From: Joe Greco jgr...@ns.sol.net
Subject: Re: Windows 10 Release
You can download an ISO and burn it to install... Guessing if your
upgrading multiple machines, that would be the way to go...
You don't even need to burn it to install. Just mount the ISO and
run setup.exe
I've
From: STARNES, CURTIS [mailto:curtis.star...@granburyisd.org]
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows10 is the
download URL.
This site launches the Download Tool so the ISO can be downloaded from
Microsoft.
Yeah, I know. But is it allowed to redistribute the .iso File(s)?
Not sure about distributing but I would think it would be ok since it is an ISO
for upgrading and the site says if it is a new installation a product key would
be needed.
Curtis
-Original Message-
From: Martin Hotze [mailto:m.ho...@hotze.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 8:17 AM
To:
If you implement SPF / DKIM / DMARC / ADSP, force your customers to relay
Before we went SaaS with email we had lots of spam problems and we also went
this route .. you must relay through us and authenticate .. postfix along with
the dkim and policyd milters (and SPF in DNS). The policyd one
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Not sure about open public but you can use that ISO on whatever many
machines your licensed to...
- --Tiernan
On 30/07/2015 13:11, Martin Hotze wrote:
From: Joe Greco jgr...@ns.sol.net Subject: Re: Windows 10
Release
You can download an ISO
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows10 is the download URL.
This site launches the Download Tool so the ISO can be downloaded from
Microsoft.
Curtis
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Martin Hotze
Sent: Thursday, July 30,
Then they might want to show an official MD5/SHA1 on their website for
the media. Or maybe simply offer a torrent/magnet-link ...
Kind regards,
Stefan
On 30.07.2015 15:19, STARNES, CURTIS wrote:
Not sure about distributing but I would think it would be ok since it is an
ISO for upgrading and
If you implement SPF / DKIM / DMARC / ADSP, force your customers to
relay their mail through something you control, and show them you are
serious about stopping the spam they may work with you then. Otherwise,
they just assume you're a spam house.
Nope. For the upgrade the only piece of information MSFT needed was your email
if you chose email notification once the upgrade was ready for you.
After it's installed it will ask to finish up the install the 'Express' method
which enabled a bunch of things like WIFI password sharing to
I was just thinking about my remaining Win 7 box _after_ I hit send and I
believe you're correct (I have one still to upgrade). Which means users
upgrading from 7 to 10 will need to create an ID, but users of 8 and 8.1
will use the one they already have.
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
Justin,
That's true, but it takes effort for people to either set up a local
account or change to one, and very few consumers will do that or have.
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
Are users required to create any type of Microsoft cloud account (e.g.,
OneDrive, Office365, et alil) in order to install and use Windows 10? Of
Office? Is it possible to simply use Windows 10 without any Microsoft or Google
or Yahoo accounts?
Is the unique identifier available to advertisers
Since the requirement is that users are upgrading from Win 7, 8, or 8.1
they've already had to create at least a minimal MS ID which means either
creating an email account on Outlook.com or providing an existing email
address and a password for MS.
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
Just as a point of debate, I've been using Windows 7 for quite some time
and I do not, nor have I ever, given MS any email information or have I
created a Live account.
On 7/30/2015 7:19 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
Since the requirement is that users are upgrading from Win 7, 8, or 8.1
they've
You do not have to create or use a Microsoft account to use Windows 10 or any
of the apps (other than the MS Store.) You can continue to log in to Windows
using a local account.
Aaron Childs
Associate Director, Infrastructure Services
Information Technology Services
Wilson Hall - 577 Western
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 1:45 PM, John Kristoff j...@cymru.com wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 19:42:46 +0530
Glen Kent glen.k...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there a reason why this is often done so? Is this because UDP
is stateless and any script kiddie could launch a DOS attack with a
UDP stream?
I hate to be that guy, but this is getting really outside the scope of
NANOG.
Chuck
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Joe Greco
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 12:58 PM
To: Scott Helms khe...@zcorum.com
Cc: NANOG nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 19:42:46 +0530
Glen Kent glen.k...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it true that UDP is often subjected to stiffer rate limits than
TCP?
Yes, although I'm not sure how widespread this is in most, if even many
networks. Probably not very widely deployed today, but restrictions and
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Ted Hardie ted.i...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 1:45 PM, John Kristoff j...@cymru.com wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 19:42:46 +0530
Glen Kent glen.k...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there a reason why this is often done so? Is this because UDP
is
On 27 Jul 2015, at 21:12, Glen Kent wrote:
Given the state of affairs these days how difficult is it going to be
for somebody to launch a DOS attack with some other protocol?
https://app.box.com/s/r7an1moswtc7ce58f8gg
---
Roland Dobbins rdobb...@arbor.net
“Forever” is a long time. We’re shooting for not having to change people’s
address multiple times per week while still trying to help them save costs by
not paying extra for “official static IPs.
Changing every 6 months as some have pointed out as their experience is
perfectly acceptable to
On Thu, 30 Jul 2015 12:02:06 -0400, Keith Stokes kei...@neilltech.com
wrote:
1. Is it really accurate that the customer’s address is tied to the
modem/router?
To the 802.1x identity of the device, yes. That's the unit serial number,
which (partial) contains the MAC.
2. For my curiosity,
hi roland
- yup... agreed on most all of your points ...
- good referral to prev ddos discussions
- i'm just saying ..
if one cannot defend and know that their ddos mitigation
is working on the low level free script kiddie ddos attacks,
they should not worry about
To bring this discussion to specifics, we've been fighting an issue where
our customers are experiencing poor audio quality on SIP calls. The only
carrier between our customers and the hosted VoIP provider is Level3. From
multiple wiresharks, it appears that a certain percentage of UDP packets -
Oh, I'm aware of the function of an NNI. I even accept that a carrier might
feel the need to filter bad traffic. I've certainly done so for things like
the Moon exploit. What I don't like is arbitrary filtering of traffic and
the denial of such filtering by the carrier.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at
In one case, when we were having an issue with a SIP trunk, we re-numbered
our end to another IP in the same subnet. Same path from A to Z, but the
packet loss mysteriously disappeared using the new IP.
lag hash put you on a congested fiber?
Several months ago we had an issue with a customer whose IPSEC tunnels we
manage. One of the tunnels dropped, and after troubleshooting we were able
to prove that only udp/500 was being blocked in one direction for one
specific source and destination IP. Level3 resolved the issue, but claimed
it
On Thursday, July 30, 2015, Jason Baugher ja...@thebaughers.com wrote:
Several months ago we had an issue with a customer whose IPSEC tunnels we
manage. One of the tunnels dropped, and after troubleshooting we were able
to prove that only udp/500 was being blocked in one direction for one
In one case, when we were having an issue with a SIP trunk, we re-numbered
our end to another IP in the same subnet. Same path from A to Z, but the
packet loss mysteriously disappeared using the new IP. It sure seems like
they are throttling somewhere.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Matt Hoppes
I’m wondering if some can share their experiences or maybe there’s an ATT
person here who can confirm policy.
I work for SaaS provider who requires a source IP to access our system to
businesses.
Normally we tell the customer to request a “Static IP” from their provider.
That term makes sense
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Keith Stokes kei...@neilltech.com wrote:
I’m wondering if some can share their experiences or maybe there’s an ATT
person here who can confirm policy.
I work for SaaS provider who requires a source IP to access our system to
businesses.
That is probably a
Access is not the only reason we ask for non-changing source IP addresses.
I’m not arguing the long-term sensibility of the approach. It’s arguably a
legacy app and has 5000 endpoints that we have to still support until different
solutions on our side are complete. That process is outside of my
Everything landline in your area is going. The enterprise and wireless
businesses are staying Verizon.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com
- Original Message -
From: Matthew Black
Does anyone know where I might find a SFP+/XFP programmer with a Mac compatible
programmer application?
Thanks!
People need to really stop using Source IP as an ACL mechanism
whereever possible. Have you considered using SSL certs or SSH keys
or some other sort of API key instead? I'm mean, do you really want
to have to know how the technology of every ISP that every possible
SaaS customer may use to
I was just thinking about my remaining Win 7 box _after_ I hit send and I
believe you're correct (I have one still to upgrade). Which means users
upgrading from 7 to 10 will need to create an ID, but users of 8 and 8.1
will use the one they already have.
This is incorrect. While the Win
I've had ATT UVerse for 3 years now and it has changed at least twice
since I got it. The DHCP address has an expiration of ~7 days and it
usually keeps the same address upon renewal but a few times I have noticed
that it's changed. I wouldn't trust it to be static forever.
--
James Hartig
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 12:38:18 -0700, alvin nanog said:
On 07/29/15 at 05:47am, Roland Dobbins wrote:
On 29 Jul 2015, at 5:19, alvin nanog wrote:
and all the other ISP's routers along the way that had to transport
those gigabyte/terabyte of useless ddos packets
No company can provide a
Verizon sent me a letter the other day stating that they are selling their
landline business to Frontier Communications. It was a very terse letter and as
a customer I don't know if it affects me. While stating they aren't exiting the
Wireless business, I want to know which parts are being sold
I would love to see what a copy of the letter they sent out looks like.
They are selling all wireline in CA, TX, and FL. So yes, all the products
you described.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Matthew Black matthew.bl...@csulb.edu
wrote:
Verizon sent me a letter the other day stating that
Justin,
That's true, but it takes effort for people to either set up a local
account or change to one, and very few consumers will do that or have.
Wow, then, problem solved, because it's at least twice as hard to get
your Microsoft Account set up, configured, and verified.
The sticky
Nevermind. I found a February article detailing the plan.
arstechnica: Verizon sells three-state territory, including 1.6 million FiOS
users
http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/02/verizon-sells-three-state-territory-including-1-6-million-fios-users/
matthew black
california state university,
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Ca By cb.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Keith Stokes kei...@neilltech.com wrote:
I’m wondering if some can share their experiences or maybe there’s an ATT
person here who can confirm policy.
I work for SaaS provider who requires a
On 7/30/2015 9:26 AM, Matthew Black wrote:
Verizon sent me a letter the other day stating that they are selling their
landline business to Frontier Communications. It was a very terse letter and as
a customer I don't know if it affects me. While stating they aren't exiting the
Wireless
No. But I've seen Level3 just have really bad packet loss.
On Jul 30, 2015, at 22:12, Jason Baugher ja...@thebaughers.com wrote:
To bring this discussion to specifics, we've been fighting an issue where
our customers are experiencing poor audio quality on SIP calls. The only
carrier
We have similar problems with UDP 500 and being able to keep IPSEC tunnels up
over Level3. It happens quite a bit when there are no signs of TCP or ICMP
packet loss.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 30, 2015, at 9:14 PM, Jason Baugher ja...@thebaughers.com wrote:
To bring this discussion to
Hi,
Flexoptics seems to do the trick but via a Web browser :
https://www.flexoptix.net/en/flexbox-v3-transceiver-programmer.html
From what I've heard, this thing does the Job.
Best regards.
Le 30 juil. 2015 à 20:28, Jason Lixfeld ja...@lixfeld.ca a écrit :
Does anyone know where I might
I have ATT u-verse small business connection at my office with a
static IP setup, and my experience matches with the ATT tech said.
We have a separate router behind the ATT router. The ATT router is
an Arris (former Motorola) NVG595. Our router has a static IP out of
our subnet and does
48 matches
Mail list logo
