OT I know, but this has to be the quote of the week:
Working the ICANN process is like being nibbled to death by ducks, it takes
forever, it doesn't make sense, and in the end we're still dead in the
water. said Tom Galvin, VeriSign's vice president for government relations.
With oratory like
Not, I hasten to add, that I support Sitefinder or WLS (although I think I
like consolidate). But what I like isn't the issue. Even if having
Just to recap here, this thread plus the articles I'm reading miss one of the
major points (a commercial one essentialy)..
Verisign is really two
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Michael Smith wrote:
We have a customer of a customer who is attempting to send traffic from
IP space we control, through the Internet and back into us via one of
our transit connections.
I have filters in place that block all inbound traffic from the blocks I
[1] Should VoIP include 911/999 service, and how does one resolve the
various geographic location issues associated with this.
Anyone who claims to answer this one should consider the how
to handle the case of a British subscriber to a VoIP service
who travels to the USA, Canada, all over
This report has been generated at Fri Feb 27 21:48:07 2004 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of an AS4637 (Reach) router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org/as4637 for a current version of this report.
Recent Table
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Nico Schottelius [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello!
I am more or less new to nanog (reading it about half a year),
so please correct me, if I do something wrong.
Jeroen Massar [Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 02:07:27PM +0100]:
Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
On Feb 27, 2004, at 1:21 AM, James Edwards wrote:
On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 21:22, Michael Smith wrote:
Hello:
We have a customer of a customer who is attempting to send traffic
from
IP space we control, through the Internet and back into us via one of
our transit connections.
Gotta ask, Why ?
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
Verisign is really two entities wrt .com/net - it is the registry and the
registrar. As a registrar it occupies the same position as the many other
registrars.. tucows, melbourne, joker etc .. as a registry it occupies a
privileged position in
Verisign is really two entities wrt .com/net - it is the registry and the
registrar.
Verisign Registrar, aka Network Solutions, was sold off to Pivotal Private
Equity last Fall.
Other lines of analysis to attempt:
o what are registry services and what are not.
o if a
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In Canada and the USA they would dial 911
In the UK they would dial 999
In Europe they would dial 112 or possibly one of the various
legacy national numbers for emergency service.
And in Australia they would dial 000.
Do you route all these
--On 27 February 2004 13:39 + Paul Jakma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sounds like a perfect job for anycast.
Because you always want to get to an E911 service in the same AS number...
(seriously, read the sip sipping w/gs)
Alex
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Alex Bligh wrote:
Because you always want to get to an E911 service in the same AS
number...
You do or you dont? I dont see why anycast addresses need or need not
be restricted to same AS.
(seriously, read the sip sipping w/gs)
Havnt got the time. :) Unless you have
--On 27 February 2004 14:52 + Paul Jakma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because you always want to get to an E911 service in the same AS
number...
You do or you dont? I dont see why anycast addresses need or need not
be restricted to same AS.
Anycast topology tends to follow AS topology, as
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 10:37:42 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
P.S. I think a solution lies in the general direction
of converting the entire world to use 112 for emergency
services and having the VoIP services set up an automated
system that rings back whenever your phone connects using
a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
P.S. I think a solution lies in the general direction
of converting the entire world to use 112 for emergency
services and having the VoIP services set up an automated
system that rings back whenever your phone connects using
a different IP address and asks you
Sam Stickland wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
P.S. I think a solution lies in the general direction
of converting the entire world to use 112 for emergency
services and having the VoIP services set up an automated
system that rings back whenever your phone connects using
a different IP address
Crist Clark wrote:
To steer a little ways back on topic, perhaps looking at the standards
for how mobile phones deal with emergency services is better analogue
for mobile IP phones than how POTS does things.
Install SRV records to the reverse zone to give you emergency,
directory, etc.
: Also, and perhaps more importantly, if the customer's line to his
: network drops, should the customer be incapable of getting to content
: hosted on his network?
Simple. I am not going to break something all the time to counter something that might
break every once and a while.
When Nagios
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 20:42:32 +0200, Petri Helenius said:
Unless you are the rare beast with Mobile IP this would probably work
alright in 99% of the cases.
20 years ago, 911 was able to say unless you're the rare beast with a cell
phone, basing it on the physical service address that the
On Feb 27, 2004, at 1:51 PM, james wrote:
: Also, and perhaps more importantly, if the customer's line to his
: network drops, should the customer be incapable of getting to content
: hosted on his network?
Simple. I am not going to break something all the time to counter
something that might
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
20 years ago, 911 was able to say unless you're the rare beast with a cell
phone, basing it on the physical service address that the copper runs to would
probably work alright in 99% of the cases.
Let's not make the same mistake again.
So all IP phones should be
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 21:19:48 +0200, Petri Helenius said:
So all IP phones should be outside of buildings and equipped with GPS or
Galileo receivers?
I can think of plenty of buildings where you'd want the GPS even inside if
feasible. Think any mall or office buil;ding over 250K square
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 21:19:48 +0200, Petri Helenius said:
So all IP phones should be outside of buildings and equipped with GPS or
Galileo receivers?
I can think of plenty of buildings where you'd want the GPS even inside if
feasible. Think any mall or office
** Reply to message from Petri Helenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 27 Feb
2004 21:19:48 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
20 years ago, 911 was able to say unless you're the rare beast with a cell
phone, basing it on the physical service address that the copper runs to would
probably work
Mobile IP phones will be the same as everything else. For different roaming
areas you'll get a different IP address and the services will be handled
that way. I think someone will come out with it as soon as they figure out
how to put together a worldwide network that will support it. I don't
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 20:42:32 +0200, Petri Helenius said:
Unless you are the rare beast with Mobile IP this would probably work
alright in 99% of the cases.
20 years ago, 911 was able to say unless you're the rare beast with a cell
phone, basing it on the physical
http://techupdate.zdnet.com/special_report/Stratton_Sclavos.html
[1] Should VoIP include 911/999 service, and how does one resolve the
various geographic location issues associated with this.
I'm glad that got people talking :-)
[snip - one of the many issues; I think you route the call to India and
have someone ask the user where they are, then re-route the
http://fightwls.com/
At 02:49 PM 2/27/2004, Jeff Shultz wrote:
** Reply to message from Petri Helenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 27 Feb
2004 21:19:48 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
20 years ago, 911 was able to say unless you're the rare beast with a
cell
phone, basing it on the physical service address that the
This one may be a variant of the recent worms. It's spreading by way of
zipfile attachments. I don't have more info yet, but my $orkplace has just
been hit by it and it's unknown to McAfee and Symantec at this time.
It's not W32.Netsky, as best I can tell, because of the attachment filename:
Yes, I got that one too. To my peering alias by coincidence. ClamAV
identifies it as Worm.Bagle.A2. ClamAV added it the database today,
and mentioned that it was not in most signature databases yet.
On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 07:12:42PM -0500, Todd Vierling wrote:
This one may be a variant of
32 matches
Mail list logo
