- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

RE: Questions about Internet Packet Losses
by Chris A. Icide 16 Jan '97

16 Jan '97

Mr. Shein; The NANOG list readership/authorship tends to fall into the more "techie" range than anything else. I will take a chance and say the techies outweigh the policy setters on this list. With this in mind, I would suggest that the Spammer problem is a policy problem, not a technical problem. Yelling at techies to fix it is not the solution. Yelling at techies for talking technical terms is even worse. If you want to use your Titanic example, let's get a blind, deaf person to stand iceberg lookout! We can tie a rope to them, and when they fall overboard, we will know we've hit a berg. Let the techies solve the technical problems, and take the policy problems to the policy makers. Now to answer your question, I do believe that Mr. Paul Vixie has a method that you may choose to use to combat the large Spam sites. Perhaps you may want to take a look into that. I forget the web address, but I'm sure someone will post it here soon for you. Chris A. Icide Nap.Net, L.L.C. P.S. Of course this is all MHO, and I apologize if I step on any ones feet for calling them a techie, or insinuating that there are no policy folks here, or just ticking someone off because they are a member of the visually and aurally handicapped. My point is to suggest to anyone who wants to come to this list and rant and rave about problems, should do so in a less agressive manner if they would really like someone to take a look at the problem. ----------

2 1

Re: Bay Networks in bed with commie censors?
by Paul Ferguson 16 Jan '97

16 Jan '97

At 04:33 PM 1/15/97 -0800, Owen DeLong wrote: > > >Well, AS 666 is owned by the ARMY Weapons Systems Test Center. > And they actually *do* have lots of black helicopters, too, but I digress. - paul

1 0

Re: Bay Networks in bed with commie censors?
by Vadim Antonov 16 Jan '97

16 Jan '97

Edward Fang <edfang(a)visi.net> wrote: On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Vadim Antonov wrote: :Their "partnership" with censors of a communist regime :is repugnant. Using the modern technology to build a :giant brainwashing machine is very scary. >How so ? Communications is actually loosening communism >as it was in China. Yes. >Fax machines have helped, and anything >that facilitates the exchange of ideas will only make >China bend closer to a 'democracy standard'. This network facilitates more propaganda; not the "exchange of ideas". A Chineze citizen would have to be a naive idiot, or a hard-core dissident not minding some time in a jail, to post anything subversive over a state network. >If you see >how China has changed from 10 years ago to now (some form >of capitalism), you will see that they cannot and will not >run the country as communism was once run. Capitalism != freedom of spech. Look at what's going on in Singapore. >I don't think this has anything to do with >commercialism. Are you implying that Cisco and/or >other US firms would turn this deal down (and or not >pursue it?). They didn't do anything like that, ok? >Should we also boycott Coke, McDonalds, KFC, McDonald >Douglas, etc ? Since they all profit from the people >of a 'communist' country that does not endorse the >same personal freedoms that we do. They do not profit by creating means for state brainwashing and censorship. The trade and communications with _people_ of communist countries is unquestionable good. Helping the communist state to spread their propaganda is amoral. Please make a difference between a person eating a burger and a state agency running the politically censored network. --vadim

2 1

Re: Bay Networks in bed with commie censors?
by doug＠pbi.net 16 Jan '97

16 Jan '97

On Jan 15, 19:23, David Schwartz wrote: > > If I owned a gun store, I wouldn't sell a gun to someone who I > thought would use it to murder someone no matter how much money he > offered. Would you? No one needs the money or the business that badly. > I hardly would compare a Bay Networks router to a gun. Then again... :) -d

1 0

Re: Bay Networks in bed with commie censors?
by Vadim Antonov 16 Jan '97

16 Jan '97

Matt Ranney <mjr(a)wacky.eit.com> wrote: >So if a bunch of Commies came over to your office with a dump truck >full of money and said, "So comrade, we need IP networks that are the >fastest they can possibly be. If we dump this in your lobby will you >help us?" I'd tell them to get a hike. Did that many times, actually, and not in safety of an American office. >You'd say no? What if they just bought a bunch of Cisco routers on >the open market without any special deal? Should Cisco turn that >money away? Look, it is impossible to keep technology from being used by communist regimes. Like it's impossible to keep knives from hands of murderers. But what do you say about a person who gives a knife to a known murderer knowing very well that it is going to be used to kill yet another victim? And teaches him how to wield it more efficiently? And gets paid for it? --vadim

1 0

Re: Bay Networks in bed with commie censors?
by Dave O'Shea 16 Jan '97

16 Jan '97

> > Ok, it looks like Bay Networks made a sweet deal with > Chinese commies. Essentially, they will provide > technology for the state propaganda network and > censored Internet. Personally, I think Bay does make for more easily-modified access control; with Cisco, removing one IP from an Access List From Hell is usually too much task to be worth it. And if I could have undersold Bay by a percent, I'd be doing the Taipei Tango whilst plugging away on a 7513. > > Their "partnership" with censors of a communist regime > is repugnant. Using the modern technology to build a > giant brainwashing machine is very scary. Actually, few brainwashing schemes could beat what Madison Avenue churns out. When you can get the American public thinking that a certain type of shoes or jeans will make you socially acceptable, you've got the Chinese beat pretty bad. Mao Tse Tung ain't got nothing on the Marlboro Cowboy. > > Some companies will do anything for a buck, though. The corporation exists maximize shareholder value; the good press from the sale (and the sale itself) obviously outweighs the risk of bad press. > > How about boycotting their products in U.S. and other > democratic countries? I dunno; suppose I boycott every company that sells to some organization that I find repugnant? Pretty soon, I won't be able to find a car to drive, a grocery store to shop in, or a telephone to talk on.

1 0

Re: Bay Networks in bed with commie censors?
by Paul Ferguson 16 Jan '97

16 Jan '97

At 03:21 PM 1/15/97 -0800, Michael Dillon wrote: > >Have you changed from a Soviet imperialist into an American imperialist? >Don't you realize that parallelism can be exploited in politics as well as >in routing? Create millions of small opportunities for Chinese people to >share information and they will do the rest. > Can we move this thread entirely to com-priv, please? Somehow, this reminds me of Godwin's Law, and a couple of associated corollaries: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." - "Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies", Mike Godwin, EFF staff counsel. "As global connectivity improves, the probability of actual Nazis being on the net approaches one." - "Van der Leun's Corollary to Godwin's Law", Gerard Van der Leun, former EFF Cambridge office director. This corollary is already proven. "Thread bandwidth consumption increases in inverse proportion to thread content quality." - "McCandlish's Second Corollary to the Wilcox/McCandlish Law", Stanton McCandlish, EFF online activist; 1995. On second thought, this thread actually reminds me of Sturgeon's Law: "90% of everything is crap." - "Sturgeon's Law", Theodore Sturgeon - paul

1 0

Re: Bay Networks in bed with commie censors?
by Selina F. Priestley 15 Jan '97

15 Jan '97

Can we move this thread to com-priv only? I got enough to read. Or at least maybe you could discuss primatology, which at least I find interesting. Thanks, Selina > On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Vadim Antonov wrote: > > > Their "partnership" with censors of a communist regime > > is repugnant. Using the modern technology to build a > > giant brainwashing machine is very scary. > > Since you are a person that saw up-front and close the democratizing > effects of a telecommunications network on the democratization of a > communist country, I find this a rather surprising statement. > > The network will let more Chinese citizens communicate with each other > than ever before. And I strongly expect that there will be dozens of > gateways between this "intranet" and China's Internet providers. > > You, of all people, should realize that withholding commnications > technology sterngthens and isolates communist regimes. But hooking them > into the global capitalist economy at the state level will eventually pay > dividends by creating a bourgeois class (the educated middle class) which > will force democratization to occur. > > Not everybody follows the U.S. model of democracy, for instance Canada > does not. But that doesn't mean we aren't free and it doesn't mean we > aren't happy. > > Have you changed from a Soviet imperialist into an American imperialist? > Don't you realize that parallelism can be exploited in politics as well as > in routing? Create millions of small opportunities for Chinese people to > share information and they will do the rest. > > Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting > Memra Software Inc. - Fax: +1-250-546-3049 > http://www.memra.com - E-mail: michael(a)memra.com >

1 0

NetSCARF Workshop Sunday (1-5PM) before NANOG
by William B. Norton 15 Jan '97

15 Jan '97

Hi all - The Merit Network Statistics Collection And Reporting Facility (NetSCARF) Project will be hosting its *second* free workshop in the afternoon on the day *before* NANOG in the San Francisco Grand Hyatt Grand Ballroom. We will provide an overview of the (2.x and February release 3.0) technology (see agenda below), future release plans, and open the floor to feedback and discussion about how you would like to see the product evolve. The NetSCARF SCION software package is a public domain network statistics collection and reporting package that uses SNMPv1 or SNMPv2u to collect stats from network devices and reports the network performance on the web. Release 3 is scheduled to be released early February and features real-time display of certain data, "clickable graphs", an administration and installation tool and security mechanisms to restrict access to network statistics. For this second workshop, we have openings for the first hundred (100) that register at http://www.merit.edu/~netscarf. If you get a chance, read the Connexions NetSCARF article on our web page before the workshop. If you have any questions, please feel free to e-mail me at ala(a)merit.edu or call at 313.763.6378. Thanks, -Andy Adams ======================================================================== NetSCARF Workshop Tentative Agenda - February 9, 1997 1-5PM ------------------------------------------ Welcome, Model and Rationale - Bill NSFNET Operations 3 Graphs of proven utility Proposal to RAC Architecture Overview - Andy NetSCARF Model - abstractions, functionality divisions, etc. New Features Scollect Component - Bill SNMP Overview Scollect Task Storage of Stats: Rtdata Tree Scook Component - Tom Motivation behind aggregating data (statistics on file sizes, etc.) The four aggregate files e-mail report Administration Tool - Tom Functionality ScServer Component - Adam Highlighting new security features Functionality ScClient, Scache Component - Bill, Andy & Eric Highlighting new real-time display of some data Highlighting the clickable bar/pie chart How Existing Reports are generated NetSCARF Futures - Discussions - all Our visions, customer visions -------------------------------------------------------------- William B. Norton <wbn(a)merit.edu> (313) 764-9430

1 0

Whois InterNIC?
by Chris A. Icide 15 Jan '97

15 Jan '97

Thanks for the hundres of hints on that AS6245. For those that think me stupid. I had a routing loop to the InterNIC, and the only info I was able to dredge from the tools I had at the time were the origin AS. Thanks for the info from everyone, we greatly appreciate the test of our office mail server. P.S. whoever was the first one, you helped me figure out the problem, thanks. Chris A. Icide

2 1