On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 00:38:33 CDT, Chris Boyd said:
- I'd like to see an actual response beyond an autoreply saying that you
can't tell me who the customer is or what actions were taken.
Well, let's see. If you're reporting abuse coming from my AS, it's almost
certainly one of 2 things:
1)
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 19:14:52 EDT, Joe Abley said:
The downside to such a plan from the customer's perspective is that
I'm pretty sure most of us would have been really bad helpdesk people.
There's a lot of skill in dealing with end-users that is rarely
reflected in the org chart or pay
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:50:25 EDT, Barry Shein said:
So this is (yet another) fishing expidition -- as MIME types are a handy
list, if any of those strings were present in a header, as in
[EMAIL PROTECTED], would any well-known thingee choke?
As a practical matter, 'bar.mime-type' had
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 08:47:04 PDT, Eric Brunner-Williams said:
The issue is whether exe in the root will break something. Rather than
just ask for a few well-known suffixes, and forgetting some, and leaving
out ps as it is already assigned to a ccTLD, I've picked on the
MIME-TYPE set of
On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 17:36:09 +0200, Thomas Kernen said:
And those of us that live next to the LHC wonder if we will be sucked
into a {vortex|wormhole}.
You mean like this?
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20080406mode=classic
pgplzlVbya2JN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 20:21:26 +0530, Glen Kent said:
says the solemn headline of Telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/06/ninternet106.xml
So yoy get higher bandwidth (physical pipe allowing) by downloading from a
grid of systems.
Sounds suspiciously like
On Mon, 07 Apr 2008 15:06:21 EDT, Brian Raaen said:
have gotten from Sprint up to this point is that they find no problems. Due
to the consistency of 5Mbps I am suspecting rate limiting, but wanted to know
if I was overlooking something else.
TCP window size tuning? I'd look there first...
On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 16:48:47 MDT, Michael Loftis said:
Yeah except in a lot of areas there is no MAN, and the ILECs want to bend
you over for any data access. I've no idea how well the MAN idea is coming
along in various areas, but you still have to pay for access to it somehow,
and that
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:25:22 PDT, Scott Weeks said:
Why would you assume this? That wouldn't be my first assumption after
reading the thread. I would assume folks would Do The Right Thing.
There is no Right Thing that is *so* obviously right that some significant
fraction of the community
On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:44:39 EDT, Martin Hannigan said:
personal opinion
I dont think that there's any issue at all to be honest. NANOG isn't
just for the clued.
/personal opinion
And more to the point - if somebody manages to go through all the hoops needed
to ask a basic question on
On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:15:06 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
mailing list. Isn't this akin to posting to a profesional mathematics forum
asking for help with your Algebra?
In 1943 he (Einstein) answered a little girl who had difficulties in school
with mathematics.
Do not worry about your
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:06:24 CDT, Frank Bulk - iNAME said:
Slightly off-topic, but tangentially related that I'll dare to ask.
I'm attending an Emerging Communications course where the instructor
stated that there are SOHO routers that natively support IPv6, pointing to
Asia specifically.
On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 13:55:05 CST, Justin Shore said:
I'm assuming everyone uses uRPF at all their edges already so that
eliminates the need for specific ACEs with ingress/egress network
verification checks.
You're new here, aren't you? :)
pgpck6mspgZyp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:29:01 EST, Randy Epstein said:
Our own or our singlehomed customers' address space -- we would reject
^^^
such an advertisement. The same inbound consistency check applies to
peers and upstreams/transits.
What do you do when one of your
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 18:38:36 EST, Sean Donelan said:
self-inflicted denial of service. Do you think the US Embassy in
Moscow really trusts the Moscow telephone company?
Not after we let them *build* the embassy building, we didn't
pgpB9OmQKXniC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:35:41 PST, Owen DeLong said:
I'm sorry, but, I have a great deal of difficulty seeing how an IP can
be considered personally identifying.
I dunno. I think I have a pretty good guess of who 192.159.10.227 is, or
at least who it was as of 14:35 -0800 today.
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:39:53 PST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
What we can do with IP addresses is conclude that the user of the
machine with an address is likely to be one of its usual users. We
can't say that with 100% certainty, because there are any number of
ways people can get unusual
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:33:20 PST, Owen DeLong said:
And oddly enough, license plates on cars act *exactly the same way* - but
nobody seems at all surprised when police can work backwards from a plate
and come up with a suspect (who, admittedly, may not have been
involved if
the car
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:15:30 CST, Joe Greco said:
make this a killer. That could include things such as firewall rules/ACL's,
recursion DNS server addresses, VPN adapters, VoIP equipment with stacks too
stupid to do DNS, etc.
I'll admit that fixing up /etc/resolv.conf and whatever the Windows
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:29:37 GMT, Steven M. Bellovin said:
You don't always want to rely on the DNS for things like firewalls and
ACLs. DNS responses can be spoofed, the servers may not be available,
etc. (For some reason, I'm assuming that DNSsec isn't being used...)
Been there, done that,
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 15:04:37 EST, Deepak Jain said:
Encouraging encryption of more protocols is an interesting way to
discourage this kind of shaping.
Dave Dittrich, on another list yesterday:
They're not the only ones getting ready. There are at least 5 anonymous
P2P file sharing networks
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 15:36:50 EST, Matt Landers said:
Semi-related article:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gyYIyHWl3sEg1ZktvVRLdlmQ5hpwD8U1UOFO0
Odd, I saw *another* article that said that while the FCC is moving to
investigate unfair behavior by Comcast, Congress is moving to
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 09:59:19 EST, Andy Davidson said:
On 29 Nov 2007, at 22:05, Eduardo Ascenco Reis wrote:
The methodology shows a good efficiency (around 40%) reducing BGP
table size, but the estimated number of affect prefixes are also
high (around 30%).
This is an interesting
On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 20:49:13 CST, Chengchen Hu said:
Suppose the following example. ISP A has a router A1 in IXP1 and a router A2
in
IXP2; and ISP B has a routers B1 in IXP1 and a router B2 in IXP2. It is
possible that we have DIRECT link A1A2 and B1B2 to connnect two IXPs, but I
don't
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:38:40 EST, Sean Donelan said:
Some people have compared unwanted Internet traffic to water pollution,
and proposed that ISPs should be required to be like water utilities and
be responsible for keeping the Internet water crystal clear and pure.
What's the networking
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:03:55 EST, Jared Mauch said:
Within the next 2 major software releases (Microsoft OS) they're
going to by default require signed binaries. This will be the only viable
solution to the malware threat. Other operating systems may follow.
(This was a WAG, based on
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:04:23 +0100, Florian Weimer said:
There's also the issue that you can't reliably tell data (which,
presumably, does not need to be signed) from code.
And active content is what happens when you *intentionally* blur the data/
code distinction.
Unfortunately, it's (a)
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:21:19 PST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
This seems a rather unwise policy on behalf of cox.net -- their customers
can originate scam emails, but cox.net abuse desk apparently does not care
to hear about it.
Seems to be perfectly wise if you're a business and care more about
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 18:45:50 EST, Raymond L. Corbin said:
Heh better then my all time favorite was the mailbox is full reply
from an abuse@ address for an ISP based in Nigeria who had a few servers
trying to open umpteen fraud accounts :D
I've seen my share of 800-pound gorillas (we're talking
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 11:33:51 EST, Drew Weaver said:
Our abuse department has been receiving e-mails daily with our feedback loop
with AOL about e-mails which were 'supposedly' sent about a year ago.
It's amazing how often I see time-warp mail caused by somebody recovering
a busticated system,
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 14:33:57 EDT, Jim Popovitch said:
Please only reply to the list, not to From:/Reply-To: AND the list
You could at least have set a Reply-To: so that those people who mindlessly hit
'reply' would have your desired reply destination already filled in.
Requesting that people
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 15:44:53 BST, Rod Beck said:
The vast bulk of users have no idea how many bytes they consume each
month or the bytes generated by different applications.
Note that in many/most cases, the person signing the agreement and paying
the bill (the parental units) are not the ones
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 02:33:35 BST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I really think that a two-tiered QOS system such as the scavenger
suggestion is workable if the applications can do the marking. Has
anyone done any testing to see if DSCP bits are able to travel unscathed
through the public Internet?
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 00:35:21 EDT, Sean Donelan said:
This doesn't explain why many universities, most with active, symmetric
ethernet switches in residential dorms, have been deploying packet shaping
technology for even longer than the cable companies. If the answer was
as simple as
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:39:48 PDT, Hex Star said:
I can see advanced operating systems consuming much more bandwidth
in the near future then is currently the case, especially with the web
2.0 hype.
You obviously have a different concept of near future than the rest of us,
and you've apparently
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 14:53:58 MDT, Alain Durand said:
Or simply ask IANA to open up 256/5. After all, this is just an entry in a
table, should be easy to do, especially if it is done on Apr 1st. ;-)
And to think that we all laughed at Eugene Terrell
pgp1oANR5GLQa.pgp
Description: PGP
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 00:41:39 BST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
This is not the case. We want to release 240/4 as a solution for those
organizations that are in a position to control enough variables to make
it useful. For those organizations, 240/4 space could buy a LOT of time,
maybe even years.
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 21:32:50 EDT, Patrick W. Gilmore said:
On Oct 8, 2007, at 6:45 PM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
I never said it was. My experience, both in my previous life as
the operator of a regional ISP and since then in other capacities
is that having disjoint origins for a chunk
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 14:01:40 EDT, Patrick W. Gilmore said:
Considering the number of inconsistently originated prefixes has been
non-trivial for at least a decade, I have trouble believing this is a
huge threat to the internet. Or even those 1500 NOC monkeys. (And
wouldn't it be 3K -
On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 22:35:33 +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum said:
Business folks once ruled the internet but those days are over. The
consumer is king.
Given yesterday's RIAA victory in their lawsuit in Minnesota, I expect the
RIAA will start lobbying for more ways to easily identify the
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 17:42:05 +0200, Mohacsi Janos said:
Except if you are using privacy enhanced ipv6 addresses a la RFC 3041
Which is more likely:
1) The RIAA successfully lobbies for a network that basically prohibits rfc3041.
2) The consumers successfully lobby for a network that
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 18:56:48 +0200, Mohacsi Janos said:
controller can force enable/disable. I don't see how RIAA can lobby for
switching off privacy enhancement - disabling certain component of the
operating system?.
Consider the fact that they lobbied *and got* 17 USC 512 takedowns, and
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 14:39:16 EDT, John Curran said:
Now the more interesting question is: Given that we're going
to see NAT-PT in a lot of service provider architectures to make
deploying IPv6 viable, should it be considered a general enough
transition mechanism to be Proposed
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 23:35:12 +1200, Nathan Ward said:
Probably doesn't work so well if you have 6k people behind the same
NAT, and they all try and use proto-41, though.
If you have 6,000 people behind a single NAT, proto-41 is probably the
least of your concerns, and Randy Bush may or may
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 15:38:30 EDT, Deepak Jain said:
Anytime you talk about rural I'm impressed with 7 hours, however --
isn't SONET supposed to make this better?
I'm not in Texas, but I am rural - there's plenty of places around here
where it's just not economically feasible to run 2 diverse
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 09:27:32 PDT, Bora Akyol said:
It is not dependent on time. You'd like a protocol to be self sufficient if
at all possible.
Moving the vulnerability of one protocol to another is not highly desirable
in general.
The interesting failure mode is, of course, what happens
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:29:38 +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum said:
they can't do it in hardware or with decent speed in software) but
there are no cheap(er) Juniper boxes that are suitable for deployment
as a 5 - 200 Mbps tunnel box, in my opinion.
I presume your thinking is that by the time
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 problem for names which are single
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:28:45 PDT, Kevin Oberman said:
I had a router that lost it's NTP servers and was off by about 20
minutes. The only obvious problem was the timestamps in syslog. (That's
what alarmed to cause us to notice and fix it.)
Trying to correlate logfiles with more than a
http://gallery.colofinder.net/shameful-cabling had a great collection of
What not to do photos, but it has apparently evaporated in the mists of
time. Anybody know if it's at a new location, or is the Wayback Machine
my only hope?
(ISTR it also had an adjacent cabling done right gallery - does
On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 23:56:29 MDT, John Osmon said:
Is anyone out there setting up routing boundaries differently for
IPv4 and IPv6? I'm setting up a network where it seems to make
sense to route IPv4, while bridging IPv6 -- but I can be talked
out of it rather easily.
We decided to map our
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 11:27:31 -1000, Randy Bush said:
how? if i read you aright, you are saying that there will likely be a
few strange folk at the 'edges' of the internet who will have problems
and whine.
What percentage of those strange folk are the strange folk who have
problems and whine
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 23:32:43 CDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
of all this President Bush insists the Iraq war is necessary. What bull...I'm
surprised a member of the press hasn't killed Bush..
I'm not at all surprised - the press has, as a whole, given the entire
Executive branch and most of
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:15:01 BST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
telecom hotel/data centre. In the exchange point, you could
theoretically have special INSURANCE peering agreements where you
don't exchange traffic until there is an emergency, and then you can
quickly turn it on, perhaps using an
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:59:54 EDT, Sean Donelan said:
Since major events in the real-world also result in a lot of new
traffic, how do you signal new sessions before they reach the affected
region of the network? Can you use BGP to signal the far-reaches of
the Internet that I'm having
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:52:37 -, Chris L. Morrow said:
I'm really not sure, but I can imagine a slew of issues where 'marketting'
doesn't plan properly and corp-ID/corp-branding end up trying to register
and make-live a domain at the 11th hour...
Failure to plan ahead on your part doesn't
On Thu, 09 Aug 2007 22:58:40 -, Paul Vixie said:
How does the (eventual) deployment of DNSSEC change these numbers?
DNSSEC cannot be signalled except in EDNS.
Right. Elsewhere in this thread, somebody discussed ugly patches to keep
the packet size under 512. I dread to think how many
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 09:45:39 CDT, Carl Karsten said:
thanks. I kinda figured it was something like that, but it was just a bit
too
unfamiliar, and around here (US) they just have 2 sides of the pool, know as
the shallow end and the deep end.
I think Peter was referring to the Wading Pool
On Thu, 09 Aug 2007 21:05:26 -, Paul Vixie said:
i think you're advising folks to monitor their authority servers to find out
how many truncated responses are going out and how many TCP sessions result
from these truncations and how many of these TCP sessions are killed by the
RFC1035
On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 11:53:15 EDT, Drew Weaver said:
Is it a fairly normal practice for large companies such as Yahoo! And
Mozilla to send icmp/ping packets to DNS servers? If so, why?
Sounds like one of the global-scale load balancers - when you do a (presumably)
recursive DNS lookup of one of
On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 12:13:03 EDT, Steven M. Bellovin said:
1) ICMP is handled at the same rate as TCP/UDP packets in all the
routers involved (so there's no danger of declaring a path slow
when it really isn't, just becase a router slow-pathed ICMP).
This is aimed at hosts, not routers,
On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:11:36 EDT, Matthew Crocker said:
But you could, it isn't hard to dump a BGP view into a box from a
border router and use that map to determine the proper DNS records to
return.
It's harder than it looks, given the number of people who pop up on this list
and ask
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:33:16 PDT, Jim Shankland said:
Hmm; I've never actually heard of anybody doing PMTUD on non-TCP
traffic, though it's possible. Does anybody actually do it?
AIX 5.2 and earlier supported it for UDP (we're getting out of the AIX
business, so I can't speak to what 5.3
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 20:51:10 MDT, Jason J. W. Williams said:
It seems to me a lot of virus scanners picked up this behavior in the
days of the I Love You and Melissa viruses, when virii tended to
infect documents rather than be self-propagating worms. We haven't lived
in a world where its
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:43:17 PDT, Roy said:
Funny story about that and the EPO we have here...
...
Story #1
Story #2
Story #3
So about 4 -5 years ago, we were in the middle of a major renovation of our
server room. Moving machines all over the place, trying to clear about
6K contiguous
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 12:00:40 CDT, Joe Greco said:
Hardly unexpected. The continuing evolution is likely to be pretty
scary. Disposables are nice, but the trouble and slowness in seeding
makes them less valuable. I'm expecting that we'll see
compartmentalized bots, where each bot has a
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:39:35 EDT, Sean Donelan said:
messages. The irc.foonet.com server clearly sends several cleaning
commands used by several well-known, and very old, Bots.
Old and well-known bots. Remember that for a moment, and think 6 month old
antivirus signatures for a bit
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:42:22 EDT, Sean Donelan said:
b. terminate tens of thousands of user accounts (of users who are mostly
innocent except their computer was compromised)
Given how often compromised computers have *multiple* installs of badware on
them, just cleaning off *one* bot that
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:44:07 EDT, Sean Donelan said:
Its more resonable to expect users to know how to remove bots and fix
their compromised computers?
Consider it an opportunity for somebody to get a new revenue stream. It
can be your provider, or a competitor, or a 3rd party support
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 22:56:32 PDT, Security Admin (NetSec) said:
Am unsure whether or not this is a mis-statement, but based on NANOG posts,
Level(3) [AS3356] seems to show up mor=e often with issues than say Sprint
[AS1239].
How many places does AS3356 connect with other AS's, and how many
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 11:07:00 PDT, Philip Lavine said:
What is strange is there is nothing prior to the drop off that would be an
impetus for congestion (no high BW utilization or packet loss).
Just because there wasn't any congestion reason that *you* could see where you
hat your
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 13:27:30 EDT, Aaron Daubman said:
I wonder what it would take to convince a major online retailer
(Amazon?), an auction site (eBay?) or even transaction handlers
(google checkout, paypal?) to put up v6 portals that offered
across-the-board (or even select) discounts to
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 13:08:52 PDT, Bora Akyol said:
At a very low, hardware centric level, IPv6 would be a lot easier to
implement if
1) The addresses were 64 bits instead of 128 bits.
2) The extension headers architecture was completely revamped to be more
hardware friendly.
Wow, a blast
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 10:43:46 EDT, Jim Popovitch said:
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 10:27 -0400, Roderick S. Beck wrote:
So none of the customers on that well known system have any ring
protection at this point nor will they during the next two weeks.
Isn't that the way a ring works? Sounds like
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:18:06 BST, Leigh Porter said:
Just out of interest, why are you looking at routing tables to find an
available subnet?
If your predecessor wasn't quite as careful documenting allocations, it can
be useful to see if your paperwork says a /28 is dark, but you're in fact
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:42:04 PDT, Scott Weeks said:
No I've never heard of that except, possibly, from non-clued phone monkeys.
It's easy to get past them to more clued folks, though...
Maybe it's easy for you. It's usually a bit harder for a Joe Sixpack who
has a Mac or Linux box, but
On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 22:40:20 +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum said:
Interestingly, nobody has mentioned on the list what the offending
content is yet. Or why this would even remotely be a good idea.
Quoting the article http://publicaffairs.linx.net/news/?p=497
At present, the government does not
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 17:44:40 PDT, Roger Marquis said:
Sure, very easily, by using NAT between the subnets.
Have at it. Nothing like trying to reach 10.10.10.10 nad having
to put in a dns entry pointing to 172.29.10.10
End-users prefer hostnames to IPs. DNS hostnames are valid on both
On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 12:20:38 PDT, Jim Shankland said:
I can't pass over Valdis's statement that a good properly configured
stateful firewall should be doing [this] already without noting
that on today's Internet, the gap between should and is is
often large.
Let's not forget all the NAT
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 though, this allows you to
provide them with a single /48 as they
On Fri, 25 May 2007 12:08:44 PDT, Scott Weeks said:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the bits of governments that deal with online crime, spam, etc.,
I can report that pretty much all of the countries that matter
realize there's a problem, and a lot of them have passed or will
On Fri, 25 May 2007 20:31:59 -, Chris L. Morrow said:
cameroon outsourced their dns infrastructure management to someone, that
contract includes a we can answer X for all queries that would return
NXDOMAIN' ... that's not 'asleep at the wheel'
As I said, asleep at the wheel or worse...
On Wed, 23 May 2007 01:32:41 BST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Anyone remember the Internet Scout? Even back then labors of love like
John December's list were more useful than the Internic services.
That worked well for 14,000 .coms. It doesn't work for 140,000,000 .coms.
Does everybody on this
On Sun, 20 May 2007 22:19:30 PDT, Roger Marquis said:
Nobody's saying that the root servers are responsible, only that they
are the point at which these domains would have to be squelched. In
theory registrars could do this, but some would have a financial
incentive not to.
Some have a
On Mon, 21 May 2007 10:38:56 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
if you can get concensus to remove .com, i'm sure the roots would
be willing to help out.
Whose bright idea *was* it to design a tree-hierarchical structure, and then
dump essentially all 140 million entries under the same
On Mon, 21 May 2007 11:54:36 PDT, Roger Marquis said:
Are there sites that accept mail from domains without a valid MX/A
record?
Depends what you call valid. A lot of sites get *real* confused when they
find out that the MX for foo.com is where foo.com's *inbound* mail servers
live, and that
On Mon, 21 May 2007 19:49:49 CDT, Neal R said:
Set up a separate SSID exclusively for HAM use. Use IPsec AH -
cryptographically signed traffic keeps the unlicensed out without
breaking the no payload encryption requirements. City gets help with the
civil defense radio of the 21st century,
On Fri, 11 May 2007 20:17:02 +0800, Joe Shen said:
Someone says , ISP should force those session
closed at 00:00 on first day of each month, because
they must ensure dial-up session of last month sould
not be accouted in next month. Is this true ?
Or they could apply a little more kloo,
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:02:38 PDT, Greg Schwimer said:
--
A message this specific is guaranteed to result in:
A) zero responses from a RoadRunner staffer that can help you.
B) Responses from groups inside RoadRunner that you didn't want to hear from.
If you're trying to fix a BGP wedgie,
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 12:34:25 BST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Did that. The first three are from J. Oquendo, Valdis Kletnieks and
Hey - I stayed out of the signed-BGP and signed-DNS lunacy. The only thing *I*
commented on was the reported leakage of 10 to 20 terabytes of data. And I
think we can
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:40:31 EDT, J. Oquendo said:
More recently, Major General William Lord told Government Computer News
in August 2006 that China has downloaded 10 to 20 terabytes of data from
DoDÂ’s main network, NIPRNet.
Hello, Chinanet? Some guys over in 99/8 want to know how to get
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 15:51:20 BST, Stephen Wilcox said:
what other examples are there as you suggest a trend in hushing security
vulns?
Skylarov ended up in jail for a while for daring to point out that a certain
foolish vendor had used ROT-13 as their encryption scheme.
Raven Adler had her
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:33:26 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
How would you feel if you used a product a company KNOWS lacks
fundamental security controls and does little to fix it. How would you
feel if AFTER the fact someone leveraged a method to affect you. How
would you feel AFTER the
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:56:06 EDT, Kradorex Xeron said:
In my personal opinion, ISPs, vendors, and such should legally be held
responsible for their product's security and unconditionally be made to
repair any security holes. -- if a vendor or ISP maintains good security
practices, there
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 08:22:49 +0300, Saku Ytti said:
On (2007-04-12 20:00 -0700), Stephen Satchell wrote:
From a practical side, the cost of developing, qualifying, and selling
new chipsets to handle jumbo packets would jack up the cost of inside
equipment. What is the payback? How
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 07:07:19 EDT, J. Oquendo said:
these so called rules? Many network operators are required to
do a lot of things, one of these things should be the
mitigation of malicious traffic from LEAVING their network.
And I want a pony.
We don't even do a (near) universal job of
On Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:11:28 EDT, Azinger, Marla said:
In my company some functions related to sending a SWIP are automated,
but my company has people on staff who know that it is happening and
what it means.
Just because *your* site has enough clue to get it right doesn't mean that
the
On Sat, 07 Apr 2007 11:40:50 PDT, Thomas Leavitt said:
... and why aren't bounce messages standardized in content and formatting?!?
Jiminy creepers, why can't people run software that implements standards
from the last frikking *millenium*??!?
1891 SMTP Service Extension for Delivery Status
On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 15:18:36 PDT, Scott Weeks said:
What I meant was: when only a few folks use email, the spammers will go away.
They won't go away, they'll just go infest whatever the people are using.
We're already seeing significant amounts of blog-comment spam, and as soon
as the spammers
On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 15:16:34 BST, Rod Beck said:
I don't think volunteer organizations are ideal from an accountability
point of view.
On the other hand, most volunteer organizations are thought of as being more
trustable than corporations or governments, precisely because while often
a
1 - 100 of 841 matches
Mail list logo
