At 06:43 PM 06-04-05 -0400, Daniel Senie wrote:
Since the uptake on IRT has been slow, and after much internal discussion,
RIPE has decided to add an abuse-mailbox attribute. For further details see:
https://www.ripe.net/ripe/maillists/archives/db-wg/2005/msg00015.html
-Hank
At 06:10 PM
Does anyone know if netlantis.org is coming back? That was a very
useful site but it has been down for a long time (with a note saying
that it will be back soon) now.
I would love to have access to that BGP info again, it was very
helpful... I am still contributing a route feed, and that
* JP Velders:
Over here in RIPE land so to speak, several ISP's (most notably
FIRST members) have put a lot of effort in getting 'IRT' objects in
the RipeDB.
I think you mean Terena/TI instead of FIRST, although there is
some overlap.
The IRT object is mostly useless because the way it was
+-le 07/04/2005 00:17 -0700, John van Oppen a dit :
|
| Does anyone know if netlantis.org is coming back? That was a very
| useful site but it has been down for a long time (with a note saying
| that it will be back soon) now.
|
| I would love to have access to that BGP info again, it was
There are New IOS features for such situations, take a look at
datacenter backup, SLB and these issues.
On Apr 7, 2005 2:35 AM, Vandy Hamidi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All,
We're an ASP and are considering adding a secondary Backup Datacenter
(BDC) in the US to protect our web presence.
My
| Does anyone know if netlantis.org is coming back? That was a very
| useful site but it has been down for a long time (with a note saying
| that it will be back soon) now.
|
| I would love to have access to that BGP info again, it was very
| helpful... I am still contributing a route feed,
The ARIN DB allows many points of contact types, including the abuse
contact. ARIN WHOIS reflects those registrants who choose to designate an
abuse contact.
Richard Jimmerson
Director of External Relations
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
We have tech support on duty 24/7 and
Ask the ASN 112 folks how many queries their servers handle.
http://www.as112.net/
I have a few stats for ISC's AS112 node:
- It gets about 2300 DNS UDP queries/sec
+ about 1300/sec SOA (due to dynamic DNS updates)
+ about 1000/sec PTR
- It also gets about 1200 DNS TCP
---Original Message---
From: Sean Donelan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: The power of default configurations
Sent: 06 Apr 2005 14:00:05
On Mon, 4 Apr 2005, Paul Vixie wrote:
adding more. oh and as long as you're considering whether to restrict
things to your LAN/campus/ISP, i'm
Ask the ASN 112 folks how many queries their servers handle.
http://www.as112.net/
I have a few stats for ISC's AS112 node:
- It gets about 2300 DNS UDP queries/sec
+ about 1300/sec SOA (due to dynamic DNS updates)
+ about 1000/sec PTR
- It also gets about
adding more. oh and as long as you're considering whether to
restrict things to your LAN/campus/ISP, i'm ready to see rfc1918
filters deployed...
Why does BIND forward lookups for RFC1918 addresses by default? Why
isn't the default not to forward RFC1918 addresses (and
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Steve Gibbard
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 8:48 PM
To: Vandy Hamidi
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: BGP Anywhere - Global Redundancy
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Vandy Hamidi wrote:
Below is how I
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
On 4/6/2005 5:00 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
Why does BIND forward lookups for RFC1918 addresses by default?
As has been pointed out already, caches need to be able to ask other
(local) servers for the PTRs.
OTOH, it might make a good feature (and
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Paul Vixie wrote:
adding more. oh and as long as you're considering whether to
restrict things to your LAN/campus/ISP, i'm ready to see rfc1918
filters deployed...
Why does BIND forward lookups for RFC1918 addresses by default? Why
isn't the
no to 1) prolong the pain, 2) beat a horsey.. BUT, why are 1918 ips
'special' to any application? why are non-1918 ips 'special' in a
different way?
i know this is hard to believe, but i was asked to review 1918 before it
went to press, since i'd been vociferous in my comments about 1597. in
On 4/7/2005 12:05 PM, Jon Lewis wrote:
I added something like this to our binds that handle recursive queries.
Is there any reason distros (or ISC) couldn't make this a part of the
default config?
This setup works if you know the server is the last resort for your local
clients. It doesn't
Paul Vixie wrote:
no to 1) prolong the pain, 2) beat a horsey.. BUT, why are 1918 ips
'special' to any application? why are non-1918 ips 'special' in a
different way?
i know this is hard to believe, but i was asked to review 1918 before it
went to press, since i'd been vociferous in my
IMO, RFC1918 went off the track when both ISP's and registries started
asking their customers if they have seriously considered using 1918 space
instead of applying for addresses. This caused many kinds of renumbering
nightmares, overlapping addresses, near death of ipv6, etc.
just
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
This setup works if you know the server is the last resort for your local
clients. It doesn't work as a default install unless you are also willing
to scream warnings about changing the defaults everytime named.conf is
modified for local use.
Would
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Paul Vixie wrote:
no to 1) prolong the pain, 2) beat a horsey.. BUT, why are 1918 ips
'special' to any application? why are non-1918 ips 'special' in a
different way?
i know this is hard to believe, but i was asked to review 1918 before it
went to press, since i'd
Paul Vixie wrote:
IMO, RFC1918 went off the track when both ISP's and registries started
asking their customers if they have seriously considered using 1918 space
instead of applying for addresses. This caused many kinds of renumbering
nightmares, overlapping addresses, near death of ipv6, etc.
So, this highlights some good operational practices in networking and
DNS-applications, but doesn't answer how 1918 is 'different' or 'special'
than any other ip address. I think what I was driving at is that putting
these proposed road blocks in bind is akin to the 'cisco auto secure'
I will build this if there is interest and it doesn't exist
elsewhere. Is there a need for a centralized repository of
this information? (I know about dshield, but without a way
to aggregate the data it's not altogether useful.)
-ejay
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 4/7/2005 1:02 PM, Jon Lewis wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
Would you really have to scream?
If folks were used to just adding forwarder entries to named.boot, yes,
since they'd also have to remember to undelegate authority for the
relevant rfc1918 address space now too. If
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
On 4/7/2005 1:02 PM, Jon Lewis wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
Would you really have to scream?
If folks were used to just adding forwarder entries to named.boot, yes,
since they'd also have to remember to undelegate authority for
On 4/7/2005 1:21 PM, Jon Lewis wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
On 4/7/2005 1:02 PM, Jon Lewis wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
Would you really have to scream?
If folks were used to just adding forwarder entries to named.boot, yes,
since they'd also have to
Can someone from Cingular please contact me off-list
Thank you,
--
--
Tom Sands
Chief Network Engineer
Rackspace Managed Hosting
(210)447-4065
--
* US still leads global spam list *
More than a third of all spam e-mails originate in the US, according to a
survey by security firm Sophos.
Full story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4420161.stm
US still leads global spam list
Spam: Made in the USA?
More than a third of all spam
That's nowhere near real figures, even for optimal topologies and
big packets.
That was exactly why I suggested that someone do some lab work on them.
-Bill
SANS Internet Storm Center:
The InfoCon is currently set at yellow in response to
the DNS cache poisoning issues that we have been reporting
on for the last several days. We originally went to yellow
because we were uncertain of the mechanisms that allowed
seemingly secure systems to be
posting news clippings to large mailing lists is just so yesterday.
try http://www.blogger.com/start
randy
So call me old-fashioned (oh, wait a minute -- you
just did)... :-)
- ferg
-- Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
posting news clippings to large mailing lists is just so yesterday.
try http://www.blogger.com/start
randy
Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
So call me old-fashioned (oh, wait a minute -- you
just did)... :-)
How about I point, laugh, and call you OLD, ob?
:)
Seriously though, your 3 articles a week are actually interesting, and I
find them on-topic.
Gadi.
I've created a Network-Automation mailing list for discussions of
issues related to automating network configuration and management,
including (but not limited to) methods, mechanisms, techniques,
philosophies, policies, and products.
Since 1990 or so, much of the research in the system
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Brent Chapman wrote:
I've created a Network-Automation mailing list for discussions of issues
related to automating network configuration and management, including (but
not limited to) methods, mechanisms, techniques, philosophies, policies, and
products.
In the spirit of
At 3:15 PM -0700 4/7/05, Bill Nash wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Brent Chapman wrote:
I've created a Network-Automation mailing list for discussions of
issues related to automating network configuration and management,
including (but not limited to) methods, mechanisms, techniques,
philosophies,
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Brent Chapman wrote:
At 3:15 PM -0700 4/7/05, Bill Nash wrote:
I've created a Network-Automation mailing list for discussions of issues
related to automating network configuration and management, including (but
not limited to) methods, mechanisms, techniques, philosophies,
I've added the following the the Policies section of the
Network-Automation list (it's a little more general than what you
suggested):
Harvesting of email addresses from this mailing list or its
archives for any purpose (but particularly commercial mailings)
is
38 matches
Mail list logo
