Re: Why is RFC1918 space in public DNS evil?

Likewise our inbound sanity route-maps deny all RFC1918 space. -- Michael Nicks Network Engineer KanREN e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] o: +1-785-856-9800 x221 m: +1-913-378-6516 Simon Waters wrote: On Monday 18 Sep 2006 07:40, you wrote: I know the common wisdom is that putting 192.168 addresses in

Re: Q on what IGP routing protocol to use for supplying only gateway address

From the sounds of what you are trying to accomplish, I'd think VRRP/HSRP would be more up your alley than any dynamic routing protocol. Also look at NIC teaming. Best Regards, -Michael -- Michael Nicks Network Engineer KanREN e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] o: +1-785-856-9800 x221 m: +1-913-378

Re: [Fwd: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]

complained about ARIN's procedures, policies, and practices, the purpose they serve is a needed one. Best Regards, -Michael -- Michael Nicks Network Engineer KanREN e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] o: +1-785-856-9800 x221 m: +1-913-378-6516 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 3) What's wrong with treating a

Re: [Fwd: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]

e who are trying to horde address space. While IP addresses certainly are not a tangible asset, and a defined intrinsic value can not be determined, there does seem to be a value to them, if only speculative at best. Best Regards, -Michael -- Michael Nicks Network Engineer KanREN e: [EMAIL

nanog@merit.edu

rpose of preventing/stopping abuse would be a very nice feature. Cheers. -Michael -- Michael Nicks Network Engineer KanREN e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] o: +1-785-856-9800 x221 m: +1-913-378-6516 Payam Tarverdyan Chychi wrote: I’ve been reading on this subject for the last several weeks and it seems

Re: New Laptop Polices

Do we all really believe this laptop ban will last? I sure don't. Best Regards, -Michael -- Michael Nicks Network Engineer KanREN e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] o: +1-785-856-9800 x221 m: +1-913-378-6516 Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote: Joseph S D Yao wrote: Do modern laptops have disk drives

Re: ISP wants to stop outgoing web based spam

That pretty much sums it up. Lose a little bit of revenue versus causing a service outage and losing a lot of revenue. -M -- Michael Nicks Network Engineer KanREN e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] o: +1-785-856-9800 x221 m: +1-913-378-6516 Hank Nussbacher wrote: On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Ken Simpson wrote

Re: SORBS Contact

Doesn't really surprise me to be frankly honest. :) The way their requirements are structured, they remind me a lot of a state agency. Best Regards, -Michael -- Michael Nicks Network Engineer KanREN e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] o: +1-785-856-9800 x221 m: +1-913-378-6516 Mikael Abrahamsson

Re: ISP wants to stop outgoing web based spam

helps. -Michael -- Michael Nicks Network Engineer KanREN e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] o: +1-785-856-9800 x221 m: +1-913-378-6516 Hank Nussbacher wrote: Back in 2002 I asked if anyone had a solution to block or rate limit outgoing web based spam. Nothing came about from that thread. I have an ISP that *

Re: SORBS Contact

, -Michael -- Michael Nicks Network Engineer KanREN e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] o: +1-785-856-9800 x221 m: +1-913-378-6516 Andrew D Kirch wrote: Albert Meyer wrote: I think we can sufficiently indict SORBS by saying that they are a poorly managed email blacklist which isn't used by anyone with a

Re: SORBS Contact

ays. -Michael -- Michael Nicks Network Engineer KanREN e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] o: +1-785-856-9800 x221 m: +1-913-378-6516 Dean Anderson wrote: SORBS is a well-known abusive/defamatory blacklist. In the US, that violates a number of state and federal laws: 1. defamation 2. illega

Re: SORBS Contact

g trouble getting them removed following the steps on their website (no action on tickets opened). 64.79.128.0/20 <http://64.79.128.0/20> Brian Boles [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Michael Nicks Network Engineer KanREN e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] o: +1-785-856-9800 x221 m: +1-913-378-6516