- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

RE: North America not interested in IP V6
by Ben Buxton 30 Jul '03

30 Jul '03

> From: Nipper, Arnold [mailto:arnold@nipper.de] > On Wednesday, July 30, 2003 9:00 AM, Peter Galbavy > <peter.galbavy(a)knowtion.net> > wrote: > > Regardless of the content of the above, let me say that > with the exception > > of "the academic community" (including those in commercial > orgs) no one in > > Europe is interested either. > > > > Here at DE-CIX (www.de-cix.net) I can see that more and more > ISP are joining > the IPv6 trial (http://www.de-cix.net/info/decix-ipv6/) . > Currently already > 20% of all ~120 ISP at DE-CIX have IPv6 enabled. AMS-IX (amsterdam IX) is also an active IPv6 internet exchange with around 25-30 IPv6 enable peers (based on my peers and a 'ping ff02::2' :). >From what I've managed to determine, the problem with fast adoption of IPv6 is not so much the networks, it's more the applications. How many appications arent coded to support IPv6 sockets? The opposite question would be more appropriate. What about apps that use hardcoded data structures/file format that assume IPv4 style addressing? Do any databases support IPv6 as a native datatype? That is the real hurdle. Turning IPv6 on in networks is trivial. Application support is not. And coders dont care about ipv6, just us networking people. BB

1 0

North America not interested in IP V6
by Roy 30 Jul '03

30 Jul '03

This article seems to imply that North American networks don't care about IP V6 while the rest of the world is suffering great hardship http://www.msnbc.com/news/945119.asp PS. Please don't shoot the messenger

8 8

RE: North America not interested in IP V6
by Daryl G. Jurbala 29 Jul '03

29 Jul '03

> The reference to 70% of people in Europe having a web enabled > phone made me laugh too... although I guess it could be true > - my last 3 mobile phones have all had WAP capability, but I > don't know of anyone that actually uses this feature. I actually use mine. But it's behind a proxy, as I suspect nearly every other provder's WAP gateway is. Daryl Jurbala

3 3

RE: OT,..
by Lapinski, Michael (Research) 29 Jul '03

29 Jul '03

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/29/politics/29WIRE-PENT.html explains it all. Interestingly enough this stuff was presented by the program lead, Michael Foster, to a group of people here yesterday and it is a very cool concept. He stressed multiple times that this wasnt betting and unfortunately the media gave it a betting spin anyway. -mtl -------------------------------------------------- Michael Lapinski Computer Scientist GE Research "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." - IBM Chairman Thomas Watson, 1943 ->-----Original Message----- ->From: Michael Hallgren [mailto:m.hallgren@free.fr] ->Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 4:19 PM ->To: nanog(a)merit.edu ->Subject: OT,.. -> -> -> ->.. but anyway: someone informed on planned role of ->policyanalysismarket.org ? -> ->Out of curiosity, -> ->mh ->

1 0

RE: OT,..
by Michael Hallgren 29 Jul '03

29 Jul '03

OK. As I said, I was merely curious (in particular of the analytical content..), since rumors running. Many thanks for URL. mh > -----Original Message----- > From: Lapinski, Michael (Research) [mailto:lapinski@crd.ge.com] > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 10:30 PM > To: 'Michael Hallgren'; nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: RE: OT,.. > > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/29/politics/29WIRE-PENT.html > explains it all. > > Interestingly enough this stuff was presented by the > program lead, Michael Foster, to a group of people > here yesterday and it is a very cool concept. He > stressed multiple times that this wasnt betting and > unfortunately the media gave it a betting spin anyway. > > -mtl > > -------------------------------------------------- > Michael Lapinski > Computer Scientist > GE Research > > > "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." > - IBM Chairman Thomas Watson, 1943 > > > ->-----Original Message----- > ->From: Michael Hallgren [mailto:m.hallgren@free.fr] > ->Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 4:19 PM > ->To: nanog(a)merit.edu > ->Subject: OT,.. > -> > -> > -> > ->.. but anyway: someone informed on planned role of > ->policyanalysismarket.org ? > -> > ->Out of curiosity, > -> > ->mh > -> >

2 1

RE: North America not interested in IP V6
by St. Clair, James 29 Jul '03

29 Jul '03

Please somebody correct me..Can't a provider simply NAT the IPv4 at his gateway, and stream IPv6 to as many wireless customers as he can lock into a painful long-term contract? (just kidding!) The demand for /8's won't change any, and you can IPv6 and eat your cake too. I do understand the v4 to v6 NAT'ing may be an issue... -----Original Message----- From: Daryl G. Jurbala [mailto:daryl@introspect.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 12:41 PM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: RE: North America not interested in IP V6 > The reference to 70% of people in Europe having a web enabled > phone made me laugh too... although I guess it could be true > - my last 3 mobile phones have all had WAP capability, but I > don't know of anyone that actually uses this feature. I actually use mine. But it's behind a proxy, as I suspect nearly every other provder's WAP gateway is. Daryl Jurbala

1 0

RE: Is there a technical solution to SPAM?
by Austad, Jay 29 Jul '03

29 Jul '03

Make it more of a hassle for them. Ralsky apparently gets *bags* of junkmail everyday because mad people signed him up for everything under the sun. If everyone faxed a 600 page document of why spam is bad to any fax numbers in the email, maybe some places would start to get the point. Fill out their web forms with contact info of someone at the FTC. Obviously laws aren't going to stop it, and people are making money off of it. If it gets to the point where the harrassment just isn't worth it, some spammers will stop. > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob German [mailto:bobgerman@irides.com] > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 8:45 AM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: RE: Is there a technical solution to SPAM? > > > > > I disagree. While you're right that it is a social problem, > it is also > a technical problem in that those of us charged with protecting our > networks and equipment need to be able to discuss methods of > engineering > our networks to counteract SPAM while the social, political and legal > issues are being played out in their arenas. > > And I doubt that career spammers give a rat's ass about proper network > etiquette. Education may help prevent newbies and brick-and-mortar > converts from becoming spammers, but it will take some combination of > legal and technical measures to deal with the career spammers. Laws > alone won't work, because laws have loopholes. > > Bob German > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On > Behalf Of > Michael.Dillon(a)radianz.com > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 9:24 AM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Is there a technical solution to SPAM? > > > > Anyone who believes that SPAM can be solved by technical means should > try > googling one of the following: > > sms spam > i-mode spam > IM spam > > It should be clear that spam is really a social problem, not > a technical > > one and therefore the solutions will be found in the social, political > and > legal spaces, not in network engineering. Some combination of > education > and training, new laws, arrests and public trials will be > needed to get > rid of it. > > I'm betting that we get the biggest bang for the buck out of education > and > training. Part of it will come from teaching people network > etiquette, > part from teaching them that spam is not a way to make money, and part > of > it from teaching website owners how to provide effective > advertising so > that website ads can dominate the cheap mass advertising space and > displace the spammers. > > In any case, I suggest that we should ban all future > discussion of SPAM > and spammers from this mailing list since it is not related > to network > engineering or operating an IP network. > > ------------------------------------------------------- > Michael Dillon > Capacity Planning, Prescot St., London, UK > Mobile: +44 7900 823 672 Internet: michael.dillon(a)radianz.com > Phone: +44 20 7650 9493 Fax: +44 20 7650 9030 > >

1 0

Re: Its not just Spam and DDOS anymore (was Re: OT: Re: User negligence?)
by Peter Gray 29 Jul '03

29 Jul '03

For a laugh, take a look at this spammer site, www.ushplans.com, currently hosted by Net Access Corporation. It claims to be "US Health Plans Inc., The Nations (sic) Leading Dental Plan" but its head office appears to be a mail drop box in New Jersey and its only known employee appears to be a telephone answering machine in Georgia. The domain name registration details give a fake address. NAC has been hosting this site for the last year, I've asked them three times to investigate and remove it, but I didn't get any constructive response. >From: william+nanog(a)hq.dreamhost.com (Will Yardley) >To: nanog(a)merit.edu >Subject: Re: Its not just Spam and DDOS anymore (was Re: OT: Re: User >negligence?) >Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 11:43:43 -0700 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from mc9-f35.bay6.hotmail.com ([65.54.166.42]) by >mc9-s18.bay6.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 28 Jul >2003 11:45:32 -0700 >Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu ([198.108.1.26]) by >mc9-f35.bay6.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 28 Jul >2003 11:45:32 -0700 >Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix)id E06BF9124D; Mon, 28 Jul 2003 >14:43:48 -0400 (EDT) >Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56)id A9FBA9124E; >Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:43:48 -0400 (EDT) >Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41])by >trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C42B9124Dfor ><nanog(a)trapdoor.merit.edu>; Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:43:45 -0400 (EDT) >Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix)id 4C2835DDF2; Mon, 28 Jul 2003 >14:43:45 -0400 (EDT) >Received: from mail.hq.newdream.net (mail.hq.newdream.net [66.33.200.10])by >segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3F025DDF0for <nanog(a)merit.edu>; >Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:43:44 -0400 (EDT) >Received: from 127.0.0.1 (zugzug.hq.newdream.net [127.0.0.1])by >drama.hq.newdream.net (Postfix) with SMTP id E6AB93B2EDfor ><nanog(a)merit.edu>; Mon, 28 Jul 2003 11:43:43 -0700 (PDT) >Received: by mail.hq.newdream.net (Postfix, from userid 1012)id D84513B2EB; >Mon, 28 Jul 2003 11:43:43 -0700 (PDT) >X-Message-Info: MxAodtZPLiQ6HPHOc8rBiXjgUFkT69DC >Delivered-To: nanog-outgoing(a)trapdoor.merit.edu >Delivered-To: nanog(a)trapdoor.merit.edu >Delivered-To: nanog(a)merit.edu >Message-ID: <20030728184343.GC29468(a)hq.newdream.net> >Mail-Followup-To: nanog(a)merit.edu >References: <Law12-F88E2sCRBHZXF0000ea4c(a)hotmail.com> >In-Reply-To: <Law12-F88E2sCRBHZXF0000ea4c(a)hotmail.com> >Organization: New Dream Network >X-Message-Flag: Why are you reading this? >User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i >Sender: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu >Precedence: bulk >Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing(a)merit.edu >X-Loop: nanog >Return-Path: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Jul 2003 18:45:32.0357 (UTC) >FILETIME=[6C832750:01C35538] > > >On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 08:56:01AM +0000, Peter Gray wrote: > > > On the subject of host security issues and spam, try doing a search of >the > > Usenet archive for '"Net Access Corporation" spam'. You get 328 >results. > > And those are just the spams which people have traced to NAC, never mind > > the millions of untraced ones.... > >The fact that their abusebot automatically forwards complaints to the >spammer^Wcustomer (even setting the 'From' address on the autoresponse >to the customer's address) may have something to do with this. > >-- >"Since when is skepticism un-American? >Dissent's not treason but they talk like it's the same..." >(Sleater-Kinney - "Combat Rock") > > _________________________________________________________________ On the move? Get Hotmail on your mobile phone http://www.msn.co.uk/msnmobile

2 1

PSI (UK/Europe) out ??
by Peter Galbavy 29 Jul '03

29 Jul '03

PSInet Europe (at least my hosted prefix - 146.101.245.xxx) has dropped off the 'net. Not visible via LINX etc. Anyone got any info ? I have been in a voice queue for > 5 minutes and being asked to leave a message or hold further. I guess something is broken. rgds, -- Peter

2 3

Re: PSI (UK/Europe) out ??
by neil＠DOMINO.ORG 29 Jul '03

29 Jul '03

To be clear Telehouse in London.

1 0