Hi There I am constantly getting these log messages for last few days:-
sshd[21015]: Failed password for root from X.X.103.152 port 21067 ssh2 sshd[21016]: Received disconnect from X.X.103.152: 11: Normal Shutdown, Thank you for playing Are these indicating any brute-force attack ?Thanks HM On Wednesday, 26 February 2014, 21:15, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: Send juniper-nsp mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of juniper-nsp digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" (ryanL) 2. Re: proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" (Phil Shafer) 3. Re: proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" (Eric Van Tol) 4. Re: proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" (Jerry Dent) 5. Re: proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" (Brent Sweeny) 6. Re: proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" (Fernando Garcia Fernandez) 7. Re: proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" (ryanL) 8. Re: proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" (Jonas Frey (Probe Networks)) 9. Re: proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" ([email protected]) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 12:22:51 -0500 From: ryanL <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Cc: Juniper for Network Service Providers <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" Message-ID: <cak_-tsayrdjhuatsnbokn2nrkcrjjgb3zwtr_cljizkuxcx...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 it's a nice-to-have, maybe? but this sounds more like an opportunity for you to sell some JNCIA courses. i mean, how long has junos been around now? On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Phil Shafer <[email protected]> wrote: > Juniper users, > > We've been asked to make a change the "clear bgp neighbor" command > to make the neighbor or "all" argument mandatory. The root cause > is the severe impact of "clear bgp neighbor" and the increasing > accidental use of this command without a specific neighbor. > > In general, we avoid changing commands to add mandatory arguments, > but my feeling is that the impact and severity of this specific > command makes this an acceptable occasion for such a change. > > I'm looking for feedback about this change. My working assumption > is that "clear bgp neighbor" is a sufficiently rare command and > would not be used in automation/scripts, so the impact of making > the neighbor/all argument mandatory would be minimal. Is this > assumption accurate? > > Thanks, > Phil > > [I've set reply-to to myself to avoid impacting the list] > > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 13:44:42 -0500 From: Phil Shafer <[email protected]> To: ryanL <[email protected]> Cc: Juniper for Network Service Providers <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain ryanL writes: >it's a nice-to-have, maybe? but this sounds more like an opportunity for >you to sell some JNCIA courses. i mean, how long has junos been around now? Not selling anything; just trying to solve a problem multiple customers have reported and escalated. I'm a software developer, working on the UI code (CLI, MGD, configuration, XML API, scripting) for 17+ years. JUNOS 3.0 (the first release with the ui code) shipped during the summer of 1998, IIRC. Thanks, Phil ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 14:24:21 -0500 From: Eric Van Tol <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > it's a nice-to-have, maybe? but this sounds more like an opportunity for > you to sell some JNCIA courses. i mean, how long has junos been around > now? Confusing comment, since this enhancement isn't about CLI inexperience. It doesn't matter how long Junos has been around or how experienced someone is, it's still too incredibly easy to hit 'Enter' too soon and clear all your BGP neighbors by accident. I don't see a problem with adding the requirement 'all'. -evt ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 13:29:18 -0600 From: Jerry Dent <[email protected]> To: Eric Van Tol <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" Message-ID: <CADUFW=wkyvha1jlwjjrwqkhlrootrpaggrwqtzw_vjlai33...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Just add a line "Reset all bgp sessions? [Y/N]" for confirmation. On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Eric Van Tol <[email protected]> wrote: > > it's a nice-to-have, maybe? but this sounds more like an opportunity for > > you to sell some JNCIA courses. i mean, how long has junos been around > > now? > > Confusing comment, since this enhancement isn't about CLI inexperience. > It doesn't matter how long Junos has been around or how experienced > someone is, it's still too incredibly easy to hit 'Enter' too soon and > clear all your BGP neighbors by accident. > > I don't see a problem with adding the requirement 'all'. > > -evt > > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 11:04:54 -0800 From: Brent Sweeny <[email protected]> To: [email protected], Juniper for Network Service Providers <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Phil, I think what you propose sounds like a reasonable and appropriately-scoped response to a real problem. Brent Sweeny Indiana University On 2/26/2014 7:36 AM, Phil Shafer wrote: > Juniper users, > > We've been asked to make a change the "clear bgp neighbor" command > to make the neighbor or "all" argument mandatory. The root cause > is the severe impact of "clear bgp neighbor" and the increasing > accidental use of this command without a specific neighbor. > > In general, we avoid changing commands to add mandatory arguments, > but my feeling is that the impact and severity of this specific > command makes this an acceptable occasion for such a change. > > I'm looking for feedback about this change. My working assumption > is that "clear bgp neighbor" is a sufficiently rare command and > would not be used in automation/scripts, so the impact of making > the neighbor/all argument mandatory would be minimal. Is this > assumption accurate? > > Thanks, > Phil > > [I've set reply-to to myself to avoid impacting the list] > > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 21:04:54 +0100 From: Fernando Garcia Fernandez <[email protected]> To: Eric Van Tol <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 +1 to include the ?all? option. In fact, coming from the IOS world, it amused me when I discovered that there was no ?*? or ?all? option to clear all neighbors. El 26/02/2014, a las 20:24, Eric Van Tol <[email protected]> escribi?: >> it's a nice-to-have, maybe? but this sounds more like an opportunity for >> you to sell some JNCIA courses. i mean, how long has junos been around >> now? > > Confusing comment, since this enhancement isn't about CLI inexperience. It > doesn't matter how long Junos has been around or how experienced someone is, > it's still too incredibly easy to hit 'Enter' too soon and clear all your BGP > neighbors by accident. > > I don't see a problem with adding the requirement 'all'. > > -evt > > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 14:25:00 -0500 From: ryanL <[email protected]> To: Phil Shafer <[email protected]> Cc: Juniper for Network Service Providers <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" Message-ID: <cak_-tsajcgxr6n3-aq7w6frmz61fh+w8y30x0fhkzslzy8e...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 yeah, i'm not slagging. just seems like poor training for newbie noc engineers or something. this is a pretty rookie error, in my view, but i've been around almost as long as you have ;-) On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Phil Shafer <[email protected]> wrote: > ryanL writes: > >it's a nice-to-have, maybe? but this sounds more like an opportunity for > >you to sell some JNCIA courses. i mean, how long has junos been around > now? > > Not selling anything; just trying to solve a problem multiple > customers have reported and escalated. I'm a software developer, > working on the UI code (CLI, MGD, configuration, XML API, scripting) > for 17+ years. > > JUNOS 3.0 (the first release with the ui code) shipped during the > summer of 1998, IIRC. > > Thanks, > Phil > > ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 21:37:20 +0100 From: "Jonas Frey (Probe Networks)" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Cc: Juniper for Network Service Providers <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" Message-ID: <1393447040.4974.178.camel@wks02> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" +1 for the "all" requirement Am Mittwoch, den 26.02.2014, 10:36 -0500 schrieb Phil Shafer: > Juniper users, > > We've been asked to make a change the "clear bgp neighbor" command > to make the neighbor or "all" argument mandatory. The root cause > is the severe impact of "clear bgp neighbor" and the increasing > accidental use of this command without a specific neighbor. > > In general, we avoid changing commands to add mandatory arguments, > but my feeling is that the impact and severity of this specific > command makes this an acceptable occasion for such a change. > > I'm looking for feedback about this change. My working assumption > is that "clear bgp neighbor" is a sufficiently rare command and > would not be used in automation/scripts, so the impact of making > the neighbor/all argument mandatory would be minimal. Is this > assumption accurate? > > Thanks, > Phil > > [I've set reply-to to myself to avoid impacting the list] > > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/attachments/20140226/ad7a1719/attachment-0001.sig> ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 22:10:50 +0100 (CET) From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [j-nsp] proposed changes to "clear bgp neighbor" Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii > We've been asked to make a change the "clear bgp neighbor" command > to make the neighbor or "all" argument mandatory. The root cause > is the severe impact of "clear bgp neighbor" and the increasing > accidental use of this command without a specific neighbor. > > In general, we avoid changing commands to add mandatory arguments, > but my feeling is that the impact and severity of this specific > command makes this an acceptable occasion for such a change. > > I'm looking for feedback about this change. My working assumption > is that "clear bgp neighbor" is a sufficiently rare command and > would not be used in automation/scripts, so the impact of making > the neighbor/all argument mandatory would be minimal. Is this > assumption accurate? For us, yes. Fully support the idea of requiring an "all" argument. Steinar Haug, AS 2116 ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp ------------------------------ End of juniper-nsp Digest, Vol 135, Issue 29 ******************************************** _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
