October 2007 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: 240/4
by Scott Weeks 18 Oct '07

18 Oct '07

--- jlewis(a)lewis.org wrote: 2) Anyone care to guess how much network gear is deployed that either won't or can't be upgraded? i.e. Old cisco gear without the RAM and/or flash to handle a newer code train...the old one in use long since unsupported, or gear from vendors that no longer exist? As long as this stuff generally works, nobody's likely to replace it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I have seen a LOT of that equipment out there in places like universities and whatnot. scott.

2 1

New NANOG Steering Committee
by Philip Smith 18 Oct '07

18 Oct '07

The new NANOG SC held its first meeting on Tuesday evening at the close of NANOG 41. One of the first action items for the SC (as per 6.1 in the Charter) is to appoint a new chair to serve for a one year term. After holding a vote, I would like to report that I have been accorded the privilege of being chair of the NANOG SC for the next year. As incoming chair, and on behalf of the new SC, I'd like to thank Joe Abley for his sterling service of the last year as outgoing SC Chair. And also thank him for his service to the community as member of the SC since August 2005. I would also like to extend the SC's appreciative thanks to Bill Norton for his valuable contribution to NANOG and the SC during his term of service on the SC. Both he and Joe have contributed much time and energy to help make the NANOG organisation what it is today. The new Steering Committee is as follows: Betty Burke (Merit Appointee) Randy Bush Steve Feldman Jared Mauch Chris Morrow Joe Provo Philip Smith with the MLC Chair (Alex Pilosov) and the PC Chair (TBA) serving as ex-officio members. Finally, many thanks to all the SC Candidates who put their names forward for to run for a position. Their support is greatly appreciated, and it is our hope that those who were unsuccessful would consider standing again next year. Philip Smith (for the SC)

1 0

RE: 240/4
by Eric Lutvak 18 Oct '07

18 Oct '07

Wow,, that's pretty heavy.. I understand and can appreciate the passion involved with this topic. But Ladies and gentlemen, please lets keep it civil ok.. In some way, shape or form we are all in this together.. Some may be less informed then others, or perhaps a difference in opinion or point of view as understood by the individual.. Please when making sarcastic/ or opinionated comments please consider all parties involved.. It in my impression this list is used for intelligent, collaboration, not flame wars over a touchy topic.. so please try to keep that in mind. ok. I do like the facility this forum provides and would like to keep it like that, it would be a sad day when people (key resources) drop off this list due to the over-whelming feeling of being (crapped on) because of the difference of vision or opinion.. Pls. lets try and keep it safe ok.. Apologies for the off topic comments, but I truly felt it is/was necessary.. Eric -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Wilcox Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 11:21 AM To: <michael.dillon(a)bt.com> Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: 240/4 On 18 Oct 2007, at 09:34, <michael.dillon(a)bt.com> <michael.dillon(a)bt.com> wrote: > >> Okay, this has descended to a point where we need some fact >> injection. > > You get a D on those facts because you did not review the > "literature", > did not attempt reasonable coverage of the problem space, and did not > investigate whether or not there were other versions of the software > that have been patched to support 240/4. step awaaaay from the crack pipe... Joe's facts were excellent. I read his email and thought "wow, this will kill this thread for sure" why on earth would you want to go and hack this stuff together, knowing that it WILL NEVER WORK so, as using these IPs publically isnt feasible why bother privately. you may as well use RFC1918 or IPv6. the latter whilst not without issues is at least being rolled out as part of a series of standards that are 10+yrs old i am really struggling with some of the logic being given here. more specifically the omissions in that logic are glaring. > not attempt to engineer a solution that will work for everybody .. > not our reponsibility to fix every problem out there .. > I believe that people are not that stupid. .. > We do not have a good reason to deny them that possibility. .. > This is easy for vendors to fix. .. > It is a trivial amount of work for the IETF to release the address > space .. > removing the 240/4 blockages could also be considered a trivial > level of effort. .. > those of us who do not want or need 240/4 addresses can ignore it. .. > The cost is effectively zero in the first case, .. > why should anyone try and convert them to the one true Internet > architecture? i think you are somewhat deluded. Steve

1 0

Ticketmaster Contact
by Darin Wayrynen 18 Oct '07

18 Oct '07

Hello, Does anyone have a contact in network engineering at Ticketmaster that they can forward to me off list or forward my contact information to them so I can speak with them? Thanks! Darin darin(a)deru.net 480-998-7237

3 2

Sun Project Blackbox / Portable Data Center
by Lorell Hathcock 17 Oct '07

17 Oct '07

www.sun.com/blackbox Has anyone seen one of these things in real life? I hear that there's been one sighted in Houston. I would love to take a tour. Also, is anyone using anything like this? It seems like they would make great fiber huts. Lorell

10 14

AT&T Routing Contact
by Brian Raaen 17 Oct '07

17 Oct '07

I am needing to reach an AT&T routing person. I have a netblock that is being advertised by AT&T to a route that is not authorized by us. -- Brian Raaen Network Engineer braaen(a)zcorum.com Tel 678-507-5000x5574

1 0

Qwest Contact
by Katherine 17 Oct '07

17 Oct '07

Good morning, Can someone clueful from Qwest contact me off list please? I have some good Seattle beer or Coffee for an engineer that can bounce some customer problems around with me. Thanks! Katherine

1 0

namesecure dns admin
by Zaid Ali 16 Oct '07

16 Oct '07

If there is a Namesecure DNS admin (or someone who knows one) in this list please contact me of-list, there is a dns issue I would like to resolve and I am not getting through the normal support channel. Thanks, Zaid

1 0

Any Comcast RBL/Email admins?
by Michael Grinnell 16 Oct '07

16 Oct '07

Hi, Our two outbound mail gateways have been blacklisted by Comcast, and the normal form (http://www.comcastsupport.com/Forms/NET/ blockedprovider.asp) is returning a weird error. See below. Your request for IP block removal has been denied for the following reason: - You have been blocked from emailing the Comcast network because we have determined that you are sending email from a dynamic/residential IP within the Comcast domain. Comcast does not allow subscribers to send email from a mail server other than smtp.comcast.net. All mail should be sent through Comcast's mail server. For information on configuring your machine to use smtp.comcast.net, please follow the link below. http://www.comcast.net/help/faq/index.jsp?faq=Email117481 Now, I'm pretty sure that our IP address block (147.9) is not part of Comcast, and we've been unable to get a hold of a person that can help explain this. Any help would be most appreciated. Thanks, Michael Grinnell Network Security Administrator The American University

1 0

Re: Elections and Survey Reminders
by Betty J. Burke 16 Oct '07

16 Oct '07

Hi Matt: For complete details follow: 2007 Eligible Voters: http://www.nanog.org/voters07.epl To create username and password: https://www.nanog.org/registration/username.epl To have username and password resent: https://www.nanog.org/registration/password.epl All Best. Betty:> --On Tuesday, October 16, 2007 10:00 AM -0700 Matthew Petach <mpetach(a)netflight.com> wrote: > On 10/16/07, Betty J. Burke <bburke(a)merit.edu> wrote: >> >> Attention Members of our Community:> >> >> On behalf of Merit and the NANOG Community a brief set of reminders >> follows!!! >> >> Just 4 hours left to vote. Vote, yes it does matter and takes just a few >> key strokes to complete... >> >> https://www.nanog.org/election/ > > Is the voting only for attendees physically present? That URL > requires a username and password, which I don't see referenced > anywhere. > > If the voting is for physically present attendees only, then it would > be good to clarify in the email messages. > > Thanks! > > Matt

1 0