May 2004 - Test - lists.nanog.org

PGP Key Signing in San Francisco
by Joe Abley 18 May '04

18 May '04

There will be a PGP Key Signing Party at the NANOG 31 meeting in San Francisco, which will also include a very brief tutorial on what key signing is all about, which I hope will make things go even more smoothly than usual :-) When: Monday 24 May 2004, 9pm Where: Italian Room Foyer, just outside the Colonial Room Before 6pm on the day of the keysigning, you need to mail me with your public keys, or (preferably) add your public keys directly to the NANOG 31 keyring using the following URL: http://www.biglumber.com/x/web?keyring=3554 For full details, see <http://www.nanog.org/pgp.html>, or drop me a note. Joe

1 0

Judge Dismisses Claim in VeriSign's ICANN Case
by Henry Linneweh 18 May '04

18 May '04

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1594815,00.asp

1 0

Re: Barracuda Networks Spam Firewall
by John Neiberger 18 May '04

18 May '04

>>> "Jared B. Reimer" <jared(a)theriver.com> 5/17/04 2:48:16 PM >>> >We have done an eval of this same product (model 400). It is very cool in >virtually every regard except one: performance. We were facing 1+ hour >mail delays (!) through the device when pumping less than 1,000,000 >messages per day through it. Given that they claim it can handle ten >times that much, I am left wondering what happened. Very disappointing in >that regard; the eval unit is being shipped back as a result. -- Jared Did you not receive some basic support from them during your evaluation? A perceived 90% drop in performance is pretty significant and I'd imagine that they'd be interested in helping to determine the cause. John --

8 9

Level3/AT&T Problems Today
by Marius Strom 18 May '04

18 May '04

Anyone else seeing problems with packets going between ATT and L3? Just starting a few minutes ago (looks like the problem is in their Dallas peering point) If you're in a position to do something about it and need more info, drop me a line and I'll get you traceroute's, IP examples, etc.. -- /-------------------------------------------------> Marius Strom | Always carry a short length of fibre-optic cable. Professional Geek | If you get lost, then you can drop it on the System/Network Admin | ground, wait 10 minutes, and ask the backhoe http://www.marius.org/ | operator how to get back to civilization. \-------------| Mike Andrews |-------------------->

1 0

Re: CiSCO IOS 12.* source code stolen
by Joe Shen 18 May '04

18 May '04

Hi, What makes me excited at this news is, is there a chance to learn details of IOS which may be one of most successful protocol implementations. And, if such code is available to both college and engineers it will surelly do good to our life. So, I'll be glad to see the releasing of those codes as what happened to Microsoft. Joe >Some years ago I was arguing with my then department head (whom I have >the greatest respect for, it should be said) at Cisco that IOS should >be turned open source. Needless to say, the suggestion was met with >"some" resistance, mildly speaking. ---- Msg sent via Spymac Mail - http://www.spymac.com

5 6

Verizon text messaging
by Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy 18 May '04

18 May '04

Perhaps this is slightly OT, but if you rely on Verizon text messaging for notification, beware that they have implemented some sort of filtering as of last night it seems. Talking to their support they will not admit to any changes, but I have lost a few important notifications yesterday. After some experimentation, it looks like that at least messages to @vtext.com have to be explicitely addressed now (i.e. "To" has to be 123123123(a)vtext.com) and there are other rules that I have not figured out yet. Perhaps there is someone from Verizon on this list who would confirm that filtering was indeed added yesterday? Here is usenet article supporting my theory: http://groups.google.com/groups?q=vtext&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d&selm=R… Grisha

2 1

The rules are fuzzy in IP numbers game
by Hank Nussbacher 18 May '04

18 May '04

http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2004/0517specialfocus.html -Hank PS I can think of yet another metric that can be measured at the SRDM-BOF at the next NANOG :-)

1 0

Maps
by P.Schroebel 17 May '04

17 May '04

Does anyone anyone know if there is still someone working at Maps.org, Paul . . . ? The phone works but is redirected to 408-453-6277 and seems to loop. Best Regards, Peter

3 3

Pay-As-You-Use High-Speed Internet?
by Jonathan M. Slivko 17 May '04

17 May '04

Hello Fellow NANOG'ers, I was just thinking about this - tell me if it sounds reasonable? The company that I work for developed a piece of technology which, through rate-limit statements, allow customers to buy/sell bandwidth "on demand". Now, I was thinking: "Why can't we take this technology that we've tested successfully in a colo environment and adapt it a little bit for personal/buisness-class ISP's to allow them to bill for the bandwidth that a customer uses, and only that with the exception of a base monthly fee (to cover the DSL/T1 loop, e-mail services, support, etc.) of a few dollars. Personally, I would like to see a senario where everyone just pays for what they use - it would be a much better system for allowing people who don't neccessarily need to get on the Internet at high-speed, get on high-speed which will not only increase revenue for the ISP's, but also for the customer who can now use DSL/T1 access in a much more effective way. Questions? Comments? Suggestions? -- Jonathan -- Jonathan M. Slivko Network Operations Center Invisible Hand Networks, Inc. help(a)invisiblehand.net 1-866-MERKATO (USA) 1-812-355-5908 (Intl) <http://www.invisiblehand.net>

10 16

ngrep question
by Scott Weeks 17 May '04

17 May '04

Hello Everyone, I have a curious question for those of you that use ngrep (http://sourceforge.net/projects/ngrep/) I see strange IP addresses and was wondering if any of you had seen these reserved IP addresses on your networks. T 175.157.10.10 -> 102.211.0.0 +1540@8:46 T 97.176.10.10 -> 103.255.0.0 +1540@8:46 T 90.68.10.10 -> 103.233.0.0 +1540@8:46 T 175.157.10.10 -> 102.211.0.0 +1540@8:46 T 143.226.10.10 -> 3.82.0.0 +1540@8:46 I am having trouble finding anything on the web. The only correlation I see is they all seem to have "+1540@8:46" and the last two octets of the sender are x.x.10.10 and the last two octets of the receiver are x.x.0.0 Thanks, scott

1 0