April 1999 - Test - lists.nanog.org

RISK FREE HOME BASED BUSINESS
by Charlie 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

Need more money? Have big dreams? NO RISK BUSINESS - Not MLM! Own a home based catalog business for $29 and work at your own pace! Debt free consumer direct manufacturer needs reps to set up wholesale accounts. True residual income on superior quality consumable products. 100% money back guarantee. Potential to earn top CEO income. If you're tired of the rat race, would like to experience time freedom, and build a risk free solid business, call (509) 880 0303. THIS IS AWESOME! You CAN have your dreamss back! ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// REMOVE AT mailto:bobb@marchmail.com?subject=remove /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

1 0

RE: Contact handles disappearing mysteriously from the whois database!
by John Fraizer 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

At 01:45 PM 4/27/99 -0600, Lauren.Nowlin(a)Level3.com wrote: > >I'm sure you have no idea what Mark went through to be allowed to >post on NANOG. Don't further frustrate the messenger... He likely >already has internal bruises for his efforts and doesn't deserve an >extra dose of sarcasm. > > -Ren Oh -- We know. It is obviously NSI policy to keep their CUSTOMERS in the dark about operational issues with a service for which we are paying $35/yr per domain. Just like it is their policy to omit information from information posted on their web site regarding financial information citing "proprietary information" although this information is available via FOIA. We appreciate the fact that Mark may be black-and-blue for weeks as a result of his post to NANOG. We do NOT appreciate the cloak-and-dagger tactics for which NSI is now world renowned. Lose a record here, arbitrarily delete a domain here, remove telephone contact information from the web site, redirect internic.net to networksolutions.com and delete/move/modify/FUBAR the information/templates/forms that have been in the same location for YEARS citing "Improvements" as a reason -- ALL without consulting the public OR the Government before doing so. I could give a rats ass about how pretty their site is. Their cutesy little graphics are a waste of bandwidth. Speaking of which, I'm surprised that there wasn't any stink about them providing ad space to VeriSign on the old internic.net site. I want reliable -- dependable -- FAMILIAR service. You would think these people had J. Edgar Hoover at the wheel. ------------------------------------------------------------------ ML.ORG is gone. Check out http://www.EZ-IP.Net - It's *FREE* ------------------------------------------------------------------ Get your *FREE* Parked Domain account at http://www.EZ-Hosting.Com ------------------------------------------------------------------ John Fraizer | __ _ | The System Administrator | / / (_)__ __ ____ __ | The choice mailto:John.Fraizer@EnterZone.Net | / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / | of a GNU http://www.EnterZone.Net/ | /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ | Generation PGP Key fingerprint = 7DB6 1CA2 DAA6 43DA 3AAF 44CD 258C 3D7E B425 81A8

3 3

Corelation between traffic and prefixes
by Alex Bligh 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

Has anyone done a (statistical) corelation and regression exercise between number of announced prefixes from peers, and traffic sent to them, and if so would they be prepared to publish the consolidated data (if not the anonymized data set)? Equally is there a corellation between advertised address space and traffic sent? Yes, there is an operational reason for this question. Essentially I'd like to know (a) whether advertized prefixes have a definable average "value" as well as "cost" (cost in terms of router resources), and (b) to what extent total prefixes is in practice a good measure of network size for peering decisions, or whether one really needs go do the Netflow. For instance on (a) I have noticed one inverse corelation - networks which are poor at CIDR tend to cause more aggro and give less value than the equivalent total address space. I am interested more in statistical data than opinion, the former of which I have have a lack of, the latter a surfeit. I will anonymize and summarize useful private replies to this list unless a preference otherwise is indicated. -- Alex Bligh GX Networks (formerly Xara Networks)

1 0

RE: Contact handles disappearing mysteriously from the whois data base!
by Lauren.Nowlin＠Level3.com 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

I'm sure you have no idea what Mark went through to be allowed to post on NANOG. Don't further frustrate the messenger... He likely already has internal bruises for his efforts and doesn't deserve an extra dose of sarcasm. -Ren On Tuesday, April 27, 1999 1:31 PM, Jay R. Ashworth [SMTP:jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us] wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 27, 1999 at 02:55:24PM -0400, Mark Kosters wrote: > > Two things have occured over the past week that have lead to changes > > in whois. > > My ghod; they _are_ alive! > > You know, I didn't see those things mentioned on RS-ANNOUNCE... > > > Cheers, > -- jra > -- > Jay R. Ashworth > jra(a)baylink.com > > Member of the Technical Staff Buy copies of The New Hackers > Dictionary. > The Suncoast Freenet Give them to all your friends. > Tampa Bay, Florida http://www.ccil.org/jargon/ > +1 813 790 7592

1 0

Re: address spoofing
by Simon Leinen 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

>>>>> "rb" == Randy Bush <randy(a)psg.com> writes: > [...] > but the uglier symptoms are packets from my own address space > deny ip 147.28.0.0 0.0.255.255 any (6 matches) One of our customers has 129.129.0.0/16, and we sure receive a lot of leaked packets with source and destination addresses in that range from our upstream. (One of these days I'll try to get those traced :-) 147.28.0.0 doesn't seem like a likely "random" prefix though. Maybe an ex-customer/employee of yours didn't clean up their configuration when they left? -- Simon. http://www.switch.ch/misc/leinen/

1 0

Re: Above.net off the air
by smd＠clock.org 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

You would think that a person working at UUNET might be able to find a counterpart at Abovenet and ask directly, rather than floating a "ha ha look - Abovenet crashed!" message on the NANOG mailing list. Sean. (disappointed)

2 1

Geektools - whois-servers.net #2
by Rodney Joffe 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

Ok, as has been pointed out, CNAME and TXT records rarely mix :-) So, we've made a change... tld.whois-servers.net will provide the CNAME etc. tld.info.whois-servers.net will provide the TXT data, when asked... /rlj www.centergate.com www.geektools.com

1 0

Re: Above.net off the air
by Avi Freedman 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

In article <99327.04417.24304(a)avi.netaxs.com> you wrote: : Anyone who was in the know care to comment on what caused Above.net to : seemingly go off the air for over an hour on 2/25/1999? : Having an entire major AS just vanish seems to be an interesting : operational item from the pov of people buying transit or having equipment : colo'ed with them. : /vijay All of the people buying transit or having collocated equipment have received 3 updates so far about what happened. Below is a summary. A bunch of bad routes got injected into OSPF and the Ciscos apparently lack some of the damping of SPF calculations that was promised some time ago. CPU went to 100%, all for OSPF process, on all routers. We were on top of it within minutes. It took rebooting some routers and disabling OSPF on others to get the core back to normal. It was the only time AboveNet has ever had a network-wide outage in AboveNet's 3 year history. We are doing some re-engineering to ensure that nothing of that scale can happen again, and have put some fixes into place to prevent any kind of OSPF confusion from lasting for more than a few minutes. I hate link state protocols. At least it didn't take us 6 hours to clear routes like the BGP deaggregation incident of a few years ago, or 18 hours as has happened to other providers who got OSPF cranked in the last few years. Avi Freedman VP, Enginering AboveNet Communications

1 0

Above.net off the air
by Vijay Gill 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

Anyone who was in the know care to comment on what caused Above.net to seemingly go off the air for over an hour on 2/25/1999? I checked the above.net network blocks at all the public exchanges, all the route servers, and there were no blocks being annouced from above.net for a while, and then the network entries came back. http://www.iad.above.net/traffic/core1.iad.above.net.pos5-0.html seems to bear out the fact that there was traffic loss. Having an entire major AS just vanish seems to be an interesting operational item from the pov of people buying transit or having equipment colo'ed with them. /vijay

1 1

GeekTools update Part 1 - whois-servers.net
by Rodney Joffe 26 Apr '99

26 Apr '99

Based on suggestions, we've now added a new set of nameservers which will serve up data on known whois servers. Requests in the form: dig xxx.whois-servers.net where xxx = tld (de, jp, com, ch, int, etcetera) will return a record with the correct CNAME and dns values. dig xxx.whois-servers.net any will return additional TXT records with the 'common' name for the TLD, for logic checking (Germany, Japan, Switzerland, International, etcetera). Obviously these answers will only be valid for the whois servers we are aware of. nslookup xxx.whois-servers.net will return the valid ip address and aliases, of course. Additionally, zone transfers (axfr) may be made for whois-servers.net if you prefer to proxy this data internally. I suggest you do this at least once to see which tld's we know about. I will also post the latest updates and features to the whois.geektools.com proxy shortly. These include: - AS numbers via APNIC, RIPE, and ARIN. Queries are routed to the proper server. - ARIN, RIPE, and APNIC "handle" and netblock lookups - RADB queries - Queries can be forced to specific NIC servers if needed while still using the proxy. - IP block lookups using the correct registry. - Self-contained - no external programs (unix whois or other lookup utility) required. - "Smart" whois server handling for those servers that tend to spew output in strange forms. The same features will also appear in the web-based whois tool at www.geektools.com. Finally, as usual, please send updates, feature requests and comments to complaints(a)centergate.com Rodney Joffe CenterGate Research Group www.centergate.com www.geektools.com

2 1