A while back we had a customer colocated vpn router (2911) come in and we put it
on our main vlan for initial set up and testing. Once that was done, I created
a
separate VLAN for them and a dot1q subinterface on an older, somewhat overloaded
2811. I set up the IPSec Tunnel, a /30 for each end
Hi,
.-- My secret spy satellite informs me that at 12-08-08 11:35 AM Darius
Jahandarie wrote:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Zachary McGibbon
zachary.mcgibbon+na...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyone at Bell Canada / Sympatico can tell us what's going on? Our routing
table is going nuts with
Somewhere in hell, Spamford Wallace is smiling.
A wonderful colleague, friend, and leading purveyor of
industry counter-rhetoric solutions.
http://www.maawg.org/page/memorial-jd-falk
http://www.cauce.org/2011/11/jdfalk.html
http://www.facebook.com/jdfalk
regards,
fh
---
On our retail footprint we block outbound traffic from customers with dynamic
IPs
towards port 25, our support tells them to use their ISP's port 587 server
That being said, since all of our home users have 50 mbit/sec or greater
upload
speeds we are pretty paranoid about the amount of
We had two users fall for a phishing email recently, and of course the result
was
that he gave his user/pass to a spammer. We caught one of them in time, but the
other got out many thousands of spam the other night before being discovered.
I am in the process of cleaning this up. Spamcop
for a phishing email recently, and of course the
result was
that he gave his user/pass to a spammer. We caught one of them in time, but
the
other got out many thousands of spam the other night before being
discovered.
I am in the process of cleaning this up. Spamcop and others were good about
on the
specifics
of the situation, and how much email volume the IP sends. Complaint ratios
determine
the amount of risk for receiving mail from an IP, so logically, reputation
improves
as the ratio of legitimate mails increases with respect to the number of
complaints.
Speeding up the process
Ok, I've done a lot of Cisco standard and extended ACLs, but I do not
understand why the following does not work the way I think it should.
Near the end of this extended named ACL, I have the following:
permit tcp any eq 443 any
permit tcp any eq 80 any
deny ip any host 2.2.3.4
permit ip any
Thanks everyone, of course this is what I wanted. Like I said, a stupid
ACL question...I'm blaming heavy medication, sorry for the noise!
On Thu, 21 Apr 2011, u...@3.am wrote:
permit tcp any eq 443 any
permit tcp any eq 80 any
deny ip any host 2.2.3.4
permit ip any any
This is applied
For the first time since I can remember, my POP3 server was effectively
shut down by too many simultaneous connections today. The first fix I
tried was to raise the number of connections from the default 40 to 100,
but the problem soon returned.
I finally ipfw'd off the offending IP
my BB BIS gmail account.
IMAP seems to still be up.
Jeff
James Smallacombe PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor
u...@3.am http://3.am
=
Sorry if this is a little OT, but we're seeing a serious problem and was
wondering if it is what I think it is.
In short: I have been moving services off of our servers in a data center
onto a server at eSecuredata, who rents dedicated servers. The idea is to
lower costs and eliminate
Please disregard this idiocy of mine...it appears that the Apache
UseCanonicalName directive selectively breaks some NameVirtualHosts, while
leaving others unscathed, but turning it off fixed it anyway.
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, u...@3.am wrote:
Sorry if this is a little OT, but we're seeing a
Disregard my disregard. The problem resurfaced with no changes on my
part. I purged browser caches and tried them from 3 browsers and each
time:
http://www.countytheater.org
redirected to: http://webmail.ns3.pil.net/ which is another NameVhost on
that server sharing that IP. This is
Again, turned out to be my own stupidity. It was just DNS on a secondary
DNS server, which was pointing to the old IP, which was redirecting to the
new IP, but at that point, the headers are lost.
I would have thought that on MacOSX (my client; the server is FreeBSD
7.2-STABLE), if I tell
takes from 1 to 4 hours. Why
they're not familiar with remote-power cycling equipment is beyond me, let
alone why they haven't resolved the issue properly, despite having
supposedly replaced hardware at one point.
My 3 year contract is up next month, after which I am so out of there.
The fact
on their Philly Big Iron switch that connects to Norristown (this
happened before last August). In a couple of hours, they had it fixed,
only for it to go into up-and-down mode a couple of hours later, for the
rest of the day. I escalated the ticket at around 6:20pm, but saw no
lasting improvment
were to leave early, but they
can jack up the price by 40-50% during that time, arbitrarily? I do not
see that provision in my contract, and would rather avoid legal expenses
if possible. Has anyone else had to deal with this sort of thing from
Level 3?
TIA,
James Smallacombe
One of my virtual web host servers have been getting multiple probes to
TCP port 1080 (socks) every day for months from AOL IP addresses.
Is AOL known to be doing something relatively innocuous on that port? I
ask because I have portsentry null routing IP addresses that make probes
like this.
19 matches
Mail list logo
