Hi Nick and List
Yes it's possible. The dud DNS response in some parts of the internet was
the public IP address being used by their proxy server. I'm not sure what
the proxy is, but it's a windows box. I was going to try to dig trace but
by then the poisoning suddenly stopped happening. Any
Hi guys,
we, a Berlin / Germany based carrier, are looking for a smart documentation
(shelfs, connections, fibers) and visualization tool for our ADVA-based
DWDM-enviroment. Do you have any suggestions or hints for me? We’re testing
„cableScout“, the only one I found, next week but.
Greetings:
In the past few months, I've spoken with, or heard second hand, from a
number of organizations that will not or cannot sign ARIN's RPKI Relying
Agreement. Acceptance of this agreement is required in order to gain
access to ARIN's Trust Anchor Locator (TAL).
Given the size and
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 09:57:05 -0500, Andrew Gallo said:
In the past few months, I've spoken with, or heard second hand, from a
number of organizations that will not or cannot sign ARIN's RPKI Relying
Agreement.
Do we have a handle on *why* organizations are having issues with the
agreement?
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:04 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 09:57:05 -0500, Andrew Gallo said:
In the past few months, I've spoken with, or heard second hand, from a
number of organizations that will not or cannot sign ARIN's RPKI Relying
Agreement.
Do we have a
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Christopher Morrow
morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:04 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 09:57:05 -0500, Andrew Gallo said:
In the past few months, I've spoken with, or heard second hand, from a
number of
Honestly, that's what I'm trying to figure out as well. In my informal
conversations, what I got was that lawyers read the agreement, said 'no,
we wont sign it' and then dropped it. If specific legal feedback isn't
making it back to ARIN, then we need to start providing it, otherwise,
the
On Dec 4, 2014, at 7:35 AM, Andrew Gallo akg1...@gmail.com wrote:
In my informal conversations, what I got was that lawyers read the agreement,
said 'no, we wont sign it' and then dropped it. If specific legal feedback
isn't making it back to ARIN, then we need to start providing it,
All
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote:
On Dec 4, 2014, at 7:35 AM, Andrew Gallo akg1...@gmail.com wrote:
In my informal conversations, what I got was that lawyers read the
agreement, said 'no, we wont sign it' and then dropped it. If specific
legal feedback
Anybody have a contact at Amazon AWS?
I sent in a spam complaint, and got back the below response - while I give them
kudos for actually, you know, responding, I'm pretty sure that we can all agree
that sending the same canned message to email addresses scraped off websites
is the very
On Dec 4, 2014, at 7:35 AM, Andrew Gallo akg1...@gmail.com wrote:
In my informal conversations, what I got was that lawyers read
the agreement, said 'no, we wont sign it' and then dropped it. If
specific legal feedback isn't making it back to ARIN, then we
need to start providing it,
Hi
Wether the addresses were gleaned using specially trained hedgehogs
or by people looking at the sites to target who they're going to
SPAM, targeted UCE is still UCE.
Apparently AWS doesn't grok that.
At 11:15 AM 04/12/2014, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote:
Anybody have a contact at Amazon
- Original Message -
From: Ca By cb.li...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote:
All the specific legal feedback I’ve heard is that this is a
liability
nightmare, and that everyone wants ARIN to take on all the
liability, but
nobody wants
On 12/4/2014 11:22 AM, William Herrin wrote:
On Dec 4, 2014, at 7:35 AM, Andrew Gallo akg1...@gmail.com wrote:
In my informal conversations, what I got was that lawyers read
the agreement, said 'no, we wont sign it' and then dropped it. If
specific legal feedback isn't making it back to ARIN,
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 11:22 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote:
All the specific legal feedback I’ve heard is that this is a liability
nightmare,
and that everyone wants ARIN to take on all the liability, but nobody
Hello,
On 12/4/2014 2:33 PM, Andrew Gallo wrote:
On 12/4/2014 11:22 AM, William Herrin wrote:
Understood and good point. I've heard rumblings of setting up a
non-ARIN TAL, though I wonder what the value is in separating RPKI from
the registry. Wouldn't this put us in the same position
Hello,
On 12/4/2014 2:33 PM, Andrew Gallo wrote:
On 12/4/2014 11:22 AM, William Herrin wrote:
Understood and good point. I've heard rumblings of setting up a
non-ARIN TAL, though I wonder what the value is in separating RPKI from
the registry. Wouldn't this put us in the same position
On 12/4/14, 10:35 AM, Andrew Gallo akg1...@gmail.com wrote:
Honestly, that's what I'm trying to figure out as well. In my informal
conversations, what I got was that lawyers read the agreement, said 'no,
we wont sign it' and then dropped it. If specific legal feedback isn't
making it back to
On Dec 4, 2014, at 11:35 AM, Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
...
Maybe it would be helpful for the ARIN Counsel to document in a more
public way (than the RPA) what the concerns are and how that
translates into 'different risk than the publication of whois data' ?
This is
On Dec 4, 2014, at 12:32 PM, George, Wes wesley.geo...@twcable.com wrote:
Those are operational matters, implemented by the staff, governed by the
board, who is informed by their legal council and staff. That is part of
the reason why I brought some of the issues to the NANOG community, since
On Dec 4, 2014, at 12:53 PM, John Curran jcur...@arin.net wrote:
On Dec 4, 2014, at 12:32 PM, George, Wes wesley.geo...@twcable.com wrote:
Those are operational matters, implemented by the staff, governed by the
board, who is informed by their legal council and staff. That is part of
the
Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net writes:
On Dec 4, 2014, at 7:35 AM, Andrew Gallo akg1...@gmail.com wrote:
In my informal conversations, what I got was that lawyers read the
agreement, said 'no, we wont sign it' and then dropped it. If
specific legal feedback isn't making it back to ARIN, then
On Dec 4, 2014, at 1:01 PM, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
I am happy to champion the change that you seek (i.e. will get it reviewed
by legal and brought before the ARIN Board) but still need clarity on what
change you wish to occur -
A) Implicit binding to the
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote:
All the specific legal feedback I’ve heard is that this is a
liability
nightmare, and that everyone wants ARIN to take on all the
liability, but
nobody wants to pay for it.
WG] Has there been any actual discussion
Comparing what you do with Time Warner cable seems like pure hyperbole and
an attempt
as CEO to inflame community discussion at minimum.
Actually, it is to remind folks that such indemnification language is
sought by most ISPs, despite their services being used in a mission
critical mode
On 4 Dec 2014, at 18:53, John Curran jcur...@arin.net wrote:
On Dec 4, 2014, at 12:32 PM, George, Wes wesley.geo...@twcable.com wrote:
Those are operational matters, implemented by the staff, governed by the
board, who is informed by their legal council and staff. That is part of
the
On Dec 4, 2014, at 10:17 AM, George, Wes wesley.geo...@twcable.com wrote:
WG] Has there been any actual discussion about how much nobody would
have to pay for ARIN (or another party) to fix the balance of liability
and provide a proper SLA that led to no, I don't want to pay for that
On 12/4/14, 1:13 PM, John Curran jcur...@arin.net wrote:
I am happy to champion the change that you seek (i.e. will get it
reviewed
by legal and brought before the ARIN Board) but still need clarity on
what
change you wish to occur -
A) Implicit binding to the indemnification/warrant
On Dec 4, 2014, at 1:34 PM, Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote:
On Dec 4, 2014, at 10:17 AM, George, Wes wesley.geo...@twcable.com wrote:
WG] Has there been any actual discussion about how much nobody would
have to pay for ARIN (or another party) to fix the balance of liability
and provide
On Dec 4, 2014, at 11:11 AM, Robert Seastrom r...@seastrom.com wrote:
I suspect you would get a similar answer if you asked people Would you be
willing to pay ARIN for whois services or would you be willing to pay ARIN
for in-addr.arpa services”.
Actually, since those are relatively
On Dec 4, 2014, at 12:39 PM, John Curran jcur...@arin.net wrote:
On Dec 4, 2014, at 11:35 AM, Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com
wrote:
Note that the claims that could ensue from an operator failing to follow best
practices
and then third-parties suffering an major operational
On Dec 4, 2014, at 1:19 PM, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
I (similar to Rob) have my own concerns about RPKI but do feel that
this is an ARIN specific construct/wall that has been raised without
action yet from ARIN.
Jared -
Please be specific - are you referring to the
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:17:34 -0800, Bill Woodcock said:
the RPKI costs are many orders of magnitude higher
Orders of magnitude? Seriously? I can buy it costs 2x or 3x.
But an additional 2 or 3 zeros on the price?
pgp_PXDy5bSuP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Dec 4, 2014, at 11:21 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:17:34 -0800, Bill Woodcock said:
the RPKI costs are many orders of magnitude higher
Orders of magnitude? Seriously? I can buy it costs 2x or 3x.
But an additional 2 or 3 zeros on the price?
Yep, that’s
Am I correct in thinking that the SIDR work going on in the IETF takes the
registries out of the real-time processing of route
authentication/attestation?
Is RPKI a stop-gap while we wait for full path validation? Should we be
focusing our energies in that area?
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:19 PM,
On 12/4/14, 1:34 PM, Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote:
I’ve asked a lot of people, “Would you be willing to pay ARIN for RPKI
services,” and the answer has always been “no.” Until I get a “yes,”
it’s hard to put a number (other than zero) on how the market values
RPKI.
WG] well, if it wasn't
On Dec 4, 2014, at 11:33 AM, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
the fact it’s taken 3 months to reach the board is of concern
Jared, ARIN is now nine years in to applying thrust to this pig. The board
does in fact revisit it with some frequency, since it’s expensive and the
primary
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:28:42 -0800, Bill Woodcock said:
On Dec 4, 2014, at 11:21 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
Orders of magnitude? Seriously? I can buy it costs 2x or 3x.
But an additional 2 or 3 zeros on the price?
Yep, thats why all this is at issue. If it were cheap, and
On 12/4/14, 2:34 PM, Andrew Gallo akg1...@gmail.com wrote:
Am I correct in thinking that the SIDR work going on in the IETF takes the
registries out of the real-time processing of route
authentication/attestation?
WG] no, but they're at least discussing ways of making the dependencies
less
Anybody got codes valid for December?
On 14 Nov 2014 18:07, Wakefield, Thad M. twakefi...@stcloudstate.edu
wrote:
Since there was some interest in the Udemy CCNA training, I'll risk
forwarding these additional discounts:
Remember that this is ONLY for the month of NOVEMBER!
*** CCNA Course
On 12/4/14, 2:19 PM, Sandra Murphy sa...@tislabs.com wrote:
Which begs the question for me -- ARIN already operates services that
operators rely upon. Why are they different? Does ARIN run no risk of
litigation due to some perceived involvement of those services in
someone's operational
have some juniper but not cisco.
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Bacon Zombie baconzom...@gmail.com wrote:
Anybody got codes valid for December?
On 14 Nov 2014 18:07, Wakefield, Thad M. twakefi...@stcloudstate.edu
wrote:
Since there was some interest in the Udemy CCNA training, I'll risk
Share them anyway? Juniper's certs have enough demand as well :)
On 12/5/2014 午前 05:13, Eric Litvin wrote:
have some juniper but not cisco.
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Bacon Zombie baconzom...@gmail.com wrote:
Anybody got codes valid for December?
On 14 Nov 2014 18:07, Wakefield, Thad
From: amitch...@isipp.com
Subject: Anybody at Amazon AWS?
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 09:15:36 -0700
To: nanog@nanog.org
Anybody have a contact at Amazon AWS?
I sent in a spam complaint, and got back the below response - while I give
them kudos for actually, you know, responding, I'm
This pig is less aerodynamic, and fewer people are pushing.
In-addr DNS and whois are simple and well-understood protocols, with many
programmer-years of software development behind them.
The problem isn't the marginal cost of a single transaction, that might only be
one or two orders of
On Dec 4, 2014, at 2:41 PM, Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote:
On Dec 4, 2014, at 11:33 AM, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
the fact it’s taken 3 months to reach the board is of concern
Jared, ARIN is now nine years in to applying thrust to this pig. The board
does in fact
On Dec 4, 2014, at 2:33 PM, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
the fact it’s taken 3 months to reach the board is of concern to me for an
issue
that was raised (prior to the October meeting) by operators, andwhere you
were an active part of the discussion afterwards in the back of the
Replying offline to Theo. Schwer zu finden.
Roy
*Roy Hirst* | 425-556-5773 | 425-324-0941 cell
XKL LLC | 12020 113th Ave NE, Suite 100 | Kirkland, WA 98034 | USA
On 12/4/2014 5:21 AM, Theo Voss wrote:
Hi guys,
we, a Berlin / Germany based carrier, are looking for a smart documentation
Hi,
thanks! I guess one of the most exhaustive and freely-available
route-views data to analyze is from RIPE Routing Information Service
project? For example if I would like to analyze a certain prefix
announced by a certain AS for time period from 1.11.2014 to
30.11.2014, then I should download
On Dec 4, 2014, at 2:19 PM, Sandra Murphy sa...@tislabs.com wrote:
...
Which begs the question for me -- ARIN already operates services that
operators rely upon. Why are they different? Does ARIN run no risk of
litigation due to some perceived involvement of those services in someone's
50 matches
Mail list logo
