Re: [AusNOG] Optus BGP issues?

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Definitely advertising routes to Optus? Have you tried bouncing the
session?

On Sat, 29 Jun 2024 at 20:51, DaZZa  wrote:

> Anyone seeing issues with OPtus?
>
> We've lost inbound traffic completely on our Optus link - outbound is
> going fine, but nothing's coming back on the inbound path.
>
> BGP sessions are up and apparently functional - BGP appears OK in
> Telstra's looking glass, but I'm getting nothing inbound on the Optus
> link - everything is coming in on our secondary link - which is
> unfortunately slower, and consequently flooded.
>
> Thanks
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] munnari.oz.au

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Dunno but pretty wild it's now in Thailand.

On Wed, 8 May 2024 at 14:44, Terry Sweetser 
wrote:

> So … AusNOG,
>
>
>
> What is the status of that server for DNS and other “very old things from
> long” ago?
>
>
> --
>
> *Terry Sweetser*
> Training Delivery Manager
> South Asia and Oceania
> e: terry.sweet...@apnic.net
> p: +61 7 3858 3100
> www.apnic.net
>
>
>
> Book time with Terry Sweetser
> 
>
>
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Netcomm wireless enters vol administration

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

It's worth reading the article - the issue was the parent having a hard
time. Netcomm itself is apparently trading, still employing people and
looking for a new owner as it's fine as a going concern.
So good chance it'll continue.

MMC

On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 at 21:48, Noel Butler  wrote:

>
> https://www.smartcompany.com.au/exclusive/netcomm-wireless-voluntary-administration/
>
> Telecom equipment supplier NetComm Wireless has entered voluntary
> administration after operating for over 40 years.
>
> Documents listed by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission
> (ASIC) on March 13 show Kate Conneely and Rahul Goyal from Cor Cordis have
> been appointed administrators of the company
>
> story continues in link
> --
>
> Regards,
> Noel Butler
>
>
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Courier insurance

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Hi,
Talking to your insurance agent about the costs of insuring various items
in transit is worth doing. Often as part of a larger business policy these
are not actually huge costs.

MMC

On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 16:24, Rhys Hanrahan  wrote:

> Thanks everyone for the responses! I managed to cause quite a flurry of
> activity – I really appreciate it.
>
>
>
> Have been mulling over all the inputs and right now I feel like checking
> in as luggage is off the cards  - most of the responses have been horror
> stories  We have done this before for our own internal equipment and
> it’s been OK, but I wouldn’t do it in this case. IMO even if I wasn’t as
> worried about the equipment, it can be quite a hassle, so easier just to
> ship it.
>
> To me right now the two front runners are:
>
>- Quotes from sensitive freight companies – TSS and COPE are the two
>I’ve seen recommended. From some rough info about TSS it seems like they’d
>insure high value equipment without it costing and arm and a leg.
>- Quote from our existing business insurance company – for a few day
>period to cover the courier trip. We’ve started the wheels on getting this
>quoted as well.
>
> But also:
>
>- To be honest, the idea of just having general transit cover for
>anything that leaves our offices is an attractive idea, as we already ship
>new PCs etc from our offices nearly every day. And as luck would have it,
>it seems like we just lost 1 of 2 Wifi Access points sent to the same site…
>Glad it wasn’t the expensive equipment.
>- Driving the gear to site is definitely a good option, but as Joe
>mentioned, in this case it’d be a massive trip and the cost per day for the
>customer for our time would outweigh even TNT’s insurance – though waiting
>to see if they have someone who can make the trip!
>
> Thanks everyone!
>
> *Rhys Hanrahan* | General Manager / CTO
> *m:* 0414 83 83 43 | *e:* r...@nexusone.com.au
>
> *“Ask us about how our Channel Partnership and Referral Program can earn
> you passive income”*
>
> [image: www.nexusone.com.au]    [image:
> signature_1237010360] 
>
> *NEXUS ONE* *|** FUSION TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS*
> *p:* 1800 NEXUS1 (1800 639 871) or 1800 565 845 *|* *a:* Suite 12.03
> Level 12, 227 Elizabeth Street, Sydney NSW 2000
> www.nexusone.com.au *|* www.fusiontech.com.au
>
> *The information in this email and any accompanying attachments may
> contain; a. Confidential information of Fusion Technology Solutions Pty
> Ltd, Nexus One Pty Ltd or third parties; b. Legally privileged information
> of Fusion Technology Solutions Pty Ltd, Nexus One Pty Ltd or third parties;
> and or c. Copyright material Fusion Technology Solutions Pty Ltd, Nexus One
> Pty Ltd or third parties. If you have received this email in error, please
> notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Fusion Technology
> Solutions Pty Ltd, Nexus One Pty Ltd does not accept any responsibility for
> loss or damage arising from the use or distribution of this email.*
>
> *Please consider the environment before printing this email.*
>
>
>
> *From: *AusNOG  on behalf of Rhys
> Hanrahan 
> *Date: *Thursday, 7 December 2023 at 11:01 pm
> *To: *"ausnog@lists.ausnog.net" 
> *Subject: *[AusNOG] Courier insurance
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> Just wondering how people handle the situation of transit insurance for
> domestic shipping of high value equipment? I am looking at options for
> TNT’s transit warranty and 1) It’s pricey and will cost thousands to get a
> warranty 2) They max out coverage at $40K it seems. I suppose we might be
> able to work around that with multiple separate shipments.
>
>
>
> We’ve got new Cisco gear worth 70-90K that we are shipping to one of our
> offices for configuration, then from NSW to a customer’s site in far north
> QLD. I’m not really keen on just trusting the gear won’t be damaged, so I’m
> looking for safe options to courier the equipment – I’m wondering if anyone
> is aware of good options for this sort of situation?
>
>
>
> We are also attending site so it’s possible that we could just check the
> boxes in as luggage, but I’m not sure if I trust baggable handlers any
> better. Typically we’d just ship directly to site, but we don’t really want
> to configure and test it entirely onsite as that has it’s own challenges in
> this case.
>
>
>
> Appreciate any suggestions. Thanks!
>
>
>
> *Rhys Hanrahan* | General Manager / CTO
> *m:* 0414 83 83 43 | *e:* r...@nexusone.com.au
>
> *“Ask us about how our Channel Partnership and Referral Program can earn
> you passive income”*
>
> [image: www.nexusone.com.au]    [image:
> signature_1237010360] 
>
> *NEXUS ONE* *|*
> * FUSION TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS p:* 1800 NEXUS1 (1800 639 871) or 1800 565
> 845 *|* *a:* Suite 12.03 Level 12, 227 Elizabeth Street, Sydney NSW 2000
> www.nexusone.com.au *|* www.fusiontech.com.au
>

Re: [AusNOG] As path prepend TPG and Vocus

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Consider if BGP is the way to go with redundancy - maybe  DNS is a
better way to steer traffic as you can, using a bunch of services out
there, do live-ness testing of end points etc.

On Tue, 2 May 2023 at 08:35, Steven Waite  wrote:

> Thank you for everyone's replies as this has given me a solution. Love the
> Ausnog community:)
>
>  I will try again and reach out to our up stream carriers. Basically we
> are multi-homed with our primary site active with the second site as
> secondary to carry selective traffic and redundancy. This was manly to get
> around slow routing changes and also eliminating a risk of asymmetrical
> routing due to session based firewalls been in the mix.
>
>
> On 2 May 2023, at 8:50 am, Matthew Moyle-Croft  wrote:
>
> 
> Have to remember some BGP basics:
>
> 1) longest prefix (eg. /24 in your case) will always win.
> 2) localpref will always win when comparing identical prefixes.
> 3) A network will always use localpref to prefer directly connected
> customer routes.
> 4) ASPath length is not going to overcome the above.
>
> What does "failover" mean to you? When there's a failure, look at what
> Vocus and TPG have in their route tables and the timing. Also check, are
> you actually withdrawing the routes during failure?
>
> MMC
>
> On Mon, 1 May 2023 at 18:09, Steven Waite  wrote:
>
>> Good evening
>>
>> I hope everyone is well. We have a /23 block broken up between TPG /24
>> and Vocus /24 with the /23 advertise to both Vocus and TPG for failover.
>> This worked will until recently as we noticed increasing failover times
>> during maintenance and now takes around 10-15 minutes. Today I decided to
>> try AS path prepending away from smallest prefix wins type of approach. I
>> think Vocus and TPG ignores prepending as these are local routes thus the
>> local route is preferred even with a lot of prepends. I would love to
>> achieve the same thing via communities if it’s possible. Is someone able to
>> share communities numbers that I should be using for Vocus/TPG please to
>> advertise the primary route for a prefix?
>>
>> Many thanks Steve
>> ___
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>> https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] As path prepend TPG and Vocus

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Have to remember some BGP basics:

1) longest prefix (eg. /24 in your case) will always win.
2) localpref will always win when comparing identical prefixes.
3) A network will always use localpref to prefer directly connected
customer routes.
4) ASPath length is not going to overcome the above.

What does "failover" mean to you? When there's a failure, look at what
Vocus and TPG have in their route tables and the timing. Also check, are
you actually withdrawing the routes during failure?

MMC

On Mon, 1 May 2023 at 18:09, Steven Waite  wrote:

> Good evening
>
> I hope everyone is well. We have a /23 block broken up between TPG /24 and
> Vocus /24 with the /23 advertise to both Vocus and TPG for failover. This
> worked will until recently as we noticed increasing failover times during
> maintenance and now takes around 10-15 minutes. Today I decided to try AS
> path prepending away from smallest prefix wins type of approach. I think
> Vocus and TPG ignores prepending as these are local routes thus the local
> route is preferred even with a lot of prepends. I would love to achieve the
> same thing via communities if it’s possible. Is someone able to share
> communities numbers that I should be using for Vocus/TPG please to
> advertise the primary route for a prefix?
>
> Many thanks Steve
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Microsoft 365 - Junk Policy (last 2 weeks)

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

I note that O365 marks Amazon Peering emails as phishing which seems pretty
anti-competitive to me :)

On Mon, Apr 3, 2023 at 10:58 AM Bradley Amm  wrote:

> Hi
>
> Yes we are noticing odd things
> Like the first post. Send emails back and forward then bang gets marked as
> spam and goes to junk mail or gets quarantined
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2023 at 8:25 AM Luke Thompson  wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Thanks for the consensus here, it's good to know we're not alone. It
>> seems the impact is being realised by more people into this week.
>>
>> We've now had clients in the health space flag this - they want links to
>> official alerts acknowledging the issue at Microsoft's end.
>>
>> It doesn't seem Microsoft have done so as yet. I've BCC'd a contact from
>> Microsoft (from mailop) to see if they write back.
>>
>> Hopefully the rulesets(?) are rolled back or modified so the impact
>> abates. It's becoming quite a noisy issue now.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Luke
>> On 3/4/2023 9:44 am, Walker, Bill (Christchurch) wrote:
>>
>> Hi Luke/Dave,
>>
>>
>>
>> Happening to 3 (out of 5) tenants I manage too, along with my personal
>> mail that uses outlook.com
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>> *Bill Walker* | Manager, Regional Networks | Stantec | Mobile: +64 21
>> 241 7206
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* AusNOG 
>>  *On Behalf Of *David Rawling
>> *Sent:* Friday, 31 March 2023 8:10 pm
>> *To:* ausnog@lists.ausnog.net
>> *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] Microsoft 365 - Junk Policy (last 2 weeks)
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Luke
>>
>>
>>
>> I can confirm that we've been seeing quite a lot of this across a number
>> of Office 365 tenants; both our own and several we manage (I'll note that I
>> am subscribed to AusNOG from my personal account not the affected tenant).
>>
>>
>>
>> As we're one of the affected tenants, we've been able to dig quite deeply
>> into the behaviour - in our case, it seems to be that almost all "new"
>> messages in a thread are successfully delivered to us, but once it becomes
>> a reply-fest it gets junked. There's some thought that it could be related
>> to one or more links in our signature - not that it's a particularly large
>> or "spammy" signature, though. No SPF, DMARC or DKIM failures here. No
>> obvious reasons it would be marked junk - the SCL is below our threshold,
>> etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> What's frustrating is that so far, it's only affecting some people in our
>> tenant. I've not had the problem with messages I send and receive, but
>> there are others where it's 90% failure. I do have a different signature
>> file - very different formatting though it looks the same to the recipient.
>> I was thinking that might be related, but no dice so far.
>>
>>
>>
>> So you're not alone but we have absolutely no idea what's breaking.
>>
>>
>>
>> Dave.
>>
>> --
>>
>> David Rawling - Principal Consultant
>> PD Consulting and Security
>>
>> t: +61 41 213 5513  |  e: d...@pdconsec.net
>>
>> Please note that whilst we take all care, neither PD Consulting and
>> Security nor the sender accepts any responsibility for viruses and it is
>> your responsibility to scan for viruses. The contents are intended only for
>> use by the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged
>> material. If you received this in error, we request that you please inform
>> the sender and/or addressee immediately and delete the material.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 2023-03-31 at 16:55 +1100, Luke Thompson wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>>
>> Strange question though curious if anyone's seen the same.
>>
>>
>>
>> We've had a range of clients reporting very intense junking behaviour
>>
>> with M365, whether sending or receiving, if there's a M365 tenant
>>
>> involved it seems to be hitting Junk for reasons that aren't clear. This
>>
>> is with SPF/DKIM/DMARC/etc all passing.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm wondering if potentially a new policy has shipped which is
>>
>> over-reaching somewhat, as no bounce-backs are being received so it's a
>>
>> case of delivered-but-not. This is across a range of clients and
>>
>> clients' clients.
>>
>>
>>
>> If we'd only heard of this from a single client we'd not think much of
>>
>> it, though this is both ways and across a range of tenants. Would be
>>
>> good to know if there's any substance to it.
>>
>>
>>
>> As we don't run M365 nor have responsibility for impacted tenants, the
>>
>> request here is to check with the IT community. Thank you.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Luke
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>>
>> AusNOG mailing list
>>
>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>>
>> https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>> 

Re: [AusNOG] NBN to offshore NOC?

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Can someone print that and show NBN next time they claim their purpose
above all else is to "deliver an investment grade return" when they argue
about price/reliability/competition/etc?

On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 10:59 AM John Edwards  wrote:

> NBN's purpose is to lift the digital capability of Australia.
>
> https://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-information/about-nbn-co/our-purpose
>
> The takeaway from offshoring activities is that the Australian government
> does not consider Network Operations to be a digital capability.
>
> John
>
>
>
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 at 10:31, Matthew Moyle-Croft  wrote:
>
>> Saving money on one thing can cost a LOT in other ways. The large siloed
>> organisation run by accountants story.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 10:10 PM Luke Thompson 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm with you on follow the sun, much like iiNet & Co. did back in the
>>> day (very effectively, almost a work of art it was so good) with some
>>> functions.
>>>
>>> In the context of a national network though, much as with Telstra the
>>> people are its greatest asset - and while it can be nightmarish landing the
>>> right folk especially over odd hours, building out a collaborative
>>> powerhouse of a team on-shore is the beauty spot if it fits. Especially
>>> with NOCs/SOCs.
>>>
>>> Follow the sun isn't blatant off shoring as you say. Removing local
>>> functions entirely though will land you with internal chaos and severe
>>> problems down the track when trying to insource.
>>>
>>> Having multiple sites has its benefits (and challenges), I just don't
>>> think binning local makes any sort of sense with the NBN NOC.
>>>
>>> On 16 March 2023 7:51:12 pm Julien Goodwin 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 16/3/23 4:06 pm, Luke Thompson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> NOC offshoring is nightmare territory - depending on how it's done.
>>>>> The
>>>>> national broadband network ought to be just that.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'll mostly agree with that.
>>>>
>>>> Pure NOC offshoring isn't great. Splitting a NOC into two or three
>>>> sites
>>>> for follow-the-sun coverage can work really well if smartly managed,
>>>> saves trying to find good staff for a night shift, although of course
>>>> it
>>>> does add plenty of issues on its own.
>>>>
>>>> Even just NOC remote from engineering, having a NOC in Brisbane, but
>>>> engineering all done out of Melbourne has plenty of issues if you don't
>>>> work strongly to ensure the various people actually talk to each other.
>>>>
>>>> Or, if you're large enough, first tier separate from second can be much
>>>> the same.
>>>>
>>>> I'm currently working with our corporate network group, and it's my
>>>> constant lament that I can't just sit in a room where their NOC folk
>>>> are
>>>> working to learn the things that aren't getting escalated, processes
>>>> that don't quite work properly, and other things I might not see from
>>>> reading their tickets. (The reasons why I can't just do this are long
>>>> and far off topic for this)
>>>>
>>>> If NBN were spinning up a NOC in the UK, Ireland, or possibly the
>>>> US/Canada east coast that could be a very good idea, but it wouldn't be
>>>> the cheap one.
>>>>
>>>> If NBN are shifting things done in Australia as an attempt at a cost
>>>> saving, I doubt it really will by the time all relevant costs are
>>>> considered.
>>>> ___
>>>> AusNOG mailing list
>>>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>>>> https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> AusNOG mailing list
>>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>>> https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>>
>> ___
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>> https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] NBN to offshore NOC?

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Saving money on one thing can cost a LOT in other ways. The large siloed
organisation run by accountants story.

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 10:10 PM Luke Thompson  wrote:

> I'm with you on follow the sun, much like iiNet & Co. did back in the day
> (very effectively, almost a work of art it was so good) with some
> functions.
>
> In the context of a national network though, much as with Telstra the
> people are its greatest asset - and while it can be nightmarish landing the
> right folk especially over odd hours, building out a collaborative
> powerhouse of a team on-shore is the beauty spot if it fits. Especially
> with NOCs/SOCs.
>
> Follow the sun isn't blatant off shoring as you say. Removing local
> functions entirely though will land you with internal chaos and severe
> problems down the track when trying to insource.
>
> Having multiple sites has its benefits (and challenges), I just don't
> think binning local makes any sort of sense with the NBN NOC.
>
> On 16 March 2023 7:51:12 pm Julien Goodwin 
> wrote:
>
> On 16/3/23 4:06 pm, Luke Thompson wrote:
>>
>>> NOC offshoring is nightmare territory - depending on how it's done. The
>>> national broadband network ought to be just that.
>>>
>>
>> I'll mostly agree with that.
>>
>> Pure NOC offshoring isn't great. Splitting a NOC into two or three sites
>> for follow-the-sun coverage can work really well if smartly managed,
>> saves trying to find good staff for a night shift, although of course it
>> does add plenty of issues on its own.
>>
>> Even just NOC remote from engineering, having a NOC in Brisbane, but
>> engineering all done out of Melbourne has plenty of issues if you don't
>> work strongly to ensure the various people actually talk to each other.
>>
>> Or, if you're large enough, first tier separate from second can be much
>> the same.
>>
>> I'm currently working with our corporate network group, and it's my
>> constant lament that I can't just sit in a room where their NOC folk are
>> working to learn the things that aren't getting escalated, processes
>> that don't quite work properly, and other things I might not see from
>> reading their tickets. (The reasons why I can't just do this are long
>> and far off topic for this)
>>
>> If NBN were spinning up a NOC in the UK, Ireland, or possibly the
>> US/Canada east coast that could be a very good idea, but it wouldn't be
>> the cheap one.
>>
>> If NBN are shifting things done in Australia as an attempt at a cost
>> saving, I doubt it really will by the time all relevant costs are
>> considered.
>> ___
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>> https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
https://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] ISDN shutdown 31 May 2022

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Don’t be like that Steven.  Let the modems die.

> On 13 Jan 2022, at 3:15 pm, Steven Waite  wrote:
> 
> 56k Still works well over G711 with no VAD very well if you have full control 
> end to end . Like been retro
> 
> 
> 
> Steven Waite
> Pre-Sales Engineer
> Comtel Pty Ltd
> Tel: +61 (7) 37154818
> Email: steven.wa...@comtel.com.au <mailto:steven.wa...@comtel.com.au>
> Website: www.comtel.com.au <http://www.comtel.com.au/>
>  <https://www.comtel.com.au/>
> 
> The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only for the 
> person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential 
> and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or 
> other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by 
> persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you 
> received this in error, please contact the sender and destroy any copies of 
> this information.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: AusNOG  <mailto:ausnog-boun...@lists.ausnog.net>> On Behalf Of Matthew Moyle-Croft
> Sent: Thursday, 13 January 2022 2:40 PM
> To: Nathan Brookfield  <mailto:nathan.brookfi...@iperium.com.au>>; russell3...@gmail.com 
> <mailto:russell3...@gmail.com>
> Cc: ausnog@lists.ausnog.net <mailto:ausnog@lists.ausnog.net>
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] ISDN shutdown 31 May 2022
> 
> Unrelated to the ISDN Issue below:
> 
> I feel that this almost declares the end of the era of analogue modem calls. 
> Wonder if Russell can help with the last 56k modem call, at least, on 
> Telstra’s network?
> 
> Should be recorded for posterity and to make sure analogue modems finally die 
> and can be all buried in landfill after being set on fire.
> 
> MMC
> (I’m not suffering any PTSD from them, no sir).
> 
> > On 13 Jan 2022, at 2:18 pm, Nathan Brookfield 
> >  > <mailto:nathan.brookfi...@iperium.com.au>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Guy,
> >
> > I believe this would indeed be a hard date for them, the shutdown started 
> > in 2019 and has been well reported and notified to customers, there is no 
> > going back from this one unfortunately.  There are lots of good middle 
> > ground alternatives though to move them between a half Analogue and Digital 
> > world but they're going to have to get cracking ☹
> >
> > Nathan Brookfield
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: AusNOG  > <mailto:ausnog-boun...@lists.ausnog.net>> On Behalf Of Guy Ellis
> > Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2022 2:38 PM
> > To: ausnog@lists.ausnog.net <mailto:ausnog@lists.ausnog.net>
> > Subject: [AusNOG] ISDN shutdown 31 May 2022
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We have a customer that is somewhat exposed here and has way too many ISDN 
> > lines still in service.
> >
> > I'm curious to here if anyone else is in the same boat, and is the entire 
> > ISDN network going to be switched off on the date?
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> >  - Guy
> >
> > --
> > Guy Ellis
> > Mobile +61 419 398 234
> > AU 03 9489 6678
> > NZ 09 884 9756
> > www.traverse.com.au <http://www.traverse.com.au/>
> >
> >
> > --
> > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> > https://www.avast.com/antivirus <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
> >
> > ___
> > AusNOG mailing list
> > AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net>
> > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> > <http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog>
> > ___
> > AusNOG mailing list
> > AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net>
> > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> > <http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog>
> 
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net>
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> <http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] ISDN shutdown 31 May 2022

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Unrelated to the ISDN Issue below:

I feel that this almost declares the end of the era of analogue modem calls. 
Wonder if Russell can help with the last 56k modem call, at least, on Telstra’s 
network?

Should be recorded for posterity and to make sure analogue modems finally die 
and can be all buried in landfill after being set on fire.

MMC
(I’m not suffering any PTSD from them, no sir).

> On 13 Jan 2022, at 2:18 pm, Nathan Brookfield 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi Guy,
> 
> I believe this would indeed be a hard date for them, the shutdown started in 
> 2019 and has been well reported and notified to customers, there is no going 
> back from this one unfortunately.  There are lots of good middle ground 
> alternatives though to move them between a half Analogue and Digital world 
> but they're going to have to get cracking ☹
> 
> Nathan Brookfield
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: AusNOG  On Behalf Of Guy Ellis
> Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2022 2:38 PM
> To: ausnog@lists.ausnog.net
> Subject: [AusNOG] ISDN shutdown 31 May 2022
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> We have a customer that is somewhat exposed here and has way too many ISDN 
> lines still in service.
> 
> I'm curious to here if anyone else is in the same boat, and is the entire 
> ISDN network going to be switched off on the date?
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
>  - Guy
> 
> --
> Guy Ellis
> Mobile +61 419 398 234
> AU 03 9489 6678
> NZ 09 884 9756
> www.traverse.com.au
> 
> 
> -- 
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Telstra ATM/Frame/BDSL decommissioning

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

"This message has been approved by Dave."

Look, what has Dave got against the poor tiny little cells?

On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 10:43 AM Russell Langton 
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
>
> Just a reminder that Telstra is seeking to decommission all ATM/Frame/BDSL
> services by 31 Aug 2022.
>
> See
> https://www.telstra.com.au/content/dam/tcom/personal/consumer-advice/pdf/business-a-full/bg_atm.pdf
>
>
>
> *ATM Cease Sale and Exit Notification*
>
> *1.5 The ATM Service will not be available for purchase by new customers
> from 9 April 2018.*
>
> *1.6 From 30 June 2019, customers with existing ATM services will no
> longer be allowed to add new ATM services, make external relocations of
> existing ATM services, or recontract existing ATM services.*
>
> *1.7 From 31 August 2022, we will exit ATM and cancel all remaining ATM
> Services.*
>
> ATM/Frame/BDSL services might be used in legacy parts of networks for
> connectivity between sites, to TID, or to different platforms.
>
> If you have any remaining ATM/Frame/BDSL services, please make sure
> migration plans are in progress with your account teams. or if not in use
> ensure cancellation orders are submitted
>
> Reach out directly if any details need to be confirmed.
> This message has been approved by Dave.
>
> Thanks
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Telstra fibre maps for planning diversity

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

HI,
The solution is to buy two circuits from carriers that will.  Telstra have some 
extremely wierd ideas about why they uniquely can’t give clear path details, 
something that no other Australian carrier seems to have an issue with.

My solution is to not buy circuits in Australia from Telstra as they fail our 
“need KMZ” requirement.

MMC

> On 25 Jun 2021, at 2:54 pm, Rhys Hanrahan  wrote:
> 
> Hi Guys,
>  
> I have a customer with a Telstra Wholesale EA circuit, and looking to get a 
> diverse fibre path to this site (with carrier diversity). Normally I don’t 
> have any issues getting some kind of indication of a path of a service I’m 
> paying for, from the carrier. Or  even to help plan diversity for a new 
> service. But TW are refusing to give any info – even if I were to  order a 
> redundant service – with them the plan is basically “trust us, it’s diverse”. 
> Which I’m not happy about.
>  
> Has anyone had to deal with this before, and have any suggestions on how to 
> get a rough path/info? I tried DBYD maps but it doesn’t really give a good 
> enough indication, even near the property, let alone all the way to the 
> exchange.
>  
> Appreciate any help, advice or ideas.
>  
> Thanks!
>  
> Rhys Hanrahan | Chief Information Officer
> e: r...@nexusone.com.au 
> 
>   
> 
> NEXUS ONE
> p: 1800 NEXUS1 (1800 639 871) | a: Suite 12.03 Level 12, 227 Elizabeth 
> Street, Sydney NSW 2000
> www.nexusone.com.au 
> 
> The information in this email and any accompanying attachments may contain; 
> a. Confidential information of Nexus One Pty Ltd or third parties; b. Legally 
> privileged information of Nexus One Pty Ltd or third parties; and or c. 
> Copyright material Nexus One Pty Ltd or third parties. If you have received 
> this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this 
> message. Nexus One Pty Ltd does not accept any responsibility for loss or 
> damage arising from the use or distribution of this email.
> 
> Please consider the environment before printing this email
>  
>  
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net 
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> 
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Lightning and FTTC - is it really this bad?

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

The DPUs being back-fed from the houses they provide service I’d suggest is the 
main reason - ADSL modems just had the ADSL signal to contend with, whereas 
back feeding power means you’ve got the DPU, with power across the 4 Cu lines 
into the houses and the power grid in four houses connected to the NTDs all 
being electrically connected for power (Potentially (Ha!) across 3 phases).

So a lightning strike that hits a power pole nearby is likely to fry a lot of 
stuff.

Reality is, FTTC is just a way of delaying spending money on fibre. To build 
FTTC NBN are building a GPON network already, just using Cu into the house. 
(It’s a very NPV friendly way of deploying, delaying capex is always a winner 
there).

MMC

> On 21 Jan 2021, at 10:34 am, Jrandombob  wrote:
> 
> Yeah, sounds to me like the NTDs just aren't very well designed.
> 
> Even in a high lightning area, as Damien said previously, if anything FTTC 
> ought to be LESS susceptible (assuming of course the devices are well 
> designed) to lightning owing to the shorter cable runs.
> 
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 10:50 AM Paul Julian  > wrote:
> As somebody who lives in one of the areas that gets affected a lot, and that 
> the article was mostly written about I believe, I can tell you that there are 
> a lot more NTD’s getting damaged than there was ADSL modems.
> 
>  
> 
> I can’t explain it either, it shouldn’t be happening, however people with 
> surge protected power boards are copping it as well, it’s like it’s coming 
> through the copper, maybe due to the nature of the DPU and other people 
> connected, perhaps it’s transiting the DPU and damaging other NTD’s, I don’t 
> know, but the DPU’s seem to be unaffected, only NTD’s, so it could be a 
> design issue.
> 
>  
> 
> I don’t use NBN myself, however our local facebook page lights up whenever 
> there is a storm approaching or upon us, with people talking about unplugging 
> NTD’s etc. and then of course afterwards when people complain about no 
> internet, and then the complaints that it’s taken NBN 5 days to get there and 
> replace it 
> 
>  
> 
> Many people have been told by the provider that NBN is looking at NTD’s which 
> handle power spikes better, I don’t know what they are actually doing but 
> that’s what people are being told.
> 
>  
> 
> The NBN techs will also not leave spare equipment, this makes sense of 
> course, but I know the question has been asked many times in our community.
> 
>  
> 
> I believe the article came about due to many people complaining to local MP’s 
> about the issues and obviously the media has picked it up as well.
> 
>  
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paul
> 
>  
> 
> From: AusNOG  > On Behalf Of Brendan Ord
> Sent: Thursday, 21 January 2021 10:36 AM
> To: Damien Gardner Jnr mailto:rend...@rendrag.net>>
> Cc: aus...@ausnog.net   >
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Lightning and FTTC - is it really this bad?
> 
>  
> 
> Damien, I agree with you.  Lightning is going to be causing the same issues 
> it always caused regardless of the technology; telegram, POTS, ADSL or VDSL 
> from the curb or cabinet – nothing’s changed because there’s still copper 
> conductors in the ground.
> 
>  
> 
> I smell a lot of agenda pushing and bias in this article and that’s about all 
> it is.
> 
>  
> 
> Although, maybe a more important topic mentioned in the article – NBN won’t 
> allow these businesses to buy a cold spare?!?
> 
>  
> 
> Brendan Ord
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: AusNOG  > On Behalf Of Damien Gardner Jnr
> Sent: Thursday, 21 January 2021 9:11 AM
> To: Troy Kelly mailto:t...@troykelly.com>>
> Cc: aus...@ausnog.net   >
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Lightning and FTTC - is it really this bad?
> 
>  
> 
> Yeah it really didn’t make sense to me. How is a product which only has a 
> TINY bit of copper compared to FTTN and indeed the older POTS network, SO 
> much more susceptible to lightning strikes?  I mean, it’s Fibre to the pit, 
> and then one breakout box is running four(?) homes, with maybe 100-150m total 
> of copper between all four homes’ runs?  Unless lightning is hitting one of 
> those houses, or the people in those houses are stupid enough to NOT be 
> running surge protection on their gear (seriously, wtf? Are there really 
> people without surge protection these days? It’s been around for 30 years, 
> and is on almost every power board Bunnings sell..), I don’t see how 
> lightning can be an issue??
> 
>  
> 
> Something doesn’t make sense here..
> 
>  
> 
> —DG
> 
>  
> 
> On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 at 8:25 am, Troy Kelly  > wrote:
> 
> Yes Mark, I've heard of it ;)
> 
>  
> 
> I guess my point was - why is (is it?) FTTC somehow apparently more 
> susceptible to discharge issues than POTS was/is. Perhaps I am getting the 
> wrong 

Re: [AusNOG] IX contact?

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Hi,
Which IX? There’s a few operating in Australia.

https://www.peeringdb.com/advanced_search?country__in=AU=ix

MMC

> On 5 Nov 2020, at 4:06 pm, Mike Everest  wrote:
> 
> Hello!
> 
> Is anyone able to offer me a good point of contact in IX who could assist
> with some routing weirdness?
> 
> Thanks!  Mike.
> 
> 
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] dark fibre encryption

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Yep or optical vendors have it baked in or can do (eg. 
https://www.ciena.com/products/wavelogic/wavelogic-encryption/ - just one of 
many examples).

MMC

> On 7 Apr 2020, at 10:16 am, Brad Peczka  wrote:
> 
> MACSEC is worth considering – it’s been baked into most switches and routers, 
> though some vendors still make it a licensed feature.
>  
> Regards,
> -Brad.
>  
> From: AusNOG  > On Behalf Of Alex Samad
> Sent: Tuesday, 7 April 2020 8:36 AM
> To: Ausnog mailto:ausnog@lists.ausnog.net>>
> Subject: [AusNOG] dark fibre encryption
>  
> Hi
>  
> I find myself in the situation that I need to look at purchasing some DC to 
> DC.  But I find I am not that well informed about whats available. what 
> people are doing as best practise.
>  
> Quick google doesn't fill me with lots of options.
>  
>  
> So packetlight is the current recommended vendor (their 2000 option).  Just 
> looking to see whats to judge next to it
>  
> Alex
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net 
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> 
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] COVID-19 Business Prep Suggestions

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Hi,
If your workforce is not used to working remote then:

- ensuring they know how to and who to contact for IT support? (Is there an 
external number for that?)
- ensuring you have things like Zoom/BlueJeans/Webex setup for people to use 
*and* that they have the things they need to drive them (eg. Working headsets)
- do they know how to use it, schedule meetings using it etc?
- ensuring that any communication apps (eg. Slack) works for people and that 
they have appropriate groups setup. 
- ensure you have a working/upto date contacts list? Not all companies have a 
nice, easy to use website for finding this. If people are in offices all the 
time they just may not have workmates/managers mobile numbers.
- if people need things like laptop chargers to work then can you get them 
delivered?  Do they have a suitable space at home? (This is OH stuff).
- if you have a time clock based work force (eg. They need to show hours) then 
have you allowed for the reporting of work?
- What do you need to teach managers to help them manage their staff, conduct 
meetings etc?
- do you need some quick guides?

Some of this is basic stuff, but, if you’ve got a work force who’s not used to 
it then think about how to enable to the workforce and make it less scary for 
them and enable their productivity. 

MMC


> On 9 Mar 2020, at 2:29 pm, Robert Haylock  wrote:
> 
> Hey all,
> 
> Hearing a few IT related plans crop up, especially around VPN concentrator 
> capacity and external capacity to handle the additional load of a much 
> greater than normal percentage of employees working from home.
> 
> Obviously, if you are lucky enough to have many services moved to the cloud 
> (Office 365, GSuite, etc) then the load is a bit more distributed and the 
> load moves to the residential broadband networks, but I am interested in any 
> other IT related things to prepare you may be recommending to your 
> customers/employers/bosses?
> 
> Rob
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Scam Number 0343444621

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Faxes, when they answer a call are silent until they hear the tone from the 
calling fax. 
A lot of the software that drives outbound calls will listen for silence on the 
far end so they don’t connect a human to a fax machine and waste time on their 
outbound call centre.

If you get a call from a number you don’t recognise, be silent when you answer. 
Mute if possible. A lot of the time your number will be marked as a fax machine 
and they’ll stop calling.

So, rather than have no answer as per below, route it to something that answers 
(costs them money to complete the call) and is silent to pretend to be a fax 
machine. 

MMC

> On 21 Jan 2020, at 10:20 pm, Saxton, Joseph (SYD-FED) 
>  wrote:
> 
> Not sure how your PBX is setup, but in the environments I've worked with I've 
> avoided using default call routing on unallocated DID numbers back to the 
> main number. I've found that a fair few of the scam callers dial through the 
> full DID range. Doesn't stop the calls but can somewhat reduce the calls from 
> them. 
> 
> -Joe
> 
> On 21/1/20, 7:00 pm, "AusNOG on behalf of James Andrewartha" 
>  wrote:
> 
>The Spam Act doesn't cover phone calls, s5 (5) excludes them. Blocking is 
>also pointless since all the caller IDs are spoofed differently per call. 
>Some of them are clearly invalid, I have examples like 07 6539 5789 and 
>08 0804 4878 which are not assigned in the numbering plan 
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.legislation.gov.au_Details_F2016C00283=dffDwIDaQ=Ftw_YSVcGmqQBvrGwAZugGylNRkk-uER0-5bY94tjsc=srheiojgNn4Jg0keeQ9hj6cyp8zgHx0m-eTRLdD3nnw=LwnNSmlgVzMX0qfT0FCeF8k-bFt_hBCeu9CfrHaZYx4=ql5IaZ4JO98B72cExoAoUF4U8ebk0zWRxgyU5vn56GA=
>  
> 
>-- 
># TRS-80  trs80(a)ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au #/ "Otherwise Bub here 
> will do \
># UCC Wheel Member 
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__trs80.ucc.asn.au_=DwIDaQ=Ftw_YSVcGmqQBvrGwAZugGylNRkk-uER0-5bY94tjsc=srheiojgNn4Jg0keeQ9hj6cyp8zgHx0m-eTRLdD3nnw=LwnNSmlgVzMX0qfT0FCeF8k-bFt_hBCeu9CfrHaZYx4=GyPeNnpGViNogqVS2NFym2NkN7rmauKXYjxvk9lKCcg=
>   #|  what squirrels do best |
>[ "There's nobody getting rich writing  ]|  -- Collect and hide 
> your   |
>[  software that I know of" -- Bill Gates, 1980 ]\  nuts." -- Acid Reflux 
> #231 /
> 
>On Tue, 21 Jan 2020, Mark Newton wrote:
> 
>> Doesn’t the subscriber handle it by complaining to ACMA? The Spam Act has to 
>> be worth something, right?
>> (if you block the number somewhere else, you’re just going to create a 
>> headache for the next person who receives it after the
>> scammer has moved on. It needs to be dealt with at the source, and that’s 
>> not exactly something you can do…)
>> 
>> - mark
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  On 21 Jan 2020, at 1:46 PM, James Andrewartha  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> What's the best way to handle these? In November we got a lot of calls
>> with random caller IDs, and I was gathering logs to open a case with our
>> carrier per the Comms Alliance CUSTOMER PROCESS –HANDLING OF LIFE
>> THREATENING AND UNWELCOME COMMUNICATIONS but by the time I was ready to,
>> they'd stopped.
>> 
>> Obviously that process is fairly weak sauce, particularly if you read the
>> actual code which allows for no action if the supplier is unable to
>> identify the source of the communication, but I was at a loss to find any
>> other process to try and stop the calls.
>> 
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.commsalliance.com.au_-5F-5Fdata_assets_pdf-5Ffile_0004_56227_IGN010-5F2017.pdf=DwIDaQ=Ftw_YSVcGmqQBvrGwAZugGylNRkk-uER0-5bY94tjsc=srheiojgNn4Jg0keeQ9hj6cyp8zgHx0m-eTRLdD3nnw=LwnNSmlgVzMX0qfT0FCeF8k-bFt_hBCeu9CfrHaZYx4=pWlePaeKZg8iidKrAzSWojXCLq1dNcW6jbIuMjOPcsc=
>>  
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.commsalliance.com.au_-5F-5Fdata_assets_pdf-5Ffile_0006_60549_C525-5F2017-2Dvariation-2D1-5F2018.pdf=DwIDaQ=Ftw_YSVcGmqQBvrGwAZugGylNRkk-uER0-5bY94tjsc=srheiojgNn4Jg0keeQ9hj6cyp8zgHx0m-eTRLdD3nnw=LwnNSmlgVzMX0qfT0FCeF8k-bFt_hBCeu9CfrHaZYx4=ojrF_jIKplq5zOpebLlbKHonU--g6CIz2saQUzMuXIk=
>>  
>> 
>> --
>> # TRS-80  trs80(a)ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au #/ "Otherwise Bub here will 
>> do \
>> # UCC Wheel Member 
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__trs80.ucc.asn.au_=DwIDaQ=Ftw_YSVcGmqQBvrGwAZugGylNRkk-uER0-5bY94tjsc=srheiojgNn4Jg0keeQ9hj6cyp8zgHx0m-eTRLdD3nnw=LwnNSmlgVzMX0qfT0FCeF8k-bFt_hBCeu9CfrHaZYx4=GyPeNnpGViNogqVS2NFym2NkN7rmauKXYjxvk9lKCcg=
>>   #|  what squirrels do best |
>> [ "There's nobody getting rich writing  ]|  -- Collect and hide your 
>>   |
>> [  software that I know of" -- Bill Gates, 1980 ]\  nuts." -- Acid Reflux 
>> #231 /
>> 
>> On Fri, 17 Jan 2020, Bradley Amm wrote:
>> 
>>  A lot come from Symbio but yes it’s probably just spoofed. 
>> 
>>  Quite easy to spoof a caller ID 
>> 
>> ___
>> 

Re: [AusNOG] Microsoft cloud issues?

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Admittedly I’m not super clear on this but I thought Microsoft stopped really 
generally offering O365 via ER and it’s now on “special request only”?

“Free peering” is “Direct connectivity” FWIW.

MMC

> On 21 Nov 2019, at 4:50 pm, Chad Kelly  wrote:
> 
> Yeah for a small team Express Route would be overkill.
> Most providers on this list should have direct connectivity though
> As an example Vocus connects directly in both Sydney and Melbourne and so do 
> Telstra.
> Microsoft are putting a significant amount of effort into their partner 
> network  they want partners to get end customers onto the CSP platform, so 
> support for the products should increase significantly over coming months.
> This is also ware a multi cloud strategy comes in handy, its more aimed at 
> enterprise customers, but prevents the issue of a single point of failure if 
> one service falls over completely.
>  
>  
> Chad Kelly
> Manager
> CPK Web Services
> Phone 03 52730246
> Web https://www.cpkws.com.au
>  
> From: Brad Peczka  
> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 4:40 PM
> To: Chad Kelly ; ausnog@lists.ausnog.net
> Subject: Re: Microsoft cloud issues?
>  
> Microsoft have publically and openly acknowledged that they had an issue 
> yesterday with their network platform.
> 
>  
> 
> The fact that you did not receive calls from your customers may not 
> necessarily indicate the absence of an issue; in fact, I'd say it indicates 
> an increasing acknowledgement and (sadly) acceptance of outages with cloud 
> services in general. What would have once resulted in system admins and 
> support staff getting strips torn off them for services being down is now met 
> with little more than a knowing nod and "Ahhh. We should let the team know 
> about that".
> 
>  
> 
> It's also worth noting that direct connectivity to Azure or AWS is great for 
> some businesses, but not applicable or suitable for others - nor is it a 
> guarantee of being unaffected by these kind of issues. As an example, a small 
> 5 person business that relies on 365 for email hosting cannot, and should not 
> have to, in most cases procure an ExpressRoute just to get connectivity to 
> their email or presence platform.
> 
>  
> 
> But hey, that's what happens when you put all your eggs on someone elses 
> computer(s).
> 
>  
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Brad.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: AusNOG  > on behalf of Chad Kelly 
> mailto:c...@cpkws.com.au>>
> Sent: Thursday, 21 November 2019 11:53:30 AM
> To: ausnog@lists.ausnog.net 
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Microsoft cloud issues?
>  
> On 11/21/2019 12:00 PM, ausnog-requ...@lists.ausnog.net 
>  wrote:
> 
> > We just had a 8 hour issue with no emails yesterday
> 
> I was at the Microsoft Head Office in Melbourne yesterday and was still 
> able to recieve mail fine.
> 
> I'd say some of these issues were specific to certain networks.
> 
> I didn't get any urgent calls from customers either.
> 
> Microsoft have connectivity directly with most ISPs in Au now a days. 
> I'd suggest not relying on free peering.
> 
> I'd get direct connectivity.
> 
> As for Teams for corporate use I would suggest running a Hybrid Cloud 
> environment for it.
> 
> I did notice some delays to email on Tuesday night but none of our stuff 
> was down totally.
> 
> Regards Chad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Chad Kelly
> Manager
> CPK Web Services
> Phone 03 5273 0246
> Web www.cpkws.com.au 
> 
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net 
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Default IPv6 Local Only Addressing for Non-Internet Devices

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

+1

Fine if a manufacturer wants to add a nerd knob for this, but as a default, no. 

I want a printer to get new firmware and keep it upto date - NOT getting 
firmware updates is normally a major security risk.

MMC

> On 16 Oct 2019, at 12:50 pm, James Hodgkinson  wrote:
> 
> I could see it as being a great option, but making it a default would be a 
> support nightmare.
> 
> "but grandma's printer works from anywhere, why doesn't mine?"
> 
> James
> 
> On Wed, 16 Oct 2019, at 12:06, Paul Brooks wrote:
>> On 15/10/2019 2:33 pm, Mark Smith wrote:
>>> I recently bought an IPv6 enabled Wifi printer. As it is attached to
>>> my single Wifi SSID it is configuring itself with IPv6 global
>>> addresses, even though I don't need it to be reachable from the
>>> Internet or able to reach the Internet. (It would be relatively hard
>>> to find from the Internet anyway with /64 prefix, and there is an IPv6
>>> firewall in front if it).
>>> 
>>> I think it would be better for these types of "Non-Internet' devices
>>> not to configure themselves with global IPv6 addresses by default.
>> 
>> It probably checks back to home base for firmware updates, and 
>> downloads firmware
>> updates direct from the manufacturer - it will need a global address 
>> for that.
>> 
>> It probably has a function (that may or may not be enabled by default) 
>> to register
>> with an external rendezvous site to enable you to print to it from 
>> outside your home
>> network, or via an app or plugin from a mobile device - it will need a 
>> global address
>> for that (and many would want to block that from happening).
>> 
>> *you* may not want it to be Internet-reachable, but sure as eggs the printer
>> manufacturer considers external connectivity an essential and major 
>> ease-of-use
>> feature, so good luck with that!
>> 
>> Paul
>> 
>> ___
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>> 
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Telstra Wi-Fi calling on our network.

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

This isn’t call termination as it’s on the customer side of the call, not the 
telco side so telco regulation of calls really isn’t the issue here. And that 
kind of approach where you randomly block traffic because you want to have a 
war with an other telco isn’t customer friendly.  If my ISP did this I’d raise 
stink. HD voice is trivial amounts of data. Even if you did high bits rates 
it’s about 36 MEGABYTES per hour.

Grow up people.

MMC


> On 13 Oct 2019, at 2:47 pm, Jonathan Brewer  wrote:
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> In every market I work in, Internet, fixed line telephony, and mobile 
> telephony are regulated differently. Australia is no different. Peering may 
> not be regulated in Australia, but call termination sure is. And that's what 
> Telstra mobile is doing here - terminating calls on the OzOnline network.
> 
> Agreeing entirely with Paul, this is a super complex issue.
> 
> With my grey hat on, I'd suggest OzOnline just drop all voice traffic bound 
> for Telstra off at some European IX & let Telstra haul it back to their 
> network. It's not a lot of bandwidth to ship elsewhere, the traffic will 
> still get to Telstra, and when Telstra wants lower latency, they can 
> negotiate a peering agreement.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Jon
> 
> 
> On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 at 09:55, Mark Smith  <mailto:markzzzsm...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> It's not truly complex.
> 
> It's as simple as asking what the OP's customers are paying for.
> 
> Are they paying for Internet access, or are they paying for Internet
> access excluding the over-the-top services that Telstra are providing?
> 
> If it is the latter, then it needs to be explicitly called out in the
> ISP's T/SFOA. If it is not in the latter, the OP is in trouble with
> the ACCC.
> 
> https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-guarantees 
> <https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-guarantees>
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 at 11:51, Paul Wilkins  <mailto:paulwilkins...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > I think this is a truly complex issue, which as it would require the wisdom 
> > of Solomon  to resolve, probably puts it beyond most people's caring or the 
> > actual extent of the problem. Because it's available to the telcos to argue 
> > it's done to improve service quality, you'd really need to prove that there 
> > existed systematic cost shifting.
> >
> > But it does raise salient questions of monopoly power. For one thing, it's 
> > not the user that opts for these alternate routes, it's the telco, and 
> > their ability to dictate firmware. This is probably not the kind of 
> > behaviour government policy makers and the ACCC envisage in the role of the 
> > national carrier.
> >
> > Not only do I think policy makers and the ACCC have bigger fish to fry, but 
> > over time the current distinction between voice and internet traffic may 
> > become less distinct. Which turns on questions of net neutrality, which is 
> > still very much an emerging debate, and realistically will be resolved in 
> > the US, and Australia will have little option but to follow suit. It's the 
> > consequence of being a branch economy, that policy and technical outcomes 
> > are put beyond the reach of national sovereignty.
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> > Paul Wilkins
> >
> > On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 at 16:42, Bradley Amm  > <mailto:b...@bradleyamm.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Well if you have your IPWAN in NZ and the internet endpoint in Australia 
> >> you can ;)
> >>
> >> Get Outlook for iOS
> >>
> >> 
> >> From: AusNOG  >> <mailto:ausnog-boun...@lists.ausnog.net>> on behalf of Matthew Moyle-Croft 
> >> mailto:m...@mmc.com.au>>
> >> Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2019 1:29 pm
> >> To: John Edwards; m...@ozonline.com.au <mailto:m...@ozonline.com.au>
> >> Cc: AusNOG
> >> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Telstra Wi-Fi calling on our network.
> >>
> >> FYI:
> >>
> >> Telstra and Optus do NOT allow WIFI calling while overseas. Which sucks.  
> >> I have US sim that does and it works fine so it’s a business not technical 
> >> decision.
> >>
> >> WIFI calling is such a tiny amount of data compared to almost all other 
> >> uses it seems dumb to think about blocking it. Especially when people rely 
> >> so much on mobile and a lot of in-building calling can suck pretty hard. 
> >> (Heck, my multi-AP, Ubiquiti wifi at home gives me better in-home coverage 
> >> than any of the telcos).
> >>
> >> MMC
&g

Re: [AusNOG] Telstra Wi-Fi calling on our network.

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

FYI:

Telstra and Optus do NOT allow WIFI calling while overseas. Which sucks.  I 
have US sim that does and it works fine so it’s a business not technical 
decision. 

WIFI calling is such a tiny amount of data compared to almost all other uses it 
seems dumb to think about blocking it. Especially when people rely so much on 
mobile and a lot of in-building calling can suck pretty hard. (Heck, my 
multi-AP, Ubiquiti wifi at home gives me better in-home coverage than any of 
the telcos).

MMC

> On 12 Oct 2019, at 1:54 pm, John Edwards  wrote:
> 
> Every bit of territory that your "sworn competitor" gives up by putting call 
> data on your network instead of their private mobile network is territory 
> that it may never get back.
> 
> Imagine what WiFi calling is doing for International roaming revenue if every 
> call now looks like a local origination.
> 
> Rejoice in this scenario and encourage a world where a 20 billion dollar LTE 
> network or 100 year monopoly are not prerequisites to making mobile calls - 
> it's one of the few places where you might get a level playing field for 
> telecommunications services.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 at 09:44,  > wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> So Telstra mobile services increasingly seem to revert to using
> Wifi calling even in the presence of decent signal strength.
> 
> If I were a CDN wanting to connect to Telstra IP,
> they'd charge me for injecting traffic into their network or for transit,
> and yet Telstra is injecting traffic into our our network to carry  
> some of their cell traffic, without payment or agreement.
> 
> Now you might say, sure, but we're doing that for our customers not  
> for Telstra. But Telstra themselves will charge CDNs for delivering  
> content
> to Telstra's customers, something Telstra's end customers are presumably
> already paying for. So yeah, we know in this industry what is good for the
> goose is not always good for the gander.
> 
> Another point, Telstra, who are our sworn competitors, are using our  
> network for Wifi calling to supplement their mobile network. Presumably
> this use of their competitor's networks reduces their capital investment
> requirement and supports their revenue stream by raising the
> quality of their coverage. Hence Telstra's use of their competitor's networks
> enhances their ability to dominate the industry, again without
> any kind of settlement to their competitor ISPs.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Also, anyone have any thoughts about what ACL one might put in place
> to block wifi calling if one was of a mind to?
> 
> Michael
> Australia On Line.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net 
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> 
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Sea-Me-We 3 down....again.

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Hangon,
That means at some point it was up again? :) :)

MMC

> On 20 Sep 2019, at 9:13 am, Cole, Michael  wrote:
> 
> Sea-Me-We 3 down again.
> Not sure where the break is, but affecting my Sydney to Singapore 
> connectivity.
>  
> 4 – 6 weeks for circuit restoration.
>  
>  
> ~michael
>  
>  
> 
> 
> This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by 
> Mimecast.
> For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com 
> 
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net 
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> 
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Came across this

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

"iiNet are apparently offering accounts for a flat fee of $25 per month.
They provide news, mail, telnet, ftp, and irc, but have no UDP support at
the moment."

Did they respond about UDP support at all?

MMC


On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 12:50 AM Matt Perkins  wrote:

> Came across this link http://www.rogerclarke.com/II/zik.faq.9403.html
> Good to see many of us old buggers still around and thoughts are with
> the ones on the list that are not.
>
>
> Matt.
>
>
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] [AUSNOG] Disk wear & Foucault Period

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

I’m not aware of any statistically significant data showing that latitude or 
direction of HD has an affect on disk life time nor direction of the racks even 
from companies with *extremely large* global fleets.

I also think before making assertions as per below that you’d need to 
demonstrate that this force is in anyway actually significant. There are lots 
of forces and physical effects acting on equipment. Vibration, temperature, 
actual usage patterns. You’d also need to understand the mechanics of the drive 
- does this force actually mean that the bearings move in any meaningful way?

eg.Vibration effects 
https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/sustainit10/tech/slides/turner.pdf
eg.Different cooling strategies: 
https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/fast16/fast16-papers-manousakis.pdf

Have you calculated the actual forces here and compared them to others? I don’t 
doubt precession exists, but I doubt it has any measurable affect on the MTBF 
of HDs. 

MMC


> On 22 Aug 2019, at 10:39 am, Paul Wilkins  wrote:
> 
> Btw, if the forces seem insignificant, consider that turning a disk over 360 
> degrees every day, means precession forces doing work equivalent to 2 full 
> start/stop/start cycles every day * sin(latitude). It's worse than this of 
> course because of the shear forces on the bearings.
> 
> Over a disk's 5 year life, that's about 1800 power cycles. Not enough to kill 
> a disk, or to even be an obvious problem, but a hidden and unnecessary drain 
> on disk life and IT budgets.
> 
> So yes, I'm now of the view we as an industry should insist that rows in our 
> DCs should be run North/South.
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Paul Wilkins
> 
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 at 10:17, Paul Wilkins  > wrote:
> I think this is germane to the mail list for the following reasons:
> 
> 1 - IF there is an obvious correlation between Au resident DCs with East West 
> running cabinet rows and higher failure rates rather than North South running 
> cabinet rows, then it should be within the ability/resources of this mail 
> list to identify.
> 
> Reason being, for precession purposes, Australia qualifies as Equitorial (as 
> opposed to Polar). The means you minimise precession with vertical disks, 
> where the disk axis points north. Because disks insert into disk arrays face 
> first, this means you minimise precession with cabinet rows that run 
> North/South. (ie. the cabinet rows are parallel to the disk axes).
> 
> 2 - IF the correlation is real, then this is knowledge of value, due to 
> improved reliability and level of service that entails. And just as 
> importantly, tech time spent restoring crashed drives can be invested 
> elsewhere. Thirdly, it may mean you get to extend the useful life of drive 
> arrays, which will give capital and operational economies.
> 
> If there's no obvious correlation, the only cost is some argument over noise 
> on the list.
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Paul Wilkins
> 
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 at 08:45, andrew khoo  > wrote:
> i hate to be a “me too”.
> 
> i personally believe this issue is of relevance to operators.
> 
> in the australian context this is even more relevant due to potential costs 
> we have to incur to keep spinning rust for our compliance requirements.
> 
> maintaining a healthy lifecycle means potentially extending the useful life 
> of storage that surely an operator cannot run without.
> 
> just my 2c.
> 
> (and OP’s theory might mean a migration to DCs in darwin? :) :))
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 at 08:37,  > wrote:
> Excuse my apparent naivety, but I thought data centres were attached to 
> networks? It’s apparent that only DevOps engineers are allowed to think 
> scientifically, unlike the rest of us mere mortals. I’m sure that I’m not the 
> only one that found Paul’s theorising quite interesting…or has the inherent 
> Luddite atmosphere of stifling creative thought in this country now permeated 
> into the Technosphere…?
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: AusNOG  > On Behalf Of James Hodgkinson
> Sent: Wednesday, 21 August 2019 6:36 PM
> To: ausnog@lists.ausnog.net 
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] [AUSNOG] Disk wear & Foucault Period
> 
>  
> 
> Please stop thinking out loud, this is the quiet carriage. 
> 
>  
> 
> James
> 
>  
> 
> On Wed, 21 Aug 2019, at 17:17, Paul Wilkins wrote:
> 
> Another thought, which is that horizontal mounting is optimal for polar 
> regions, whereas you minimise precession at equitorial latitudes with 
> vertical mounting (but only if the axis is north aligned), which could go 
> some way to explaining the anecdotal stuff you hear about horizontal versus 
> vertical mounting. Though I've yet to hear anyone asking what's your latitude 
> before they proceed to build a data centre or installing your vertical disks 
> arrays to be north axis aligned.
> 
>  
> 
> Kind 

Re: [AusNOG] URGENT Digital Ocean NETOPS Contact

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Did you look at their peeringdb entry for the listed emails and phone numbers? 
https://www.peeringdb.com/net/6494 

> On 25 Apr 2019, at 11:05 am, Matthew Matters  
> wrote:
> 
> Can someone point me in the right direction to get in touch with Digital Ocean
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net 
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> 
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Assistance and Access Bill moves to PJCIS

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

April 2nd is budget day.

May 11 is *likely* Election Day (may 18th as a backup).

Sitting days are: 
https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Sitting_Calendar/Sitting_calendar_2019-text_version

33 days is the *minimum* from issuing writs (usually on a Monday) to polling 
day which isn’t that far after budget day - so we’ll go into caretaker mode the 
moment the budget is passed.

I don’t expect anything to actually *happen* until the next government of which 
ever flavour is sworn in and starts moving on their legislative path - which 
could be well into the second half of this year.

I’m not smart enough to understand the “real issues” that the election will be 
“fought” over but I doubt it’s the #aabill and so I’m not even sure it’s worth 
saying much until after the election and the winning part(y|ies) start thinking 
about the next Parliament.

(I’ve attempted to discuss AABill with both my current Fed member and the other 
major Party’s candidate and neither were interested in engaging on it and the 
sitting member was, let’s say, very dismissive of my comments).

MMC


> On 29 Mar 2019, at 3:48 pm, Paul Wilkins  wrote:
> 
> Crunch time is 3rd April, when the PJCIS will report back to Parliament. I 
> expect Labor recommending their same amendments plus whatever washes up from 
> the latest round of consultation. Then it's up to the Liberals to either act 
> in good faith, and pass the Labor amendments as per prior agreement, or, play 
> politics, refuse to pass the agreed amendments, and scare up the issue. I'd 
> like to think there would be serious political cost for not honouring the 
> agreement. Unfortunately, the Liberal hard right Trumpists are the one's 
> invested in the populist theatre of blowing up public policy grounded in 
> evidence.
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Paul Wilkins
> 
> 
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 10:52, Paul Brooks  > wrote:
> On 28/03/2019 5:29 pm, Peter Fern wrote:
> > On 28/3/19 12:33 pm, Paul Wilkins wrote:
> >> The silence on the Assistance and Access Act since it passed in December 
> >> has been
> >> deafening. It was firmly understood, on representations by the Liberal 
> >> Government,
> >> that the bill passed was passed as an expedient, yet now we have the third 
> >> report
> >> from PJCIS due 3rd April, and yet another round of submissions from 
> >> corporations
> >> large and small, industry luminaries and human rights and legal experts, 
> >> all saying
> >> that basically we're where we were back in September 2018, when Dutton 
> >> rather
> >> disingenuously reported to the House that:
> >>
> >> "The government has consulted extensively with industry and the public on 
> >> these
> >> measures and has made amendments to reflect the feedback in the 
> >> legislation now
> >> before the parliament."
> >>
> >> Yet no matter how many submissions are made to how many parliamentary 
> >> committees,
> >> we now seem stuck with a deeply flawed Act, the Liberals are walking 
> >> backwards on
> >> the Labor amendements, while the country's police forces now operate with 
> >> sweeping
> >> interception powers well beyond what's necessary and proportional.
> >
> >
> > Because, of course we are - anyone who thought we'd be anywhere else today 
> > was
> > living in a fantasy land.  And you can thank Labor for this, on account of 
> > being
> > completely spineless weasels, almost as much as the Libs for ramrodding this
> > disgusting mess through in the first place.  Tech policy in this country is 
> > an
> > absolute joke.
> 
> Looking forward to your submission to the PJCIS, and let us know how your 
> meeting with
> your local federal MP goes when you explain all this in words of one syllable 
> to her/him.
> 
> This week's event was the commercial tech industry waking up to the huge 
> economic
> impact, and the distrust and loss of business from international customers and
> prospects that will lead to Australian tech firms moving out of Australia, 
> and not
> starting up in Australia in the first place. When companies like Senatas and 
> Atlassian
> say they will need to move all their operations out of the country to avoid 
> the
> suspicion and mistrust, and Microsoft recently that the #AABill is making 
> them uneasy
> about storing customer data in Australia, the momentum is building that even 
> the
> relevant Ministers can't ignore.
> 
> Yes, it would have been great if the bill hadn't been passed back in December 
> - but
> that egg has been scrambled, the exercise now is to get it modified or 
> cancelled.
> 
> There is a template letter to your local MP hosted at
> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/u64wadpyy97sw4f/AACTZ-grqUgUqFClXBmzPk99a?dl=0 
> , 
> put
> together by the InnovationAUS crew, to help make it easy to send a message. 
> If they
> don't hear the message from the people - and trust me, they aren't reading 
> AusNOG -
> they won't change.
> 

Re: [AusNOG] Damage to iiNET HFC cable

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

There’s no good way of reporting infrastructure damage to most telcos that
I’ve found.

eg. (a while back) I was at a Telstra Exchange and saw someone had damaged
something on the outside of the building (involved cabling to the colocated
mobile tower). I tried to report it via “official channels” and didn’t get
anywhere. Damage was still evident a long time later.

I suspect it’s easier for people to ignore and fix during an outage so they
can call it Force Majeure rather than proactively prevent an issue.

MMC

On 5 Feb 2019, at 11:25 am, Matthew Matters 
wrote:

Hey Guys,

Quick question, can someone contact me off list about damage to the HFC
cable in Ballarat area, I have gotten a few customers call me to advise me
that the cable is very low and at risk of being ripped from the pole.

Been on hold to support but they are not being much help.




[image: Follow us] [image: Facebook]
 [image:
Twitter]  [image: Google+]


The information transmitted in this e-mail is for the exclusive use of the
intended addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material.
Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of it, or the
taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons and/or
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received
this in error, please inform the sender and/or addressee immediately and
delete the material. If you have been sent this email and it is not
addressed to you please forward the email as is to
hostmas...@ausnetservers.net.au and delete all local and inta-local copies
including backups from your system. E-mails may not be secure, may contain
computer viruses and may be corrupted in transmission. Please carefully
check this e-mail (and any attachment) accordingly. No warranties are given
and no liability is accepted for any loss or damage caused by such matters.

This email has been scanned before transmission with business grade
antivirus and antispam software but as mentioned above no warranties can be
given that the email has not been contaminated after transmission.
   ___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] [AUSNog] : Re Data Centre Fire Suppression Safety

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

CO2 is popular in some markets - eg. Japan still. I’ve talked to operators 
there and they seem pretty confident in it. 

Halon is definitely a thing for certain tasks - my Dad at one point was 
responsible (well, people who reported to him were) for an irreplaceable 
historic collection and they valued protecting over anything. I recall you had 
to be careful about signing in and out and carry a kit and you had a minute to 
get out when the alarm went off.

10% oxygen is about summit of Denali (20kft) - it’s not something most of us 
deal with, but you can survive for a bit. (Obviously not quite the same as the 
gas is more dense than at 20kft etc).

MMC

> On 13 Dec 2018, at 8:21 pm, Alan Maher  wrote:
> 
> Co2 was the original choice for fire problems in early data centres.
> Then... they found a few problems.
> Number one problem was that Co2 was so cold it not only put put the fire, but 
> it completely
> destroyed all the circuit boards. They cracked and so did the computers.
> Plan B was Halon, and we all know how that worked.
> Illegal now, but probably the guys in Antarctica may have hit the wrong 
> button.
> On 13/12/2018 6:17 PM, Matt Perkins wrote:
>> Depends on the fire system. If it’s co2 like in some high power environments 
>> it can be quite dangerous but most other agents are relatively harmless.   I 
>> can’t think of a good reason why a data Center would use co2. Most 
>> environments with co2 suppression also have leak detectors and alarms. 
>> 
>> Matt
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> /* Matt Perkins
>>Direct 1300 137 379 Spectrum Networks Ptd. Ltd.
>>Office 1300 133 299 m...@spectrum.com.au 
>> 
>>Fax1300 133 255 Level 6, 350 George Street Sydney 2000
>>   SIP 1300137...@sip.spectrum.com.au 
>> 
>>Google Talk mattaperk...@gmail.com 
>>PGP/GNUPG Public Key can be found at  http://pgp.mit.edu 
>> 
>> */
>> 
>> On 13 Dec 2018, at 11:00 am, Chris Ford > > wrote:
>> 
>>> As a university cadet working for IBM in the late 80s I remember getting 
>>> inducted into the Westpac data centres and getting a long explanation of 
>>> what to do when the halon system went off – where the breathing gear was, 
>>> where the exits were, to basically just drop everything and run.
>>>  
>>> Have been inducted into a few DCs in the last 3 years and can’t remember 
>>> that being part of the induction at all – although given I already knew it 
>>> I may have just glossed over that part.
>>>  
>>> --
>>> Chris Ford
>>> Chief Technology Officer
>>>  
>>> INABOX GROUP
>>> m 0401 988 844 e chris.f...@inaboxgroup.com.au 
>>> 
>>> t 02 8275 6871 w www.inaboxgroup.com.au 
>>>  
>>> From: AusNOG >> > On Behalf Of Paul Wilkins
>>> Sent: Thursday, 13 December 2018 10:53 AM
>>> To: AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net 
>>> Subject: [AusNOG] [AUSNog] : Re Data Centre Fire Suppression Safety
>>>  
>>> Every data centre has a fire suppression system. We're not used to thinking 
>>> of this as a hazardous environment, but consequent to two techs being found 
>>> dead working on a fire suppression system in Antarctica 
>>> ,
>>>  I find myself wondering yet again, why there aren't more stringent 
>>> controls around the fire suppression systems in data centres: viz - when 
>>> you enter a data centre, how confident can you be you're not going to be 
>>> quietly asphyxiated?
>>> 
>>> Kind regards
>>> 
>>> Paul Wilkins
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> AusNOG mailing list
>>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net 
>>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net 
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
>> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Virus-free. www.avast.com 
> 
>  
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net 
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> 

___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Telstra and Vocus Peering

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

I think it'd be brave to say that.

On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 8:55 AM Cameron Murray 
wrote:

> some of us.
>
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 8:24 AM Matthew Moyle-Croft 
> wrote:
>
>> Looking at 3.6:
>>
>> 3.6 The peering partner's nationally deployed resilient Internet backbone
>> network should
>> operate on circuits of at least 50% of Telstra’s Internet backbone
>> network from Perth
>> to Brisbane that is dedicated to public Internet traffic.
>>
>> I'd ask who qualifies at all?
>>
>> MMC
>>
>>
>> On 24 Oct 2018, at 7:05 am, John Edwards  wrote:
>>
>> Links to peering docs from the ACCC web site:
>>
>>
>> https://www.telstrawholesale.com.au/content/dam/tw/products/data_ip/Telstra%20Wholesale%20Internet1/Telstra%20Peering%20Guidelines.pdf
>> https://www.tpg.com.au/peering-guidelines
>>
>> https://www.optus.com.au/content/dam/optus/documents/wholesale/fixed/Optus%20IP%20Interconnect%20Policy%20-%20Summary_2018.pdf
>> http://www.verizonenterprise.com/terms/peering/
>>
>> These things do have a tendency to disappear from web sites over time so
>> if you aspire to one day peer with the big guys I recommend that you save a
>> copy of each of these
>>
>> The Telstra and TPG documents mention "Sender Keep All", which implies
>> that the IP itself is "free"
>>
>> The Telstra standard for peering is exclusive - requiring interconnection
>> in Darwin AND Hobart, which probably rules out most of the International
>> content providers that setup in Sydney
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 00:56, Bradley Amm  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> https://www.crn.com.au/news/optus-telstra-tpg-publish-peering-criteria-for-interested-isps-514364
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.computerworld.com.au/article/648621/no-need-regulate-isp-peering-arrangements-accc-says/
>>>
>>> Doesn't say if its paid or settlement free
>>>
>>>
>>> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> AusNOG mailing list
>>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>>
>> ___
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>>
>> ___
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Telstra and Vocus Peering

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Looking at 3.6:

3.6 The peering partner's nationally deployed resilient Internet backbone
network should
operate on circuits of at least 50% of Telstra’s Internet backbone network
from Perth
to Brisbane that is dedicated to public Internet traffic.

I'd ask who qualifies at all?

MMC


On 24 Oct 2018, at 7:05 am, John Edwards  wrote:

Links to peering docs from the ACCC web site:

https://www.telstrawholesale.com.au/content/dam/tw/products/data_ip/Telstra%20Wholesale%20Internet1/Telstra%20Peering%20Guidelines.pdf
https://www.tpg.com.au/peering-guidelines
https://www.optus.com.au/content/dam/optus/documents/wholesale/fixed/Optus%20IP%20Interconnect%20Policy%20-%20Summary_2018.pdf
http://www.verizonenterprise.com/terms/peering/

These things do have a tendency to disappear from web sites over time so if
you aspire to one day peer with the big guys I recommend that you save a
copy of each of these

The Telstra and TPG documents mention "Sender Keep All", which implies that
the IP itself is "free"

The Telstra standard for peering is exclusive - requiring interconnection
in Darwin AND Hobart, which probably rules out most of the International
content providers that setup in Sydney

John


On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 00:56, Bradley Amm  wrote:

>
> https://www.crn.com.au/news/optus-telstra-tpg-publish-peering-criteria-for-interested-isps-514364
>
>
> https://www.computerworld.com.au/article/648621/no-need-regulate-isp-peering-arrangements-accc-says/
>
> Doesn't say if its paid or settlement free
>
>
> Get Outlook for Android 
>
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] supermicro stocks dive

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Fairly robust rebuttal from the usually very silent Amazon.

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/setting-the-record-straight-on-bloomberg-businessweeks-erroneous-article/

MMC

On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 2:18 PM Rob Thomas  wrote:

> Odd. I've messaged the mods, I had a bit.ly link in it, which may have
> triggered the spamfilter.
>
> I've pastebin'ed the text here -- https://pastebin.com/mVpqNa38
>
> --Rob
>
>
> On Fri, 5 Oct 2018 at 14:43, Bill Woodcock  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> > On Oct 4, 2018, at 9:39 PM, Rob Thomas  wrote:
>> >
>> > I posed to /r/netsec if anyone cares to take the discussion there
>>
>> Posted seven minutes ago, and already removed?
>>
>> -Bill
>>
>> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] after hours staff requirement

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Hi,
I’ve got to agree with this. A properly scripted/documented list will reduce 
engineer call outs (improving staff morale) and, more importantly, mean that if 
they get woken up they know it’s worth doing something about. 

MMC

> On 17 Sep 2018, at 4:55 pm, Kisakye Alex  wrote:
> 
> I think what a human provides is the ability to sort through tickets for what 
> can wait until morning and what needs the engineer to wake up. If you are 
> forwarding the calls directly to an engineer on call, then half the time s/he 
> is making decisions on whether to get up or not.
> 
> Alex
> 
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 12:09 AM Chad Kelly  > wrote:
> With most modern PBX systems they will tell you if it's a PBX call and 
> give you the option to either answer the call or hang up.
> 
> Or you can send the call to an answering machine which means you can get 
> to the issue the next morning.
> 
> If you are running services that are mission critical that you need the 
> phone answered 24/7 then you really need someone in the office who is 
> awake and functioning but given what has been discussed a decent PBX 
> would be fine as even if you wanted to redirect calls to a call centre 
> ware a human answers that is also an option, though less needed.
> 
> As a voicemail system would be a lot cheaper and tickets work better for 
> more complex issues anyway.
> 
> Regards Chad.
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/17/2018 4:50 PM, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > I can see the benefit of having someone else take the call. I can remember 
> > my days as an on call engineer years ago where I would get a phone call 
> > from  the NOC in the middle of the night, I would need to keep a pen and 
> > paper by the bed to write down basic details, as in my just woken state, I 
> > would forget whatever I was told 2 seconds later.
> >
> > You don’t want end customers talking to someone who just woke up seconds 
> > ago, as they won't be in a state to properly take down details and provide 
> > a mechanism to follow up (ticket numbers etc)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Andrew Jones
> > 0435 658 228
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: AusNOG  > > On Behalf Of Chad Kelly
> > Sent: Monday, 17 September 2018 4:35 PM
> > To: ausnog@lists.ausnog.net ; 
> > ausnog-requ...@lists.ausnog.net 
> > Subject: Re: [AusNOG] after hours staff requirement
> >
> > On 9/17/2018 12:00 PM, ausnog-requ...@lists.ausnog.net 
> >  wrote:
> >
> >> I'm looking for a company to take on our level 1 support, after hours.
> >> 10pm - 8am AEST
> >> 7 days a week, including public holidays.
> >> Would prefer a local Australian company, but will consider
> >> International too.
> >> Require a team of sorts, that handles other companies too as it's not
> >> financially viable to have a team dedicated to us as the volume of
> >> calls is bugger all.
> >>
> >> We'll just redirect the 1300 number to you during those times, a
> >> simple greeting, take down notes and urgency, check the on-call
> >> calendar and call the Engineer to action.
> >> Basically, I need you to wake up the Engineer on call:)
> > Frankly if this is all you need a decent phone system will do this without 
> > you needing to hire an outsourcing company.
> > Most decent PBX systems will redirect to a mobile after hours or better yet 
> > straight to an answering machine that will email a voicemail message to an 
> > engineer.
> > That way they can decide if the message is important enough to bother doing 
> > anything about, and frankly if you offer an on call service you should be 
> > charging enough that it deters  unwanted callers from ringing you in the 
> > middle of the night anyway.
> > This is why we don't advertise 24/7 support as idiots randomly spam the 
> > ticket system with rubbish which you then need to delete anyway.
> > We offer support for critical issues on weekends for existing customers 
> > only.
> > Your PBX also should have a decent blacklist function for telemarketers.
> >
> > Regards Chad.
> >
> > --
> > Chad Kelly
> > Manager
> > CPK Web Services
> > Phone 03 5273 0246
> > Web www.cpkws.com.au 
> >
> > ___
> > AusNOG mailing list
> > AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net 
> > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Chad Kelly
> Manager
> CPK Web Services
> Phone 03 5273 0246
> Web www.cpkws.com.au 
> 
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net 
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> 
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> 

Re: [AusNOG] Telstra mobile issues again?

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

> On 23 May 2018, at 10:49 am, Bradley Amm  wrote:
> 
> It would be great if we could “roam” between all networks or a company comes 
> up with a product that can roam between all networks

I just moved back from the USA to Australia and still have my T-Mobile sim in 
one of the phones, happily roams on all the networks! (As do most roaming 
SIMs). Google with their Project Fi have that across at least Sprint and T-Mo 
in the USA (yes, soon to be one network). Summary - get a non-Australian SIM 
that has some reasonable roaming rates and that’s what you get. (Maybe get a 
Voda NZ sim? Dunno what the rates are)

The only reason you can’t is commercial - if you could run your own HLR and 
negotiate the agreements with the 3 (soon 4) carriers here you’d be able to do 
it.  They’re just not interested in enabling that.  

MMC

>  
>   <>
> From: AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-boun...@lists.ausnog.net 
> ] On Behalf Of Brenden Cruikshank
> Sent: Wednesday, 23 May 2018 6:37 AM
> To: ausnog@lists.ausnog.net 
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Telstra mobile issues again?
>  
> I’m on a personal Telstra plan with an iPhone 8 Plus. It’s my choice to use 
> Telstra because I’m either on call or backup to the oncall and I selected 
> Telstra due to its “premium” mobile network. It’s not just coverage but 
> actually reliable data speeds. 
>  
> Throughout the Telstra outage my phone never went SOS only, does this mean my 
> phone wouldn’t have been able to fail over to another network for 000 / 
> 112??? I was unable to make outbound calls and my incoming calls all went to 
> voicemail. My guess is I would be unable to call 000/112 and in an emergency 
> hopefully someone is on another carrier 
>  
> This happened just outside my office building yesterday, if Telstra was out 
> on Tuesday instead of Monday what’s your chances? Would the Telstra outage 
> have affected emergency services once they arrived??
>  
> https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/woman-seriously-injured-after-being-hit-by-bus-in-brisbane-cbd-20180522-p4zgo5.html
>  
> 
>  
>  
> Telstra seems to publicly dismiss its outages as minor or “affected a small 
> number of users” meanwhile people are mentioning it nation wide. The outages 
> have been higher then usual over the last 6 months but I’ve got 18 months 
> left on my contact. 
>  
> At work we use an Optus evolve service and have 1-3 fixed voice or data 
> outages on a good month lasting 30-90 mins to half a day or longer. Business 
> is in contract until 2020, it’s now just accepted as a normal thing and 
> phones are too hard so “thinking about what to do about it” isn’t as simple 
> as that. (We did get a second internet service so I guess we did think about 
> it on the data side). 
>  
> On the other hand we have a legacy Telstra frame relay service, it’s had 100% 
> uptime for as long as I can remember. Old technology just seems so much more 
> reliable. 
>  
> Tonight I’m picking up a Amaysim to use as a backup on their $10/mo plan. 
> It’s cheap and what Telstra recommends I don’t do! 
> https://www.itnews.com.au/news/telstra-warns-users-off-cheap-sims-491236 
>  
>  
> And 4G was unavailable this morning at Central station in Brisbane with 
> minimal to no 3G data throughput. Thanks Telstra. 
>  
>  
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On 22 May 2018, at 11:11 pm, Joshua D'Alton  > wrote:
> 
>> If a business, regardless of size, isn't looking at these Telstra outages 
>> (or any of their provider outages really) and getting the ball rolling on 
>> what to do about it. well, not good.
>>  
>> The smallest business has the ability, even if not the 
>> intelligence/motivation/smarts/etc, to evaluate what they rely on and the 
>> level of continuity they require. Literally even just reading this thread 
>> should be enough to raise the appropriate questions, such as "why do you 
>> think something like "they pay for a service. It probably isn't the 
>> cheapest, but they pay for it anyhow because the name brings an element of 
>> trust" means zero downtime?"
>> 
>>  
>> It is interesting that there has been a shift between services you could 
>> totally rely on (say Telstra in the 90s), to those you can't even with a 
>> tight SLA (Telstra now..), but the reality is those considering a 
>> bulletproof system in the 90s still had a backup incase of a Telstra outage.
>>  
>> But back to the OP, Telstra dropping 000 should be hounded like no tomorrow. 
>> People think power gas is essential services, but 000 is actually essential. 
>> Is anyone monitoring the ACMA or whoever responses to these events and the 
>> lapsing of SLAs?
>>  
>> On 22 May 

[AusNOG] Phone Numbers in Australia

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Previous thread about fake caller ID made me think about what phone numbers 
mean in the Australian context.

Historically we’ve had numbers that are geo based for landlines (02, 03, 08 
etc) and other numbers that delineate the cost to call (eg. 04 for mobile, 
13/18 for fixed cost non-geo or free, 1900 for “premium” etc). But we’re now 
looking to a future where a range of factors are meaning that the 
differentiation is less meaningful. 

A _lot_ of people are moving, because of generation change, NBN, etc to only 
have a mobile number. Many people are on mobile or “fixed line” plans where 
calls are all-inclusive so knowing the cost of a call from the phone number is 
pretty much irrelevant. My parents and some of my grandparents (yes I still 
have them) basically use mobile only and don’t answer home phones *because* of 
the scams on home phones!  I don’t actually know what my brothers and sisters 
home phone numbers are. 

There’s still a historic “interconnect” charging model/market between telcos 
that I suspect is just as painful as when I last looked at it.

What is the future for voice and calls in Australia? Do geo-numbers make sense? 
Why shouldn’t I be able to have an 08   number as my mobile number? (I 
know the back-end charging/porting reasons, but we’re looking forward not 
backward here).

Even calling internationally - voice calls now between countries are generally 
so awful to use (delay, crappy audio etc) that even for business calls I use 
things like Facetime/Facebook/WhatsApp/Hangout calls where the voice is so good 
and low delay I can’t tell where the other person is from.

I suspect nothing much will change and that’s primarily because the major 
telcos with mobile networks want to continue to make money out of charging each 
other for calls, but, even that I suspect will all fade away.

We do get attached to phone numbers - my Australian mobile is one from the dawn 
of GSM in Australia and I’ve had it now for more than 20 years and even though 
I don’t live in Australia at the moment I keep it running on a long life 
prepaid! So, don’t think I lack sentiment here.

MMC

___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Rise in fake calling numbers?

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

> On 30 Apr 2018, at 2:03 pm, Narelle  wrote:
> 
> 
> The problem is that they are now using genuine third party numbers.
> 
> And the poor ducks that actually own them end up receiving a million calls in 
> response.
> 
> Please everyone - make sure you secure your call servers and ensure good 
> authentication!! Not to mention enforcement of number ownership in your 
> configs…

This happens because people aren’t validating CLID on interconnects. It’s not 
really about security and authentication of VOIP infrastructure. It came about 
because people want to set CLID on outbound calls via carriers that don’t own 
their numbers. In some ways it’s consumer/business friendly BUT abuse leads to 
phone calls being a trashfire. In the US it’s meaning that some carriers run 
all calls through some validation and present some info about whether it’s real 
or not or the likely actual origin. T-Mobile are doing this - super helpful as 
you get info on whether it’s a scam or not. HIGHLY recommend Australian 
carriers get onto this. It’s cut down the amount of dodgy calls in the US a lot 
recently.

MMC

> 
> 
> Narelle 
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 1 May 2018, 1:23 AM Chris Watts  > wrote:
> Yea got 2 today and one yesterday all were the Telstra scam, you know the 
> one... alleging to be from Telstra technical support.
> 0403 567 139
> 0161 926 190 91
> +91 80-432 640 00
> 
> I block them at the pbx so they cant call me from that number again.
> 
> Chris.
> 
> 
> On 1/05/2018 1:05 am, Tom Storey wrote:
>> Im based in London, but a colleague of mine has been getting a few calls on 
>> his mobile recently from random Australian numbers.
>> 
>> Random-ish anyway. The last 3 digits seem to be the same, although that 
>> could be entirely coincidental.
>> 
>> 0403 595 417
>> 0401 499 417
>> 
>> Does anyone else see the same kind of thing, or am I reading way too far in 
>> to it?
>> 
>> 
>> On 23 April 2018 at 07:18, Narelle > > wrote:
>> 
>> And here is the promised summary of responses! Thanks team. Please send any 
>> additional commentary to narelle.clark "at" accan.org.au-nospamplease
>> 
>> Problem statement:
>> Consumer reps are hearing a rise in the incidence of VoIP calls faking their 
>> caller ID for the purposes of spamming and scamming.
>> 
>> Consumers check the caller ID on their handset CND and accept the Australian 
>> sourced number, only to find it is a complete scam. This is often tied to 
>> the 'missed call scam' but now they are presenting using genuine Aussie 
>> phone numbers and the actual owners aren't happy.
>> 
>> Summary of responses:
>> This could be from a few likely possibilities 1. a local VoIP system has 
>> poor security and has been compromised and is being used as a local dialler. 
>> 2 incorrect configuration of a VoIP server with incorrect numbers on 
>> outbound calls within Australia or 3 outright fraud from overseas VoIP 
>> servers presenting as Australian numbers.
>> 
>> Ideally, this could be handled similarly to IP address matching within BGP 
>> ASes, but not likely to be as simple.
>> 
>> By inference any provider doing so would be in contravention of the ACMA 
>> Numbering Plan 2015 Part 2 s102 and therefore fines are payable:
>> "s 102 Carriage service provider must not issue a number that it has not been
>> allocated
>> A carriage service provider must not issue a number to a customer unless the
>> carriage service provider holds the number."
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> De-identified responses (some typos corrected):
>>  8<  8<  8<  8<  8<  8<  
>> 8<  8<- 
>> I'd say that in my experience, most of the time it's not spoofed CID or ANI, 
>> rather a compromised set of SIP gateway credentials. Once in, they either 
>> don't bother setting CLIP (because it's a scam call) or they set it to 
>> something that the caller is likely to pick up - local area code prefix or 
>> similar. The side effect of this is the usual network security approach, 
>> rather than telephony security - setting up fail2ban, choosing strong 
>> passwords, whitelisting source IP's that you know are cool, blacklisting 
>> certain countries IP ranges (India...) yada yada.
>> 
>> Personally, for our call-center kids, we use zendesk for telephony, 
>> single-sign-on via gsuite authentication, which in turn is protected by 
>> password policies and enforced 2factor auth. Works well. 
>> 
>>  8<  8<  8<  8<  8<  8<  
>> 8<  8<-
>> Most network operators will filter the source CallerID to ensure that only 
>> CallerIDs attached to the calling account are able to make a call.
>> 
>> The ACMA is rather strict in regards to this and network operators can face 
>> fines if they knowingly allow a 'spoofed' callerID without verifying the 
>> number 

Re: [AusNOG] Megaport IX Sydney - Sudden grows in number of prefixes

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Ask them for a bilateral session then do something evil like put 7545 in
the path :)

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 4:03 PM, John Alexander <jo...@wideband.net.au>
wrote:

> That's what I've done for the time being, it would be just good to
> actually use HE but anyway...
>
> On 01/12/2018 11:01 AM, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
>
> https://www.megaport.com/blog/fine-tuning-route-advertisements/
>
> .. has at least how to block advertisements TO peers on the MP RS. That
> should at least stop any bad latency issues even if it does mean not being
> able to use the HE routes.
>
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 3:36 PM, John Alexander <jo...@wideband.net.au>
> wrote:
>
>> That's what I'd like to do, but TPG don't peer at NSW-IX or Megaport for
>> that matter.  They are only at Pipe, unless they are secretly there and
>> don't tell anyone...
>>
>> On 01/12/2018 10:33 AM, Mark Newton wrote:
>>
>> Bilateral peering with TPG over the NSW-IX fabric should fix that.
>>
>>   - mark
>>
>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 7:46 AM, John Alexander <jo...@wideband.net.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>> With this, does anyone know of a way of keeping HE routes, but excluding
>> a specific one, namely TPG 7545 which is a direct customer of HE. Traffic
>> from them goes from Syd -> LA -> Syd -> he peering -> me.  I'd prefer to
>> just make them stay at home so to speak instead of going around the world.
>> We don't peer at Pipe which would be the only other place to connect to tpg.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On 01/11/2018 05:55 PM, Nathan Le Nevez wrote:
>>
>> I assume it was Hurricane Electric...IPv6 routes are now at 21843 too
>>
>> Nathan
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-boun...@lists.ausnog.net 
>> <ausnog-boun...@lists.ausnog.net>] On Behalf Of Paul Holmanskikh
>> Sent: Thursday, 11 January 2018 5:00 PM
>> To: ausnog@lists.ausnog.net
>> Subject: [AusNOG] Megaport IX Sydney - Sudden grows in number of prefixes
>>
>> G'day,
>>
>> Number of prefixes we are receiving from Megaport IX in Sydeney suddenly 
>> jumped to 40493.
>> At lest 100% grow.  Any ideas what happened.
>>
>>
>> as_path  count
>> 36351945
>> 4739 909
>> 9443 658
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>>
>
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Megaport IX Sydney - Sudden grows in number of prefixes

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

https://www.megaport.com/blog/fine-tuning-route-advertisements/

.. has at least how to block advertisements TO peers on the MP RS. That
should at least stop any bad latency issues even if it does mean not being
able to use the HE routes.

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 3:36 PM, John Alexander 
wrote:

> That's what I'd like to do, but TPG don't peer at NSW-IX or Megaport for
> that matter.  They are only at Pipe, unless they are secretly there and
> don't tell anyone...
>
> On 01/12/2018 10:33 AM, Mark Newton wrote:
>
> Bilateral peering with TPG over the NSW-IX fabric should fix that.
>
>   - mark
>
> On Jan 12, 2018, at 7:46 AM, John Alexander  wrote:
>
> With this, does anyone know of a way of keeping HE routes, but excluding a
> specific one, namely TPG 7545 which is a direct customer of HE. Traffic
> from them goes from Syd -> LA -> Syd -> he peering -> me.  I'd prefer to
> just make them stay at home so to speak instead of going around the world.
> We don't peer at Pipe which would be the only other place to connect to tpg.
>
> John
>
> On 01/11/2018 05:55 PM, Nathan Le Nevez wrote:
>
> I assume it was Hurricane Electric...IPv6 routes are now at 21843 too
>
> Nathan
>
> -Original Message-
> From: AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-boun...@lists.ausnog.net 
> ] On Behalf Of Paul Holmanskikh
> Sent: Thursday, 11 January 2018 5:00 PM
> To: ausnog@lists.ausnog.net
> Subject: [AusNOG] Megaport IX Sydney - Sudden grows in number of prefixes
>
> G'day,
>
> Number of prefixes we are receiving from Megaport IX in Sydeney suddenly 
> jumped to 40493.
> At lest 100% grow.  Any ideas what happened.
>
>
> as_path   count
> 36351 945
> 4739  909
> 9443  658
>
>
>
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
>
>
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] NBN Action (potentially semi-political post)

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Ross,
Seems a parliamentary report basically agrees that NBNCo should have
someone overseeing them:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-29/fixing-nbn-requires-tougher-rules-and-stronger-watchdog/9002802

Seems this would be a good step given the issues already.

MMC

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Ross Wheeler  wrote:

>
> Really just putting this "out there" for ideas, thoughts, directions...
>
> There is signigicant and growing unrest in the community over the nbn -
> what it's costing, what it's delivering, etc.
>
> In some areas I'm sure it's doing an adequate job.
> In other areas, and to some customers, it isn't.
>
> I cite by way of example, an individual consumer whos only option was nbn
> fixed wireless. The fastest service available to them from any vendor was
> listed as 50/20. (Well, "up to" in small print of course)
>
> The delivered service - which has been tested with now 4 completely
> different and unrelated RSPs - has been entirely unacceptable, with peak
> speeds (2-3am) reaching a blistering 25Mbps down and 10Mbps up (50%), while
> peak-use-time (pretty much 3pm to 11pm) that drops to as low as 1.2Mbps
> down and about 2Mbps up.
>
> This isn't uncommon from what I'm hearing.
>
> The thing that really gets under my skin is that virtually all the public
> reporting on this blames the RSP for under-provisioning CVC. The nbn
> themselves of course can't be reached directly by end-users, and widely,
> loudly and constantly blame RSPs. I have sufficient evidence from different
> suppliers to prove that in some cases this simply is not the case, and it's
> in fact congestion between the POI and the customer (I'm talking here
> specifically with reference to fixed-wireless, but the same problems may
> exist with other technologies).
>
> Through their ongoing "mis-information" campaign, the end users are
> getting shafted. Many carriers/RSPs are probably happy to maintain the
> current situation because they blame nbn, nbn blame the RSP, and nobody can
> prove how much blame resides with either, and eventually just give up.
>
> Complaints to the TIO cost us, as an industry. WE have to wear the costs,
> even when it is outside our control. Where WE buy more capacity in an
> attempt to alleviate the congestion, in many cases it does nothing to
> address the problem (because it wasn't our CVC in the first place) so we're
> getting ripped off by nbn just as the customer is.
>
> The ACCC seem to be doing nothing of any substance. Oh, sure, they're
> going to fund some end-user speed-monitoring devices, but it still doesn't
> necessarily show where the problem is. Sure, they're telling RSPs to
> advertise realistic "peak use" speeds rather than headline "up to" speeds,
> but we're still not addressing the root of the problem.
>
> Is there any interest, cohesive push, group or collective with any desire
> to bring pressure to bear to increase transparency and actually get the
> steaming pile of sh!t that is the current nbn (company, staff,
> infrastructure, policy, etc, etc) to a position that is actually what was
> intended?
>
> I believe it will require political directives. As it stands, there is no
> desire or incentive for nbn to change the way it is, and lots of reasons
> for them to want to continue with the secret, hidden, non-disclosure,
> maximm profit for minimum effort policies they've had for ages.
>
> We - as industry players and Australian citizens both - deserve better,
> but I don't see it happening unless enough of us make a noise about it.
>
> (Or should I just resign myself to a world where jamtins and string are
> the peak of technical innovation?)
>
> R.
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] NBN and CVC

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

ompetitive options, the ACCC has endorsed the NBN monopoly 
> rents on your service.  As a result your $60 broadband plan will not support 
> a guaranteed single standard definition Netflix stream so we have had to 
> deploy traffic shaping technology across the network so we can delay non-time 
> sensitive/bandwidth insensitive traffic and reduce the quality of the Netflix 
> stream to the point that it can now work during peak times and while you 
> start to notice degradation, at the moment we can avoid you seeing 
> hieroglyphics.  If the CVC fee was between $2-$5/mbps this would be less of 
> an issue, but the ACCC believed it reasonable that the cost to stream data 
> from a house next door to the NBN PoI 50 metres to the NBN PoI should be 
> twice to three times as expensive as connecting the NBN PoI to stream data 
> from a website hosted 20,000km on the other side of the planet.”
> 
>  
> Rod as Chairman of the ACCC needs to accept responsibility of the mess his 
> organization has left for every Australian broadband consumer to endure for a 
> generation.  Every way you look at this; Rod Simms - It’s time for you to go.
> 
> 
> On 30 July 2017 at 11:00, Matthew Moyle-Croft <m...@mmc.com.au 
> <mailto:m...@mmc.com.au>> wrote:
> Hi,
> I’m going to side step that entirely - I think it’s always interesting to 
> look at other models, but at the moment we’ve got what we’ve got.
> 
> I did have some interesting responses - I think it’s pretty clear though that 
> a p95 product for CVC would be popular and unlock a lot of options for ISPs.  
> It may mean a bit of a drop of revenue for NBN but not too much, but it’d 
> definitely overcome a lot of the issues with congestion where ISPs can’t 
> always keep up and/or predict some spikes.
> 
> MMC
> 
> > On 29 Jul 2017, at 4:19 pm, Mark Delany <g...@juliet.emu.st 
> > <mailto:g...@juliet.emu.st>> wrote:
> >
> >> Is buying the CVC in fixed amounts the right model?
> >
> > I've always wonder why it's been a speed-based system. It strikes me
> > that speed has always been a poor proxy for resources consumed and now
> > that model is just getting in the way.
> >
> > Would it be better and simpler to set the local-loop (LL) line speed
> > to the maximum the tech allows and charge on bits delivered to/from
> > POI to LL along with a flat rate for LL upkeep?
> >
> > Just like other utilities such as electricity and water.
> >
> > It's been shown that most people don't generally consume unlimited
> > amounts of data - they consume what they need. And, now that people
> > are well and truly comfortable with quotas on their service, moving to
> > a true resources-based system is hardly much of a mindset change like
> > it once might have been.
> >
> >
> > The advantages of this approach are:
> >
> > a) RSP scaling costs match revenue much better than a menagerie of speed
> >   proxies
> >
> > b) Consumers aren't penalized with slow speeds just because they are
> >   light users
> >
> > c) All consumers get the best speed experience possible and are thus
> >   likely to grow their usage which means quicker revenue growth
> >
> > d) No "chilling effect" on the development of high speed applications
> >
> > e) RSPs have no incentive to throttle consumers
> >
> > f) It makes pricing transparent to the consumer
> >
> > g) It takes NBNCo out of the performance discussion
> >
> > h) It lets NBNCo focus on continuously improving the LL
> >
> >
> > All that needs to be done is:
> >
> > a) Replace CVC with a quota/resource system to maintain an appropriate
> >   ROI on POIs. Basically $X per MB delivered.
> >
> > b) Replace AVC with a fixed LL upkeep/ROI fee
> >
> >
> > The main down-side is that given the MTM - it will expose the lower
> > speed services for what they are: vastly inferior to the higher speed
> > services. That might not be politically palatable under the current
> > regime.
> >
> > It will also more directly expose RSPs who under-provision rather than
> > what we have today which is to smear the blame between NBNCo and
> > RSPs. But that's a good thing, right?
> >
> > Of course the resources-consumed pricing could still be set absurdly
> > high to suit the politics of making the NBN "profitable" for a future
> > sale but that is obscured now with the complex pricing. It will be
> > much more transparent with a simpler resources system. Also a good
> > thing.
> >
> >
> > Mark.
> > ___
> > AusNOG mailing list
> > AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net>
> > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> > <http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog>
> 
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net>
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> <http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog>
> 

___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] NBN and CVC

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Hi,

> On 30 Jul 2017, at 2:27 am, David Hooton <david.hoo...@ordnance.co> wrote:
> 
> On 30/7/17, 6:37 am, "AusNOG on behalf of Matthew Moyle-Croft" 
> <ausnog-boun...@lists.ausnog.net on behalf of m...@mmc.com.au> wrote:
> 
>Given the nature of users I don’t think a p95 number could be gamed 
> particularly, but it would ease some of the peaks a bit. 
> 
> The problem with this approach is that it assumes that NBN Co have the 
> available backhaul to carry the capacity they are selling. 95th percentile 
> charging is absolutely the right way to sell access to a network you want 
> users to consume freely, however that is not the current mandate they operate 
> under.

Not sure I quite follow that. Hiding behind CVC lack of scaling is obviously 
going to be revealed but I don’t see that it would change NBNCo costs 
significantly other than potentially to encourage them to scale earlier and in 
large amounts to ensure they can bill more. Hopefully a more virtuous cycle.

MMC

> 
> Dave

___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] NBN and CVC

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

> On 29 Jul 2017, at 8:23 pm, Trent Farrell <tbfli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I've always assumed the reasoning was that it allowed for a simple way to 
> plan your aggs when thinking scalability etc. Not defending the reasoning, it 
> seems to be an ancient trunky way of thinking about architecture.

I suspect you’re right. TW aggregation was the same way.
> 
> I have little faith the big guys could handle the provisioning load that 
> would land if CVC became more accessible though. Mess.

I don’t think it’d be much of a burden - I suspect that this is going to be 
less burden or could be made to be.  eg. if you’re big enough to be running 
multiple ports toward NBN then you can scale them up and the CVC will burst as 
required.  Otherwise you have to be in there hand managing CVC sizes all the 
time. 

MMC


> On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 11:01 AM Matthew Moyle-Croft <m...@mmc.com.au 
> <mailto:m...@mmc.com.au>> wrote:
> Hi,
> I’m going to side step that entirely - I think it’s always interesting to 
> look at other models, but at the moment we’ve got what we’ve got.
> 
> I did have some interesting responses - I think it’s pretty clear though that 
> a p95 product for CVC would be popular and unlock a lot of options for ISPs.  
> It may mean a bit of a drop of revenue for NBN but not too much, but it’d 
> definitely overcome a lot of the issues with congestion where ISPs can’t 
> always keep up and/or predict some spikes.
> 
> MMC
> 
> > On 29 Jul 2017, at 4:19 pm, Mark Delany <g...@juliet.emu.st 
> > <mailto:g...@juliet.emu.st>> wrote:
> >
> >> Is buying the CVC in fixed amounts the right model?
> >
> > I've always wonder why it's been a speed-based system. It strikes me
> > that speed has always been a poor proxy for resources consumed and now
> > that model is just getting in the way.
> >
> > Would it be better and simpler to set the local-loop (LL) line speed
> > to the maximum the tech allows and charge on bits delivered to/from
> > POI to LL along with a flat rate for LL upkeep?
> >
> > Just like other utilities such as electricity and water.
> >
> > It's been shown that most people don't generally consume unlimited
> > amounts of data - they consume what they need. And, now that people
> > are well and truly comfortable with quotas on their service, moving to
> > a true resources-based system is hardly much of a mindset change like
> > it once might have been.
> >
> >
> > The advantages of this approach are:
> >
> > a) RSP scaling costs match revenue much better than a menagerie of speed
> >   proxies
> >
> > b) Consumers aren't penalized with slow speeds just because they are
> >   light users
> >
> > c) All consumers get the best speed experience possible and are thus
> >   likely to grow their usage which means quicker revenue growth
> >
> > d) No "chilling effect" on the development of high speed applications
> >
> > e) RSPs have no incentive to throttle consumers
> >
> > f) It makes pricing transparent to the consumer
> >
> > g) It takes NBNCo out of the performance discussion
> >
> > h) It lets NBNCo focus on continuously improving the LL
> >
> >
> > All that needs to be done is:
> >
> > a) Replace CVC with a quota/resource system to maintain an appropriate
> >   ROI on POIs. Basically $X per MB delivered.
> >
> > b) Replace AVC with a fixed LL upkeep/ROI fee
> >
> >
> > The main down-side is that given the MTM - it will expose the lower
> > speed services for what they are: vastly inferior to the higher speed
> > services. That might not be politically palatable under the current
> > regime.
> >
> > It will also more directly expose RSPs who under-provision rather than
> > what we have today which is to smear the blame between NBNCo and
> > RSPs. But that's a good thing, right?
> >
> > Of course the resources-consumed pricing could still be set absurdly
> > high to suit the politics of making the NBN "profitable" for a future
> > sale but that is obscured now with the complex pricing. It will be
> > much more transparent with a simpler resources system. Also a good
> > thing.
> >
> >
> > Mark.
> > ___
> > AusNOG mailing list
> > AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net>
> > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> > <http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog>
> 
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net>
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog 
> <http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog>

___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Re: [AusNOG] Government intends to pass TSSR this parliament

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 6:08 AM, Paul Wilkins 
wrote:

> Thales nShield Connect provides FIPs 140-2 grade security to distributed
> hosts. Keys are distributed using an encrypted remote file system.
>
> So people advising government will be thinking of architectures where a
> government escrow server is an additional client. Give it Moore's law,
> technical advances, and the march of time, it's inevitable one day you'll
> need a license to run crypto services.
>
> And I find the assumption of bad faith from government bewildering. It's
> been said democracy is a terrible system, it's just better than all other
> systems of government. But you hardly have grounds to complain if you won't
> engage in constructive public debate, which is how government policy
> actually happens, regardless of what some might think.
>

Who's "you" in this context?  Brandis, Shorten, Turnbull et al are the ones
who seem uninterested in a constructive public debate with people who have
an ACTUAL understanding of this. They seem quite keen on rushing this
through (just as they did with the meta data bullshit) without ANY actual
informed debate.

We've had many years since 2001 of governments succumbing to/using the
"terrorist" buzzword to undermine privacy and rights in general.  We'll
give up privacy here BUT IT STILL WONT BE ENOUGH, so they'll come back in
another year saying we need to give up more.

The theme here is that the government knowing more hasn't changed anything,
or worse, them knowing more hasn't made them more competent at their job -
no one asks "well, we gave up all these other privacies and rights because
you said it'd make us safer, but you're saying it hasn't and now we need to
give up more?"

I call bullshit on the whole thing - from immigration policy, to giving up
meta data, to the government wanting EXTRAORDINARY powers to coerce,
detain, reject citizens, strip citizenship with no recourse.  Not a single
part of this has made us safer or society better.  And that's because
politics has descended into a revolting human hating mess.

We need to look in the other direction and stop falling for this crap - we
need to make society stronger so that we value it and value each other so
that we're more likely to want look after each other and each other's
children.

The Australian government does not need more powers to intercept.
Australian Politicians need to focus on building a strong, diverse, society
that values each other's similarities AND differences and celebrates that.

Stop falling for this distraction and focus on the important stuff.  It's
harder to do but much more worthwhile.

MMC


>
> 
>
> Kind regards
>
> Paul Wilkins
>
> On 15 June 2017 at 17:44, Robert Hudson  wrote:
>
>> I concur.
>>
>> Providing an alternative solution is only useful if there is actually a
>> valid alternative.
>>
>> If there is not, you're best to just say it. If an idea is stupid, state
>> not only that it is so, but state why. And don't sugar coat it either,
>> sugar coating just gives wriggle room to someone trying to justify their
>> own stupidity.
>>
>> Rip that bandaid off.
>>
>>
>> On 15 Jun. 2017 5:14 pm, "grenville armitage" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 06/15/2017 15:47, Mark Newton wrote:
>> [..]
>>
>> Whether we're talking about internet censorship, copyright takedowns,
>>> data retention, or now this, these Australian (always Australian) technical
>>> mailing lists are always full of people who say, "That's stupid, what they
>>> *really* should do is..." followed by, "We're working positively with the
>>> Government to make the best of a bad situation," after the inevitable loss.
>>>
>> [..]
>>
>> You don't need to offer an alternative to a bad idea to communicate that
>>> it's a bad idea.
>>>
>>
>> (I've got nothing to add. I just want to see the words above repeated.)
>>
>> cheers,
>> gja
>>
>>
>> ___
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>>
>
> ___
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
___
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog