On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 15:39 -0500, Srikanth Sundaresan wrote:
> Can anyone explain why ATT's UVerse adds significant delay to packets
> compared to their ADSL service?
U-Verse is actually the name of two entirely different services - VDSL
and FTTP. This is a typical symptom of stupidity on behalf
On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 17:06 +0100, Richard Hartmann wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 14:14, Scott Morris wrote:
>
> > If 8 bits is a byte, then 16 bits should be a mouthful.
>
> When does it become a meal and, more importantly, do you want to
> supper (sic) size?
>
The supersize option offered
On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 16:43 -0500, Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> I'm surprised it took this long for the DDoS train to pull into the station.
Wikileaks gets DDoSed all the time. My understanding is that PRQ
nullrouted the IP because the DDoS is much larger this time.
William
On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 17:07 -0500, Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> I wouldn't have thought that PRQ would have any significant protection in
> place.
They used to host thepiratebay. I would figure that site probably got a
lot of ddos attacks...
William
On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 20:02 -0500, Bret Clark wrote:
> On 11/29/2010 07:55 PM, Ren Provo wrote:
> > http://blog.comcast.com/2010/11/comcast-comments-on-level-3.html
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
> >
> >
> Okay's let's say L3 gives in to Comcast and pays them.
L3
Hi,
On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 10:58 -0500, Jay Nakamura wrote:
> I really want to move all newly installed internal and customer racks
> over to all 208v power instead of 120v. As far as I can remember, I
> can't remember any server/switch/router or any other equipment that
> didn't run on 208v AC.
On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 18:34 +1100, Ben McGinnes wrote:
> On 9/12/10 8:04 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Philip Dorr wrote:
> >> The problem is that they were also slashdotted. The logs would also have a
> >> large number of unrelated.
> >
> > pro-tip: the tool
Hi,
I am wondering why it seems that many ISPs still do not do packet
source verification in 2010? Just last night I had to deal with a DoS
attack that would have been impossible if more ISPs did packet source
verification.
I mean, it's 2010. We can do IP-level ACLs in hardware on most of the
c
Hi,
On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 22:49:15 -0500
Richard Barnes wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> What IPv6 prefix lengths are people accepting in BGP from
> peers/customers? My employer just got a /48 allocation from ARIN, and
> we're trying to figure out how to support multiple end sites out of
> this (probably ar
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:09:07 -0500
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> That's fine, but the listings don't even make sense. There is no
> evidence in the listing and i'm still trying to figure out a) why they
> think that these new listings have anything to do with the ones we
> already cleaned and b) whi
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 18:35:22 -0500
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> William,
>
> I'm not certain that any Black Lotus IP's are even connected to EFnet.
Maybe not presently, but your company has a history in the IRC
community. And it's not a history I would define as "good."
A history of selling "protect
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 18:54:37 -0500
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> William,
>
> Our company is primarily focused on the filtering of DDoS traffic. A
> significant amount of our IP space is routed elsewhere via proxy or
> GRE. If a customer pollutes, they pollute and thats their own
> business. If the
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 19:11:37 -0500
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> William,
>
> You're quite right, we don't. We presume that our customers are
> honorable until proven otherwise. We're a legitimate U.S. based
> corporation and we make ourselves available to the pertinent RBL's and
> authorities as a
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 19:13:16 -0500
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> Bill,
>
> I'm getting 72.215.225.9 for that host.
The nameservers just changed to ns2/ns4.codiz.net.
ns2 is a bogon, the real deal is ns4 hosted at corbina.ru, which has an
abuse@ that goes to /dev/null so whatever.
Man. Hosting Y
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 19:21:19 -0500
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> William,
>
> It depends, we have criteria. You can't just e-mail
> ab...@blacklotus.net and expect any given web site to be immediately
> shut down. There is due process and we need to make a decision on the
> matter and serve it to o
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 19:42:22 -0500
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> I fat fingered the netmask, try now.
$ wget -S www.vertrouwdeapotheek.nl
--2011-01-17 19:07:59-- http://www.vertrouwdeapotheek.nl/
Resolving www.vertrouwdeapotheek.nl... 208.64.120.197
Connecting to www.vertrouwdeapotheek.nl|208.64.120.19
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 19:46:55 -0500
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> Raymond,
>
> I do not take you for a fool, the assignment is legitimately null
> routed. My traceroutes are dropping at my home ISP.
I call bollocks. It's alive and kicking via BGP here.
edge1.lax01# show ip bgp 208.64.120.197/32
B
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 20:23:17 -0500
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:21 PM, William Pitcock
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 19:46:55 -0500
> > Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> >
> >> Raymond,
> >>
> >> I
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 20:28:55 -0500
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> Rhetorical question. Probably PCCW isn't accepting the null routes.
> Why not blacklist them for having messed up communities?
Why not actually nullroute the IPs instead of depending on BGP tagging?
Again: "ip route 208.64.120.197 255.255.
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 20:38:54 -0500
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> It's a problem with PCCW not accepting the tags, we've had this issue
> with them occasionally and will need to address it with them directly.
> The machine itself has also been shut down so there should not be any
> further heartache.
$ w
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:34:49 -0500
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> We were offering a privacy protected domain registration service at
> one point which we have since discontinued for obvious reasons.
Ah yes! That *was* you guys.
Did you know that you're still being recommended on 4chan /b/ for
no-quest
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:45:40 -0500
Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
> All,
>
> I would like to extend a special thanks to one of the Spamhaus team
> members for reaching out to me and offering dialogue on this matter.
> He was quite polite and understanding of the situation and we came to
> terms on wha
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 10:50:38 +0100 (BST)
Tim Franklin wrote:
> > Thankfully, the current test has been a success.
>
> Including stopping non-members from posting to the list, and other
> anti-spam?
>
> I've got a sudden influx this morning of spam addressed to
> nanog@nanog.org :(
>
Ditto. G
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:31:13 -0700 (PDT)
"Brian R. Watters" wrote:
> We are looking for a SORBS contact as their web site and registration
> process is less than friendly if somehow you get listed by them.
As I recall it, you can manually create an account on their
request-tracker instance and
On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 13:47:03 -0400
Chris wrote:
> For folks who do not understand, I'm trying to "McColo" XSServer so
> their lack of response in regards to abuse is gone rather than the
> suggestions of scripting (guess you didn't read the full text of the
> email) or you pushing a product on me
On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 20:22:53 -0400
Chris wrote:
> > McColo and Atrivo were disconnected for much larger sins than
> > spamming someone's wordpress blog.
>
> Many of you do not understand the scope of "just spamming a Wordpress
> blog".
I do understand the scope of shady SEO companies.
> This i
hi,
On Feb 8, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Nicolai wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 10:20:07PM -0500, Ryan Rawdon wrote:
>> Assuming it is not a futile/wasted effort, where is the current best
>> place/resource to report an active botnet C&C to?
>
> I don't know if there's a single best option, but there a
Hi,
On 3/8/2012 5:40 PM, Matthew Huff wrote:
Just got an email today to our account associated with our legacy ARIN address space. A firm
"Precision Management of Texas" is interested in subleasing some of our IP space for
"on-demand solutions for brand marketers and website promotion chiefly
On Jun 28, 2012, at 10:42 AM, Eric Germann wrote:
> All,
>
> I'm trying to understand why a Vyatta 6.4 collection of routers is carping
> about the following as martian routes:
>
> 113.107.174.14
> 27.73.1.159
> 94.248.215.60
> 95.26.105.161
>
> They don't look like they fall in the traditio
Hi,
On Jun 28, 2012, at 10:50 AM, Eric Germann wrote:
> Well, I did when I checked them shortly after I saw the log messages.
>
> Wondering now if the routes for those bounced and in the "middle" of the
> bounce, they're considered martian.
Yes, that sounds reasonable. Anything that is retur
Hi,
On Aug 3, 2012, at 2:22 PM, "Otis L. Surratt, Jr." wrote:
> Anyone charging end users for IPv6 space yet? :p
>
> Just wondering, with so many IPv6 resources in a single allocation it
> would seem difficult to charge anything at all.
>
> 1. How are you making up loss of revenue on IPv4 assi
Hi!
On Aug 3, 2012, at 6:32 PM, "Otis L. Surratt, Jr." wrote:
> By end user I mean hosting clients (cloud, collocation, shared, dedicated,
> VPS, etc.) of any sort. For example you have clients that would needsay
> /24 for their dedicated server. If you charge a $1.00/IP which is typical
On Wed, 2010-04-07 at 15:31 -0500, Joe Greco wrote:
> > On Apr 7, 2010, at 9:22 AM, William Herrin wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 12:09 PM, John Palmer (NANOG Acct)
> > > wrote:
> > >> Was looking at the ARIN IP6 policy and cannot find any reference to those
> > >> who have
> > >> IP4 le
On Fri, 2010-04-09 at 22:10 -0400, Steve Bertrand wrote:
> Would someone from Google kindly confirm/deny this claim? I'm as patient
> as any other, but I'm beginning to feel for those who have yet (but are
> ready to) to trigger the filters...
>
> Thankfully, my 'reasonable' regex knowledge has me
On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 07:09 -0700, todd glassey wrote:
> On 4/12/2010 2:49 AM, Alex Kamiru wrote:
> > I am in the process of sourcing for a carrier class email security
> > solution that will replace our current edge spam gateways based on open
> > source solutions. Some solutions that am currently
On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 15:07 -0500, Dennis Burgess wrote:
> I have a customer that has an IP of 12.43.95.126. Currently, I can not
> get any reverse on this IP.
>
>
>
> What is the best way to find out the responciable servers for this?
> Thanx in advance.
>
neno...@petrie:~$ dig -x 12.43.95
On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 14:54 -0700, 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?
DHCPv6 solv
On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 15:11 -0500, Olsen, Jason wrote:
> I'm a bit surprised that after the furor here on NANOG when the story
> first broke (in 2008) that there's been no discussion about the recent
> outcome of his trial (convicted, one count of felony network tampering).
Surely even at DeVry th
On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 21:48 -0400, David Krider wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 16:47 -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
> > Surely even at DeVry they teach that if you refuse to hand over
> > passwords for property that is not legally yours, that you are
> > committing a crime. I
On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 21:23 -0500, Larry Sheldon wrote:
> On 4/29/2010 21:05, William Pitcock wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 21:48 -0400, David Krider wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 16:47 -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
> >>> Surely even at DeVry they teach t
On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 14:12 -0400, Bill Bogstad wrote:
> Like many people, I can't justify the expense of "commercial" IP
> connectivity for my residence. As a result, I deal with dynamic IP
> addresses; dns issues; and limitations on the services that I can host
> at my residence. It just struck
Hi,
On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 11:27 -0400, Brad Beck wrote:
> All,
>
> I've been working diligently to improve performance of interactive
> applications (Citrix, terminal) that are run by users in our office
> located in Anchorage, and are served by a managed Internet connection
> provided by GCI. O
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 23:40 -0700, jacob miller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am getting the following error from my SCO UNIX box.
They mean "use an operating system not made by crackheads." There's a
reason why SCO switched from UNIX sales to Intellectual Property
trolling after all.
William
Hi,
On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 11:35 -0700, Tom wrote:
> In connecting to the conference network, I noticed this on the Westin
> wireless:
>
> ath0: no link . got link
> DHCPREQUEST on ath0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67
> DHCPREQUEST on ath0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67
> DHCPNAK from 1.2.1.3
> DH
On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 11:07 -0700, Seth Mattinen wrote:
> On 6/17/2010 11:01, Sandone, Nick wrote:
> > I would also add Brocade/Foundry to the mix as well. We've been deploying
> > these switches with great results. Since the IOS is very similar to
> > Cisco's, the transition has been quite eas
Hi,
On Fri, 2010-06-18 at 11:57 -0400, Steven Fischer wrote:
> Does anyone have any experience with the Dell PowerConnect 8024F 10-gig
> switch that they'd be willing to share? How does it perform? How reliable
> is it? My experiences with the Dell switches have been less than favorable
> to th
On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 23:32 +0200, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> We're going to anycast a /24 for some DNS servers (and possibly another UDP
> based service)[1].
>
> I see that ARIN are listing on https://www.arin.net/knowledge/ip_blocks.html
> the smallest allocations from each pr
On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 23:42 +0200, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
> On Jun 21, 2010, at 23:34, William Pitcock wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 23:32 +0200, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> We're going to anycast a /24 for some DNS s
On Sun, 2010-01-17 at 19:16 +, Andy Davidson wrote:
> On 16 Jan 2010, at 05:30, Tammy A. Wisdom wrote:
>
> > Mark Schouten wrote:
> >> http://virbl.bit.nl/index.php#ipv6
> >> Comments on the listing method are appreciated.
> > wow bind? thats gonna get slower and slower and slower. I hope y
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 15:50 -0400, Steven King wrote:
> I am very curious to see how this would play with networks that
> wouldn't support such a technology. How would you ensure communication
> between a network that supported 33-Bit addressing and one that doesn't?
33-bit is a fucking retarded c
On Mon, 2010-07-26 at 14:42 -0400, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
> But I do take your point about .co/.com, and in all fairness, it is a
> decade delayed favor returned by NeuStar to Verisign for the .bz/.biz
> "collaborative marketing" ploy of 2001.
Or eNom's .cc/.com ploy from 1999-present. D
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 11:29 +, Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote:
> hmm funny, it had the piratebay on it,
if you think that is a good sales point... do you actually have any
legitimate customers?
william
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 11:25 +, Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote:
> it is:
>
> c) RIAA/MPAA members trying to make ISPs liable for what customers do in
> order to somehow fork the isp into kicking out the customer, as they
> refuse to simply go to court against the customer but rather prefer to
> ha
On Fri, 2010-08-13 at 18:49 +, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
>
> Isn't this a little bit like an SSL daemon?
no.
> One which refuses to process a revocation list on the basis of the
> function of the certificate is useless.
no, it's not. ssl as a form of identity assurance itself is what is
usel
Vyatta's commercial products (the bundles with OS+Hardware) come with adequate
support in my experience.
William
(Sorry for topposting. The android email experience is depressingly lacking.)
Andrew Kirch wrote:
> On 8/23/2010 1:17 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>> What it really comes down to is p
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 16:29 -0700, J.D. Falk wrote:
> On Sep 2, 2010, at 1:43 PM, Brad Fleming wrote:
>
> > Any Road Runner abuse reps on the list?
>
> http://postmaster.rr.com/ is a good place to start.
Quoting that website:
| The Postmaster team is part of the Road Runner Mail Operations
| te
Hi,
Have you checked the IronPort reputation scores for your mailserver IPs?
Google uses this data as part of it's spam detection method.
William
On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 16:15 -0400, Erik L wrote:
> I realize that this is somewhat OT, but I'm sure that others on the list
> encounter the same issu
nd IP aliasing
wouldn't work either. Unless routes facing the world on the device are
"tweaked", this should work fine and be reliable (if implemented cluefully).
Am I not getting it?
Best,
-M<
--
Martin Hannigan mar...@theicelandguy.com
p: +16178216079
Power, Network, and Costs Consulting for Iceland Datacenters and Occupants
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-866-519-6149
-Kai
My experience with the AMD HE CPUs has been that the scaling breaks
Win2K3, and any virtualized environments.
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-866-519-6149
automatically, even.
Also, at least at Equinix Chicago, 120V service was cheaper when we
colocated there. I do not know if this is the same case at Steadfast in
Chicago, and as far as I know, HE does not offer 208/240 service in
their Fremont-2 facility. I could be misinformed on that, thoug
idth provisioning equipment to hosting/storage
equipment, per unit of revenue in each case?
Thanks for your input.
Regards,
Zartash
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-866-519-6149
you a
tainted class-C. With the shortage of IPv4 addresses becoming more and
more imminent, such policy is simply unacceptable.
William
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-866-519-6149
aving it anyway.
Right now we are using software routing appliances for this, but they do
not tend to fare well in high packets/second scenarios (e.g. inbound
DDoS attacks).
William
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-800-688-5018
ite a lot on a CPU based platform.
>
> Perhaps the OP can clarify whether his omission of these was accidental,
> because such features were assumed, or because he does not need them.
>
I don't need any of that stuff, just BGP, OSPF and fast packet
forwarding for IPv4. But the point
anyone, blame the script kiddies who pull this kind of stunt.
...have you ever heard of forged packet headers? Just saying.
William
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-800-688-5018
t; > Exactly.
> >
> > Now you see the problem ?
> >
>
> The problem is the DDoS attacks. Not AT&T. 4chan's users constantly instigate
> this. Chris Poole needs to do more than just sit back and watch. He needs to
> start collecting this information and
ic is peering anyway.
This discussion is about AT&T, not you.
William
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-800-688-5018
iscussion there is /80
vs /96, but both of those subnets seem wasteful to me. One of our
upstream providers hands our border router off a /125 (which is just
weird), for these single-ip-needed situations.
William
--
William PitcockSystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-866-519
elf at risk
based on this.
Mark
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-866-519-6149
live.com/ - it is listed in their bounce messages,
even...
--
William Pitcock SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-866-519-6149 http://www.systeminplace.net/
Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/systeminplace
her than "customize MRTG a lot" that we can
> use to get a better look into these systems?
We use Cacti for this purpose, but it still requires creating custom
datasources for the vendor-specific SNMP MIBs.
William
--
William Pitcock SystemInPlace -
M5 Hosting
http://www.m5hosting.com
You can have your own custom Dedicated Server up and running today !
RedHat Enterprise, CentOS, Ubuntu, Debian, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and more
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting
depends on how much money they pay me.
If they pay me a lot of money, then I will likely give them what they
want. If not, well, that's too bad for them.
It doesn't matter to me, regardless, provided that they aren't violating
my AUP by you know, spamming or someth
On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 02:59 -0500, RAAPID Technical wrote:
> Confirmed total power outage at Fremont-2 building:
> http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=695888
That is from 2008...
William
On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 10:47 -0700, Seth Mattinen wrote:
> Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> > On Oct 12, 2009, at 12:52 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
> >
> >> sure would be nice if there was a diagnosis before the lynching
> >
> > If this happened in v4, would customers care 'why' it happened?
> > Obviously n
fort to protect free speech (which may not legally be free
speech). Courts determine what is free speech. ISPs just try to stay the
hell out of the way.
Jack
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-866-519-6149
change the way IP issues get handled.
(again, not the opinions of my employer.)
William
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-866-519-6149
-Original Message-
From: "Brian Johnson"
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:03:29
To: North American Network Operators Gro
let userspace sort
it out".
I've done the former for a few thousand aliases with no degredation
in performance. The hacks available for freebsd-4.x for the Web Polygraph
software did something similar.
2c,
Adrian
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-866-519-6149
e any information about this? I got hit by the ATS failure last
month, so I guess it's possible that that equipment may have flaked again.
-t
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-866-519-6149
This sort of garbage (e.g. posting IRC logs to NANOG) really isn't
helpful. Yay for the shit-infested drama trap that is NANOG.
Whoever you are, grow the fuck up.
- nenolod
On Wed, 2008-10-01 at 21:27 -0400, intercage blows wrote:
> * RussM ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) has joined #dronebl
> * RussM *poke
Hi,
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 09:06 +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Noel Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > They wouldn't have the guts to post under their real name, remember, IRC
> > is for the gutless keyboard commandos...and for posting IRC logs on
> > mai
e source is in
> 88.247.0.0/17, why not ACL the source at your router or at whatever
> device is being DoSsed).
>
You do?
I can assure you there are several people who would love to have this
information. Care to share with the rest of the anti-abuse community?
Kind regards,
William Pitcock
DroneBL
Hello,
That is 6to4. You can tell due to the (2002::) prefix.
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace
On Sun, 2008-10-12 at 09:07 -0700, Max Clark wrote:
> I'm in LA with Time Warner Cable - didn't know they rolled out an IPv6
> link to AMS-IX.
>
> HOST: macbook.local
gt;
> Is Google broken, or is the functionality of listing sites as broken,
> broken?
It's broken here.
http://petrie.dereferenced.org/~nenolod/googlefailsit.png
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-800-688-5018
message.
But I digress, their nameservers are out of sync, causing problems with
reverse DNS suddenly going away for some SBC IPs in our logs. Appears to
be an issue with ns1.pbi.net...
So yeah, if someone knows somebody who could fix that, that would be
fantastic.
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace -
ry 2009. It
seems to be ok. We do have the ability to disable RDNS access to
specific users if we feel it is being abused, however.
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-866-519-6149
Hi,
If someone on this list works for Versaweb and can handle a botnet
situation, please contact me off list.
William
Hi,
Can someone at Ubiquity or Mzima fix this routing loop:
traceroute to hg.atheme.org (72.37.225.164), 30 hops max, 40 byte
packets
1 64.62.134.193 12.402 ms 12.370 ms 12.363 ms
2 ge5-0.cr01.ord01.mzima.net (206.223.119.62) 16.003 ms 15.985 ms
15.964 ms
3 ge0-ubiquity.cust.ord01.mzim
Hi,
On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 12:40 -0700, Aaron Glenn wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 12:27 PM, William Pitcock
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Can someone at Ubiquity or Mzima fix this routing loop:
> >
>
> How long ago did you contact Ubiq
On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 13:32 -0700, Aaron Glenn wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 1:02 PM, William Pitcock
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Sadly, I don't have any contact with either one, but I do need to be
> > able to access that server, and
On Thu, 2008-07-24 at 09:51 +0200, Robert Kisteleki wrote:
> Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> > Anyone have a foolproof way to get grandma to always put "https://"; in
> > front of "www"?
>
> I understand this is a huge can of worms, but maybe it's time to change the
> default behavior of browsers fr
On Thu, 2008-07-24 at 11:21 -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > 11 seconds.
> >
> > and at&t refuses to patch.
> >
> > and all iphones use those name servers.
>
> Has at&t told you they are refusing to patch? Or are you just spreading
> FUD about at&t and don't
Hi,
We're looking at using Mikrotik's RouterOS for some some sort of
software routing solution as part of our network in combination with
supervised layer3 switching doing most likely some sort of limited BGP.
Does anyone else here run it? Is it any good? Is it better than e.g.
vyatta?
If Router
Greetings,
I can further vouch for this... an unusually large amount of botnets
reported to DroneBL have command and control servers on Atrivo's
network.
With the amount of listings and reports I get, it is obvious that Atrivo
does not care about the abuse@ inbox... which is unfortunate.
William
Hi,
On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 07:06 -0700, Scott Weeks wrote:
> --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> From: Andrew D Kirch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Basically is what it boils down to for me - its
> > easy to blame an NSP/ISP/Hoster for what their
> > clients do, it takes real dedication to find out
> >
Hi,
On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 17:54 -0700, Scott Weeks wrote:
>
> --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have also noticed that most of the people doing the whining aren't
> even the people who are tracking the problem. Again, a case of the NANOG
> story verses the real story...
> -
On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 19:28 -0700, Paul Ferguson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 7:24 PM, Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > John Bambenek wrote:
> >> When there is no law to speak of all that is left is tribal justice.
> >
> > this wa
Hi,
On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 19:39 -0700, Scott Weeks wrote:
>
> --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> From: William Pitcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > I didn't whine.
>
> No, but others have, and it isn't helpful towards resolving this
> problem.
>
On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 19:58 -0700, Paul Ferguson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 7:52 PM, William Pitcock
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 19:28 -0700, Paul Ferguson wrote:
>
> >> I think that _more_than_reasonable_ background research,
On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 21:50 -0700, Paul Ferguson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 8:10 PM, William Pitcock
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Esthost are nullrouted as of this morning. Even their administrative
> > network is nullrouted.
> >
> >
1 - 100 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
