Re: Building a technical library

[alvin nanog]

hi ya chris

On 05/31/16 at 08:53pm, Ca By wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 31, 2016, Chris Costa  wrote:
> 
> > Looking to develop a technical library for about 15 staff members all under
> > the same roof.  Subject matter would focus around Juniper/Junos, TCP/IP,
> > dwdm, python, java, and expand from there.  The O'reilly Safari service
> > looks rather comprehensive, although at $400/user there may be more value

$400 is good for around 5-8 new books .. 

> > buying hard copies and own them outright (or at least until they walk
> > away). 

books are like paper clips and pens .. somehow they grow legs and like
to play hide-n-seek

> > Are there other online resources that offer a good value?  Other
> > experiences weighing the pros and cons?

i'm one that say "owning" is better than renting under some cases ..
- books is best owned because you probably have to look up the 
  subject matter again and again, or put it into your online notes 

- usually, books comes with examples on DVD, or at least the ones i get

- oreilly series, sam's, dummy series, IDG series, one can go broke :-)
  i have most of the common topics, but not cisco/juniper type stuff
  and most all books have been in dozens of boxes since moving and 
  not unpacked

- google is always good resource but filtering thru various posts/blogs
  implies you know what you're looking for

- barns n noble is usually good for quick browsing 
- computer literacy is always good ( sf bay area ), not sure if they still
  around, similarly for digital guru

> I have always used the public library, libraries i am familiar with have
> ebook offerings that are comparable to safari if not safari itself

public libraries are seriously lacking "good techie books" stuff

university libraries are good too, but not sure if they let anybody browse

another option .. everybody contributes to your "wiki" with pertinent info
of what you were expecting to find in the "rent-a-book" services

happy reading ( n comprehension )
alvin
#
# DDoS-Mitigator.net
# DDoS-Simulator.net
#

Re: Building a technical library

[Ca By]

On Tuesday, May 31, 2016, Chris Costa  wrote:

> Looking to develop a technical library for about 15 staff members all under
> the same roof.  Subject matter would focus around Juniper/Junos, TCP/IP,
> dwdm, python, java, and expand from there.  The O'reilly Safari service
> looks rather comprehensive, although at $400/user there may be more value
> buying hard copies and own them outright (or at least until they walk
> away).  Are there other online resources that offer a good value?  Other
> experiences weighing the pros and cons?
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
>

I have always used the public library, libraries i am familiar with have
ebook offerings that are comparable to safari if not safari itself

Building a technical library

[Chris Costa]

Looking to develop a technical library for about 15 staff members all under
the same roof.  Subject matter would focus around Juniper/Junos, TCP/IP,
dwdm, python, java, and expand from there.  The O'reilly Safari service
looks rather comprehensive, although at $400/user there may be more value
buying hard copies and own them outright (or at least until they walk
away).  Are there other online resources that offer a good value?  Other
experiences weighing the pros and cons?

Thanks,
Chris

Re: ISP License in the USA?

[Owen DeLong]

> On May 31, 2016, at 12:05 , Miles Fidelman  wrote:
> 
> On 5/31/16 2:53 PM, Dennis Burgess wrote:
> 
>> I would suggest getting a new consultant .. :)
>> 
> What Dennis said.
> 
>> Lol got me!   There is nothing that I know of that you have to "license" to 
>> become a ISP in the US of A. . You do have to fill out Form 477 twice a 
>> year. :)
> 
> But only if you provide:
> - facilities-based broadband services, and/or,
> - provide wired or fixed wireless local exchange telephone service
> - provide interconnected VoIP service
> - provide facilities based wireless telephony
> (see https://transition.fcc.gov/form477/WhoMustFileForm477.pdf)
> 
> If you provide basic dial-up services, or wireless Internet over unlicensed 
> channels - there's no licensing requirement whatever.

This also applies if you are applying over unbundled elements or other leased 
facilities AIUI.

Owen

Re: ISP License in the USA?

[Owen DeLong]

Not necessarily…

If you aren’t a facilities-based carrier:

https://transition.fcc.gov/form477/WhoMustFileForm477.pdf

You don’t need to.

Owen

> On May 31, 2016, at 11:53 , Dennis Burgess  wrote:
> 
> I would suggest getting a new consultant .. :)  
> 
> Possible Acronyms
> 
> College of Arts and Letters (Missouri State University; Springfield, MO)  
> Cartridge Overall Length (shooting)
> Client Object Access Layer
> Circle of Acro Lovers
> Columbus Ohio Area Local
> Consolidated Operational Activities List
> Customer Order Acceptance List
> Common Operational Activities List (US Navy)  
> Chance of a Lifetime (raffle)
> 
> Lol got me!   There is nothing that I know of that you have to "license" to 
> become a ISP in the US of A. . You do have to fill out Form 477 twice a year. 
> :)  
> 
> 
> www.linktechs.net - 314-735-0270 x103 - dmburg...@linktechs.net 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Lorell Hathcock
> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 1:14 PM
> To: 'NANOG list' 
> Subject: ISP License in the USA?
> 
> NANOG:
> 
> 
> 
> Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP 
> license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other countries 
> like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal experience.)
> 
> 
> 
> I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't know 
> of a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to end 
> customers.
> 
> 
> 
> I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a 
> requirement to pass traffic.
> 
> 
> 
> He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.
> 
> 
> 
> Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license for a 
> small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users (commercial 
> and/or residential).
> 
> 
> 
> I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to kick 
> in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> 
> Lorell Hathcock
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: ISP License in the USA?

[Jared Mauch]

> On May 31, 2016, at 4:16 PM, William Herrin  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Lorell Hathcock  wrote:
>> Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP
>> license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other countries
>> like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal experience.)
> 
> Howdy,
> 
> There is generally no license required to be an ISP.
> 
> If you wish to own physical infrastructure located in the public right
> of ways or use licensed radio frequencies, there are various licensing
> and regulatory requirements.
> 
> We call those "cable companies," "telcos," "LECs," or "CLECs" even if
> they also provide ISP service.
> 
> If you lease your long-haul cabling infrastructure (from folks who are
> licensed) or implement physical infrastructure only on property you
> own or lease, you need not address licensing yourself.

In some cases it’s very simple to do something, in Michigan (for example) you
can run fiber and place items in the right of way by meeting the standards of
a Metro Permit, eg:

http://www.michigan.gov/lcsa/0,5798,7-333-23730-221070--,00.html

For most places, you just need to pay the state or local licensing
fees.  You can generally do this for low cost, setting up a new C-corp
or LLC is $50 to file in my area.  Well worth it if you just want to
establish yourself as a legal entity.  Then you can do business with
that and usual minimal paperwork.  You can pay hundreds to nearly
infinite money to establish your structure(s).

You do need to have some sort of TIN or EIN.  This gets complex and
imposes requirements, consult an accountant, CPA or lawyer as well
in this area.  It shouldn’t be more than $1k to establish the legal entity
unless there are very complex situations involved. 

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/apply-for-an-employer-identification-number-ein-online

Unless you are offering certain regulated services, the bar is quite
low to establish a company and maintain yourself.  I’d say when possible
avoid complex programs, they tend to come with high reporting and auditing
costs.  

- Jared

Re: ISP License in the USA?

[William Herrin]

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Lorell Hathcock  wrote:
> Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP
> license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other countries
> like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal experience.)

Howdy,

There is generally no license required to be an ISP.

If you wish to own physical infrastructure located in the public right
of ways or use licensed radio frequencies, there are various licensing
and regulatory requirements.

We call those "cable companies," "telcos," "LECs," or "CLECs" even if
they also provide ISP service.

If you lease your long-haul cabling infrastructure (from folks who are
licensed) or implement physical infrastructure only on property you
own or lease, you need not address licensing yourself.


> He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.

https://apps.fcc.gov/coals/

That's if you want to be a cable TV operator (plus Internet). Unless
you're planning to run your own coax on the telephone poles, you don't
need that.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems . Web: 

craigslist.com admin

[Dennis Burgess]

Looking for a craigslist.com admin to connect with offlist about a block :)

[DennisBurgessSignature]
www.linktechs.net - 314-735-0270 x103 - 
dmburg...@linktechs.net

RE: ISP License in the USA?

[Naslund, Steve]

What you have been hearing so far is correct.  You do not need a license to be 
an ISP other than normal business licenses in your municipality/state.  The 
only thing I can think of would be if you were a voice carrier or wanted to 
become a CLEC which would give you better/cheaper access to local 
infrastructure via interconnection agreements (like local loops for DSL and 
duct/conduit access for building out your own fiber network).  I can tell you 
that the CLEC route is pretty expensive and has quite extensive regulatory 
hurdles at both the state and federal level.  If you are a pure data ISP (i.e. 
not originating voice services) running on leased access circuits there is not 
much more you should need to do.  Of course, you could and should ask this same 
question of your state's communications commission if you need a legally sound 
opinion on this.

Steven Naslund
Chicago IL

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Sean Donelan
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 1:55 PM
To: Lorell Hathcock
Cc: 'NANOG list'
Subject: Re: ISP License in the USA?

On Tue, 31 May 2016, Lorell Hathcock wrote:
> Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an 
> ISP license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other 
> countries like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal 
> experience.)
>
> I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I 
> don't know of a license that we are required to have to route IP 
> traffic to end customers.
> I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a 
> requirement to pass traffic.
>
> He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.
>
> Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal 
> license for a small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to 
> end users (commercial and/or residential).
>
> I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to 
> kick in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.

As always, you should consult with your company's attorney or legal advisor.

ISP's do not have a seperate license in the USA (besides normal business and 
tax licenses).

COALS refers to cable operators and multichannel video programming distributors.

CLEC refers to competitive local exchange carriers (i.e. telephone and private 
line circuits).

Wireless ISPs may need a FCC radio frequency license for high power or 
exclusive use of radio frequencies.  Low-powered Wi-Fi doesn't need a license.

Generally you need some kind of permission or license to install facilities in 
a public right of way or exclusive use of public airwaves.

ISPs can lease those facilities from licensed operators, and don't need a 
license themselves. In practice, most cable operators and telephone companies 
are also "self-provisioned" ISPs. They have "license" from a state and/or FCC; 
but that's because they are cable or telephone companies installing 
telecommunication facilities in public rights of way, not because they are ISPs.

RE: ISP License in the USA?

[STARNES, CURTIS]

I've got it! Send $25,000 and I will print you a shiny new license to hang on 
the wall!


Curtis Starnes
Senior Network Administrator
Granbury ISD
600 W. Bridge St. Ste. 40
Granbury, Texas  76048
(817) 408-4104
(817) 408-4126 Fax
curtis.star...@granburyisd.org
www.granburyisd.org 
 
 

OPEN RECORDS NOTICE: This email and responses may be subject to Texas Open 
Records laws and may be disclosed to the public upon request. 



-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Wayne Bouchard
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: Dustin Jurman 
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group 
Subject: Re: ISP License in the USA?

Well, now you're talking tax ID or, rather, a general license to operate a 
commercial enterprise, not a specific license related to ISPs.

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 07:05:29PM +, Dustin Jurman wrote:
> Local Business License.
> 
> Dustin
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Dennis 
> Burgess
> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 2:53 PM
> To: North American Network Operators' Group 
> Subject: RE: ISP License in the USA?
> 
> I would suggest getting a new consultant .. :)
> 
> Possible Acronyms
> 
> College of Arts and Letters (Missouri State University; Springfield, MO)  
> Cartridge Overall Length (shooting)
> Client Object Access Layer
> Circle of Acro Lovers
> Columbus Ohio Area Local
> Consolidated Operational Activities List Customer Order Acceptance List
> Common Operational Activities List (US Navy)  
> Chance of a Lifetime (raffle)
> 
> Lol got me!   There is nothing that I know of that you have to "license" to 
> become a ISP in the US of A. . You do have to fill out Form 477 twice a year. 
> :)  
> 
> 
> www.linktechs.net - 314-735-0270 x103 - dmburg...@linktechs.net
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Lorell 
> Hathcock
> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 1:14 PM
> To: 'NANOG list' 
> Subject: ISP License in the USA?
> 
> NANOG:
> 
>  
> 
> Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an 
> ISP license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other 
> countries like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal 
> experience.)
> 
>  
> 
> I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't know 
> of a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to end 
> customers.
> 
>  
> 
> I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a 
> requirement to pass traffic.
> 
>  
> 
> He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.
> 
>  
> 
> Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license for a 
> small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users (commercial 
> and/or residential).
> 
>  
> 
> I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to kick 
> in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>  
> 
> Lorell Hathcock
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 

---
Wayne Bouchard
w...@typo.org
Network Dude
http://www.typo.org/~web/

Re: ISP License in the USA?

[Wayne Bouchard]

Well, now you're talking tax ID or, rather, a general license to
operate a commercial enterprise, not a specific license related to
ISPs.

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 07:05:29PM +, Dustin Jurman wrote:
> Local Business License.
> 
> Dustin
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Dennis Burgess
> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 2:53 PM
> To: North American Network Operators' Group 
> Subject: RE: ISP License in the USA?
> 
> I would suggest getting a new consultant .. :)  
> 
> Possible Acronyms
> 
> College of Arts and Letters (Missouri State University; Springfield, MO)  
> Cartridge Overall Length (shooting)
> Client Object Access Layer
> Circle of Acro Lovers
> Columbus Ohio Area Local
> Consolidated Operational Activities List Customer Order Acceptance List
> Common Operational Activities List (US Navy)  
> Chance of a Lifetime (raffle)
> 
> Lol got me!   There is nothing that I know of that you have to "license" to 
> become a ISP in the US of A. . You do have to fill out Form 477 twice a year. 
> :)  
> 
> 
> www.linktechs.net - 314-735-0270 x103 - dmburg...@linktechs.net 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Lorell Hathcock
> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 1:14 PM
> To: 'NANOG list' 
> Subject: ISP License in the USA?
> 
> NANOG:
> 
>  
> 
> Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP 
> license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other countries 
> like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal experience.)
> 
>  
> 
> I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't know 
> of a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to end 
> customers.
> 
>  
> 
> I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a 
> requirement to pass traffic.
> 
>  
> 
> He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.
> 
>  
> 
> Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license for a 
> small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users (commercial 
> and/or residential).
> 
>  
> 
> I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to kick 
> in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>  
> 
> Lorell Hathcock
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 

---
Wayne Bouchard
w...@typo.org
Network Dude
http://www.typo.org/~web/

RE: ISP License in the USA?

[STARNES, CURTIS]

Maybe the consultant is confusing "licensing" with IP address allocations from 
ARIN.


Curtis Starnes
Senior Network Administrator
Granbury ISD
600 W. Bridge St. Ste. 40
Granbury, Texas  76048
(817) 408-4104
(817) 408-4126 Fax
curtis.star...@granburyisd.org
www.granburyisd.org 
 
 

OPEN RECORDS NOTICE: This email and responses may be subject to Texas Open 
Records laws and may be disclosed to the public upon request. 




-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Miles Fidelman
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 2:06 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: ISP License in the USA?

On 5/31/16 2:53 PM, Dennis Burgess wrote:

> I would suggest getting a new consultant .. :)
>
What Dennis said.

> Lol got me!   There is nothing that I know of that you have to "license" to 
> become a ISP in the US of A. . You do have to fill out Form 477 twice a year. 
> :)

But only if you provide:
- facilities-based broadband services, and/or,
- provide wired or fixed wireless local exchange telephone service
- provide interconnected VoIP service
- provide facilities based wireless telephony (see 
https://transition.fcc.gov/form477/WhoMustFileForm477.pdf)

If you provide basic dial-up services, or wireless Internet over unlicensed 
channels - there's no licensing requirement whatever.

As Dennis said - first get a new consultant.  Look for one who can work through 
your service model - what you're going to be selling, to whom, using what 
technology(ies) - and work from there to whatever licenses (if any) that you 
require.

Miles Fidelman

--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   Yogi Berra

Re: ISP License in the USA?

[Wayne Bouchard]

+1

Do not confuse a desire from some party you wish to do business
saying, "Our own consultants have said that we shouldn't do business
with anyone not compliant with these standards," as a requirement for
licensure. Bureaucrats simply like certificates and that's all this
really boils down to, a way for consultants and/or politicians to
meddle in both ends of what has previously been a pretty open process,
creating a solution in search of a problem and adding complexity where
it's generally not needed.

In fine, the only thing you need in the US to be an ISP is a network.
The rest is mostly all about trying to get customers from one section
or another of business or of the general public.

-Wayne

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 11:54:38AM -0700, Eric Flanery (eric) wrote:
> There is no such thing as an 'ISP license' in the US. I have a hard time
> imagining Texas of all places would have such a requirement.
> 
> Depending on what exactly you are doing, there are various and highly
> varied requirements, such as acquiring a SPIN number for E-Rate, filing FCC
> 477 if you do broadband, FCC 499 if you do VoIP (CLEC and ETC also apply
> there), a FRN if you do pretty much anything FCC-related, various sorts of
> licenses for most radio/microwave systems (excepting part 15 stuff), CALEA,
> open internet, etc...
> 
> COALS _could_ apply _if_ you are running a cable TV system that also
> delivers data services, but it isn't an 'ISP thing'.
> 
> More to the point...
> 
> I wouldn't take US legal advice from any consultant not familiar with US
> law, or really any non-lawyer consultant at all. I wouldn't take it from
> NANOG either; while it's a tremendous technical resource, it is not your
> attorney.
> 
> There are a number of telecommunications focused law firms out there, with
> knowledgeable lawyers. It would be a good idea to establish a relationship
> with one, if you intend to enter the increasingly complex legal minefield
> of being an ISP.
> 
> --Eric
> 
> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Dan White  wrote:
> 
> > Not familiar with the process, but look at E-rate if you want to provide
> > service to schools, libraries and health providers.
> >
> >
> > On 05/31/16 13:14 -0500, Lorell Hathcock wrote:
> >
> >> NANOG:
> >>
> >> Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP
> >> license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other
> >> countries
> >> like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal experience.)
> >>
> >> I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't
> >> know
> >> of a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to end
> >> customers.
> >>
> >> I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a
> >> requirement to pass traffic.
> >>
> >> He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.
> >>
> >> Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license
> >> for
> >> a small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users
> >> (commercial and/or residential).
> >>
> >> I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to
> >> kick
> >> in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Dan White
> > BTC Broadband
> >

---
Wayne Bouchard
w...@typo.org
Network Dude
http://www.typo.org/~web/

Re: ISP License in the USA?

[Miles Fidelman]

On 5/31/16 2:53 PM, Dennis Burgess wrote:


I would suggest getting a new consultant .. :)


What Dennis said.


Lol got me!   There is nothing that I know of that you have to "license" to 
become a ISP in the US of A. . You do have to fill out Form 477 twice a year. :)


But only if you provide:
- facilities-based broadband services, and/or,
- provide wired or fixed wireless local exchange telephone service
- provide interconnected VoIP service
- provide facilities based wireless telephony
(see https://transition.fcc.gov/form477/WhoMustFileForm477.pdf)

If you provide basic dial-up services, or wireless Internet over 
unlicensed channels - there's no licensing requirement whatever.


As Dennis said - first get a new consultant.  Look for one who can work 
through your service model - what you're going to be selling, to whom, 
using what technology(ies) - and work from there to whatever licenses 
(if any) that you require.


Miles Fidelman

--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   Yogi Berra

RE: ISP License in the USA?

[Dustin Jurman]

Local Business License.

Dustin



-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Dennis Burgess
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 2:53 PM
To: North American Network Operators' Group 
Subject: RE: ISP License in the USA?

I would suggest getting a new consultant .. :)  

Possible Acronyms

College of Arts and Letters (Missouri State University; Springfield, MO)
Cartridge Overall Length (shooting)
Client Object Access Layer
Circle of Acro Lovers
Columbus Ohio Area Local
Consolidated Operational Activities List Customer Order Acceptance List
Common Operational Activities List (US Navy)
Chance of a Lifetime (raffle)

Lol got me!   There is nothing that I know of that you have to "license" to 
become a ISP in the US of A. . You do have to fill out Form 477 twice a year. 
:)  


www.linktechs.net - 314-735-0270 x103 - dmburg...@linktechs.net 

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Lorell Hathcock
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 1:14 PM
To: 'NANOG list' 
Subject: ISP License in the USA?

NANOG:

 

Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP license 
to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other countries like 
Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal experience.)

 

I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't know of 
a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to end customers.

 

I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a 
requirement to pass traffic.

 

He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.

 

Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license for a 
small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users (commercial 
and/or residential).

 

I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to kick in 
once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.

 

Thanks,

 

Lorell Hathcock

 

 

 

 

 

Re: ISP License in the USA?

[Eric Flanery (eric)]

There is no such thing as an 'ISP license' in the US. I have a hard time
imagining Texas of all places would have such a requirement.

Depending on what exactly you are doing, there are various and highly
varied requirements, such as acquiring a SPIN number for E-Rate, filing FCC
477 if you do broadband, FCC 499 if you do VoIP (CLEC and ETC also apply
there), a FRN if you do pretty much anything FCC-related, various sorts of
licenses for most radio/microwave systems (excepting part 15 stuff), CALEA,
open internet, etc...

COALS _could_ apply _if_ you are running a cable TV system that also
delivers data services, but it isn't an 'ISP thing'.

More to the point...

I wouldn't take US legal advice from any consultant not familiar with US
law, or really any non-lawyer consultant at all. I wouldn't take it from
NANOG either; while it's a tremendous technical resource, it is not your
attorney.

There are a number of telecommunications focused law firms out there, with
knowledgeable lawyers. It would be a good idea to establish a relationship
with one, if you intend to enter the increasingly complex legal minefield
of being an ISP.

--Eric

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Dan White  wrote:

> Not familiar with the process, but look at E-rate if you want to provide
> service to schools, libraries and health providers.
>
>
> On 05/31/16 13:14 -0500, Lorell Hathcock wrote:
>
>> NANOG:
>>
>> Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP
>> license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other
>> countries
>> like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal experience.)
>>
>> I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't
>> know
>> of a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to end
>> customers.
>>
>> I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a
>> requirement to pass traffic.
>>
>> He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.
>>
>> Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license
>> for
>> a small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users
>> (commercial and/or residential).
>>
>> I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to
>> kick
>> in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.
>>
>
> --
> Dan White
> BTC Broadband
>

Re: ISP License in the USA?

[Sean Donelan]

On Tue, 31 May 2016, Lorell Hathcock wrote:

Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP
license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other countries
like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal experience.)

I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't know
of a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to end
customers.
I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a
requirement to pass traffic.

He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.

Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license for
a small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users
(commercial and/or residential).

I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to kick
in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.


As always, you should consult with your company's attorney or legal 
advisor.


ISP's do not have a seperate license in the USA (besides normal business 
and tax licenses).


COALS refers to cable operators and multichannel video programming 
distributors.


CLEC refers to competitive local exchange carriers (i.e. telephone and
private line circuits).

Wireless ISPs may need a FCC radio frequency license for high power or 
exclusive use of radio frequencies.  Low-powered Wi-Fi doesn't need a

license.

Generally you need some kind of permission or license to install 
facilities in a public right of way or exclusive use of public airwaves.


ISPs can lease those facilities from licensed operators, and don't need a 
license themselves. In practice, most cable operators and telephone 
companies are also "self-provisioned" ISPs. They have "license" from a 
state and/or FCC; but that's because they are cable or telephone 
companies installing telecommunication facilities in public rights of way, 
not because they are ISPs.

RE: ISP License in the USA?

[Dennis Burgess]

I would suggest getting a new consultant .. :)  

Possible Acronyms

College of Arts and Letters (Missouri State University; Springfield, MO)
Cartridge Overall Length (shooting)
Client Object Access Layer
Circle of Acro Lovers
Columbus Ohio Area Local
Consolidated Operational Activities List
Customer Order Acceptance List
Common Operational Activities List (US Navy)
Chance of a Lifetime (raffle)

Lol got me!   There is nothing that I know of that you have to "license" to 
become a ISP in the US of A. . You do have to fill out Form 477 twice a year. 
:)  


www.linktechs.net - 314-735-0270 x103 - dmburg...@linktechs.net 

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Lorell Hathcock
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 1:14 PM
To: 'NANOG list' 
Subject: ISP License in the USA?

NANOG:

 

Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP license 
to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other countries like 
Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal experience.)

 

I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't know of 
a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to end customers.

 

I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a 
requirement to pass traffic.

 

He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.

 

Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license for a 
small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users (commercial 
and/or residential).

 

I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to kick in 
once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.

 

Thanks,

 

Lorell Hathcock

 

 

 

 

 

Re: ISP License in the USA?

[Faisal Imtiaz]

>>> > He is suggesting COALS .

as in lumps of coals, is what you are going to get on christmas from him, if he 
does not get this gig !


:)


Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom


- Original Message -
> From: "Lorell Hathcock" 
> To: "nanog list" 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 2:14:17 PM
> Subject: ISP License in the USA?

> NANOG:
> 
> 
> 
> Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP
> license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other countries
> like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal experience.)
> 
> 
> 
> I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't know
> of a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to end
> customers.
> 
> 
> 
> I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a
> requirement to pass traffic.
> 
> 
> 
> He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.
> 
> 
> 
> Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license for
> a small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users
> (commercial and/or residential).
> 
> 
> 
> I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to kick
> in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> 
> Lorell Hathcock

RE: ISP License in the USA?

[STARNES, CURTIS]

+1 on the SPIN, when we file our e-Rate form 470 and form 471's each year with 
USAC, we have to provide our carrier's SPIN on these forms.

Curtis Starnes
Senior Network Administrator
Granbury ISD
600 W. Bridge St. Ste. 40
Granbury, Texas  76048
(817) 408-4104
(817) 408-4126 Fax
curtis.star...@granburyisd.org
www.granburyisd.org 
 
 

OPEN RECORDS NOTICE: This email and responses may be subject to Texas Open 
Records laws and may be disclosed to the public upon request. 




-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Ray Orsini
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 1:32 PM
To: Dan White ; Lorell Hathcock 
Cc: NANOG list 
Subject: RE: ISP License in the USA?

Just to clarify. You don't need a SPIN (e-rate Service Provider Identification 
Number) to provide service to those entities. You only need a SPIN to qualify 
for USF/USAC funding for those entities. If they want to pay full price (which 
some do) you don't need the SPIN. Applying for a SPIN is extremely easy. 
Applying for e-rate funding, on the other hand, is usually best done via a 
consultant. Thankfully that's the customer's problem, not yours.

Regards,
Ray Orsini – CEO
Orsini IT, LLC – Technology Consultants
VOICE DATA  BANDWIDTH  SECURITY  SUPPORT
P: 305.967.6756 x1009   E: r...@orsiniit.com   TF: 844.OIT.VOIP
7900 NW 155th Street, Suite 103, Miami Lakes, FL 33016 http://www.orsiniit.com 
| View My Calendar | View/Pay Your Invoices | View Your Tickets



-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Dan White
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 2:25 PM
To: Lorell Hathcock 
Cc: 'NANOG list' 
Subject: Re: ISP License in the USA?

Not familiar with the process, but look at E-rate if you want to provide 
service to schools, libraries and health providers.

On 05/31/16 13:14 -0500, Lorell Hathcock wrote:
>NANOG:
>
>Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP 
>license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other 
>countries like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal
>experience.)
>
>I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't 
>know of a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to 
>end customers.
>
>I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a 
>requirement to pass traffic.
>
>He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.
>
>Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license 
>for a small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users 
>(commercial and/or residential).
>
>I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to 
>kick in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.

--
Dan White
BTC Broadband

RE: ISP License in the USA?

[STARNES, CURTIS]

E-Rate is more of a "discounted" rate process than a license.
I work for a mid-sized school district and apply for and are granted E-Rate 
funding every year.
So from the end user stand point not as a transit ISP, E-Rate would not apply.

Curtis Starnes
Senior Network Administrator
Granbury ISD
600 W. Bridge St. Ste. 40
Granbury, Texas  76048
(817) 408-4104
(817) 408-4126 Fax
curtis.star...@granburyisd.org
www.granburyisd.org 
 
 

OPEN RECORDS NOTICE: This email and responses may be subject to Texas Open 
Records laws and may be disclosed to the public upon request. 



-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Dan White
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 1:25 PM
To: Lorell Hathcock 
Cc: 'NANOG list' 
Subject: Re: ISP License in the USA?

Not familiar with the process, but look at E-rate if you want to provide 
service to schools, libraries and health providers.

On 05/31/16 13:14 -0500, Lorell Hathcock wrote:
>NANOG:
>
>Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP 
>license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other 
>countries like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal 
>experience.)
>
>I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't 
>know of a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to 
>end customers.
>
>I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a 
>requirement to pass traffic.
>
>He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.
>
>Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license 
>for a small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users 
>(commercial and/or residential).
>
>I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to 
>kick in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.

--
Dan White
BTC Broadband

RE: ISP License in the USA?

[Ray Orsini]

Just to clarify. You don't need a SPIN (e-rate Service Provider
Identification Number) to provide service to those entities. You only need a
SPIN to qualify for USF/USAC funding for those entities. If they want to pay
full price (which some do) you don't need the SPIN. Applying for a SPIN is
extremely easy. Applying for e-rate funding, on the other hand, is usually
best done via a consultant. Thankfully that's the customer's problem, not
yours.

Regards,
Ray Orsini – CEO
Orsini IT, LLC – Technology Consultants
VOICE DATA  BANDWIDTH  SECURITY  SUPPORT
P: 305.967.6756 x1009   E: r...@orsiniit.com   TF: 844.OIT.VOIP
7900 NW 155th Street, Suite 103, Miami Lakes, FL 33016
http://www.orsiniit.com | View My Calendar | View/Pay Your Invoices | View
Your Tickets



-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Dan White
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 2:25 PM
To: Lorell Hathcock 
Cc: 'NANOG list' 
Subject: Re: ISP License in the USA?

Not familiar with the process, but look at E-rate if you want to provide
service to schools, libraries and health providers.

On 05/31/16 13:14 -0500, Lorell Hathcock wrote:
>NANOG:
>
>Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP
>license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other
>countries like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal
>experience.)
>
>I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't
>know of a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to
>end customers.
>
>I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a
>requirement to pass traffic.
>
>He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.
>
>Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license
>for a small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users
>(commercial and/or residential).
>
>I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to
>kick in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.

--
Dan White
BTC Broadband

Re: ISP License in the USA?

[Dan White]

Not familiar with the process, but look at E-rate if you want to provide
service to schools, libraries and health providers.

On 05/31/16 13:14 -0500, Lorell Hathcock wrote:

NANOG:

Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP
license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other countries
like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal experience.)

I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't know
of a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to end
customers.

I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a
requirement to pass traffic.

He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.

Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license for
a small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users
(commercial and/or residential).

I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to kick
in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.


--
Dan White
BTC Broadband

Re: rfc 1812 third party address on traceroute

[William Herrin]

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Octavio Alvarez
 wrote:
>>.-.
>>| |
>>|   B |- D
>> S -| A  R|
>>|   C |- (toward S)
>>| |
>>`-'

> I'm not sure if you mean that, if sent through C it should have the
> source addres of A, or that it should actually be sent through A
> regardless of the routing table (which sounds better to me).

Howdy,

That doesn't make sense. There may be multiple next hops out A. If the
next hop in the FIB is out C, how would the router pick the next hop
to send to out A?

Anyway, Randy's comment was about source address selection, not
routing. With the packet coming from S into interface A, he'd prefer
that the ICMP error message be sourced from the IP address assigned to
A, not the IP address assigned to C or R.

Regards,
Bill

-- 
William Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems . Web: 

ISP License in the USA?

[Lorell Hathcock]

NANOG:

 

Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP
license to operate in the United States.  (Like they have in other countries
like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal experience.)

 

I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't know
of a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to end
customers.

 

I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state.  But it is not a
requirement to pass traffic.

 

He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar.

 

Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license for
a small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users
(commercial and/or residential).

 

I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to kick
in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license.

 

Thanks,

 

Lorell Hathcock

 

 

 

 

 

Re: rfc 1812 third party address on traceroute

[Hugo Slabbert]

On Tue 2016-May-31 09:08:42 -0700, Octavio Alvarez  
wrote:


On 05/30/2016 10:03 PM, Randy Bush wrote:

rfc1812 says

   4.3.2.4 ICMP Message Source Address

   Except where this document specifies otherwise, the IP source address
   in an ICMP message originated by the router MUST be one of the IP
   addresses associated with the physical interface over which the ICMP
   message is transmitted.  If the interface has no IP addresses
   associated with it, the router's router-id (see Section [5.2.5]) is
   used instead.

some folk have interpreted this to mean that, if a router R has three
interfaces

   .-.
   | |
   |   B |- D
S -| A  R|
   |   C |- (toward S)
   | |
   `-'

of course, simpletons such as i would desire the source of the time
exceeded message to be A.  after all, this is the interface to which i
sent the icmp with the TTL to expire.


Do you mean the source address or the source interface?

I'm not sure if you mean that, if sent through C it should have the
source addres of A, or that it should actually be sent through A
regardless of the routing table (which sounds better to me).


How is the latter better?  What guarantees are there that the adjacent L3 
device on R's interface A has a route for S and if such a route exists that 
it doesn't simply point at R?  As Randy so eloquently put it:



(yes, virginia, the internet is highly asymmetric)




Octavio.


--
Hugo Slabbert   | email, xmpp/jabber: h...@slabnet.com
pgp key: B178313E   | also on Signal


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: rfc 1812 third party address on traceroute

[Octavio Alvarez]

On 05/30/2016 10:03 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
> rfc1812 says
> 
>4.3.2.4 ICMP Message Source Address
> 
>Except where this document specifies otherwise, the IP source address
>in an ICMP message originated by the router MUST be one of the IP
>addresses associated with the physical interface over which the ICMP
>message is transmitted.  If the interface has no IP addresses
>associated with it, the router's router-id (see Section [5.2.5]) is
>used instead.
> 
> some folk have interpreted this to mean that, if a router R has three
> interfaces
> 
>.-.
>| |
>|   B |- D
> S -| A  R|
>|   C |- (toward S)
>| |
>`-'
> 
> of course, simpletons such as i would desire the source of the time
> exceeded message to be A.  after all, this is the interface to which i
> sent the icmp with the TTL to expire.

Do you mean the source address or the source interface?

I'm not sure if you mean that, if sent through C it should have the
source addres of A, or that it should actually be sent through A
regardless of the routing table (which sounds better to me).

Octavio.

Re: rfc 1812 third party address on traceroute

[William Herrin]

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Randy Bush  wrote:
>.-.
>| |
>|   B |- D
> S -| A  R|
>|   C |- (toward S)
>| |
>`-'
>
> i would desire the source of the time
> exceeded message to be A.  after all, this is the interface to which i
> sent the icmp with the TTL to expire.

Hi Randy,

I've thought for a number of years that routers should have an "ip
icmp-error-from" interface directive which allows the operator to
specify the source address for ICMP errors messages generated due to
packets received on that interface.

The behavior you describe where the time-exceeded message comes from C
instead of A is a nuisance. The RDNS gives you clues which point in
the wrong direction. Darn. Guess you'll have to rely on the preceding
router to tell you where the packet came from before it reached R.

The behavior Mikael notes is more deadly. Bogon filters drop packets
from RFC1918 sources. They aren't subtle enough to allow ICMP errors
through while dropping other IP packets. With bogon filters in place,
ICMP errors originated from RFC1918 space don't reach S. PMTUD dies
and your TCP connections die along with it. It's really important that
an Internet router not originate ICMP from 192.168.1.1!

It would also have been nice if ICMP error messages had defined a text
comment field where ops could place diagnostic information such as the
received interface. Overloading the functionality of the layer-3
address for any purpose (such as hanging an RDNS entry with textual
diagnostic information) is bad bad bad. Probably too late to shoehorn
that in.

Regards,
Bill Herrin



-- 
William Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems . Web: 

Akamai Geolocation

[Bryn Sadler]

Hi all, anyone on-list from Akamai that could help out with a Geolocation issue 
our customers are experiencing? We tried the support channels on the website.

Many thanks,

Bryn Sadler

Chief Technical Officer


T: +44 (0)20 3102 5254

M: +44 (0)7872 684 671

C: +1 (347) 558 2133
W: essensys.tech




The content of this email is confidential. If you are not the addressee, you 
may not distribute, copy or disclose any part of it. If you receive this 
message in error, please delete this from your system and notify the sender 
immediately by reply.


essensys Ltd | 1 Triton Square Regents Place London NW1 3DX | Registration No. 
05959557
essensys Inc | 450 7th Avenue Suite 2407 New York NY 10123
Please consider the environment when reading this email and only print a copy 
if you think it's really necessary.

Re: rfc 1812 third party address on traceroute

[Owen DeLong]

It seems to me that a plain text reading of RFC-1812 is as Randy describes 
undesirable. It also seems that the violation of this text is commonplace in 
actual implementations because of yet another time where operators have made it 
clear to developers that the IETF is silly. 

I like the Linux solution... Comply with the RFC by default and provide a knob 
to do the "right thing" if desired. 

Best of all would be to put forth an errata against RFC1813 to change the text 
to specify the inbound interface of the packet triggering the ICMP message when 
applicable. The behavior currently described should be preserved for ICMP 
packets which are not triggered by inbound packets. 

Owen


> On May 31, 2016, at 01:27, Job Snijders  wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 10:03:33PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
>>   .-.
>>   | |
>>   |   B |- D
>>S -| A  R|
>>   |   C |- (toward S)
>>   | |
>>   `-'
>> 
>> if the source of a traceroute from S toward D with TTL to expire on R,
>> and R's FIB wants to exit via C to get back to S (yes, virginia, the
>> internet is highly asymmetric), the source address of the time exceeded
>> message should be C.
>> 
>> of course, simpletons such as i would desire the source of the time
>> exceeded message to be A.  after all, this is the interface to which i
>> sent the icmp with the TTL to expire.
>> 
>> is anyone seeing the dreaded rfc1812 behavior in a citable fashion?  how
>> common is it?
> 
> On most Linux the default behaviour is using source address "C", but
> this can be corrected by setting the following somewhere in your
> /etc/sysctl.d/ files:
> 
># make traceroute nice
>net.ipv4.icmp_errors_use_inbound_ifaddr=1
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Job

Re: CALEA

[Christopher Morrow]

"Encryption

The number of state wiretaps in which encryption was encountered decreased
from 41 in 2013 to 22 in 2014. In two of these wiretaps, officials were
unable to decipher the plain text of the messages. Three federal wiretaps
were reported as being encrypted in 2014, of which two could not be
decrypted. Encryption was also reported for five federal wiretaps that were
conducted during previous years, but reported to the AO for the first time
in 2014. Officials were able to decipher the plain text of the
communications in four of the five intercepts."

that's certainly interesting...

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 3:12 AM, Martin Hannigan  wrote:

> Misfire. Sorry, early in the AM. The URL I intended to send is here:
>
> http://www.uscourts.gov/statistics-reports/wiretap-report-2014
>
>
> Best,
>
> -M<
>
> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Martin Hannigan 
> wrote:
> > CALEA isn't a type of request, it's a law that enabled par function
> > access for LEO's e.g. "the ladder" pin register, trap+trace, DTMF
> > translation, three-way/off hook ops and the call content (not
> > necessarily in that order).
> >
> > You can see the non national security activity here:
> >
> >
> > On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Mike Joseph  wrote:
> >> I can say via firsthand knowledge that CALEA requests are definitely
> >> happening and are not even that rare, proportional to a reasonably sized
> >> subscriber-base.  It would be unlawful for me to comment specifically on
> >> any actual CALEA requests, however.  But if you have general questions
> >> about my observations, feel free to reach out directly.
> >>
> >> -MJ
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Brian Mengel 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> My comments were strictly limited to my understanding of CALEA as it
> >>> applied to ISPs, not telcos.  A request for a lawful intercept can
> entail
> >>> mirroring a real time stream of all data sent to/from a customer's
> Internet
> >>> connection (cable modem/DSL/dedicated Ethernet) to a LEA.  AFAIK this
> >>> requires mediation before being sent to the LEA and it is the mediation
> >>> server itself that initiates the intercept when so configured by the
> ISP.
> >>> Perhaps some LEAs have undertaken the mediation function so as to
> >>> facilitate these intercepts where the neither the ISP nor a third
> party can
> >>> do so.  If that were the case then very little would be needed on the
> part
> >>> of the ISP in order to comply with a request for lawful intercept.  I
> can
> >>> say with certainty that these types of requests are being made of
> broadband
> >>> ISPs though I agree that they are very rare.
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Ricky Beam  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > On Tue, 10 May 2016 17:00:54 -0400, Brian Mengel 
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > AFAIK being able to do a lawful intercept on a specific, named,
> >>> >> individual's service has been a requirement for providers since
> 2007.
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > It's been required for longer than that. The telco I worked for over
> a
> >>> > decade ago didn't build the infrastructure until the FCC said they
> were
> >>> > going to stop funding upgrades. That really got 'em movin'. (suddenly
> >>> "data
> >>> > services" people -- i.e. ME -- weren't redheaded stepchildren.)
> >>> >
> >>> > have never heard of a provider, big or small, being called out for
> being
> >>> >> unable to provide this service when requested.
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > Where existing infrastructure is not already in place (read:
> >>> T1/BRI/etc.),
> >>> > the telco can take up to 60 days to get that setup. I know more than
> one
> >>> > telco that used that grace period to actually setup CALEA in the
> first
> >>> > place.
> >>> >
> >>> > did not perform intercepts routinely.
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > The historic published figures (i've not looked in years) suggest
> CALEA
> >>> > requests are statistically rare. The NC based telco I worked for had
> >>> never
> >>> > received an order in the then ~40yr life of the company.
> >>> >
> >>> > The mediation server needed to "mediate" between your customer
> >>> aggregation
> >>> >> box and the LEA is not inexpensive.
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > And also is not the telco's problem. Mediation is done by the LEA or
> 3rd
> >>> > party under contract to any number of agencies. For example, a telco
> tap
> >>> > order would mirror the control and voice traffic of a POTS line
> (T1/PRI
> >>> > channel, etc.) into a BRI or specific T1 channel. (dialup was later
> >>> added,
> >>> > but wasn't required in my era, so we didn't support it.) We used to
> test
> >>> > that by tapping a tech's phone. Not having any mediation software,
> all I
> >>> > could do is "yeap, it's sending data" and listen to the voice
> channels
> >>> on a
> >>> > t-berd.
> >>> >
> >>> > --Ricky
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
>

Re: rfc 1812 third party address on traceroute

[Job Snijders]

On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 10:03:33PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
>.-.
>| |
>|   B |- D
> S -| A  R|
>|   C |- (toward S)
>| |
>`-'
> 
> if the source of a traceroute from S toward D with TTL to expire on R,
> and R's FIB wants to exit via C to get back to S (yes, virginia, the
> internet is highly asymmetric), the source address of the time exceeded
> message should be C.
> 
> of course, simpletons such as i would desire the source of the time
> exceeded message to be A.  after all, this is the interface to which i
> sent the icmp with the TTL to expire.
> 
> is anyone seeing the dreaded rfc1812 behavior in a citable fashion?  how
> common is it?

On most Linux the default behaviour is using source address "C", but
this can be corrected by setting the following somewhere in your
/etc/sysctl.d/ files:

# make traceroute nice
net.ipv4.icmp_errors_use_inbound_ifaddr=1

Kind regards,

Job

Re: CALEA

[Martin Hannigan]

Misfire. Sorry, early in the AM. The URL I intended to send is here:

http://www.uscourts.gov/statistics-reports/wiretap-report-2014


Best,

-M<

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Martin Hannigan  wrote:
> CALEA isn't a type of request, it's a law that enabled par function
> access for LEO's e.g. "the ladder" pin register, trap+trace, DTMF
> translation, three-way/off hook ops and the call content (not
> necessarily in that order).
>
> You can see the non national security activity here:
>
>
> On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Mike Joseph  wrote:
>> I can say via firsthand knowledge that CALEA requests are definitely
>> happening and are not even that rare, proportional to a reasonably sized
>> subscriber-base.  It would be unlawful for me to comment specifically on
>> any actual CALEA requests, however.  But if you have general questions
>> about my observations, feel free to reach out directly.
>>
>> -MJ
>>
>> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Brian Mengel  wrote:
>>
>>> My comments were strictly limited to my understanding of CALEA as it
>>> applied to ISPs, not telcos.  A request for a lawful intercept can entail
>>> mirroring a real time stream of all data sent to/from a customer's Internet
>>> connection (cable modem/DSL/dedicated Ethernet) to a LEA.  AFAIK this
>>> requires mediation before being sent to the LEA and it is the mediation
>>> server itself that initiates the intercept when so configured by the ISP.
>>> Perhaps some LEAs have undertaken the mediation function so as to
>>> facilitate these intercepts where the neither the ISP nor a third party can
>>> do so.  If that were the case then very little would be needed on the part
>>> of the ISP in order to comply with a request for lawful intercept.  I can
>>> say with certainty that these types of requests are being made of broadband
>>> ISPs though I agree that they are very rare.
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Ricky Beam  wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Tue, 10 May 2016 17:00:54 -0400, Brian Mengel 
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > AFAIK being able to do a lawful intercept on a specific, named,
>>> >> individual's service has been a requirement for providers since 2007.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > It's been required for longer than that. The telco I worked for over a
>>> > decade ago didn't build the infrastructure until the FCC said they were
>>> > going to stop funding upgrades. That really got 'em movin'. (suddenly
>>> "data
>>> > services" people -- i.e. ME -- weren't redheaded stepchildren.)
>>> >
>>> > have never heard of a provider, big or small, being called out for being
>>> >> unable to provide this service when requested.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Where existing infrastructure is not already in place (read:
>>> T1/BRI/etc.),
>>> > the telco can take up to 60 days to get that setup. I know more than one
>>> > telco that used that grace period to actually setup CALEA in the first
>>> > place.
>>> >
>>> > did not perform intercepts routinely.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > The historic published figures (i've not looked in years) suggest CALEA
>>> > requests are statistically rare. The NC based telco I worked for had
>>> never
>>> > received an order in the then ~40yr life of the company.
>>> >
>>> > The mediation server needed to "mediate" between your customer
>>> aggregation
>>> >> box and the LEA is not inexpensive.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > And also is not the telco's problem. Mediation is done by the LEA or 3rd
>>> > party under contract to any number of agencies. For example, a telco tap
>>> > order would mirror the control and voice traffic of a POTS line (T1/PRI
>>> > channel, etc.) into a BRI or specific T1 channel. (dialup was later
>>> added,
>>> > but wasn't required in my era, so we didn't support it.) We used to test
>>> > that by tapping a tech's phone. Not having any mediation software, all I
>>> > could do is "yeap, it's sending data" and listen to the voice channels
>>> on a
>>> > t-berd.
>>> >
>>> > --Ricky
>>> >
>>>
>>>

Re: CALEA

[Martin Hannigan]

CALEA isn't a type of request, it's a law that enabled par function
access for LEO's e.g. "the ladder" pin register, trap+trace, DTMF
translation, three-way/off hook ops and the call content (not
necessarily in that order).

You can see the non national security activity here:


On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Mike Joseph  wrote:
> I can say via firsthand knowledge that CALEA requests are definitely
> happening and are not even that rare, proportional to a reasonably sized
> subscriber-base.  It would be unlawful for me to comment specifically on
> any actual CALEA requests, however.  But if you have general questions
> about my observations, feel free to reach out directly.
>
> -MJ
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Brian Mengel  wrote:
>
>> My comments were strictly limited to my understanding of CALEA as it
>> applied to ISPs, not telcos.  A request for a lawful intercept can entail
>> mirroring a real time stream of all data sent to/from a customer's Internet
>> connection (cable modem/DSL/dedicated Ethernet) to a LEA.  AFAIK this
>> requires mediation before being sent to the LEA and it is the mediation
>> server itself that initiates the intercept when so configured by the ISP.
>> Perhaps some LEAs have undertaken the mediation function so as to
>> facilitate these intercepts where the neither the ISP nor a third party can
>> do so.  If that were the case then very little would be needed on the part
>> of the ISP in order to comply with a request for lawful intercept.  I can
>> say with certainty that these types of requests are being made of broadband
>> ISPs though I agree that they are very rare.
>>
>> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Ricky Beam  wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, 10 May 2016 17:00:54 -0400, Brian Mengel 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > AFAIK being able to do a lawful intercept on a specific, named,
>> >> individual's service has been a requirement for providers since 2007.
>> >>
>> >
>> > It's been required for longer than that. The telco I worked for over a
>> > decade ago didn't build the infrastructure until the FCC said they were
>> > going to stop funding upgrades. That really got 'em movin'. (suddenly
>> "data
>> > services" people -- i.e. ME -- weren't redheaded stepchildren.)
>> >
>> > have never heard of a provider, big or small, being called out for being
>> >> unable to provide this service when requested.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Where existing infrastructure is not already in place (read:
>> T1/BRI/etc.),
>> > the telco can take up to 60 days to get that setup. I know more than one
>> > telco that used that grace period to actually setup CALEA in the first
>> > place.
>> >
>> > did not perform intercepts routinely.
>> >>
>> >
>> > The historic published figures (i've not looked in years) suggest CALEA
>> > requests are statistically rare. The NC based telco I worked for had
>> never
>> > received an order in the then ~40yr life of the company.
>> >
>> > The mediation server needed to "mediate" between your customer
>> aggregation
>> >> box and the LEA is not inexpensive.
>> >>
>> >
>> > And also is not the telco's problem. Mediation is done by the LEA or 3rd
>> > party under contract to any number of agencies. For example, a telco tap
>> > order would mirror the control and voice traffic of a POTS line (T1/PRI
>> > channel, etc.) into a BRI or specific T1 channel. (dialup was later
>> added,
>> > but wasn't required in my era, so we didn't support it.) We used to test
>> > that by tapping a tech's phone. Not having any mediation software, all I
>> > could do is "yeap, it's sending data" and listen to the voice channels
>> on a
>> > t-berd.
>> >
>> > --Ricky
>> >
>>
>>