RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco

2005-04-04 Thread Pendergrass, Greg

Well, they already eat into your profits.  

-Original Message-
From: Wayne E. Bouchard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 01 April 2005 22:34
To: Fergie (Paul Ferguson)
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco


Does this mean our routers will be edible? :-)

On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 04:45:17PM +, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
> 
> 
> Priceless. ;-)
> 
> The Register:
> Published Friday 1st April 2005 15:22 GMT
> 
> "Cisco Systems and Kraft Foods shocked investors today
> with an unlikely mega-acquisition that will see Cisco
> buy Kraft's Nabisco unit for $15bn. Perhaps even more
> surprising, former RJR Nabisco and IBM CEO Lou Gerstner
> has come out of retirement to head the new firm
> tentatively called NaCisco."
> 
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/01/cisco_buys_nabisco/
> 
> - ferg
> 
> --
> "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
>  Engineering Architecture for the Internet
>  [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]

---
Wayne Bouchard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Dude
http://www.typo.org/~web/


Vodafone Group Services Limited 
Registered Office:  Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire  RG14 2FN

Registered in England No. 3802001

This e-mail is for the addressee(s) only.  If you are not an addressee, you
must not distribute, disclose, copy, use or rely on this e-mail or its
contents, and you must immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail
and all copies from your system.  Any unauthorised use may be unlawful.  The
information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged.



RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco

2005-04-04 Thread Pendergrass, Greg

It gives number crunching an entirely new meaning.  

-Original Message-
From: Bill Nash [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 01 April 2005 19:09
To: Church, Chuck
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco


On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Church, Chuck wrote:

>
> Incorrectly chosen switching path can now result in lost packets AND
> indigestion.
>

Is this mitigated by activating Nabisco Express Forwarding?


Vodafone Group Services Limited 
Registered Office:  Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire  RG14 2FN

Registered in England No. 3802001

This e-mail is for the addressee(s) only.  If you are not an addressee, you
must not distribute, disclose, copy, use or rely on this e-mail or its
contents, and you must immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail
and all copies from your system.  Any unauthorised use may be unlawful.  The
information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged.



RE: sms messaging without a net?

2004-08-03 Thread Pendergrass, Greg

We use kannel on a linux box and a GSM modem, it works very well for us. 

www.kannel.org

Regards,

Greg



-Original Message-
From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 03 August 2004 10:18
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: sms messaging without a net?



Does anyone know of a way to send SMS messages without an internet 
connection?

Having a network monitoring system send sms pages via email very quickly 
runs into chicken-egg scenario. How do you email a page to let the admins 
know their net has gone down. :-P

AT&T shut down their TAP dialup late last year.

The only method that comes to mind is to buy a GSM modem which has SMS 
messaging capability.

Has anyone done this?

-Dan


Vodafone Group Services Limited 
Registered Office:  Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire  RG14 2FN

Registered in England No. 3802001 

This e-mail is for the addressee(s) only.  If you are not an addressee, you
must not distribute, disclose, copy, use or rely on this e-mail or its
contents, and you must immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail
and all copies from your system.  Any unauthorised use may be unlawful.  The
information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged.



RE: Google?

2004-07-26 Thread Pendergrass, Greg

Some say it's a new version of mydoom:

http://isc.sans.org/diary.php?isc=d46940064182f61f40ca333bc3c2f439

-GP

-Original Message-
From: Marco Davids (SARA) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 26 July 2004 16:28
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Google?



Google seems to fail on every search containing the word 'mail' ?
-- 
Marco Davids
SARA High Performance Networking - Amsterdam





Vodafone Group Services Limited 
Registered Office:  Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire  RG14 2FN

Registered in England No. 3802001 

This e-mail is for the addressee(s) only.  If you are not an addressee, you
must not distribute, disclose, copy, use or rely on this e-mail or its
contents, and you must immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail
and all copies from your system.  Any unauthorised use may be unlawful.  The
information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged.



RE: Strange behavior of Catalyst4006

2004-06-29 Thread Pendergrass, Greg

Hi Joe,

It would be good to know the type (and software version) of firewall as it
could be the firewall and not the switch that's the problem. For instance,
there's a known bug with checkpoint and NAT where automatic arp entries
"disappear". 

If you can ping it all from the catalyst but not from the rest of your
network it could be that you have a problem with your dynamic routing
protocols, or with a device connected to the catalyst. Check your adjacent
routers, do you have a valid route to the catalyst for the 192.168.5.7
subnet? What does a traceroute show from your NOC?

-GP



-Original Message-
From: Joe Shen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 29 June 2004 02:01
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Strange behavior of Catalyst4006





Hi,


We met a strange problem with Catalyst 4006 when provideing leased line
service to one of our customers.


Catalyst4006   Customer's firewall ---Customer's
Intranet
  

The customer is allocated a Class C address block 192.168.5/24.  And , they
connect their network to our
network  by using a firewall.  The Interface on Cata4006 is set up as "no
switchport", and inter-connecting 
subnet is configured between Cata4006 and firewall
interface(10.10.1.122/30).

Static route is used on Catalyst4006  to designate route  to customer's
intranet address. ( ip route 192.168.5.0 
255.255.255.0 10.10.1.124 ). Customer setup their email server at
192.168.5.7, dns server at 192.168.5.1,
 web server at 192.168.5.9.  

At the very begining all system works fine. After sometime  they said they
could not  acces their email/web/dns 
server from host outside their company's network. But, when we telnet to
Cata4006, we could 'ping' 
192.168.5.7, but if we move to host in NOC ping failed all the time. ( ping
to server is allowed on firewall). At the same 
time, their intranet host could access our network.

We restart ( shut; noshut) the fastethernet interface on Catalyst4006, and
then servers' network access recovered.

The phenomon comes up frequently, and our customer said this is a bug with
catalyst4006. But, to my understanding, 
if this is a bug to catos, it should not only affact only three servers.
But, why it could be solved by restart catalyst interface?

Would you please do some help? ( I attach system info below)

Joe Shen



==-=

4006#sh version
Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software 
IOS (tm) Catalyst 4000 L3 Switch Software (cat4000-IS-M), Version
12.1(12c)EW1, EARLY DEPLOYMENT RELEASE 
SOFTWARE (fc1) TAC Support: http://www.cisco.com/tac Copyright (c) 1986-2002
by cisco Systems, Inc. Compiled Thu 24-
Oct-02 23:05 by eaarmas Image text-base: 0x, data-base: 0x00CA7368

ROM: 12.1(12r)EW
Dagobah Revision 63, Swamp Revision 24

4006-wulin uptime is 41 weeks, 12 hours, 34 minutes
System returned to ROM by power-on
System restarted at 05:40:46 RPC Mon Sep 15 2003
System image file is "bootflash:cat4000-is-mz.121-12c.EW1.bin"

cisco WS-C4006 (XPC8245) processor (revision 5) with 524288K bytes of
memory. Processor board ID FOX05200BRH Last 
reset from PowerUp 144 FastEthernet/IEEE 802.3 interface(s) 2 Gigabit
Ethernet/IEEE 802.3 interface(s) 403K bytes of non-
volatile configuration memory.

Configuration register is 0x2102

4006#


4006-wulin#sh run int f4/41
Building configuration...

Current configuration : 141 bytes
!
interface FastEthernet4/41
 no switchport
 ip address 10.10.1.213 255.255.255.252
 duplex full
 speed 100
end

4006#


===




 Cool Things Happen When Mac Users Meet! Join the community in Boston
this July: www.macworldexpo.com


Vodafone Group Services Limited 
Registered Office:  Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire  RG14 2FN

Registered in England No. 3802001 

This e-mail is for the addressee(s) only.  If you are not an addressee, you
must not distribute, disclose, copy, use or rely on this e-mail or its
contents, and you must immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail
and all copies from your system.  Any unauthorised use may be unlawful.  The
information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged.



RE: Power Failure

2004-05-21 Thread Pendergrass, Greg

I'm in Telecity at 8/9 Harbour exchange and I lost 2 BGP sessions to
Abovenet at about 10:50 BDT. I've been told there is a power failure there
but I'm not sure if my problem is related.

Greg Pendergrass
---
Network and Security Manager
Vodafone Global Services Limited

-Original Message-
From: Tom Daly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 21 May 2004 12:08
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Power Failure



Anyone aware of or have details about a power failure within 8&9 Harbour
Exchange, London, UK? Seems that some Telcos in this facility are having
problems.


-- 
Thomas J. Daly
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chief Infrastructure Officer
Dynamic Network Services, Inc.
http://www.dyndns.org/


Vodafone Group Services Limited 
Registered Office:  Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire  RG14 2FN

Registered in England No. 3802001 

This e-mail is for the addressee(s) only.  If you are not an addressee, you
must not distribute, disclose, copy, use or rely on this e-mail or its
contents, and you must immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail
and all copies from your system.  Any unauthorised use may be unlawful.  The
information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged.



RE: Counter DoS

2004-03-11 Thread Pendergrass, Greg

By "The Art of War on the Internet" I didn't mean information warfare,
that's been with us as long as there's been information and the internet is
certainly going to be a major part of that. What I am against is anyone
trying to popularize the idea of the internet as a battleground where one
uses force and deception to "gain ground". It's just another case of people
wrongly attempting to fit somthing that they don't understand into a
framework that they do understand, thereby creating a fallacy. Trying to
base a product off of a flawed idea is bound to fail but also likely be a
major irritation before it does.

GP


-Original Message-
From: Etaoin Shrdlu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 11 March 2004 14:58
To: Nanog
Subject: Re: Counter DoS



"Pendergrass, Greg" wrote:
> 
> I can see now that it's only a matter of time before some nut writes "The
> Art of War in the Internet". I read the whitepaper, it goes on a lot about
> how defensive policies are ineffective but doesn't really say why active
> response has never been tried:

Ask, and ye shall receive.

http://btobsearch.barnesandnoble.com/textbooks/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?us
erid=2XH986JPUE&btob=Y&isbn=1581128576&TXT=Y&itm=1

I thought that someone mentioned that Mr. Forno was reputed to be on staff
with these folk. 

> Their proposition is a terrible idea and their "rules of engagement" would
> be funny instead of frightening if it wasn't serious

I note that he also has a title from last year, which seems applicable
here:

Weapons of Mass Delusion (ISBN 15896X)

I will point out that I cannot take seriously a company (Symbiot) that
depends on a shockwave plugin to put up a web page.

Pity that they came out so aggressively; it might have been an interesting
product. Hype can kill as well as sell.

--
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed,
the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning.
It is by caffeine only I set my mind in motion.


Vodafone Global Content Services Limited 
Registered Office:  Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire  RG14 2FN

Registered in England No. 4064873 

This e-mail is for the addressee(s) only.  If you are not an addressee, you
must not distribute, disclose, copy, use or rely on this e-mail or its
contents, and you must immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail
and all copies from your system.  Any unauthorised use may be unlawful.  The
information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged.



RE: Counter DoS

2004-03-11 Thread Pendergrass, Greg

I can see now that it's only a matter of time before some nut writes "The
Art of War in the Internet". I read the whitepaper, it goes on a lot about
how defensive policies are ineffective but doesn't really say why active
response has never been tried:

A. Most of the time dDOS traffic is from spoofed sources anyway so whichever
machine you "return fire" on is probably not the  one that attacked you. 

B. NAT translation means a hacker has a tailor-made defense against any
active repsonse. 

C. Even if you can directly attack a machine being used against you it's
almost certainly not the perpetrator's box, he/she is sitting half a world
away. The box you intentionally destroy is likely some innocent family PC
that was taken over using some unplugged windows security hole. 

D. Widely deployed active defense will give an attacker a new form of dDOS
attack, spoof the source of the one you want to hit in attacking several
"active defense" systems and watch them attack your target for you.

Their proposition is a terrible idea and their "rules of engagement" would
be funny instead of frightening if it wasn't serious

GP


-Original Message-
From: Joshua Brady [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 11 March 2004 01:27
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Counter DoS



http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,39020375,39148215,00.htm 

Comments?



Vodafone Global Content Services Limited 
Registered Office:  Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire  RG14 2FN

Registered in England No. 4064873 

This e-mail is for the addressee(s) only.  If you are not an addressee, you
must not distribute, disclose, copy, use or rely on this e-mail or its
contents, and you must immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail
and all copies from your system.  Any unauthorised use may be unlawful.  The
information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged.



RE: Lawsuit on ICANN (was: Re: A few words on VeriSign's sitefind er)

2004-02-27 Thread Pendergrass, Greg

OT I know, but this has to be the quote of the week:

"Working the ICANN process is like being nibbled to death by ducks, it takes
forever, it doesn't make sense, and in the end we're still dead in the
water." said Tom Galvin, VeriSign's vice president for government relations.

With oratory like that how can they possibly loose?  ;)

GP


 

-Original Message-
From: Deepak Jain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 26 February 2004 21:51
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Lawsuit on ICANN (was: Re: A few words on VeriSign's
sitefinder)




Since no one else has mentioned this:

http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/040226/tech_verisign_2.html
> 


Vodafone Global Content Services Limited 
Registered Office:  Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire  RG14 2FN

Registered in England No. 4064873 

This e-mail is for the addressee(s) only.  If you are not an addressee, you
must not distribute, disclose, copy, use or rely on this e-mail or its
contents, and you must immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail
and all copies from your system.  Any unauthorised use may be unlawful.  The
information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged.



RE: How relable does the Internet need to be? (Was: Re: Converged Network Threat)

2004-02-26 Thread Pendergrass, Greg

I think how reliable the internet needs to be depends on what you want to
use it for: if you want to call an ambulance you DON'T use the internet, if
you want to transfer money from one account to another you DO use the
internet. In other words right now it's good for things that are important
but not critical from an immediate action standpoint. If it can wait until
tomorrow use the internet otherwise pick up the phone and dial. 

I can count on one hand the number of times I've had problems with my
landline in my entire life but I can count on two hands the number of
problems I've had with my internet connection in one year. If we ever want
the internet to grow from being a handy medium for exchanging data to the
converged, all-encompassing communications medium then it needs to go from
"Mom, the internet's down again!" to "Dude, my internet connection went down
yesterday, that ever happen to you before?". For that to happen there has to
be more accountability in the industry. 

-GP

-Original Message-
From: Steve Gibbard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 26 February 2004 00:30
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: How relable does the Internet need to be? (Was: Re: Converged
Network Threat)



Having woken up this morning and realized it was raining in my bedroom
(last night was the biggest storm the Bay Area has had since my house got
its new roof last summer), and then having moved from cleaning up that
mess to vacuuming water out of the basement after the city's storm sewer
overflowed (which seems to happen to everybody in my neighborhood a couple
of times a year), I've spent lots of time today thinking about general
expectations of reliability.  In the telecommunications industry, where we
tend to treat reliability as very important and any outage as a disaster,
hopefully the questions I've been coming up with aren't career ending. ;)
With that in mind, how much in the way of reliability problems is it
reasonable to expect our users to accept?

If the Internet is a utility, or more generally infrastructure our society
depends on, it seems there are a bunch of different systems to compare it
to.  In general, if I pick up my landline phone, I expect to get a
dialtone, and I expect to be able to make a call.  If somebody calls my
landline, I expect the phone to ring, and if I'm near the phone I expect
to be able to answer.  Yet, if I want somebody to actually get through to
me reliably, I'll probably give them my cell phone number instead.  If it
rings, I'm far more likely to able to answer it easily than I am my
landline, since the landline phone is in a fixed location.  Yet some
significant portion of calls to or from my cell phone come in when I'm in
areas with bad reception, and the conversation becomes barely
understandable.  In many cases, the signal is too weak to make a call at
all, and those who call me get sent straight to voicemail.  Most of us put
up with this, because we judge mobility to be more important than
reliability.

I don't think I've ever had a natural gas outage that I've noticed, but
most of my gas appliances won't work without electric power.  I seem to
lose electric power at home for a few hours once a year or so, and after
the interuption life tends to resume as it was before.  When power outages
were significantly more frequent, and due to rationing rather than to
accidents, it caused major political problems for the California
government.  There must be some threshold for what people are willing to
accept in terms of residential power outages, that's somewhere above 2-3
hours per year.

In Ann Arbor, Michigan, where I grew up, the whole town tended to pretty
much grind to a halt two or three days a year, when more snow fell than
the city had the resources to deal with.  That quantity of snow necessary
to cause that was probably four or five inches.  My understanding is that
Minneapolis and Washington DC both grind to a halt due to snow with
somewhat similar frequency, but the amount of snow requred is
significantly more in Minneapolis and significantly less in DC.  Again,
there must be some threshold of interruptions due to exceptionally bad
weather that are tolerated, which nobody wants to do worse than and nobody
wants to spend the money to do better than.

So, it appears that among general infrastructure we depend on, there are
probably the following reliability thresholds:

Employees not being able to get to work due to snow: two to three days per
year.
Berkeley storm sewers: overflow two to three days per year.
Residential Electricity: out two to three hours per year.
Cell phone service: Somewhat better than nine fives of reliability ;)
Landline phone service:  I haven't noticed an outage on my home lines in a
few years.
Natural gas: I've never noticed an outage.

How Internet service fits into that of course depends on how you're
accessing the Net.  The T-Mobile GPRS card I got recently seems
significantly less reliable than my cell phone.  My SBC DSL line is almost

RE: dry pair

2003-08-29 Thread Pendergrass, Greg

Neither do we. Could you include some more details?

-Greg

-Original Message-
From: Austad, Jay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 29 August 2003 17:08
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: dry pair



Does anyone know to go about getting Qwest or a CLEC to patch through a dry
pair between two buildings connected to the same CO?

When I called to order one, no one knew what I was talking about.

-jay


Vodafone Global Content Services Limited 
Registered Office:  Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire  RG14 2FN

Registered in England No. 4064873 

This e-mail is for the addressee(s) only.  If you are not an addressee, you
must not distribute, disclose, copy, use or rely on this e-mail or its
contents, and you must immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail
and all copies from your system.  Any unauthorised use may be unlawful.  The
information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged.



RE: How much longer..

2003-08-14 Thread Pendergrass, Greg

I don't know if you've driven in the East End of London recently, but I
assure you there those rules don't always apply! 

The computers as cars metaphor is perfectly correct in many aspects: 

1. You don't have to know how a car works to drive it: If everyone had to be
a qualified mechanic in order to drive safely then there'd be very few
drivers. Also, if everyone had to study car mechanics to drive nobody would
be able to study anything else. For the majority of people computers need to
be simple enough that anyone can use it without advanced knowledge. The
thought of teaching my mother to use a linux system makes me shudder.

2. Computers, like cars, need regular maintenance in order to function
properly: Cars need oil changes, computers need regular updates. With cars
there is a maintenance infrastructure to maintain them and, more
importantly, there is a basic understanding throughout the population about
what a car needs in order to function. When you have a problem with a car,
there's no shortage of people who have at least a basic understanding of
what to do. Plus everyone knows you can call a mechanic. Computers don't
have this infrastructure or basic permeated understanding yet, to most
people they are a magic box that flashes things on the screen-thingy. Most
have no idea that windows-update exists and wouldn't understand what it
does, and just as important doesn't know anyone who can tell them. Their
question is: what do I need to click on to fix it? 


Greg




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 14 August 2003 14:17
To: St. Clair, James
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED] '
Subject: RE: How much longer..



On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, St. Clair, James wrote:

> Cars did not become more popular because owners had to learn how to swap
> more parts. 

The good ole "computers as cars" metaphor.  In the UK:
 
1) In order to drive a car, you have to have a license.

2) In order to have the car on the road, you have to have it taxed and 
have a qualified mechanic certify it for basic road worthiness.

Neither of these rules currently apply to computers.  Maybe they should.

Rich


Vodafone Global Content Services Limited 
Registered Office:  Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire  RG14 2FN

Registered in England No. 4064873 

This e-mail is for the addressee(s) only.  If you are not an addressee, you
must not distribute, disclose, copy, use or rely on this e-mail or its
contents, and you must immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail
and all copies from your system.  Any unauthorised use may be unlawful.  The
information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged.



Blaster packet rates

2003-08-14 Thread Pendergrass, Greg

Hello All,

I am trying to get real figures on how much blaster scanning is going on to
my network, but I don't have enough information. I am seeing 2200 packets
per minute average (for TCP 135, 137-139) on my ingress points. As I'm
advertising a /19 that's around .27 RCP and netbios packets per IP address
per second being sent to my IP range. 

I haven't done a long-term look at RCP and netbios traffic on the web so I
have no way to determine how much is blaster generated, does anyone have
baseline information on the amount of RCP and netbios packets were on the
web before blaster was propagated? Alternatively, has anyone worked out the
% of blaster scan as opposed to "normal" background RCP and netbios traffic?

Thanks,

Greg Pendergrass
--
Network Security Manager
Vodafone Global Content Services



Vodafone Global Content Services Limited 
Registered Office:  Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire  RG14 2FN

Registered in England No. 4064873 

This e-mail is for the addressee(s) only.  If you are not an addressee, you
must not distribute, disclose, copy, use or rely on this e-mail or its
contents, and you must immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail
and all copies from your system.  Any unauthorised use may be unlawful.  The
information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally
privileged.