- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

DMVPN via Internet or Private APN
by Sean Kelly 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

Hello Nanog's I offer a question to help me settle an internal debate. As a network engineer for a large enterprise, do you choose ISP flexibility or ISP security when you build an OOB network? I was tasked to create an OOB network for my company. Realistically it would only be deployed to 25% of the companies sites as they are considered important enough to justify the cost. The design is simple enough. Hub and spoke using cellular routers. DMVPN will carry data from the spoke to the hub. The real debate arrives when it's time to choose a carrier to host the router. I choose to go with a major cell carrier using a "private" APN. It allows me to connect my cell routers to a private layer 2 network and my private IP addresses will be used to provide layer 3 connectivity. I know that there will be outliers that can't use this carrier or cellular at all. These outliers, in my opinion, shouldn't have a majority stake in the overall design. The APN overall cost is low and so is the data plan for the hosted routers. The private APN also eliminates the router as an internet attack vector. I don't believe routers are appropriate security appliances to defend and monitor against network threats. Some of my colleagues believe that the flexibility of public cellular access outweighs the security risks. The cellular internet will provide us with a solution for more of the outliers than a private APN. I don't agree with this philosophy even though it's not "technically" wrong. I am interested in a broader range of opinion and technical reasoning. Nanog member KELLYSP

5 4

RE: Parler
by Keith Medcalf 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

That would make me wonder how many cases there have been of someone "shouting fire in a crowded theatre" where there was no fire and at least one person died as a result; and the charge laid against the shouter was "reckless disregard for human life resulting in culpable homocide" and the elements of that offence being proved, was dismissed on the basis that the "speech" was protected by the first amendment? -- Be decisive. Make a decision, right or wrong. The road of life is paved with flat squirrels who could not make a decision. >-----Original Message----- >From: Rod Beck <rod.beck(a)unitedcablecompany.com> >Sent: Monday, 11 January, 2021 05:13 >To: Keith Medcalf <kmedcalf(a)dessus.com> >Subject: Re: Parler > >Hi, > > >Your distinction sounds specious. The Courts have consistently that the >1st amendment protects free speech from government retaliation in many >instances. It is not just prior restraint. > > >Best, > > >Roderick. > > >________________________________ > >From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+rod.beck=unitedcablecompany.com(a)nanog.org> on >behalf of Keith Medcalf <kmedcalf(a)dessus.com> >Sent: Monday, January 11, 2021 3:11 AM >To: nanog(a)nanog.org <nanog(a)nanog.org> >Subject: RE: Parler > >>The first amendment deals with the government passing laws restricting >>freedom of speech. It has nothing to do with to whom AWS chooses to sell >>their services. It is also not absolute (fire, crowded theater, etc.) > >You are correct and incorrect. The First Amendment prohibits the >Government from passing laws which constitute "prior restraint". It does >nothing with respect to anyone other then the "Government" and its >agents. > >You are also incorrect. Freedom of Speech is Absolute. There is no >prior restraint which precludes you from "(fire, crowded theatre, etc.)" >whatever that means. That does not mean that speech does not have >"consequences". The first amendment only protects against prior >restraint, it does not protect against the suffering of consequences. >And of course "consequences" come AFTER the speech, not BEFORE the >speech. > >Furthermore your "(fire, crowded theater, etc.)" (whatever the hell that >means) cannot, as a matter of fact, possibly justify any action taken >prior to the so-called speech having been made as that would be an >assumption of fact not in evidence (also known as a hypothetical >question) and the courts do not rule on hypotheticals. If you do not >understand the difference then perhaps you should be sentenced to death >since you have a hand, and having a hand it could hold a gun, and since >it could hold a gun, you could also murder someone. So therefore you >should be put to death now as "prior restraint" to prevent you from >committing murder. > >I am neither a lawyer nor a yankee doodle and I know these facts to be >self-evident. > >-- >Be decisive. Make a decision, right or wrong. The road of life is paved >with flat squirrels who could not make a decision. > > >

10 10

Register now for our DNS Fundamentals Webinar 👉 Jan 22, via NANOG U
by NANOG News 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

NANOG U Webinars provide students across North America a way to virtually connect and engage with industry innovators, while learning the latest Internet technologies + best practices, and accessing career-building tools + resources. Our next Webinar will take place on Friday, January 22! *DNS Fundamentals * *Date + Time: * Jan 22, 11am - 1pm PST / 2pm - 4pm EST *Speaker:* Eddy Winstead, Internet Systems Consortium (ISC) *Agenda:* DNS is a distributed database which maps domain names to IP addresses. Join us for an overview of how DNS works, and how to leverage the system to support your Internet related communications. *Registration: * NANOG U Webinars are free to attend, but registration is required to participate. All sessions are conducted at nanog.org. To register for the webinar, you'll first need to sign up for a NANOG account. It's free, simple, and takes less than a minute. Register Now <https://www.nanog.org/meetings/webinar-dns-fundamentals/> Watch Past Webinars <https://nanog.org/news-stories/nanog-tv/nanog-u/>

1 0

Just a heads up, apparently Ubiquiti had a breach.
by eric-list＠truenet.com 11 Jan '21

11 Jan '21

Official statement: https://mailchi.mp/ubnt/account-notification?e=30527b2904 Sincerely, Eric Tykwinski TrueNet, Inc. P: 610-429-8300

2 1

Amazon peering
by JASON BOTHE 11 Jan '21

11 Jan '21

Hi all Just curious if anyone has recently requested Amazon peering and if they’ve gotten a timely response. I know historically it was months and months but I thought I had read where they had turned over a new leaf and were responding promptly. I have a pending request but it was done over the holidays so hoping it’s just in a small backlog :-) Thanks J~

2 2

Re: more bad lawyering about Parler
by William Herrin 11 Jan '21

11 Jan '21

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 2:19 AM Danny O'Brien <danny(a)spesh.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 8:54 PM William Herrin <bill(a)herrin.us> wrote: >> there have been some real post-CDA head scratchers where >> a court decided that an online service exercised sufficient control of >> the content to have made itself a publisher. > > You really need to give citations here, because IMHO not only is this *exactly* the scenario that Section 230 was intended to provide legal clarity regarding (and so protect service providers from this kind of moderation double-bind), but as I understand it pretty much all the subsequent caselaw has *strengthened* the ability for providers to moderate and manage content, including user-generated content, without triggering liability. Well, for example, Oberdorf v. Amazon.com, No. 18-1041 (3rd Cir. July 3, 2019) which found that Amazon was a seller of goods and not merely hosting information about a third party's sale, and thus subject to product liability law for the product that was sold. But in the Erie Insurance case, with similar circumstances, the court found the opposite, that section 230 barred the plaintiff from suing Amazon over a defective third-party product. Regards, Bill Herrin -- Hire me! https://bill.herrin.us/resume/

3 3

Re: Parler
by hank＠interall.co.il 11 Jan '21

11 Jan '21

Toma, I would assume Google and Azure would act the same to Parler. So what will end up happening is that US based fringe content will end up being hosted in China or Russia, and Chinese and Russian fringe content will end up being hosted in the USA. -Hank Caveat: The views expressed above are solely my own and do not express the views or opinions of my employer ------------------ In my experience, moving off Amazon services isn't that much of a trouble, especially if compared to moving off Azure. Cloud Active Directory + Sentinel + PowerBI ? and boom, your company is with Azure for life. -- Töma

2 1

RE: Parler
by Keith Medcalf 10 Jan '21

10 Jan '21

That is an exercise for the reader. Unfortunately I do not have the answer sheet for the exercizes to hand yet. -- Be decisive. Make a decision, right or wrong. The road of life is paved with flat squirrels who could not make a decision. >-----Original Message----- >From: James Laszko <jamesl(a)mythostech.com> >Sent: Sunday, 10 January, 2021 15:07 >To: Keith Medcalf <kmedcalf(a)dessus.com> >Subject: RE: Parler > >Which ones are the Nazi’s? > > > > > >James > > > >From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+jamesl=mythostech.com(a)nanog.org> On Behalf Of >Keith Medcalf >Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2021 1:59 PM >To: nanog(a)nanog.org >Cc: niels=nanog(a)bakker.net >Subject: RE: Parler > > > > > > > >>It's amazing how far the world has stumbled that "fomenting violent > >>insurrection and calling for the murder of elected officials" now > >>falls under standard T&Cs against abusive behaviour where this used > >>to be perfectly fine a year ago. > > > >The world is now a different place with the election of the Nazi's. > > > >-- > >Be decisive. Make a decision, right or wrong. The road of life is > >paved with flat squirrels who could not make a decision. > > > > > >

1 0

Re: Parler
by sronan＠ronan-online.com 10 Jan '21

10 Jan '21

Yes, it seems subsection (c)(2)(b) gives them cover, perhaps it’s time that this is revised, less the Internet content become moderated by a small group of private platform owners. Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 10, 2021, at 9:05 AM, Daniel Jurado <jurado98(a)mail.com> wrote: > > > Government made it political. > Parler is free conservative speech that the MSM doesn't control. > CNN stated that it was a threat to democracy because they didn't have control over what was posted like Twitter or Facebook. > So at this point it is 100% political. > > -- > Sent from my Android phone with mail.com Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >> On 1/10/21, 8:57 AM sronan(a)ronan-online.com wrote: >> Why? This is extremely relevant to network operators and is not political at all. >> >> On Jan 10, 2021, at 8:51 AM, Mike Bolitho <mikebolitho(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> Can we please not go down this rabbit hole on here? List admins? >> >> - Mike Bolitho >> >>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021, 1:26 AM William Herrin <bill(a)herrin.us> wrote: >>> Anybody looking for a new customer opportunity? It seems Parler is in >>> search of a new service provider. Vendors need only provide all the >>> proprietary AWS APIs that Parler depends upon to function. >>> >>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/09/amazon-parler-suspensi… >>> >>> Regards, >>> Bill HErrin > > <Daniel Jurado.vcf>

3 2

WhatsApp's New Policy Has...
by Mark Tinka 09 Jan '21

09 Jan '21

... finally been the final push all my friends needed to dump it and move to Signal. Several of the WhatsApp groups I'm on have, as of this morning, been disbanded and re-launched on Signal. Facebook say the new policy applies to business accounts, but heck, the cat's out the bag and gone. What's most amazing to me is that a lot more people seem to be a tad more concerned about their privacy, when they ordinarily wouldn't have. Mark.

10 17