- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: 1.1.1.0/24
by Jack Hahn 15 May '98

15 May '98

Any rational request or comment that any stakeholder (meaning user, network operator, etc) would like to present I will entertain and be more than happy to listen to. My duty as an AC member is to the public. -- -- Karl Denninger (karl(a)MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin http://www.mcs.net/ | T1's from $600 monthly / All Lines K56Flex/DOV | NEW! Corporate ISDN Prices dropped by up to 50%! Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| EXCLUSIVE NEW FEATURE ON ALL PERSONAL ACCOUNTS Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | *SPAMBLOCK* Technology now included at no cost On Thu, May 14, 1998 at 08:32:52PM -0400, Dean Robb wrote: > At 17:14 5/14/98 -0500, you wrote: > > > >Right now, I haven't seen any input from ARIN members indicating this > >is somethign desire. I don't see raising the issue to the advisory council > >unless the ARIN membership desires this. (If your not an ARIN member > >then your opinion may not have any weight with the AC.) > >I think its a reasonable idea, but I'm not inclined to go against the > >wishes of the membership. > > I must say I find your attitude....appalling. > > 1. How can you say you're not inclined to "go against the wishes of the > membership" if you don't even ask the membership what their wishes are? > I'd lay odds that no one has even thought about the issue, let alone decide > if it's a weighty matter. > > 2. You explicitly say that unless I'm a member, my opinion may carry no > weight with the AC. Does that mean that I can't have a good idea unless I > first pony up $1000? How positively absurd and insulting...to the other > members. > > Mr. Dillon said "IANA and ARIN and RIPE and APNIC are composed of some very > ordinary yet clueful Internet folks that are capable of recognizing a good > idea when it is explained to them.". He did NOT add the codicil that > people must have paid One Thousand Dollars for the privilege of presenting > an idea to these clueful folks. I sincerely hope and trust that others > don't think that only the elite few can have an idea. > > 3. It's too late, anyway. I'm NOT a member but have made the suggestion. > Hopefully, some forward-thinking, intellegent members may see this and > think it worthy of discussion. > > 4. Of course, you can ignore the issue and let the ARIN database > deteriorate to the state that InterNIC's WhoIs is in. Shall we take a poll > on how many people are happy with IT? Far better to deal with a problem > while it's small and keep it from becoming large. > > 5. I sincerely hope other members take you to task for your attitude. If > all members have your mindset, I wouldn't join even if I DID had a spare > grand sitting around. > > > > Spam(tm) is pressed meat. Spammers should be too. > > Dean Robb > PC-Easy > On-site computer services > (757) 495-EASY [3279] >

1 0

Re: Wired Q: Embedded NT
by Hank Nussbacher 15 May '98

15 May '98

>From: Jesse Freund <freund(a)wired.com> >i'm working on a piece about nt-embedded and i have a couple of questions. >i'm hoping you might be able to hook me up with a smart network operator or >someone else in the know or perhaps you know. basically, i'm curious why >the hell someone would want a version of nt embedded in a switch or router? >and who provides the custom solutions nt-embedded is meant to replace? Go read some competitor's mag: http://www.ncworldmag.com/ncworld/ncw-04-1998/ncw-04-nextten.html Bottom line: big mistake if this is to run in the 1998/1999 time frame. -Hank

1 0

Re: Wired Q: Embedded NT
by owen＠DeLong.SJ.CA.US 15 May '98

15 May '98

Given the brokenness of NT's networking stack, I would certainly reject any solution which involved embedding NT in a piece of networking hardware. Owen > Hi all, > > James Glave at Wired News again. This time around I am seeking opinions on > behalf of a friend up at Wired (the print magazine) -- concerning embedded > NT. I couldn't find any discussion in the nanog archive, so I'm wondering > if anoyne here has any experience with, or knowledge of, embedding NT in > networking hardware - if that even makes any sense....? > > >From: Jesse Freund <freund(a)wired.com> > >i'm working on a piece about nt-embedded and i have a couple of questions. > >i'm hoping you might be able to hook me up with a smart network operator or > >someone else in the know or perhaps you know. basically, i'm curious why > >the hell someone would want a version of nt embedded in a switch or router? > >and who provides the custom solutions nt-embedded is meant to replace? > > Thanks, all! > > jtg > > James Glave, Senior Technology Writer > Wired News http://www.wired.com (415) 276-8430 > > Unstoppable Force of the Week: "Gettin' jiggy wit' it!" >

4 3

Re: Privacy of Customer Information
by Bradley Dunn 15 May '98

15 May '98

On Thu, 14 May 1998, Bradley Dunn wrote: > > If you want to give your lawyer a heart attack, ask her if the > > data is covered under Title 47 Section 222 Privacy of Customer > > Information. > > http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/222.shtml > says > "Repealed". Sorry. It has been pointed out to me that the Telecom Act of '96 added a new Title 47 Section 222. ftp://ftp.loc.gov/pub/thomas/c104/s652.enr.txt Search down to "222". Bradley

1 0

Re: Privacy of Customer Information
by Sean Donelan 15 May '98

15 May '98

>> If you want to give your lawyer a heart attack, ask her if the >> data is covered under Title 47 Section 222 Privacy of Customer >> Information. > >http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/222.shtml >says >"Repealed". This is why you should talk to your lawyer. The US Code at the cornell site is from 1996. The Telecommunications Deregulation Act added a new section 222 when it was passed last year. -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

1 0

Privacy of Customer Information
by Sean Donelan 15 May '98

15 May '98

>However there are some companies that feel that their customer >data is confidential, and refuse to reveal it. (Also if they >use rwhois fixing swip won't solve the problem completely.) If you want to give your lawyer a heart attack, ask her if the data is covered under Title 47 Section 222 Privacy of Customer Information. Have you noticed the companies that are most likely to refuse to register their customer data, are also the the ones most likely to have a large direct sales organizations which uses such customer network information for its own marketing efforts. -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

2 1

Ligistics; Wireless..
by Andrew J. Doane 14 May '98

14 May '98

Which wireless standard will be supported? 802.11 or openair? /ajd/ -- _/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ Andrew J. Doane _/ _/ _/ _/ Director, Network Operations _/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ American Information Systems, Inc. _/ _/ _/ _/ Email: adoane(a)ais.net, http://www.ais.net _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ (312) 255-8500 Voice, (312) 255-8501 Fax For my PGP public key, email me with the subject "pgp request"

3 2

Re: 1.1.1.0/24
by Sean Donelan 14 May '98

14 May '98

>has a classfull C somewhere on the net. As for filtering 1.1.1.1/24 or >the entire block because it is reserved for that matter, who is to say >that with the address space thinning out that the IANA won't start >allocating it? Some poor provider is going to be route filtered on a >totally legitimate block if we use your reasoning. Its called "Network Management" and not "Network forget about it" for a reason. I'm making no statement about filtering by prefix length. Unassigned is true whether it is a unassigned traditional Class A 1.0.0.0/8 address or a unassigned Class ? 254.0.0.0/32 address. IANA has been exceptionally careful to document and put in a public place all its assignments. A careful network manager could check this public information on a regular basis and use it to verify the information they are hearing from others. Address hijacking is a major and growing problem. There are two ways to stop it, and I would suggest you need to do both. You can either trust everyone will only announce their own routes properly, or you can check the routes you recieve that they have in fact been delegated to the person announcing it. Or in the case of 1.1.1.0/24, delegated at all. There are extremes, you can check every single prefix or you can do no checking at all. Or you can do some intermediate level of checking such as filtering 'Martian' addresses, or addresses unassigned or reserved by IANA. -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

1 0

Re: Spam .. Find the sender !
by Sean Donelan 14 May '98

14 May '98

I was wondering where the Men in Dark Glasses went. I doubt the kiddies have stopped their pranks. We used get the confused US Secret Service agent showing up in person asking us to looking up the address; but they stopped sometime last summer. I figured they had finally gotten their own Internet $19.95 account and could do the WHOIS themselves. Oh, I get it.... do the WHOIS themselves. >As a person who has been getting a call and/or email from the US Secret >Service, the FBI, the NCIS, and probably the CIA (but if they told me, >they'd have to kill me of course), every other week, I'll just say the >clueless don't need encouragement (also, it'd be nice if someone in the US >gov't could read the little lines that say "check the APNIC database before >contacting APNIC". But then again, why should the US Gov't be any >different that the people in the US?) -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

1 0

Re: Core router bakeoff?
by shields＠crosslink.net 14 May '98

14 May '98

In article <Pine.BSI.3.93.980514011954.4143A-100000(a)sidhe.memra.com>, Michael Dillon <michael(a)memra.com> wrote: > If you were using ssh for secure access then the answer would be to find a > machine with a web browser, go to http://www.datafellows.com and download > the 30-day free trial version of the Windows or Mac ssh client as > appropriate, and, voila!, you have secure access to your network. And if you were using Kerberized telnet you would download the clients from your own web page and voila! (Of course neither of these is a substitute for doing the telnet from your trusted laptop) -- Shields, CrossLink.

1 0