January 2003 - Test - lists.nanog.org

TTM use in North America
by Josh Fleishman 21 Jan '03

21 Jan '03

I am interested in hearing how/if TTM (Test Traffic Measurements) is currently being used in North American networks. Practical experiences, gotcha's, value proposition, support, etc.. would be of interest. Also, are there any alternative projects that are also worth consideration? Thanks, Josh _______ Josh Fleishman Staff Network Engineer Network Earthlink

2 1

clear blue sf with out power
by Scott Granados 20 Jan '03

20 Jan '03

Anyone know what's up with Clearblue in SF, 650 Townsend St. I've been getting alerts that they have been with out power now for a couple days and are still on generator power. Thanks Scott

3 3

Lorain A50B50 Rectifier
by Brian Wallingford 20 Jan '03

20 Jan '03

I know this isn't an equipment list, but exhaustive searches have afforded no useable results. I'm in need of the above-mentioned rectifier. If anyone has such in stock, kindly send a quote off-list. Thanks in advance, Brian

1 0

RE: Cheap SONET mux recommendations
by Bender, Andrew 20 Jan '03

20 Jan '03

Don't think you can find products *without* NEBS/DC for products of this type, but have a look at: http://www.oasystel.com/ Regards, Andrew taqua.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Mathew Lodge [mailto:Mathew@CPlane.com] > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 7:17 PM > To: nanog(a)nanog.org > Subject: Cheap SONET mux recommendations > > > > I'm looking for recommendations for a small, cheap SONET ADM > for our labs. > It doesn't have to be fancy, just basic ADM and TDM mux > functionality -- we > don't care about NEBS, redundancy, remote management, cabling > simplicity, > power etc. > > Our ideal system would take in a channelized OC3/STM-1 and > drop out CT3 / > CE3 and T1 / E1 trunks. We're open to having a cheap > OC3/STM-1 to CT3/CE3 > ADM, and then using an M13 to demux the CT3/CE3, if that's a better > combination. > > Replies off-list appreciated (I can summarize if there is interest). > > Thanks, > > Mathew > > >

1 0

Cheap SONET mux recommendations
by Mathew Lodge 20 Jan '03

20 Jan '03

I'm looking for recommendations for a small, cheap SONET ADM for our labs. It doesn't have to be fancy, just basic ADM and TDM mux functionality -- we don't care about NEBS, redundancy, remote management, cabling simplicity, power etc. Our ideal system would take in a channelized OC3/STM-1 and drop out CT3 / CE3 and T1 / E1 trunks. We're open to having a cheap OC3/STM-1 to CT3/CE3 ADM, and then using an M13 to demux the CT3/CE3, if that's a better combination. Replies off-list appreciated (I can summarize if there is interest). Thanks, Mathew

1 0

RE: standard network symbols/icons
by Mark Segal 20 Jan '03

20 Jan '03

Try.. http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/503/2.html They are "cisco" icons.. But they are mostly the generic kinds as described by David in a follow up email. Mark -- Mark Segal Director, Data Services Futureway Communications Inc. Tel: (905)326-1570 > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael.Hawk(a)i-structure.com > [mailto:Michael.Hawk@i-structure.com] > Sent: January 20, 2003 12:01 PM > To: nanog(a)trapdoor.merit.edu > Subject: standard network symbols/icons > > > > Hello, > > Do any of the standards organizations (ISO?) have a set of > icons/symbols to represent network devices ranging from > routers to servers to load balancers? I've always used the > basic Cisco and Juniper icons, but I'm being directed to find > something not associated with a vendor in *any* way, but > prettier than rectangular boxes. > > My google and ISO website searches have turned up empty aside > from an apparently independent attempt at developing standard symbols: > http://www.meshuggeneh.net/shoki/symbols/ Does anyone know of any more official source? Thank you, -mike ------------ Michael Hawk Senior Network Engineer (i)Structure, Inc

2 1

Re: Is there a line of defense against Distributed Reflective attacks?
by Stewart, William C (Bill), RTLSL 20 Jan '03

20 Jan '03

> > > > Block all TCP 21 and 80 ? > > > Why not just block all incoming SYN ? > > Doesn't this stop kazaa/morpheus/gnutella/FTP/<some aim stuff like private chats>? > Indeed it does break that. P2P clients: Mostly transfer illegal content. [...] > Ftp/HTTP etc I believe most cable providers currently block these anyway :-) > There's a chance it'd break things like file transfers on IM clients but > I'm sure they'd be altered too. The policy of some cable modem companies against running anything resembling a server is even more clueless from a business perspective than it is from a technical perspective, but that's a rant for another list. I'd assumed the "block all SYN" was humor, but if we're discussing it seriously, it's a genuinely bad idea. A large number of applications really are servers, such as the listener clients for IM systems (including IRC as well as commercial ones), VOIP clients, Netmeeting and other videoconference tools, and Games, which are one of the critical markets for selling broadband. Some of them use UDP for everything that isn't central-server based, either for packet-loss-tolerant apps or else for reinventing TCP the hard way, or sometimes for NAT traversal, but many of them do or should use TCP. Bill Stewart Official Technical Spokesperson for ~0.00001% of Comcast cable network.

1 0

Re: Is there a line of defense against Distributed Reflective attacks?
by Steven M. Bellovin 20 Jan '03

20 Jan '03

In message <Pine.GSO.4.44.0301182004040.16112-100000(a)clifden.donelan.com>, Sean Donelan writes: > >On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: >> theory, trace a single packet. But the real problem with either idea >> is this: suppose that you know, unambiguously and unequivocally, that >> 750 zombies are attacking you. What do you do with that information? > >The reality is its not 750 zombies, its generally one person controlling >750 zombies attacking you. Right -- and neither itrace nor hash-based tracing are going to solve that: > > 3) Find and convict the true attacker Hash-based trace might help on that, *if* there was recording of the packets to the zombies. But doing that ubiquitously might -- would? -- turn the Internet into a surveillance state. > > 2) Track and stop DDOS quickly when it does happen That's the point of pushback. >So how do we > 1) Make end-user systems less vulnerable to being compromised That's my real goal... --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me) http://www.wilyhacker.com (2nd edition of "Firewalls" book)

6 6

Re: [spamtools] Tracking a DDOS
by william＠sokol.elan.net 20 Jan '03

20 Jan '03

So did you aquire those "assets" from clearblue or where the appliedtheory's assets kindof devided between fastnet and clearblue? And if undertand it correctly apliedtheory name & domain are still with clearblue/navisite? If so is it the same for CRL? I'm primarily just curious in terms of finding out what happened to earliest companies that made internet - CRL being one of the first commercial isp... On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Matt McGuirl wrote: > Fastnet acquired some of AppliedTheory's assets at one point in mid to > late 2002. > > Matt

1 0

standard network symbols/icons
by Michael.Hawk＠i-structure.com 20 Jan '03

20 Jan '03

Hello, Do any of the standards organizations (ISO?) have a set of icons/symbols to represent network devices ranging from routers to servers to load balancers? I've always used the basic Cisco and Juniper icons, but I'm being directed to find something not associated with a vendor in *any* way, but prettier than rectangular boxes. My google and ISO website searches have turned up empty aside from an apparently independent attempt at developing standard symbols: http://www.meshuggeneh.net/shoki/symbols/ Does anyone know of any more official source? Thank you, -mike ------------ Michael Hawk Senior Network Engineer (i)Structure, Inc

3 2