Re: [swinog] IP ROUTE 64.94.110.11 255.255.255.255 Null0

2003-09-18 Thread Nicolas Desir
Pascal Gloor wrote: You should reject the mail with a permanent fatal error. Otherwise the enduser wont get any error message. Pascal, and other too, what do you think of the verisign smtp implementation?: guiness:~# telnet akdjflasdf.com 25 Trying 64.94.110.11... Connected to

Re: [swinog] IP ROUTE 64.94.110.11 255.255.255.255 Null0

2003-09-18 Thread Nicolas Desir
Pascal Gloor wrote: very bad, and the error message should not be 550 (refering to nanog discussions). Are you planning to patch your resolvers? That's already done for one, (the djb one), i will take this opportunity to migrate from bind to djb for the second. Nicolas

Re: [swinog] Termelec network

2003-01-15 Thread Nicolas Desir
Pascal Gloor wrote: A part of the termelec network in geneva is down since over two hours. anyone got more informations about it? I have one small piece of information: - they are going to change a motherboard of some equipment at 19:00 We will see Nicolas

Re: [swinog] IP-Plus filter-policy

2002-06-03 Thread Nicolas Desir
Hi Andre, Andre Chapuis a écrit : Hi, Please note that in the next days/weeks, IP-Plus will begin filtering BGP prefixes longer that the minimal RIR allocations (called 'martian-prefixes') on all its peerings/upstream BGP sessions. So, If I understand most of the paragraphs at the end of