Why is NANOG starting to sound like full-disclosure? Can't you kids
just argue amongst yourselves on IRC or something? This is so
off-charter...
If any of the involved parties thinks anyone cares, you'd do well to check
your egos.
--
Charles Sprickman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004,
Ken Diliberto wrote:
The smarter students put a NAT box on their port so they can run their
desktop, laptop, XBox and have a place their friend can plug in.
NAT is evil, not smart. If the addresses run out because of legitimate
use, more addresses should be allocated.
Pete
Paul Vixie wrote:
at scale, with things as they now are, i simply don't believe this. with
a 1:1 ratio (daily customers to onduty clues), it is never going to be
possible to contact every customer out of band (by phone, that is) when they
need to be told how to de-virus their win/xp box.
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Petri Helenius wrote:
I see this as a two different processes. There are definetly some
individuals who have no help whatsoever with their computers and need
the abuse/helpdesk to walk them through the disinfecting process.
Gartner estimates the total cost of ownership of
I was wondering :
We recently installed 10GE interface on GSR boxes (Engine4+).
I are experiencing a SNMP counter issue with 802.1q VLAN.
We were used to have counters by 802.1q VLAN on GSR on 1GE, but it looks
to be broken for 10GE subinterfaces.
Counters are available by SNMP, but
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004, Andrew Dorsett wrote:
In a dorm room situation or an apartment situation, you again know the
physical port the DHCP request came in on. You then know which room that
port is connected to and you therefore have a general idea of who the
abuser is. So whats the big deal
## On 2004-03-14 11:58 - Simon Lockhart typed:
SL
SL If someone can point me to Virtual Solaris Machine, then I'd willingly offer
SL that as a service (the colo I help run as a hobby is Sun only).
AFAIK that will be in Solaris 10 -
See N1 Grid Containers on
On Mon Mar 15, 2004 at 12:26:09PM +0200, Rafi Sadowsky wrote:
AFAIK that will be in Solaris 10 -
See N1 Grid Containers on http://wwws.sun.com/software/solaris/10/
You can get a non-supported preview for free
(or pay 99$ for one year support)
Well, it's Zones. I downloaded the latest
Sorry this thread is huge, I hope I'm not repeating comments..
if the market for this is nanog and you're just looking for smtp/shell surely we
can manage this between ourselves without charge (ask your nanog buddy for a
shell as a favour).. I know I can and will do this
Steve
On Sun, 14 Mar
$50/month at 40U rentable is $2000/rack/month if it's full.
And then there's the newer high-density rackmount units
like this one http://www.rlx.com/products/serverblades/dense.php
This product puts up to 24 server blades in a 3U chassis
which basically means you can put 8 times as many servers
For most people it'd probably make much more sense to find a provider
that
offers some form of SMTP relay service. It'd probably be cheaper/month,
and they wouldn't have the trouble and expense of providing/maintaining
a colo server.
Yep, if you aren't technically inclined that is better.
Certianly the point central to your arguement is that with the right
abuse-desk to customer ratio AND the right customer base, things could be
kept clean for smtp/web/ftp/blah 'hosting'.
I'll take the right customer base for $50 please Alex.
This
Sean Donelan wrote:
If I send an abuse complaint to an organization's mailbox on a Friday
night, will it be dealt with in the next 10 seconds? Or sometime next
week? If the computer reboots every 60 seconds, and gets different IP
addresses every time, a single infected computer can appear with
I expect every NANOG conference from now on will be filled with
announcements asking people to please fix their computers because
worms are killing the network. NANOG has less than 500 attendees,
yet has about the same number as infected computers as any other
ad-hoc network population.
Maybe
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Maybe NANOG needs to implement a system where you have to log
in to a web page with your NANOG meeting passcode in order to
get a usable IP address. Then, when an infected computer shows
up we will know exactly whose it was. Might even be interesting
for a
a suitably snarky don't hire these top network engineers to maintain
your fleet of windows boxes message) could be displayed on the
Is this an opt-in list? I'd like to opt-in. Now. Nu. Proto. A lifetime ago.
Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
Seconded. This is dirt simple to do. If we believe in public
humiliation, a list of infected machines and their owners (along with
a suitably snarky don't hire these top network engineers to maintain
your fleet of windows boxes message) could be displayed on the
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:29:29 -0500 (EST)
Andrew Dorsett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a topic I get very soap-boxish about. I have too many problems
with providers who don't understand the college student market. I can
There are certain environments where it would be nice for people to
Ken Diliberto wrote:
Something else I just remembered:
Connecting so much equipment in our dorms creates a fire hazard. The
are only two or three outlets (what I've been told) in a room shared by
two or three students. Add to the computer equipment a TV, stereo, DVD
player, alarm clocks,
Pete Templin wrote:
Employee to PHB: You hired me to provide core network engineering and
lead the level 2 network ops staff. Tell me again why you want me to
provide any server engineering, if you knew my strengths when you hired
me?
There's a reason I've gotten out of small ISP consulting
Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. [3/15/2004 7:39 PM] :
If you were willing to live in a place where an electrical overload
caused a fire (as opposed to tripping a circuit-breaker or blowing a
fuse), you have not correctly identified your worst problem, or the
the University's.
That's always there, but
Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. [3/15/2004 7:39 PM] :
If you were willing to live in a place where an electrical overload
caused a fire (as opposed to tripping a circuit-breaker or blowing a
fuse), you have not correctly identified your worst problem, or the
the
This whole thing makes me think that we should be encouraging VOIP traffic
to run over IPSEC so we can claim we don't know what it is.
Owen
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Owen,
That sounds like an invitation to have the Jack Booted Thugs barbeque your
home a'la Branch Davidian compound style.
:)
Christopher J. Wolff, VP CIO
Broadband Laboratories, Inc.
http://www.bblabs.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote:
Pete Templin wrote:
There's a reason I've gotten out of small ISP consulting - I don't do
Windows, and I'm getting overrun by Linux corrosion slowly. I route,
I switch, I help with securing networks. And I do wear a lot of hats
at my day job, but I remind them
Pete Templin wrote:
Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote:
Pete Templin wrote:
There's a reason I've gotten out of small ISP consulting - I don't do
Windows, and I'm getting overrun by Linux corrosion slowly. I route,
I switch, I help with securing networks. And I do wear a lot of hats
at my day
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 04:57:03 -0500 (EST), Sean Donelan wrote:
NANOG has less than 500 attendees,
yet has about the same number as infected computers as any other
ad-hoc network population.
If true this is a very significant fact
Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
if the market for this is nanog and you're just looking for smtp/shell surely we
can manage this between ourselves without charge (ask your nanog buddy for a
shell as a favour).. I know I can and will do this
Well, I do have motives beyond outbound smtp.
I actually looked
On 15 Mar 2004 08:01:15 -0500
Robert E. Seastrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe NANOG needs to implement a system where you have to log
in to a web page with your NANOG meeting passcode in order to
get a usable IP address. Then, when an infected computer shows
[...]
Seconded. This is
John,
There are the beginnings of some wireless devices that are capable of
directing wireless clients to cease transmission with L2 link control
messages. These are just beginning to emerge, and unfortunately I'm
certain that with only a matter of time people will write drivers that
ignore such
Leaving directed-bcast open would accomplish this on these devices, as well
as many others. A bigger problem here is that these irresponsible network
polyps would offer an icmp-independent amplifier. They essentially open
smurf amplification to any other protocol. Whereas a network might
This is part of a law enforcement wishlist which has been around for a
long time (See Magic Lantern, Clipper Chip et. al. for examples).
What is desired here is a system by which all communications
originating/or terminating at $DESIGNATED_TARGET can be intercepted with
no intervention by
Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote:
Pete Templin wrote:
I didn't suggest saying I'm not gonna do it. I just suggested You
hired me to deploy dynamic routing on your statically-routed network.
What prompted you to think that I could configure site-wide anti-virus
services such that no one ever
Bit hard by same bug. What version of code are you running on the 6513
8.1(2) fixes the bug on the 6x48 line cards. What happens is that packets
of 64 bytes or less are silently dropped. Replacing linecards will not
help unless there is another bug of which I am not aware. With a little
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Scott McGrath wrote:
What is desired here is a system by which all communications
originating/or terminating at $DESIGNATED_TARGET can be intercepted with
no intervention by and/or knowledge of the carrier hence ensuring the
security of the investigation.
I don't think
I have read the filing it's another step down the road. True all comms
are subject to intercept _already_ what is desired is a way to _easily_
perform the intercept and the easily part is the kicker. Some things
should be hard especially where civil rights are involved.
See all the light and
Can someone from Wiltel contact me offlist please.
Brian Boles
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Speaking on Deep Background, the Press Secretary whispered:
I have read the filing it's another step down the road. True all comms
are subject to intercept _already_ what is desired is a way to _easily_
perform the intercept and the easily part is the kicker. Some things
should be
Mark,
i heard there is a way to run MPLS for layer3 VPN(2547)
service without needing to run label switching in the
core(LDP/TDP/RSVP) but straight IP (aka iMPLS).
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-townsley-l2tpv3-mpls-01.txt
See also Mark's talk from the last NANOG
Yes, Gregory Taylor aka OseK is a perfect gentlemen now. Here are logs
from Feb 4th 2004 showing him being a perfect gentlemen...
(08:35:45) #sigdie!OseK_ :[NEMESIS] Nodes are attacking 212.242.41.0/24 on
port 666 for 60 seconds using spoofed TCP RESET Packets ...
(08:36:04) #sigdie!OseK_
On Monday, March 15, 2004 1:11 PM [EST], John Harold [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yes, Gregory Taylor aka OseK is a perfect gentlemen now. Here are logs
from Feb 4th 2004 showing him being a perfect gentlemen...
You know how easy it is to fake IRC logs?
(16:12:01) #nanog!jh I l33t hax0red
hice html shows lusers not operators, and i am not a browser.
DIVHello,/DIV
DIVnbsp;/DIV
DIVI think cisco woke up now, A
href=http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/5/36156.html;http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/5/36156.html/A/DIV
DIVnbsp;/DIV
DIVYou NSPs are the worst enemy for the
Stop it children. The thousands of people on this mailing list do not need
to watch this road kill. -ren
At 06:11 PM 3/15/2004 +, John Harold wrote:
Yes, Gregory Taylor aka OseK is a perfect gentlemen now. Here are logs
from Feb 4th 2004 showing him being a perfect gentlemen...
: Stop it children. The thousands of people on this mailing list do not need
: to watch this road kill. -ren
But they sure make good kill file fodder !
James Edwards
Routing and Security
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
At the Santa Fe Office: Internet at Cyber Mesa
Store hours: 9-6 Monday through Friday
ren wrote:
Stop it children. The thousands of people on this mailing list do not
need to watch this road kill. -ren
mode=voice in the wilderness
Some where it was ineffectively written that if you stop responding to
them, and particularly, if you stop endorsing the crap by quoting it
all
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joe Abley wrote:
|
|
| On 12 Mar 2004, at 23:24, joe mcguckin wrote:
|
| Patrick,
|
| I suspect that each FE goes to a different AS...
|
|
| In that case, sample/count outbound traffic volumes by
| (prefix/AS/AS_PATH/something), sort the resulting
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 00:36:00 EST, Joshua Brady said:
I was talking more along the lines of disclosing personal information without
permission, slander is another one as well...
I'm coming up empty-handed on statutes for the disclosure issue. Asking around
in the office found lots of rules that
Susan,
could you please clarify the NANOG AUP for the benefit
of some of our young/new posters?
Thank you,
-David Barak
-Fully RFC 1925 Compliant-
--- John Harold [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snipped IRC junk
=
David Barak
-fully RFC 1925 compliant-
__
Do you
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, David Barak wrote:
Susan,
could you please clarify the NANOG AUP for the benefit
of some of our young/new posters?
Thank you,
-David Barak
-Fully RFC 1925 Compliant-
Either that or they can check out the website,
http://www.nanog.org/aup.html
--
Is it just me that they don't like?
--
Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Administration - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WestNet: Connecting you to the planet. 805 884-6323 WB6RDV
NetLojix Communications, Inc. - http://www.netlojix.com/
Anyone else seeing an error getting to www.cisco.com?
!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN
HTMLHEAD
TITLE403 Forbidden/TITLE
/HEADBODY
H1Forbidden/H1
You don't have permission to access /
on this server.P
PAdditionally, a 403 Forbidden
error was encountered while trying to use an
| Behalf Of Jay Hennigan
| Sent: March 15, 2004 3:19 PM
|
| Is it just me that they don't like?
Apparently they don't like me either. On top of that, they're running
Apache 1.0--not so good.
Todd
--
Nope. It's horked.
= TC
-Original Message-
From: Jay Hennigan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 2:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Cisco website www.cisco.com 403 forbidden?
Is it just me that they don't like?
--
Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network
Nah, they hate me too. :-)
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Jay Hennigan wrote:
Is it just me that they don't like?
--
Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Administration - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WestNet: Connecting you to the planet. 805 884-6323 WB6RDV
NetLojix Communications, Inc. -
On 15.03.2004 21:18 Jay Hennigan wrote:
Is it just me that they don't like?
me too
Arnold
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Jay Hennigan wrote:
Is it just me that they don't like?
Nope, they got me too.
Jay Hennigan wrote:
Is it just me that they don't like?
I've seen one or two other reports.
Seems like a good opportunity for a round of Wild Speculation.
--
Requiescas in pace o email
| Behalf Of Jay Hennigan
| Sent: March 15, 2004 3:19 PM
|
| Is it just me that they don't like?
All fixed now, but load times are hella slow:
phoenix:~# curl -I cisco.com
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 20:40:53 GMT
Server: Apache/1.0 (Unix)
Set-Cookie:
It was down the first time I tried... seems to be back now.
Jeff
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Todd Mitchell - lists
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 1:23 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Cisco website www.cisco.com 403 forbidden?
|
Works fine for me.
-- amar
Al Qaeda packets?
-Original Message-
From: Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 2:25 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Cisco website www.cisco.com 403 forbidden?
Jay Hennigan wrote:
Is it just me that they don't like?
I've seen one or
Scott,
Yep, we had to send in the line cards to get them
upgraded, didn't have any information on upgrading the s/w
on the Line cards and TAC wanted me to RMA them back. So.
Boy this one was a real pain because it only seemed protocol
specific at the time.
Here's the referenced Bug
On Mon, March 15, 2004 3:21 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Anyone else seeing an error getting to www.cisco.com?
Yep, from AOL, level3, and RoadRunner. All coming back as 403.
--
Brian Bruns
The Summit Open Source Development Group
Open Solutions For A Closed World / Anti-Spam Resources
Anyone else seeing an error getting to www.cisco.com?
Maybe I missed to renew a service contract? They don't like me either.
Adi
I expect, that good (tier-3, to say) network engineer MUST know Windows and
Unix (== Linux, FreeBSD etc) on tear-2 (or better) level. Else, he will not
be able to troubleshout his _network problem_ (because they are more likely
complex Network + System + Application + Cable problem).
So, it is
no issues here
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone else seeing an error getting to www.cisco.com?
!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN
HTMLHEAD
TITLE403 Forbidden/TITLE
/HEADBODY
H1Forbidden/H1
You don't have permission to access /
on this server.P
PAdditionally, a 403 Forbidden
error was
** Reply to message from Todd Mitchell - lists [EMAIL PROTECTED] on
Mon, 15 Mar 2004 15:23:14 -0500
| Behalf Of Jay Hennigan
| Sent: March 15, 2004 3:19 PM
|
| Is it just me that they don't like?
Apparently they don't like me either. On top of that, they're running
Apache 1.0--not so
Anyone going to open a TAC case ?
--
Richard Danielli
Founder/President
eSubnet Enterprises Inc.
TORONTO, ON
Canada
(416) 203-5253
c: (416) 525-6148
http://www.eSubnet.com
~~~
This E-mail message is confidential, intended only for the named
recipient(s)
I can access it from Canada, but it seems that the first page is missing
some info which are typically there.
Priyantha
Wightman Internet
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Todd Mitchell - lists
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 3:23 PM
To:
Back for me now too. I was seeing the error earlier though.
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Amar Andersson wrote:
Works fine for me.
-- amar
Have noticed several sites down today.
Can't seem to get to www.sunfreeware.com as well as Cisco.
--
Jon R. Kibler
Chief Technical Officer
A.S.E.T., Inc.
Charleston, SC USA
(843) 849-8214
==
Filtered by: TRUSTEM.COM's Email Filtering Service
no issues here..loads quickly.
Todd Mitchell - lists wrote:
| Behalf Of Jay Hennigan
| Sent: March 15, 2004 3:19 PM
|
| Is it just me that they don't like?
All fixed now, but load times are hella slow:
phoenix:~# curl -I cisco.com
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 20:40:53 GMT
Server:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote:
Jay Hennigan wrote:
Is it just me that they don't like?
I've seen one or two other reports.
Seems like a good opportunity for a round of Wild Speculation.
Cisco is under spam attack
Cisco has closed their website because Vendor J made
On Mon, March 15, 2004 3:41 pm, Todd Mitchell - lists said:
| Behalf Of Jay Hennigan
| Sent: March 15, 2004 3:19 PM
|
| Is it just me that they don't like?
All fixed now, but load times are hella slow:
Probably a million other people just discovered it was back up as well.
I know
: This is a topic I get very soap-boxish about. I have too
: many problems with providers who don't understand the college
: student market. I can think of one university who requires
: students to login through a web portal before giving them a
: routable address. This is such a waste
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Alexei Roudnev wrote:
: I expect, that good (tier-3, to say) network engineer MUST know Windows and
: Unix (== Linux, FreeBSD etc) on tear-2 (or better) level. Else, he will not
: be able to troubleshout his _network problem_ (because they are more likely
: complex Network
People keep asking me why don't you take that off list?
I have a suggestion: say instead STFU--it is easier to type.
And that is the net effect, because every attempt to take an item
off-list results in something like the following.
I can not really figure out what the problem is.
Still 404s on me now when I try to log into CCO or follow any of my
bookmarks to case query, pricelist, or TAC Case generation.
Todays excuse of the day is:
flip
flip
flip
SUNSPOTS!
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Todd Mitchell - lists wrote:
| Behalf Of Jay Hennigan
| Sent: March 15, 2004 3:19 PM
Nor here. Been connected via GBLX all day to one of their pages.
ymmv,
--ra
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 03:42:12PM -0500, William Warren said something to the effect
of:
no issues here
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone else seeing an error getting to www.cisco.com?
!DOCTYPE HTML
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 03:38:39PM -0500, Richard Danielli wrote:
Anyone going to open a TAC case ?
Good god, is there really so little interesting shit on the Internet that
we are reduced to 20 post long threads me too-ing a 30 minute outage of a
website which is now fixed?
The god damn
On Mon, March 15, 2004 3:51 pm, Jon R. Kibler said:
Have noticed several sites down today.
Can't seem to get to www.sunfreeware.com as well as Cisco.
Works fine here. Possibly some flapping going on somewhere?
I just logged into several routers and checked, I see nothing entirely out
of
It was down, came back up.
It's certainly not a networking problem so saying it's down from a couple
hosts doesn't matter.
that's it that's all, no need to tell everybody it was down for you.
-chris
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Forrest Houston wrote:
Back for me now too. I was seeing the error
At 03:53 PM 15/03/2004, Tom (UnitedLayer) wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote:
Jay Hennigan wrote:
Is it just me that they don't like?
I've seen one or two other reports.
Seems like a good opportunity for a round of Wild Speculation.
Cisco is under spam attack
Cisco
No true in many cases. All I have to prove is it's not the network and
then I hand it off to the windows/*nix/whatever sysadmins. To prove
it's not the network, I don't need to know the end systems in any sort of
detail.
to pass the buck, one needs to know nothing. what makes a great noc
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote:
And that is the net effect, because every attempt to take an item
off-list results in something like the following.
I can not really figure out what the problem is.
You're on SPEWS eh?
Due to previous ipal name collision discovered last week the project has
been renamed PRISP, big thanks to GertJan Hagenaars for this name. Again
if people would like to participate, this project will develop opensource
software (or framework and database schema for such software) to help
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 12:21:54PM -1000, Randy Bush wrote:
No true in many cases. All I have to prove is it's not the network and
then I hand it off to the windows/*nix/whatever sysadmins. To prove
it's not the network, I don't need to know the end systems in any sort of
detail.
Anyone else seeing an error getting to www.cisco.com?
Yep, from AOL, level3, and RoadRunner. All coming back as 403.
You expected the webserver to react differently depending on how your packets
got there?
Steve
On Monday, March 15, 2004 6:01 PM [EST], Stephen J. Wilcox
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone else seeing an error getting to www.cisco.com?
Yep, from AOL, level3, and RoadRunner. All coming back as 403.
You expected the webserver to react differently depending on how your
packets got there?
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Randy Bush wrote:
: No true in many cases. All I have to prove is it's not the network and
: then I hand it off to the windows/*nix/whatever sysadmins. To prove
: it's not the network, I don't need to know the end systems in any sort of
: detail.
:
: to pass the buck,
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe NANOG needs to implement a system where you have to log
in to a web page with your NANOG meeting passcode in order to
get a usable IP address. Then, when an infected computer shows
up we will know exactly whose it was. Might even be
I find it ironic that one of the presentations at the last nanog was about
a system kind of like that:
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0402/gauthier.html
and that we had some luser on the nanog30 wireless network infected by SQL
slammer.
Well it wouldnt be nanog without a few infections, password
Found on slashdot:
http://www.scienceblog.com/community/article2473.html
Any idea what they're trying to say/sell?
The article is so vague as to be mostly useless, but it seems to indicate
the usual stuff like sliding windows.
-S
--
Scott Call Router Geek, ATGi, home of $6.95 Prime Rib
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/grp/scs/net/talk03/tcp-slac-nov03.pdf
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Ok - is name resoluution issue network issue or not? if it is, how can you
answer anything without knowing, for example,
of existing Windows DNS client with internal cache, and difference between
'ping' and 'nslookup' name resolution on Solaris?
Is ARP problem - network one or not? if it is, how
The US Department of Interior was ordered to disconnect most, but
not all, Internet connections. They don't have to disconnect their
modems, private networks, or other agency networks.
This is the third time the court has ordered the Interior Department
to disconnect some or all of their
Is it bad, If they (your sysadmins) understand your backbone infrastructure
and understand such things, as MTU MTU discovery, knows about
ACL filters (without extra details) and existing limitations? They are not
required to know about VPN mode or T3 card configuration, but they must
understand
Apparently there's some PGE problem, and a possible electrical fire. It
appears that 501 2nd street is on Generator, and several other businesses
on federal and 2nd streets are out of power. Bryant street appears to have
spotty power in the area.
Anyone else know anything about this?
---
Tom
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 11:27:42 -1000, Scott Weeks [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Also, most .edueyeball networks have (and have always had) a VERY low
budget for networking stuff. As a result, generally, there is little to
no plant map documentation, so it isn't the case of looking up the
physical
I know that CW was supposed to close their US ops, and then it went to
re-org and became CW America or something of the sort, but does anyone
here have a clue as to their new support info? Because just a week or so
ago 800-486-9932 got me to a real human for support, and now it just
rings and
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
