- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

fwd: contact for the world etc (nanog)
by Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine 14 Dec '04

14 Dec '04

Oki all, FYI Eric ------- Forwarded Message Return-Path: bzs(a)world.std.com Delivery-Date: Tue Dec 14 15:07:09 2004 Return-Path: <bzs(a)world.std.com> Received: from TheWorld.com (pcls3.std.com [192.74.137.143]) by nic-naa.net (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iBEF78Cm009901 for <brunner(a)nic-naa.net>; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:07:08 GMT (envelope-from bzs(a)world.std.com) Received: from world.std.com (root(a)world-e.std.com [69.38.147.5]) by TheWorld.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id iBEJ4rW5012319; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:04:53 -0500 Received: (from bzs@localhost) by world.std.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.8) id iBEJ4qV1016516; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:04:52 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:04:52 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200412141904.iBEJ4qV1016516(a)world.std.com> From: Barry Shein <bzs(a)world.std.com> To: hannigan(a)theworld.com, brunner(a)nic-naa.net Subject: contact for the world etc (nanog) As far as I can tell I'm permanently blocked from nanog for no reason I understand or care much about. Oh well, if someone there wants info I have I guess they can pay my consulting rates. The text the guy cites isn't from our staff, we don't even have an auto-ack system. Maybe it's from some customer or maybe entirely forged, he doesn't include any headers and seems to just want to vent. Anyhow, that's all the time I plan to spend on this one, too bad nanog has become so useless. Feel free to forward. - -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs(a)TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD The World | Public Access Internet | Since 1989 *oo* ------- End of Forwarded Message

2 1

Server Room Environment
by Erik Sundberg 14 Dec '04

14 Dec '04

I have a couple of quick questions about environmental settings for server rooms. What is the ideal temperature and humidity for a server room? What is too cold for a server room? What should the humidity range be? Thanks Erik

4 3

Contact for "The World"
by David A. Ulevitch 14 Dec '04

14 Dec '04

Does anyone have a contact @ The World? They are not listed in Jared's NOC list nor do postmaster@ or mailer-daemon@ seem to have a human behind the wheel. As an aside, they send one of the most annoying spam-receipt-auto-ack's I've ever seen and the fact that you can't even reply to it is even more annoying. (sent from mailer-daemon) ISPs like them make the necessary evil of running an active abuse-desk all the more frustrating. Thanks, davidu ---------------------------------------------------- David A. Ulevitch - Founder, EveryDNS.Net http://david.ulevitch.com -- http://everydns.net ----------------------------------------------------

3 4

RE: CBX-500 question, FRF.8
by Richmond, Jeff (ELI) 14 Dec '04

14 Dec '04

CBX-500 should do what you want. We have a number of Interworking VCs using the same cards as you listed, and it works fine. For the Translation type in the PVC setup, your options are: 1483 <=> 1490 None Hth, -Jeff -----Original Message----- From: james [mailto:hackerwacker@tarpit.cybermesa.com] Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 10:36 PM To: Nanog@Merit. Edu Subject: CBX-500 question, FRF.8 I am working on a solution that will require my CBX-500 to do transparent mode and not translation mode. I've grepped the docs I have and looked on the web and can't find reference to which mode the CBX uses. This cross connect would be between the FR 3/1 card to the ATM DS3 card. Does anyone know which mode the CBX uses ? -- James H. Edwards Routing and Security Administrator At the Santa Fe Office: Internet at Cyber Mesa jamesh(a)cybermesa.com noc(a)cybermesa.com (505) 795-7101

1 0

[Fwd: zone transfers, a spammer's dream?]
by Gadi Evron 14 Dec '04

14 Dec '04

8 9

Re: The Cidr Report
by Joe Provo 14 Dec '04

14 Dec '04

[This was started last month. been a little busy. unsuprisingly I only had to *add* an incident and it still works.] On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 02:47:30PM -0800, Randy Bush wrote: [snip] Yes it means what you think. No, I don't see anyone giving a rat's patootie about aggregation. I was starting to think I was the only one still reading the reports. Had a half-written rant each time interesting events happened, just been too busy. In recent months: - on the 4th->5th of November, the (reported) table bloated by ~9k pfefixes overnight. not an eyebrow raised. - when the table bloated over 140k, just this last July, the report was hosed at the end of a cycle obviously hit its own MAXINT. Not a comment from regular report readers, nor even a mocking Nelson "Ha-Haw" post by those taking the actions. - this month, another knee was at 150k [Dec 4th] and similarly garbled results came out. Again, no response. ...in this one year we've seen the shape of the climb return to the curve characterized by two years 99-01. Going for e? I'm not quite sure what the current point of the report is if no-one responds to even it breaking. I never saw a single post following up to to the actual purpose and policy issues from October's "aggregation & table entries" thread. Other than the specifics of multihomed customers and RPF issues, my point about segregation of internal and externaal policies and the reflection in the "announce used" vs "announce allocated" was neither agreed, refuted, nor even commented further. I have seen deaggregators claim 'security' [shred the routing table in response to windows worms scanning their classical-B], or assume that if Some Other Company can base their entire business plan on moving the costs of 'optimized' deaggregation onto the global community (beyond their providers), then why can't they. When I'm feeling conspiracy-minded, it seems that those of a certain size are trying to squeeze the smaller folks out of the business by encouraging the behavior of bloat. But then I correct the angle of my tinfoil beanie and realize they are just lazy. Their laziness does directly cost any newly-multihoming enterprises; some of the networks who are contributing to the garbage still tell customers that full tables will fit into 128M on a cisco. (eg, http://www.sprintlink.net/support/bgp_request.html) It is disappointing and frankly I can't see a way past it. When 2914 finally slid down to the lowest common denominator, the last 'big stick' was gone. 1239 is unapologetically violating their own customer bgp policies in this regard (point 9 on http://www.sprintlink.net/policy/bgp.html) The list goes on and on. Otherwise reasonable people have refuted logic and claim adding more data into the system doesn't increase churn effect and thereby degrade stability. Control theory and structured programming be damned, they say "it hasn't melted yet." Perhaps they want to see if they can make Metcalfe's predict come true, just 10 years too early? The baseline expectation is that the DFZ carries rechability data. Any more-specific data of interest is exchanged between parties who want it, request it, or pay for it. "Being conservative in what you send" also applies to anticipating *others* not being liberal in what they receive. There's a whole lot of non-conservative senders out there, and when they have reachability problems of their own making, with simple and trivial fixes if they had only thought things through in the first place, they have no-one but themselves to blame. Those believing otherwise are encouraged to send real, hard data. There is no meaningful data I can find since the Bellovin/Bush/ Griffin/Rexford 2001 paper. Joe -- RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE

3 5

ICANN moves to add .mobi & .jobs
by Fergie (Paul Ferguson) 14 Dec '04

14 Dec '04

http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-13dec04.htm - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net

1 0

Re: Contact for "The World"
by Hannigan, Martin 14 Dec '04

14 Dec '04

ISP's aren't required to register in Puck's database. How about trying abuse@ ? -M --- Martin Hannigan hannigan(a)verisign.com Verisign, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu <owner-nanog(a)merit.edu> To: nanog(a)merit.edu <nanog(a)merit.edu> Sent: Mon Dec 13 22:51:56 2004 Subject: Contact for "The World" Does anyone have a contact @ The World? They are not listed in Jared's NOC list nor do postmaster@ or mailer-daemon@ seem to have a human behind the wheel. As an aside, they send one of the most annoying spam-receipt-auto-ack's I've ever seen and the fact that you can't even reply to it is even more annoying. (sent from mailer-daemon) ISPs like them make the necessary evil of running an active abuse-desk all the more frustrating. Thanks, davidu ---------------------------------------------------- David A. Ulevitch - Founder, EveryDNS.Net http://david.ulevitch.com -- http://everydns.net ----------------------------------------------------

1 0

RE: [Fwd: zone transfers, a spammer's dream?]
by Matt Ryan 14 Dec '04

14 Dec '04

www.bl.uk? Matt. -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Stephane Bortzmeyer Sent: 14 December 2004 09:52 To: Gadi Evron Cc: nanog list Subject: Re: [Fwd: zone transfers, a spammer's dream?] On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 03:52:38AM +0200, Gadi Evron <ge(a)linuxbox.org> wrote a message of 174 lines which said: > 171 uk.zone Everything is in subdomains like co.uk, so there is no point in blocking zone transfers for the TLD. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Life in Broadband www.telewest.co.uk The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Statements and opinions expressed in this e-mail may not represent those of the company. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete the material from any computer. ==============================================================================

2 1

"User Unknown" errors related to DNS issues?
by Jim Popovitch 14 Dec '04

14 Dec '04

Hi all, I see a periodic problem with some email servers that report "User Unknown" for valid users. The most recognizable problematic host is hotmail.com, but there usually are others mixed in (today's additional problematic hosts included msn.com, verizon.net, and incentre.net) Here is one of the errors: Dec 13 11:20:55 mail sm-msp-queue[5360]: iBDGFPc0004630: to=<frank-****(a)msn.com>, delay=00:05:30, xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=esmtp, pri=470333, relay=mx1.hotmail.com. [64.4.50.99], dsn=5.7.1, stat=User unknown I found this post on Neohapsis that suggests the problem is DNS/firewall related: http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2004-03/1774.html What I can't understand is why this would be periodic and what, if anything, I can do to validate the authenticity of the errors? Do others see this same issue? -Jim P.

3 3