* o...@delong.com (Owen DeLong) [Thu 17 May 2018, 03:19 CEST]:
At this point if I were a registrar or registry doing business in
such a way as to be subject to gdpr, I’d seriously consider spinning
up a subsidiary only for that purpose and leave it with minimal
revenues and nothing to collect
Dear Francois,
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:14:19AM +, Francois Devienne wrote:
> The examples you mention confirm the issues are mainly due to poorly
> configured networks where routes are leaked out although they
> shouldn’t be. Adequate routers are able to filter out prefixes based
> on
IXes are generally a far better use of eyeball resources than additional
transit networks.
Obviously, there are some edge exceptions.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com
- Original Message -
From:
Agreed. This is garbage, un-needed legislation.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com
- Original Message -
From: "Owen DeLong"
To: b...@theworld.com
Cc: "Constantine A. Murenin"
* na...@ics-il.net (Mike Hammett) [Thu 17 May 2018, 14:44 CEST]:
Agreed. This is garbage, un-needed legislation.
Disagreed. These are great and necessary regulations.
I'm loving the flood of convoluted unsubscribe notices this month from
companies that had stored PII for no reason.
I often question why\how people build networks the way they do. There's some
industry hard-on with having a few ginormous routers instead of many smaller
ones. I've learned that when building Internet Exchanges, the number of
networks that don't have BGP edge routers in major markets where they
Just be aware of the impact a default route can have on your infrastructure,
such as uRPF no longer works as expected as everything has a valid route.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com
- Original Message
You shouldn't need to contact your ISP on the lowered BGP timers as BGP
should establish based on the lowest value. That said, they may have a
value limit where anything lower than that, is set at your own risk.
You can look at running BFD over the BGP session as well. Technically it
has
* br...@ampr.org (Brian Kantor) [Thu 17 May 2018, 16:23 CEST]:
An article in The Register on the current status of Whois and the
GDPR.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/16/whois_privacy_shambles/
My registrar already does all the things listed in this article that
registrars supposedly
In a related note, I received a note from my registrar this morning
telling me that, per current ICANN rules, I need to verify all the
personal identifying information for the domains I control.
1. I checked WHOIS for all my domains, and they point to the proxy
service that my registrar
Hi,
> Dne 17/05/2018 v 15:03 Niels Bakker napsal(a):
>> * na...@ics-il.net (Mike Hammett) [Thu 17 May 2018, 14:44 CEST]:
>>> Agreed. This is garbage, un-needed legislation.
>>
>> Disagreed. These are great and necessary regulations.>
>> I'm loving the flood of convoluted unsubscribe notices
An article in The Register on the current status of Whois and the GDPR.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/16/whois_privacy_shambles/
Thomas,
Thanks for the info. This is probably why my multipath configuration wasn't
working as I thought it would. I will give this a test run also.
Mike,
Interesting thought. This would mean rpf-check wouldn't work on my outside
interfaces. Good to know.
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 8:55 AM Mike
On Thu 2018-May-17 10:49:37 -0400, Adam Kajtar
wrote:
Thomas,
Thanks for the info. This is probably why my multipath configuration wasn't
working as I thought it would. I will give this a test run also.
Mike,
Interesting thought. This would mean rpf-check
Dne 17/05/2018 v 15:03 Niels Bakker napsal(a):
> * na...@ics-il.net (Mike Hammett) [Thu 17 May 2018, 14:44 CEST]:
>> Agreed. This is garbage, un-needed legislation.
>
> Disagreed. These are great and necessary regulations.>
> I'm loving the flood of convoluted unsubscribe notices this month from
On 17 May 2018 at 08:03, Niels Bakker
Just got this.
Dear Equinix Customer,
IBX(s): DA6
IBX Address: 1950 North Stemmons Freeway Suites 2049 & 3050 Dallas, TX 75207
Ticket#: 5-152980676699
Date and Time of Occurrence: 17-MAY-2018 14:04 Site Local Time
INCIDENT SUMMARY: Fire Alarm - IBX was Evacuated
INCIDENT DESCRIPTION:
Appears to have just been a drill. They let us all back in within 15 mins.
-Matt
On Thu, May 17, 2018, 14:26 Luke Guillory wrote:
> Just got this.
>
>
>
>
> Dear Equinix Customer,
>
> IBX(s): DA6
> IBX Address: 1950 North Stemmons Freeway Suites 2049 & 3050 Dallas,
On May 17, 2018 at 10:29 niels=na...@bakker.net (Niels Bakker) wrote:
> We cannot escape UDRP but at least we now have a say in what we are
> forced to publish about ourselves.
Just curious, what does UDRP have to do with any of this?
UDRP is an ICANN process which allows someone who
I don't. I have better things to do than babysit various accounts
I've signed up over the years. Just because someone signs up for an
account and forgets about it is not a good enough reason to have my
information DESTROYED WITHOUT MY PERMISSION if I do happen to be busy
that week to sign in
20 matches
Mail list logo