Glen Kent wrote:
says the solemn headline of Telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/06/ninternet106.xml
It is always good to see that journalists don't know that "Networks" are
also used for other purposes than their daily dose of nonsense (also
called the In
Paul Vixie wrote:
[..]
i wouldn't want to get in an argument with somebody who was smart and savvy
enough to invent packet switching during the year i entered kindergarden,
but, somebody told me once that keeping information on every flow was *not*
"inexpensive." should somebody tell dr. roberts
Joel Snyder wrote:
[..]
Experimentation with SixXS.NET has proven to be problematic,
How so? It is always fun to read that people have 'problems', but it is
even funnier then when the person's name isn't even listed in
whois.sixxs.net and thus doesn't even have an account, nor am I able to
e
Jason LeBlanc wrote:
I did look at it, it still lacks a few things, but it does cover most.
It would be nice if you added some screenshots or demo pages as to what
the reporting looks like. I had to dig around and find a paper on the
slammer worm to see what the output looks like.
Contact
Jason LeBlanc wrote:
My bad, you might be able to do it with PingPlotter using remote proxies
that are linux. I can see using the Vixie personal colo list to find
cheap vm offerings in various locations. Other option, a few could get
together and share some resources to get the proxies dist
John A. Kilpatrick wrote:
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Tom Sands wrote:
When we did get a hold of someone, they mentioned they could support
simple ICMP requests.
To them "simple" means it's just a ping check. They won't
montior/graph/care about latency.
I was pondering creating a "smoke ping col
Arnd Vehling wrote:
Randy Epstein wrote:
My point was that even with a license, accidents still occur.
My point is that without a license more accidents will occur.
The problem here is a problem causes in a *REMOTE* network, that you, as
a decent engineer, should safeguard against in *YOUR*
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[..]
Pushing this task off to a server that does not have packet-forwarding
duties also allows for flexible interfaces to network management
systems including the possibility of asking for human confirmation
before announcing a new route.
There is no (direct) requiremen
First the operational portion:
For all the affected network owners, please read and start
using/implement one of the following excellent ideas:
* Pretty Good BGP and the Internet Alert Registry
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0606/pdf/josh-karlin.pdf
* PHAS: A Prefix Hijack Alert System
http://i
Bjørn Mork wrote:
Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Network Solutions appears to have some level of support for RRs
because I am aware of domain names registered through them that have
RRs.
it is pushing glue to the parent zone, com et alia, that is the
problem.
Why don't
Randy Bush wrote:
David Freedman wrote:
Will somebody please, please PLEASE let me know what magic process for
networksolutions are to get glue added, am on the 72nd hour of
the phone game where questions are bouncing between:
as far as i have been able to sort this
o netsol unders
Randy Bush wrote:
for those of us who are trying to provide dual stack services, how the
heck do we get v6 glue added to the gtlds? specifically, i want to add
v6 glue for psg.com and rip.psg.com in the com zone.
similarly for the root, as rip.psg.com serves some tlds.
Depends on your reg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a customer that's trying to do something I've never seen before,
and I'm trying to help him set it up.
They have a 2811 set up with a VPN using a GRE tunnel. We have that up
and running to the other end ok. However, the customer wants to control
which RFC 1918
Rod Beck wrote:
[..]
6. I am not aware of any Dutch per se ISP conferences although that
market is certainly quite vibrant.
See http://www.nlnog.net/ though "conferences" is not the case, then
again there is RIPE + AMS-IX meetings, who needs more than that :)
Also see http://www.swinog.org f
Scott Weeks wrote:
[..]
> I have about 100K DSL customers at this time and most all are households.
> 65K wouldn't cover that. At this point, I doubt that I'd require much
> more than just asking and making sure the person is understanding what
> they're asking for. Mostly, that'd be the leased l
Leigh Porter wrote:
>
>
> Wow, is this what you folks do at Christmas ?
Clearly you yourself are affectionate about this thing called Christmas,
if you are so affectionate about it, then why are you making silly
comments which do not contribute at all to the topic at hand?
Must be very boring th
Joe Greco wrote:
[..]
> Okay, here, let me make it reaaally simple.
Yes, indeed lets make it reaaally simple for you:
> If your ISP has been delegated a /48 (admittedly unlikely, but possible)
> for $1,250/year, and they assign you a /56, their cost to provide that
> space
Leo Vegoda wrote:
> On 19 Dec 2007, at 21:31, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> When an ISP is not going to provide /48's to endusers then RIPE NCC
>> should revoke the IPv6 prefix they received as they are not following
>> the reasons why they received the
Lou Katz wrote:
>
> I am having trouble understanding why I cannot get an allocation of
> any size, only an assignment. Unless I didn't read the documentation
> correctly, there seems to be no way in hell that I can get PI v6
> space of any size, which of course leads me to be disinterested
> in v
Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Dec 19, 2007 5:03 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>>
>>> "new" as in "We already have one, but we actually didn't really know
>>> what we where r
Mohacsi Janos wrote:
>> This would force these places to:
>> a) use bridging to get that single /64 onto their network
>>thus making firewalling really difficult.
>
> I am not quite sure. My colleague tested NetScreen box with /64
> advertised from LNS. It seems to be working.
If you are rout
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
[..]
> The world tends to change in 7 years. You seem to like bashing people
> for not knowing future policy and changes 7 year ahead of time, which I
> think it quite sad.
Not intended that way. What I was really surprised, and critical, of
though is you mentioning that
Mohacsi Janos wrote:
[..]
> In my opinion there is two type of users as usually ISP services are
> marketed:
>
> 1. Home user - not really interested in configuration of their devices -
> they just want Internet (now IPv4, soon IPv4 and IPv6) connectivity:
> They generaly don't use more than one L
Kevin Oberman wrote:
[..]
> Note that sixxs only deals with commercial providers. Many (most?) of
> the major research and education networks around the globe have done
> IPv6 in production for years. That includes ESnet, DREN, NREN and
> Internet2 in the US, CAnet in Canada, Geant/Dante in Europe
Changing subject for these replies which will definitely be a bit on the
quite mean side... no offense but start reading for once. Next to that
there are also LIR courses which cover all of this.
(see other mail for /56 for end-user-sites, /48 for end-business-sites)
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
[..
Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Jeroen Massar:
>
>> For a list of ISP's doing IPv6 check:
>> http://www.sixxs.net/faq/connectivity/?faq=native
>
> Does PPPv6 still work on the T-DSL platform? 8-/
From what I understand it depends on the router/dslam/whateverthingy one
get
Steven Haigh wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 10:09:16AM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>> Vassili Tchersky wrote:
>> [..]
>>
>>> XS4All (Netherlands) is providing the same service if I correctly remember.
>> They used to have a product called "PowerDSL"
Vassili Tchersky wrote:
[..]
> XS4All (Netherlands) is providing the same service if I correctly remember.
They used to have a product called "PowerDSL", which did IPv6 over
PPPv6, but apparently due to changes in the infra they had to drop this.
XS4all does still, since about 2001 or so, provide
Edward A. Trdina III wrote:
> I wonder if they will permit BGP announcements from the business grade
> FIOS service? Does anyone know?
man tun|tinc|openvpn|*swan|ipsec|...
If they don't allow it and you can live with a few bytes of overhead per
packet, nothing (except hard firewalling and doing
Adrian Chadd wrote:
[..]
> Here's the real question. If an open source protocol for p2p content
> routing and distribution appeared?
It is called NNTP, it exists and is heavily used for doing exactly where
most people use P2P for: Warezing around without legal problems.
NNTP is of course "nice" t
[added bcc to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that they can have a look at it too from
their end etc etc]
Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> ARIN has set up a wiki at http://www.getipv6.info to publish information
>> that will help ISPs, large and small in implementing IPv6 and
Barrett Lyon wrote:
>
> On Sep 18, 2007, at 1:30 PM, David Conrad wrote:
[..]
>> On Sep 18, 2007, at 5:45 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>>> Please please please, for the sake of a semi-'standard', please only use
[..]
>> What RFC (or other standards publication)
Barrett Lyon wrote:
[..]
> I would actually think Apple (and any other vendor that default enable
> v6 tunnels without notifying the user) should react to this and provide
> a fix that allows their current user base to opt-in to their
> pre-existing tunnels with education on what that means to the
Hi,
As some of you might know we maintain a list of ISP's that provide IPv6
connectivity to endusers, thus over Cable/DSL/PPP etc. This list is at:
http://www.sixxs.net/faq/connectivity/?faq=native
If you have any additions/changes for that, don't hesitate to spam the
details to me offlist so
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 17:15:38 EDT, John Curran said:
>
>>In addition, if the record is added for the node, instead of
>>service as recommended, all the services of the node should be IPv6-
>>enabled prior to adding the resource record. "
>>
>> Not a prob
[as this has nothing to do with Apple Airports in particular I changed
the subject again]
Martin Hannigan wrote:
> Should be an operation defined by gethostbyname() no?
and in another:
> "Pretty good" as in there is a browser standard to poke for v6 then v4
> or is this a stack behavior?
No, it
[spam: Check http://www.sixxs.net/misc/toys/ for an IPv6 Toy Gallery :)]
Somewhat long, hopefully useful content follows...
Barrett Lyon wrote:
[..]
> The other thought that occurred to me, does FF/Safari/IE have any
> ability to default back to v4 if v6 is not working or behaving badly?
> This
Stephen Sprunk wrote:
[..]
> P.S. I'm writing this from behind a monopoly ISP who deliberately
> blocks all proto 41 traffic, and thus 6to4, so I have no idea what
> content, if any, the Experiment is actually providing... Anyone want to
> give me a Teredo relay for "research" purposes? :)
As t
Stephen Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 11:16:40PM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
[..]
>> You don't change the hints you just provide zones that override
>> B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET, F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET, H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET,
>> K.ROOT-SERVERS.NET and M.ROOT-SERVERS.NET or just use your
>
Barrett Lyon wrote:
>
> Apparently GoDaddy does not support v6 glue for their customers, who
> does? I don't think requiring dual-stack v6 users perform v4 queries to
> find records is all that great.
At least eNom does.
There are a few others but it tends to be that you have to raise a
su
Eric Vyncke wrote:
> Beware the subject line is wrong, it assumes that eBay is using Teredo ;-)
>
> (you scared me for a while!)
Oops, indeed, some other people also noted this already. And it is good
to see that people read subject lines, as due to recent nanog-banter I
would almost have believe
Hi,
As the below is of course a 'good to see they are going at IPv6' thing
this one is of course nice. But there is an additional point in it which
might cause folks to check up on their filtering: it's a /41.
Just to make clear again, ARIN IPv6 PI allocs can be of size /40 - /48.
So better chec
Hank Nussbacher wrote:
>
> http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/06/hubble
>
> "Despite its robust appearance, more than 10 percent of the internet
> flickers out like a candle every day, according to researchers who
> unveiled on Wednesday an experimental tool that probes the networ
Joe Abley wrote:
[..]
> Anyway, how does BT's cleanfeed work? How are British 3G operators doing
> equivalent blocking? I'd be interested in learning about the
> implementation.
I wonder how this solves the, from what I found out, common situation
that people rent cheap "root servers" in a country
For all you "NAT is soo secure I need to NAT" folks please take the
time and read the following RFC that the IETF has carefully put
together to address all those arguments.
URL: http://myietf.unfix.org/documents/rfc4864.txt
Abstract:
8<-
Antonio Querubin wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>
>> Please at least honor: ip6.de.easynet.net/ipv6-minimum-peering.txt
>
> A typical trans-Pacific path is significantly longer than a typical
> trans-Atlantic path. The < 40 ms policy recomm
Krichbaum, Eric wrote:
> I saw this question a while ago but no (maybe one) answers. Who does
> have IPv6 in production today. Of the fixedorbit.com top ten for
> example?
http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/lg/
You can check the routing tables for which ASN's are active or check
the DFP list to see
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> The magic answer to training setups: one big fat Xen box with
>> a lot of VM's, virtual interfaces and of course: Quagga.
>
> You said "magic". Does this mean that there is a site where you can
> download ISOs for this big fat XEN box?
www.debian.org
www.ubuntu.org
ww
Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 03, 2007, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>
>> The magic answer to training setups: one big fat Xen box with a lot of
>> VM's, virtual interfaces and of course: Quagga.
>>
>> It looks like a Cisco, it feels like a Cisco, it i
Petri Helenius wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Alex Rubenstein writes:
>>
>>> Does anyone know of any good IPv6 training resources (classroom, or
>>> self-guided)?
>>>
>>
>> If your router vendor supports IPv6 (surprisingly, many do!):
>>
> Too bad the IPv6 support on the low-end
Charlie Allom wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 02:28:34PM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>> I am spamming this to NANOG, as there is bound to be ISP's out there
>> and other service providers who might have something cool to add to
>
> I have plans to use IPv6 on people&#x
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, 31 May 2007 18:40:42 BST, Jeroen Massar said:
>
>> When you have a large company, the company is also split over several
>> administrative sites, in some cases you might have a single
>> administrative group covering several sites th
Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>
> Thus spake "Donald Stahl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Current policy allows for greater-than-/48 PI assignments if the
>>> org can justify it. However, since we haven't told staff (via
>>> policy) what that justification should look like, they are currently
>>> approving all
[Major cross post, set reply-to to NANOG, please honor it... ]
[Note: I am not talking about ULA Central here, though it could apply]
To stop the pesky emails about ULA, I hereby present a (partial)
solution to this problem.
We have ULA as per RFC4193. With a little math one can generate a ULA
pr
Jo Rhett wrote:
[..]
>> While NANOG is a nice stopgap for getting to the right people, it seems
>> to me that we should, collectively, come up with a better system for
>> doing this. If only the RIR databases were verified so that all contacts
>> listed were reading, willing and able to act on abu
K K wrote:
[..]
> I'm hoping to find either a better and widely accepted way to handle
> non-spam-related network abuse complaints (hacking, DoS, etc), or at
> least best practices for triage on the huge volume of mail that comes
> into abuse@, procedures such that the rare legitimate complaint ab
Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 10:06:32AM +0100, Randy Bush wrote:
>> roam.psg.com:/usr/home/randy> doc -p -w www.cnn.com.
>> Doc-2.2.3: doc -p -w www.cnn.com.
>> Doc-2.2.3: Starting test of www.cnn.com. parent is cnn.com.
>> Doc-2.2.3: Test date - Thu Apr 26 09:04:52 GMT 2007
>>
Sean Donelan wrote:
>
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Chris L. Morrow wrote:
>> I think the strawman proposals so far were something like:
>>
>> 1) iana has 'root' ca-cert
>> 2) iana signs down certs for RIR's
>> 3) RIR's sign down certs for LIR's
>> 4) LIR's sign down certs for 'users' (where 'users' is p
Yi Wang wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Could anyone give me a sense how many BGP routes a large ISP typically
> sees in total?
> Here by "in total", I mean if the RIB of all routers in the ISP were
> merged, how many distinctive
> routes would there be?
Google(route bgp) "I am feelink lucky"
aka first hit,
Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>
> Thus spake "Jeroen Massar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> But for the rest it all seems pretty fine to me...
>>
>> or do you mean that those ibahn things see "NOERROR" and
>> then no answers, thus wrongly cache that as lab
Chris L. Morrow wrote:
[..]
> the STSN devices? or 'ibahn' ? One thing to keep in mind is that the
> DNS-LB used by Google/yahoo (in the examples above) seems to be returning
> a CNAME for queries, then nothing for the follow-up resolution
> request for a for the CNAME... So, ipv6 things
[h how come I didn't parse any operational content in this post...]
Fred Heutte wrote:
[..]
> I spent a couple hours in a hotel recently trying to untangle why
> using the DSL system I could see the net but couldn't get to any
> sites other than a few I tried at random like the BBC, Yahoo
> an
David Conrad wrote:
[..]
>> Why doesn't IANA operate a whois server?
>
> We do. The proper question to ask is why isn't our whois server
> populated with address information instead of just domain name
> information. I don't know the reason historically. However, today,
> when the topic was rec
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> We checked with IANA, ARIN, and the US DoD regarding 7.0.0.0/8. We
>> were told that this netblock should not see the light of day,
>
> 10/8 used to be a DoD address block, but it was also used exclusively in
> their blacker networks and similar non-connected infrast
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
[..]
> Another interesting case:
>
> 025/8 Jan 95 UK Ministry of Defense (Updated - Jan 06)
[..]
> I tried emailing RIPE and ARIN. [EMAIL PROTECTED] returned my message
> unread and I have no idea what other email adddress to use,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ta
Roland Dobbins wrote:
>
> On Mar 28, 2007, at 12:54 PM, Steve Sobol wrote:
>
>> If I am seeing a routing problem, is Jared's list an appropriate place to
>> check for contacts at the ISP with the problem?
>
> One hopes so.
Come on, it usually is :)
Also for all IPv6 related Operational Discussi
Paul Vixie wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason LeBlanc) writes:
>
>> After looking for 'the ideal' tool for many years, it still amazes me
>> that no one has built it. Bulk gets, scalable schema and good portal/UI.
>> RTG is better than MRTG, but the config/db/portal are still lacking.
[..]
> "been
[ 2-in-1, before I hit the 'too many flames posted' threshold ;) ]
Roland Dobbins wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 22, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>
>> But which address space do you put in the network behind the VPN?
>>
>> RFC1918!? Oh, already usi
Roland Dobbins wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 22, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>
>> But I guess it is nonsense.
>
> This is what ssh tunnels and/or VPN are for, IMHO
[..]
Of course, for protecting them you should use that and firewalls and
other security measures that o
Jim Shankland wrote:
> "Travis H." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> IIRC, someone representing the electrical companies approached
>> someone representing network providers, possibly the IETF, to
>> ask about the feasibility of using IP to monitor the electrical
>> meters throughout the US
>>
Hi,
It seems that there are quite a few ISP's with IPv6 capabilities that
are nicely filtering. Of course they also forget to actually update
those filters.
Blocks that are filtered by quite a number of ISP's that should not be
filtered are: 2001:500::/30, 2001:678::/29, 2400::/16, 2600::/12,
262
Gadi Evron wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
>
>
>
>> ISPs probably don't have an interest in BT caching because of 1)
>> cost of ownership, 2) legal concerns (if an ISP cached a publicly
>> distributed copy of some pirated software, who's then responsible?),
>
> They cache t
Pekka Savola wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Nicolás Antoniello wrote:
>> A /28 prefix may have a lot of incoming traffic associated to it, so I
>> believe the dissagregation (subnets) of the prefix should be allowed
>> by the policy.
I guess you are talking about 2800:a0::/28 which was allocated by
Gadi Evron wrote:
[..]
> Environment:
> Tested with router's standard config on 01/04/07. Runs smoothly with NSTX
> (http://nstx.dereference.de/nstx/
> Version 1.1-beta6) and an ssh-session for connection testing without any
> authentication via the FON captive portal.
Any smart user can get ar
Randy Bush wrote:
>> Well, the undocumented fact is that RIS does not accept multi-hop BGP
>> peerings, which may somewhat limit its coverage.
>
> this is a good thing. as multi-hop bgp is very fragile, measurements
> go borkville just when you want them the most.
While that is true, it does he
Sebastian Rusek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Since November 2006 we announce our 3 new prefixes:
[..]
> Could you please check your configuration or help us to isolate the problem?
You could also check http://www.ris.ripe.net/ and use that tool to
determine exactly which networks are not seeing you and then
Roland Dobbins wrote:
>
>
> I recently purchased a Slingbox Pro
It's a neat toy indeed, I would almost run out to get one too was it not
for the cash deficiency. I assume you got your X-mas presents early ? :)
[..]
> What I'm wondering is, do broadband SPs believe that this kind of system
> wil
Barry Greene (bgreene) wrote:
[..list of good things..]
> So what would be helpful are people who say "I've done everything (or
> some of the things) off the Bogon Team page and think there is a better
> way." The core problem right now are that too many organizations are
> doing nothing to mainta
Stephen Satchell wrote:
>
> Jared Mauch wrote:
>> linking to stuff like the bogon-announce list too wouldn't
>> be a bad idea either :)
>
>
> Bogon announce list?
Read here: http://www.cymru.com/
And you will find:
http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/bogon-announce
Btw it is the first
[After the very short IANAL part, an operational part wrt 2001:678::/29]
Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
>
> no, he's saying that a lawsuit is a useful method of forcing someone
> who is intentionally or negligently distributing incorrect information
> that other people who do not know any better then
Alexander Harrowell wrote:
>
> Is hosting a phishing site and bouncing abuse reports..
Not so strange, gmail addresses are being used a lot a for spam sources.
With the description you gave, I would also ignore it, it's a miracle
that the spamfilter didn't drop it dead on the floor in the first p
Hi,
Apparently there is still some silly [f|s]oul who has to forward NANOG
to blogger and blogger still doesn't handle multipart/signed and thus
very nicely and totally anonymously reports that it fails.
Thank you dear person who is forwarding his subscription to NANOG to his
blogger account!
Th
Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I seem to be having a problem. Limelight has SWIP'd
> 69.28.185.0/24 to me, and I asked for IN-ADDR.ARPA control.
> I recently went to check and it seemed not to be working
> right. I sent them an email around 11p Eastern Sunday nite
> asking it to be fix
Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Thus spake "Jeroen Massar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8<-
IPv6 Assignment Blocks CIDR Block
2620::/23
->8
Expect blocks in between /40 and /48 there.
Expect mostly /48
It's update your IPv6 filters time:
http://www.arin.net/reference/ip_blocks.html
8<-
IPv6 Assignment Blocks CIDR Block
2620::/23
->8
Expect blocks in between /40 and /48 there.
That is enough space for best-c
John van Oppen wrote:
we don't run one either... :)
The last person I know who was running one, was in the proccess of killing it.
Apparently you found some people killing it off, while there are
actually companies who specialize in NNTP access. It seems that for
mysterious reasons which
On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 12:31 -0400, Derek J. Balling wrote:
> Who forwards NANOG posts to a blogger gateway? You, me, and a
> claw-hammer need to have a chat.
Can I join in the fun? I'll bring some tubing along, Sin City style ;)
> Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > Blogger does not accept multipa
On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 09:50 -0400, Mills, Charles wrote:
> I think if such a thing would exist, the "verification" gifs to prevent
> automated free yahoo and hotmail account signups would be defeated as
> well.
You mean Captcha (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captcha)
Which is not so much of an iss
On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 06:11 -0700, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
[..]
> My answer is based on the word "startup" so I'm assuming "no money"
> but I could be "wrong". :-) We use the standard SpamAssassin, ClamAV
> setup both on ingress and egress.
Currently the trend seems to be to send images
On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 13:42 -0700, David Conrad wrote:
> > Afaik, the reasons for "Lack Of Demand for IPv6" consists of:
> [...]
> - Unwillingness of enterprise operators to pay the cost of migrating
> while remaining under the "you must renumber if you change providers"
> rule.
Ack, this fall
On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 14:48 -0400, Todd Underwood wrote:
> folx,
>
> along with several others i've been putting together a panel for
> ripe/nanog about ipv6. the core contention is that there is a large,
> unrepresented body of operators who are sceptical as to the need for
> IPv6, see no market
On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 12:01 -0500, Jeffrey Sharpe wrote:
> Does anyone know if Ultradns uses anycast?
Do you know if Google is a search engine?
> Or how to get someone at UltraDNS or PIR to take ownership of a
> issue and resolve it?
What about google(ultradns noc) and feeling lucky.
Not for
On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 13:50 +0200, leo vegoda wrote:
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> At recent RIPE Meetings, we have reported a steady rise in requests from
> our members for Provider Independent (PI) address space for End User
> networks.
Any link to the slides which might contain the expected increase
On 6/28/06, Phillip Vandry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> SSH implements neither a CA hierarchy (like X.509 certificates) nor
> a web of trust (like PGP) so you are left checking the validity of
> host keys yourself. Still, it's not so bad if you only connect to a
> small handful of well known serve
On Wed, 2006-06-07 at 11:01 -0700, Josh Karlin wrote:
> Check out the IAR for "Potential Prefix Hijacks" and if you're coming
> to this more than 24 hours after the post, do a search on AS 23520 as
> the hijacking AS.
>
> I don't know how long the routes were announced, but they seem to be
> gone
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: host kay.sprintlink.net[199.0.233.8] said: 553 5.3.0
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... User Unknown (in reply to RCPT TO command)
It's must be 6/6/6 that it ain't working. I guess they are scared that
IPv6 might scare their fisherprice routers ;)
Anybody a *working* contact so that
On Wed, 2006-05-17 at 08:09 -1000, Scott Weeks wrote:
> - Original Message Follows -
> From: Jeff Rosowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > > I just tried that, says I'm 100 miles south of where I
> > > really am. That's quite a long way out in a small
> > country like England.
> >
> > Only 100
On Wed, 2006-05-17 at 15:14 +0100, Ivan Groenewald wrote:
[..]
> If you mean you are getting traffic destined for RFC1918 space, then make
> sure you aren't announcing those networks to your upstreams by accident.
> Poor upstream configs/filters could allow stuff like that to escape to peers
> of t
On Tue, 2006-05-16 at 18:42 -0400, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
> I know at least some people here (srs?) use HE.net's tunnelbroker service.
>
> Has anyone else been experiencing issues? I have three different tunnels
> that I've noticed are down (to various data centers), and calling their
On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 16:25 +0100, Mat Sharpe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone have any info on IPv6 deployment at the Tier-1 / Tier-1.5 level?
>
> We are multi-homed to both Level3 and Abovenet in the UK and Level3 only
> in the US.
The big question with IPv6, from a provider perspective, is of cou
1 - 100 of 276 matches
Mail list logo
