February 2005 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: AOL scomp
by Robert Bonomi 26 Feb '05

26 Feb '05

> From owner-nanog(a)merit.edu Thu Feb 24 23:19:15 2005 > Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 22:46:13 -0500 > From: Rich Kulawiec <rsk(a)gsp.org> > To: nanog(a)merit.org > Subject: Re: AOL scomp > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 02:53:14PM -0500, Mark Radabaugh wrote: > > Now here I would disagree. These are specific requests by > > individuals to forward mail to from one of their own accounts to > > another one of their own accounts. > > But a request to forward mail is not a request to facilitate > abuse by forwarding spam. > > > I do not think AOL (or anyone) should consider mail forwarded > > at the customers request as indicating that our mail servers are sending spam. > > Why not? Because the recipient *expressly* requested that "all mail which would reach my inbox on your system be sent to me at AOL (or any other "somewhere else"). This means that every such message from the 'forwarding' system to the destination system is, BY DEFINITON, "solicited". The mailbox owner has expressly and explicictly requested those messages be sent to him at the receiving system. If that person then reports such messages -- that they have EXPRESSLY requested be sent to the receiving system -- as spam, to the operator of the receiving system, then that person is *indisputably* IN THE WRONG for doing so. The _person_ who issued the directive causing that message to end up in the recipient's inbox is the *recipient*himself*. If he reports the message as spam, then it can be logically held that *he* is the spammer. And his access on *both* systems (forwarding and receiving) should be terminated for AUP violation. Now, if the recipient wants to report it to the forwarding system -- so that they can block any further inbound attempts -- that's a whole nother story. Of course, this requires that the person involved be "smart enough" to read and understand the headers on the message. In actuality, *I* am not QUITE as draconian as suggested a couple of paragraphs previously. If I forward somebody's mail and get a complaint from the reciveing system about spam to that user, "originating" from my system, that user *permanently* loses any forwarding privileges/capabilities. No appeal, no _notice_ no 'second chance', no nothing -- forwarding just "stops working" for them. They _were_ told of this "down-side risk", with regard to such an error, *before* the forwarding was enabled. They get to live with the consequences.

3 2

Re: E1 - RJ45 pinout with ethernet crossover cable
by Miquel van Smoorenburg 26 Feb '05

26 Feb '05

In article <cistron.cvn2v1$kc2$1(a)news.cistron.nl>, Miquel van Smoorenburg <miquels(a)cistron.nl> wrote: > >In article ><cistron.Pine.WNT.4.61.0502251117300.4032(a)tech1.office.toastedmedia.net>, >Sam Stickland <sam_ml(a)spacething.org> wrote: >>Quick question: If I have two E1 ports (RJ45), then will running a >>straight ethernet cable between the two ports have the same affect as >>plugging a ballan into each port and using a pair of coax (over a v. >>short distance). >> >>Likewise would using an ethernet crossover cable have the same affect as >>swapping the pairs round on one balland. >> >>Or are the pinouts different to ethernet? I tried googling but couldn't >>find anything (perhaps because I can't seem to spell ballan :/ ). > >The pinouts are different. It's easy to make your own E1 crosscable >though. > >E1 uses pairs 4-5 and 3-6, just swap those. > > 4-5 <------------> 3-6 > 3-6 <------------> 4-5 I wrote this from memory, and I got it wrong. Sorry. It's not 4/5 and 3/6, but 1/2 and 4/5 (as others undoubtedly will point out). Mike.

1 0

Weekly Routing Table Report
by Routing Table Analysis 25 Feb '05

25 Feb '05

This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. Daily listings are sent to bgp-stats(a)lists.apnic.net If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith <pfs(a)cisco.com>. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 26 Feb, 2005 Analysis Summary ---------------- BGP routing table entries examined: 156548 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 91690 Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 75829 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 19031 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 16549 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 7725 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 2482 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 79 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 4.5 Max AS path length visible: 23 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 11 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table: 0 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 12 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 1379580644 Equivalent to 82 /8s, 58 /16s and 186 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 37.2 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 58.8 Percentage of available address space allocated: 63.2 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 72821 APNIC Region Analysis Summary ----------------------------- Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes: 31231 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 15140 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 29261 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks: 15379 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 2215 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 647 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 325 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.4 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 15 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 175092096 Equivalent to 10 /8s, 111 /16s and 177 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 65.0 APNIC AS Blocks 4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 23552-24575 APNIC Address Blocks 58/7, 60/7, 124/7, 126/8, 202/7, 210/7, 218/7, 220/7 and 222/8 ARIN Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes: 87346 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation: 52946 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 66670 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 24362 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 9886 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 3580 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 947 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 4.3 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 21 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 239662592 Equivalent to 14 /8s, 72 /16s and 246 /24s Percentage of available ARIN address space announced: 71.4 ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106 2138-2584, 2615-2772, 2823-2829, 2880-3153 3354-4607, 4865-5119, 5632-6655, 6912-7466 7723-8191, 10240-12287, 13312-15359, 16384-17407 18432-20479, 21504-23551, 25600-26591, 26624-27647, 29696-30719, 31744-33791 ARIN Address Blocks 24/8, 63/8, 64/6, 68/7, 70/7, 72/8, 198/7, 204/6, 208/7 and 216/8 RIPE Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 29717 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation: 20476 Prefixes being announced from the RIPE address blocks: 26601 Unique aggregates announced from the RIPE address blocks: 17648 RIPE Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 6338 RIPE Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 3347 RIPE Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1080 Average RIPE Region AS path length visible: 5.1 Max RIPE Region AS path length visible: 23 Number of RIPE addresses announced to Internet: 193123920 Equivalent to 11 /8s, 130 /16s and 214 /24s Percentage of available RIPE address space announced: 67.7 RIPE AS Blocks 1877-1901, 2043, 2047, 2107-2136, 2585-2614 2773-2822, 2830-2879, 3154-3353, 5377-5631 6656-6911, 8192-9215, 12288-13311, 15360-16383 20480-21503, 24576-25599, 28672-29695 30720-31743, 33792-34815 RIPE Address Blocks 62/8, 80/5, 88/8, 188/8, 193/8, 194/7, 212/7 and 217/8 LACNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------ Prefixes being announced by LACNIC Region ASes: 6885 Total LACNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 2417 Prefixes being announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 6798 Unique aggregates announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 4016 LACNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 421 LACNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 126 LACNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 80 Average LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 5.1 Max LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 16 Number of LACNIC addresses announced to Internet: 17608192 Equivalent to 1 /8s, 12 /16s and 174 /24s Percentage of available LACNIC address space announced: 52.5 LACNIC AS Blocks 26592-26623, 27648-28671 LACNIC Address Blocks 200/7 Emerging AfriNIC Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------------------- Prefixes being announced by AfriNIC Region ASes: 1358 Total AfriNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 711 Prefixes being announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 908 Unique aggregates announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 716 AfriNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 97 AfriNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 25 AfriNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 14 Average AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.5 Max AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 12 Number of AfriNIC addresses announced to Internet: 2177280 Equivalent to 0 /8s, 33 /16s and 57 /24s Percentage of available AfriNIC address space announced: 13.0 AfriNIC AS Blocks <none> AfriNIC Address Blocks 196/8 APNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 4134 886 4712 174 Data Communications Bureau 1221 790 1187 562 Telstra Pty Ltd 9583 601 49 18 Satyam Infoway Ltd., 4766 593 3416 284 Korea Internet Exchange for " 4755 469 241 100 Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Aut 7545 462 74 158 TPG Internet Pty Ltd 17676 403 6060 70 XTAGE CORPORATION 9443 374 77 79 Primus Telecommunications 9929 353 165 37 China Netcom Corp. 2907 348 1839 322 SINET Japan 17557 324 24 149 Pakistan Telecom 10036 296 27 269 C&M Communication Co. Ltd. 7474 285 283 207 Optus Communications Pty Ltd 703 273 355 214 UUNET 2764 258 238 206 connect.com.au pty ltd 9498 244 81 53 BHARTI BT INTERNET LTD. 9800 240 395 71 CHINA UNICOM 4808 237 170 129 CHINANET core WAN North 4802 231 28 140 Wantree Development 17974 229 63 24 PT TELEKOMUNIKASI INDONESIA ARIN Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 7018 1461 6609 971 AT&T WorldNet Services 721 1170 21835 318 DLA Systems Automation Center 701 1033 8309 878 UUNET Technologies, Inc. 4323 1031 668 221 Time Warner Telecom 1239 923 2871 654 Sprint 6197 867 379 405 BellSouth Network Solutions, 2386 823 496 611 AT&T Data Communications Serv 18566 767 208 6 Covad Communications 174 711 5521 615 PSINet Inc. 209 648 3466 499 Qwest 3356 591 10867 442 Level 3 Communications, LLC 20115 579 478 300 Charter Communications 3561 560 2374 416 Cable & Wireless USA 852 527 1126 399 Telus Advanced Communications 3602 501 120 93 Sprint Canada, Inc. 6478 494 822 104 AT&T Worldnet Services 22773 474 1090 24 Cox Communications, Inc. Atla 6198 468 567 189 BellSouth Network Solutions, 27364 465 43 18 Armstrong Cable Services 5668 451 91 20 Century Telephone RIPE Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 702 609 2006 500 UUNET - Commercial IP service 3320 295 2992 229 Deutsche Telekom AG 3301 289 1112 277 TeliaNet Sweden 8220 277 466 271 COLT Internet - International 680 253 2041 239 DFN-IP service G-WiN 3246 229 476 223 Song Networks 8708 219 120 197 Romania Data Systems S.A. 13083 217 51 8 Mannesmann Datenverarbeitung 1257 208 709 174 SWIPnet Swedish IP Network 3215 204 1034 78 France Telecom Transpac 5515 187 842 135 Sonera Solution Autonomous Sy 6746 178 47 142 Dynamic Network Technologies, 786 176 1794 176 The JANET IP Service 8866 176 20 16 Bulgarian Telecommunication C 3300 164 185 84 AUCS Communications Services 3269 163 1424 72 TELECOM ITALIA 719 161 322 103 LANLINK autonomous system 25186 141 138 99 France Telecom Transpac's Tra 5400 139 234 123 BT Ignite European Backbone 9121 137 227 19 TTnet Autonomous System LACNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ----------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 6140 361 140 70 ImpSat 8151 335 501 142 UniNet S.A. de C.V. 16814 233 14 6 NSS, S.A. 11172 220 99 54 Servicios Alestra S.A de C.V 6147 205 102 20 Telefonica Del Peru 11664 150 19 24 Keytech SA 7303 146 66 30 Telecom Argentina Stet-France 6505 135 90 91 Global One Communicaoes Ltda 14117 119 7 5 Telefonica del Sur S.A. 6503 118 146 80 AVANTEL, S.A. 11992 107 9 31 Integrated Systems 11556 97 48 3 Cable-Wireless Panama 13999 90 52 9 Mega Cable S.A. de C.V. 11311 88 8 23 Sinectis S.A. 6535 87 7 23 Chilesat Servicios Empresari 14420 87 6 42 ANDINATEL S.A. 5639 82 8 8 Telecommunications Services o 10481 81 32 7 Prima S.A. 4270 77 18 9 Red de Interconexion Universi 15311 77 24 36 Telefonica Empresas AfriNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ------------------------------------------ ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 3741 268 635 225 The Internet Solution 5536 114 15 18 Internet Egypt Network 2018 90 295 87 Tertiary Education Network 20928 85 16 2 Noor Advanced Technologies AS 2905 84 267 76 The Internetworking Company o 24835 53 34 6 RAYA Telecom - Egypt 8452 42 20 5 TEDATA 6713 35 54 9 Itissalat Al-MAGHRIB 11845 35 9 11 Data Pro Business Online 9129 30 3 2 UUNET Kenya 12455 30 6 7 Jambonet Autonomous system 5713 27 141 24 Telkom SA Ltd 8524 23 1 4 AUCEGYPT Autonomous System 16637 22 10 19 Johnnic e-Ventures 10798 19 1 11 Standard Bank of South Africa 12258 18 3 12 Vodacom Internet Company 8346 17 10 11 SONATEL-AS Autonomous System 21280 17 2 3 Swift Global Kenya Ltd.Is an 21491 16 1 3 UTL On-line is RF broadband I 15706 15 4 2 Sudatel Internet Exchange Aut Global Per AS Maximum Aggr summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets Net Savings Description 721 1170 852 DLA Systems Automation Center 4323 1031 810 Time Warner Telecom 18566 767 761 Covad Communications 4134 886 712 Data Communications Bureau 9583 601 583 Satyam Infoway Ltd., 6197 867 462 BellSouth Network Solutions, 22773 474 450 Cox Communications, Inc. Atla 27364 465 447 Armstrong Cable Services 5668 451 431 Century Telephone 3602 501 408 Sprint Canada, Inc. 6478 494 390 AT&T Worldnet Services 4755 469 369 Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Aut 17676 403 333 XTAGE CORPORATION 6467 361 328 E.Spire Communications, Inc. 9929 353 316 China Netcom Corp. 4766 593 309 Korea Internet Exchange for " 7545 462 304 TPG Internet Pty Ltd 9443 374 295 Primus Telecommunications 6140 361 291 ImpSat 20115 579 279 Charter Communications List of Unregistered ASNs (Global) ---------------------------------- Bad AS Designation Network Transit AS Description 25695 UNALLOCATED 64.57.112.0/20 5713 Telkom SA Ltd 64826 PRIVATE 64.200.250.0/23 7911 Williams Communicati 40439 UNALLOCATED 66.194.101.0/24 30439 Memphis Daily News 65503 PRIVATE 193.125.183.0/24 3217 SIMBIRSK 64512 PRIVATE 199.213.17.0/25 15296 Netera Alliance Inc. 64512 PRIVATE 199.213.17.128/25 15296 Netera Alliance Inc. 64512 PRIVATE 199.216.97.0/28 15296 Netera Alliance Inc. 64512 PRIVATE 199.216.148.0/24 15296 Netera Alliance Inc. 65535 PRIVATE 204.10.155.0/24 33205 KMC Telecom Solution 65529 PRIVATE 216.21.199.0/24 14697 VDot.Net 65529 PRIVATE 216.152.237.0/24 14697 VDot.Net Advertised Unallocated Addresses -------------------------------- Network Origin AS Description 132.0.0.0/10 721 DLA Systems Automation Center 137.0.0.0/13 721 DLA Systems Automation Center 158.0.0.0/13 721 DLA Systems Automation Center 192.43.230.0/24 7575 Australian Academic and Rease 192.44.0.0/24 5501 Fraunhofer Gesellschaft 192.44.0.0/19 702 UUNET - Commercial IP service 192.70.164.0/24 25689 National Research Council of 192.84.205.0/24 719 LANLINK autonomous system 192.119.135.0/24 270 NASA 192.135.50.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Services 192.172.0.0/19 721 DLA Systems Automation Center 192.200.100.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Services Number of prefixes announced per prefix length (Global) ------------------------------------------------------- /1:0 /2:0 /3:0 /4:0 /5:0 /6:0 /7:0 /8:19 /9:3 /10:8 /11:14 /12:62 /13:148 /14:305 /15:564 /16:8291 /17:2422 /18:4127 /19:10093 /20:10735 /21:8570 /22:11847 /23:13076 /24:85468 /25:265 /26:237 /27:98 /28:49 /29:23 /30:83 /31:0 /32:41 Advertised prefixes smaller than registry allocations ----------------------------------------------------- ASN No of nets Total ann. Description 18566 752 767 Covad Communications 6197 710 867 BellSouth Network Solutions, 7018 634 1461 AT&T WorldNet Services 2386 587 823 AT&T Data Communications Serv 4323 479 1031 Time Warner Telecom 27364 450 465 Armstrong Cable Services 9583 424 601 Satyam Infoway Ltd., 4766 404 593 Korea Internet Exchange for " 5668 381 451 Century Telephone 702 371 609 UUNET - Commercial IP service 1239 371 923 Sprint 6198 335 468 BellSouth Network Solutions, 10036 296 296 C&M Communication Co. Ltd. 6517 288 310 Yipes Communications, Inc. 9929 278 353 China Netcom Corp. 6467 273 361 E.Spire Communications, Inc. 11456 263 310 Carolina Online, Inc. 13609 257 306 Choice One Communications Inc 701 246 1033 UUNET Technologies, Inc. 25844 245 245 Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher Number of /24s announced per /8 block (Global) ---------------------------------------------- 4:4 8:9 12:1488 13:1 15:9 16:2 17:3 18:4 20:5 24:736 32:65 33:4 38:99 40:55 44:3 47:2 52:3 55:2 56:3 57:23 59:3 60:21 61:705 62:527 63:1864 64:2582 65:2053 66:2716 67:519 68:505 69:912 70:65 71:9 72:71 80:545 81:519 82:331 83:275 84:131 85:122 128:142 129:162 130:94 131:279 132:36 133:1 134:142 135:30 136:191 137:65 138:160 139:53 140:198 141:101 142:140 143:129 144:172 145:44 146:278 147:100 148:266 149:164 150:95 151:63 152:110 153:81 154:3 155:143 156:71 157:81 158:152 159:164 160:67 161:59 162:420 163:84 164:216 165:159 166:130 167:223 168:402 169:133 170:312 171:9 192:5671 193:3089 194:2267 195:1598 196:636 198:3886 199:3257 200:3984 201:52 202:5201 203:6043 204:3687 205:2022 206:2343 207:2741 208:2078 209:3196 210:1571 211:790 212:1157 213:1264 214:242 215:31 216:3641 217:1070 218:189 219:113 220:366 221:88 222:76 End of report

1 0

Re: Finding useful/pertinent IP reallocation WHOIS info
by Fergie (Paul Ferguson) 25 Feb '05

25 Feb '05

I can assure you, this Brazilian ISP is not "small"... :-) I have visited with them (as well as a couple of other ISP's in Brazil), and communicating with them has never been a problem, at least for the ones that I have previously met with. As an aside (and not intentionally meaning to sound like an English biggot), but let's face it, English has always been the language of Internet technology, at least communicating technological issues on a global level. - ferg -- Michael.Dillon(a)radianz.com wrote: Well, if you could speak Portuguese you would immediately see that they shuffled the website and the page you want is at http://registro.br/cgi-bin/nicbr/whois And if you don't speak Portuguese, how are you going to communicate with a small Brazilian ISP in the first place? -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net

1 0

E1 - RJ45 pinout with ethernet crossover cable
by Sam Stickland 25 Feb '05

25 Feb '05

Hi, Quick question: If I have two E1 ports (RJ45), then will running a straight ethernet cable between the two ports have the same affect as plugging a ballan into each port and using a pair of coax (over a v. short distance). Likewise would using an ethernet crossover cable have the same affect as swapping the pairs round on one balland. Or are the pinouts different to ethernet? I tried googling but couldn't find anything (perhaps because I can't seem to spell ballan :/ ). Sam

4 5

Need help from Cox.net and Bellsouth.net guys.....
by Vish Yelsangikar 25 Feb '05

25 Feb '05

I need help from Cox.net and Bellsouth.net abuse team. Netflix is having issues sending emails to the above ISPs. We are getting the following error messages. (Deferred: Connection reset by mx.east.cox.net.) (Deferred: Connection reset by mx00.mail.bellsouth.net.) Same message from all mx servers from both ISPs. These mails are transactional messages to subscribed customers, not unsolicited mail. Can somebody from these ISPs contact our NOC at noc(a)netflix.com offlist. NOC tel # 408.317.3614? Appreciate your help in resolving our problem. Vish Yelsangikar Network and Security Manager Netflix. 408-317-3793 (O)

1 0

RE: E1 - RJ45 pinout with ethernet crossover cable
by Hannigan, Martin 25 Feb '05

25 Feb '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of > Sam Stickland > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 6:26 AM > To: nanog(a)nanog.org > Subject: E1 - RJ45 pinout with ethernet crossover cable > > > > Hi, > > Quick question: If I have two E1 ports (RJ45), then will running a > straight ethernet cable between the two ports have the same affect as > plugging a ballan into each port and using a pair of coax (over a v. > short distance). If I understand you correctly, you can eliminate the coax altogether with a standard t1/e1 cable betweem the dsu's: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 RX Tip RX Ring n/c TX Tip TX Ring n/c n/c n/c Just for reference, here's ether xover: Crossover Cable (EIA/TIA 568A) RJ-45 PIN RJ-45 PIN 1 Rx+ 3 Tx+ 2 Rc- 6 Tx- 3 Tx+ 1 Rc+ 6 Tx- 2 Rc- > Likewise would using an ethernet crossover cable have the > same affect as > swapping the pairs round on one balland. Not that I know of, but I've never attempted what you describe. Putting the baluns in the loop will destroy the framing i.e. it's going to try and convert b8zs/ami to 802.x. [ SNIP ] -M<

3 2

RE: E1 - RJ45 pinout with ethernet crossover cable
by Hannigan, Martin 25 Feb '05

25 Feb '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: Alex Bligh [mailto:alex@alex.org.uk] > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 10:32 AM > To: Hannigan, Martin; Sam Stickland; nanog(a)nanog.org > Cc: Alex Bligh > Subject: RE: E1 - RJ45 pinout with ethernet crossover cable > > > > > --On 25 February 2005 09:43 -0500 "Hannigan, Martin" > <hannigan(a)verisign.com> wrote: > > > Not that I know of, but I've never attempted what you > > describe. Putting the baluns in the loop will destroy the > > framing i.e. it's going to try and convert b8zs/ami to 802.x. > > How does a balun destroy the framing (or rather line coding)? > It's just a > pair of transformers, and hence AC characteristics pass > through intact. > All you've done is converted impedance (and, IIRC, line voltage). My mistake, I misunderstood their function. -M<

1 0

Re: Why do so few mail providers support Port 587?
by Adrian Chadd 25 Feb '05

25 Feb '05

[reposting this to nanog, as my answer might be reasonably ontopic] On Fri, Feb 25, 2005, Brad Knowles wrote: > At 8:05 AM +0000 2005-02-25, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > >> Because your MUA doesn't support SSL on what it considers to be > >> non-standard ports? Because your ISP won't let you set up an ssh > >> tunnel instead? Because there would be no other way to keep your > >> mail connection secure, if SSL and ssh are denied to you? > > > > Which MUA, that you/your users are using, won't let you run SSL on port > > 587? > > Apparently, many Microsoft MUAs don't support that kind of thing. Thats strange. I'm sure I've had outlook 200x speak SSL on 587. I've only ever had issues with Outlook parsing unsigned SSL certificates - it'll complain, then randomly crash. > Other MUAs don't support SSL at all, and therefore if you want to > secure their communications, they either have to be tunneled over > ssh, or you have to use a VPN. Well, thats a bit silly then. There's SSL wrappers to use to "fake" SSL but you shouldn't have to. Rightio. It may be the case that its less of an MTA configuration issue and more of an MUA issue. Adoption rates may be higher if popular MUAs supported AUTH SMTP/SSL over port 587. Adrian -- Adrian Chadd "You don't have a TV? Then what's <adrian(a)creative.net.au> all your furniture pointing at?"

2 1

RE: UN Panel Aims to End Internet Tug of War by July
by Network.Security 25 Feb '05

25 Feb '05

Invented is irrelevant. Effective mgmt is what counts. Having said that, things seem to work fine as is, and in the end if we ask large (aka fortune 100) multi-internationals if the ITU (UN) should try and manage, and glean off another nickel or two, the inet...hmmm...answer? No way, money talks... Thanks, Brad bradley.swanson(a)target.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Stephane Bortzmeyer Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 5:45 AM To: William Warren Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: UN Panel Aims to End Internet Tug of War by July On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 05:00:22PM -0500, William Warren <hescominsoon(a)emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com> wrote a message of 45 lines which said: > If the UN wants control of the INET WE invented. Who is WE? ICANN? The US governement?

1 0