RE: Free access to measurement network

[timrutherford]

The problem lies in the contracts that the big providers make the 
municipalities sign.  Basically says that the incumbent cable provider cannot 
be ousted without breach of contract.   The towns all sign because their only 
other choice is to roll out their own infrastructure which very few see the 
real value in. 

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 11:05 AM
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Free access to measurement network

BTW: There are no government-enforced monopolies anywhere in the US, aside from 
possibly Native American reservations. 




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "Edwin Pers" 
To: "Mike Hammett" 
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 10:03:52 AM
Subject: RE: Free access to measurement network 

Yes, the fact that both the city I work in and the town I live in have local 
govt-enforced monopolies reinforces the statement that I've (and all the other 
people near me) been voting with our collective wallets this entire time 

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 10:23 AM
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Free access to measurement network 

It's a consumer thing. If consumers wanted more options, they would be 
supporting those options with their wallets. They don't. 




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message - 

From: "Max Tulyev" 
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 4:43:54 AM
Subject: Re: Free access to measurement network 

So for my point of view, better solution is to push some law that ease access 
to the buildings for ISPs. 

15.12.17 19:40, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu пише: 
> On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 07:47:42 -0500, Dovid Bender said: 
>> What kind of internet are these devices on? With Net Neutrality gone 
>> here in the US it would be a good way to measure certain services 
>> such as SIP to see which ISP's if any are tampering with packets.
> 
> Given previous history, the answer will probably be "most of them". 
> 
> "The results are not inspiring. More than 129 million people are 
> limited to a single provider for broadband Internet access using the 
> FCC definition of 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload. Out of those 129 
> million Americans, about 52 million must obtain Internet access from a 
> company that has violated network neutrality protections in the past and 
> continues to undermine the policy today.
> 
> In locations where subscribers have the benefit of limited 
> competition, the situation isn't much better. Among the 146 million 
> Americans with the ability to choose between two providers, 48 million 
> Americans must choose between two companies that have a record of violating 
> network neutrality."
> 
> https://muninetworks.org/content/177-million-americans-harmed-net-neut
> rality
> 

RE: Suggestions for a more privacy conscious email provider

[timrutherford]

You will also need your internet provider to setup reverse DNS for you, 
otherwise many mail servers may reject your mail if the reverse DNS does not 
match the hostname of the mail server.  


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Michael S. Singh
Sent: Sunday, December 3, 2017 12:57 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Suggestions for a more privacy conscious email provider

Hi Filip I appreciate the response!

Do you host the mail server with a third party provider (e.g Rackspace) or do 
you have an 'in-house' solution. If you're able to elaborate more on your 
setup, I would love to read more about it.

I am considering purchasing a Raspberry Pi and hosting my own, as it seems 
worth the experience. However does it require that I have my own DNS server and 
a static IP address in order to connect to the mail server from anywhere in the 
world?


On 12/03/2017 09:08 AM, Filip Hruska wrote:
> It's kind of a pain to manage a mail server.
>
> Even if you have SPF, DKIM correctly setup and you are not on any 
> common blacklists, you constantly have to fight for good 
> deliverability - some mail server solutions will simply reject you no 
> matter what.
> You might be on some obscure blacklist nobody uses and then you have 
> to waste time sending blacklist removal requests.
>
> I personally run my own mail server, but route outgoing emails via 
> Amazon SES. Gives me all the benefits of having my own mail server 
> (domain aliases, extensions, custom spam filter etc) and saves me from 
> the pain of managing outgoing reputation.
>
>
> --
> Filip Hruska
> Linux System Administrator
>
> Dne 12/3/17 v 16:12 Jean | ddostest.me via NANOG napsal(a):
>> If you plan to use it for a small group of people, you should 
>> consider hosting it yourself. You could set it up with SPF, dkim, dmarc, 
>> ipv6.
>>
>> It could be seen as a personal challenge to achieve.
>>
>> Then if you need real privacy, you will need to encrypt with public 
>> keys like PGP or S/MIME. You can upload your public key to the public 
>> pgp key servers. I guess that one day this thing will be very popular.
>>
>> Challenge accepted?
>>
>> Jean
>>
>> On 17-12-02 05:20 PM, Paul Ferguson wrote:
>>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Michael S. Singh 
>>> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I am in need of some suggestions for some privacy conscious email 
 providers. I am currently using Migadu [...]
>>> I use KolabNow, based in Switzerland, for a lot of personal e-mail 
>>> communications. They are very, very privacy conscious:
>>>
>>> --> https://kolabnow.com/feature/confidence
>>>
>>> They are *not* free, but quite reasonable, and I am quite happy with 
>>> the m.
>>>
>>> - ferg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>

--
Sincerely Michael S Singh,
M: 914-266-0601
W: www.wadadli.me
F: 5E0E FD46 4592 1682 A4B6 5F62 761E 4940 A177 3B38



Sent via Migadu.com, world's easiest email hosting

RE: Please run windows update now

[timrutherford]

>>  
>> 
>>  
>> https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/msrc/2017/05/12/customer-guidance-for-wannacrypt-attacks/

>> Look near the bottom under Further Resources.

 

Those are the links appear to be patches for older versions of Windows.

 

The link that Josh sent initially is probably the most straight forward for 
currently supported versions.  

 


https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/security/ms17-010.aspx

 

Scroll down below “Affected Software and Vulnerability Severity Ratings” and 
click on the link in the left column it will being you to the MS Update Catalog 
download page for the patch in question.

 



 

 

Keep in mind that since MS started doing monthly patch rollups instead of 
individual patches, they are listing a “rollup” KB# and “security only” KB# for 
each version of Windows.

 

For example, look at Windows 2012/2012R2 above – there are four different KB#s 
depending on the OS version and update method being used.  

 

KB4012217 : “monthly rollup” version for 2012 (gets delivered via windows 
update - contains this patch and several others)

KB4012214 : “security only” version for 2012 for this one patch 

 

KB4012216 : 2012R2 version of the rollup 

KB4012213 : 2012R2 version of the security only patch 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Keith Stokes
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 11:49 AM
To: Keith Medcalf 
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Please run windows update now

 

 

 
https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/msrc/2017/05/12/customer-guidance-for-wannacrypt-attacks/

 

 

Look near the bottom under Further Resources.

 

 

On May 15, 2017, at 10:44 AM, Keith Medcalf < 
 
kmedc...@dessus.com> wrote:

 

 

I do not see any links to actually download the actual patches.  Just a bunch 
of text drivel.

 

 

--

˙uʍop-ǝpısdn sı ɹoʇıuoɯ ɹnoʎ 'sıɥʇ pɐǝɹ uɐɔ noʎ ɟı

 

-Original Message-

From: NANOG [  mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] 
On Behalf Of   
timrutherf...@c4.net

Sent: Monday, 15 May, 2017 09:23

To: 'Josh Luthman'; 'Nathan Fink'

Cc:   nanog@nanog.org

Subject: RE: Please run windows update now

 

I should clarify, the link in my email below is only for windows versions that 
are considered unsupported.

 

This one has links for the currently supported versions of windows

 

  
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4013389/title

 

 

-Original Message-

From:   timrutherf...@c4.net [ 
 mailto:timrutherf...@c4.net]

Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 11:12 AM

To: 'Josh Luthman' <  
j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>; 'Nathan Fink'

<  nef...@gmail.com>

Cc: 'nanog@nanog.org' <  nanog@nanog.org>

Subject: RE: Please run windows update now

 

They even released updates for XP & 2003

 

  
http://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/search.aspx?q=4012598

 

 

-Original Message-

From: NANOG [  mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] 
On Behalf Of Josh Luthman

Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 10:45 AM

To: Nathan Fink <  nef...@gmail.com>

Cc:   nanog@nanog.org

Subject: Re: Please run windows update now

 

Link?

 

I only posted it as reference to the vulnerability.

 

 

Josh Luthman

Office: 937-552-2340

Direct: 937-552-2343

1100 Wayne St

Suite 1337

Troy, OH 45373

 

On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 2:07 AM, Nathan Fink <  
nef...@gmail.com> wrote:

 

I show MS17-010 as already superseded in SCCM

 

On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Josh Luthman  
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/security/ms17-010.aspx

 

 

Josh Luthman

Office: 937-552-2340

Direct: 937-552-2343

1100 Wayne St

Suite 1337

Troy, OH 45373

 

On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 2:35 PM, JoeSox <  
joe...@gmail.com> wrote:

 

Thanks for the headsup but I would expect to see some references to the patches 
that need to be installed to block the vulnerability (Sorry for sounding like a 
jerk).

We all know to update systems ASAP.

 

--

Later, Joe

 

On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Ca By <  
cb.li...@gmail.com> wrote:

 

This looks like 

RE: Please run windows update now

[timrutherford]

I should clarify, the link in my email below is only for windows versions that 
are considered unsupported.

This one has links for the currently supported versions of windows 

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4013389/title


-Original Message-
From: timrutherf...@c4.net [mailto:timrutherf...@c4.net] 
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 11:12 AM
To: 'Josh Luthman' ; 'Nathan Fink' 

Cc: 'nanog@nanog.org' 
Subject: RE: Please run windows update now

They even released updates for XP & 2003

http://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/search.aspx?q=4012598


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 10:45 AM
To: Nathan Fink 
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Please run windows update now

Link?

I only posted it as reference to the vulnerability.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 2:07 AM, Nathan Fink  wrote:

> I show MS17-010 as already superseded in SCCM
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Josh Luthman 
>  >
> wrote:
>
> > MS17-010
> > https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/security/ms17-010.aspx
> >
> >
> > Josh Luthman
> > Office: 937-552-2340
> > Direct: 937-552-2343
> > 1100 Wayne St
> > Suite 1337
> > Troy, OH 45373
> >
> > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 2:35 PM, JoeSox  wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for the headsup but I would expect to see some references 
> > > to the patches that need to be installed to block the 
> > > vulnerability (Sorry for sounding like a jerk).
> > > We all know to update systems ASAP.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Later, Joe
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Ca By  wrote:
> > >
> > > > This looks like a major worm that is going global
> > > >
> > > > Please run windows update as soon as possible and spread the 
> > > > word
> > > >
> > > > It may be worth also closing down ports 445 / 139 / 3389
> > > >
> > > > http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/05/12/
> > > > 528119808/large-cyber-attack-hits-englands-nhs-hospital-
> > > > system-ransoms-demanded
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

RE: Please run windows update now

[timrutherford]

They even released updates for XP & 2003

http://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/search.aspx?q=4012598


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 10:45 AM
To: Nathan Fink 
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Please run windows update now

Link?

I only posted it as reference to the vulnerability.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 2:07 AM, Nathan Fink  wrote:

> I show MS17-010 as already superseded in SCCM
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Josh Luthman 
>  >
> wrote:
>
> > MS17-010
> > https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/security/ms17-010.aspx
> >
> >
> > Josh Luthman
> > Office: 937-552-2340
> > Direct: 937-552-2343
> > 1100 Wayne St
> > Suite 1337
> > Troy, OH 45373
> >
> > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 2:35 PM, JoeSox  wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for the headsup but I would expect to see some references 
> > > to the patches that need to be installed to block the 
> > > vulnerability (Sorry for sounding like a jerk).
> > > We all know to update systems ASAP.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Later, Joe
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Ca By  wrote:
> > >
> > > > This looks like a major worm that is going global
> > > >
> > > > Please run windows update as soon as possible and spread the 
> > > > word
> > > >
> > > > It may be worth also closing down ports 445 / 139 / 3389
> > > >
> > > > http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/05/12/
> > > > 528119808/large-cyber-attack-hits-englands-nhs-hospital-
> > > > system-ransoms-demanded
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

RE: Level 3 voice outage

[timrutherford]

We are back in action here in MA.

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of timrutherf...@c4.net
Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 11:20 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Level 3 voice outage

Our upstream Voice provider is also having inbound issues with numbers that 
were ported into their system, but the main trunk number is working.

-Tim

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+timrutherford=c4@nanog.org] On Behalf Of 
Benjamin Hatton
Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 11:04 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Level 3 voice outage

We just got a notification from one of our upstream Voice providers that they 
are seeing problems both inbound and outbound that seems to be Level 3 related

*Ben Hatton*

Network Engineer

Haefele TV Inc.

d:(607)589-8000

bhat...@htva.net

www.htva.net

On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Mark Stevens <mana...@monmouth.com> wrote:

> Is anyone noticing issue with Level 3 voice? I can't even call their 
> 800 number using one of my other carriers.
>
> Mark
>

RE: Level 3 voice outage

[timrutherford]

Our upstream Voice provider is also having inbound issues with numbers that 
were ported into their system, but the main trunk number is working.

-Tim

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+timrutherford=c4@nanog.org] On Behalf Of 
Benjamin Hatton
Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 11:04 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Level 3 voice outage

We just got a notification from one of our upstream Voice providers that they 
are seeing problems both inbound and outbound that seems to be Level 3 related

*Ben Hatton*

Network Engineer

Haefele TV Inc.

d:(607)589-8000

bhat...@htva.net

www.htva.net

On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Mark Stevens <mana...@monmouth.com> wrote:

> Is anyone noticing issue with Level 3 voice? I can't even call their 
> 800 number using one of my other carriers.
>
> Mark
>

RE: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE

[timrutherford]

I didn’t research the full feature list, but you might take a quick look at 
Mikrotik.

www.mikrotik.com



-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Tim Raphael
Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2015 10:51 AM
To: Daniel Rohan
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE

You’ll be looking at a Juniper MX or a Cisco ASK9K I think.

The MXs are targeted as being full-features edge routers. An MX5 will take a 
full feed just fine and do all the *VPN you want.
If you’re talking about multiple full feeds then you’ll need a MX240 with one 
of the higher-power REs for a decent reconvergence time.


 On 9 Apr 2015, at 10:42 pm, Daniel Rohan dro...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 
 On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 7:25 AM, Tim Raphael raphael.timo...@gmail.com 
 mailto:raphael.timo...@gmail.com wrote:
 L3VPN hand off is the only thing I can think of from the top of my head. But 
 then, there would be no need to have a full table unless you had customers 
 requesting a full table.
 
 
 I have one customer who needs an L3VPN for some shared private routes along 
 with a full table in inet.0. There are ways of accomplishing this creatively 
 but I'm looking for devices that can handle these types of requests that 
 permit us some level of sanity.