On 09/09/2015 06:36 AM, Dovid Bender wrote:
I am trying to understand why the legal babble bothers anyone. Does
it give you a nervous twitch? Remind you why you hate legal? It's
just text at the bottom of your email.
It's all about best practices.
In an e-mail thread, where the thread grows wi
On 09/15/2015 11:40 AM, Jake Mertel wrote:
C) keep the
image firmware file size the same, preventing easy detection of the
compromise.
Hmmm...time to automate the downloading and checksumming of the IOS
images in my router. Hey, Expect, I'm looking at YOU.
Wait a minute...doesn't Cisco have
On 09/23/2015 02:38 PM, Jason Bullen wrote:
I've always worked in enterprise only so I thought you guys might be able
to help me with this one.
We are dual homed to Verizon and AT&T. We prepend all our prefixes out
AT&T to make them least preferred. During a recent issue we found some
users wer
On 09/24/2015 07:05 AM, Blake Hudson wrote:
However, the ultimate way to control routing would be to advertise more
specific prefixes via the path that you want traffic to flow.
Tried that, no joy.
On 09/24/2015 09:49 AM, Dovid Bender wrote:
The issue now is convincing clients that they need it. The other
issue is many software vendors still don't support it.
And this may trigger a refresh on routers, as people old or refurbed
equipment find they need to change. The whole reason for the
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1876 (EXPERIMENTAL)
There appears to be a way of associating a subnet in the IN-ADDR.ARPA
domain to a FQDN, which could then be queries for LOC data. For single
addresses, the domain owner could opt to include location data for their
domain. For subnets, the op
On 09/25/2015 04:20 PM, Ca By wrote:
RFO: Google unilaterally deployed a non-standard protocol to our production
environment, driving up helpdesk calls x%
After action: block udp 80/443 until production ready and standard ratified
use deployed.
Let me be gentle about this. Why were you allowi
On 10/02/2015 12:44 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 02 Oct 2015 02:09:00 -0400, Rob McEwen said:
Likewise, sub-allocations can come into play, where a hoster is
delegated a /48, but then subdivides it for various customers.
So they apply for a /32 and give each customer a /48.
A h
On 10/02/2015 07:27 AM, Steve Mikulasik wrote:
I think people get too lost in the weeds when they start focusing on
device support, home router support, user knowledge, etc. Just get it
working to the people and we can figure out the rest later.
The reality is that if customers can get it wron
On 10/01/2015 08:18 PM, corta...@gmail.com wrote:
Excuse my probable ignorance of such matters, but would it not then be
preferred to create a whitelist of proven Email servers/ip's , and just
drop the rest? Granted, one would have to create a process to vet anyone
creating a new email server, b
On 10/02/2015 07:48 AM, Cryptographrix wrote:
For ISPs that already exist, what benefit do they get from
providing/allowing IPv6 transit to their customers?
Keep in mind that the net is now basically another broadcast medium.
Interesting you should use that phrase. IPv4 is the "AM band", whil
On 10/04/2015 06:40 AM, Matthias Leisi wrote:
Fully agree. But the current state of IPv6 outside "professional“
networks/devices is sincerely limited by a lot of poor CPE and
consumer device implementations.
I have to ask: where is the book _IPv6 for Dummies_ or equivalent?
Specifically, is
This is excellent feedback, thank you.
On 10/07/2015 04:54 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Oct 4, 2015, at 7:49 AM, Stephen Satchell wrote:
My bookshelf is full of books describing IPv4. Saying "IPv6 just
works" ignores the issues of configuring intelligent firewalls to block
the ne-e
On 10/07/2015 06:29 AM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
On Oct 7, 2015, at 5:01 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Instead, the followup question is needed… “That’s great, but how
does that help me reach a web site that doesn’t have and can’t get an
IPv4 address?”
At the present time, a web site that doesn't ha
On 10/08/2015 05:50 PM, Ricky Beam wrote:
You are an ISP. You don't get to say "NO!" to IPv6. It is what the
global internet is moving towards. You _WILL_ support it, or you will be
left behind, and your customers who have little or no other options will
suffer for it.
ISP == "Internet Service
I have been reviewing the proposed submission to the FCC ET Docket No.
15-170, regarding the requirement that vendors of wireless equipment
"lock down" updates, and find this quote in that submission particularly
apropos to the ongoing IPv6-on-wireless discussion:
"Most Wi-Fi routers, even the
On 10/09/2015 08:18 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
(I'm going to regret this but...)
No good deed ever goes unpunished.
(I'm sure there's a Dune quote to be used here somewhere as well...)
Indeed:
"A beginning is the time for taking the
most delicate care that the balances
are co
On 10/13/2015 02:56 AM, Max Tulyev wrote:
So upgrade hardware and network admins are NOT sufficient for IPv6
adoption;)
Was that a typo? Didn't you have to upgrade your network admins, too?
On 10/14/2015 03:37 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 12:12:29PM +0200, Randy Bush wrote:
jeezus folk!
http://www.procmail.org/
I wouldn't necessarily recommend that approach. There is no obligation
for victims of spammers to continue providing Internet services to them,
inclu
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Deployment_Guide/s1-dhcp_for_ipv6_dhcpv6.html
Applies to CentOS 7, which does not have a front-end licensing load.
Find stores that sell lease return computers, and you can pick up a
cheap box.
On 10/16/2015 04:08 A
On 10/17/2015 07:29 AM, Jason Canady wrote:
I'm going to go with Justin's suggestion and go with a wholesale
provider such as DialupUSA. It's not worth paying for the lines and
keeping a T1 or better for just a few users. DialupUSA use to charge
around $5/user. They also had hourly and per por
On 10/18/2015 03:38 PM, Aaron Hopkins wrote:
It appears to be limited to 14.4k due to patent issues and handles faxes
only, but its existence suggests writing a software-only data modem should
be possible.
That's exactly what WinModems were, back in the day. The board was
nothing more than a
On 10/20/2015 07:55 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
Right now imap.gmail.com appears down for me from at least two local
networks in India, just saying
I guess that's what the original poster wanted to ask about.
From time to time, I see outages of IMAP at Google, but they don't last
long.
On 10/22/2015 07:24 AM, Clay Curtis wrote:
I work for a VAR and we are starting to have customers come to us to help
with internet redundancy projects and they are unable to get address space
from ARIN. What are the viable options here? I have read about secondary
markets, transfers, auction si
On 10/25/2015 03:55 PM, Jason Baugher wrote:
This is getting really old.
Yep, so old I put in a filter to shunt them away to the trash. It's the
same subject line, so it's easy to filter out.
No coding required, just used Thunderbird's facility. Eight seconds
start to finish. No more spa
On 10/26/2015 02:11 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
Otherwise, simply thank them for doing what you refuse to do and get on with
your life.
Thank you, communications committee, for the work you do.
Also, if you think what happened was a spam flood, you are very lucky.
While a mail admin and ve
On 10/26/2015 04:40 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
Whats a Twitter? Is it IRC on a web-page for the addle, sort of like
a "web-forum" is Usenet for the addle?
Never used a "Twitter". Web Forums rately. The 1 D 10 T quotient is
too high ..
The Pony Express has been dead for years, what DO you use
On 12/16/2015 04:14 PM, Mel Beckman wrote:
I don't like what you eat. Lets put a surcharge on it to make you feel pain and
do what I want.:)
"I don't like what you eat. Lets put a TAX on it to make you feel pain
and do what I want."
There. Fixed it for you.
On 12/24/2015 04:50 PM, Daniel Corbe wrote:
Let’s just cut off the entirety of the third world instead of having
a tangible mitigation plan in place.
While you thing you are making a snarky response, it would be handy for
end users to be able to turn on and off access to other countries
retai
On 12/25/2015 06:18 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
To the thread, not necessarily Daniel, if blocking
countries\continents is a bad thing (not saying I disagree), how do
you deal with the flood of trash? Just take it on the chin?
The degree of splash damage by blocking this way will vary based
uponwhat
On 12/26/2015 06:19 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
How much is an acceptable standard to the community? Individual /32s
( or /64s)? Some tipping point where 50% of a /24 (or whatever it's
IPv6 equivalent would be) has made your naughty list that you block
the whole prefix?
My gauge is volume of obnoxi
On 12/26/2015 11:37 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
If someone like Consumer Reports or similar agency started testing and
rating devices on these things like long-time support, automatic
updates, software quality etc, and not just testing wifi speed as a
factor of distance, we might get somewhere.
On 01/24/2016 11:06 AM, Lorell Hathcock wrote:
All:
Does anyone out there have some valuable OID's for a Cisco CMTS?
The ones I am looking for are:
Signal to Noise per upstream channel
Cable Modem counts of all kinds
connected / online
ranging
It depends on whether the exact model is being sold after a couple of
years, and not superseded by new models. This is the case in the
wireless router world, where product churn leaves last year's model an
orphan when it comes to updates.
Not so much in the OS world, only because the OS doesn
On 03/08/2016 07:30 AM, greg whynott wrote:
I'd like to purchase a IP to
Serial port device I can use for each location in the event I lock myself
out. The requirement would be an Ethernet port, a serial port, and SSH.
I've used Cisco 2500 routers for this type of service, using the AUX
On 03/08/2016 10:36 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
You can use a 2600 or 2800 with the 16 port serial module.
Or a 32-port module (NM-32A)...but I think that would have been overkill
for what the OP was originally asking for. :)
On 02/27/2015 06:50 AM, Rob McEwen wrote:
> btw - does anyone know if that thick book of regulations, you know...
> those hundreds of pages we weren't allowed to see before the vote...
> anyone know if that is available to the public now? If so, where?
It was in the FCC story: the rules (that thi
On 02/27/2015 06:05 AM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
> http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/fccs-throwback-thursday-move-imposes-1930s-rules-on-the-internet
>
OK. The Morse code I knew about, from news stories. What I didn't know
is that the "translation" would be PDF of 1930s-style typewritten
t
On 02/27/2015 07:09 AM, Jack Bates wrote:
> I'm curious if the changes will effect the small ISPs concerning things
> like CALEA.
The first indications of any changes would be Cisco and Juniper
announcing CALEA products in their low- and mid-line network products.
Or there may be some near-startup
On 02/27/2015 07:21 AM, Bob Evans wrote:
>
>
>> Just think of all that innovation and investment that's been "stifled"
>> over the last 50 years under Title II.
>> Anyone remember having to "rent" their rotary phones from AT&T?
>
> Yes, I am that old. You were not allowed to connect a phone of y
On 02/27/2015 09:40 AM, Naslund, Steve wrote:
> If people want a different ratio of up to downlink speed it could
> certainly be done. ADSL is by definition asymmetric. We also sold
> SDSL which is symmetric service and the primary buyers were generally
> businesses. See G.SHDSL if you want a s
One of the FUD items I keep seeing from some factions is that the FCC
will regulate content on the Internet in the same way as they did for
television during the time of the "fairness doctrine". In particular,
these people *expect* the FCC to take a page from the IRS and start
putting up roadblock
On 02/27/2015 11:57 AM, Mel Beckman wrote:
> It is NOT the ISP's responsibility to provide you with X Mbps if that
> was advertised as "UP TO x Mbps" (which is exactly how every
> broadband provider advertises its service -- check your contract).
> We're not talking about the Internet's capacity he
On 02/27/2015 01:27 PM, Jack Bates wrote:
> My 2 cents. I don't design these things, but you'd think people would
> start realizing that static allocation is kind of limiting. Giving
> someone 50mb/s with 20mb/s waste is annoying when they are saturating
> 3mb/s the opposite direction. Wouldn't it
On 02/27/2015 12:44 PM, Adam Rothschild wrote:
> I interpreted the FCC press release[*] to apply these provisions to
> "broadband access" providers only -- that is to say, not hosters, nor
> CDNs. It will indeed be interesting to see how this works once the
> full documentation is released.
So di
On 02/28/2015 07:57 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
> Over 95% of the people don't do anything of the sort (probably much
> closer to 100 than 95). The most common usage is tablets and phones
> going to Facebook, YouTube and Netflix. Regular consumers couldn't
> care less about anything else. If you think
On 02/28/2015 02:49 PM, Jack Bates wrote:
> On 2/28/2015 4:38 PM, Barry Shein wrote:
>> Asymmetric service was introduced to discourage home users from
>> deploying "commercial" services. As were bandwidth caps.
>>
> Hmm, at one point I was going to ask if anyone else remembered a long
> time ago I
On 02/28/2015 07:55 PM, Barry Shein wrote:
> And given lousy upload speeds the opportunities to develop for example
> backup services in a world of terabyte disks is limited. At 1mb/s it
> takes approx 100,000 seconds to upload 1TB, that's roughly one week,
> blue sky.
If that terabyte drive holds
On 03/01/2015 01:44 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> fairly certain that none of these folk block port 25 on their business
> customer links.
Correct as far as Charter goes. Particularly for people with dedicated
IP addresses, as I do. I can't speak for DHCP address space.
On 03/01/2015 05:53 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Business customers only get static from Comcast if they pay extra for it.
That's also true for Charter. I know of one ISP offering DSL that gives
its customers static addresses. Only one. That doesn't mean there
aren't more that do.
On 03/02/2015 06:22 AM, Daniel Taylor wrote:
> I'm clearly not a normal user, or I wouldn't be here.
> Normal users have never experienced high-speed symmetrical service.
>
> People don't miss what they have never had.
I would agree with that statement in a slightly modified form:
"People don't
On 03/02/2015 09:33 AM, Naslund, Steve wrote:
> A. Me - "Hey genius, why don't you download a movie about networks
> because my upload does not affect your streaming movie download
> except for the insignificant amount of control traffic in the
> opposite direction."
>
Unless there is significant
On 03/02/2015 09:14 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> Just tell that to your child that has to submit a assignment before
> midnight or get zero on 20% of the year's marks. There are plenty
> of cases where uploads are time critical there are also time where
> it really doesn't matter.
That's what USB th
On 03/12/2015 10:25 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
> Robustness is desirable from a security perspective. Failure to be
> liberal in what you accept and not being prepared to deal with
> malformed input leads to such wonders as the Microsoft bug that led
> to unexpected/malformed IP datagrams mishandled
On 03/25/2015 07:31 PM, Aaron C. de Bruyn wrote:
> After getting a few helpful users on the phone to run some quick
> tests, we found port 22 was blocked.
It's been a while since I did this, but you can select an additional
port to accept SSH connections. A Google search indicates you can
specify
I'm sorry, packets are for the birds.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2549
On 04/01/2015 04:35 PM, Gary Wardell wrote:
> My packets prefer owls.
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Thomas
>> Maufer
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2015 7:15 PM
On 04/27/2015 07:02 PM, Rob Seastrom wrote:
Anyone else been spammed by Andy Boland at "Function5 Technology
Group"?
I'm not sure it's fair to class the e-mail as "spam", but he is one
persistent fellow. My company made list for some of the equipment we
retired for purchase, and his Cisco bu
On 04/27/2015 08:30 PM, Rob Seastrom wrote:
Suresh Ramasubramanian writes:
though a remarkably persistent one to one, I would suggest procmail,
unless you know heâ(TM)s harvested nanog and is sending the same
offer mail merged to a bunch of operators.
Gee, it's almost as if by posing a ques
On 05/04/2015 07:55 PM, nan...@roadrunner.com wrote:
Possibly a bit off-topic, but curious how all of you out there segment
your networks. Corporate/business users, dependent services, etc. from
critical data and/or processes with remote locations thrown in the mix
which could be mini-versions o
On 05/09/2015 08:17 AM, Jim Popovitch wrote:
On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
No test/plain? Delete without further ado.
In the past year or so it seems that all RAA Verification emails, or
at least the ones I see, contain no plain text. :-(
-Jim P.
I'm surprised.
On 06/05/2015 11:47 AM, Blake Hudson wrote:
The fire marshal that regularly inspects our building will cite us if he
sees an extension cord in use - even temporarily - or sees a temporary
power tap/surge suppressor connected to another. Meanwhile, in another
city, I see government and commercial
On 06/05/2015 06:38 PM, Mike Hale wrote:
We need a pool on what percentage of readers just googled traceroute.
I didn't google traceroute. Didn't need to. Instead, I drew on the
knowledge I gained when Clifford and I wrote _Linux IP Stacks
Commentary_. Unfortunately, the Steven's books are
On 06/06/2015 03:32 AM, jim deleskie wrote:
I remember you asking me who Jon was:) I have since added to my list of
interview questions... sad but the number of people with clue is declining
not increasing.
It's not a question of clue, but of history. How many CS grads are
exposed to the de
On 06/06/2015 07:17 PM, John Fraizer wrote:
And if you've
got a cert, you had better know your stuff because if your cert says you're
an EXPERT. I'm gonna expect you to be one!
X -- math quantity denoting the unknown
SPURT -- drip of water under pressure
X-SPURT -- unknown drip under pressure
On 06/07/2015 01:10 AM, Joshua Riesenweber wrote:
Now from what I understand of the CCIE lab exam (which I haven't
attempted yet), it is a practical exam and you need to know your
stuff to pass. I'm sure people think up ways to cheat and devalue it,
that's bound to happen. I've sat on both sides
On 06/07/2015 09:28 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
i assume, but have zero actual knowledge/experience, that certification
courses/programs actually cover all the corners and minutiae of a subject
such as is-is. so you come out knowing all the options and details, 42%
of which you will use; or maybe 24%
On 06/08/2015 07:34 PM, shawn wilson wrote:
On Jun 8, 2015 10:11 PM, "Shane Ronan" wrote:
Certs have ruined the industry.
Certs have made the industry more interesting. After all, without certs,
we'd have less stupid to point at and laugh (or scream). And HR screeners
would need to know som
On 06/10/2015 07:47 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
Over the past 25 years or so, I can think of a half-dozen offers I've
turned down because the employer failed the interview. (Which
doesn't make me a geeenious ... just someone who values low blood
pressure, and prefers an interesting work environm
On 06/14/2015 07:06 AM, Niels Bakker wrote:
* raf...@gav.ufsc.br (Rafael Possamai) [Sun 14 Jun 2015, 04:54 CEST]:
This was either an isolated incident or they really don't care much.
Have you considered the third option?
Third option?
Even cheaper, but a little more DYI, you can look into building a small
Linux box, load MRTG (which you should be running anyway), and crafting
small probe scripts that would feed the "traffic" grapher. For switch
closures like on water-sensors, you will need an I/O board, but they are
readily
On 06/14/2015 10:23 AM, Jürgen Jaritsch wrote:
We're using PRTG from Paessler (http://www.paessler.com).
This is a product designed for use on Windows only, no mention of ports
to other operating systems. For some people, this is fine. For others,
who don't want to mess with Windows at all,
schäftsführer: Alexander Windbichler
Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT U63216601
-Original Message-
From: Stephen Satchell [l...@satchell.net]
Received: Sonntag, 14 Juni 2015, 19:37
To: nanog@nanog.org [nanog@nanog.org]
Subject: Re: Hardware monitoring
On 06/18/2015 10:15 AM, Nick B wrote:
I wish I had some simple solution, but I don't, it's going to require
years, probably decades, of hard work by a motivated and skilled team.
Also, a stable of unicorns.
Not to mention an Act of Congress. Oh, wait...
On 06/20/2015 11:56 PM, Mike Lyon wrote:
Waaay to many variables to answer the question. Each deployment is
different and requires proper engineering and experience...
And a good description of the problem, too, as I learned the hard way
trying to work with the IT people for a Ruckus installat
On 06/24/2015 12:44 PM, Matthew Huff wrote:
It looks like the safest thing for us to do is to keep our NTP
servers running and deal with any crashes/issues. That's better than
having to deal with FINRA.
For what it's worth, Red Hat pushed updates to NTP and to TZDATA. You
might want to check
On 06/26/2015 12:03 PM, Paul Stewart wrote:
Personally I think it's pure marketing ... something I think we all
know...
I seen a few years back a FTTH development get completed using GPON -
everything in the area got "Full Gig Internet". Speedtest while I
was onsite showed about 900Mb/s downloa
On 06/27/2015 11:48 AM, manning wrote:
This is kind of like asking when we will stop using ethernet framing
(ethernet was designed for a 3Mbps transmission rate) yet we are
deploying 100Gbps networks. Still stuck on that 1500byte limitation.
When can we get rid of that?
Speed has nothing to do
On 06/29/2015 01:16 AM, a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
Hi,
I knew several people who built their career path on the assumptions of IPX.
Ouch.
or DECnet ;-)
Or XNS. On the other hand, people did have a nice career with SNA...but
they weren't trying to push packets over the
On 06/30/2015 07:28 AM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
There are still isolated pockets of devices out there speaking IPX,
DECnet, Appletalk, etc, but either they're not connected to the
'Internet', or their traffic passes through other devices that
encapsulate and de-encapsulate it in IP to allow it
On 07/11/2015 08:17 PM, Harlan Stenn wrote:
Thanks, and I'm kinda stunned that folks are running such ancient
versions of NTP.
https://support.ntp.org/bin/view/Dev/ReleaseTimeline
4.2.0 was EOL'd in June of 2006, and we've fixed about 3,000 issues in
the codebase since then.
I used to do a lo
This goes back a number of years. There was a product that literally
was a cardboard box that contained everything one needed to get started
on the Internet. Just add a modem and a computer, and you were on your
way. No fuss, no "learning curve".
I'm beginning to think that someone needs to
On 07/15/2015 02:23 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
I will point out that nobody has said “what the F*** were they
thinking” when they made it possible to use 4GB of RAM instead of
just 640k, but lots of people have said “what the F*** were they
thinking when they limited it to 640k.”
That 640k was the
On 07/15/2015 07:32 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
None of which is the fault of the protocol. Blame the equipement vendors
for being negligent.
I'm sorry, it is just me? Or is the issue before us to fix the PROBLEM
and not fix the BLAME? Pointing fingers isn't going to help get us to
widespread
On 07/22/2015 09:01 PM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
You're certainly free to block whatever traffic you wish, but your
customers might not appreciate a heavy-handed approach to stopping bad
traffic at the gates.
As opposed to not being able to pass traffic at all? After all, isn't
the goal of a
On 07/28/2015 08:06 PM, Bryan Tong wrote:
Hello All,
SpamHaus has done us the favor of blacklisting all of our prefixes due to
the issues with handful of IPs from customers we have removed from our
network.
They are now being unresponsive on helping us get these listings removed
and we have a l
On 08/03/2015 05:40 AM, Mel Beckman wrote:
What would be the point of spoofing the source IPs to be identical?
You're just making the attack trivial to block. Plus you could never
do any kind of TCP session attack, since you can't complete a
handshake. I would have to call this sort of attack a
On 08/03/2015 07:04 AM, Roland Dobbins wrote:
On 3 Aug 2015, at 21:00, Roland Dobbins wrote:
due to DDoS exhaustion
That should read '[TCP] state exhaustion', apologies.
And any half-awake server operator would have turned on SYNCOOKIES a
long time ago.
Interesting this should come up. I run a small multihomed network in
Reno, NV, with a couple /21s and 65 megabits of upstream. For the last
few weeks, one of my co-location customers has been attacked with SYN
floods with forged source-IP addresses, overloading the SonicWall he
has, and whe
John Curran wrote:
Steve -
For the first end site that has to connect via IPv6,
it will be very bad if there is not a base of IPv6
web/email sites already in place.
As the network administrator for a Web hosting company, I've not seen
any coherent (and useful) information about
My mail servers return 5xx on NXDOMAIN. If my little shop can spend not
too much money for three-9s reliability in the DNS servers, other shops
can as well. When I first deployed the system, the overwhelming
majority of the rejects were from otherwise known spam locations
(looking at Spamha
Brandon Galbraith wrote:
On 6/23/08, Nathan Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Do 'normal' web hosting providers allow customer created scripts to create
TCP sessions out to arbitrary things?
Doesn't PHP provide a fair amount of TCP functionality that can be used
simply by uploading the code yo
On 6/22/20 12:59 AM, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:
William Herrin
Howdy,
Why is latency between the east and west coasts so bad? Speed of light
accounts for about 15ms each direction for a 30ms round trip. Where does
the other 30ms come from and why haven't we gotten rid of it?
Wallstre
201 - 292 of 292 matches
Mail list logo
