Re: AutoTask as a ticketing system in a MNS NOC

[Ameen Pishdadi]

Well what do u recommend 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 7, 2014, at 3:08 PM, Chris Adams  wrote:
> 
> Once upon a time, Chris Garrett  said:
>> Does anyone on list have any firsthand experience with this software as a 
>> primary ticketing platform in a high volume NOC?
> 
> A small ISP I used to work for switched to Autotask a couple of years
> ago, and I was not impressed.  The web UI was slow, the API was slower,
> and their standard mail gateway was broken.
> 
> For example: they used AT for CRM as well, and the mail gateway tried to
> auto-associate tickets with contacts based on email address.  That would
> be great, but we had some people that were contacts for multiple
> customers (using the same email address), and emails from them to the
> ticket system would just go into a black hole (no ticket, no bounce, no
> notification).
> 
> There are various third-party tools available to handle the email
> gateway as well; I don't know how well they may work, but it seemed to
> me that a ticket system that needed third-party tools to handle email
> was broken.
> 
> -- 
> Chris Adams 

Re: DDoS mitigation Equinix?

[Ameen Pishdadi]

It was none of the mentioned , didn't wanna come off as advertising .. Gigenet 
is the company 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 20, 2014, at 1:51 PM, Christopher Morrow  
> wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Ameen Pishdadi  wrote:
>> Equinix doesn't provide Ddos protection ,  cloud flare is able to mitigate 
>> attacks by spreading out the traffic across 20-30 different pops which are 
>> mostly located at Equinix. Cloud flare is pretty much a cdn , people have 
>> been using cdns for years to mitigate Ddos like akaimi , wasn't really 
>> popular though because of how expensive cdns like Akamai were, btw they 
>> recently bought prolexic. Cloud flare as far as I know does not sell Ddos 
>> protection service by any other means then there web proxy/cache service. 
>> Also there core business isn't Ddos protection it's website optimization via 
>> cdn type setup.
>> 
>> Our company also uses Equinix and other carrier hotels to provide Ddos 
>> protection,
> 
> 'our company' .. since use used 3 different names of companies in the
> previous part of the message, which one is 'our' ?
> 
> we provide a connection to our network by cross connects or peering
> exchanges , 1 gig or 10 gig and filter the Ddos before it leaves our
> network, this can be on full time or only when an attack is detected.
>> Other methods of filtered traffic delivery are gre VPN tunnels and reverse 
>> proxy method. The difference between us  , prolexic vs cloud flare is the 
>> different delivery methods allow protection against attacks towards other 
>> services and protocols besides http protocol/websites, and protection 
>> against entire networks versus an individual domain, it's just a different 
>> business model going after different market segments.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Jul 19, 2014, at 2:44 AM, Abuse Contact  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> I've heard that using Equinix has it's DDoS protection benefits like large
>>> companies such as CloudFlare use them for DDoS mitigation, I don't get it,
>>> how do they help with DDoS protection? You still get a 1Gbit from them or
>>> whatever and also do you guys know around how much they'd cost?
>>> 
>>> Thanks!
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Jul 19, 2014, at 2:44 AM, Abuse Contact  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> I've heard that using Equinix has it's DDoS protection benefits like large
>>> companies such as CloudFlare use them for DDoS mitigation, I don't get it,
>>> how do they help with DDoS protection? You still get a 1Gbit from them or
>>> whatever and also do you guys know around how much they'd cost?
>>> 
>>> Thanks!

Re: DDoS mitigation Equinix?

[Ameen Pishdadi]

Equinix doesn't provide Ddos protection ,  cloud flare is able to mitigate 
attacks by spreading out the traffic across 20-30 different pops which are 
mostly located at Equinix. Cloud flare is pretty much a cdn , people have been 
using cdns for years to mitigate Ddos like akaimi , wasn't really popular 
though because of how expensive cdns like Akamai were, btw they recently bought 
prolexic. Cloud flare as far as I know does not sell Ddos protection service by 
any other means then there web proxy/cache service. Also there core business 
isn't Ddos protection it's website optimization via cdn type setup.

Our company also uses Equinix and other carrier hotels to provide Ddos 
protection, we provide a connection to our network by cross connects or peering 
exchanges , 1 gig or 10 gig and filter the Ddos before it leaves our network, 
this can be on full time or only when an attack is detected. 
Other methods of filtered traffic delivery are gre VPN tunnels and reverse 
proxy method. The difference between us  , prolexic vs cloud flare is the 
different delivery methods allow protection against attacks towards other 
services and protocols besides http protocol/websites, and protection against 
entire networks versus an individual domain, it's just a different business 
model going after different market segments. 



Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 19, 2014, at 2:44 AM, Abuse Contact  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> I've heard that using Equinix has it's DDoS protection benefits like large
> companies such as CloudFlare use them for DDoS mitigation, I don't get it,
> how do they help with DDoS protection? You still get a 1Gbit from them or
> whatever and also do you guys know around how much they'd cost?
> 
> Thanks!

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 19, 2014, at 2:44 AM, Abuse Contact  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> I've heard that using Equinix has it's DDoS protection benefits like large
> companies such as CloudFlare use them for DDoS mitigation, I don't get it,
> how do they help with DDoS protection? You still get a 1Gbit from them or
> whatever and also do you guys know around how much they'd cost?
> 
> Thanks!

Re: Ddos mitigation service

[Ameen Pishdadi]

Hi Matt ,

Are you still looking for ddos protection? 

Thanks,
Ameen Pishdadi


On Jan 31, 2013, at 12:13 PM, matt kelly  wrote:

> Can anyone recommended ddos mitigation companies with US east coast
> presence that provide the services via bgp?  We are not interested in an
> appliance but rather offloading the traffic.
> 
> Thanks.

Re: Solutions for DoS & DDoS

[Ameen Pishdadi]

Sounds like an advertisement to me 

Thanks,
Ameen Pishdadi


On Dec 10, 2012, at 7:22 AM, Vasile Borcan  wrote:

> Try the DDoS attacks detection and mitigation software named WANGUARD
> from http://www.andrisoft.com. It's not expensive and non-profit
> organisations like you are granted with a 30% discount. Install it on
> a Linux server and you'll have DDoS attacks detection in no time.
> Since you're not a carrier the DDoS scrubbing feature won't be useful
> to you, but the black hole routing probably will. You can also
> configure it to send alerts to your upstream carrier or to your
> attackers' ISPs.
> 
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Mike Gatti  wrote:
>> Hello Everyone,
>> 
>> I'm assisting a non-profit organization to research solutions to secure 
>> their network from DOS/DDOS attacks. So far we have gone the route of 
>> discussing with their ISP's to see what solutions they have to offer, 
>> believing that the carriers are better positioned to block the attack from 
>> the source.
>> 
>> I wanted to get the lists thoughts on our approach going the carrier route 
>> and/or hear about successful implementation of other solutions.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> Michael Gatti
>> 949.371.5474
>> (UTC -8)
> 

Re: Dear Linkedin,

[Ameen Pishdadi]

Don't know if someone already posted this but there forcing people the reset 
there passwords, but it let's you reset it to the same password as before... 
How many people are going to use the same pass? I'd say a good portion, 
LinkedIn needs some new isec employees 

On Jun 10, 2012, at 6:11 PM, Jay Ashworth  wrote:

> - Original Message -
>> From: "Brett Frankenberger" 
> 
>> But the same reasoning still applies. The card issuers don't want you
>> have to show ID, becuase you might decide it's too much trouble, and
>> just use some other method to pay.
> 
> Except for Amex, who have always *stringently* required this; I've even
> seen customer-facing advertising pointing it out.
> 
> They have to do something to get merchants to take their card with the
> higher discount rate.
> 
> Cheers,
> -- jra
> -- 
> Jay R. Ashworth  Baylink   
> j...@baylink.com
> Designer The Things I Think   RFC 2100
> Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
> St Petersburg FL USA  http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
> 

Re: Recommendation for OOB management via IP

[Ameen Pishdadi]

What's wrong with a dsl connection doesn't need to be anything fancy just 
reliable enough to be up when your other stuff is down 

Thanks,
Ameen Pishdadi


On Jun 4, 2012, at 3:45 PM, "Hiten J. Thakkar"  wrote:

> Hello!
> 
> My work place is looking for an OOB management over IP. We have Lantronix KVM 
> in our Datacenter with nearly 100% uptime and Lantronix SLC-8/16/48 ports 
> with 2 NICs deployed across various MDFs on campus and remote locations (5). 
> On our main campus we have a parallel net, but for the remote locations we 
> are looking to access Lantronix SLCs' via the second NIC card using IP based 
> solution. Can you kindly make suggestions. I supremely appreciate your time 
> and inputs in advance.
> 
> -- 
> 
> Thanks and regards,
> Hiten J. Thakkar
> 
> 

Re: Comcast Paid Peer Pricing

[Ameen Pishdadi]

Concast I love it!! 

Thanks,
Ameen Pishdadi


On Jun 2, 2012, at 6:57 PM, "Justin M. Streiner"  
wrote:

> On Sat, 2 Jun 2012, Nabil Sharma wrote:
> 
>> Dear NANOG:
>> I seek pricing on Comcast AS7922 paid peer at following commit level:
>> 1G
>> 10G
>> 100G
>> Please reply in private and I will sum up on list.
> 
> Perhaps these would be worth reviewing?
> 
> http://www.concast.com/peering/
> http://www.comcast.com/dedicatedinternet/?SCRedirect=true
> http://as7922.peeringdb.com/
> 
> Your best bet would be to hit up their sales contact if you want pricing on 
> non-SFI peering.
> 
> jms
> 

Re: Need (to acquire or sell) IPv4? Come to SpaceMarket.

[Ameen Pishdadi]

Lol

Thanks,
Ameen Pishdadi


On May 30, 2012, at 10:07 PM, Nathan Eisenberg  wrote:

> None of these jokes are class-e.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: STARNES, CURTIS [mailto:curtis.star...@granburyisd.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 7:44 PM
> To: STARNES, CURTIS; 'lann...@lanning.cc'; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Need (to acquire or sell) IPv4? Come to SpaceMarket.
> 
> I guess I will just have to settle for selling my 224.0.0.0/24 :-<
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: STARNES, CURTIS [mailto:curtis.star...@granburyisd.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 9:41 PM
> To: 'lann...@lanning.cc'; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Need (to acquire or sell) IPv4? Come to SpaceMarket.
> 
> I thought the 10.0.0.0/8 was mine.
> I was going to sell some of it!
> 
> Curtis
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Hajime Lanning [mailto:lann...@lanning.cc]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 5:51 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Need (to acquire or sell) IPv4? Come to SpaceMarket.
> 
> Can I trade in my class A? (10/8)
> 
> On 05/29/12 17:43, The SpaceMarket wrote:
>> IPv4 is not going away as quickly as many would like.  Most realistic 
>> observations show IPv4 will still be the numbering scheme most widely 
>> deployed and utilized for the next decade.  This due mainly to peers 
>> and providers whom have not deployed IPv6 and ISP end-users, which 
>> continue to use, antiquated operating systems.
>> 
>> SpaceMarket provides a platform for entities to acquire additional 
>> resources that find themselves deficient, and a platform for those 
>> with excess/unused resources to monetize their valuable resources.
>> 
>> Our platform is safe, secure and confidential.
>> 
>> Buyers and sellers can rest assured that their trades will be executed 
>> without a hitch (no hijacked network ranges or scammers) as each 
>> network allocation available has been thoroughly investigated and 
>> tested (we’re either announcing or have announced the networks 
>> available for an extended period of time), and upon request by either 
>> the buyer or seller, SpaceMarket will serve as an escrow agent for the 
>> transaction.
>> 
>> Currently (as of this writing), there we have just over
>> 150,000 addresses available for immediate use. This may seem like a 
>> low number, but allocations are listed and acquired daily using our 
>> automated system—we don’t have to be involved in your transaction. In 
>> order to provide our services without hassle and confidentially, we 
>> provide access to our trading platform via Tor (as a Tor Hidden 
>> Service).  This allows our members to connect freely and without worry 
>> as to who may be monitoring your online activities or visitors to our 
>> site.  Additionally, access to the site is restricted to active 
>> members of our trading community.
>> 
>> For more information on our service, site URL or membership please 
>> e-mail us at spacemar...@tormail.org.  We look forward to assisting 
>> you with your IPv4 needs! Please use our public key (below) when 
>> corresponding via E-mail.  Don’t forget to send us yours!
> 
> --
> Mr. Flibble
> King of the Potato People
> 

Re: Need (to acquire or sell) IPv4? Come to SpaceMarket.

[Ameen Pishdadi]

Of all the people you pick to spam you picked NANOG, maybe you should hit up 
bugtraq next 

On May 29, 2012, at 7:16 PM, Timothy McGinnis  wrote:

> Dear Unnamed person at The SpaceMarket,
> 
> This list has an Acceptable Use Policy at:
> 
> http://www.nanog.org/mailinglist/
> 
> "Acceptable Use Policy
> 
> 1. Discussion will focus on Internet operational and technical issues
>as described in the charter of NANOG.
>
> 2. Postings of issues inconsistent with the charter are prohibited.
> 3. Cross posting is prohibited.
> 4. Postings that include foul language, character assassination, and
>lack of respect for other participants are prohibited.
> 5. Product marketing is prohibited.
> 6. Postings of political, philosophical, and legal nature are prohibited.
> 7. Using list as source for private marketing initiatives is prohibited.
> 8. Autoresponders sending mail either to the list or to the poster are
>prohibited.
> 
> Individuals who violate these guidelines will be contacted and asked to
> adhere to the guidelines. "
> 
> Please take your Unsolicited Bulk Mail elsewhere.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> 
> McTim
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 5/29/2012 8:43 PM, The SpaceMarket wrote:
>> IPv4 is not going away as quickly as many would like.  Most realistic
>> observations show IPv4 will still be the numbering scheme most widely
>> deployed and utilized for the next decade.  This due mainly to peers
>> and providers whom have not deployed IPv6 and ISP end-users, which
>> continue to use, antiquated operating systems. 
>> 
>> SpaceMarket provides a platform for entities to acquire additional
>> resources that find themselves deficient, and a platform for those with
>> excess/unused resources to monetize their valuable resources. 
>> 
>> Our platform is safe, secure and confidential. 
>> 
>> Buyers and sellers can rest assured that their trades will be executed
>> without a hitch (no hijacked network ranges or scammers) as each
>> network allocation available has been thoroughly investigated and
>> tested (we’re either announcing or have announced the networks
>> available for an extended period of time), and upon request by either
>> the buyer or seller, SpaceMarket will serve as an escrow agent for the
>> transaction. 
>> 
>> Currently (as of this writing), there we have just over
>> 150,000 addresses available for immediate use. This may seem like a low
>> number, but allocations are listed and acquired daily using our
>> automated system—we don’t have to be involved in your transaction. In
>> order to provide our services without hassle and confidentially, we
>> provide access to our trading platform via Tor (as a Tor Hidden
>> Service).  This allows our members to connect freely and without worry
>> as to who may be monitoring your online activities or visitors to our
>> site.  Additionally, access to the site is restricted to active members
>> of our trading community.  
>> 
>> For more information on our service, site URL or membership please
>> e-mail us at spacemar...@tormail.org.  We look forward to assisting you
>> with your IPv4 needs! Please use our public key (below) when
>> corresponding via E-mail.  Don’t forget to send us yours!
>> 
>> -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>> 
>> mQINBE/FaAgBEADT4VpYwIRnUj8R7tFAAWdcHBHR9SEpebBskq400kG50UA8o3Cq
>> Ox5tBfY0It9AOaRE6yhOu7TcPbLrJyjjkl2UqqpMF/pIRasqXTbwHKT1vkpt22Oc
>> CtHFmXSY4KgE51lfHq7ijRt+m9B3j78Jr6uklpca8IW41eXNyje4272DLv4L1wHR
>> X00VXPr6pULn3bgm/KfnwmmY0ucpDlLJIZ1xsRFTstNKrA5d0K96RhhqDWcaZGyf
>> 21nskMRwRahO+VcRVE4515AZ09L1CfSoUbNOVtSHIiANYSPbq9QQHNeBas5MJkuA
>> 2aZ/TyCEJ501AtTKL735w1ile+3DMK/sRQhEOzTp/Y4AmIDJSKRDYnhJnE9T2x/C
>> bud54hvoT+sx7xq3Fbo18xCAeBWDO/3k2G44z2ecyAzGCP8YUGAVp5sa+X7nHvZR
>> Z2W+DQn/XuPXPSzsbPqh6wxnhrr5/0IdU06jjLK398n+r2eM8nDJnm8BFYICrBE4
>> UcG4Jd2KHejL+PeIB1IO4KHmmCJD3W1Ya1zi2wUjPX5PB3gf3p492+2iowu/k9kt
>> FyTx+FoVZQDfqUGdBm7C8JvwNCXB2c92P58mV8ds0vmGPoMk7zioWMspInVFDXUB
>> vbShwtK4eowfoT3u1PwtgRJdsKzDZ3TTIKqmGFF24OkP2c2s5DBi2W/PYwARAQAB
>> tCVTcGFjZU1hcmtldCA8c3BhY2VtYXJrZXRAdG9ybWFpbC5vcmc+iQI3BBMBCAAh
>> BQJPxWgIAhsDBQsJCAcDBRUKCQgLBRYCAwEAAh4BAheAAAoJEOaJI/0SIsh9MpgP
>> /R3uEtdnJWbTlI1uaJQ/50Xh7XtarY+qKSlK/YC059v4mJYgRx+la15pmryGyKDF
>> 1qyPu+EI1r437EREr8uGy+LFqI2lD4oKXxvJRDJSqaiwYpAVM2t/prE9bYju5puS
>> VZbeNEsUse9MthhoesOg+fGfsI6P5W1aAWQswKWDM/tegjW+NPXbv8yWnC7Vfe6b
>> HUghDlUETihleohWxtoqGla6I7s8qxYMFa684mF84Xyrnj/5DIey8Z5ROwwqQv4y
>> M2jVOPpa02S1tyLd4aNI2pP7IVsBMK9uvsN+VBKUtGlhap1RSAMQaFWoKR0L1M3o
>> V3LkmezSKaMjlk2XhSzokJP9snV99KRMxMjlCQwEnS7dct6JLokU1cYNyHSSjDOC
>> WN57FeBt4pnG1HA31Z2B81jz3oKzYN2lOqAvY5L657sIUWWoPfhGjkEIiFtlRGCl
>> WvEg4xyXRUf2dsXFHsYqDsMzR3p67L2CwTNErqF5ZhwxchuNp6E1gIdYoZghcYuT
>> myxbGF0uFTH7ymg3yzJxuE/78iqhbMGAnkwdCa2GaczmymQiWkNqVQjpZizUdN7w
>> hTrm5vQ9OucrpHCFoLOZ3Kk29o7m586I3welE0Kz4cmDdcoqM798k3/BxKUTAHFv
>> FNhjHfzllDy1QiLXbm9z+Uu/oIr/h/X8DNRHzFXNwqcUuQINBE/FaAgBEADBqS9r
>> 49m5RmRUH/YTy6V2iAwdf6fTzr+hOT9FDhdKYfF9TEgT4

Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth

[Ameen Pishdadi]

Has nothing to do with whether or not they deal with all the major carriers , 
they are a budget provider , always have , always will be. Aside from that what 
matters the most is eye ball user connectivity and level3 , AT&T, Verizon 
significantly have more eye balls connected directly to there network then 
cogent , we have cogent and level3 and 5 other providers on our Chicago network 
, with out any traffic engineering almost every thing will come in or go out 
level3, we use traffic optimizing equipment to automate our commit levels and 
also do performance based routing adjustments , I literally have to put a gun 
to its head to get a descent amount of traffic out to cogent , you may say it's 
a matter of opinion but statistics don't lie, even Telia out performs cogent 
according to stats , not just cause they have a massive eye ball network in 
Europe.

Ask yourself , who are the majority customers of cogent? Not end user ISPs , 
hosting companies aka content providers, and when there selling bandwidth 
cheaper then it costs to peer then there going to keep there costs to the 
minimum ... Cheaper is cheaper , the saying is true , you get what you pay for. 

A Kia and Ferrari can both get me from point a to point b, but the Ferrari is 
capable of getting me there way quicker, and yes I'm going to pay a premium for 
it but if I'm going from NYC to San Fran I'd definitely feel safer in the 
Ferrari reliability wise and get there a hell of a lot quicker... 


But like I said and the other 10 replies nothing wrong with cogent in a nice 
blend of 3 or more other providers ...


Thanks,
Ameen Pishdadi


On May 14, 2012, at 10:49 PM, Faisal Imtiaz  wrote:

> I often tell folks, Cogent is the 'Heidi Fleiss' of the industry .. 
> pretty much everyone of the major carriers / providers deal with them.. but 
> no one wants to admit it.
> 
> I don't think there is any carrier out there that could be considered 
> 'Premium' in terms of quality of service (yeah their are a lot of folks who 
> are Premium based on what they charge)...
> 
> One can only hedge one's bet for a quality connection by having multiple 
> providers (you can mix and match) or go with some one like Internap or Tinet 
> (folks who are taking traffic across multiple providers at their POP).
> 
> Of course your mileage may vary as long as you have alternate 
> connectivity, it makes dealing with issues more palatable, whether it is 
> Cogent or Level3...
> 
> Regards.
> 
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
> 
> 
> On 5/14/2012 10:38 PM, Ameen Pishdadi wrote:
>> No way they stack up against level3 or any of the other 4 big tier 1s but if 
>> you throw them in a blend with level3 there shouldn't be any issue and I 
>> wouldn't pay more the .75 cents a meg for a gig
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Ameen Pishdadi
>> 
>> 
>> On May 14, 2012, at 5:03 PM, Jason Baugher  wrote:
>> 
>>> The emails on the Outages list reminded me to ask this question...
>>> 
>>> I've done some searching and haven't been able to find much in the last 3 
>>> years as to their reliability and suitability as an upstream provider. For 
>>> a regional ISP looking for GigE ports in the Chicago/St. Louis area, is 
>>> Cogent a reasonable solution? Our gut feeling is that they don't stack up 
>>> against a Level3 or Sprint, but they are being very aggressive with pricing 
>>> to try and get our business.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jason
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth

[Ameen Pishdadi]

No way they stack up against level3 or any of the other 4 big tier 1s but if 
you throw them in a blend with level3 there shouldn't be any issue and I 
wouldn't pay more the .75 cents a meg for a gig 

Thanks,
Ameen Pishdadi


On May 14, 2012, at 5:03 PM, Jason Baugher  wrote:

> The emails on the Outages list reminded me to ask this question...
> 
> I've done some searching and haven't been able to find much in the last 3 
> years as to their reliability and suitability as an upstream provider. For a 
> regional ISP looking for GigE ports in the Chicago/St. Louis area, is Cogent 
> a reasonable solution? Our gut feeling is that they don't stack up against a 
> Level3 or Sprint, but they are being very aggressive with pricing to try and 
> get our business.
> 
> Thanks,
> Jason
> 

Re: CDNs should pay eyeball networks, too.

[Ameen Pishdadi]

Right on

Thanks,
Ameen Pishdadi


On May 1, 2012, at 11:39 AM, Dominik Bay  wrote:

> Yesterday I received the following mail, from a CDN:
> 
> >8
> Greetings,
> 
> Limelight Networks periodically reviews its interconnection strategy to 
> ensure the quality and integrity of its interconnection between all its 
> partners. We have recently updated our requirements for settlement-free 
> peering which are posted at http://www.as22822.net/
> 
> This letter is to notify you that yyy no longer meets our minimum 
> requirements. If yyy would like to maintain our current interconnectivity, 
> there will be settlement associated with doing so. If you are interested in 
> pursuing this option, please reply back to this email indicating such.
> 
> Should your company decline this option, or if we do not have an agreement 
> regarding the settlement in place prior to May 31st 2012, Limelight Networks 
> will terminate the peering sessions on that day, with this letter serving as 
> 30 day notice.
> 
> 
> Sincerely,
> 8<
> 
> The same mail was sent out last year, about end of April 2011, to another ISP 
> I'm working with.
> They got depeered, but the ISP which received the mail above yesterday didn't 
> meet the requirements last year either.
> I totally understand that some companies might not be able to handle 
> sub-5Mbps peering sessions, be it technical or organisational, but >=100Mbps 
> should be worth any effort, as long as it improves the network.
> 
> In this particular case I'm talking about >=600Mbps of traffic send out by 
> Limelight to "my" eyeballs, not mentioning their fairly small footprint in 
> Germany in comparison to other CDNs.
> 
> These points aside, we are talking about a Content *Delivery* Network here. 
> There are CDNs out there who burn to improve their customer experience (both 
> the content creators and the content receiver) at high cost.
> Having a Tier1 attitude and telling eyeball networks with <1Gbps of traffic 
> exchanged to bugger off or pay is not one of the ways to improve this.
> 
> At the end of the day I'm going to charge CDNs who want to deliver their 
> customers content to my eyeballs and make me pay (about 2USD per Mbps, with a 
> minimum of 1Gbps).
> 
> -dominik
> 

Re: Operation Ghost Click

[Ameen Pishdadi]

Nope there dead unfortunately but if they were alive I'd clean up there 
machines maybe give them chrome books something idiot proof 

Thanks,
Ameen Pishdadi


On Apr 27, 2012, at 8:15 PM, ryanL  wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Ameen Pishdadi  wrote:
>> If the user is stupid enough to be infected for that long I think it's a 
>> good thing they get cut off from the net , should be a policy of all ISPs , 
>> If your infected then you lose privilege to get online and thus you can't 
>> scan and infect other idiots or become a ddos tool for the script kiddies. I 
>> for one say turn em off
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Ameen Pishdadi
> 
> you're obviously lucky, and don't have "stupid" grandparents.

Re: Operation Ghost Click

[Ameen Pishdadi]

If the user is stupid enough to be infected for that long I think it's a good 
thing they get cut off from the net , should be a policy of all ISPs , If your 
infected then you lose privilege to get online and thus you can't scan and 
infect other idiots or become a ddos tool for the script kiddies. I for one say 
turn em off

Thanks,
Ameen Pishdadi


On Apr 27, 2012, at 6:50 PM, Jeroen van Aart  wrote:

> O'Reirdan, Michael wrote:
>> Please look at www.dcwg.org
> 
> Thanks all for the information.
> 
> It looks like the practical upshot is that computers that have been infected 
> and not yet fixed may loose the ability to resolve names into IP addresses 
> starting sometime after July 9, which is when the replacement nameservers are 
> supposed to be stopped.
> 
> That in and of itself is quite a nuisance for the individual as well as the 
> ISP helldesks but it could have been worse. I would certainly not call it 
> "Internet doomsday".
> 
> Greetings,
> Jeroen
> 
> -- 
> Earthquake Magnitude: 4.9
> Date: Friday, April 27, 2012 21:51:23 UTC
> Location: Prince Edward Islands region
> Latitude: -41.1063; Longitude: 43.4278
> Depth: 10.00 km
> 

Re: Attack on the DNS ?

[Ameen Pishdadi]

Looks like your network has a user or two participating in this retarded 
attempt to drop the Internet.

Thanks,
Ameen Pishdadi


On Mar 31, 2012, at 8:30 PM, Greg Ihnen  wrote:

> I manage a tiny network in the Amazon, a satellite internet connection and 
> decent sized wireless network.
> 
> All of my users started complaining yesterday about lost connectivity except 
> for Skype. I had no problems. I checked from the users'  computers and could 
> not resolve domain names (when Skype connects and nothing else does it's 
> always been a DNS issue). After much troubleshooting I finally fired up 
> Wireshark and saw that the DNS servers (or someone appearing to have their IP 
> addresses) were replying to our queries with "no such name".
> 
> The reason I was having no problems is I'm using OpenDNS' DNSCrypt. With 
> DNSCrypt on we have no problems. With good old fashioned unencrypted DNS 
> (Googles, OpenDNS', our ISPs) we're barely able to communicate.
> 
> Is DNS traffic being directed to bogus servers? Are the real servers being 
> overloaded? Am I seeing the results of some kind of DDOS mitigation technique?
> 
> Is anyone else seeing this?
> 
> Greg Ihnen