- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

worldnic
by Jon Lewis 08 Jun '98

08 Jun '98

I must not be on enough or the right lists...but what's the deal with worldnic.com? I'd not heard anything about it until today. I tried to move a domain (a .org domain) for a customer today, and got the following reply from domreg(a)internic.net: Thank you for contacting Network Solutions, Inc., InterNIC Registration Services. The domain name you are attempting to update was registered through WorldNIC Services and should be updated via the following URL: http://www.worldnic.com This looks like Network Solutions taking advantage of its position as controller of the big three commercially used TLDs to find new ways to dip their fingers into another part of the pie...perhaps in anticipation of losing their monopoly on domain registrations. What does my ISP need to do to get setup with Network Solutions such that anytime someone wants to modify a domain registered through us, the request is bounced litterally saying "you can't do that, go talk to FDT about it."? ------------------------------------------------------------------ Jon Lewis <jlewis(a)fdt.net> | Spammers will be winnuked or Network Administrator | drawn and quartered...whichever Florida Digital Turnpike | is more convenient. ______http://inorganic5.fdt.net/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key____

9 10

NANOG 'Cast
by Eric Germann 08 Jun '98

08 Jun '98

Low bandwidth RealVideo looks great across the Digex backbone. Mucho better than white spot the last time. ============================================================================= Eric Germann Computer and Communications Technologies ekgermann(a)cctec.com Van Wert, OH 45891 Phone: 419 968 2640 http://www.cctec.com Fax: 419 968 2641 Network Design, Connectivity & System Integration Services A Microsoft Solution Provider "Linux.. the choice of a gnutered generation." - brad(a)poofy.tbn.tm

3 3

Re: WorldNIC
by Tim Salo 08 Jun '98

08 Jun '98

> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:08:00 -0400 > From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra(a)scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us> > [...] > Domain Namespace is a natural resource, Mr. Gomes. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I can see it now. My daughter's geography class will now talk about oil, forests, ... and domain names! -tjs

1 0

Re: worldnic
by Paul Vixie 08 Jun '98

08 Jun '98

well, at least it's worldnic.com and not thedotorgpeople.com. for .com registrations, network solutions is pushing folks to thedotcompeople.com, at $119 for two years registration. i'm sad to see that all of the paranoia about network solutions abusing their monopoly status were true, and i'm hoping very much that becky burr's presentation tomorrow absolutely guts the network solutions monopoly. -- Paul Vixie La Honda, CA "Many NANOG members have been around <paul(a)vix.com> longer than most." --Jim Fleming pacbell!vixie!paul (An H.323 GateKeeper for the IPv8 Network)

2 1

URL for Sean's presentation
by Andy McConnell 08 Jun '98

08 Jun '98

Could someone closer tot he front of the room send us the URL for Sean's morning talk? We couldn't see it weel back here at the tables :-) -Andy -- Andy McConnell Network Architect, NTT Multimedia Communications Laboratories

2 1

Re: URL for Sean's presentation
by sob＠academ.com 08 Jun '98

08 Jun '98

1 0

Re: NANOG 'Cast
by Simon Leinen 08 Jun '98

08 Jun '98

The Mbone feed is excellent, too, here in Switzerland. -- Simon Leinen simon(a)babar.switch.ch SWITCH http://www.switch.ch/

1 0

Re: Load balancing/Multiple CNAME's (Was: Re: Beyond DNS...)
by Paul Vixie 08 Jun '98

08 Jun '98

manar(a)ivision.co.uk (Manar Hussain) writes: > Actually I'm not so sure - I can well imagine that a reasonably well > publicised change in how DNS works in order to make "the web better" would > probably get adopted more readily in browsers than mere conformance to well > documented, already existent RFCs that are currently flouted. i imagined that, which is why i contributed to RFC 2052. but i was wrong. the browser vendors don't think of this as one of their important problems. -- Paul Vixie La Honda, CA "Many NANOG members have been around <paul(a)vix.com> longer than most." --Jim Fleming pacbell!vixie!paul (An H.323 GateKeeper for the IPv8 Network)

2 1

Network collapses
by mark＠vielle.datasys.net 08 Jun '98

08 Jun '98

If a large network with large amounts of nonportable space, like UUNET, were to fail entirely (financially, or system-wide, e.g.), what would happen to the address space that that network had assigned to its customers? When those customers go elsewhere for access, would the routing tables be flooded with /24's? Alternately, would that space be reclaimed by the registries, and all of those customers be forced to renumber? How long would that take? In a similar vein, how would the DNS act with millions more lame delegations? (And what if all of the root servers were smurfed under at the same time? ;^) If this has been discussed elsewhere, I apologize for the bother, and would appreciate a pointer to that discussion. --- Mark R. Lindsey, mark(a)datasys.net Internet Engineering, DSS Online, LLC Voice: 912.241.0607; Fax: 912.241.0190 (Wish I were there.)

6 6

In the terminal room...
by James Klossner 08 Jun '98

08 Jun '98

People might want to be careful what binary you run in the terminal room if you're using ssh (or whatever). I happened to find this today while using them (extra junk snipped): % pwd /usr/home/nanog % ls -al ssh -rwxr-xr-x 1 nanog nanog 1218960 Jun 7 13:04 ssh % ./ssh -v SSH Version 1.2.22 [i386-unknown-freebsd2.2.6], protocol version 1.5. Standard version. Does not use RSAREF. [snipped] % which ssh /usr/local/bin/ssh % ls -al /usr/local/bin/ssh lrwxrwxrwx 1 root wheel 14 Jun 6 07:55 /usr/local/bin/ssh -> ../ssh/bin/ssh % ls -al /usr/local/ssh/bin/ssh lrwxrwxrwx 1 root wheel 4 Jun 6 07:55 /usr/local/ssh/bin/ssh -> ssh1 % ls -al /usr/local/ssh/bin/ssh1 -rws--x--x 1 root wheel 212952 May 20 09:20 /usr/local/ssh/bin/ssh1 % /usr/local/bin/ssh -v SSH Version 1.2.23 [i386-unknown-freebsd2.2.6], protocol version 1.5. Standard version. Does not use RSAREF. [snipped] Dot isn't in the path on these boxes, but you still might want to be careful anyway. Perhaps someone just brought over their own ssh binary, because they didn't trust the one here, or it could be something more malicious. I guess the moral of the story is to be careful about what you run on these machines. -jkk -- Jim Klossner - jkk(a)frontiernet.net http://www.frontiernet.net "VMS is about as secure as a poodle encased in a block of lucite... ...about as useful, too." -wendigo(a)pobox.com

1 0