Re: Jon Postel Re: 202210301538.AYC

On 11/5/22 8:19 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote: William Allen Simpson wrote: Something similar happened with IPv6.  Cisco favored a design where only they had the hardware mechanism for high speed forwarding.  So we're stuck with 128-bit addresses and separate ASNs. Given that high speed

Re: Jon Postel Re: 202210301538.AYC

On 11/2/22 8:33 AM, Abraham Y. Chen wrote: 0) "Internet Vendor Task Force indeed.":  Thank you so much in distilling this thread one more step for getting even closer to its essence. As I'd mentioned already, Randy Bush has also had some cogent thoughts over the years. That's where I'd

Re: Jon Postel Re: 202210301538.AYC

On 10/31/22 9:27 AM, Donald Eastlake wrote: On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 2:37 AM Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG wrote: 1. What is going on on the Internet is not democracy even formally, because there is no formal voting. 3GPP, ETSI, 802.11 have voting. IETF decisions are made by bosses who did

Re: FEC AO 2022-14

On 8/1/22 9:47 PM, sro...@ronan-online.com wrote: On Aug 1, 2022, at 9:38 PM, Michael Rathbun wrote: On Sun, 31 Jul 2022 12:11:07 -0400, William Allen Simpson wrote: At our residence, the US mailbox is positioned near the recycling bin. Bulk mail generally goes directly into recycling

FEC AO 2022-14

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/07/29/republican-fundraising-google-spam/ Forwarded Message Subject: AO 2022-14 Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2022 12:03:20 -0400 From: William Allen Simpson To: a...@fec.gov https://www.fec.gov/data/legal/advisory-opinions/2022-14

Re: IPv6 "bloat" history

On 3/31/22 7:44 AM, William Allen Simpson wrote: [heavy sigh] All of these things were well understood circa 1992-93. That's why the original Neighbor Discovery was entirely link state. ND link state announcements handled the hidden terminal problem. Also, it almost goes without saying

Re: IPv6 "bloat" history

On 3/29/22 5:21 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) via NANOG wrote: * APs today snoop DHCP; DHCP is observable and stateful, with a lifetime that allows to clean up. So snooping it is mostly good enough there. The hassle is the SL in SLAAC which causes broadcasts and is not deterministically

Re: IPv6 "bloat" history

On 3/23/22 2:25 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote: William Allen Simpson wrote: Neighbor Discovery is/was agnostic to NBMA.  Putting all the old ARP and DHCP and other cruft into the IP-layer was my goal, so that it would be forever link agnostic. To make "IP uber alles", link-dependent

IPvB performance header

This was the IPvB (nee original IPv6) *performance* header. We required that each IP variant have its own link layer designation. Therefore, the IP version number wasn't needed. We could simply set two upper bits to a value (0) that would distinguish it from every extant IP version. Also,

IPvB translation header

This was the IPvB (nee original IPv6) *translation* header. Note that it was cleverly designed to translate from IPv4. Most of the fields are in exactly the same place. Especially, the 32-bit Source IP address is in exactly the same place, hoping that filters could operate on both stacks. We

Re: IPv6 "bloat" history

On 3/23/22 2:25 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote: William Allen Simpson wrote:   6) The Paul Francis (the originator of NAT) Polymorphic Internet Protocol (PIP) had some overlapping features, so we also asked them to merge with us (July 1993).  More complexity in the protocol header chaining

Re: IPv6 "bloat" history

Admitting to not having read every message in these threads, but would like to highlight a bit of the history. IMnsHO, the otherwise useful history is missing a few steps. 1) The IAB selected ISO CLNP as the next version of IP. 2) The IETF got angry, disbanded, replaced, and renamed IAB.

Re: V6 still not supported

On 3/10/22 9:22 PM, Masataka Ohta wrote: Matthew Walster wrote: IPv6 is technologically superior to IPv4, there's no doubt about that. It is not. Though IPv6 was designed against OSI CLNP (with 20B, or, optionally, 40B addresses), IPv6 incorporated many abandoned ideas of CLNP and XNS

Re: V6 still not supported

I'd flagged this to reply, but sadly am a bit behind On 3/10/22 11:02 AM, Matthew Walster wrote: IPv6 is technologically superior to IPv4, there's no doubt about that. It is vastly inferior when it comes to understanding what is going on by your average sysadmin, network engineer, IT

Russian aligned ASNs?

There have been reports of DDoS and new targeted malware attacks. There were questions in the media about cutting off the Internet. Apparently some Russian government sites have already cut themselves off, presumably to avoid counterattacks. Would it improve Internet health to refuse Russian

Re: Rack rails on network equipment

On 9/25/21 7:52 PM, Joe Greco wrote: On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 04:23:38PM -0700, Jay Hennigan wrote: On 9/25/21 16:14, George Herbert wrote: (Crying, thinking about racks and racks and racks of AT 56k modems strapped to shelves above PM-2E-30s???) And all of their wall-warts [...] You were

Re: IS-IS and IPv6 LLA next-hop - just Arista, or everyone?

On 5/4/21 11:34 AM, Saku Ytti wrote: On Tue, 4 May 2021 at 18:28, Adam Thompson wrote: When I look at my IPv6 routing table, the next-hops are all... well... gibberish, at least to me. My experience is that LLAs are not durable, so memorizing them is not IMHO a useful task. Figuring out

Re: Google peering pains in Dallas

On 4/29/20 8:53 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote: I suppose it's time for a more public: "Hey, when you want to test a service, please take the time to test that service on it's service port/protocol" Testing; "Is the internet up?" by pinging a DNS server, is ... not great ;( I get that telling

Re: Reminiscing our first internet connections (WAS) Re: akamai yesterday - what in the world was that

On 1/27/20 3:06 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote: I remember going from 300b to 1200b and thinking wow, this is it, we're done, I cannot read text scrolling on the screen at 1200b. Other than the 75 and 110 baud teletypes that only did text, my first TCP/IP connection was 300b, back when we had to

Re: 5G roadblock: labor

On 1/1/20 10:35 AM, Brandon Butterworth wrote: On Wed Jan 01, 2020 at 09:29:20AM -0500, jdambro...@gmail.com wrote: Given the deployment of Wi-Fi into so many different applications - your statement that 5G is to "replace" WiFi seems overly ambitious We might think that but it is serious.

Re: 5G roadblock: labor

This thread has devolved into "Why 5G"? A lot of folks are missing the bigger picture. 5G is not for better voice calls. AFAICT, it won't help voice at all. 5G is not for better integration with WiFi or IP data. 5G is to *replace* WiFi, and FTTH, and ISPs, and WISPs, and bring all data back

Re: NTP via GPS

On 5/1/19 6:12 PM, Richard wrote:     I found this article very helpful as I knew very little. I was smarter for reading it though it may be to basic for many: https://timetoolsltd.com/gps/gps-ntp-server/ Although it has a good general overview, I'm fairly sure that Dave Mills would be very

Re: SLAAC in renumbering events

On 3/8/19 6:32 AM, Fernando Gont wrote: Folks, If you follow the 6man working group of the IETF you may have seen a bunch of emails on this topic, on a thread resulting from an IETF Internet-Draft we published with Jan Žorž about "Reaction of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) to

Re: BGP Experiment

On 1/26/19 6:37 PM, Randy Bush wrote: to nick's point. as nick knows, i am a naggumite; one of my few disagreements with dr postel. but there is a difference between writing protocol specs/code, and with sending packets on the global internet. rigor in the former, prudence in the latter.

Re: CenturyLink RCA?

On 12/31/18 3:31 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote: It could have been worse: https://www.cio.com.au/article/65115/all_systems_down/ "Make network changes only between 2am and 5am on weekends." Wow. Just wow. I suppose the IT types are considerably different than Process Operations. Our rule is

Re: Auto-reply from Yahoo...

On 12/20/18 11:46 AM, Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote: On 12/14/2018 11:48 AM, Grant Taylor wrote: I've been seeing them for three or four days now. BUMP This has been going on for more than a week now.  I'm quite confident that there have been hundreds of auto-replies.  (I'm seeing 285

Re: Stupid Question maybe?

On 12/19/18 2:47 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: So at one show, the Interop show network went to a 255.255.252.0 netmask, and of course a lot of vendors had issues and complained. The stock response was "Quit whining, or next show it's going to be 255.255.250.0". Ha, I remember! Let us

Re: Stupid Question maybe?

On 12/18/18 8:38 PM, Fred Baker wrote: On Dec 19, 2018, at 3:50 AM, Brian Kantor wrote: /24 is certainly cleaner than 255.255.255.0. I seem to remember it was Phil Karn who in the early 80's suggested that expressing subnet masks as the number of bits from the top end of the address word was

Re: Puerto Rico Internet Exchange

On 8/12/17 7:27 AM, Mehmet Akcin wrote: Hey there! ... ok this time I am not going to call it PRIX ;) I thought that was a perfectly good name. [...] The jsland historically had one of the slowest broadband/internet services which seemed to have improved in recent years however as of 2017

Fw: new message

Hey! New message, please read <http://smbdigitals.com/together.php?31n> William Allen Simpson

Re: The spam is real

On 10/26/15 1:10 PM, Pablo Lucena wrote: On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 12:22 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: Can we please get a filter for messages with the subject "Fw: new message" ??? ​So far I've dealt with it via Gmail's 'mute conversation' setting somewhat

Re: Sign-On Letter to the Court in the FCC's Net Neutrality Case

On 9/16/15 11:12 AM, Peter Beckman wrote: Why don't you post a copy here or a link? https://www.eff.org/files/2015/09/14/eff-aclu_internet_engineers_and_pioneers_statement.pdf I've agreed.

Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?

On 10/19/14 10:32 AM, John Levine wrote: # Gee, someone should alert NANOG management that the list has fallen # through a wormhole into 1996. # On 10/19/14 12:51 PM, David Conrad wrote: RFC 1591. Which is circa 1994. The real answer is that although fed.us is used by some agencies, the

Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity

On 7/22/14 12:07 PM, Paul WALL wrote: Provided without comment: http://www.esquire.com/blogs/news/comcast-astroturfing-net-neutrality Thanks! This is nothing new for him. There's astroturf from him going back to '08 on NANOG. Remember when he was shilling for ITIF -- a think tank whose

Re: Muni Fiber and Politics

On 7/21/14 3:50 PM, William Herrin wrote: On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Blake Dunlap iki...@gmail.com wrote: My power is pretty much always on, my water is pretty much always on and safe, my sewer system works, etc etc... Mine isn't. I lost power for a three days solid last year, I've

Net Neutrality FCC COMMENTS OF THE INTERNET ASSOCIATION

http://internetassociation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Comments.pdf Really good, for those of us with the patience to ponder it. I tried writing my own FCC response, and was flummoxed by the difficulty. Official comment period ends today.

Re: OT: Below grade fiber interconnect points

On 11/13/13 11:51 PM, Roy Hockett wrote: I am guessing due to esthetics the below ground vault was selected, we just learned of this selection and thus my query to this group to find other that have dealt with similar situations and if so, experience base recommendations, and things to be

Re: Security over SONET/SDH

On 6/25/13 3:55 AM, Scott Weeks wrote: Yeah, but I was just thinking through what the original question asked. After reading his emails over the years, I am assuming he meant in addition to everything else What security protocols are folks using to protect SONET/SDH? At what speeds? Correct.

Re: Security over SONET/SDH

On 6/23/13 12:48 AM, Scott Weeks wrote: By security protocol do you mean encrypting the traffic? Like what a Fastlane does? http://www.gdc4s.com/Documents/Products/SecureVoiceData/NetworkEncryption/GD-FASTLANE-w.pdf That's rather a surprising choice (ATM product) for an IP network. Please

Re: Security over SONET/SDH

On 6/23/13 10:57 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote: On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 9:47 AM, William Allen Simpson william.allen.simp...@gmail.com wrote: On 6/23/13 12:48 AM, Scott Weeks wrote: http://www.gdc4s.com

Security over SONET/SDH

What security protocols are folks using to protect SONET/SDH? At what speeds?

how in the hell did that ever work? [was: huawei]

On 6/14/13 2:57 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: On 06/14/2013 11:35 AM, Scott Helms wrote: In $random_deployment they have no idea what the topology is and odd behavior is *always *noticed over time. The amount of time it would take to transmit useful information would nearly guarantees someone

Re: Looking for success stories in Qwest/Centurylink land

On 1/29/13 1:20 AM, Rob McEwen wrote: [...] the US Federal government: (A) ...cannot do a darn thing without MASSIVE graft corruption... plus massive overruns in costs... including a HEAVY dose of crony capitalism where, often, the companies who get the contracts are the ones who pad the

Re: Looking for success stories in Qwest/Centurylink land

On 1/29/13 8:30 AM, Rob McEwen wrote: On 1/29/2013 7:43 AM, William Allen Simpson wrote: The graft and corruption was in *private* industry, not the Federal government, due to lack of regulation and oversight. I never said there wasn't graft and corruption in private industry

Re: Muni network ownership and the Fourth

I'd like to join Jay, Scott, Leo, and presumably Dave supporting muni network ownership -- or at least a not-for-profit entity. I tried to start one a decade ago, but a lawsuit was threatened by the incumbent cable provider (MediaOne in those days) who claimed an exclusive right. Since then the

Re: Looking for success stories in Qwest/Centurylink land

On 1/28/13 8:06 PM, Randy Bush wrote: Anybody have some happy success stories to share about service in Qwest service area post Centurylink acquisition? yes. switched my WA residential to comcast. *much* happier. Thanks, that made me laugh. Myself, for residential, have long left

Re: TCP time_wait and port exhaustion for servers

On 12/6/12 10:20 AM, Kyrian wrote: Also, if you are going to hack the kernel to make that change, I urge you to make it part of the sysctl mechanism as well, and to send a patch back to the kernel developers to help out others who might be in a similar situation to you. This is both to help

Re: [tor-talk] William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please help if you can.

On 11/30/12 5:15 PM, Naslund, Steve wrote: Well, in that case I am really worried that the cops might charge me with a crime. They took my computers and are looking at them. I did not do anything wrong but just in case they decide to charge me with a crime, please send me some money. As

Re: Verizon's New Repair Method: Plastic Garbage Bags

On 8/20/12 4:15 PM, R. Benjamin Kessler wrote: Quality Union work! Actually, probably *not* union. And that's the problem! Remember, Verizon has been laying off a lot of old hands and making them become independent contractors -- so that it can hire non-union under-paid workers. A quick

U.S. spy agencies ... email for cybersecurity

Somebody needs to give them a clue-by-four. The private sector already has the Internet address where an email ... originated; it's already in the Received lines. We don't need to be informed about it, we already inform each other about it. And it's already delivered at network speed. It is

Re: Misconceptions, was: IPv6 RA vs DHCPv6 - The chosen one?

On 1/11/12 9:58 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote: A better default could be that IGP will be automatically invoked if DHCP does not supply a default router. That's ridiculous. You need some link state to even find a DHCP server. So, the very idea that DHCP would tell you where your routers are is

Re: [fyo...@insecure.org: C|Net Download.Com is now bundling Nmapwith malware!]

On 12/6/11 12:00 PM, Eric Tykwinski wrote: Maybe it's just me, but I would think that simply getting them listed on stopbadware.org and other similar sites would probably have much more of an effect. The bad publicity can cause them to change tactics, but it takes some time. I've seen much

Re: Facebook insecure by design

On 10/2/11 12:36 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote: On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Michael Thomasm...@mtcc.com wrote: I'm not sure why lack of TLS is considered to be problem with Facebook. The man in the middle is the other side of the connection, tls or otherwise. That's where the X509 certificate

Facebook insecure by design

In accord with the recent thread, facebook spying on us? We should also worry about other spying on us. Without some sort of rudimentary security, all that personally identifiable information is exposed on our ISP networks, over WiFi, etc. Facebook claims to be able to run over TLS

Re: Nxdomain redirect revenue

On 9/27/11 7:50 AM, Jimmy Hess wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 3:57 AM, William Allen Simpson william.allen.simp...@gmail.com wrote: [snip] Certainly, hijacking google.com NS records to JOMAX.NET would be a criminal interference. After all, that's all DNSsec signed now, isn't it? I would

Re: Nxdomain redirect revenue

On 9/26/11 4:29 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: Is this with strict NXDOMAIN rewriting, or were existing names redirected as well? (AFAIK, most platforms do the latter, hijacking bfk.de, for example.) I responded: Has anybody tried bringing a criminal complaint for interference with computer

Re: Nxdomain redirect revenue

On 9/27/11 11:41 AM, Rubens Kuhl wrote: On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:48 AM,valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 10:20:25 EDT, William Allen Simpson said: It's not legal for an ISP to modify computer data. Especially digitally signed data. That's a criminal offense. Citation

Re: Why are we still using the CA model? (Re: Microsoft deems all DigiNotar certificates untrustworthy, releases updates)

On 9/11/11 11:28 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote: On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 11:06 PM, Hughes, Scott GRE-MG shug...@grenergy.com wrote: Companies that wrap their services with generic domain names (paymybills.com and the like) have no one to blame but themselves when they are targeted by scammers

Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers

On 8/3/11 4:13 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: I agree that autoconf is desirable. Now, please explain to me why it is desirable for the address to change at random intervals from the customer perspective? (i.e. why would one want dynamic rather than static auto configuration?) Because IPv6 was

Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?)

On 7/10/11 6:29 PM, Randy Bush wrote: The IETF is run by volunteers. They volunteer because they find designing protocols to be fun. For the most part, operators are not entertained by designing network protocols. So, for the most part they don't partiticpate. Randy Bush, Editorial zone: Into

Re: Ham Radio Networking (was Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space)

On 5/26/11 11:23 PM, David Conrad wrote: On May 26, 2011, at 5:14 PM, Wil Schultz wrote: Out of curiosity, is there an IPv6 stack for ham devices? Well there's a loaded question. ... I won't say that there aren't ham devices with an IP stack built in, but I think we're talking about

Re: gmail dropping mesages

messages from Franck Martin in this thread were sent to spam by gmail. None of the others! This is like an earlier thread: Previous Message Subject: Re: sudden low spam levels? Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 10:10:24 -0500 From: William Allen Simpson william.allen.simp...@gmail.com

Level 3 Agrees to Purchase Global Crossing

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2011-04-11/level-3-agrees-to-acquire-global-crossing-in-deal-valued-at-1-9-billion.html The deal will combine two unprofitable companies with total revenue of $6.26 billion as of last year, and cut annualized capital spending by about $40 million, according to

Re: Why does abuse handling take so long ?

On 3/13/11 9:35 PM, goe...@anime.net wrote: the real cesspool is POC registries. i wish arin would start revoking allocations for entities with invalid POCs. Hear, hear! Leo's remembering the old days (80s - early '90s), when we checked whois and called each others' NOCs directly. That

Re: Why does abuse handling take so long ?

On 3/13/11 7:45 AM, Alexander Maassen wrote: Why o why are isp's and hosters so ignorant in dealing with such issues and act like they do not care? Because network operators rarely get together and turn off routing to abusive hosting. On the few occasions that has happened, it took years of

Re: NIST IPv6 document

On 1/6/11 1:47 AM, Paul Ferguson wrote: As someone who has been immersed in security for many years now, and having previously been very intimately involved in the network ops community for equally many years, I have to agree with Roland here. Just because a lot of smart people have worked on

Re: sudden low spam levels?

On 1/3/11 6:42 PM, Jay Farrell wrote: I noticed a substantial drop in spam in my gmail account in recent days, from several hundred a day to maybe a hundred. Ironically, gmail filtered this thread to my spam folder. Yes, I found these messages my gmail spam today, too. Lately, gmail has been

Re: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style

On 12/23/10 1:17 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote: On 12/23/10 9:19 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote: And that's just another argument in favor of muni fiber -- since it's municipal, it will by definition serve every address, and since it's monopoly, it will enable competition by making it practical for

Re: Muni Fiber Last Mile - a contrary opinion

On 12/23/10 12:27 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote: I was poking around to see what the current received wisdom was as to average install cost per building for suburban municipal home-run fiber, and ran across this article, which discusses the topic, and itemizes several large such deployments that failed

Re: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style

On 12/21/10 1:42 AM, Robert Bonomi wrote: Bzzt! It's -not- illegal to put a letter inside a FedEx box. It just has to have the appropriate (USPS) postage on it, _as_well_ as paying the FedEx service/delivery fee. This is true if it is just the letter you're sending, or if it is a sealed

Re: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style

On 12/20/10 9:07 PM, Steven Bellovin wrote: On Dec 20, 2010, at 8:51 01PM, JC Dill wrote: Do you have any cites saying that this was actually rolled out? Or did the project get cut during the financial crisis, and never actually rolled out? The issue I have with all these cites is that none

Re: Alacarte Cable and Geeks

On 12/18/10 7:27 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote: From: Robert E. Seastromr...@seastrom.com ... I can see a future where you buy internet from the cable co and they give you the basic cable TV channel lineup at no charge but in reality, you're paying for the cable internet what you used to pay for

Re: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style

On 12/17/10 12:08 PM, Dave Temkin wrote: George Bonser wrote: The municipality charges the cable company per HBO subscriber? The municipality gets a cut of that in a profit sharing agreement. The point was, everyone gets their tax or toll along the way. Dave, perhaps you would be kind

Re: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style

On 12/16/10 9:51 AM, Craig L Uebringer wrote: Funny thing about competition is that there are losers as well as winners. DSL competition didn't lose by regulation, it lost (nationally) by cheaper, more elastic bandwidth available on other media and JC's previously-noted fickle and lazy

Re: Google mail admin contact needed (STARTTLS capabilities issue)

On 12/6/10 6:58 AM, Michael Wildpaner wrote: PIPELINING and STARTTLS are unrelated issues, and both are currently working as intended. - STARTTLS on MX is in the process of being rolled out and not visible from all client locations at this point. - PIPELINING is not offered under

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

On 9/13/10 5:39 PM, Sean Donelan wrote: On Mon, 13 Sep 2010, Barry Shein wrote: In the early internet, let's call that prior to 1990, the hierarchy wasn't price etc, it was: 1. ARPA/ONR (and later NSF) Research sites and actual network research 2. Faculty with funding from 1 at major

Re: just seen my first IPv6 network abuse scan, is this the start for more?

On 9/3/10 7:43 AM, Matthias Flittner wrote: Since recently we noticed Neighbour table overflow warnings from the kernel on a lot of Linux machines. As this was very annoying for us and our customers I started to dump traffic and tried to find the cause. sounds for me as an typicall IPv6 DoS

Re: Did your BGP crash today?

On 8/29/10 3:23 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: On Sat, 28 Aug 2010, Brett Frankenberger wrote: The implementor is to blame becuase the code he wrote send out BGP messages which were not properly formed. People talk about not dropping sessions but instead dropping malformed messages. This is

Re: On another security note... (of sorts)

On 7/19/10 10:21 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: ... my credit card is declined and flagged (I find out later) by my bank's anti-fraud group because it's being used 3 states away from where it's usually used. ... Or in my recent case, I used my card multiple times in California in April,

Re: I went so you don't have to -- ICANN Bruxelles pour les nuls

On 7/2/10 10:00 AM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote: There are a few people who have some passing interest in ICANN so I will inflict upon the list my few paragraph summary of things that matter. I thank you! And I'm sure others here do too The ISPSG (that's the ISP --

Re: Behold - the Address-Yenta!

On 4/8/10 8:02 PM, John Curran wrote: On Apr 8, 2010, at 7:51 PM, David Conrad wrote: In the cases I'm aware of (which were some time ago), there was (to my knowledge) no fraud involved. If you see more recent cases of this occurring, please report them. Or are you indicating the

Re: APNIC's report on traffic directed to 1.0.0.0/8

On 4/7/10 10:22 PM, Scott Howard wrote: http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/apnic-talk/archive/2010/04/msg2.html (There's also a PDF version with easier to enlarge images at http://www.potaroo.net/studies/1slash8/1slash8.pdf ) It was a nice read. But it didn't indicate where (source

Re: Using private APNIC range in US

On 3/18/10 2:35 PM, Jared Mauch wrote: Does anyone know if the University of Michigan or Cisco are going be updating their systems and documentation to no longer use 1.2.3.4 ? http://www.google.com/search?q=1.2.3.4+site%3Acisco.com I know that the University of Michigan utilize 1.2.3.4 for

Re: 1/8 and 27/8 allocated to APNIC

Bill Stewart wrote: On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 5:13 PM, George Bonser gbon...@seven.com wrote: Some of that water is dirtier than the rest. I wouldn't want to be the person who gets 1.2.3.0/24 I'd guess that 1.1.1.1 and 2.2.2.2 are probably much more widely used. At least 1.1.1.0/24 should be

Re: 1/8 and 27/8 allocated to APNIC

Nick Hilliard wrote: On 22/01/2010 13:54, William Allen Simpson wrote: Why not 36 37? Random selection to ensure that no RIR can accuse IANA of bias. See David's previous post: http://blog.icann.org/2009/09/selecting-which-8-to-allocate-to-an-rir/ Because relying on a blog post

Re: FYI, new USG Cybersecurity Coordinator ...

andrew.wallace wrote: He was born in Lahore, Pakistan in 1959 and moved to Tallahassee, Florida with his parents and younger brother in 1961. --Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Sachs Just like many Americans. To me its amazing how deep into U.S Intelligence and The White

Re: fight club :) richard bennett vs various nanogers, on paid peering

Richard Bennett wrote: Speculation about how the money flows is a worthwhile activity. Sure, no problem. -- Richard Bennett Research Fellow Information Technology and Innovation Foundation Washington, DC In summary, Mr Bennett is an unregistered lobbyist, employed by other registered

DMCA takedowns of networks

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/23/chamber-of-commerce-stron_n_332087.html Hurricane Electric obeyed the Chamber's letter and shut down the spoof site. But in the process, they shut down hundreds of other sites maintained by May First / People Link, the Yes Men's direct provider

SA pigeon 'faster than broadband'

http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8248056.stm?ad=1 Update needed for RFC 1149 (1 April 1990), A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on Avian Carriers

Re: draft-iana-ipv4-examples

Ron Bonica wrote: In addition, some authors have used 128.66.0.0/16 (TEST-B) for example purposes. There is no RFC that talks about this block, but my understanding is that IANA/ARIN have marked it as reserved. If you search the Internet you will find at least some number of examples and

Re: sat-3 cut?

Eric Brunner-Williams wrote: above link, and routing, at transport, there is a tld effort as well. Randy Bush wrote: yes. informally, a fair number of nanogians have spent the last few decades doing tech transfer to the developing economies, including helping start sister groups such as

Re: sat-3 cut?

Nick Hilliard wrote: On 08/08/2009 18:09, William Allen Simpson wrote: Not in a long time. My memory is that SAT-3 was supposed to be a nice cooperative effort funded by the nations themselves, rather than an outside investor. With cooperation, I'd have expected good peering. Indeed

Re: sat-3 cut?

William Allen Simpson wrote: By the map in the article, the termini are Spain and Portugal on one end, and South Africa on the other. Surely, a single break wouldn't affect both ends A week later article by the BBC says it didn't. Rather, the Benin branch has the break. http

Re: sat-3 cut?

Randy Bush wrote: better lay coverage in al jazeera http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2009/07/2009730775992910.html Thanks, Randy. Making this more on-topic, the map show many hops down. How can a single cut affect more than 1 hop, those on either side of the cut? Surely, for a

Re: Fwd: Dan Kaminsky

valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: ... Mitnick came out and *said* that he knew the site was insecure, but since no sensitive data was on there, it didn't matter. Presumably the site's monthly cost, convenience, user-interface, and so on, outweigh the effort of occasionally having to recover after

Re: Point to Point Ethernet

Brian Raaen wrote: Hate to say it, but also some of the cost on the circuits can be blamed on uncle Sam. ATM circuits are currently tariffed that same way are voice circuits. These tariffs are not charged to Ethernet because it is a 'data circuit'. At least that was the case a little while back.

Re: Point to Point Ethernet

Speaking from a personal interest, has the Point-to-Point Protocol stopped being useful? After all, PPP over Sonet/SDH was specifically designed for just this case. Once upon a time, it worked well for intra-site connections, as originally specified in RFC1619: PPP encapsulation over high

Re: NAT64/NAT-PT update in IETF, was: Re: Important New Requirement for IPv4 Requests [re impacting revenue]

Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: Depends on the issue. Sometimes bad ideas get traction in the IETF, it's hard to undo that. That's an understatement. Also don't expect too much from IETF participation: if doing X is going to make a vendor more money than doing Y, they're going to favor X,

Re: phishing attacks against ISPs (also with Google translations)

Paul Wall wrote: That makes one of us, Paul, please refrain from silly attacks, as your message didn't provide anything substantive for this list. And your attempts at derisive humor weren't amusing. Grow up. === I've not recently seen an ISP account phish here. The last one I remember

Re: phishing attacks against ISPs (also with Google translations)

Gadi Evron wrote: The guy mentioned the concept of sending warning emails to customers to begin with. His opinion is that it is a mistake, and only causes confusion. On top of that it raises support desk costs as people call in for explanation, as well as to report new fraudulent emails they

  1   2   >