Re: NOC Personel Question (Possibly OT)
GE Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:49:20 -0500 (CDT) GE From: Gadi Evron [ tongue perhaps only slightly in cheek ] GE Some things the NOC used to help us with quite lot, that were not GE directly related to their obvious job description: GE GE 1. Reboots (as specified earlier). GE 2. Getting files on and off machines (via email to the NOC?) GE 3. Installing machines. 4. Frequent NANOG posting. GE Meaning, tasks which either take a lot of time or make us go down three GE floors to do ourselves. I believe one would classify the proposed #4 as the former. Eddy -- Everquick Internet - http://www.everquick.net/ A division of Brotsman Dreger, Inc. - http://www.brotsman.com/ Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building Phone: +1 785 865 5885 Lawrence and [inter]national Phone: +1 316 794 8922 Wichita DO NOT send mail to the following addresses: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -*- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -*- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sending mail to spambait addresses is a great way to get blocked. Ditto for broken OOO autoresponders and foolish AV software backscatter.
The Cidr Report
This report has been generated at Fri Mar 16 21:46:08 2007 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of an AS4637 (Reach) router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org/as4637 for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date PrefixesCIDR Agg
09-03-07211361 137006
10-03-07211723 136945
11-03-07211514 137020
12-03-07211573 137100
13-03-07211659 137294
14-03-07211828 137121
15-03-07211917 137205
16-03-07211983 137331
AS Summary
24555 Number of ASes in routing system
10355 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix
1488 Largest number of prefixes announced by an AS
AS7018 : ATT-INTERNET4 - ATT WorldNet Services
90339584 Largest address span announced by an AS (/32s)
AS721 : DISA-ASNBLK - DoD Network Information Center
Aggregation Summary
The algorithm used in this report proposes aggregation only
when there is a precise match using the AS path, so as
to preserve traffic transit policies. Aggregation is also
proposed across non-advertised address space ('holes').
--- 16Mar07 ---
ASnumNetsNow NetsAggr NetGain % Gain Description
Table 212177 1373607481735.3% All ASes
AS4323 1328 356 97273.2% TWTC - Time Warner Telecom,
Inc.
AS4134 1251 314 93774.9% CHINANET-BACKBONE
No.31,Jin-rong Street
AS9498 969 95 87490.2% BBIL-AP BHARTI BT INTERNET
LTD.
AS4755 1043 209 83480.0% VSNL-AS Videsh Sanchar Nigam
Ltd. Autonomous System
AS6478 1133 389 74465.7% ATT-INTERNET3 - ATT WorldNet
Services
AS22773 732 49 68393.3% CCINET-2 - Cox Communications
Inc.
AS11492 1005 360 64564.2% CABLEONE - CABLE ONE
AS8151 1074 457 61757.4% Uninet S.A. de C.V.
AS18566 997 382 61561.7% COVAD - Covad Communications
Co.
AS17488 612 57 55590.7% HATHWAY-NET-AP Hathway IP Over
Cable Internet
AS19262 708 175 53375.3% VZGNI-TRANSIT - Verizon
Internet Services Inc.
AS6197 1032 507 52550.9% BATI-ATL - BellSouth Network
Solutions, Inc
AS7018 1488 970 51834.8% ATT-INTERNET4 - ATT WorldNet
Services
AS18101 541 31 51094.3% RIL-IDC Reliance Infocom Ltd
Internet Data Centre,
AS19916 568 97 47182.9% ASTRUM-0001 - OLM LLC
AS17676 503 65 43887.1% JPNIC-JP-ASN-BLOCK Japan
Network Information Center
AS4766 737 314 42357.4% KIXS-AS-KR Korea Telecom
AS15270 510 115 39577.5% AS-PAETEC-NET - PaeTec.net -a
division of
PaeTecCommunications, Inc.
AS4812 439 71 36883.8% CHINANET-SH-AP China Telecom
(Group)
AS2386 1095 742 35332.2% INS-AS - ATT Data
Communications Services
AS721618 276 34255.3% DISA-ASNBLK - DoD Network
Information Center
AS5668 575 238 33758.6% AS-5668 - CenturyTel Internet
Holdings, Inc.
AS3602 520 184 33664.6% AS3602-RTI - Rogers Telecom
Inc.
AS16852 400 74 32681.5% BROADWING-FOCAL - Broadwing
Communications Services, Inc.
AS7029 558 239 31957.2% WINDSTREAM - Windstream
Communications Inc
AS7011 775 463 31240.3% FRONTIER-AND-CITIZENS -
Frontier Communications, Inc.
AS33588 432 132 30069.4% BRESNAN-AS - Bresnan
Communications, LLC.
AS14654 3025 29798.3% WAYPORT - Wayport
AS6198 564 268 29652.5%
BGP Update Report
BGP Update Report Interval: 02-Mar-07 -to- 15-Mar-07 (14 days) Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS4637 TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name 1 - AS701525174 1.5% 6.2 -- CCCH-AS2 - Comcast Cable Communications Holdings, Inc 2 - AS701 14862 0.9% 15.4 -- UUNET - MCI Communications Services, Inc. d/b/a Verizon Business 3 - AS958313600 0.8% 26.6 -- SIFY-AS-IN Sify Limited 4 - AS17557 13135 0.8% 37.0 -- PKTELECOM-AS-AP Pakistan Telecom 5 - AS721 12228 0.7% 27.9 -- DISA-ASNBLK - DoD Network Information Center 6 - AS702 12121 0.7% 17.1 -- AS702 MCI EMEA - Commercial IP service provider in Europe 7 - AS24731 11754 0.7% 279.9 -- ASN-NESMA National Engineering Services and Marketing Company Ltd. (NESMA) 8 - AS12654 10761 0.6% 290.8 -- RIPE-NCC-RIS-AS RIPE NCC RIS project 9 - AS204269897 0.6%9897.0 -- PWC-AS - PriceWaterhouseCoopers, LLP 10 - AS8151 9559 0.6% 10.7 -- Uninet S.A. de C.V. 11 - AS240869392 0.6% 447.2 -- ETC-AS-VN Electric Telecommunication Company 12 - AS179749094 0.5% 39.9 -- TELKOMNET-AS2-AP PT TELEKOMUNIKASI INDONESIA 13 - AS7545 8892 0.5% 15.1 -- TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Internet Pty Ltd 14 - AS8452 8315 0.5% 30.2 -- TEDATA TEDATA 15 - AS4323 7309 0.4% 10.6 -- TWTC - Time Warner Telecom, Inc. 16 - AS176457290 0.4% 729.0 -- NTT-SG-AP ASN - NTT SINGAPORE PTE LTD 17 - AS337837195 0.4% 64.8 -- EEPAD 18 - AS3269 7039 0.4% 32.3 -- ASN-IBSNAZ TELECOM ITALIA 19 - AS3561 6952 0.4% 14.4 -- SAVVIS - Savvis 20 - AS7011 6946 0.4% 8.6 -- FRONTIER-AND-CITIZENS - Frontier Communications, Inc. TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS (Updates per announced prefix) Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name 1 - AS204269897 0.6%9897.0 -- PWC-AS - PriceWaterhouseCoopers, LLP 2 - AS3043 3397 0.2%3397.0 -- AMPHIB-AS - Amphibian Media Corporation 3 - AS315941335 0.1%1335.0 -- FORTESS-AS Fortess LLC Network 4 - AS313071297 0.1%1297.0 -- YKYATIRIM YAPI KREDI YATIRIM 5 - AS390662257 0.1%1128.5 -- KREDYTBANKUA-AS Kredyt Bank (Ukraine) AS 6 - AS19580 994 0.1% 994.0 -- ZONETEL - ZONE TELECOM, INC. 7 - AS33797 972 0.1% 972.0 -- APIS-NET-AS Grupa Internetowa 8 - AS34378 865 0.1% 865.0 -- RUG-AS Razguliay-UKRROS Group 9 - AS307071703 0.1% 851.5 -- SICOR-US-CA-IRVINE - SICOR Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 10 - AS38151 774 0.1% 774.0 -- ENUM-AS-ID APJII-RD 11 - AS176457290 0.4% 729.0 -- NTT-SG-AP ASN - NTT SINGAPORE PTE LTD 12 - AS3217 662 0.0% 662.0 -- SIMBIRSK 13 - AS118283096 0.2% 619.2 -- SOINET - State of Illinois/CMS 14 - AS261131196 0.1% 598.0 -- TNS-ASN - Triware Networld Systems 15 - AS331881108 0.1% 554.0 -- SCS-NETWORK-1 - Sono Corporate Suites 16 - AS15964 466 0.0% 466.0 -- CAMNET-AS 17 - AS213911360 0.1% 453.3 -- TDA-AS 18 - AS240869392 0.6% 447.2 -- ETC-AS-VN Electric Telecommunication Company 19 - AS22072 440 0.0% 440.0 -- DEFINITYHEALTH - Definity Health 20 - AS146994747 0.3% 431.5 -- BTCBCI - Bloomingdale Communications Inc TOP 20 Unstable Prefixes Rank Prefix Upds % Origin AS -- AS Name 1 - 155.201.48.0/219897 0.5% AS20426 -- PWC-AS - PriceWaterhouseCoopers, LLP 2 - 209.140.24.0/243397 0.2% AS3043 -- AMPHIB-AS - Amphibian Media Corporation 3 - 89.4.128.0/24 3363 0.2% AS24731 -- ASN-NESMA National Engineering Services and Marketing Company Ltd. (NESMA) 4 - 89.4.131.0/24 3361 0.2% AS24731 -- ASN-NESMA National Engineering Services and Marketing Company Ltd. (NESMA) 5 - 89.4.129.0/24 3299 0.2% AS24731 -- ASN-NESMA National Engineering Services and Marketing Company Ltd. (NESMA) 6 - 125.162.94.0/232538 0.1% AS17974 -- TELKOMNET-AS2-AP PT TELEKOMUNIKASI INDONESIA 7 - 192.6.180.0/24 2509 0.1% AS2129 -- HP-EUROPE-AS-TRADE Hewlett-Packard 8 - 58.65.1.0/24 2380 0.1% AS17645 -- NTT-SG-AP ASN - NTT SINGAPORE PTE LTD 9 - 202.136.182.0/24 2313 0.1% AS17645 -- NTT-SG-AP ASN - NTT SINGAPORE PTE LTD 10 - 202.136.176.0/24 2313 0.1% AS17645 -- NTT-SG-AP ASN - NTT SINGAPORE PTE LTD 11 - 163.191.160.0/19 2194 0.1% AS11828 -- SOINET - State of Illinois/CMS 12 - 62.89.226.0/24 1832 0.1% AS20663 -- INAR-VOLOGDA-AS Autonomous System of Vologda 13 - 64.95.193.0/24 1699 0.1% AS30707 -- SICOR-US-CA-IRVINE - SICOR Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 14 - 216.85.83.0/24
Qwest outage?
Anyone know what is going on with Qwest? I have issues reaching a
particular block that began at about 3:30am(ish).
traceroute 65.115.xxx.xxx
traceroute to 65.115.xxx.xxx (65.115.xxx.xxx), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 pwwr1.edge.xxx.xxx.xxx (208.51.xxx.xxx) 0.409 ms 0.423 ms
0.4
82 ms
2 so-1-3-1.585.ar1.JFK1.gblx.net (208.48.236.105) 3.479 ms 3.471 ms
3.485
m
s
3 so0-0-0-2488M.ar3.jfk1.gblx.net (67.17.72.30) 3.480 ms 3.474 ms
3.485 ms
4 qwest-1.ar3.JFK1.gblx.net (208.50.13.170) 3.481 ms 2.974 ms 2.986 ms
5 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 4.691 ms
22 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 4.948 ms 4.470 ms
4.485 ms
23 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 4.473 ms 4.970 ms
4.485 ms
24 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 4.975 ms 4.973 ms
4.976 ms
25 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 4.972 ms 4.971 ms
4.989 ms
26 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 4.973 ms 4.966 ms
4.985 ms
27 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 4.974 ms 4.970 ms
4.985 ms
28 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 4.972 ms 4.969 ms
4.985 ms
29 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 4.975 ms 4.968 ms
4.985 ms
30 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 5.017 ms 5.467 ms
5.486 ms
$ traceroute 65.115.xxx.xxx
traceroute to 65.115.xxx.xxx (65.115.xxx.xxx), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 198.66.92.81 (198.66.xxx.xxx) 1.293 ms 0.565 ms 0.235 ms
2 65.106.223.89.ptr.us.xo.net (65.106.223.89) 4.854 ms 4.033 ms
4.608 ms
3 ge5-0-0.mar1.houston-tx.us.xo.net (207.88.82.49) 4.979 ms 3.810
ms 2.358 ms
4 p5-1-0-2.rar1.dallas-tx.us.xo.net (65.106.4.157) 9.355 ms 8.596
ms 8.359 ms
5 p0-0.ir1.dallas2-tx.us.xo.net (65.106.4.182) 8.979 ms 7.627 ms
7.980 ms
6 206.111.5.50.ptr.us.xo.net (206.111.5.50) 7.854 ms 7.629 ms 6.857 ms
7 dal-core-02.inet.qwest.net (205.171.225.54) 7.978 ms 7.775 ms
8.480 ms
8 * * *
9 * * *
10 * * ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 48.716 ms
11 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 49.358 ms 49.895 ms
49.958 ms
12 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 50.959 ms 49.940 ms
49.209 ms
13 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 48.959 ms 50.217 ms
49.832 ms
14 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 49.956 ms 49.699 ms
50.081 ms
15 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 49.709 ms 49.212 ms
49.331 ms
16 * * *
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 51.848 ms 51.060 ms
49.833 ms
22 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 50.331 ms 49.962 ms
50.836 ms
23 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 50.328 ms 50.575 ms
51.956 ms
24 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 52.332 ms 50.807 ms
50.583 ms
25 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 49.834 ms 50.581 ms
50.085 ms
26 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 50.956 ms 51.091 ms
64.203 ms
27 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 50.834 ms 50.244 ms
50.457 ms
28 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 50.956 ms 50.827 ms
50.583 ms
29 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 50.457 ms 50.821 ms
50.459 ms
30 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 51.082 ms 50.846 ms
50.833 ms
31 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 50.953 ms 50.957 ms
51.335 ms
32 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 51.082 ms 51.221 ms
51.580 ms
33 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 50.831 ms 50.832 ms
51.211 ms
34 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 51.326 ms 50.298 ms
51.454 ms
35 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) 51.207 ms 50.457 ms
50.710 ms
36 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) 79.188 ms * *
37 * * *
38 * * *
39 *^C
From Level3
1 ae-2-52.mp2.Boston1.Level3.net (4.68.100.33) 24 msec
ae-2-54.mp2.Boston1.Level3.net (4.68.100.97) 0 msec
ae-2-56.mp2.Boston1.Level3.net (4.68.100.161) 24 msec
2 so-0-0-0.bbr1.NewYork1.Level3.net (64.159.4.182) 4 msec
ae-0-0.bbr2.NewYork1.Level3.net (64.159.1.42) 4 msec 4 msec
3 ge-6-0-0-53.gar4.NewYork1.Level3.net (4.68.97.69) 4 msec
ge-7-0-0-52.gar4.NewYork1.Level3.net (4.68.97.37) 40 msec
ge-6-0-0-51.gar4.NewYork1.Level3.net (4.68.97.5) 4 msec
4 qwest-level3-oc48.NewYork.Level3.net (4.68.110.174) 4 msec
ewr-brdr-02.inet.qwest.net (205.171.1.97) [AS209 {ASN-QWEST}] 4 msec
4 msec
5 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.125) [AS209 {ASN-QWEST}] 4
msec 36 msec 4 msec
6 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) [AS209 {ASN-QWEST}] 4
msec 4 msec 4 msec
7 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.117) [AS209 {ASN-QWEST}] 8
msec 8 msec 4 msec
8 ewr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.118) [AS209 {ASN-QWEST}] 8
msec 4 msec 4 msec
9
AUP enforcement diligence
--- Sean Donelan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How many people thank the police officer for stopping them and giving them a ticket for violating traffic rules? I do, but perhaps I'm uncommon in this regard. Your larger point, however, is completely valid: there is a relatively normal desire to have rules enforced on other people with more zeal than one would choose for oneself. Perhaps more transparency is a tonic for this? If ToS and the AUP are more clearly written and enforced as consistently as possible, I would expect customers to be less horked off by AUP/ToS shutdowns. It does surprise me that no enterprising person/group has turned this into a salable feature: we're the network which shuts down spammers/infected/baddies. I could imagine that there would be customers who would rather give their business to providers who are more active in this regard than less, and that would be a way for a service provider to differentiate themself from the rest of the pack. -David David Barak Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise: http://www.listentothefranchise.com Need Mail bonding? Go to the Yahoo! Mail QA for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=listsid=396546091
Re: AUP enforcement diligence
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007, David Barak wrote: It does surprise me that no enterprising person/group has turned this into a salable feature: we're the network which shuts down spammers/infected/baddies. I could imagine that there would be customers who would rather give their business to providers who are more active in this regard than less, and that would be a way for a service provider to differentiate themself from the rest of the pack. People try that. They then get DDoS'ed. Then they stop. (Thats the people that try to do it by providing internet-based services. People who sell products probably fare slightly better.) Adrian
Weekly Routing Table Report
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. Daily listings are sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For historical data, please see http://thyme.apnic.net. If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 17 Mar, 2007 Analysis Summary BGP routing table entries examined: 215817 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 115556 Deaggregation factor: 1.87 Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 104950 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 24639 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 21439 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 10359 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:3200 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 71 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 3.6 Max AS path length visible: 29 Max AS path prepend of ASN (31269) 23 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 4 Unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 5 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table:0 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 12 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 1688675212 Equivalent to 100 /8s, 167 /16s and 35 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 45.6 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 62.6 Percentage of available address space allocated: 72.8 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 112245 APNIC Region Analysis Summary - Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes:49398 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 19932 APNIC Deaggregation factor:2.48 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 46476 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:20919 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:2896 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:780 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:432 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:3.7 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 16 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 287310976 Equivalent to 17 /8s, 32 /16s and 4 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 71.2 APNIC AS Blocks4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911 APNIC Address Blocks 58/7, 60/7, 116/6, 120/6, 124/7, 126/8, 202/7 210/7, 218/7, 220/7 and 222/8 ARIN Region Analysis Summary Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes:105063 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation:61530 ARIN Deaggregation factor: 1.71 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks:77083 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 29859 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:11405 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:4374 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:1044 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 3.4 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 21 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 320763008 Equivalent to 19 /8s, 30 /16s and 116 /24s Percentage of available ARIN address space announced: 70.8 ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106 (pre-ERX allocations) 2138-2584, 2615-2772, 2823-2829, 2880-3153 3354-4607, 4865-5119, 5632-6655, 6912-7466 7723-8191, 10240-12287, 13312-15359, 16384-17407 18432-20479, 21504-23551, 25600-26591, 26624-27647, 29696-30719, 31744-33791 35840-36863, 39936-40959 ARIN Address Blocks24/8, 63/8, 64/5, 72/6, 76/8, 96/6, 199/8, 204/6, 208/7 and 216/8 RIPE Region Analysis Summary Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 44473 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation:29021 RIPE Deaggregation factor: 1.53 Prefixes being announced from the RIPE
Re: Possibly OT, definately humor. rDNS is to policy set by federal law.
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 07:41:58PM -0700, S. Ryan wrote: However, while it's not really above me to do the same, he could have removed the email address so spammers aren't adding to that guys list of problems. Anti-spam strategies based on concealment and/or obfuscation of addresses are no longer viable. (For a variety of reasons, including harvesting from public sources, harvesting from private sources such as compromised systems, and the deployment of abusive, spam-supporting tactics such as callbacks/sender address verification.) Yes, I know there are counter-examples, I have my own collection of them. But they're exceptions, not the rule. ---Rsk
RE: Possibly OT, definately humor. rDNS is to policy set by federal law.
We do not have any problem with SORBS. We use SORBS entire list with the exception of the DUL at all of our client sites. I have worked with Mat for years, and despite our differences with regard to DUL lists, our relationship has always been both respectful and cordial. This guy was talking out the wrong end of his anatomy, and Mat called him on it. You can like SORBS (as I do), or not like them, that's your choice, and I will respect all of you for it. But a follow-up bashing SORBS listing policies certainly went off topic if the original premise of the post was maybe a little off topic. I think what we're talking about here as the larger issue is your dog in your yard. Your dog is free to take a crap in your yard all it likes, but when your dog comes over to my yard and takes a crap, I might build a fence. I might also conscript something like Mat's service, or Steve Lindford's service, or mine to keep my yard clean, if that means your dog doesn't get to play in my yard... well that's just unfortunate for you. (or in another manner of speaking, I could care less) And damn, I think I just equated all of my volunteer time to the equivalent of a pooper-scooper... ooh well. Andrew D Kirch - All Things IT Office: 317-755-0200 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of S. Ryan Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 10:42 PM To: Steve Sobol Cc: Matthew Sullivan; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Possibly OT, definately humor. rDNS is to policy set by federal law. Nothing is wrong with what he posted. The guy is a moron. However, I was taking my 15 min of fame to jab at SORBS policy of listing people on their respective lists. It's dysfunctional and broken, but that again is just my opinion. Oh and, of course publicly humiliating the guy is certainly not that cool. However, while it's not really above me to do the same, he could have removed the email address so spammers aren't adding to that guys list of problems. Anyway, don't mind me. I just wanted to add to the off-topic drivel Mat posted since I can't stand SORBS. : Steve Sobol wroteth on 3/15/2007 7:31 PM: On Thu, 15 Mar 2007, S. Ryan wrote: Typical SORBS behavior. While this guy can demand all he wants, doesn't mean he will get what he wants or that he's right or wrong. What's wrong with what Mat posted? The guy claiming DNS is regulated by federal law is an idiot. Not that I always agree with what Mat says, but the guy's claims are obviously and patently false. The claims, in fact, are so ridiculous that I tend to think he's making them to weasel out of solving the problem that got him listed in the first place. People doing that *deserve* to be publically ridiculed. When I talk to Mat I generally have no problems having a civil and productive discussion with him. But I don't start out with an attitude, and I don't cook up absurd stories to try to get out of fixing my spam problem. (Not that I have one, but if I did, I'd not try to weasel out of fixing it.) Personally, we gave up using SORBS because of it's very high false-positive ratio YMMV; at $DAYJOB we don't seem to have the same problem. Disclaimer: My opinions, not my boss's, etc.
Global Crossing Contact?
Anyone from GBLX Peering? Contact me off list if so, thank you..semi-urgent matter -Christian
RE: Global Crossing Contact?
NM |-Original Message- |From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On |Behalf Of Koch, Christian |Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 2:53 PM |To: nanog@merit.edu |Subject: Global Crossing Contact? | | |Anyone from GBLX Peering? | |Contact me off list if so, thank you..semi-urgent matter | |-Christian |
RE: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property)
Almost ALL providers should be multihomed. --Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of virendra rode // Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 11:26 AM To: NANOG Subject: Re: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Frank Bulk wrote: http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/articlePrint.cfm?id=1310151 Is this a normal thing for Level 3 to do, cut off small, responsive providers? Frank - Just curious, should small responsive providers should be multi-homed? regards, /virendra -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF+XOApbZvCIJx1bcRAtkwAJ9vNak3F8FlCf9VDycf6IlAr445nACg59kB w2OWAGdchd2XQyxxgZWQaug= =Yb1+ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property)
Almost ALL? Any company, or any person for that matter, that relies on their Internet connectivity for their lively hood should be multihomed. -wil On Mar 16, 2007, at 4:42 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: Almost ALL providers should be multihomed. --Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of virendra rode // Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 11:26 AM To: NANOG Subject: Re: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Frank Bulk wrote: http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/articlePrint.cfm?id=1310151 Is this a normal thing for Level 3 to do, cut off small, responsive providers? Frank - Just curious, should small responsive providers should be multi- homed? regards, /virendra -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF+XOApbZvCIJx1bcRAtkwAJ9vNak3F8FlCf9VDycf6IlAr445nACg59kB w2OWAGdchd2XQyxxgZWQaug= =Yb1+ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
RE: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property)
Some locations are just too cost prohibitive to multihome, but that really is a select few. Few places are out of the reach of a couple wireless hops back to civilization. --Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wil Schultz Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 6:56 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property) Almost ALL? Any company, or any person for that matter, that relies on their Internet connectivity for their lively hood should be multihomed. -wil On Mar 16, 2007, at 4:42 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: Almost ALL providers should be multihomed. --Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of virendra rode // Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 11:26 AM To: NANOG Subject: Re: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Frank Bulk wrote: http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/articlePrint.cfm?id=1310151 Is this a normal thing for Level 3 to do, cut off small, responsive providers? Frank - Just curious, should small responsive providers should be multi- homed? regards, /virendra -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF+XOApbZvCIJx1bcRAtkwAJ9vNak3F8FlCf9VDycf6IlAr445nACg59kB w2OWAGdchd2XQyxxgZWQaug= =Yb1+ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property)
On 16-Mar-2007, at 19:56, Wil Schultz wrote: Almost ALL? Surely all those except those who are competing with you for the same customers should multi-home. :-) Joe
Re: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 16, 2007, at 6:59 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: Some locations are just too cost prohibitive to multihome, but that really is a select few. It isn't just cost but can be path diversity (or lack thereof). We used to be headquartered 210 miles from civilization. We had a choice of providers and could have multihomed. However, the only realistic way for any of those providers to get to us would have been Bell frame relay. Since by far the most likely point of failure was the last mile (which was 210 miles), we made a decision that actually multihoming wasn't a good use of resources. We instead went with a good quality regional provider who was themselves multihomed. Now clearly there were cases where that wouldn't have any good but given the remoteness it just seems most likely that anything that took out one provider would have taken the other one as well. Now this case we are discussing is probably the exception to our assumptions but we had a much better provider at the time than Level3 ;-] From the sounds of the original post I wouldn't be too surprised if it was also fairly remote. Chris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) iD8DBQFF+zOWElUlCLUT2d0RAtwLAJ9esOECOSbeXOpPhPbEL3A9vmbJ5wCfWgnU Dd4lEmIoaMtPCRU9WXJRSVo= =wxdX -END PGP SIGNATURE-
RE: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property)
I've been working at a smaller ISP (~4000 subs, plus businesses), and not one has asked me if I'm multi-homed. When we or our upstream provider have a problem the telephones light up and people act as if it's a problem, but the reality is that they're not communicating it, up front, as a business requirement. Frank -Original Message- Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 8:54 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property) Almost ALL? Any company, or any person for that matter, that relies on their Internet connectivity for their lively hood should be multihomed. -wil On Mar 16, 2007, at 4:42 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: Almost ALL providers should be multihomed. --Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of virendra rode // Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 11:26 AM To: NANOG Subject: Re: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Frank Bulk wrote: http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/articlePrint.cfm?id=1310151 Is this a normal thing for Level 3 to do, cut off small, responsive providers? Frank - Just curious, should small responsive providers should be multi- homed? regards, /virendra -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF+XOApbZvCIJx1bcRAtkwAJ9vNak3F8FlCf9VDycf6IlAr445nACg59kB w2OWAGdchd2XQyxxgZWQaug= =Yb1+ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property)
Joe Abley wrote: On 16-Mar-2007, at 19:56, Wil Schultz wrote: Almost ALL? Surely all those except those who are competing with you for the same customers should multi-home. :-) To the NANOG T-shirt Committee: Please consider this as the slogan for the next design.
Re: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property)
On 3/16/07, Justin M. Streiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 16 Mar 2007, Joe Abley wrote: Almost ALL? Surely all those except those who are competing with you for the same customers should multi-home. :-) True :) I'd also think (read: hope) if an organization was located in an area where multi-homing was not possible, then that organization and its customers would not be doing things that are mission critical, i.e. business stops if there is no Internet connectivity. Mission critical seems to be quite subjective these days. -brandon
