On 12-okt-04, at 7:30, Fred Baker wrote:
From an ISP perspective, I would think that it would be of value to
offer *not* ingress filtering (whether by ACL or by uRPF) as a service
that a customer pays for.
So what is our collective position on ISPs filtering their peers?
Both the position that
--- Andrew D Kirch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
and anyone posting from yahoo/gmail/hotmail
should have their
posting rights immediately revoked because obviously
they have no claim
whatsoever to any critical Network Operations.
You had me until then: has it not occurred to you that
some
On 11-okt-04, at 10:12, Pekka Savola wrote:
The document is about to be IETF Last Called for Informational RFC,
but prior to that, I'd like to solicit comments/feedback/review from
the people here because I'm 100% sure a lot of people have been faced
with these issues (we certainly have..).
Well,
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, David Barak wrote:
and anyone posting from yahoo/gmail/hotmail should have
their posting rights immediately revoked because
obviouslythey have no claim whatsoever to any critical
Network Operations.
You had me until then: has it not occurred to you that
some of
For the week starting Sept 12, our dark space telescope saw
1675 spoofed DDOS attacks.
any idea why someone(s) is ddosing dark space? seems a bit silly.
randy
At 04:59 AM 13-10-04 -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
For the week starting Sept 12, our dark space telescope saw
1675 spoofed DDOS attacks.
any idea why someone(s) is ddosing dark space? seems a bit silly.
No one is DDOSing dark space. The dark space telescope picks up the
richochets caused by DDOS.
Randy Bush wrote:
For the week starting Sept 12, our dark space telescope saw 1675
spoofed DDOS attacks.
any idea why someone(s) is ddosing dark space? seems a bit silly.
Something like this I rather fancy ...
http://lists.planet-lab.org/pipermail/announce/2004-April/12.html
on Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 07:09:10AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [12/10/04 13:16 -0400]:
If I, and my little 7-man company, can afford to have me solve the
problem on our end, why the heck can't you do the same?
You can do it because you are a 7-man
On 13 Oct 2004, Paul Vixie wrote:
How many people have seen forged spoofed IP addresses being used for DOS
attacks lately?
syn-flood protection, and random TCP ISS, are now common enough that
spoofed-source isn't effective for TCP flows. if you want to bring down
somebody's web server
NANOG,
It is with great sadness that I inform you that Richard Steenbergen,
long-time NANOG contributor and colleague, has been censored by Dr.
Harris this morning. Richard will be barred from posting to this list
until such a time when the Doctor deems it appropriate.
Those who take issue
FREE RICHARD
-chris
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Husan Sarris wrote:
NANOG,
It is with great sadness that I inform you that Richard Steenbergen,
long-time NANOG contributor and colleague, has been censored by Dr.
Harris this morning. Richard will be barred from posting to this list
until such
FREE RICHARD
so really low capex but high opex?
randy
i've never seen a dns attack that didn't have 50% or more packets coming
from spoofed sources, though due to loose-mode uRPF, most spoofed sources
in the last year or so have been from addresses for which a route exists.
--
Paul Vixie
reiterating a sometimes heretical idea...
i've never seen a dns attack that didn't have 50% or more packets coming
from spoofed sources, though due to loose-mode uRPF, most spoofed sources
in the last year or so have been from addresses for which a route exists.
--
Paul Vixie
reiterating a sometimes heretical
or... why do people insist on injecting routes to non-existent
things?a route table entry is a route table entry, regardless
of the scope.
Is this where you advocate that providers only announce the parts of
their assigned blocks that are in use?
seems like a
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 07:49:03PM +0100, Anderson, Ian wrote:
Anyone else seeing excessive DNS requests hammering their local
forwarders this evening. We've just taken our residence network
off-line owing to the level of port 53 traffic coming from it. Can't
see anything in the usual
quote who=Anderson, Ian
Anyone else seeing excessive DNS requests hammering their local
forwarders this evening. We've just taken our residence network
off-line owing to the level of port 53 traffic coming from it. Can't
see anything in the usual places regarding this
Things seem
Hi all
ls there any websites to provide the information
about AS no and IP?
When typing the AS no, it can display all the
information fo the company
and IP belongs to this company also
Thank you
www.cidr-report.org
On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 03:19:58AM +0800, adrian kok wrote:
Hi all
ls there any websites to provide the information
about AS no and IP?
When typing the AS no, it can display all the
information fo the company
and IP belongs to this company also
Thank you
--
On (13/10/04 18:43), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this where you advocate that providers only announce the parts of
their assigned blocks that are in use?
seems like a good lead in, so yes - i advocate folks only
announce what they use. may play old-hob on the ISP that
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, adrian kok wrote:
ls there any websites to provide the information
about AS no and IP?
When typing the AS no, it can display all the
information fo the company
and IP belongs to this company also
That's what whois does. There are web-sites
Um, no.
That site is a dud, and I have no idea why Crack would be related to ASNs.
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 03:29:04PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.smartwhois.net
-Original Message-
From: Bubba Parker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 3:21
At 03:19 PM 10/13/2004, you wrote:
ls there any websites to provide the information
about AS no and IP?
When typing the AS no, it can display all the
information fo the company
and IP belongs to this company also
http://www.fixedorbit.com/search.htm
Have fun!
-Robert
Tellurian Networks - The
A standard whois program can not tell you what IP addresses a particular AS is
announcing.
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 12:21:34PM -0700, Bill Woodcock wrote:
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, adrian kok wrote:
ls there any websites to provide the information
about AS no and IP?
When
A standard whois program can not tell you what IP addresses a particular AS is
announcing.
When typing the AS no, it can display all the
information fo the company
and IP belongs to this company also
That's true, however, it's not what he asked. I loosely
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 18:43:45 +
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
or... why do people insist on injecting routes to non-existent
things?a route table entry is a route table entry, regardless
of the scope.
Is this where you advocate that
The second is a harder problem, because of the business decisions
of some providers to source packets from prefixes that they do
not announce.
i presume you are not intending to recommend that i drop packets
that multi-homed customers hand me when they have also asked me to
de-pref the prefix
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 12:54:44PM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote:
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 18:43:45 +
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
or... why do people insist on injecting routes to non-existent
things?a route table entry is a route table
Cliff Albert wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 02:33:53PM -0500, Bubba Parker wrote:
A standard whois program can not tell you what IP addresses a particular AS is announcing.
Actually it can tell you what IP adresses a particular AS SHOULD
announce.
whois -i origin -h whois.ripe.net AS28788
And what
I seem to remember someone telling me they had this license plate. Saw
it today, not sure I recognized the driver.
Would someone mind refreshing my poor little memory?
Thanks,
Deepak
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Christian Malo wrote:
FREE RICHARD
Of course my understanding of revoking posting privileges is that you cant post
to the list.. not you are imprisoned in the merit dungeons, i think that
punishment is reserved for Bandy/Husan/etc
However I do like some humor being
The second is a harder problem, because of the business decisions
of some providers to source packets from prefixes that they do
not announce.
i presume you are not intending to recommend that i drop packets
that multi-homed customers hand me when they have also asked me to
de-pref the
|On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Husan Sarris wrote:
|
| NANOG,
|
| It is with great sadness that I inform you that Richard
Steenbergen,
| long-time NANOG contributor and colleague, has been censored by
|Dr.
ETC.
finally!
i just want to say how disappointed I am that people have been
posting
notes using
I've got what seems to me like an innocuous question for this list...
Someone is requesting access to about 3 mb of traffic up/dn. I figure 2
T1s will give them the 3 Mb I need, but I'm looking for suggestions on
either efficiently combining those 2 to get the most bandwidth for their
buck or
The second is a harder problem, because of the business
decisions of some providers to source packets from prefixes
that they do not announce.
i presume you are not intending to recommend that i drop packets
that multi-homed customers hand me when they have also asked me
to de-pref the
multilinking t1s will work fine.
but depending on your customer, there are lots of things between a T1 and DS3..
such as 10Mb ethernet
Steve
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Gerald wrote:
I've got what seems to me like an innocuous question for this list...
Someone is requesting access to about 3
yep. some times it is even less intentional and less understood;
see tim's paper on bgp wedgies. and the management made me do
it, is a bit disingenuous. it's part of what it means to have
customers.
My customers, back when I had them, must have been better-behaved
than most.
Did anyone else just get a hiccup on Verio circuits? Lost routing in
small 2-5 second bursts incrementally over the past 10 minutes.
Joe Johnson
JMDN.net
yep. some times it is even less intentional and less understood;
see tim's paper on bgp wedgies. and the management made me do
it, is a bit disingenuous. it's part of what it means to have
customers.
My customers, back when I had them, must have been better-behaved
than most.
then why
yep. some times it is even less intentional and less understood;
see tim's paper on bgp wedgies. and the management made me do
it, is a bit disingenuous. it's part of what it means to have
customers.
My customers, back when I had them, must have been better-behaved
than most.
We saw a hiccup in San Diego. Routes towards a lot of our monitored
customers vanished and starting going out other providers...
James Laszko
Pipeline Communications, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Joe
Bandy Rush, Dean Soran, Husan Sarris, and Sichard Reenbergen
^^
Clearly an imposter... Anyone who knows Dean S. Moran knows he would
never misspell his own name.
-Bill
[ Apologies to those of you who receive this note in multiple forums. ]
Hi, team.
We are pleased to announce some updated monitoring, as well as some
new monitoring, on our web site. This includes aesthetic fixes as
well as increased visibility.
Our DNS monitoring now has increased
We have an OC3 with Verio and took a hit as well..
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 17:06:02 -0500
Joe Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did anyone else just get a hiccup on Verio circuits? Lost routing in
small 2-5 second bursts incrementally over the past 10 minutes.
Joe Johnson
JMDN.net
Everything did come back up before I sent the email (otherwise I
wouldn't have been able to unless I dialed in).
I was a little disappointed about their blanket temporary major network
issues statement from Level 3 support. Normally they are really good
about support.
Joe Johnson
JMDN.net
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
...also look into IMA (inverse multiplex atm).
regards,
/vicky
Gerald wrote:
| I've got what seems to me like an innocuous question for this list...
|
| Someone is requesting access to about 3 mb of traffic up/dn. I figure 2
| T1s will give them the 3
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Randy Bush wrote:
The second is a harder problem, because of the business decisions
of some providers to source packets from prefixes that they do
not announce.
i presume you are not intending to recommend that i drop packets
that multi-homed customers hand me when
47 matches
Mail list logo
