11/17/2014 01:11 PM, Radke, Justin wrote:
> This past weekend we started receiving bursts of lookups on our DNS server
> for "localhost." We blocked our subscriber abusing this lookup (most
> assuredly malware and not intentional) but curious what safeguards you put
> in place for DOS attacks on
On 11/24/2014 08:41 AM, Alain Hebert wrote:
> Well,
>
> NetSol?
>
> Is it just me or they came up a few times lately (past year) in high
> profil case of DNS Hijacking?
>
Someone was kind enough to break into one of my domains at Register.com
-- and to their credit Register.com dete
On 11/30/2014 11:26 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Dec 2014 00:53:07 +0900, "Paul S." said:
>> Do these people never check what exactly they end up originating
>> outbound due to a config change, if that's really the case?
>
> You're new here, aren't you? :)
Thank you, I needed t
On 12/03/2014 04:04 AM, Niels Bakker wrote:
> * shortdudey...@gmail.com (Grant Ridder) [Wed 03 Dec 2014, 12:54 CET]:
>> Both of Google’s public DNS servers return complete results every time
>> and one of the two comcast ones works fine.
>>
>> If this is working by design, can you provide the RFC w
bnet won't affect
queries from other parts of the net. Queries from my IP address range
have a high cap; J random IP addresses have a lower cap.
On 12/03/2014 07:28 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> So have A record queries. Do you filter those as well?
>
> Jared Mauch
>
>> On
On 01/13/2015 03:18 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 16:52:49 -0600, Blair Trosper said:
>> All packets traveling through customer edges and routers in Miami/Daytona
>> seem to be incurring *extraordinary* latency (4+ seconds) all of a sudden.
>
> I'm impressed that the rou
On 01/25/2015 10:15 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> It shares another problem - that doing calculations across a boundary is
> difficult. If you have a recurring timer that pops at 23:58:30 on June 30,
> and you want another one in 2 minutes. do you want a timer that the next pop
> is at 00:00
On 08/15/2015 06:40 AM, Matthew Huff wrote:
neither side wants to upgrade their peeing
Oh, the irony of this typo of "peering"...
On 08/26/2015 05:40 AM, Ramy Hashish wrote:
Anybody here has experienced a PoC for any anti DDoS appliance, or already
using a anti DDoS appliance in production and able to share his user
experience/review?
We need to collect good reviews from people whom got their hands dirty with
the configura
On 09/04/2015 12:32 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
As a defensive measure (among others) I crafted a .sig that contained
all of the telephone numbers and email addresses by which I could be
reached (included a pager number) 7 x 24 x 52 with (guaranteed) no more
than 20 minute delay.
It ran to 7 lines,
101 - 200 of 292 matches
Mail list logo
