Re: de-peering for security sake

On 25/Dec/15 14:14, Nick Hilliard wrote: > You mean, cut off Sweden, Ireland, Finland, Switzerland and Israel? And watch the transit per-Mbps price go up? Who do we think funds the low bandwidth costs of the "first world"? Mark.

Re: IPv4 shutdown in mobile

On 25/Dec/15 09:56, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > > I know of at least one mobile provider in Sweden, Finland and Germany > that have IPv6 enabled for at least part of their device base. > > Some have chosen IPv4v6 (providing dual stack) which means they can do > this with Apple devices today,

Re: de-peering for security sake

> On Dec 25, 2015, at 22:16 , Dan Hollis wrote: > > On Fri, 25 Dec 2015, Owen DeLong wrote: >> Merely because people are asleep at the switch does not give those of us in >> a position to understand the consequences license to abuse our position. > > At what point do you cut the wire? How abus

Re: de-peering for security sake

Speaking as a former DNSBL operator, NANOG has a poor history of dealing with those who report abuse as well. On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Fri, 25 Dec 2015, Colin Johnston wrote: > >> why do the chinese network folks never reply and action abuse reports, >> norm

Re: de-peering for security sake

ARF (http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5965.txt , https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6650.txt) and X-ARF (http://www.x-arf.org/index.html ) are used quite alot and many, like Yahoo, only accept ARF reports on abusive emai

Re: de-peering for security sake

Just in case I missed the /s on there: > Maybe such a format already exists and just isn't widely used. It does and it isn't. http://www.x-arf.org/ -- Hugo h...@slabnet.com: email, xmpp/jabber also on Signal From: Clayton Zekelman -- Sent: 2015-12-25 - 14:12 > Just an off the cuff

Re: de-peering for security sake

Just an off the cuff thought but if the format of the abuse messages could be standardized so handling them would be semi-automated somewhat like ACNS notices, it might improve response. Maybe such a format already exists and just isn't widely used. Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 25, 2015, at 4:

Re: de-peering for security sake

On Fri, 25 Dec 2015, Colin Johnston wrote: why do the chinese network folks never reply and action abuse reports, normal slow speed network abuse is tolerated, but not high speed deliberate abuse albeit compromised machines This is not a chinese problem, this is a general ISP problem. Most IS

Re: de-peering for security sake

I think that even in the US, a provider would want a more specific complaint than “The network abuses”. Owen > On Dec 25, 2015, at 12:40 , Colin Johnston wrote: > > been there, done that > 网络滥用 fix you ntp reflection servers :) > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On 25 Dec 2015, at 20:29, Baldur No

Re: de-peering for security sake

been there, done that 网络滥用 fix you ntp reflection servers :) Sent from my iPhone > On 25 Dec 2015, at 20:29, Baldur Norddahl wrote: > >> On 25 December 2015 at 21:10, Colin Johnston wrote: >> >> why do the chinese network folks never reply and action abuse reports, >> normal slow speed networ

Re: de-peering for security sake

On 25 December 2015 at 21:10, Colin Johnston wrote: > why do the chinese network folks never reply and action abuse reports, > normal slow speed network abuse is tolerated, but not high speed deliberate > abuse albeit compromised machine > They do not speak the same language as you. They barely

Re: de-peering for security sake

why do the chinese network folks never reply and action abuse reports, normal slow speed network abuse is tolerated, but not high speed deliberate abuse albeit compromised machines Sent from my iPhone > On 25 Dec 2015, at 19:43, Baldur Norddahl wrote: > >> On 25 December 2015 at 20:06, Lee w

Re: de-peering for security sake

On 25 December 2015 at 20:06, Lee wrote: > Enable IPv6 for your users. 1) it's not going to have any "history" & > 2) ipv6 probably isn't blocked. > I am not aware of just one single government site in this country (Denmark) that is IPv6 enabled. There are zero danish news sites that are IPv6 e

Re: de-peering for security sake

On 12/24/15, Baldur Norddahl wrote: > I am afraid people are already doing this. Every time I bring a new IP > series into production, my users will complain that they are locked out > from sites including many government sites. This is because people will > load IP location lists into their firew

Re: announcement of freerouter

it's free and as far as i know the only sw router with working evpn/pbb, evpn/vxlan, and evpn/cmac data plane, just to name one... regards, cs On 12/25/2015 07:27 AM, Gabriel Marais wrote: And very well priced for the rich feature list. On 25 Dec 2015 6:25 AM, "Josh Reynolds"

Re: announcement of freerouter

And very well priced for the rich feature list. On 25 Dec 2015 6:25 AM, "Josh Reynolds" wrote: > RouterOS is an existing product by MikroTik. > On Dec 24, 2015 9:46 PM, "mate csaba" wrote: > > > hi, > > pleased to announce a stable release of freerouter. > > this is a routing daemon that does pa

Weekly Routing Table Report

This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, AusNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, SAFNOG, PaNOG, SdNOG, BJNOG, CaribNOG and the RIPE Routing WG. Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists

Re: de-peering for security sake

> On Dec 25, 2015, at 06:18 , Mike Hammett wrote: > > To the thread, not necessarily Daniel, if blocking countries\continents is a > bad thing (not saying I disagree), how do you deal with the flood of trash? > Just take it on the chin? Allowing hate speech is the price of having free speech

Re: de-peering for security sake

You know, without actually looking I’m willing to lay money down that the people beating the blocklist drum are the same people who scream the loudest about net neutrality when they can’t actually get to the content they want. > On Dec 25, 2015, at 11:25 AM, Daniel Corbe wrote: > > >> On Dec

Re: de-peering for security sake

> On Dec 25, 2015, at 9:18 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: > > To the thread, not necessarily Daniel, if blocking countries\continents is a > bad thing (not saying I disagree), how do you deal with the flood of trash? > Just take it on the chin? If you as an end user want to be the cyber-equivalent

Re: de-peering for security sake

On 12/25/2015 06:18 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: To the thread, not necessarily Daniel, if blocking countries\continents is a bad thing (not saying I disagree), how do you deal with the flood of trash? Just take it on the chin? The degree of splash damage by blocking this way will vary based uponwhat

Re: IPv4 shutdown in mobile

On Friday, December 25, 2015, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > On 22/Dec/15 14:45, Ca By wrote: > > > > At least in mobile, the change to ipv6 has been quick and the pace is > > increasing -- not just on ipv6 deployment but also on ipv4 shutdown. I > know > > many people liken ipv6 to "the boy who cried w

Re: de-peering for security sake

To the thread, not necessarily Daniel, if blocking countries\continents is a bad thing (not saying I disagree), how do you deal with the flood of trash? Just take it on the chin? The degree of splash damage by blocking this way will vary based upon what kind of network you are. Residential eye

Re: de-peering for security sake

> On Dec 25, 2015, at 7:14 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote: > > Daniel Corbe wrote: >> Let’s just cut off the entirety of the third world instead of having >> a tangible mitigation plan in place. > > You mean, cut off Sweden, Ireland, Finland, Switzerland and Israel? > >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

Re: de-peering for security sake

Come on, keep calm and wait a year: Russia and China will de-peer with all the world for their security (AKA censorship) reasons! ;) On 25.12.15 01:44, Colin Johnston wrote: > see > http://map.norsecorp.com > > We really need to ask if China and Russia for that matter will not take abuse > repor

Re: de-peering for security sake

Daniel Corbe wrote: > Let’s just cut off the entirety of the third world instead of having > a tangible mitigation plan in place. You mean, cut off Sweden, Ireland, Finland, Switzerland and Israel? > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World What an enormously silly idea. Seasons greetings to a

Re: de-peering for security sake

> On 25 Dec 2015, at 00:48, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 23:44:10 +, Colin Johnston said: >> We really need to ask if China and Russia for that matter will not take abuse >> reports seriously why allow them to network to the internet ? > > Well, first off, it isn't