November 1998 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Best Practices for Being Permanently Added to the RBL
by Paul Vixie 18 Nov '98

18 Nov '98

black(a)layer8.net (Ben Black) writes: > RBL Working Group Ben Black > INTERNET DRAFT Layer 8 Networks > Obsoletes: draft-ietf-rbl-selfdefense-00.txt this draft is now available online at http://maps.vix.com/rbl/draft-ietf-rbl-selfdefense-00.txt and yes, it has a link from http://maps.vix.com/rbl/ -- Paul Vixie <paul(a)vix.com>

1 0

Exodus Customer Security
by Adam Rothschild 18 Nov '98

18 Nov '98

FYI- "There was something with one of our customers, however it was a customer machine, and as such, we aren't at liberty to discuss the issue unless they specifically allow us to." - quoth Exodus So, in other words, they can't discuss abuse issues with the victim, unless the *offender* (client) gives them permission to? I'll sleep much better tonight knowing this.

11 16

Re: luser of the day award!
by Paul Vixie 18 Nov '98

18 Nov '98

> >> I wonder how he's going to find out just who is using RBL and who isn't? > > > >Wouldn't it be easy enough to ping each suspect network from a machine > >that he knows has been RBL'd? Or (in the stealth scenario) send a message > >to an autoresponder on each suspected network? identifying suspect networks would be hard, though. > >I wonder if he could subpeona the list of RBL subscribers in the interests > >of naming them in a law suit. Not that I think he has the financial > >backing to actually carry the suit out, but it is a curiosity. yes, he could do that. > Look at the RBL site, a DNS subsciber it not tracked anywhere, except maybe > Vixie's XFER log files. Even the MAPs crew doesn't know how many > subscribers they have. slight correction here: the subscribers number in the two hundred and twenties, and we know exactly who they are. noone AXFR's the zone without registering, or gets a BGP feed without registering. the thing we don't know how many we have of, is unsubscribed users who just add FEATURE(rbl) to their sendmail.mc files and never register at all. we've estimated this to be in the thousands or tens of thousands just based on the splay shown among query source addresses on the RBL.MAPS.VIX.COM nameservers, but a that's pretty rough way to estimate this quantity. -- Paul Vixie <paul(a)vix.com>

1 0

RE: luser of the day award!
by Goldstein, William C, MIDMK 18 Nov '98

18 Nov '98

Although I share a surname with the more notable and quotable Emmanuel Goldstein, we are not related, to the best of my knowledge. Bill Goldstein Senior Internet Specialist AT&T wgoldstein(a)att.com TEL:(412)642-7288 > ---------- > From: Christopher Neill[SMTP:chrisn@qual.net] > Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 1998 6:34 PM > To: Goldstein, William C, MIDMK; nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: luser of the day award! > > On Wed, Nov 18, 1998 at 04:37:04PM -0500, Goldstein, William C, MIDMK > wrote: > > Has anyone started a "Paul Vix Defense Fund?" > > > > I'll contribute! > > > > I hear Emmanual Goldstein of 2600 Magazine will be hold a special > fundraiser in New York.. > > "Free Kevin Mitnick and Paul Vix Gala 1999" > > w00 h00!@ >

1 0

Re: AS_PATH length and route selection (WAS: Strange BGP announcement)
by Sean M. Doran 18 Nov '98

18 Nov '98

Deepak Jain wrote: | Best guess approximation? Say not more than 1 minute per router (* N | router hops between 1 edge of network and the other?) typically more like | 10 seconds on moderately loaded routers/links? Hm, where does 1 minute per router come from? The only interesting per-router issue is that there may be multiple congested gateways between the source of an iBGP update and some of its destinations. Since iBGP rides on top of TCP it is sensitive to dropped segments, and where traffic pours into a forwarding loop, this can cause multiple full RTOs. Hierarchicalizing the iBGP mesh is a win in part because it localizes some TCP connections such that there are fewer (or no) intermediate gateways that may be congested, thus reducing the liklihood of dropped segments. Likewise, prioritizing iBGP TCP segments over other traffic also reduces the incidence of drops. As far as I know, all large networks currently do both of these things. Finally, fast convergence is a false deity: increasing control traffic in the face of the instability that is endemic to the Internet is a recipe for disaster. Staying slow and being stable is a more intelligent engineering goal; the drawback is that some routing protocols create transient forwarding loops whose lifetimes can be extended under load -- and the load may stem from forwarding packets in a fast loop. A permanently non-converging iBGP mesh replete with loops and black-holes is not just a theoretical possibility. :( Sean.

1 0

Re: luser of the day award!
by Dan Bustillos - Datalink Internet 18 Nov '98

18 Nov '98

This guy has got way too much time on his hands. We as NSP/ISP's must protect our self from spammers. We don't like it and our customers don't like it. I only have one question: Wht are his legal grounds? If any! Just my 2 Cents! Thank you, Dan Bustillos Technical Support Specialist Datalink Internet (530) 897-6400 (888) 328-4638 ******************* "Error, No Keyboard - Press F1 to continue" Only on a PC would you see this error. Never on my mac.

1 0

Re: AS_PATH length and route selection (WAS: Strange BGP announcement)
by Sean M. Doran 18 Nov '98

18 Nov '98

Ben Black wrote: | The key to this is that the administrative preference in question has domain | scope. Assuming you are correctly implementing iBGP, whether with a full | mesh, reflectors, or confederations, and assuming consistent announcements | from external route originators, then you can't make a loop because the | same policy is in effect for all the routers in the AS. You will not form a *persistent* loop or black-hole. However, as there is invariably some degree of propagation delay among iBGP speakers, particularly in a large network, there can be short-lived loops or black-holes when converging upon routing changes. Sean.

3 2

Re: luser of the day award!
by Paul Vixie 18 Nov '98

18 Nov '98

> This seems like good incentive for anyone who does not use the RBL to sign > up. -:) > > Sean. See http://maps.vix.com/rbl/ for more information on using the RBL, either by signing up or just adding a line to your sendmail.mc file. -- Paul Vixie <paul(a)vix.com>

1 0

Re: luser of the day award!
by Mike Reno 18 Nov '98

18 Nov '98

Do it in Vegas and go for some additional high risk investment capital! :) -=Mike Reno=- At 11:19 AM 11/18/98 -0800, D wrote: >Is it contempt of court if you look forward to the court case as a better >solution to expensing a technical seminar? We should just hold the >next NANOG the lobby of the courthouse, then we can countersue for court >costs, and have him pay our way... and afford to stay in POSH hotels. :) > >Just a thought. :) > >D > /=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\ ! Mike Reno ! EarthLink Network ! ! Hostmaster ! 3100 New York Drive ! ! email: mreno(a)earthlink.net ! Pasadena CA 91107 ! !. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .! ! Voice 626-296-5072 ! FAX 626-296-5113 ! \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=/ Earthlink -- The High Fiber Decongestant for the Internet

1 0

cw.net congestion in Seattle?
by Joe Hamelin 18 Nov '98

18 Nov '98

Has anyone else noticed congestion (lost packets) going through cw.net in Seattle? The router I see is bordercore2-hssi5-0-1.Seattle.cw.net (166.48.208.5). Thanks, Joe

2 1