On Jul 31, 2011, at 9:15 AM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there an RFC specifying precisely what are considered the proper
precautions?
precautions should ideally be enabled in BIND by default.
Not of which I'm aware. I'm happy to contribute to any efforts you or anyone
else are
Dear someone from Verisign,
It looks from over here (and some other hosts I checked) that
http://www.verisigninc.com/ is dead when using a host having iPv6
dual-stack.
Some packets do come over, so the browser is not failing over into IPv4.
Also the whois server for whois.nic.name is not working
Hi,
extra info:
Site problem looks path mtu related. On tunneled hosts the site does not
work. On native hosts it does. Looks like something is blocking icmpv6 path
mtu requests. My tunnels are ok, so must be in the verisign network, my
guess a misconfigured firewall.
Whois server problem is also
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 15:18:17 EDT, William Herrin said:
2. I assume the subscription request came from a web page because if
it was from an email request you received then you ignored my SPF
records when generating the confirmation request. That was OK in 2001
but in 2011 you ought not be
Several of my customers in San Diego noticed large drops in traffic at 1pm
today. Note it was not a total loss in connectivity. Anyone else notice
this?
--
Joe Renwick
IP Network Consultant, CCIE #16465
GO NETFORWARD Inc.
Direct: 619-569-1621
Mobile: 619-972-7793
Emergency Support:
I am one of your customers that noticed it. To add some data points;
This affected Cogent, Level3 and several networks we peer with at the
Any2 Exchange at One Wilshire.
On Sun, 2011-07-31 at 13:35 -0700, Joe Renwick wrote:
Several of my customers in San Diego noticed large drops in traffic at
Also impacted our POP's out of Houston and San Antonio, TX. We peer
with L3 at both of those locations.
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Michael J McCafferty
m...@m5computersecurity.com wrote:
I am one of your customers that noticed it. To add some data points;
This affected Cogent, Level3 and
On 07/31/2011 01:35 PM, Joe Renwick wrote:
Several of my customers in San Diego noticed large drops in traffic at 1pm
today. Note it was not a total loss in connectivity. Anyone else notice
this?
---
Several of our east coat/overseas customers called in about reachability
Also noticed it in Dallas, lasted about 10 mins. L3's edge would take the
packets, but didn't go any further into their network.
John
On Jul 31, 2011, at 1:35 PM, Joe Renwick wrote:
Several of my customers in San Diego noticed large drops in traffic at 1pm
today. Note it was not a total
On 07/31/2011 01:55 PM, Khurram Khan wrote:
Also impacted our POP's out of Houston and San Antonio, TX. We peer
with L3 at both of those locations.
Level3's had a core router failure in their Dallas region that lost
adjacency towards LA region.
regards,
/virendra
On
Level3 had an issue between LA and Dallas at 1pm. Apparently large amounts
of traffic from San Diego head through Dallas so it appeared at a whole
Internet drop.
Joe
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 1:54 PM, virendra rode virendra.r...@gmail.comwrote:
On 07/31/2011 01:35 PM, Joe Renwick wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 2:32 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
That sort of shoots your If Woody had gone straight to the
SPF record, none of this would have happened claim.
My WHAT claim? You asked if I wanted mailing list confirmation
requests that arrive at my mail server to have a non-null
On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 18:36:22 EDT, William Herrin said:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 2:32 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
That sort of shoots your If Woody had gone straight to the
SPF record, none of this would have happened claim.
My WHAT claim?
What you said:
2. I assume the subscription
not to detract from the seasonal sorbs pissing contest, but in the spirit of
you never notice operations when it works, i wish to thank and congratulate
the folk who moved this mailing list. i seems to just work.
randy
In message m2k4ay0zhm.wl%ra...@psg.com, Randy Bush writes:
not to detract from the seasonal sorbs pissing contest, but in the spirit of
you never notice operations when it works, i wish to thank and congratulate
the folk who moved this mailing list. i seems to just work.
randy
Seconded.
In message 09d7a1d0-0b13-4570-8891-835ca6568...@arbor.net, Dobbins, Roland
writes:
On Jul 31, 2011, at 9:15 AM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there an RFC specifying precisely what are considered the proper prec=
autions?
precautions should ideally be enabled in BIND by
On Aug 1, 2011, at 7:42 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
Named already takes proper precautions by default. Recursive service is
limited to directly connected networks by default. The default
was first changed in 9.4 (2007) which is about to go end-of-life once the
final wrap up release is done.
In message ae105312-3108-4b0b-8445-7116b84ec...@arbor.net, Dobbins, Roland
writes:
On Aug 1, 2011, at 7:42 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
Named already takes proper precautions by default. Recursive service is =
limited to directly connected networks by default. The default
was first changed
On Aug 1, 2011, at 9:22 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
And even if DNS/TCP was use by default machines can still get DoS'd because
IP is spoofable.
They can be DDoSed with spoofed or non-spoofed packets, and there are defenses
against such attacks.
Apologies if I was unclear - my point was that
19 matches
Mail list logo
