Re: Google's QUIC
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:12 PM, Octavio Alvarez alvar...@alvarezp.ods.org wrote: I wish my Debian mirror would just be the mirror.debian.net *service* (not host), and the network could choose the best for me. Try http.debian.net see: http://http.debian.net -Jim P.
Re: ATT / Bellsouth Email Feedback Loop
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:00, Wade Peacock wade.peac...@sunwave.net wrote: Greetings Brain Trust, We have found ATT to be heavy handed with their email (spam) filtering. Without warn all of our mail servers will be denied from delivering email to their many domains (att.net, bellsouth.net, etc). They have a removal request form (like most other large ISPs) which takes 2 days to process. We never find out why the we get listed. We always check as many email reputation systems and rbl searches to determine why. Everywhere we look we see no evidence of a problem. We have joined other ISP feedback look system, (AOL, Yahoo and even Hotmail/Live) which all have helped stop issues (comprised accounts, bots, etc) before they get to the point of a listing/block. I have searched and I can not find out definitively whether ATT has or does not has a feedback loop system. Anyone out there know? I know of no ATT FBL system. If you are getting ATT rejects, then you can enter some info here: http://worldnet.att.net/general-info/block_admin.html However, if you are getting blackhole'd you have no recourse, IMHO. If any ATT rep wants to step forward, I've know a few people waiting in the wings with very similar issues. One even suggested the blackhole'ing is related to American Idol, as you need to keep your pipes clean for those revenue generating SMS texts. ;-) -Jim P.
Re: 1.0.0.0/8 route from MERIT ?
2010/2/24 Alex H. Ryu r.hyuns...@ieee.org: Today I jumped into one of our routers, and I found that 1.0.0.0/8 is announced from AS237, which is MERIT. IIRC, there was an email/wiki/announcement last month about 1/8 undergoing some testing soon. -Jim P.
Re: [Nanog-futures] spam-l list
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 02:29, Jo Rhett jrh...@netconsonance.com wrote: That's funny, given that Mailman is the source of significant amounts of backscatter. Mailman is neither an MTA nor a MUA. Something before or after Mailman is backscattering. -Jim P. ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: Minnesota to block online gambling sites?
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 10:53, Ken Gilmour ken.gilm...@gmail.com wrote: So is this going to become like the great firewall of China eventually? You can see in the letters that they are going to see how it goes and then maybe start blocking more stuff if they are successful. I can see a big nightmare heading this way if ISPs start caving in to requests like this. Isn't this akin to a state legislature mandating that the DOT block drugs at the state's border? Also, why is the order to block sites rather than monitoring and arresting Minnesotans who are violating the law? Sort'a looks like the MN legislature is trying to hide the bad behavior of it's citizens. ;-) -Jim P.
Re: [Nanog-futures] Draft Policy re individual sites
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 18:45, Simon Lyall si...@darkmere.gen.nz wrote: The availability and operation of specific Internet site such as websites and email services is off-topic unless: (a) The problems are caused by network reachability rather than problems at the site hosting the service. (b) The Internet site is a route-server or similar service which directly supports network routing and connectivity. It's really just easier to say that NANOG is only for old-timers, BGP, and long boring discussions of interest only to IETF policy makers and IETF wanna-bes. IMHO, Engineering belongs on IETF lists, Operational issues on NANOG, and everything else should expire within 24 hours. Is it down for just me *can* be Operational, depending on the poster. -Jim P. ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: Outside plant protection, fiber cuts, interwebz down oh noes!
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 18:04, Charles Wyble char...@thewybles.com wrote: Seriously though I want to start some discussion around outside plant protection. This isn't the middle of the ocean or desert after all. I'll pipe in with this: No amount of money can deter a determined entity. If there is a will, there is a way, etc. Want to protect your outside plant, then make it resilient network-wise. There use to be a time when dual paths was acceptable, I (personally) think that quad paths should be the norm. -Jim P.
Re: Dynamic IP log retention = 0?
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 23:17, Joe Greco jgr...@ns.sol.net wrote: Looking around Rockefeller Center generally isn't a crime. Looking around where you're in my back yard and peeking in the windows is, at a minimum, trespass, and if our local cops notice you doing it, you can expect that you may find yourself ... severely inconvenienced. There is no freedom to look around on private property, despite what you appear to think. Isn't Rockefeller Center private property? ;-) -Jim P.
Re: Comcast - No complaints! [was: Re: Craptastic Service!
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 13:26, JC Dill jcdill.li...@gmail.com wrote: Many businesses could make out like a bandit if they don't have to pay a penalty when they don't perform, but just give you your money back. I'm curious, when traveling by car or by plane, do you often demand imposition of penalties for travel latency? -Jim P.
Re: Comcast - No complaints! [was: Re: Craptastic Service!
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 16:37, JC Dill jcdill.li...@gmail.com wrote: When you have a confirmed reservation, airlines in the US and EU are required to pay delayed boarding compensation when you are involuntarily bumped, unless the reason is something completely outside their control (such as the weather or when planes are ordered grounded as happened after 9/11), or they are flying smaller jets (special exceptions because of weight-and-balance safety rules). This is in addition to allowing you to use your ticket on the next available flight. If you elect to make alternate travel arrangements US airlines also have to refund your ticket, even when it's a non-refundable ticket. But that doesn't really equate to network traffic (IMHO). If your upstream has an outage, it is more akin to a delayed departure rather than an airline bump or flight cancellation. You reach your destination later than planned (latency) and you may have to take a different route, but your packet^Wbutt gets through. Neither of those situations involve cash compensation, or penalties paid, by major airlines. At most you might get a few loyalty points. Now if your upstream network provider disconnected you and/or was unable to route your packets to their final destination -Jim P.
Re: Comcast - No complaints! [was: Re: Craptastic Service!
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 18:31, John Martinez jmarti...@zero11.com wrote: So the most constructive answer that I received related to this thread is that someone is using Comcast Ethernet services for $5.25/MB for a 500MB pipe. I wonder how much 10MB synchronous would cost? From: http://business.comcast.com/large/index.aspx call 1-866-511-6489, option1 to speak with an Account Manager Same page also has other contact resources. -Jim P.
Re: Craptastic Service! (was: Re: comcast price check)
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 02:44, Sharma, Kapeel kapeel.sha...@mckesson.com wrote: This is BS how narrow minded our providers are. It is also BS how high the expectations are for the $$ spent. ;-) -Jim P.
Re: Craptastic Service! (was: Re: comcast price check)
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 12:00, Steven King sk...@kingrst.com wrote: I don't think the expectations are that high for the money spent. They are promising a service for a particular price. They either deliver on that service in a 100% working condition or its false advertising and thus is not honest. It isn't the customers fault they decided to promise a service at a price blow market value. What did the customer's contract state? I suspect the contract differs greatly from your text above. Never let marketing madness deliver non-legally binding expectations. ;-) -Jim P.
Re: ANTI-TERRORIST AND MONITARY CRIMES DIVISION
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 20:00, Ted Cooper ml-nano...@elcsplace.com wrote: As for how it ended up on the list ... I'd say that Ray Thom @ ATT may have a compromised computer :P FWIW, ATT employees don't use $n...@att.com email addresses, and ATT customers have .net addrs. -Jim P.
Re: ANTI-TERRORIST AND MONITARY CRIMES DIVISION
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 20:08, Suresh Ramasubramanian ops.li...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 6:35 AM, Jim Popovitch jim...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 20:00, Ted Cooper ml-nano...@elcsplace.com wrote: As for how it ended up on the list ... I'd say that Ray Thom @ ATT may have a compromised computer :P FWIW, ATT employees don't use $n...@att.com email addresses, and ATT customers have .net addrs. FWIW (and from interacting with ATT employees) .. guess what, you're wrong. FWIW, the ones I interact with don't ;-) As with every rule, there will always be some exceptions. -Jim P.
Re:
Stop the insanity. (please)
Re: Leap second tonight
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 04:15, Simon Lockhart si...@slimey.org wrote: On Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 04:53:57PM -0800, Wil Schultz wrote: At which point my Solaris 10 v490's reboot in unison, lovely. Anyone else see anything interesting? I had a couple of Oracle servers (Solaris 10) reboot a couple of minutes just before the leap second. All my other Solaris 10 boxes appear to have stayed up fine. Have either of you determined if this was a OS reboot and not a bios reset? -Jim P.
Re: Level 3 issues
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 17:17, Blake Pfankuch bpfank...@cpgreeley.com wrote: It seems highly unlikely that a train derailment yesterday caused major network issues today. Have you ever seen cleanup efforts after a major accident. Cleanup usually involves more backhoes, and other major equipment, than a normal well planned construction site. -Jim P.
Re: Netblock reassigned from Chile to US ISP...
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 14:38, Nicolas Antoniello nantonie...@antel.net.uy wrote: How about US tourists in Chile trying to buy something with it's US based credit card? :) It just doesn't work. -Jim P.
network testbed (was: Stress Testing LAN/WAN)
Coincidentally, this week I was asked to specify current and next-gen equipment for a new network testbed at $DAYJOB. This lab would be used to test software used to monitor large networks. Specifically I need to setup an environment similar to that of large SPs, with emphasis on MPLS, STP, OSPF and BGP. What present and next-gen hardware would you recommend to include in such a testbed? I have vendor C pretty well covered, and I am really trying to look outside the box on this, but whatever you want to recommend is welcome. Private replies are also welcome, I can post a recap once I've received some feedback. Thanks, -Jim P. On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 17:23, Brian Feeny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have the need to stress test a LAN and WAN. The primary concern is the WAN which is at most OC-3. The LAN would be an additional bonus if I could do that as well. I am familiar with tools such as those from Spirent and IXIA which are very expensive. I was wondering if someone has had to do this and can recommend some open source tools that would work well. I need to test a few different types of traffic, specifically trying to push traffic into various switch/router policies to make sure everything is performing as expected. If anyone knows of some software that works well for this I would appreciate letting me know. Thanks, Brian
Re: an over-the-top data center
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 16:34, Steven M. Bellovin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: HavenCo, which ran a datacenter on the nation of Sealand, is no longer operating there: Which is the same story for most (if not all) of these hype-driven bullet-proof data centers. I recall a .com CEO espousing the capabilities of his datacenter-inside-an-old-bank-vault to prevent DoS attacks such as the one that had hit Yahoo! the week before. I must say that the provided dinner, drinks and Hummer Limo ride, to the DC, made the humor of the CEO more enjoyable. Sadly a lot of older pensioners were eating his every word. At that time I worked for an equipment/services reseller and I persisted quietly, as best I could, to save some people's life savings. I felt like a diver witnessing a herring infused shark fest. -Jim P.
Re: Public Assertions
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 18:52, Bill Woodcock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Dean Anderson wrote: A photo of Bill Woodcock's refused letter is at http://www.av8.net/BillWoodcock.jpg That's not a refused letter, that's a certified letter that hasn't yet been mailed. When refused, the item is signed and stamped (in red ink) by the postal delivery agent.It would be very interesting to see the image of the other side of the envelope (where postage stamp/payment info would appear). That said... this whole thing has an air of childishness associated with it. -Jim P.
Re: Current subscribe address for outages list?
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 13:58, Chaim Rieger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: actually nobody has posted any info about this other than what you just posted, no details/carrier/location etc. Perhaps not on NANOG, but on the Outages list itself it was covered quite well. On 21-June-2008, RLVaughn posted to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list that the list would end in 12 to 18 hours and would move to a new host (un-identified at that time) On 23-June-2008, Jared Mauch posted the first post from the new Outages mailinglist host: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/2008-June/000749.html Also on 23-June-2008, virendra rode posted an updated message on the move: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/2008-June/000755.html To put simply, it seemed (to me) to be an urgent need for the move, and it was handled quickly and professionally by all those involved. -Jim P.
Re: Nanog 44 Hockey Event -- Last Call
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 09:06, Steven M. Bellovin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just no self-styled hockey moms, please... You Maverick you. ;-) -Jim P.
Re: Hey ISC, thanks for providing free wifi to intercage!
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 10:40, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about moving the meta-nanog themes in this thread to nanog-futures, instead of adding to the noise on the main list? Because nobody reads it? Try because nobody knows that NANOG has a website where you can simple instructions to subscribe to Nanog-futures. Does it really qualify as a futures item? Larry's point seems more for the present than for the future. -Jim P.
Re: how to unsubscribe
It's in the email headers of every recent email from NANOG. ;-) List-Unsubscribe: http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] hth, -Jim P. On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 15:30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How do you unsubscribe from the list? When I go to the nanog site, log in and hit unsubscribe but it never sends me the email to confirm... What am I doing wrong?
Re: prefix hijack by ASN 8997
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 22:13, Jim Popovitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 21:06, Scott Weeks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am hoping to confirm a short-duration prefix hijack of 72.234.0.0/15 (and another of our prefixes) by ASN 8997 (OJSC North-West Telecom in Russia) in using ASN 3267 (Russian Federal University Network) to advertise our space to ASN 3277 (Regional University and Scientific Network (RUSNet) of North-Western and Saint-Petersburg Area of Russia). Yep, saw this for 69.61.0.0/17 GlobalCompass (my upstream) this AM: SEQUENCE_NUMBER: 1222091638 TYPE: last-hop BGP-UPDATE-TIME: 1222075864 PHAS-DETECT-TIME: 1222091637 PHAS-NOTIFY-TIME: 1222091637 PREFIX: 69.61.0.0/17 SET: 3561,3267,3356,3491 GAINED: 3267 - Russian Federal University Network LOST: SEQUENCE_NUMBER: 1222091638 TYPE: origin BGP-UPDATE-TIME: 1222075864 PHAS-DETECT-TIME: 1222091637 PHAS-NOTIFY-TIME: 1222091637 PREFIX: 69.61.0.0/17 SET: 8997,22653 GAINED: 8997 - OJSC North-West Telecom, St.-Petersburg, Russia LOST: SEQUENCE_NUMBER: 1222096125 TYPE: origin BGP-UPDATE-TIME: 1222076569 PHAS-DETECT-TIME: 1222092415 PHAS-NOTIFY-TIME: 1222096124 PREFIX: 69.61.0.0/17 SET: 22653 - GlobalCrossing Small typo on my part above... 22653 is GlobalCompass, not GlobalCrossing as I mistakenly typed above. -Jim P.
Re: prefix hijack by ASN 8997
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 21:06, Scott Weeks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am hoping to confirm a short-duration prefix hijack of 72.234.0.0/15 (and another of our prefixes) by ASN 8997 (OJSC North-West Telecom in Russia) in using ASN 3267 (Russian Federal University Network) to advertise our space to ASN 3277 (Regional University and Scientific Network (RUSNet) of North-Western and Saint-Petersburg Area of Russia). Yep, saw this for 69.61.0.0/17 GlobalCompass (my upstream) this AM: SEQUENCE_NUMBER: 1222091638 TYPE: last-hop BGP-UPDATE-TIME: 1222075864 PHAS-DETECT-TIME: 1222091637 PHAS-NOTIFY-TIME: 1222091637 PREFIX: 69.61.0.0/17 SET: 3561,3267,3356,3491 GAINED: 3267 - Russian Federal University Network LOST: SEQUENCE_NUMBER: 1222091638 TYPE: origin BGP-UPDATE-TIME: 1222075864 PHAS-DETECT-TIME: 1222091637 PHAS-NOTIFY-TIME: 1222091637 PREFIX: 69.61.0.0/17 SET: 8997,22653 GAINED: 8997 - OJSC North-West Telecom, St.-Petersburg, Russia LOST: SEQUENCE_NUMBER: 1222096125 TYPE: origin BGP-UPDATE-TIME: 1222076569 PHAS-DETECT-TIME: 1222092415 PHAS-NOTIFY-TIME: 1222096124 PREFIX: 69.61.0.0/17 SET: 22653 - GlobalCrossing GAINED: LOST: 8997 -Jim P.
Re: confusing packet data
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 00:43, Hank Nussbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you running Skype? Have you become a supernode? There is now a registry switch in 3.0 that allows you to disable supernode functionality. No. Nothing is running on this host (my laptop) when initiating etherape. Also, etherape reports nothing until I initiate some traffic (i.e. whois www.yahoo.com) I suspect that Nathan is correct and I have filed a bug report with Debian. -Jim P.
confusing packet data
This is something has been bugging me lately Etherape is a Linux tool that graphs packets arriving at your host, and shows paths of connectivity. I captured the graphs, at the URL below, from my Linux laptop connected to a Linksys wifi router that is hooked to a Comcast cable modem. Why is it that I can see packet data from IPs all over the place? http://picasaweb.google.com/jimpop/Public# Any insight is much appreciated. -Jim P.
Re: Washington Post: Atrivo/Intercage, why are we peering with the American RBN?
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 19:14, Gadi Evron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 29 Aug 2008, Marc Sachs wrote: Unless I'm mis-reading this (or perhaps GBLX read Kreb's story and said good-bye to Atrivo/Intercage), it looks like they are no longer their upstream: http://cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/as-report?as=AS27595v=4view=2.0 Current peers: http://cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/as-report?as=AS19151 (just purchased by Host.net) http://cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/as-report?as=AS26769 This popped up on my radar only because of AS19151 and the BGP Attack thread mentioning PHAS. Just last night I got phaser@ notifications about 19151 popping in and out of 22653 (a network I reside deep inside of) for about a 12 hour span. H, -Jim P.
Re: https (was: Re: Exploit for DNS Cache Poisoning - RELEASED)
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:24 PM, Hank Nussbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wish Yahoo and Hotmail even had the ability of *reading* email via https: http://www.interall.co.il/hotmail-yahoo-https.html Hah! It was only a year ago that Yahoo even added SSL capabilities for login. Six months ago they added POP3S. -Jim P.
Re: tacid.org
On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Nick Shank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jim, ATM I have exchange set to dis-allow outbound mail Hi Nick, I (personally) don't think that is enough. If the box was rooted, there could be bots (i.e. other processes) sending outbound email. Those processes could be persistent or periodic, and they could be additional services or sub-processes of known-good services. Further, the bots could be dynamically loaded via on-box applications (i.e. Internet Explorer, Firefox, etc.) You would need an off-box firewall to successfully block outbound SMTP connections. With most, if not all, rooted boxs there really is no safe way of securing it. Your best path forward is to (IMHO) buy an new harddrive and start from scratch, manually copying only known-good files to the new drive, preferably using an intermediate box to virus scan each moved file. Best wishes, -Jim P.
Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens up Pandora'sBox of
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 1:21 PM, Peter Beckman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let the search engines organize the web, not DNS. OK, (assuming you believe that), why keep dns around. Why not go back to just IP addrs and hosts files for those that need them. -Jim P.
Re: Mail Server best practices - was: Pandora's Box of new TLDs
On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Frank Bulk - iNAME [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FB The point is that those are able to create a valid rDNS entry likely have more control of their infrastructure than those who don't. You must admit, if you can't get a proper rDNS entry created for your domain, what does that say about your ability to control your infrastructure? And to that point, a valid rDNS entry can easily be removed by the netblock holder at smal co-lo facility. This is an easy, although not widely used enough, means for co-lo providers to retain control over leased (mail) servers without worrying about the legal issues with pre-maturely taking a customer offline. I've never seen a posted service delivery statement that guaranteed PTRs. In fact, IMHO, PTRs are a courtesy from the netblock owner, not a given. -Jim P.
ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs
Two years ago I posed the question here about the need for TLDs (http://www.mcabee.org/lists/nanog/May-06/msg00110.html). I summerizsed that companies IP (Intellectual Property) guidelines would never allow domain.org to exist if they owned domain.com (ibm.org vrs ibm.com).I felt that TLDs really represented a monetary harvesting scheme as every new TLD forced companies to pay for yet another domain name (slowly milking businesses). At that time several knowledgeable folks commented that TLDs were necessary in the beginning due to the need to distribute queries. Now it seems, ICANN has decided to add a new paradigm :-) How will a TLD like .ibm be handled now, and how is this different than what I proposed in 2006? -Jim P.
Re: comcast
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: when was the last time you saw this prefix reachable? i dont see anything announced from comcasts 73.0.0.0/8 allocation within the past 2 weeks... FYI: Internally within Comcast it does route: $ mtr --report -c 1 73.0.0.1 HOST: blueLoss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev 1. linksys 0.0% 10.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.0 2. c-24-98-192-1.hsd1.ga.comcas 0.0% 17.3 7.3 7.3 7.3 0.0 3. ge-2-5-ur01.a2atlanta.ga.atl 0.0% 18.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 0.0 4. te-9-1-ur02.a2atlanta.ga.atl 0.0% 16.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 0.0 5. te-9-3-ur01.b0atlanta.ga.atl 0.0% 16.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 0.0 6. 68.85.232.62 0.0% 16.4 6.4 6.4 6.4 0.0 7. po-15-ar01.b0atlanta.ga.atla 0.0% 17.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 0.0 8. te-4-1-cr01.atlanta.ga.cbone 0.0% 19.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 0.0 9. te-1-1-cr01.charlotte.nc.cbo 0.0% 1 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 0.0 10. te-1-1-cr01.richmond.va.cbon 0.0% 1 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 0.0 11. te-1-1-cr01.mclean.va.cbone. 0.0% 1 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0 12. te-1-1-cr01.philadelphia.pa. 0.0% 1 25.6 25.6 25.6 25.6 0.0 13. be-40-crs01.401nbroadst.pa.p 0.0% 1 26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5 0.0 14. be-50-crs01.ivyland.pa.panjd 0.0% 1 28.8 28.8 28.8 28.8 0.0 15. po-10-ar01.verona.nj.panjde. 0.0% 1 41.7 41.7 41.7 41.7 0.0 16. po-10-ar01.eatontown.nj.panj 0.0% 1 33.5 33.5 33.5 33.5 0.0 17. po-10-ur01.middletown.nj.pan 0.0% 1 34.4 34.4 34.4 34.4 0.0 18. po-10-ur01.burlington.nj.pan 0.0% 1 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 0.0 -Jim P.
Re: comcast
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:34 PM, Martin Hannigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Jim Popovitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 18. po-10-ur01.burlington.nj.pan 0.0% 1 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 0.0 23 114 ms 122 ms 113 ms ge-0-1-ubr02.pittsburg.ca.sfba.comcast.net [68.8 7.197.22] Für eine Weile hatten wir Zugang durch eine Hong Kong basiert Piraten-Netzwerk Yeah, I've saw similar in traces a few days back, I wondered wtf. -Jim P.
Re: [Nanog-futures] Announce list: Re: Hughes Network
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Jason J. W. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm subscribed to both now. ;-) The advantage to the NANOG subject header was obviously it was resilient to e-mail address changes for the list. A nice attribute given e-mails now come in from both nanog@nanog.org and [EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses. Anyhow, I assume there was compelling reason for the change. There are a plethera of common headers available for filtering, regardless of To: -Jim P.
Re: Hughes Network
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Jason J. W. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone else noticed that the [NANOG] prefix has been missing intermittently from the list traffic over the last couple of days? This was planned, and then announced approx 5 days ago. You are subscribed to nanog-announce, right? ;-) -Jim P.
Re: [Nanog-futures] Announce list: Re: Hughes Network
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 9:35 PM, someone wrote: Add me to the list of never-saw-that. In addition, I just checked the nanog archives, and there isn't an announcement of that type in the archives. Below is the full email, with headers, from Monday. Hopefully it will put this issue to rest but somehow I doubt that. ;-) -Jim P. Received: by 10.90.53.15 with SMTP id b15cs245753aga; Mon, 19 May 2008 16:02:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.10.13 with SMTP id n13mr12798008pyi.30.1211238167720; Mon, 19 May 2008 16:02:47 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from s0.nanog.org (s0.nanog.org [198.108.95.20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id s59si4779396pyh.13.2008.05.19.16.02.47; Mon, 19 May 2008 16:02:47 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of [EMAIL PROTECTED] designates 198.108.95.20 as permitted sender) client-ip=198.108.95.20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of [EMAIL PROTECTED] designates 198.108.95.20 as permitted sender) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=s0.nanog.org) by s0.nanog.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) id 1JyENK-0006V5-UV; Mon, 19 May 2008 23:02:38 + Received: from ind-iport-1.cisco.com ([64.104.129.195]) by s0.nanog.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) id 1JyENI-0006UC-1L for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 19 May 2008 23:02:36 + X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i=4.27,512,1204482600; d=scan'208;a=107943185 Received: from hkg-dkim-1.cisco.com ([10.75.231.161]) by ind-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 May 2008 04:32:33 +0530 Received: from hkg-core-1.cisco.com (hkg-core-1.cisco.com [64.104.123.94]) by hkg-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m4JN2XlM012133 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 20 May 2008 07:02:33 +0800 Received: from Philip-PB.local (sin-vpn-client-20-47.cisco.com [10.68.20.47]) by hkg-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m4JN2WVp007247 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 19 May 2008 23:02:32 GMT Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 09:02:58 +1000 From: Philip Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Cisco Systems User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Authentication-Results: hkg-dkim-1; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/hkgdkim1002 verified; ); Subject: [NANOG-announce] email subject tags and footers X-BeenThere: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: NANOG-Announce nanog-announce.nanog.org List-Unsubscribe: http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List-Archive: http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog-announce List-Post: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List-Help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List-Subscribe: http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi everyone, Following the discussion on nanog-futures, we'd like to let you all know that the [NANOG] in the subject line and the three extra info lines mailman appends will be dropped from all future messages going to the NANOG list, starting in around 24 hours from now. If any of you have you changed your nanog@nanog.org e-mail filtering to depend on the [NANOG] subject tag, please consider this 24 hours notice to move to another message filtering technique. Best wishes, philip (for the SC) -- ___ NANOG-announce mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce
Re: [Nanog-futures] MLC post-mortem]
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 1:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps you are not that familiar with the world of Open Source, Perhaps I am, perhaps you could have google'd my name. ;-) Perhaps I run other mailinglists, perhaps I know Mailman intimately, as well as blogging software. Perhaps I also know what GSOC projects are really truly capable of producing, let alone NANOG theorists. BUT... with all those possibilities... I stand by my earlier statement that NANOG MLC shouldn't proceed down an uncertain development path. ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] Subject line Tag and footer
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 6:19 PM, Sean Figgins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jim Popovitch wrote: Some advice, once given to me by a NANOGer, is: just use .procmailrc to change your headers as you see fit Not everyone that reads NANOG runs their own mail servers, or have access to procmail. Personally, I HATE procmail. It's almost as bad as manually writing the rules in sendmail. I have the option to use, or not to use procmail, as I run my own server, and that of my company, but I still prefer that NANOG mailing list puts the tag in the header. LOL! I'm too lazy (tired?) to search the archives... but I would bet that my response back then was near similar to your response today. Please understand I only recommended procmail as a tongue-in-cheek work around. I wish that everyone would just adjust themselves to change rather than me stuck in the past with excuses like it wastes space, or it violates XXX principle. Those arguments always sound like a bunch of rules lawyers that don't actually care about the content of the list as much as the proving themselves right, and thus better than everyone else. :-) Generally I Agree. One counter-point: as the intertubes are focusing on smaller and smaller devices, Subject line realestate is becoming a valid concern. -Jim P. ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [Nanog-futures] reply-to
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 4:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To echo an earlier comment, how much development work would be involved in allowing list members to individually specify whether they want: Tags in the subject line, Additional message footers, Reply-to headers Not as much as you might think Mailman supports nested-lists (Umbrella lists). The solution could be to create nanog-robust@ and change nanog@ to have lite functionality (headers, subject line, reply-to, etc.) Then you would subscribe nanog-robust@ to nanog@, and set the reply-to for nanog-robust@ to nanog@ Folks could then subscribe to nanog@ or nanog-robust@ and In the end everybody wins... except the guys/gals who have to maintain it. ;-) -Jim P. ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: [NANOG] would ip6 help us safeing energy ?
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Dale Carstensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think Disney/ABC thinks they can get individual ISPs to pay them to carry sports audio/video streams. I suppose that would be yet another multicast stream method, assuming an ISP location had multiple customers viewing the same stream. Are other content providers trying to do something similar? How are operators dealing with this? What opinions are there in the operator community? I'm not sure of the particulars, but Hulu (NBC/Universal and News Corp) and FanCast (Comcast) seem to have an interesting relationship. I would love to know more, but i detest reading financials. ;-) -Jim P. ___ NANOG mailing list NANOG@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
Re: Mailing list newbies suggestion
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 8:27 PM, Keith O'Neill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am not sure why this is an issue. Someone asked a question about multihoming and the way I see it if you don't want to respond to it or don't want to read it than don't. Why does this have to be a major issue. I read what I want and respond to what I want. I think the rest of the community can do the same. I completely agree. As mostly a reader of NANOG, I would rather read 70+ responses to multihoming best practices based on decades of experience from some of the most respected senior network engineers to date. Sadly what we get is 70+ responses, from some of the most respected senior network engineers to date, debating what is and isn't a good question or what isn't or isn't a good place to ask a question. :-( -Jim P.
Re: Worst Offenders/Active Attackers blacklists
On Jan 29, 2008 12:58 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A general purpose host or firewall is NOTHING like a mail server. There is no race condition in a mail server, because the server simply waits until the DNS query is returned. No user is watching the mail queue, if mail is delayed by 1/10 of a second, or even many seconds, nothing happens. Now magine every web page you visit is suddenly paused by 100ms, or 1000ms, or multiple seconds? Imagine that times 100s or 1000s of users. Imagine what your call center would look like the day after you implemented it. (Hint: Something like a smoking crater.) There might be ways around this (e.g. zone transfer / bulk load), but it is still not a good idea. Of course I could be wrong. You shouldn't trust me on this, you should try it in production. Let us know how it works out. Andrew, IIUC, suggested that the default would be to allow while the check was performed. -Jim P.
Re: Cox clamping VPN traffic?
On Jan 25, 2008 12:17 PM, Tomas L. Byrnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've got a local peer with Cox for VPN users to co-lo. A VPN connection that otherwise shows no issues just had their file transfer rate during a large file transfer over the VPN go from 10Mbps to 43kbps, and stay there. This isn't transit, it's local peering. I see the *exact* same problem with Comcast at home. I get about 30 seconds of the 6.6Mbps provisioned rate then the drop kicks in and down to 43kbps it goes. In talking with Comcast engineers privately, I've learned that the provisioned rates should no longer be considered as sustainable, only initial. Now I don't normally need a sustained up/down rate, but it has come in handy in the past when up/down-loading backups or ISOs... but I guess those days are behind us as the large providers have started re-interpreting the definition of provisioned, or to be more accurate they have implemented a TTL on it. That said, I do see their point of view wrt PTP, esp torrent traffic, and their desire to limit it's impact on their networks but it does boil my blood when *I* need to use my bandwidth for legitimate purposes only to find myself throttled. :-) Part of me wonders if this isn't an effort to push business class services. -Jim P.
Re: [Nanog-futures] Cisco outage
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 13:56 -0600, J Bacher wrote: Absent an inability to have a private conversation as an admin, what do you (all) suggest? An admin email to the list directed to that individual? Do nothing, apply the three strikes you're out when applicable without any notification? How about From: J Bacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]. Merit, or whoever, should be able to securely setup those capabilities. -Jim P. ___ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
Re: Cisco outage
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 01:17 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 17:06:38 CST, J. Oquendo said: In re: previous post http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9823196-7.html So much for self healing networks eh Given that according to the link you provide, at some points, the *main* page was working, but other pages on the same server were broken, that tends to say webserver screwup rather than a networking issue. So the problem is probably (one or more of) Windows/Linux/Unix/IBM/Dell/Sun/etc, none of which are *network* kit by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. Unless somewhere along the line, IOS grew an Apache module? Cisco (Distributed|Local)Director is close to *network* kit. ;-) -Jim P.
Re: AUP modification - full first and last names
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 11:15 -0700, Scott Weeks wrote: -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:- Members must do at least one of the following: -Subscribe/post with your work email address -Use your proper name in your email address (i.e. Bob Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Identify yourself in your email sig -Inform the list admins of your correct identity - : -Subscribe/post with your work email address No, not acceptable. Some companies don't want you to use their email service for things like the NANOG list. : -Identify yourself in your email sig No, some folks don't do sigs. OK, that still leaves 2 other options for the membership. No one plan fits everyone... every NANOG'er should know that. Flexibility (in the requirements as well as by the members) is the key. -Jim P.
