- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

R Scott Perry (HopOne/Superb.net collateral damage)
by Simon Waters 19 Feb '07

19 Feb '07

Anyone have an email for him, could they drop it to me off list. He seems to have stuff hosted with that the den of spammers at HopOne Internet. On the upside it seems there is at least one genuine service amongst the address space we blocked at HopOne. But that is 1 address out of 32 class Cs we blocked. They seem to have a virulent PayPal Phish sender at 66.36.228.37 as well this week. Ho Hum Simon

1 0

remove
by Tushar Patel 19 Feb '07

19 Feb '07

2 1

Measurement data on transit traffic in IP routers?
by Chris Develder 18 Feb '07

18 Feb '07

Hi All, In preparation of a course, I'm looking for reference material (paper, report, talk...) giving real world data on the amount of transit traffic (ie. not locally dropped or added, but passing through to other (backbone) routers) in a "typical" edge router of a core network, esp. ratio of local vs passthrough traffic (is it 30%, 40%...?) -- I don't need absolute figures, just realistic estimates of that ratio. Any help in locating such references would be highly appreciated. Kind regards, Chris -- Chris Develder, PhD Ghent University - IBBT, Dept. of Information Technology (INTEC), IBCN Gaston Crommenlaan 8, bus 201 BE-9050 Gent, Belgium T: +32 9 3314961 (secr: +32 9 3314900) F: +32 9 3314899 E: chris.develder(a)intec.ugent.be

3 2

RE: botnets: web servers, end-systems and Vint Cerf
by michael.dillon＠bt.com 18 Feb '07

18 Feb '07

> >Therefore, I assert that securing systems adequately for use on the > >Internet is indeed a SOLVED PROBLEM in computing. > > A HUNDRED MILLION machines beg to differ. You misunderstand. The problem of securing machines *IS* solved. It is possible. It is regularly done with servers connected to the Internet. There is no *COMPUTING* problem or technical problem. The problem of the 100 million machines is a social or business problem. We know how they can be secured, but the solution is not being implemented. --Michael Dillon

8 7

Do routers prioritize control traffic?
by Christos Papadopoulos 18 Feb '07

18 Feb '07

I know routers today have the ability to prioritize traffic, but last I heard, these controls are not often used for user traffic (let's not discuss net neutrality here). Are they used for control (e.g., routing) traffic? Please say a bit more than "It depends!" :-) Our students are interested in real-world practices. Answers on or off list are welcome. Christos Papadopoulos Colorado State University.

3 2

Re: botnets: web servers, end-systems and Vint Cerf
by J. Oquendo 18 Feb '07

18 Feb '07

michael.dillon(a)bt.com wrote: > > You misunderstand. The problem of securing machines *IS* solved. It is > possible. It is regularly done with servers connected to the Internet. > There is no *COMPUTING* problem or technical problem. > The problem of the 100 million machines is a social or business problem. > We know how they can be secured, but the solution is not being > implemented. > > --Michael Dillon > After all these years, I'm still surprised a consortium of ISP's haven't figured out a way to do something a-la Packet Fence for their clients where - whenever an infected machine is detected after logging in, that machine is thrown into say a VLAN with instructions on how to clean their machines before they're allowed to go further and stay online. If you ask me, traffic providers (NSP's/NAP's) and ISP's don't mind this garbage coming out of their networks, if they did they'd actually ban together and do something about it. Its obvious those charging for traffic will say little. Minimized traffic means minimized revenue. All I see is "No we despise that kind of traffic" along with a shrug and nothing being done about it. I'm sure if some legislative body somewhere started levying fines against providers, the net would be a cleaner place. For comments on 100 million infected machines... Doubtable. Anyone can play fuzzy math games, heck I just strangely figured out that MS is costing me an arm and a leg! http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg04755.html -- ==================================================== J. Oquendo http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1383A743 sil . infiltrated @ net http://www.infiltrated.net The happiness of society is the end of government. John Adams

7 15

RPSL question
by Andreas Voellmy 18 Feb '07

18 Feb '07

Hi, I'm trying to learn about BGP and just ran across RPSL. I've seen www.radb.net and know that lots of people are registering their policies here. Are organizations also using these RPSL policies to compile configuration files for their routers (via RtConfig)? Or do they just maintain their RPSL policies and router configurations separately? Thanks, Andreas

3 2

Re: botnets: web servers, end-systems and Vint Cerf
by Fergie 18 Feb '07

18 Feb '07

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hey, Danny: - -- Danny McPherson <danny(a)tcb.net> wrote: >While I understand your frustration, lest we not forget, providers are in >the business of making money, and solutions of this type today only add >to churn, additional operational expense and liability. It's not quite so >black and white as you make it, unfortunately. Unfortunately, if ISPs don't do _something_ to "clean up their own backyards", I hate to think of what the alternative may be. >With that, as Sean points out, providers are trying to address the issues >in an business-savvy manner and some do seem to have reasonable (IMO) >solutions underway. But be careful what you ask for, some of these >solutions you're mandating might very well resemble SiteFinder-style >schema's (or far worse) in order to justify the investment by the >providers. Indeed. It's a hairy problem, but an important one that needs to be addressed. - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.3 (Build 5003) wj8DBQFF16eOq1pz9mNUZTMRAhNYAKCSmQieIM8K44H4AnRWcWbXVwax8wCglsF6 BMb6JC95v5IrtIH2x+MYMw0= =T5dQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

1 0

RE: Do routers prioritize control traffic?
by michael.dillon＠bt.com 18 Feb '07

18 Feb '07

> I know routers today have the ability to prioritize > traffic, but last I heard, these controls are not > often used for user traffic (let's not discuss > net neutrality here). > > Are they used for control (e.g., routing) traffic? They are used for BUSINESS traffic. Also, since these controls make routers work harder, there is no point in using them where there are no traffic problems. Most providers build their core networks with enough headroom so that there are no traffic problems. That leaves the last mile connection to tinker with, however, the cost problem remains. The only way to solve the cost problem is where a business customer will pay for traffic controls to be implemented on the provider's edge routers. Bottom line is that use of QOS is very common on CPE routers and edge routers of business customers and this is usually part of a total managed network package such as a VPN or Extranet. I have seen QOS implemented for control traffic but that was a scenario where the company allowed business customers access to a tool which would ping through to the CPE router. In order to prevent the customer from DOSing themself with pings, they capped the traffic with CAR or similar. It can be a bad idea to apply QOS to control traffic since it is generally easier and cheaper to add bandwidth. Just because the machine has lots of bright buttons and knobs on the control panel doesn't mean that it is a good idea to play with them all. And the fundamental problem of QOS means that you only use it where you have to. QOS works by delaying or discarding packets. It is hard to sell that as a valuable service to ordinary users. --Michael Dillon

2 1

tracking fiber assets
by Frank Coluccio 17 Feb '07

17 Feb '07

Daniel, Ordinarily, I might suggest a straightforward software-based cable management system. However, since your list of concerns also includes active elements and their wavelength and probably sub- lambda derivatives, you'll probably want something that's rule-based with a bit more smarts. Give a look at the "One Plan" system from VPIsystems Inc (Holmdel, NJ). It was written up recently in Lightwave Magazine: http://tinyurl.com/25q88n One Plan has a photonic-layer inventory and configuration module that will very likely satisfy your needs at the cable, strand and multimplexed levels, and then some. Whether or not it is available as a standalone module, however, I can't rightly say. Good Luck. Frank A. Coluccio DTI Consulting Inc. New York City 347-526-6788 fcoluccio(a)dticonsulting.com ------- On Thu Feb 15 18:52 , Daniel J McDonald sent: > >What do people use to keep track of fiber-optic assets? We own fiber on >electric transmission lines - a hundred spans or so, mostly 24-48 count, >about 800-900 total route-miles. But we lack a tool to keep track of >what is in use, which customers would be affected when we perform >maintenance, and the like. > >Any suggestions for good tools to manage this would be most appreciated. >Our spreadsheets, CAD drawings, and directories full of OTDR shots are >just not cutting it. > > >-- >Daniel J McDonald, CCIE # 2495, CISSP # 78281, CNX >Austin Energy >http://www.austinenergy.com

1 0