October 2007 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Creating demand for IPv6, and saving the planet
by Daniel Senie 24 Jun '08

24 Jun '08

A number of people have bemoaned the lack of any IPv6-only killer-content that would drive a demand for IPv6. I've thought about this, and about the government's push to make IPv6 a reality. What occurred to me is there is a satellite sitting in storage that would provide such content: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triana_(satellite) Al Gore pushed for this satellite, Triana, to provide those on earth with a view of the planet among its scientific goals. The Republicans referred to it as an "overpriced screen saver," though the effect even of just the camera component on people's lives and how they treat the planet could be considerable. By combining the launch of Triana with feeding the still images and video from servers only connected to native IPv6 bandwidth, the government would provide both a strong incentive for end users to want to move to IPv6, and a way to get the people of this planet to stop from time to time and ponder the future of the earth. Of course getting this done any time soon would require getting the present administration to reverse its bias against Triana and global warming. But it seemed to me an interesting way to advance two goals in synergy. Dan -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Daniel Senie dts(a)senie.com Amaranth Networks Inc. http://www.amaranth.com "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.

26 54

bgp protection
by Randy Bush 05 Nov '07

05 Nov '07

at nanog san jose, steve bellovin presented a simple proposal for bgp tcp/md5 re-keying. it is now rfc 4808 "Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5." this allows us to install and/or roll keys without disturbing the bgp session. and it is trivial for vendors to implement and for operators to use. imiho, until it is easy for us to use ipsec, or some other wonderful universal solution, that we implement and deploy rfc 4808. it will solve 95% of our problem for the next five years while more sophisticated scheme(s) can be developed. so i propose we ask our vendors to please implement 4808, which should be far simpler than the other hacks they seem to be adding, and that those of us who care enough to use data integrity assurance on our bgp peerings deploy it. kierkegaard nietzsche you are a stoopid schmuck kant :) randy

1 1

BGP Peering and Prefix filterin Question
by Jim McBurnett 04 Nov '07

04 Nov '07

Hello, Recently I have been told that some ISP's are automatically or maybe manually modifying their BGP inbound prefix listing after a network is not advertised to them for a period of time. So the questions I pose to the group: 1. Is this normal? 2. Can anyone share your policies? 3. Who does it? 4. How often? 5. Is it automagic? Or the dirty work slaved off to the junior engineer in the corner somewhere? a. I know you probably won't trust that junior engineer, but some do.... Anyway just a little research after a small problem a customer recently had. Thanks, Jim

3 3

monitoring tools
by Nesser, Phil 01 Nov '07

01 Nov '07

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 It has been a while since I have had to seriously think about network/system/application monitoring and now I have got to look at it. Can anyone point me towards: 1. Serious documents on monitoring (i.e. not vendor whitepapers) 2. Open Source Tools that you use or would recommend (I know the obvious smokeping, mrtg, nagios). Thanks, - ---> Phil -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) iD4DBQFHJ5sZa2RfHGe2XK4RAj3bAJ4oNXS4XUfUiUz5pc8zeL4cdnCUBwCY06dP qN872ahrJT+fCX/+g0hrZw== =b5pJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

9 10

Re: mail operators list
by Al Iverson 01 Nov '07

01 Nov '07

On 10/30/07, Andy Davidson <andy(a)nosignal.org> wrote: > > On 30 Oct 2007, at 16:21, Daniel Senie wrote: > > > At 12:07 PM 10/30/2007, Al Iverson wrote: > >> On 10/30/07, chuck goolsbee <chucklist(a)forest.net> wrote: > >> > On a more relevant and operational sort of note, it sure would be > >> > nice if there were a NAMOG (North American Mail Operators Group) or > >> > the like to resolve these sorts of issues. Feel free to clue-by- > >> four > >> > me if I've missed it. > >> MAAWG come pretty close: http://www.maawg.org/home > > Smaller/regional ISPs need not apply. Minimum cost of entry is > > $3,000/year, no voting rights ($12.5K if you actually care about > > voting). So if you're not Verizon or Comcast or similarly sized, it > > appears you're not really welcome. > > Though it might make sense to discuss some other things NANOG could > > do in addition to worrying about routing table size and churn in > > the core, those are all discussions for the Futures list. > > I would support the creation of a mail-operators list (& agenda time > for a mailops bof, since a lot of networks are small enough to mean > that netops and sysops are often the same guys) if it's deemed to be > offtopic on nanog-l. I have a sinking fear it'll be overrun with loud people who aren't actually responsible for anything more than a single IP at most, like SPAM-L, but I suppose it's worth a shot. Al Iverson -- Al Iverson on Spam and Deliverability, see http://www.spamresource.com News, stats, info, and commentary on blacklists: http://www.dnsbl.com My personal website: http://www.aliverson.com -- Chicago, IL, USA Remove "lists" from my email address to reach me faster and directly.

4 3

Damn:
by Jamie Bowden 31 Oct '07

31 Oct '07

Some of you probably already know, but this just hit my inbox: From: Jun Murai <jun(a)wide.ad.jp> Dear Friends, I am regretful to pass along the sad news that Itojun (Dr. Junichiro Hagino) passed away on October 29, 2007. He was 37 years old. The WIDE community would like to send our condolences to his family and friends. Itojun has been an important member of the WIDE community, making numerous worldwide contributions in the field of network computing, especially on IPv6 and the Internet protocol area. He has had an important influence on each of our experiences in the WIDE project, IETF, and on the Internet community. We will miss him terribly. .... There's more, but I won't repost the whole thing.

2 1

RIPE is just more fun.
by Leo Bicknell 30 Oct '07

30 Oct '07

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y36fG2Oba0 -- Leo Bicknell - bicknell(a)ufp.org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request(a)tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org

5 4

Re: Any help for Yahoo! Mail arrogance?
by Martin Hannigan 30 Oct '07

30 Oct '07

On 10/30/07, chuck goolsbee <chucklist(a)forest.net> wrote: > > >believe me, if your user is jackass enough to click report spam on > >email that comes through his .forward the complaints can go up real > >high) .. is enough to get your IP blocked. > > > While there really should be some sort of particularly painful and > embarrassing punishment for this sort of jackass** we just kill their > .forward and try to clue-by-four them when they call. Sigh. > > > On a more relevant and operational sort of note, it sure would be > nice if there were a NAMOG (North American Mail Operators Group) or > the like to resolve these sorts of issues. Feel free to clue-by-four > me if I've missed it. > Hi Chuck, Mail problems that are operational in nature are more than welcome here. The politics and kookery of spam policy and fighting should be directed elsewhere. Best Regards, Martin Hannigan NANOG MLC Member

2 1

Re: Any help for Yahoo! Mail arrogance?
by Daniel Senie 30 Oct '07

30 Oct '07

At 12:07 PM 10/30/2007, Al Iverson wrote: >On 10/30/07, chuck goolsbee <chucklist(a)forest.net> wrote: > > > On a more relevant and operational sort of note, it sure would be > > nice if there were a NAMOG (North American Mail Operators Group) or > > the like to resolve these sorts of issues. Feel free to clue-by-four > > me if I've missed it. > >MAAWG come pretty close: http://www.maawg.org/home Smaller/regional ISPs need not apply. Minimum cost of entry is $3,000/year, no voting rights ($12.5K if you actually care about voting). So if you're not Verizon or Comcast or similarly sized, it appears you're not really welcome. Though it might make sense to discuss some other things NANOG could do in addition to worrying about routing table size and churn in the core, those are all discussions for the Futures list.

1 0

Re: Any help for Yahoo! Mail arrogance?
by Al Iverson 30 Oct '07

30 Oct '07

On 10/30/07, chuck goolsbee <chucklist(a)forest.net> wrote: > On a more relevant and operational sort of note, it sure would be > nice if there were a NAMOG (North American Mail Operators Group) or > the like to resolve these sorts of issues. Feel free to clue-by-four > me if I've missed it. MAAWG come pretty close: http://www.maawg.org/home Regards, Al Iverson -- Al Iverson on Spam and Deliverability, see http://www.spamresource.com News, stats, info, and commentary on blacklists: http://www.dnsbl.com My personal website: http://www.aliverson.com -- Chicago, IL, USA Remove "lists" from my email address to reach me faster and directly.

1 0