The notorious fax spammer (Swiss Money Report,
European Money Report, etc; Altanus Ltd.) is
currently residing in 91.223.119/24
(91.223.119.174), which is registered to
Traian Zoran Tariceanu, First Media Service Ltd.
The contacts at @fmsss.info bounce. What is the
proper channel for reporting
* Eugen Leitl:
The notorious fax spammer (Swiss Money Report,
European Money Report, etc; Altanus Ltd.) is
currently residing in 91.223.119/24
(91.223.119.174), which is registered to
Traian Zoran Tariceanu, First Media Service Ltd.
The contacts at @fmsss.info bounce. What is the
proper
On May 15, 2011, at 8:55 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
On 5/15/2011 7:08 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On May 15, 2011, at 8:28 AM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
...and we'll agree to disagree on this one (RTMFP)... and users will just
be ok with BitTorrent and Skype not working on the v6-only + NAT64
On 16 mei 2011, at 9:31, Owen DeLong wrote:
I believe that the BitTorrent clients
are smart enough to discard the IPv4 nodes reached through NAT64 and will,
instead, just
use the native IPv6 nodes. I don't see this as a problem and Im not sure why
you do.
Because that way the IPv4 and
Because that way the IPv4 and IPv6 swarms remain disconnected in the
absence of some dual stack peers. (I.e., if the swarm is small and
you're the only IPv6 participant.)
It would be much better if you could go from IPv6 to IPv4 through a
NAT64.
The problem is when the client is handed
KSK CEREMONY 5
The fifth KSK ceremony for the root zone took place in Culpeper,
VA, USA on Wednesday 2011-05-11. The Ceremony Administrator was
Mehmet Akcin. The ceremony was completed successfully.
Video from Ceremony 5 was recorded for audit purposes. Video and
associated audit materials
On 15 May 2011, at 22:55, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
On 5/15/2011 7:08 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On May 15, 2011, at 8:28 AM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
...and we'll agree to disagree on this one (RTMFP)... and users will just
be ok with BitTorrent and Skype not working on the v6-only + NAT64
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Jeroen van Aart jer...@mompl.net wrote:
Something like:
-I FORWARD -j DROP
-I FORWARD -s 2001:db8::/64 -j ACCEPT
-I FORWARD -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
Double check the kernel version you have. IIRC kernels before 2.6.20
didn't have the
On 05/14/2011 07:39 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:
Jim Gettysj...@freedesktop.org writes:
... we have to get naming squared away. Typing IPv6 addresses is for the
birds, and having everyone have to go fuss with a DNS provider isn't a
viable solution.
perhaps i'm too close to the problem because that
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 14:37:46 -0400
From: Jim Gettys j...@freedesktop.org
perhaps i'm too close to the problem because that solution looks quite
viable to me. dns providers who don't keep up with the market (which
means ipv6+dnssec in this context) will lose business to those who do.
I am curious to understand how copper Ethernet keepalive are used and work
between a host or router and a switch?
Cisco default keepalive is 10 seconds with 3 or 5 retries, does this mean
30s or 50s to detect copper link failure??
I may miss something, thanks for your help.
The link failure
On May 16, 2011, at 1:56 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 16 mei 2011, at 9:31, Owen DeLong wrote:
I believe that the BitTorrent clients
are smart enough to discard the IPv4 nodes reached through NAT64 and will,
instead, just
use the native IPv6 nodes. I don't see this as a problem and
On May 16, 2011, at 2:10 AM, George Bonser wrote:
Because that way the IPv4 and IPv6 swarms remain disconnected in the
absence of some dual stack peers. (I.e., if the swarm is small and
you're the only IPv6 participant.)
It would be much better if you could go from IPv6 to IPv4 through a
Greetings all.
I've been tasked with comparing the use of open source load balancing software
against commercially available off the shelf hardware such as F5, which is what
we currently use. We use the load balancers for traditional load balancing,
full proxy for http/ssl traffic, ssl
In message 51008.1305573...@nsa.vix.com, Paul Vixie writes:
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 14:37:46 -0400
From: Jim Gettys j...@freedesktop.org
perhaps i'm too close to the problem because that solution looks quite
viable to me. dns providers who don't keep up with the market (which
S/W vs H/W is really a question rooted in performance and feature
needs vs cost... weigh your options carefully.
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Welch, Bryan bryan.we...@arrisi.com wrote:
Greetings all.
I've been tasked with comparing the use of open source load balancing
software against
We used Pound (http://www.apsis.ch/pound) on a couple of FreeBSD servers
some years ago.
Configuration is simple and the software has lots of good and interesting
features.
The only problem was that always our traffic had a spike, serving pages
through it became a nightmare.
Eventually we ended
From: Owen DeLong o...@delong.com
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 16:12:27 -0700
... It's not like you can even reach anything at home now, let alone
reach it by name.
that must and will change. let's be the generation who makes it possible.
In message 80660.1305606...@nsa.vix.com, Paul Vixie writes:
From: Owen DeLong o...@delong.com
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 16:12:27 -0700
... It's not like you can even reach anything at home now, let alone
reach it by name.
that must and will change. let's be the generation who makes it
19 matches
Mail list logo
