- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: Digital Bill of Rights
by Paul Vixie 21 Nov '98

21 Nov '98

Please note the reply-to on this message and respect it. Someone has gone to the trouble and expense of creating a new mailing list just for the rbl discussion; we should use it. If you reply to other messages on this thread within nanog, please do the same "reply-to" thing I'm doing in the headers of this message. > Noone is treading on your rights, and what Paul is doing is not > the act of a vigilante. Paul has not forced anyone to subscribe to his > service. Paul could charge for this service. The fact that he chooses > to provide this service for free (at significant personal expense, I might > add) is testament to his community-mindedness. A vigilante is someone who > takes the law into their own hands without consent of the effected parties. It's not so much a testament to my community-mindedness as it is a testament to my unwillingness to manage another business. Once MAPS, LLC (yes, we did incorporate it recently) gets an executive director (applications welcome!) we will start charging fees to recover the costs of that person's salary and also the costs of full time people to track down spammers, write a web-based database (with deeper access allowed for paying subscribers than for lurkers), and answer the endless stream of telephone calls from people who want to get off of the list. And of course we need to buy some insurance. Again, please note, respect, and emulate the reply-to of this message. -- Paul Vixie <paul(a)vix.com>

2 1

Re: NSI policy on lame delagations
by Paul Vixie 21 Nov '98

21 Nov '98

> Remember these aren't nameservers that serve 5 domains, figure tens of > thousands. Perhaps I am not being clear. Reloads, even a HUP, cause > named, even the new version, to pause for a while before being able to > serve requests again. That will change in 8.1.2++, btw. "ndc" will use a socket, not signals. > All the relevant nameservers for the domains would > have to be reloaded 300 times a day in this case. It isn't good if named > stops responding that often because it slows access to the web sites > domains by inserting a dropped DNS query timeout every time the reloading > server is queried (50% or 33% depending on 2 or 3 nameservers. If the > reload takes 30 seconds then reloading 300 times == each nameserver is > down for 150 minutes a day. Not good. Not bad, either. This is why we have slave servers. > Or do you suggest delaying client domain name registrations 24 hours? I always put a zone up on the master before I send in the registration. If the slaves take a day or so to catch up I can live with that. -- Paul Vixie <paul(a)vix.com>

1 0

Re: ORBS: Another Vigilante Group
by Bob Allisat 21 Nov '98

21 Nov '98

Someone wrote: > I test, and block open relays, and I'm damned proud of it. Who gave you permission to do anything of the sort? Short answer: no-one. Long answer: no:one. You are engaging in attacks on people's lively- hoods for no apparent reason with no authority other than than given to you by your mommy. Dangerous ground when dealing with unknown quantities. Bob Allisat Free Community Network _ bob(a)fcn.net . http://fcn.net http://fcn.net/allisat _ http://fcn.net/draft

1 0

optical/electrical g.703<>bellcore GR-253 IR
by Sean M. Doran 21 Nov '98

21 Nov '98

Has anyone managed to play with interfacing an electrical-only (g.703 coax) ADM with a Cisco POS line card (LC-4OC3/POS-SM ideally) to be able to recommend a converter box? Sean.

2 1

Re: Black Hole Vixie/RBL
by dlr＠bungi.com 21 Nov '98

21 Nov '98

[In the message entitled "Black Hole Vixie/RBL" on Jun 21, 22:11, Bob Allisat writes:] > > + we got. Because blackholing NSI would be of operational concern to a > + lot of you, I've decided to ponder this question out loud: > + > + >Technically, this is an opt-out customer-relationship spam. > + > > + > I think it is a special case, because _there is no where else to go_. > + > > + > 208.226.58.70 should be RBL'ed, IMHO. Help me. > I've taken the liberty of upgrading Bob's comments from the VIC-20 40 column standard. People taking a position on these comments should read http://www.fcn.net, and http://maps.vix.com/rbl before assesing his (or my) views. > Mr. Vixie and his cohorts increasingly imagine themselves to be the final and > ultimate arbiters in matters of Network integrity. Having them sit in > judgement over the Black Holing of successive and alleged perpetrators > violates numerous protections and freedoms all citizens Citizens implies affiliation with some political area. The Internet isn't affiliated with any one polical area, as far as I can see. With any freedom, comes responsibilty. If there is no responsibility or accountability, freedom quickly turns to disaster. Anyone with children quickly recognizies that. If not Paul sitting in judgement, then who? No one else has stepped forward. No tribunal in Sri Lanka will get any attention of ISPs in Seattle. No commitee-of-5 in Boise will get the attention of a spam farm in Israel. The RBL has a narrow focus. Stopping email spammers. It doesn't care about what kind of spam. It doesn't blackhole "people that Paul doesn't like". It doesn't blackhole competitors of networks that use the RBL. It doesn't blackhole ISP's that don't express distaste for the RBL. And it doesn't blackhole the "Anti-RBL" web pages. It blackholes spammers, and spam support services. And before it does this, it attempts to engage in meaningful dialog with these firms. The RBL is effective _precisely_ due to these facts. If it were not so, it would not be in such wide use. People can _easily_ test this, and do, on a regular basis. If it started blackholing sites based on other criteria, it would quickly be dropped by networks and sites using it, and would lose its effectiveness. And there is _no doubt_ as to its effectiveness. It has caused a policy change _towards people that spam_ on a large number of networks. It has raised the level of awareness about open relays. It has helped people to secure their sites. It has protected networks from large volumes of spam. And _it is painful to be on the RBL_. Which is why everyone involved in the RBL project is very careful about researching sites, and demanding sufficient documentation prior to recommending a site to be RBLed. Some cases are obvious. Some are borderline. Some are just too hard for anyone to figure out, which is why, for the first time ever, Paul went to the public for opinions of everyone. > It is my opinion that these activities have reached their zenith and > something should be done to finally Black Hole Vixie/RBL should they > continue on their renegade mission of uncontrolled and arbitrary censorship. Renegade? Perhaps. Uncontrolled an arbitrary censorship? I don't think so. No site is ever listed on the RBL unless it is participating in UCE/SPAM. No network is forced - ever - to use the RBL. They use it _because it works_. > Maybe it is time to pull the plug on the ultimate plug pullers, black hole > the black holers! Too late. A few months ago, Paul listed maps.vix.com on the RBL himself :-) Took about 18 hours for us to notice, and remove the listing :-) -- Dave Rand dlr(a)bungi.com http://www.bungi.com

3 2

Mailing list for discussion of Internet technical issues
by Greg Harp 21 Nov '98

21 Nov '98

Is there a mailing list where folks can discuss actual Internet networking and routing issues? Is there one where I can watch for reports of various major outages or SNAFUs on the 'net? Is there one where I may be able to get in contact with various powers that be around the 'net to discuss how we may all work together to stabilize and improve service for our customers? Darn, I thought this was that mailing list... Recommended reading for all those continuing to discuss the legal issues of SPAM and the RBL as well as the fallout from those discussions which seems to have deteriorated to adolescent playground bickering: http://www.nanog.org/NANOG.charter.html http://www.nanog.org/aup.html Please take this discussion elsewhere, folks!!!! -- Greg Harp Manager - Internet Network Engineering SBC Internet Services, Inc. 972 470-1207 gharp(a)swbell.net

3 2

Re: AS_PATH length and route selection (WAS: Strange BGP announcement)
by Sean M. Doran 21 Nov '98

21 Nov '98

I Am Not An Isp <patrick(a)ianai.net> writes: [wrt RFC 1771, A Border Gateway Protocol 4] > There are just other parts of the RFC with which I'm > not so sure I agree. Oh do tell. Better still, tell the IDR WG. There are open drafts which might be apropos to your concerns, and certainly nobody would assert that they are flawless. Sean.

1 0

Re: NSI policy on lame delagations
by Dean Anderson 21 Nov '98

21 Nov '98

I think the technique is called 'lazy evaluation' ;-) --Dean At 08:18 PM 11/20/1998 -0500, Daniel Senie wrote: >Patrick Greenwell wrote: >> >> Seems that NSI has a new policy on lame delagations. I never heard >> anything about this. Anyone else? > >Interesting. Their policies state you must have the name servers for a >domain up and running before you apply for a domain, but they clearly do >not enforce that... Sounds like they're adding checking after the fact. >It still would be nice if they queried the name servers you told them >were to be used during the application process, though. > >Dan > >-- >----------------------------------------------------------------- >Daniel Senie dts(a)senie.com >Amaranth Networks Inc. http://www.amaranthnetworks.com > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 0

RE: Digital Bill of Rights
by Bob Allisat 20 Nov '98

20 Nov '98

James, I feel it is important to reply to your reasoned article with an equal response. Mr. Fowler wrote: > [Fowler, James] Bob, Yes you do have the right to e-mail > anyone you want. I can refuse e-mail from anyone I want. This is > the same for the US postal service. If I choose not to accept > e-mail from you, then you don't get a real say in the matter. The > RBL is a voluntary list. i.e. your network is used for Spam, one > can not get off of your Spam list, they document what they have > done, then add your address to the RBL. it is punishment for you > not respecting the rights and requests of others not to send Spam, > so we (RBL Users) have a right not to accept Spam. This is NOT > envelope steaming, this is looking at the address from who it was > sent from and then stopping the e-mail from going further. > > It is MY company's network, My company's storage system, > My company's connection, My company's money paid for all of this. > My company CAN choose who we want to use our services. > > Your attitude, "Welcome to the digital age. Here is 2000 > pieces of Spam for you. Thanks for the use of your bandwidth and > storage." This is not right. It would be like someone going to > your house, walking in, going to you fridge, getting a drink, and > using your phone and watching your TV, without your permission. > Is this what you really want? This list is a group of people who > have wasted too many hours in trying to get people like you to > listen and please stop the spamming, but it takes a discussion / > Flame mail to do this. Why? Mail is mail is mail in my opinion. And what you do on a *private* server is your own business. Once that server opens for general public usage the obligation is to simply deliver the god-damned mail. Not snif or steam or read the addresses to see if they are kosher. We have our rights and freedoms in a civil society. One day they will be integrated into our laws and various constitutions. Until then I guess Public ISPs will continue to get away with abuses. In my opinion all this RBL nonsense is vastly more destructive in the long term than a few ad e-mails. You may agree to disagree. That too is your right. However you still may not block, manipulate or deny any mail directed at me. *UNLESS* I explicitly give you that permission. Otherwise - buzz of boys. You're treading on dangerous ground. Bob Allisat Free Community Network _ bob(a)fcn.net . http://fcn.net http://fcn.net/allisat _ http://fcn.net/draft

4 3

RE: recent rash of otherlistcontent posts
by Dean Anderson 20 Nov '98

20 Nov '98

I'm usually easily sucked into these political discussions, and even I'm staying out of this one. Everything has been discussed already last winter or last fall. Nothing new has been added. Please read the Nanog Archives and make sure you have something new and worthwhile before posting more on this topic. Especially you oldsters, who know this has been hashed over before. Point people to the archives instead of re-typing. --Dean anti-spammers-are-worse-than-spam Anderson. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 0