On 9/28/07, Paul Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -- Hex Star [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This problem is easily solved by simply rejecting mail sent by servers on
dynamic IP ranges...
Great. I guess we can all go home now. :-)
As long as
This report has been generated at Fri Sep 28 21:18:27 2007 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date
On Fri, 28 Sep 2007, Martin Hannigan wrote:
After researching the outsourced mail options, I found that the market
is not mature or flexible enough yet. For example, we need the hook
into automated systems, we need some level of control for front line
support,
ATT, Verizon, BT and so on have
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007, Ken Simpson wrote:
RBLs are only effective against perhaps 50% of spam traffic, because
so much of it comes from never-seen-before zombies.
I'm seeing 80%-90% of spam blocked by the Spamhaus ZEN list, which
includes the PBL for blocking home computers, infected or not.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
RBLs are only effective against perhaps 50% of spam traffic, because
so much of it comes from never-seen-before zombies.
I'm seeing 80%-90% of spam blocked by the Spamhaus ZEN list, which
includes the PBL for blocking home computers, infected
Anyone else seeing it?
BGP_Level3traceroute 208.70.27.35
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 208.70.27.35
1 4.79.220.77 0 msec 4 msec 0 msec
2 4.68.123.30 [AS 3356] 8 msec 0 msec 4 msec
3 4.68.18.5 [AS 3356] 0 msec 4 msec 0 msec
4 4.68.110.138 [AS 3356] 4 msec 0 msec 4
Windows Software Update Services doesn't require the end-user to be
part of a domain to get updates. You just need to define the WSUS
server as the source for updates by changing a few registry entries
and make sure the server is available via HTTP or HTTPS to your
customers. You can
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Lyon wrote:
Anyone else seeing it?
BGP_Level3traceroute 208.70.27.35
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 208.70.27.35
1 4.79.220.77 0 msec 4 msec 0 msec
2 4.68.123.30 [AS 3356] 8 msec 0 msec 4 msec
3 4.68.18.5
We're seeing very poor performance on Cogent in Chicago to major sites
such as CNN and Salon. Traceroutes indicate packets dropping inside
Cogent's network and at their handoff to at atdn.net. Opened a ticket with
Cogent around 10am Central, haven't heard from anybody since.
Not necessarily
CNN and www.archive.org were the two sites I couldn't get to...
-Mike
On 9/28/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
We're seeing very poor performance on Cogent in Chicago to major sites
such as CNN and Salon. Traceroutes indicate packets dropping inside Cogent's
network and at
Maybe they depeered themselves. They seem to be on a roll!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Mike Lyon
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 2:39 PM
To: NANOG
Subject: Cogent issues in SF area?
Anyone else seeing it?
The archive.org/Cogent stuff was an issue specific to archive.org's
connection to Cogent.
Jim Shankland
http://www.e-gerbil.net/cogent-t1r looks like they're playing the
depeering games again.
E
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Mike Lyon
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 3:45 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: NANOG
Subject: Re: Cogent
at http://www.e-gerbil.net/cogent-t1r there is a plain text document with
the following HTTP headers:
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 21:56:34 GMT
Server: Apache/2.2.3 (Unix) PHP/5.2.3
Last-Modified: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 19:15:53 GMT
ETag: 92c1e1-a85-43b36ea5bcc40
No problem here...
computer:~ hexstar$ traceroute 208.70.27.35
traceroute to 208.70.27.35 (208.70.27.35), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 10.0.1.1 (10.0.1.1) 2.672 ms 1.937 ms 1.730 ms
2 * * *
3 ge-2-8-ur01.oakland.ca.sfba.comcast.net (68.86.249.113) 11.590 ms
11.371 ms 15.132 ms
4
at http://www.e-gerbil.net/cogent-t1r there is a plain text document
with
the following HTTP headers:
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 21:56:34 GMT
Server: Apache/2.2.3 (Unix) PHP/5.2.3
Last-Modified: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 19:15:53 GMT
ETag: 92c1e1-a85-43b36ea5bcc40
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 10:00:41PM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
[snip]
the second plain text assertion which caught my eye was:
Why is this happening? There are a few possibilities. First, Cogent
may simply want revenue from the networks it has de-peered, in the
form of
Randy Epstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Clearly you can see the article was published by T1R in their Daily T1R
report: http://www.t1r.com/
(listed under The Daily T1R Headlines)
If you subscribe to the Daily T1R, you can find Dan's report issued today.
Sorry, T1R.com requires Flash 8 or
Paul,
This is the scenario. Peer B is send lots of outbound to Peer A.
Peer A depeers Peer (well former Peer) B. Why? Well, Peer A is having
ratio problems with other Peers C-F. Keep reading...
After depeering, some of (now former) Peer B's outbound traffic to
Peer A will now flow over
I don't know that NLayer was depeered yesteray for a fact, although
someone I trust did report that to me. I do know for a fact that
Limelight was. No offense to the good folk at nLayer, but most of the
people who I work for care a good bit more about Limelight
Didn't know about VW
On 9/21/07, Deepak Jain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, when I see Location of Maintenance: France and a 5 minute
outage for a protected SONET service on a supposedly redundant, high
quality International voice/data network... well, let's just say I'm not
impressed -- on 36 hrs notice, no
21 matches
Mail list logo
