On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 12:05:25AM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
>
> 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.
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,
- Original Message -
From: Joshua Levitsky
To: Brian Bruns
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; Suresh Ramasubramanian
Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 3:10 PM
Subject: Re: AOL mail server problems?
> What is the PTR record for your mail server? If you don't have one or if
- Original Message -
From: "Suresh Ramasubramanian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Brian Bruns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 2:39 PM
Subject: Re: AOL mail server problems?
> W
Brian Bruns writes on 10/12/2003 11:58 PM:
This is one of those reasons why I hate DUL lists with a passion. Its not
foolproof, and alot of smaller sites get nailed in this mess.
When it comes to a choice between letting in the ~ 1% of small
businesses and linux geeks on dialup + dynamic DNS, an
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes on 10/12/2003 11:46 PM:
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003, Brian Bruns wrote:
I've noticed some weird things going on with AOL's smtp servers today -
2003-10-12 12:37:48 1A8k8X-0002OC-0c Remote host mailin-04.mx.aol.com
[64.12.138.89] closed connection in response to initial connection
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Brian Bruns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 2:16 PM
Subject: Re: AOL mail server problems?
> They're probably blocking you. Have you gotten many scomp co
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003, Brian Bruns wrote:
> I've noticed some weird things going on with AOL's smtp servers today -
> 2003-10-12 12:37:48 1A8k8X-0002OC-0c Remote host mailin-04.mx.aol.com
> [64.12.138.89] closed connection in response to initial connection
> 2003-10-12 12:37:55 1A8k8X-0002OC-0c Rem
Hello everyone,
I've noticed some weird things going on with AOL's smtp servers today -
2003-10-12 12:37:48 1A8k8X-0002OC-0c Remote host mailin-04.mx.aol.com
[64.12.138.89] closed connection in response to initial connection
2003-10-12 12:37:55 1A8k8X-0002OC-0c Remote host mailin-04.mx.aol.com
[
Michael Heitland writes on 10/10/2003 7:41 PM:
Has anyone seen issues with hotmail receiving emails several days
after they are sent. We are not getting bounces, just long delays in
what appears to be hotmails posting to inboxes.
Yes. Since quite some time.
--
srs (postmaster|suresh)@outblaze.co
>>> Has anyone seen issues with hotmail receiving emails several days after
they are sent. We are not getting bounces, just long delays in what appears
to be hotmails posting to inboxes.
>>We've been seeing lots of server timeouts and connection resets to
hotmail.com and msn MXs over the last c
cc:
Sent by: Subject: Hotmail Problems
[EMAIL PRO
On Fri, 2003-10-10 at 08:11, Michael Heitland wrote:
>
> Has anyone seen issues with hotmail receiving emails several days after
they are sent. We are not getting bounces, just long delays in what appears
to be hotmails posting to inboxes.
>
> Some customers have waited 2 days to see an email
Has anyone seen issues with hotmail receiving emails several days after they are sent.
We are not getting bounces, just long delays in what appears to be hotmails posting to
inboxes.
Some customers have waited 2 days to see an email reach their inbox. We have tested
this from not only our doma
They probably upgraded the code on their { CSSes | Localdirectors }.
;-)
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003, Sean McPherson wrote:
And poof, that's it. No data. Try again, and I randomly get the whole
page, part of the page down to the 'Feedback' line, or nothing.
Same thing happens from work (AT&T / Q
> From: Brennan_Murphy
> Date: Mon Oct 06 14:56:46 2003
>
> ---
>
> I'm on multiple mailing lists now with multiple persons reporting
> connectivity issues to cisco.com.
>
> Can anyone summarize what the issue is?
I'm cur
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:54:41AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm on multiple mailing lists now with multiple persons reporting
> connectivity issues to cisco.com.
>
> Can anyone summarize what the issue is?
i see timeouts after connecting via ie5.x and lynx. if i telnet to port
80 and do
I'm on multiple mailing lists now with multiple persons reporting
connectivity issues to cisco.com.
Can anyone summarize what the issue is?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Ezequiel Carson
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 11:41 AM
To: M
Judging by traceroutes to livejournal.com, which is hosted at Internap,
there are problems with Sprintlink after that hop to Toyko. I'm now hitting
Verio instead.
([EMAIL PROTECTED]/pts/1:~) traceroute shell.wgops.com
traceroute to shell.wgops.com (66.92.192.108), 30 hops max, 38 byte pa
According to speakeasy system status page (my DSL provider at the other end
there)... It seems though it's rather more widespread than what this
notice makes it out to be.
09/26/03 02:18:07 PM Seattle POP Packet Loss
Region : Seattle
E.T.A. : (none)
Services Affected : Some broadband services
I'm seeing this on my cable connection too.
([EMAIL PROTECTED]/pts/1:~) traceroute shell.wgops.com
traceroute to shell.wgops.com (66.92.192.108), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 10.65.80.1 (10.65.80.1) 7.106 ms 11.420 ms 40.080 ms
2 srp4-0.chrlncsa-rtr4.carolina.rr.com (24.93.66.110) 6.847
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Loftis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 2:47 PM
Subject: Massive sprintlink problems?
>
> Anyone else seeing this:: (1sec+ delay to my idle DSL line across
> sprintlink..
Anyone else seeing this:: (1sec+ delay to my idle DSL line across
sprintlink...)
traceroute is definitely taking an asymmetric path, since pings and tcp
connections are consistent 1sec plus RTT starting somewhere in seattle or
tacoma.tok? tokyo? Anyway before I start rattling this around
ith responsive admins and low spam
counts. I'll be very happy to take out networks that solve their spam
problems, but so far none have done so.
Now and then someone writes and says "I fixed my open relay, please
unlist me" (no, it's not a list of individual open relays) or "
Once again, Verisign screws up. Can someone point me to the correct
contact information to see if my registration actually went through or
not? I don't see anything besides [EMAIL PROTECTED] listed on the website.
--
nicholas harteau
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, David G. Andersen wrote:
With load balancing, traffic can get routed down a non-functional
path while routing takes place over the other one - BBN did that
to us once, was very entertaining).
Ah yes, I'll always have a special place in my heart for those
Localdirectors
DGA> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 18:32:19 -0400
DGA> From: David G. Andersen
DGA> The whole problem with only listing two anycast servers is that
DGA> you leave yourself vulnerable to other kinds of faults. Your
DGA> upstream ISP fat-fingers "ip route 64.94.110.11 null0" and
DGA> accidentally blitze
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, David G. Andersen wrote:
> > Yes, I hope that UltraDNS implements something like this, if they have not
> > already. It's still not a guarantee that things will get withdrawn -- or be
> > reachable, even if working but not withdrawn -- in case of a problem. That
> > still l
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 02:38:18PM -0400, Todd Vierling quacked:
>
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, E.B. Dreger wrote:
>
> : EBD> That's why one uses a daemon with main loop including
> : EBD> something like:
> : EBD>
> : EBD>success = 1 ;
> : EBD>for ( i = checklist ; i->callback != NULL
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 01:36:41PM -0400, Todd Vierling wrote:
>
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Rodney Joffe wrote:
>
> : You started from a point of having no idea that UltraDNS used anycast,
> : confirmed for everyone in your second email that you had no clue about
> : how anycast worked,
>
> Please
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Rodney Joffe wrote:
: You started from a point of having no idea that UltraDNS used anycast,
: confirmed for everyone in your second email that you had no clue about
: how anycast worked,
Please stop the bellicose, holier-than-thou attitude because you feel like
assuming tha
Todd Vierling wrote:
>
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Alex Bligh wrote:
>
> : > DNS site A goes down, but its BGP advertisements are still in effect.
> : > (Their firewall still appears to be up, but DNS requests fail.) Host
> : > site C cannot resolve ANYTHING from DNS site A, even though DNS site B
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> Todd Vierling
> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:37 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: apathy (was Re: .ORG problems this evening)
>
>
> I've repeatedly d
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Alex Bligh wrote:
: > DNS site A goes down, but its BGP advertisements are still in effect.
: > (Their firewall still appears to be up, but DNS requests fail.) Host
: > site C cannot resolve ANYTHING from DNS site A, even though DNS site B is
: > still up and running. But h
--On 18 September 2003 10:05 -0400 Todd Vierling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DNS site A goes down, but its BGP advertisements are still in effect.
(Their firewall still appears to be up, but DNS requests fail.) Host
site C cannot resolve ANYTHING from DNS site A, even though DNS site B is
still
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
: > Sucks to be anyone trying to use the service whose routers pick those nodes
: > as the only ones available. That's the fault of the implementor, not the
: > client.
: I think it's out of line to speculate on how UltraDNS has configured
: thes
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 02:22:19PM -0400, Todd Vierling wrote:
> Sucks to be anyone trying to use the service whose routers pick those nodes
> as the only ones available. That's the fault of the implementor, not the
> client.
I have a sneaking suspicion that if UltraDNS's tld cluster tha
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> > A truely robust anycast setup has two "addresses" (or networks, or
> > whatever), but only one per site. From the momentary outage while
> > BGP reconverges to the very real problem of the service being down
> > and the route still being announced
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, John Fraizer wrote:
: Todd, you don't make the announcement for the anycast address from your
: border.. You do it from within the anycast cluster as a CONDITIONAL
: announcement. IE; you use a specially written BGP daemon that makes the
: announcement when the service is a
> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:36:37 -0700 (PDT)
> From: bmanning
> > Bill, I know you know better, so let's try more facts and less
> > FUD. Mmmmkay? Your above paragraph is a red herring that is
> > analogous to saying "all multihomed services must be run on the
> > router itself".
>
> ye
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, E.B. Dreger wrote:
: EBD> That's why one uses a daemon with main loop including
: EBD> something like:
: EBD>
: EBD> success = 0 ;
: EBD> for ( i = checklist ; i->callback != NULL ; i++ )
: EBD> success &= i->callback(foo) ;
: EBD> if ( success )
: EBD> s
ou advertise the route, you'd better be ready to handle the
traffic. (Did someone say "7007"?)
TV> BGP errors happen (everyone here should be able to attest to
TV> that readily), and they did. What's to stop some other
TV> boneheaded DoS or oversight from causing this
> Bill, I know you know better, so let's try more facts and less
> FUD. Mmmmkay? Your above paragraph is a red herring that is
> analogous to saying "all multihomed services must be run on the
> router itself".
yes, it does lean that way... but to expose a sigma-six
blip in how
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, John Fraizer wrote:
: As has been stated by others, UltraDNS, like the roots and other TLD hosts
: is under nearly constant attack. Perhaps your local nodes were effected
: by an attack. IE; the pipe was full but the service was still alive so the
: anycast prefix wasn't ret
EBD> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:01:07 + (GMT)
EBD> From: E.B. Dreger
EBD> That's why one uses a daemon with main loop including
EBD> something like:
EBD>
EBD>success = 0 ;
EBD>for ( i = checklist ; i->callback != NULL ; i++ )
EBD>success &= i->callback(foo) ;
EBD>if (
> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:00:53 -0700 (PDT)
> From: bmanning
> Sorry no zebra. Perhaps I should run my TLDs
> DNS service on my Juniper Routers. some expect/cron
> work should provide the needed glue...
Bill, I know you know better, so let's try more facts and less
FUD. M
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Keptin Komrade Dr. BobWrench III esq. wrote:
: And, I might add, in the case of a highly complex anycast application,
: you will need to check not only for correctness, but for timeliness.
All this still assumes that DNS should be trusting a single anycast location
as the on
> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:29:06 -0700 (PDT)
> From: bmanning
> Ick. you really believe that BGP can or should be augmented to
> understand application "liveness"? BGP reaching past the
And why not? BGP deals in reachability information. Perhaps it
conventionally represents interface and
> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 13:47:01 -0400
> From: Keptin Komrade Dr. BobWrench III esq.
> And, I might add, in the case of a highly complex anycast
> application, you will need to check not only for correctness,
> but for timeliness.
In a realtime system, something that is late is considered
inco
> > BGP has no way to know that an internal network problem occurred. If
> > someone mistakenly tripped over a network cable that disconnected DNS
> > clusters from a router, how would the router know to drop anycast
> > advertisements?
> >
> > (Sure, you could run zebra on the cluster. But wha
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Todd Vierling wrote:
BGP has no way to know that an internal network problem occurred. If
someone mistakenly tripped over a network cable that disconnected DNS
clusters from a router, how would the router know to drop anycast
advertisements?
(Sure, you could run z
E.B. Dreger wrote:
TV> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 13:01:18 -0400 (EDT)
TV> From: Todd Vierling
TV> BGP doesn't know when a DNS server dies. Therein lies the
TV> findamental problem of using anycast as an application
TV> redundancy scheme.
But it can and should. Again, seeing if the process is runnin
Todd Vierling wrote:
BGP doesn't know when a DNS server dies. Therein lies the findamental
problem of using anycast as an application redundancy scheme.
You ever think that maybe, just maybe, Ultra wrote some code to do this?
Yes, it might have concievably failed in a way that seems to have left
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Todd Vierling wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, E.B. Dreger wrote:
>
> : TV> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:05:15 -0400 (EDT)
> : TV> From: Todd Vierling
> :
> : TV> DNS site A goes down, but its BGP advertisements are still in
> : TV> effect.
> :
> : Or are they?
>
> I couldn't
> TV> BGP doesn't know when a DNS server dies. Therein lies the
> TV> findamental problem of using anycast as an application
> TV> redundancy scheme.
>
> But it can and should. Again, seeing if the process is running
> is easy; verifying correct functionality requires more work, but
> definitel
TV> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 12:52:29 -0400 (EDT)
TV> From: Todd Vierling
TV> I couldn't know for sure from some sites, but traceroutes
TV> sure got there. That would imply that (at their end) the
TV> advertisements were still up.
Which would be an implementation flaw, not something inherently
w
TV> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 13:01:18 -0400 (EDT)
TV> From: Todd Vierling
TV> BGP doesn't know when a DNS server dies. Therein lies the
TV> findamental problem of using anycast as an application
TV> redundancy scheme.
But it can and should. Again, seeing if the process is running
is easy; verif
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, E.B. Dreger wrote:
: TV> Anycasting only works as a redundancy scheme when you have a
: TV> mesh of *partially* overlapping BGP advertisements, so that a
: TV> client has a guarantee that at least one address in the mix
: TV> is located elsewhere from the rest.
:
: Don't be s
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, E.B. Dreger wrote:
: TV> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:05:15 -0400 (EDT)
: TV> From: Todd Vierling
:
: TV> DNS site A goes down, but its BGP advertisements are still in
: TV> effect.
:
: Or are they?
I couldn't know for sure from some sites, but traceroutes sure got there.
That
TV> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:39:17 -0400 (EDT)
TV> From: Todd Vierling
TV> And guess what: neither of the two addresses supplied by
TV> UltraDNS worked last night for some sites, because their
TV> anycast configuration is not allowing DNS redundancy. It is
TV> depending on every site somehow
TV> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:05:15 -0400 (EDT)
TV> From: Todd Vierling
TV> DNS site A goes down, but its BGP advertisements are still in
TV> effect.
Or are they?
Eddy
--
Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - EverQuick Internet Division
Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building
Pho
Speaking on Deep Background, the Press Secretary whispered:
>
> : I think you'll find most people on the list would disagree with you
> : on this point. Many ISP's run anycast for customer facing DNS
> : servers, and I'll bet if you ask the first reason why isn't because
> : they provide faster
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Leo Bicknell wrote:
: > Anycast is *NOT* a "redundancy and reliability" system when dealing with
: > application-based services like DNS. Rather, anycast is a geographically
:
: I think you'll find most people on the list would disagree with you
: on this point. Many ISP's
In a message written on Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 10:05:15AM -0400, Todd Vierling wrote:
> Anycast is *NOT* a "redundancy and reliability" system when dealing with
> application-based services like DNS. Rather, anycast is a geographically
I think you'll find most people on the list would disagree with
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> A truely robust anycast setup has two "addresses" (or networks, or
> whatever), but only one per site. From the momentary outage while
> BGP reconverges to the very real problem of the service being down
> and the route still being announced there are i
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Leo Bicknell wrote:
: Number your sites from 1..N, have all odds announce one address, all
: evens the other. DNS servers will still use the closest (due to RTT
: checking), but will now also have a backup that does not go to the same
: site in steady state, but is still ver
In a message written on Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 09:57:23AM -0400, Todd Vierling wrote:
> The problem with UltraDNS, the point which many on this people are missing,
> is that at least some UltraDNS sites are advertising *all* anycast networks
> simultaneously (see traceroutes below). Yes, all == 2 at
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, just me wrote:
: If you're still confused, have a read here:
:
: http://www.ultradns.com/support/managed_dns_faq.cfm
:
: "Q. I read that your service is supposed to make use of several
: servers all over the world, but you only give users two server
: addresses to provide to
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
: 1. Only you were affected
I doubt this. At least one person has noted seeing the same on this list,
and I bet many more would corroborate by looking for DNS temp failures for
MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in mail logs from last night between about
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Todd Vierling wrote:
12 dellfweqab.ultradns.net (204.74.103.2) 24.811 ms !H
A nameserver's response to anything but DNS queries is just as
relevant as a web server's response to NTP queries. Why do you insist
that the ability to traceroute to it is an operational require
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Todd Vierling wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>
> : > Still doesn't help .ORG, which is 100% anycast and thus has no DNS-based
> : > redundancy
> :
> : Wrong since there are two IP addresses. They may fail at the same time
> : (which apparently happen
> : > There's an easy fix to that particular situation: Make the first (or first
> : > two) listed servers anycast, and the rest unicast.
> :
> : It would require a central management (or at least a central
> : oversight) of the root name servers and I do not believe there is one:
> : each root n
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
: > Still doesn't help .ORG, which is 100% anycast and thus has no DNS-based
: > redundancy
:
: Wrong since there are two IP addresses. They may fail at the same time
: (which apparently happened to you) but there is a least an element of
: non-BGP
Todd Vierling wrote:
>
> Yes, it is firewalled. I was pointing out that the route is the same for
> tld1 and tld2 for me, all the way up to the firewall.
Please post traceroutes from your location, as well as from the two
locations in different parts of the USA (You said earlier: "I
tracerout
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
: > There's an easy fix to that particular situation: Make the first (or first
: > two) listed servers anycast, and the rest unicast.
:
: It would require a central management (or at least a central
: oversight) of the root name servers and I do no
On donderdag, sep 18, 2003, at 14:08 Europe/Amsterdam, Stephane
Bortzmeyer wrote:
BGP is really bad at. DNS servers on the other hand track RTTs for
query responses
BIND does it but what about Microsoft cache/forwarder? At RIPE 45 (you
were there),
Was I???
a talk by people at CAIDA showed that
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
: they have two distinct servers by IP, globally they have N x clusters. i'm sure
: each instance is actualyl more than a single linux PeeCee
Doesn't matter if it's a cluster at each location. The fact remains that
there were only two IP addresses v
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
: BIND does it but what about Microsoft cache/forwarder? At RIPE 45 (you
: were there), a talk by people at CAIDA showed that A.root-servers.net
: received twice as much traffic as the other root name servers since it
: is just the first one listed.
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Todd Vierling wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> : ultradns uses the power of anycast to have these ips that appear
> : to be on close subnets in geographyically diverse locations.
>
> Oh, that's brilliant. How nice of them to defeat the concept of red
On donderdag, sep 18, 2003, at 13:38 Europe/Amsterdam, Todd Vierling
wrote:
: ultradns uses the power of anycast to have these ips that appear
: to be on close subnets in geographyically diverse locations.
Oh, that's brilliant. How nice of them to defeat the concept of
redundancy
by limi
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
: I didn't have a problem with .org this evening, and I've asked
: around and others don't seem to have noticed anything either. It would be
: more helpful if you told us your source prefix, and which filter you're
: hitting when you traceroute to
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Jared Mauch wrote:
: ultradns uses the power of anycast to have these ips that appear
: to be on close subnets in geographyically diverse locations.
Oh, that's brilliant. How nice of them to defeat the concept of redundancy
by limiting me to only two of their servers
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 12:50:28AM -0400, Todd Vierling wrote:
> tld[12].ultradns.net, the NS for .ORG, was completely unreachable for about
> an hour or two this evening, timing out on all DNS queries. Anyone else see
> similar? (The hosts are unpingable and untracerouteable, so I had to use
>
Todd/Chris,
It makes me wonder how UltraDNS got a contract to manage the domain on
all of two nameservers hosted on the same subnet, given that they were
supposed to have deployed "geographically diverse" (or something like
that) servers. But then, we know ICANN smokes the crack liberally at
times
um, dude, can you sayANYCAST.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 12:50:28AM -0400, Todd Vierling wrote:
>
> tld[12].ultradns.net, the NS for .ORG, was completely unreachable for about
> an hour or two this evening, timing out on all DNS queries. Anyone else see
> similar? (The hosts are unpingable a
Todd Vierling wrote:
>
> tld[12].ultradns.net, the NS for .ORG, was completely unreachable for about
> an hour or two this evening, timing out on all DNS queries. Anyone else see
> similar? (The hosts are unpingable and untracerouteable, so I had to use
> DNS queries to determine when they we
CLM> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 05:28:05 + (GMT)
CLM> From: Christopher L. Morrow
CLM> Just because they hosts are on the same subnet and are
CLM> apparently behind the same end device for you doesn't make
CLM> them non-geographically diverse if they are really anycast
CLM> pods, does it? It rea
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Todd Vierling wrote:
>
> >
> > It makes me wonder how UltraDNS got a contract to manage the domain on all
> > of two nameservers hosted on the same subnet, given that they were supposed
> > to have deployed "geographically
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Todd Vierling wrote:
>
> It makes me wonder how UltraDNS got a contract to manage the domain on all
> of two nameservers hosted on the same subnet, given that they were supposed
> to have deployed "geographically diverse" (or something like that) servers.
> But then, we kno
TV> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 00:50:28 -0400 (EDT)
TV> From: Todd Vierling
TV> tld[12].ultradns.net, the NS for .ORG, was completely
TV> unreachable for about an hour or two this evening, timing out
TV> on all DNS queries. Anyone else see similar? (The hosts are
I don't recall having troubles th
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 12:50:28AM -0400, Todd Vierling wrote:
>
> tld[12].ultradns.net, the NS for .ORG, was completely unreachable for about
> an hour or two this evening, timing out on all DNS queries. Anyone else see
> similar? (The hosts are unpingable and untracerouteable, so I had to use
tld[12].ultradns.net, the NS for .ORG, was completely unreachable for about
an hour or two this evening, timing out on all DNS queries. Anyone else see
similar? (The hosts are unpingable and untracerouteable, so I had to use
DNS queries to determine when they were back up.)
It makes me wonder h
On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 10:48:16PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Lovely...still not on the mirrors yet, either...
http://phat.nether.net/iso/openssh-3.7.1p1.tar.gz
Obviously check your md5 and other signatures.
- jared
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Jeff Wasilko wrote:
>
Lovely...still not on the mirrors yet, either...
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Jeff Wasilko wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 08:58:13PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >
> > I hope you mean OpenSSH 3.7p1 ?
>
> No, there was a 2nd release today:
>
> ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/OpenSSH/portabl
JS> Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 20:58:13 -0400 (EDT)
JS> From: James Smallacombe
JS> I hope you mean OpenSSH 3.7p1 ?
No. He means 3.7.1p1 -- fire up your compiler(s) again.
Eddy
--
Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - EverQuick Internet Division
Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network buildin
On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 08:58:13PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> I hope you mean OpenSSH 3.7p1 ?
No, there was a 2nd release today:
ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/OpenSSH/portable/openssh-3.7.1p1.tar.gz
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I hope you mean OpenSSH 3.7p1 ?
No, he means 3.7.1. There was another release today.
bye,
ken emery
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Alex Lambert wrote:
>
> >
> > 3.7.1 was just released.
> >
> > Two patches for similar issues in a very short timeframe. Wh
I hope you mean OpenSSH 3.7p1 ?
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Alex Lambert wrote:
>
> 3.7.1 was just released.
>
> Two patches for similar issues in a very short timeframe. Who do they
> think they are -- Microsoft?
>
>
>
>
> apl
>
> Original Message
> Subject: OpenSSH Security Adviso
3.7.1 was just released.
Two patches for similar issues in a very short timeframe. Who do they
think they are -- Microsoft?
apl
Original Message
Subject: OpenSSH Security Advisory: buffer.adv
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 01:13:30 +0200
From: Markus Friedl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
I had intermittent failures to resolve whois.arin.net today,
and haven't bothered to investigate this until now: someone
please forward this to an after-hours person at ARIN,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] will probably not be read for a while.
Reason:
BUCHU.arin.net. 3H IN A 192.100.59.110
a
601 - 700 of 960 matches
Mail list logo
