July 2010 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Who controlls the Internet?
by Robert Bonomi 26 Jul '10

26 Jul '10

> From: Tarig Yassin <tariq198487(a)hotmail.com> > To: nanog <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Subject: Who controlls the Internet? > Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 20:24:27 +0300 > > > Deal all > > I want to show you some obstacles that some countries face them every day. > > For example when users from Sudan trying to access some web site they will > get a *Forbidden Access Error* message. > > And some messages say: you are forbidden to access this web site because > your IP address appears form country black listed due to USA government > p= > y. > I would like to issue a question here, who controls this Internet? "Fluffy owns USENET", as everybody knows, and her big mean brother owns the Internet. I could tell you his name, but then I'd have to kill you. Whether you like it or not, the government of a country where a server is located, and/or where the service operator is located, *CAN* dictate terms to that server or service operator. There are _no_ 'uniform' international rules, or guarantees of aceess. Be thankful you're not in China, where attempts to access 'forbidden' sites can bring the secret police knocking. Or some of the Middle East Countries, where *everything* going out-of- country goes through government-owned/-operated censorship boxes. The answer to your question -- "as asked" -- is "everybody, and NOBODY". Any government entity can enact laws concerning what people _within_ _their_jurisdiction_ can do over the Internet, just as they can regulate any other aspcet of 'life'. OTOH, there's no international authority you have to go to, to get a 'license' to get on the Internet and use it. except to whatever extent it is controlled by local government, you can set up services, buy connectivity from whomever you want, and -do- whatever you want, regardless of whether or not such activities make you a 'good net neighbor' or a 'bad' one. As for your particular 'problem', some countries have intternational reputations for being 'bad neighbors'. Things like financing known terrorist organizations, providing various facilities and training capabilities, etc. Countries that do things like this -- or more properly _allow_ things like this to go on within their jurisdiction, run the risk of being cast as 'beyond the pale' by those countries that frown on such things. In which case, any resources that _might_ help those 'bad guys' with ther malevolent efforts are denied to _anyone_ from that country. If you don't like being in that classification, take it up with *your* government. Good Luck.

2 1

RE: Who controlls the Internet?
by Tarig Yassin 25 Jul '10

25 Jul '10

And why not the ICCAN take this reponsibity as an International organization not USA government? From: tariq198487(a)hotmail.com To: nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: Who controlls the Internet? Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 20:24:27 +0300 Deal all I want to show you some obstacles that some countries face them every day. For example when users from Sudan trying to access some web site they will get a *Forbidden Access Error* message. And some messages say: you are forbidden to access this web site because your IP address appears form country black listed due to USA government policy. I would like to issue a question here, who controls this Internet? Thanks Tarig Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. Sign up now. _________________________________________________________________ Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969

3 2

Fwd: Re: North Korea conflict with US and South Korea could spark cyber war
by Andrew Kirch 25 Jul '10

25 Jul '10

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: North Korea conflict with US and South Korea could spark cyber war Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2010 17:04:23 -0700 (PDT) From: andrew.wallace <andrew.wallace(a)rocketmail.com> To: Andrew Kirch <trelane(a)trelane.net> Continue to call me a troll in public and I'll be seeking legal advice. ----- Original Message ---- From: Andrew Kirch<trelane(a)trelane.net> To: nanog(a)nanog.org Sent: Sun, 25 July, 2010 0:46:28 Subject: Re: North Korea conflict with US and South Korea could spark cyber war That is because n3td3v is a troll. Please do not feed, thx. Andrew QED.

3 3

Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course
by Brandon Butterworth 25 Jul '10

25 Jul '10

> > Such a site would be the seed for when (if) we come up with the tech > > for everyone to have PI and lose all the restrictions imposed so far. > > Oh, we have the technology. It's called "memory" If that were viable then we'd be doing it. > Speaking from the perspective of a vendor, I'll happily sell it to you. > > Don't complain to me about the size of the route table, don't complain to me about heat or power requirements, and don't complain to me about convergence intervals. I'll tell you that you designed the bed you wanted to sleep in, and it was all yours. > Indeed, best not listen to vendors brandon

3 3

Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course
by Brandon Butterworth 25 Jul '10

25 Jul '10

> The RFC provides for two address ranges in fc00::/7, one for random > prefixes (fc00::/8), the other reserved for later management (fd00::/8). Later, in some undefined way. A PI lacking enterprise considering doing v6 this way either waits or decides the available space will do as someone will fix the managment later. Sixxs demonstrated that some will see a need With low take up of v6 it's early to know what they will see important > The more important it is to you that your allocation be unique, the > more careful you will be to choose a truly random one. So a way to have really unique is reasonable. > The chance that any > random prefix will conflict with any chosen prefix is very, very small. > The chance that two conflicting prefixes would belong to entities that > will ever actually interact is even smaller. People still play the lotteries. brandon

3 2

Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course
by Brandon Butterworth 25 Jul '10

25 Jul '10

> > Enterprises of non-trivial size will likely use RFC4193 (and I > > fear we will notice PRNG returning 0 very often) and then NAT it to > > provider provided public IP addresses. Eventually ARIN (or someone else will do it for them) may create a site you can register your address and know that it really is unique among participating registrants. Random is fine, unique is better. Such a site would be the seed for when (if) we come up with the tech for everyone to have PI and lose all the restrictions imposed so far. > > I'm just hoping that we'll at least > > see 1:1 NAT instead of NAPT being used. I think that will be a common PI alternative. If people really don't want NAT then we shouldn't provide reasons for it to exist. RFC4193 seems to be the best enterprise plan. They can link to other enterprises and change ISPs easily or multihome. They are not beholden to any ISP or numbering authority. The global table doesn't explode. > Why on earth would you do that? Why not just put the provider-assigned > addresses on the interfaces along side the ULA addresses? Using ULA > in that manner is horribly kludgy and utterly unnecessary. Enterprises tend to want only one identifier to manage per device and that it be unique and mostly permanent. With several PA and ULA on each device, links to ISPs and other enterprises, the combinations of addresses and paths to manage flows and security over become too hard (if it's not simple it's probably not secure). Every device becomes a router and firewall and the staff who manage those aren't cheap. > > This is to facilitate easy and cheap way to change provider. Getting PI > > address is even harder now, as at least RIPE will verify that you are > > multihomed, while many enterprises don't intent to be, they just need low > > cost ability to change operator. > > > Why is that easier/cheaper than changing your RAs to the new provider and > letting the old provider addresses time out? And changing all the ACLs based on the old providers addresses And allowing for all the 5 - 15 year old kit that predates this and won't be upgraded (we have that problem with NT embedded in systems with 10year+ refresh cycle) brandon

5 4

North Korea conflict with US and South Korea could spark cyber war
by andrew.wallace 25 Jul '10

25 Jul '10

n3td3v Security is monitoring the situation between North Korea, US and South Korea. North Korea has already threatened to use its nuclear arms when the "wargames" begin Sunday by United States and South Korea, but n3td3v Security predicts North Korea is planning a large scale cyber attack on US interests. We could really see the first cyber war proper here when it all kicks off Sunday between US, S.Korea and the North. n3td3v Security is warning critical infrastructure utility companies to keep an eye on its cyber assets incase NK's cyber command launch any attack. Andrew Wallace http://sites.google.com/site/n3td3v/

9 10

Caribbean Network Operators Group Inaugural Meeting in St Maarten August 15th to 20th 2010
by André Edwards 24 Jul '10

24 Jul '10

Invitation to CARIBNOG 1 -------------------------------------- August 15th – 20th, 2010 Westin Hotel & Resort 144 Oyster Pond Road St Maarten -------------------------------------- Dear colleagues, members of the Lacnic community. The Caribbean Network Operators Group (CARIBNOG) has the pleasure of announcing and inviting you to participate in the first Regional CaribNOG meeting, CARIBNOG 1, from August 15th – 20th, 2010. The event will be held at the Westin Hotel and Resort in the beautiful island of St. Maarten during the Inaugural St. Maarten’s ICT Week which is being hosted by the Government of St. Maarten and the Caribbean Telecommunications Union (CTU). The Caribbean Network Operators Group (CaribNOG) is a community of Network Operators dedicated to exchanging technical information and experiences related to the management of IP networks in the Caribbean region. CaribNOG conferences provide a forum for the coordination and dissemination of technical information related to networking technologies, research and operational practices. The meetings are informal, with an emphasis on practical solutions, training and insight relevant to the region. In St. Maarten, expert speakers from the regional and international technical community will be conducting hands-on workshops, in-depth tutorials and presentations on the following topics: · VoIP: VOIP workshop – Deploying secure small and medium Scale VoIP solutions · LINUX: Configuring and Securing LAMP, creating a secure LAMP application, IP Services and Security · ROUTING: Basics; introduction to OSPF, BGP, VoIP and SIP · CSIRT: Developing a Network Security and Incident Response Team. You are welcome to join us in St Maarten for this inaugural meeting. More detailed information on the event and its program, accommodation, registration, and general information will soon be available on CARIBNOG's website: www.caribnog.org Sincerely, Andre Edwards CARIBNOG 1 Program Committee

3 3

Router/switch vendor recommendations? off-list replies fine
by Jack Bates 24 Jul '10

24 Jul '10

I'm trying to find versatile vendors that can handle a variety of features that meet my needs for several projects. Honestly, the projects aren't that big, but I'd like certain versatility with them, and having trouble finding the right vendors. Perhaps it's just my engineering that is flawed. Suscriber management (both a redundant and non-redundant unit) - PPPoE (4/6) - DHCP (4/6) - IPv6 support for both with reasonable management plans - option 82 (DHCPv6 have an equiv option?) - backend support for DHCP (preferably both radius and DHCP) - q-in-q L3 termination w/ proxy-arp support - LAG for at least 2 Gig-E - line rate L3 speeds - support for OC3 SONET a plus - support for OC3 ATM with RBE type setup a plus - isis (4/6) multi-topology - BGP4 (4/6) NSR a plus L2 Switch (redundant) - LAG (40Gig+ ring) - Line rate - 8100 in 8100 (simple q-in-q) - ability to take untagged traffic on port and arbitrarily provide it double tags (one to send across network, and the inner to drop on a trunk to an aggregation site for customer) Basic q-in-q but customer doesn't have ability to assign vlan on their side. - standard guards for spanning tree, dhcp, IPv6 etc. - rj45 10/100, mm-fx 100, sm-fx 100/1000 CPE switch (for customer who can't terminate fiber or for extending our testing demarc) -1 to 2 rj45 100/1000 -1 to 2 sm-fx 100/1000 -inexpensive, small

1 0

Proposed Global Policy for Autonomous System Numbers - Final Call for Comments and Background Report
by IPv3.com 24 Jul '10

24 Jul '10

Proposed Global Policy for Autonomous System Numbers - Final Call for Comments and Background Report http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-23jul10-en.htm ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: IPv3.com <ipv3.com(a)gmail.com> Date: Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 7:45 AM Subject: ASN IANA MLM Leasing Business Out-Dated - Now Automated To: asn-proposal-2010(a)icann.org ASN IANA MLM Leasing Business Out-Dated - Now Automated Selling or leasing UNIQUE binary values is no longer viable because .COM owners can derive them FREE With IPv3 and IPv16 a simple 6-bit Alphabet (Symbol Set) is used for mapping UNIQUE binary values 64 symbols - 6-bits - {[0-9][A-Z][a-z]-.} A 5-Letter .COM owner can create a UNIQUE 30-bit ASN for FREE via the 6-bit Alphabet If upper and lower case symbols are used, several FREE ASNs can be generated A $6 annual fee for the .COM registration covers all of the costs needed to generate UNIQUE binary values The 4-Letter .COM owners can generate several FREE 24-bit prefixes (called /24s) for IPv* Addressing ASN IANA MLM Leasing Business Out-Dated - Now Automated 4096 Trending TLD selections are also automated ICANN and the RIRs can be Dissolved

1 0