Re: [swinog] Domain grabbing: nextra.ch
Hello Fredy! Simple answer: We're not allowed to do so, since the legal department of T-Systems is not willing to spread the information to the public. Thy don't release any press informations when they are selling or dropping something, they only inform about new customers and takeovers. You're right, the good old nextra days are gone, but we at mhs (together with a few very close friends from the ex nextra team) try to keep this spirit alive. Best wishes, Matthias - Original Message - From: Fredy Kuenzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 7:41 AM Subject: Re: [swinog] Domain grabbing: nextra.ch Matthias Hertzog wrote: I'm now an official member of this mailing list. Welcome to SwiNOG! Hope you already made a mark in your agenda: http://www.swinog.ch/meetings/swinog7/index.asp ... But first things first... [snip] I hope to have pointed everything out. For additional questions, please contact me. Fair enough. But why don't you state all this on an intermediate website at http://www.nextra.ch/ before forwarding to your own? This would make it clear. I guess many people still don't know that Nextra has passed away. Sad, anyway - remember old days of Swinog #1 ... cute and cosy in a small room at Hotel Alfa ... thanks Phil @ Nextra, you made it all possible. http://www.swinog.ch/meetings/swinog1/index.asp F. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Maillist-Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/swinog%40swinog.ch/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Maillist-Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/swinog%40swinog.ch/
Re: [swinog] Domain grabbing: nextra.ch
On Friday 03 October 2003 09:18, Matthias Hertzog wrote: so. In this particular case, the switch helpdesk was not available, all Normaly as an ISP you have a Switch Key Account Manager. I have good experience in the past with this solution, even bulkupdates are possible. Cheers Erich -- * Erich Hohermuth IP Engineer - SolNet (AS 9044) PGPKEY-46A08FCB * pgp0.pgp Description: signature
[swinog] delegation only patch?
G'morning, Just a quick review: which providers have already installed the Bind delegation only patch re. Verisign/Sitefinder (or similar for their environment)? -- Matthias -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Maillist-Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/swinog%40swinog.ch/
Re: [swinog] delegation only patch?
Just a quick review: which providers have already installed the Bind delegation only patch re. Verisign/Sitefinder (or similar for their environment)? We did this week (although we are not an ISP, but perhaps this does not make much difference in this case): BIND 9.2.2-P3. No problem so far. Regards, Paolo -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Maillist-Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/swinog%40swinog.ch/
Re: [swinog] delegation only patch?
Just a quick review: which providers have already installed the
Bind delegation only patch re. Verisign/Sitefinder (or similar
for their environment)?
Done this the last couple of days for VIA (some servers upgraded to latest bind9,
others bind8 forwarder-chained to the new bind9 ones as per the instructions
on www.isc.org). Only thing to watch out: there _are_ TLDs that include
non-delegation records, so don't be too restrictive in your root-delegation-only
clause. With the following setting from what I can tell in the logs there should
be no legit entries rejected, but I'll have to recheck in a while:
root-delegation-only exclude { de; lv; museum; us; ch; biz; };
(I don't know about .ch - there at least USED to be MX records in there
directly in the good old UUCP times, don't know whether some survived;-)).
Markus
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Maillist-Archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/swinog%40swinog.ch/
