Re: is nanog really in the spoofer report?

[Jared Mauch]

I can confirm that the hardware that NANOG does use can't filter it all 
automatically I think for v6 as I helped them look at it. 

Sent via RFC1925 compliant device

> On Jul 10, 2022, at 5:22 PM, Matthew Luckie  wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> I just realized that many automatically put emails with the subject
>> line of "Spoofer Report for NANOG" in the trash, so I changed it.
>> 
>> Is that for real or a spoof itself?  If it's real I know a buncha
>> guys that will help. ;)
> 
> This is real:
> 
> https://spoofer.caida.org/recent_tests.php?as_include=19230
> 
> These are correlated with conference network deployments at each NANOG
> event.  Some NANOG conference networks have SAV deployed (more so
> before 2017), but my understanding is that networking equipment does
> not come with SAV enabled by default, so it is easy to overlook.
> 
> Matthew

signature.asc
Description: Binary data

Re: is nanog really in the spoofer report?

[scott via NANOG]

On 7/10/2022 11:18 AM, Matthew Luckie wrote:

I just realized that many automatically put emails with the subject
line of "Spoofer Report for NANOG" in the trash, so I changed it.

Is that for real or a spoof itself?  If it's real I know a buncha
guys that will help. ;)


This is real:

https://spoofer.caida.org/recent_tests.php?as_include=19230

These are correlated with conference network deployments at each NANOG
event.  Some NANOG conference networks have SAV deployed (more so
before 2017), but my understanding is that networking equipment does
not come with SAV enabled by default, so it is easy to overlook.

-


Ah, OK.  I didn't think of conferences.  DOH!  I have never been to one.

Thanks!
scott

Re: is nanog really in the spoofer report?

[Matthew Luckie]

> I just realized that many automatically put emails with the subject
> line of "Spoofer Report for NANOG" in the trash, so I changed it.
>
> Is that for real or a spoof itself?  If it's real I know a buncha
> guys that will help. ;)

This is real:

https://spoofer.caida.org/recent_tests.php?as_include=19230

These are correlated with conference network deployments at each NANOG
event.  Some NANOG conference networks have SAV deployed (more so
before 2017), but my understanding is that networking equipment does
not come with SAV enabled by default, so it is easy to overlook.

Matthew

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Rogers Outage Canada

[L F]

fyi - see BOLD.

A Message from Rogers President and CEO

Dear Valued Customer,

As you know, we experienced a service outage across the Rogers, Fido, Chatr
and Cityfone wireless networks on Friday.

I am reaching out to share that our services have been restored, and our
networks and systems are close to fully operational. Our technical teams
are continuing to monitor for any remaining intermittent issues. I also
want to outline an action plan we are putting in place to address what
happened.

I want to share what we know about what happened on Friday. We now
believe *we’ve
narrowed the cause to a network system failure following a maintenance
update in our core network, which caused some of our routers to
malfunction. We disconnected the specific equipment and redirected traffic,*
which allowed our network and services to come back online over time as we
managed traffic volumes returning to normal levels.



On Sat, Jul 9, 2022 at 9:09 PM L F  wrote:

>
> Lest we ALL MOVE ON….
>
>
> Yes he said
>
> “RETARD” =
>
> The delay in processing the current status of a Situation…
>
>
> Lets move on to bigger n scarier Post mortems:
>
>
> Was This or Was this NOT
>
> A CYBERATTACK ???
>
> Done.
>
> Lets deal with REAL threats not PC references.
>
> Time to evaluate n re eval Our NTS!!
>
> Veni vidi vici 2022
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 9, 2022 at 5:01 PM Eric Kuhnke  wrote:
>
>> Can we have a discussion with the list admins about a list member
>> appending a threat of violence to their outbound emails?  Whether serious
>> or not.
>>
>> Does this person need directions to some local mental healthcare
>> resources?
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 at 08:48, Keith Medcalf  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> >I can't either, but the reality right now seems to be that 911 calls are
>>> >failing for anyone on a Rogers cellphone.
>>>
>>> This is par for the course.  These people chose to deal with Rogers
>>> despite knowing the consequences.  It is like if you bought a Rogers
>>> Snowblower and it did not work.  That would mean that people who bought the
>>> Rogers Snowblower will not be using it to get rid of the snow that is
>>> preventing them from leaving their house.
>>>
>>> Mutatis mutandis when Rogers is down things that are Rogers dependent
>>> will not work.
>>>
>>> Some people are so retarded it is astonishing!
>>>
>>> --
>>> (CAUTION) You are advised that if you attack my person or property, you
>>> will be put down in accordance with the provisions of section 34 & 35 of
>>> the Criminal Code respectively.  If you are brandishing (or in possession)
>>> of a weapon then lethal force will be applied to your person in accordance
>>> with the law.  This means that your misadventures may end in your death.
>>> Consider yourself cautioned and govern your actions appropriately.
>>>
>>> >-Original Message-
>>> >From: NANOG  On Behalf Of
>>> >Eric Kuhnke
>>> >Sent: Friday, 8 July, 2022 13:34
>>> >To: jim deleskie 
>>> >Cc: NANOG list 
>>> >Subject: Re: Rogers Outage Canada
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >I have seen anecdotal reports that the mobile network is in a half
>>> broken
>>> >state that phones remain registered to, so a 911 call will attempt and
>>> >then fail.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >This is unlike what would happen if you had a US/Canada cellphone with
>>> >battery power but no SIM card in it that would search for any available
>>> >network in RF range for a 911 call if needed.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 at 12:31, jim deleskie >> > > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   i cant see BGP taking out SS7.
>>> >
>>> >   -jim
>>> >
>>> >   On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 2:45 PM Snowmobile2004
>>> >mailto:greenjosh6...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   According to Cloudflare Radar
>>> > ,
>>> Rogers
>>> >BGP announcements spiked massively to levels 536,777% higher than normal
>>> >(343,601 vs 64 normally) just minutes before the outage. I would not be
>>> >surprised if this happened to be the culprit.
>>> >
>>> >   Regards,
>>> >   Josh Green
>>> >
>>> >   On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 2:19 PM Andrew Paolucci via NANOG
>>> >mailto:nanog@nanog.org> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   In the early hours of the morning around 2-3am
>>> my modem
>>> >got hit with a configuration update that caused a DHCP release that
>>> >wasn't renewed for about two hours, after rollback the connection was
>>> >fine for 3 hours before this network wide outage.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   Maybe a failed night time update was attempted
>>> again
>>> >during office hours, I've heard daytime guys are still WFH and night
>>> >shift is in building.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   I expect we'll never get a real explanation.
>>> Rogers is
>>> >notorious for withholding any type of helpful or technical information.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   Sent from my inoperable Rogers Mobile via
>>> emergency eS