On 17 Jun 2012, at 20:29, Owen DeLong wrote:
Lather rinse repeat with a better choice of address...
2001:550:3ee3:f329:102a3:2aff:fe23:1f69
This is in the ARIN region...
It's from within a particular ISP's /32.
Has that ISP delegated some overlapping fraction to another ISP? If
On Jun 18, 2012, at 4:50 AM, Arturo Servin wrote:
On 17 Jun 2012, at 20:29, Owen DeLong wrote:
Lather rinse repeat with a better choice of address...
2001:550:3ee3:f329:102a3:2aff:fe23:1f69
This is in the ARIN region...
It's from within a particular ISP's /32.
Has that ISP
In article 20120617095906.ga32...@vacation.karoshi.com.?,
bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com top-posts:
Why not. Lots of aspects of the Internet are regulated.
Internet Regulator?
/bill
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:43:26AM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In article
On 18 Jun 2012, at 09:48, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Jun 18, 2012, at 4:50 AM, Arturo Servin wrote:
On 17 Jun 2012, at 20:29, Owen DeLong wrote:
Lather rinse repeat with a better choice of address...
2001:550:3ee3:f329:102a3:2aff:fe23:1f69
This is in the ARIN region...
It's from
- Original Message -
From: Arturo Servin arturo.ser...@gmail.com
Again, if every ISP followed BCP 38 that would not happen (IPv6 and
IPv4). But they are not, and probably they won't.
I disagree with Arturo's assertion that BCP38 would help the people
don't SWIP their subdelegations
In article 20120616160738.eee09...@resin05.mta.everyone.net, Scott
Weeks sur...@mauigateway.com writes
What is going to make folks change their behavior?
If all else fails, perhaps a regulator fining the ISP $1000 for every
allocation (I agree that whether it's IPv4 or IPv6 isn't relevant)
Internet Regulator?
/bill
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:43:26AM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In article 20120616160738.eee09...@resin05.mta.everyone.net, Scott
Weeks sur...@mauigateway.com writes
What is going to make folks change their behavior?
If all else fails, perhaps a regulator
On Jun 16, 2012, at 7:07 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
From: John Curran jcur...@arin.net
With respect to updating Whois, it is true that many ISPs do not
update their sub-delegations until applying for their next IPv4
block. Whether this is also the case with IPV6 or not remains
to be seen,
But whois info is really the linchpin for LEAs trying to find criminals?
I find that very hard to believe.
CB
It's about time and cost. If it's an emergency situation, trying to guess who
might own the address waste time to get confirmation, if it is a complete
guessing game. Then a warrant has to be gotten. You need to know who to put on
the warrant to make a request.
Cameron Byrne cb.li...@gmail.com
On Jun 17, 2012, at 9:39 AM, joseph.sny...@gmail.com wrote:
It's about time and cost. If it's an emergency situation, trying to guess who
might own the address waste time to get confirmation, if it is a complete
guessing game. Then a warrant has to be gotten. You need to know who to put
on
Wouldn't BCP38 help?
/as
On 15 Jun 2012, at 11:59, Jay Ashworth wrote:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57453738-83/fbi-dea-warn-ipv6-could-shield-criminals-from-police/
sigh
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 13:10:59 -0400, Arturo Servin said:
Wouldn't BCP38 help?
The mail I'm replying to has as the first Received: line:
Received: from ?IPv6:2800:af:ba30:e8cf:d06f:4881:973a:c68?
([2800:af:ba30:e8cf:d06f:4881:973a:c68]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id
On 6/17/12 10:24 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 13:10:59 -0400, Arturo Servin said:
Wouldn't BCP38 help?
The mail I'm replying to has as the first Received: line:
Received: from ?IPv6:2800:af:ba30:e8cf:d06f:4881:973a:c68?
You would go to the whois:
whois -h whois.lacnic.net 2800:af::/32
You will find that it is assigned to ISP Whatever. If you are the
cops you will find who I am asking them.
BCP 38 would work. The problem is that many ISPs do not ingress filter,
so I can use whatever
BCP 38 would work. The problem is that many ISPs do not ingress filter,
so I
can use whatever unnallocated IPv6 space
(2F10:baba:ba30:e8cf:d06f:4881:973a:c68) to SPAM and then go invisible and use
another one (2E10:baba:ba30:e8cf:d06f:4881:973a:c68)
How do you plan to get the return
If the ISP fails to filter my bogus space and leak that route to the
Internet (which happens today everyday with IPv4, and will with IPv6) I would
get my return path.
Again, if every ISP followed BCP 38 that would not happen (IPv6 and
IPv4). But they are not, and probably
On 6/15/2012 11:59 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57453738-83/fbi-dea-warn-ipv6-could-shield-criminals-from-police/
sigh
Cheers,
-- jra
I fail to see the problem the media and FBI are worried about. If the
regional registries are accurately documenting who they are
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 10:53:52 -0700, Joel jaeggli said:
On 6/17/12 10:24 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
So - who owns 2800:af:ba30:e8cf:4881:973a:c68? And how does an LEO
find that info quickly if they need to figure out who to hand a warrant to?
so first of you introduced a typo
Aha.
On 6/17/12 13:22 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 10:53:52 -0700, Joel jaeggli said:
On 6/17/12 10:24 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
So - who owns 2800:af:ba30:e8cf:4881:973a:c68? And how does an LEO
find that info quickly if they need to figure out who to hand a
On Jun 17, 2012, at 4:01 PM, Vinny Abello wrote:
I fail to see the problem the media and FBI are worried about. If the
regional registries are accurately documenting who they are allocating
assignments to, the authorities have somewhere to start. Even if
everything is properly documented via
On Jun 17, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Joel jaeggli wrote:
On 6/17/12 10:24 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 13:10:59 -0400, Arturo Servin said:
Wouldn't BCP38 help?
The mail I'm replying to has as the first Received: line:
Received: from
Hello everyone,
Yes the FBI can't just rely on Whois for apart of their investigation.
yes I will agree it's a big part but also those records are spoofed alot.
But reverse Ip looks I can understand.
James Smith
CEO, CEH
SmithwaySecurity
Toronto, Canada
On 12-06-17 08:29 PM, Owen DeLong
On 6/17/12 16:29 , Owen DeLong wrote:
On Jun 17, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Joel jaeggli wrote:
On 6/17/12 10:24 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 13:10:59 -0400, Arturo Servin said:
Wouldn't BCP38 help?
The mail I'm replying to has as the first Received: line:
Received:
Lather rinse repeat with a better choice of address...
2001:550:3ee3:f329:102a3:2aff:fe23:1f69
This is in the ARIN region...
Actually it's not a valid address at all, because it also has a typo.
one might assume with a typo that the most significant bits are probably
correct but
On 6/17/12, Joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
[snip]
resources were delegated to them. future prefix assignments will
clearly require that the demonstrate utilization much as they are
required to in ipv4.
Sure. But they don't necessarily have to have WHOIS listings up to
date in order to
Hey John,
Thanks for taking the time for the detailed response. I always enjoy
reading your posts.
On 6/17/2012 7:16 PM, John Curran wrote:
On Jun 17, 2012, at 4:01 PM, Vinny Abello wrote:
If anything, I feel like this is a ploy by the FBI feeding the media to
get criminals to adopt IPv6
On 6/17/2012 10:22 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
On 6/17/12, Joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
[snip]
resources were delegated to them. future prefix assignments will
clearly require that the demonstrate utilization much as they are
required to in ipv4.
Sure. But they don't necessarily have to
--- vi...@abellohome.net wrote:
From: Vinny Abello vi...@abellohome.net
: It would seem to me if the if law enforcement is concerned about
: incentives to make networks do this, then it should be made a law
: within their operating jurisdiction to enforce this compliance.
: This is a law
On 6/17/2012 10:48 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
--- vi...@abellohome.net wrote:
From: Vinny Abello vi...@abellohome.net
: It would seem to me if the if law enforcement is concerned about
: incentives to make networks do this, then it should be made a law
: within their operating jurisdiction to
On Jun 17, 2012 7:46 PM, Vinny Abello vi...@abellohome.net wrote:
On 6/17/2012 10:22 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
On 6/17/12, Joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
[snip]
resources were delegated to them. future prefix assignments will
clearly require that the demonstrate utilization much as
This is a law enforcement problem and I feel it should be properly
solved by a legal solution,
Worst case solution. Guaranteed.
So again, please propose a better one and save us, because you know
this is what will happen. :)
soapbox
o terms such as regulation and governance presuppose
APNIC has a web based whois form that is pretty easy to drive.
Jonathon
-Original Message-
From: Steven Noble [mailto:sno...@sonn.com]
Sent: Saturday, 16 June 2012 12:05 p.m.
To: goe...@anime.net
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: ZOMG: IPv6 a plot to stymie FBI !!!11!ONE
On Jun 18, 2012, at 10:50 AM, Jonathon Exley wrote:
APNIC has a web based whois form that is pretty easy to drive.
Yes, but data-entry tools which are viewed as secondary to the task at hand -
i.e., address allocations - and which require interactive human participation
to perform
In message fa98e8a1-f50e-4951-ab63-a0bd1d54b...@arbor.net, Dobbins, Roland
writes:
On Jun 18, 2012, at 10:50 AM, Jonathon Exley wrote:
APNIC has a web based whois form that is pretty easy to drive.=20
Yes, but data-entry tools which are viewed as secondary to the task at hand=
-
On Jun 18, 2012, at 11:23 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
APNIC has B2B over email. It should be possible to totally automate updating
APNIC.
That's a much better option than the Web form.
---
Roland Dobbins rdobb...@arbor.net //
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 15:53:48 -0700, goe...@anime.net said:
if arin would clamp down and revoke allocations that had provably
wrong/fraudulent whois data, we would probably get 50% IPv4 space back.
50%? I'd have estimated 10-15% tops.
pgpgePrNUQjrP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Jun 15, 2012, at 6:53 PM, John Curran wrote:
On Jun 15, 2012, at 8:05 PM, Steven Noble wrote:
Part of the issue is how hard it is to update ARIN, they gladly take your
money but it's like pulling teeth to get anything updated and sometimes you
run out of teeth.
Steve -
--- jcur...@arin.net wrote:
From: John Curran jcur...@arin.net
With respect to updating Whois, it is true that many ISPs do not
update their sub-delegations until applying for their next IPv4
block. Whether this is also the case with IPV6 or not remains
to be seen, but given IPv6
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57453738-83/fbi-dea-warn-ipv6-could-shield-criminals-from-police/
sigh
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 11:59:26 -0400, Jay Ashworth said:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57453738-83/fbi-dea-warn-ipv6-could-shield-criminals-from-police/
So everybody who's ever not bothered SWIP'ing an IPv4 allocation is helping the
terrorists?
pgpuDNGlAjKnS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
So everybody who's ever not bothered SWIP'ing an IPv4 allocation is helping
the terrorists?
Yes, of course. Mindless, irrational reactions to overblown threats are
everyone's job.
R's,
John
PS: Why do you hate America?
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:34 AM, John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote:
So everybody who's ever not bothered SWIP'ing an IPv4 allocation is helping
the terrorists?
Yes, of course. Mindless, irrational reactions to overblown threats are
everyone's job.
I want some of that stupid for breakfast
- Original Message -
From: valdis kletnieks valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 11:59:26 -0400, Jay Ashworth said:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57453738-83/fbi-dea-warn-ipv6-could-shield-criminals-from-police/
So everybody who's ever not bothered SWIP'ing an IPv4
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 11:59:26 -0400, Jay Ashworth said:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57453738-83/fbi-dea-warn-ipv6-could-shield-criminals-from-police/
The article sure does have a lot of threatening and smack-down tones toward
service providers (us):
We're looking at a problem that's
On 6/15/2012 11:59 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57453738-83/fbi-dea-warn-ipv6-could-shield-criminals-from-police/
I don't know how much of this has been covered on NANOG, and I
personally have a healthy innate distrust of government power grabs and
intrusive
On 6/15/2012 4:30 PM, Rob McEwen wrote:
And/or limit (what would be considered) valid IPv6 mail servers to
those assigned a particular IP on particularly large-sized block... then
sending IP not within those specs.
oops. typo. That last part should have been:
then block sending IPs not within
On 6/15/2012 4:30 PM, Rob McEwen wrote:
Certainly, 65,536 /64 blocks in a /24
allocation
another typo. I meant:
Certainly, 65,536 /64 blocks in a /48
allocation
--
Rob McEwen
http://dnsbl.invaluement.com/
r...@invaluement.com
+1 (478) 475-9032
On Jun 15, 2012, at 12:23 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 11:59:26 -0400, Jay Ashworth said:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57453738-83/fbi-dea-warn-ipv6-could-shield-criminals-from-police/
The article sure does have a lot of threatening and smack-down tones toward
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012, Scott Weeks wrote:
This is not a question of willful rejection,ISPs are happy to do this. They're
just lazy...It doesn't have a direct impact on them and their ability to get new address space
because they don't need new address space.
Yep, we're definitely the lazy ones.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57453738-83/fbi-dea-warn-ipv6-could-shield-criminals-from-police/
The article sure does have a lot of threatening and smack-down tones toward
service providers (us):
We're looking at a problem that's about to occur,It occurs as service
providers
--- goe...@anime.net wrote:
or you can fix the problem that has been festering for 10+ years.
---
Yeah, that. Why make it seem that v6 is the problem when it isn't.
scott
On Jun 15, 2012, at 2:55 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57453738-83/fbi-dea-warn-ipv6-could-shield-criminals-from-police/
The article sure does have a lot of threatening and smack-down tones toward
service providers (us):
We're looking at a problem that's
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012, Scott Weeks wrote:
--- goe...@anime.net wrote:
or you can fix the problem that has been festering for 10+ years.
---
Yeah, that. Why make it seem that v6 is the problem when it isn't.
if arin would clamp down and revoke allocations that
Dave Edelman
On Jun 15, 2012, at 16:43, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Jun 15, 2012, at 12:23 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 11:59:26 -0400, Jay Ashworth said:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57453738-83/fbi-dea-warn-ipv6-could-shield-criminals-from-police/
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 15, 2012, at 3:53 PM, goe...@anime.net wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012, Scott Weeks wrote:
if arin would clamp down and revoke allocations that had provably
wrong/fraudulent whois data, we would probably get 50% IPv4 space back.
Part of the issue is how hard it is
On Jun 15, 2012, at 8:05 PM, Steven Noble wrote:
Part of the issue is how hard it is to update ARIN, they gladly take your
money but it's like pulling teeth to get anything updated and sometimes you
run out of teeth.
Steve -
Suggestions for improvement are welcome; either formally
57 matches
Mail list logo
