- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Trace Sites
by Jay 08 Feb '01

08 Feb '01

Last week someone posted to this list about compiling a list of various hosts on various networks which accept ICMP/UDP packets for traceroutes. The purpose of this list was for network engineers (or similar) to have a resource of "traceroute-able" hosts for diagnostics, troubleshooting, testing, etc... I replied to the individual who originally posted the idea, but have not heard anything from him. I would like to pick up this idea, as it could be a very useful resource. All would get out of it what you put into it. Meaning, the list of hosts should be opt-in only -- if you're responsible for a host, add it to the list. If you don't want your host(s) on the list, don't add 'em. If anyone has any thoughts on this, please email me off-list and I'll re-post to the list in a week or so with the compiled status. -- ~Jay .. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. ..

1 0

Draft Atlanta agenda
by Susan Harris 08 Feb '01

08 Feb '01

Greetings - here's the draft agenda for NANOG 21. Any changes will be announced on the web: http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0102/ If you have questions about the agenda, the upcoming meeting, or the email list, please send 'em to nanog-support(a)nanog.org, rather than to the NANOG list. Thanks. --Susan Harris -------------------- DRAFT Agenda NANOG 21 - February 18-20, 2001 Atlanta, GA SUNDAY TUTORIALS 1:30 - 3:00 p.m. Exterior Routing 201: The Full Picture Howard Berkowitz, Nortel 3:00 - 3:30 p.m. BREAK 3:30 - 5:00 p.m. Understanding Standards Track IETF MIBs Mike MacFaden, Riverstone Chris Elliott, Cisco 3:30 - 5:00 p.m. Customer Satisfaction 201 Howard Berkowitz, Nortel MONDAY GENERAL SESSION 9:00 a.m. Welcome, Introductions Susan Harris, Merit Greg Hankins, Riverstone 9:15 a.m. Multiservice Core Design Vijay Gill, MFN Jim Boyle, Level 3 9:45 a.m. Reasons Not to Deploy RED (or, "On the Limits of Active Queue Management") Christophe Diot, Sprint 10:15 a.m. DDoS Attacks and Pushback Steve Bellovin, AT&T 10:45 a.m. BREAK 11:00 a.m. Review & Analysis of Y2K vs. Previous Years' Outages - What's Being Done to Protect the Network Infrastructure? Analysis of Network Outages and Events in the Year 2000 Compared to Previous Years Sean Donelan, Equinix 11:30 a.m. FlowScan Dave Plonka, University of Wisconsin - Madison 12:00 p.m. LUNCH 1:30 p.m. Single Source Multicast: The Multicast Broadcast Model Marshall Eubanks, Multicast Technologies 2:00 p.m. Blurring the Lines Between Circuits and Protocols: Plans to Re-Organize Sub-IP Technologies in the IETF Scott Bradner, Harvard 2:30 p.m. BGP MED Oscillation Daniel Walton, Cisco 3:00 p.m. BREAK 3:15 p.m. Dynamic Service Provisioning in Converged Network Infrastructure Muckai Girish, Atoga 3:35 p.m. Panel: Provider-Provisioned VPNs Jessica Yu, Cosine, Moderator Kireeti Kompella, Juniper Alvaro Retana, Cisco Luyuan Fang, AT&T 5:30 - 7:30 p.m. Beer 'n Gear! Monday Evening BOFs 7:30 - 9 p.m. Network Policy Paul Vixie, MFN, moderator 7:30 - 9 p.m. FlowScan Dave Plonka, University of Wisconsin - Madison 7:30 - 9 p.m. AAA John Vollbrecht, Interlink, moderator 9 - 10:30 p.m. Data Center BOF II Bill Norton, Equinix Michael Lucking, Epoch Internet, moderators TUESDAY GENERAL SESSION 9:00 a.m. Panel: Global Routing System Scaling Issues Cathy Wittbrodt, iVMG, Moderator Bill Woodcock, Zocalo Tony Li, Procket Networks Abha Ahuja, Arbor Networks Vijay Gill, MFN Enke Chen, Redback 10:30 a.m. BREAK 10:45 a.m. IPv6 in Mobile Wireless Networking Dana Blair, Cisco 11:15 a.m. Network Policies - Current and Proposed (BOF Follow-Up) Paul Vixie, MFNa 11:40 a.m. New Version of the RIPE Database Andrei Robachevsky, RIPE 12:00 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. LUNCH 1:30 p.m. Very Short Reach OC-192/STM-64 Interfaces Russ Tuck, Pluris 1:45 p.m. Florida Exchanges Facing South: NOTA and the MIX Bill Manning, ISI, moderator Dan Golding, Netrail Christian Kuhtz, BellSouth 2:45 p.m. Closing Remarks Susan Harris, Merit 2:50 p.m. Adjourn

1 0

Re: FC: More on how FCC and Congress will regulate new vs. old media
by William Allen Simpson 08 Feb '01

08 Feb '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Declan McCullagh wrote: > From: "Dave McClure" <dmcclure(a)usiia.org> > I fear that in the current environment, the answer will be to allow all > networks to be closed to competition. That scrunching sound you hear > is the door slamming shut on 7,000 independent ISPs. . . > > Regards, > Dave McClure > > [Dave and I generally agree, but we may part paths here. We justify keeping > telco lines open because of the ex-monopoly status of the RBOCs, but in the > long run hope that those regulations can fade away. --Declan] > I'm afraid I have the numbers to back up Dave.... That's fine in theory, but in your "long run", we are all dead. I'm a partner in an ISP in rural northern Mississippi. We were the first in the region, 7+ years ago, and have been offering DSL about a year. Bellsouth charges ISPs $40 per month, plus $375 installation, for a "dry pair" (alarm equivalent), or $91 per month, plus $2,000 installation, for the "unloaded" version (needed for DSL over more than a few hundred feet of distance). That's a pair with no switch, no user billing, nothing. We have to provide both ends of the equipment, switching, and Internet service from a backbone. Bellsouth went to court to overturn the original FCC determination that a fair price for an unbundled pair would be $15 per month in rural Mississippi (less in more urban states). Bellsouth.net, the unregulated subsidiary, just showed up in several of our towns offering ADSL for $40 per month at 1.5M/256K bps, with higher fees for "business" rates. Calculating costs for upstream, amortizing costs of equipment, and assuming that a T3 will support about 900 DSL users, unregulated Bellsouth.net would have to pay regulated Bellsouth less than $8 per line per month to break even. Since we "know" that Bellsouth.net has very few customers as yet, we can understand that they might operate at a loss for awhile. Still, it would take pretty deep pockets.... But, assuming that they are being charged the tariffed rate for wiring that Bellsouth swore in court papers was needed as a base price, they can NEVER MAKE MONEY. Remember, the Bells were highly subsidized when they started up. They've leveraged that subsidized monopoly into owning all the rights of way, and by statute are exempt from paying to install their lines. We have to pay a monthly fee to the cities per pole and linear foot where we run our lines in parallel, although there is a court case over that in some states. Our barriers to entry are huge. Sorry, but the unregulated regime is killing ISPs, and the tenor has drastically changed now that the baby bells know that the new administration is unlikely to rein in anti-competitive behaviour. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 6.5.1 iQCVAwUBOoLaQ9m/qMj6R+sxAQG0GwQAxIbwK2XfZWABlqcX6k1HvJjiaXDCL+xh 2z2RHcJmG5ZJZdbhKZkaX8VNHvfnrSr04l7uKM9Gge4GgtpwM16ioxm8lVPW+qZT UbY/fE+tjnOEDXEbjLV/dOdZ7IOdrn9uF942VU1h9oXttfKsVku326bl8djS4elQ GMN3bWFWXNw= =rCSF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Social responsibility (censorship?) on NANOG?
by Steven M. Bellovin 08 Feb '01

08 Feb '01

> >I'm not the only one seeing this problem and I'm pretty sure that we all >understand how the mailing list works. We've all been active for years, >even prior to there being such thing as "nanog-post" so, something is >happening on that end that shouldn't be. I haven't had problems posting, but a few months ago, I also was mysteriously unsubscribed from the nanog list. I don't know if it was a glitch in the mailing list manager software or enemy action (of course, I'm a security guy, so I always wonder about enemy action...). --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb

1 0

Re: Social responsibility (censorship?) on NANOG?
by John Fraizer 08 Feb '01

08 Feb '01

On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Jeffrey Haas wrote: > On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 11:38:48PM -0500, John Fraizer wrote: > > I was recently SPAMMED by a WCOM sales-droid. Wanting to bring this to > > the attention to as many movers-and-shakers as possible, I forwarded the > > SPAM to nanog-post. > > You may have simply typo'd this, but one never sends mail to > nanog-post. Just nanog. > > -- > Jeff Haas > NextHop Technologies > OK. nanog-post was a typo. The mail was sent to nanog(a)merit.edu. --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc

1 0

Re: Social responsibility (censorship?) on NANOG?
by John Fraizer 08 Feb '01

08 Feb '01

On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Susan Harris wrote: > John, your forwarded message went to nanog-post, not to the NANOG list. > nanog-post is simply the list of people who are subscribed (allowed) to > send to the NANOG list, and therefore nanog-post doesn't go anywhere. > > People that are on the NANOG list also have to belong to the nanog-post > list if they want to send messages to the nanog list. This is explained > on the web: > > http://www.nanog.org/email.html > > See section 2. > > Susan Harris, Ph.D. > Merit Network/Univ. of Mich. > Susan, The only way my message was going to nanog-post is if the MTA there at MERIT is mutating them on their way in. Here is what has been sent out. ATTEMPT #1: Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:12:42 -0500 (EST) From: John Fraizer <nanog(a)EnterZone.Net> To: nanog(a)merit.edu cc: spam(a)wcom.com, abuse(a)wcom.com bcc: Jason.Weeks(a)wcom.Com Subject: WCOM SPAM!!! : Lower Cost T-1/ T-3 lines from WorldCom/UUNET for ISP's. Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102061402350.8783-100000(a)Overkill.EnterZone.Net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII ATTEMPT #2: Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 00:41:53 -0500 (EST) From: John Fraizer <nanog(a)EnterZone.Net> To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: WCOM SPAM!!! : Lower Cost T-1/ T-3 lines from WorldCom/UUNET for ISP's. Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102070041240.20944-100000(a)Overkill.EnterZone.Net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII (Unsubscribed from NANOG and NANOG-POST, resubscribed with email@FQDN) ATTEMPT #3: Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 22:22:46 -0500 (EST) From: John Fraizer <nanog(a)Overkill.EnterZone.Net> To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: WCOM SPAM!!! : Lower Cost T-1/ T-3 lines from WorldCom/UUNET for ISP's. (fwd) Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102072222060.12448-100000(a)Overkill.EnterZone.Net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII As you can see, every message was sent to nanog(a)merit.edu, just as always. I'm not the only one seeing this problem and I'm pretty sure that we all understand how the mailing list works. We've all been active for years, even prior to there being such thing as "nanog-post" so, something is happening on that end that shouldn't be. I thought I should bring it to the attention of the powers that be. --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc

1 0

[jared@puck.Nether.net: New "operational" list.]
by Adam Rothschild 08 Feb '01

08 Feb '01

FYI, since I still haven't seen this post make its way to the list... -adam ----- Forwarded message from Jared Mauch <jared(a)puck.Nether.net> ----- Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:28:06 -0500 From: Jared Mauch <jared(a)puck.Nether.net> Subject: New "operational" list. To: Adam Rothschild <asr(a)latency.net> Cc: John Fraizer <nanog(a)Overkill.EnterZone.Net>, nanog(a)merit.edu I've set up an unmoderated list inet-ops(a)puck.nether.net that people can subscribe to. List information: to subscribe: echo subscribe | mail inet-ops-request(a)puck.nether.net to unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe | mail inet-ops-request(a)puck.nether.net There is no list charter so everything is on-topic. We do request that you send issues that are better suited for other lists such as vendor specific issues or otherwise to more appropriate lists than this one. Thanks, - Jared On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 11:49:55PM -0500, Adam Rothschild wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 11:38:48PM -0500, John Fraizer wrote: > > Is the list being moderated or filtered in some way? > > Apparently. That, or it's somehow silently discarding random messages > of an operational nature, either of which is a bad thing(tm). > > -adam -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared(a)puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine. ----- End forwarded message -----

1 0

Re: /24's run amuck?
by Richard A. Steenbergen 08 Feb '01

08 Feb '01

On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 09:20:34PM -0800, Randy Bush wrote: > > > Almost time to bring back the satanic filters. > > bring back? Speaking of satan(ic filters)... :P What size routing table does verio carry? :P -- 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)

5 4

Re: [asr@latency.net: Re: Social responsibility (censorship?) on NANOG?]
by Jamie --gavroche 08 Feb '01

08 Feb '01

>From: Adam Rothschild <asr(a)latency.net> >On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 11:38:48PM -0500, John Fraizer wrote: > > Is the list being moderated or filtered in some way? > >Apparently. That, or it's somehow silently discarding random messages >of an operational nature, either of which is a bad thing(tm). No, I dont think that is the case. I am posting now from my hotmail account because I've somehow been black holed from posting. It's very clear to me that this is not a mailer problem ... A couple weeks ago, I found myself unsub'd from both nanog@ and the nanog-post list. Now, I could see being unsub'd accidentally from nanog@ if something weird happened and bounces came back, but no list mechanism would unsub someone from nanog-post@, since it doesn't generate outgoing messages. I was removed without notice or warning, and e-mail to susan harris went unanswered. It was fairly rude, considering I've been around nanog since, what, 95? I'd think I'd deserve a little more respect than that. At least three times since then I've been unsub'd from nanog-post, *but not nanog*, again, without warn or notice. Today, I found out that while I was still on nanog-post@, any post that I make from my primary account gets blackholed. I know the list is working, and I know mail is being delivered to the merit mail servers: 04/02/2001 20:03:00 sendmail[22307]: f1512eV22305: to=nanog(a)merit.edu, ctladdr=jamie (100/20), delay=00:00:20, xdelay=00:00:18, mailer=esmtp, pri=60967, relay=mail.merit.edu. [198.108.1.41], dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent (Ok: queued as 421A35DDC2) 07/02/2001 15:03:13 sendmail[54414]: f17K2pK54412: to=nanog(a)merit.edu, ctladdr=jamie (100/20), delay=00:00:22, xdelay=00:00:20, mailer=esmtp, pri=61366, relay=mail.merit.edu. [198.108.1.41], dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent (Ok: queued as E55775DE63) 07/02/2001 17:53:43 sendmail[54937]: f17MrfM54935: to=nanog(a)merit.edu, ctladdr=jamie (100/20), delay=00:00:02, xdelay=00:00:01, mailer=esmtp, pri=61085, relay=mail.merit.edu. [198.108.1.41], dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent (Ok: queued as 710C85DD96) 07/02/2001 17:55:02 sendmail[54951]: f17MsVP54949: to=nanog(a)merit.edu, ctladdr=jamie (100/20), delay=00:00:31, xdelay=00:00:04, mailer=esmtp, pri=120967, relay=mail.merit.edu. [198.108.1.41], dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent (Ok: queued as E92CB5DDCC) So, who is deciding who gets to be on the list and who doesn't? Since this is obviously a MERIT-sponsored forum, what is MERIT's policy on supporting selective censorship in its mail lists? Considering the level of OT posts lately on the list, and the list maintainer's silent policies, where can one go for less S:N, better administration, etc. ? jamie _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

2 1

RE: Social responsibility (censorship?) on NANOG?
by John Fraizer 08 Feb '01

08 Feb '01

I have received tons of requests to forward the message and headers to people. It is now posted in all it's glory at: http://stats.ez-hosting.net/~tvo/WCOM-SPAM.txt --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc

1 0