At 02:55 PM 2/3/2006, you wrote:
The heart of this problem, like so many other problems before it, is that
most people are dumber than dirt itself.
So ... responsible prociders should only serve customers with some
minimum IQ?
One can wish
At 10:46 PM 10/5/2005, you wrote:
ok, vijay popping up is not totally surprising, but twice?
dorian was a bit of a surprise. but you, joe? coming out of
the woodwork? the lack of clue in this thread must be *really*
painful.
It's pretty evident that this has been a clue-free thread...
Once you find a host on a /48 jump to the next one I guess. Or make
some guess on what IP addressing scheme is being followed and which
subnets of that /48 are being used [assuming that an end site like a
cellphone carrier decides to give v6 IPs to all its phone users] ...
scan from within
At 08:49 PM 8/28/2005, you wrote:
Thanks.
Hopefully the storm will pass a bit to the east of the city thus sparing us
the worst.
From everything I've seen this evening, the storm going just to the east
would be among the worst case scenarios, as far as flooding is concerned.
Here's
At 12:02 AM 8/29/2005, you wrote:
Some of this is on topic. Internet access is as important as the
lights or water being on. Right, get out, but it'll be good
to see reasonable updates on what's going on utilities wise
down there when the weather shifts.
Y'know... I do have to wonder whether
how many different bandaids are applied. It is time
to re-engineer with the benefit of hindsight.
However desirable this may be, don't you agree that no matter what
mechanism comes along, there's a huge inertia to overcome.
We can debate the correct way to handle email forever. But of
At 06:12 PM 6/7/2005, you wrote:
If we started posting about every fiber cut of every carrier anywhere in
North America every time it happened there wouldn't be any room left on
this list for talking about spam, senderid, DNS RFCs, E911 for VoIP
carriers, err... wait which side am I arguing
At 01:53 PM 5/3/2005, you wrote:
--
Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000
All this argument about a guy whose business website is a GIF, with 4 links
above it, 2 of which point to a machine that's
At 10:52 AM 2/25/2004, you wrote:
recommendation come out regarding VoIP calls. How long until a simple
power failure results in the inability to place calls?
We're already at that point. If the power goes out at home, I'd have to
grab a flashlight and go hunting for a regular ol' POTS-powered
At 02:13 AM 11/11/2003, J. Oquendo wrote:
Uhm... Correct me if I missed something, but LEO's get paid to uphold the
law BY ACTING on crime in their expertise and if it's out of their range
(juridstiction) an `LEO` should have better contacts than someone on the
outside.
Perhaps they will have
At 11:42 PM 11/7/2003, Kee Hinckley wrote:
It appears that they've learned their lesson. This is tacked at the
bottom of the front page at Belkin.
Important message from Belkin:
We at Belkin apologize for the recent trouble our customers have
experienced with the wireless router/browser
] As to your call for us to suspend the service, I would respectfully
] suggest that it would be premature to decide on any course of action
] until we first have had an opportunity to collect and review the
] available data.
One would think it would be equally premature to roll out the service
At 02:01 PM 9/20/2003, Matt Larson wrote:
In response to this feedback, we have deployed an alternate SMTP
implementation using Postfix that should address many of the concerns
we've heard. Like snubby, this server rejects any mail sent to it (by
returning 550 in response to any number of RCPT TO
At 11:36 PM 8/28/2003, Danny McPherson wrote:
Not sure how many places you intend to post this or related
messages, but if you've got a problem vote with your money.
Whining to NANOG and a slew of other mailing lists and still
giving money to Qwest seems silly to me...
Agreed...
Likewise, the
I can't say for certain, not having taken an exhaustive look (it is, after
all, almost 3 in the morning out here on the right coast), but on the one
MS SQL server here, there do not appear to be new files installed, and
after rebooting, the server is *not* spewing forth traffic as it was
At 02:21 PM 1/25/2003, you wrote:
By the way, I know you guys probably don't care but McAfee is saying that if
you have SP3 on your windows2000 server you will not be infected with
SQLSlammer, this is absolutely NOT true, I have a box with sp3 and it IS
infected.
To clarify, we're talking
At 05:10 PM 1/25/2003, you wrote:
We have had multiple customers who had SP3 on their boxes that were
hit. SP3 was _supposed_ to include this patch, there is no
verification so far that it did.
Since all the providers have been blocking the attack spread from the
routers, installing SP3 on
If a customer is infected, then the problem is on their end. The fact that
they don't have throughput is their issue, not that of the provider's.
Many, many customers don't understand this - if they don't have throughput,
it's the provider's problem and the provider has to fix it. One of
At 12:09 AM 8/22/2002, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Brad Knowles [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Show me the headers that demonstrate these delays. On the
message I am responding to, I see an end-to-end delay of just a few
minutes, and that amount of time could easily be accounted
At 08:42 PM 7/5/2002, Dan Hollis wrote:
Is there a single wcom customer on nanog that *hasn't* been overbilled?
I heard once that there was, but I think it's actually an urban legend.
At 02:29 PM 6/24/2002, you wrote:
Point 3) is just about the same as 1), but it does imply
a slightly different motivation behind the inspection.
I know informing a suspect of a phone tap, in the telecom business will
get you hard time. SO again, check with your law people...a lot's changed
21 matches
Mail list logo
