been a while, but seems like lately it's more a question of how long. ISPs
can be in position where they need to, but as things have consolidated,
seems like they'd really like to forget it as soon as they can. If you've
got a specific case in mind, likely best to find a direct contact and get a
I'm not sure about the current state of the industry it's been a while
since I was responsible for an access network. In the past we would keep
radius logs for about 4 months, these would include the username,IP
address and yes (to date myself) the caller id of the customer at the
time.
Sam
On Dec 11, 2013, at 10:23 PM, Rob Seastrom r...@seastrom.com wrote:
Pretty much works out of the box on Mikrotik RouterOS if you are
secure enough in your geek cred to admit to running such stuff here in
this august forum.
-r
I run a few at home and even in an access role at an ISP I
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Ryan Wilkins r...@deadfrog.net wrote:
They are a bit quirky but generally they work fairly well when configured
and left alone.
That describes most every router ever made :)
-Steve
Anurag Bhatia m...@anuragbhatia.com wrote:
Now I see presence of some (legitimate) DNS forwarders and hence I don't
wish to limit queries.
You are going to have to change your mind about this one. Open recursive
resolvers are a really bad idea, unless you can afford a lot of time and
There is a significant delay for user termination via L2TP; more than 40
seconds.
--- Original Message ---
From: Paul Stewart p...@paulstewart.org
Sent: December 12, 2013 5:33 AM
To: Nilesh Kahar nilesh.ka...@outlook.com, nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: BRAS
What kind of issues? How many subs
I thought that was resolved? Don’t have an L2TP scenario at the moment
but will in early January so will have to follow up with engineering to
confirm…
Many thanks,
Paul
On 12/12/2013, 8:36 AM, Nilesh Kahar nilesh.ka...@outlook.com wrote:
There is a significant delay for user termination via
Hi All,
One of our customer having the following requirement.
There is a domain abcd.com ( zone file created , A records are pointed ).
He has another domain xyz.com. He want us to create a separate zone file
for xyz.com abcd.com should be the CNAME of it. ( No A records
mentioned )
I'm bit
Hi, Looking to see if people can PRIVATELY EMAIL ME about an opportunity for a
client of mine for a private 100Mb/s circuit between:
A location of Suite 102F in SF (200 Paul) TelX
Z location of 4th Fl (Atlantic Metro) 325 Hudson in NYC, NY.
They are planning to pick the provider on the best
Huawei ME60E
Отправлено с iPhone
10 дек. 2013 г., в 18:21, Nilesh Kahar nilesh.ka...@outlook.com написал(а):
Which is a good BRAS product, to handle 15000 subscribers sessions with full
QoS other features?
I'm no lawyer but in the U.S., 18 USC 2703 appears to indicate this data
must be kept for at least 180 days.
-Scott
On 12/12/13 06:34, Sam Moats wrote:
I'm not sure about the current state of the industry it's been a while
since I was responsible for an access network. In the past we would
While I'm also not an attorney, my reading of 18 USC 2703 leads me to
believe that records need only to be preserved for 180 days if a
governmental entity (i.e. law enforcement agency, regulatory body,
prosecutors office, etc) makes a request that such records be preserved. To
the best of my
On Wed, 11 Dec 2013, Methsri Wickramarathna wrote:
Hi All,
One of our customer having the following requirement.
There is a domain abcd.com ( zone file created , A records are pointed ).
He has another domain xyz.com. He want us to create a separate zone file
for xyz.com abcd.com should be
They are a bit quirky but generally they work fairly well when configured
and left alone.
That describes most every router ever made :)
except those which burst into flame
except those which ...
On 12/12, R. Scott Evans wrote:
I'm no lawyer but in the U.S., 18 USC 2703 appears to indicate this
data must be kept for at least 180 days.
You are very mistaken. There is no requirement to retain *any* logs
(notwithstanding any orders issued by a court).
short answer: can't be done
You cannot have a cname and 'other' information for same entry. As a zone
requires an SOA record, you cannot have a CNAME for the entire domain
(theoretically a registrar could do it in .com, but afaik nobody does
his).
Depending on customer's requirements, can
Option 82 info and logging.
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Carlos Kamtha [mailto:kam...@ak-labs.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 10:00 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: do ISPs keep track of end-user IP changes within thier network?
Hi,
just a general curiousity question. it's
Confused :(
Do your customer want:
www.xyz.com pointing to the same IP as www.abcd.com
without having to manage xyz.com?
--
With bind:
zonefile xyz.com
$ORIGIN xyz.com.
yadiyada TTL SOA
$INCLUDEdomains/abcd.com.all
zonefile abcd.com
http://www.team-cymru.org/Services/Resolvers/
The Internet will be a better place with less open resolvers around.
--SiNA
On Dec 12, 2013 5:32 AM, Tony Finch d...@dotat.at wrote:
Anurag Bhatia m...@anuragbhatia.com wrote:
Now I see presence of some (legitimate) DNS forwarders and hence I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Also:
http://openresolverproject.org/
Also, open resolvers are harmful to the Internet, so it would not surprise
me to see organizations to begin blocking any communication with them by
published lists open recursive resolvers.
- - ferg.
On
The internet will be better without ISP refusing to apply BCP38.
end of comment
This is a pointless argument since the majority of the industry
prefer going after the flavor of the month UDP flood instead of
curbing the problem at its source once and for all.
-
Alain Hebert
On Dec 12, 2013, at 3:27 PM, Alain Hebert aheb...@pubnix.net wrote:
The internet will be better without ISP refusing to apply BCP38.
end of comment
This is a pointless argument since the majority of the industry
prefer going after the flavor of the month UDP flood instead of
Our web site has been incorrectly listed on McAfee's SiteAdvisor service
as SPAM URLs. We offer dedicated servers to clients and I suspect
that one of them was in the same /24 block of IPs. I have tried
numerous times to get removed and have been unsuccessful.
Does anyone have a contact at
Hi.
We are doing a fiber link between us and another SP using CWDM.
There is traffic flowing just fine at the 1310 wave, and have recently added a
1471 wave.
On the 1471 wave there are some problems with it. From our perspective, and we
have packet captured this, we are transmitting data to
On Dec 12, 2013, at 8:11 PM, Keith kwo...@citywest.ca wrote:
Hi.
We are doing a fiber link between us and another SP using CWDM.
There is traffic flowing just fine at the 1310 wave, and have recently added a
1471 wave.
On the 1471 wave there are some problems with it. From our
On 12/12/2013 5:15 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
On Dec 12, 2013, at 8:11 PM, Keith kwo...@citywest.ca wrote:
Hi.
We are doing a fiber link between us and another SP using CWDM.
There is traffic flowing just fine at the 1310 wave, and have recently added a
1471 wave.
On the 1471 wave there are
That is whats next. They took down the whole fiber instead of just the 1471
wave to test
which killed transit...grrr..
They say their tx/rx are within spec.
Next is jumpers and sfp swaps I guess.
Thanks.
On 12/12/2013 6:40 PM, Sam Roche wrote:
If you have a CWDM optical power meter and light
28 matches
Mail list logo
