It doesn't matter who wrote:
If you don't find network operations to be relevant, then by all
means STOP POSTING TO THE GOD DAMNED NETWORK OPERATIONS MAILING LIST.
Some of those, particularly those who *gasp* run networks, still find
it relevent. If there is this much disagreement about your
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Paul Vixie wrote:
and yet, when i consider my nontechnical friends with their DSL and cablemodem
connections, i know that if they get hit by an exploding DLL, their ISP is one
of the likely places they will place a call.
For assistance with Microsoft security issues in
i've
assumed that the hardcore bgp engineering community now meets elsewhere.
Or perhaps BGP engineering hasn't changed in so many years
that it is now more than adequately covered by books,
certificate courses, and internal sharing of expertise.
Lists are good for things that are new or
To the people who say we throw in the towel and just say Gadi will
never
stop posting off-topic crap, so why bother trying to correct him?, I'd
suggest that this is a self-defeating attitude. Not only because Gadi
could actually be posting useful stuff if set on the right path as to
what
P.S. Note that I do not agree that anyone has yet tried
to correct Gadi.
i guess what i've found most bemusing about this whole thread is -- i went
looking for the first email Gadi posted.
turns out that his posting habits have convinced Outlook that his email is
junk - and _all_ of his posts
On 22 Sep 2006, at 11:06, Lincoln Dale wrote:
P.S. Note that I do not agree that anyone has yet tried
to correct Gadi.
i guess what i've found most bemusing about this whole thread is --
i went
looking for the first email Gadi posted.
turns out that his posting habits have convinced
Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
Unless we're ready to admit that NANOG is completely and totally worthless
as a forum for discussing network operations, people NEED to step up and
take responsibility for the self policing that we're all supposed to be
doing in srh's absence.
I think you meant
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:11:20 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or perhaps BGP engineering hasn't changed in so many years
that it is now more than adequately covered by books,
certificate courses, and internal sharing of expertise.
Lists are good for things that are new or confusing or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sean Donelan) writes:
For assistance with Microsoft security issues in the US, call (866) PC-SAFETY
according to http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2019162,00.asp, microsoft has
not released a patch for the VML thing, so calling (866) PC-SAFETY isn't going
to be a
Once again, ONE arguably off-topic post, followed by a non-stop stream
of DOZENS of messages, for days, by self-appointed listcops.
I'm sorry if the only thing which prompts you, and you know who you
are, to post is that little rush of self-righteous adrenaline upon
seeing a message you think
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Paul Vixie wrote:
For assistance with Microsoft security issues in the US, call (866) PC-SAFETY
last but not least, according to http://isotf.org/zert/ there is a non-MSFT
patch for the VML thing. i don't expect ISP's to recommend its use, due to
liability reasons, but
Hi guys, several ISP's are experiencing a flood of calls from customers
who get failed installations of the recent IE 0day - VML - (vgx.dll).
If you are getting such floods too, this is why.
This is currently discussed on the botnets@ list, as raised by Cox, and I
figured I will float it out
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 08:06:13PM -0500, Gadi Evron wrote:
Hi guys, several ISP's are experiencing a flood of calls from customers
who get failed installations of the recent IE 0day - VML - (vgx.dll).
If you are getting such floods too, this is why.
This is currently discussed on the
Gadi Evron wrote:
Hi guys, several ISP's are experiencing a flood of calls from customers
who get failed installations of the recent IE 0day - VML - (vgx.dll).
If you are getting such floods too, this is why.
This is currently discussed on the botnets@ list, as raised by Cox, and I
figured I
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Bill Sehmel wrote:
Gadi Evron wrote:
Hi guys, several ISP's are experiencing a flood of calls from customers
who get failed installations of the recent IE 0day - VML - (vgx.dll).
If you are getting such floods too, this is why.
This is currently discussed on
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Gadi Evron wrote:
Are you telling me tech support overflow at this immense scale does not
affect the ISP and its network staff as well?
define 'immense scale' ... no calls here... so 'immense scale' in this
case is 'nothing'.
No, one thing you might say is that increased
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Gadi Evron wrote:
Are you telling me tech support overflow at this immense scale does not
affect the ISP and its network staff as well?
define 'immense scale' ... no calls here... so 'immense scale' in this
case
On Sep 21, 2006, at 10:11 PM, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Gadi Evron wrote:
Are you telling me tech support overflow at this immense scale
does not
affect the ISP and its network staff as well?
define 'immense scale' ... no calls here... so 'immense scale' in
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Dave Stewart wrote:
At 10:28 PM 9/21/2006, you wrote:
2) how is this different from any other large worm outbreak thing
It's not.
Which makes it operational in which sense?
I'm starting to think that these alerts need to be filed along with
the daily OMG,
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Gadi Evron wrote:
Paranoia has its place, but this ain't the place.
The report is NOT paranoia. Several LARGE user ISPs suffer immensely from
this. Use this information if it is useful to you and you encounter the
same problems.
Does it impact the network
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Gadi Evron wrote:
Paranoia has its place, but this ain't the place.
The report is NOT paranoia. Several LARGE user ISPs suffer immensely from
this. Use this information if it is useful to you and you encounter the
same
On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 12:01:58PM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006, Gadi Evron wrote:
Paranoia has its place, but this ain't the place.
The report is NOT paranoia. Several LARGE user ISPs suffer immensely from
this. Use this information if it is useful to you and
Gadi Evron wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Dave Stewart wrote:
At 10:28 PM 9/21/2006, you wrote:
2) how is this different from any other large worm outbreak thing
It's not.
Which makes it operational in which sense?
I'm starting to think that these alerts need to be filed along with
the
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Gadi, your initial query lacked the factual background that would have
been useful for someone to decide if it was relevant to them or not.
While I do believe that the intersection of host and applications issues
and networking has applicability here I
Does it impact the network operation?
Eg, does it adversely affect the network? (say, like Beagle did.)
I was thinking sql-slammer, massive flood causing signifcant
amount of network infrastructure to go down. (people on low speed links
with large blocks of address space were
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jared Mauch) writes:
I was thinking sql-slammer, massive flood causing signifcant
amount of network infrastructure to go down. (people on low speed links
with large blocks of address space were DoS'ed off the network).
right.
I don't think of drive-by
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joel Jaeggli) writes:
Even in an enterprise it's really hard to justify the expenditure that a
rapid response to a host security problem involves. For an isp which is
not likely to be in the position to recover the cost of being reactive
let alone pro-active I can't
Paul Vixie wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joel Jaeggli) writes:
Even in an enterprise it's really hard to justify the expenditure that a
rapid response to a host security problem involves. For an isp which is
not likely to be in the position to recover the cost of being reactive
let alone
On Thu, 21 September 2006 21:01:51 -0400, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
[..]
Seriously Gadi, what *possible* relevence could this have to network
operations?
that, and a thread where half of the posts are from the
initial poster himself anyway. but then, happily watching
him, at least he is
On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 12:11:33AM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:
Does it impact the network operation?
Eg, does it adversely affect the network? (say, like Beagle did.)
I was thinking sql-slammer, massive flood causing signifcant
amount of network infrastructure to go down.
Ok so:
1) Gadi sends his org email out stating bla bla bl abla
2) a dozen people reply back with to-all.. which causes further controversy
3) Gadi replys, trying to save him self
Can we please keep the flamewar offlist! .. if you got something to say..
say it to the person and not the entire
31 matches
Mail list logo
