- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

let's just have one mailing list
by Paul A Vixie 29 Mar '97

29 Mar '97

------- Blind-Carbon-Copy to: nobody(a)vix.com reply-to: nobody(a)vix.com Subject: let's just have one mailing list Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 15:14:17 -0800 From: Paul A Vixie <vixie(a)wisdom.home.vix.com> why on earth do we have a nanog list that's separate from spam-list that's separate from spam-list? clearly all discussions on any topic belong on all three lists -- otherwise why would we consistently see: cc: spam-list(a)psc.edu, nanog(a)merit.edu, spam(a)zorch.sf-bay.org i'm receiving multiple copies of this stuff since i'm on all three lists. can't we just coalesce all three lists, and the other 20,000 mailing lists on the internet, onto one? we could call it net.general(a)ihnp4.uucp and just put everybody on the internet onto it. then noone would ever miss out on an interesting discussion that takes place on a list that they are not on. not being on a mailing list is clearly an error, and if someone happens to prefer not being on a list since they don't want to hear about the topic of that list, they are clearly confused since lists don't have topics, right? i'm especially worried about the fact that there is a NAIPR list for ARIN discussions and that not all NANOG messages are -- yet -- automatically CC'd to it. can the postmaster(a)merit.edu please automatically CC all NANOG messages to all known mailing lists to correct this obvious problem? (grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.) ------- End of Blind-Carbon-Copy

1 0

Anti-SPAM announcement from AT&T Worldnet (fwd)
by Jim Carroll 29 Mar '97

29 Mar '97

> Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 18:08:44 -0500 > From: Jonathan Clark <jhc(a)lynxhub.att.com> > To: spam-list(a)psc.edu, nanog(a)merit.edu, spam(a)zorch.sf-bay.org > Subject: Anti-SPAM announcement from AT&T Worldnet > > AT&T Worldnet announces that starting Monday, March 31 1997, > it will be taking action to stop email from non-AT&T Worldnet > account holders being relayed through its servers. > > We have reserved the right to treat such mail any way we deem appropriate, > which may include deleting it without notification to the originator. > > Please address any questions about this policy to abuse(a)worldnet.att.net. This should really be treated as a warning message to mail administrators everywhere. If you have not already implemented mail-relay blocking, you should think seriously about adding it now. When AT&T starts the filtering, those senders "hijacking" AT&T mail servers will go searching for alterate servers; sort of like rats fleeing an abandoned warehouse that is now being renovated. --- Jim C., President | C A R R O L L - N E T, Inc. 201-488-1332 voice | New Jersey's Premier Internet Service Provider 201-487-5717 dialup | http://www.carroll.com | Ask about our Business Web Services

1 0

ARIN mail
by Jonathan Heiliger 29 Mar '97

29 Mar '97

i apologize for further increasing the S/N of this list.. but I believe the 'naipr(a)arin.net' list was created to focus on ARIN discussions, among other things. as we all know, NANOG's charter is defined in murky terms, but why continue a retorical debate on two lists? thanks. -jh- ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 29 Mar 97 14:12 PST From: Michael Gersten <michael(a)stb.info.com> To: JimFleming(a)unety.net, naipr(a)arin.net Cc: ckuehn(a)NSF.GOV, gstrawn(a)NSF.GOV, lsundro(a)NSF.GOV, nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: ARINANOG Jim raises an extremely good point. Why not start ARIN off by giving it a /8 to work with and see how well it will actually work? Lets face it, there is only ONE /0, and giving that to ARIN might not be a good idea if it doesn't work right. By giving them a /8, they will have to compete with other ways of assigning IP addresses, and demonstrate that they actually can work. Just like a would-be ISP has to start with a /24 and work up... Michael

1 0

Re: Anti-SPAM announcement from AT&T Worldnet
by Scott Bradner 29 Mar '97

29 Mar '97

-- Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm under the impression that the Electronic Communications Act of 1986 (?) makes it quite illegal to screw around with mail that you have accepted for delivery. -- spammers bill of rights? kinda don't think that would have been the aim. Scott

2 1

RE: ARIN is not/is too/is not/is too... blah.
by Jim Fleming 29 Mar '97

29 Mar '97

On Saturday, March 29, 1997 5:49 AM, Michael Dillon[SMTP:michael@MEMRA.COM] wrote: @ On Sat, 29 Mar 1997, Aleph One wrote: @ @ > I for one like the idea of ARIN. It's the pricing structure that is @ > compleatly wrong. The structure will create a market for companies to @ > "lease" large quantities for address space from ARIN, and then "sublease" @ > them cheaper than ARIN it self. You may claim you can not sell address @ > space but we have all seen it happen. @ @ I'm not claiming that ARIN is perfect and that it will instantly solve all @ problems. But I do believe that it will be far more responsive to the @ industry than the Internic could be. And if enough ISP's join ARIN and @ come up with a better funding/pricing scheme then I believe it *CAN* @ be implemented. The fundamental feature of ARIN is that it will be @ responsive to the needs of those organizations who use IP address space. @ It's just a first step in the right direction, not the ultimate goal. @ @ Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting @ Memra Software Inc. - Fax: +1-250-546-3049 @ http://www.memra.com - E-mail: michael(a)memra.com @ @ @ If more companies had been allowed to develop more Registry Industy Infrastructure during the past 18 months, rather than debate how many IAHCs or ARINs can dance on the head of a pin, then we would all be much further, at least here in the U.S. As companies come up to speed in the Registry Industry they will be natural candidates to help take over some of the InterNIC duties. IP allocations are only one aspect of those duties. Some companies may not choose to get into that activity, other companies might start there. Again, why don't the people chomping at the bit to form ARIN, just do it ? Once they do they can stand in line with the other ISPs to obtain an IP allocation which they can then use to provide "services" to fund themselves. -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp Check out...http://Register.A.Mall

1 0

RE: ARIN is not/is too/is not/is too... blah.
by Jim Fleming 29 Mar '97

29 Mar '97

On Saturday, March 29, 1997 5:09 AM, Michael Dillon[SMTP:michael@MEMRA.COM] wrote: @ On Sat, 29 Mar 1997, Matthew Pearson wrote: @ <snip> @ @ I don't understand why so many people want to push these ideas to reductio @ ad absurdum. We all rely on a cooperative network in order to support our @ businesses. Without a cooperative network there is no industry and we @ would all be out of work. Why can you not see that ARIN is just another @ form of cooperation in keeping the network running smoothly so that we can @ all get on with business. As the network gets bigger there are more and @ more activities that it makes sense to carve out and run autonomously. @ @ @ Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting @ Memra Software Inc. - Fax: +1-250-546-3049 @ http://www.memra.com - E-mail: michael(a)memra.com @ @ @ Yes Michael...you never seem to understand... Maybe the reason is that some people rely on MORE than just a cooperative network to support their businesses. They rely on cooperative communities, they rely on cooperative governments, and they rely on cooperative companies to provide jobs, etc. For a person tucked away in a cabin in the woods in Canada without a TV and without contact with urban areas, you may not be able to understand. Unfortunately, many of the people in the real world have different challenges that face them each day, because of that they have different solutions than the ones you dream up. Have you considered that people DO understand that ARIN is "just another form of cooperation", but the problem is it is a cooperation of people that are out of touch with the needs of the real world ? -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp Check out...http://Register.A.Mall

1 0

Re: Anti-SPAM announcement from AT&T Worldnet
by Jonathan Clark 29 Mar '97

29 Mar '97

> Any email...even regular questions/replies....I think specific > types of email would be more appropriate..."spam","obscene" etc. I read it as clearly stating that _any_ mail (not limited to spam or obscene, etc.) being relayed (not to or from an AT&T Worldnet customer) will not be delivered by AT&T Worldnet's mail servers. ``We have reserved the right to treat such mail any way we deem appropriate,''. This may include actually delivering it, but in the vast majority of cases I do not expect the mail to reach its intended destination(s). We will be keeping statistics and I hope to be able to present these in some public forum in due course. Jonathan

2 1

Re: ARIN is not/is too/is not/is too... blah. (fwd)
by epg＠corp.home.net 29 Mar '97

29 Mar '97

Forwarded message:

1 0

RE: ARIN is not/is too/is not/is too... blah.
by Jim Fleming 29 Mar '97

29 Mar '97

On Saturday, March 29, 1997 7:50 AM, Mark J Elkins[SMTP:mje@mje99.posix.co.za] wrote: @ On Mar 29, 7:22pm, "David R. Conrad" wrote: @ } >Comparing APNIC and RIPE to the current US model is not fair or @ } >accurate. @ } @ } True. Where APNIC and RIPE members have direct input into how their @ } registries are operated, American (and South African) ISPs are subject @ } to the political winds of the US government. Where APNIC and RIPE @ } members control how resources are expended, American (and South @ } African) ISPs must abide by a commercial company's decisions as @ } (theoretically) moderated by the NSF. Where APNIC and RIPE members @ } take responsibility for the administration of the resource on which @ } they depend, American (and South African) ISPs rely on the US @ } government to play mommy. @ }-- End of excerpt from "David R. Conrad" @ @ I'm from South Africa. The fact that we are so tied to the USA upsets @ me. I also administer the 'co.za' domain - probably the largest domain @ in Africa - with (as of writing) 5607 registered names. @ @ Many folk have stated that Africa should have its own NIC. It would @ make most sense that DNS, ASN and IP Allocation came from one place. @ Adopting the line of 'slow startup' - I approached the InterNIC for a @ single superblock of Class C addresses - to start attending with some @ of the local address problems - and have currently been refused. @ Who did you talk to or contact ? Did you contact the NSF ? @ I'm not planning on running all this myself - but it would be unfair @ to expect any organisation to suddently have the full required @ infrastructure to run everything that a full blown NIC probably should @ have. Sure there are a number of people talking about getting this @ going - but thats all - just talking. The AfricanNIC has to start @ somehow - and a slow start is the Internet Way. @ You have to start somewhere. People who already have all of the "nic" infrastructure are not going to give you much help building yours, because they want to try to control the industry. Your task is large but it is not impossible. There are many activities that you might want to consider as you proceed. Here is a short list: 1. Get the buy-in from 4 or 5 ISPs that have existing facilities to handle the basics and pick a name and banner to rally around. 2. Get the buy-in of your elected officials and have them contact the U.S. State Department and the National Science Foundation. 3. Deploy a confederation of TRUE Root Name Servers similar to the eDNS confederation (http://www.edns.net) 4. Develop a Registration Authority (RA) to help cultivate the growth of TLD Registries. 5. Develop one or more TLD Registries to develop some of the infrastructure and business community awareness needed to support the Internet Registry industry in an area. 6. Help with IPv4 ecology and reclamation efforts and plan to take over the management of an existing /8 once you have enough infrastructure in place. @ So whom do I petition? @ @ Oh - my personal interests range as far as Central Africa - Zaire - @ etc... This is not just a local South African only thing. @ Just as your range is a wide area of Africa, the topics the Registry Industry touches cover the gamut. It is important to develop and demonstrate the infrastructure needed to handle domain names, IP addresses, etc. As more and more products and services are added to the Registry Industry, the companies that you help to develop will be the natural candidates to provide the region with the Internet Infrastructure management that is needed to grow the region in an organized way. -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation http://www.Unir.Corp Check out...http://Register.A.Mall

1 0

Re: ARIN is *NOT* A Good Thing
by John Curran 29 Mar '97

29 Mar '97

At 1:29 3/29/97, David Stoddard wrote: > >The inference here is that by creating a costly >new bureaucracy, all our problems will go away. The inference is that we can have IP address allocations being made by a relatively nimble non-profit if we take the steps to establish such now. There is a very real difference between a large for-profit company working under the goverment cooperative agreement and a small standalone operation running under member goverance. I don't think creating ARIN solves the world's problems, but I do think it provides a solid path forward for IP administration in a very uncertain world. /John

1 0