In message 108454.1346989...@turing-police.cc.vt.edu, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
writes:
--==_Exmh_1346989445_1993P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 08:30:12 +1000, Mark Andrews said:
In message 85250.1346959...@turing-police.cc.vt.edu,
Oliver wrote:
All that necessary is local changes on end systems of those who
want the end to end transparency.
There is no changes on the Internet.
You're basically redefining the term end-to-end transparency to suit your
own
Already in RFC3102, which restrict port number ranges, it is
If a relying party's use of PKI infrastructure legally equated to
acceptance of the relying party agreement (RPA), then having an
explicit record of acceptance of the RPA would not be necessary.
Alas, it does not appear possible to equate use of PKI certificates
with agreement to the
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
the DNS and won't discover anything about the DNS that can't be had
via getaddrinfo() until long after its too late redefine the protocol
in terms of seeking SRV records.
Oh, sure, I get that. One of the problems I've had with the end to
end NAT argument is exactly
On Sep 6, 2012, at 22:31 , Sean Harlow s...@seanharlow.info wrote:
On Sep 6, 2012, at 23:44, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
However, Joe Sixpack doesn't really have that option. And
unless you figure out a scalable and universal way for Joe Sixpack's Xbox or
PS3 or
whatever to request
This has been experimental with no forward progress since 2001.
Any sane person would conclude that the experiment failed to garner any
meaningful support.
Is there any continuing active work on this experiment?
Any running code?
Didn't think so.
Owen
On Sep 6, 2012, at 23:23 , Masataka Ohta
On Sep 7, 2012, at 7:31 AM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com
wrote:
If a relying party's use of PKI infrastructure legally equated to
acceptance of the relying party agreement (RPA), then having an
explicit record of acceptance of the RPA would not be necessary.
Alas, it does not appear
Sean Harlow wrote:
None of these options are impacted by being behind a NAT as long
as they have the ability to open a port via UPnP or equivalent,
so if in an ideal world all client software understood SRV
records this particular negative of NAT would be of minimal impact.
My point is that
Good morning Randy -
it is late afternoon
Are you indicating that RPKI services should be offered without any
RPA (and/or CPS) at all, or that these agreements should legally
adhere without explicit agreement? There is an statement expressing
that CPS or RPA might benefit from the
Owen DeLong wrote:
Then why is IPv6 deployment happening faster in the internet core than
at the edge?
The real world seems to defy your claims.
Which world, are you talking about? Martian?
This has been experimental with no forward progress since 2001.
Obviously because it is a new
Does anyone make a cheaper OC3 circuit emulation module or box?
Maybe Cisco ME 3600X 24CX Switch or Cisco ASR 903 Router
adam
On Sep 7, 2012, at 7:55 AM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote:
Good morning Randy -
it is late afternoon
Indeed... that may contribute significantly to the difference in
perspective. In the US, little details such as legal structures
often take on greater importance than would be otherwise
On 07/09/12 02:38, Will Orton wrote:
Having much more experience with ethernet/packet/MPLS setups, we are trying
to
get the client to admit that 1g/10g waves running ethernet with QoS would be
as
good as or better in terms of latency, jitter, and loss for their packet
data.
So far
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 16:01:10 +1000, Mark Andrews said:
There is NOTHING stopping Sony adding code to the PS3 to perform
dynamic updates to add the records. We have a well established
protocol to do this securely. 100's of millions of records get
updated daily using this protocol in the
On Friday 07 September 2012 15:23:30 Masataka Ohta wrote:
Oliver wrote:
All that necessary is local changes on end systems of those who
want the end to end transparency.
There is no changes on the Internet.
You're basically redefining the term end-to-end transparency to suit
your
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 3:45 PM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
It is regularly alleged, on this mailing list, that NAT is bad *because
it
violates the end-to-end principle of the Internet*, where each host is a
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
BGP Update Report
Interval: 30-Aug-12 -to- 06-Sep-12 (7 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS6517 143391 6.8% 279.0 -- RELIANCEGLOBALCOM - Reliance
Globalcom Services, Inc
2 -
This report has been generated at Fri Sep 7 21:13:05 2012 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 for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date
No IPv6?
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:46 PM, Matthew Luckie m...@caida.org wrote:
Hello,
We have been working on refreshing the data and algorithms behind CAIDA's
as-rank project. We have published AS-relationships and AS-rankings
computed for June 2012. We are currently seeking further
Noticed lot of A record queries for
time-b.netgear.com/time-c.netgear.comon dns servers.
Has anyone noticed similar behavior on any of your dns servers? Anyone
aware about a known issue with netgear home routers which can create bulk
dns queries?
-Basil
Yo Basil!
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:22:29 -0400
Basil Baby basilb...@gmail.com wrote:
Noticed lot of A record queries for
time-b.netgear.com/time-c.netgear.comon dns servers.
Has anyone noticed similar behavior on any of your dns servers? Anyone
aware about a known issue with netgear home
Hmm... Even though similar issue was identified in 2003, looks like still
there are devices in market with those old firmwares or similar
behavior. sheesh !! :(
-Basil
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Gary E. Miller g...@rellim.com wrote:
Yo Basil!
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 20:22:29 -0400
Basil
On Sep 7, 2012, at 7:44 PM, Basil Baby wrote:
Hmm... Even though similar issue was identified in 2003, looks like still
there are devices in market with those old firmwares or similar
behavior. sheesh !! :(
-Basil
While NETGEAR does have a history of issues like this, the UofW issue is
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 20:44:44 -0400, Basil Baby said:
Hmm... Even though similar issue was identified in 2003, looks like still
there are devices in market with those old firmwares or similar
behavior. sheesh !! :(
A long long time ago in a network far far away, one of our campus NTP servers
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 7:36 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
Interestingly enough, the *hostname* is still in use (by another machine under
my desk) - and it gets near zero hits. So it's all hardcoded IP addrs not
hostnames.
And for NTP implementations that use DNS they also often
26 matches
Mail list logo
