Re: LA power outage?

At 02:08 AM 14-09-05 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And reported Oct 2004: -Hank threat models for huricanes are different that earthquakes. (or is that one of those "disaster+geography" e

Re: mail service with no mx (was - Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?)

Application layer firewalls have existed for at least 6 years. Make that 15 I suspect that claiming to that they existed farther back than 1990 would require careful debate about the functionality. Taking it at its most general: a boundary barrier service that mediated particular

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

on Sat Sep 10 03:39:59 2005 Christopher L. Morrow writes On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > > [Perhaps this thread should migrate to Multi6?] > perhaps... then jason can argue this instead of me :) The most basic question is if there will be a problem if we solve the multiho

Re: mail service with no mx (was - Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?)

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:31:05PM -0700, william(at)elan.net wrote: > On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Roy Badami wrote: > > > william(at)elan> Could you elaborate on how firewall will > > william(at)elan> determine if the connection is from mail server > > william(at)elan> or from telnet on port 25?

Re: CAT5 surge/lightning strike protection recommendations?

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, David Lesher wrote: > Put a fiber transceiver in building A. At least 10 foot away, > put in a 2nd transceiver and connect THAT to the CAT5 going to > building B. Connect A & B wallwarts to different breakers, with > surge protectorsand stock spares.o That's an amazingl

Re: CAT5 surge/lightning strike protection recommendations?

David Lesher wrote: > >Surge protectors can not protect you from ground differential issues. > > True enough - but 10/100 Ethernet is normally isolated by the transformer on the Ethernet transceiver. AFAIK there is not a connection between the signal lines and ground. Isolation is 1500V for t

Re: LA power outage?

> BTW - care to speculate what will happen if cat5 hurricane hits LA? :) > Or maybe we should be thinking of 8+ earthquake > > -- > William Leibzon threat models for huricanes are different that earthquakes. (or is that one of those "disaster+geography" equations?) --bill

Re: CAT5 surge/lightning strike protection recommendations?

Speaking on Deep Background, the Press Secretary whispered: > > > I have a bunch of cat5 buried about 1 ft below the surface connecting multiple > buildings on a campus (short runs) and lightning strikes nearby have caused > surges along one or more of the cables and burnt out switch ports. I w

Re: LA power outage?

folx, On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 01:28:09AM +, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote: > > It's also interesting to note that, at least by some estimates, > the brief power outage in L.A. yesterday took down more networks > than Hurrucane Katrina: > > http://www.techweb.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=

Re: LA power outage?

"william(at)elan.net" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I think there is a difference as to network going down for 3 hours >and network going down for 3 months... > Semantics. :-) >BTW - care to speculate what will happen if cat5 hurricane hits LA? :) >Or maybe we should be thinking of 8+ earthquake

RE: mail service with no mx (was - Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?)

> > > >Application layer firewalls have existed for at least 6 years. > > > Make that 15 Socks, fwtk (before it went commercial) to name a few. -M<

Re: LA power outage?

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote: It's also interesting to note that, at least by some estimates, the brief power outage in L.A. yesterday took down more networks than Hurrucane Katrina: http://www.techweb.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=170702966 Of course, So. California i

Re: mail service with no mx (was - Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?)

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Adam McKenna writes: > >On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:31:05PM -0700, william(at)elan.net wrote: >> Telnet option negotiation is at Layer 7 after TCP connection has been >> established. Firewalls typically don't operate at this level (TCP session >> is Layer 4 if I reme

Re: LA power outage?

It's also interesting to note that, at least by some estimates, the brief power outage in L.A. yesterday took down more networks than Hurrucane Katrina: http://www.techweb.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=170702966 Of course, So. California is pretty "network-dense", but what does that say about

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

> >$ dig mx fema.gov > >;; ANSWER SECTION: > >fima.org. 3600IN MX 0 smtp.secureserver.net. > >fima.org. 3600IN MX 10 > >mailstore1.secureserver.net > > That's interesting -- I'm not getting that response. from tokyo roam.psg.com:/usr/home

Re: LA power outage?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 21:21:59 -, "Reeves, Rob" said: We've been told by our field tech in LA that One Wilshire had lost power for a bit, but it is now restored. I don't know the duration of the outage, but our equipment there is on DC and did not go down. So - w

Re: rate limiting bandwidth

I'm pretty fond of the the Packeteer gear. The API is pretty decent, I can get a pretty good range of stats off the box in flexible formats (tab or comma delimited, or in an XML format). Config-wise, I believe I can change just about anything on the box, including running commands remotely, and

Re: CAT5 surge/lightning strike protection recommendations?

R.P. Aditya wrote: >I have a bunch of cat5 buried about 1 ft below the surface connecting multiple >buildings on a campus (short runs) and lightning strikes nearby have caused >surges along one or more of the cables and burnt out switch ports. I would >like to protect the switch ports -- there se

Re: CAT5 surge/lightning strike protection recommendations?

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 12:24:39 +1200 (NZST) "Mark Foster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I have a bunch of cat5 buried about 1 ft below the surface connecting > > multiple > > buildings on a campus (short runs) and lightning strikes nearby have > > caused > > surges along one or more of the

Re: mail service with no mx (was - Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?)

Adam McKenna wrote: On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:31:05PM -0700, william(at)elan.net wrote: Telnet option negotiation is at Layer 7 after TCP connection has been established. Firewalls typically don't operate at this level (TCP session is Layer 4 if I remember right) and would refuse or reject (d

Re: CAT5 surge/lightning strike protection recommendations?

> > I have a bunch of cat5 buried about 1 ft below the surface connecting > multiple > buildings on a campus (short runs) and lightning strikes nearby have > caused > surges along one or more of the cables and burnt out switch ports. I would > like to protect the switch ports -- there seem to be l

Re: mail service with no mx (was - Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?)

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:31:05PM -0700, william(at)elan.net wrote: > Telnet option negotiation is at Layer 7 after TCP connection has been > established. Firewalls typically don't operate at this level (TCP session > is Layer 4 if I remember right) and would refuse or reject (difference > type o

OMB: No new money for IPv6 [Was: Re: Multi-6]

Although I know you're speaking metaphorically, to top it off, see SUBJ: line. http://www.fcw.com/article90779-09-13-05-Web "Upgrade to v6 by 2008 -- no new money." - ferg -- Tony Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Moore's Law has not, and does not apply to routers. Thus, costs are going up non

rate limiting bandwidth

Does anyone have any recommendations concerning hardware rate limiting solutions with extensive API's? I remember packeteer from back in the day and have been looking at some of their newer solutions that have XML API's. Comments? Alternatives? I would appreciate any feedback that can be p

Re: mail service with no mx (was - Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?)

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Roy Badami wrote: william(at)elan> Could you elaborate on how firewall will william(at)elan> determine if the connection is from mail server william(at)elan> or from telnet on port 25? Perhaps because most telnet clients will attempt telnet option negotiation? I

mail service with no mx (was - Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?)

william(at)elan> Could you elaborate on how firewall will william(at)elan> determine if the connection is from mail server william(at)elan> or from telnet on port 25? Perhaps because most telnet clients will attempt telnet option negotiation? If so one could avoid this by using a cl

mail service with no mx (was - Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?)

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Joseph S D Yao wrote: There is no requirement - even in this century - for MX records. It is a Good Idea(tm). But not a requirement. Lack of MX records does NOT mean that you lose the store-and-forward capability of SMTP. Lack of a secondary server, while equally not a

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On 9/13/2005 5:23 PM, Joseph S D Yao wrote: > "SEF [is] unique in that it can detect what appear to be telnet > connections to Port 25 and drop the connection. This is probably because > telnet connections send one character at a time whereas real SMTP > clients send all the strings at once." W

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

For "contact us", I'm now getting a 403 error: Forbidden You don't have permission to access /feedback/ on this server. Apache/1.3.33 Server at www.fema.gov Port 80 -- William Allen Simpson Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 05:54:03PM -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph S D Yao writes > : > >On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:56:58PM -0400, Joseph S D Yao wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:28:41PM -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > >> ... > >> > Telnet options

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph S D Yao writes : >On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:56:58PM -0400, Joseph S D Yao wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:28:41PM -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: >> ... >> > Telnet options, and for that matter speed, happen after the 3-way >> > handshake. We're not

RE: CAT5 surge/lightning strike protection recommendations?

> > Anyone have recommendations (tested/practical is best :-)? > > The APC Protectnet PNET1 and PRM24 seem quite nice and not > too expensive -- > if they workpros? cons? It sounds like you're either out of NEC, or, you are grounding them to waterpipe. I believe NEC calls for grounding v

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

OBTW, this discussion of how SEF tells the difference between SMTP and telnet is rather beside the point. Most of what I wrote was, read RFC 2821. It's a little different from the RFC 821 that some of us have always cited, but I believe the points I noted are the same. AND it's a bit more OT, I

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:56:58PM -0400, Joseph S D Yao wrote: > On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:28:41PM -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > ... > > Telnet options, and for that matter speed, happen after the 3-way > > handshake. We're not getting that far. > > > > --Steven M. Bellovin,

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

At 05:10 PM 13/09/2005, kent crispin wrote: Port 587? Not everyone implements that. You would make a large part of the internet unreachable via email vinyl# telnet mx2.mail.yahoo.com 587 Trying 67.28.114.36... telnet: connect to address 67.28.114.36: Connection refused Trying 4.79.181.13..

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

> The rules today have not resulted in and overly huge number of > multihomers. I suspect that is a matter of perspective. Even if 10% of all sites are multihomed, and we continue in the IPv4 multihoming model, then we will end up with slow exponential growth of the routing table which eventu

Katrina Recovery Post: techs looking for bandwidth in Bay St. Louis, MS

Apologies in advance if this posting is not operational enough. I received a call from a friend who is part of a team who are putting together some wireless networks in the affected areas. They are in need of an internet connection, a link of any kind, in Bay St. Louis, MS. GPS = N 30 22.375",

Re: CAT5 surge/lightning strike protection recommendations?

Fiber would be my choice. Not only will it solve the lightening strike problem; you will not have to worry about ground potentials being different on each side of the cable run. James Routing and Security Administrator At the Santa Fe Office: Cyber Mesa Telecom [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: CAT5 surge/lightning strike protection recommendations?

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, R.P. Aditya wrote: > I have a bunch of cat5 buried about 1 ft below the surface connecting multiple > buildings on a campus (short runs) and lightning strikes nearby have caused > surges along one or more of the cables and burnt out switch ports. Don't do that, then. > I wo

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: > On 13-sep-2005, at 0:22, Igor Gashinsky wrote: > > > (firmly in the shim6 does not adress *most* of the issues camp) > > So where were you the past years in multi6 and months in shim6? > Please be part of the solution and not part of the problem

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:28:41PM -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: ... > Telnet options, and for that matter speed, happen after the 3-way > handshake. We're not getting that far. > > --Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb Steve, I defer to your expertise, as alwa

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

On 13-sep-2005, at 21:58, Daniel Senie wrote: So where were you the past years in multi6 and months in shim6? Please be part of the solution and not part of the problem. (That goes for John Payne and Daniel Senie too.) I was there in the beginning for Multi6. When I saw the direction (s) tha

RE: CAT5 surge/lightning strike protection recommendations?

I've had good luck with Oneac products, such as RJELP100. That being said, it's probably not a good idea to connect switches and/or pc's in different buildings with copper. I'd use fiber between buildings if at all possible . Differences in ground potential between buildings (especially during e

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

> Waitaminute - isn't the whole *purpose* of layer 3 > that the network makes these routing decisions? > > If there are N routers in an ISP, I would expect the > ISP to connect to X endsystems, where 10N < X < 1000N. > How does knowing about X endsystems scale better than > knowing about N int

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 15:50:12 EDT, Joseph S D Yao said: > Oh, and also ... please consider that some firewalls try to discern > whether the connection on port 25 is from a mail server or from Telnet. OK, I'll bite. A long time ago, I saw code that would trap the fact that many telnet binaries wou

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph S D Yao writes : > >On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:15:29PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: >> At 03:50 PM 13/09/2005, Joseph S D Yao wrote: >> >> >Oh, and also ... please consider that some firewalls try to discern >> >whether the connection on port 25 is from a mail

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

On Sep 13, 2005, at 3:19 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: On 13-sep-2005, at 0:22, Igor Gashinsky wrote: :: I must be missing something, but there's a good chance that the requester is :: going to have to wait for a timeout on their SYN packets before failing over :: to another address to t

CAT5 surge/lightning strike protection recommendations?

I have a bunch of cat5 buried about 1 ft below the surface connecting multiple buildings on a campus (short runs) and lightning strikes nearby have caused surges along one or more of the cables and burnt out switch ports. I would like to protect the switch ports -- there seem to be lots of product

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:15:29PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > At 03:50 PM 13/09/2005, Joseph S D Yao wrote: > > >Oh, and also ... please consider that some firewalls try to discern > >whether the connection on port 25 is from a mail server or from Telnet. > >While I mourn the simplicity of manua

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

At 03:50 PM 13/09/2005, Joseph S D Yao wrote: Oh, and also ... please consider that some firewalls try to discern whether the connection on port 25 is from a mail server or from Telnet. While I mourn the simplicity of manual debugging of such sites, it remains that: the fact that you can't TELN

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

At 03:19 PM 9/13/2005, you wrote: So where were you the past years in multi6 and months in shim6? Please be part of the solution and not part of the problem. (That goes for John Payne and Daniel Senie too.) I was there in the beginning for Multi6. When I saw the direction(s) that were being c

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 07:23:33AM -0700, william(at)elan.net wrote: ... > Which indeed means they have no MX servers listed and that MAY be a > problem for some mail servers (though normally mail servers are supposed > to send email based on A record then). > > Obviously not having MX record i

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

On 13-sep-2005, at 0:22, Igor Gashinsky wrote: :: I must be missing something, but there's a good chance that the requester is :: going to have to wait for a timeout on their SYN packets before failing over :: to another address to try. Or is the requester supposed to send SYNs to all :

On-topicness and FEMA's mail server

Extensive troubleshooting of somebody else's mail server seems a bit off-topic for the NANOG list. That's the sort of thing that, once the problem has been pointed out, will need to be fixed by people internal to the organization that runs the mail server. -Steve NANOG list administration g

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

At 10:17 AM 9/10/2005, Joe Abley wrote: On 10-Sep-2005, at 09:18, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: [Perhaps this thread should migrate to Multi6?] multi6 hasn't existed for some time. The "level-3 shim" approach to multi-homing that was the primary output of multi6 is being discussed in shim6.

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Sep 13, 2005, at 11:13 AM, Hannigan, Martin wrote: ObOp: Email is NOT a reliable form of communication. ^^^ unrelated and I disagree... DHS shouldn't start to think so either. NANOG shouldn't worry about if someones email is working as a byproduct, but sure wor

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

--- Mikael Abrahamsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The "shimming" model is a way to solve this by the > endsystems knowing > about multihoming, instead of the network. I > personally think this is a > better idea and scales much better. Let's have the > network moving packets > as its prima

RE: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

> > http://www.fema.gov/staff/extended.jsp > > Lists an "IT Services Division" that has ~250 possible points of > contact. > > Surely one of them has some clue... :-/ I think this sort of > problem > shows the endemic disease currently in place at FEMA. It's not just > an "IT gaffe" o

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 14:45:31 +0300, Joe Abley said: > And with many peer-to-peer applications, isn't the traffic > engineering already effectively performed at the edge? "already performed ineffectively at the edge" is probably a better description of the true state of affairs. Remember that

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 10:39:21 EDT, Christian Kuhtz said: william(at)elan.net wrote: Which indeed means they have no MX servers listed and that MAY be a problem for some mail servers (though normally mail servers are supposed to send email based on A record th

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Sep 13, 2005, at 1:13 PM, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote: Attempts by agencies to spur the Federal Emergency Management Agency into urgent action were met with bouncing emails, the Journal said. http://www.fema.gov/staff/extended.jsp Lists an "IT Services Division" that has ~250 possi

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 10:39:21 EDT, Christian Kuhtz said: > > william(at)elan.net wrote: > > > > > Which indeed means they have no MX servers listed and that MAY be a > > problem for some mail servers (though normally mail servers are > > supposed to send email based on A record then). > > Uh, w

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On 9/13/05, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Attempts by agencies to spur the Federal Emergency Management Agency into > urgent action were met with bouncing emails, the Journal said. > while the lot of you can debate proper DNS records and what OS their mail server might

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Christian Kuhtz wrote: william(at)elan.net wrote: Which indeed means they have no MX servers listed and that MAY be a problem for some mail servers (though normally mail servers are supposed to send email based on A record then). Uh, which mainstream mail server out

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

At 10:29 AM 13/09/2005, Steven Champeon wrote: on Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 09:54:42AM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > > Looks Solaris'ish > > # telnet ns2.fema.gov smtp > Trying 162.83.67.144... > Connected to ns2.fema.gov. > Escape character is '^]'. > 220 ns2.fema.gov ESMTP Sendmail 8.11.7p1+Sun/8.

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

william(at)elan.net wrote: Which indeed means they have no MX servers listed and that MAY be a problem for some mail servers (though normally mail servers are supposed to send email based on A record then). Uh, which mainstream mail server out there is ignorant enough not to send to A rec

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tuesday 13 September 2005 09:23, william(at)elan.net wrote: > Which indeed means they have no MX servers listed and that MAY be a > problem for some mail servers (though normally mail servers are supposed > to send email based on A record then). > > Obviously not having MX record is not conside

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Christian Kuhtz wrote: > Marshall Eubanks wrote: > >On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 17:41:51 -0400 > > John Payne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>On Sep 12, 2005, at 6:58 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: > I'll be blunt. As long as that question is up in the air, none of > the ma

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

on Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 09:54:42AM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > At 09:31 AM 13/09/2005, Steven Champeon wrote: > > >Does anyone know what their mail infrastructure looks like? From what I > >can see, they don't even have an MX record for fema.gov... > > No MX record, and the A record for fema.

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

The newspaper did not say which computer systems FEMA uses. $ dig mx fema.gov ;; ANSWER SECTION: fima.org. 3600IN MX 0 smtp.secureserver.net. fima.org. 3600IN MX 10 mailstore1.secureserver.net That's interesting -- I'm not getting that

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On 13/09/05, Steven M. Bellovin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >$ dig mx fema.gov > >;; ANSWER SECTION: > >fima.org. 3600IN MX 0 smtp.secureserver.net. > >fima.org. 3600IN MX 10 > >mailstore1.secureserver.net > > That's interesting -- I'm not

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 10:08:59AM -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "william(at)elan > .net" writes: > >;; ANSWER SECTION: > >fima.org. 3600IN MX 0 smtp.secureserver.net. > >fima.org. 3600IN MX 10 > >mailsto

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

Steven M. Bellovin wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "william(at)elan .net" writes: not say which computer systems FEMA uses. $ dig mx fema.gov ;; ANSWER SECTION: fima.org. 3600IN MX 0 smtp.secureserver.net. fima.org. 3600IN MX

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "william(at)elan .net" writes: > > >On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote: > >> It quoted a Department of Health official as saying every email it had >> sent to FEMA staff bounced. "They need a better internet provider during >> disasters," the Journa

Re: Katrina Network Damage Report

On 13/09/05, Scott A Crosby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > When the number of open print servers exceeds a threshold, I predict > that 'innovative marketers' will start using zombied toasters to send > advertisements to all open print servers they can find. > > And at that point, security matter

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

Marshall Eubanks wrote: On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 17:41:51 -0400 John Payne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sep 12, 2005, at 6:58 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: I'll be blunt. As long as that question is up in the air, none of the major content providers are going to do anything serious in

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote: It quoted a Department of Health official as saying every email it had sent to FEMA staff bounced. "They need a better internet provider during disasters," the Journal quoted her or him as saying. A number of US agencies made desperate call

Re: need help regarding portmaster 2E as a dialin server

An entity claiming to be Md. kamal Hossain ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: : Dear all I have portmaster 2E with 30 asyn port.I try to : configure it as dialin server.But when i dial it can't : authenticate. can anyone help regarding this configuration Kamal, I'd recommend signing up for some of the m

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

At 09:31 AM 13/09/2005, Steven Champeon wrote: Does anyone know what their mail infrastructure looks like? From what I can see, they don't even have an MX record for fema.gov... No MX record, and the A record for fema.gov does not accept smtp traffic. # telnet fema.gov smtp Trying 205.128.1.

Re: Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

on Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 01:13:19PM +, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) quoth: > Attempts by agencies to spur the Federal Emergency Management Agency > into urgent action were met with bouncing emails, the Journal said. > > It quoted a Department of Health official as saying every email it had > sent to

Computer systems blamed for feeble hurricane response?

This is the first I've heard of this... Via The Inquirer: [snip] REPORTERS at the Wall Street Journal said they have seen documents which show that a swift response by the US federal government to Hurricane Katrina was hampered because FEMA computer servers crashed. Michael Brown, FEMA's he

AOL whitelisting - a heads-up and a request for assistance

Hi Folks, This is both a request for assistance and a warning which I hope will benefit others. We've been on AOL's whitelist for more than 5 years. We've been reorganizing our delivery servers in the past month or so with no problems. A recent spike in complaints from one of our clients' list

Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

On 13-Sep-2005, at 03:28, Crist Clark wrote: Igor Gashinsky wrote: [snip] Moving everything to the end-hosts is simply not a good idea imho. But isn't that what IP is supposed to be about? Smart endpoints, dumb network (a.k.a. the stupid network)? And with many peer-to-peer applications,

Re: Katrina Network Damage Report

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 12:47:00 +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 12-sep-2005, at 2:47, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Amazingly enough, the *single* biggest problem in trying to get Joe >> Sixpack to secure their systems is "But I don't have anything >> they'd be interest

need help regarding portmaster 2E as a dialin server

Dear all   I have portmaster 2E with 30 asyn port.I try to configure it as dialin server.But when i dial it can't authenticate.   can anyone help regarding this configuration     best of luck   kamal-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content and is believed to be cle