- Test - lists.nanog.org

Hello List, a easy Cisco question.
by bill＠kruchas.com 11 Jul '11

11 Jul '11

Hello, I am not a heads down network guy, but I have setup a few firewalls, and have got them to do what I wanted, "eventually". But mostly through reading and trial and error. I am struggling with this one, but I think I know the answer, but want to verify it with some experts. We have a cisco asa 5505, with an internet connection with only one useable ip address (subnet 255.255.255.252). We/they have had a nat setup for outgoing connections for some time, but I have been trying to get a new inbound connection going for terminal services to a specific host on tcp port 3389. I'm using "ASDM" but checking the config file and it's building the correct static statement, and access lists (I think anyway). But It doesn't work, and doesn't give a real good definative log message. I was wondering if possibly the fact that nat is using the one ip address, if that precludes the static mapping from working. I've read several step by steps, and again had this working several other places, but always with more ip's. If having just one ip isn't the isssue, is there any other issues I should be looking for. I'd appreciate any insight you might share. Thanks in advance

2 1

Mediacom Communications Corporation contact available?
by Eric Tykwinski 11 Jul '11

11 Jul '11

Looking for a NOC contact if there are any available. Sincerely, Eric Tykwinski TrueNet, Inc. P: 610-429-8300 F: 610-429-3222

1 0

RE: Hello List, a easy Cisco question.
by bill＠kruchas.com 11 Jul '11

11 Jul '11

Hello, I believe I have setup the appropriate access-lists, even have created it both ways in case I have the inside and outside reversed. The packet trace always drops through and hits the implicit rule which is deny everything. No matter how I have the access list setup. I have tried it several ways, and also included the nat exclude statement, but the current config doesn't have that listed anymore as I wanted to try to keep the config as clean as I can, but if the exclude is needed I can certainly add it. But none on the examples used it. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Hello List, a easy Cisco question. From: James Laszko <[1]jamesl(a)mythostech.com> Date: Mon, July 11, 2011 1:02 pm To: "[2]bill(a)kruchas.com" <[3]bill(a)kruchas.com> Have you setup the appropriate access rule along with the NAT? The packet trace button is useful in testing as well... Regards, James Laszko Mythos Technology Inc [4]Jamesl(a)mythostech.com ----- Original Message ----- From: [5]bill(a)kruchas.com [[6]mailto:bill@kruchas.com] Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 12:33 PM To: nanog <[7]nanog(a)nanog.org> Subject: Hello List, a easy Cisco question. Hello, I am not a heads down network guy, but I have setup a few firewalls, and have got them to do what I wanted, "eventually". But mostly through reading and trial and error. I am struggling with this one, but I think I know the answer, but want to verify it with some experts. We have a cisco asa 5505, with an internet connection with only one useable ip address (subnet 255.255.255.252). We/they have had a nat setup for outgoing connections for some time, but I have been trying to get a new inbound connection going for terminal services to a specific host on tcp port 3389. I'm using "ASDM" but checking the config file and it's building the correct static statement, and access lists (I think anyway). But It doesn't work, and doesn't give a real good definative log message. I was wondering if possibly the fact that nat is using the one ip address, if that precludes the static mapping from working. I've read several step by steps, and again had this working several other places, but always with more ip's. If having just one ip isn't the isssue, is there any other issues I should be looking for. I'd appreciate any insight you might share. Thanks in advance References 1. mailto:jamesl@mythostech.com 2. mailto:bill@kruchas.com 3. mailto:bill@kruchas.com 4. mailto:Jamesl@mythostech.com 5. mailto:bill@kruchas.com 6. mailto:bill@kruchas.com 7. mailto:nanog@nanog.org

1 0

AOL security contact?
by Chris 11 Jul '11

11 Jul '11

Anyone have an AOL security contact because like I posted yesterday, CNN was hit through a redirect vulnerability in their ad system and now AOL is suffering the same thing by having some scammer serving up "Casey Anthony leaked lawyer video" crap as Facebook spam where unsuspecting lusers are clicking like wild on it -- --C "The dumber people think you are, the more surprised they're going to be when you kill them." - Sir William Clayton

3 3

IMPORTANT ADMINISTRIVIA - NANOG list and website changes over the next week
by Michael K. Smith - Adhost 11 Jul '11

11 Jul '11

Hello Everyone We are going to be moving the NANOG mailing list over to our new service provider beginning this week. There are several changes that will occur over time that will, hopefully, reduce the service impact to users. One key note - the new system doesn't use Mailman, so your filtering rules may need to be changed to accommodate the new system. - July 8th - We will begin the transition of the NANOG website to its new location with our service provider. - There may be service glitches through the weekend on the site, but nothing catastrophic - July 9th - Mailman will be modified to use our service provider's MX for outbound messages. - Hopefully this will be transparent to list participants, but users can add mail.amsl.com to their filters. - July 9th - Subscription changes to the list will be frozen and the list archives will be unavailable. - Administrivia requests will receive a bounce message during this phase. - July 11th - MX records will be updated so all inbound/outbound mail goes through their system. - At this stage, mail.amsl.com will be the only MX for NANOG list services. - July 11th - DNS records will be updated for the website as well. - At this point, all services will have been moved to our provider. If you have any questions or concerns you can send them to me directly. I'd be happy to provide more specifics if people are interested, but I thought a brief and to-the-point message to the list was more appropriate. Regards, Mike -- Michael K. Smith - CISSP, GSEC, GISP Chief Technical Officer - Adhost Internet LLC mksmith(a)adhost.com w: +1 (206) 404-9500 f: +1 (206) 404-9050 PGP: B49A DDF5 8611 27F3 08B9 84BB E61E 38C0 (Key ID: 0x9A96777D)

4 3

Re: [NANOG] NANOG TEST
by Joe Sniderman 11 Jul '11

11 Jul '11

On 07/10/2011 10:03 PM, Steve Feldman wrote: > Another test, sorry for the noise. > Steve Well, at least the fears that nanog would be IPv4 only are unfounded.. Received: from mail.amsl.com (mail.amsl.com [IPv6:2001:1890:1112:1::14])... -- Joe Sniderman <joseph.sniderman(a)thoroquel.org>

1 0

Re: CNN security contact?
by Chris 11 Jul '11

11 Jul '11

CNN patched the redirect vulnerability which was making it easier to social engineer Nancy Grace tards who followed the case

1 0

UPDATE: NANOG List Cutover Schedule
by Michael K. Smith - Adhost 10 Jul '11

10 Jul '11

Hello: We have moved the NANOG list back to its original location for the time being. We have a few issues to address before we can cut the system over permanently. I will let everyone know again when we are ready to proceed. Thanks, Mike -- Michael K. Smith - CISSP, GSEC, GISP Chief Technical Officer - Adhost Internet LLC mksmith(a)adhost.com w: +1 (206) 404-9500 f: +1 (206) 404-9050 PGP: B49A DDF5 8611 27F3 08B9 84BB E61E 38C0 (Key ID: 0x9A96777D) > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael K. Smith - Adhost [mailto:mksmith@adhost.com] > Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 3:38 PM > To: NANOG list (nanog(a)nanog.org) > Subject: NANOG List Cutover Schedule > > Hello All: > > We are going to cut the mailing list over to the new location at 4:00 PM PDT > (GMT -7). We will be testing the cutover on this list to make sure everything > goes smoothly. Please filter on the subject "NANOG TEST". > > Regards, > > Mike > > -- > Michael K. Smith - CISSP, GSEC, GISP > Chief Technical Officer - Adhost Internet LLC mksmith(a)adhost.com > w: +1 (206) 404-9500 f: +1 (206) 404-9050 > PGP: B49A DDF5 8611 27F3 08B9 84BB E61E 38C0 (Key ID: 0x9A96777D) > >

1 0

Re: [NANOG] NANOG TEST
by Kristian Erik Hermansen 10 Jul '11

10 Jul '11

No. On Jul 10, 2011 7:06 PM, "Michael K. Smith - Adhost" <mksmith(a)adhost.com> wrote: > Please ignore > > -- > Michael K. Smith - CISSP, GSEC, GISP > Chief Technical Officer - Adhost Internet LLC mksmith(a)adhost.com > w: +1 (206) 404-9500 f: +1 (206) 404-9050 > PGP: B49A DDF5 8611 27F3 08B9 84BB E61E 38C0 (Key ID: 0x9A96777D) > >

1 0

NANOG List Cutover Schedule
by Michael K. Smith - Adhost 10 Jul '11

10 Jul '11

Hello All: We are going to cut the mailing list over to the new location at 4:00 PM PDT (GMT -7). We will be testing the cutover on this list to make sure everything goes smoothly. Please filter on the subject "NANOG TEST". Regards, Mike -- Michael K. Smith - CISSP, GSEC, GISP Chief Technical Officer - Adhost Internet LLC mksmith(a)adhost.com w: +1 (206) 404-9500 f: +1 (206) 404-9050 PGP: B49A DDF5 8611 27F3 08B9 84BB E61E 38C0 (Key ID: 0x9A96777D)

1 0