- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: Selection of Appropriate Local SMTP Relay
by Michael Shields 12 Jan '00

12 Jan '00

In article <Pine.BSF.3.96.1000110222525.438A-100000(a)workhorse.iMach.com>, "Forrest W. Christian" <forrestc(a)iMach.com> wrote: > I'm going to make a pitch for the IP-address based method. > > Specifically, if you have a set of well known IP addresses for common > services, thus something like: > > 223.255.255.1 - Primary DNS > 223.255.255.2 - Secondary DNS > 223.255.255.3 - SMTP Mail > 223.255.255.4 - Time Server Why did you choose to have exactly 2 DNS servers and exactly 1 SMTP and "time" server? -- Shields.

3 2

Re: Selection of Appropriate Local SMTP Relay
by Joe Abley 12 Jan '00

12 Jan '00

On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 12:16:25PM -0500, Daniel Senie wrote: > Using DNS, as you propose, has some problems. In your example, you rely > on the topology of the network, and make assumptions about classful > structure. This isn't workable in the present network environment. I'm not convinced that I do. It's quite possible to specify a different mail relay for every individual address in an ISP's network. I might be using octet boundaries so that I can follow the same well-known in-addr.arpa zone structure as is currently used, but that's all. It seems to me that handing out mail relays in IPCP and DHCP are also very valid approaches, although they arguably require more software changes to be useful (e.g. in access-server firmware). Here are a couple of points: 1. The use of MX records in the manner I suggested allows the SMTP relays to be used to be changed fairly dynamically -- using IPCP, for example, a caller would only get one set per call (and calls can be pretty long-held; I see calls lasting five days here). 2. The use of MX records also allows backup mail relays to be specified, with an associated priority, in a familiar way. 3. Using a network-layer protocol like PPP or DHCP to collect the data requires some consistent application-layer interface to retrieve the specified nameserver info by client software; this, ideally, would require standardisation across platforms, and practically does not sound trivial. However, there's already a well-defined mechanism in almost every platform for applications to perform DNS queries. Thanks for the feedback, Joe

12 19

Re: Netgate.net.nz/ORBS spam colusion
by Dean Anderson 11 Jan '00

11 Jan '00

After all the bashing, I get to gloat a little. I see the guy in Russia took his model from ORBS, and did exactly the same thing: He apparently used a security exploit to get data, and published that data. So far, it doesn't sound like he made any credit card charges. Sounds like he didn't actually damage the compromised system. According to Derek Balling and a few others, he should be free and clear. According to those few people, the cracker hasn't done anything wrong. According to those same people, CD Universe accepted the consequences of having an insecure server. Anybody could accessed the data. So it must be publicly available information then. He just published some publicly available data. US law doesn't apply to Russians. The fault here is with CD Universe for operating an insecure server. There is no fault with the guy who published the credit cards. He is not responsible if other people misuse that data. Wrong. If it wasn't already clear to reasonable people, it certainly is now. Those people who made those stupid assertions are clearly full of crap. Now what happens to the Russian ISP that refuses to shut down the site? Yep. You guessed it. --Dean Around 05:37 PM 1/10/2000 -0800, rumor has it that Randy Bush said: > >>> And if anything disparaging about the chinese government were to appear on >>> his web site, he could be extradited and put to death! >> Who gets his organs..... > >warning, there may not be a full set > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

4 4

Re: Something very odd on an older 2514 .
by Dean Anderson 11 Jan '00

11 Jan '00

I think you are hitting a performance wall in the 2514. You can't really expect much more than 2 x T1 performance, and then you'll hit a wall. The 2500 series is only a 68040, (old ones are 030's) which "manually" shuffles packets, and can't handle sustained full ether bandwidth. If you look closely with a sniffer, you'd see that its dropping packets. Your FTP slows down because the TCP window is full. --Dean Around 07:46 PM 1/10/2000 -0800, rumor has it that Mr. James W. Laferriere said: > > > Hello All , I've just been doing a few tests on some 2514 routers > I had laying around . I setup the two ether interfaces & on each > like the diagram below > > +--------+ +--------+ > | 2514 |+----------------------+| 2514 | > +--------+ +--------+ > + + > [hub] [hub] > + + > +---------+[ ftp source ] +---------+[ ftp source ] > > I noticed a drastic lessening of expected bandwidth thru the > routers . On the range of seeing only 24-25% of available > ether bandwidth . > But when I plug the two 'ftp source's into the same hub I am > getting a more resonable 66-75% of the available ether bandwidth . > > Has anyone any info on what might be the cause of the lack of > expected thru put . Tia , JimL > > +----------------------------------------------------------------+ > | James W. Laferriere | System Techniques | Give me VMS | > | Network Engineer | 25416 22nd So | Give me Linux | > | babydr(a)baby-dragons.com | DesMoines WA 98198 | only on AXP | > +----------------------------------------------------------------+ > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 0

AS discovery tools / CAIDA
by curtis l owings 11 Jan '00

11 Jan '00

A while back I saw a demo of an applet that would display AS number as they connect to each other and a color indication of the number of route flaps within each AS. But, of course, my memory is too poor to remember which NANOG conference it was or what the name of the tool was. I'm specifically looking for a tool that will show an AS and what other networks connect to it (I don't really care about route flaps). I've done a quick scan of the NANOG site and CAIDA, but didn't find it. ____________________________________________ Curtis Owings phone: 913-534-2322 Sprint Broadband cell: 913-706-6157 BSC Engineer page: 1-800-724-3508 OP, KS <clowings(a)sprintparanet.com> ____________________________________________ "Your enemy is not evil in his own mind."

6 6

Read an email, lose your privacy
by Henry R. Linneweh 11 Jan '00

11 Jan '00

http://www.sunworld.com/sunworldonline/swol-01-2000/swol-01-silicon.html -- Thank you; |--------------------------------------------| | Thinking is a learned process so is UNIX | |--------------------------------------------| Henry R. Linneweh

3 2

Re: Selection of Appropriate Local SMTP Relay
by Sean Donelan 11 Jan '00

11 Jan '00

On Mon, 10 January 2000, "Forrest W. Christian" wrote: > Remember, that the purpose of this is for someone to be able to find the > "correct" server to provide the services which a roaming user will find at > different locations depending on where they are dialing in, thus, a > config for a user would be: > > DNS Servers - varies by location > SMTP server - varies by location > pop3/imap server - always home isp > time server - varies by location > > etc.... > > Thus the table would only list those services which should vary based on > where the user is dialing in/connecting. I disagree. You are making the assumption that servers are identical except for location, or that "local" users are always allowed to use the servers.

1 0

Re: Netgate.net.nz/ORBS spam colusion
by Hank Nussbacher 11 Jan '00

11 Jan '00

At 10:42 10/01/00 -0500, wb8foz(a)nrk.com wrote: > > >Section8er said: > > >> I've already spoken with FBI about juridiction. FBI considers crimes >> against US computers to be US crimes, even when initiated from foriegn >> countries. They can extradite for this. > >OK. Call us back when you can tell us the flight number and arrival >time for the folks in handcuffs. I'll get friends in the media to >show up to see same. Why not just get the flight number and punch it into: http://flight.thetrip.com/flightstatus/ and then decide whether you want to wait till he lands or not. :-) -Hank > >Until then, go back to what you were smoking, and be sure it hide it >when the census taker knocks at the door; I bet DEA pays them >bounties for likely targets. > > > >-- >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: Selection of Appropriate Local SMTP Relay
by Vadim Antonov 11 Jan '00

11 Jan '00

Randy Bush wrote: >> I hear it was one of the first Internet's ideas - to declare well-known >> addresses in addition to the well known ports. > and notice that, in general, it did not catch on. and in the few places it > did, it's been a continual pain in the ass. bad-idea fairy strikes again. Well, the idea to attach FQDNs to services, not to computers, is pretty sound; and could (if implemented) concievably replace lots of ad-hockery like MX RRs, "virtual" HTTP servers, etc, etc. WKS RRs weren't doing that - the boundary between host names and service names was still in place; so WKS RRs were simply redundant. Following the logic of lazylution they quietly died off. --vadim

3 2

Re: Netgate.net.nz/ORBS spam colusion
by Shawn McMahon 11 Jan '00

11 Jan '00

You better hope a court strikes that interpretation down, Dean. If it holds, then it would mean that the reverse could also be true. Imagine one of your users posts something defamatory to the Chinese government on their web site, and a Chinese web browser picks it up. Congratulations, your network just sent information into China that violates Chinese law. Better hope we don't sign an extradition treaty with them any time soon. Similar crimes, albeit with less nasty punishments, could happen with countries with which we *DO* have extradition treaties. This is a can of worms that will bite us all in the ass, if opened. Fortunately, I doubt that you'll get far. I sure hope you don't. I'd hate to see what happens if, say, somebody uses my email server to send a death threat to, say, the President of France. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dean Anderson" <dean(a)av8.com> To: "Adrian J Close" <adrian(a)esec.com.au> Cc: <nanog(a)merit.edu> Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2000 5:00 PM Subject: Re: Netgate.net.nz/ORBS spam colusion > I've already spoken with FBI about juridiction. FBI considers crimes > against US computers to be US crimes, even when initiated from foriegn > countries. They can extradite for this. That it originated from NZ isn't > an issue. While the FBI agreed that these were indeed violations, my > initial complaint was not prosecuted because we could at the time only come > up with $900 in damages. We are closing on the $100K mark, where I'll make > an updated complaint, which I hope will get more attention.

5 5