DG Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 20:04:38 -0700
DG From: Darrell Greenwood
[ editted for brevity ]
DG The 5 day course can be boiled down really to one concept
DG that can be taught in 5 minutes... binary search.
Every half-decent programmer knows O(log(N)) is one's friend
unless the scalar
At 9:43 am -0700 (GMT) 25/6/04, Ben Browning wrote:
At 04:00 PM 6/24/2004, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
[ Operations content: ] Do you know of any ISP's null routing AS701?
ISPs? Not of the top of my head. I know several businesses who
have, and a great many people who have blocked UUNet space from
Greetings,
Anyone know anything about IP 128.232.0.31?
# host 128.232.0.31
31.0.232.128.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer dns-probe.srg.cl.cam.ac.uk.
We have been getting persistent zone transfer attempts that originate from this IP
address. We have had repeated zone transfer attempts
Steve Linford wrote:
I seldom post here because the couple of times I have followed-up to
correct wrong statements in nanog regarding Spamhaus, such as the
above, I have each time been told by nanog's admin that I will be
removed from the nanog list if I respond to any question in nanog
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 11:19:16 -0400
Jon R. Kibler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Anyone know anything about IP 128.232.0.31?
| # host 128.232.0.31
| 31.0.232.128.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer dns-probe.srg.cl.cam.ac.uk.
|
| We have been getting persistent zone transfer attempts that originate
|
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004, Jon R. Kibler wrote:
Greetings,
Anyone know anything about IP 128.232.0.31?
# host 128.232.0.31
31.0.232.128.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer dns-probe.srg.cl.cam.ac.uk.
We have been getting persistent zone transfer attempts that originate
from this IP address.
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004, Jon R. Kibler wrote:
I seldom post here because the couple of times I have followed-up to
correct wrong statements in nanog regarding Spamhaus, such as the
above, I have each time been told by nanog's admin that I will be
removed from the nanog list if I respond to
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 10:50:12 -0700 (PDT) Tom (UnitedLayer) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The big deal is that spam complaining/etc is not operational content, and
there are several other lists to handle that sort of thing.
but then, individuals get 1 free shot at saying things that are in
some
Have just spent some time trying to track down what seemed to be an
elusive problem, I thought I'd mention it here.
I've had problems accessing www.level3.net, www.ebay.co.uk and
www.dabs.com (and a few others I don't recall). As I'm the first user of
a reasonably new netblock I thought it might
Title: RE: The use of .0/.255 addresses.
I see traffic from this last IP address octet all the time from prefixes of length less than /24. Use of these host id's when the prefix length is greater than or equal to /24 is illegal. So if that's your case, I'd suggest not doing it.
If that's not
Jonathan McDowell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
Various people I've asked about this have said they wouldn't use the
.0 or .255 addresses themselves, though couldn't present any
concrete info about why not; my experience above would seem to
suggest a reason not to use them.
It's funny that
Various people I've asked about this have said they wouldn't use the .0
or .255 addresses themselves, though couldn't present any concrete info
about why not; my experience above would seem to suggest a reason not
to
use them.
The .255 address is very likely to be a broadcast address from a
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004, Tony Li wrote:
The .255 address is very likely to be a broadcast address from a
netblock of /24 or longer. I would suspect that folks are wary of
accepting packets from a broadcast address as that could easily be a
smurf. The .0 address was used as a broadcast address
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 12:32:40AM +0100, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
Have just spent some time trying to track down what seemed to be an
elusive problem, I thought I'd mention it here.
I've had problems accessing www.level3.net, www.ebay.co.uk and
www.dabs.com (and a few others I don't
At 10:03 PM -0400 6/26/04, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
This is what happens when your educational system continues to teach
classful routing as anything other than a HISTORICAL FOOTNOTE
*coughCiscocough*. This is also how you end up with 76k /24s in the global
routing table.
Do you part to help
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004, Jared Mauch wrote:
This includes Washington state host software vendors that
may need to distribute patches for networking stacks with defects
in their handling of outbound TCP connections (referenced in an alternate
email..)
Then of course we could use their
Amen, brother.
- ferg
-- Richard A Steenbergen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you part to help control the ignorant population: whenever you hear
someone say class [ABC] in reference to anything other than a historical
allocation, smack them. Hard.
--
Fergie, a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
I can tell you that at least with my customers, the term class C is
only used to clarify what is meant by slash 24 and always with the
phrase is the equivilant to
And a bit surprisingly, I'm having to explain this less and less. Even
the sales team is learning to speak CIDR.
So there is indeed
- Original Message -
From: Wayne E. Bouchard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Fergie (Paul Ferguson) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2004 11:01 PM
Subject: Re: The use of .0/.255 addresses.
I can tell you that at least with my customers, the term class C is
19 matches
Mail list logo
