I was wondering if anybody has any suggestions for a low priced, off the
shelf, complete (includes any necessary receivers), standalone (as in you
just plug it in and connect ethernet), stratum 1 NTP server?
Please also mention where to buy it.
Mike.
+- H U R R I C A N E - E
http://www.truetime.com/index.html
Not exactly stand alone because you have to place the antenna somwhere
where it can see the GPS satellites as is the case with any any Stratum 1
NTP device. Then you have to program the IP into it and plug the ethernet
into it. They are really simple to
...and, occasionally, your ISP's abuse desk. If this function of
your ISP costs less than 1 FTE per 10,000 dialups or 1,000 T1's or 100
T3's, then your ISP is a slacker and probably a magnet for professional
spammers as well.
Not to try to undercut the general point, but that would
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Greg A. Woods wrote:
Well, you might be able to pay your ISP for that kind of service, but
not all ISPs need supply such service and certainly not many users
really _need_ such a level of service.
So now I have to justify the kind of services I want to use?
Filters are static things, that have to be updated, and can't see every
case that comes thru.
It might be possible to make filters that don't need to be updated that
often if
you apply AI techniques to recognizing SPAM. For instance, check out this
new approach:
If GPS visibility is not an option (GPS can be very finicky about being
able to see an open percentage of the sky), then CDMA signals are also an
option in the states. Handy if the installation is going to be in a
highrise. Prices seem to vary greatly between manufacturers, I've gotten
quotes
The new ARIN SWIP template confuses me. The reassign-simple I sent in
lastnight came back with:
Fail to Pass Validation. Error Message:
*PUBLIC COMMENTS can not be removed
I had:
9. Customer Country Code: US
10. Public Comments: NONE
END OF TEMPLATE
And the docs say:
PUBLIC
Anyone know whats up with 198.41.0.0/22 ? I am seeing all sorts of whois
lookup failures as a result.
route-views.oregon-ix.netshow ip bgp 198.41.0.0/22
% Network not in table
route-views.oregon-ix.net
net.whois-servers.net
---Mike
Hi:
I'm doing an article on IPv6 and am looking for comments - here is a
portion on IPv6 which relates to the privacy issue ... any comments,
crtics or interviews welcomed.
-- snip
As you know IPv6 is a suite of protocols for the network layer of the
Internet which uses IPv4 gateways. It's
ooh how exciting, you can tell who uses 3Com network cards :)
Most networks eg P2P will use /127 and not use MAC anyway so I cant see this
being a privacy on issue on anything but end devices and you can override if yuo
feel the need...
On end devices by default yes it uses mac, I cant see
- Original Message -
From: Joe Baptista [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 09:41
Subject: IPv6 Interview Questions and critic
Hi:
I'm doing an article on IPv6 and am looking for comments - here is a
portion on IPv6 which relates to the privacy
Mr. Zeier,
I have just review the template you submitted. The error listed below was
generated because the template you submitted was a NEW. The NONE feature
is used to remove existing public comments. We will modify our software to
be more forgiving in the future. BTW, Registration Services
Joe,
Ipv6 uses 128 bits to provide addressing, routing and identification
information on a computer. The 128-bits are divided into the left-64 and
the right-64. Ipv6 uses the right 64 bits to store an IEEE defined global
identifier (EUI64). This identifier is composed of company id value
I still think that it causes problems for mailing lists.
I understand the proposal to be based on the envelope sender, not the
sender in the body. Hence, mailing lists work, because they are the
envelope sender, not the person who submitted the mail to the mailing
list.
numerically
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Vixie) writes:
whenever you get spammed, it's because some isp somewhere is a slacker,
what i meant to say was whenever you're getting repeat spam from the same
place, day after week after month, it's because some isp somewhere is a
slacker. any given isp can be
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 10:41:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: Joe Baptista [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi:
I'm doing an article on IPv6 and am looking for comments - here is a
portion on IPv6 which relates to the privacy issue ... any comments,
crtics or interviews welcomed.
I have a POP in 60 Hudson, 19th floor. The only peering exchange I'm
aware of in the building is Stealth's IPV6 exchange in Tel-X (23rd
floor). If there's any interest in IPV4 peering from any networks with a
presence on the 19th, I'd be willing to provide free 100baseTx ports on a
peering
Here is your base pricing from Truetime:
NTS-150 $2395
NTS-200 $3595
-Mike
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, John Todd wrote:
Happen to know what the base price is for these? Low price is a
relative term when dealing with clock makers. :)
JT
http://www.truetime.com/index.html
Not exactly
Kevin == Kevin Oberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Kevin This is really pretty silly.
Not really, Joe may actually have a point here.
Kevin Only end nodes will auto-configure with the MAC address
Kevin used for 48 bits of the IPv6 address. Exactly how this is a
Kevin
So what's so bad about forwarding all tcp/25 traffic over that relay and
letting that relay decide if the MAIL FROM: is allowed to be relayed?
Because I want to send mail through my own SMTP server that speaks
STARTTLS and uses certificates that are under my control.
Maybe I don't want my
So, is there a significant Worldcom operational issue that
has not yet been reported to nanog?
To answer my own question: Yes, there was a problem on the MFS
ring between S63 and S77 (a BZ ring problem). Fixed with
a card swap yesterday near mid-day.
-mark
$750 is not unreasonable for 2 strand dark fiber in 60 Hudson. And if you
work hard, you can get this down to $500. Check 111 8th Ave, it costs well
into the $3,000/mo range generally.
In addition, we're already working on (in progress) cat5 xcon's between TelX and
suite 1505 in 60 Hudson.
On Tuesday, August 27, 2002, at 10:41 AM, Joe Baptista wrote:
Ipv6 uses 128 bits to provide addressing, routing and identification
information on a computer. The 128-bits are divided into the left-64
and
the right-64. Ipv6 uses the right 64 bits to store an IEEE defined
global
Mike Leber([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2002.08.26 23:52:08 +:
I was wondering if anybody has any suggestions for a low priced, off the
shelf, complete (includes any necessary receivers), standalone (as in you
just plug it in and connect ethernet), stratum 1 NTP server?
some years ago, i migrated
From: JC Dill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I guess you haven't read RFC 3098 yet then.
http://www.geektools.com/rfc/rfc3098.txt
Wow, I missed that. It's really quite good. So good, in fact, that I
just sent copies of it out to the 300 MILLION ADDRESSES I have on this
CD here...
No, seriously, it's good
There was a major OC-48 failure somewhere near Salinas, California about
2AM PDT today which resulted in loss of connectivity to a lot of the
ISPS in that LATA.
Anyone have any details?
At 7:02 PM -0400 2002/08/26, Scott Gifford wrote:
The proposal suggests that you get all of the A records for all of the
accepted names, then make sure that one of the A records matches the
address that the connection came from. See sec. 2.3.
Right. And when they add a new mail
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:43:38 -0400
Peter John Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2002, at 10:41 AM, Joe Baptista wrote:
Ipv6 uses 128 bits to provide addressing, routing and identification
information on a computer. The 128-bits are divided into the left-64
and
However IPv6 has many privacy issues. IPv6 address space uses an ID
(indentifier) derived from your hardware or phone. That allows your
packets to be traced back to your PC or cell-phone said censored.
censored fears abuse as a hardware ID wired into the ipv6 protocol can
be used to
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Since it so easy for a host (relative to ipv4) to have multiple ip
addresses, I like what Microsoft has done. If told by a router, a Win
XP box will assign itself a global unicast address using EUI-64. It
will also create a global unicast
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Kurtis Lindqvist wrote:
censored fears abuse as a hardware ID wired into the ipv6 protocol can
be used to determine the manufacturer, make and model number, and value
of the hardware equipment being used by the end user.
...uhm, and? What is the real difference with
On Tuesday, August 27, 2002, at 05:07 PM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:43:38 -0400
Peter John Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2002, at 10:41 AM, Joe Baptista wrote:
Since it so easy for a host (relative to ipv4) to have multiple ip
addresses, I
On August 27, 2002 at 03:15 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Vixie) wrote:
Every single purely technical approach to stopping spam has been a
complete loser.
In the fullness of time, the universe itself will die of heat. So what?
How come this makes me want to raise the issue of our
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 23:33:40 +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum said:
How can I recognize someone by doing a portscan?
http://www.insecure.org/nmap
It slices, it dices, it makes julienne fries.
(I'm assuming you mean in the same sense as you can identify a machine's
vendor based on the EUI-64... -
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 17:48:24 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
(I'm assuming you mean in the same sense as you can identify a machine's
vendor based on the EUI-64... - neither a portscan or a MAC address will
tell you who's machine it is, as far as I know (although doing an nmap to find
ports
In the fullness of time, the universe itself will die of heat. So what?
How come this makes me want to raise the issue of our immortal souls?
spammers have souls?
So for example saying this or that filter appears to have repelled 1M
spam msgs per day doesn't really prove much unless
Oh to some extent even the first time it's because they're slackers.
If instead of a brainless rush to sign up dial-up accts and check
credentials later they demanded a credit card or other verifiable
information (a phone number we can call you back at to activate) then
they'd burn up about
$750/mth is once you get to MetCom. For the cx on the 19th to their FDP
is another $300/mth. Now you're at $1050/mth. For $1K/mth I can get 100M
from the 19th floor to 25 Broadway, + $100/mth for the cat5 cx. So if I
were going to spend a grand a month to connect to an exchange point, it
At 12:14 PM +1000 2002/08/27, Martin wrote:
but surely an MTA derives it's usefulness by running on port 25. i don't
remember reading about where in the DNS MX RR you could specify what port
the MTA would be listening on...
Proper support of SRV records would allow you to put the
At 7:19 PM -0700 2002/08/26, David Schwartz wrote:
Every ISP I have ever worked for and every ISP I have ever used has
eventually been convinced by me to come around to this policy. Do whatever
you want by default, but let trusted/clueful people opt out of it and just
get their IP
At 9:45 PM -0600 2002/08/26, David Van Duzer wrote:
Not to try to undercut the general point, but that would imply that
Earthlink, AOL, and MSN (for examples) should have a combined abuse
department of roughly 1500 employees.
Last I checked, AOL itself had over 6000 employees, of
At 7:43 AM + 2002/08/27, Paul Vixie wrote:
i doubt they will comment in detail here, since
the actual numbers are likely to be some kind of internal secret. i know
i get far less spam from AOL than i used to, and i've assumed that this
is because they
At 12:58 PM +0100 2002/08/27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It might be possible to make filters that don't need to be updated that
often if
you apply AI techniques to recognizing SPAM. For instance, check out this
new approach:
http://www.paulgraham.com/paulgraham/spam.html
At 12:16 PM +0200 2002/08/27, Bruce Campbell wrote:
I understand the proposal to be based on the envelope sender, not the
sender in the body. Hence, mailing lists work, because they are the
envelope sender, not the person who submitted the mail to the mailing
list.
Read my
... (http://dcc.rhyolite.com/) ...
Indeed, that is a cool idea. I definitely want to look into
that a lot more closely. Perhaps we can combine this with deep
blacklist checking (beyond just the first hop), tagging, and Bayesian
content filtering. Perhaps then we will have a
At 9:59 PM + 2002/08/27, Paul Vixie wrote:
My point is that I think we really need to start focusing on solutions
which aren't primarily or solely technical.
the folks at http://spam.abuse.net/ and http://www.cauce.org/ and even
http://www.spamcon.org/ would be alarmed to hear you
At 7:37 PM -0400 2002/08/27, Dean Anderson wrote:
You worked at AOL? This happens quite often. I've known of several admins
who started reading email, checking terminal servers, and disrupting
users who complained about the admins performance. One admin wrote a
script that reset the
This is an auto-generated mail on Fri Aug 23 23:00:00 PDT 2002
It is not checked before it leaves my workstation. However, hopefully
you will find this report interesting and will take the time to look
through this to see if you can improve the amount of aggregation you
perform.
Check
Maybe I don't want my email sitting around in your MTA queue for
your sysadmins to read.
Given the volumes of mail that pass through these kinds of
things, that's not likely to be a problem. More likely to be a
problem would be the fact that the mail might sit there for a week
before it
--On Monday, August 26, 2002 10:34 PM +0200 Iljitsch van Beijnum
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a user, I pay my ISP to forward IP packets. If there happen to be TCP
segments in those packets, that's something between me and the person the
packet is addressed to, whether the destination port
--On Tuesday, August 27, 2002 6:13 PM -0700 David Schwartz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm afraid the technology to rapidly sift through large volumes of
information to search for specific areas of interest is widely available.
It is totally reasonable to not want to send mail through
enjoy ... and i'm curious if there are any small or large system admins in
canada here that this affects and their opinions.
regards
joe baptista
- Original Message -
From: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 6:43 PM
Subject: FC:
Is news.com.com run by news.com ?
http://news.com/2100-1023-955595.html?tag=politech == 404
--Phil
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Joe Baptista
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 10:44 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Will Canada's
Hmm... $2400 is still in the pricey range to be throwing out
bunches of these across a network in wide distribution. (Pardon me
if some of you on the list snicker at my reluctance at the $2400
price - for some of us the new, new Econcomy is making things like
NTP Stratum 1 clocks a luxury
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 19:40:16 -0700, Jim Hickstein wrote:
--On Tuesday, August 27, 2002 6:13 PM -0700 David Schwartz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm afraid the technology to rapidly sift through large volumes of
information to search for specific areas of interest is widely available.
It is
I will go out on a limb and say that a reduction in the cost of
stratum-1 servers will increase their use across the Internet. The
results of such an increase would be arguably visible, as the current
multi-layer timekeeping system seems to be more-or-less keeping
clocks correct to the
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 11:57:39PM -0400, John Todd wrote:
Hmm... $2400 is still in the pricey range to be throwing out
bunches of these across a network in wide distribution. (Pardon me
if some of you on the list snicker at my reluctance at the $2400
price - for some of us the new, new
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 11:57:39PM -0400, John Todd mooed:
Hmm... $2400 is still in the pricey range to be throwing out
bunches of these across a network in wide distribution. (Pardon me
[...]
One would think that a vendor could come up with a 1u rackmount box
with a GPS and
--On Tuesday, August 27, 2002 9:01 PM -0700 David Schwartz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your secure mail server (i.e. me) just has to be named in a MAIL-FROM MX
record. We do DNS for some of our customers, and can add this trivially;
the others control their own zones. Works for me.
59 matches
Mail list logo
