All,
Sending this out (to multiple lists -- apologies for the potential
duplicates) in the hopes to proactively resolve any mail flow issues to /
from Proofpoint customers.
Earlier this evening, we had some DNS issues with our domain (proofpoint.com).
We've resolved the main problem, however,
Wouldn't it make sense if we created a specific mail alias for
requesting DNS flushes? This seems to happen statistically often enough
it might be a valuable service to bundle under the NANOG umbrella.
Todd
On 4/16/2014 2:27 AM, Jaren Angerbauer wrote:
All,
Sending this out (to multiple
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:45 AM, TGLASSEY tglas...@earthlink.net wrote:
Wouldn't it make sense if we created a specific mail alias for requesting
DNS flushes? This seems to happen statistically often enough it might be a
valuable service to bundle under the NANOG umbrella.
What would make
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:49:24AM -0400, William Herrin wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:45 AM, TGLASSEY tglas...@earthlink.net wrote:
Wouldn't it make sense if we created a specific mail alias for requesting
DNS flushes? This seems to happen statistically often enough it might be a
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:04 AM, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:49:24AM -0400, William Herrin wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:45 AM, TGLASSEY tglas...@earthlink.net wrote:
Wouldn't it make sense if we created a specific mail alias for requesting
DNS
By the way, can we do something about this joker? I'm tired of
receiving his notice every time I post to NANOG.
Received: from us25.unix.fas.harvard.edu (us25.unix.fas.harvard.edu
[140.247.35.201]) by magic.dirtside.com (8.14.3/) with ESMTP id
s3GFgisL026781 for b...@herrin.us; Wed, 16 Apr 2014
Hello,
Not sure where to point this... I was wondering if anybody knows an inroad
to reach ATT and Verizon systems people to flush their caches for
proofpoint.com?
Any help is greatly appreciated!
Steven Briggs
ᐧ
The generally accepted and scalable way to accomplish this is to advertise your
freshness preferences using the SOA record of your domain. It would be pretty
tricky to make this work with a swivel chair type system for every domain and
host on the internet. You would have to contact every
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:43AM -0500, William Herrin wrote:
By the way, can we do something about this joker? I'm tired of
receiving his notice every time I post to NANOG.
Hi Bill and the NANOG mailing list,
The NANOG Communications Committee, reachable at adm...@nanog.org, is
the
Yeah...I know. Unfortunately, the domain was mishandled by our
registrar, who imposed their own TTLs on our zone, THEN turned it back over
to us with a 48HR TTL. Which is very bad.
I really appreciate all of your help, guys!
ᐧ
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Laszlo Hanyecz
At 10:21 16/04/2014 -0600, Steven Briggs wrote:
Been discussed and nothing has been done:
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-dnsop-8.pdf
https://www.dns-oarc.net/files/workshop-201005/DNS-Emergency-Alert-System.pdf
Will keep happening until someone decides to act.
-Hank
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 9:49 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
What would make sense is some sort of attribute on the DNS record
which instructed servers not to cache it for so long that mistakes
have a lasting impact.
Or a pub/sub method of sending an immediate invalidation request,
Seems like the DNS protocol already addresses this issue with TTLs. The
issue is that people sometimes regret the TTLs they chose (or their
service provider chose for them). Any reason registrars commonly choose
a 2 day TTL? Would they be just as well off with a 1 day TTL (my guess
is that
On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 10:21:34 -0600, Steven Briggs said:
Yeah...I know. Unfortunately, the domain was mishandled by our
registrar, who imposed their own TTLs on our zone, THEN turned it back over
to us with a 48HR TTL. Which is very bad.
That's almost calling for a name-and-shame.
Be grateful it is only 48 hours.Verzion (not Verizon Wireless) frequently
has multi-week outages affecting multiple customers in the NYC area.
One of the DS3s some customer circuits ride only works when there is no usage.
Once there is usage massive errors occur. This has been going on
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:56 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 10:21:34 -0600, Steven Briggs said:
Yeah...I know. Unfortunately, the domain was mishandled by our
registrar, who imposed their own TTLs on our zone, THEN turned it back over
to us with a 48HR TTL. Which is
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote:
It's not hard to use WHOIS to lookup the registrar of each of the
nameservers for proofpoint.com
(ns1.proofpoint.us, ns3.proofpoint.us).
Long TTLS are appropriate for a production zone, but in my
estimation, it is
I can't cite chapter and verse but I seem to remember this zeroing
problem was solved decades ago by just introducing a bit which said
this chunk of memory or disk is new (to this process) and not zeroed
but if there's any attempt to actually access it then read it back as
if it were filled with
On 4/16/2014 11:17 AM, Andrew Koch wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:43AM -0500, William Herrin wrote:
By the way, can we do something about this joker? I'm tired of
receiving his notice every time I post to NANOG.
Hi Bill and the NANOG mailing list,
The NANOG Communications Committee,
On 4/16/2014 4:34 PM, Jason Iannone wrote:
I can't cite chapter and verse but I seem to remember this zeroing
problem was solved decades ago by just introducing a bit which said
this chunk of memory or disk is new (to this process) and not zeroed
but if there's any attempt to actually access it
Looks to be godaddy. No surprise then.
On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 12:56:59 -0400
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 10:21:34 -0600, Steven Briggs said:
Yeah...I know. Unfortunately, the domain was mishandled by our
registrar, who imposed their own TTLs on our zone, THEN turned it
The NANOG Communications Committee, reachable at adm...@nanog.org, is
the appropriate place to bring mailing list concerns to.
dear god, please save me from an operational community becoming a
hidebound bureaucrazy
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Larry Sheldon larryshel...@cox.net wrote:
If the hardware (as has been suggested) or the OS does any of this, how do
diagnostic routine in or running under the OS work?
The OS does it, when allocating memory to userland programs.
For memory, before memory is
Jason Iannone wrote:
I can't cite chapter and verse but I seem to remember this zeroing
problem was solved decades ago by just introducing a bit which said
this chunk of memory or disk is new (to this process) and not zeroed
but if there's any attempt to actually access it then read it back as
In message
CADE4tYUzZdKDCnDyz7k9Pwbn7oH5_zzs6zqEnteAtifnB=f...@mail.gmail.com, B
randon Galbraith writes:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 9:49 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
What would make sense is some sort of attribute on the DNS record
which instructed servers not to cache it for so
On April 17, 2014 at 10:03 g...@gdt.id.au (Glen Turner) wrote:
Jason Iannone wrote:
I can't cite chapter and verse but I seem to remember this zeroing
problem was solved decades ago by just introducing a bit which said
this chunk of memory or disk is new (to this process) and not
On April 16, 2014 at 15:34 jason.iann...@gmail.com (Jason Iannone) wrote:
I can't cite chapter and verse but I seem to remember this zeroing
problem was solved decades ago by just introducing a bit which said
this chunk of memory or disk is new (to this process) and not zeroed
but if
On 04/14/2014 03:47 PM, Jim Popovitch wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Scott Howard sc...@doc.net.au wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Jim Popovitch jim...@gmail.com wrote:
7-April: Monday, Yahoo's dmarc change kicks everyone in the groin, the
last full week before the US tax
On 4/16/2014 11:19 PM, Private Sender nobody snovc com wrote:
Does that raise any alarms?
--
Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics
of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:29 AM, Larry Sheldon larryshel...@cox.netwrote:
On 4/16/2014 11:19 PM, Private Sender nobody snovc com wrote:
Does that raise any alarms?
Of course it does. http://whois.domaintools.com/snovc.com
computerguy0...@yahoo.com Bret Taylor
-Jim P.
BAE did this cute poster on the attack model
https://image-store.slidesharecdn.com/6f0027d2-c58c-11e3-af1f-12313d0148e5-original.jpeg?goback=%2Egde_1271127_member_5862330295302262788
On 4/16/2014 7:50 PM, Barry Shein wrote:
On April 17, 2014 at 10:03 g...@gdt.id.au (Glen Turner) wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:19 AM, Private Sender nob...@snovc.com wrote:
On 04/14/2014 03:47 PM, Jim Popovitch wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Scott Howard sc...@doc.net.au wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Jim Popovitch jim...@gmail.com
wrote:
7-April: Monday, Yahoo's dmarc
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 9:39 PM, TGLASSEY tglas...@earthlink.net wrote:
BAE did this cute poster on the attack model
https://image-store.slidesharecdn.com/6f0027d2-
c58c-11e3-af1f-12313d0148e5-original.jpeg?goback=%2Egde_1271127_member_
5862330295302262788
I'm guessing accuracy probably
33 matches
Mail list logo
