August 2003 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Re[2]: relays.osirusoft.com
by George William Herbert 28 Aug '03

28 Aug '03

>> returning 127.0.0.2 for everything would be an ugly way to bow out. > >yes, but it's been done before. Someone has been in contact with Joe via phone and posted to another mailing list That Zhall Not Be Named that exactly that is happening. The zone is dead, he's put *.*.*.* in, he's asking people not to use it anymore. It may be back in the future with a new network setup, but right now consider it down. We're working on getting him to send out a public announcement. Yes, this is due to a massive DDOS. At least three of the spamfilter BLs have been so attacked this week. Some of the networks represented here have not been as timely about helping the BL providers with the DDOSes as they could be. Please keep in mind that without dynamic BLs anti-spam folks will fall back to sending out static block maps, which getting your IP space out of will be difficult if not impossible. IT IS VERY MUCH IN NETWORK OPERATORS BEST INTEREST THAT THIS NOT HAPPEN. Please take what measures are necessary to help ensure that your customers are not intentionally or neglegently DDOSing the BLs. -george william herbert gherbert(a)retro.com

8 8

Re: Cross-country shipping of large network/computer gear?
by Brian Dickson 28 Aug '03

28 Aug '03

Various war-story authors wrote: > > My experience is a 40% damage rate when shipping Cisco 7507 > > and 7513 routers via FedEx Heavy. Here are some pictures from back > > when I was at AboveNet: http://www.seastrom.com/fedex/ > > > >You aren't alone: > >http://www.16paws.com/FedEx/ > > Although this is a small item, I believe it wins the contest for "Most thoroughly damaged shipment". > http://colofinder.net/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album18 While I sadly no longer have the image, sometimes words paint a more vivid picture... We had a 7505 which could have won, simultaneously, awards for: "Most Blantant Disregard For Shipment Contents" "Least Excusible or Fathomable Damage Mode" "Failure To Note Packing Material Damage - Outstand Achievement" "Shipper Rules Weaseling - Special Mention" "Vendor Sudden Observance Of Fine Print" "One *Tough* Box" We shipped the 7507 in its original packing material, including crimped straps, to a colo site. The site contact received it, signed for it, and discarded the packing material, all without noticing the damage. What damage, you ask? UPS had driven a forklift tine through its side. As in, straight in, through packing material, and *pierced* the chassis, right in the center of the side, ie into the card cage. Without the packing material, UPS wouldn't pay damages. Cisco wouldn't RMA the chassis. Not a pleasant situation at all. However, the router only had a couple of cards, which were installed (luckily) next to the power supplies, and at the opposite end from the gaping 3/4" x 2.5" hole. The site tech suggested seeing if it would boot. Sure enough, it did. And ran fine. And to the best of my knowledge, is still in service. It's a good thing the airflow wasn't too badly disrupted by the hole. It's the last time we used UPS... -- Brian Dickson Email: briand(a)cineclix.com http://www.cineclix.com Tel : +1 604 688 2339

1 0

Re: Cross-country shipping of large network/computer gear?
by Eric Kuhnke 28 Aug '03

28 Aug '03

http://colofinder.net/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album18 Although this is a small item, I believe it wins the contest for "Most thoroughly damaged shipment". :-) > My experience is a 40% damage rate when shipping Cisco 7507 > and 7513 routers via FedEx Heavy. Here are some pictures from back > when I was at AboveNet: http://www.seastrom.com/fedex/ > > >You aren't alone: > >http://www.16paws.com/FedEx/

2 1

Tier-1 without their own backbone?
by Rick Ernst 27 Aug '03

27 Aug '03

We are sending out feelers for adding an additional DS-3, or possibly frac OC-3. One of the responses came back with "we won't be competive with <provider> because they don't have their own backbone. Is there a cross-reference for provider vs network backbone, or is this just something that we have to ask each provider for? I "assume" that UU, Sprint, and AT&T are self-owned backbones, but others... ? One of the providers we are looking at is Level-3. Any comments good/bad on reliability and clue? We already have UU, Sprint, and AT&T. I also realize that the "they suck less" list changes continuously... :) Thanks, Rick

6 5

Re: Sobigf + BGP
by guy 27 Aug '03

27 Aug '03

> 'vuln'dev', and besides I wouldn't think that any > one here would do something malicious with any idea > that actually worked for the worse. Assuming that everyone subscribed to the list has the best of intentions, what about people that can scan the publicly accessible archives? Or even the search engines that have nanog archives indexed? There's nothing wrong with kicking ideas like this around with the intention of coming up with a strategy on how to combat them, but perhaps a more discreet forum would be appropriate? I didn't get a chance to look at your idea very closely, but there are interesting possibilities brought up. Guy

7 6

RE: Redback contact needed
by sowens＠epik.net 27 Aug '03

27 Aug '03

I got some names. Thanks to all that responded. Shane -----Original Message----- From: sowens(a)epik.net [mailto:sowens@epik.net] Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 4:58 PM To: nanog(a)merit.net Subject: OT: Redback contact needed Does anyone know an escalation contact for Redback's TAC? Shane Owens Sr Manager IP/IT Engineering and Network Control Center EPIK Communications desk: 407-472-8291 Sowens<at>epik<dot>net

1 0

OT: Redback contact needed
by sowens＠epik.net 27 Aug '03

27 Aug '03

Does anyone know an escalation contact for Redback's TAC? Shane Owens Sr Manager IP/IT Engineering and Network Control Center EPIK Communications desk: 407-472-8291 Sowens<at>epik<dot>net

1 0

RE: Tier-1 without their own backbone?
by Joel Perez 27 Aug '03

27 Aug '03

I have a Level-3 OC-3 in Miami. So far they have proved to be more stable than my other 2 upstreams. Never had a problem with their helpdesk either! Regards, ---------------------------------------------- Joel Perez <jperez(a)ntera.net> | IP Engineer http://www.ntera.net/ | Ntera 305.914.3412 >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Rick Ernst [mailto:erond@legendz.com] >>Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 3:33 PM >>To: nanog(a)merit.edu >>Subject: Tier-1 without their own backbone? >> >> >> >>We are sending out feelers for adding an additional DS-3, or possibly frac >>OC-3. One of the responses came back with "we won't be competive with >><provider> because they don't have their own backbone. >> >>Is there a cross-reference for provider vs network backbone, or is this >>just >>something that we have to ask each provider for? I "assume" that UU, >>Sprint, >>and AT&T are self-owned backbones, but others... ? >> >>One of the providers we are looking at is Level-3. Any comments good/bad >>on >>reliability and clue? We already have UU, Sprint, and AT&T. I also >>realize >>that the "they suck less" list changes continuously... :) >> >>Thanks, >>Rick >>

1 0

relays.osirusoft.com
by Richard Welty 27 Aug '03

27 Aug '03

although this has to do with spam, i think folks will agree that there's operational content here: relays.osirusoft.com is down, it's history, stop using it. it is currently returning 127.0.0.2 for everything, so if you're using it, you won't receive this, but at least those who don't use it will know what to say when the issue comes up. richard -- Richard Welty rwelty(a)averillpark.net Averill Park Networking 518-573-7592 Java, PHP, PostgreSQL, Unix, Linux, IP Network Engineering, Security

6 7

RE: Cross-country shipping of large network/computer gear?
by JC Dill 27 Aug '03

27 Aug '03

>At 11:19 AM 8/27/2003, Matthew Zito wrote: > >I was wondering if anyone could provide any advice or suggestions on >shipping heavy/bulky equipment (~300 pounds, about a half-rack worth of >gear) on short notice cross-country? We're obviously looking to minimize >cost, but realistically it can't be in transit for more than two days. Is the problem moving them ASAP or moving them with the least delay while in transit? If you have enough time to buy airplane tickets at a reasonable rate it can often be more cost effective to fly someone to pull the gear and fly with the boxes. I pulled and moved a rack full of servers in and out of colos quite a few times, flying out with new equipment and bringing the old equipment back, or flying out with empty boxes and packing the equipment in the right boxes (with the right foam inserts etc.) and bringing them back. You can save quite a bit by not having to pay "remote hands" at the other end to pull and pack the gear. I believe that most airlines allow you 3 items of checked luggage up to 70 lbs at no additional charge. Extra checked items were ~$50 per box, and occasionally ~$50 extra if the box is overweight. I had a carry-on for my personal needs (clothes, laptop). If you need a rental car, get an SUV and get one where the rear deck "folds down flat". The largest passenger SUVs (like a Lincoln or Ford) sometimes have a rear seat that sits on top of the rear deck and can NOT be removed, check this when making reservations as it's a big PITA to put boxes in and over this lump. I highly recommend a Durango instead. Every time I shipped boxes instead of flew with them there were shipping delays. *Especially* when going thru international boundaries. When I took boxes with me thru customs as checked luggage, no delays. If the computers you need to move are going to or from the west coast, I'm available if you want to hire someone to do this, if you can't spare a person to fly. Email off-list. HTH jc

1 0