Re: clickbank.net and bundleway.com
This GoogleAd appeared while reading this thread: $400k ClickBank Website - www.AffiliateSiteX.com - Get your very own ClickBank website And let me show you how to push it Thanks, Google! (Link obviously redacted for security reasons.) Leads to www.affiliatesitex.com, which appears to be an alias for www.dollarmonitor.com...which Google is also carrying ads for. Alex
Re: rack power question
I still think the industry needs to standardise water cooling to popularise it; if there were two water ports on all the pizzaboxes next to the RJ45s, and a standard set of flexible pipes, how many people would start using it? There's probably a medical, automotive or aerospace standard out there. On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Leigh Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: $5 Adrian Chadd wrote: This thread begs a question - how much do you think it'd be worth to do things more efficiently? Adrian
Re: rack power question
A valve in the connector; has to be pushed in by the other connector to let the water flow. Water pressure pushes it shut otherwise so it fails-safe. On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Leigh Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That would be pretty good. But seeing some of the disastrous cabling situations it'd have to be made pretty idiot proof. Nice double sealed idiot proof piping with self-sealing ends.. -- Leigh -- Leigh Alexander Harrowell wrote: I still think the industry needs to standardise water cooling to popularise it; if there were two water ports on all the pizzaboxes next to the RJ45s, and a standard set of flexible pipes, how many people would start using it? There's probably a medical, automotive or aerospace standard out there. On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Leigh Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: $5 Adrian Chadd wrote: This thread begs a question - how much do you think it'd be worth to do things more efficiently? Adrian
Re: rack power question
Question: what worries you more, fire or leaks? On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Ben Butler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While it has the potential to catch fire - it does however work fine in my car engine. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Shore Sent: 25 March 2008 14:20 To: Dorn Hetzel Cc: nanog list Subject: Re: rack power question Dorn Hetzel wrote: Of course, my chemistry is a little rusty, so I'm not sure about the prospects for a non-toxic, non-flammable, non-conductive substance with workable fluid flow and heat transfer properties :) Mineral oil? I'm not sure about the non-flammable part though. Not all oils burn but I'm not sure if mineral oil is one of them. It is used for immersion cooling though. Justin
Re: rack power question
We'll need non-returns in there as well, to limit the maximum possible spillage. More seriously, the energy-efficiency community has a whole design approach for industrial facilities called Factor 10 Engineering which is about saving heat or cooling by using the shortest, straightest, fattest pipes you can at any point. You'd probably want to keep the flexible water over ethernet pipes to a minimum; have a pair of bigger risers per rack and tap into those. On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Christopher LILJENSTOLPE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Provided the brilliant tech didn't forget to remove the grit from the connector on the pizzabox that then gets in the said valve and wedges it open. :) Remember folks, someone will always make brighter remote hands In principal, though, I like it. Chris On 25 Mar 2008, at 06.08, Alexander Harrowell wrote: A valve in the connector; has to be pushed in by the other connector to let the water flow. Water pressure pushes it shut otherwise so it fails-safe. On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Leigh Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That would be pretty good. But seeing some of the disastrous cabling situations it'd have to be made pretty idiot proof. Nice double sealed idiot proof piping with self-sealing ends.. -- Leigh -- Leigh Alexander Harrowell wrote: I still think the industry needs to standardise water cooling to popularise it; if there were two water ports on all the pizzaboxes next to the RJ45s, and a standard set of flexible pipes, how many people would start using it? There's probably a medical, automotive or aerospace standard out there. On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Leigh Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: $5 Adrian Chadd wrote: This thread begs a question - how much do you think it'd be worth to do things more efficiently? Adrian - --- 李柯睿 Check my PGP key here: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCB67593B -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJH6RboAAoJEGmx2Mt/+Iw/O/UIAIEWSjeRr0mEcUNXoclxefEG 4k7VjzoGLCBKlven62DwKXcFInBsGaaHXQyZH8vIKiraeh9JYFXo5wLotgO4bjYk vV0l7Sd3iLpueDzFLbho3YWAcCh52dmLbZRn31L3/eSoNivagQKBruIy8WQmgJIt 54/KiBIr7PUQXFYqA4kwiWnkOAZ+DfpGcfKY/LRhksGltVFW5N+X8FKSvlIR/ZjK Ka+omSh2ccUNpD5Y6Iwa+KkAYulEnus5i1pzA07rz0YKxkIfXpPnadlMmdFJJiYo wOqwIUVcjQQ2aruANKyXBnkWcTTD228xc06KgLLJToNjVY9XeOeJqQOxF6mNglc= =+lj0 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: YouTube IP Hijacking
Interesting that (according to Renesys) BT reconnected about 500 networks in Pakistan after the big fibre cut. I wonder if there's any data around that would tell us who filters and who doesn't? On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 9:02 AM, Jim Mercer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: having built an ISP or two in pakistan, PTCL (Pakistan Telecom) is not the sole provider of bandwidth to the country, although it likely carries the bulk of traffic to the country. operationally, there are a number of jurisdictions which filter content and connectivity on a variety of basis. adjusting the BGP announcements is a fairly quick and sure way to hobble connectivity to specific content. although, it is quickly bypassed by shifting the content to other addresses and domain names. i'm sure that this was an accidental leakage, and that appropriate corrections were/are taken in due course. -- Jim Mercer[EMAIL PROTECTED]+971 55 410-5633 I'm Prime Minister of Canada, I live here and I'm going to take a leak. - Lester Pearson in 1967, during a meeting between himself and President Lyndon Johnson, whose Secret Service detail had taken over Pearson's cottage retreat. At one point, a Johnson guard asked Pearson, Who are you and where are you going?
Re: ITU: Submarine Cable Cuts Acts of Sabatoge?
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 7:44 AM, Paul Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Sound of heads exploding: http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2008/02/18/undersea-cables-may-h ave-been-cut-by-saboteurs/http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2008/02/18/undersea-cables-may-have-been-cut-by-saboteurs/ Some experts doubt the prevailing view that the cables were cut by accident, especially as the cables lie at great depths under the sea and are not passed over by ships, Murshed said on the sidelines of a conference on cyber-crime held in Gulf state of Qatar. Nonsense. The Straits of Hormuz are not great depths of the sea, and they are constantly full of shipping. The same goes for the eastern Mediterranean. Murshed seems ill-informed. Further, looking at National Terror Alert.com, I have my doubts; it seems to be a private enterprise with links to lots of really, really, extreme-right wing blogs that's trying to look like an official US Government product. Also, it's an old journo trick to headline a story about - say - aircraft accident investigators not ruling something unlikely out (they never rule anything out until there is good reason to) as if they were suggesting it was the truth. Alex
Re: Fourth cable damaged in Middle Eest (Qatar to UAE)
Two days from Alexandria to the Gulf? Pull the other one. And you can't go through the Suez Canal submerged. On Mon, Feb 4, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Frank Coluccio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This will be my only post on this subject after biting my tongue for several days:) Some members will appreciate this item I came across earlier, I'm sure. As always, caveat emptor. Where is the USS Jimmy Carter? By Dave | February 3, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/3y7zgu List members -- and lurking students, in particular, should NOT take much of what's been posted _on _this _topic _ too seriously or regard everything written as factual. This cautionary note applies equally to the article I've posted above, as well. 73s,
Re: Sicily to Egypt undersea cable disruption
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Hank Nussbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think more interesting is the landing stations where numerous cables intersect. They may be diverse in the water, but they cluster around each other when they hit the landing stations. Exactly; which have historically been in the same strategic locations. Suez, Singapore, Cape Town; it's the strategic map of the British Empire. Five strategic keys lock up the world, as Lord Fisher said. (Dover, Gibraltar, Singapore, Cape Town, and Suez). The similarity is truly uncanny.
Re: abandon cable the price of copper
Perhaps this paper from this month's Review of Network Economics ( http://www.rnejournal.com/articles/bernstein_et_al_RNE_sep_2007.pdf) on the irreversibility of telecoms investments isn't as clear as we thought. On 9/13/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: this might be a revenue stream ... --bill
Re: Using Mobile Phone email addys for monitoring
GSM/GPRS modems are cheap; so are SMS messages. The answer should be clear... On 9/6/07, Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The only thing I spec for SMS notifications is a GSM modem physically connected to the monitoring box. There's still points of failure, but they're a lot fewer than SMTP to some third party. True paranoids (as we all should be) monitor their monitoring box, and it might be permissible to use an SMTP to SMS gateway for that monitoring, as long as you're monitoring all the appropriate things so that wide-scale failures (such as power loss) still get to you via your GSM modem (mmm, local UPSen). - Matt Professional Paranoid
Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery)
This is what I eventually upshot.. http://www.telco2.net/blog/2007/08/variable_speed_limits_for_the.html On 8/19/07, Mikael Abrahamsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 19 Aug 2007, Perry Lorier wrote: Many networking stacks have a TCP_INFO ioctl that can be used to query for more accurate statistics on how the TCP connection is fairing (number of retransmits, TCP's current estimate of the RTT (and jitter), etc). I've always pondered if bittorrent clients made use of this to better choose which connections to prefer and which ones to avoid. I'm unfortunately unsure if windows has anything similar. Well, by design bittorrent will try to get everything as fast as possible from all peers, so any TCP session giving good performance (often low packet loss and low latency) will thus end up transmitting a lot of the data in the torrent, so by design bittorrent is kind of localised, at least in the sense that it will utilize fast peers more than slower ones and these are normally closer to you. One problem with having clients only getting told about clients that are near to them is that the network starts forming cliques. Each clique works as a separate network and you can end up with silly things like one clique being full of seeders, and another clique not even having any seeders at all. Obviously this means that a tracker has to send a handful of addresses of clients outside the clique network that the current client belongs to. The idea we pitched was that of the 50 addresses that the tracker returns to the client, 25 (if possible) should be from the same ASN as the client itself, or a nearby ASN (by some definition). If there are a lot of peers (more than 50) the tracker will return a random set of clients, we wanted this to be not random but 25 of them should be by network proximity (by some definition). You want to make hosts talk to people that are close to you, you want to make sure that hosts don't form cliques, and you want something that a tracker can very quickly figure out from information that is easily available to people who run trackers. My thought here was to sort all the IP addresses, and send the next 'n' IP addresses after the client IP as well as some random ones. If we assume that IP's are generally allocated in contiguous groups then this means that clients should be generally at least told about people nearby, and hopefully that these hosts aren't too far apart (at least likely to be within a LIR or RIR). This should be able to be done in O(log n) which should be fairly efficient. Yeah, we discussed that the list of IPs should be sorted (doing insertion sort) in the data structures in the tracker already, so what you're saying is one way of defining proximity that as you're saying, would probably be quite efficient. -- Mikael Abrahamssonemail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery)
On 8/17/07, Adrian Chadd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Aug 16, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm pushing an agenda in the open source world to add some concept of locality, with the purpose of moving traffic off ISP networks when I can. I think the user will be just as happy or happier, and folks pushing large optics will certainly be. This is badly needed in my humble opinion; regarding the wireless LAN case described, it's true that this behaviour would be technically suboptimal, but interestingly the real reason for implementing it would be maintained - economics. After all, the network operator (the owner of the wireless LAN) isn't consuming any more upstream as a result. When you hear stories like the Icelandic ISP who discovered that P2P was 80% of their submarine bandwidth and promptly implemented P2P throttling, I think that the open source P2P will be driven to it by their user demand. Yes. An important factor in future design will be network friendliness/responsibility. .. or we could start talking about how Australian ISPs are madly throttling P2P traffic. Not just because of its impact on international trunks, but their POP/wholesale DSL infrastructure method just makes P2P even between clients on the same ISP mostly horrible. Similar to the pre-LLU, BT IPStream ops in the UK. Charging flat rates to customers and paying per-bit to wholesalers is an obvious economic problem; possibly even more expensive to localise the p2p traffic, if the price of wholesale access bits is greater than peering/transit ones!
Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery)
An Internet variable speed limit is a nice idea, but there are some serious trust issues; applications have to trust the network implicitly not to issue gratuitous slow down messages, and certainly not to use them for evil purposes (not that I want to start a network neutrality flamewar...but what with the ATT/Pearl Jam row, it's not hard to see rightsholders/telcos/government/alien space bats leaning on your upstream to spoil your access to content X). Further, you're going to need *very good* filtration; necessary to verify the source of any such packets closely due to the major DOS potential. Scenario: Bad Guy controls some hacked machines on AS666 DubiousNet, who peer at AMS-IX. Bad Guy has his bots inject a mass of slow down! packets with a faked source address taken from the IX's netblock...and everything starts moving Very Slowly. Especially if the suggestion upthread that the slowdown ought to be implemented 1-2 AS away from the problem is implemented, which would require forwarding the slowdowns between networks. It has some similarities with the Chinese firewall's use of quick TCP RSTs to keep users from seeing Bad Things; in that you could tell your machine to ignore'em. There's a sort of tragedy of the commons problem - if everyone agrees to listen to the slowdown requests, it will work, but all you need is a significant minority of the irresponsible, and there'll be no gain in listening to them.
Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery)
On 8/16/07, Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, that's why I was limiting the need (requirement) to only 1-few ASN hops upstream. I view this as similar to some backbones offering a special blackhole everything BGP community that usually is not transitive. This is the Oh Crap, Don't Blackhole Everything but Slow Stuff Down BGP community. and the two hops upstream but not the source router spools the packets to the hard drive? Ideally you'd want to influence the endpoint protocol stack, right? (Which brings us to the user trust thing.)
What's up at NTL/VirginMedia?
Seems to be a large-scale outage going on at Virgin Media ex-NTL, AS5089 in the UK. Lost service about 1600GMT yesterday to a wide range of locations throughout the country. Recorded phone message now saying several post code areas in SW London suburbs still dark, but status page shows lots'o'tickets open all over the country. Anyone know what's up?
Re: Why do we use facilities with EPO's?
I fail to see why one couldn't have TWO buttons of the same type This is done on quite a few lumps of industrial machinery. While one of the priest-theologians meant well, we learned what happened when holy water is sprinkled into the high voltage supply of a gas chromatograph That's a literal example of what happens when faith and science collide. More broadly, quote of note from Royal Marine officer after recent floods in the UK - they were shoring up the walls of a major power-grid switching station, with water inside the facility and much more outside. I remembered electricity and water don't mix, but it wasn't a good moment to think that.. With 600,000 customers hanging off it, needs must when the devil drives.
Re: Routing public traffic across county boundaries in Europe
On 7/27/07, Lionel Elie Mamane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What I would expect is that you still have to obey lawful intercept legislation, so you need to interconnect with the government black box rooms, and these are at the major IXs in the country. (And I've repeatedly heard that in the Netherlands, for some time in the past at least, the way the ISPs got rid of the lawful intercept obligation was to have the AMS-IX send a copy of *all* the traffic to the government black box. Not that they had to do that, but it was the easiest / cheapest way.) Easiest/cheapest for the Dutch ISPs. Not for the government though! AMS-IX can be 200GBits a second, so I wonder if this was an exercise in killing the snoopers with kindness. If there were any such obligation, I'd expect the real reason not to be the egress country can snoop, but it is harder for the originating country to snoop. Perhaps. The French and German govts are not keen on their officials using Blackberrys 'cos all European BlackBerry traffic goes via a building near my house (single point of failure? we don't need no stinkin' redundancy!) in London.
Re: China Internet problems
The Internet treats censorship as damage and...Delivery Status Notification (Failure) Can't find host mx201.sina.com It remains true that censorship is a single point of failure. On 7/18/07, Sean Donelan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Reuters is reporting that some traffic between China and other countries is having some problems. Sina.com and 263.com have notified its users about problems with overseas e-mail. http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNewsstoryID=2007-07-18T124822Z_01_PEK91855_RTRIDST_0_TECH-CHINA-INTERNET-COL.XMLarchived=False BEIJING (Reuters) - Internet users and company officials in China on Wednesday blamed a series of disruptions to cross-border email traffic on adjustments to the country's vast Internet surveillance system.
Re: UK ISPs v. US ISPs (was RE: Network Level Content Blocking)
On 6/10/07, William Allen Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sean Donelan wrote: UK ISP associations have developed a centralized blocking solution with IWF providing the decision making of what to filter. 90% of the UK broadband users accept the same voluntary decisions about what to filter. I have not seen any evidence presented that *any* UK broadband users either *know* about or accept the voluntary decisions of their ISP, made for them in their 'Net Nanny role. Could you point to the URL for this scientific polling data? I learned of it this week from NANOG and UKNOF.
Re: Network Level Content Blocking (UK) for people who cant be bothered to read the article..
On 6/7/07, Leigh Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since only port 80 is passed through the filter then of course there are all manor of things you could do to circumvent the filter and this will of course always be the case as people will use whatever they can to get what they want. After all, all yuo really need to do in order to get all the dodgy material you want is to subscribe to a decent USENET service and get it all from that. For what it's worth though it works well for what it is and we certainly get a few hits on it. Have you been asked by the Dibble for the squid's server log yet? It's the obvious next step - if you had a URL request blocked, obviously you were where you shouldn't have been. You're either with us...or you're with the terrorists.
Re: Network Level Content Blocking (UK) for people who cant be bothered to read the article..
On 6/8/07, Leigh Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I actually removed the code in Squid that logs so it's impossible to log without significant development work ;-) -- Leigh Porter Internet governance by benevolent conspiracy:-)
Re: Network Level Content Blocking (UK) for people who cant be bothered to read the article..
Well, it seems to be a standard operating procedure that anyone in a high profile case gets accused of possessing child porn via anonymous leaks from the police to the national press. (See the Forest Gate incident - not only did they tear the guy's house apart looking for nonexistent chemical weapons, they accidentally shot him, then they briefed the tabloids that his computer was riddled with evil images of children. Naturally, he was never prosecuted for same.) If any UK ISP is willing to NOT do this, you've got my business.
Re: Network Level Content Blocking (UK)
I strongly recommend you read Richard Clayton's paper on how (among other things) one could hack the Cleanfeed system to *find* the really bad stuff. He and his colleagues at the Cambridge Computer Lab also have a fine blog - http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org
Re: Slate Podcast on Estonian DOS atatck
On 5/23/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just now got from a 6 hours beer fest with ISP/CERT/military/etc. guys who have been working on these attacks on Estonian infrastructure for the past 3 weeks here in Tallinn.. so if I make less sense than usual, please forgive me. Beer good. Sitting with these folks for the past week, I got so impressed with the abuse handling work they are doing that even I, who had a very negative opinion of Estonia and cyber-crime, completely changed my mind. Their CERT is *extremely* responsive, their ISPs are all talking and cooperating on abuse and security (and drinking beer). Things are very different from what they were even just a year ago. Even their Police force is clued. If anyone has issues in Estonia, I'd strongly urge you to contact the Estonian CERT at www.cert.ee, and you most likely won't get disappointed. A lot of good people over here. Gadi. How serious was the attack really? The national press reporting was either nonexistent or hysterical (Cyberwar! Woo!), but it didn't disturb anyone to post to NANOG at any point, and it does not seem to have had any measurable real-world consequences. Was this because a) it wasn't really that serious, b) it was serious but mitigation was successful, or c) being well-mitigated (BCP38 and the like) from the word go, its seriousness or otherwise wasn't obvious?
Very high latency from Monaco377CWNTLWorld
traceroute to 86.0.6.36 (86.0.6.36), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 192.168.32.1 (192.168.32.1) 2.607 ms 1.162 ms 1.068 ms 2 netsgo-195-78-19-65.monaco377.com (195.78.19.65) 745.752 ms 608.475ms 639.013 ms 3 * netsgo-195-78-19-81.monaco377.com (195.78.19.81) 701.242 ms 579.526ms 4 195.78.8.1 (195.78.8.1) 466.199 ms 620.392 ms 645.002 ms 5 195.78.4.18 (195.78.4.18) 532.842 ms 534.536 ms 690.368 ms 6 * * * 7 so-5-2-0-dcr2.par.cw.net (195.2.10.94) 867.274 ms 582.233 ms 737.946ms 8 * so-0-0-0-dcr2.tsd.cw.net (195.2.10.138) 179.080 ms 642.880 ms 9 ntl-interconnect-lnd.cw.net (195.2.9.150) 690.381 ms 954.678 ms 817.904 ms 10 bre-bb-b-ge-000-0.inet.ntl.com (213.105.174.226) 717.548 ms 553.635ms 621.631 ms [snipped] WTF?
Re: Question on 7.0.0.0/8
On 4/14/07, Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another interesting case: 025/8 Jan 95 UK Ministry of Defense (Updated - Jan 06) # whois -h whois.arin.net 25.0.0.0 | more OrgName:DINSA, Ministry of Defence OrgID: DMD-16 Address:DINSA, HQ DCSA Address:H4, Copenacre City: Corsham StateProv: Wiltshire PostalCode: SN13 9NR Country:GB Fair enough. RAF Corsham is the HQ of DINSA and a few other military comms and IT orgs. NetRange: 25.0.0.0 - 25.255.255.255 CIDR: 25.0.0.0/8 NetName:RSRE-EXP NetHandle: NET-25-0-0-0-1 Parent: NetType:Direct Assignment NameServer: NS1.CS.UCL.AC.UK NameServer: RELAY.MOD.UK Comment: RegDate:1985-01-28 Updated:2005-09-06 Ah. I think you'll find this is a result of there being some legacy stuff from before the UK NIC, Nominet, was set up in 1996. Before then, the de facto authority was the academics, JANET, working out of the University of London Computer Centre. Hence cs.ucl.ac.uk getting in there. There are a few domain names in a similar position - post nominet, the .uk zone was reorganised to assign 2LDs like *.gov.uk, but there were already a few 1LD .uk assignments, notably mod.uk and parliament.uk. I'm not sure if it's been cleared up who is responsible for them.
Re: airfrance.com
On 4/3/07, Geo. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've poked around most of yesterday and this morning and initially I thought it was a dns problem but it appears to me that www.airfrance.com is blocking a whole lot of the IP space in the US from accessing their website. Using proxy servers I find that ATT network, my network are both blocked but roadrunner can access their website. Can you? AF has country-specific front pages. Airfrance.com, the generic corporate site, is OK from here; Airfrance.us is reachable from London (if you lie:-)) but extremely slow loading. Airfrance.fr is OK. Airfrance.co.uk is slow but OK. 1 1 1 0 0.7 ms 66.36.240.2 AS14361 HOPONE-DCA c-vl102-d1.acc.dca2.hopone.net.255 US Unix: 15:25:04.988 2 0 0 1 0.7 ms [+0ms] 66.36.224.248 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 gec3.core1.dca2.hopone.net. 0 miles [+0] 254 US Unix: 16:24:46. 18 3 5 3 1 1.4 ms [+0ms] 66.36.224.18 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 ge3-0.core1.iad1.hopone.net.0 miles [+0] 253 US Unix: 15:26:48.426 4 3 1 1 1.5 ms [+0ms] 66.36.224.178 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 ge-3-0-0.ashbb2.ashburn.opentransit.net.0 miles [+0] 252 US Unix: 15:24:25. 45 5 3 1 2 1.5 ms [+0ms] 193.251.243.141 AS5511 OPENTRANSIT gi4-0-0.ashcr1.ashburn.opentransit.net. 0 miles [+0] 251 FR [Router did not respond] 6 * 82 81 81 ms [+80ms] 193.251.242.97 AS5511 OPENTRANSIT po6-0.pascr3.paris.opentransit.net. 0 miles [+0] 250 FR [Router did not respond] 7 120 82 82 82 ms [+0ms] 193.251.129.61 AS5511 OPENTRANSIT po9-0.pascr1.paris.opentransit.net. 0 miles [+0] 249 FR [Router did not respond] 8 128 83 84 82 ms [+0ms] 193.251.126.57 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 pos15-0.ntsta202.paris.francetelecom.net. -1 miles [+0] 0 miles [+0]248 FR [Router did not respond] 9 154 82 82 82 ms [+0ms] 193.251.126.70 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 po14-0.ntsta302.paris.francetelecom.net.-1 miles [+0] 0 miles [+0] 247 FR [Router did not respond] 10 97 88 89 88 ms [+6ms] 193.251.126.93 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 pos0-3-0-0.nrlyo302.lyon.francetelecom.net. -1 miles [+0] 0 miles [+0] 245 FR [Router did not respond] 11 150 96 96 96 ms [+7ms] 193.252.101.149 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 po9-2.ncmar302.marseille.francetelecom.net. -1 miles [+0] 0 miles [+0] 245 FR [Router did not respond] 12 150 96 96 96 ms [+0ms] 193.253.14.102 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 pos-4-0.marg2.marseille.raei.francetelecom.net. -1 miles [+0] 0 miles [+0] 244 FR [Router did not respond] 13 124 100 100 98 ms [+2ms] 81.52.15.234 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 atm-6-0-0-732.sph2.sophia.raei.transitip.francetelecom.net. -1 miles [+0] 0 miles [+0] 241 FR [Router did not respond] 14 120 104 102 98 ms [+0ms] 81.54.114.30 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 unknown.rain.fr -1 miles [+0] 0 miles [+0] 241 FR [Router did not respond] 15 121 100 106 98 ms [+0ms] [192.168.x.x] AS16559 REALCONNECT-01 [Internal] -1 miles [+0] 0 miles [+0] 241 [??][Router did not respond] 16 * * 106 98 ms [+0ms] [192.168.x.x] AS16559 REALCONNECT-01 [Internal] -1 miles [+0] 0 miles [+0] 238 [??][Router did not respond] 17 * * * 98 ms [+0ms] [Unknown] [Unknown - Firewall did not respond] -1 miles [+0] 0 miles [+0] 18 * * 98 98 ms [+0ms] 193.57.244.15 AS25186 TRANSIT-VPN-AS [Reached Destination]double6.airfrance.fr.
Re: airfrance.com
On 4/3/07, Geo. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So far everyone who responded has managed to get the site to come up. When I go to www.airfrance.com from anywhere in my network 216.144.0.0/18 I simply get a timeout using anything including telnet to port 80, see below 15 297ms 299ms 299ms pos9-0.ncmar302.Marseille.francetelecom.net [193.252.101.53] 16 300ms 295ms 300ms pos-4-0.marg2.marseille.raei.francetelecom.net [193.253.14.102] 17 306ms 301ms 296ms atm-6-0-0-732.sph2.sophia.raei.transitip.francetelecom.net [81.52.15.234] That's almost certainly Sophia-Antipolis - a big location for data centres, including France Tel and IBM Global Services, between Nice and Cannes.
PGE on data centre cooling..
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasicarticleId=9014674source=rss_news50
Re: [funsec] Not so fast, broadband providers tell big users (fwd)
On 3/13/07, Daniel Senie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How do longer-range wireless technologies like WiMAX potentially impact the equation? If cell phone companies have not covered an area, what makes you think WiMAX is a magic solution? How well does WiMAX work to cover hilly, forested, rural terrain? Who will pay to put up enough towers to provide coverage? Will municipalities unhappy about the look of towers consider this a reasonable alternative to running services along telephone poles that already exist? If the cell carriers haven't found it economic to provide coverage, why would the WiMAX provider? WiMAX should work very well for hilly and forested terrain - it splits the signal across any multipath that may be around, so the more the merrier (within reason).
Re: [funsec] Not so fast, broadband providers tell big users (fwd)
On 3/14/07, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Current wireless technologies have no problem with the rural aspect, just the hills and foliage. Get on a tall enough tower in a remote enough area, you can have quite a range on your wireless coverage. I'm not sure of the cost of a cell tower setup, but the cost outfitting a tower for WISP use on 3 bands is under $10k. --Mike Currently, the cost of a typical cellular Node-B is around 10k in sterling. Plus you have various infrastructure elements that don't exist in 802.world, RNCs, BSCs, and softswitches. And they cost serious money. Whereas the 802 technologies are natively IP and Ethernet, and the business layer stuff is basically the AAA and Diameter kit you already have.
Re: [funsec] Not so fast, broadband providers tell big users (fwd)
Broadband-over-powerlines, like its cousin ethernet-over-domestic wiring, is one of those things that gets discovered every three years, hyped, oohed and aahed over, then disappears. Reason: it's a solution looking for a problem, for the reasons given above. Why not, rather than try to kludge data over high voltage, just borrow the pylons or the cable dig and use proper data networking technology? If the electricity grid is suitable for good BPL, there's probably a reasonable copperline phone network, and anyway the distances are short enough that laying cat5 isn't out of the question. And if you're in the wilds enough that you can't do DSL, then you probably can't do BPL. Something amusing in the fact that power-over-ethernet is a lot more useful than ethernet-over-power!
Re: Cable/DSL and the future of high-speed internet
Data point: a considerable number of mobile ops worldwide are pulling fibre to their Node-Bs or at least their RNCs. (No, wireline types - not Republican National Committees, Radio Network Controllers - you have one for every 10-15 Node-Bs, for a very rough idea) Sources say the triggering event is the enablement of HSDPA (and presumably Revision A for the CDMA world, although I haven't heard of a CDMA carrier fibreing up yet). Some deployments so far have been up to 2,000 cell sites with fibre backhaul.
Paul Vixie: Suspected Arms Dealer
One of my blog-related interests is the career of Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout. I recently checked out the namebase.org social network diagram for him...and was a little surprised to see where our very own Paul Vixie comes in it. http://www.namebase.org/cgi-bin/nb06?BOUT_VICTOR_ Is there something he's not telling us? More seriously, good work.
Re: Paul Vixie: Suspected Arms Dealer
On 3/7/07, J. Oquendo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . Alright truth be told. Paul is using telekinetic coding that gets inserted to DNS lookups via Bind in which he then secretly inserts the KFC secret recipe into p2p apps in Siberia. There... Happy now? That's roughly what I assumed.
Re: FCC on wifi at hotel
On 3/1/07, Brandon Galbraith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2/28/07, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a small number of wifi users with a card in a laptop to get to cellular broadband, itd be pretty easy.. Or directional wifi uplink to a building nearby, preferably G vs B (for 54Mbps). Just *say* you're using the hotel WLAN. If they show up with a spectrum analyser, well...you'll have to pay, but then that reminds me of the calibration standard for the first radar speed trap, which was based on a measurement by the National Physical Laboratory on the basis that if you could prove the NPL wrong you deserved to get away with speeding.
Re: wifi for 600, alex
It shouldn't be that difficult, because one device that does manage its power output shouldn't affect anyone else who doesn't.
Re: wifi for 600, alex
Another mobile-land feature 802.11 could do with - dynamic TX power management. All the cellular systems have the ability to dial down the transmitter power the nearer to the BTS/Node B you get. This is not just good for batteries, but also good for radio, as s/n has diminishing returns to transmitter power. WLAN, though, shouts as loud next to the AP as on the other side of the street, which is Not Good for a system that operates in unlicensed spectrum. UMTS, for example, has a peak tx wattage an order of magnitude greater than WLAN, but due to the power management, in a picocell environment comparable to a WLAN the mean tx wattage is less by a factor of 10.
Re: wifi for 600, alex
On 2/16/07, JAKO Andras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please don't forget that 802.11 uses the CSMA/CA protocol. All nodes, including the AP and _all_ the clients should hear each others' transmissions so that they can decide when to transmit (when the medium is idle). Yes. But so long as they can all interfere with each other, you're still going to pay a cost in informational overhead to sort it out at a higher protocol layer, and you're still going to have the electronic warfare in a phone box problem at places like NANOG meetings. 3GSM is the same - even the presence of ~10,000 RF engineers doesn't prevent the dozens of contending networks.. Essentially, this is a problem that perhaps shouldn't be fixed. Having an open-slather RF design and sorting it out in meta means that WLAN is quick, cheap, and hackable. Trust me, you don't want to think about radio spectrum licensing. On the other hand, that particular sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic quality about it causes problems. Intentionally limiting the clients' TX powers to the minimum needed to communicate with the AP makes RTS/CTS almost obligatory, which may be considered a bad thing. Once again, in the ideal situation all nodes hear each other, at least from the CSMA/CA's point of view. Regards, Andras I'm not sure that's ideal in my point of view, in so far as we're talking about a point-to-multipoint network rather than a mesh. And why would anyone ever want to use more power/create more entropy than necessary? This argument sailed around in the early days of WiMAX, when people were talking about running it in unlicensed 5.8GHz spectrum and finally getting away from the telcos and the government, until they realised that it's not big wi-fi and isn't designed to cope with contending networks.. Alex
Re: Every incident is an opportunity (was Re: Hackers hit key Internet traffic computers)
On 2/12/07, Gadi Evron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As a very smart person said a couple of weeks ago when this same argument was made: are you willing to do tech-support for my mother is she uses linux? Gadi. Name anyone techie who doesn't have to do tech support for their mother on MS Windows..
Re: motivating security, was Re: Every incident...
On 2/12/07, Edward Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Security is never something I should want, it is always something I have to have. No-one wants security, they want not-trouble. Similar to the point that no-one wants energy, they want warm rooms and cold beers. Perhaps we need a concept of security efficiency? Security has to resign itself to being second-class in the hearts and minds of society. Security has to be provided in response to it's environment and not complain about it's lot in life. (I realize that this post doesn't say anything about people dying - I've heard that in other contexts.) Yup Society holds individuals accountable for many forms of irresponsible behaviour. This is true, but individuals are not held entirely accountable. A reckless driver can cause a multi-car accident on an exit ramps and cause a tie up for the entire morning rush. Are the victims of this compensated? What about the person who loses a job offer because of a missed interview and suffers fallout from that? And maybe it isn't recklessness. A failed water pump may cause a breakdown, followed by an accident, etc. Mentioned just to spread the analogy out. The whole logic of modern computing is that everything migrates towards users. Why shouldn't security? After all, if people didn't let the nasties in, 'twould be very hard to start a botnet.. There's no need to make exceptions for computer users. Make computer-owners/users pay in full for damages caused by their equipment with no discount for incompetence. If that happened, then computer users would be the exception. I can't think of any situation in which an accident might occur and the one causing the accident pays in full to everyone. [snip] True, but there are plenty of examples of either market (insurance) or government (regulation) solutions to problems where the individual's misfortune also falls on society. Arguably the bulk of the costs of malware proliferation is an externality - the benefits go to the enemy, but costs aren't restricted to the hacked. Not even close. I used to work for a gov't facility whose mission was science. They had a serious telecommunications problem on their hands. Although it was important to solve, they funded science first - up until all the telecom problems became too annoying and money was allocated to solve the problem. The appropriate analogy is the Great Stink of 1858. London had been suffering from not having sewerage for years, and poor people had been dying in droves from cholera, but nobody with the power to do anything about it cared enough until the Thames got so bad the committee rooms on the river side of Whitehall stank so much nobody would go in them. Then, wham, out came the chequebook, the compulsory purchase powers, and in came Joseph Bazalgette, with the result of an infrastructure used to this day.
Re: motivating security, was Re: Every incident...
d Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't mean to say that the car owners or computer users are free from blame. But holding a sentiment of just blaming users is not helpful. OTOH, if there was something the operators could clearly do to stop this, someone would have suggested it by now. (There are all them laws about snooping traffic, etc.) I thought I had a conclusion ... but I don't. Sure. Demonising sufferers didn't stop the spread of AIDS, probably made it worse (Saudi Arabia has one of the fastest growing HIV problems, they say). But shouting at people to wear condoms/use a firewall has diminishing returns. It's complicated.
Fwd: death of the net predicted by deloitte -- film at 11
-- Forwarded message -- From: Alexander Harrowell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Feb 12, 2007 4:13 PM Subject: Re: death of the net predicted by deloitte -- film at 11 To: Paul Vixie [EMAIL PROTECTED] Paul, that's very interesting. A query: AMT Site: A multicast-enabled network not connected to the multicast backbone served by an AMT Gateway. It could also be a stand-alone AMT Gateway. Should that read: a multicast-enabled network, not connected to the multicast backbone, served by an AMT Gateway? It looks like it from the meat of the RFC. On 12 Feb 2007 06:14:00 +, Paul Vixie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mboned-auto-multicast-00 is what i expect. note: i've drunk that koolaid am helping on the distribution side. -- Paul Vixie
Re: Request for topic death on Cold War history (was RE: Every incident is an opportunity)
Causality? WW2=nukes, cold war=arpanet=internet, surely? On 2/12/07, micky coughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmm, let's see. Nukes = cold war = arpanet = internet Yup, looks ok. On 2/12/07, Olsen, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course, but the point was the goal of that targetting. The US public by and large believed, and seems to still believe [snip] If anniliation is the goal than it's of no importance, just bomb the densest population centers. To borrow from snarky comments past: Unless Vendor C has introduced a no nuclear-apocalpyse command that I need to enable in IOS, it seems that this thread has wandered far from the flock and subsequently lost most any relevance to the listserv and/or topic that spawned it. Cold War strategy is fascinating and all (I do mean that in a non-snarky way) but does it really belong on NANOG after it has seemingly dropped any pretense of being an analogy for anything list-relevant? -Feren Sr Network Engineer DeVry University
Re: Every incident is an opportunity (was Re: Hackers hit key Internet traffic computers)
3. Even if your computer is secure, miscreants depend on your trust. Be suspicious of messages, files, software; even if it appears to come from a person or company you trust. Anti-spam, anti-spyware, anit-virus, anti-phishing tools can help. But don't assume because you are using them, you can click on everything and still be safe. The miscreants are always finding new ways around them. It may just be human nature, but people seem to engage in more risky behavior when they believe they are protected. 4. If your computer is compromised, unplug it until you can get it fixed. Its not going to fix itself, and ignoring the problem is just going to get worse. 5. Paying for AV software is not a solution, no matter how often it's been on TV. (Norton - the antivirus software one finds on virus-infected computers)
Any NANOGers going to 3GSM World Congress?
For the mobile maniacs among us..if you're coming to Barcelona, and flying Iberia, BA or Lufthansa via Heathrow, beware that your aircraft will come in at Terminal A but your checked baggage will be sent to Terminal B. Do NOT pass through the doors to the baggage reclaim in Terminal A because you won't be able to get back through, and will have to pass through the security checkpoint in Terminal B Departures to recover your bags. This will be problematic for non-Spanish speakers and impossible for anyone who has thrown away their ticket stub. That is, of course, if any NANOG users actually *have* checked baggage.
Re: Hackers hit key Internet traffic computers
It was clear from the highly reliable index I call the Nanogdex that nothing was seriously amiss. Ndex value of 0, i.e. no traffic on-list, means either all systems go! or outage so serious that Mitre is unreachable. Stockpile ammunition Ndex value of 5, i.e. +/=100 mails/day, means serious crisis A caveat - Ndex 4 is usually situation normal, members bored and discussing the relative merits of the Chicago and Kansas City cable tie knots.
Re: who was the last legit spammer?
Define legit spammer. Do you mean one who was just advertising a real product, albeit in an objectionable fashion, as opposed to those who are trying to spread malware or commit fraud?
Re: Cable-Tying with Waxed Twine
looks like a string of half hitchen to me. of course, if you need something huskier you could do a timber hitch, then a half, repeat as necessary. wasn't anyone else here a boy scout?
Re: Colocation in the US.
How long before we rediscover the smokestack? After all, a colo is an industrial facility. A cellar beneath, a tall stack on top, and let physics do the rest. Anyway, RJ45 for Water is a cracking idea. I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't already standardised pipe connectors in use elsewhere - perhaps the folks on NAWOG (North American Water Operators Group) could help? Or alt.plumbers.pipe? But seriously folks, if the plumbers don't have that, then other people who use a lot of flexible pipework might. Medical, automotive, or aerospace come to mind. All I can think of about that link is a voice saying Genius - or Madman?
Re: Colocation in the US.
On 1/25/07, Paul Vixie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How long before we rediscover the smokestack? After all, a colo is an industrial facility. A cellar beneath, a tall stack on top, and let physics do the rest. odd that you should say that. when building out in a warehouse with 28 foot ceilings, i've just spec'd raised floor (which i usually hate, but it's safe if you screw all the tiles down) with horizontal cold air input, and return air to be taken from the ceiling level. i agree that it would be lovely to just vent the hot air straight out and pull all new air rather than just make up air from some kind of ground-level outside source... but then i'd have to run the dehumidifier on a 100% duty cycle. so it's 20% make up air like usual. but i agree, use the physics. convected air can gather speed, and i'd rather pull it down than suck it up. woefully do i recall the times i've built out under t-bar. hot aisles, cold aisles. gack. Seriously - all those big old mills that got turned into posh apartments for the CEO's son. Eight floors of data centre and a 200 foot high stack, and usually an undercroft as the cold-source. And usually loads of conduit everywhere for the cat5 and power. (In the UK a lot of them are next to a canal, but I doubt greens would let you get away with dumping hot water.)
Re: Google wants to be your Internet
Why don't utilities strike deals with celluar providers to push data back to HQ over the cellular network at low utilization times (how many people use GPRS in the dead of night?). -brandon Enron did this with SkyTel paging in California. Or rather they wanted to do it, couldn't hack it, so used the bulk-bought pager airtime as a perk.
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
Said Sprunk: Caching per se doesn't apply to P2P networks, since they already do that as part of their normal operation. The key is getting users to contact peers who are topologically closer, limiting the bits * distance product. It's ridiculous that I often get better transfer rates with peers in Europe than with ones a few miles away. The key to making things more efficient is not to limit the bandwidth to/from the customer premise, but limit it leaving the POP and between ISPs. If I can transfer at 100kB/s from my neighbors but only 10kB/s from another continent, my opportunistic client will naturally do what my ISP wants as a side effect. The second step, after you've relocated the rate limiting points, is for ISPs to add their own peers in each POP. Edge devices would passively detect when more than N customers have accessed the same torrent, and they'd signal the ISP's peer to add them to its list. That peer would then download the content, and those N customers would get it from the ISP's peer. Creative use of rate limits and acess control could make it even more efficient, but they're not strictly necessary. Good thinking. Where do I sign? Regarding your first point, it's really surprising that existing P2P applications don't include topology awareness. After all, the underlying TCP already has mechanisms to perceive the relative nearness of a network entity - counting hops or round-trip latency. Imagine a BT-like client that searches for available torrents, and records the round-trip time to each host it contacts. These it places in a lookup table and picks the fastest responders to initiate the data transfer. Those are likely to be the closest, if not in distance then topologically, and the ones with the most bandwidth. Further, imagine that it caches the search - so when you next seek a file, it checks for it first on the hosts nearest to it in its routing table, stepping down progressively if it's not there. It's a form of local-pref. The third step is for content producers to directly add their torrents to the ISP peers before releasing the torrent directly to the public. This gets official content pre-positioned for efficient distribution, making it perform better (from a user's perspective) than pirated content. The two great things about this are (a) it doesn't require _any_ changes to existing clients or protocols since it exploits existing behavior, and (b) it doesn't need to cover 100% of the content or be 100% reliable, since if a local peer isn't found with the torrent, the clients will fall back to their existing behavior (albeit with lower performance). Importantly, this option makes it perform better without making everyone else's perform worse, a big difference to a lot of proposed QOS schemes. This non-evilness is much to be preferred. Further, it also makes use of the Zipf behaviour discussed upthread - if 20 per cent of the content and 20 per cent of the users eat 80 per cent of the bandwidth, forward-deploying that 20 per cent of the content will save 80 per cent of the inter-provider bandwidth (which is what we care about, right, 'cos we're paying for it). One thing that _does_ potentially break existing clients is forcing all of the tracker (including DHT) requests through an ISP server. The ISP could then collect torrent popularity data in one place, but more importantly it could (a) forward the request upstream, replacing the IP with its own peer, and (b) only inform clients of other peers (including the ISP one) using the same intercept point. This looks a lot more like a traditional transparent cache, with the attendant reliability and capacity concerns, but I wouldn't be surprised if this were the first mechanism to make it to market. It's a nice idea to collect popularity data at the ISP level, because the decision on what to load into the local torrent servers could be automated. Once torrent X reaches a certain trigger level of popularity, the local server grabs it and begins serving, and the local-pref function on the clients finds it. Meanwhile, we drink coffee. However, it's a potential DOS magnet - after all, P2P is really a botnet with a badge. And the point of a topology-aware P2P client is that it seeks the nearest host, so if you constrain it to the ISP local server only, you're losing part of the point of P2P for no great saving in peering/transit. However, it's going to be competing with a deeply-entrenched pirate culture, so the key will be attractive new users who aren't technical enough to use the existing tools via an easy-to-use interface. Not surprisingly, the same folks are working on deals to integrate BT (the protocol) into STBs, routers, etc. so that users won't even know what's going on beneath the surface -- they'll just see a TiVo-like interface and pay a monthly fee like with cable. As long as they don't interfere with the user's right to choose someone else's content, fine. Alex
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
Sprunk: It's a nice idea to collect popularity data at the ISP level, because the decision on what to load into the local torrent servers could be automated. Note that collecting popularity data could be done at the edges without forcing all tracker requests through a transparent proxy. Yes. This is my point. It's a good thing to do, but centralising it is an ungood thing to do, because... Once torrent X reaches a certain trigger level of popularity, the local server grabs it and begins serving, and the local-pref function on the clients finds it. Meanwhile, we drink coffee. However, it's a potential DOS magnet - after all, P2P is really a botnet with a badge. I don't see how. If you detect that N customers are downloading a torrent, then having the ISP's peer download that torrent and serve it to the customers means you consume 1/N upstream bandwidth. That's an anti-DOS :) All true. My point is that forcing all tracker requests through a proxy makes that machine an obvious DDOS target. It's got to have an open interface to all hosts on your network on one side, and to $world on the other, and if it goes down, then everyone on your network loses service. And you're expecting traffic distributed over a large number of IP addresses because it's a P2P application, so distinguishing normal traffic from a botnet attack will be hard. And the point of a topology-aware P2P client is that it seeks the nearest host, so if you constrain it to the ISP local server only, you're losing part of the point of P2P for no great saving in peering/transit. That's why I don't like the idea of transparent proxies for P2P; you can get 90% of the effect with 10% of the evilness by setting up sane rate-limits. OK. As long as they don't interfere with the user's right to choose someone else's content, fine. If you're getting it from an STB, well, there may not be a way for users to add 3rd party torrents; how many users will be able to figure out how to add the torrent URLs (or know where to find said URLs) even if there is an option? Remember, we're talking about Joe Sixpack here, not techies. You would, however, be able to pick whatever STB you wanted (unless ISPs deliberately blocked competitors' services). Please. Joe has a right to know these things. How long before Joe finds out anyway?
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
Gibbard: It seems like if there's an issue here it's that different parties have different self-interests, and those whose interests aren't being served aren't passing on the costs to the decision makers. The users' performance interests are served by getting the fastest downloads possible. The ISP's financial interests would be served by their flat rate customers getting their data from somewhere close by. If it becomes enough of a problem that the ISPs are motivated to deal with it, one approach would be to get the customers' financial interests better aligned with their own, with differentiated billing for local and long distance traffic. That could be seen as a confiscation of a major part of the value customers derive from ISPs. Perth, on the West Coast of Australia, claims to be the world's most isolated capitol city (for some definition of capitol). Next closest is probably Adelaide, at 1300 miles. Jakarta and Sydney are both 2,000 miles away. Getting stuff, including data, in and out is expensive. Like Seattle, Perth has many of its ISPs in the same downtown sky scraper, and a very active exchange point in the building. It is much cheaper for ISPs to hand off local traffic to each other than to hand off long distance traffic to their far away transit providers. Like ISPs in a lot of similar places, the ISPs in Perth charge their customers different rates for cheap local bandwidth than for expensive long distance bandwidth. When I was in Perth a couple of years ago, I asked my usual questions about what effect this billing arrangement was having on user behavior. I was told about a Perth-only file sharing network. Using the same file sharing networks as the rest of the world was expensive, as they would end up hauling lots of data over the expensive long distance links and users didn't want to pay for that. Instead, they'd put together their own, which only allowed local users and thus guaranteed that uploads and downloads would happen at cheap local rates. Googling for more information just now, what I found were lots of stories about police raids, so I'm not sure if it's still operational. Brendan Behan: There is no situation that cannot be made worse by the presence of a policeman. -Steve
Re: Google wants to be your Internet
The Internet: the world's only industry that complains that people want its product. On 1/20/07, David Ulevitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rodrick Brown wrote: On 1/20/07, Mark Boolootian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cringley has a theory and it involves Google, video, and oversubscribed backbones: http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070119_001510.html The following comment has to be one of the most important comments in the entire article and its a bit disturbing. Right now somewhat more than half of all Internet bandwidth is being used for BitTorrent traffic, which is mainly video. Yet if you surveyed your neighbors you'd find that few of them are BitTorrent users. Less than 5 percent of all Internet users are presently consuming more than 50 percent of all bandwidth. Moreover, those of you who were at NANOG in June will remember some of the numbers Colin gave about Youtube using 20gbps outbound. That number was still early in the exponential growth phase the site is (*still*) having. The 20gbps number would likely seem laughable now. -david
Re: Google wants to be your Internet
Marshall wrote: Those sorts of percentages are common in Pareto distributions (AKA Zipf's law AKA the 80-20 rule). With the Zipf's exponent typical of web usage and video watching, I would predict something closer to 10% of the users consuming 50% of the usage, but this estimate is not that unrealistic. I would predict that these sorts of distributions will continue as long as humans are the primary consumers of bandwidth. Regards Marshall That's until the spambots inherit the world, right?
Re: Comment spammers chewing blogger bandwidth like crazy
Frisvold: How does this make his assumption incorrect? Spam is spam and DNSBLs will likely be very effective when it comes to stopping comment spam. There are, of course, some severe problems with using a DNSBL as a blocklist for comments... But there's a major problem here... A DNSBL is a source blocklist. Since the current trend in spam (comment and smtp) is to use botnets, then by blocking the bots, you also block the users who would make meaningful comments. Especially as bots are usually found in customer dynamic-IP pools. Assigning a value for relative spamminess by country would work up to a point (Italy, Ukraine, we mean you) but the false positive rate is unacceptable. Anyway, very anti-Internet and hardly appropriate for a blog whose declared mission is pan-European opinion.. The argument there is that those users don't deserve to comment if they can't keep their computers clean, but let's get real.. Some of this stuff is getting pretty advanced and it's getting tougher for general users to keep their computers clean. I think a far better system is something along the lines of a SURBL with word filtering. I believe that Akismet does something along these lines. We had a word filter plus lookups of bsb.spamlookup.net. Our experience in the last few months was not good - the rate of false positives was high (essentially all genuines had to be individually approved, and worse, rather than into a queue they usually went into the spamtrap) and the rate of false negatives was nontrivial. We have recently implemented Akismet. It's a major improvement - the false positives have been nearly eliminated and the false negatives down to a couple a week. Multi-layered defence is a must - for example, most comments spam is very self-similar, so you could run a Bayesian filter comparing the stuff rejected by the blocklist with the content of the trap in order to sort between spam and hold for approval. Mind you, some of the Bayesian-beating techniques used for SMTP spam are now showing up in comments - for example, delivering the beneficiary link and a paragraph of news scraped from news.bbc.co.uk, which is a lot like a real (but dull:-)) comment. Perhaps a better filter might be on the links they contain (some domains come up again, and again, and again). Then again, once you're doing anything like that, it's already hit your server and is costing cycles if nothing else. In the future, someone will lose the vote through being mistaken for a spambot. Alex
Re: what happens when you put a typo in a DNSBL server?
Let's all hope they don't think of the possibilities *too* quickly. On 1/16/07, Wes Hardaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A number of ISPs use njabl.org as a DNS BL server. However, starting jan 2 a new domain exists njalb.org which is serving A records for anything queried against it's DNS server. (note the difference: njaBL vs njaLB). Previous to this date a misconfigured ISP was just not being protected by the BL. Now, it's potentially dropping all mail from anyone because of the typo. # dig +short mail.merit.edu a 198.108.1.11 # dig +short 11.1.108.198.combined.njabl.org # dig +short 11.1.108.198.combined.njalb.org 64.20.43.107 66.45.232.66 66.45.232.75 66.45.237.187 I know of at least one ISP that is likely dropping mail from everyone... -- In the bathtub of history the truth is harder to hold than the soap, and much more difficult to find. -- Terry Pratchett
Re: Comment spammers chewing blogger bandwidth like crazy
Gadi, if your HTTP spam DNSBL gets working, we would certainly be interested in feeding our spam filter from it. It is my experience so far that comments spam is not very botnetty but more boxy - the proportion of the total we get from any single IP address is relatively high. Actually, to put that better, rather than being evenly distributed over many IPs, a core-group of the IPs spamming us at any one time account for the bulk of it. 80/20 rule again On 1/14/07, Gadi Evron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 14 Jan 2007, Peter Corlett wrote: On 14 Jan 2007, at 13:27, Tony Finch wrote: [Blog spammers] Most of the IP addresss you listed are are already on various DNS blacklists. Ooh, now that is interesting. I had assumed that the DNSBLs only covered SMTP spam sources, but on reflection I suppose SMTP is a dead protocol these days in the wider Internet. For the benefit of those of us who have been lucky to Recover from ISP work and now herd blogs[0], would you be so kind as to share which blacklists are worthwhile and worth consulting on this front? [0] Before you ask, no, it's no easier, in fact arguably harder work, although the pay and hours are better. But yes, we're hiring. Your assumption is incorrect. These DNSBLs cover spam sent in email, indeed. Thing is, spam is spam and spammers are spammers. Meaning, they spam in every way they can. In my experience 20-70 per cent would be flagged by email DNSBLs. Not accurate to filter out blog spam. As in, bots will be bots. I've been working on a new DNSBL for comment/etc. spam for a while, which will be reliable, generally, it doesn't exist yet for public consumption. There is such a black listing service already, but again, reliability is an issue. Gadi.
Re: Comment spammers chewing blogger bandwidth like crazy
Yes. Fistfulofeuros.net has seen dramatically higher levels of comments spam since last autumn. Not as much as below, but we were offline due to supposed overuse (I say supposed because our host claimed a script we don't have was responsible) over Christmas. On 1/13/07, Thomas Leavitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A friend of mine operates a blog at seeingtheforest.com, and he pays for traffic over a (fairly minimal) cap. He posted this comment recently: http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archives/2007/01/eating_bandwidt.htm Eating Bandwidth Last month something ate up a tremendous amount of bandwidth at Seeing the Forest, costing me a lot of money. So now I regularly check bandwidth use. Why has 209.160.72.10, HopOne in DC, been eating a HUGE amount of bandwidth? Gigabytes! What are they doing? (I banned them.) Why has 220.226.63.254, an IP in India, been eating a tremendous amount of bandwidth? What are they doing? Why has 195.225.177.46, an IP in Ukraine, been eating a tremendous amount of bandwidth? What are they doing? Why has 62.194.1.235 AND 83.170.82.35 AND 89.136.115.220 AND 62.163.39.183 AND 212.241.204.145, all from the /same company/ in Amsterdam, been eating a TREMENDOUS amount of bandwidth? What are they doing? Why is 206.225.90.30 and 69.64.74.56 and Abacus America Inc.eating a TREMENDOUS amount of my bandwidth, *** One of the comments said: Yeah, I've seen a huge bump in my blog's traffic, I haven't figured out what they're doing, but it ate like 4Gb of bandwidth last month. Now that you mention it, I checked last month's stats and yep, there's 209.160.72.10 producing 62% of my blog traffic. I did a little checking around the web and they're an obvious spam host. Banned. *** They also chew up a lot of CPU (comment filter code). At few times, myself, I've had to simply take code offline that was getting hit too heavily... seems like the IPs (and their ilk) listed above are good prospects for a bad behavior blacklist, at a level below that of collaborative spam filter (which doesn't prevent traffic or CPU cycles from being consumed). Given the volume of traffic mentioned, this must be a real problem for some hosts and networks... although, on the other hand, if their marginal use rates are high enough, they might actually be making money off this. Regards, Thomas Leavitt -- Thomas Leavitt - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 831-295-3917 (cell) *** Independent Systems and Network Consultant, Santa Cruz, CA ***
Re: Comment spammers chewing blogger bandwidth like crazy
I was asked to join late in 2005. On 1/13/07, Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you operate fistfulofeuros? That's a good blog/community. I operate wampum and koufax, and draftgore2008, and we do see persistant commerical ad inserts, and the occasional event for which no commercial motive is self-evident. Eric
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
On 1/10/07, Simon Lockhart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed Jan 10, 2007 at 09:43:11AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And it is difficult to plug Internet TV into your existing TV setup. Can your average person plug a cable / satellite / terrestrial (in the UK, the only mainstream option here for self-install is terrestrial)? Power, TV, and antenna? Then why can't they plug in Power, TV phone line? That's where IPTV STBs are going... Simon Especially as more and more ISPs/telcos hand out WLAN boxen of various kinds - after all, once you have some sort of Linux (usually) networked appliance in the user's premises, it's quite simple to deploy more services (hosted VoIP, IPTV, media centre, connected storage, maybe SIP/Asterisk..) on top of that. Slingbox-like features and mobile-world things like UMA are also pushing us that way.
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
On 1/10/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Then why can't they plug in Power, TV phone line? That's where IPTV STBs are going... OK, I can see that you could use such a set-top box to sell broadband to households which would not otherwise buy Internet services. But that is a niche market. Especially as more and more ISPs/telcos hand out WLAN boxen of various kinds - after all, once you have some sort of Linux (usually) networked appliance in the user's premises, it's quite simple to deploy more services (hosted VoIP, IPTV, media centre, connected storage, maybe SIP/Asterisk..) on top of that. He didn't say that his STB had an Ethernet port. And I'm not aware of any generic Linux box that can be used to deploy additional services other than do-it-yourself. And that too is a niche market. For example: France Telecom's consumer ISP in France (Wanadoo) is pushing out lots and lots of WLAN boxes to its subs, which it brands Liveboxes. As well as the router, they also carry their carrier-VoIP and IPTV STB functions. If they can be remotely managed, then they are a potential platform for further services beyond that. See also 3's jump into Slingboxes. Also, note that the proliferation of boxes, each needing its own power connection and some place to sit, is causing its own problems in the household. Stacking boxes is not straightforward because some have air vents on top and others are not flat on top. The TV people have not learned the lessons of that the hi-fi component people learned back in the 1960s. Analogous to the question of whether digicams, iPods etc will eventually be absorbed by mobile devices. Will convergence on IP, which tends towards concentration of functions on a common box, outpace the creation of new boxes? CES this year saw a positive rash of home server products.
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
Joe Abley said: (For example, you might imagine an RSS feed with BitTorrent enclosures, which requires no human presence to trigger the downloads.) I think that is essentially the Democracy client I mentioned. Great thread so far, btw.
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
In the mobile world, there is a lot of telco-led activity around providing streaming video (TV), which always seems to boil down to the following points: 1) Just unicasting it over the radio access network is going to use a lot of capacity, and latency will make streaming good quality tough. 2) Therefore, it has to be delivered in some sort of defined-QOS fashion or else over a dedicated, broadcast or one-way only radio link. 3) That means either a big centralised server we own, or another big radio network we own. 4) 5) PROFIT!! The unexamined assumptions are of course that: 1) Streaming is vital. 2) By definition, just doing it in TCP/IP must mean naive unicasting. 3) Only telco control can provide quality. 4) Mobile data latency is always and everywhere a radio issue. Critique: Why would you want to stream when you can download? *Because letting them download it means they can watch it again, share it with their friends, edit it perhaps?* Why would you want to stream in unicast when there are already models for effective multicast content delivery (see Michael's list)? *See point above!* In my own limited experience with UMTS IP service, it struck me that the biggest source of latency was the wait for DNS resolution, a highly soluble problem with methods known to us all. *But if it's inherent in mobility itself, then only our solutions can fix it...* On 1/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That might be worse for download operators, because people may download an hour of video, and only watch 5 minutes :/ So, from that standpoint, making a video file available for download is wasting order of 90% of the bandwidth used to download it. Considering that this is supposed to be a technically oriented list, I am shocked at the level of ignorance of networking technology displayed here. Have folks never heard of content-delivery networks, Akamai, P2P, BitTorrent, EMule? --Michael Dillon
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
Michael Dillon said: The word multicast in the above quote, does not refer to the set of protocols called IP multicast. Content delivery networks (CDNs) like Akamai are also, inherently, a form of multicasting. So are P2P networks like BitTorrent and EMule. That's precisely what I mean. Marshall Eubanks said: I have heard that several big mobile providers are shortly going to come out with 802.16 networks in support (I assume) of point 3 I don't know whether Sprint Nextel's big 802.16e deployment is going to be used for this, although their keenness on video/TV argues for it. A wide range of technologies are in prospect, including DMB, DAB-IP, DVB-H, Qualcomm's MediaFLO and IPWireless's TDTV. These are radio broadcast systems of various kinds - MediaFLO and TDTV are adaptations of 3G mobile technologies, from the CDMA2000 world and UMTS respectively. TDTV, the one I am most familiar with, is essentially a UMTS-TDD network with all the timeslots set to send (from the base station's viewpoint). 3GPP and 3GPP2 are standardising a Multimedia Broadcast-Multicast Subsystem as an add-on to the R99 core network, expected in 2008. From an IP perspective, most of these are fairly orthogonal, being essentially alternative access networks on the other side of the MBMS control function.
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
Yes, on reflection that should also have been filed under unexamined assumptions. On 1/7/07, Patrick W. Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 7, 2007, at 8:59 AM, Alexander Harrowell wrote: 1) Just unicasting it over the radio access network is going to use a lot of capacity, and latency will make streaming good quality tough. I'm confused why high latency makes streaming good quality tough? Perhaps this goes back to the streaming vs. downloading problem, but every player I've ever seen on a personal computer buffers the content for at least a second, and usually multiple seconds. Latency is measured in, at most, 10th of a second, and jitter another order of magnitude less at least. High latency links with stable throughput are much better for streaming than low latency links with any packet loss, even without buffering. IOW: Latency is irrelevant. -- TTFN, patrick
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
There's also Democracy - http://www.getdemocracy.org Open source TV-over-IP suite including edit tools, server, and client. For these purposes, more interesting is that the transport layer is BitTorrent, so yup, if you're receiving you're also sending. On 1/6/07, Trent Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Howdy, On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 03:18:03AM -0500, Robert Boyle wrote: At 01:52 AM 1/6/2007, Thomas Leavitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If this application takes off, I have to presume that everyone's baseline network usage metrics can be tossed out the window... Interesting. Why does it send so much data? Is it a peer to peer type of system where it redistributes a portion of the stream as you are viewing it to other users? The Venice Project is the new system being developed by Janus Friis and Niklas Zennstr?m, the Scandinavian entrepreneurs behind the revolutionary services Kazaa and Skype. That's probably a safe assumption. :) Cheers, Trent R Tellurian Networks - Global Hosting Solutions Since 1995 http://www.tellurian.com | 888-TELLURIAN | 973-300-9211 Well done is better than well said. - Benjamin Franklin
Re: Phishing and BGP Blackholing
For those of us who read nanog from a mobile device, it's incredibly annoying to have no content in the first few bytes - a lot of mobile e-mail clients (all MS Windows Mobile 5 devices and every Blackberry I've seen) pull the first 0.5KB of each message, i.e. the header, subject line and the first few lines of text, so the user can decide which ones are worth reading in full. Intention is to save bandwidth on low-speed, noncertain networks (GPRS, 1xRTT) which also tend to be metered per-bit - spending actual money to read something like the following is always a great way to start the day. NANOG User wrote: . . Steve wrote: . . Another User temporarily inconvenienced several million electrons to lucubrate anent following philosophy, and how clever silly synonyms for said are: Someone's PGP Key Someone's Smartass Sig
Re: Phishing and BGP Blackholing
(All right then, scroll down for content :-)) On 1/4/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For those of us who read nanog from a mobile device, it's incredibly annoying to have no content in the first few bytes - a lot of mobile e-mail clients (all MS Windows Mobile 5 devices and every Blackberry I've seen) pull the first 0.5KB of each message, i.e. the header, subject line and the first few lines of text, so the user can decide which ones are worth reading in full. Why should all 1 billion Internet users change their behavior just because your minority mail-reading system is broken? Hint: Procmail is your friend. Set up your own mail server and run procmail against all incoming email with newline-greaterthan in the first 500 bytes. You can preprocess these messages to do something like strip headers that you don't read and copy the first few reply lines to be first in the message. That way your mobile device will get more bang for the buck than most other people's. Paul Vixie's colo registry may be of help if you need to find a place to stick your own mail server http://www.vix.com/personalcolo/ --Michael Dillon Minority? A mail client has been standard-ish for the last three to four years of upgrade iterations. There are a LOT of mobiles out there. Granted not many of them are used for e-mail, but that is a percentage that is only going to go up. Anyway, I wouldn't write a letter with nothing worth reading on the first page. I don't write articles with nothing in the first paragraph. Why should over a billion users of the English language, etc, etc..
Re: Security of National Infrastructure
And then I can refuse to read anything that comes from the US. After all, the pharma spam is clearly targeted on US residents. But what about all the Alice.it/Telecom Italia spam? Killfile the whole country, clearly. And the Chinese porno spam? And the Russian hackers? I remember there used to be something called the Internet.. On 12/30/06, Chris L. Morrow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 29 Dec 2006, Randy Bush wrote: Why is it that every company out there allows connections through their firewalls to their web and mail infrastructure from countries that they don't even do business in. Shouldn't it be our default to only allow US based IP addresses and then allow others as needed? The only case I can think of would be traveling folks that need to VPN or something, which could be permitted in the Firewall, but WHY WIDE OPEN ACCESS? We still seem to be in the wild west, but no-one has the [EMAIL PROTECTED] to be braven and block the unnecessary access. maybe because those godless communist sexually deviant vicious perverts out there in the rest of the world are damned hard to differentiate from the sexually deviant vicious perverts we have in our government? and there money is still good. you may want to look at the balance of trade and worry about the opposite flow. I think the better answer is: your network your choices, my network my choices
Re: Home media servers, AUPs, and upstream bandwidth utilization.
Mobile access to Orb or Slingbox does not include using your mobile as a modem. Not sure what that means. They certainly support mobileusbpc or datacard use, so it's not that. Do they mean no Slingbox viewing on a pc attached to a mobile? Why? On 12/26/06, Roland Dobbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 25, 2006, at 3:05 PM, Randy Bush wrote: Kenjiro Cho, Kensuke Fukuda, Hiroshi Esaki, Akira Kato. The Impact and Implications of the Growth in Residential User-to-User Traffic. SIGCOMM2006, pp207-218. Pisa, Italy. September 2006. http://www.iijlab.net/~kjc/papers/rbb-sigcomm2006.pdf I saw this paper when it came out Randy, thanks - I had several interrelated questions about TOS/AUP, and whether or not the presumed legality/illegality of a potentially popular non-infringing home media server vs. standard P2P applications (and the jaundiced view of them, rightly or wrongly) would affect what folks are doing or considering doing. The questions were also somewhat specific to North America, which is a substantially different market than the one described in this paper, and which may well evolve differently. This is a very interesting and thought-provoking paper, but it doesn't answer the questions I was asking, I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. --- Roland Dobbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] // 408.527.6376 voice All battles are perpetual. -- Milton Friedman
Re: Home media servers, AUPs, and upstream bandwidth utilization.
UK UMTS operator 3 (a Hutchison division) is advertising its so-called X-Series service, which provides unlimited data service (plus various lumps of steam telephony) for £25 rising to £40 a month. Skype is being bundled with the devices involved, and here's the kicker - 3 is offering Slingboxen thrown in for £99 extra. 3 has just begun HSDPA Class 5 upgrades in metro areas (claimed maximum 3.6Mbits/s) and plans to launch HSUPA in the uplink next spring, with a claimed max of 1.4Mbits/s. On 12/25/06, Thomas Leavitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Check the AUP and TOS for that EVDO connection - my guess is that by viewing stuff from your Slingbox, you're risking termination of service. I don't have an EVDO connection myself (still toodling along with my Sidekick's GPRS), and part of the reason why is that they have a lot of what I think are unreasonable restrictions on how these services can be used -- this is based on what I've read on the various mailing lists I'm on (Dave Farber's IP, Declan McCullagh's Politech, and Dewayne Hendrick's Dewayne-Net). I don't know how significant restrictions like this are from a competitive perspective, but my broadband ISP also has a very liberal TOS... and that's one of the reasons I use them. I suspect that as items like the Slingbox become more common, folks will start paying more attention to what they're permitted to do with their upstream bandwidth. Thomas Roland Dobbins wrote: I recently purchased a Slingbox Pro, and have set it up so that I can remotely access/control my home HDTV DVR and stream video remotely. My broadband access SP specifically allow home users to run servers, as long as said servers don't cause a problem for the SP infrastructure nor for other users or doing anything illegal; as long as I'm not breaking the law or making problems for others, they don't care. The Slingbox is pretty cool; when I access it, both the video and audio quality are more than acceptable. It even works well when I access it via EVDO; on average, I'm pulling down about 450kb/sec up to about 580kb/sec over TCP (my home upstream link is a theoretical 768kb/sec, minus overhead; I generally get something pretty close to that). What I'm wondering is, do broadband SPs believe that this kind of system will become common enough to make a signficant difference in traffic paterns, and if so, how do they believe it will affect their access infrastructures in terms of capacity, given the typical asymmetries seen in upstream vs. downstream capacity in many broadband access networks? If a user isn't doing something like breaking the law by illegally redistributing copyrighted content, is this sort of activity permitted by your AUPs? If so, would you change your AUPs if you saw a significant shift towards non-infringing upstream content streaming by your broadband access customers? If not, would you consider changing your AUPs in order to allow this sort of upstream content streaming of non-infringing content, with the caveat that users can't caused problems for your infrastructure or for other users, and perhaps with a bandwidth cap? Would you police down this traffic if you could readily classify it, as many SPs do with P2P applications? Would the fact that this type of traffic doesn't appear to be illegal or infringing in any way lead you to treat it differently than P2P traffic (even though there are many legitimate uses for P2P file-sharing systems, the presumption always seems to be that the majority of P2P traffic is in illegally-redistributed copyrighted content, and thus P2P technologies seem to've acquired a taint of distaste from many quarters, rightly or wrongly). Also, have you considered running a service like this yourselves, a la VoIP/IPTV? Vidoeconferencing is somewhat analogous, but in most cases, videoconference calls (things like iChat, Skype videoconferencing, etc.) generally seem to use a less bandwidth than the Slingox, and it seems to me that they will in most cases be of shorter duration than, say, a business traveler who wants to keep up with Lost or 24 and so sits down to stream video from his home A/V system for 45 minutes to an hour at a stretch. Sorry to ramble, this neat little toy just sparked a few questions, and I figured that some of you are dealing with these kinds of issues already, or are anticipating doing so in the not-so-distant future. Any insight or informed speculation greatly appreciated! --- Roland Dobbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] // 408.527.6376 voice All battles are perpetual. -- Milton Friedman -- Thomas Leavitt - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 831-295-3917 (cell) *** Independent Systems and Network Consultant, Santa Cruz, CA ***
Re: today's Wash Post Business section
Yes, Mac OSX has a whois client in Network Utility, but it's crap. On 12/21/06, Robert Bonomi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 20 21:49:49 2006 Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 22:48:06 -0500 Subject: Re: today's Wash Post Business section At 19:31 -0800 12/20/06, Thomas Leavitt wrote: Many people don't understand anything about how they access the Internet, they have a vague idea that they need to type a domain name into a box somewhere... so they type www.myspace.com into the Google search box, the result set pops up, and then they click on the first result to get to the web site in question... I've seen it more than once. Thomas Yeah, granted anyone looking for myspace might meet that demographic, but how many neophytes would use Google for a IP Who Is search? That's the listing I thought odd. Does MS-Windows come with a 'whois' client? Does MacOS come with a 'whois' client? How many people have a search engine as their 'home page' in their web browser? How many end-user types _don't_know_ about anything other than a web-browser/ mail-client for Internet access? With the 'forced education' most people get with regard to spam recieved in their mailbox, it's not suprising that the masses are using the tools they 'know how to use' to check up on things.
Re: Best Email Time
This account sees something over 10x more spam than genuine traffic, almost all of which is autofiltered. On 12/9/06, Rich Kulawiec [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 07:50:57AM -0500, David Hester wrote: CNN recently reported that 90% of all email on the internet is spam. http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/11/27/uk.spam.reut/index.html CNN is behind the times. We passed 90% junk (spam, viruses, bogus virus warnings, worms, outscatter spam, C/R spam, etc.) a few years ago. Locally, over the last three months, we've been rejecting 98% of incoming traffic with just two reported problems from internal and external users. And almost all of that rejected traffic TCP-fingerprints as originating from hosts running Windows. ---Rsk
Re: U.S./Europe connectivity
You cannae break the laws of physics, Captain! Seriously, LINX is the obvious first step. On 12/6/06, David Temkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have you ever had to use Radianz' service? :-) (disclaimer: it's far, far better nowadays) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert E. Seastrom Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 6:38 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: U.S./Europe connectivity [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: BTW, the speed of light in fibre is roughly equal to the speed of electrons in copper and roughly equal to two-thirds the speed of light in a vacuum. You just can't move information faster than about 200,000 km/hr. Slow day at work, Michael? In my universe light in glass moves about 3600 times as fast. :-) ---Rob
Re: How to stop UltraDNS sales people calling
Oh, I don't work here - I'm a burglar On 11/29/06, Jay Hennigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alexander Harrowell wrote: Can I speak to so-and-so? I'm sorry I can't help. I am a counter-terrorism officer monitoring this line for reasons of national security. Can I speak to so-and-so? I'm sorry, he's in prison. He went on a shooting spree at a telemarketing call center. -- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV
Re: How to stop UltraDNS sales people calling
Can I speak to so-and-so? I'm sorry I can't help. I am a counter-terrorism officer monitoring this line for reasons of national security. On 11/29/06, William Yardley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 05:48:55PM -0800, Joseph Jackson wrote: I had ultradns calling also but told them we weren't at a place to use their product and they said ok and let me be. They were always professional on the phone. One more on the side of They call all the time and won't leave us the @#$@ alone, no matter how direct we are. Fortunately, they don't call me (yet), but they have been calling several other folks at our office repeatedly for years, despite being told pretty bluntly to knock it off. w
Re: Verizon PSTN continued
Centralised switching guarantees QOS! Keep saying it and it might be true! On 11/9/06, Sean Donelan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Chris L. Morrow wrote: Working with 2 other carriers on a similar issue, response I rec'd was congestion due to automated political dialers. Not sure if I believe that or not... you'd think they'd have systems monitoring that and trimming down the 'fat'? or can they do that? (legally I mean, sorta like QOS for the phone network I suppose) They can, and do. But SS7 interconnect battles between carriers are about as much fun as peering battles between ISPs, lots of finger pointing and blustering and more lawyers. If you lose SS7 links between carriers, and there is not enough SS7 capacity remaining, the SS7 systems start flapping (the SS7 folks probably use a different term, but it gives the IP folks some idea of what happens). It has happened a few times. I expect the SS7 vendors and protocol wizards are thinking up more clever ways to address it. It has nothing (essentially) to do with the type of calls being made, although high call volumes always make any problem worse. Another time it happened was just before Christmas a few years ago, during peak shopping time and the dialup credit card authorization numbers (and lots of other types of numbers) got jammed up during a SS7 incident as I found out doing my Christmas shopping that afternoon.
Re: FYI: Explosions Reported At eBay PayPal Building In SJ, All Cool Now
Police seeking buyer of Tower Bridge, enriched uranium and hawt teenage Russian bride. On 11/1/06, Fergie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No one injured, no operations interrupted on this, Oidhche Shamhna. http://cbs5.com/local/local_story_305004735.html Cheers, - ferg -- Fergie, a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/
rbnnetwork.org
Is hosting a phishing site and bouncing abuse reports.. -- Forwarded message -- From: Alexander Harrowell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Oct 31, 2006 2:38 PM Subject: Phisher To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] We're receiving large volumes of comments spam advertising a site hosted in your network. http://onlineinvestmentworld.com is located at 81.95.146.166, which is your netblock: inetnum:81.95.144.0 - 81.95.147.255 netname:RBNET descr: Russian Business Network admin-c:RBNR-ORG tech-c: RBNR-ORG mnt-by: RBN-MNT status: ASSIGNED PA country:RU remarks:INFRA-AW changed:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 20060 Tracert: 1 0 1 1 0.6 ms 66.36.240.2 AS14361 HOPONE-DCA c-vl102-d1.acc.dca2.hopone.net.255 US Unix: 14:38:16.496 2 0 2 6 0.6 ms [+0ms] 66.36.224.232 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 gec2.core1.dca2.hopone.net. 0 miles [+0] 254 US Unknown: 833f257b 3 0 0 1 0.7 ms [+0ms] 66.36.224.233 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 gec2.core2.dca2.hopone.net. 0 miles [+0] 254 US Unix: 14:07:58.580 4 6 8 6 6.5 ms [+5ms] 198.32.160.102 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 gi3-0.nyc-002-inter-1.interoute.net.0 miles [+0] 253 US Unix: 14:37:46.936 5 * 75 77 74 ms [+67ms] 212.23.43.177 AS8928 INTEROUTEgi0-0.nyc-002-inter-1.interoute.net.0 miles [+0] 248 GB Unix: 14:37:47. 45 6 * 75 75 74 ms [+0ms] 212.23.43.150 AS8928 INTEROUTEpo3-0.lon-wal-core-2.interoute.net. 0 miles [+0] 250 GB Unix: 14:37:47.128 7 * 74 74 74 ms [+0ms] 217.118.119.26 AS8928 INTEROUTEte9-1.lon-wal-access-4.interoute.net. 0 miles [+0] 250 GB Unix: 14:37:47.162 8 * 85 78 78 ms [+3ms] 84.233.231.138 AS8928 INTEROUTEunknown.net.uk 0 miles [+0] 248 GB Unknown: 8100e8e2 9 * 124 125 124 ms [+46ms] 81.95.156.34 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 gbit-eth-34-uk.sbttel.com. 0 miles [+0] 247 RU Unix: 14:37:16.972 10 * 125 124 124 ms [+0ms] 81.95.156.58 AS0 IANA-RSVD-0 oc-3-sbttel.rbnnetwork.com. 0 miles [+0] 55 RU Unix: 14:35:47.772 11 * 143 149 143 ms [+19ms] 81.95.146.166 ASN=40989[Destination Unreachable] ip-146-166.rbnnetwork.com.
Re: Boeing's Connexion announcement
I wrote a 800 word article on a 15 Powerbook in Singapore Airlines economy class last year, and filed it via Connexion..and that was quite neck-yanking enough.On 10/15/06, Todd Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: patrick, all,On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 04:56:34AM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: AC power is not required.Bigger seats might be. :) bigger seats may not be required.ac power is. However, that same 12 PB (not a large laptop by any definition) on Luftansa is close unusable in coach if the person in front of you leans back.I had to contort pretty horribly to use it.(Which I did, 'cause I -had- to send e-mail from the plane. :)Lack of seat power was not an issue, I just had two batteries.And this was BOS - MUC, which ain't a short flight. Using a 15 or larger laptop on that flight is essentially unthinkable.I could not have opened the laptop enough to see the screen.During meals, the flight attendants made everyone sit up, otherwise the people behind them wouldn't have been able to eat. Yes, it was that bad.i managed to post:http://www.renesys.com/blog/2006/04/tracking_plane_flight_on_inter.shtml with a 15 thinkpad from coach on lufthansa.so that includes the ssh session to screen to coorindate withcoworkers, the several browsers, the emacs window and all the typing.it's not a short post, it has pictures that had to be screencaptured (or grabbed from the boeing nanog preso, respectively), but it wasn'toverly difficult.maybe i'm just more of a contorionist than most.the issue of power is the same, i think as the even bigger issue of consistency/predictability which is what rodney was trying to pointout, i think.people want to know that they're going to be able touse the service and they want to know this in advance.since noairline rolled it out on every single flight and no airline gave advance notice to passengers which flights would have the service, itwas impossible to plan on being able to use it.that does two things:1) it reduces the value of the service since it now becomes a happy coincidence rather than a planned part of the work day; 2) it makes itless likely that everyone will already have a full charge on theirlaptop batteries.having power at every seat would be easy and they should just do it. t_todd underwood+1 603 643 9300 x101renesys corporation chief of operations security [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.renesys.com/blog/todd.shtml
Re: Broadband ISPs taxed for generating light energy
Reasonable? I think you mean justifiable. On 10/10/06, Bill Woodcock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sounds reasonable to me. Since the sale of energy is usually measured in kilowatt-hours, how many kwh of energy is transmitted across the average optical fibre before it reaches the powereda mplifier in the destination switch/router? Also, remember, it's _net_ energy delivered which matters... I'm sure the customer is delivering light back toward the ISP as well. -Bill
Re: Outages mailing list
Presumably, if you find you can't reach the outages list because their listserv has had an outage, you just come up on NANOG like before? On 9/29/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 01:32:35 +0200, Niels Bakker said: Gadi's tactics in a nutshell: 1) develop a long-term habit of posting off-topic stuff to nanog 2) get called on it repeatedly OK, for the purposes of this discussion, we'll postulate that in fact, the posting was indeed off-topic... 3) challenge what's supposed to be on-topic for the mailing list anyway 4) start a new mailing list in an attempt to take real content away from nanog But if he takes the supposedly off-topic stuff away, what real content is he taking away? You can't have it both ways. If it's sufficiently real that you're concerned about it being taken to a different list, you shouldn't have labelled it off-topic earlier. Don't fall for it, people. Don't fall for what?
Re: Zimbabwe satellite Internet link restored
I'm a little surprised they came back up. I can certainly see the benefit for the regime to have - unavoidably, no money! - no Internet for the public (whilst they no doubt have private bgan/thuraya/whatever). On 9/28/06, Sean Donelan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Zimbabwe's Reserve Bank authorized release of TelOne's, the state communications operator, payment of satellite charges to Intelsat in foreign currency. Intelsat restored its satellite link, which was the primary Internet connection for most ISPs in Zimbabwe. To raise hard currency, TelOne is trying to get diplomatic missions and ISPs to pay in foreign currency for Internet service.
Re: Zimbabwe satellite Internet link restored
And sufficiently heavily demanded by the regime that having their own satellite access is insufficient.
Re: Zimbabwe satellite Internet link restored
Any chance of a moderator de-subscribing [EMAIL PROTECTED] from nanog? Every time anyone posts it kicks back a DSN, either failed or mail-loop On 9/28/06, Joe Provo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 09:24:30AM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote: [snip] Or it could be a sign that the internet is sufficently valuable to the government that they must restore the link. Some may be a bit suspicious of the internet being that critical, but it just may be the case. [snip] Pr0n knows no politics. -- RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE
Re: Topicality perceptions
Concur. Nanog has been an on-going education in essentially all aspects of internetworking, routing, data centres, security, spam/malware/abuse. Long may it stay that way. I'd argue that the fuzziness is probably a reflection of the ever-broadening role of IT/telco/netops people and ideas in current organisations. Now, someone mentioned issues with SIP. I'd like to flag that this is going to become a top line operational issue in the next few years, due to the deployment of following technologies: 1) Carrier/Enterprise VoIP 2) Peer-to-Peer VoIP using SIP (see - Gizmo) 3) Concurrent applications using SIP 4) IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) in mobile networks (and possibly fixed networks) interworking with each other, PSTN and the public Internet 5) ETSI TISPAN activity (probably the least important of the five) Note that 1 through 3 use SIP as defined by IETF whereas 4 and 5 use the 3GPP/3GPP2/ETSI extensions to it, which may mean they cannot interwork. Further, IMS and various associated technologies employ DNS ENUM to map e164 numbers to SIP URIs, not to speak of ordinary DNS to map URIs to IP addresses. Some DNS security measures previously discussed on NANOG have the effect of filtering ENUM replies. There is also the problem that IMS carriers, as far as anyone knows, are going to operate as private internetworks and do some form of NAT at the Session Border Controller (ie - gateway to the public Internet). How they will handle this at private interconnections with each other is unclear. It is also unclear how connections between a Carrier SIP client with a privately assigned or RFC1918 address and a carrier-land URI, and an open-Internet IETF SIP client with a globally routable address and its own URI, will work. It also seems clear that IMS-adopting carriers will continue to declare themselves as carrier grade, which suggests that the criticality of their private DNS will be very high.
Re: NANOG Thread
Well, if anyone wants to add more to it, there are quite a few prominent 'noggers still to cast.
NANOG Thread
After recent events, may I propose the ultimate NANOG thread..NANOG User: MessageRichard A Steenbergen: Can we keep this off-topic crap off NANOG?Gadi Evron: That message is deeply relevant to us all. I can't understand what your porblme is.Sean Donelan: Fascinating, User. I suppose ISSUE would be different ifyou were running a NETWORK and using ROUTER.Christopher L. Morrow: I think you have a point, Sean, but can you try not to engage with this? ISSUE is definitely off topic.RAS: Only Auntie Jane on a crappy Windows box would have ISSUE anyway.Donelan/Evron/Morrow in chorus: But Jane is our customer.RAS/Bill Manning together: Get a clue! Valdis Kletnieks: NANOG User said:snip We had ISSUE on a DEVICE in our FACILITY back in 2004. Have you got the DATA?.Of course all this wouldn't be a problem if STANDARDS BODY had got a clue and decided to implement PROPOSAL.NANOG User: *pastes 86 hop tracert, last week's BGP update log andhalf the CIDR report*Valdis/RAS/Evron/Bill/Morrow: Couldn't you have sent that offlist? Get a clue! NANOG User: I'm sorry if I offended your refined sensibilities. Who doyou think you are?Random Lurker desperately seeking status: Bill is right. This is theNetwork Operators' list.RAS: Anyway, PROPOSAL would have been a good idea, but nobody was ever going to deploy it. We ought to go straight to IPVersionX.All: IP Version X?? Get a clue!Valdis: Only someone who thinks we ought to go back to ATM wouldsupport that Bellhead POS. From a network architecture perspective, it's plain stupid.Evron: You obviously have no idea of how the botnets would exploit that.Bill: Gadi, that's off topic.Morrow: No, it's not.Third-world ISP operator: Hello, I've got SERIOUS PROBLEM on my network in POOR COUNTRY and no money. Can anyone advise on how we canfix it? ThanksRandy Bush: I can't read your message. It's got capital letters in it.Anyway, I think we need to get back to some operational content. Fergie: Hey guys, this looks interesting - ahref="" href="http://link.to.newsstory">http://link.to.newsstoryChinese scientists teach monkey towrite technical manual/a Randy Bush: I can't read your message. It's got HTML in it.Valdis: RFCx says you can have capital letters AND links in your e-mail.Randy: I don't care.Evron: Major security alert!Morrow: Bullshit. RAS: No, that is on topic.Donelan: Probably more suited to LIST, but it certainly hasconsequences for support costs.NANOG User: Why does Sean always take RAS's side like this?Peter Dambier: It's because of the 2004 Olympics that all e-mail has to be routed to the European Commission so the SS7 signalling can bescreened for correct geopolitical routing. I can see this because mytraceroute is broken!, ,,User, I think your ISSUE could be resolved by WILDLY IMPRACTICALSOLUTION, as long as you use an alternate root server.Valdis: Peter, you're insane.Peter Dambier: The psychiatric-industrial complex denounces all victims of ICANN mind control as mentally ill! Resist the empirenow!NANOG User: Is that on topic for NANOG?All: That is on topic/That is off topic!Bill: Well, I think he's got a point about ICANN. RAS: They're nowhere near as bad as ARIN, though. I only wantedanother /8 and it took me three whole weeks!All: Swine!Donelan: ARIN's never been a problem for me.Another NANOG User: STUPID REMARK about evil state bureaucracies forcing their eurosexual communism on us. Buy guns!Evron: So who should assign IPs? ATT? Get a clue!Randy Bush: You would say that. Anyway, I think WILDLY IMPRACTICALSOLUTION is actually quite a good idea, except for the alternate root bit. Back at RESEARCH CENTRE in the 1970s, Vint Cerf and I triedsomething similar.Bill: Namedropper![EMAIL PROTECTED]: I think this thread should be moved to NANOG-FUTURES. RAS: Why isn't there a NANOG-CRAP?[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Are you sure there isn't?Morrow: Anyone else seeing high latency to TELCO in CITY?Crickets: chirping Random Lurker, still hoping one of the silverbacks will show him somelove: So, what about IPVersion Y?All: That's not operational!*thread peters out in howling clue vacuum*
Re: NANOG Thread
This inspired me: http://highclearing.com/index.php/archives/2006/04/07/4991
Re: is this like a peering war somehow?
Whatever. No-one's actually trying to do some packets are more equal than others here in Europe, except for the mobile people with IMS and such. BT just transferred its access network into a new division with a specific remit to provide open access to all ISPs and alt- tels who want it. It's in the US that the RBOCs and cablesters are actually doing this. On 1/20/06, Per Heldal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 23:44:59 +, Paul Vixie [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: proving once again that peering ratios only matter if the other guy's customers can live without your assymetric content, here are two articles i saw today via slashdot. what's interesting to me is whether bellsouth will be sued some time later by some other content provider for de-peering them without also having applied the same rules to google. note, this isn't a bellsouth-specific rant, they just happen to be mentioned in today's story. Carriers trying to charge content-providers for access to their network/customers is just part of a greater picture. The telco industry is fighting to re-establish their dominant position. Traditionally they've been able to pocket (extort) a large portion of the revenue for 3rd-party PSTN services (content services) themselves. Over the last decade they've gained control of the ISP-industry and noe they want to achieve the same level of control of the internet. The most conservative are even suggesting to remove internet-governance from the public domain. The European telecoms industry is openly urging the UN to take control of ICANN's role. In the process they are trying to place the functions of IANA and IETF in their belowed ITU. Their ultimate goal is to eliminate IP as a product, to be able to sell access to sub-protocols as individual services. //per -- Per Heldal http://heldal.eml.cc/
Re: is this like a peering war somehow?
Mike, can I make: Preferential treatment can degrade service, but it cannot improve service. my motto?
Re: Stupidity: A Real Cyberthreat.
First of all: the IRA carried out very successful systems attacks on the City of London, and also on major transport systems - motorway viaducts, railway stations and signalling centers, airport terminals - both in kinetic (real, actual bombs) and nonkinetic (hoax calls) modes. All of these were practically speaking pre-Internet. All right, this is NANOG. Yes, some of you were chatting over the thing about who you wanted to fuck at Berkeley in 1973. For economically and practically real-existing purposes in the UK, 1996 was pre-Internet. I'm sorry, I'm not in the master race. The IRA 1990s London offensive was intended specifically to inflict economic costs and political disruption without serious casualties, as the IRA was in negotiations with government at the time. After John Major kicked over the negotiations in order that the DUP would keep his government in power, they wanted to put a fire to his balls without appearing uncivilised enough to cause a hate-wave among the public. Hence the sysdisrupts. One thing they did not do was attack telecommunication targets. I still have no idea why. In the UK they are normally quite obvious. Beware..
Re: [MailServer Notification]To sender: eManager settings were matche d and action was taken.
Wank, did I use a fucking naughty shitting word? On 1/19/06, System Attendant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: eManager Notification * The following message was blocked because it contains sensitive content. Source mailbox: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Destination mailbox(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED];anti.confidentiality [EMAIL PROTECTED];[EMAIL PROTECTED];nanog@merit.edu Rule/Policy: Profanity Action: Quarantine to D:\Program Files\Trend\SMCF\Quarantine\2004-09-04\15-50-25.10\2006-01-19\23-04-40.11853 \DFImessagebody43d01b082e4d.tmp Note: ScanMail eManager content filter Blocked an email thought to contain offensive or inappropriate information. Please contact Internal support if you have any questions or believe this is a legitimate mail. *** End of message * DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and may also be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, use of the information contained in this e-mail (including disclosure, copying or distribution) is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please inform the sender and delete the message immediately from your system. This e-mail is attributed to the sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the Patsystems Group and no member of the Patsystems Group accepts any liability for any action taken in reliance on the contents of this e-mail (other than where it has a legal or regulatory obligation to do so) or for the consequences of any computer viruses which may have been transmitted by this e-mail. The Patsystems Group comprises Patsystems plc and its subsidiary group of companies.
Re: is this like a peering war somehow?
I refer to a previous post: Best effort is best effort, right? Ergo setting special QOS for special people=worse QOS for notspecial people. And who knew these content providers were getting free bandwidth? Me, I thought they had to pay for their leased lines :-) I'd say more, but I'll trigger swearfilters..
Re: GoDaddy.com shuts down entire data center?
I'm astonished GoDaddy pulled anyone for spamming. Isn't spamming the whole point of GoDaddy, what with its content-free WHOIS records, integrated no-name domain registry and hosting division? In fact, I would go so far as to say taking out entire GoDaddy would probably be a small increase in the amount of useful information on the Net..
Re: WMF patch
Indeed. It's the security equivalent of the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent - perhaps we could reformulate that as the users can remain clueless longer than your business can survive the DDOSOn 1/5/06, Stephane Bortzmeyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 05:58:16PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 46 lines which said: How many times do you propose we FTDT before we get fed up and ask upper management to authorize a migration to some other software with a better record? And how many more FTDT's do we need to tolerate while we wait for upper management to authorize a migration?There is no limit to what human beings can stand before becomingreasonable. That is human nature and the engineers' rationality is no match for it.Think about religion, for instance. A lot of people still believe in asupernatural being despite a very bad track record (much worse thanMS-Windows').
