ic and only one destination) and
solution in this case appears to be to manually change MAC addresses
of some servers until I can acheive better load-balancing.
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004, william(at)elan.net wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have etherchannel setup between cisco 7500 router and 5500 switch.
>
Hi,
I have etherchannel setup between cisco 7500 router and 5500 switch.
For data going from 7500 router everything seems to be ok and data is
well split between four interfaces with about 1/4th sent to each one
(about 40% utilization each right now).
But for data going from 5500 switch the s
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, David Barak wrote:
> > and anyone posting from yahoo/gmail/hotmail should have
> > their posting rights immediately revoked because
> > obviouslythey have no claim whatsoever to any critical
> > Network Operations.
>
> You had me until then: has it not occurred to you that
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Joe Shen wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I just received an email from one of my friends and he
> told me http://www.hriders.com/ is providing free 10GB
> email box for subscribers.
Translation:
We don't have a functioning quota filesystem so we'll let subscribers
have as much space
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
>
> http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2004/092704ietfspam.html
http://www.moongroup.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=2
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 05:56:42PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
> > The proposal (which comes from APNIC members, not from APNIC staff)
> > concerns non-portable addresses assigned to end-users. I don't know
> > about anybody else, but
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004, Matt Ghali wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 16:19:19 +1000, George Michaelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This is an important announcement on the implementation of APNIC
> > approved proposal prop-007-v001 regarding privacy of customer assignment
> > records. The proposal
> As such, when we have seen our IP blocks get blocked strictly because of
> the rDNS entry having 'dsl' in it, a simple email to the admins
> explaining that we are not providing dynamic services has gotten our
> rDNS entries taken off of the blacklist.
I don't particularly like situation where
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Arnold Nipper wrote:
> As already noted here a couple of times:
>
> RIPE != RIPE NCC
>
> Although MERIT is organizing NANOG meetings, no one would say: MERIT ==
> NANOG. Right?
Not quite. As far as I'm concerned, NANOG is part of MERIT activities.
And while I'm not c
On Thu, 9 Sep 2004, Tulip Rasputin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a general policy question.
>
> Do the ISPs ever look for some particular AS number in the BGP AS_PATH and
> then decide what action/preference/priority they need to take/give based on
> the AS number(s) present in the BGP AS_PATH_SEQ/
On 2 Sep 2004, Paul Vixie wrote:
> Now that AT&T has followed T-Mobile's example by screwing the pooch on my
> cell phone billing, and I've flung yet another SIM-locked Motorola V600
> out the window of yet another moving vehicle, and am about to enter into
> another year long "you violated the
On Fri, 13 Aug 2004, Bevan Slattery wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Just to ease peoples concerns, the patent has nothing to do with
> > blackholing. A brief description of the way it works can be found here:
> >
> > http://www.scamslam.com/ScamSlam/whatis.shtml
And based on what I've read, the
> > Google seems to fail on every search containing the word 'mail' ?
>
> http://isc.sans.org/diary.php?isc=d46940064182f61f40ca333bc3c2f439
>
> Operational in the context that it's a response to a network traveling
> worm, and will generate customer calls.
Don't know about customer calls, bu
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004, Duane Wessels wrote:
> Maybe, but don't forget that when BIND9 and DJBDNS caches find
> expired nameserver address (A) records they don't trust any cached
> data and start them back at the roots. And in the case of BIND9,
> it sends both A and A6 queries for each nameserver
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004, Richard Cox wrote:
> The key here is not registration but change. Currently, while spammers
> and other malfeasants have the ability to send out through compromised
> proxies and zombied PCs, there is little that can be done to identify
> them until they require a response,
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
> What I am concerned about is the pressure to lower TTLs across the board
> if the increase in zone update speed creates expectations that it alone
> cannot fulfill.
>
> I observe this being sold as "instantaneous updates" instead of
> "instantaneo
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004, Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine wrote:
> > the primary beneficiaries of this
> > new functionality are spammers and other malfeasants,
>
> I think this is a true statement. I think it is important to keep in
> mind that registry operators "compete" for TLD franchise
re are any
problems found that would arrise from the change that the plan to address
them would be made available.
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 04:35:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: "william(at)elan.net" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Matt Larson <[EMAIL
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, William Warren wrote:
> coolwebsearch has become more and more sneaky..so bad that
> development of cws shredder has been abandoned by its
> developerEither serious lock down you ie(which with CWS is
> not going to help) or use something other than ie.
http://www.sec
On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, Matt Larson wrote:
> VeriSign Naming and Directory Services (VNDS) currently generates new
> versions of the .com/.net zones files twice per day. VNDS is
> scheduled to deploy on September 8, 2004 a new feature that will
> enable VNDS to update the .com/.net zones more frequ
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, william(at)elan.net wrote:
> Not an ARIN example but when KPNQwest went out of business, the situation
> was as you desribe and it would have been difficult to everybody to quickly
> renumber so their PA assigned customer ip blocks with assistance of RIPE
&g
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Dan Hollis wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Sabri Berisha wrote:
> > And then I'm not even taking into account the fact that the UCI/Pegasus
> > is a well-known spammer (http://www.spews.org/html/S2649.html).
>
> I imagine NAC is pretty tired of being RBL'd. Can't blame them fo
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, Crist Clark wrote:
> Also can one think of other circumstances where non-portable IPs should
> become portable without reallocation through ARIN? Say, *poof*, ISP
> goes out of business _very_ suddenly with no one buying up its assets
> and taking over its operations quickly
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, Matthew Crocker wrote:
> The TRO is irrelevant, The courts made the wrong decision, did anyone
> actually think they would have a clue?
Actually, after reading most of the papers which Richard just made available
at http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras/nac-case/ I don't see that c
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, Edward B. Dreger wrote:
> JL> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 08:08:03 -0400 (EDT)
> JL> From: Jon Lewis
>
> JL> If someone figures out the IP block in question let me know.
>
> I don't know the rogue netblock, but
> http://www.fixedorbit.com/cgi-bin/cgirange.exe?ASN=8001
Mor
What you really should try is to have ARIN provide "friend of the court"
brief and to explain to judge policies and rules in regards to ip space,
so you need to have your laywer get in touch with ARIN's lawyer. You can
probably even force them to provide a statement or testimony (if they
don'
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 i
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Curtis Maurand wrote:
> spamhaus has gotten too agressive. Its now preventing too much legitimate
> email.
Spammers have gotten too agressive. If you don't filter you would not
see any legitimate email.
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > Anything I/we can do to help the cause?
>
> not at the moment. i'm not a defendant, just a named co-conspirator.
Hah? Are they also naming individually all the dns operators that installed
bind patch and specifically enabled it so that wildcards woul
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Owen DeLong wrote:
> > Point I am making is that the post office is not responsible and/or
> > liable for the content of the packages they deliver. However, if they
> > deliver packages that are obviously visibly dangerous to the recipient
> > they have an obligation to i
> ARIN is cracking down on IP Space that is or has been issued (legally) and
> have been found to have the contact records "out of date" or the e-mail
> addresses either don't work or their are mailboxes full and so on. You will
> see more and more of these allocations being removed for failing
Based on this problem, completewhois has stopped listing 206.46.0.0/16 as
a bogon (and actively having it blocked through dns for those using
bogons.dnsiplists.completewhois.com for active blocking in email), this
exception will last 48 hours. If you're using bogon lists in firewall
with daily
it'd
likely be done on the specialized forums. That is why I asked how targeted
do you think that email was...
On Fri, 4 Jun 2004, Alexei Roudnev wrote:
> Of course, this is not new on IRC, but it is new in SPAM.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "william(at)
On Fri, 4 Jun 2004, Alexei Roudnev wrote:
> Ooo, a great idea. As a result - $60 for QA, plus a chance to catch a
> criminal -:). Just as _want to test network IDS - set up IRC, join it into
> EFNet, and here you are_.
>
> Generally speaking, I think it deserves attention (this adv.).
You're as
Historic moment. 32k+ ASN assignments are coming!
On Fri, 28 May 2004, Doug Barton wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> This is to inform you that the IANA has allocated the following
> block of AS Numbers to ARIN:
>
> 32768 - 33791
>
> For a full list of IANA AS
On Sat, 8 May 2004, Bastiaan Spandaw wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-05-08 at 03:30, william(at)elan.net wrote:
>
> > My understanding is that they have made twice as many ip6 allocations as
> > rest of the world combined! That is very impressive indeed!!!
> > But its still not e
On Sat, 8 May 2004, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 8-mei-04, at 1:18, william(at)elan.net wrote:
>
> > Why so many ip6 blocks at once?
>
> The RIPE NCC gives out /32s to ISPs, but they actually reserve a /29.
> This means they have to get a new /23 for every 64
Also FYI - I noticed this message was actually signed (PGP) and I believe
that may be first iana announcement message that was, thank you !!!
P.S. Of course its also notable that it says "Version: PGP 8.0 - not
licensed for commercial use". I kind of wonder if use by IANA or ICANN
is considere
Why so many ip6 blocks at once?
Its not that I'm worrried about us running out of ip space for ip6 :)
but is ripe really using ip6 20 times more then rest of the world?
On Fri, 7 May 2004, John L Crain wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Greetings,
>
> This is t
On Wed, 5 May 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > (To deflect the inevitable "NAT is not a firewall" complaints, the box
> is a
> > stateful inspection firewall -- as all NAT boxes actually are).
>
> Hmmm, are you saying that the solution to many so-called
> Internet security vulnerabilities i
On Mon, 3 May 2004, Sean Donelan wrote:
> On Mon, 3 May 2004, Rob Thomas wrote:
> > ] Just because a machine has a bot/worm/virus that didn't come with a
> > ] rootkit, doesn't mean that someone else hasn't had their way with it.
> >
> > Agreed.
>
> Won't help. What's the first thing people do
Yes, for last couple days I'm getting constant nagios reports about some
windows servers getting rebooted all the time (these are all win2000 but
obviously it has same kernel as xp and viruses and exploits are all same)
I could not find any good way to actually shut this all down on firewall
lev
On Sun, 18 Apr 2004, Michel Py wrote:
> - Tomorrow, IPv4 will get the small upgrades that are needed.
Like what? 128bit ip addresses so we don't run out 10 years from now?
Or ability to do QoS PtP over internet? Or security that is built in and
not part of additional layer?
Perhaps ipv6 has
If there is somebody from Cisco on this list who has been accessing
completewhois port 43 whois service with thousands of consequitive queries
for last few days (or possibly somebody else from cisco who can lookup in
your gateway/firewall logs to see it was) then please contact me for
privat
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Eric A. Hall wrote:
> On 4/1/2004 11:15 AM, william(at)elan.net wrote:
>
> > Where as WYSIWYG html email client (no matter if its web-based or
> > outlook or mozilla) will reference and display all images contained in
> > email
>
> You can turn
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Richard Cox wrote:
> Some times the request goes to the website, sometimes a DNS request to
> nameservers is sufficient to cause the account to be tagged as active.
I don't quite understand how that would work. DNS Request does not contain
name of who the email is addressed
On Wed, 31 Mar 2004, Michel Py wrote:
>
> > Deepak Jain wrote:
> > Can someone explain to me (publicly or privately) why someone
> > would send spam with no product to sell, no position to pitch,
> > nothing except text designed to get by a spam filter -- without
> > even HTML to KNOW it got by
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004, Daniel Golding wrote:
> Its time to figure out what to do about this, employing a proactive stance.
> The answer is not "start a new mailing list". Names have power, as they say,
> and NANOG has the juice. So, a few simple proposals for people to chew
> over...
>
> 1) Turn o
ters joined
together are getting nastier and nastier.
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, william(at)elan.net wrote:
>
> Me thinks somebody has found a trapdoor in nanog mailsetup and is in
> general out to get us ...
>
> This one supposedely came from 203.18.63.43 (australia powerhous museum -
Me thinks somebody has found a trapdoor in nanog mailsetup and is in
general out to get us ...
This one supposedely came from 203.18.63.43 (australia powerhous museum -
phm.gov.au) and advertises page on ip 165.134.187.102 (saint louis
univerisity - slu.edu). "Connection refused" when I tried
(On topic to nanog for a change...)
I'll be soon going through resetup of one of our primary hosting POPs
(moving to different DC and upstream provider) and as a result have
opportunity to make some changes to the configuration, etc and want to
set it up so there is standby backup available
I Just received this. I would like to check if others have received it
and did it indeed come through nanog mailist:
> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 21:10:38 +
> From: Deep Throat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Spamhaus Exposed
>
> Disturbing information on one of the found
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Tue, 16 Mar 2004, Alexei Roudnev wrote:
>
> > Hmm, if someone (except masochists and security vendiors) still hosts
> > efnet... I can only send them my condoleences.
> >
> > I saw sthe same dialogs 6 years ago. Nothing changes.
>
> What abo
Why would nlayer be now using AS4436? It is listed as scruz.net, but as
far as I remember scruz was taken overy by DSL.NET (I think that even
included their peering agreements) and some of their ip block such as
204.139.8.0/21, 204.147.224.0/20 and others certainly seem to confirm that.
As fa
have
been some smaller discussions last week on different mail lists but we're
starting it all again to keep track of this in archives):
--
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 13:40:26 -080D (PST)
From: "william(at)elan.net"
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> Students have an existing legal relationship with the school; they can be
> required to accept the AUP in writing at some point during the enrollment
> process.
They may have legal relationship with the school but internet service can
be considered t
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
> > What do you think spews wants? My experience with them has been that
> > that's pretty much the only thing that will satisfy them. I have had
>
> That's funny since we've cleaned up several over the years, yet they are
> still listed... and
On Fri, 12 Mar 2004, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
>
> Henry Linneweh writes on 3/12/2004 8:41 AM:
> > I have received almost 200 different spam messages from domains
> > hosted by this provider from russain domains attempting to sell
> > pharmacueticals and other unsolicited services that I d
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004, Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote:
> Petri Helenius wrote:
>
> > Maybe there is a lesson to be learned from many RBL operators. To make
> > sure, just send packets to the whole /24 or /16 you got an "attack"
> > packet from.
>
> Which RBL operators flood /24's or /16's? What
e. IPal is a commercial product available
> from Internet Associates LLC. (www.internetassociatesllc.com).
>
> - Dennis
>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:17:12AM -0800, william(at)elan.net wrote:
> >
> >
> > We're starting project to create opensource software hel
We're starting project to create opensource software help ISPs to provision
network services and track information related to that afterwards. This would
include allocation of ip addresses and database of such allocations, database
of circuits and network devices, administration and colloborat
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004, Petri Helenius wrote:
> Gregory Taylor wrote:
> > Oh yes, lets not forget the fact that if enough sites have this
> > 'firewall' and one of them gets attacked by other sites using this
> > firewall it'll create a nuclear fission sized chain reaction of
> > looping Denial o
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Joshua Brady wrote:
>
> http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,39020375,39148215,00.htm
> Comments?
This is not really a comment about this article. But I really think it
would have been better if people don't just put the link and then say
"comments" but actually p
Several commercial ip allocation systems exist (cost thousands, I came
across couple of them but did not keep list). The closest opensource on
this is freeipdb (http://www.freeipdb.org), but its not very feature-rich.
The IRM project (which I've never heard about until I just demod it right
no
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004, John Bishop wrote:
>
> Since it has the potential to make everyone's jobs here more interesting, I
> thought I'd bring it up and get everyone's opinion. This company claims to be
> developing a "security solution" that claims to "fight back" against attackers.
>
> I'm sure
Or was there something more devious behind the surge?
The answer, said security experts, is a bit of both, with some fighting
over hacker turf thrown in for good measure
..."
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, william(at)elan.net wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Mar 2004, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
>
> > Perh
On Wed, 3 Mar 2004, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
> Perhaps I'm only following this as its affecting us more, but I dont recall a
> time previously when I've had so many viruses hitting us and getting thro our
> scanners with nothing we can do about it. I dont recall seeing viruses with
> variants
On Tue, 2 Mar 2004, John Obi wrote:
> Hello Nanogers!
>
> I'm happy to see this, and I hope C&W, Verio, and Level3 will do the same!
> http://informationweek.securitypipeline.com/news/18201396
"MCI/WorldCom Monday unveiled a new service level agreement (SLA) to help
IP services customers thwa
I have just seen emails (several different kinds) pretending to be sent
from 3 of my isp domains to users of those domains warning users that
their email account would be disabled and asking to open a .pif attachment.
I know largest ISPs probably have expierenced this but I believe what I
have
> On 2 Mar 2004, at 15:57, Michael Airhart wrote:
> > Somehow it seems like when you take into account the number of PCs on
> > high speed connections, these numbers make a lot of sense. The US has
> > a large population of these PCs so yeah, duh, the US leads in
> > compromised hosts.
>
> W
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Deepak Jain wrote:
>
> Since no one else has mentioned this:
>
> http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/040226/tech_verisign_2.html
And I'm sure ICANN will remember it for long time - right up to the point
when Verisign's contracts for .com/.net management are up for renewal.
--
Willia
d on that Verisign rule over these tlds ends in November 2007
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Roman Volf wrote:
>
> When are they up for renewal exactly?
>
> william(at)elan.net wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Deepak Jain wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Since no one else has
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, John Kinsella wrote:
> > > When are they up for renewal exactly?
> > November 10, 2007, according
>
> Any way to speed that up? ;)
http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/registry-agmt-com-25may01.htm
"16. Termination
...
B. In the event of termination by DOC of its
BTW - in the email it meant to be just stand DOS (Original IBM PC Operating
System based on CP/M), I automaticly write small "o" now when using this
word because of how I've used it in the last sevaral years
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, william(at)elan.net wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Assuming the pilot program does some form of reachability testing and then
> some effort is made to notify those with bad filters (good luck), then at
> least this notifies them before it's a real inconvenience for anyone.
> They may or may not c
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Michel Py wrote:
> Hint: all this bogon or related filtering is not a long-term solution.
> We need it now, but the long term solution is some kind of
> authentication that will allow only the rightful owner of a block to
> announce it.
This I completely agree with. The corr
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Michel Py wrote:
>
> William,
>
> > william(at)elan.net wrote:
> > [http://www.cymru.com/BGP/bogon-rs.html]
> > Unfortunetly this is kind-of a bgp hack and as has
> > been already mentioned it needs very carefull
> > implemention
>
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Timothy Brown wrote:
> > Completewhois bogon ip lists provide data on ip blocks that are not allocated
> > by RIRs to ISPs (rather then just list of /8 blocks not allocated by IANA
> > to RIRs as for example cymru does). The list can be used for anti-spam
> > filtering thro
This has been mentioned on nanog maillist before, it appears several months
after notification swisscom still has not fixed this problem (when similar
leak came from he, I think they fixed it in 48 hours!). Here are pointers
to previous thread:
http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/2003-11
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Timothy Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 04:32:46PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > >The RIPE NCC has prepared a draft document titled "De-Bogonising New
> > >Address Blocks":
> >
> > That is a misleading title.
I agree, consindering the block is still a bogo
FYI - this is probably regarding the same issues:
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/39381
They are reporting it as DDOS from "compromised home PCs", i.e. zombies.
There are some interesting rumors there (note its nothing more then rumors)
from lusers about possible irc connections and this be
On 22 Feb 2004, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
> "Michel Py" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > There is a regrouping of BGP feeds for various "questionable" hosts and
> > networks around AS29467;
That is actually not correct. The AS29467 will stay as being used for
BOGON and similar data. It is qu
Note - I got confused by the subject and everything myself. The routes you
have locally would not be from IBGP but just directly through IGP (i.e.
OSPF or EIGRP etc). I don't think you can really do IBGP if routers are
not configured with the same ASN.
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, willi
Ok. The way I read this is that you're redundant as far as one of your
upstream links going down - it'd not cause complete meltdown as that
router that had that link would still be announcing that space to the
other router (over EBGP) and then to the net.
What you're worrying then is what ha
Small clarification, this was award for year 2003. But I think they are
planning on being nominated (and winning) this year as well ...
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Ray Bellis wrote:
>
> Seeing as this didn't appear to hit NANOG yet -
>
> Our dear friends at Verisign won the "Internet Villain" of th
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Trojaned PCs and zombie proxies relaying spam are like cold
> sores; they don't kill anyone, they just make things mildly
> uncomfortable, so we numb them over, and go about our
> business like normal, even if that includes allowing the
> infection t
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004, Tim Thorpe wrote:
>
> > If these exist then why are we still having problems?
>
> Because the spammers are creating proxies faster than any of the anti-spam
> people can find them. Evidence suggests, at least on the order
There are several groups working on identifying open relays, proxies, etc
and creating lists of such ips for active blocking. For example see
http://www.spamhaus.org/xbl/index.lasso
The problem is not as much actual open relays (which are now rare and
almost universlly blocked) but open proxies
301 - 388 of 388 matches
Mail list logo
