By any chance is this list available via xml/rss?
Thanks,
Mike
On 19 Jan 2005, at 08:17, Mike Callahan wrote:
By any chance is this list available via xml/rss?
Try http://rss.gmane.org/gmane.org.operators.nanog
Joe
Mike Callahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
By any chance is this list available via xml/rss?
There are several email to rss gateway software packages out there; it
would be trivial to roll your own.
YMMV, but after reading a couple of other mailing lists that were
gatewayed to rss, my sense is
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 09:11:20 -0500, Robert E. Seastrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
YMMV, but after reading a couple of other mailing lists that were
gatewayed to rss, my sense is that RSS is not the right technology for
reading NANOG unless one were to create a first article only feed.
Due to
Mike Callahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
By any chance is this list available via xml/rss?
Thanks,
Mike
You can get it via blog and rss format from here -
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.org.operators.nanog?set_skin=zawodny
-srs
On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 09:11 -0500, Robert E.Seastrom wrote:
Mike Callahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
By any chance is this list available via xml/rss?
There are several email to rss gateway software packages out there; it
would be trivial to roll your own.
YMMV, but after reading a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is a matter of choosing a registrar that has the right business model
and services to suit the registrant.
What if a company doesn't want to deal with
any registrar? What if they just want to
register their domain name and have it stay
registered. For some
Can someone from this network contact me offlist - we are having routing
issues with your network.
Thanks
**
Richard J. Sears
Vice President
American Internet Services
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 15:55:19 +0100, Jeroen Massar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 09:11 -0500, Robert E.Seastrom wrote:
Mike Callahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
By any chance is this list available via xml/rss?
There are several email to rss gateway software packages
On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 11:36 -0500, chip wrote:
SNIP
Try pointing your subscription to Gmail.
Why the peep would I want to rely on a service provider like Gmail or
Hotmail or whatever for something as as important as my email ?
I also like to use my own domain for sending mail, it will never
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert E.Seastrom) writes:
By any chance is this list available via xml/rss?
...
Due to different ways of looking at data than one would usually think
of when designing a mail or usenet reader, all RSS readers of my
admittedly fairly narrow acquaintance are lacking in
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Paul Vixie
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 11:59 AM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: NANOG via RSS
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert E.Seastrom) writes:
By any chance is this list available via
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 17:48:07 +0100, Jeroen Massar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 11:36 -0500, chip wrote:
SNIP
Try pointing your subscription to Gmail.
Why the peep would I want to rely on a service provider like Gmail or
Hotmail or whatever for something as as important
On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 16:59 +, Paul Vixie wrote:
i can't
imagine how any of you read this forum using a normal e-mail tool.
With some difficulty... ;)
--
Cheers
Dg off to investigate the various options proposed
[a dated, biased (what isn't?), insightful, and
relevant interview]
Published on Policy DevCenter
(http://www.oreillynet.com/policy/)
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/policy/2002/12/05/karl.html
Karl Auerbach: ICANN Out of Control
by Richard Koman
12/05/2002
Editor's note: Strong forces
i can't imagine how any of you read this forum using a normal e-mail tool.
I've used Outlook 2003 since Beta, and couldn't imagine not using it for
emailing. Just setup a rule to send NANOG emails to their own folder and
let 'em roll in. I'll browse every so often and decide I don't care
the panix.com incident, a few nights of dreaming
solutions, and this interview lead me wonder about
p2p dns.
david
And, on this point, I believe Karl was right.
$.02,
- ferg
-- David M. Besonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Auerbach: The public interest is not being served.
--
Fergie, a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
Engineering Architecture for the Internet
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 9:58 AM
To: 'nanog@merit.edu'
Subject: BOGON Filtering IP Space?
Our NOC is opening a lot of tickets for customers that live on our
72.14.128.0/19 network going towards local and federal government
Yes - the space in question was allocated last January - it looks like
not everyone has updated their bogon access lists to remove this space
from the bogon list.
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 13:51:11 -0500
Kurt Kruegel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
from http://www.cymru.com/Documents/bogon-list.html
--- Richard J. Sears [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes - the space in question was allocated last
January - it looks like
not everyone has updated their bogon access lists to
remove this space
from the bogon list.
I think that Cisco's Autosecure feature is part of the
problem here:
Our NOC is opening a lot of tickets for customers that live on our
72.14.128.0/19 network going towards local and federal government sites
in particular.
Our customer - Angelo State U was recently assigned IP space
72.18.160.0/19. They have also seen some issues getting packets to
). This advisory is available at
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-sa-20050119-itscme.shtml
Cisco has made free software upgrades available to address this
vulnerability for all affected customers. There are workarounds
available to mitigate the effects of the vulnerability
The archives didn't show a hit for IP address management when it comes
to a large MS AD shop. We went from NetID to home-grown scripts... Men
and Mice have given some presentations on their tool. Any others out
there that do not force a switch to some other vendor's DNS/DHCP
servers? Just
Anyone have any suggestions on graphing peering on a cisco router? I'm
using mrtg and i did mac address accounting but the numbers are off.
Thank i appreciate it in advance.
Andrew
Hi, Bryan.
] Rob T - this should be a periodic FAQ:
]
]http://www.cymru.com/Bogons/
That's a great idea! Everyone knows I don't send out nearly enough
email. :) Seriously, we'll try to be better about sending out
regular reminders.
Thanks!
Rob.
--
Rob Thomas
http://www.cymru.com
Peering Coordinators attending NANOG in Las Vegas -
We have a very exciting (and very full) Peering BOF agenda...Let me give
you a flavor for what we are doing this year.
At 9PM we'll start out with a State of the Peering Internet and, with the
audience, identify a few key trends and the most
no i mean graph bgp sessions...
it's a single interface, and i want to graph every bgp session so i
can see how much traffic i'm doing between each peer.
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:25:37 + (GMT), Stephen J. Wilcox
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, andrew matthews wrote:
Anyone
Andrew,
You could probably whip something up with a shell script, and pipe the
results to something like cacti (www.cacti.net).
Cacti is one of the easiest utilities I've worked with to graph other
types of data besides bits in/out. Check it out.
= TC
-Original Message-
From: andrew
If you're already using MRTG, hopefully you're at least passingly familiar
with perl and SNMP. If so, you can do some hackery to identify your BGP
peer interfaces automatically and then use it to reference existing
interface graphs.
Take a peek in the BGP4 mib, specifically at the
Andrew's issue is this - he's got an Ethernet port on a public peering
switch with a bunch of peers. He can see the interface stats just fine but
he's having trouble figuring out how much traffic is going to (or coming
from) each peer. One interface, many peers, confusing problem. There isn't
Ah, completely different animal altogether, that. Thanks for the
clarification. My initial read was multiple peers on separate interfaces,
which isn't overly complex to track.
- billn
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Daniel Golding wrote:
Andrew's issue is this - he's got an Ethernet port on a public
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/19/panix_hijack_more/
Panix.com hijack: Aussie firm shoulders blame
By Lucy Sherriff
Published Wednesday 19th January 2005 16:49 GMT
An Australian domain registrar has admitted to its part in last
weekend's domain name hijack. of a New York ISP. Melbourne IT
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Darrell Greenwood wrote:
customers' domains. Panix.com says its domain name was locked, and
that despite this, it was still transferred. ®
I seem to recall someone saying it wasnt locked, now theyre saying it was?
-Dan
Well with mac accounting i've found that the results are not correct
number they have to multiplied or something.
I have a GigE and it has multiple peering sessions on it. Flowscan
can't keep up, i have to export it in samples and that just defeats
the purpose. I'm trying to find a way to graph
On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 15:51 -0800, Dan Hollis wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Darrell Greenwood wrote:
customers' domains. Panix.com says its domain name was locked, and
that despite this, it was still transferred.
I seem to recall someone saying it wasnt locked, now theyre saying it was?
Thornton wrote:
On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 15:51 -0800, Dan Hollis wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Darrell Greenwood wrote:
customers' domains. Panix.com says its domain name was locked, and
that despite this, it was still transferred.
I seem to recall someone saying it wasnt locked, now
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, William Allen Simpson wrote:
(2) Registrants can't lock domains, it's a registrar-lock. Users
can only ask that domains be locked. Stupid policy, bad results.
This is not correct, prior to the new policy many registrars were
already putting control over the
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Darrell Greenwood wrote:
customers' domains. Panix.com says its domain name was locked, and
that despite this, it was still transferred. (r)
I seem to recall someone saying it wasnt locked, now theyre
saying it was?
The information we have so far, indicates
Upon what verifiable facts do you base your endless speculation?
(1) Stop blaming the victim!
(2) Registrants can't lock domains, it's a registrar-lock. Users
can only ask that domains be locked. Stupid policy, bad results.
(3) This is a red-herring issue anyway, since there is no
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, andrew matthews wrote:
Well with mac accounting i've found that the results are not correct
number they have to multiplied or something.
I have a GigE and it has multiple peering sessions on it. Flowscan
can't keep up, i have to export it in samples and that just
on 1/19/05 6:46 PM, Bruce Tonkin at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The information we have so far, indicates that it was not on Registrar
LOCK at the registry at the time of the transfer.
Bruce,
It is well known that the date of transfer of the panix.com domain from
Dotster to Melbourne IT was on
On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 03:14:24AM +, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, andrew matthews wrote:
Well with mac accounting i've found that the results are not correct
number they have to multiplied or something.
I have a GigE and it has multiple peering sessions
Oki all,
I wasn't going to discuss this because it is potentially confusing,
but as we're ratholing on registrar lock ...
---
Some 60 plus days after a party acquired a domain, s/he initiated an
UNLOCK at the user interface of the operator that had arrainged to
acquire this particular domain.
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:37:54 -0800, andrew matthews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
no i mean graph bgp sessions...
it's a single interface, and i want to graph every bgp session so i
can see how much traffic i'm doing between each peer.
If you are looking to graph statistics about the BGP peering
Mark Jeftovic wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, William Allen Simpson wrote:
(2) Registrants can't lock domains, it's a registrar-lock. Users
can only ask that domains be locked. Stupid policy, bad results.
under the new policy if the registrar
employs it they must provide access to the
Bruce Tonkin wrote:
The information we have so far, indicates that it was not on Registrar
LOCK at the registry at the time of the transfer.
No, the information we have so far is that it *WAS* supposed to be on
registrar-lock! Quoting Alexis Rosen, forwarded by TLS, Sun, 16 Jan
2005 07:08:59
Hello William,
Stop blaming the victim! Stop blaming anybody else.
I at no stage have blamed the victim. In fact I am sincerely sorry for
the damage caused to panix.com.
The transfer should NEVER have been initiated. Melbourne IT has
consistently acknowledged the error.
I have
William Allen Simpson wrote:
Not that I've ever noticed. Are you actually a network operator
anywhere? Are you even _in_ North America? Your email isn't
To correct my own post, I saw Au, and assumed a shill for Mel-IT.
But it's Az, which is Arizona (still in North America this year). My
When a registrar sends a transfer request to the registry operator (and
the name is not on Registrar LOCK), the registry operator sends a
confirmation email to both the losing and gaining registrar.
Here is the copy of the email Melbourne IT received.
Regards,
Bruce Tonkin
From [EMAIL
Bruce Tonkin wrote:
To repeat again, I am not trying to escape any blame, not cast any blame
on any other party. I am interested from an engineering point of view
in improving the process to avoid it happening again.
Good. Thank you! Early on in the process, Eric Brunner claimed you
were a
On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 00:49 -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote:
William Allen Simpson wrote:
Not that I've ever noticed. Are you actually a network operator
anywhere? Are you even _in_ North America? Your email isn't
To correct my own post, I saw Au, and assumed a shill for
52 matches
Mail list logo
