In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Sean M. Doran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Why treat exchange subnets differently to any other bit of backbone
| infrastructure?
Oh, I wholeheartedly agree. I would love them all to use RFC 1918
addresses, because it is VERY VERY VERY rare that anything outside
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, John Palmer wrote:
Update - it appears to be either NAS or COVAD that has melted down on the
East coast. It seems to
it's a little late for this update, but it doesn't appear to have been
NAS. none of my NAS customers (including myself) saw enough of a blip
to trigger*
I haven't seen a 'icmp source lo0' interface command yet. Hopefully
it will be added for ipv6 so exchanges can use link-local addressing
(ipv6 has no fragmentation, PMTUd is mandatory).
Mike.
Now expired...
draft-kato-bgp-ipv6-link-local-01.txt
Proof of concept
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 01:07:21AM -0500, John Palmer wrote:
Is there some sort of a router meltdown somewhere this evening? I cant
get through to most destinations, either with TELNET, http, ftp, DNS -
nothing.
And yet, unfortunately for us all, your mail continues to work.
--
Richard A
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 08:34:58AM +, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
I haven't seen a 'icmp source lo0' interface command yet. Hopefully
it will be added for ipv6 so exchanges can use link-local addressing
(ipv6 has no fragmentation, PMTUd is mandatory).
I'm not terribly sure why you
GAW Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 23:14:58 -0400 (EDT)
GAW From: Greg A. Woods
GAW If a given router uses a single unique-to-itself canonical
GAW globally routable source address for all ICMP error replies
GAW it generates then the output of the likes of traceroute and
GAW even ping will still be
Given the current situation of KPNQwest and the possibility
of its services going offline sometime soon, the RIPE NCC in
agreement with KPNQwest will be temporally hosting this
server (ns.eu.net) in its premises.
nice emergency hack and sorry to whine. but i used them both
to get
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 09:50:17PM +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
[snip]
RB :0 Wh: msgid.lock
RB | formail -D 8192 msgid.cache
Randy,
Are you sure that:
1) All NANOG subscribers recognize the above as a procmail rule ?
most of them, probably.
2) That all NANOG subscribers read
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 09:50:17PM +0300, Rafi Sadowsky wrote:
## On 2002-06-05 04:45 -0700 Randy Bush typed:
RB :0 Wh: msgid.lock
RB | formail -D 8192 msgid.cache
Randy,
Are you sure that:
1) All NANOG subscribers recognize the above as a procmail rule ?
If they don't,
I received 20 responses which isn't exactly overwhelming :-). All of the
responses included usage information for eBGP-MD5 and a few provided
information on MD5 for interior protocols. In addition to these 20 I also
received a few more with commentary. Conclusion from these messages?
+ only
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 03:18:58PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
This is an auto-generated system message. Please do not reply to this
address.
[snip legalese]
Whoever this is, will you PLEASE fix your auto-noise generator to not pollute
mailing lists?
Apologies to the list for the
Merit RADB technical staff will be hosting an Internet
Routing Registry (IRR) Help Desk at NANOG 25. The desk will
be staffed on Sunday 7:00 - 9:30PM, and from 1:00 - 1:30PM
and during breaks on Monday and Tuesday. A list of potential
discussion topics are included below --
-- General
Since a discussion of NAS/CAIS DSL came up last week, I am assuming there
are at least some DSL resellers out there, so . . .
Verizon had a converence call for the Northeast ISPs this afternoon to
introduce a new product. It began with them explaining to us why our
customers might want a
| 2) That all NANOG subscribers read list E-mail on machines that have
| procmail on them ?
No, certainly not. Many enlightened subscribers know about
http://www.gnus.org/manual/gnus_124.html#SEC123
or
http://www.gnus.org/manual/gnus_171.html#SEC171
(which is a very gnus-ish documentation
Which, by the way, rocks the hizzy.
If anyone needs some qmail-scanner and/or spam-assassin help in qmail, let
me know. I just spent the last couple days pfutzing with it extensively.
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
some of them have spamassassain
Which, by the way, rocks the hizzy.
If anyone needs some qmail-scanner and/or spam-assassin help in qmail,
let me know. I just spent the last couple days pfutzing with it
extensively.
I just bumped my hit count to 6. I found a small number of lists I am on
were making it into my spam
16 matches
Mail list logo
