November 2009 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Smartcard and non-password methods (was Re: Password repository)
by Sean Donelan 24 Nov '09

24 Nov '09

Are any network providers supporting smartcards or other non-password based authentication methods? Passwords always end up blaming the user for choosing/not remembering good passwords instead of blaming the technology for choosing/not doing things so the user isn't forced to work around its flaws. I know about the DOD Common Access Card. One-time code-generator tokens seem more widely used by single enterprises. But inter-operable credentials still seem to be one of those great unsolved problems for compter security. Are passwords still the only lowest-common-denominator?

12 15

Tucows vs Postini
by Paul Stewart 24 Nov '09

24 Nov '09

Hi folks... Anyone have much experience with outsourcing antispam/antivirus to Tucows? We use Postini today and are overall pleased. The Tucows pricing seems to be MUCH lower so curious on any feedback... Thanks, Paul ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and contains confidential and/or privileged material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender immediately and then destroy this transmission, including all attachments, without copying, distributing or disclosing same. Thank you."

5 5

Re: Testing Internet Speeds and Capacity
by Xai Xi 24 Nov '09

24 Nov '09

As mentioned, there is a limitation to TCP-based speed tests - TCP throughput is very sensitive to packet losses, particularly during slow-start, in addition to requiring end-host tuning (as an exercise, try running speedtest.net on a high bandwidth connection). You could use something called "available bandwidth", which is kind of like the "leftover capacity" on your path - I've been using this tool called pathload2: http://www.measurementlab.net/measurement-lab-tools#pathload2 _________________________________________________________________ Keep your friends updated—even when you’re not signed in. http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-it-in-action/so…

3 2

Testing Internet Speeds and Capacity
by shake righa 23 Nov '09

23 Nov '09

Hi, how does one truly test internet speeds provided by your provider. Speed test sits give different results that one provided by the provider. Regards, Shake

6 6

ip capacity provider
by Beavis 23 Nov '09

23 Nov '09

All, I know this is a long shot, but can anyone help me out on getting in touch with carriers in Miami FL. one that can pass ip traffic into latin america?. any help would be greatly appreciated. thanks, -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments

1 0

Re: earthlink sorbs
by chaim.rieger＠gmail.com 23 Nov '09

23 Nov '09

Same here Many bounces, started this weekend. Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

2 1

IPv6 Deployment for the LAN
by Ray Soucy 23 Nov '09

23 Nov '09

Looking for general feedback on IPv6 deployment to the edge. As it turns out delivering IPv6 to the edge in an academic setting has been a challenge. Common wisdom says to rely on SLAAC for IPv6 addressing, and in a perfect world it would make sense. Given that historically we have relied on DHCP for a means of NAC and host registration, like many academic institutions, the idea of sweeping changes to accommodate IPv6 was just not going to happen in the near future. The only solution that lets us expand our roll out IPv6 to the edge without major changes to the production IPv4 network seems to point to making use of DHCPv6, so the effort has been focused there. Our current IPv6 allocation schema provides for a 64-bit prefix for each network. Unfortunately, this enables SLAAC; yes, you can suppress the prefix advertisement, and set the M and O flags, but that only prevents hosts that have proper implementations of IPv6 from making use of SLAAC. The concern here is that older hosts with less than OK implementations will still enable IPv6 without regard for the stability and security concerns associated with IPv6. Needless to say, the thought of being able to enable IPv6 on a per-host basis is met with far less resistance than opening up the floodgates and letting SLAAC take control. Ultimately, the best solution that I've been able to come up with is to preserve the IPv6 allocation schema and reserve a 64-bit prefix for each network, but for the initial deployment use an 80-bit one in its place with the extra 16 bits given a value of 1. The advantages of this: Guarantee that SLAAC will not be initiated for the prefix; Allow for a migration path to 64-bit prefixes in the future; and, Make it easy to identify a network that us making use of an 80-bit prefix by setting the extra bits to a value of 1. This allows us to be fairly confident that extending IPv6 to edge networks will not impact production services, and focus on DHCPv6 for host configuration and address assignment. We have no problem using a 64-bit prefix and letting SLAAC take care of addressing for certain networks where we actually manage the hosts, so that has been included as an exception. All other networks, however, will make use of DHCPv6 or manual configuration to receive native IPv6. So far, this has proven to work well with testing of various hosts and applications. Has anyone run into issues with applications in not using a 64-bit prefix? Of course, the other challenge here is proper DHCPv6 client implementations for host operating systems. Linux, Windows Server 2003 and later, Windows Vista, and Windows 7 all support DHCPv6. Windows XP has a poor implementation of IPv6 but has the option of using Dibbler or some other 3rd party DHCPv6 client. Mac OS X is a challenge; it currently has no option for DHCPv6, though newer releases provide for manual configuration of IPv6 addressing. Does anyone know if Apple has plans to release a DHCPv6 client for Mac OS X? Since the goal for this initial wave is to make IPv6 available to those who request it or have a need for it, we feel its acceptable that there will need to be some user participation in enabling IPv6 for a host. I think the hope is that more systems, like Windows 7, will begin including mature DHCPv6 clients which are enables when the M flag for a router advertisement is set and perhaps make it the default behavior. Is this likely to happen or am I being too optimistic? Anyway, just thought I'd bounce it to NANOG and get some feedback. -- Ray Soucy Communications Specialist +1 (207) 561-3526 Communications and Network Services University of Maine System http://www.maine.edu/

42 140

earthlink sorbs
by Carlos Alcantar 23 Nov '09

23 Nov '09

Did earthlink just get put on sorbs over the weekend? We have gotten 4 tickets in today about users not getting email from earthlink/mindspring users and looking thru the logs they are getting blocked for being listed on sorbs. Carlos Alcantar Race Telecommunications, Inc. 101 Haskins Way South San Francisco, CA 94080

1 0

Anyone from Global Crossing on-list?
by Drew Weaver 23 Nov '09

23 Nov '09

Hi, I'm seeking someone at GLBX who can assist me with an issue we've been having, all attempts at resolution via customer service/trouble tickets (ucommand) have failed. thanks, -Drew

1 0

backupdns.com down?
by Antonio Querubin 22 Nov '09

22 Nov '09

Anyone else having trouble reaching backupdns.com or their nameservers? Antonio Querubin 808-545-5282 x3003 e-mail/xmpp: tony(a)lava.net

7 11