RE: ENUM/E.164 books

2003-02-23 Thread Irwin Lazar
I've put some ENUM resources on http://www.itprc.com/tcp_ip.htm Irwin -Original Message- From: Pete Kruckenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 11:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ENUM/E.164 books Anyone have recommendations on good books (or similar

RE: Symantec detected Slammer worm hours before

2003-02-23 Thread Terry Baranski
Apologies if this is old news. It's from Thursday, but I didn't see it until today. Symantec comes clean Somewhat: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/56/29406.html -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sean Donelan Sent: Thursday,

Re: 223.255.255.0/24

2003-02-23 Thread bdragon
I can imagine there is some reason why this was originally reserved thats probably not valid any more.. It definately is not valid unless someone is living in the stone ages. The network corresponds to the numerically highest Class C network, and is reserved for a potential future classful

Re: 223.255.255.0/24

2003-02-23 Thread Simon Lyall
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So far, I've received no response from IANA or APNIC on the subject. http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/apops/archive/2003/02/msg9.html -- Simon Lyall.| Newsmaster | Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Network/System Admin |

Re: 223.255.255.0/24

2003-02-23 Thread Anne Lord
hi Simon, In light of the discussions on this list and subsequent to the posting referenced below, use of this network has been added to the agenda of the Address Policy SIG as an AOB discussion item by the community. http://www.apnic.net/meetings/15/sigs/policy/index.html The Address

Re: 223.255.255.0/24

2003-02-23 Thread Randy Bush
The outcome of the discussions at the Address Policy SIG will be posted to this list. where, one hopes, discussion will continue, yes? randy

Re: 223.255.255.0/24

2003-02-23 Thread bmanning
The outcome of the discussions at the Address Policy SIG will be posted to this list. where, one hopes, discussion will continue, yes? randy why would an APNIC/AP region specific issue need to be discussed on the NANOG list and not the RIPE/AFNOG/et.al. regional

untied

2003-02-23 Thread Randy Bush
could someone else please check the dns for www.united.com? the servers for united.com seem to delegate www.united.com, but the delegatee seems not to return an soa. i get very confusing results. randy, feeling stoopid

Re: untied

2003-02-23 Thread Scott Kupferschmidt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] host -a www.united.com Trying null domain Trying domain isprime.com rcode = 3 (Non-existent domain), ancount=0 Trying null domain Host not found, try again. Sincerely, Scott Kupferschmidt ISPrime, Inc. 866.502.4678 ext. 3 AIM: Scott ISPrime - ICQ: 174337249 On Mon, 24 Feb

Re: 223.255.255.0/24

2003-02-23 Thread Sean Donelan
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: why would an APNIC/AP region specific issue need to be discussed on the NANOG list and not the RIPE/AFNOG/et.al. regional ops lists? This is a prefix delegated to the APregion and so they should be the ones who set the

Re: untied

2003-02-23 Thread Randy Bush
btw, when querying bind9 and requesting 'any www.united.com', i get servfail, but when requesting 'A www.united.com', i do get a response. that is the reaction to their misconfiguration. i am in a dual-stack universe over here (iij/tokyo). so the browser, looking for an A or , probably

Re: untied

2003-02-23 Thread Avleen Vig
On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 02:03:30PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote: could someone else please check the dns for www.united.com? the servers for united.com seem to delegate www.united.com, but the delegatee seems not to return an soa. i get very confusing results. Hmm host -t NS united.com:

Re: untied

2003-02-23 Thread Ross Veach
At 2:03 PM +0900 2/24/03, Randy Bush wrote: could someone else please check the dns for www.united.com? Doesn't look good... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home 3% dig @a.gtld-servers.net www.united.com ; DiG 8.3 @a.gtld-servers.net www.united.com ; (1 server found) ;; res options: init recurs defnam

Re: untied (fwd)

2003-02-23 Thread Christopher L. Morrow
fwd per request... (I'm not sure how to contact united, though I'd guess PNAP/InterNap might know, since I see the fictional www.united.com through there) -- Forwarded message -- Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 14:36:00 +0900 From: Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Christopher L. Morrow

Re: untied

2003-02-23 Thread Allan Liska
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: MD5 Hello Randy, Monday, February 24, 2003, 12:03:30 AM, you wrote: RB could someone else please check the dns for www.united.com? the servers RB for united.com seem to delegate www.united.com, but the delegatee seems RB not to return an soa. i get

Re: untied

2003-02-23 Thread Randy Bush
ross? lazarus arises! wow! could someone else please check the dns for www.united.com? Doesn't look good... they seem to be making similar messes with ual.com, ua2go, ... and all the stuff that links from their pages. but it probably 'works' if your host is not dual stack, could you please

Re: untied

2003-02-23 Thread Richard A Steenbergen
On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 02:46:44PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote: ross? lazarus arises! wow! could someone else please check the dns for www.united.com? Doesn't look good... they seem to be making similar messes with ual.com, ua2go, ... and all the stuff that links from their pages.