Re: NOAA warning for rf communications
Well, this is more than you really wanted to know, but ELV Exremely Lowdc - 3khz VLF Very Low Freq 3khz - 30khz LF Low Frequency 30khz - 300Khz MF Medium 300Khz - 3Mhz HF High3mhz-30mhz VHF Very High 30mhz-300mhz UHF Ultra High 300-3Ghz SHF Super High 3Ghz - 30 Ghz EHF Extremely High 30Ghz - 300Ghz Different folks put the breaks at slightly different places (the.g. the amatuer radio community puts the hf/vhf break @ 50Mhz and the MF/HF break @ 1.8Khz. And, as a side note, I can't find the URL, but the US Cong is talking about pulling all the funding for the NASA space weather programs. Would mean less/no warning of this sort of stuff. We now return you to our regularly scheduled off topic discussions Komrade Owen DeLong wrote: This will not likely affect point-to-point line-of-site communications above 50Mhz. It will likely affect non-terrestrial communications and HF communications depending on ionospheric reflection. Owen --On Friday, October 24, 2003 07:15:29 AM -0400 Todd Vierling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 23 Oct 2003, Roy wrote: : Satellite and other spacecraft operations, power systems, high : frequency communications, and navigation systems may experience : disruptions over this two-week period. : : I think you will find that 802.11b and other terrestrial microwave LOS : links don't meet any of those criteria and should be unaffected. High frequency communications? We *are* talking about multi-GHz frequencies here. -- -- Todd Vierling [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tomatoes for Verisign at NANOG 29
You have to give Verisign some props for having the balls to present at NANOG...and those props should be in the form of not chasing them from the room with angry threats and pitchforks. Mark and the rest of the folks from Verisign, formerly NSI, formerly Internic, etc, etc have long been CONTRIBUTING members of NANOG. Please treat them with the respect you would ask be accorded yourselves should the situation be reversed someday. Separate the actions of the individuals from the actions of the company. Who of us has always worked for a company whose actions we 100% agree with? Who of us live in a country whose goverment's actions we 100% agree with? Let he who is without sin cast the first...you get the point. Back to operational content please
Re: .ORG problems this evening
Todd Vierling wrote: BGP doesn't know when a DNS server dies. Therein lies the findamental problem of using anycast as an application redundancy scheme. You ever think that maybe, just maybe, Ultra wrote some code to do this? Yes, it might have concievably failed in a way that seems to have left you and one or two others in the veritable dark, but I don't think, at this point, using NANOG to debug the problem, no matter where it was, is going to be very productive. But, of course, I don't know anything about using DNS and anycast. ;-) Bob
Re: .ORG problems this evening
E.B. Dreger wrote: TV Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 13:01:18 -0400 (EDT) TV From: Todd Vierling TV BGP doesn't know when a DNS server dies. Therein lies the TV findamental problem of using anycast as an application TV redundancy scheme. But it can and should. Again, seeing if the process is running is easy; verifying correct functionality requires more work, but definitely is doable. And, I might add, in the case of a highly complex anycast application, you will need to check not only for correctness, but for timeliness. And, again, in the case of a highly complex app such as an anycast DNS, you need to check several behind the scenes apps, such as maybe a db, the responsivness of your high avail partner server, the dns daemon, connectivity through two or more network paths, connectivity to master update servers, BGP on whatever boxes are providing BGP, etc, the list goes on. But again, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. ;-)
Verisign brain damage and DNSSec.....Was:Re: What *are* they smoking?
Has anyone thought through the DNSsec implications of this? (spool up the black helicopters) Greg Maxwell wrote: On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Haesu wrote: I must ask the subject again. What in the name of censored *are* they smoking? Who exclusively gave them the right to own the 'net and decide which domain points to where? Completely unacceptable. It's very amusing to see people on *this* list asking *who* gave control to them. Who else configures your customers DNS settings?
Re: Measured Internet good v. bad traffic
I can have some sympathy for the customer in this case...But... Do you consider the definition of 'bad traffic to include spam? To me, this is really simple. (as usual, IANAL, BUT...) It is 'theft of services' on the part of: a) the person(s) who wrote and released the virus, and b) contributory negligence on the part of anyone who didn't patch their systems when they found out. It would remain an open legal question if the ISP could be held negligent for not blocking the ports. Not ground I, as an ISP, would like to see explored either. Even though we did block all the appropriate ports. As to billing credit, it is an interesting problem. An equivalent would be someone causes your power utilization to go up. You still have to pay the bill. If you can prove who is doing it, you might be able to re-coup some of the costs. This all comes, again, back to the matter of enforcment for the crimes. And LEO's being unwilling to do anything unless you can show a direct financial loss. Well, the financial loss is starting to show up. Complain to your upstream, and call the long arm of the law. Bob Raymond, Steven wrote: Have received complaints from usage-based-billing Internet customers lately about not wanting to pay for the nuisance traffic caused by worm-of-the-day. I believe that in the case of a short-duration, targeted attack that can be eventually be stopped, a billing credit is probably appropriate. But what about these current plagues that go on for weeks or forever- what is your network's response? Some simply want the traffic filtered in our routers- permanently. That is my least favorite option. Others want to simply not be billed for bad traffic. My reaction is to suggest that metered billing is probably not for you, then. But I could of course sympathize if I were footing the bill. What are other network operators doing about this issue, if it is an issue for them at all? Thanks
Re: OT: Notebooks /w a serial port?
I've even had luck with them on on applications that are simply looking to toggle the sense lines to control outside devices. Bob Dave Israel wrote: There are relatively cheap USB-to-serial devices. That's worked pretty well for me. On 3/21/2003 at 16:46:51 -0500, Drew Weaver said: Seems like these are all but extinct, but does anyone know of a 'new' notebook that has a serial port built onto it? I've found some that have port replicators, but that can be a pain when you need to serial into a router or some other device. What do you guys use? -Drew
