Paging AS13335/Cloudflare to the courtesy phone

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Why are you sending me this crap...please stop. I've reached out to your NOC to no avail. Sep 7 19:11:19 web4.domainmail.net nginx: 172.68.1.193 - _ "POST /dms2/services2/ServerMMS2 HTTP/2.0" 400 150 "-" "Agent-Probe" Sep 7 19:11:19 web4.doma

Re: it's mailman time again

On Sat, 2023-09-02 at 13:10 -0400, John Levine wrote: > > It's like changing your password, it sort of made sense in the 1980s > when networks meant coax Ethernets and bored students could sniff > passwords, and now it's cargo cult security. These days the only > sniffable shared media left is pas

Re: it's mailman time again

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Fri, 2023-09-01 at 10:16 -0700, Randy Bush wrote: > and i just have to wonder about sending passords over the net in > cleartext in 2023.  really? > > randy For those that wish to do something about it... $ ~/mailman/debian/patches$ cat 21-mas

Re: NANOG List posts and DMARC

On Tue, 2022-08-02 at 11:24 -0700, Michael Thomas via NANOG wrote: > On 8/2/22 11:18 AM, Chris Adams via NANOG wrote: > > Once upon a time, Chris Adams said: > > > Once upon a time, Jared Mauch said: > > > > Can someone flip the option in Mailman for DMARC please, it’s > > > > problematic as if

Re: FYI - 2FA to be come mandatory for ARIN Online? (was: Fwd: [arin-announce] Consultation on Requiring Two-Factor Authentication (2FA) for ARIN Online Accounts

On Sat, 2022-05-28 at 11:36 -0700, Randy Bush wrote: > >   I am not in the ARIN region but I have attended few Arin meetings. > >   As a comment, I live a country were mobile roaming does not > > exists, > > therefore, when 2FA only works with SMS I can not use the service. > > Having > > said that

Re: Court orders for blocking of streaming services

On Sun, 2022-05-08 at 12:01 +, Mel Beckman wrote: > The plaintiff’s won a default judgement, because the defendants didn’t show > up in court. But they could not have shown up in court, because they were > only listed as “John Does” in the lawsuit. Thus no defendant could have > “actual kno

Re: Xfi Advances Security (comcast)

On Fri, 2021-09-10 at 10:31 -0400, Jason Kuehl wrote: > For whatever reason Comcast Xfinity is blocking my VPN URL. Not certain that this applies, but Concast Advanced Security (setup in your Comcast gateway) only allows outbound VPN connections to UDP ports 500, 4500, and 62515 and TCP port 1723

Re: EMail server gets blocked by Microsoft

On Wed, 2021-04-28 at 09:30 +0200, Markus wrote: > Am 27.04.2021 um 16:46 schrieb Brian Turnbow via NANOG: > > Hi Dominque, > > > > And sign up for snds > > > > https://sendersupport.olc.protection.outlook.com/snds/index.aspx > >

Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...?

On Mon, 2021-03-22 at 16:24 -0700, Edward McNair wrote: > I don’t understand the impact. Those who are comfortable with using > the mailing list via email would just keep doing what they are doing > now. With the exact same email address. There should be no procedural > changes. In theory, we could

Re: APOLOGIES: QB server hiccups

On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 18:04 +, Paul Nash wrote: > Autocorrect changed a misspelled recipient to “nanog”. > Not quite. What happened was sometime in the past Brian sent an email to NANOG from a domain publishing a DMARC record. Mailman on nanog@ wraps such an email and (like it or not) sets

Re: AWS issues with 172.0.0.0/12

On October 1, 2019 9:39:03 PM UTC, Matt Palmer wrote: >On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 04:50:33AM -0400, Jim Popovitch via NANOG >wrote: >> On 10/1/2019 4:09 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote: >> > possible that this is various AWS customers making >iptables/firewall mistakes? &

Re: AWS issues with 172.0.0.0/12

On 10/1/2019 4:09 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote: possible that this is various AWS customers making iptables/firewall mistakes? "block that pesky rfc1918 172/12 space!!" AWS also uses some 172/12 space on their internal network (e.g. the network that sits between EC2 instances and the AWS ex

Re: DNS Flag Day, Friday, Feb 1st, 2019

On January 31, 2019 1:55:26 AM UTC, Christopher Morrow wrote: >On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 5:41 PM Jim Popovitch via NANOG > >wrote: > >> On Wed, 2019-01-30 at 17:22 -0800, Matthew Petach wrote: >> > Any chance this could wait until say the Tuesday >> > *after* t

Re: DNS Flag Day, Friday, Feb 1st, 2019

On Wed, 2019-01-30 at 17:22 -0800, Matthew Petach wrote: > Any chance this could wait until say the Tuesday  > *after* the Superbowl, when we aren't cutting an  > entire religion's worth of potential workers out of  > the workforce available to fix issues in case it  > turns out to be a bigger prob

Re: DNS Hijacking? - FiOS Northeast

On Wed, 2019-01-09 at 18:30 +, Phil Lavin wrote: > > We are seeing DNS requests for A and to 8.8.8.8 come back with > > erroneous replies resolving to 146.112.61.106 when sent via FiOS > > circuits in the northeast. Anyone else seeing issues with DNS on > > FiOS in Northeast? Issue started

Re: [NANOG] Re: unwise filtering policy on abuse mailboxes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Wed, 2018-08-01 at 11:19 -0400, Rich Kulawiec wrote: > 1. They needed to stop doing so a few decades ago.  Anybody still > doing it today is doing it on purpose, which of course leads directly > to the question: why? One reason as to "why" is tha