At 01:12 AM 7/31/2005, you wrote:
This kind of response does have a certain market-based logic to it, I must
admit, but its highly risky. I don't think its all that wise for this to be
delayed indefinitely until the point at which its turning from an orderly
transition into a last second panic, and I don't think that many customers
will place this high on their vendor support priority list until they are
actually allocated a 4-byte AS number because the 2-byte pool has been
exhausted. .
>So - to NANOG at large - if you want your vendor to include 4-Byte AS
>support in their BGP code anytime soon, in order to avoid some last minute
>panic in a couple of years hence, then it would appear that you should
>talk to them now and say clearly that you want 4-Byte AS support in your
>BGP software right now.
I agree that implementation sooner rather than later is a good idea, but
all of us already have a 2-Byte AS so although we care in theory and
believe it is a good idea, we don't _really_ care as much as the first guy
who gets a 4-Byte AS will. Eventually one of our BGP speaking transit
customers will be assigned these AS numbers and other newer providers will
too, but unless someone plans to chop up their network or split into two
companies, I don't see that there will be much clamoring for this - yet.
When we can't provide connectivity to a potential customer because we can't
accept or wrap up their 4B AS, then there will be demand. Just some food
for thought...
-R
Tellurian Networks - The Ultimate Internet Connection
http://www.tellurian.com | 888-TELLURIAN | 973-300-9211
"Well done is better than well said." - Benjamin Franklin
> "www.really-cool.alt. Now fix your systems so I can access it"
>
> The poor guy/gal at the other end of the line will need a really good
> answer.
"Looks like your friend has been duped by some domain hijackers/phishers
exploiting a DNS security hole. We've kept you safe from that perhaps
your friend would like to move to us rather than the insecure ISP"
> Not to mention the answers we need for the market droids...
>
> "Hey, I heard that Tiscali is offering more Internet than us at no
> extra cost, and they make a lot of money on it too. How soon can we
> start doing the same?"
"I hear you can buy .tiscali for $1M so all our users plus
some others will get our site instead of theirs. Unfortunately
the same scam means a bunch of other people have .telenor"
> This puts a lot of pressure on other European ISPs, and eventually
> also North American ISPs (to make this on-topic :-) I hope the rest of
> us can stand together against it.
The rot started when icann hijacked . and started selling
pointless gtlds, it's not surprising others want to do the
same.
brandon
On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 09:18:12PM -0400, Robert Guess wrote:
> > Piotr KUCHARSKI <chopin(a)sgh.waw.pl> 7/30/2005 8:40:21 PM >>>
> > On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 07:03:47AM -0400, Scott Morris wrote:
> > > Based on some pictures from
> > > http://tomsnetworking.com/Sections-article131.php I would agree with
> > > you that they were edited.
> > Contents seem the same, just the pics are missing.
> > Anyone from conference to judge the completeness of circulating
> > presentation?
> I took pictures of the slides but may have missed one or two. Grab them
> here: http://164.106.251.250/docs/netsec/defcon13/7-27-05.zip
Thank you.
I compared one by one; your photos show few additional slides:
about why he was doing it, two green font views of cisco console
and one slide about him looking for job.
Other than that (and lack of jpgs on each slide in pdf), the circulating
presentation seems to be the exactly same.
p.
PS I took the liberty of mirroring it at 42.pl/lynn/
--
Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his
heart he dreams himself your master. -- Commissioner Pravin Lal
