Hi,
thanks for the help.
Because IPv6 aware nameservers make queries
for the
IPv6 addresses of the nameservers and as a result
see the
NXDOMAIN / CNAME. The IPv4 only nameservers don't
make
these queries, as a matter of practice, and only
see the
Maybe Congress uncovered that mystery in their IPv6 hearings. ;-)
http://www.techweb.com/wire/ebiz/164903883
- ferg
-- william(at)elan.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Mark Andrews wrote:
No. These are just a mis-configured zones.
hangzhou.gov.cn only has
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 04:35:30PM -0500, Brad Knowles wrote:
Fortunately for me, all the phishing attempts were pretty stupid,
and failed because they relied too much on Windows-specific attacks,
Windows-specific MUAs, etc
In my case they were merely amusing. If there *were* an
Just in case anyone was wondering, U.S. gummint agencies will
be screaming in migration agony for the next couple of years. ;-)
http://www.fcw.com/article89432-06-29-05-Web
- ferg
--
Fergie, a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
Engineering Architecture for the Internet
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Fergie (Paul Ferguson)
Just in case anyone was wondering, U.S. gummint agencies will
be screaming in migration agony for the next couple of years. ;-)
http://www.fcw.com/article89432-06-29-05-Web
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 06:06:38PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 01:33:14PM -0400, Jason Frisvold wrote:
On 6/29/05, Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
indeed! i use them often. remember when you had to go into the
bank and wait in a queue for a teller?
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 14:02:33 GMT
Fergie (Paul Ferguson) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just in case anyone was wondering, U.S. gummint agencies will
be screaming in migration agony for the next couple of years. ;-)
http://www.fcw.com/article89432-06-29-05-Web
Well, when I was in the gummint,
Thought thief. ;-)
- ferg
-- Daniel Senie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just in case anyone was wondering, U.S. gummint agencies will
be screaming in migration agony for the next couple of years. ;-)
http://www.fcw.com/article89432-06-29-05-Web
GOSIP II anybody? Will it be different this time
No kidding. He should be nominated to head up coordinating transition
planning to IPv6.
;-)
Not that I'm complaining, GOSIP paid my contract fees in 1996/1997
(sic). Most of these clowns don't realize how hard these mandates are
to stop if they turn out to be in error, especially if they
At 11:30 -0400 6/30/05, Daniel Senie wrote:
At 10:02 AM 6/30/2005, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
Just in case anyone was wondering, U.S. gummint agencies will
be screaming in migration agony for the next couple of years. ;-)
http://www.fcw.com/article89432-06-29-05-Web
GOSIP II anybody?
So, the questions are: will OMB fund the transfer of the US gov't
sites? Will there ever be a US gov't web site only on IPv6? (I
think the API issue has been solved.)
While that would certainly be nice.. There doesn't need to be.
Unlike GOSIP, IPv6 is largely transparent, thanks to all the
At 2:51 AM -0700 2005-06-29, Mike Leber wrote:
Ya, ya, ya... you are going to say 1) its impossible to get people to use
designated servers for outgoing email. Or you will say 2) even if you do
this there will still be *spam*! (egads shock horrror!) Ugh please.
That's not the problem.
At 11:30 AM -0400 2005-06-30, Daniel Senie wrote:
http://www.fcw.com/article89432-06-29-05-Web
GOSIP II anybody? Will it be different this time than it was with OSI?
Everyone had to scramble in the late 1980s to get OSI stuff done, then
the gov't never used it.
I worked for DISA at
I'm glad you brought that up. :-)
As a follow-up to the two posts that I made earlier about
Congressional hearings and the OMB mandate, let me applaud
Congressman Tom Davis (did I really just say that?!?) for
making a salient point during the hearings yesteday:
Asian countries have been
Thus spake Kuhtz, Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So, the questions are: will OMB fund the transfer of the US gov't
sites? Will there ever be a US gov't web site only on IPv6? (I
think the API issue has been solved.)
While that would certainly be nice.. There doesn't need to be.
Agreed,
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 14:02:33 GMT
Fergie (Paul Ferguson) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just in case anyone was wondering, U.S. gummint agencies will
be screaming in migration agony for the next couple of years. ;-)
http://www.fcw.com/article89432-06-29-05-Web
Well, when I was in the
On Thursday 30 June 2005 14:56, Ted Fischer wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 14:02:33 GMT
Fergie (Paul Ferguson) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just in case anyone was wondering, U.S. gummint agencies will
be screaming in migration agony for the next couple of years. ;-)
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
I'm glad you brought that up. :-)
As a follow-up to the two posts that I made earlier about
Congressional hearings and the OMB mandate, let me applaud
Congressman Tom Davis (did I really just say that?!?) for
please find some ivory soap
The author of the TechWeb article wrote those words extolling
improved security measures, not me, dude. :-)
I stated explicitly that all of the new features lauded
by v6 proponents have effectively been retro-fitted to v4,
thereby negating almost every v6 migration argument, with
the exception
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Brad Knowles wrote:
At 2:51 AM -0700 2005-06-29, Mike Leber wrote:
Ya, ya, ya... you are going to say 1) its impossible to get people to use
designated servers for outgoing email. Or you will say 2) even if you do
this there will still be *spam*! (egads shock
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
The author of the TechWeb article wrote those words extolling
improved security measures, not me, dude. :-)
the soap comment was aimed at you for the tom davis 'support' :) I
understood you didn't write the other parts.
I stated
We could have been much better served adding 3-bits at the beginning.
Effectively giving a full IP v4 space to every continent (even Antartica)
and having an extra one for the extra-terrestrial working group. ;)
And it would have given us real geographic-based filtering capabilities at
the same
Scott Morris wrote:
We could have been much better served adding 3-bits at the beginning.
Effectively giving a full IP v4 space to every continent (even Antartica)
and having an extra one for the extra-terrestrial working group. ;)
And it would have given us real geographic-based filtering
At 2:02 PM -0700 2005-06-30, Mike Leber wrote:
In practice if your remote users don't use the submit port on your servers
it gives rise to all kinds of different issues involving you trying to
support the outbound filtering AOL is doing on your customers sending from
non AOL domains.
Heheheh... But see, wasn't that one of the whole theories behind the
aggregation schemes built into the allocation of IPv6 address? Come
now...
Because we have deployed it today in a manner where that's not possible
doesn't make it a rule per se.
Is this theory any different that simply
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Brad Knowles wrote:
In practice if your remote users don't use the submit port on your servers
it gives rise to all kinds of different issues involving you trying to
support the outbound filtering AOL is doing on your customers sending from
non AOL domains.
Effectively giving a full IP v4 space to every continent
which will do so much for aggregation. not.
At 05:02 PM 6/30/2005, you wrote:
Of course, if you're going to do this, you should also be doing
at least SMTPAUTH and preferably TLSSMTP, but then again many clients
are broken and don't support these technologies or don't support them
correctly.
Or you support POP AUTH, which just
Heheheh... But see, wasn't that one of the whole theories behind the
aggregation schemes built into the allocation of IPv6 address? Come
now...
Because we have deployed it today in a manner where that's not possible
doesn't make it a rule per se.
nope. you're absolutely right.
we just
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Greetings,
This is to inform you that the IANA has allocated the following
three (3) IPv4 /8 blocks to RIPE NCC:
89/8
90/8
91/8
For a full list of IANA IPv4 allocations please see:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space
- --
Doug
At 5:43 PM -0400 2005-06-30, Todd Vierling wrote:
I've done a look-see around my network and acquaintances a while ago, and
among them were quite a few mailers, all of which supported not only
alternate ports, but also SMTP AUTH. MSA support is far more available than
this classic FUD.
Does anyone have related and/or specific outage information to the
Equinox IBX facility in Chicago that occurred this past weekend? I'm
more curious of actual root cause of their power facilities, outage
timelines, response times...etc.
thanks,
Pablo
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brad Knowles) [Fri 01 Jul 2005, 00:33 CEST]:
At 5:43 PM -0400 2005-06-30, Robert Boyle wrote:
Support them all and let your customers decide which ones work for them
based on their particular circumstances at the time and the network
they happen to be using.
That's
On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 01:21:33PM -0400, Edward Lewis wrote:
Having been in the US gov't (too) at the time of GOSIP, there were
three reasons why I never used it much:
[...]
3) There was no tidbit of information available over the network that
was on a server that spoke only GOSIP and
On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 03:52:00PM -0700, Pablo's Gmail wrote:
Does anyone have related and/or specific outage information to the
Equinox IBX facility in Chicago that occurred this past weekend? I'm
more curious of actual root cause of their power facilities, outage
timelines, response
On Jun 30, 2005, at 5:37 PM, Todd Underwood wrote:
where is the service that is available only on IPv6? i can't seem to
find it.
You might ask yourself whether the Kame Turtle is dancing at
http://www.kame.net/. This is a service that is *different* (returns a
different web page) depending
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Brad Knowles wrote:
I've done a look-see around my network and acquaintances a while ago, and
among them were quite a few mailers, all of which supported not only
alternate ports, but also SMTP AUTH. MSA support is far more available
than
this classic FUD.
At 21:29 -0400 6/30/05, Todd Underwood wrote:
the rest of fred's comment stands with useful information but i'm
still looking for the tipping point where people migrate, en-masse,
away from the Internet to this new, incompatible network.
You can color me skeptical on IPv6 - basing this on
- Original Message -
From: James Laszko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 7:34 AM
Subject: RE: ATM
Most MPLS networks use a combination of point to point, frame and ATM
facilities as the infrastructure. The phone companies use ATM just
about everywhere to deliver
39 matches
Mail list logo
