RE: improving the registrar transfer process
On Fri, 2005-01-21 at 10:28 +1100, Bruce Tonkin wrote: > Interestingly, the ICANN equivalent in Australia (auDA), does > pro-actively enforce policies, and even took Capital Networks to court > on the basis that they could be de-accredited as a registrar for .au, if > they continued not to allow transfers for .com. > > See: > > http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCAFC/2004/324.html > > The original judgment is at: > > http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/federal_ct/2004/808.html > > yes they did. now pacnames in another country supposedly bought capital... at least they are allowing you to transfer away this time though auDA being proactive is good...now its time icann is...
Re: improving the registrar transfer process
On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 01:13 -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote: > We know how to do 3-way handshakes. Rather a fundamental of the > Internet. So quickly folks forget > > We knew in advance that the VRSN/NetSol/whatever protocol was terrible, > and that the ICANN policy change was not going to be helpful. > > I think the notification process should parallel what anybody competent > would expect in a communications protocol. Retry. Several times. > (Admittedly, I've been involved in protocol design for 28+ years, thus > have a tendency to see things that way.) > > At the retry limit, declare the peer to be "down". > > In this case, the peer being down means taking all their domains away > and revoking their registrar status and the performance bond. > > Accountability. Responsibility. I agree with you on this 100%. ICANN needs to enforce there current policies. Look at totalnic/pacnames. They have been refusing transfer requests years now until very very recent. What has ICANN done about all those complaints and violations that has been well documented? nothing! ICANN needs to stop just accepting money and start enforcing policies...
Re: panix hijack press
On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 00:49 -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote: > William Allen Simpson wrote: > > > Not that I've ever noticed. Are you actually a network operator > > anywhere? Are you even _in_ North America? Your email isn't > > > To correct my own post, I saw Au, and assumed a shill for Mel-IT. > > But it's Az, which is Arizona (still in North America this year). My > question about actually operating a network still stands. Thats good..had me thinking..I'm not in North America..what...haha and since it isn't really relevant..short answer is yes...and no that isn't yes i am not in north America :-)
Re: panix hijack press
> Upon what verifiable facts do you base your endless speculation? > > (1) Stop blaming the victim! > > (2) Registrants can't "lock" domains, it's a registrar-lock. Users > can only ask that domains be locked. Stupid policy, bad results. > > (3) This is a red-herring issue anyway, since there is no evidence > that Mel-IT ever sent notification, or even waited 5 days for a > response. The domain was hijacked in the middle of the night, in the > middle of a weekend -- a very odd time for confirming responses by a > staff that wasn't in the office answering the phones > > (4) Mel-IT has admitted it "failed to properly confirm", and a > "loophole" caused the error. > > (5) Mel-IT has an executive and a lawyer that were both notified about > the problem, and refused to mitigate the damage. > > (6) Stop blaming the victim! i dont think anyone is blaming the victim...what evidence do you have to support the domain being locked? a user can lock a domain..they can login to the control panel for there registrar and select registrar lock, registrar-lock, or lock and i am sure there are other registrars that word it even differently. once you select that it effectively locks your domain so it cant be transfered.
Re: panix hijack press
On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 15:51 -0800, Dan Hollis wrote: > On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Darrell Greenwood wrote: > > customers' domains. Panix.com says its domain name was locked, and > > that despite this, it was still transferred. Â > > I seem to recall someone saying it wasnt locked, now theyre saying it was? > > -Dan > > panix claims it was locked but I dont think it was. Like was mentioned they locked there other domains after panix.com was taken over. Why would they just lock one domain?
Re: How many backbones here are filtering the makelovenotspam screensaver site?
I dont know how many providers are blocking them but at home I have a cox cable connection and they are blocking them... On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 07:04 +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > I've heard reports of traceroutes through several backbones timing out > or going !H after a few hops, and I note that the impact seems to have > been enough for the site's IP to change .. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06:56:27 [~]$ dnsip www.makelovenotspam.com > 213.115.182.123 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07:01:16 [~]$ dnsname 213.115.182.123 > ua-213-115-182-123.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se > > Hosted on a cablemodem? Tch, tch, how the mighty have fallen >
Re: Microsoft problems?
I've been using MSN messenger all morning and it has been working fine for me. I havnt heard of anyone having problems with it either. On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 11:26, Chaim Fried wrote: > Anybody know of any prolonged outages at Microsoft (MSN messenger)today? > > Thornton Cierra Group www.cierragroup.com Efficient Licensing and Consulting
Re: Are AOL's MXs mass rejecting anyone else's emails?
On Tue, 2004-09-07 at 07:59, Christopher X. Candreva wrote: > On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, Jon Lewis wrote: > > > Any network that doesn't already have it, I highly recommend signing up > > for AOL's feedback loop (aka scomp reports) at > > http://postmaster.aol.com/tools/fbl.html. This will give you a sort of > > early warning system notifying you of spam issues on your network. > > And you will also get random emails that your users have sent to AOL users, > who then click on "Report as spam" seemingly at random. > > I've received Spam reports on e-mail asking when someone's kids should be > picked up at school, giving directions for a job interview, CONGRATULATING > that same person on being accepted for the job, and in once case received > a 'spam complaint' on every mail my user sent as part of a conversation. > > As in, the AOL user replied, then clicked "Report as spam". He received a > reply to his reply, replied, and Reported as Spam. This was not a "Stop > e-mailing me" conversation. It was a perfectly normal conversation between > two people. > > Then there are the people who have mail forwarded from here to their AOL > account, and can't get it through their thick skulls that "Report as spam" > isn't doing a damn thin in this case. thats because they think report as spam is the same as delete. they dont want the email anymore so lets click report as spam > > G. > > So it's a nice idea -- but IMHO fails in practice. > > == > Chris Candreva -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- (914) 967-7816 > WestNet Internet Services of Westchester > http://www.westnet.com/ Thornton Cierra Group www.cierragroup.com Efficient Licensing and Consulting
Re: 292 cellular towers out of service due to generator failure
On Mon, 2004-09-06 at 15:41, Sean Donelan wrote: > Due to a generator failure, 292 Sprint wireless towers in Polk, Pasco, > Hillsborough, Pinellas, Manatee, Hardee, Sarasota and Charlotte counties > were disrupted. There is no estimated time for restoration of power > to the Sprint switch serving the towers. > For that many towers to have power generator issues makes you wonder if they had power generators to begin w/. Maybe they just had a few hours worth of UPS power or something. Thornton Cierra Group www.cierragroup.com Efficient Licensing and Consulting
Re: Are AOL's MXs mass rejecting anyone else's emails?
On Tue, 2004-09-07 at 04:15, Peter Galbavy wrote: > Robert Blayzor wrote: > > One would hope that they're rejecting the incoming mail with a 400 > > series error and not 500 series. > > Where does the 400lb gorilla lie down ? Whereever it likes. > > AOL does pretty much anything it wants to. If they start 500'ing your mail, > it becomes your problem. Unless you have a large budget and a good legal > team. > > Peter > Only thing you can do is try to call them but that probably wont get you anywhere. If you have enough customers on AOL they can complain and if you really have a lot could get it removed. But for the most part your just SOL Thornton Cierra Group www.cierragroup.com Efficient Licensing and Consulting
RE: XP SP2 other than windows update
not in all areas they are not at any of the retail stores here. On Mon, 2004-09-06 at 18:58, Jim Popovitch wrote: > Fwiw, XP SP2 CDs are available at some PC retail outlets. I picked one > up from Best Buy late last week, and saw them again at a CompUSA over > the weekend. As with the download, ymmv. > > -Jim P. > > On Mon, 2004-09-06 at 21:32, Michel Py wrote: > > Nanog folk, > > Last week, I downloaded XP2 SP2 on one the major P2P networks (eDonkey). > > > > > > Preliminary/FYI: > > > > None of the large organizations I am involved with has deployed SP2 on a > > large scale yet. Users that request it will likely get it (from a share > > on a corporate server that is); some organizations are also testing > > their SP2 image by rolling out some of the new PCs with SP2; help desks > > are still building FAQs about it as problems generated by early adopters > > pop in. I expect most to push it to the desktop with SMS or similar > > within a month. > > > > > > Hard facts: > > > > - The P2P download took two hours. Ymmv. > > > > - The file was legit (I did a binary compare with the original; > > matches). The file I downloaded is WindowsXP-KB835935-SP2-ENU.exe. This > > is the full install; the slower your connection to the net is the more > > you want to download this only one-time and make it available locally > > and burn a CD with it. > > > > - The original file has been available from Microsoft for at least three > > weeks free of charge, no need for any kind of signup. > > > > > > Comments: > > > > - If I did not have the original file I would not have know which one to > > grab. The most distributed files were complete slipstreams, not SP only > > (I selected the best file of matching size). > > > > - Two hours for 266 MB is not too shabby in the absolute, but the > > original downloaded in less than 15 minutes from home each time and > > tried and a lot less from the office depending where I was. > > > > - On some P2P systems this kind of download speed can typically be > > achieved only by sharing files to get a good U/L ratio. People that > > don't share files would get at the end of the queue. > > > > - I typically get much better download speeds while sharing than people > > with an el-cheapo router because I QOS the upstream; one of the > > annoyances of sharing files is that it will tend to clog the upstream > > making even surfing rather painful. > > > > - Downloading with P2P requests installing a client and possibly poking > > holes in the NAT/Firewall. > > > > - There is a trust issue. When the file I get is from Microsoft from a > > download that I initiated myself not by clicking on a link provided by > > someone else, I would tend to trust it. OTOH, all P2P systems feature > > large amounts of illegal contents, including some that does not even > > exist (Norton utilities 2004, anyone?). > > > > - I never experienced nor heard any significant pipe clogging because of > > SP2. Contrary to some FUD propagated earlier there was no operational > > issue as a consequence of the download process. > > > > > > Conclusion: > > I did not see any advantage of using P2P to download XP SP2 and several > > drawbacks. I will continue to download patches directly from vendors. > > > > Michel. > > > Thornton Cierra Group www.cierragroup.com Efficient Licensing and Consulting
Re: OT- need a new GSM provider
voicestream is tmobile everywhere On Thu, 2004-09-02 at 16:14, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote: > On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Paul Vixie wrote: > > > > > Now that AT&T has followed T-Mobile's example by screwing the pooch on my > > cell phone billing, and I've flung yet another SIM-locked Motorola V600 > > out the window of yet another moving vehicle, and am about to enter into > > another year long "you violated the agreement first" small claims battle, I > > need a new GSM provider. I'm going to buy an unlocked tri-band GSM this > > time. Anybody had notable (good or bad) billing and/or customer service > > experiences with Voicestream or any other GSM provider with native coverage > > in the San Francisco Bay Area? > > Voicestream IS t-mobile, at least out here. > > -Dan > > > > > > (If you reply privately to me, I'll summarize back to the list.) > > -- > > Paul Vixie > > > > -- > > "No mowore webooting!!!" > > -Paul, 10-16-99, 10 PM > > ----Dan Mahoney > Techie, Sysadmin, WebGeek > Gushi on efnet/undernet IRC > ICQ: 13735144 AIM: LarpGM > Site: http://www.gushi.org > --- > Thornton Cierra Group www.cierragroup.com Efficient Licensing and Consulting
Re: XP SP2 other than windows update
They will have to wait for international delivery. On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 04:18, Roland Perry wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Sean > Donelan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > >You can order a Free CD on the Microsoft web site. Although it says 4-6 > >weeks, people report they are getting a CD in the mail in about a week. > > Is distribution from all their worldwide offices, or will users outside > the USA have to wait for international delivery? Thornton Cierra Group www.cierragroup.com Efficient Licensing and Consulting
Re: XP SP2 other than windows update
The CD's are supposed to hit Comp USA and Best BUy within the next month or two for SP2. The download link in this email should work fine for you even though it is the large network install if you really need it and have broadband go for it. On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 03:59, Sean Donelan wrote: > On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, David A. Ulevitch wrote: > > > would provide). If anyone's that desperate, email me. I only used it > > > after waiting a week with the "Automatic Updates" switched on, and > > > nothing arriving. > > > > Microsoft isn't hiding the link: > > http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/6/5/165b076b-aaa9-443d-84f0-73cf11fdcdf8/WindowsXP-KB835935-SP2-ENU.exe > > CompUSA is offering to install XP SP2 on any Windows XP computer for free > if you bring your computer to any of their stores. Expect them to use > the opportunity to try to sell you some upgrades or security software. > > You can order a Free CD on the Microsoft web site. Although it says 4-6 > weeks, people report they are getting a CD in the mail in about a week. > > There has been talk about Microsoft XP SP2 CD's being distribued through > various consumer and business electronics stores. But I haven't seen > any yet. > > Thornton Cierra Group www.cierragroup.com Efficient Licensing and Consulting
Re: FBI bust DDoS 'Mafia'
Yes America defiantly isn't what it used to be or what it was meant to be. However Guantanamo isn't America. Some of them are starting to be tried now too. Sklyarov is on bail. Although I think its time he either be tried or for them to drop it. But as far America, things need to be changed to restore our civil rights and other injustices that are going on here. On Sun, 2004-08-29 at 01:29, Pekka Savola wrote: > I shouldn't be feeding a troll but in case this was serious.. > > On Sun, 29 Aug 2004, Ricardo "Rick" Gonzalez wrote: > > > No comments, check the url > > > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/27/ddos_mafia_busted/ > > > > > > I'm happy some of these criminals sent to jail! > > > > You know, here in America, we have this concept called "innocent until > > proven guilty". What country are you from? > > The America is not what it used to be. Welcome to the 21st century. > > Have those guys rotting at Guantanamo been proven guilty? What was > the deal with Sklyarov (http://www.freesklyarov.org/)? Etc. Thornton Cierra Group www.cierragroup.com Efficient Licensing and Consulting
Re: Anybody at ATT.net email services?
Our email to att.net has been going through w/o any problems and we actually have a lot of emails going there. It may be your IP's are being flagged as passable for some reason and is causing the resend action. This is the first I have heard of they delaying any email like this though. You can try [EMAIL PROTECTED] but I think all that email gets ignored. On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 17:10, Vish Yelsangikar wrote: > We're having trouble with ATT delaying our email. They are using a > "grey-listing" technique to filter spam. Their mail servers give a > "deferred" message and ask you to resend your email two hours later. > The mail is allowed through on the retry. This filters out most spam, > because most spam engines ignore return codes and will not retry. This > is causing problems, because our mail servers are getting all clogged up > with email to att.net customers and slowing down. > > Our difficulty has been in finding someone at AT&T to speak with about > this. Can somebody from ATT.net help Netflix? > > Thanks > > Vish. Thornton Cierra Group www.cierragroup.com Efficient Licensing and Consulting
Streaming problem?
Is there something hoopy up with the streaming? Attempts to connect are eventually failing, complaing that: rtsp://198.108.1.36/broadcast/NANOG/encoder/nanog27.rm is not found. Any fixes at the far end welcome... -- Paul
Re: ISP responses to DOS/DDOS attacks for customers
We, respond within the hour. With regards to the scope/depth of the support. I, personally assist the customer up to the point of Auditing the suspected internal host(s). At, that point i recommend tools and websites to the customer. Best Regards, Tony Thornton The new electronic interdependence recreates the world in the image of a global village. 1967- Marshall McLuhan; 1911-1980 Therefore, Internet security is a journey, not a destination. - Original Message - From: "Wayne Bogan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 1:35 AM Subject: ISP responses to DOS/DDOS attacks for customers > > Is there a standard/general level of response that ISPs should provide when > responding to DOS/DDOS attacks for customer networks. We try to respond and > help any customer with identifying and resolving the problem since most of > our customers don't have the staff to respond appropriately. How far should > we go? > > If this issue has already been addressed, please respond off-list with the > correct direction to search. > > Regards, > > Wayne > >
Re[2]: gtld-servers returning multiple A records for a NS?
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Allan Liska wrote: > Yea, apparently in January Verisign changed their long standing policy of > allowing only one name server to be registered per IP Address. To > confuse matters even more, I don't think all of the registrars support > this, and I have not seen anything official from ICANN (not that > anyone cares what ICANN thinks). I'm not certain that this is entirely accurate. Certainly, ns0.ja.net has had two IP addresses for as long as I can remember (at least for the last five years...) and has been happily reflected in the whois and .net zone. -- Paul
