On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 01:00:58PM -0700, goe...@anime.net wrote:
Looks like they've finally completely blocked off their abuse mailboxes.
That's not a problem. Now that Yahoo has deployed DMARC, all the spam,
phishing, carding, stalking, kiddie porn, fraud, and other choice bits
of
Yahoo.fr has the p=none policy:
$ dig txt _dmarc.yahoo.fr +short
v=DMARC1\; p=none\; pct=100\; rua=mailto:dmarc-yahoo-...@yahoo-inc.com\;;
So there might be some abuse still there ;-).
David Hofstee
Deliverability Management
MailPlus B.V. Netherlands (ESP)
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Amazon peers at many key exchanges, with dozens of hosting shops
(where customers might share mutual infrastructure) like yours:
https://www.peeringdb.com/view.php?asn=16509
Rather than play the blame game with third-party transit providers,
why not hit them up for some sessions?
Drive Slow,
I don't think anyone is blaming anyone, just trying to pass on information
where we see a problem.We routed around it no problem.
Bryan Socha
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Paul WALL pauldotw...@gmail.com wrote:
Amazon peers at many key exchanges, with dozens of hosting shops
(where
We've corresponded offline.
I documented the difficulties in providing reverse DNS for IPv6
residential users in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-howard-isp-ip6rdns-06
It's a long-expired draft, which never found sufficient support from a WG
or AD. I've been meaning to rewrap it as a BCOP, but
On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, John van Oppen wrote:
It is generally much better to do the following:
mls cef maximum-routes ipv6 90
mls cef maximum-routes ip-multicast 1
This will leave v4 and mpls in one big pool, puts v6 to something useful for
quite a while and steals all of the multicast space
On 13/06/2014 15:54, Jon Lewis wrote:
I was just looking at / thinking about this again, and though I don't
disagree that doing the split your way is probably better, I think it's a
moot point. I strongly suspect these boxes will run out of RAM before
they're able to utilize another 256k
On Jun 13, 2014, at 10:39 AM, Lee Howard l...@asgard.org wrote:
We've corresponded offline.
I documented the difficulties in providing reverse DNS for IPv6
residential users in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-howard-isp-ip6rdns-06
It's a long-expired draft, which never found sufficient
On 6/13/14, 8:26 AM, James R Cutler wrote:
On Jun 13, 2014, at 10:39 AM, Lee Howard l...@asgard.org wrote:
We've corresponded offline.
I documented the difficulties in providing reverse DNS for IPv6
residential users in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-howard-isp-ip6rdns-06
It's a
If you are still seeing problems can you please contact me with details? I’ve
seen some things done and am looking for confirmation it’s fixed. (or still
broken).
- Jared
On Jun 13, 2014, at 1:48 AM, Bryan Socha br...@digitalocean.com wrote:
The problem we are seeing we had to route around.
It appears to be fixed. Feel free to test from us if you want to look
closer at a test.
Thanks,
Bryan Socha
Network Engineer
DigitalOcean
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
If you are still seeing problems can you please contact me with details?
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, AusNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, LacNOG,
TRNOG, CaribNOG and the RIPE Routing Working Group.
Daily listings are sent to
Does Charter Cable have IPV6 for businesses yet? If so can someone
point me in the right direction. Their NOC seems to be clueless on
their IPV6 plans
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:44:51AM +, Paul WALL wrote:
Amazon peers at many key exchanges, with dozens of hosting shops
(where customers might share mutual infrastructure) like yours:
https://www.peeringdb.com/view.php?asn=16509
Rather than play the blame game with third-party transit
This report has been generated at Fri Jun 13 21:13:55 2014 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org/2.0 for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
BGP Update Report
Interval: 05-Jun-14 -to- 12-Jun-14 (7 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS9829 138352 5.2% 145.6 -- BSNL-NIB National Internet
Backbone,IN
2 - AS26615
HA!
I've been bugging Charter for 2 years. There was a beta program that
they metioned on NANOG a while back that I tried to get on-board wth.
That never came to fruition.. As of 2 months ago, they are still not
offering IPv6
On 6/13/2014 12:39 PM, Roy wrote:
Does Charter Cable have
On 6/13/14, 2:28 PM, Matt Palmer wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:44:51AM +, Paul WALL wrote:
Amazon peers at many key exchanges, with dozens of hosting shops
(where customers might share mutual infrastructure) like yours:
https://www.peeringdb.com/view.php?asn=16509
Rather than play
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:39:42PM -0700, Roy wrote:
Does Charter Cable have IPV6 for businesses yet? If so can someone
point me in the right direction. Their NOC seems to be clueless on
their IPV6 plans
I have the same issue; no one can give me an answer on when. They had a
link on their
19 matches
Mail list logo
