Well, what's a "peering point"? Most traffic does not traverse public
peering points, domestically. So, in order to look at enough traffic to make
it worthwhile, the .gov would have to optically tap all the private peering
x-connects between major carriers. That is a major endevour, and would
sur
since this list bashes on people/orgs for NOT dealing with
security matters, I thought I'd be contrary..
Qwest.net, FNSI.net, online-mac
all sent swarms of bad packets towards a client lastnite.
all where 100 percent responsive in solving / fixing
the problem puppies quickly, no hassle, no f
Unnamed Administration sources reported that Daniel Golding said:
>
> Well, what's a "peering point"? Most traffic does not traverse public
> peering points, domestically. So, in order to look at enough traffic to make
> it worthwhile, the .gov would have to optically tap all the private peering
> what's your own NOC's SOP for when the G-men knock on the door at
> midnight waving paper & steel?
Yes sir, the servers are over there and here's the root password.
Oh wait, unless somethings broke or I'm breaking it I'm not at work at
midnight.
At my last place of employment, we would grant
Hi all -
I have walked about 30 people through the "Do ATM-based Internet Exchange
Points make sense anymore?" white paper and have received some really good
feedback, suggestions and price points to calibrate the Peering Financial
Model. I have applied these calibrations and I am ready to re
I got a chance to go to last years LISA for the first time. I had been
trying to go for 3 yrs. I have changed companies since then and am now
working for a lot smaller company that can't afford to pay for these kinds
of things which brings me to my question(s) for the list:
How can an individual
Its GOOD to hear one of these once in a whilea hearty "attaboy" to all
who did their jobs properly...
At 07:28 8/15/02 -0700, you wrote:
>since this list bashes on people/orgs for NOT dealing with
>security matters, I thought I'd be contrary..
>
>Qwest.net, FNSI.net, online-mac
>
>all sent
Welcome to installment 2 of ALGX leaking routes. If they have any
connectivity to speak of by the end of the day, I'd be amazed.
At 03:00 PM 8/15/2002 -0500, Stanley, Jon wrote:
>Welcome to installment 2 of ALGX leaking routes. If they have any
>connectivity to speak of by the end of the day, I'd be amazed.
Well, it was one of ALGX downstreams leaking to them. Shame on them
for not filtering their customer properly
Hi all - Thanks for all the feedback and keep it coming ! I'll summarize
the 80 or so responses so far.
As an aside, I especially liked this paper request:
"I'd like to see a copy of your paper - please fragment it into 48
byte chunks."
A couple points seem to come up from a bunch of
Chris,
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Chris Parker wrote:
>
> At 03:00 PM 8/15/2002 -0500, Stanley, Jon wrote:
>
> >Welcome to installment 2 of ALGX leaking routes. If they have any
> >connectivity to speak of by the end of the day, I'd be amazed.
>
> Well, it was one of ALGX downstreams leaking to
>I'm sure that they have all sorts of methods. On the other hand,
>cellphones make devilishly difficult "bugs" to eliminate, especially
>the ones that are capable of automatically answering the call and
>activating the microphone without any audible ring. You can't just
>block all cellphones,
Are they dead now?
I have been trying to contact them for over two months regarding attacks
from one of their customers. They dont return any email or phonecalls.
AS7911 is asleep at the wheel now, or on autopilot?
-Dan
--
[-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 03:49:19PM -0700, Dan Hollis wrote:
>
> Are they dead now?
>
> I have been trying to contact them for over two months regarding attacks
> from one of their customers. They dont return any email or phonecalls.
>
> AS7911 is asleep at the wheel now, or on autopilot?
Try
At 7:10 PM -0700 2002/08/14, Scott Granados wrote:
> Actually, yes you do block all cell phones and transmissions in these
> facilities.
Are you talking about a SCIF -- Secure Compartmented Information
Facility? The sort of place where they basically Tempest-shield the
entire build
At 10:37 PM -0400 2002/08/14, David Lesher wrote:
> Not at all.
>
> The entry guard says "No Cell Phones".. and [s]he has the gun.
> You can whine and pout but [s]he still has the gun.
When I was there, they never searched anyone's purse, bag, or
briefcase. So, just leave it inside
At 8:36 PM -0700 2002/08/14, Scott Granados wrote:
> Can the nsa for
> example listen in somehow to eering points or other such common areas
> and observe things that interest them?
Yup. Google for "ECHELON" and read the lengt
At 12:37 PM -0400 2002/08/15, Gerald wrote:
> How can an individual that has passed beyond "student" status afford the
> costs of LISA? I'm already a Usenix member in good standing, but even at
> those rates, to attend the whole week is quite expensive for an
> individual. (It's about equal
At 9:52 AM -0400 2002/08/15, Daniel Golding wrote:
> Well, what's a "peering point"? Most traffic does not traverse public
> peering points, domestically. So, in order to look at enough traffic to make
> it worthwhile, the .gov would have to optically tap all the private peering
> x-connects
If you are one of these famous John's, who helped make Onyx such a resounding
success, drop me a line, eh? ;)
We now return you to your normally schedualed NANOGing.
Jamie
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Chris Parker wrote:
> Well, it was one of ALGX downstreams leaking to them. Shame on them
> for not filtering their customer properly. How many times do we have
> to learn this lesson?
As much as it would be nice if everyone used prefix-lists on their
customer BGP session
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joe Wood) [Fri 16 Aug 2002, 02:16 CEST]:
> As much as it would be nice if everyone used prefix-lists on their
> customer BGP sessions, but sometimes this is not possible, or cumbersome.
> I know from past experience as a transit customer, that I have personally
> shyed away f
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Niels Bakker wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joe Wood) [Fri 16 Aug 2002, 02:16 CEST]:
> > As much as it would be nice if everyone used prefix-lists on their
> > customer BGP sessions, but sometimes this is not possible, or cumbersome.
> > I know from past experience as a trans
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 05:15:04PM -0700, Joe Wood wrote:
>
> However, I don't really see a reason why ISP's shouldn't implement
> max-prefixes on their customer sessions; This would not prevent against
> very small prefix leaks, but would prevent partial and whole routing table
> leaks that imp
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joe Wood) [Fri 16 Aug 2002, 02:38 CEST]:
>>> I know from past experience as a transit customer, that I have
>>> personally shyed away from ISP's that have restricted me to having
>>> their NOC update my ACL.
>> But instead you prefer a "lazy" NOC, where you need manual interv
On 15 Aug 2002 at 17:38, Joe Wood wrote:
[...]
> It's been my experience that a lot of the providers that do prefix
> filtering on customer BGP sessions take great amounts of time before they
> act on the prefix-filter update request. This much fun when it's 5pm or
> later and you really need to
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> If you're using a Cisco, and they leak, their session stays down until a
> human clears it. It also does very little to prevent leaking of a single
> route (like one of Phil Rosenthal's /24s), impacting someone else. As a
> customer, I would al
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Peter E. Fry wrote:
> On 15 Aug 2002 at 17:38, Joe Wood wrote:
> > It's been my experience that a lot of the providers that do prefix
> > filtering on customer BGP sessions take great amounts of time before they
> > act on the prefix-filter update request. This much fun when
Joe Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
>> However, for ISP's that do NOT use any sort of prefix filters, wouldn't
>> you prefer that your BGP session was limited to a number of prefixes, in
>> case of a routing leak?
We'ld prefer that such ISPs identify themselves here so we can
straighten them out
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Niels Bakker wrote:
> >> But instead you prefer a "lazy" NOC, where you need manual intervention in
> >> case you screw up a filter list on your end to re-enable the BGP session?
> > No, instead I prefer to do all route filtering on my (cust) side, and have
> > the ISP do fi
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard A Steenbergen) [Fri 16 Aug 2002, 03:01 CEST]:
[..]
> IMHO AS Path filters are useless and redundant if you have proper
> prefix-lists.
Did you ever run into that bug in IOS where if you had `ip as-path
access-list 1 permit ^(1|2|3)+_$' (where 2 and 3 would be custome
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joe Wood) [Fri 16 Aug 2002, 03:30 CEST]:
> True, but my point is that if ISP is doing filtering based on ^CUST-AS_
> they should be implementing _some_ sort of protection against full table
> leaks.
Yes, and I'm in violent agreement with that. :-) Apologies if that
wasn't
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Mark Kent wrote:
> We'ld prefer that such ISPs identify themselves here so we can
> straighten them out. Wasn't that your intention when you asked this
> question:
>
> How many of you that currently do not filter your customer BGP
> sessions have max-prefixes config
warning: operational content
in 12.0(22)S there was a new max-prefix feature added that
people running this software (or similar) can enable to shut down
your customers who leak routes.
Most customers don't advertize 8k prefixes, so a simple
setup like this:
(config-router)#nei
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 11:12:00PM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> warning: operational content
Thank you Jebus!
> in 12.0(22)S there was a new max-prefix feature added that
> people running this software (or similar) can enable to shut down
> your customers who leak routes.
>
> Mos
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> A better system might be where the session is kept up (or periodically
> polled, if you want to make it obvious to the other party that there is a
> problem) without installing the routes, and kept in a "quarantine" state
> for X amount of time
I believe you are correct as long as you inteligently apply
this restart-timer on max-prefix along with your dampening policy.
YMMV depending on what your defaults are set for.
- Jared
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 09:09:15PM -0700, Joe Wood wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Rich
Can anyone recommend some links/mailing lists/resources
for HP Openview and/or Ciscoworks?
Thanks,
--
blake
Hey,
In my fraternity we have a tradition of sending "donkey balls" messages
to people who leave their email accounts open on other people's machines.
Anyhow, just a friendly "Hi, you suck donkey balls!" note from your
friend Emily.
:-D
E
Please disregard the previous message (and this one also). A joke which
would have been much funnier had the person known that [EMAIL PROTECTED]
was not my email address (and therefore sent the email to the correct
address) :)
Nathan
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Nathan wrote:
>
> Hey,
> In my frater
40 matches
Mail list logo
