On 5/4/21 11:34 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
On Tue, 4 May 2021 at 18:28, Adam Thompson wrote:
When I look at my IPv6 routing table, the next-hops are all... well...
gibberish, at least to me. My experience is that LLAs are not durable, so
memorizing them is not IMHO a useful task. Figuring out an
On 1/27/20 3:06 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote:
I remember going from 300b to 1200b and thinking wow, this is it,
we're done, I cannot read text scrolling on the screen at 1200b.
Other than the 75 and 110 baud teletypes that only did text, my first
TCP/IP connection was 300b, back when we had to
On 4/29/20 8:53 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
I suppose it's time for a more public:
"Hey, when you want to test a service, please take the time to test
that service on it's service port/protocol"
Testing; "Is the internet up?"
by pinging a DNS server, is ... not great ;(
I get that telling '
On 9/25/21 7:52 PM, Joe Greco wrote:
On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 04:23:38PM -0700, Jay Hennigan wrote:
On 9/25/21 16:14, George Herbert wrote:
(Crying, thinking about racks and racks and racks of AT&T 56k modems
strapped to shelves above PM-2E-30s???)
And all of their wall-warts [...]
You were
There have been reports of DDoS and new targeted malware attacks.
There were questions in the media about cutting off the Internet.
Apparently some Russian government sites have already cut themselves
off, presumably to avoid counterattacks.
Would it improve Internet health to refuse Russian AS
I'd flagged this to reply, but sadly am a bit behind
On 3/10/22 11:02 AM, Matthew Walster wrote:
IPv6 is technologically superior to IPv4, there's no doubt about that. It is vastly inferior when it comes to understanding what is going on by your average sysadmin, network engineer, IT helpdesk
On 3/10/22 9:22 PM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
Matthew Walster wrote:
IPv6 is technologically superior to IPv4, there's no doubt about that.
It is not. Though IPv6 was designed against OSI CLNP (with 20B,
or, optionally, 40B addresses), IPv6 incorporated many abandoned
ideas of CLNP and XNS already
Admitting to not having read every message in these threads,
but would like to highlight a bit of the history.
IMnsHO, the otherwise useful history is missing a few steps.
1) The IAB selected ISO CLNP as the next version of IP.
2) The IETF got angry, disbanded, replaced, and renamed IAB.
3)
On 3/23/22 2:25 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
William Allen Simpson wrote:
6) The Paul Francis (the originator of NAT) Polymorphic Internet Protocol
(PIP) had some overlapping features, so we also asked them to merge
with us (July 1993). More complexity in the protocol header chaining
This was the IPvB (nee original IPv6) *translation* header.
Note that it was cleverly designed to translate from IPv4.
Most of the fields are in exactly the same place. Especially,
the 32-bit Source IP address is in exactly the same place, hoping
that filters could operate on both stacks.
We we
This was the IPvB (nee original IPv6) *performance* header.
We required that each IP variant have its own link layer
designation. Therefore, the IP version number wasn't
needed. We could simply set two upper bits to a value (0)
that would distinguish it from every extant IP version.
Also, many
On 3/23/22 2:25 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
William Allen Simpson wrote:
Neighbor Discovery is/was agnostic to NBMA. Putting all the old
ARP and DHCP and other cruft into the IP-layer was my goal, so
that it would be forever link agnostic.
To make "IP uber alles", link-dependent
On 3/29/22 5:21 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) via NANOG wrote:
* APs today snoop DHCP; DHCP is observable and stateful, with a lifetime that
allows to clean up. So snooping it is mostly good enough there. The hassle is
the SL in SLAAC which causes broadcasts and is not deterministically
observ
On 3/31/22 7:44 AM, William Allen Simpson wrote:
[heavy sigh]
All of these things were well understood circa 1992-93.
That's why the original Neighbor Discovery was entirely link state.
ND link state announcements handled the hidden terminal problem.
Also, it almost goes without saying
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/07/29/republican-fundraising-google-spam/
Forwarded Message
Subject: AO 2022-14
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2022 12:03:20 -0400
From: William Allen Simpson
To: a...@fec.gov
https://www.fec.gov/data/legal/advisory-opinions/2022-14
On 8/1/22 9:47 PM, sro...@ronan-online.com wrote:
On Aug 1, 2022, at 9:38 PM, Michael Rathbun wrote:
On Sun, 31 Jul 2022 12:11:07 -0400, William Allen Simpson
wrote:
At our residence, the US mailbox is positioned near the recycling bin.
Bulk mail generally goes directly into recycling
On 10/31/22 9:27 AM, Donald Eastlake wrote:
On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 2:37 AM Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG
wrote:
1. What is going on on the Internet is not democracy even formally,
because there is no formal voting.
3GPP, ETSI, 802.11 have voting. IETF decisions are made by bosses who did
On 11/2/22 8:33 AM, Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
0) "Internet Vendor Task Force indeed.": Thank you so much in distilling this
thread one more step for getting even closer to its essence.
As I'd mentioned already, Randy Bush has also had some cogent thoughts
over the years. That's where I'd firs
On 11/5/22 8:19 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
William Allen Simpson wrote:
Something similar happened with IPv6. Cisco favored a design where only
they had the hardware mechanism for high speed forwarding. So we're
stuck with 128-bit addresses and separate ASNs.
Given that high
On 5/1/19 6:12 PM, Richard wrote:
I found this article very helpful as I knew very little. I was smarter for
reading it though it may be to basic for many:
https://timetoolsltd.com/gps/gps-ntp-server/
Although it has a good general overview, I'm fairly sure that Dave Mills
would be very
This thread has devolved into "Why 5G"?
A lot of folks are missing the bigger picture.
5G is not for better voice calls. AFAICT, it won't help voice at all.
5G is not for better integration with WiFi or IP data. 5G is to
*replace* WiFi, and FTTH, and ISPs, and WISPs, and bring all data back t
On 1/1/20 10:35 AM, Brandon Butterworth wrote:
On Wed Jan 01, 2020 at 09:29:20AM -0500, jdambro...@gmail.com wrote:
Given the deployment of Wi-Fi into so many different applications
- your statement that 5G is to "replace" WiFi seems overly ambitious
We might think that but it is serious. They
On 12/18/18 8:38 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
On Dec 19, 2018, at 3:50 AM, Brian Kantor wrote:
/24 is certainly cleaner than 255.255.255.0.
I seem to remember it was Phil Karn who in the early 80's suggested
that expressing subnet masks as the number of bits from the top end
of the address word was e
On 12/19/18 2:47 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
So at one show, the Interop show network went to a 255.255.252.0 netmask, and
of course a lot of vendors had issues and complained. The stock response was
"Quit whining, or next show it's going to be 255.255.250.0".
Ha, I remember!
Let us no
On 12/20/18 11:46 AM, Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote:
On 12/14/2018 11:48 AM, Grant Taylor wrote:
I've been seeing them for three or four days now.
BUMP
This has been going on for more than a week now. I'm quite confident that
there have been hundreds of auto-replies. (I'm seeing 285 incomin
On 12/31/18 3:31 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
It could have been worse:
https://www.cio.com.au/article/65115/all_systems_down/
"Make network changes only between 2am and 5am on weekends."
Wow. Just wow. I suppose the IT types are considerably different than Process
Operations. Our rule is t
On 1/26/19 6:37 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
to nick's point. as nick knows, i am a naggumite; one of my few
disagreements with dr postel. but there is a difference between
writing protocol specs/code, and with sending packets on the global
internet. rigor in the former, prudence in the latter.
OK,
On 3/8/19 6:32 AM, Fernando Gont wrote:
Folks,
If you follow the 6man working group of the IETF you may have seen a
bunch of emails on this topic, on a thread resulting from an IETF
Internet-Draft we published with Jan Žorž about "Reaction of Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) to Renumb
On 8/12/17 7:27 AM, Mehmet Akcin wrote:
Hey there!
... ok this time I am not going to call it PRIX ;)
I thought that was a perfectly good name.
[...] The jsland historically had one of the slowest
broadband/internet services which seemed to have improved in recent years
however as of 2017 t
I've read through the entire thread thus far, and there are several very
interesting points. I'd like to know more about the Australian experiment?
But there were a couple of disparate comments that seem highly related, so
I'll reply to them jointly here:
On 11/30/10 2:59 AM, JC Dill wrote:
W
On 12/1/10 8:47 PM, William Herrin wrote:
"Dual agency is not legal in all 50 states."
Kinda the opposite of the monopoly/duopoly ISP who doesn't seek your
permission in dealing with anyone else.
Finally, realize that in both cases (real estate agent and apartment
broker) you're dealing with a
[Changed long CC list to BCC]
On 12/2/10 12:49 AM, Frank Bulk wrote:
George Ou touches on a similar point at the end of his article:
http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/11/level-3-outbid-akamai-on-netflix-by-re
selling-stolen-bandwidth/
The Ou article makes no sense at all! It's based on the p
On 12/6/10 6:58 AM, Michael Wildpaner wrote:
PIPELINING and STARTTLS are unrelated issues, and both are currently
working as intended.
- STARTTLS on MX is in the process of being rolled out and not visible
from all client locations at this point.
- PIPELINING is not offered under all
On 12/16/10 9:51 AM, Craig L Uebringer wrote:
Funny thing about competition is that there are losers as well as winners.
DSL competition
didn't lose by regulation, it lost (nationally) by cheaper, more elastic
bandwidth available
on other media and JC's previously-noted fickle and lazy consumer
On 12/18/10 7:27 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
From: "Robert E. Seastrom"
... I can see a future where you buy internet from
the cable co and they give you the basic cable TV channel lineup at
"no charge" but in reality, you're paying for the cable internet what
you used to pay for both cable intern
On 12/17/10 12:08 PM, Dave Temkin wrote:
George Bonser wrote:
The municipality charges the cable company per HBO subscriber?
The municipality gets a cut of that in a profit sharing agreement. The point
was, everyone gets their tax or toll along the way.
Dave, perhaps you would be kind enou
On 12/21/10 1:42 AM, Robert Bonomi wrote:
Bzzt! It's -not- illegal to put a letter inside a FedEx box. It just has
to have the appropriate (USPS) postage on it, _as_well_ as paying the FedEx
service/delivery fee. This is true if it is just the letter you're sending,
or if it is a sealed letter
On 12/20/10 9:07 PM, Steven Bellovin wrote:
On Dec 20, 2010, at 8:51 01PM, JC Dill wrote:
Do you have any cites saying that this was actually rolled out? Or did the
project get cut during the financial crisis, and never actually rolled out?
The issue I have with all these "cites" is that non
On 12/23/10 1:17 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
On 12/23/10 9:19 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
And that's just another argument in favor of muni fiber -- since it's municipal,
it will by definition serve every address, and since it's monopoly, it will
enable competition by making it practical for competitors
On 12/23/10 12:27 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
I was poking around to see what the current received wisdom was as to
average install cost per building for suburban municipal home-run fiber,
and ran across this article, which discusses the topic, and itemizes
several large such deployments that "failed
On 1/3/11 6:42 PM, Jay Farrell wrote:
I noticed a substantial drop in spam in my gmail account in recent days,
from several hundred a day to maybe a hundred. Ironically, gmail filtered
this thread to my spam folder.
Yes, I found these messages my gmail spam today, too. Lately, gmail has
been r
On 1/6/11 1:47 AM, Paul Ferguson wrote:
As someone who has been immersed in security for many years now, and having
previously been very intimately involved in the network ops community for
equally many years, I have to agree with Roland here. Just because a lot of
smart people have worked on IPv
http://internetassociation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Comments.pdf
Really good, for those of us with the patience to ponder it. I tried
writing my own FCC response, and was flummoxed by the difficulty.
Official comment period ends today.
On 7/22/14 12:07 PM, Paul WALL wrote:
Provided without comment:
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/news/comcast-astroturfing-net-neutrality
Thanks! This is nothing new for him. There's astroturf from
him going back to '08 on NANOG.
Remember when he was shilling for ITIF -- a "think tank" whose
bo
On 7/21/14 3:50 PM, William Herrin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Blake Dunlap wrote:
My power is pretty much always on, my water is pretty much always on
and safe, my sewer system works, etc etc...
Mine isn't. I lost power for a three days solid last year, I've
suffered 3 sanitary s
On 7/10/11 6:29 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
The IETF is run by volunteers. They volunteer because they find
designing protocols to be fun. For the most part, operators are not
entertained by designing network protocols. So, for the most part they
don't partiticpate.
Randy Bush, "Editorial zone: Into
On 8/3/11 4:13 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
I agree that autoconf is desirable. Now, please explain to me why it is
desirable for the address to change at random intervals from the customer
perspective? (i.e. why would one want dynamic rather than static auto
configuration?)
Because IPv6 was original
On 9/11/11 11:28 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 11:06 PM, Hughes, Scott GRE-MG
wrote:
Companies that wrap their services with generic domain names (paymybills.com
and the like) have no one to blame but themselves when they are targeted by
scammers and phishing schemes.
On 9/26/11 4:29 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
Is this with strict NXDOMAIN rewriting, or were existing names
redirected as well? (AFAIK, most platforms do the latter, hijacking
bfk.de, for example.)
Has anybody tried bringing a criminal complaint for interference with
computer (network) data?
Cer
On 9/27/11 7:50 AM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 3:57 AM, William Allen Simpson
wrote:
[snip]
Certainly, hijacking google.com NS records to JOMAX.NET would be a
criminal interference. After all, that's all DNSsec signed now,
isn't it?
I would rather see DNSSEC and
On 9/26/11 4:29 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
Is this with strict NXDOMAIN rewriting, or were existing names
redirected as well? (AFAIK, most platforms do the latter, hijacking
bfk.de, for example.)
I responded:
Has anybody tried bringing a criminal complaint for interference with computer
(netw
On 9/27/11 11:41 AM, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:48 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 10:20:25 EDT, William Allen Simpson said:
It's not legal for an ISP to modify computer data. Especially
digitally signed data. That's a criminal offense.
Citation?
Could tamp
In accord with the recent thread, "facebook spying on us?"
We should also worry about other spying on us. Without
some sort of rudimentary security, all that personally
identifiable information is exposed on our ISP networks,
over WiFi, etc.
Facebook claims to be able to run over TLS connection
On 10/2/11 12:36 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Michael Thomas wrote:
I'm not sure why lack of TLS is considered to be problem with Facebook.
The man in the middle is the other side of the connection, tls or otherwise.
That's where the X509 certificate comes in. A ma
On 12/6/11 12:00 PM, Eric Tykwinski wrote:
Maybe it's just me, but I would think that simply getting them listed on
stopbadware.org and other similar sites would probably have much more of an
effect.
The bad publicity can cause them to change tactics, but it takes some time.
I've seen much quicke
On 11/30/12 5:15 PM, Naslund, Steve wrote:
Well, in that case I am really worried that the cops might charge
me with a crime. They took my computers and are looking at them. I did
not do anything wrong but just in case they decide to charge me with a
crime, please send me some money.
As
On 12/6/12 10:20 AM, Kyrian wrote:
Also, if you are going to hack the kernel to make that change, I urge you to
make it part of the sysctl mechanism as well, and to send a patch back to the
kernel developers to help out others who might be in a similar situation to
you. This is both to help
th
On 1/28/13 8:06 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
Anybody have some happy success stories to share about service in Qwest
service area post Centurylink acquisition?
yes. switched my WA residential to comcast. *much* happier.
Thanks, that made me laugh. Myself, for residential, have long left
ATT/SBC/A
On 1/29/13 1:20 AM, Rob McEwen wrote:
[...] the US Federal government:
(A) ...cannot do a darn thing without MASSIVE graft & corruption... plus
massive overruns in costs... including a HEAVY dose of "crony
capitalism" where, often, the companies who get the contracts are the
ones who pad the wal
On 1/29/13 8:30 AM, Rob McEwen wrote:
On 1/29/2013 7:43 AM, William Allen Simpson wrote:
The graft and corruption was in *private* industry, not the Federal
government, due to lack of regulation and oversight.
I never said there wasn't graft and corruption in private industry...
but th
I'd like to join Jay, Scott, Leo, and presumably Dave
supporting muni network ownership -- or at least a
not-for-profit entity.
I tried to start one a decade ago, but a lawsuit was
threatened by the incumbent cable provider (MediaOne in
those days) who claimed an exclusive right. Since then
the
On 1/11/12 9:58 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
A better default could be that IGP will be automatically invoked
if DHCP does not supply a default router.
That's ridiculous. You need some link state to even find a
DHCP server. So, the very idea that DHCP would tell you where
your routers are is prep
Somebody needs to give them a clue-by-four. The private sector
already has the "Internet address where an email ... originated";
it's already in the Received lines. We don't need to be informed
about it, we already inform each other about it.
And it's already delivered "at network speed."
It i
On 8/20/12 4:15 PM, R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
Quality Union work!
Actually, probably *not* union. And that's the problem!
Remember, Verizon has been "laying off" a lot of "old hands" and
making them become "independent contractors" -- so that it can
hire non-union under-paid workers.
A quic
On 10/19/14 10:32 AM, John Levine wrote:
# Gee, someone should alert NANOG management that the list has fallen
# through a wormhole into 1996.
#
On 10/19/14 12:51 PM, David Conrad wrote:
RFC 1591.
Which is circa 1994.
The real answer is that although fed.us is used by some agencies,
the overa
On 9/16/15 11:12 AM, Peter Beckman wrote:
Why don't you post a copy here or a link?
https://www.eff.org/files/2015/09/14/eff-aclu_internet_engineers_and_pioneers_statement.pdf
I've agreed.
Hey!
New message, please read <http://smbdigitals.com/together.php?31n>
William Allen Simpson
On 10/26/15 1:10 PM, Pablo Lucena wrote:
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 12:22 AM, Josh Luthman
wrote:
Can we please get a filter for messages with the subject "Fw: new message"
???
So far I've dealt with it via Gmail's 'mute conversation' setting somewhat
effectively.
Gmail was smart enough to
On 6/14/13 2:57 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
On 06/14/2013 11:35 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
In $random_deployment they have no idea what the topology is and odd behavior
is *always *noticed over time. The amount of time it would take to transmit
useful information would nearly guarantees someone noti
What security protocols are folks using to protect SONET/SDH?
At what speeds?
On 6/23/13 12:48 AM, Scott Weeks wrote:
By security protocol do you mean encrypting the traffic?
Like what a Fastlane does?
http://www.gdc4s.com/Documents/Products/SecureVoiceData/NetworkEncryption/GD-FASTLANE-w.pdf
That's rather a surprising choice (ATM product) for an IP network.
Please desc
On 6/23/13 10:57 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Christopher Morrow
wrote:
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 9:47 AM, William Allen Simpson
wrote:
On 6/23/13 12:48 AM, Scott Weeks wrote:
http://www.gdc4s.com/Documents/Products/SecureVoiceData/NetworkEncryption/GD
On 6/25/13 3:55 AM, Scott Weeks wrote:
Yeah, but I was just thinking through what the original question asked.
After reading his emails over the years, I am assuming he meant in
addition to everything else "What security protocols are folks using to
protect SONET/SDH? At what speeds?"
Correct.
On 11/13/13 11:51 PM, Roy Hockett wrote:
I am guessing due to esthetics the below ground vault was selected, we just
learned of this selection and thus
my query to this group to find other that have dealt with similar situations
and if so, experience base recommendations,
and things to be aware
On 4/8/10 8:02 PM, John Curran wrote:
On Apr 8, 2010, at 7:51 PM, David Conrad wrote:
In the cases I'm aware of (which were some time ago), there was (to my
knowledge) no fraud involved.
If you see more recent cases of this occurring, please report them.
Or are you indicating the mechanisms
On 4/7/10 10:22 PM, Scott Howard wrote:
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/apnic-talk/archive/2010/04/msg2.html
(There's also a PDF version with easier to enlarge images at
http://www.potaroo.net/studies/1slash8/1slash8.pdf )
It was a nice read. But it didn't indicate where (source AS
On 7/2/10 10:00 AM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
There are a few people who have some passing interest in ICANN so I will
inflict upon the list my few paragraph summary of things that matter.
I thank you! And I'm sure others here do too
The ISPSG (that's the ISP -- Internet.Service.Pro
On 7/19/10 10:21 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
... my credit card is declined and flagged (I find out later) by my bank's
anti-fraud group because it's being used 3 states away from where it's usually
used. ...
Or in my recent case, I used my card multiple times in California in April, and
On 8/29/10 3:23 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Sat, 28 Aug 2010, Brett Frankenberger wrote:
The implementor is to blame becuase the code he wrote send out BGP messages
which were not properly formed.
People talk about not dropping sessions but instead dropping malformed
messages. This is
On 9/3/10 7:43 AM, Matthias Flittner wrote:
>> Since recently we noticed "Neighbour table overflow" warnings from
>> the kernel on a lot of Linux machines. As this was very annoying for
>> us and our customers I started to dump traffic and tried to find the
>> cause.
> sounds for me as an typical
On 9/13/10 5:39 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010, Barry Shein wrote:
In the "early internet", let's call that prior to 1990, the hierarchy
wasn't price etc, it was:
1. ARPA/ONR (and later NSF) Research sites and actual network research
2. Faculty with funding from 1 at major universi
Speaking from a personal interest, has the Point-to-Point Protocol
stopped being useful?
After all, PPP over Sonet/SDH was specifically designed for just this case.
Once upon a time, it worked well for intra-site connections, as originally
specified in RFC1619:
PPP encapsulation over high spe
Brian Raaen wrote:
Hate to say it, but also some of the cost on the circuits can be blamed
on uncle Sam. ATM circuits are currently tariffed that same way are
voice circuits. These tariffs are not charged to Ethernet because it is
a 'data circuit'. At least that was the case a little while back.
Randy Bush wrote:
better lay coverage in al jazeera
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2009/07/2009730775992910.html
Thanks, Randy.
Making this more on-topic, the map show many hops down. How can a single
cut affect more than 1 hop, those on either side of the cut?
Surely, for a major
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
... Mitnick came out and *said* that he knew the site was insecure, but
since no sensitive data was on there, it didn't matter. Presumably the
site's monthly cost, convenience, user-interface, and so on, outweigh the
effort of occasionally having to recover after
William Allen Simpson wrote:
By the map in the article, the termini are Spain and Portugal on one end,
and South Africa on the other. Surely, a single break wouldn't affect
both ends
A week later article by the BBC says it didn't. Rather, the Benin branch
has the br
Nick Hilliard wrote:
On 08/08/2009 18:09, William Allen Simpson wrote:
Not in a long time. My memory is that SAT-3 was supposed to be a nice
cooperative effort funded by the nations themselves, rather than an
outside investor. With cooperation, I'd have expected good peering.
Indeed, it
Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
above link, and routing, at transport, there is a tld effort as well.
Randy Bush wrote:
yes. informally, a fair number of nanogians have spent the last few
decades doing tech transfer to the developing economies, including
helping start sister groups such as afnog.
Ron Bonica wrote:
In addition, some authors have used 128.66.0.0/16 (TEST-B) for example
purposes. There is no RFC that talks about this block, but my
understanding is that IANA/ARIN have marked it as reserved. If you
search the Internet you will find at least some number of examples and
firewall
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8248056.stm?ad=1
Update needed for RFC 1149 (1 April 1990),
A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on Avian Carriers
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/23/chamber-of-commerce-stron_n_332087.html
Hurricane Electric obeyed the Chamber's letter and shut down the spoof
site. But in the process, they shut down hundreds of other sites
maintained by May First / People Link, the Yes Men's direct provider
(Hu
Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 2:17 PM, chris neill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Give me a break. You're telling me the White House's mail servers are even
on the same network as their web servers? What, is this 1997?
Well, I do know that there's two ways you can contact y
John Schnizlein wrote:
I connected the internal network of the US House of Representatives to
the Internet when I worked there, and operated it through both
Democratic and Republican control.
Aha, I wondered who was to blame
Of course, my Member was on the Internet before the House, as ME
Måns Nilsson wrote:
These data centres are designed to Swedish military command center
specifications (not like Cheyenne Mountain but significantly better than,
say, a Minuteman site)
At one point some time ago, on NANOG we discussed putting exchanges in old
minuteman silos. (so long ago a qui
Paul Vixie wrote:
have been able to bind a reputation to an IP address and act in some way based
on that reputation because TCP more or less requires that a real IP address
be used. we're seeing cracks at the edges of this model now, because so many
core routers have login: cisco; password: cisc
Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 01:14:52PM -0400, Charles Regan
wrote:
I'll explain. We are a small ISP on a very remote Island.
We have a /22 from ARIN. We have a 20mbits pipe from ISP1 and 20mbits from ISP2.
Perhaps you could post the IP addresses on your en
Peter Beckman wrote:
SO. Who's problem is this to fix? Is it:
1. Me? Am I a dope for using a very reliable but anycasted resolving
name service? Clearly, I could just use the handy dandy easy to
remember because I worked there 198.6.1.x, or is that an Internet
faux
Brett Charbeneau wrote:
I've been nudging an operator at Covad about a handful of hosts from
his DHCP pool that have been attacking - relentlessly port scanning -
our assets.
Port scanning is rather common, and shouldn't be considered "attacking" --
unless it's taking a significant amount
J. Oquendo wrote:
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009, Glen Turner wrote:
William Allen Simpson wrote:
A telecommunications carrier releasing a customer's details without their
permission, to a non-investigatory third party, without a court order.
Hmmm. It's certainly illegal here in Australia.
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Maybe we should start the nanog-law mailing list.
Maybe we should stick to the operational "Subject" at hand: log retention?
Is there any disagreement that everybody SHOULD keep dynamic assignment logs
for at least 36 hours as a Best Current Practice?
Is there any evi
1 - 100 of 123 matches
Mail list logo
