June 1998 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: IP over SONET considered harmful?
by avg＠pluris.com 06 Jun '98

06 Jun '98

> Subject: IP over SONET considered harmful? > > I'd hoped that MPLS would solve this problem, but from reviewing > the drafts I believe that the LSRs _WILL_ decrement the TTL. I think this is a non-issue, considering that with the next generation of IP-only boxes ATM will become hopelessly useless. Better yet, the real big boxes are removing any need to do clustering, so the average number of IP hops for an NSP is going to be like 3 or 4. --vadim

6 5

Re: More smurf networks. FIX YOUR ROUTERS.
by Studded 06 Jun '98

06 Jun '98

Michael J. Freeman wrote: > > Stop the spam, why don't you send mail to this person directly, Actually, I did. He replied to the list. > I'm sure no one cares to hear about dal.net, at least I don't. I felt that if one person was interested others might be. Perhaps posting that response to the list was not appropriate, if so I apologize. At the same time, I would appreciate it if any further remonstrations were sent to me in private. It is arguably worse to chastise someone publicly for not sending a response in private than it is to post a public response to a public query. But I digress, Doug

1 0

Hello, Detriot! This is not an operational message...
by Al Reuben 06 Jun '98

06 Jun '98

So, we're here. If anyone is interested in having a beer, getting dinner, whatever, call me; 973.332.4016! -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 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 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

1 0

Re: Load balancing/Multiple CNAME's (Was: Re: Beyond DNS...)
by shields＠crosslink.net 06 Jun '98

06 Jun '98

In article <35788244.55A2D71(a)san.rr.com>, Studded <Studded(a)san.rr.com> wrote: > > For the same reason you can't CNAME a zone's root to something else > > (meaning, if I am setting up the zone map for n.ml.org, I can CNAME > > web.n.ml.org to narnia.n.ml.org, > > Right. > > > but I can't CNAME n.ml.org to > > narnia.n.ml.org, nor can I CNAME n.ml.org to ftp.microsoft.com, or any > > other host), > > Why not? Because you cannot have CNAME RRs along with any other RR, including NS and SOA. DNSSEC RRs are excepted. > Finally, if you plan to disagree with anything in this post, please > quote chapter and verse from the relevant RFC. I've spent a lot of time > studying this topic and am quite sure of my facts. RFC 2181 section 10.1. -- Shields, CrossLink.

3 3

Re: More smurf networks. FIX YOUR ROUTERS.
by Studded 05 Jun '98

05 Jun '98

Jan Czmok wrote: > No Problem!The network 194.152.36.255 is NOT LONGER a SMURF AMPIFIER - we fixed it > completely. > I think all of our routes are clean now... Muchas gracias. :) > [NANOG OFF-TOPIC:] Another question: how about getting the ipf.net irc server > connected to dal.net ? http://www.dal.net/vote/server-app.txt We look forward to hearing from you. :) One note, we will shortly be amending the application to indicate that the minimum number of users your server would need to support is 1,500. Doug -- *** Chief Operations Officer, DALnet IRC network *** *** Proud designer and maintainer of one of the world's largest *** Internet Relay Chat servers with 5,328 simultaneous connections *** Try spider.dal.net on ports 6662-4 (Powered by FreeBSD)

1 0

Beyond DNS...
by Jim Fleming 05 Jun '98

05 Jun '98

On Monday, June 01, 1998 9:45 AM, Jared Mauch[SMTP:jared@puck.nether.net] wrote: @On Mon, Jun 01, 1998 at 09:23:38AM -0500, Jim Fleming wrote: @> On Monday, June 01, 1998 4:18 AM, James Rishaw[SMTP:jamie@dilbert.ais.net] <snip> @ @ Even *fewer* people understand how dns works, nor can configure @it properly. This is easy to tell, log lame delegations on your @nameserver. Or log the "invalid" hostnames stuff, folks with _/, etc.. @in their dns entries. @ The DNS could be used for much more than it currently is configured to handle. It is only a matter of time before people become better educated about the general purpose nature of the system. Some people think that A records can only contain 32 bit IP addresses when in fact they are generic containers for objects of class, Integer. Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - An H.323 GateKeeper for the IPv8 Network http://www.unir.net 0:196 .MALL

11 14

Re: PPP over Ethernet?
by Michael Nelson 05 Jun '98

05 Jun '98

>No, actually, this is a tool that a close friend wrote while working on a >test harness for the PPTP protocol. It seems that MS PPTP doesn't quite >work as advertized and it was necessary to sniff a ton of sessions to >determine the protocol and write the state machine to interface to >something other than Winblows as a client or server. I suppose that >"releasing" the crack will brings with it notoriety in the community if >that's what you're after. Personally, I find it more gratifying to know it >can be done and have the prowess to do it than to provide the code to every >bored 13y/o on the planet via anonymous ftp. > >>According to my Microsoft insider, "depends what the client is. If it's >>NT and uses the NTLM hash, it's quite secure. If it's 9x and uses the >>LM hash, it's easy to crack. Basically the deal is that 9x clients use >>a shitty old hash method that's really easy to sniff and crack." > >The session hijacked was NT<->NT. With 3DES/Blowfish/etc freely available, >why does MS feel the need to _attempt_ to write their own encryption? Who said they wrote their own encryption? They use RC4 (40 or 128 bit). The problems deal with authentication/key management, not encryption. -mike

1 0

PLANE TICKET
by Al Reuben 05 Jun '98

05 Jun '98

Hrmph. Turns out one of us nac.net types will not be able to go to NANOG. So, we have a spare ticket. The cost is $166, plus a $75 change fee. The flights: 6/6/98 Leaving Newark (EWR) 9:20am Arriving Detroit (DTW) 11:17am Flight Number: 1749 6/9/98 Leaving Detroit (DTW) 7:15pm Arriving Newark (EWR) 9:00pm Flight Number: 482 If you are interested, call me at 973.366.3000 or 973.989.5600. You'd need to be at Newark Airport at 8:30 am. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 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 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

1 0

Re: PPP over Ethernet?
by John Fraizer 05 Jun '98

05 Jun '98

At 05:40 PM 6/4/98 -0400, you wrote: >> Give me 10 minutes with a sniffer and a few nifty tools and not only can I >> find the PPTP session but, take control. Now, *I* have access to your file >> on that NiceTry Server. > ><http://www.counterpane.com/pptp.html> of course. No, actually, this is a tool that a close friend wrote while working on a test harness for the PPTP protocol. It seems that MS PPTP doesn't quite work as advertized and it was necessary to sniff a ton of sessions to determine the protocol and write the state machine to interface to something other than Winblows as a client or server. I suppose that "releasing" the crack will brings with it notoriety in the community if that's what you're after. Personally, I find it more gratifying to know it can be done and have the prowess to do it than to provide the code to every bored 13y/o on the planet via anonymous ftp. >According to my Microsoft insider, "depends what the client is. If it's >NT and uses the NTLM hash, it's quite secure. If it's 9x and uses the >LM hash, it's easy to crack. Basically the deal is that 9x clients use >a shitty old hash method that's really easy to sniff and crack." The session hijacked was NT<->NT. With 3DES/Blowfish/etc freely available, why does MS feel the need to _attempt_ to write their own encryption? >Supposedly there are patches that close the holes, but PPTP still doesn't >appear to have been designed nicely to begin with. ---START PATCH.BAT--- ;patch.bat echo "Please insert Linux Bootable Installation CD in CD drive." pause "Press <ENTER> when ready." echo "This process may take several minutes depending on the speed of your computer" pause "Please press CTRL-ALT-DEL to begin the patch process..." ---END PATCH.BAT--- ------- John Fraizer (root) | __ _ | The System Administrator | / / (_)__ __ ____ __ | The choice mailto:root@EnterZone.Net | / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / | of a GNU http://www.EnterZone.Net/ | /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ | Generation A 486 is a terrible thing to waste...

1 0

The Cidr Report
by Tony Bates 05 Jun '98

05 Jun '98

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri Jun 5 12:00:00 PDT 1998 It is not checked before it leaves my workstation. However, hopefully you will find this report interesting and will take the time to look through this to see if you can improve the amount of aggregation you perform. The report is split into sections: 0) General Status List the route table history for the last week, list any possibly bogus routes seen and give some status on ASes. 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level This lists the "Top 30" players who if they decided to aggregate their announced classful prefixes at the origin AS level could make a significant difference in the reduction of the current size of the Internet routing table. This calculation does not take into account the inclusion of holes when forming an aggregate so it is possible even larger reduction should be possible. 2) Weekly Delta A summary of the last weeks changes in terms of withdrawn and added routes. Please note that this is only a snapshot but does give some indication of ASes participating in CIDR. Clearly, it is generally a good thing to see a large amont of withdrawls. 3) Interesting aggregates Interesting here means not an aggregate made as a set of classful routes. Thanks to xara.net for giving me access to their routing tables once a day. Please send any comments about this report directly to me. Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr-report.html for a daily update of this report. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CIDR REPORT for 05Jun98 0) General Status Table History ------------- Date Prefixes 290598 50967 300598 51064 310598 50995 010698 50998 020698 51248 030698 51503 040698 51477 050698 50625 Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr.plot.html for a plot of the table history. Possible Bogus Routes --------------------- AS Summary ---------- Number of ASes in routing system: 3625 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix: 1747 (923 cidr, 824 classful) Largest number of cidr routes: 360 announced by AS3561 Largest number of classful routes: 1108 announced by AS701 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level --- 05Jun98 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS4293 466 240 226 48.5% IMCI AS2493 503 293 210 41.7% iSTAR Internet, Inc. AS174 810 622 188 23.2% Performance Systems International AS3602 499 315 184 36.9% Sprint Canada Inc. AS701 1108 929 179 16.2% Alternet AS3749 220 65 155 70.5% TECNET AS3221 112 42 70 62.5% EENet Autonomous System AS5668 115 47 68 59.1% Century Telephone Inc. AS4755 97 30 67 69.1% Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. India AS3248 128 61 67 52.3% VIAnet AS10928 108 44 64 59.3% UNKNOWN AS7046 203 141 62 30.5% UUNET-CUSTOMER AS6269 125 66 59 47.2% AT&T NWCS backbone network AS3804 199 141 58 29.1% Bell Solutions AS271 110 52 58 52.7% BCnet Backbone AS549 206 153 53 25.7% ONet Backbone AS4740 374 324 50 13.4% ASN-OZEMAIL (Ozemail Pty Ltd) AS4539 74 24 50 67.6% NETROPOLIS AS1221 274 224 50 18.2% AARNET-AS AS72 85 37 48 56.5% Schlumberger Information Network AS6335 68 20 48 70.6% NTRNET AS1239 541 494 47 8.7% SprintLink Backbone AS4200 144 99 45 31.2% AGIS (Apex Global Information Ser AS852 159 118 41 25.8% AGT Advance Communication AS719 443 404 39 8.8% LANLINK autonomous system AS7657 120 82 38 31.7% The Internet Group Limited AS762 117 80 37 31.6% WELLFLEET-AS AS6181 65 28 37 56.9% FUSE-NET AS803 72 36 36 50.0% SaskNet Backbone AS4763 108 72 36 33.3% Telstra New Zealand For the rest of the previous weeks gain information please see http://www.employees.org:80/~tbates/cidr-report.html 2) Weekly Delta Please see http://www.employees.org:80/~tbates/cidr-report.html for this part of the report 3) Interesting aggregates Please see http://www.employees.org:80/~tbates/cidr-report.html for this part of the report

1 0