from my laptop to the first hop
64 bytes from 130.128.20.1: icmp_seq=108 ttl=255 time=5.842 ms
64 bytes from 130.128.20.1: icmp_seq=109 ttl=255 time=5.844 ms
64 bytes from 130.128.20.1: icmp_seq=110 ttl=255 time=5.950 ms
64 bytes from 130.128.20.1: icmp_seq=111 ttl=255 time=5.848 ms
64 bytes
roam.psg.com:/usr/home/randy ping 130.128.20.1
PING 130.128.20.1 (130.128.20.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 130.128.20.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=53.508 ms
64 bytes from 130.128.20.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=14.806 ms
64 bytes from 130.128.20.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=19.954 ms
^C
---
www.isi.edu/~bmanning/in-addr-audit.html
It does not cover specific /16 /24 delegations, it just looks at
all of the SOA entries. Still, it does give a representation of how much
space is delegated.
uh, as these data appear to be the statistics of an attempt to walk the
dns
All I know is that we have thousands of sites using private address space,
which completely falsifies any real data and makes it impossible to attach
any real meaning to concepts such as "running out of addresses".
the original question was not whether address panic was justified. it asked
Are you claiming that because the DNS has been used to pound other things,
it is no longer any good for hammering (IP address) nails?
hypothesis: the net dns traffic is not significantly more than the email
traffic about the dns.
g
randy
Editor's Note: Press reports of the ACLU's action confused two separate
issues. The first was a discussion (not a plan) of what should be the
IETF's policy regarding supporting wiretapping for IETF protocols. This
had nothing to do with IPv6. The issue was aired at the IETF's November
the idea is that IPv6 site renumbering will be so much easier than for
IPv4 that renumbering will be *less* painful than NATting.
this needs to be reconciled with the *much* more conservative statements on
v6 renumber-ability coming from respected v6 folk such as deering et alia.
randy
I'm not sure we're there yet in the support technology for renumbering.
We have good ideas but we haven't pushed them totally out the door yet.
However, we do have good ideas.
[ flame, not directed at you personally but at this thread ]
this is not the internet marketing task force.
get
memory is cheap now, so lets loosen those thumb screws ;-)
i think we need an automaton to post a few things every few hours to this
and the nanog list.
it's not the memory. it's the processing power required which is quite
non-linear.
it's not the memory for the /24s in old b space, it's
Ok, so it seems like there is a 1-1 mapping of TLAs to AS numbers --
in reality, with the current ipv6 allocation policy of the registries, all
asns are using the same single tla. it's one of those theory and practice
things.
randy
What's the SOLUTION?
:
* ^Subject:.*How large is too large
/dev/null
procmail is your friend
randy
2. The proposed RFC is not what should be used:
this is not relevant to the publication of *this* rfc, the intent of which
is to document what IS used not what SHOULD BE used.
randy
there is a nascent bof on getting location from wireless. mailing list is
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
randy
Regarding the recent TCP SYN Flooding attacks, why aren't ALL ISPs
required to put filtering on their networks that PREVENTS packets with
invalid source addresses ever entering their infrastructure?
maybe you want to be reading the nanog mailing list, [EMAIL PROTECTED], where
the problems
is it the goofy british plug they use in HongKong?
flipped pairs like hongkong?
no. it is unique
I brought with me to IETF 47 a WaveLAN Turbo Bronze wireless card which I
use daily in my office at home, but it doesn't appear to work with the
WaveLAN-Silver-based wireless net here (the LEDs flash briefly as though
it's not finding the named network).
as far as a bunch of us can tell, the
I had the identical problem with my bronze card (flash briefly). I got one
of the silver cards and plugged it in, and it just worked with my existing
Bronze 4.0 driver and application. I didn't need to update either the
silver card firmware or the driver SW. This is on NT 4.0.
a number
I have a question: so ~who~ is the RFC-Editor these days given that The
RFC-Editor (aka Jon Postel) has passed on? I've groveled thru the
www.ietf.org and the www.rfc-editor.org pages and can't see who all is
presently acting in this role, but perhaps I simply missed it.
brought to you by
rip.psg.com:/usr/home/randy/mp3/neil_young nslookup ietf.org.
Server: cache.psg.com
Address: 147.28.0.3
*** No address (A) records available for ietf.org.
rip.psg.com:/usr/home/randy/mp3/neil_young ns ietf.org.
Default Server: cache.psg.com
Address: 147.28.0.3
Server: cache.psg.com
Most users are not networking geeks. They like NAT because NAT boxes
make what they want to do so easy.
presumably they don't realize that the NATs are making it hard
to do other things that they might want to do.
I wonder...how many of these folks really want network address
Is there a GRIP online email archive ??
details about all ietf wgs are on the ietf web site, http://ietf.org/.
grip's in particular is http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/grip-charter.html.
randy
Forgive this spam, but I am looking for 7 CCIE's
for locations in London, Silicon Valley,
California and Tokyo.
i can not find an rfc for "CCIE." what is one, some kind of can opener?
randy
Cisco Certified Internetwork Expert (CCIE)
certified to spam
WAP's goal is not to replace IP, but mediate between non-IP wireless
devices, and existing IP based wire line applications.
So then obvious the Right Thing is to put an IP stack on each of those
devices. Then such "mediation" is unnecessary.
but there may not be enough room in the 640k
Existing SMTP/IMAP/TCP technology is not well suited for
mobile and wireless environments where bandwidth and
capacity are always limited and precious.
ahhh yes. that 640k video buffer again. historically every time we have
made a large kludge to save bits we have looked very stupid in far
no. but a email thread on
bluetooth is just scsi without copper
might be interesting:-)
but don't newer scsi busses have a larger address space?
I will bite regarding one issue near and dear to IETF hearts -- which is the
seeming need to buy yet another 802.11 card for each IETF meeting.
btw, those daze are over, at least for the moment.
from the current version of draft-ymbk-termroom-op-03.txt,
2.5 Wireless LAN
...
OK, we have come to use and like the 802.11 nets at the IETF meeting. What
will happen if many attendees also turn up BlueTooth devices? AFAIK, they
operate on the same frequency band, and the BT devices emit enough noise
to seriously hamper 802.11 operation!
simple, we take them out and
if i have a device which can only send and receive email, am i "on the
internet?"
if i have a device that lets me send and receive messages to/from internet
users, am i "on the internet"
note that sms with a gateway satisfies the last one.
my point is not to push sms or whatever. but that by
I would go further - first to define by exclusion, secondly to define
a new class of providers (according tro common uisage) so that
discussion can proceed
My intention is to provide a semi permanent definition as an Informational
RFC.
It is important to make the definition protected
of course you will exuse the providers if we continue to be perverse and
find new business models.
not bloody likely. some things are inexcusable. munging data in
transit is one of them. the fact that you may have a business
model that says you can make money doing something that is
http://rfc2826.x42.com/ (try for any rfc)
operationally, useably, ... how is this more useful than putting the rfc
after the slash, e.g.
http://x42.com/rfc2826
what's it get me, other than less dns hits?
ramdu
I sent the following to Becky Burr a few minutes ago as a formal
complaint about the ICANN abuse of users
some of us want to do work and not play in the snake pit. please remove me,
ietf, ... from your list of teh diseas-laden. thanks.
randy
apologies to the community for pollution of not s/ietf/iesg/. it's a bad
week.
randy
apologies, but ...
randy
From: Bernard Aboba [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: draft-ietf-aaa-na-reqts-05.txt
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 00:51:28 -0700 (PDT)
apologies, but ...
randy
From: Bernard Aboba [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: draft-ietf-aaa-na-reqts-05.txt
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 00:51:28 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would like to request that this draft be withdrawn from the RFC editor
The USA is the best networked country in the world
oh really?
I have always heard that the RFC Editor will not publish
any document as an RFC if it tries to reference an Internet-Draft.
^ normatively
PS - is no one else alarmed by the re-publishing of material
submitted under an explicit agreement for 'removal after 6 mos'?
I also share this concern.
as do i, though i understand the ipr motivation.
randy
Dave Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED], on behalf of "Nexsi
Corporation", has sent unsolicited job-recruitment spam to addresses
apparently gleaned from the posted IETF Nomcom volunteer list.
actually, it must have been a wider list, as i was included as a victim.
i foolishly presume folk on the
If that were the case, well Randy, I'll forward you a message or two from
head hunters "on behalf of Verio", or Cisco, or Juniper, or pretty much
any other company you can name.
most of the time they are lying
and if i know my friend mary is looking, and i incidentally get a call from
a
There isn't much overlap between the markets for baked goods and network
protocols.
the main intersection is in the doughnut area of high fat, too much sugar,
and too little nutritional value.
randy
But the Internet is not the postal system nor the phone system. We already
have the postal system and the phone system. They may be slower, but does
that mean they should be replaced or that the Internet must duplicate what
these systems do?
i am sorry, but i can not understand the above.
"I'm sorry, I'm not going to be able to figure out how to type that email
address on my keyboard, could you please send me a message, and I'll just hit
reply".
if the app-presentation - internal coding - dns request mapping is not
one:one and reversable on the other end, even this is not sure
Really big post offices have special places to handle things such
as incomplete addresses. Nothing guaranteed, but if you are lucky,
you may even successfully send a letter from an arbitrary place to
anywhere in the world using local addressing, at least if you don't
forget the country name
my wife, a preschool teacher was in oslo. she said that she had never
conceived that so many add (attention deficit) people could be in one
place. our population has an overly high proportion of people who
think that they are more 'important' than everyone else, the kind of
folk who cut in
small two button usb mouse and sony usb cable in black bag?
actually left in plenary last night?
randy
Excellent. We've agreed that IPv6's problems are a subset of IPv4's.
unfortunately, we have not shown it is a proper subset. e.g. the larger
address space may exacerbate issues already causing problems in v4, such as
the increasing number of routes.
and i am not 'taunting' but trying to see
I would suggest that chairs try setting the agenda around issues, not
around drafts themselves. The main point of the face-to-face meetings
is to resolve issues that cannot be resolved by mail. Put those on the
agenda, and let the combatants present as much tutorial information as
they
How about a first step: In WG sessions that I chair, there are going
to be no more presentations. From now on, one week before the IETF
meeting, document editors will be required to send me a list of
outstanding issues they wish to discuss in the WG session for their
particular drafts. I
Frank was a good AD and managed WGs as well as any of us (and better than
many)
as a wg chair who served in frank's area, i will second and third that.
randy
Few ideas are really bad. Most are either pre or post mature.
thanks for the quotes file entry!
actually, if it is a delivery failure notification, 1123 5.3.3 would seem
to apply. mail bounces are to be sent to the MAIL FROM: not the original
sender. or even if they were sent to the from: we would not see them.
this bleep has been designed to be max annoying. get the word out. tell
as no one has mentioned this approach, i figured to add to the non-
productive confusion as follows:
nanog had an analogous crowding issue. the organizers looked at the problem
and said
the goal is not to become large, the goal is to maintain quality
but one does not want to
I hate to argue with Randy's common sense but I don't think this
works. There are always people who can't get travel authorisation
until very late, or whatever, among those who are absolutely needed
(i.e. document authors etc.). So we would need rules about who gets in
regardless of the
Anyone who has posted to the IETF list in the last week or two has
gotten literally dozens of "out of office notification" messages from
Microsoft Exchange clients. You would think the largest application
software provider in the world would understand the difference between
envelope and
Is there a way to still do zone-transfers? No, I don't want .com, just
.edu. None of the root servers seem to allow it.
from rfc 2780
2.7 Root servers SHOULD NOT answer AXFR, or other zone transfer,
queries from clients other than other root servers. This
restriction is
| I hear that people aren't passing prefixes longer than /20. Is this
| true, and how broadly is this being implemented? If I wanted to advertise
| my own IP space (say a /24) instead of space provided by my ISP, would many
| ISP's not pass my route because of prefix length?
I am
I found this news report of some concern
glad to hear it. but it does not seem to be an internet ENGINEERING issue.
randy
I found this news report of some concern
glad to hear it. but it does not seem to be an internet ENGINEERING
issue.
So, who's issue is it then?
first, i don't know whose issue grape juice is either. i just know it's not
an ietf issue. the ietf is not the internet's default garbage can.
you have a new email address for me to add to the sociopath filter, eh?
randy
It's our collective job to ensure that IPv6 doesn't
leave any of the motivations to do NAT intact.
i suggest that, for most of us, there are more useful and concrete major
direct goals of ipv6 than anti-nat religion.
randy
i suggest that, for most of us, there are more useful and concrete major
direct goals of ipv6 than anti-nat religion.
to the extent that anti-NAT is a religion it is because NAT is a religion
no, it's a market reality. we may not like it, but we'd be fools to deny
it.
randy
i suggest that, for most of us, there are more useful and concrete major
direct goals of ipv6 than anti-nat religion.
And in fact, the anti-NAT religion hurts deployment of IPv6
because it is hard to get customers to throw away things
they have already bought.
I would also suggest that
Given the penetration of NAT, particularly in the business world, I
suspect B2B applications that do not work with NAT will not exist too
long.
from the little i have seen, because b2b usually wants authentication,
authorization, and encryption, a lot of that stuff goes through gateways/
Also, why isn't HTML an accepted format for Internet Drafts
just a sec. traditionally, we have this discussion every six months. it
has not been six months yet.
randy
I wonder if the future's most effective denial-of-service attacks
will simply trigger semiautomatic "your customer XYZ isn't doing
enough to protect our intellectual property, so disconnect them,
or we'll increase your legal bills alot" claims from publishing
houses and the like. This
A router decrements the IP TTL field.
It should also not propagate broadcast IP packets (subnet or all 1's).
for a non-attached subnet, what is a broadcast packet?
A router decrements the IP TTL field.
It should also not propagate broadcast IP packets (subnet or all 1's).
for a non-attached subnet, what is a broadcast packet?
Maybe he meant directed broadcast as in 10.10.255.255 ?
i guess i was too suble. from here, i do not know that 10.10.255.255 is
As long as about 2/3 of the IETF attendees are from North
America, 2/3 of the meetings should be in North America.
similar logic might apply to havana.
or, as long as 2/3 of the meetings are held in north america,
2/3 of the attendees will be from north america.
randy
when will you be hosting?
I've done it 1.5 times myself. How about you?
2002, i believe. working on it now.
randy
This is appalling. How can this be STOPPED?
un sub scribe
To: 'Jim Fleming' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
please do not feed the trolls. they do not digest the food and just puke on
the public floor
randy
There is a school of thought that seems to believe that IPv6 is a
failure because it only solves a quite narrow although extremely
important problem -- specifically address space exhaustion.
The fact that it does not solve the global routing table meltdown is,
according to such people, an
though i appreciate the intent. i would appreciate a separate mailing list
for process issues as opposed to technical stuff. it is my job to work on
the technical stuff at some depth. the process discussions often get a bit
too detailed g.
randy
You see, it is not within the purview of POISSON to decide by itself,
without approval from the IESG, that any process related document is
fair game to be opened, reviewed, and revised whenever POISSON decides
it should be done.
this statement seems unnecessarily polarizing. the problem
lest we forget on whose shoulders we stand, jon postel died three years ago
today.
randy
RIRs allocate TLAs (or sub-TLAs) to TLA Registries.
there are no longer such things as TLAs
randy
Is this the reason why multicast seems to have stopped?
it stopped because i disabled pim to wireless. someone less harried
can explain why, or you can read draft-ymbk-termroom-op-06.txt
randy
after a BOF that I chair, I generally get the blue sheet from the
Secretariat and make sure the email addresses are on the relevant mailer.
it has long been generally held that adding people to mailing lists without
their consent is quite impolite.
randy
I've known several folks who have Sunday booked solid with
business/design-team/etc meetings weeks before the actual IETF begins.
I would personally prefer extending into Friday...
aol me too /aol
randy
I have a feeling we are going to have t think
VERY hard about the entire schedule for the 54th meeting oin
Yokohama given 80% of folks there wil be on severe sleep
deprivation...
i know the japanese are said to be workaholic. but will they
be more tired than the 20% of us who fly?
/
If configured on your laptop and at your home name server, this will
enable you to get a dynamically allocated address which has your own
domain name both in the forward zone and in the reverse zone.
Fantastic. My laptop's DNS name is lust.indecency.org. Please arrange
for the records for
What? No DNSSEC? ;)
if you *read* the web page, you will find a setion labeled Updating
Signed Zones in the 5. Limitations and Possible Complications section.
this stuff is not yet made simple. it's been enough fun to make it work
reliably. folk will probably actually have to read the doc.
what jakob's message was saying is that the in-addr.arpa and ip6.arpa
zones will be correctly configured to work with the ietf net's correctly
configured dhcp server.
I appreciate the effort that has been made to set this up, and I'll
look forward to seeing whether it really does make a
What about people who have zero intention to run either IPv4 or DHCP?
sorry, if you READ THE DOCUMENT, you will see that this is a dhcp-dns
experiment. if you don't run dhcp, or don't run dns, sorry.
randy
i use it so that hosts at home can run scripts such as
scp foo laptop:
randy
It's also quite clear to me that stable DNS names are not an adequate
substitute for stable IP addresses, and that the existence of a service
that can be used to update DNS names when IP addresses change should not
be taken as an indication (for example) that it's okay for providers to
we eagerly look forward to you providing this technology, and maybe
even having an isp lynching or effigy burning at yokohama or do we
need to be more patient?
patience helps one person can only do so much
i figured i would help, probably be the lynchee
randy
it's really nice to see the NSRG and MIP folk working their issues in this
more public space. it's a whole lot better than some pathetic idiot flaming
about his drivel being filtered, and the hundreds of folk who feel a need to
reply.
but, just to remind folk, if you want to try the dynamic dns
re: nanog list
luckily, there are no clueless flames, stupidity, or knee-jerk reactions
on this list
randy
Those of us who have been doing this for a while sometimes forget that
there are things that are not obvious to those just joining us
Protocol number assignments are at
http://wwwianaorg/numbershtml; Application procedures are at
wwwianaorg IP Protocol numbers are at
i believe one will be able to rent wireless cards there will be a wireless
lan
randy
Would the idiot who spammed every IETF mailing list with
a subscription solicitation for a Yahoo MPLS mailing list
kindly identify itself?
s/spammed/attempted to spam/ some are configured responsibly
for the sad but modern age.
and it is most likely that they just scraped the ietf web pages
s/spammed/attempted to spam/ some are configured responsibly
for the sad but modern age.
They also nailed the linux-ipv6 list, so it's not IETF-only.
probably
i wonder if we know how to get the attention of a grown-up at yahoo
and just get this whole mess completely nuked. it should be a bit
of an embarrassment to yahoo that someone can use them to perp this
form of net abuse.
randy
Net meeting by Microsoft is not suppoted by NAT . this is the major
problem
you may not have noticed that
o there is no ietf standards track document for net meeting
o there is no ietf standards track document for nat
hence no one here is surprised. caveat emptor.
we design and
dan, for those of us out here who are mono-lingual honkeys, easily
confused when we cross a county line, blah blah blan, could you
give one *simple* *concrete* example of the failure mode you fear?
and try not to use adjectives. thanks.
randy
It's possible to eliminate the interoperability failures by upgrading
_everything_, or by ugprading _nothing_. The problem is the transition.
so, it sounds like the problem is not the proposed standard in question,
but the lack of a transition plan without holes. shades of ipv6!
so it sounds
Another, very different reaction to the disparity between promise and
accomplishment is to ensure that working groups meet their milestones.
and if they don't we reduce their salaries, right?
of course. but making milestones, especially in a culture reknown
for poor estimation, seems to be a rather minor aspect of producing
quality. and i believe the latter to be far more important, and to
be more difficult to judge, motivate, guide, ...
high quality that misses its market
1 - 100 of 426 matches
Mail list logo
