Dobbins, Roland wrote:
> On Jan 9, 2010, at 7:52 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>
>> see my post in the subject, a reasonably complete performance
>> report for the device is a useful place to start.
>
> The problem is that one can't trust the stated vendor performance
> figures, which is why actual
On Jan 9, 2010, at 7:52 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> see my post in the subject, a reasonably complete performance report for the
> device is a useful place to start.
The problem is that one can't trust the stated vendor performance figures,
which is why actual testing is required. I've seen in
Dobbins, Roland wrote:
> On Jan 8, 2010, at 9:02 PM, bill from home wrote:
>
>> And maybe there is no way to tell, but I feel I need to ask the question.
>
> Situationally-dependent; the only way to really tell, not just theorize, is
> to test the firewall to destruction during a maintenance w
(a) It might be better to try the relevant "postmaster" addresses
and (b) it also might be better to try the "mailop" list, where
the focus is more on mail than on networking.
---Rsk
In case this affects any of you:
Dear AT&T IP Services Customer:
This e-mail is to notify you we are currently experiencing an impairment
with Newark Gigabit Access Router 1. We expect to have additional
information as soon as possible, and we deeply apologize for any
inconvenience this impairmen
Sorry to bother the list, but, could subscribers @atlasbiz.com and/or
@dfw-dc1.skywitelecomm.net
please contact me off list?
Your spam filters are broken and blocking messages for, um, interesting reasons.
Owen
I'm having a strange issue with my traffic to google, could somebody from
Google can contact me off-list.
Thanks!
- Chris
--
Chris Murray
Stargate Connections Inc.
cmur...@stargate.ca
604-606-8988
This report has been generated at Fri Jan 8 21:11:27 2010 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date
BGP Update Report
Interval: 31-Dec-09 -to- 07-Jan-10 (7 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS580061685 5.7% 310.0 -- DNIC-ASBLK-05800-06055 - DoD
Network Information Center
2 -
bill from home wrote:
> All,
>This thread certainly has been educational, and has changed my
> perception of what an appropriate outward facing architecture should be.
> But seldom do I have the luxury of designing this from scratch, and also
> the networks I administer are "small business's"
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Unfortunately, I only have the spamcop report sent to me, I don't have the
> original message.
> What spamcop sends does not include Content-Type headers or the additional
> parts of
> the message, only the plain text portion.
Ah, that explai
Unfortunately, I only have the spamcop report sent to me, I don't have the
original message.
What spamcop sends does not include Content-Type headers or the additional
parts of
the message, only the plain text portion.
Unfortunately, it's turnning things like SPAMCOP into a DOS attack against th
It's a phish people.
I've received several of these for zimmy.co.uk, they lasted about a
week, then they stopped. I would suggest waiting this out, if after a
week or two they haven't ceased then I would suggest contacting the ISP
from where these EMails are originating.
As for the blacklisting
It's a phishing scam:
http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=7918&rss
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:41:07 -0700
Blake Pfankuch wrote:
> I too have been receiving these to my spamtrap domain... again any
> ideas to combat this would be helpful.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Shane Ronan [mai
Yep. I've been receiving them from several of my domains for a couple
weeks. I've been sending the normal complaints to the provider of the IP
space in the header but other than that I have no good ideas about combating
it.
Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Owen DeLong [mailto:o...@delong
I too have been receiving these to my spamtrap domain... again any ideas to
combat this would be helpful.
-Original Message-
From: Shane Ronan [mailto:sro...@fattoc.com]
Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 12:34 PM
To: Owen DeLong
Cc: Nanog list
Subject: Re: New SPAM DOS
I recently started r
> I host scvrs.org on one of my servers, and, it does not have any outlook or
> owa
> services. For some reason, someone decided to try and send this message
> out to various internet recipients:
...
> Anyone seen this before? Any good techniques for combatting it?
If you look more closely at t
I recently started receiving these as well for my domain.
Would appreciate anyone's input on what the deal is.
On Jan 8, 2010, at 2:22 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> At least this is new for me...
>
> I host scvrs.org on one of my servers, and, it does not have any outlook or
> owa
> services. For
At least this is new for me...
I host scvrs.org on one of my servers, and, it does not have any outlook or owa
services. For some reason, someone decided to try and send this message
out to various internet recipients:
> Dear user of the scvrs.org mailing service!
>
> We are informing you that
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net
For historical data, please see http://thyme.apnic.net.
If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith .
Routing
Scott Weeks wrote:
Try no notice at all and 4 GigEs of upstream bandwidth down at 1:30am. :-(
Honestly, I feel for them. They probably left it up to the account reps,
which means the smaller circuits probably got notified and the HUGE
wholesale accounts were not. Oh, well. That's why we hav
> All,
> This thread certainly has been educational, and has changed my
> perception of what an appropriate outward facing architecture should be.
> But seldom do I have the luxury of designing this from scratch, and also
> the networks I administer are "small business's".
> My question is at
(Apologies in advance that some of you will see multiple copies of
this message on various lists.)
On March 1, 2010, VeriSign will be making two changes that affect the
behavior of the authoritative name servers for the .com, .net and .edu
zones ([a-m].gtld-servers.net). The changes are a prerequ
On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 08:22:00 EST, bill from home said:
> My question is at what size connection does a state table become
> vulnerable, are we talking 1mb dsl's with a soho firewall?
Security - you're doing it wrong. ;)
The question you *should* be asking yourself is "at what size connection am
On Thu Jan 07, 2010 at 01:04:01PM -0800, Jay Hennigan wrote:
Or better:
- Allow from anywhere port 80 to server port > 1023 established
Adding "established" brings us back to stateful firewall!
Not really. It only looks to see if the ACK or RST bits are set. This
is different from
I've found them to be quite sufficient here in the PDX metro area. They
support all L2 tunnels, in particular, QnQ which I require. We have diverse
paths, multiple strands and multi-colored. We are a bit of a special case as
we are serviced by a group that is intended for government and education
w
On Jan 8, 2010, at 9:02 PM, bill from home wrote:
> And maybe there is no way to tell, but I feel I need to ask the question.
Situationally-dependent; the only way to really tell, not just theorize, is to
test the firewall to destruction during a maintenance window (or one like it,
in the lab)
Roland,
I understand, but at the site we are protecting, at what point is
the bottleneck the connection speed, and at what point is the state
table the bottle neck.
It saves me the following uncomfortable conversation.
ME> Mr customer, remember that firewall you bought a couple of years ago
On Jan 8, 2010, at 8:22 PM, bill from home wrote:
> Or as I suspect we are talking about a larger scale?
Even an attacker with relatively moderate resources can succeed simply by
creating enough well-formed, programatically-generated traffic to 'crowd out'
legitimate traffic.
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 06:13:16PM -0500, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 13:51:41 CST, Brian Johnson said:
> > > On 7 Jan 2010, at 18:18, William Pitcock wrote:
> > > > ...why would you have that on a mailing list post?
> > > because the mail server that adds it is too dumb to
All,
This thread certainly has been educational, and has changed my
perception of what an appropriate outward facing architecture should be.
But seldom do I have the luxury of designing this from scratch, and also
the networks I administer are "small business's".
My question is at what size c
On Jan 8, 2010, at 3:21 PM, Arie Vayner wrote:
> Further on, if you want to really protect against a real DDoS you would most
> likely would have to look at a really distributed solution, where the
> different geographical load balancing solutions come into play.
GSLB or whatever we want to ca
What is nice about load balancers is that if you design your solution
correctly, you can scale them in a very nice way. Things like direct server
return, where only the requests hit the load balancer, but the replies
(which are usually larger) just route back directly to the client can free
up reso
33 matches
Mail list logo
