May 2002 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Fw: website case
by todd glassey 14 May '02

14 May '02

FYI - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rae Cogar" <rcogar(a)localnet.com> To: <CLCC-MEMS(a)MAIL.ABANET.ORG> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 7:26 AM Subject: website case > Here is a recently reported case from California that found a company > guilty of spoliation of evidence by changing information on their > website during litigation. One point made by the court in this case is > there were no policies or procedures for the updating or deleting of > material from the website. You can find this opinion at: > > > http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/tentrule.nsf/4f9d4c4a03b0cf70882567980073b > 2e4/cf68f686007991fa88256af1006a9e16?OpenDocument > > (you will need to cut and paste url) > > Spoliation Sanctions for Deletion of Web Page > The defendant corporation moved to dismiss for lack of personal > jurisdiction, denying minimum contacts with the state of California. > The plaintiff offered as evidence a page from the defendant's web site > that listed a California office address. While the motion was pending, > the California address disappeared from the defendant's web site. > Though one employee of the defendant testified that he had deleted the > page in routine maintenance, there was no corporate maintenance policy > that would explain the deletion. The court granted the plaintiff's > motion to enjoin further spoliation and ordered that the defendant pay > plaintiff's attorney's fees as a sanction. Pennar Software Corp. v. > Fortune 500 Sys., 51 Fed. R. Serv. 279 (N.D. Cal. 2001). > > > Another case for good records management! > > Rae Cogar, Esq. > RCS Consulting > Hamburg, NY 716-646-6192 > rcogar(a)localnet.com

1 0

and from the Supreme's..
by blitz 14 May '02

14 May '02

FYI: - - - - - - - - Verizon Communications, Inc. v. Fed. Communications Comm'n Decided: 05/13/02 No. 00-511 Full text: http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/00-511.html TELECOMMUNICATIONS (Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Rules Under Telecommunications Act of 1996 Valid) The United States Supreme Court held 8-0 (opinion by Souter; concurrence by Breyer; dissent in part by Breyer; O'Connor took no part in decision) that the FCC can require state commissions to set the rates charged by incumbents for leased elements on a forward-looking basis untied to the incumbents' investment and can also require the combination of elements. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Act) was intended to eliminate the monopolies enjoyed by the inheritors of AT&T's local franchises. The Act entitles the new entrants to lease elements of the incumbent carriers' local-exchange networks, and directs the FCC to prescribe methods for state utility commissions to use in setting rates for the sharing of those elements. The FCC promulgated rules that created pricing provisions, based on a forward-looking pricing methodology, and required incumbent local telephone companies to combine certain previously uncombined network-elements when a new entrant requests the combination. Incumbent carriers and state commissions challenged the FCC's rules. The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit invalidated both of these rules, holding that the Act required that rates be based on the actual, not hypothetical, cost of providing the network element and that there was no authority for the FCC to require the combination of elements. The United States Supreme Court reversed, stating that the FCC's rules were reasonable interpretations of the Act and the incumbents did not meet their burden of showing unreasonableness to defeat the deference due the FCC. [Summarized by K'elly Rees] - - - - - - - -

1 0

Any impact from the 5.2 earthquake in Gilroy CA?
by Joe 14 May '02

14 May '02

Just wondering if anyone else saw loss of service durng this quake. Ours was Aprx. 30 mins. -Joe

2 2

RE: BGP and aggregation
by Daniska Tomas 14 May '02

14 May '02

actually gre fragmentation itself has nothing to do w/df bit. you either leave the tunnel with default mtu (and use ip fragmentation - of course depending on df) or you may cause it fragmenting packets and resembling them at the tunnel end. on cisco boxes this is triggered by using larger 'ip mtu' (not interface mtu) value. there are some memory and cpu drawbacks due to defragmentation (a hold queue for fragments until they all arive etc.) -- Tomas Daniska systems engineer Tronet Computer Networks Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia tel: +421 2 58224111, fax: +421 2 58224199 A transistor protected by a fast-acting fuse will protect the fuse by blowing first. > -----Original Message----- > From: Forrest W. Christian [mailto:forrestc@imach.com] > Sent: 14. mája 2002 0:02 > To: Roger Marquis > Cc: nanog(a)trapdoor.merit.edu > Subject: Re: BGP and aggregation > > > > On Mon, 13 May 2002, Roger Marquis wrote: > > > Last time I tried this (IOS11.X to IOS11.X GRE) it was unreliable > > due to MTU limits. Certain websites (mainly financial) send large > > packets and set DF. This probably works around some security issue > > but the result was that these SSL servers couldn't reach clients > > over the GRE. > > We have seen the same issue in recent history. > > Generally, we try to have most of the traffic not pass through a GRE > tunnel. With some creative routing, we can pass the data back out to > our upstream which knows the more specific for that route. > > That said, we do support /32 static dialups across our net - > I.E. if you > have a /32 static on your dialup, you get the same /32 no > matter where you > dialup. These generally pass through the GRE tunnel as we > only know of > them through OSPF through the GRE tunnel. > > We have found that setting a mtu of roughly 1514 on the > tunnel fixes this. > I think this forces the GRE encapsulation to frag the packets > regardless > of the setting of the DF bit. Whether the far end router reassembles > them or not I'm not sure about and haven't had the > opportunity to stick a > packet sniffer on the far end to tell. Regardless, it seems > to fix the > broken sites. YMMV > > - Forrest W. Christian (forrestc(a)imach.com) AC7DE > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > The Innovation Machine Ltd. P.O. Box 5749 > http://www.imach.com/ Helena, MT 59604 > Home of PacketFlux Technogies and BackupDNS.com (406)-442-6648 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Protect your personal freedoms - visit http://www.lp.org/ > >

2 1

5.2 Earthquake in Northern California
by Sameer R. Manek 14 May '02

14 May '02

We just had a 5.2 magnitude earthquake at 10pm, it was centered SW of Gilroy, CA. Cingular's network was peaked for a few minutes after the call, presumably as everyone called friends/family. No reports of phone/power outages yet. Sameer ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sameer R. Manek Email: manek(a)ghur.net "What one has not experienced, one will never understand in print." --Isadora Duncan -------------------------------------------------------------------------

4 3

Phone for Broadwing NOC?
by Roy 13 May '02

13 May '02

Anyone get a better phone number for the broadwing NOC? The one I used just left me on hold for 45 minutes. Their repair number says to call back during business hours. Roy Engehausen

1 0

RE: DirecPC Engineering Contact
by Heath_Dieckert＠Dell.com 13 May '02

13 May '02

I can understand your lack of belief. Imagine my surprise when I got 9 emails in response to my question and 15 questions about how to replicate my sig. LOL!!! I've been laughing about that all day. Who says engineers can't have a sense of humor. If you met me somewhere besides work, or even at work, you probably wouldn't think I was an engineer. But I am. -----Original Message----- From: Rik Thomas [mailto:rikt@smartbackups.com] Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 8:08 PM To: Heath_Dieckert(a)exchange.dell.com; nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: DirecPC Engineering Contact And I can't believe an engineer would know any better than to post that signature.

1 0

BGP and aggregation
by Ralph Doncaster 13 May '02

13 May '02

I have transit in 2 cities. I have a circuit connecting the 2 cities as well. So far I've been using non-contiguous IPs, so there's been no opportunity for aggregation. Having just received my /20 from ARIN, I'm trying to plan my network. Lets say I split the /20 into 2 /21's, one for each city. I'd like to announce the aggregate /20 instead of 2 /21's, as long as the circuit connecting the 2 cities is working. If the circuit goes down I want each city to announce the local /21. Is this possible? (using either a Cisco router or Zebra) Ralph Doncaster principal, IStop.com div. of Doncaster Consulting Inc.

10 30

Re: BGP and aggregation
by Roger Marquis 13 May '02

13 May '02

Scott Granados wrote: > We set ospf > internally, set up bgp for the announcements at each site and used the > no-export tag for the more specifics. Then gre tunnels:) for the > internal. It worked and I pushed probably 45 to 50mb over the internal > loops or gre tunnels. Not ideal but it worked. Last time I tried this (IOS11.X to IOS11.X GRE) it was unreliable due to MTU limits. Certain websites (mainly financial) send large packets and set DF. This probably works around some security issue but the result was that these SSL servers couldn't reach clients over the GRE. -- Roger Marquis Roble Systems Consulting http://www.roble.com/

2 1

C&W outage in So. Florida
by Mitch Halmu 13 May '02

13 May '02

Cable & Wireless had an outage in South Florida approx. between 12:50 - 16:10 EDT today. Anoyone privy to details? --Mitch NetSide

1 0