December 2004 - Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG
by Joe Johnson 06 Dec '04

06 Dec '04

I wanted to say the same thing earlier, but a hands-off approach works best on NANOG. The question at hand is not whether procmail will work . . . It's whether procmail should have to work. Joe Johnson -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Vixie Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 9:47 PM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG > From: Daniel Golding <dgolding(a)burtongroup.com> > ... > Its entirely possible for nanog-l to be self policing, or, failing > that, for users to simply use procmail on those who wander off-topic > (for some definition of off-topic). Putting an [OT] subject banner on > such posts is also nice. i don't want widescale procmail to be the only way nanog@ is readable by a big subset of the netops community, simply because i know a lot of the folks here (lazy overworked disorganized bums, mostly) and if it takes way more effort to be subscribed than not, many will just unsubscribe. > There's such a thing as throwing the baby out with the bathwater. When > highly clued, genuinely contributing folks are treated poorly for the > occasional in-joke or comment, the S:N ratio will suffer in the longer > term. nope nope nope no-no-nope. that's a subjective standard. there's no way to moderate based on "does more good than harm" without strong and formal and objective definitions of what "good" is and what "harm" is, plus an appeals process. trust me: we don't want "strong" "formal" "process". (my own system, which has produced only two warnings in about 10 years, is to make the good:harm ratio high enough in any given message that the "in" jokes are merely a tolerable percentage of the mass of THAT message; what i see some other bums doing, though, is pure-"in"-joke messages.) > I'm certainly hoping that the network operations community will feel > no need to "talk with their feet" after we all sit down with the Merit > staff and let our feelings be known, but that is certainly a possibility. like the libertarians say, "use your dollar votes!" i'm comfortable with a system whereby susan occasionally turns around in the front seat of ye olde station wagon and says "you'd better stop that right now, because if i have to stop this car and come back there, you'll be sorry" and the rest of the time we just keep the fighting down to (bloodless) dull roar. but if you have a better system in mind you should propose it; and if you can't get traction for it inside nanog, there's always room for another ops list. (in Usenet days we used to say "could you move this thread to $other_group, where it will be on-topic, and where i'm not a subscriber?" and it WORKED a lot of the time, just to wake folks up and show that topic-consensus was a property both nec'y and desireable in ALL forums, digital or otherwise.)

16 19

Bangladesh gets itself an IXP
by suresh＠outblaze.com 06 Dec '04

06 Dec '04

http://www.bdix.net looks quite good to me. Open peering, with over 10 local ISPs peering there. What a change from the joke that is NIXI (www.nixi.org) in India .. srs (depressed)

1 0

MCI/Worldcom billing hell?
by joe mcguckin 04 Dec '04

04 Dec '04

So, how many of you out there have been been lucky enough to experience the joys of trying to get MCI billing errors corrected? On today's episode of "This American Life", they detail the experiences of the show's producer, who had her long distance service slammed over to MCI. A call to her mother that should have cost a couple of dollars ended up as a $900 past due amount that MCI tried to collect. Here's the synopsis published at the show's website (www.thislife.org) > On Hold, No One Can Hear You Scream. This show documents This American Life > Senior Producer Julie Snyder's ten-month battle with her phone company (MCI > Worldcom), which overcharged her $946.36. She spent hours on hold, in a > bureaucratic nowhere. Finally, she enlists the aid of the national media > specifically host Ira Glass. You can register a complaint about the phone > company at the Better Business Bureau or at the FCC. To reach Jim Myers, the > MCI executive interviewed in the story, email him at jim.myers(a)mci.com. An audio archive of the show will be available next week from the show's website. In the meantime, I'd suggest that you send your tales of woe to Jim Meyers of MCI to dispute any argument that MCI's pervasive, systemic billing problems are isolated, rare occurrences. -- Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications 994 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: 650-213-1302 Cell: 650-207-0372 Fax: 650-969-2124

3 3

ddos from .mil, and from state.oh.us
by Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine 04 Dec '04

04 Dec '04

Oki all, A month ago today Gadi was looking for a contact at US .mil, this morning I had the same need, as a node in the nipr.mil playpen was a major player in a 100+ node ddos directed at a web blog customer we host -- it had a high rate of fire, accounting for over 20% of the total POST methods. Email to the DO was a waste of time, but I did find a useful contact. One of the nodes used in today's ddos against that customer blog appeard in a seperate multi-thousand ad insert (unpaid, naturally) attack on another of our customer blogs, accounting for about half of the total POST methods. If anyone has a useful contact in the state.oh.us playpen, please drop me a line. Email since 24/Nov is unanswered. TiA, Eric

2 1

is reverse dns required? (policy question)
by Greg Albrecht 04 Dec '04

04 Dec '04

i'm currently having an argument with management. we've recently gotten an influx of customer request for us to setup reverse dns for the customer's mail servers, since most sites (aol, freebsd, others) require it to accept mail, and reject mail if it is not from a server with reverse dns (i'm aware this is an emerging trend). because of previous management decisions, we were never directed to setup any reverse dns records for any customers unless solicited to do so by the customer. however, management has taken it upon themselves to charge our customers for every reverse dns request they submit to us. my argument to management is that it's good practice to set this up even before customer solicitation, and to do specific host names per customer specification, completely with-out cost. my question is: are we obligated, as a user of ARIN ip space, or per some BCP, to provide ad-hoc reverse dns to our customers with-out cost, or without financial obligation. thanks!, -xs -- Greg Albrecht (gba(a)undef.net) www.undef.net * 1-415-794-5944

15 22

RE: AOL Abuse/Email contact
by James Ashton 04 Dec '04

04 Dec '04

I have had great luck in the past contacting there Postmasters. The link is hard to dig up on there site though. http://postmaster.info.aol.com/contact/ Give them a call. They are very good to deal with. James Ashton -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of JDeane(a)sungardfutures.com Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 6:07 PM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: AOL Abuse/Email contact If someone from AOL abuse and or email group could contact me off list to discuss mail delivery issues, it would be most appreciated. Attempts to resolve issues via generic contacts have proved fruitless. Regards, Jade Jade E. Deane Senior Network Engineer SunGard Futures Systems SunGard Systems International, Inc. jdeane(a)sungardfutures.com +1 (312) 577-6100

1 0

Microsoft suing spammers....Tilting at windmills?
by Fergie (Paul Ferguson) 03 Dec '04

03 Dec '04

Given the discussion here on the Lycos anti-spam campaign, it is also interesting to note that Microsoft is taking a more "direct" approach to curtail spammer activity -- suing them. As reported on the NewsFactor Network, "Microsoft has filed seven more lawsuits against spammers, this time targeting those who violate the 'brown-paper wrapper' provision of the CAN-SPAM law, which sets rules for sexually oriented e-mail solicitations." Story: http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_title=Microsoft-Sues-More-Spamm… It makes one wonder if an entity with as deep pockets and adept legal staff might actually make an impact on spammers, or if they are simply tilting at windmills. - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net

4 3

APRICOT 2005 in Kyoto, Japan
by Philip Smith 03 Dec '04

03 Dec '04

Hi everyone, This is to let you know that the registration for APRICOT 2005 in Kyoto, Japan, from 18th to 25th February 2005 is now open. APRICOT is the Asia Pacific region's Internet operations and technology conference, and consists of workshops, tutorials, conference, as well as the 6 monthly APNIC meeting. Full information about APRICOT 2005 can be had at www.2005.apricot.net. Registration and accommodation information is at: www.2005.apricot.net/registration.html www.2005.apricot.net/accommodation.html You are encouraged to register as soon as possible as the early bird registration discount finishes on the 12th of January. Hope to see you in Kyoto early next year! philip --

1 0

Is the Internet a Phone Company
by Ted Fischer 03 Dec '04

03 Dec '04

</lurk> All, Right from the Horse's Mouth: Quote: FCC Chairman Michael K. Powell applauded the Supreme Court's move to hear the case. "The 9th Circuit's decision would have grave consequences for the future and availability of high-speed Internet connections in this country," he said in a statement. "High-speed Internet connections are not telephones." Unquote: Context: Mr. Powell's statement re: "The Supreme Court said Friday it will consider whether Internet providers should be allowed to sell their high-speed service over the cable television system." Full article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6645391/ Although I am not well versed in the particulars of this specific case, the statement itself would seem to have broad operational ramifications on how "High-speed Internet connections" are built marketed, and priced - at least in the U.S. The pressure for "extra-net" (if you'll pardon the marketing term) VOIP is immense, for example. I would appreciate The List's - US as well as Non-US - reaction to this statement. It is the first time I have seen it so explicitly stated by someone who's opinion on this matter carries more than just a little weight. Ted Fischer <lurk>

1 0

RE: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG
by Hannigan, Martin 03 Dec '04

03 Dec '04

> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 3:31 PM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Banned on NANOG > [snip] > > This is my first post directly to the NANOG list. Ever. I'm not sure why you chose this thread as your sunshine, but welcome. > A post earlier this week even showed one use attempting to > escalate past The early attempt this week was, at best, suspect. It's not too hard to figure out how to reach people in Merit. [ hint: www ] Can we get back to operations? Can we ever get back to operations? -M<

2 1