- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: FW: The worst abuse e-mail ever, sverige.net
by Mikael Abrahamsson 21 Sep '04

21 Sep '04

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote: > Unless your connection is permenent, with a permanent static ip, you > should not be *directly* sending out mail. The very nature of dynamic ips > implies that even if a single subscriber gets infected, you have no > guarantee YOU won't wind up with that ip next. As I said, this is DSL, which to me implies always on. Each DSLAM port only allows one IP address, this is set statically. The customer has a static IP address assigned to him/her, which never changes over time. No DHCP, nothing dynamic what so ever. If you want to make yourself unreachable to one of our customers you blacklist their IP which is always the same. Simple. Now, how do we make the world understand this? -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike(a)swm.pp.se

3 4

The worst abuse e-mail ever, sverige.net
by james edwards 21 Sep '04

21 Sep '04

This is the rudest, most arrogant abuse complaint I have seen. It is a frigging dial up user. james ----- Original Message ----- From: <RBL> To: <ruthe_herrera(a)wanadoo.fr> Cc: <postmaster(a)65.19.17.201>; <postmaster(a)sf-du401.cybermesa.com>; <postmaster(a)cybermesa.com>; <abuse(a)cybermesa.com> Sent: Sunday, September 19, 2004 12:32 PM Subject: Email is in RBL _ DENIED _ (by bl.spamcop.se from ruthe_herrera(a)wanadoo.fr reason Sending IP 65.19.17.201 support SPAM ) > You have sent a message that has been stopped! This > is because of your sending e-mailserver being listed in > an anti spam database. You should probably alert your > email administrator and/or your ISP and send this email > along to him. > > The only reason a serious ISP or email administers would > be on such a list is that he do not yet know about it being > listed. Otherwise he would already have fixed the wrongfully > configured server. Or he terminated the contract with the > offending customer that put him on that list. > > We have also tried to send this letter on the following > standardized addresses: > ======================= > postmaster(a)65.19.17.201 > postmaster(a)sf-du401.cybermesa.com > postmaster(a)cybermesa.com > abuse(a)cybermesa.com > ======================= > > But very often administrators that don't know how to > configure a secure mailserver, don't know that they have > to implement these system addresses either. > And we feel that you will probably get better results > if you call or send this your self. > > Most responses we get are about the spelling and > grammar from postmasters and administrators. They > are usually angry that we have made their customers > aware about their problems. This is kind of silly as the > Information given is easy to understand anyway, and > we could have sent the letter in correct Swedish instead. > > But as our purpose in sending this is neither to make it > unreadable nor to make it offensive to anyone. Our > purpose is to inform about systems being misused or miss > configured so that the administrators gets a fair chance to > fix their servers. > > So if you're an administrators please don't get angry > just fix your email servers and we will be happy to relay > your messages again. As a result your customers will be > happy and you will get less angry calls and letters making > you happy as well. > > The few administrators, postmasters and ISP's that just > don't give a damn, will probably be noticed by their > customers anyway. As these letters will keep arriving > although they are probably just a very small part of the > end users problems. > > Please send any comments to postmaster(a)sverige.net > > Date time = 2004-09-19 18:32:03 > Subject = Our promise: to save you money on your medication. CMHSO > Message-ID = <868612222822.u8KNRNC38686(a)pan.mail.tpnet.pl> > rcipient = a-0914(a)mailbox.sverige.net > rbl list = bl.spamcop.se > ErrorMessage = 542 Rejected - see http://spamcop.net/w3m?action=checkblock&ip=65.19.17.201 > Reason = Sending IP 65.19.17.201 support SPAM > Denied IP = 65.19.17.201 > > Message Source 10 lines > ======================= > Received: from [65.19.17.201] by mailbox.sverige.net (JPHS RBL mail from ruthe_herrera(a)wanadoo.fr) with SMTP id for a-0914(a)mailbox.sverige.net; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 20:31:59 +0200 > Received: from coalesce.mail.tpnet.pl by 62.13.25.2; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 19:30:58 -0200 > To: <joakim.andersson(a)sverige.net> > From: anthony roop <anthony.roop(a)tpnet.pl> > Reply-To: <roop_anthony(a)tpnet.pl> > Subject: Our promise: to save you money on your medication. CMHSO > Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 16:31:58 -0500 > Message-ID: <868612222822.u8KNRNC38686(a)pan.mail.tpnet.pl> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: multipart/mixed; > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > X-Priority: 3 > X-Mailer: PocoMail 2.61 (1055) - Licensed Version > X-jphspassrblrun: 1 > > =======================

3 5

RE: RE: RE: NYSE
by Temkin, David 21 Sep '04

21 Sep '04

You are correct. The rings are geographically diverse and separated (ie, they have separate rings for each metro and then tie the rings together in multiple places). No idea about the right-of-ways, but my understanding is that it wasn't necessarily meant to be a be-all-end-all for those sorts of outages. You are correct, however, it is one of the most reliable infrastructures we connect to. > -----Original Message----- > From: R. Benjamin Kessler [mailto:rbk@midwestnsg.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 12:39 PM > To: sgorman1(a)gmu.edu; 'Temkin, David' > Cc: 'Alen Capalik'; 'Philip Lavine'; 'nanog' > Subject: RE: RE: RE: NYSE > > My understanding is that the way the SFTI network is built > the loss of an entire ring between Site A and Site B wouldn't > cause an outage because Site B would also have a ring between > it and Site C and Site A would be connected to Site n. > > I can't speak to how the fibers were procured and whether or > not they're in their own rights-of-way (as another poster > suggested; I'd guess that they're using previously dark fiber > in existing bundles). > > Based-on the drawings I've seen (unfortunately, they don't > appear to be on SFTI's web site so they must be considered > proprietary) the multiple rings are separated in some places > by several hundred miles to prevent the single back hoe incident. > > Aside from the $$ and the joy of dealing with SIAC (they tend > to be a bit inflexible at times), the infrastructure has been > quite stable in the 18 months that my client has been using it. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On > Behalf Of sgorman1(a)gmu.edu > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 10:31 AM > To: Temkin, David > Cc: Alen Capalik; Philip Lavine; nanog > Subject: Re: RE: RE: NYSE > > > > So, that would be a another conduit sitting in the same right > of way, and this is supposed to make it "completely > independent". Last time I checked a backhoe treated all > conduits the same. Not trying to shoot the messanger jsut > trying to make a point. > > Points of entry is different than the number of pipes. The > biggest single problem in the security of these networks is > physical diversity, at least in my biased point of view. > There are six different sets of right of ways in Manhattan > and forty something fiber providers, but no one seems to fess > up when they are not offering redundancy but just another > pipe in the same conduit. Do the math and you see the > problem. It is not just a SFTI problem but a generic > problem. Just worrisome that it appears that SFTI does not > see it as a problem, or worse view at as a problem they have > solved by laying new pipe in the same conduits. > > The problem rears it head in several examples where > effeciency and cost savings trumps true diversity. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Temkin, David" <temkin(a)sig.com> > Date: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 11:11 am > Subject: RE: RE: NYSE > > > It's my understanding that > > A) The providers of the actual ring did install "Separate" > fiber for > > SFTI but I have no idea whether or not they're in new > rights of way - > > I'm willing to bet not > > > > B) Reducing the points of entry into the ring reduces > complexity and > > makes it much easier to recover the ring in the event of a disaster. > > Understanding that SIAC has thousands and thouands of customers > > connecting at the DS-3+ level to get data that's generated from one > > place means that you need to keep the distribution uniform. > > Basically,it boils down to them being able to say "Our ring > is up, if > > your connectivity to our ring is down it's your problem" in > order to > > maintainfairness between Trading firm A that has 10 people > and Trading > > firm B that has 10,000 people. > > > > When they were maintaining separate interfaces for each > customer they > > could potentially run into issues where they'd get certain larger > > firmsback able to trade sooner than smaller ones and then > you create > > unfair market disadvantages. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: sgorman1(a)gmu.edu [mailto:sgorman1@gmu.edu] > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 10:40 AM > > > To: Temkin, David > > > Cc: Alen Capalik; Philip Lavine; nanog > > > Subject: Re: RE: NYSE > > > > > > > > > There are a few things about the SFTI set up that are a > bit baffling > > > to me. From their website: > > > > > > SFTI carries IP traffic over a topology of redundant, > self-healing > > > fiber-optic rings, completely independent of all other telco > > > circuits and conduits. SFTI's design is straightforward, > > > consolidating traffic into fewer pipes, which minimizes > complexity > > > and reduces the number of potential points of failure. > > > > > > What does "completely independent of all other telco circuits and > > > conduits" mean? Did they get their very own "new" right > of ways dug > > > out. A certain government report listed their physical fiber > > > provider, and they certainly are not new right of ways. Further, > > > I'm a bit baffled how reducing the number of pipes reduces the > > > number of potential points of failure. > > > Usually fewer pipes means less diversity. A ring is nice till > > > someone hits it in two places. I also wonder how many of these > > > rings are collapsed in a single conduit. I hope someone > over there > > > is asking tough questions and are following up on getting > a second > > > physical fiber provider. > > > I'd recommend not advertising who it this time either. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Temkin, David" <temkin(a)sig.com> > > > Date: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 9:45 am > > > Subject: RE: NYSE > > > > > > > > > > > You can no longer order "direct" lines to SIAC unless you have > > an > > > > extremely compelling reason. Nowadays you must order a > > > line to "SFTI" > > > > which is their Disaster-Recovery-centric service. You are > > correct > > > > aboutthe connection method, but he will need to be specific > > and > > > > understandthat he wants to connect to SFTI and not just "SIAC" > > > > directly anymore. > > > > > > > > See: https://sfti.siac.com/sfti/index.jsp for more details. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu > > > [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf > > > > > Of Alen Capalik > > > > > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 10:20 PM > > > > > To: Philip Lavine > > > > > Cc: nanog > > > > > Subject: Re: NYSE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 10:36:16AM -0700, Philip Lavine wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > If I where to connect to SIAC thru a SONNET ring who's > > > > > would it be? Is > > > > > > it private or public? > > > > > > > > > > They use any provider (Verizon, MCI, AT&T and ConEd > > > Comm.), however > > > > > ConED Comm. is their primary backbone provider. So, > > > here's how you > > > > > go about it. You order a line (DS-1, DS-3, 100Mb/s, Gig, > > > whatever) > > > > > from any of the providers you use (if I were you I would > > > use either > > > > > Verizon or ConEd Comm, I can give you the number for ConEd > > Comm. > > > > > head sales person). You contact SIAC, and you start the > > > paperwork > > > > > to get your network connected into their backbone SONET. > > > Once you > > > > > get permit numbers, you have the provider drop a line > > > into one of 5 > > > > > data centers around NY area, and SIAC gives you a port on > > one of > > > > > their Juniper Routers. They also give you a VLAN setup > > > requirements > > > > > so you can configure your border switch/router. > > > > > The line is owned by you. SIAC only gives you a port on > > their > > > > > routers. NOTE: NEVER ORDER ONE LINE. > > > > > ORDER TWO OR MORE LINES TO DIFFERENT SIAC DATA CENTERS. The > > cost > > > > > for one port (one line) is as follows: > > > > > > > > > > MRC (Monthly Reaccuring Cost): > > > > > $4,400.00 > > > > > NRC (Non-Reaccuring Cost i.e. one time fee): $8,800 > > > > > > > > > > Any line you drop at SIAC will cost you that amount, and > > > that's on > > > > > top of the line costs from the provider. That's it. Hope > > this > > > > > helps. Like I said it's a very long and tedious process > > > getting the > > > > > line up and running with SIAC. > > > > > They are practically a government institution, and they > > > don't move > > > > > too fast for anybody. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- "R. Benjamin Kessler" <rbk(a)midwestnsg.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've setup a highly-redundant connection for one of my > > > > clients > > > > > > > (equipment in two different access-centers in two > > > > > different cities). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you looking to do? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Ben > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > > R. Benjamin Kessler > > > > > > > Sr. Network Consultant > > > > > > > CCIE #8762, CISSP, CCSE > > > > > > > Midwest Network Services Group > > > > > > > Email: rbk(a)midwestnsg.com > > > > > > > http://www.midwestnsg.com > > > > > > > Phone: 260-625-3273 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu > > > > > > > [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Philip Lavine > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 2:38 PM > > > > > > > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > > > > > > > Subject: NYSE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone have experience in setting up a direct > > > > > connection with > > > > > > > NYSE, specifically SIAC or SFTI? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > > > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > > > > > Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. > > > > > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > > > > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! > > > > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Alen Capalik > > > > > CTO > > > > > Wiretap Networks Inc. > > > > > > > > > > Tel: (310)497-3512 > > > > > Email: alen(a)wiretapnetworks.com > > > > > Website: http://www.wiretapnetworks.com > > > > > > > > > > /* > > > > > * Anything that is considered impossibility, > > > > > * will in fact occur with absolute certainty. > > > > > */ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its > > > > attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended > > recipient, > > > > please notify the sender immediately by reply and > > > immediately delete > > > > this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, > > > reproduction, > > > > disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment > > by an > > > > unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this > > > message nor > > > > any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an > > offer, > > > > solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or > > other > > > > financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her > > > employer nor any > > > > of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the > > > > completeness or accuracy of any of the information > > > contained herein or > > > > that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its > > attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, > > please notify the sender immediately by reply and > immediately delete > > this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, > reproduction, > > disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an > > unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this > message nor > > any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, > > solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other > > financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her > employer nor any > > of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the > > completeness or accuracy of any of the information > contained herein or > > that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses. > > > > > IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.

1 0

Re: SkyCache/Cidera replacement?
by David Lesher 21 Sep '04

21 Sep '04

[I'm informed my post violated the AUP. I submit a modified revision] Speaking on Deep Background, the Press Secretary whispered: > > > People still use usenet? ;) yes. > Seriously though, you'd have to be an awfully large organization for > outsourced news to not be a slam dunk financially. Perhaps, but Panix runs their own; one of the many reasons they get my money. {And <gosh durn> little of it compared to the benefits..} -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz(a)nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

1 0

Re: RE: RE: NYSE
by sgorman1＠gmu.edu 21 Sep '04

21 Sep '04

So, that would be a another conduit sitting in the same right of way, and this is supposed to make it "completely independent". Last time I checked a backhoe treated all conduits the same. Not trying to shoot the messanger jsut trying to make a point. Points of entry is different than the number of pipes. The biggest single problem in the security of these networks is physical diversity, at least in my biased point of view. There are six different sets of right of ways in Manhattan and forty something fiber providers, but no one seems to fess up when they are not offering redundancy but just another pipe in the same conduit. Do the math and you see the problem. It is not just a SFTI problem but a generic problem. Just worrisome that it appears that SFTI does not see it as a problem, or worse view at as a problem they have solved by laying new pipe in the same conduits. The problem rears it head in several examples where effeciency and cost savings trumps true diversity. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Temkin, David" <temkin(a)sig.com> Date: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 11:11 am Subject: RE: RE: NYSE > It's my understanding that > A) The providers of the actual ring did install "Separate" fiber for > SFTI but I have no idea whether or not they're in new rights of > way - > I'm willing to bet not > > B) Reducing the points of entry into the ring reduces complexity and > makes it much easier to recover the ring in the event of a disaster. > Understanding that SIAC has thousands and thouands of customers > connecting at the DS-3+ level to get data that's generated from one > place means that you need to keep the distribution uniform. > Basically,it boils down to them being able to say "Our ring is up, > if your > connectivity to our ring is down it's your problem" in order to > maintainfairness between Trading firm A that has 10 people and > Trading firm B > that has 10,000 people. > > When they were maintaining separate interfaces for each customer they > could potentially run into issues where they'd get certain larger > firmsback able to trade sooner than smaller ones and then you > create unfair > market disadvantages. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: sgorman1(a)gmu.edu [mailto:sgorman1@gmu.edu] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 10:40 AM > > To: Temkin, David > > Cc: Alen Capalik; Philip Lavine; nanog > > Subject: Re: RE: NYSE > > > > > > There are a few things about the SFTI set up that are a bit > > baffling to me. From their website: > > > > SFTI carries IP traffic over a topology of redundant, > > self-healing fiber-optic rings, completely independent of all > > other telco circuits and conduits. SFTI's design is > > straightforward, consolidating traffic into fewer pipes, > > which minimizes complexity and reduces the number of > > potential points of failure. > > > > What does "completely independent of all other telco circuits > > and conduits" mean? Did they get their very own "new" right > > of ways dug out. A certain government report listed their > > physical fiber provider, and they certainly are not new right > > of ways. Further, I'm a bit baffled how reducing the number > > of pipes reduces the number of potential points of failure. > > Usually fewer pipes means less diversity. A ring is nice > > till someone hits it in two places. I also wonder how many > > of these rings are collapsed in a single conduit. I hope > > someone over there is asking tough questions and are > > following up on getting a second physical fiber provider. > > I'd recommend not advertising who it this time either. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Temkin, David" <temkin(a)sig.com> > > Date: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 9:45 am > > Subject: RE: NYSE > > > > > > > > You can no longer order "direct" lines to SIAC unless you have > an > > > extremely compelling reason. Nowadays you must order a > > line to "SFTI" > > > which is their Disaster-Recovery-centric service. You are > correct > > > aboutthe connection method, but he will need to be specific > and > > > understandthat he wants to connect to SFTI and not just "SIAC" > > > directly anymore. > > > > > > See: https://sfti.siac.com/sfti/index.jsp for more details. > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu > > [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf > > > > Of Alen Capalik > > > > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 10:20 PM > > > > To: Philip Lavine > > > > Cc: nanog > > > > Subject: Re: NYSE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 10:36:16AM -0700, Philip Lavine wrote: > > > > > > > > > > If I where to connect to SIAC thru a SONNET ring who's > > > > would it be? Is > > > > > it private or public? > > > > > > > > They use any provider (Verizon, MCI, AT&T and ConEd > > Comm.), however > > > > ConED Comm. is their primary backbone provider. So, > > here's how you > > > > go about it. You order a line (DS-1, DS-3, 100Mb/s, Gig, > > whatever) > > > > from any of the providers you use (if I were you I would > > use either > > > > Verizon or ConEd Comm, I can give you the number for ConEd > Comm. > > > > head sales person). You contact SIAC, and you start the > > paperwork > > > > to get your network connected into their backbone SONET. > > Once you > > > > get permit numbers, you have the provider drop a line > > into one of 5 > > > > data centers around NY area, and SIAC gives you a port on > one of > > > > their Juniper Routers. They also give you a VLAN setup > > requirements > > > > so you can configure your border switch/router. > > > > The line is owned by you. SIAC only gives you a port on > their > > > > routers. NOTE: NEVER ORDER ONE LINE. > > > > ORDER TWO OR MORE LINES TO DIFFERENT SIAC DATA CENTERS. The > cost > > > > for one port (one line) is as follows: > > > > > > > > MRC (Monthly Reaccuring Cost): > > > > $4,400.00 > > > > NRC (Non-Reaccuring Cost i.e. one time fee): $8,800 > > > > > > > > Any line you drop at SIAC will cost you that amount, and > > that's on > > > > top of the line costs from the provider. That's it. Hope > this > > > > helps. Like I said it's a very long and tedious process > > getting the > > > > line up and running with SIAC. > > > > They are practically a government institution, and they > > don't move > > > > too fast for anybody. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- "R. Benjamin Kessler" <rbk(a)midwestnsg.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I've setup a highly-redundant connection for one of my > > > clients > > > > > > (equipment in two different access-centers in two > > > > different cities). > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you looking to do? > > > > > > > > > > > > - Ben > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > R. Benjamin Kessler > > > > > > Sr. Network Consultant > > > > > > CCIE #8762, CISSP, CCSE > > > > > > Midwest Network Services Group > > > > > > Email: rbk(a)midwestnsg.com > > > > > > http://www.midwestnsg.com > > > > > > Phone: 260-625-3273 > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu > > > > > > [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Philip Lavine > > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 2:38 PM > > > > > > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > > > > > > Subject: NYSE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone have experience in setting up a direct > > > > connection with > > > > > > NYSE, specifically SIAC or SFTI? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > > > > Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. > > > > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > > > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! > > > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Alen Capalik > > > > CTO > > > > Wiretap Networks Inc. > > > > > > > > Tel: (310)497-3512 > > > > Email: alen(a)wiretapnetworks.com > > > > Website: http://www.wiretapnetworks.com > > > > > > > > /* > > > > * Anything that is considered impossibility, > > > > * will in fact occur with absolute certainty. > > > > */ > > > > > > > > > > > > > IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its > > > attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended > recipient, > > > please notify the sender immediately by reply and > > immediately delete > > > this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, > > reproduction, > > > disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment > by an > > > unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this > > message nor > > > any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an > offer, > > > solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or > other > > > financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her > > employer nor any > > > of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the > > > completeness or accuracy of any of the information > > contained herein or > > > that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses. > > > > > > > > > IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its > attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended > recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and > immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any > review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this > message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly > prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended > as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or > recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial > instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of > their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the > completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained > herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of > viruses.

1 0

Log Analizing tool for Cisco and Juniper router (switch)
by Joe Shen 21 Sep '04

21 Sep '04

Hi, We want to analize log from Cisco and Juniper Router and switch periodically. We have set up a Solaris box to collect all those log generated by Juniper router ,Cisco Router , cisco L2/L3 switch. But, we found log file format diverse greatly even between Cisco products. Is there any good tool for this? Thanks Joe __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Log on to Messenger with your mobile phone! http://sg.messenger.yahoo.com

4 3

RE: RE: NYSE
by Temkin, David 21 Sep '04

21 Sep '04

It's my understanding that A) The providers of the actual ring did install "Separate" fiber for SFTI but I have no idea whether or not they're in new rights of way - I'm willing to bet not B) Reducing the points of entry into the ring reduces complexity and makes it much easier to recover the ring in the event of a disaster. Understanding that SIAC has thousands and thouands of customers connecting at the DS-3+ level to get data that's generated from one place means that you need to keep the distribution uniform. Basically, it boils down to them being able to say "Our ring is up, if your connectivity to our ring is down it's your problem" in order to maintain fairness between Trading firm A that has 10 people and Trading firm B that has 10,000 people. When they were maintaining separate interfaces for each customer they could potentially run into issues where they'd get certain larger firms back able to trade sooner than smaller ones and then you create unfair market disadvantages. > -----Original Message----- > From: sgorman1(a)gmu.edu [mailto:sgorman1@gmu.edu] > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 10:40 AM > To: Temkin, David > Cc: Alen Capalik; Philip Lavine; nanog > Subject: Re: RE: NYSE > > > There are a few things about the SFTI set up that are a bit > baffling to me. From their website: > > SFTI carries IP traffic over a topology of redundant, > self-healing fiber-optic rings, completely independent of all > other telco circuits and conduits. SFTI's design is > straightforward, consolidating traffic into fewer pipes, > which minimizes complexity and reduces the number of > potential points of failure. > > What does "completely independent of all other telco circuits > and conduits" mean? Did they get their very own "new" right > of ways dug out. A certain government report listed their > physical fiber provider, and they certainly are not new right > of ways. Further, I'm a bit baffled how reducing the number > of pipes reduces the number of potential points of failure. > Usually fewer pipes means less diversity. A ring is nice > till someone hits it in two places. I also wonder how many > of these rings are collapsed in a single conduit. I hope > someone over there is asking tough questions and are > following up on getting a second physical fiber provider. > I'd recommend not advertising who it this time either. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Temkin, David" <temkin(a)sig.com> > Date: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 9:45 am > Subject: RE: NYSE > > > > > You can no longer order "direct" lines to SIAC unless you have an > > extremely compelling reason. Nowadays you must order a > line to "SFTI" > > which is their Disaster-Recovery-centric service. You are correct > > aboutthe connection method, but he will need to be specific and > > understandthat he wants to connect to SFTI and not just "SIAC" > > directly anymore. > > > > See: https://sfti.siac.com/sfti/index.jsp for more details. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu > [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf > > > Of Alen Capalik > > > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 10:20 PM > > > To: Philip Lavine > > > Cc: nanog > > > Subject: Re: NYSE > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 10:36:16AM -0700, Philip Lavine wrote: > > > > > > > > If I where to connect to SIAC thru a SONNET ring who's > > > would it be? Is > > > > it private or public? > > > > > > They use any provider (Verizon, MCI, AT&T and ConEd > Comm.), however > > > ConED Comm. is their primary backbone provider. So, > here's how you > > > go about it. You order a line (DS-1, DS-3, 100Mb/s, Gig, > whatever) > > > from any of the providers you use (if I were you I would > use either > > > Verizon or ConEd Comm, I can give you the number for ConEd Comm. > > > head sales person). You contact SIAC, and you start the > paperwork > > > to get your network connected into their backbone SONET. > Once you > > > get permit numbers, you have the provider drop a line > into one of 5 > > > data centers around NY area, and SIAC gives you a port on one of > > > their Juniper Routers. They also give you a VLAN setup > requirements > > > so you can configure your border switch/router. > > > The line is owned by you. SIAC only gives you a port on their > > > routers. NOTE: NEVER ORDER ONE LINE. > > > ORDER TWO OR MORE LINES TO DIFFERENT SIAC DATA CENTERS. The cost > > > for one port (one line) is as follows: > > > > > > MRC (Monthly Reaccuring Cost): > > > $4,400.00 > > > NRC (Non-Reaccuring Cost i.e. one time fee): $8,800 > > > > > > Any line you drop at SIAC will cost you that amount, and > that's on > > > top of the line costs from the provider. That's it. Hope this > > > helps. Like I said it's a very long and tedious process > getting the > > > line up and running with SIAC. > > > They are practically a government institution, and they > don't move > > > too fast for anybody. > > > > > > > > > > > --- "R. Benjamin Kessler" <rbk(a)midwestnsg.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I've setup a highly-redundant connection for one of my > > clients > > > > > (equipment in two different access-centers in two > > > different cities). > > > > > > > > > > What are you looking to do? > > > > > > > > > > - Ben > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > R. Benjamin Kessler > > > > > Sr. Network Consultant > > > > > CCIE #8762, CISSP, CCSE > > > > > Midwest Network Services Group > > > > > Email: rbk(a)midwestnsg.com > > > > > http://www.midwestnsg.com > > > > > Phone: 260-625-3273 > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu > > > > > [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Philip Lavine > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 2:38 PM > > > > > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > > > > > Subject: NYSE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone have experience in setting up a direct > > > connection with > > > > > NYSE, specifically SIAC or SFTI? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > > > Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. > > > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! > > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > > > > > > -- > > > Alen Capalik > > > CTO > > > Wiretap Networks Inc. > > > > > > Tel: (310)497-3512 > > > Email: alen(a)wiretapnetworks.com > > > Website: http://www.wiretapnetworks.com > > > > > > /* > > > * Anything that is considered impossibility, > > > * will in fact occur with absolute certainty. > > > */ > > > > > > > > > IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its > > attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, > > please notify the sender immediately by reply and > immediately delete > > this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, > reproduction, > > disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an > > unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this > message nor > > any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, > > solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other > > financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her > employer nor any > > of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the > > completeness or accuracy of any of the information > contained herein or > > that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses. > > > IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.

1 0

Re: RE: NYSE
by sgorman1＠gmu.edu 21 Sep '04

21 Sep '04

There are a few things about the SFTI set up that are a bit baffling to me. From their website: SFTI carries IP traffic over a topology of redundant, self-healing fiber-optic rings, completely independent of all other telco circuits and conduits. SFTI's design is straightforward, consolidating traffic into fewer pipes, which minimizes complexity and reduces the number of potential points of failure. What does "completely independent of all other telco circuits and conduits" mean? Did they get their very own "new" right of ways dug out. A certain government report listed their physical fiber provider, and they certainly are not new right of ways. Further, I'm a bit baffled how reducing the number of pipes reduces the number of potential points of failure. Usually fewer pipes means less diversity. A ring is nice till someone hits it in two places. I also wonder how many of these rings are collapsed in a single conduit. I hope someone over there is asking tough questions and are following up on getting a second physical fiber provider. I'd recommend not advertising who it this time either. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Temkin, David" <temkin(a)sig.com> Date: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 9:45 am Subject: RE: NYSE > > You can no longer order "direct" lines to SIAC unless you have an > extremely compelling reason. Nowadays you must order a line to "SFTI" > which is their Disaster-Recovery-centric service. You are correct > aboutthe connection method, but he will need to be specific and > understandthat he wants to connect to SFTI and not just "SIAC" > directly anymore. > > See: https://sfti.siac.com/sfti/index.jsp for more details. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On > > Behalf Of Alen Capalik > > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 10:20 PM > > To: Philip Lavine > > Cc: nanog > > Subject: Re: NYSE > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 10:36:16AM -0700, Philip Lavine wrote: > > > > > > If I where to connect to SIAC thru a SONNET ring who's > > would it be? Is > > > it private or public? > > > > They use any provider (Verizon, MCI, AT&T and ConEd Comm.), > > however ConED Comm. is their primary backbone provider. So, > > here's how you go about it. You order a line (DS-1, DS-3, > > 100Mb/s, Gig, whatever) from any of the providers you use (if > > I were you I would use either Verizon or ConEd Comm, I can > > give you the number for ConEd Comm. head sales person). You > > contact SIAC, and you start the paperwork to get your network > > connected into their backbone SONET. Once you get permit > > numbers, you have the provider drop a line into one of 5 data > > centers around NY area, and SIAC gives you a port on one of > > their Juniper Routers. They also give you a VLAN setup > > requirements so you can configure your border switch/router. > > The line is owned by you. SIAC only gives you a port on > > their routers. NOTE: NEVER ORDER ONE LINE. > > ORDER TWO OR MORE LINES TO DIFFERENT SIAC DATA CENTERS. The > > cost for one port (one line) is as follows: > > > > MRC (Monthly Reaccuring Cost): > > $4,400.00 > > NRC (Non-Reaccuring Cost i.e. one time fee): $8,800 > > > > Any line you drop at SIAC will cost you that amount, and > > that's on top of the line costs from the provider. That's > > it. Hope this helps. Like I said it's a very long and > > tedious process getting the line up and running with SIAC. > > They are practically a government institution, and they don't > > move too fast for anybody. > > > > > > > > --- "R. Benjamin Kessler" <rbk(a)midwestnsg.com> wrote: > > > > > > > I've setup a highly-redundant connection for one of my > clients > > > > (equipment in two different access-centers in two > > different cities). > > > > > > > > What are you looking to do? > > > > > > > > - Ben > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > R. Benjamin Kessler > > > > Sr. Network Consultant > > > > CCIE #8762, CISSP, CCSE > > > > Midwest Network Services Group > > > > Email: rbk(a)midwestnsg.com > > > > http://www.midwestnsg.com > > > > Phone: 260-625-3273 > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu > > > > [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Philip Lavine > > > > Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 2:38 PM > > > > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > > > > Subject: NYSE > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone have experience in setting up a direct > > connection with > > > > NYSE, specifically SIAC or SFTI? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > > Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. > > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > > > > -- > > Alen Capalik > > CTO > > Wiretap Networks Inc. > > > > Tel: (310)497-3512 > > Email: alen(a)wiretapnetworks.com > > Website: http://www.wiretapnetworks.com > > > > /* > > * Anything that is considered impossibility, > > * will in fact occur with absolute certainty. > > */ > > > > > IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its > attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended > recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and > immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any > review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this > message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly > prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended > as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or > recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial > instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of > their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the > completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained > herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of > viruses.

1 0

RE: NYSE
by Temkin, David 21 Sep '04

21 Sep '04

You can no longer order "direct" lines to SIAC unless you have an extremely compelling reason. Nowadays you must order a line to "SFTI" which is their Disaster-Recovery-centric service. You are correct about the connection method, but he will need to be specific and understand that he wants to connect to SFTI and not just "SIAC" directly anymore. See: https://sfti.siac.com/sfti/index.jsp for more details. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On > Behalf Of Alen Capalik > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 10:20 PM > To: Philip Lavine > Cc: nanog > Subject: Re: NYSE > > > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 10:36:16AM -0700, Philip Lavine wrote: > > > > If I where to connect to SIAC thru a SONNET ring who's > would it be? Is > > it private or public? > > They use any provider (Verizon, MCI, AT&T and ConEd Comm.), > however ConED Comm. is their primary backbone provider. So, > here's how you go about it. You order a line (DS-1, DS-3, > 100Mb/s, Gig, whatever) from any of the providers you use (if > I were you I would use either Verizon or ConEd Comm, I can > give you the number for ConEd Comm. head sales person). You > contact SIAC, and you start the paperwork to get your network > connected into their backbone SONET. Once you get permit > numbers, you have the provider drop a line into one of 5 data > centers around NY area, and SIAC gives you a port on one of > their Juniper Routers. They also give you a VLAN setup > requirements so you can configure your border switch/router. > The line is owned by you. SIAC only gives you a port on > their routers. NOTE: NEVER ORDER ONE LINE. > ORDER TWO OR MORE LINES TO DIFFERENT SIAC DATA CENTERS. The > cost for one port (one line) is as follows: > > MRC (Monthly Reaccuring Cost): > $4,400.00 > NRC (Non-Reaccuring Cost i.e. one time fee): $8,800 > > Any line you drop at SIAC will cost you that amount, and > that's on top of the line costs from the provider. That's > it. Hope this helps. Like I said it's a very long and > tedious process getting the line up and running with SIAC. > They are practically a government institution, and they don't > move too fast for anybody. > > > > > --- "R. Benjamin Kessler" <rbk(a)midwestnsg.com> wrote: > > > > > I've setup a highly-redundant connection for one of my clients > > > (equipment in two different access-centers in two > different cities). > > > > > > What are you looking to do? > > > > > > - Ben > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~ > > > R. Benjamin Kessler > > > Sr. Network Consultant > > > CCIE #8762, CISSP, CCSE > > > Midwest Network Services Group > > > Email: rbk(a)midwestnsg.com > > > http://www.midwestnsg.com > > > Phone: 260-625-3273 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu > > > [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Philip Lavine > > > Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 2:38 PM > > > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > > > Subject: NYSE > > > > > > > > > Does anyone have experience in setting up a direct > connection with > > > NYSE, specifically SIAC or SFTI? > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > > -- > Alen Capalik > CTO > Wiretap Networks Inc. > > Tel: (310)497-3512 > Email: alen(a)wiretapnetworks.com > Website: http://www.wiretapnetworks.com > > /* > * Anything that is considered impossibility, > * will in fact occur with absolute certainty. > */ > IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.

1 0

SkyCache/Cidera replacement?
by Rick Chavez 21 Sep '04

21 Sep '04

Does anyone know of one? Hell, has anyone even considered starting one? For that matter, would anyone be interested or willing to pay for their services if someone did or is bandwidth so cheap that it's just not needed anymore? ...rdc

12 13