365 Main - an operators' nightmare?
I don't know if this is true, but it's more exciting reading than blaming it on a 'power outage'... http://valleywag.com/tech/breakdowns/a-drunk-employee-kills-all-of- the-websites-you-care-about-282021.php Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications [EMAIL PROTECTED] 650-207-0372 cell 650-213-1302 office 650-969-2124 fax
Re: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?
Mark,A more 'correct' analogy would be as follows: Let's say you win a judgement against another party where the court essentially awards you all the assets of the defendant. One of the assets is a paging company. So, you hike down to the FCC and want the radio licenses for the business re-registered in your name, you present a valid court order to show that the court has awarded you title to the assets. In fact, you present a court order specifically ordering the FCC to re-register the licensed spectrum to you.How can the FCC refuse? Any court with proper jurisdiction certainly has the ability to assess damages and specify remedies for thosedamages. A station license or spectrum - even though is not actual ownership, but a lease or license - is an asset and routinely are soldfor millions, even billions of dollars.More to the point, how can ARIN refuse such an order?Joe McGuckinViaNet Communications[EMAIL PROTECTED]650-207-0372 cell650-213-1302 office650-969-2124 fax On Sep 8, 2006, at 11:57 AM, Mark Kent wrote:Joe McGuckin typed: 2) Why does ARIN believe that it can ignore a court order? Maybe because ARIN wasn't a party to the original proceedingsthat generated that order?Let's say you're eating lunch one day, minding your own business,and a sheriff comes up with an official looking document andsays "You need to hand your car over to Fred..." because,unknown to you, Fred and Barney just finished court proceedingswhere the judge ruled that Barney had to give Fred "his" car,even though that car was owned by you and just loaned to Barney.Not a great analogy, because of the whole pink slip thing,but you get the point.-mark
Re: [Fwd: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]
I read the complaint. I don't like the fact that a lot of my friends are named in the suit, but I think there are somepoints worth discussing within the community:1) IP address blocks are not 'property' "Domains are not property. The assignee of a domain has no ownership interest" Network Solutions made this same argument years ago. That was their shield against lawsuits when negligence (or worse) on NetSols part would cause a domain to be erroneously transferred. When mistakes were made, Network Solutions was notoriously unwilling to reverse the transaction to correct the error. Then they got sued for refusing to reverse a fradulent domain transfer, and they lost. The case had the side effect of setting the precedent that domains *are* in fact tangible property. Now when a registrar or registry makes a mistake, they can be legally held responsible. (What case was that? Kremen v. Network Solutions) I would say that's an improvement.2) Why does ARIN believe that it can ignore a court order?3) What's wrong with treating assignments like property and setting up a market to buy and sell them? There's plenty of precedent for this: Mineral rights, mining claims, Oil and gas leases, radio spectrum. If a given commodity is truly scarce, nothing works as good as the free market in encouraging consumers to conserve and make the best use of it.Joe McGuckinViaNet Communications[EMAIL PROTECTED]650-207-0372 cell650-213-1302 office650-969-2124 fax
Is there a Comcast netops person lurking?
Joe McGuckinViaNet Communications[EMAIL PROTECTED]650-207-0372 cell650-213-1302 office650-969-2124 fax
Re: New Laptop Polices
Why not put critical or proprietary files on a flash key? I carry a 4G flash key on my keyring. Airport security has never given it a secondlook. If the laptop ends up in the hands of a sticky-fingered baggage handler (or the TSA), there's nothing there for them to find.And, to defeat the nosey customs folk who now want to login and rummage around your files when you enter the US, create a dummyaccount and give them that login when they insist on inspecting your laptop for "child porn". I've got nothing to hide, but I don't want someham handed idiot accidently deleting stuff either...Joe McGuckinViaNet Communications[EMAIL PROTECTED]650-207-0372 cell650-213-1302 office650-969-2124 fax On Aug 12, 2006, at 7:44 AM, Todd Vierling wrote:On 8/11/06, Christopher L. Morrow<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's also a great time to plant some file that POOF the authorities> will decrypt & show it's kiddie porn. {Or just hide same in your> browser cache.} Do YOU know what every frigging file on your> machine is?and here I was thinking: "Quick! buy stock in whole disk encryptionsoftware makers!" Any laptop NOT using full disk encryption from the moment of boot-upis begging for trouble. As has been pointed out many times, laptopsDO get lost, and not just in airline facilities.This can be accomplished with just about any OS. Some require loadingan OS kernel first with a custom ramdisk or mini-partition to kick offthe encrypted disk driver; others can use off the shelf productsdesigned expressly for this purpose.The only thing that bugs most people about full disk encryption isthat it often doesn't support "hibernation" -- but if the hardware hasa standby power save mode that is low enough on power consumption (S3or similar), that shouldn't be a problem.-- -- Todd Vierling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: APC Matrix 5000 question(s) (please, lets end this)
Can't you guys take this off-list? I'm seeing this thread gatewayed on *another* mailing list also. Somehow, APC battery maintenance doesn't seem like a critical topic (unlike for example, internet pipe cleaning day) ^) Joe McGuckinViaNet Communications[EMAIL PROTECTED]650-207-0372 cell650-213-1302 office650-969-2124 fax On Aug 2, 2006, at 6:34 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:On Wed, 2 Aug 2006, Matthew Sullivan wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Update: I replaced the batteries today, and indeed, several of the oldones (mostly in the first pack) were split and some had popped a couple oftheir "sealed" tops.I left for several hours and came back to the house stinking like burningrubber. The new batteries are apparently melting the terminal rubberinsulation. I had to throw it back into bypass mode and unplug that pack(the only one with new batteries!)Any ideas to the cause? The status screens looked ok. ("no bad batteries"again) Tip: Except where a newly supplied battery is faulty, replace all ornone - across all your packs connected to the same UPS. Understood...that's why I unplugged the other 2 XR packs from the UPS.APC rejected the notion that there was a controller problem, until theyhad me perform the battery test, when it not only cut power (batterieswere fried anyway), it stayed in test mode until bypassed. According tothem, even with dead batteries, it should come out within 5-10 seconds.James Smallacombe PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://3.am=
Did anyone else notice the CAIDA skitter poster in the background of George Bush's speech at the NSA?
http://tinyurl.com/doy6r -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: GoDaddy.com shuts down entire data center?
Richard, On the other hand , I'm not comfortable with the idea that an organization that provides network infrastructure services under the aegis of the US Government could unilaterally revoke those services for something that is not illegal. By all means, the Justice Dept. and police should move against anyone performing illegal acts such as phishing, I just don't think that it is ICANN or ARIN and GoDaddy's job to police good net citizenship. Joe On 1/16/06 10:07 AM, "Richard A Steenbergen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 03:32:02PM -0800, Matt Ghali wrote: >> >> On Sun, 15 Jan 2006, Elijah Savage wrote: >> >> Any validatity to this and if so I am suprised that our team has >> got no calls on not be able to get to certain websites. >> >> http://webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=477562 >> >> >> I for one applaud godaddy's response. If more piddling "Hosting >> Providers" with "Datacenters" got turned off when they started >> spewing abusive traffic, the net would be a much nicer place. >> >> Whoever the heck "nectartech" is, I guess they might act a little >> more responsibly in the future. Or, more probably, they'll just >> change to another DNS registrar who doesn't care as much about >> abuse. > > FYI, Nectartech is a small hosting shop out of 55 S Market in San Jose. I > wouldn't describe them as a "datacenter", since I don't think they own or > operate any facilities. > > Perhaps if they ever managed to find "the command to make two routers talk > to each other and be redundant" (a real quote from what has been loosely > described as their network admin, I'm not kidding, you can't make stuff > like this up :P), their next step might be to find the command to make dns > servers talk to each other and be redundant. > > Reality check time, what we have here is a small hosting shop with a long > history of shady customers. I doubt GoDaddy nukes nameservers on a whim, > my money is that there was a lot of abuse which went on for a long time > without getting any response. Its amazing how quickly some people who > don't respond or address abuse issues at all when you're asking nicely > will appear and take care of things once you turn them off. The rest is > just some random blowhard web hosting customer who gets off on being an > ass and blaming everyone but himself and his choice in hosting companies. > Hardly an uncommon sight. :) -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: Two Tiered Internet
Sean, I think you are skirting the real issue here. Prioritizing traffic in order to provide reliable transport for isochronous services is one thing; Using QoS features to de-prioritize traffic from a competitor or a company who refuses to pay to access your customers is something completely different. These are not just paranoid ravings from the tin-foil brigades: two telecom CEO's have recently floated trial balloons proposing exactly this scenario. What good is 6Mbit DSL from my ISP (say, SBC for example) if only a small portion of the net (sites that pay for non-degraded access) loads at a reasonable speed and everything else sucks? Joe On 12/13/05 12:26 PM, "Sean Donelan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Blaine Christian wrote: >> http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/12/13/ >> telecoms_want_their_products_to_travel_on_a_faster_internet/ >> >> My commentary is reserved at this point... but, it does make me >> shudder. > > Comcast has been advertising in press releases it gives priority to its > voice traffic over its network for a while. > > http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/12-12-2 > 005/0004231957&EDATE= > > Unlike traditional Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) offerings that > run on the public Internet, Comcast Digital Voice calls originate and > travel over Comcast's advanced, proprietary managed network. Because > Comcast Digital Voice is a managed service, Comcast can make sure that > customer calls get priority handling. > > -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: Using BGP to force inbound and outbound routing through particular routes
RAS, I have to admit that I'm guilty of using the phrase "class C" more or less interchangably with "/24" - I suspect a lot of us still do that... On 11/2/05 2:22 PM, "Richard A Steenbergen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 03:35:07PM -0600, John Dupuy wrote: >> >> There is nothing about a cable modem that would normally prevent a >> BGP session. Nor do all the intermediate routers need to support BGP >> (multi-hop BGP). However, direct connections are preferred. >> >> Your _real_ challenge is convincing Roadrunner's NOC staff to program >> one of their backbone routers to do a BGP session with a cable modem >> sub. Or, for that matter, getting them to even route a non-roadrunner >> IP block to a cable modem sub. >> >> Instead you might try borrowing a bunch of old 2500s and setting up a >> test lab that isn't connected to actual net. >> >> Best of luck on your CCIE. > > A) No cable company in their right mind is going to speak BGP to a > $29.95/mo residential customer, period. > > B) The answer to his question about "I don't know if what I'm doing will > violate the AUP or not" is, when in doubt the answer is YES. No sane > comapny is going to let this guy near bgp with a 10ft pole after that > statement, but then again no sane people read nanog any more I suspect. > > C) If this guy actually had a CCIE, I would encourage Cisco to quickly > implement a SWAT team responsible for reposessing the CCIE medals of > anyone caught using the words "Class C" for a /24 out of 66. space. > > D) Please do not feed the trolls. :) -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
L3 purchases Wiltel from Leucadia
www.forbes.com/business/manufacturing/feeds/ap/2005/10/31/ap2308682.html -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google
They're just collecting all the big brains, putting them in big glass jars so nobody else can have them... -joe On 9/8/05 12:32 PM, "Steve Sobol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote: > >> That kind of goes hand-in-hand with Vint's Galactic >> Internet theme. > > Uhhh... why does a dotcom need an Internet evangelist? > > :-S -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: fcc ruling on dsl providers' access to infrastructure
On 8/7/05 7:20 PM, "Richard A Steenbergen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Maybe what we need is a certain class of > company who will be responsible for running and maintaining the public > data infrastructures. They could have lots of government regulations to > ensure that they are charging a "fair" price while still being guaranteed > a profit, and they could provide the last mile service for all those ISPs > out there who are the ones that can actually compete and innovate. Yes, it's called structural separation. -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: Fiber cut in SJ
Stephen, The point I'm trying to make is that over classifying everything as 'secret' or 'confidential' at this late date is useless. The horse is already out of the barn. You can omit the site of a fiber backhoe accident from an email and say it's due to security concerns, but I can call any telecom vendor who sells SONET or metro ethernet services and get them to fax me a map of their network. At the very minimum all I have to do is keep an eye out for USA markings on the street. Or I could call USA and the next day people with paint cans would be marking up the street, showing me exactly where to dig. If someone wants to cause trouble, the information they need is freely available. The so-called security provisions most telecom companies use are just enough to deter curious teen-agers. On 8/7/05 8:15 AM, "Stephen J. Wilcox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sat, 6 Aug 2005, Joe McGuckin wrote: > >> >> On 8/5/05 8:12 PM, "George William Herbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> First, an electrical contractor backhoed a large fiber >>> link in downtown San Jose (address deleted due to security >>> concerns) this morning, causing moderate damage. >> >> That's just plain silly. As if we (or even your imagined 'terrorist') don't >> know where the fiber runs around here. > > well.. theres lots of ducting going down streets but not that many folks know > which of them are the major cable routes, i think keeping specific detail > discrete is reasonable > > in a fire near where i am a couple years ago: > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/10/23/arson_suspected_in_manchester_cable/ > > it seemed a bit of a coincidence that both the active and protect paths of a > major sdh route got hit in this attack and it took out a lot of long distance > circuits > > Steve > -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: Fiber cut in SJ
On 8/5/05 8:12 PM, "George William Herbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > First, an electrical contractor backhoed a large fiber > link in downtown San Jose (address deleted due to security > concerns) this morning, causing moderate damage. That's just plain silly. As if we (or even your imagined 'terrorist') don't know where the fiber runs around here. Mindlessly classifying everything as 'secret' is a tactic I'd expect of DHS, not NANOG. 'Need to know' does not appear anywhere in the constitution. -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications (address deleted due to security concerns)
Where is Looking Glass source code?
Nitrous doesn't seem to exist anymore. Can someone point me to a copy somewhere? Thanks, Joe -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: MCI billing fraud ... again
We've certainly experienced WorldCom's billing ineptness. For years we tried to clear up billing errors without getting anywhere. After WCOM's bankruptcy, things seem different. We've actually been able to get the old outstanding errors cleared up - rather easily, I might add. So, far, the 'new' MCI seems to be a big improvement over the old WorldCom. FYI - MCI is changing the format of their invoices, so there probably will be errors over the next couple of months until they get all the bugs worked out. Joe On 7/22/05 11:48 PM, "Richard A Steenbergen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 12:34:43PM -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> >> Thus spake "Randy Bush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> We're being hit up by MCI's billing fraud again. >>> >>> mci's billing problems are gross ineptitude, not fraud. and just >>> about every major (and many minor) telco has the same mess. >> >> "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by >> stupidity." > > But also be wary of attributing solely to stupidity a consistent pattern > of billing "mistakes" which can be explained by pointing at stupid people > but which net a lot of money from the folks who don't notice the errors. > :) > > Seems to happen a LOT in this industry, across many vendors, but some > more often than others. -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: clued/interested LEO list
Isn't there already one 'secret handshake' club in existence already? On 4/10/05 3:45 AM, "Gadi Evron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm creating a list of clued and/or interested LEO's, who would like to > be part of CLOSED/PRIVATE/SECRET online communities such as > anti-botnets, anti-spam, anti-phishing, etc. mailing lists, and/or get > information in their area of responsibility. > > I feel such a resource has been needed for a long time, so I just > decided to sit down and get it done. > > If anyone has someone to add, I'll be working on it in the next couple > of weeks. > > Gadi. > -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: High volume WHOIS queries
How about caching the data from previous ARIN whois lookups? I do agree that the bulk data and high volume limitations on whois servers are silly... -joe On 2/28/05 1:30 PM, "Dan Lockwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm in a disagreement with ARIN about my application for bulk whois > data. I've got a software program that needs resolve AS numbers to the > Company Name of the owner. The software app has need to do this on a > very high volume. E.g. I run a report that returns the top 100 AS > destinations for my network and I want to resolve the numbers to the > names as part of the report generation. Since ARIN throttles the number > of queries that you can execute against their servers I seems to "just > make sense" that you would do the processing using local data. > > That is all fine and good, but the problem comes when I distribute the > software to users. ARIN's AUP for bulk whois states: > > "Redistributing bulk ARIN WHOIS data is explicitly forbidden. It is > permissible to publish the data on an individual query or > small number of queries at a time basis, as long as reasonable > precautions are taken to prevent automated querying by > database harvesters." > > My original AUP application stated that I would transfer the data to the > users using an XML file on a regular basis. Clearly in violation of the > first point. Fine. But now after a phone conversation they are telling > me that I can not operate a server to distribute the data on a "per > query" basis too. Providing a server that answers whois queries just > like ARIN seems to be clearly permissible based on the remaining AUP > verbage. At this point the only thing I can get out of the guy/gal on > the phone is "NO!". > > Does anyone have any experience doing something like this? How about a > sanity check? Am I completely wrong in how I'm interpreting the AUP? > > Thanks, > Dan > -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: UUNET peering policy
They probably had a near-peer experience with another network and decided to 'tighten' up the requirements... On 1/3/05 4:35 PM, "Tom Vest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey, did anyone notice when UU peering policy explicitly incorporated a > requirement for number of transit customers served, measured by unique > AS? > > Thanks, > > Tom > -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
MCI/Worldcom billing hell?
So, how many of you out there have been been lucky enough to experience the joys of trying to get MCI billing errors corrected? On today's episode of "This American Life", they detail the experiences of the show's producer, who had her long distance service slammed over to MCI. A call to her mother that should have cost a couple of dollars ended up as a $900 past due amount that MCI tried to collect. Here's the synopsis published at the show's website (www.thislife.org): > On Hold, No One Can Hear You Scream. This show documents This American Life > Senior Producer Julie Snyder's ten-month battle with her phone company (MCI > Worldcom), which overcharged her $946.36. She spent hours on hold, in a > bureaucratic nowhere. Finally, she enlists the aid of the national media > specifically host Ira Glass. You can register a complaint about the phone > company at the Better Business Bureau or at the FCC. To reach Jim Myers, the > MCI executive interviewed in the story, email him at [EMAIL PROTECTED] An audio archive of the show will be available next week from the show's website. In the meantime, I'd suggest that you send your tales of woe to Jim Meyers of MCI to dispute any argument that MCI's pervasive, systemic billing problems are isolated, rare occurrences. -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: Heathrow scanner experiences?
I believe this is one of the 'backscatter' X-Ray units, where they bounce low intensity x-rays off of your body. The radiation dose is low enough that it does not penetrate your body (in theory, anyway). Joe On 11/19/04 5:11 AM, "Paul Wouters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [ It is a bit off topic, but I am looking for people who have travelled > through Heathrow lately with the new x-ray scanner, and nanog people are > generally engaged in a lot of traveling ] > > I was just pointed out to this article: > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/18/blunkett_xray_blank/ > > It says: > > "To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what air kerma > rate has been used to assess radiation doses associated with the use of > the Rapiscan Secure 1000 apparatus." David Blunkett's (yes, him again, > sorry about that) response was: "The information sought is not in the > public domain." > > "This would mean that a security scanner would have to deliver 2,500 > scans of an individual annually at 0.1 µSv per scan in order to reach > the US administrative control level of 0.25 mSv. For an airport security > scanner, even operating at a rather higher level, you'd probably have > to be living in it to achieve that kind of level." > > I went through Heathrow a few weeks ago, and was luckilly selected as > a winner and destined to test these new Rapiscan boxes. I was informed > it was an X-ray scanner, but with a very low dosage, the equivalent of > being in an airplane for 11 minutes. Ofcourse only later did I realise > that if these shots take 0.5 seconds, I was getting a dose 2*11*60= > 1330 times the dose of the backgorund radiation of being in a plane. I > wouldn't be suprised if those 11 minutes were per shot either. But at > the time, I was more curious then worried. > > The machine looked like a big wall. I needed to stand in front of it, > without jacket, arms and legs spread, torso turned. Two shots were > made with me turned in both positions. A third shot was made when I > was standing straight, exactly like a criminal. Legs slightly spread, > arms up. I then asked to the officer if they were storing these scans, > and what they actualy showed. He then offered me a look behind the scene > (and screen). A second officer was there, looking at a monitor that > still showed my third shot. I saw myself from behind, 'naked'. I was quite > suprised that this technology could actually render me naked. I could see > where I have body hair and where not. From a technological point of view > quite an achievement. (There was a second scanner, but I am not sure if > those were run by women, and whether they only picked women or not) The > officer further told me this was meant to scan for objects on the body, > and that the images were not stored. They did not ask me for my passport, > so I don't think this information is cross checked or stored. I also read > on an earlier news article that the person seeing the monitor cannot > see the person in real life, which is meant to 'reduce' the privacy > invasion. The person seeing you 'naked' never sees the real you. > > I forgot about the scanner and walked into the secure shopping mall, > and checked for books. About five minutes after the scan, while I > was not even thinking about the scanner anymore, I suddenly felt very > nauseous all over. I then felt a sharp pain in my lower right abdomen > which dissipated in the next minute. The nausea passed as well. > > I am a bit worried, and I did Google around, but found no other people > reporting the same. I did not go back to the scanner, since I couldn't > reach the insecure area anymore. > > I wondered about the pain. AFAIK there are no vital organs on the > right side. The liver, spleen and 'alvleesklier' (?) should be more > to the left or lower. The only thing on the right side is the end of > your intestines. That made me think that in fact they might have used > a higher dose or a more targeted scan to check deeper into my body for > hidden drugs or explosives or whatever. > > I'd love to hear from anyone else who has gone through this scanner and > what their experience was. > > Paul -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: Website contact for www.cisco.com
Or CEF/DCEF if a linecard 'loses' a forwarding entry. On 9/26/04 1:03 PM, "Petri Helenius" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Burton, Chris wrote: > >> I also ran into this problem yesterday, I contacted Cisco and >> they said that they were not block any of my addresses or ranges which I >> found to be strange since from what I could tell out of an entire /22 >> only one IP address was affected. As of around 0500 PDT this morning I >> was able to access Cisco's website again though. >> >> >> > "Content switching", when partially broken, can do fancy effects. > > Pete > -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: IMP #1
I wonder if that was the same IMP that was gathering dust in a corner of the student/staff lounge in Boelter Hall at UCLA? I used to see it when I would pass by there on my way to the library 20 years ago... Joe On 9/1/04 1:40 PM, "Peter H Salus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Tomorrow (Sept. 2) it will be 35 years since IMP #1 > was plugged in at Len Kleinrock's lab at UCLA. > > Happy Birthday! > > Peter > -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: On the back of other security posts (well some over a year ag o now)....
What strikes me as interesting is the fact that someone did hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of damage in exchange for -- a shell account?? This is beyond idiotic. Joe On 8/27/04 7:56 AM, "Hosman, Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Wow... > > Glad to see we know the real reason foonet got raided. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > Matthew Sullivan > Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 4:41 AM > To: nanog > Subject: On the back of other security posts (well some over a year ago > now) > > > > Need I say more...? > > http://www.securityfocus.com/news/9411 > > My thanks to those who listened and helped me. My thanks to those who > helped Spamhaus, and my thanks to anyone else who got involved with the > whole deal. > > / Mat > -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: Looking for recommendations for Datacenter off CA Faultline
Sacramento -joe On 7/16/04 4:34 PM, "Tony Li" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > You mean that they're not near any *known* fault lines. Remember > Northridge? > > If you're in CA or NV, you *are* near a fault line, no matter where you > are. > > http://quake.wr.usgs.gov/recenteqs/Maps/122-39.htm > http://quake.wr.usgs.gov/recenteqs/latest.htm > > Tony > > > On Jul 16, 2004, at 3:53 PM, Jonathan Nichols wrote: > >> >> >>> Might anyone have any recommendations for datacenters and or ways I >>> can best >>> determine this? It does me no good to go to a datacenter whose >>> connectivity also comes >>> from the same peeing points or fiber that would be effected or take >>> down a >>> data center in South Bay. Despite being off faultline. >> >> www.ragingwire.com >> >> Their data center is not near any fault lines. In fact, it's not near >> much of anything... except Sacramento. :) >> >> Nice place. Fairly new, and they're pleasant folks to deal with. >> >> -Jonathan >> > -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?]
On 7/5/04 1:18 AM, "Steve Gibbard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The performance arguments are probably more controversial. The arguments > are that shortening the path between two networks increases performance, > and that removing an extra network in the middle increases reliability. > The first argument holds relatively little water, since it's in many cases > only the AS Path (not really relevant for packet forwarding performance) > that gets shortened, rather than the number of routers or even the number > of fiber miles. If traffic goes from network A, to network A's router at > an exchange point, to network C, that shouldn't be different > performance-wise from the traffic going from network A, to Network B's > router at the exchange point, to Network C. Assuming none of the three > networks are underprovisioning, the ownership of the router in the middle > shouldn't make much difference. The reliability argument is probably more > valid -- one less network means one less set of engineers to screw > something up, but the big transit networks tend to be pretty reliable > these days, and buying transit from two of them should be quite safe. > I believe that peering does lead to a more robust network and somewhat better performance. Being heavily peered means that when one of my transit providers suffers a network 'event', I am less affected. Also, just because I'm sitting at a network exchange point (and take my transit there) doesn't mean that's where my transit networks peer. Quite often, I see traffic going to Stockton or Sacramento through one of my transit connections to be delivered to a router just a few cages away at PAIX. > The pricing issues are simpler. There's a cost to transit (which is, to > some degree, paying some other network to do your peering for you), and > there's a cost to peering. Without a clear qualitative difference between > the two, peering needs to be cheaper to make much sense. The costs of > transit involve not just what gets paid to the transit provider for the IP > transit, but also the circuit to the transit provider, the router > interface connecting to the transit provider, engineering time to maintain > the connection and deal with the transit provider if they have issues, and > so forth. Costs of peering include not just the cost of the exchange > port, but also the circuit to get to the exchange switch, sometimes colo > in the exchange facility, engineering time to deal with the connection and > deal with the switch operator if there are issues, and time spent dealing > with each individual peer, both in convincing them to turn the session up, > and dealing with problems affecting the session. Even if the port on the > exchange switch were free, there would be some scenarios in which peering > would not be cheaper than transit. > When we established our connection at PAIX, peering bandwidth was a factor of 20 cheaper than transit. Now they're at parity. Unfortunately, some *IX operators haven't seen fit to become more competitive on pricing to keep peering more economical than average transit pricing. $5000 for an ethernet switch port? It makes me long for the days of throwing ethernet cables over the ceiling to informally peer with other networks in a building. In the 'bad' old days of public exchanges (even the ad hoc ones), most of the problems were with the design and traffic capacity of the equipment itself (not a real problem now), not with actual 'operations'.
Re: Can a Customer take their IP's with them? (Court says yes!)
Mark, I suspect they confused 'mega' with 'kilo'. > > They mention 60 megawatts of power. It seems to me that the focus > shouldn't be on the easy task of renumbering a /24 in 85 days (is it > really just a /24?), but on moving the servers :-) > > There is mention of increased power charges (up to $18,000) and usage > of 60Mw. Isn't $20/amp/month still a standard charge in co-lo sites? > If so, $18,000 buys 900amps. With 120V service, we get > (120*900)/1.67 = 65kw. 65kw over 30 twenty-four hour days is > about 47Mw. So, the customer is getting a deal. > > -mark > -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: best effort has economic problems
I don't see the correlation between settlements, profitability and level-of-service. -joe
Re: Load Balancing Multiple DS3s (outgoing) on a 7500
Patrick, I suspect that each FE goes to a different AS... On 3/12/04 7:27 PM, "Patrick W.Gilmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mar 12, 2004, at 10:39 PM, Drew Weaver wrote: > >> Does anyone know of an article, or documentation regarding >> load balancing the traffic on 3 or more FastEthernet interfaces on the >> outgoing direction? Right now we're running BGP internally, and the >> routes that are being chosen based upon the final BGP decision step or >> what I like to call the 'IP address tie breaker' which is not always >> optimal. We have a cisco 7500 that is connected to 4 other Cisco 7500s >> which each have 45Mbps ds3s to the Internet, we would like to load >> balance the outgoing traffic across all 4 of these 7500s, can anyone >> shine any advice my way? I noticed that there are instructions on >> Cisco's site regarding doing LB on 12000s. > > Load balancing with BGP is the same on any cisco router. > > Are you doing BGP with the routers on the other side of those DS3s? If > you are, you will need their help in load balancing properly. Get them > to allow you peering with a loopback interface and use equal cost > static routes to do the load balancing to that loopback interface.
Re: How relable does the Internet need to be? (Was: Re: Converged Network Threat)
If the internet core is going to carry traffic that traditionally was delivered via switched tdm networks, I think we can expect significantly more regulation in the coming years. The FCC and state PUC's will want to see VOIP reliability and call completion statistics that are on par with existing tdm networks. That means ISP's of moderate size and larger will have to have buildouts comparable to the existing phone networks: e.g. Hardened physical facilities and triply redundant network paths into every service area. That's a very expensive undertaking and may lead the internet business back into the regulated, guaranteed margin business models of the ILECS. E911 and FBI surveillance are just the tip of the iceberg... Joe
Former WorldCom C.E.O. John Sidgmore Dies at 52
(From the New York Times) WASHINGTON (AP) -- John Sidgmore, the WorldComexecutive who helped reveal the accounting troubles that led to the biggest bankruptcy filing in U.S. history, died Thursday at 52. He died of complications associated with acute pancreatitis, said B. Jay Cooper, a family spokesman. http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Obit-Sidgmore.html
Re: NTP, possible solutions, and best implementation
> It depends upon how low a probability failure you're willing to consider > and how paranoid you are. For one thing, the U.S. National Command Authority > could decide that GPS represents a threat to national security and disable > or derate GPS temporarily or indefinitely over a limited or unlimited area. > Derating GPS wouldn't affect the time reference functionality. Turning off GPS entirely would seriously affect military aviation operations. > It is well known that GPS is vulnerable to deliberate attacks in limited > areas, perhaps even over large areas (see Presidential Decision Directive > 63). Backup systems are officially recommended for "safety-critical > applications" and the US government is actively intersted in developing > low-cost backup systems (presumably because they're concerned about GPS as a > SPOF too). > > The US government, and other entities, do perform "GPS interference > testing". This basically means they interfere with GPS. The government is > also actively investigating "phase-over to private operation", which could > mean changes to operation, fee system, or reliability of the GPS system. > > One could also imagine conditions that would result in concurrent failures > of large numbers of satellites. Remember what happened to Anik E-1 and E-2 > (space weather caused them to spin out of control). > > If you do develop a system with GPS as a SPOF, you should certainly be > aware of these risks and monitor any changes to the political and technical > climate surrounding GPS. I do believe that it is currently reasonable to > have GPS as a SPOF for a timing application that is not life critical (that > is, where people won't die if it fails). > > Aviators try very, very hard not to trust their lives to GPS. > As opposed to LORAN ?
nanog@merit.edu
Try LA DWP. They have fiber (lit & dark) going between most buildings downtown. Contact is: Eric Taylor[EMAIL PROTECTED] 866.DWP.LAON (397.5266)
Re: OT: Notebooks /w a serial port?
On 3/21/03 1:46 PM, "Drew Weaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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 > Buy a MAC Powerbook. I just purchased a 12" PB as a backup to my 15" TiBook and for folks around the office to use for field use. With a USB serial adaptor and Zterm (shareware terminal emulator) it works great.
Re: OT: level3 contact
We were L3 customer a while back. We tried to get in contact with our account rep for a couple of weeks with no results. We found out that L3 had laid off most of their sales staff and had decided to focus on wholesale sales. Our 'new' account manager later told us that L3 didn't want to sell anything smaller than an OC3. Now, that was about a year ago. Perhaps it's different now. Joe On 3/5/03 2:01 PM, "Daniel Golding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The assumption here is that they are a current customer, with an active > connection, and have exchanged routes. We don't know any of that. Level(3) > is generally pretty responsive - if the guy on the phone doesn't know the > answer, they tend to be pretty good about finding out. > > Maybe the original poster would care to share the resolution? > > Thanks, > Dan > > On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Andy Dills wrote: > >> >> On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Kris Foster wrote: >> > Can someone clueful at level3 please contact me about bgp. We are a > customer, and phone calls and email have failed to get us a contact. WOW...you're a _customer_ and you can't get somebody on the phone? >>> >>> 'get somebody on the phone' or 'get someone with BGP clue on the phone' >> >> Either and both. I'm sure L3 has people outside of their core engineering >> group that understand BGP. >> >> Ok, so maybe he's looking to start running BGP. I could understand not >> being able to get somebody on the phone without effort when trying to get >> things running the first time (but with multiple emails and calls, it's >> still inexcusable). However, if you're already exchanging routes with >> them, there's no excuse for not being able to get somebody who understands >> BGP on the phone. >> >> Andy >> >> >> Andy Dills 301-682-9972 >> Xecunet, LLCwww.xecu.net >> >> Dialup * Webhosting * E-Commerce * High-Speed Access >> >> >
OT: Need the name of a good Qwest account rep.
I need to order some Qwest circuits. Is there an ISP account group? Can someone recommend a good account manager to work with? Thanks, Joe
OC3 to DS3 mux ?
Can someone recommend a vendor for an OC3 to DS3 DACS or mux? I need a small one with capacity for a single OC3. Thanks, Joe
Re: [spamtools] Tracking a DDOS
Speaking of early networks: I see where Epoch was broken up and sold recently. On 1/21/03 1:48 PM, "Avi Freedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > : So did you aquire those "assets" from clearblue or where the appliedtheory's > : assets kindof devided between fastnet and clearblue? And if undertand it > : correctly apliedtheory name & domain are still with clearblue/navisite? > : If so is it the same for CRL? > > : I'm primarily just curious in terms of finding out what happened to > : earliest companies that made internet - CRL being one of the first > : commercial isp... > > FastNet purchased the access business from AppliedTheory, and Clearblue > got the hosting. > > In terms of abuse, [EMAIL PROTECTED] can be used for fastnet and > appliedtheory space also. I just supped with Mr. Abuse @netaxs > last Saturday night, and he can resolve or forward internally > anything for appliedtheory/fastnet/netaxs/etc customers. > > Thanks, > > Avi >
Re: DC power versus AC power
It only takes 30ma to put your heart into atrial fibrillation. In the usa, gfi's are set to trip at 5ma. Normally 48VDC wouldn't be considered a 'lethal' voltage (I've talked to telephone technicians who said they used to play a game in the CO by wiring a handle to 90V ring voltage and seeing who could grab it for the longest time), but you've got to consider the extreme cases where the working environment may be wet or a worker could get exposed through open wounds, puncture wounds or mucus membranes. Under the right circumstances, nearly any voltage can be lethal. Joe On 12/29/02 5:40 PM, "Scott Granados" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is 48V DC at the amps present normallyin switch rooms etc enough to cause > electricucian? I have seen bad things with wrenches dropped across > batteries even 12 volt car batteries although in this case it was a large > battery bank in a submarine but I was curious about the 48V sources in > switch rooms. > > > > - Original Message - > From: "David Lesher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "nanog list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 4:43 PM > Subject: Re: DC power versus AC power > > >> >> Unnamed Administration sources reported that Michael Painter said: >>> >>> >>> > But, as Stephen already eluded to... Compared with an AC plant > design, to >>> me, one of the biggest drawbacks of a DC plant is safety (I have had to >>> kick a fellow worker away from the rack before). << >>> >>> What was the worker doing? Is this 48 VDC? >> >> Bet so. >> >> And note, it's not just ISP's, of course. I heard that Sprint >> PCS ha[s,d] a Dallas tech in critical condition and a dead switch >> after a dropped wrench & resulting fire. >> >> In the words of Phil Esterhaus: >> >> Let's be careful out there >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> A host is a host from coast to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> & no one will talk to a host that's close[v].(301) 56-LINUX >> Unless the host (that isn't close).pob 1433 >> is busy, hung or dead20915-1433 >> >
Re: future transit prices
How do you compute CGS on a network that is 25% utilized? Is it expenses/current utilization or expenses/maximum capacity? I think a lot of the low-ball pricing that is in the market is the result of networks selling off underutilized capacity at discounted pricing just to get some additional cash flow. This pricing probably doesn't take into account the necessary capex that will be required to upgrade the network when it approaches saturation. On 10/18/02 10:46 AM, "Paul Vixie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > someone wrote, in response to my piece this morning... > >> Can you explain more about why you think transit prices will return to >> the $200-$300/mbps. I've been quoted $40/mbps on a 50mbps commit >> (95th%) ... which I think is pretty much as low as it's going to get. >> I can understand prices going back up near $100/mbps over time, but >>> $200 is much more than I'm expecting. > > the way i think about this is that somebody has to carry the traffic to > wherever it's got to go. with a "top tier" of huge networks, the pricing > model gets smoother in two ways: (1) the distance insensitivity in sales > has a larger set of costs to average against; and (2) cost per bit-kilom > goes down as pipe size goes up. however, the cost per bit per second of > switching these is relatively constant over time (people, rent, depreciation > or lease of equipment). > > a non-top tier provider who wants to get into the game will not be able > to make money at market prices until they fill their network to a > certain crossover point. (and if you buy your pipes too small you can't > get there at all, and if you buy them too large then you can never fill > the whole thing.) > > a lot of networks, both top-tier and non-top-tier, have been selling > transit without being able to determine their costs other than at a very > gross level. the thought seems to have been, we have to charge what the > market will bear, and hope we're the last ones standing. but i think > we, as an industry, have pretty much burned all the cash we'll be able > to burn in that way. > > when i look at the ingredients: > > worldwide presence (peering points, pops, whatever) > worldwide L1/L2 costs between pops > staff (engineering, operations, management, sales, marketing, etc) > capital (for all those pops) > rent (of things that aren't pops, like HQ offices) > marketing, legal, travel, other goo > and so on > > it looks to me like you could run an OC48 backbone at 60% capacity and > make a sustained single digit NPM selling at $250/Mbit average, or you > could do an OC192 backbone at 60% capacity and single digit margins at > maybe $175/Mbit. perhaps an OC768 backbone running at 60% will be able > to make single digit NPM at $100/Mbit, but i'm really reaching on that one. > > doing it for less involves either (a) not knowing your costs yet, or (b) > buying market share, or (c) cost containment strategies like using > assets that have been recently through the cleansing ritual of > bankruptcy, or (d) selling ahead of usage like getting 100Mbit/sec > commits from a lot of 20Mbit/sec customers. none of those things lasts > forever. > >> Regardless of which of us is right, I guess I'm still pretty safe if I >> lock in todays rates for multiple years. > > oh yeah, oh yeah, oh yeah. > >
Re: Colocation Enclosures
Southwest Data Products - distributed through Graybar AMCO DATACOM www.amcoengineering.com On 7/15/02 8:48 PM, "Christopher J. Wolff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Greetings, > > I'm trying to find alternative sources for a 2 or 3 section locked > colocation cabinet cosmetically similar to the following: > > http://www.budind.com/images/big/DC-8125bg.jpg > > It appears that Encoreusa is no longer in business so I would appreciate > any pointers as to where I may locate such an enclosure. Thank you! > > Chris > >
FW: wcom overbilling
-- Forwarded Message From: joe mcguckin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 21:43:23 -0700 To: Hank Nussbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: wcom overbilling On 7/6/02 9:04 PM, "Hank Nussbacher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > At 04:50 PM 06-07-02 +0100, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote: > >> .. which is why I think people (especially US altho it seems to be coming >> more >> the normal in other markets) use EBITDA as it smooths out the bumps even >> tho the >> bumps are still there! >> >> The other nice thing in the telecoms world about EBITDA is the 'D' which >> seems >> to work quite well at hiding losses caused by falling fibre/bandwidth prices! > > From Barrons: > EBITDA = Earnings Before I Tricked the Dumb Auditor > > -Hank > > >> Steve > > Why shouldn't interest expense be taken into account? After all, they (name your favorite carrier) wouldn't have that nice fiber network if it weren't for all the money they borrowed. Paying the interest on the borrowed money should be treated as a normal business expense. Joe -- End of Forwarded Message
Hotel in Seattle area w- internet access ?
I'm leaving for Seattle this evening. Can anyone recommend a hotel that has internet access in the rooms? Thanks, joe
Any opinions regarding Telehouse ?
We're seriously considering moving out of 1 Wilshire, due to Carlyle's factor of eight fee increase for meet-me room cage rents and their practice of insisting on charging us for items our contract specifically says we can't be charged for. One leading candidate for our new 'home' in LA is Telehouse. Any opinions about them? Thanks, Joe
Re: Bandwidth Monitoring by IP
If you're running *BSD, install a packet filter that counts octets - one filter rule per IP address. Then sample every 5 minutes. On 6/20/02 5:48 AM, "Mitchell, Dan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > Does anyone know of a low-cost solution for monitoring bandwidth by IP? My > original thought was 1 switch port = 1 IP, but in the case of virtual IP's > on a single port, that just wouldn't work. I'm seeing more and more of a > demand for a basic BW report by IP, so our customers can bill their customer > accordingly. > > Any recommendations? > > Thanks, > Dan > > Dan Mitchell > Internet Systems Engineer - Boston > AllegianceInternet / Hosting.com > 781.478.1857 Direct Line > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: Error in assignments....?
On 6/12/02 6:10 PM, "Mike Leber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Sabri Berisha wrote: >> On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote: >>> route: 209.81.0.0/19 >>> origin:AS7091 >> >> The netblock you are referring to is not globally visible btw. > > Correct, ViaNet is announcing 209.81.0.0/18 now and the 209.81.0.0/19 is > an example of that cruft I was talking about that people should clean up. > > (typing in the background as somebody sends in an update ;) > > Mike. > > Even when CRL was alive (not just a zombie) we were never able to get them to clean this up.
Road Runner NOC ?
Will someone from Road Runner please contact me? You have a customer that is spamming and using my email address for the return address. I'm getting thousands of MAILER-DAEMON bounce messages per day. Thanks, Joe -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124
Re: Metromedia Fiber warns of possible bankruptcy :-(
Whoever the buyer is, I hope it's not WorldCom! Joe On 3/18/02 10:23 AM, "Richard A Steenbergen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 10:19:30AM -0800, Rusty H. Hodge wrote: >> >> Metromedia said it is seeking to restructure its debts. As of Feb. >> 28, it had $3.3 billion of consolidated debt and about $37.3 million >> in cash. A restructuring could substantially dilute the value held by >> stockholders, the company said. > ... >> To raise cash, Metromedia said it plans to sell the facilities of its >> Internet exchange, PAIX, for about $50 million cash and an equity >> interest in the buyer. A substantial part of the proceeds from the >> sale, expected to close in the second quarter, will be used to pay >> down debt, it said. > > $50 mil down, $3.25 billion to go...
