-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
try radb . they mirror:
$ whois [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[whois.radb.net]
aut-num: AS1221
as-name: TELSTRA-AS
descr: TELSTRA-AS
admin-c: GIH105
tech-c:DW187
notify:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mnt-by:MAINT-AS1221
changed:
At 10:45 AM +1000 20/8/02, Philip Smith wrote:
Note that the delegation records for some of the ASNs assigned
before APNIC and the RIPE NCC existed have been moved to the latter
databases. Telstra is but one example. (I agree it might be more
helpful if a query on whois.arin.net displayed a
Q.931 is built into H.323 (a VOIP call control protocol). Bellhead
standards are weird.
Hope this helps...
--vadim
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, cw wrote:
I'm not familiar with all the protocols involved, so if my searches
are correct Q.931 is an ISDN control protocol. This is odd because
this
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002 05:09:30 -0700 (PDT), Vadim Antonov wrote:
Q.931 is built into H.323 (a VOIP call control protocol). Bellhead
standards are weird.
Hope this helps...
It might do you see my work involves H.323 based services, however my laptop does not
take any part in that and has no
For the list archives, this seems to be a moderately objective approach to
that question:
http://www.networkuptime.com/columns/guide/index.html
-BM
-Original Message-
From: Dr. Mosh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 6:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
cw,
i think the frame 5 was just misinterpreted by ethereal (probably it
found some initial byte sequence that made it consider the frame this
way). if you go through the decode you'll find out that the data
contained in the (claimed) 'q.931' part is something really far from
q.931 - most of
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CALL FOR PRESENTATIONS
NANOG 26
GENERAL SESSION
TUTORIALS
Does any one else out there think smart hands at Equinix is a rip off? I can
send a package over night to the IBX for less than what it costs to move it
from the mailroom to my cage. Just curious
_
Join the worlds largest
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Ali Jackson wrote:
Does any one else out there think smart hands at Equinix is a rip off? I
can send a package over night to the IBX for less than what it costs to
move it from the mailroom to my cage. Just curious
Uh, yes. Equinix is a rip off in general. I got
Yes.
Equinix security, while it looks very tough, is very easy to social
engineer.
Too much fluff, need more stuff.
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Nathan Stratton wrote:
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Ali Jackson wrote:
Does any one else out there think smart hands at Equinix is a rip off? I
can send
I think that getting caught is a good indication that they take the security
of the facility seriously. Some places will ban you forever if you violate
their policies. The mantrap thing is there for a reason. People are always
free to build out their own spaces however they wish. If you
There is no perfect location. Any common location has a certain
level of insecurity. Im sure u could sneak in a squeeze bottle and
spray equipment also. The point is, it is a relatively secure
location, short of building your own facility or blding and manning
it.
Even many military
Equinix has show considerable interest in catering to the carrier market,
and has always been very customer service oriented. Their security is
generally good, and their security managers take the sort of stuff you are
talking about very seriously. I have no doubt that they would take some
On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 03:08:22PM -0400, N. Richard Solis wrote:
I think that getting caught is a good indication that they take the security
of the facility seriously.
Which is clearly exhibited by them leaving a side door propped
open, or not checking or securing this door
On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 02:07:49PM -0400, Nathan Stratton wrote:
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Ali Jackson wrote:
Does any one else out there think smart hands at Equinix is a rip off? I
can send a package over night to the IBX for less than what it costs to
move it from the mailroom to my
Does any one else out there think smart hands at Equinix is a rip off? I
can send a package over night to the IBX for less than what it costs to
move it from the mailroom to my cage. Just curious
Uh, yes. Equinix is a rip off in general. I got kicked out of Chicago
using the side
Leaving or forcing doors to be propped open generally triggers an alarm that
prompts a visit from someone in security. It is entirely possible that
someone who worked at the facility informed the security staff of what they
were doing because they needed to leave the door open to fetch a
ssh and telnet =)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
[This may sound like a perennial question.]
I'm curious as to how you configure your routers (whatever they may be).
In particular, what tools do you use? Home grown? Rancid? Vendor
provided?
I'll summarize.
Thanks in
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, N. Richard Solis wrote:
Leaving or forcing doors to be propped open generally triggers an alarm that
prompts a visit from someone in security. It is entirely possible that
someone who worked at the facility informed the security staff of what they
were doing because
Speakig of paix's and locations, I know the mfn filings have held up
progress but I wondered and maybe others on this list wonder what the
status of the paix nyiix interconnection might be?
On 20 Aug 2002, Paul
Vixie wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathan Stratton) writes:
Uh, yes. Equinix
Speakig of paix's and locations, I know the mfn filings have held up
progress but I wondered and maybe others on this list wonder what the
status of the paix nyiix interconnection might be?
until mfn finishes selling paix, there will likely be no progress on this.
At 2:19 PM -0600 8/20/02, among other things Irwan Hadi wrote:
BTW, if small (tier 4 - 5) ISPs can be threatened by its uplink for non
compliance with the AUP (for example transmitting spam all the time),
and medium ISPs (tier 3 - 4) can also be threatened by its uplink for non
compliance with
Then the appropriate person to talk to is the account manager. Catching a
problem yourself doesn't do anyone any good if the management of the
facility (or the company) isn't involved. My experience is that a LOT of
companies want to hear from customers when things go amiss. They can't
always
Some ISPs seem to be taking the position that the best defense is a good
offense.
http://www.informationwave.net/news/20020819riaa.php
IWT Bans RIAA From Accessing Its Network
August 19, 2002
Information Wave Technologies has
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, N. Richard Solis wrote:
Then the appropriate person to talk to is the account manager. Catching a
problem yourself doesn't do anyone any good if the management of the
facility (or the company) isn't involved.
That presumes there is a single account manager.
With
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Deepak Jain wrote:
I'm curious -- did they kick you out for the day, or terminate your contract
and move you out?
Basically they said they would ban me personally if I gave there security
people a hard time about their security. I don't think they ever would
terminate a
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Deepak Jain wrote:
I'm curious -- did they kick you out for the day, or terminate
your contract
and move you out?
Basically they said they would ban me personally if I gave there security
people a hard time about their security. I don't think they ever would
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Nathan Stratton wrote:
Correct, I am sorry I think that is my point. There are a lot of things
that they SHOULD have been doing, but they were not. I am saying they
spent lots of money on a security image and not on security. They never
found me using the door and that
This is copy of the message sent to IETF mail list. As subject said,
I'd like to organize IETF working group to define new additions to SMTP.
As everyone I'm sure have seen on the last why is spam a problem and
other similar threads on ietf as well as numerous similar threads
I am not an ex-employee of Equinix, so here's my 2 cents:
When we built the IBXs, having spent a couple of years listening to
you folks tell me what you want at the PAIX and elsewhere, I basically
learned it was impossible to satisfy everyone. If you please one network
engineer, you're going
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Jay Adelson wrote:
2) Customers are given one point of contact they can call for anything.
I'm your customer and I'm telling you that I haven't been and when I've
specifically asked for a single point of contact I've been told that I
need to contact a variety of people
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is copy of the message sent to IETF mail list. As subject said,
I'd like to organize IETF working group to define new additions to SMTP.
As everyone I'm sure have seen on the last why is spam a problem and
other similar
Several (if not most) of the issues indeed have solutions available (which
is BIG plus for this project), almost none have any standards and there
is no wide use at all. I want standards to be defined and in a way that
would encorage worldwide use of these features and in my view it means
new
Anyone have confirmation about this ?
Record labels today filed suit in District Court in DC against Verizon,
asking that Verizon be compelled to turn over information regarding their
subscribers under the pre-complaint subpoena power granted under 17 USC
512(h) of the DMCA.
Regards
Marshall
Patrick,
Yes, really! That's what the ERC is for. I guess the confusion is outside
your email thread, which indicates as such... But yes, the single point is
supposed to be the ERC.
Feel free to contact me with specifics...
-Jay
On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 05:29:43PM -0700, Patrick wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, David Lesher wrote:
Unnamed Administration sources reported that N. Richard Solis said:
If you haven't worked in an environment where you had to turn in your
cellphone and pager at the front desk, show a badge to a camera around every
corner, and get your office keys
36 matches
Mail list logo
