Apparently they are - 219 of the 304 in the queue are for Yahoo - some
over 1280 minutes.
Or, as my boss put it when I mentioned that Yahoo was having e-mail
issues: "What's new?"
Chris Lauretano wrote:
Yep, experiencing the same here. The only e-mails stuck in the queue are
outbound to Ya
What all good advertised, unallocated prefixes do... send mail...
(senderbase shows a fair amount of volume)
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2008, sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
>
> > Axtel is announcing 100.10.10.0/24, which is within the 100.0.0.0/8block,
> > w
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
Calling Cogent, Avantel (AS 6503) and Axtel (AS 14000):
Axtel is announcing 100.10.10.0/24, which is within the 100.0.0.0/8 block,
which is unallocated according to
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/
As long as someone's try
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008, sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
> Axtel is announcing 100.10.10.0/24, which is within the 100.0.0.0/8 block,
> which is unallocated according to
I'd love to see what that prefix is doing.. :)
Anyone have anything they can share?
adrian
Calling Cogent, Avantel (AS 6503) and Axtel (AS 14000):
Axtel is announcing 100.10.10.0/24, which is within the 100.0.0.0/8 block,
which is unallocated according to
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/
I am seeing this from two of my transit providers, the common AS path is
What I was describing is filtering the announcements of /24s that are
part of larger allocations. Not filtering the announcements of "The
Swamp".
>-Original Message-
>From: Skywing [mailto:skyw...@valhallalegends.com]
>Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 7:08 PM
>To: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu;
We are experiencing some unanticipated hardware issues
with the machine archive.routeviews.org.
This machine serves as the front-end to our primary data
archive. It also hosts http://www.routeviews.org/ and
is answering for route-views6.routeviews.org.
We are currently working to deploy a replac
Also one of the reason why not putting default route may be because of
recursive lookup from routing table.
If you have multi-homed site within your network with static route, and
if you use next-hop IP address instead of named interface, you will see
the problem when you have default route in rout
Nathan Ward wrote:
Let me rephrase; Are there people who are filtering /24s received from
eBGP peers who do not have a default route?
of course.
Curiously, it was really meant as a rhetorical question where the answer
was "no".
Why are people doing this? Are they lacking clue, or, is there
On 23/12/2008, at 6:40 PM, Church, Charles wrote:
I help a buddy who works for a small ISP. I believe they're
ignoring or
null routing large chunks of APNIC. Their customers are aware of the
policy, and cool with it. Port scanning and other malicious stuff
dropped 50% afterwards.
That sor
10 matches
Mail list logo
