June 1998 - Test - lists.nanog.org

reset TCP connections to *.microsoft.com
by Mr. Dana Hudes 09 Jun '98

09 Jun '98

Anyone else experiencing trouble connecting various microsoft www and ftp sites? I put a Sniffer on the line and found that I have a part of a web page come up and then the connection is reset. This is using Netscape Communicator4 on both NT and SPARC Solaris. If one uses IE3 it works better. I find this highly suspicious. Also straight ftp from a unix system is very slow if you get in at all. I think we can all agree that the tcp/ip stack on sparc solaris 2.5.1 is not likely broken (patched to current level, January '98, just in case) where NT might be suspect even 4.0 w/service pack 3. One possible problem I consider is that I have Path MTU discovery turned on in all my routers interfaces (Bay RS12.10). My path to microsoft is via Alter.Net . The local Ethernet MTU is 1518 but the UUNET circuit is 1600. The packets I see come by with "don't fragment" set for several and then one that does not have DF and then the TCP reset comes in. Suggestions and opinions? Thanks Dana Hudes Graphnet

3 2

RE: WorldNIC
by cgomes＠internic.net 09 Jun '98

09 Jun '98

Bad habit. I have been using the InterNIC address for 2.5 years. Also, there are hundreds of customers who know that email address. Chuck Gomes Network Solutions -----Original Message----- From: pete(a)missing.com [mailto:pete@missing.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 1998 5:24 PM To: Peter Galbavy Cc: Gomes, Chuck; haug(a)seicom.net; sjsobol(a)shell.nacs.net; chris(a)empnet.com; nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: WorldNIC I'd like to point out that it's interesting that this email is coming from the @internic.net address, not worldnic.net or some netsol domain. If you are part of Network Solutions and going to promote the company and not the organization (InterNIC) which was temporarily entrusted to you by the NSF contract -- why are you sending this email from an InterNIC address and not being clear about who you are and who you represent. I don't believe that anyone should be sending email from @internic.net if it isn't for the purpose of processing and registring domain names and the temporary business arrangement which was granted to Network Solutions (and 2 other companies) under the National Science Foundation contract. > > > Nothing is being offered that cannot be delivered. The regulations of each > > country code TLD registry are followed. > > SOrt of. You are using your influence (that of InterNIC) to make deals with > these NICs. This is anti-competative and illegal. > > > > > -- > Peter Galbavy > Knowledge Matters Ltd > http://www.knowledge.com /http://www.wonderland.org/ http://www.literature.org/ > -- Pete Bowden, Network Engineer, Operations Supervisor pete(a)internex.net repete(a)concentric.com repete(a)cncx.com (Former InterNex) Concentric Network Corp, 2306 Walsh Ave Santa Clara, CA 95051 Voice: 408 327-2491 NIC: PB8 Fax: 408 496-5484

1 0

RE: WorldNIC
by cgomes＠internic.net 09 Jun '98

09 Jun '98

Winfried, Nothing is being offered that cannot be delivered. The regulations of each country code TLD registry are followed. Chuck -----Original Message----- From: Winfried Haug [mailto:nanog@hq.seicom.net] Sent: Monday, June 08, 1998 5:03 PM To: Gomes, Chuck Cc: sjsobol(a)shell.nacs.net; chris(a)empnet.com; nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: WorldNIC Hello.. > Chris, > > idNames, now a part of Network Solutions, offers registration in country code TLDs > for companies that would like to do that. Is that fraud? What am I missing here? well you are offering something you cant deliver... we are just about to register domains in 30 countries for 2 customers and a lot of NICs want a trademark proof, that this company has a trademark in this country.. second: often the company must have an address in this country... e.g you cant register a domain in the TLD of germany .DE if you cant provide an adddress in germany. what are you doing, if your customer doesnt have a "real" address in germany ? you have lost.... btw: the german NIC is a real desaster currently. To do this kind of job, you need a *lot* of letters, papers etc to complete it in all the interesting TLDs... Well every company can do their business, i think over 17.000.- is a lot of money...but everybody can decide to get to Worldnic or not :-))) Winfried

4 3

RE: WorldNIC
by Doug Stanfield 09 Jun '98

09 Jun '98

>Michael Dillon said: >but I personally don't give a >damn and prefer a more diverse and chaotic system of naming. Your preferences aren't historical and in any religious war the one with the most historical references wins. Doug Stanfield Oceanic Cable Data Networking Manager 200 Akamainui St. dougs(a)oceanic.com Mililani, HI 96789

1 0

RBN -- Please try later
by Bob Collie 09 Jun '98

09 Jun '98

Anyone else having major problems with overloaded RBN servers? If so, any suggestions from our friends at RBN? -Bob -- Bob Collie, VP/Chief Technical Officer, Telalink Corporation mailto:bob.collie@telalink.net

6 5

smurf reporting
by Mikael Abrahamsson 09 Jun '98

09 Jun '98

To report smurfs in a more automated fashion we need a utility that'll take an IP number as input and then return email adresses from the arin/ripe whois database. I guess this can be done an an hour or five :) but I wonder if someone already has done this and would consider posting it here or to me privately? I was also pondering if mail should be sent to upstream providers or not, for instance, if one of netcoms customers was a smurf intermediate, doing a whois on their /24 would reveal both them and netcom, should an email be sent to both? I think this would be a good thing the way things are run here in Europe (when the ISP often owns the router placed at the customers location) but I dont know how it is run over over there so perhaps someone could enlighten me and give me an opinion? ----- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike(a)swm.pp.se

2 1

Re: $110,000 for Gated Source Code
by Tony Li 09 Jun '98

09 Jun '98

alex(a)Relcom.EU.net (Alex P. Rudnev) writes: > There is ONLY (ONLY) two well-debugged and wideworld checked router > implementation now - first is CISCO IOS, second is GATED. I'd like to take some small issue with that statement. Well debugged????? ROTFL Tony

2 1

Re: $110,000 for Gated Source Code
by Tony Li 09 Jun '98

09 Jun '98

dhudes(a)graphnet.com (Mr. Dana Hudes) writes: > I agree with Alex. People don't seem to realize that GateD > ran the NFSNET backbone for years. People need to recall the difference between rcp_routed and gated. Tony

2 1

servint contact
by Scott Gross 09 Jun '98

09 Jun '98

If anyone from Servint is out there, please contact me off-line. Thank you Scott Gross Engineer Worldcom/GDNO scott.gross(a)wcom.com

1 0

I didn't make it up to the microphone quick enough...
by Alex Rubenstein 09 Jun '98

09 Jun '98

I have a question about the ip reverse-path verification. Obviously, it won't work very well in asymetric multi-homed environment. But, the usefullness could be there (even limitedly) if you could at least filter packets that have source address which does not exist in the routing table _at all_ (irregardless of ingress or egress interface). Is this something that could be implemented easily? -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Atheism is a non-prophet organization. I route, therefore I am. Alex Rubenstein, alex(a)nac.net, KC2BUO, ISP/C Charter Member Father of the Network and Head Bottle-Washer Net Access Corporation, 9 Mt. Pleasant Tpk., Denville, NJ 07834 Don't choose a spineless ISP! We have more backbone! http://www.nac.net -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

5 4