On 1 Nov 2003, at 12:43, Owen DeLong wrote:
That probably means they are not using SIP, but, instead are using
either H.323 or some other proprietary ugliness. That's unfortunate.
You can use SIP through a NAT, if you can hack the NAT to poke
particular ranges of ports back to devices on the i
On 31 Oct 2003, at 11:43, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
There is NO security benefit to NAT/PAT/NAPT.
Disagree.
None of the scanning / infecting viruses could get past a $50 NAT/PAT
device which Joe User brings home and turns on without configuring.
It's not the NAT that those boxes are doing whic
On 27 Oct 2003, at 16:49, just me wrote:
The physical location is secondary to the quality of connectivity to
the region, and the quality of the facility, in that order.
The pertinent questions are, I think (a) what do you mean by "the
region" and (b) what constitutes good quality connectivity
On 27 Oct 2003, at 10:25, Sean Donelan wrote:
Most ISPs are relatively secure. Yes, occasionally a backbone
router shows up on some list with a password of "cisco." The major
problems are in the systems managed and installed on non-ISP networks
(i.e. end-users).
Maybe all the ISPs I've been in
On 20 Oct 2003, at 21:12, John Brown (CV) wrote:
Interested data point
Those ASNs have all been assigned by the respective RIR (and LIR, in
one case) to ISC for use as part of ISC's ongoing effort to distribute
the F root nameserver globally.
Each of the anycast instances of F is designed to
A E9DD 05A3 9674 ACF2 23D9 C30E BAC2 12B7
3747
sub 1792g/7C4464D1 2003-06-02
pub 1024R/EB9D36A9 1994-09-30 Tony Weasler III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Key fingerprint = 7F D5 03 E8 16 43 6A 5E ED A4 07 4B 42 3E FE 7E
pub 2048R/9AD09F2D 2003-10-17 Troy Lister (RSA Legacy / PGP 2.
On 17 Oct 2003, at 03:47, Randy Bush wrote:
Incidentally, there is a similar mechanism available for the F root
nameserver, in case people are not aware:
dig @f.root-servers.net hostname.bind chaos txt
For most people this will reveal a nameserver hostname with a "PAO" or
an SFO in it. Peopl
On 16 Oct 2003, at 11:25, Bruce Campbell wrote:
I know to look for 'version.bind', 'id.server', 'version.server' and a
few
others, but I hadn't considered asking for 'whoareyou.arbitary.domain'.
Why would other people consider it?
Incidentally, there is a similar mechanism available for the F r
I think I'm seeing problems performing recursive queries for names
under ORG against tld[12].ultradns.net at the moment, which is causing
resolvers without cached data to behave as if domains don't exist.
It's not trivial to tell whether this is just a local problem, since
all the authoritative
On 14 Oct 2003, at 12:36, Bill Woodcock wrote:
is this something that an ix could/should worry about?
Absolutely not, as that intrudes upon the terms of the commercial
relationship between the individual members of the exchange.
The HKIX in Hong Kong maintains a an access-list per member on its
[the original mail I sent had the wrong date in the third paragraph;
this one has the right date. sorry about the confusion.]
There will be a brief introduction to PGP key signing presented in the
General Session at 11:15 a.m. on Monday, entitled "Building a Web of
Trust".
New for NANOG 29: yo
On 10 Oct 2003, at 13:30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 13:20:16 EDT, you said:
Chicago. We have been scheduled to meet on Monday, June 2, after the
ISP Security and NSP-SEC BOF, at around 9pm in Salon F. If the BOF
runs
date/time/location check???
Arrgh. Monday 20 October, is w
There will be a brief introduction to PGP key signing presented in the
General Session at 11:15 a.m. on Monday, entitled "Building a Web of
Trust".
New for NANOG 29: you will find stickers available at the checkin desk
which which you can stick on your name tag. The red dot means "I sign
keys"
On 9 Oct 2003, at 12:19, Vinny Abello wrote:
Personally, I think preventing residential broadband customers from
hosting servers would limit a lot of that. I'm not saying that IS the
solution. Whether or not that's the right thing to do in all
circumstances for each ISP is a long standing deb
On 9 Oct 2003, at 00:32, Curtis Maurand wrote:
I was able to view all of the .ppt's with openoffice.org running on
RedHat 9.
Just because the file formats have been reverse engineered, it doesn't
mean they're open.
South Asian Network Operators Group (SANOG) III Annoucement
SANOG III: 15-22 January, 2004, Bangalore, India
SANOG III will be colocated with the South Asian IPv6 Summit in the
silicon city of India. As in the past, the SANOG program will feature
workshops, tutorials and presentations on operat
On Friday, Sep 26, 2003, at 14:06 Canada/Eastern, Mike Tancsa wrote:
But 3 days later, I got another email with the same scam, this time to
a different provider in Korea Next.
Korea has a very large number of reliably- and permanently-connected
windows boxes in comparison to most other cou
On Tuesday, Sep 23, 2003, at 18:15 Canada/Eastern, David Schwartz wrote:
As for 'fsck.de', a good argument can be made that this is not really
a
legal domain. It's a host. Checking for an SOA is a good way to tell
if a
domain is valid, depending upon what you mean by 'domain' and 'valid'.
Are
On Tuesday, Sep 23, 2003, at 17:32 Canada/Eastern,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 14:15:48 PDT, Dan Hollis said:
china seems hellbent on becoming a LAN. i see the same thing
eventually
happening to networks which refuse to deal with their ddos sources.
Well.. that's all fine and
On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 11:02 Canada/Eastern, Nine, Jason wrote:
We will need to run BGP here in the next few weeks, does anyone know
where you apply for an ASN certificate?
For an organisation based in the US, as you seem to be, see:
http://www.arin.net/library/training/asn_process/index
On Tuesday, Sep 9, 2003, at 08:26 Canada/Eastern, Andy Walden wrote:
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Gil Levi wrote:
Can anyone help me convert a 100MB Ethernet interface to an OC-3 POS
interface in a small cheap box ?
Depends on what you mean by cheap? Ethernet<->POS isn't a conversion
per
say, but it co
On Thursday, Sep 4, 2003, at 09:59 Canada/Eastern, Ian Mason wrote:
The best diagnostic tool I've ever had is a script I cobbled together
over two hours one night. Once an hour, it simply collected all the
router configs across the network, did a 'diff' between the current
and last config, an
On Saturday, Aug 30, 2003, at 14:53 Canada/Eastern,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given the Lion worm that hit Linux boxes, and the fact there's
apparently a
known remote-root (since fixed) for Apple's OSX, what operating
systems would
you consider "acceptable"?
I'm not aware of any operating syst
On Saturday, Aug 30, 2003, at 01:58 Canada/Eastern, Matthew S. Hallacy
wrote:
On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 11:42:16PM -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:
North Texas charges students $30 if their computer is infected, and
needs
to be cleaned.
Excellent, perhaps they'll learn early that they have to patch o
Hi,
Does anybody happen to know the pinouts for the console port on a
Scitec SAT3000 E1 DSU?
(I am at a particularly remote site, and local information is hard to
come by)
Joe
On Monday, 25 August 2003, at 21:32PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
You of course are correct with the trusting of the data, but
we are in a somewhat of a chicken and egg situation. If people don't
trust the IRR, they don't filter on it, and then the data is
allowed to get out of date. But peopl
On Monday, 25 August 2003, at 19:08PM, Haesu wrote:
You ARE correct. If everyone employs IRR and put explicit filters
everywhere,
it'd be the perfect world..
... if everybody used the IRR to build explicit filters everywhere, if
everybody kept their objects in the IRR up-to-date, and if there
On Tuesday, 19 August 2003, at 15:55PM, Mark Segal wrote:
I heard.. (via CBC I think).. That their computer system in Toronto
crashed
during the power outage.. My guess is they have some serious problem
with
their DB.
I just booked a ticket.. Hopefully I am going somewhere. :)
Google pointe
I'm sitting on the tarmac on AC63 from YVR to ICN which was due to take
off about half an hour ago. So far they have about a quarter of the
plane loaded.
The problem I am hearing is that there's a system-wide network issue
with Air Canada, and other airlines as well: "apparently everybody" is
On Friday, 15 August 2003, at 15:34PM, Rich Casto wrote:
I wonder how much of the understanding and "100 years experience" of
building power distribution networks is based on the fact that
affordable, distributed, small-scale power generation is not possible,
mandating large-scale, centralised
On Friday, 15 August 2003, at 16:19PM, Dragos Ruiu wrote:
This is the third such outage
the American power grid has seen since dc isolated zones were set up,
the first in 1965, the second in 1978. There was also another incident
about half this size in 1996 in the western region, where most but
On Friday, 15 August 2003, at 11:55AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps the lesson to learn is that very large networks don't always
lead to very high stability. A much larger number of smaller, more
autonomous generation and transmission facilities might have much more
reasonable interconnecti
On Thursday, 14 August 2003, at 23:13PM, David Lesher wrote:
I'm no power engineer but I do not envy them. Can YOU build an
equal size TCP/IP network with the added requirement that you
never drop any more than say one or 2 bits/hour?
Perhaps the lesson to learn is that very large networks don't
On Thursday, 7 August 2003, at 07:28AM, Rob Pickering wrote:
Then you've just got your BGP convergence time and unequal load
balancing effects to worry about.
Whilst I'm not knocking Paul's solution in an application like running
a root NS for which it is perfect, I'm not so sure it's necessa
On Thursday, Jul 17, 2003, at 15:59 Canada/Eastern, Andy Dills wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Jack Bates wrote:
Sendmail root exploit took less than 24 hours to craft. I suspect that
this exploit will be found within 48 hours. Enough information was
provided to quickly guess where the problem lies
On Monday, Jun 30, 2003, at 19:16 Canada/Eastern, Callahan, Richard M,
SOLGV wrote:
The FCC has, as of Thursday the 26th, adopted all aspects of the FTC
DNCR. Now all
long-distance phone companies
airlines
banks and credit unions; and
the business of insurance,
are fully covered and enforceabl
On Saturday 28 June 2003, at 12:08, Jim Popovitch wrote:
Questions:
1) How does one registrar 'win out' over a second registrar when
updating root servers?
It's important not to confuse registry services (in which a central
registry of names and metadata is maintained by various authorised
On Wednesday, Jun 25, 2003, at 21:25 Canada/Eastern, Leo Bicknell wrote:
* Put in the e-mail a clear, short, easy to read over the phone
link (http://www.yoursite.com/spam.html) that describes what
action on the web site sends these e-mails, how to identify an
e-mail as actually coming fro
On Tuesday, Jun 17, 2003, at 12:18 Canada/Eastern, John Brown wrote:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 05:03:07AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For all top-level domains you can register a domain and not have any
name servers specified for it. In whois it'll say exactly that -
"no nameservers".
Not corr
On Monday, Jun 9, 2003, at 12:53 Canada/Eastern, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since the RIRs contain the information required to answer those
questions, you'd expect them (or their data) to be involved in the
process of answering them.
They really don't. Thus far, when space is assigned, the RIRs h
On Monday, Jun 9, 2003, at 02:36 Canada/Eastern, John Brown wrote:
RIR's are not and should not be in the business of dictating what
goes into the routing table, or what label is used on what goes
into the routing table.
Just the other day I heard of a new customer of an ISP in Toronto who
had
On Friday, Jun 6, 2003, at 10:46 Canada/Eastern, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
What is wrong with the potaroo list ? (Last mentioned last week, BTW.)
http://www.cidr-report.org/reserved-ases.html
BTW, is there a difference between that one and
http://bgp.potaroo.net/as1221/asnames.txt ?
the former
The BOFs ran late this evening, so we're going to try again tomorrow,
during the morning break. There will be handwaving tomorrow morning at
some approprate juncture during which the location will be announced.
We will be holding a PGP Key signing party at the NANOG 28 meeting in
Salt Lake City, Utah. Details can be found here:
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0306/pgp.html
and a brief summary is:
+ Monday June 2, 2003, 9pm
+ Smoke House Room
+ ASCII-armoured public keys to [EMAIL PROTECTED] before n
On Wednesday, Mar 12, 2003, at 12:11 Canada/Eastern,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The fact is that are operating these 21st century networks using 19th
century business technology. This does not scale. The net is too big
to be
managed by person to person exchange of information. That's why we have
On Monday, Mar 10, 2003, at 10:54 Canada/Eastern, Haesu wrote:
Since most service providers should be thinking about a sink hole
network
for security auditing (and backscatter), why not have ONE place
where you
advertise all unreachable, or better yet -- a default (ie everything
NOT
learned
On Tuesday, Mar 4, 2003, at 07:44 Canada/Eastern,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In any case, I don't want to replicate the DNS. It works just fine as
it
is and I want to leave it alone. I especially don't want to expand the
role of the DNS by adding features to it.
I think Bill's point was that if
On Sunday, Mar 2, 2003, at 14:06 America/Vancouver, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It doesnt cost a million dollars to have access to a RR, its
somewhat
less! You pay for your domains you pay for your IPs you pay for your
ASN you pay for your SSL, so why be shocked you pay a little for
this
too? An
On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 11:28 America/Vancouver, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It doesnt cost a million dollars to have access to a RR, its somewhat
less! You
pay for your domains you pay for your IPs you pay for your ASN you
pay for your
SSL, so why be shocked you pay a little for this too?
On Wednesday, Feb 12, 2003, at 08:44 Canada/Eastern, Andrew Odlyzko
wrote:
VOIP is likely to cause a financial upheaval in the telecom industry,
because the overwhelming fraction of revenues still comes from voice
services. However, VOIP is likely to have only a minor impact on
Internet backbo
On Tuesday, Feb 11, 2003, at 13:42 Canada/Eastern, Kevin Oberman wrote:
The slides are (almost) all available at the start of each talk in
PDF. Go to http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0302/agenda.html. Select a talk
that is about to begin (or has begun) and a pointer to the slides is
at the end of the a
On Tuesday, Feb 11, 2003, at 07:50 Canada/Eastern, Robert E. Seastrom
wrote:
Charles Sprickman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, Paul Vixie wrote:
Deal Enables ISC to Mirror DNS Root Server in Additional U.S.
Locations
Let's hope Telehouse put them on the "good" generator.
On Thursday, Feb 6, 2003, at 19:19 Canada/Eastern, just me wrote:
If they lack the sense to stop trying to relay to a host that does not
even ACK their SYNs after several thousand tries, I suspect their
proficiency at configuring rfc-compliant DNS might be lacking as well.
Just out of interes
[apologies if you get two copies of this; the first one didn't seem to
go out for some reason]
The South Asian Network Operators Group (SANOG) held their first
meeting in Kathmandu, Nepal, a few weeks ago. By any standards the
meeting was a great success, and plans are already being made for
On Wednesday, Jan 29, 2003, at 12:53 Canada/Eastern, Tim Yocum wrote:
on the 31st of December, 02, VeriSign was no longer the registry
operator for .org.
The new registrar is called "Public Interest Registry"
One can only speculate why the whois servers have vanished,
whois.crsnic.net was
On Wednesday, Jan 29, 2003, at 04:56 Asia/Katmandu, Steven M. Bellovin
wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Barney Wolff
writes:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 03:50:34AM +0545, Joe Abley wrote:
On Wednesday, Jan 29, 2003, at 01:25 Asia/Katmandu, Joe Abley wrote:
On FreeBSD, NetBSD, O
On Wednesday, Jan 29, 2003, at 01:25 Asia/Katmandu, Joe Abley wrote:
On FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD and Darwin/Mac OS X (the only xterms I
happen to have open right now) this is not the case, and has not been
for some time. I presume, perhaps naïvely, that other operating
systems have done
On Monday, Jan 27, 2003, at 14:04 Asia/Katmandu, Sean Donelan wrote:
Its not just a Microsoft thing. SYSLOG opened the network port by
default, and the user has to remember to disable it for only local
logging.
You're using mixed tense in these sentences, so I can't tell whether
you think t
On Friday, Dec 20, 2002, at 13:11 Canada/Eastern, Joe Abley wrote:
On Friday, Dec 20, 2002, at 13:02 Canada/Eastern, jcvaraillon wrote:
4Today the network 18.0.0.0/8 disappeared from the Internet, it is
now reachable.
I went to different looking glass (MAE East, LINX, GRnet) and
18.0.0.0
On Friday, Dec 20, 2002, at 13:02 Canada/Eastern, jcvaraillon wrote:
4Today the network 18.0.0.0/8 disappeared from the Internet, it is now
reachable.
I went to different looking glass (MAE East, LINX, GRnet) and
18.0.0.0/8 was not in their routing table.
Is it related to a major problem?
On Monday, Dec 16, 2002, at 22:47 Canada/Eastern, Grant A. Kirkwood
wrote:
On Monday 16 December 2002 07:37 pm, Joe Abley wrote:
If you are interested in traffic *to* a particular destination, surely
you could just tweak localpref on routes based on an as-path filter?
And then quantify it
On Monday, Dec 16, 2002, at 22:28 Canada/Eastern, Richard A Steenbergen
wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 09:16:55PM -0500, K. Scott Bethke wrote:
based on ALL the ASN's of the people on the peering switch.. but in
most
cases anyone pushing any real traffic will probably not have fine
grained
On Friday, Dec 6, 2002, at 12:18 Canada/Eastern,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ARIN don't guarantee routability of the blocks they allocate, and it's
difficult to see how they ever could.
If you want to discuss what ARIN could or could not do, then please
join
the ARIN ppml list.
I don't, but th
On Friday, Dec 6, 2002, at 11:57 Canada/Eastern,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My question is as follows - We are losing customers because of this
problem. It is costing us reputation and money. It is out of our
control. If you were us, what would you do? We have already asked
ARIN
to reassign
On Wednesday, Nov 27, 2002, at 10:25 Canada/Eastern, Stephen J. Wilcox
wrote:
Hmm, well until the comment about STP it sounded like the guy did
something
stupid on a program/database on a mainframe..
I cant see how STP could do this or require that level of DR. Perhaps
its just
the scapegoat
On Monday, Nov 25, 2002, at 22:31 Canada/Eastern, Randy Rostie wrote:
We received the following email, with an incredible number of email
addresses in the cc: field. We did not even get the original message.
Maybe someone has a virus on their computer?
Maybe someone forwarded all the address
On Tuesday, Nov 5, 2002, at 15:22 Canada/Eastern, Eric Germann wrote:
Anyone want to admit privately (I'll summarize to the list) if they
actively
filter certain partitions of APNIC space?
We did a little experiment the past couple of days and saw at 85% of
our
port 13[5-9] scans, Code Red/N
On Wednesday, Oct 9, 2002, at 11:36 Canada/Eastern, Stephen J. Wilcox
wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Greg A. Woods wrote:
>
>> Such things REALLY _NEEED_ to be broken, and the sooner the better as
>> then perhaps the offenders will fix such things sooner too, because
>> they
>> are by definitio
On Tuesday, Oct 8, 2002, at 10:45 Canada/Eastern, Iljitsch van Beijnum
wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Joe Abley wrote:
>
>> Also, egress filtering is NOT easy,
>
>> What is difficult about dropping packets sourced from RFC1918
>> addresses
>> before they leave
On Tuesday, Oct 8, 2002, at 10:21 Canada/Eastern, Kelly J. Cooper wrote:
> Nope. As previously established, there are ISPs out there using
> RFC1918
> networks in their infrastructure. Also, egress filtering is NOT easy,
What is difficult about dropping packets sourced from RFC1918 addresse
On Friday, Oct 4, 2002, at 18:01 Canada/Eastern, Sean Donelan wrote:
> Should the Service Provider version of routing software include the
> redistribute bgp command? Other than CCIE labs, I haven't seen a
> real-world use for redistributing the BGP route table into any IGP.
>
> If the command
On Wednesday, Oct 2, 2002, at 23:21 Canada/Eastern, Ralph Doncaster
wrote:
> I would like to restrict access from certain countries to content on my
> network (for security and legal reasons).
>
> So far the best algorithm I've been able to come up with is a
> combination
> of reverse DNS and
Hi,
We're trying to assemble a small herd of script hackers in Eugene
in the form of a BOF.
If anybody has interesting tools they use to wrangle routers (or
interesting problems that can currently only be solved by hand, for
which automated solutions would be useful), want to drop me a line
and
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 08:36:02AM -0700, David Conrad wrote:
> > sadly the best spot to interconnect is not in the AP region, its in Palo
> > Alto.
>
> Is this really still true?
I would not be surprised to find that it is.
Asia Pacific is an enormous region with lots of inconvenient ocean
al
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 04:07:47PM -0400, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 12:50:17PM -0700, Lane Patterson wrote:
>
> > And there are at least 4 ways of computing 95th percentile, though I'm sure
> > there've already been threads on this.
>
> There is only one way, anyone
On Friday, September 6, 2002, at 04:04 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Sep 2002, Joe Abley wrote:
>
>> How many people learn about networks from certification courses or
>> in school, anyway? It was always my impression that people learnt
>> mainly by l
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 01:13:27PM -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> Because "Cee" is easier to pronounce than "slash twenty-four". Ease of use
> trumps open standards yet again :)
Nobody was talking. "/24" is easier to type than "class C". No
trumps! Everybody loses!
How many people learn about
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 03:46:22PM -0400, Vinny Abello wrote:
> I just stumbled across something I thought was interesting. All the .mil
> domain names used by the U.S. Military are served by one single root
> server.
[jabley@peppermill]% for n in a b c d e f g h i j k l m; do
for> dig @${
On Thursday, July 18, 2002, at 05:25 , Marshall Eubanks wrote:
> I still don't see where the excess 20K routes come from. Could these be
> internal routes from an iBGP ?
The export policy of contributors to route-views collectors is not
well-defined. While some participants might be sending a
On Tuesday, July 16, 2002, at 02:44 , Pedro R Marques wrote:
> I would be inclined to agree with your statement that the major blame
> should lie on "router vendors" if you see your router vendor as
> someone that sells you the network elements + the NMS to manage it.
The NMS for the vast majo
On Saturday, July 13, 2002, at 06:17 , Stephen Stuart wrote:
>> Legend speaks of a well known BGP community referred to as 'no export',
>> which causes people with no direct connections to $carrier to not
>> have to listen to all that extra junk while still engineering inbound
>> traffic w/ mor
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 08:24:38PM -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:
> Yes, several people mentioned that the two groups should just maintain
> their seperate ways. There is this thing called convergence.
I know a small number of operators with really talented and dedicated
architecture people who hav
On Thursday, June 27, 2002, at 04:54 , Leigh Anne Chisholm wrote:
> The FCC prohibits communication using a cellular telephone while in an
> aircraft in US airspace. In Canada, I don't believe there is such a
> regulation.
I couldn't find the energy to go swimming in the Canadian Air
Regulat
On Sunday, June 9, 2002, at 12:58 , John Payne wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 12:46:59AM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
>> traceroute to 209.208.0.0 (209.208.0.0), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
>> 15 gsvlfl-br-1-s2-0.atlantic.net (209.208.6.126) 50.244 ms 49.778 ms
>>
On Sunday, June 9, 2002, at 12:06 , John Payne wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 11:06:04AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Yesterday morning, I noticed mail-abuse.org appeared to be down
>> (unreachable). I checked again, and it's still unreachable. In fact, I
>> can't even reach its nam
On Tuesday, June 4, 2002, at 07:49 , Sean M. Doran wrote:
> | Messy traceroutes make the helpdesk phone ring.
>
> Messy architecture is worse!
Agreed. An inconsistent architecture is a messy one. Why treat exchange
subnets differently to any other bit of backbone infrastructure? Why
number p
On Tuesday, June 4, 2002, at 03:47 , Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> Exchange point blocks SHOULDN'T be transited by anyone, therefore you
> should not hear them from your peers.
Unless an exchange point includes such a restriction in the agreements
with their participants, isn't this a privat
On Tuesday, June 4, 2002, at 12:48 , Barry Raveendran Greene wrote:
>> Then we come to the extra bogons like exchange point allocations. Can't
>> forget them. :)
>
> I've never heard anyone refer to the IXP allocations as "bogons." Plus,
> I've
> not heard of anyone filtering the IXP prefixes
On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 10:41:09AM -0700, David Conrad wrote:
> On 5/6/02 10:20 AM, "Grant A. Kirkwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm sorry, but ARIN's policy practically _encourages_ the "efficient
> > wasting" of space to qualify for PI space. This is one of the most
> > frustrating things
On Wednesday, May 1, 2002, at 10:33 , Steven J. Sobol wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 May 2002, Deepak Jain wrote:
>
>> I'm more concerned that if the major metropolitan markets deploying
>> GPRS
>> all use NAT, then the Next Big Thing won't ever happen on GPRS devices.
>> Customers won't jump ship if th
On Wednesday, April 24, 2002, at 03:47 , Shivkuma wrote:
> Inter-domain:
>- Hot potato/cold potato routing
>- Inbound load balancing (between peering links)
>- Inbound load balancing (between transit links or a mix of
> peering/transit)
>- Outbound load balancing (between peeri
For those private pilots planning to attend the meeting in Richmond
Hill, Diamond Aircraft are located about two hours (drive) away at CYXU.
The popular DA20-C1 two-seat trainer is manufactured on the field, as is
the new four-place DA40-180 which has received some glowing reviews
recently (s
On Wednesday, April 17, 2002, at 02:29 , Kevin Loch wrote:
> "Rubens Kuhl Jr." wrote:
>>
>> Spread-spectrum radio systems are not that easy to DoS, a good benefit
>> from
>> the original military applications.
>
> Actually, at close range it should be trivial to Dos an 802.11 system.
> Just
>
On Tuesday, March 12, 2002, at 03:23 , Ratul Mahajan wrote:
>> Perhaps the attacks on core routers aren't bad enough to justify such
>> a drastic step yet. I get conflicting signals from engineers still
>> working. Some say they see attacks all the time, others say they've
>> never seen one on
On Friday, March 8, 2002, at 08:39 , Ron da Silva wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 04:48:49AM +, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
>>
>> ...I don't think I can put it any more clearly. There has got
>> to be a push from the USERS of this equipment (not just one user, all
>> users) to get line
On Thursday, March 7, 2002, at 04:37 , Sean Donelan wrote:
> My comment was originally prompted by the meeting minutes which
> reported on the survey data showing that 100% of carriers are
> implementing
> firewalls in their gateways. The 100% is what caught my eye. As the
> topic comes up i
On Wednesday, March 6, 2002, at 12:53 AM, David Luyer wrote:
> Often the server TCP stack and the customer TCP stack may be dodgy and
> sometimes
> even unable to directly communicate, but the good TCP stack in the
> middle can
> communicate to both of the dodgy TCP stacks at either end as well
401 - 497 of 497 matches
Mail list logo
