- Test - lists.nanog.org

POE bump-in-the-wire conversion
by Robert E. Seastrom 31 Dec '10

31 Dec '10

Perhaps someone from this august list can offer a clue here. Have: Cisco 3524-PWR (paleo-POE, pre-802.3af Cisco standard). It runs the 7960Gs great. Have: Wireless AP stuff that wants 12v on the unused pairs for passive POE. 48v will let the magic smoke out. Might buy: phone that does 802.3af Want to run these with the 3524-PWR. I can't imagine that nobody makes a bump-in-the-wire converter for this application, but haven't been able to find anything other than 802.3af to the passive POE use case. Anyone got a pointer for me? Thanks, -r

4 4

.gov DNSSEC operational message
by Matt Larson 31 Dec '10

31 Dec '10

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 A KSK roll for the .gov zone will occur at the end of January, 2011. This key change is necessitated by a registry operator transition: VeriSign has been selected by the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) to operate the domain name registry for .gov. It is important that you prepare for this key change NOW. DO NOT WAIT until late January, 2011, to take action: the changes described below should be made as soon as possible. Because .gov was signed prior to the signing of the root zone, it is reasonable to believe that many DNSSEC validators (usually part of recursive name servers) have the .gov zone's KSK statically configured as a trust anchor. Further, because automated trust anchor rollover software implementing the protocol described in RFC 5011 has not been widely available until recently, it is reasonable to believe that few validators with a statically configured .gov trust anchor would be able to understand a KSK roll using RFC 5011 semantics and update their trust anchor store automatically. VeriSign is sending this message to announce the impending .gov KSK roll so that the DNSSEC operational community will be informed of the change and has the opportunity to take the necessary steps to prepare for it. The .gov KSK roll will occur between 27 January 2011 and 31 January 2011. The rollover will not use RFC 5011 semantics because of issues surrounding the registry operator transition. The new KSK will not be published in an authenticated manner outside DNS (e.g., on an SSL-protected web page). Rather, the intended mechanism for trusting the new KSK is via the signed root zone: DS records corresponding to the new KSK are already present in the root zone. Because the root zone has had DS records corresponding to the current .gov KSK since 27 October 2010, static configuration of a trust anchor for .gov is currently no longer strictly necessary. Because there will be no non-DNS-based mechanism to authenticate subsequent .gov KSKs, configuration of the .gov KSK as a trust anchor is NOT RECOMMENDED. Take these steps NOW to prepare for the .gov KSK roll in late January 2011: 1. If your DNSSEC validators DO NOT HAVE a trust anchor for the root zone configured, CONFIGURE the root zone's KSK as a trust anchor. An authenticated version of the root zone's KSK is available at http://data.iana.org/root-anchors/. 2. If your DNSSEC validators have a trust anchor for the .gov zone configured, REMOVE the .gov zone's KSK as a trust anchor from your validator's configuration. If you follow both steps above, your DNSSEC validators should continue to validate names in .gov, but the .gov KSK will be authenticated via the signed root's KSK rather than a locally configured trust anchor. DO NOT WAIT until late January, 2011, to take these actions: the trust anchor changes described above should be made as soon as possible. If you have any questions or comments, please send email to registrar(a)dotgov.gov or reply to this message. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin) iQEVAwUBTRJqVNdGiUJktOYBAQJaHQf+OKcKsnUySDLzwdMUdjDpFhvm53iJF4RN /fWMK+5ahTqWpWgDnMi0NZij6OKCu+jUtH75Q9z4iXglyQzl5rweL4N01jV7GquV tYO18ys2lQ7w07XFP2Y8568ckYeWkDgYGwHJ4GKRMW4/cyl6YlE3Z+sxMbn/O3/G CcaTgmVtVHkVvLJfPMotaE9M4ldAlM3yMAHQspadVPrBNtzmYUBjJhjvwe1XxAok UBJLwqubSnY2qoAsXrwcHov4Z1izxMiuLIthyjoc79r11J0CYzwDNpDd2QyPD/3y 7nFHlxCIYDm9r2lnv8sbc/p+/PuM7rpzpkCUvpWY9FArZWt7h7gSfA== =+pAa -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

10 22

Looking for a Cisco network/server admin
by Brielle Bruns 31 Dec '10

31 Dec '10

Hello all, I was wondering if someone could direct me offlist to a Cisco network/admin that could fix a mail server on their network that is out of sync time wise. Not a big deal, but I figured I'd ask. :) -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org / http://www.ahbl.org

1 1

[NANOG-announce] NANOG 51 in coming up at the end of January....submit your talks now!
by David Meyer 30 Dec '10

30 Dec '10

Folks, NANOG 51 is coming up a the end of January. If you like to submit a talk or tutorial, please create an account on https://pc.nanog.org (if you don't have one) and submit your materials. Thanks, and everyone have a safe and happy new year. Dave (for the NANOG PC) _______________________________________________ NANOG-announce mailing list NANOG-announce(a)nanog.org https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

1 0

medicare.gov / cms.gov DNSSEC Validation Failures
by Richard Laager 30 Dec '10

30 Dec '10

I'm looking for a DNS contact for medicare.gov (and cms.gov) They are failing DNSSEC validation. Emails to hostmaster, webmaster, and postmaster bounce, as does dnsadmin(a)rdcms.eds.com (from their SOA) and dnsadmin(a)eds.com (from eds.com's WHOIS). WHOIS for .gov is essentially empty. HHS_ITIO_Service_Desk(a)hhs.gov was suggested to me, but a person at that address said medicare.gov was not their responsibility and did not provide any further contact information. Thanks, Richard

7 8

Best Customer Support Practices
by jacob miller 30 Dec '10

30 Dec '10

Hi, Am looking towards formulating a document that will encompass best customer support practices. Am looking to formulate the document based on well known best practices and experience from different individuals. Any help will be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Regards, Jacob

1 0

Specific Network Querying
by J. Oquendo 30 Dec '10

30 Dec '10

Good morning and happy holidays all. I'm in the process of creating an automated filtering application and would like to know if anyone can point me to the right place. I'd like to be able to query a site/db/etc., and pull out specific netblocks to create fw rules. Since IP space is always changing, it would be helpful if my queries can be tailored to something like: wget site | Parse IP space | grep Company | create rule Or: wget site | Parse IP space | grep {EDU_IP_SPACE,MIL_SPACE,GOV_SPACE} | create rule Follow? Right now I am using potaroo with something like : wget -qO - http://bgp.potaroo.net/ipv4-stats/allocated-{apnic.html,ripe.html, etc} But this just gives me entire blocks, not who is behind them. Is there any site I could use to query specifics? E.g., for a gov client: wget -qO - this.site.org | grep "\.gov" | parse_with_awk '{print "fw_rule"}' Thanks in advance and Happy New Year to everyone. -- =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ J. Oquendo SGFA, SGFE, C|EH, CNDA, CHFI, OSCP, CPT "It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things differently." - Warren Buffett 227C 5D35 7DCB 0893 95AA 4771 1DCE 1FD1 5CCD 6B5E http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x5CCD6B5E

4 3

Re: <BGP SNMP OID Help>
by Scott Weeks 29 Dec '10

29 Dec '10

--- mruiz(a)lstfinancial.com wrote: From: "Michael Ruiz" <mruiz(a)lstfinancial.com> I would like to the OID number for displaying the number of routers that your EBGP peer has received. Thank you in advanced. --------------------------------------------- http://www.oidview.com/mibs/detail.html scott

1 0

<BGP SNMP OID Help>
by Michael Ruiz 29 Dec '10

29 Dec '10

Hello folks, I would like to the OID number for displaying the number of routers that your EBGP peer has received. Thank you in advanced. Michael Ruiz

1 0

Re: 5.7/5.8 GHz 802.11n dual polarity MIMO through office building glass, 1.5 km distance
by GP Wooden 29 Dec '10

29 Dec '10

+1 on Alvarion. ----- Reply message ----- From: "Bryan Fields" <Bryan(a)bryanfields.net> Date: Wed, Dec 29, 2010 9:30 am Subject: 5.7/5.8 GHz 802.11n dual polarity MIMO through office building glass, 1.5 km distance To: <nanog(a)nanog.org> On 12/29/2010 08:19, Robert E. Seastrom wrote: > > Most of these regulations are centered on the concern that your > building not look like a tower site. An antenna that is sufficiently > small that it can not be seen from the ground without resorting to > optics may be on their "oh, that's fine" list once they see one > sitting on the table in front of them. Don't forget about OTARD, where so long as you control the space in your lease, no local government regulations can prevent installation of a internet reception radio. Also, the Ubiquiti is crap from a build/reliability standpoint. If you're doing anything serious, it would be worth it to buy a better product. I'm partial to the Alvarion and Motorola PtP links. -- Bryan Fields 727-409-1194 - Voice 727-214-2508 - Fax http://bryanfields.net

1 0