apple.com/mac.com Postmaster Contacts
Hi Folks, Does anyone have specific contact information for apple.com or mac.com postmasters? I've tried the standard postmaster/hostmaster addresses at both domains, with no response/autoresponders, etc. If you have this information available and are willing to share, please contact me of list. Thanks, Tom Daly -- Thomas J. Daly [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dynamic Network Services, Inc. http://www.dyndns.com/
Re: Multiple BGP Routes in FIB
This situation subverts BGP's basic loop prevention mechanism. If the /20 is ever deaggragated into more specifics, a forwarding loop may result. If you want to put rounds in the chamber before pointing the muzzle at your temple, you're free to do so. However, some of us would prefer to stand a long way away. It seems to me that this is only true if there is ever a possibility of one of your next-hops believing the route to the destination is back through you - or perhaps if the upstream has no route at all to the destination. In the case of most non-tier-1 networks, any packet destined for anywhere outside my own ASN (and customer ASNs if you have BGP customers - which I do not) can be handed to any upstream transit provider without fear of looping. So, the device injecting the traffic engineering route needs to be smart enough to never inject a route that matches an announcement of you or your customers. Beyond that, looping (should) never happen simply by definition of the transit/customer relationship. So, it subverts BGP's loop detection - but the transit/customer relationship (hopefully combined with appropriate announcement filtering) avoids the issue. Of course, if you leak one transit provider to another, and that gets accepted, you might loop due to your traffic engineering routes - but at that point you've got plenty of problems anyway.
Re: [routing-wg]BGP Update Report
Was it merely not enough customers? or were there other issues? inquiring minds is all =)-brandonOn 9/9/06, Michael Painter < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:From their webpage:Service AdvisoryOn Aug. 17, 2006, the Boeing Company announced that a detailed business and market analysis of Connexion by Boeing is complete, and the company has decided to exit the high-speed broadband communications connectivity markets. Boeing will work with its customers tofacilitate an orderly phase out of the Connexion by Boeing service. Passengers traveling on Internet-equipped flights will be able to use the service until it is phased out between now and the end of the year, depending on the airline.- Original Message -From: "Joe Provo" < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: "Hank Nussbacher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; < nanog@merit.edu>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 6:35 AMSubject: Re: [routing-wg]BGP Update Report >> On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 05:57:10PM +0300, Hank Nussbacher wrote: On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Strike me as curious, but this seems as if Connexion by Boeing is handing >> off a /24 from ASN to ASN as a certain plane moves over certain geographic>> areas. Or is there some other explanation?>> Detailed at nanog 31 (among other meetings):> http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0405/abarbanel.html>> 2005 detail from a blogger:> http://bayosphere.com/node/879>> 2006 detail from another blogger: > http://www.renesys.com/blog/2006/04/tracking_plane_flight_on_inter.shtml>> --> RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE >-- Brandon GalbraithEmail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]AIM: brandong00Voice: 630.400.6992"A true pirate starts drinking before the sun hits the yard-arm. Ya. --thelost"
RE: Multiple BGP Routes in FIB
> What you see in BGP is not necessarily what you get for > actual routing. > This isn't the only situation where advertisements do not > match actual > routing. Consider traffic engineering systems such as the > Internap FCP (old > NetVMG). Imagine I have two upstreams (A and B) and you > advertise a /20. I > might prefer path A for your /20. However, my traffic > engineering system > may inject a no-export /24 route into my network to shift a > portion of your > traffic to go out my upstream B. > > This is quite interesting/confusing from the customer > perspective, where you > only see the BGP path through upstream A advertised, yet in > reality a /24 > out of that /20 is going through a completely different path > that you do not > see via BGP. > > Is this wrong/evil? I guess that is up to each network to decide. This situation subverts BGP's basic loop prevention mechanism. If the /20 is ever deaggragated into more specifics, a forwarding loop may result. If you want to put rounds in the chamber before pointing the muzzle at your temple, you're free to do so. However, some of us would prefer to stand a long way away. Tony
Re: Multiple BGP Routes in FIB
Do providers really do this? Would they install multiple BGP Paths with different AS Paths (but same length) in their FIB, and yet advertise only one? Is the the right thing to do? What you see in BGP is not necessarily what you get for actual routing. This isn't the only situation where advertisements do not match actual routing. Consider traffic engineering systems such as the Internap FCP (old NetVMG). Imagine I have two upstreams (A and B) and you advertise a /20. I might prefer path A for your /20. However, my traffic engineering system may inject a no-export /24 route into my network to shift a portion of your traffic to go out my upstream B. This is quite interesting/confusing from the customer perspective, where you only see the BGP path through upstream A advertised, yet in reality a /24 out of that /20 is going through a completely different path that you do not see via BGP. Is this wrong/evil? I guess that is up to each network to decide. Disclaimer: I use such a system and have many /24 no-export routes in my table. It works great and keeps my 7 upstream providers all nicely balanced with no manual intervention ever. However, I have no BGP downstreams so the above misrepresentation of BGP advertisements is not an issue since it never leaves my network.
Re: portability... HAH!
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] >man I'd love to live in your universe... or are you suggesting >that things have evolved in the last decade to the point that the >ostensible goal of the IETF PIER wg can finally be met, to >completely renumber the entire Internet every 20 minutes... :) Man, I remember that vaguely. :-) - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/
portability... HAH!
> >And the same way that government forced telephone number portability, I > >foresee one day government requiring IP number portability among ISPs in > >order to increase competition. So all those SWIPS and PA assignments in > >ARIN/RIPE/APNIc may one day be used to allow Acme Nail with their /29 > >assignment to leave ISP A and move to ISP B. Legislators have been > >known to make more idiotic laws and regulations so don't think it > >couldn't happen. > > Customers already have portability. It's called DNS. > > IP addresses aren't published in the big web rolodexes. They don't need > their IP address to stay with them. > > pt yeah... like BGP peers are looked up thorugh DNS, SNMP is all DNS-lookup based, SYSLOG doesnt care about MAC or IP addresses, ISP's -never- re-write their DNS entries to actually map the clients prefered/canonical DNS entries application vendors always map software licenses to DNS names and never IP addresses. and... how do you find those DNS servers in the first place? man I'd love to live in your universe... or are you suggesting that things have evolved in the last decade to the point that the ostensible goal of the IETF PIER wg can finally be met, to completely renumber the entire Internet every 20 minutes... :) --bill
Re: [routing-wg]BGP Update Report
From their webpage: Service Advisory On Aug. 17, 2006, the Boeing Company announced that a detailed business and market analysis of Connexion by Boeing is complete, and the company has decided to exit the high-speed broadband communications connectivity markets. Boeing will work with its customers to facilitate an orderly phase out of the Connexion by Boeing service. Passengers traveling on Internet-equipped flights will be able to use the service until it is phased out between now and the end of the year, depending on the airline. - Original Message - From: "Joe Provo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Hank Nussbacher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 6:35 AM Subject: Re: [routing-wg]BGP Update Report On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 05:57:10PM +0300, Hank Nussbacher wrote: On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Strike me as curious, but this seems as if Connexion by Boeing is handing off a /24 from ASN to ASN as a certain plane moves over certain geographic areas. Or is there some other explanation? Detailed at nanog 31 (among other meetings): http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0405/abarbanel.html 2005 detail from a blogger: http://bayosphere.com/node/879 2006 detail from another blogger: http://www.renesys.com/blog/2006/04/tracking_plane_flight_on_inter.shtml -- RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE
Re: [Fwd: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]
Hank Nussbacher wrote: And the same way that government forced telephone number portability, I foresee one day government requiring IP number portability among ISPs in order to increase competition. So all those SWIPS and PA assignments in ARIN/RIPE/APNIc may one day be used to allow Acme Nail with their /29 assignment to leave ISP A and move to ISP B. Legislators have been known to make more idiotic laws and regulations so don't think it couldn't happen. Customers already have portability. It's called DNS. IP addresses aren't published in the big web rolodexes. They don't need their IP address to stay with them. pt
Re: Data Center Wiring Standards
On Friday 08 September 2006 19:36, Rick Kunkel wrote: > Heya folks, > > I hope this is on-topic. I read the charter, and it falls somewhere along > the fuzzy border I think... > > Can anyone tell me the standard way to deal with patch panels, racks... As many have mentioned here, TIA/EIA-942 is a good starting point. There are a couple of good Data Centers books out there, also (a visit to your local Borders or B&N could allow for an interesting afternoon browsing). I have personally had positive experience with some docs and advice from some folks with expertise in cable management and data centers infrastructure: http://www.panduit.com/enabling_technologies/091903.asp HTH, Stefan
RE: [Fwd: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Tony Li wrote: And the same way that government forced telephone number portability, I foresee one day government requiring IP number portability among ISPs in order to increase competition. So all those SWIPS and PA assignments in ARIN/RIPE/APNIc may one day be used to allow Acme Nail with their /29 assignment to leave ISP A and move to ISP B. Legislators have been known to make more idiotic laws and regulations so don't think it couldn't happen. -Hank Nussbacher http://www.interall.co.il Another somewhat important point is that we also need to conserve routing entries. If you make a market for addresses without regard to routability, you risk creating a situation where you flood the world with /32's. No thanks. Tony
Re: [Fwd: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]
On September 8, 2006 at 16:28 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fergie) wrote: > > I like how Jack Bates framed it: The IP address space is a "community > asset" and as such, the allocation of it needs to be done in a way > which serves & benefits the Internet community at-large. > Which would form a strong analogy to the FCC's original legal justification for existence in 1934 which was that the radio spectrum is a limited, public trust and as such the FCC is given the power to regulate it and its contents in the public's interest (and, hence, to regulate content in "the public interest".) I would be very careful what I wish for. Fortunately IPv6 could be a counter-balance to any claims of jurisdiction based on limited address space though perhaps the camel's nose will get into the tent first; in theory all address space is finite, even if vast. It's hard to imagine power over content achieved based on IPv4's limited address space would be later yielded for IPv6 any more than the tiny spectrum space of 1934 was ever yielded due to the vast expansion of spectrum afforded by subsequent improved technology. -- -Barry Shein The World | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD| Login: Nationwide Software Tool & Die| Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*
Re: [Fwd: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]
On September 8, 2006 at 09:06 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Ghali) wrote: > > People who use the courts as a way to bleed their targets like this > are vermin. Not surprising at all that this is all about some > domain-squatting nonsense. If a lawyer, any lawyer, sits you down in his office, looks you square in the eyes, and says "Don't let them get away with that!" my advice is leap up and run as if you are running for your life because indeed you are. A client's moral outrage and lust for revenge are an attorney's stock-in-trade. -- -Barry Shein The World | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD| Login: Nationwide Software Tool & Die| Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*
Re: Data Center Wiring Standards
> Rick Kunkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Can anyone tell me the standard way to deal with patch panels, racks, and > > switches in a data center used for colocation? > > Network Cabling Handbook by Chris Clark is a bit dated (5 years old) > but probably should be on your bookshelf anyway, particularly since it > is ridiculously cheap used/new on Amazon (I got my copy a couple of > years ago after a friend tipped me off that they were on sale for > $5.99 on clearance at Micro Center). It's mostly geared to the > enterprise but it does have a chapter on doing communication rooms > which is probably a good starting point. ISBN 0-07-213233-7 > > Also, no substitute for visiting your competition and taking a survey > of how others, particularly larger datacenters, are doing it. :) Having seen so many different things over the years, I don't actually think there's any one particular right way to do it. Is the data center carrier neutral? If so, that tends to lead to solutions where circuits need to be run point-to-point (whether physically or virtually). Are customers expected to be requiring large amounts of bandwidth? If not, aggregation based solutions may make more sense (such as putting a switch in each rack). What's the smallest and largest customer footprint? If you're going to sell 5 racks to a customer, in a shared cage with doors and side panels, and the customer needs multiple gigE connections internally, do you want to try to solve that problem as part of your site strategy, or do you figure it out on a case by case basis? Possible solutions are varied. For a colo where they'll be buying your bandwidth, and nobody's using gigabits of it, for example, there's an excellent manageability argument to be made for running a (single, pair of) gig uplink to each cabinet and having a 24- or 48-port 1U switch in the cabinet. You will have a minimal amount of wiring, which makes problem resolution easier, and you can even do vlan stuff to allow customers with equipment in different cabinets to have virtual private segments. I've seen providers that put a 24-port patch panel in each cab and then ran it back to a central switching point, which is arguably more useful but eats up a lot of wiring, and you have a fundamental problem in that some cabs may be populated with colo'ed 1U's (so you hit the wall or have to add another panel) and others have a single customer with a bunch of goofy equipment, and they just want a link to their own router/firewall, so you only use 1/24th the cable. Facilities like Equinix probably don't have a lot of realistic options other than what they already do, given the sheer complexity of it all. ... JG -- Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net "We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN) With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.
Re: Data Center Wiring Standards
Rick Kunkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Can anyone tell me the standard way to deal with patch panels, racks, and > switches in a data center used for colocation? Network Cabling Handbook by Chris Clark is a bit dated (5 years old) but probably should be on your bookshelf anyway, particularly since it is ridiculously cheap used/new on Amazon (I got my copy a couple of years ago after a friend tipped me off that they were on sale for $5.99 on clearance at Micro Center). It's mostly geared to the enterprise but it does have a chapter on doing communication rooms which is probably a good starting point. ISBN 0-07-213233-7 Also, no substitute for visiting your competition and taking a survey of how others, particularly larger datacenters, are doing it. :) ---Rob
