February 2007 - Test - lists.nanog.org

messy
by Lucy Lynch 02 Jul '07

02 Jul '07

and hard to read... http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf adhoc allocation taken to it's limits?

3 4

Cable-Tying with Waxed Twine
by Dan Mahoney, System Admin 01 Jul '07

01 Jul '07

Hey all, This seems a wee bit off topic, but definitely relates to network operations (somewhere below layer 1) and I can't think of a better place to ask. Upon leaving a router at telx and asking one of their techs to plug in the equipment for me, I came back to find all my cat5 cables neatly tied with some sort of waxed twine, using an interesting looping knot pattern that repeated every six inches or so using a single piece of string. For some reason, I found this trick really cool. I have tried googling for the method, (it's apparently standard, I've seen it in play elsewhere), and for the type of twine, but had little luck. I was wondering if any of the gurus out there would care to share what this knot-pattern is actually called, and/or if there's a (illustrated) howto somewhere? -Dan "Tired of getting scratched up by jagged cable ties" Mahoney -- --------Dan Mahoney-------- Techie, Sysadmin, WebGeek Gushi on efnet/undernet IRC ICQ: 13735144 AIM: LarpGM Site: http://www.gushi.org ---------------------------

21 20

who was the last legit spammer?
by Travis H. 27 Jun '07

27 Jun '07

Hey, was discussing something from the long distant past recently. Specifically it was my memory of the last legitimate spamhaus, and how (IIRC) their backbone was DDoS'd as an act of pseudo-vigilante justice. I also seem to remember their backbone as spinning it as a content-neutral free-speech kind of thing, but they buckled and the Internet was probably better off. This isn't the kind of thing where one can make an easy google query, but I'll bet you that someone here remembers a name that would lead to a URL that I could forward to the person asking for more info. TIA. -- ``Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.'' -- Albert Einstein -><- <URL:http://www.subspacefield.org/~travis/> For a good time on my UBE blacklist, email john(a)subspacefield.org.

5 5

Lightning talks at NANOG 39!
by Steve Feldman 31 May '07

31 May '07

We have reserved one hour of the NANOG 39 agenda for "Lightning Talks". A lightning talk is a very short presentation or speech by any attendee on any topic relevant to the NANOG audience. These are limited to ten minutes; this will be strictly enforced. If you have a topic that's timely, interesting, or even a crackpot idea you want to share, we encourage you to consider presenting it. The Program Committee will decide which submissions are relevant (using criteria based on the NANOG mailing list AUP) and choose the best six to be presented. Use of slides is optional. All slides must be in PDF or Powerpoint format, and will be loaded in advance onto the speaker laptop on the podium. There is a good overview of the use of lightning talks at the Perl conference at http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2004/07/30/lightningtalk.html. Although their format is slightly different, many of their ideas will apply here. To submit a lightning talk proposal for NANOG 39, go to http://www.nanogpc.org/lightning/ See you in Toronto! Steve Feldman PC Chair

1 2

RE: [cacti-announce] Cacti 0.8.6j Released (fwd)
by michael.dillon＠bt.com 17 May '07

17 May '07

> how do you define your schema? > how long does it take to insert/index/whatnot the data? This is a much bigger deal than most people realize. Poor schema design will cause your system to choke bade when you try to scale it. In fact, relational databases are not the ideal way to store this kind of data so when you design your schema, you are really fighting against the database to wrestle it into something that will work. > this is a huge burden to figure it all out, implement > and then monitor/operate 24x7. miss enough samples or data > and you end up billing too little. this is why most folks > have either cooked their own, or use some expensive suite of > tools, leaving just a little bit of other stuff out there. Personally, I doubt that it is possible to build a workable system, even with plugins, that will do the job for a significant percentage of service providers. Different companies have different needs, different hot button items, etc. This is an area where breaking the problem down into well-defined separate problems with a well-defined linkage, will go a long way. But to start with, just solving the data storage problem is a good place to start. If someone can create a specialized network monitoring database that scales, then the rest of the toolkit will be much easier to deal with. Note that people have done a lot of research on this sort of time-series database. People working in high-energy physics also have to deal with massive sets of time-series data. There is plenty of literature out there to help guide a design effort. But Open-Source developers don't usually do this kind of up-front research before starting coding. Money and manpower won't solve that kind of problem. --Michael Dillon

13 16

RE: Google wants to be your Internet
by michael.dillon＠bt.com 09 May '07

09 May '07

> We also see this with extranet/supply-chain-type connectivity > between large companies who have overlapping address space, > and I'm afraid it's only going to become more common as more > of these types of relationships are established. Fortunately, IP addresses are not intended for use on the Internet. Rather, they are intended for use with Internet Protocol (IP) implementations. That's why the RIRs, in alignment with RFC 2050, section 3(a), do give out IP address allocations to organizations who are connected to extranet-type networks. If you read RFC 1918, section 2, category 3, you will see that this is consistent. So if the power companies want to assign a unique network address to all power meters then there is no good reason to stop them. After all, it is consistent with the goals of the original IP designers to address every light switch and toaster. Just remember, IP addresses are *NOT* Internet addresses. They are Internet Protocol addresses. Connection to the Internet and public announcement of prefixes are totally irrelevant. --Michael Dillon

7 7

Google wants to be your Internet
by Mark Boolootian 09 May '07

09 May '07

Cringley has a theory and it involves Google, video, and oversubscribed backbones: http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070119_001510.html

39 74

96.2.0.0/16 Bogons
by Eric Ortega 04 Mar '07

04 Mar '07

> I am a network engineer for Midcontinent Communications We are an ISP in > the American Midwest. Recently, we were allocated a new network > assignment: 96.2.0.0/16. We've been having major issues with sites still > blocking this network. I normally wouldn't blanket post to the group, but > I'm looking to hit as many direct network engineers/operators as possible. > Would it be possible to have people do a quick check on their inbound > filters? > > > Thanks! > > > > Eric Ortega > Midcontinent Communications > Network Engineer > 605.357.5720 > eric.ortega(a)midco.net >

18 36

FCC on wifi at hotel
by Carl Karsten 02 Mar '07

02 Mar '07

me again. So wifi at pycon 07 was 'better than 06' witch I hear was a complete disaster. More on 07's coming soon. Now we are talking about wifi at pycon 08, which will be at a different hotel (Crown Plaza in Rosemont, IL) and the question came up: Can the hotel actively prevent us from using our own wifi? _maney: although - wasn't the hotel stuck on "our wifi or no wifi" at last report? CarlFK: only the FCC can restrict radio tpollari: it's their network and their power the FCC has no legal right to that. and no, you show me where they do. I'm not wasting my day with that tripe -- the caselaw you're likely thinking of has to do with an airline and an airport and the airline's lounge, in which case they're paying for the power and paying for their bandwidth from a provider that's not the airport. We're not. I know that there are all sorts of factors, and just cuz the FCC says boo isn't the end of the story, but i don't even know what the FCC's position on this is. google gave me many hits, and after looking at 10 or so I decided to look elsewhere. Carl K

11 14

Re: FCC on wifi at hotel
by Robert Bonomi 28 Feb '07

28 Feb '07

> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:38:10 -0500 > From: Jared Mauch <jared(a)puck.nether.net> > Subject: Re: FCC on wifi at hotel > [[.. munch ..]] > http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.pdf > > I do suggest reading this. They can not legally bar you from > using the devices. They can charge you outrageous fees to get to/from > the MMR or telco demarc and make it prohibitively expensive. > > It may also be problematic to be held hostage showing up > and them saying that no, you can not install your equipment while you > hire a lawyer to explain to them that you are violating FCC fules > for the "OTARD rules". > > - Jared Note well that the 'OTARD rules' do *NOT* apply to an organization holding a meeting at a hotel, or other meeting/convention facility. I quote: For the OTARD rules to apply, the antenna must be installed "on property within the exclusive use or control of an antenna user where the user has a direct or indirect ownership or leasehold interest in the property" upon which the antenna is located. An orgaization contractig for the short-term use of a meeting facility has _no_ such 'ownership or leashold' interest in the property.

1 0