Re: Root Authority

[Paul Vixie]

> An interesting question I've dealt with a few times:
> 
> From whom do the root nameservers derive their authority?

we (i'm speaking for f-root here) have no "authority".  nobody has to
listen to us, we are the most powerless bunch of folks you'll ever meet.

now if you'd asked where we derive our *relevance*, i'd say the same as
mr. bush and mr. kletnieks -- from all the root.cache files that point
at us.  and as long as we don't do anything stupid i guess (and hope)
that this state of affairs will continue.  (relevance trumps authority.)

that having been said, f-root got its start as NS.ISC.ORG and the man
who said it was ok for us to be a root name server was jon postel.  i'm
not sure he had any "authority" either, but folks "pointed at" him and
so what he said was relevant in spite of any authority he mightn've had.
--
Paul Vixie

Re: Root Authority

[Daniel Karrenberg]

On 16.12 07:14, Paul Vixie wrote:
> we (i'm speaking for f-root here) have no "authority".  nobody has to
> listen to us, we are the most powerless bunch of folks you'll ever meet.
> 
> now if you'd asked where we derive our *relevance*, i'd say the same as
> mr. bush and mr. kletnieks -- from all the root.cache files that point
> at us.  and as long as we don't do anything stupid i guess (and hope)
> that this state of affairs will continue.  (relevance trumps authority.)
> 
> that having been said, f-root got its start as NS.ISC.ORG and the man
> who said it was ok for us to be a root name server was jon postel.  i'm
> not sure he had any "authority" either, but folks "pointed at" him and
> so what he said was relevant in spite of any authority he mightn've had.

Amen!

This also holds for k-root and is so well put that I will not paraphrase it
just for the sake of putting it differently.  It is worth reading again!

Daniel

Re: Root Authority

[Michael . Dillon]

>> Sorry Mr Bush.  We derive our authority from the old IANA, who
>> assigned out the exiting roots.

>No, that's who *appointed* you.  However, you derive your actual
>authority from all the named.ca hints files that point to you.

Valdis is right. I suppose I could repeat my post about the free market
economy of ideas, but if anyone missed it last time, it's in the
NANOG archives here:
http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg00294.html

The root servers are yet another area in which authority grew
on its own rather than being handed down from above. If the explanations
of this seem confusing it's because, like the Tao, what can be spoken
is only a one-sided view of what really is.

--Michael Dillon

Re: Root Authority

[Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr.]

Paul Vixie wrote:
> 
> > An interesting question I've dealt with a few times:
> >
> > From whom do the root nameservers derive their authority?
> 
> we (i'm speaking for f-root here) have no "authority".  nobody has to
> listen to us, we are the most powerless bunch of folks you'll ever meet.
> 
> now if you'd asked where we derive our *relevance*, i'd say the same as
> mr. bush and mr. kletnieks -- from all the root.cache files that point
> at us.  and as long as we don't do anything stupid i guess (and hope)
> that this state of affairs will continue.  (relevance trumps authority.)
> 
> that having been said, f-root got its start as NS.ISC.ORG and the man
> who said it was ok for us to be a root name server was jon postel.  i'm
> not sure he had any "authority" either, but folks "pointed at" him and
> so what he said was relevant in spite of any authority he mightn've had.

I think that testimony belongs in a collection of Jon Postel
characterizations.

I long for the days when people did things simply and only because
they were the right thing to do.

Thanks for the reminder, Mr. Vixie.

Re: Root Authority

[Henry Linneweh]

Trying to remember back that far is quite a task , the greatest authority of the time was Jon Postal since he had the uncanny ability to remember all of the things that made it work, so when he spoke it was like Moses coming down from the
mountain presenting the 10 commandments and everyone agreed it was good,
at that time corporate greed and scheming scamming little weasels were not part of the community, and everything was based on trust because you really were a professional and you could trust the guy on the other end of the connection to be the same as you.
 
By precedent over the years of use,the root home-servers established their own 
authority and everyone agreed it was the most stable approach, and is still the most
stable approach since it does not require and use of resource to point routers
and switches and router servers in any other direction which would impact business
globally and cause a plethora of other problems that I would want to imagine
 
-henry"Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul Vixie wrote:> > > An interesting question I've dealt with a few times:> >> > From whom do the root name servers derive their authority?> > we (i'm speaking for f-root here) have no "authority". nobody has to> listen to us, we are the most powerless bunch of folks you'll ever meet.> > now if you'd asked where we derive our *relevance*, i'd say the same as> mr. bush and mr. kletnieks -- from all the root.cache files that point> at us. and as long as we don't do anything stupid i guess (and hope)> that this state of affairs will continue. (relevance trumps authority.)> > that having been said, f-root got its start as NS.ISC.ORG and the man> who said it was ok for us to be a root name server was jon postel. i'm> not sure he had any "authority" either, but folks
 "pointed at" him and> so what he said was relevant in spite of any authority he mightn've had.I think that testimony belongs in a collection of Jon Postelcharacterizations.I long for the days when people did things simply and only becausethey were the right thing to do.Thanks for the reminder, Mr. Vixie.

NANOG 30 Meeting Information

[Carol Wadsworth]

Registration is now open for NANOG 30, February 8-10, 2004,
in Miami.  The meeting will be hosted by Terremark Worldwide,
Inc.  Join us for NANOG's 10th anniversary celebration:
  http://www.nanog.org/

See you there!

[carolw@merit.edu: NANOG 30 Meeting Information]

[Chris Woodfield]

Can someone make sure that a proper supply of torches and pickaxes is requisitioned 
for 
the excusrsion to Boca Raton?

-C

- Forwarded message from Carol Wadsworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -

Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivery-date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 13:50:11 -0500
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 13:48:50 -0500
From: Carol Wadsworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: NANOG 30 Meeting Information
X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.1 (Mac OS/PPC)
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: nanog
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on 
tino.semihuman.com
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham 
version=2.60


Registration is now open for NANOG 30, February 8-10, 2004,
in Miami.  The meeting will be hosted by Terremark Worldwide,
Inc.  Join us for NANOG's 10th anniversary celebration:

  http://www.nanog.org/

See you there!

- End forwarded message -


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[Christopher McCrory]

Hello...


On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 15:12, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> Sometimes illustrating the way a job should *not* be done is a  powerful 
> educational tool.  I have collected a gallery of messy and ridiculous 
> cabling jobs:
> 

Maybe someone here has pictures of the meetme room at one wilshire from
the last several years.  By far the messiest cabling I have ever seen in
any datacenter.  (but it's getting better :)




> http://gallery.colofinder.net/shameful-cabling
> 
> my favorite (not horrible, but funny):
> http://gallery.colofinder.net/shameful-cabling/cables
> 
> Anonymous submissions can be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] , equipment 
> labels and faces will be blurred if requested.
-- 
Christopher McCrory
 "The guy that keeps the servers running"
 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://www.pricegrabber.com
 
Let's face it, there's no Hollow Earth, no robots, and
no 'mute rays.' And even if there were, waxed paper is
no defense.  I tried it.  Only tinfoil works.

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[SG]

Christopher,
>
> Hello...


> Maybe someone here has pictures of the meetme room at one wilshire from
> the last several years.  By far the messiest cabling I have ever seen in
> any datacenter.  (but it's getting better :)
>

Someone did take some pictures and were posted today ;)

> --
> Christopher McCrory
>  "The guy that keeps the servers running"
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  http://www.pricegrabber.com
>
> Let's face it, there's no Hollow Earth, no robots, and
> no 'mute rays.' And even if there were, waxed paper is
> no defense.  I tried it.  Only tinfoil works.
>
>

25,000 ton amphibious spam relay

[Eric Kuhnke]

http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/200312/msg00070.html

=

At 09:59 AM 12/16/2003, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
[ Doesn't it just make you feel all safe and cozy when the people
responsible for our defense are allowing military hardware to be
hijacked to relay spam?
---Rsk ]

- Forwarded message from Bruce Gingery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -

 > Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 00:48:14 -0700
 > From: Bruce Gingery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 > Subject: Spam, Block: 25,000 ton spam relay, with photos of it!
 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 >
 > ANNOUNCING:  The amphibious transport dock and spam relay
 >
 > http://www.news.navy.mil/list_all.asp?id=8488
 > Zoom-in
 > http://www.news.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=4553
 > http://www.news.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=2746
 >
 > > The ship supports the Marine Corps "mobility triad," the LCAC
 > >(Landing Craft Air Cushion vehicle), the "Triple A-V" (AAAV -
 > > Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle) and the MV-22 (Osprey
 > > tiltrotor aircraft),
 >
 > and (apparently) spammers in Guandong. Red China.
 >
 > > Furthermore, San Antonio incorporates the latest quality of life
 > > standards for the embarked Marines and sailors, including the sit-up
 > > berth, ship services mall, a fitness center and learning resource
 > > center/electronic classroom
 >
 >   and Unsolicited Bulk E-Mail.
 >
 > Of course, it's possible that one of the OTHER eleven ships, still under
 > construction, is the Avondale, LA dot-MIL spam relay, or trojaned boat,
 > or some nice-and-secure Windows box in the construction drydocks, 
running
 > Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13
 >
 > But doesn't it make all Americans feel all fuzzy and secure that a
 > Red Chinese spammer can abuse a US Naval Vessel of one of the newest
 > designs, to relay his "business proposition"?
 >
 > Perhaps it's tied to the USS Green Bay, instead? or USS New Orleans?
 > 
http://www.navsea.navy.mil/newswire_content.asp?txtDataID=8963&txtTypeID=2
 >
 > The USS Mesa Verde, seems to be in Mississippi, instead
 > 
http://www.navsea.navy.mil/newswire_content.asp?txtDataID=8663&txtTypeID=2
 >
 > But the E-Mail headers finger the USS San Antonio, LPD 17, already
 > christened, and due for commissioning some time this coming year.
 >
 > > LPD 17 Looks Like a "Gator"
 >
 > 
http://www.navsea.navy.mil/newswire_content.asp?txtDataID=8596&txtTypeID=2
 >
 >  but from here, it just looks like another spammer.
 >
 > [SPECIMEN]
 > H: Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 > H: Received: from avnavfw.lpd17.navsea.navy.mil
 > H:  (avnavfw.pms317.navy.mil [205.67.231.235])
 > H:  by mail.gtcs.com (8.12.10/8.11.3/gtcs-6.3.8) with SMTP
 > H:  id hBG65HO8091853
 > H:  for <[victim]>; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 23:06:39 -0700 (MST)
 > H:  (envelope-from: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
 > H: X-Authentication-Warning: serv.gtcs.com: Host
 > H:  avnavfw.pms317.navy.mil [205.67.231.235]
 > H:  claimed to be avnavfw.lpd17.navsea.navy.mil
 > H: Received: from no.name.available by avnavfw.lpd17.navsea.navy.mil
 > H:via smtpd (for [209.181.16.1]) with SMTP; 16 Dec 2003 
05:53:08 UT
 > H: Received: from avnavfw.AVONDALE (205.67.231.5 [205.67.231.5]) by
 > H: swn-email.lpd17.navy.mil with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange 
Internet Mail
 > H: Service Version 5.5.2653.13)
 > H:  id YY2BDP4P; Tue, 16 Dec 2003 00:07:28 -0600
 > H: From: "HuatonE-ScooterCo.,Ltd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 > H: Received: from [61.145.234.62] by avnavfw.AVONDALE
 > H:via smtpd (for [205.66.99.30]) with SMTP; 16 Dec 2003 
05:51:47 UT
 > H: Subject: Re.About our new product
 > H: Content-Type: text/html
 > H: Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 13:57:41 +0800
 > H: X-Priority: 3
 >
 > [extract from HTML body]
 > B: Our company specializes in exporting electric & gas scooters, which
 > B: are most popular with our customers at home and abroad. Now we are
 > B: writing to offer you an opportunity to develop a mutual trade. If
 > B: you are interested in establishing business relations with us, please
 > B: let us know your requirements. Then we would like to forward 
catalogues
 > B: as well as detailed information to you, and offer the best price to
 > B: you. We assure you of our best attention to your any inquiries.
 > B: We anticipate your early response in respect.
 >
 > B: Huaton E-scooter Co., Ltd.
 > B: Room.B-202,Building Si-Hai-Ming-Yuan
 > B: Burg Weiji,Zone Gongbei
 > B: City Zhuhai 519020
 > B: Province Kwangtung,China
 > B: Tel:86-756-821-6922
 > B: Fax:86-756-888-3037
 >  ...
 >
 > Spam support by:
 > The US Navy, Avondale Lousiana Shipyard, Firewall, and hosts behind it
 >
 >   OrgName:DoD Network Information Center
 >   OrgID:  DNIC
 >   Address:7990 Science Applications Ct
 >   Address:M/S CV 50
 >   City:   Vienna
 >   StateProv:  VA
 >   NetRange:   205.0.0.0 - 205.117.255.255
 >   Comment:DOD Network Information Center
 >  

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[Grant A. Kirkwood]

Christopher McCrory said:
>
> Hello...
>
>
> On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 15:12, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
>> Sometimes illustrating the way a job should *not* be done is a  powerful
>> educational tool.  I have collected a gallery of messy and ridiculous
>> cabling jobs:
>>
>
> Maybe someone here has pictures of the meetme room at one wilshire from
> the last several years.  By far the messiest cabling I have ever seen in
> any datacenter.  (but it's getting better :)


Someone in our office (who'll remain nameless) took these yesterday:

http://www.tnarg.org/mmr.html


-- 
Grant A. Kirkwood - grant(at)tnarg.org
Fingerprint = D337 48C4 4D00 232D 3444 1D5D 27F6 055A BF0C 4AED

Re: 25,000 ton amphibious spam relay

[Tom (UnitedLayer)]

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/200312/msg00070.html
> [misc deleted]

Wow, just wait.
BMW iDrive systems will get internet dongles and soon be able to relay
spam, 150Mph smooth autobahn cruising spam relays.

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[John Kinsella]

On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 11:32:44AM -0800, Christopher McCrory wrote:
> Maybe someone here has pictures of the meetme room at one wilshire from
> the last several years.  By far the messiest cabling I have ever seen in
> any datacenter.  (but it's getting better :)

Another suggestion, although I'd be surprised to see it...anybody got
a shot from under PBI's datacenter floor when it was at 2nd and Folsom
in SF (across 2nd from SNFC21)?  That was truely a work of art, quite
obvious that telco people who cut off plugs and leave cables under the
floor when they're done where there for quite a while...

John

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[Charles Sprickman]

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Grant A. Kirkwood wrote:

> Someone in our office (who'll remain nameless) took these yesterday:
>
> http://www.tnarg.org/mmr.html

What does this sign say?

http://www.tnarg.org/mmr_pics/100_0118.JPG

And are we looking up, down, left, right...  I just can't figure out what
this mess is:

http://www.tnarg.org/mmr_pics/100_0123.JPG

Thanks for the chuckles.

Charles

>
> --
> Grant A. Kirkwood - grant(at)tnarg.org
> Fingerprint = D337 48C4 4D00 232D 3444 1D5D 27F6 055A BF0C 4AED
>

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[Grant A. Kirkwood]

Charles Sprickman said:
> On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Grant A. Kirkwood wrote:
>
>> Someone in our office (who'll remain nameless) took these yesterday:
>>
>> http://www.tnarg.org/mmr.html
>
> What does this sign say?
>
> http://www.tnarg.org/mmr_pics/100_0118.JPG

NOTICE

WHEN RUNNING FIBER THROUGH THIS UNIT, THERE MUST BE ENOUGH SLACK IN YOUR
CABLE TO WRAP HALF WAY AROUND THE BOTTOM OF THIS PULL BOX. IF YOUR CABLE
RUNS STRAIGHT ACROSS THE MIDSECTION WITH NO SLACK, THEN IT WILL BE REMOVED
FROM THE UNIT AT YOUR EXPENSE. YOUR COOPERATION IS APPRECIATED.

MMR MANAGEMENT

> And are we looking up, down, left, right...  I just can't figure out what
> this mess is:
>
> http://www.tnarg.org/mmr_pics/100_0123.JPG

Looking up, into one of the smaller fiber trays. :)

Grant


-- 
Grant A. Kirkwood - grant(at)tnarg.org
Fingerprint = D337 48C4 4D00 232D 3444 1D5D 27F6 055A BF0C 4AED

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[Tom (UnitedLayer)]

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, John Kinsella wrote:
> Another suggestion, although I'd be surprised to see it...anybody got
> a shot from under PBI's datacenter floor when it was at 2nd and Folsom
> in SF (across 2nd from SNFC21)?

Heh, its actually in SF21 now.
I got to see it a few months ago, I believe I saw 10 foot+ racks, packed
to the ceiling with gear.
There were step ladders everywhere...

RE: 25,000 ton amphibious spam relay

[Swaar, Matthew L.]

E-mailing the DOD-CERT is also another way to try to get these things fixed.

(...I'm not 100% certain that getting this fixed was the point of this, but
I
figured I'd point that out on the off chance.)

I'm forwarding the header information of this spam to the appropriate folks.

V/R,
Matthew Swaar
ASN568 Analyst
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: Eric Kuhnke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 2:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: 25,000 ton amphibious spam relay



http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/200312/msg0007
0.html

=

At 09:59 AM 12/16/2003, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
[ Doesn't it just make you feel all safe and cozy when the people
responsible for our defense are allowing military hardware to be
hijacked to relay spam?

---Rsk ]

- Forwarded message from Bruce Gingery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -

  > Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 00:48:14 -0700
  > From: Bruce Gingery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  > Subject: Spam, Block: 25,000 ton spam relay, with photos of it!
  > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  >
  > ANNOUNCING:  The amphibious transport dock and spam relay
  >
  > http://www.news.navy.mil/list_all.asp?id=8488
  > Zoom-in
  > http://www.news.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=4553
  > http://www.news.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=2746
  >
  > > The ship supports the Marine Corps "mobility triad," the LCAC
  > >(Landing Craft Air Cushion vehicle), the "Triple A-V" (AAAV -
  > > Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle) and the MV-22 (Osprey
  > > tiltrotor aircraft),
  >
  > and (apparently) spammers in Guandong. Red China.
  >
  > > Furthermore, San Antonio incorporates the latest quality of life
  > > standards for the embarked Marines and sailors, including the sit-up
  > > berth, ship services mall, a fitness center and learning resource
  > > center/electronic classroom
  >
  >   and Unsolicited Bulk E-Mail.
  >
  > Of course, it's possible that one of the OTHER eleven ships, still under
  > construction, is the Avondale, LA dot-MIL spam relay, or trojaned boat,
  > or some nice-and-secure Windows box in the construction drydocks, 
running
  > Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13
  >
  > But doesn't it make all Americans feel all fuzzy and secure that a
  > Red Chinese spammer can abuse a US Naval Vessel of one of the newest
  > designs, to relay his "business proposition"?
  >
  > Perhaps it's tied to the USS Green Bay, instead? or USS New Orleans?
  > 
http://www.navsea.navy.mil/newswire_content.asp?txtDataID=8963&txtTypeID=2
  >
  > The USS Mesa Verde, seems to be in Mississippi, instead
  > 
http://www.navsea.navy.mil/newswire_content.asp?txtDataID=8663&txtTypeID=2
  >
  > But the E-Mail headers finger the USS San Antonio, LPD 17, already
  > christened, and due for commissioning some time this coming year.
  >
  > > LPD 17 Looks Like a "Gator"
  >
  > 
http://www.navsea.navy.mil/newswire_content.asp?txtDataID=8596&txtTypeID=2
  >
  >  but from here, it just looks like another spammer.
  >
  > [SPECIMEN]
  > H: Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  > H: Received: from avnavfw.lpd17.navsea.navy.mil
  > H:  (avnavfw.pms317.navy.mil [205.67.231.235])
  > H:  by mail.gtcs.com (8.12.10/8.11.3/gtcs-6.3.8) with SMTP
  > H:  id hBG65HO8091853
  > H:  for <[victim]>; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 23:06:39 -0700 (MST)
  > H:  (envelope-from: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
  > H: X-Authentication-Warning: serv.gtcs.com: Host
  > H:  avnavfw.pms317.navy.mil [205.67.231.235]
  > H:  claimed to be avnavfw.lpd17.navsea.navy.mil
  > H: Received: from no.name.available by avnavfw.lpd17.navsea.navy.mil
  > H:via smtpd (for [209.181.16.1]) with SMTP; 16 Dec 2003 
05:53:08 UT
  > H: Received: from avnavfw.AVONDALE (205.67.231.5 [205.67.231.5]) by
  > H: swn-email.lpd17.navy.mil with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange 
Internet Mail
  > H: Service Version 5.5.2653.13)
  > H:  id YY2BDP4P; Tue, 16 Dec 2003 00:07:28 -0600
  > H: From: "HuatonE-ScooterCo.,Ltd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  > H: Received: from [61.145.234.62] by avnavfw.AVONDALE
  > H:via smtpd (for [205.66.99.30]) with SMTP; 16 Dec 2003 
05:51:47 UT
  > H: Subject: Re.About our new product
  > H: Content-Type: text/html
  > H: Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 13:57:41 +0800
  > H: X-Priority: 3
  >
  > [extract from HTML body]
  > B: Our company specializes in exporting electric & gas scooters, which
  > B: are most popular with our customers at home and abroad. Now we are
  > B: writing to offer you an opportunity to develop a mutual trade. If
  > B: you are interested in establishing business relations with us, please
  > B: let us know your requirements. Then we would like to forward 
catalogues
  > B: as well as detailed information to you, and offer the best price to
  > B: you. We assure you of our best attention to your any inquiries.
  > B: We anticipate your early response in respect.
  >
  >

ping GUS.NET

[Christopher Chin]

Hello,

Is GUS Network America (GUS.NET) represented here, or does
anyone have a live contact?

Neither the ARIN nor whois POC have been repsonsive.

Off-list replies will be appreciated.

Thanks,
 - Christopher

==

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[haesu]

Now that you've educated the world about messy cabling jobs that should _not_ be done,
perhaps you or someone else should now post _CLEAN_ cabling jobs that everyone should
follow examples of :-)

Thanks for the good pictures btw. Some of them are actually funny hehe


On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 03:12:20PM -0800, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> 
> Sometimes illustrating the way a job should *not* be done is a  powerful 
> educational tool.  I have collected a gallery of messy and ridiculous 
> cabling jobs:
> 
> http://gallery.colofinder.net/shameful-cabling
> 
> my favorite (not horrible, but funny):
> http://gallery.colofinder.net/shameful-cabling/cables
> 
> Anonymous submissions can be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] , equipment 
> labels and faces will be blurred if requested.

-- 
James Jun (formerly Haesu)
Network Operations
TowardEX Technologies, Inc.
Consulting, IPv4 & IPv6 colocation, web hosting, network design & implementation
http://www.towardex.com  | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cell: (978)394-2867  | Office: (978)263-3399 Ext. 170
Fax: (978)263-0033   | AIM: GigabitEthernet0
NOC: http://www.twdx.net | POC: HAESU-ARIN, HDJ1-6BONE

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[Richard Irving]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now that you've educated the world about messy cabling jobs that should _not_ be done,
perhaps you or someone else should now post _CLEAN_ cabling jobs that everyone should
follow examples of :-)


http://new.onecall.net/timages/dsxcabling.jpg

http://new.onecall.net/timages/cat5patch.jpg

Just a couple humble suggestions.


Thanks for the good pictures btw. Some of them are actually funny hehe

On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 03:12:20PM -0800, Eric Kuhnke wrote:

Sometimes illustrating the way a job should *not* be done is a  powerful 
educational tool.  I have collected a gallery of messy and ridiculous 
cabling jobs:

http://gallery.colofinder.net/shameful-cabling

my favorite (not horrible, but funny):
http://gallery.colofinder.net/shameful-cabling/cables
Anonymous submissions can be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] , equipment 
labels and faces will be blurred if requested.

Re: 25,000 ton amphibious spam relay

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

Swaar, Matthew L.  writes on 12/16/2003 3:52 PM:

E-mailing the DOD-CERT is also another way to try to get these things fixed.

(...I'm not 100% certain that getting this fixed was the point of this, but
I
figured I'd point that out on the off chance.)
I'm forwarding the header information of this spam to the appropriate folks.
Yup - and this was behind a Raptor firewall, which seems to have added 
to rather than subtracted from the general insecurity of an old exchange 
server, in this case.

  > H: Received: from no.name.available by avnavfw.lpd17.navsea.navy.mil
  > H:via smtpd (for [209.181.16.1]) with SMTP; 16 Dec 2003 
05:53:08 UT
The no.name.available and via smtpd in the top header say it all - and 
so much for smtp proxies trying to munge every single piece of version 
information in sight including the smtp banner, to ensure "security by 
obscurity" :)

  > H: Received: from avnavfw.AVONDALE (205.67.231.5 [205.67.231.5]) by
  > H: swn-email.lpd17.navy.mil with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange 
Internet Mail
  > H: Service Version 5.5.2653.13)
Not that just plain old exchange of such an antique vintage would have 
been anything but secure, nosirree ...

--
srs (postmaster|suresh)@outblaze.com // gpg : EDEDEFB9
manager, outblaze.com security and antispam operations

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[John Kinsella]

Always liked the work my fellow coworkers at Globix used to do - I don't
have any shots of SJC or NYC online (too bad - a few projects I went to
alot of trouble on to show the rest how it should be done ;) ), but
here's one of our demo panels from LHR:

http://thrashyour.com/lhr1-wiringdemo.jpg

And yeah, most of what was under the floors in all the DCs looked like
that, and yeah I hear for strict cat5 regs that they shouldn't be
velcroed together like that.  Wire wraps were never used (only velcro),
bundles are laid down so that shortest is on the bottom side, longest
on the top.

John

On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 05:24:44PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Now that you've educated the world about messy cabling jobs that should _not_ be 
> done,
> perhaps you or someone else should now post _CLEAN_ cabling jobs that everyone should
> follow examples of :-)

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[Richard Irving]

Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote:
Richard Irving wrote:
http://new.onecall.net/timages/cat5patch.jpg
Is that one really Cat. 5 compliant?  (Tails out of the sheath look
too long one some of them.)
  Routine "Spin Downs" created that (extended) Telco standard, we just
  carried it over to Data structured wiring, as well.
  :\

Whole lot prettier than some of the other pictures though.

 >>http://new.onecall.net/timages/dsxcabling.jpg


Looks like an old-fashioned Western job--dint think anybody still
working knew how to do that.
  8-)

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[Richard Irving]

Sharif Torpis wrote:
> uh-oh, what's this?
>
> http://new.onecall.net/timages/wanrack.jpg
  Hehehe.. :}

  The -old- building, and Telecom WAN room, circa early 1990's,
  late 1980's, and a bank of auto-ops from before the time
  when there was such a thing as a 1U server.
  "new".onecall.net is actually a misnomer,
  the actual -new- site (www) has minimal detail
  Programmers keep the old web site around,
  under the name "new", (Programmer Humor, eh ?)
  which has a few pictures
  snapped during the building of the -=new=- facility.
  :P

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[David Lesher]

http://www.tux.org/wb8foz/


It's a building near the Hill. 

There's a fiber mux in there somewhere. Other switches are
hanging from duct tape above...



-- 
A host is a host from coast to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
& no one will talk to a host that's close[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead20915-1433

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[David Lesher]

Speaking on Deep Background, the Press Secretary whispered:
> 
> 
> Now that you've educated the world about messy cabling jobs that should _not_ be 
> done,
> perhaps you or someone else should now post _CLEAN_ cabling jobs that everyone should
> follow examples of :-)
> 
> Thanks for the good pictures btw. Some of them are actually funny hehe

Look for Terry Kennedy's ny.net




-- 
A host is a host from coast to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
& no one will talk to a host that's close[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead20915-1433

Re: Request for submissions: messy cabling and other broken things

[David Lesher]

Someone claiming to be me said:

> http://www.tux.org/wb8foz/
> 
> It's a building near the Hill. 
> 
> There's a fiber mux in there somewhere. Other switches are
> hanging from duct tape above...

ooops -- sorry...




-- 
A host is a host from coast to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
& no one will talk to a host that's close[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead20915-1433