Re: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular
* A spamware daemon is installed on the dedicated server, to keep the network interface in promiscuous mode * The daemon determines which IP addresses on the local subnet are not in use. It also determines the addresses of the network routers. One or more unused IP addresses are commandeered for use by the spammer. * The perp server sends unrequested ARP responses to only the gateway routers, so that the routers never have to ask for a layer-3 to layer-2 association -- it's alway in the ARP cache of the routers. Nobody else sees this traffic in an EtherSwitch fabric, so ARPWATCH and its kin are defeated. Pings and traceroutes also fail with host unreachable.. The daemon then only has to watch on the NIC, in promiscuous mode, for TCP packets to the hijacked address on port 80, and pass them down the tunnel to the remote Web server. * Finally, GRE and IPIP tunneling is used to connect the stolen IP addresses to the spammer's real servers hosted elsewhere. The end result is that the spammer has created a server at an IP address which not even the owners of the network are aware of. And if one went to http://www.senderbase.org/ and monitored their own IP block, wouldn't the spammer appear there? Or just plain monitoring spikes in outgoing port 25 traffic should alert someone that something is amiss. -Hank
Re: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
Bill Nash wrote: Trying to migrate customers to their own vlan when they've been alloted IPs, willy nilly, across one of the bajillion /24's secondaried on the vlan interface drives me into an entire new dimension of pissed off. Unless I am missing something obvious, it seems like rfc 3069 (sub/super vlans) provides an easy (interim?) solution to this dilemma.
Re: DNSSEC in Plain English
but it ain't the crypto. never has been. and it is not always easy to explain math in plain english. so let's focus on where work needs to be done. You and I are in violent agreement. The problem is in understanding whether or not the crypto under the hood really does provide a TRUSTABLE system. And that is more to do with policies and procedures. This is the stuff that I don't see explained in plain English so that the decision makers who rely on DNS can make a decision on DNSSEC. Ed Lewis pointed out two presentations which he claims have no crypto. However his own presentation at Apricot is laced with technical jargon including crypto. Stuff like hierarchy of public keys, DNSSEC data, hash of the DNSKEY, certificates, and so on. This is fine for a technical audience but it won't help explain the issue to the decision makers who spend the money. I understand how the crypto works to the extent that I believe it is technically possible for something like DNSSEC to work. However, I don't see an explanation of the policies and procedures that convinvces me that it DNSSEC really does work. The history of crypto-based security is filled with flawed implementations. --Michael Dillon --Michael Dillon
Re: IPv6 Transit?
On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 12:07 -0400, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: Hello, Some information is available at http://www.ipv6tf.org/guide/organizations/services/isp.php Can you add NDSoftware in the list ? Thank you Best Regards, -- Nicolas DEFFAYET NDSoftware http://www.ndsoftware.com/
Re: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Chris Hills wrote: Unless I am missing something obvious, it seems like rfc 3069 (sub/super vlans) provides an easy (interim?) solution to this dilemma. Some ciscos can do this as well (recent IOS). IP unnumbered and static routes towards vlan interfaces means you can put customers in their own vlan and still have them be part of a larger IP subnet spanning several vlans. Since it was Extreme that filed RFC3069 I seriously doubt Cisco will ever implement it straight up. -- Mikael Abrahamssonemail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 11:59:51 -0700 Warren Kumari [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 14, 2006, at 2:18 AM, John van Oppen wrote: That being said, I know at least one of our transit customers does hosting exactly how you are describing. Coincidentally, this customer is also one of the customers that asked if we could give them a class C block. Ok, I KNOW I am going to be slapped by a bunch of people here, but I often refer to a /24 (anywhere in the space) as a class C. SLAP! Actually, we've recently seen an Internet service RFP requesting Class A addresses because they were better than Class Bs! At least they won't be asking for any Class Cs - too low rent for them ! Hmm, I've just realised that we've just been assigned a Class A /18, so maybe we can supply the customer Class A, Number 1 Grade, Premium, Royal Quality IP addresses after all. -- Sheep are slow and tasty, and therefore must remain constantly alert. - Bruce Schneier, Beyond Fear
RE: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: Some ciscos can do this as well (recent IOS). IP unnumbered and static routes towards vlan interfaces means you can put customers in their own vlan and still have them be part of a larger IP subnet spanning several vlans. Since it was Extreme that filed RFC3069 I seriously doubt Cisco will ever implement it straight up. I don't think it was Extreme that filed it, or at least they didn't write it. It was the good folks at Qwest engineering who came up with the idea, which was implemented (for some low value of implemented) by Extreme. The authors had moved on by the time the RFC was published, but they were certainly Qwesties (and probably CSN before that). I *think* the same idea was floated to Cisco at the same time; their PVLAN was offered in beta not long after Extreme moved super/sub-VLANs into public release. Unfortunately for those of us who had to actually implement said abomination, it didn't quite work as well as promised. In fact I was just trying to decide which was more painful, taking over a hosting network with 90% of their hosts in one VLAN (VLAN2, they asked for free advice when they first started to attempt to migrate), or supporting super/sub-VLANs in an operational environment. Customers hated both, but at least they saw better performance once the hosting network was broken up per-customer VLANs. Jeremiah
RE: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Kristal, Jeremiah wrote: advice when they first started to attempt to migrate), or supporting super/sub-VLANs in an operational environment. Customers hated both, but at least they saw better performance once the hosting network was broken up per-customer VLANs. Why would customers hate it? We have deployed super/subvlan for residential DSL (1 static IP address per residential user) and we have no complaints afaik. Yes, if you want more flexiblity to put any IP in any vlan in any or alike, the implementation is lacking. -- Mikael Abrahamssonemail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: advice when they first started to attempt to migrate), or supporting super/sub-VLANs in an operational environment. Customers hated both, but at least they saw better performance once the hosting network was broken up per-customer VLANs. Why would customers hate it? We have deployed super/subvlan for residential DSL (1 static IP address per residential user) and we have no complaints afaik. Yes, if you want more flexiblity to put any IP in any vlan in any or alike, the implementation is lacking. Customers hated it because of some very serious operational flaws. Some stuff was to be expected, like seeing broadcast traffic in all subs under a super-VLAN. Some stuff was truly flawed, like having some small percentage of packets leaking across sub-VLANs. Residential customers don't mind, and probably would never notice. Large corporate clients who are putting important servers in a hosting environment get rather concerned when you start seeing traffic (including cleartext login info) from their neighbors on their interfaces. Trying to convince your vendor that this (and other) flaw exists when you're the only client using it in production, and you're pushing several orders of magnitude more traffic than their labs, can be slightly frustrating. I personally felt that this was a solution in search of a problem. The enterprise hosting division on an RBOC was probably not the best place to deploy it. The current low-end hosting environment is a problem that fits pretty well, but based on my experience in that segment, there is a much bigger return on investment in paying a couple of engineers well enough to manage your VLAN allocations correctly and use existing (generally secondary market) hardware and tools. Jeremiah
h.gtld-servers.net offline...
Unless I am mistaken, h.gtld-servers.net is offline and has been for an hour or two. I can't see the containing prefix, 192.54.112.0/24. http://www.ris.ripe.net/perl-risapp/prefixinuse.do?rrc_id=1000Submit=Submit.submit=typesortby=timeoutype=htmlpreftype=ematchinterval=1prefix=192.54.112.0/24 Will
Re: h.gtld-servers.net offline...
On 15-Jun-2006, at 09:41, Will Hargrave wrote: Unless I am mistaken, h.gtld-servers.net is offline and has been for an hour or two. I can't see the containing prefix, 192.54.112.0/24. I think you're mistaken about the server being off-line, since I can see it just fine from many places. The RIPE NCC dnsmon tool can also see it from its various probes: http://dnsmon.ripe.net/dns-servmon/server/?server=h.gtld- servers.netshow=SHOW I don't know any details about how that servers is deployed, however, so it's non-trivial to draw more conclusions about what problems you're having. Perhaps a single anycast node has some issues, or perhaps 192.54.112.0/24 has flapped a bit, and has been suppressed due to dampening in your neck of the woods. Joe
Re: DNSSEC in Plain English
At 11:11 +0100 6/15/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: certificates, and so on. This is fine for a technical audience but it won't help explain the issue to the decision makers who spend the money. We should be clear on who the decision makers are. I've spent a long time trying to trick folks with engineering budgets and policy roles into doing DNSSEC. As much as they have been sympathetic to the cause, they can't find the justification they need to make DNSSEC happen. It's not that they are ignorant. It's that they answer to other authorities - not the *gasp* engineers. The people who have investments in the Internet are the decision makers here. The consumers of the Internet, those who buy its services and turn them around for a profit, are the decision makers. They are the ones exposed to risk, they are the ones to best judge if DNSSEC fills a need. Unfortunately, I don't speak their language. Shucks, I'm just a simple country engineer from the old days. I do not mean to say we should stop technical discussions of DNSSEC nor stop the education process happening today. I also don't mean to say that we ought to give up on developing tools that will make DNSSEC less onerous. I mean to say that the effort to deploy DNSSEC has to consider (or increase what's done now) reaching out to those who we think are the consumers or beneficiaries of DNSSEC. -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis+1-571-434-5468 NeuStar Nothin' more exciting than going to the printer to watch the toner drain...
Re: h.gtld-servers.net offline...
Joe Abley wrote: I think you're mistaken about the server being off-line, since I can see it just fine from many places. The RIPE NCC dnsmon tool can also see it from its various probes: http://dnsmon.ripe.net/dns-servmon/server/?server=h.gtld-servers.netshow=SHOW That's old data. This is a recent incident. (IIRC, the most recent data isn't publicly available). It's rolled over and you can see it going down in the live interface now: http://dnsmon.ripe.net/dns-servmon/server/plot?type=dropsserver=h.gtld-servers.netday=15month=6year=2006hour=6period=2hshift=%2B6h I don't know any details about how that servers is deployed, however, so it's non-trivial to draw more conclusions about what problems you're having. Perhaps a single anycast node has some issues, or perhaps 192.54.112.0/24 has flapped a bit, and has been suppressed due to dampening in your neck of the woods. I did (and do) check on multiple ASs that I run and asked a few others to check, also checked looking glasses and so on. But anyway, it's back now, so nothing to see. Obviously a local problem of some sort. Will
Re: h.gtld-servers.net offline...
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Will Hargrave wrote: Joe Abley wrote: I think you're mistaken about the server being off-line, since I can see it just fine from many places. The RIPE NCC dnsmon tool can also see it from its various probes: I did (and do) check on multiple ASs that I run and asked a few others to check, also checked looking glasses and so on. So, out of curiousity, i loss of 1 of 13 gtld servers important? I believe (though I could be mistaken) that these are actually anycast as well. I think dropping even 2-3 of the servers probably wouldn't affect overall performance would it? won't bind pick the 'best' place to ask regardless and stick/prefer that over 'slow' servers? It's certainly an interesting data point, but how does it affect the network as a whole? (perhaps this was the 1 hour/year permitted for maint on the network/device in question?)
Re: h.gtld-servers.net offline...
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Christopher L. Morrow wrote: On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Will Hargrave wrote: Joe Abley wrote: I think you're mistaken about the server being off-line, since I can see it just fine from many places. The RIPE NCC dnsmon tool can also see it from its various probes: I did (and do) check on multiple ASs that I run and asked a few others to check, also checked looking glasses and so on. So, out of curiousity, i loss of 1 of 13 gtld servers important? I believe (though I could be mistaken) that these are actually anycast as well. I think dropping even 2-3 of the servers probably wouldn't affect overall performance would it? won't bind pick the 'best' place to ask regardless and stick/prefer that over 'slow' servers? I think he was right to report it here - its operational issue with very large TLD. But it is certainly nothing to seriously worry about as dns compensates for such problems. -- William Leibzon Elan Networks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: h.gtld-servers.net offline...
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, william(at)elan.net wrote: On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Christopher L. Morrow wrote: On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Will Hargrave wrote: Joe Abley wrote: I think you're mistaken about the server being off-line, since I can see it just fine from many places. The RIPE NCC dnsmon tool can also see it from its various probes: I did (and do) check on multiple ASs that I run and asked a few others to check, also checked looking glasses and so on. So, out of curiousity, i loss of 1 of 13 gtld servers important? I believe (though I could be mistaken) that these are actually anycast as well. I think dropping even 2-3 of the servers probably wouldn't affect overall performance would it? won't bind pick the 'best' place to ask regardless and stick/prefer that over 'slow' servers? I think he was right to report it here - its operational issue with very large TLD. But it is certainly nothing to seriously worry about as dns compensates for such problems. Ooops, sorry, I didn't mean to harangue Will for reporting it, I was asking if it was in fact not a big deal because the system has compensation methods in place to deal with even 2-4 device outages. sorry for the confusion.
RE: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
Has anyone considered using sFlow to detect this type of bad behavior? Many layer 2 switches vendors mentioned in the discussion support sFlow (see http://www.sflow.org/products/network.php for a list). sFlow operates at layer 2 (think of it as a kind of remote sampled mirror port capability that lets you capture the first 128 bytes of Ethernet frames from every l2/l3 switch port in the data center). Information that you could get from sFlow that is relevant to the discussion include: ingress switch port, source and destination mac addresses, vlans, ip addresses, ARP targets and senders, layer 4 protocol and ports. Peter
Re: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
At 7:03 PM -0400 6/14/06, Matt Buford wrote: There is also strong demand among web hosting customers to scatter sites across multiple /24's due to search engine optimization. I hear this line of thinking often, but to me it sounds like bulls^X^X^X^X^X... um, folklore. When our customers/salesdroids ask for it, I (politely) refuse. We acquired a hosting operation in 2004 that had blown a full /20 on literally a rack and a half of hardware, and I was aghast at what a nightmare that was. We're still untangling that mess. Anyway, if somebody could enlighten me to definitive proof, or stated policy by Goo... er search engines, that confirms this search engine result optimization by blatant abuse of IP addresses I'd appreciate it. I for one believe it is bunk dreamt up by somebody trying to sell something. If it is true though, I would have to say that it is evil and I would imagine many folks here (and not to mention ARIN, RIPE, et al) would agree. --chuck
Re: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
chuck goolsbee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyway, if somebody could enlighten me to definitive proof, or stated policy by Goo... er search engines, that confirms this search engine result optimization by blatant abuse of IP addresses I'd appreciate it. I for one believe it is bunk dreamt up by somebody trying to sell something. If it is true though, I would have to say that it is evil and I would imagine many folks here (and not to mention ARIN, RIPE, et al) would agree. Is it true? I don't know, but a quick google search returns everyone talking about it as if it is true. If it is true, is it sort of gaming the system? Yes, I suppose so. Instead of pulling 1 block of 30 from your IP allocation tool, you have to pull 30 blocks of 1. This is more administrative work and I can completely understand why someone might refuse to do it just because it is a silly hassle. But how could this possibly be IP abuse or evil (except perhaps in the eyes of the search engines)? What difference does it make to ARIN if I give a customer 30 IPs from a single /24 or 30 IPs from 30 different /24s? It makes little difference to me and is trivial to do in my topology since I already have 30+ /24s on the interface. So, I do so simply because I can't think of any reason not to. It is slightly more work to document the IPs since they each have to be put into my database instead of a single range, but this is handled by the server people.
Re: on topic?
Paul Vixie wrote: The effect of Nanog is remarkable. All the hybrid cells became fully converted to embryonic stem cells, said Jose Silva of the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, who reported the findings in the journal Nature. http://news.com.com/Gene+may+mean+adult+cells+can+be+reprogrammed/2100-1008_3-6083878.html?tag=nefd.top That is why more people from the old continent have subscribed NANOG than lists.ripe.net :) Cheers Peter and Karin -- Peter and Karin Dambier Cesidian Root - Radice Cesidiana Graeffstrasse 14 D-64646 Heppenheim +49(6252)671-788 (Telekom) +49(179)108-3978 (O2 Genion) +49(6252)750-308 (VoIP: sipgate.de) mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://iason.site.voila.fr/ https://sourceforge.net/projects/iason/
Re: on topic?
When the inevitable T-shirt is made with this on it, I want a copy. On Jun 14, 2006, at 6:14 PM, Paul Vixie wrote: The effect of Nanog is remarkable. All the hybrid cells became fully converted to embryonic stem cells, said Jose Silva of the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, who reported the findings in the journal Nature. http://news.com.com/Gene+may+mean+adult+cells+can+be+reprogrammed/ 2100-1008_3-6083878.html?tag=nefd.top Regards Marshall
RE: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
At 7:03 PM -0400 6/14/06, Matt Buford wrote: There is also strong demand among web hosting customers to scatter sites across multiple /24's due to search engine optimization. I hear this line of thinking often, but to me it sounds like bulls^X^X^X^X^X... um, folklore. When our customers/salesdroids ask for it, I (politely) refuse. We acquired a hosting operation in 2004 that had blown a full /20 on literally a rack and a half of hardware, and I was aghast at what a nightmare that was. We're still untangling that mess. Anyway, if somebody could enlighten me to definitive proof, or stated policy by Goo... er search engines, that confirms this search engine result optimization by blatant abuse of IP addresses I'd appreciate it. I for one believe it is bunk dreamt up by somebody trying to sell something. If it is true though, I would have to say that it is evil and I would imagine many folks here (and not to mention ARIN, RIPE, et al) would agree. I think you're 100% right. AFAIK it *is* just folklore. But unfortunately, SEO's have to make their money somehow and all too often it seems they make their money making up crap like this. Then all the sheep that lap up every word that comes out of their favorite SEO's mouth start demanding whatever the latest craze in SEO is. This creates opposing pressures between the need to maintain a secure, reliable infrastructure and your salesdroids begging for whatever the clients are requesting. It's a tough balance to strike...best practices are all well and good, but rigid inflexibility is unlikely to win you many clients. (Especially when you consider that the vast majority of the webhosting clients out there couldn't care less about security until it affects them.) It's a shame, but the reality is I think market forces pressure most of us into making technology decisions against our better judgement from time to time. So does it surprise me in the least that there are datacenters out there running hundreds of customers out of one giant subnet? No, not one bit. Will it eventually come back to bite them, causing countless hours and $$$ to clean up the situation when it does? Inevitably. But I don't believe it's done out of ignorance in most cases. I honestly can't believe there is that much rampant incompetence out there. To me it's more likely to be a bunch of network geeks *who know better* kowtowing to pressures from management to deliver what customers are demanding, security risks be damned. But maybe that just highlights a niche market just waiting to be exploited. I imagine there's money to be made marketing security devices that allow for the convenience of being able to assign IP's on a one-by-one basis while still protecting against the various nonsense that can create, all with an easily manageable interface. Doesn't seem to far-fetched. The tools and technology already exist, just a matter of putting them all together and making it easy. Andrew Cruse
Re: on topic?
Marshall Eubanks wrote: When the inevitable T-shirt is made with this on it, I want a copy. There's more ! At the risk of following the bad precedent set by my new employer for the on-topicness of postings here :-) ...having a geneticist in the house clued me into this one some time ago. Apparently: - NANOG is a new marker for testicular carcinoma in situ and germ cell tumours. - Ten processed NANOG pseudogenes are identified in the complete human genome Notable publication titles include: - Eleven daughters of NANOG - Nanog: a new recruit to the embryonic stem cell orchestra Won't do this again... Keith http://www.keithmitchell.co.uk On Jun 14, 2006, at 6:14 PM, Paul Vixie wrote: The effect of Nanog is remarkable. All the hybrid cells became fully converted to embryonic stem cells, said Jose Silva of the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, who reported the findings in the journal Nature.
Re: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
On 6/14/06, Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are universal subscriber gateways that simply override all network configuration on the host, but they aren't marketed at datacenters AFAIK. After all, who would think that a datacenter needs a network security policy similar to that of a hotel offering Internet access in its rooms? That's the way we are using now... works very well... With a subscriber management equipment, you can put each customer in their own vlan. Each vlan is bound to a subscriber which has its ip addresses. When more addresses are requested, just add some to the subscriber. Thanks, Richard
Re: on topic?
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Peter Dambier wrote: Paul Vixie wrote: The effect of Nanog is remarkable. All the hybrid cells became fully converted to embryonic stem cells, said Jose Silva of the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, who reported the findings in the journal Nature. http://news.com.com/Gene+may+mean+adult+cells+can+be+reprogrammed/2100-1008_3-6083878.html?tag=nefd.top That is why more people from the old continent have subscribed NANOG than lists.ripe.net :) I believe that the effect NANOG creates, despite all the community issues on conduct in discussion, is critical. Both to the Internet and to our daily jobs. If NANOG wasn't here, things would have been a lot more difficult. Gadi.
Re: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
At 2:35 PM -0400 6/15/06, Matt Buford wrote: But how could this possibly be IP abuse or evil (except perhaps in the eyes of the search engines)? What difference does it make to ARIN if I give a customer 30 IPs from a single /24 or 30 IPs from 30 different /24s? How is that customer using those IPs? If the IPs are on a single server used for webhosting, it is in violation of ARIN's IPv4 allocation policy. In every case where we've seen people asking for outrageous amounts of IP space for webhosting it is either because: * They are trying to game the search engines due to this pervasive folklore. or * They lacked sufficient clue to grok name-based virtual hosting. The latter can be fixed quite easily. I wish I had some way of debunking the former. It makes little difference to me and is trivial to do in my topology since I already have 30+ /24s on the interface. Just becasue you can, doesn't mean that you should. But hey, your network, your rules I guess. It is slightly more work to document the IPs since they each have to be put into my database instead of a single range, but this is handled by the server people. I prefer to have our 'server people' and our 'network people' working together without annoying each other too much. While my use of the word evil was a smirking poke at the dominant search engine, I don't really think this behavior is malice so much as disregard for the ecosystem. We've done our best to be very conservative in our IP allocations to our customers, if nothing else to remain good neighbors to the rest of the Network. I wasn't even aware of this bizarre SEO/IP scheme until we made that acquisition two years ago. Now I look around and see operations a fraction of our size consuming large allocations for small installations. The pursuit of a page rank seems a pretty selfish reason to consume a limited resource. --chuck
Re: on topic? not...
- Original Message Follows - From: Gadi Evron [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Peter Dambier wrote: Paul Vixie wrote: The effect of Nanog is remarkable. All the hybrid cells became fully converted to embryonic stem cells, said Jose Silva of the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, who reported the findings in the journal Nature. http://news.com.com/Gene+may+mean+adult+cells+can+be+reprogrammed/2100-1008_3-6083878.html?tag=nefd.top That is why more people from the old continent have subscribed NANOG than lists.ripe.net :) I believe that the effect NANOG creates, despite all the community issues on conduct in discussion, is critical. Both to the Internet and to our daily jobs. If NANOG wasn't here, things would have been a lot more difficult. You didn't read the mailinglist emails or the articles, did you? scott
Re: on topic? not...
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Scott Weeks wrote: - Original Message Follows - From: Gadi Evron [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Peter Dambier wrote: Paul Vixie wrote: The effect of Nanog is remarkable. All the hybrid cells became fully converted to embryonic stem cells, said Jose Silva of the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, who reported the findings in the journal Nature. http://news.com.com/Gene+may+mean+adult+cells+can+be+reprogrammed/2100-1008_3-6083878.html?tag=nefd.top That is why more people from the old continent have subscribed NANOG than lists.ripe.net :) I believe that the effect NANOG creates, despite all the community issues on conduct in discussion, is critical. Both to the Internet and to our daily jobs. If NANOG wasn't here, things would have been a lot more difficult. You didn't read the mailinglist emails or the articles, did you? Seemed like a good place to say that. Manty of us take NANOG for granted, it shouldn't be. That said, I am getting that shirt. scott
Re: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
Once upon a time, chuck goolsbee [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: * They lacked sufficient clue to grok name-based virtual hosting. Name-based virtual hosting is not a cure-all. Think about SSL and anonymous FTP uploads for starters. -- Chris Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
