- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Myspace contact needed
by TProphet 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

I use a VPN from Beijing, where I reside. It's pretty common for myspace to blacklist any IP addresses that they believe belong to crawlers, linkbots, VPN services, etc. This appears to be an automated process. I've never had luck getting any of my VPN IPs unblocked. Good luck getting in touch with anyone there, the company was just sold to a consortium of celebrities after massive News Corp. layoffs and it's left with walking zombies. I'd be surprised if anyone competent is still left... -TProphet On 7/12/2011 9:49 PM, Walter Keen wrote: > > Sorry about the lack of details. > > I'm looking for a Myspace contact, We're an ISP (AS20394) and all of our > users are getting a 302 redirect to google after contacting a myspace > server. If there is an appropriate contact on this list, or someone who > can forward this to such a contact, it would be greatly appreciated. > I don't have this issue from other ISP connections(such as my home > connection), but have not heard back from the website support portal as > of yet. > > > > > wkeen@tnwx-nms-3:~$ traceroute www.myspace.com > traceroute to www.myspace.com (216.178.39.11), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets > 1 tnwx-core-1.rainierconnect.com (69.10.208.1) 0.409 ms 0.479 ms 0.559 ms > 2 74.50.203.97 (74.50.203.97) 1.772 ms 1.769 ms 1.805 ms > 3 ge5-0-2d0.cir1.seattle7-wa.us.xo.net (216.156.100.41) 1.703 ms 1.708 > ms 1.707 ms > 4 4.59.232.53 (4.59.232.53) 2.064 ms 2.067 ms 2.056 ms > 5 ae-31-51.ebr1.Seattle1.Level3.net (4.69.147.150) 11.408 ms 11.374 ms > 11.484 ms > 6 ae-7-7.ebr2.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.69.132.49) 19.095 ms 18.870 ms > 18.997 ms > 7 ae-34-34.ebr4.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.69.153.34) 20.638 ms 30.373 ms > 30.333 ms > 8 ae-5-5.ebr2.SanJose5.Level3.net (4.69.148.141) 19.631 ms 19.813 ms > 19.803 ms > 9 ae-6-6.ebr2.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.148.201) 29.283 ms 28.981 ms > 29.246 ms > 10 ae-62-62.csw1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.137.18) 29.091 ms > ae-72-72.csw2.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.137.22) 29.461 ms 29.437 ms > 11 ae-24-70.car4.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.144.70) 29.684 ms > ae-44-90.car4.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.144.198) 29.562 ms > ae-14-60.car4.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.144.6) 29.680 ms > 12 ve202.lax.myspace.com (4.71.128.10) 29.351 ms 28.998 ms 29.203 ms > 13 vl342.cs2.lax1.myspace.com (204.16.35.137) 29.431 ms 29.540 ms 29.638 ms > 14 vl3552.cs2.els2.myspace.com (216.178.35.77) 29.970 ms 29.717 ms 29.726 ms > 15 * * * > 16 * * * > 17 * * * > 18 * * * > 19 * * * > > wkeen@tnwx-nms-3:~$ wget www.myspace.com > --2011-07-12 06:45:32-- http://www.myspace.com/ > Resolving www.myspace.com... 63.135.80.46 > Connecting to www.myspace.com|63.135.80.46|:80... connected. > HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 302 Found > Location: http://www.google.com [following] > --2011-07-12 06:45:32-- http://www.google.com/ > Resolving www.google.com... 72.14.213.106, 72.14.213.147, 72.14.213.99, ... > Connecting to www.google.com|72.14.213.106|:80... connected. > HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK > Length: unspecified [text/html] > Saving to: `index.html.5' > > [ <=> ] 9,908 --.-K/s in 0.009s > > 2011-07-12 06:45:32 (1.01 MB/s) - `index.html.5' saved [9908] > > wkeen@tnwx-nms-3:~$ > > > > <walter.keen(a)rainierconnect.net> wrote: > > My apologies all, I meant to say myspace contact > > > > You're more likely to get a response if you give some indication > of what the issue is; for example, saying "I'm looking for a MySpace > contact because there is an attack coming from their servers that > appears to indicate they may have been compromised" will likely > get you a faster reaction from the security people. Or, if it's a > network issue, saying "I'm looking for a MySpace network contact > because it appears they are announcing the following blocks which > really belong to me, which is causing reachability issues" will more > likely get you a reaction from an appropriate network person. > > Without an indication of the nature of the problem, I think you'll find > most people on the list tend to ignore generic requests like this. > > Thanks! > > Matt >

2 1

Can somebody stop nanog@nanog.org from forwarding spam, kthx!
by Jeroen Massar 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

I am fairly sure that the fake "Western Union" message and various other spams that are dripping through are from real subscribers... Also, as somebody decided to drop mailman and replace it by 'bulk_mailer v1.13' maybe one should start fixing that software also to add the List-* headers aka RF2369 headers before we get a flood of 'I want to unsubscribe!' kind of messages, as currently there are no details in the message... Greets, Jeroen -- Return-Path: <help(a)nanog.org> [..] Received: by c1a.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 8827E1C39C0D; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 01:56:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c1a.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 859251C39C0C; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 01:56:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by nanog.org (bulk_mailer v1.13); Tue, 12 Jul 2011 01:56:13 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Authentication-Results: c1a.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass header.i=(a)yahoo.com by localhost (c1a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 57kfPoQcM1II for <c5-22-1041(a)c1a.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 01:55:54 -0700 (PDT) by c1a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6F391C39502 for <nanog(a)nanog.org>; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 01:55:53 -0700 (PDT) by s0.nanog.org with smtp (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <wu001122(a)hotmail.com>) id 1QgYTR-000O9p-FX for nanog(a)nanog.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 08:37:46 +0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-5 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 599896.49560.bm(a)omp1019.access.mail.sp2.yahoo.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1310459863; bh=kV1F/5fAMRswMRBHHPz7BAoiVx+V1whaOXmIw6DNpoQ=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-RocketYMMF:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=HaBDhJm8t+WHLeZ9JYMQWuC9hraN+xVQEYPlAaLG5M1vCXflWFCFCt+AWleOQRuc1063jgI5P0CYfpY4XAloY0FTwceXSntuo6fqmUgFQ2v9tCYxkWg0Z5/L5iy9utw73OrZ2FpYmcHB1fjNwLAeM/QiIUSKBQWyaoag5bUPZ6w= X-YMail-OSG: w33eh74VM1mZnVdAav_H6n4sKFUZGa.HTRs7c0RtQrPA6zT b9YAb0Nqk2hDHJXSi9J2XdgJeCrLtDQnz4_JjZLcBN9vSDIynSh.eD8rT_KB sYUe92vhC5f70p25BnhFd9ZsKvZVbSygr991WfCYWWyJKLzWr1d.FJlk2ogS Hz0Sz56HiSGhHBadGZbno1k3XkNSvWg5f5vnX8hgYzVbL4wHxz8mC3KtqQoj L3rC0WGp_k.5dnNQIOWcv56QpJ9qSiA02nP9Ac_DfUJ_VdheCcZjA13Ncr7J wrd73Iqvr1LMQmLuijPB16fgXHlMwaZZMo0xckq0tYzvb8AHHKWaa7YqyrsH VZoGenVnEe530zbxQqpDB7Jg5N4KoFs8K4xQBItr3sZdLHOKX6OndA2jLoeY sgs_p03CutbV_VggXh7KsOPVyWg-- X-RocketYMMF: webbmb(a)att.net X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/572 YahooMailWebService/0.8.112.307740 Message-ID: <1310459863.39197.YahooMailRC(a)web180907.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 01:37:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Western Union Award <wu001122(a)hotmail.com> Subject: THANK YOU FOR USING WESTERN UNION!!!KINDLY OPEN THE ATTACHMENT, To: undisclosed recipients: ; MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="0-2023431952-1310459863=:39197" Reply-to: wu001122(a)hotmail.com X-C5I-RSN: 22/0/1041/6659/37972 X-C5I-Spamscore: -4.00 List-Id: North American Network Operators Group <nanog.nanog.org> Precedence: list --0-2023431952-1310459863=:39197 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1056351656-1310459863=:39197" --0-1056351656-1310459863=:39197 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii THANK YOU FOR USING WESTERN UNION!!!KINDLY OPEN THE ATTACHMENT,

4 3

AMSL vs the ex-incument
by bmanning＠vacation.karoshi.com 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

AMSL has a number of interesting operational choices in its handling of email. Lets see if they are willing to take the email from a NANOG supporter (fiscally). /bill

1 0

Re: NANOG List Update - Moving Forward
by Christopher J. Pilkington 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 1:19 AM, Michael K. Smith - Adhost <mksmith(a)adhost.com> wrote: > Thankfully, the current test has been a success. We are going to stay in Hooray for testing in production. -cjp

3 2

NANOG Move - Moved back
by Michael K. Smith - Adhost 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

Hello All: We're back on the old configuration for now. I will send an update later this afternoon once I speak with AMS about the issues we experienced over night. Regards, Mike

3 2

Re: NANOG List Update - Moving Forward
by Tim Franklin 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

----- Original Message ----- > The new posts do not have list (un)subscribe information in the > headers. Also, a statement would be nice as to what header definitely *will* be in place that we can filter on. At the moment, I'm assuming 'List-ID', but I'm not sure if that header or its contents can be relied on. Regards, Tim.

1 0

RE: NANOG List Update - Moving Forward
by Chris Barlow 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

And adding to it as well +7 Kind Regards Chris Barlow BSc. MBCS Information Technology Manager TICS (Global) Ltd, Oxford House Sixth Avenue, Robin Hood Airport Doncaster DN9 3GG Tel +44 (0)1302 623074 Fax +44 (0)1302 623075 Mob +44(0)7909 520445 This message is for the intended recipient only. It may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it, destroy all copies of it and notify the sender. You must not use or disclose any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. If you contact us by email, we may store your name and address to facilitate communication. We take reasonable precautions to ensure our emails are virus free, however we cannot accept responsibility for any virus transmitted by us and recommend that you subject any incoming email to your own virus checking procedures. Head Office: TICS Ltd, Oxford House, Sixth Avenue, Robin Hood Airport, Doncaster DN9 3GG Registered in England and Wales under registration number 7164795 For further information about TICS Ltd, please visit http://www.tics-ltd.co.uk -----Original Message----- From: jim deleskie [mailto:deleskie@gmail.com] Sent: 12 July 2011 13:03 To: nenolod(a)systeminplace.net Cc: tim(a)pelican.org; NANOG list Subject: Re: NANOG List Update - Moving Forward +1 On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:32 AM, William Pitcock <nenolod(a)systeminplace.net> wrote: > On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 10:50:38 +0100 (BST) Tim Franklin > <tim(a)pelican.org> wrote: > >> > Thankfully, the current test has been a success. >> >> Including stopping non-members from posting to the list, and other >> anti-spam? >> >> I've got a sudden influx this morning of spam addressed to >> nanog(a)nanog.org :( >> > > Ditto. Getting lots of crap here. > > William >

1 0

Re: NANOG List Update - Moving Forward
by Jon Lewis 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote: > >> If you have any questions or concerns please let me know. > > The new posts do not have list (un)subscribe information in the headers. Also, the headers now no longer include the origin of messages. i.e. the new mailing list manager is throwing away all Received: lines such that if I look at the message headers, all I know is the mail came to me through amsl.com. So with the spam getting through now, there's no way for list members to see where it actually came from. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________

1 0

Re: NANOG List Update - Moving Forward
by Aftab Siddiqui 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

Just want to re-confirm. I've got only 4 in my spam. Is it google spam who is not putting it in SPAM folder? Regards, Aftab A. Siddiqui On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 4:32 PM, William Pitcock <nenolod(a)systeminplace.net>wrote: > On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 10:50:38 +0100 (BST) > Tim Franklin <tim(a)pelican.org> wrote: > > > > Thankfully, the current test has been a success. > > > > Including stopping non-members from posting to the list, and other > > anti-spam? > > > > I've got a sudden influx this morning of spam addressed to > > nanog(a)nanog.org :( > > > > Ditto. Getting lots of crap here. > > William >

1 0

Re: NANOG List Update - Moving Forward
by Joe Greco 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

> On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote: > > > If you have any questions or concerns please let me know. > > The new posts do not have list (un)subscribe information in the headers. I'll offer an evenhanded comment in that it's frustrating that the headers used have changed, since some of us key procmail off of them to split mailing lists into folders, but it *is* nice to see that the current NANOG mailing list team has been supporting List-Id for some time now, and that such was propagated properly between old and new host. Good job. Unfortunately my filter predates NANOG's use of that so now I gotta go fix it here. ... JG -- Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net "We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN) With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.

1 0