nathan and all,
How true! ROFLMAO. It is not too dissimilar to those that believed that
Jon Postel and Venton Cref are "Fathers" of the internet religious fervor
nonsense.
Personally I wish old Al had not made this comment referenced in the
quoted article you provided here, as I am supportive of his race
for the next president. But he really stuck his foot in his mouth with this one!
Sheeeesh! It looks like a fellow texan, George W. Bush is going to
eventually get the nod, I am afraid!
Nathan James wrote:
> Somehow this fits in here :)
> http://cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/03/12/gore.internet.ap/
>
> Nathan James
> ----------
> >From: Frank Rizzo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Re: [IFWP] Re: What ICANN doesn't want you to know - a well hid
> >Date: Tue, Mar 16, 1999, 4:58 PM
> >
>
> > At 11:55 AM -0800 3/16/99, Kevin J. Connolly wrote:
> >>I think this is a cheap shot. Were it not for ISOC's involvement after
> >>Jon Postel presented his ur-proposal, we would have (a) complete chaos
> >>(generic TLDs allocated on a first-come, first serve, let the lawyers
> >>figure it out basis), (b) untrammeled US-centric rules, and ( c) continued
> >>unchallenged market dominance by NSI. Don Heath took one hell of a
> >>political risk suggesting that the input of the international internet
> >>community was needed on these issues. In fact, Don Heath is responsible
> >>for the very idea that expanding the TLD namespace was something other
> >>than a purely technical issue to be resolved by the IETF.
> >
> > Hahahahahahah, my God that is funny.
> >
> > If any of you believe this, I'm selling some Y2K compatible gas addititive
> > for your car. Pour it in, and your car will run after the millenium.
> >
> > God Damn that's funny, Don Heath saves the Internet from "complete chaos".
> >
> > heheheheheheh,
> >
> > -rIzZy
> >
> >
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
/8.8.7)
with ESMTP id VAA07649
for <[email protected]>; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 21:56:15 -0500
Received: from beasley.paix.gnac.net (beasley.paix.gnac.net [209.182.195.70]) by
mars.netspire.com.sg (8.9.0/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA19574 for <[email protected]>; Wed,
17 Mar 1999 10:24:37 +0800
X-Original-Recipient: <[email protected]>
X-Envelope-To: <[email protected]>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by beasley.paix.gnac.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA03621
for firewalls-include; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 17:47:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.diginsite.com (warden.digitalinsight.com [208.29.163.2])
by beasley.paix.gnac.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA03606
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 17:47:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dlang (dlang.diginsite.com [10.1.1.2])
by mail.diginsite.com (8.8.8/8.8.6) with ESMTP id RAA19431;
Tue, 16 Mar 1999 17:44:04 -0800
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 18:39:27 -0800 (PST)
From: David Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Sender: dlang@dlang
To: Bennett Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: Bill Husler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Multiple levels of trust on one switch (Cisco)
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9903161833290.9691-100000@dlang>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
When my cisco rep tried to sell me on this I asked him to explain how
their vlan setup could be as secure (let alone more seccure) then my
existing method of using an air gap between different switches (with
firewalls connecting them as appropriate). He couldn't answer so I am
still using multiple small switches and air gaps.
As for redundancy, it depends on what sort of downtime you can afford if a
switch fails. I decided that the most cost effective method for me was to
order 9 3com 3300 switches for my 6 networks (8 needed for the networks
and one spare) As we have round the clock operators, if a switch fails we
can unplug everything from one switch and plug in into the new switch in a
very short time period. (we did have to try this one day so we know it is
under 5 min to do the switch)
David Lang
On Tue, 16 Mar 1999, Bennett Todd wrote:
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 18:49:10 +0000
> From: Bennett Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Bill Husler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Multiple levels of trust on one switch (Cisco)
>
> 1999-03-16-15:20:00 Bill Husler:
> > We have networks with varying levels of trust [...] and intend for traffic
> > flowing between these networks to traverse firewalls. It has been suggested
> > that we implement this with a single (actually multiple for redundancy)
> > Cisco Switch using VLAN technology to isolate the varying levels of trust.
>
> I surely wouldn't. Go with smaller switches --- or hubs, or routers --- for
> the various networks. Keep 'em separate. A smaller switch is cheaper than a
> bigger one. Some of the nets won't need the performance of a switch; hub might
> be great for them. Others might profit from a multi-port router; if you didn't
> want to budget a huge wad o' $$$ you could do a nice one on the cheap with
> Znyx boards[1]. But if you're thinking about a multiple big Cisco switches,
> cost is clearly no object:-). Switches are designed as performance-enhancing
> gizmos, not security barriers, and traditionally they've been slow to get
> security fixes. I wouldn't build a security design that depended critically on
> switches not being compromised.
>
> -Bennett
>
> [1] <URL:http://www.znyx.com/products/netblaster/zx340.htm>
> -
> [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
>
"If users are made to understand that the system administrator's job is to
make computers run, and not to make them happy, they can, in fact, be made
happy most of the time. If users are allowed to believe that the system
administrator's job is to make them happy, they can, in fact, never be made
happy."
- -Paul Evans (as quoted by Barb Dijker in "Managing Support Staff", LISA '97)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv
iQEVAwUBNu8V4D7msCGEppcbAQGjLggAnUvU4+n8p0aFE91lVUyfRkr5MgMYP9Jz
xxRO2txmKBe/rN2pKXuoPesa56YODo+AAzBJFy/c0YXO3W8EiNXCarE1JmIAwTSl
HMBLYuomUueY5mPOSD6pVkOj1Rdbq5J2aic8EKor+a3NirQhoW/Cl6ICYtkz2+da
zoT0Kb2cRtOkdAIhirRVcNbyU3D5CHLKy8Sm1/PzoprZszAt9Ggk9Bwzp+ULv/69
+5xppKixhUlQ9BP271tQIPzUnHegpAi6Hmqivs7FCq8z4W5D4ivSw90S/cVChJYW
U8VfPzFpGxcK54qLMcOZgy07tImBmxM0pSXCtXDaSB30h2lZQfHVrA==
=pl87
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
