- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: GRC rides again...
by Ron Buchalski 05 Jul '01

05 Jul '01

Chris Rapier writes: >From: Chris Rapier <rapier(a)psc.edu> >CC: nanog(a)merit.edu >Subject: Re: GRC rides again... >Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 10:45:39 -0400 > >My feeling is that he's missing some clues regarding the necessary >realities of the situation. Its not so much a matter of laziness, <snip> >I'm also sure that XP might increase the number of spoofed packets >running through the network. If that spurs more ISPs to use source >address filtering them thats a good thing. Even if they don't it is >possible to track down where a spoofed IP is coming from - its more of a >social engineering issue than a technical one. The GRC page talks about his dos attack, and he also rants about the "dangers" of the IP stack in XP, but his dos attack didn't come from sources sending spoofed packets, so source address filtering wouldn't have helped in this case. GRC complaining about the spoofed packet problem should be a separate rant on his website (who knows...it probably is!). -rb _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

4 3

RE: Broadband v. baseband ... again?
by Roeland Meyer 05 Jul '01

05 Jul '01

> From: Tom Lettington [mailto:tom@tfl.net] > Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 11:01 AM > > At the risk of incurring the wrath of Mr. Meyer by posting without > permission, I offer the following: Harry Newton, of "Newton's TELECOM > Dictionary - The Official Dictionary of Telecommunications & > the Interent" > (Updated 15th Expanded Edition), defines "Broadband" (in the > WAN context) > as anything over 45Mbps (T3). heh, that dictionary may be a good marketing tool, but try and pass your engineering exams with it ... you won't. By that definition, my 1.5Gbps switched backplane is a broadband system. It isn't, regardless of what that dictionary says. > The language we use in our industry is evolving at an extremely rapid > rate. The great unwashed masses don't necessarily stick with > the time > honored definitions we would prefer that they admire, > respect, and accept > as gospel. Get over it! You must work in marketing. Fuzzy definiions mean fuzzy equations, which reults in things not working. The unwashed masses are allowed to be imprecise, we are not. That's why we get the big bucks (not).

1 0

Re: Broadband v. baseband ... again?
by Richard A. Steenbergen 05 Jul '01

05 Jul '01

On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 11:00:52AM -0700, Tom Lettington wrote: > > At the risk of incurring the wrath of Mr. Meyer by posting without > permission, What about at the risk of looking like a gigantic idiot in front of a whole 'lot of people? > I offer the following: Harry Newton, of "Newton's TELECOM > Dictionary - The Official Dictionary of Telecommunications & the > Interent" (Updated 15th Expanded Edition), defines "Broadband" (in the > WAN context) as anything over 45Mbps (T3). >From the Offical Dumbfuck's Guide to Not Posting Stupid Shit to Nanog (Updated and Expanded 69th Edition): cluebie noun 1: A person so stupid their right to live should seriously be questioned before they have a chance to breed. see: People who make up definitions. > The language we use in our industry is evolving at an extremely rapid > rate. The great unwashed masses don't necessarily stick with the time > honored definitions we would prefer that they admire, respect, and > accept as gospel. Get over it! Hrm any other definitions we can make up? We've already redefined Tier 1 to mean anyone who thinks their network is good enough to call it that. Lets change broadband and baseband too, it's too difficult to explain it to people. -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras(a)e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)

2 1

RE: Broadband v. baseband ... again?
by Roeland Meyer 05 Jul '01

05 Jul '01

The thing is, cable systems ARE broadband. Some DSL methods use broadband transits, especially on the last mile. Anything transiting HFC is using broadband as a part of the link. FrameRelay has many of the same constrants as HFC cable, but is definitely a baseband technology. The reason that HFC has such horrible aggregation congestion effects is that the head-ends are over-commited. Fewer clients per head-end would eliminate the bottle necks, as would a larger return band, or application of spread-spectrum technologies on the HFC medium. (At PacBell/ACN, this was the subject of much debate, business economics won out. We had cost targets to hit, at ~400 homes passed per HFC head-end.) The same is true for many FR clouds. I'm looking into 802.11b regional wireless systems right now and am seeing the same things. BTW, for the audience, 802.11b is definitely broadband, as is any other wireless technology. The real kicker is how many of those companies will be around one year from now? ALSO, some advocates of broadband don't realize that GigE is baseband at 1Gbps. Getting it on broadband would require a 4GHz carrier and would pretty much saturate the spectrum. Now I'm getting really far from my BSEE days and let the RF guys take it over (if we have any here). At PacBell/ACN, we had a 10MHz return band, on a 750Mhz HFC system. Of course, I couldn't understand why we couldn't allocate an entire digital video band for the purpose <grin>. But, the only routing was at the super head-end. The head-ends were never considered to have return data, in the original design. -- > From: Miles Fidelman [mailto:mfidelman@civicnet.org] > Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 10:24 AM > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Roeland Meyer wrote: > > > Broadband isn't a speed, it's a signaling architecture. The > alternative is > > baseband. Ethernet is baseband. Broadcast radio is > broadband. Now that you > > have the two competing terms, please see your friendly > neighborhood search > > engine (PSYFNSE). > > Though, to be fair, a lot of people have coopted the term > "broadband." You > and I know that broadband is defined in the 802 series of > specs as a way > to run ethernet over an analog cable system. But... the cable > companies > would have you believe that it means "the fastest thing going" and the > telcos would have you believe that DSL is "broadband." > > Miles > > > ************************************************************** > ************ > The Center for Civic Networking PO Box 600618 > Miles R. Fidelman, President & > Newtonville, MA 02460-0006 > Director, Municipal Telecommunications > Strategies Program 617-558-3698 fax: > 617-630-8946 > mfidelman(a)civicnet.org > http://civic.net/ccn.html > > Information Infrastructure: Public Spaces for the 21st Century > Let's Start With: Internet Wall-Plugs Everywhere > Say It Often, Say It Loud: "I Want My Internet!" > ************************************************************** > ************ >

1 0

It's way too quiet
by Larry Diffey 05 Jul '01

05 Jul '01

Since it's so quiet in here, I want to stir things up a little with an informal survey. With all of this talk about broadband (mostly in reference to cable modems and xDSL), consumers have been tricked into actually believing that if it's faster than a modem then it's broadband. I have a number in my head as to what I consider broadband. It's not an unreasonable number but it certainly does exceed what is available to the average consumer. Oh wise nanogers, what speeds do we need to achieve for the average consumer before we truly have broadband? I will try and keep track of all the numbers that you give you an average and I'll also give you the number I had in mind. Regards, Larry Diffey **Incidentally, I am at this very moment wearing a t-shirt that says "Will work for bandwidth".

2 1

RE: crsnic whois updates
by Roeland Meyer 04 Jul '01

04 Jul '01

When my DSL link got interrupted, last March, I had to go to a new upstream. I paid the $29.95 per name server, to NSI, and got it straightened out in less than four days. $30 bucks, for expedited service, isn't very expensive, considering the alternative. All my domains are served by the same three zone-servers, with backup zone-servers in AboveNet. After the main zone-server were back online, I used the normal process to get the rest of it straightened out, at no additional cost. That took a few extra weeks, but once the main zone servers were online, I had no pressing time issues. > From: mike harrison [mailto:meuon@highertech.net] > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 7:19 PM > > > Apparently NSOL thinks they are "special".. Even though my > nameservers are > > registered with OpenSRS, NSOL thinks that I need to spend > time (weeks, > > sometimes), sending them an updated "host" form every time > I change an IP > > address. > > I have some important name servers at NSOL that I have been trying > to get updated for weeks, I'm down to the 'pay em $299' extortion plan > to get them updated. --Mike--

1 0

Re: VPN Illegal In-Migration
by Troy Corbin 03 Jul '01

03 Jul '01

Kysi- You have sent me this message twice in the past 5 minutes detailing your fears about Mexican Covert Operations and their threat to our internet freedom. Please put the bong down, stop doing using crystal meth, and do something useful. -t On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, kysi ferul wrote: > > > kysi ferul <redwingblakburdz(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > we evenb heard the rumour that many of the Mexican trucks would actually be MOBILE COMMAND CENTERS...virtual rolling LANS and ISP on the go's? > The 'take-down' of the GRID and/or the TAKEOVER of the TELECOMMUNICATIONS in the contiguous 48 has been often times expressed in MOVIE BOOK and TV SHOW,,,but we are so slow on the UPTAKE...it is to our best interests to make the INTERNET CLEAN AND SAFE...but FREE! And that can NOT happen unless everyone GROWS UP! (Ands that ESPECIALLY 'means' ..."FROGFACE!") > Troy Corbin <troyc(a)titan.communitech.net> wrote: > im looking for any operational experiences/references > regarding large wan migrations from private frame-relay > to extranet VPNs for remote office connectivity. > specifically, what backbone provider(s) did you choose, > what type of cost savings were realized in both telco > charges as well as management overhead, and what > performance increases/decreases did you experience? > > thanks, > troy > > > > > > Kysi Ferul redwingblakburdz(a)yahoo.com > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > Kysi Ferul redwingblakburdz(a)yahoo.com > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

2 1

Re: SWIP update intervals (was: Re: Getting an AS and /18)
by Adam McKenna 03 Jul '01

03 Jul '01

On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 05:21:12PM -0400, Lapinski, Michael (CRD) wrote: > Do you honestly think that spammers cant write a > little bit more code that will parse out the URL > and then parse the email addresses out of web page? Do you honestly think that most spammers are using custom tools to extract e-mail addresses from web pages? (There are winblows GUI tools designed explicitly for this purpose -- you can download them from tucows.) > It would probably help them because they'd have an > up-to-date list of people to spam. Most places already have a contact list published on the web. There are also ways of "hiding" e-mail addresses in web forms to make them harder for spammers' tools to parse, i.e., adam [at] flounder.net, etc. --Adam

1 0

Re: SWIP update intervals (was: Re: Getting an AS and /18)
by Dave Stewart 03 Jul '01

03 Jul '01

At 04:21 PM 7/3/2001, Mitch Halmu wrote: >weed out such addresses from their lists... Not judging by the amount of spam that's caught by the filters here... as well as the amount that gets through.

1 0

T1 line
by Tatsuya Kawasaki 03 Jul '01

03 Jul '01

I have a simple question for you all. For T1 line that teleco provide, one that goes to smartjack from CO, is there any standard coloring for cable? which one goes where? It appeared that they are sets of twisted by pairs.. Does it means are they tip and ring pairs??? TIA, Tatsuya /_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Tatsuya Kawasaki Allegiance Telecom Unlock the Power of the Internet http://www.kivex.com Phone 301.215.6777 Fax 301.215.5991 Affiliation given for identification not representation /_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

3 4