- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: Busy Connect
by William Allen Simpson 02 Feb '99

02 Feb '99

> From: "William Allen Simpson" <wsimpson(a)greendragon.com> > > From: "Steven J. Sobol" <sjsobol(a)nacs.net> > > Ameritech offers the same service, and I've only been charged for the times > > I've actually used the feature. If I hang up, I don't get charged. I have to > > believe BellSouth works the same way, although I could be wrong. > > > Ameritech doesn't offer it here in Michigan, so I don't know what > problems there are. > Well, I'll be damned! It's here today. Only 2 days ago, I got a normal busy signal here in Ann Arbor. Just now, I got a voiceover that said "Let repeat dialing call you back when this line is free. To activate, for 75 cents, press 3. No additional charge to repeat dialing customers. If you are calling from a rotary dial phone, please hang up and dial 1166." I could barely hear the busy signal in the background, but the modem didn't catch it. Good thing there isn't a 3 or a 1166 in my dialing sequence. WSimpson(a)UMich.edu Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32

4 3

ARIN lowered minimum IP allocation
by MAEMURA Akinori 02 Feb '99

02 Feb '99

Hi, there I'm not at NANOG15 but experiencing it through Web. I found in ARIN's slide, that they lowered their minimum IP allocation policy from /19 to /20. I wonder if ISPs like Sprint and AGIS have lowered their filtering policy as well. Does anyone have any idea around ? ----- MAEMURA Akinori Network Engineer, C&C Internet Service mesh, NEC Corporation, JAPAN maem(a)mesh.ad.jp, maemura(a)mms.mt.nec.co.jp

1 0

evening bof's
by Brett_Watson＠enron.net 02 Feb '99

02 Feb '99

does anyone know if bof's will be encoded for network playout? -brett

1 0

Re: spam whore, norcal-systems.net
by George Herbert 01 Feb '99

01 Feb '99

This posting, may perhaps not be a nanog charter violation, though the thread is highly borderline. Please don't shoot me. Ravi described a packet filter, not monitoring or intercept. Blocking traffic doesn't constitute unauthorized examination, intercept, or access of email. You are welcome to attempt to establish otherwise in a court case, Dean, but your interpretation appears completely inconsistent with existing case law, attorneys interpretations, and the intent of the statute. Again. -george william herbert gherbert(a)crl.com I don't work for CRL, speak for it, or anything else.

1 0

RE: Cisco >224.0/3 problems..
by Martin, Christian 01 Feb '99

01 Feb '99

Did you try ip mroute? RES-RTR6(config)#ip mroute 224.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 Null0 RES-RTR6(config)#no ip mroute 224.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 Null0 RES-RTR6(config)#^Z RES-RTR6# Feb 1 17:53:56 EST: %SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console by chris on consol e RES-RTR6# RES-RTR6#conf t Enter configuration commands, one per line. End with CNTL/Z. RES-RTR6(config)#no ip multicast-rou RES-RTR6(config)#ip mroute ? A.B.C.D Source address RES-RTR6(config)#ip mroute 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 null 0 RES-RTR6(config)#ip multicast-rou RES-RTR6(config)#no ip mroute 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 null0 RES-RTR6(config)#^Z RES-RTR6# > -----Original Message----- > From: James Rishaw [mailto:jamie@dilbert.ais.net] > Sent: Monday, February 01, 1999 2:07 PM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Cisco >224.0/3 problems.. > > > Hello all, > > Ran into a problem, thought maybe someone else has run into this and > knows of a "fix", if this is intentional or what not. > > It seems that Cisco IOS has a problem dealing with addresses above > 224.0.0.0/3. > > This came up in an e-mail with Paul Vixie about MAPS RBL, > where I asked > him why 224+ wasn't filtered. The reply was: IOS ignores it. > GateD likes > it, IOS doesn't. > > I'm finding that IOS isn't propagating routes, etc., (nor > will it even > seem to *recognize*) address space above 224. > > To wit: > > > As a /3: > bordercore1.chi(config)#ip route 224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 Null0 > %Invalid destination prefix > > /8, close to the end of address space: > bordercore1.chi(config)#ip route 252.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 null0 > %Invalid destination prefix > > As a /24: > bordercore1.chi(config)#ip route 225.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 Null0 > %Invalid destination prefix > > bordercore1.chi(config)#ip route 230.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 Null0 > %Invalid destination prefix > > It's not Null0: > > bordercore1.chi(config)#ip route 234.128.230.123 255.255.255.255 h9/0 > %Invalid destination prefix > > bordercore1.chi(config)#ip route 241.102.34.93 > 255.255.255.255 atm4/0 > %Invalid destination prefix > > I know this is all "multicast" space, but considering > classless routing > and CIDR, shouldn't this space be usable and able to be manipulated ? > > -jamie > -- > jamie rishaw (efnet:gavroche) @ AIS / Exodus > "I want peace on earth and goodwill towards men." > "We are the United States Government. We don't do that sort > of thing." > --sneakers >

1 0

spam whore, norcal-systems.net
by Ravi Pina 01 Feb '99

01 Feb '99

Just a heads up- Down stream customer and end-user spammer norcal-systems.net via layer9.net started spamming yesterday afternoon. At first I was going to dismiss this and wait till Monday, but the complaints came in at a constant and fast pace. So I placed a filter on their network t about 3:00pm EST yesterday. Extended IP access list 142 deny tcp 216.115.78.0 0.0.1.255 eq smtp any log (2226195 matches) permit ip any any (57747076 matches) What was really great is when I called layer9.net's provider, their Abuse guy suggested that we just null0 the offending block, but needs to get approval from his manager. Since its obvious this customer is going to get booted, make sure they don't find you! -r

1 0

recent update from ARIN
by bmanning＠vacation.karoshi.com 01 Feb '99

01 Feb '99

Subject: Lowering of minimum allocation from /19 to /20 .... more should be on the ARIN web site soon... --bill

4 3

BGP Metrics
by Rusty Zickefoose 01 Feb '99

01 Feb '99

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi all, I've occasionally noticed a requirement to disregard mask when determining preferred route in the BGP algorithm. Specifically, when a multi-homed customer wishes to announce both his delegated networks through both connections. The goal is to achieve true multi-homing, with out requiring the customer to get independent address space. Thus far, I've used various "miserable hacks". Has anyone else perceived a similar requirement? if so, has anything being done to get such a flag added? Or am I just missing the obvious? - -- Rusty Zickefoose | The most exciting phrase to hear in science, rusty(a)cw.net | the one that heralds new discoveries, is not | "Eureka!", but "That's funny ..." | -- Isaac Asimov -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv Comment: Public key may be found at http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371 iQCVAgUBNrXVHu4+ch/bGDylAQExFAQAx4Xpmssc5W7621ZdU7Dg4Xu0jLTVk9bH gfWqKmoagX3vfsMuGNR5mhaMTXCbjO5URBLGxtYAhAqy6uwLFJm3HLy8MNMMf/Iq wWMJTbcr9CeQnl9IhDkePusyHbFYwS5XV51uP19Xx0RnoLJkueeqMviVNSqEBJ/0 Q2BjjVEpGi4= =QIWi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Busy Connect
by William Allen Simpson 31 Jan '99

31 Jan '99

I don't know how many other small/dialup ISPs are seeing this problem. BellSouth just turned it on in our area. Sent our support calls through the ceiling during busy evening hours. >Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:39:31 -0600 >Subject: Please Help Us >From: "Howard Shere" <hshere(a)watervalley.net> > >BellSouth recently added a feature to your phone service called "Busy >Connect". This service plays a recording whenever you dial and get a busy >signal offering to keep trying the number for 75 cents. This service will >interfere with your modems ability to detect a busy signal and your computer >will report that "the computer you are dialing is not answering" or some >similar message. > >2 weeks ago BellSouth told us that this service was on our lines and we >asked that it be removed. They told us that this would solve the "no answer" >problems that our customers were reporting. We have continued to get >complaints from customers about "no answer" problems and when we talked to >BellSouth today, we were told that this service was on our customers lines >and not on ours. We are not sure why we were given the wrong information >when we first reported this trouble. > >We are asking that all of our customers call BellSouth and ask to have this >service removed. They have refused to help us directly and have said that >the only way to have this service removed is for our customers to call them >directly. > >BellSouth can be reached at 557-6500 (for home telephone customers) or >557-6000 (for small business customers). Tell them you want the "Busy >Connect" service removed from your line. There is no charge from BellSouth >for removing this service. >

7 7

Hello, Denver
by alex＠nac.net 31 Jan '99

31 Jan '99

I am here, and if anyone wants to hang tonight, hollar! -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Atheism is a non-prophet organization. I route, therefore I am. Alex Rubenstein, alex(a)nac.net, KC2BUO, ISP/C Charter Member Father of the Network and Head Bottle-Washer Net Access Corporation, 9 Mt. Pleasant Tpk., Denville, NJ 07834 Don't choose a spineless ISP; we have more backbone! http://www.nac.net -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

1 0