Re: Third Party VoIP Over Xfinity

On 9/14/24 9:04 AM, Brandon Martin wrote: On 9/13/24 11:20, Michael Thomas wrote: On 9/13/24 7:19 AM, Matt Hoppes wrote: Yes. We run lots of SIP UDP over many networks without issue.    I feel like bloat is exactly an application for using UDP? With TCP won't that cause more bloat/

Re: Third Party VoIP Over Xfinity

On 9/13/24 7:19 AM, Matt Hoppes wrote: Yes. We run lots of SIP UDP over many networks without issue.    I feel like bloat is exactly an application for using UDP? With TCP won't that cause more bloat/delay?  That being said, we generally see about 3-6 ms between end points and our PBX system

Re: Third Party VoIP Over Xfinity

On 9/12/24 9:08 AM, Brandon Svec via NANOG wrote: What kinds of third party SIP are you all having so much issue with?  I manage a lot of accounts using the big, hosted providers and plenty of the endpoints sit behind Xfinity/Comcast boxes without issue. The dropping registrations just sound

Re: Third Party VoIP Over Xfinity

and such. Now the RTP traffic could stay clear UDP, this was just the SIP part. -- Brandon Jackson bjack...@napshome.net On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 5:01 PM Michael Thomas wrote: On 9/10/24 1:36 PM, Mark Wiater wrote: What happens when you decrease your registr

Re: Third Party VoIP Over Xfinity

On 9/10/24 1:36 PM, Mark Wiater wrote: What happens when you decrease your registration frequency? Do the phones stay registered? Have you tried TLS for the SIP transport by chance? I manage a few phones on comcast across the country and have no problems. In this day and age TLS isn't the

Re: Current diameter of the Internet?

On 7/21/24 4:05 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: Mel, Voyager is using radio waves, which travel faster than the speed of light (in a vacuum, too!).  But my point is more Earth to outside the solar system is ~24 hours so where did circumnavigating the globe get three days of latency? ::Albert Eins

interesting article on video encoding

not exactly this list's main focus, but i suspect that lots of people here's day job is to move these bits around as fast as possible once they are being streamed. https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/22/24171581/netflix-bet-advanced-encoding-anne-aaron Mike

Re: Mailing list SPF Failure

On 5/16/24 7:36 PM, John R. Levine wrote: I think a lot of us have nanog whitelisted or otherwise special cased. I don't and gmail is my backend. That's trivial falsification that lack of an SPF records alone will cause gmail rejects. Mike Also, it's been pumping out list mail for decad

Re: Should FCC look at SS7 vulnerabilities or BGP vulnerabilities

On 5/16/24 6:55 PM, John Levine wrote: It appears that Brandon Martin said: I think the issue with their lack of effectiveness on spam calls is due to the comparatively small number of players in the PSTN (speaking of both classic TDM and modern IP voice-carrying and signaling networks) world

Re: Mailing list SPF Failure

they're broken...there's a few guys on the list here. On Thursday, 16/05/2024 at 19:17 Michael Thomas wrote: On 5/16/24 3:54 PM, William Herrin wrote: > On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 12:03 PM John Levine mailto:jo...@iecc.com>> wrote: >> It appears that Michael Th

Re: Should FCC look at SS7 vulnerabilities or BGP vulnerabilities

On 5/16/24 4:17 PM, Brandon Martin wrote: I think the issue with their lack of effectiveness on spam calls is due to the comparatively small number of players in the PSTN (speaking of both classic TDM and modern IP voice-carrying and signaling networks) world allowing lots of regulatory cap

Re: Mailing list SPF Failure

On 5/16/24 3:54 PM, William Herrin wrote: On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 12:03 PM John Levine wrote: It appears that Michael Thomas said: Since probably 99% of the mail from NANOG is through this list, it hardly matters since SPF will always fail. Sorry, but no. A mailing list puts its own

Re: Mailing list SPF Failure

On 5/16/24 8:59 AM, Scott Q. wrote: Uhm, not really. An SPF failure is really bad even though DKIM works. It might depend what they do with DMARC but even so, there's no reason they can't just add that IP to their SPF record. SPF has from day one been known to be broken with mailing lists. It

Re: Mailing list SPF Failure

On 5/16/24 8:11 AM, Peter Potvin via NANOG wrote: Appears there’s no SPF record at all now for nanog.org , which is not ideal… Since probably 99% of the mail from NANOG is through this list, it hardly matters since SPF will always fail. What is more important is that they r

Re: Microsoft missing public DNS TXT entry for DKIM records (msn.com)

On 4/4/24 12:43 AM, Jay Acuna wrote: On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 1:23 AM Adam Brenner via NANOG wrote: .. It seems to me that if msn.com is going to include DKIM headers in their outgoing email, they should also publish their DKIM public key. If they are not going to publish their DKIM public key,

Re: IPv6 uptake

On 2/18/24 1:10 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote: Michael Thomas wrote on 18/02/2024 20:56: That's really great to hear. Of course there is still the problem with CPE that doesn't speak v6, but that's not their fault and gives some reason to use their CPE. Already solved: cable mod

Re: IPv6 uptake

On 2/18/24 12:50 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote: Michael Thomas wrote on 18/02/2024 20:28: I do know that Cablelabs pretty early on -- around the time I mentioned above -- has been pushing for v6. Maybe Jason Livingood can clue us in. Getting cable operators onboard too would certainly be a good

Re: IPv6 uptake (was: The Reg does 240/4)

On 2/18/24 8:47 AM, Greg Skinner via NANOG wrote: On Feb 17, 2024, at 11:27 AM, William Herrin wrote: On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 10:34?AM Michael Thomas wrote: Funny, I don't recall Bellovin and Cheswick's Firewall book discussing NAT. And mine too, since I hadn't heard of

Re: IPv6 uptake (was: The Reg does 240/4)

On 2/17/24 11:27 AM, William Herrin wrote: On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 10:34 AM Michael Thomas wrote: I didn't hear about NAT until the late 90's, iirc. I've definitely not heard of Gauntlet. Then there are gaps in your knowledge. Funny, I don't recall Bellovin and Ches

Re: IPv6 mail The Reg does 240/4

On 2/17/24 2:21 PM, John Levine wrote: But what happens under the hood at major mailbox providers is maddeningly opaque so who really knows? It would be nice if MAAWG published a best practices or something like that to outline what is actually happening in live deployments. Unfortunately, spa

Re: The Reg does 240/4

On 2/17/24 10:19 AM, Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote: Mike, it’s true that Google used to be a lot less strict on IPv4 email than IPv6, but they want SPF and /or DKIM on everything now, so it’s mostly the same. There is less reputation data available for IPv6 and server reputation is a harder pro

Re: IPv6 uptake

On 2/17/24 10:26 AM, Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote: On Feb 16, 2024, at 14:20, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: - Original Message - From: "Justin Streiner" 4. Getting people to unlearn the "NAT=Security" mindset that we were forced to accept in the v4 world. NAT doesn't "equal" security.

Re: IPv6 uptake (was: The Reg does 240/4)

On 2/16/24 6:33 PM, William Herrin wrote: On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 6:10 PM Ryan Hamel wrote: Depending on where that rule is placed within your ACL, yes that can happen with *ANY* address family. Hi Ryan, Correct. The examples illustrated a difference between a firewall implementing address

Re: IPv6 uptake (was: The Reg does 240/4)

On 2/16/24 5:37 PM, William Herrin wrote: On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 5:33 PM Michael Thomas wrote: So you're not going to address that this is a management plain problem. Hi Mike, What is there to address? I already said that NAT's security enhancement comes into play when a -mistak

Re: IPv6 uptake (was: The Reg does 240/4)

On 2/16/24 5:30 PM, William Herrin wrote: On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 5:22 PM Michael Thomas wrote: On 2/16/24 5:05 PM, William Herrin wrote: Now, I make a mistake on my firewall. I insert a rule intended to allow packets outbound from 2602:815:6001::4 but I fat-finger it and so it allows them

Re: IPv6 uptake (was: The Reg does 240/4)

On 2/16/24 5:05 PM, William Herrin wrote: On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 3:13 PM Michael Thomas wrote: If you know which subnets need to be NAT'd don't you also know which ones shouldn't exposed to incoming connections (or conversely, which should be permitted)? It seems to me that a

Re: IPv6 uptake (was: The Reg does 240/4)

On 2/16/24 3:01 PM, William Herrin wrote: On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 2:19 PM Jay R. Ashworth wrote: From: "Justin Streiner" 4. Getting people to unlearn the "NAT=Security" mindset that we were forced to accept in the v4 world. NAT doesn't "equal" security. But it is certainly a *component* of

Re: IPv6 Traffic Re: IPv6? Re: Where to Use 240/4 Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

On 1/15/24 11:02 PM, Saku Ytti wrote: On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 at 21:08, Michael Thomas wrote: An ipv4 free network would be nice, but is hardly needed. There will always be a long tail of ipv4 and so what? You deal with it at your I mean Internet free DFZ, so that everyone is not forced to

Re: IPv6 Traffic Re: IPv6? Re: Where to Use 240/4 Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

On 1/15/24 12:26 AM, Saku Ytti wrote: On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 at 10:05, jordi.palet--- via NANOG wrote: In actual customer deployments I see the same levels, even up to 85% of IPv6 traffic. It basically depends on the usage of the caches and the % of residential vs corporate customers. You th

Re: IPv6 Traffic Re: IPv6? Re: Where to Use 240/4 Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

On 1/15/24 12:56 AM, jordi.palet--- via NANOG wrote: No, I’m not saying that. I’m saying "in actual deployments", which doesn’t mean that everyone is deploying, we are missing many ISPs, we are missing many enterprises. I don't think what's going on internally with enterprise needs to change

Re: IPv6? Re: Where to Use 240/4 Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

On 1/12/24 11:54 AM, Darrel Lewis wrote: On Jan 12, 2024, at 11:47 AM, Seth David Schoen wrote: Michael Thomas writes: I wonder if the right thing to do is to create a standards track RFC that makes the experimental space officially an add on to rfc 1918. If it works for you, great, if

Re: IPv6? Re: Where to Use 240/4 Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

On 1/12/24 8:45 AM, Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote: Frankly, I care less. No matter how you use whatever IPv4 space you attempt to cajole into whatever new form of degraded service, the simple fact remains. IPv4 is a degraded technology that only continues to get worse over time. NAT was bad. CG

Re: Appropriate venue to find out about the state of art of spear phishing defense?

On 11/13/23 12:29 PM, Mel Beckman wrote: We use KnowBe4.com's user training. That's really the only way you can fight this, since its a human problem, not a technical one. These guys provide fully automated, AI based (well, who knows what that means) simulated phishing attacks, largely to give

Appropriate venue to find out about the state of art of spear phishing defense?

I know this is only tangentially relevant to nanog, but I'm curious if anybody knows where I can ask what orgs do to combat spear phishing? Spear phishing doesn't require that you deploy DMARC since you can know your own policy even if you aren't comfortable publishing it to the world. tia,

Re: [EXTERNAL] DNS filtering in practice, Re: Charter DNS servers returning malware filtered IP addresses

On 10/28/23 3:13 AM, John Levine wrote: It appears that Michael Thomas said: If you're one of the small minority of retail users that knows enough about the technology to pick your own resolver, go ahead. But it's a reasonable default to keep malware out of Grandma's iPad.

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Charter DNS servers returning malware filtered IP addresses

On 10/27/23 2:20 PM, John Levine wrote: It appears that Bryan Fields said: -=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=- On 10/27/23 7:49 AM, John Levine wrote: But for obvious good reasons, the vast majority of their customers don't I'd argue that as a service provider deliberately messing with DNS is an obviou

Re: transit and peering costs projections

On 10/15/23 8:33 PM, Matthew Petach wrote:  I think we often forget just how much of a massive inversion the communications industry has undergone; back in the 80s, when I started working in networking, everything was DS0 voice channels, and data was just a strange side business that nobody in

Re: xfinity not working

On 10/11/23 11:34 AM, William Herrin wrote: On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 11:12 AM Delong.com wrote: There are still some knobs… e.g. bridge mode or not (usually) I'm guessing that's only if there's a built-in wifi router. My grand experience with cable modems counts to exactly two brands and fou

Re: what is acceptible jitter for voip and videoconferencing?

On 9/22/23 1:54 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: Telnet sessions where often initiated from half duplex terminals. Pushing that flow control across the network helped those users. I'm still confused. Did it require the telnet users to actually take action? Like they'd manually need to enter the GA

Re: what is acceptible jitter for voip and videoconferencing?

On 9/22/23 9:42 AM, Jay Hennigan wrote: On 9/21/23 17:04, Michael Thomas wrote: When I wrote my first implementation of telnet ages ago, i was both amused and annoyed about the go-ahead option. Obviously patterned after audio meat-space protocols, but I was never convinced it wasn'

Re: what is acceptible jitter for voip and videoconferencing?

On 9/21/23 3:31 PM, William Herrin wrote: On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 6:28 AM Tom Beecher wrote: My understanding has always been that 30ms was set based on human perceptibility. 30ms was the average point at which the average person could start to detect artifacts in the audio. Hi Tom, Jitte

Re: So what do you think about the scuttlebutt of Musk interfering in Ukraine?

On 9/14/23 6:34 AM, Dave Taht wrote: This is one of those threads where I do think folk would benefit from hearing from the horses' mouths. In a recent bio of musk published this past week, the author claimed that starlink withdrew service over crimea based on the knowledge it was going to be

Re: So what do you think about the scuttlebutt of Musk interfering in Ukraine?

On 9/14/23 9:26 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: *nods* likely plenty of similar examples by less polarizing people. Then lets hear them? It certainly seems like an  operational issue if this starts to become common. How is it dealt with if at all beyond diversity which is hard to come by with LEO sy

So what do you think about the scuttlebutt of Musk interfering in Ukraine?

Doesn't this bump up against common carrier protections? I sure don't want my utilities weaponizing their monopoly status to the whims of any random narcissist billionaire. Mike

Re: Hawaiian ILEC infrastructure and fire

On 8/17/23 11:26 AM, scott via NANOG wrote: I don't want to overwhelm the list, but since there's interest here's something interesting I just now got from the electric company.  400 poles and 300 transformers.  Wow! Those of us from California and the west have watched this in abject ho

Re: Copper wire thefts increase 139% in one California county

On 7/1/23 9:46 AM, Sean Donelan wrote: Copper wire thefts of all kinds appear to be increasing in 2023. Not just telecommunications copper cables, but also electric and transit cables. San Joaquin County reported a 139% increase in copper wire thefts over four months, and one theft in the

Re: Northern Virginia has had enough with data centers

On 6/26/23 6:06 PM, Ron Yokubaitis wrote: Dalles: government subsidized Hydroelectric Power, that’s why. Well that maybe, but electric rates are hella cheap in Oregon regardless. Mike Sent from the iPad of Ron Yokubaitis On Jun 26, 2023, at 7:37 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:  On 6/24

Re: Northern Virginia has had enough with data centers

On 6/24/23 5:28 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: On Jun 23, 2023, at 18:04, Michael Thomas wrote:  On 6/23/23 4:01 PM, Delong.com via NANOG wrote: The electric grid complaints are about the demand on the grid making the entire region less stable and proposed construction of new high-voltage tower

Re: Northern Virginia has had enough with data centers

On 6/23/23 4:01 PM, Delong.com via NANOG wrote: The electric grid complaints are about the demand on the grid making the entire region less stable and proposed construction of new high-voltage tower corridors for data centers. Yeah, I can kind of understand those, but as long as the grid is p

Re: FCC Chair Rosenworcel Proposes to Investigate Impact of Data Caps

On 6/17/23 4:14 PM, Tom Beecher wrote: Also: they plan to use Starship when it's available which has 10x more capacity. If it really is fully reusable as advertised, that is going to really drive down the launch cost. Starship is years away from being flight ready. The most recent

Re: FCC Chair Rosenworcel Proposes to Investigate Impact of Data Caps

oo bird but say what you will he does have big ambitions. Ambition is good. But reality tends to win the day. As does math. On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 4:38 PM Michael Thomas wrote: On 6/17/23 1:25 PM, Tom Beecher wrote: Won't Starlink and other LEO configurations be t

Re: FCC Chair Rosenworcel Proposes to Investigate Impact of Data Caps

in their cpe that makes them much more expensive than, say, satellite tv dishes? I can see marginally more because of the LEO aspect, but isn't that mainly just software? It wouldn't surprise me that the main cost is the truck roll. Mike On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 4:17 PM Michael T

Re: FCC Chair Rosenworcel Proposes to Investigate Impact of Data Caps

On 6/16/23 3:18 PM, Keith Stokes wrote: Cox also has a 1.2 TB cap. If I can believe my graphs, the metered Cox connection (video streaming primarily for wife) is about 90 GB the month of April and the unmetered ATT fiber WFH for me is about 370 GB. Total LAN is about 450 GB. Napkin math but

Re: FCC Chair Rosenworcel Proposes to Investigate Impact of Data Caps

are numbering them though. Are the they using the same scheme that the mobile providers are using with ipv6? hmm. Mike On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 4:22 PM Mark Tinka wrote: On 6/16/23 22:16, Michael Thomas wrote: > Won't Starlink and other LEO configurations be that backstop sooner

Re: FCC Chair Rosenworcel Proposes to Investigate Impact of Data Caps

On 6/16/23 1:22 PM, Mark Tinka wrote: On 6/16/23 22:16, Michael Thomas wrote: Won't Starlink and other LEO configurations be that backstop sooner rather than later? I don't know if they have caps as well, but even if they do they could compete with their caps. Maybe. I real

Re: FCC Chair Rosenworcel Proposes to Investigate Impact of Data Caps

On 6/16/23 1:09 PM, Mark Tinka wrote: On 6/16/23 21:19, Josh Luthman wrote: Mark, In my world I constantly see people with 0 fixed internet options.  Many of these locations do not even have mobile coverage.  Competition is fine in town, but for millions of people in the US (and I'm goin

Re: FCC Chair Rosenworcel Proposes to Investigate Impact of Data Caps

On 6/15/23 10:41 PM, Crist Clark wrote: Comcast still has data caps. My service is 1.2 TB per month. If we get close, we get a warning email. If we were to go over (hasn’t happened yet), we get billed per additional 500 MB. However, I just looked at my account usage for the first time for a

Re: FCC Chair Rosenworcel Proposes to Investigate Impact of Data Caps

On 6/15/23 3:19 PM, Sean Donelan wrote: While a lot of ISPs gave up on data caps, the language is still lurking in many Terms Of Service. https://www.fcc.gov/document/chair-rosenworcel-proposes-investigate-impact-data-caps proposed Notice of Inquiry to learn more about how broadband p

Re: Are we back to the 2000's again?

On 6/3/23 4:24 PM, William Herrin wrote: On Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 4:09 PM Michael Thomas wrote: How can the RIAA even know? I mean, are they putting up honey pots or something? IIRC, they went after folks sharing the files via bit torrent rather than folks who only downloaded them. Oh yeah

Re: Are we back to the 2000's again?

On 6/3/23 4:01 PM, William Herrin wrote: On Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 2:51 PM Mel Beckman wrote: It’s like blaming water companies for people stealing boats :) It's been a while and the article is light on the facts of the case, but IIRC what happened was: RIAA made some DMCA complaints to Cox. Co

Are we back to the 2000's again?

Apparently the RIAA is back suing ISP's (Cox in this case) for users pirating music. It was pretty bogus back then, but with the uptake of TLS for almost everything and DoH to conceal DNS requests what exactly is an ISP supposed to do these days? Throw in a VPN and the pirates completely cut

Re: Do ISP's collect and analyze traffic of users?

On 5/19/23 6:09 AM, Justin Streiner wrote: Hank: No doubt there is a massive amount of information that can be gathered from in-box telemetry.  This thread appears to be more focused on providers gathering data from traffic in flight across their infrastructure. Yeah, my curiosity was whet

Re: Do ISP's collect and analyze traffic of users?

On 5/16/23 7:55 AM, Saku Ytti wrote: Of course there are other monetisation opportunities via other mechanism than data-in-the-wire, like DNS And with DoH, that doesn't sound like a very long term opportunity. Mike

Re: Do ISP's collect and analyze traffic of users?

On 5/16/23 7:35 AM, Livingood, Jason via NANOG wrote: +1 to what Josh writes below. I would also differentiate between mobile networks (service provisioned to individual devices & often carrier s/w on the device) and wireline networks (home devices behind a router/gateway/NAT). I just don'

Re: Do ISP's collect and analyze traffic of users?

On 5/15/23 9:46 PM, Matthew Petach wrote: On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 6:42 PM Dave Phelps wrote: I think it's safe to assume they are selling such data. https://www.techdirt.com/2021/08/25/isps-give-netflow-data-to-third-parties-who-sell-it-without-user-awareness-consent/ https:/

Do ISP's collect and analyze traffic of users?

And maybe try to monetize it? I'm pretty sure that they can be compelled to do that, but do they do it for their own reasons too? Or is this way too much overhead to be doing en mass? (I vaguely recall that netflow, for example, can make routers unhappy if there is too much "flow"). Obvious

Re: Namecheap's outbound email flow compromised: valid rdns, spf, dkim and dmarc on phishes

wrote: Namecheap has updated their status page item to include "We have stopped all the emails (that includes Auth codes delivery, Trusted Devices’ verification, and Password Reset emails, etc.)" Yikes. On Sun, Feb 12, 2023, 3:54 PM Michael Thomas wrote: I think that it might be appr

Re: Namecheap's outbound email flow compromised: valid rdns, spf, dkim and dmarc on phishes

registrars are not supposed to make such a rookie mistake. On Sun, Feb 12, 2023, 3:46 PM Michael Thomas wrote: On 2/12/23 3:40 PM, Eric Kuhnke wrote: > https://www.namepros.com/threads/concerning-e-mail-from-namecheap.1294946/page-2#post-8839257 > >

Re: Namecheap's outbound email flow compromised: valid rdns, spf, dkim and dmarc on phishes

On 2/12/23 3:40 PM, Eric Kuhnke wrote: https://www.namepros.com/threads/concerning-e-mail-from-namecheap.1294946/page-2#post-8839257 https://lowendtalk.com/discussion/184391/namecheap-hacked It looks like a third party service they gave their keys to has been compromised. I got several phi

Re: About emails impersonating Path Network

On 2/7/23 11:33 AM, Jay Hennigan wrote: On 2/7/23 11:18, Michael Thomas wrote: FWIW, lookalike domains can and do happen with http too. Nothing unique about that to email. Then the bad guys throw in the occasional Cyrillic, etc. character that looks like a Roman one and things get even

Re: About emails impersonating Path Network

On 2/7/23 6:09 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote: On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 12:41:43PM -0800, Michael Thomas wrote: This seems like a perfect object lesson on why you should use DKIM and SPF and make sure the sending domain can set up a p=reject policy for DMARC. But it's not. DKIM and SPF are m

Re: About emails impersonating Path Network

This seems like a perfect object lesson on why you should use DKIM and SPF and make sure the sending domain can set up a p=reject policy for DMARC. Mike On 2/6/23 10:25 AM, Konrad Zemek wrote: Hi Nanog, It looks like someone with an axe to grind against our company has decided to email ever

Re: Starlink routing

On 1/23/23 3:14 PM, Eric Kuhnke wrote: The original and traditional high-cost way of how this is done for MEO/LEO is exemplified by an o3b terminal, which has two active motorized tracking antennas. The antenna presently in use for the satellite that is overhead follows it until it's descendi

Re: Starlink routing

On 1/22/23 3:05 PM, Matthew Petach wrote: On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 2:45 PM Michael Thomas wrote: I read in the Economist that the gen of starlink satellites will have the ability to route messages between each satellite. Would conventional routing protocols be up to such a

Starlink routing

I read in the Economist that the gen of starlink satellites will have the ability to route messages between each satellite. Would conventional routing protocols be up to such a challenge? Or would it have to be custom made for that problem? And since a lot of companies and countries are getting

Fred Brooks has died

His Mythical Man Month is a must read for anybody even remotely adjacent to coding, and frankly it should be read out of that context too. RIP Fred and thank you, that was one of the most important books I've ever read. Mike

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

On 10/7/22 12:45 AM, Brian Turnbow via NANOG wrote: The federal law in 47 USC 227(e) says: (1)In general It shall be unlawful for any person within the United States, or any person outside the United States if the recipient is within the United States, in connection with any voice service

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

On 10/4/22 5:23 PM, Peter Beckman wrote: On Tue, 4 Oct 2022, Michael Thomas wrote: Exactly. And that doesn't require an elaborate PKI. Who is allowed to use what telephone numbers is an administrative issue for the ingress provider to police. It's the equivalent to gmail not allo

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

On 10/4/22 3:08 PM, Shane Ronan wrote: I'm talking about PSTN hops, which like I previously said still accounts for a VERY significant amount of calls. But what percentage of the spam calls? I thought they were mainly coming from voip/SIP? Mike

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

e I'm talking all SIP here, not with PSTN hops. Or is that what you're talking about? Mike On Oct 4, 2022, at 4:50 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:  On 10/4/22 1:40 PM, sro...@ronan-online.com wrote: Except the pstn DB isn’t distributed like DNS is. Yes, I had forgot about &quo

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

ng about the calling provider not the called provider all along. Mike On Oct 4, 2022, at 2:40 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:  On 10/4/22 11:21 AM, Shane Ronan wrote: Except the cost to do the data dips to determine the authorization isn't "free". Since every http request in th

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

e routing is not being done with e.164 addresses like in the legacy PSTN. It's just bellheaded thinking that e.164 addresses mean anything these days.The only time they make any difference is if they need to off ramp to legacy signaling which is becoming rarer and rarer. Mike On Tu

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

e: On October 3, 2022 at 16:05 m...@mtcc.com (Michael Thomas) wrote: > The problem has always been solvable at the ingress provider. The > problem was that there was zero to negative incentive to do that. You > don't need an elaborate PKI to tell the ingress provider which pre

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

-- *From: *"Shane Ronan" *To: *"Michael Thomas" *Cc: *"Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org *Sent: *Tuesday, October 4, 2022 1:21:41 PM *Subject: *Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls) Except the cost to do the data dips to determine the aut

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

ike a very compelling concern. Mike On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 2:18 PM Michael Thomas wrote: On 10/4/22 6:07 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: I think the point the other Mike was trying to make was that if everyone policed their customers, this wouldn't be a problem. Since some don&#

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

space. Like for one, the FCC exists and regulates it. That is not true of email. Mike - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com -------- *From: *"Mic

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

. And yes the telephony network is a lot easier than email to police. Mike On 10/3/22, 5:05 PM, "Michael Thomas" wrote: The problem has always been solvable at the ingress provider. The problem was that there was zero to negative incentive to do that. You don'

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

tions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com *From: *"Shane Ronan" *To: *"Michael Thomas" *Cc: *nanog@nanog.org *Sent: *Monday, October 3, 2022 9:54:07 PM *Subject: *Re: FCC chairwom

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

. Mike On 10/3/22 3:13 PM, Jawaid Bazyar wrote: We're talking about blocking other carriers. On 10/3/22, 3:05 PM, "Michael Thomas" wrote: On 10/3/22 1:54 PM, Jawaid Bazyar wrote: > Because it's illegal for common carriers to block traffic otherwise. Wa

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

On 10/3/22 1:54 PM, Jawaid Bazyar wrote: Because it's illegal for common carriers to block traffic otherwise. Wait, what? It's illegal to police their own users? Mike On 10/3/22, 2:53 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Michael Thomas" wrote: On 10/3/22 1:34 PM

Re: FCC chairwoman: Fines alone aren't enough (Robocalls)

On 10/3/22 1:34 PM, Sean Donelan wrote: 'Fines alone aren't enough:' FCC threatens to blacklist voice providers for flouting robocall rules https://www.cyberscoop.com/fcc-robocall-fine-database-removal/ [...] “This is a new era. If a provider doesn’t meet its obligations under the law, it n

Re: VZ FIOS and Intel TCP IPv6 Checksum Offload problems

retransmissions. Yeah, sorry brain fart. I'd be surprised if that were a big issue on home networks, but who knows. Mike -mel via cell On Aug 27, 2022, at 3:08 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:  On 8/27/22 12:00 PM, Sean Donelan wrote: Hopefully, my pain will help someone else. I've ha

Re: VZ FIOS and Intel TCP IPv6 Checksum Offload problems

On 8/27/22 12:00 PM, Sean Donelan wrote: Hopefully, my pain will help someone else. I've had sporadic Internet slowdowns and stuck networking since IPv6 was enabled on my FIOS ONT a few months ago. After too much troubleshooting, I found out some older Intel GbE ethernet cards have a IPv6

Re: Facebook down?

I can see in the browser debug spew that it's getting 503's on fbcdn.net. Mike On 8/11/22 2:36 PM, Joe Loiacono wrote: Well, makes sense. According to Schrodinger it's both up and down. On 8/11/2022 5:16 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: On 8/11/22 2:12 PM, Mel Beckman wrote

Re: Facebook down?

On 8/11/22 2:12 PM, Mel Beckman wrote: According to Heisenberg, it’s up :) It's still having problems serving up images. Thankfully their ad images are not affected :/ Mike -mel via cell On Aug 11, 2022, at 1:44 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: And of course the act of sending this

Re: Facebook down?

And of course the act of sending this mail caused the wave function to collapse and it seems to be up again, at least for me. Mike On 8/11/22 1:37 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: They haven't been serving up images for like an hour or so and now it's showing their fail whale. Not sure

Facebook down?

They haven't been serving up images for like an hour or so and now it's showing their fail whale. Not sure if it's a (internal) network problem or not. I'm in California fwiw. Mike

Re: NANOG List posts and DMARC

On 8/2/22 12:30 PM, Jim Popovitch via NANOG wrote: 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

Re: NANOG List posts and DMARC

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 one posts and does DMARC and has feedback on, our messages are possibly rejected, and t

Re: Sigh, friends don't let politicians write tech laws

On 7/29/22 2:57 PM, Anne Mitchell wrote: On Jul 29, 2022, at 3:37 PM, John Levine wrote: It appears that Michael Thomas said: -=-=-=-=-=- https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/4409/text?r=9&s=1 the body of the proposed law: This bill was filed by a bunch of

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >