- Test - lists.nanog.org

XO and microsoft.com
by Sergio D. 01 Apr '09

01 Apr '09

Anyone going out through XO having problems getting to microsoft.com? This seems to work out our other connections but not XO. Thanks. -- Sergio Danelli

4 4

Re: Fiber cut on Irish Sea
by isabel dias 01 Apr '09

01 Apr '09

ken, who's fiber on the ground was it after all? Roderick Beck wrote: > Probably Global Crossing. > > A very strong wager. > > -R. > ------Original Message------ > From: Ken Gilmour > To: isabeldias1(a)yahoo.com > Cc: nanog(a)nanog.org > Subject: Re: Fiber cut on Irish Sea > Sent: 29 Mar 2009 16:04 > > We received the report from Packet Exchange, however they are not the > owners of the cable. I assume they just rent spectrum. > > 2009/3/29 isabel dias <isabeldias1(a)yahoo.com>: >> >> affecting whom? and who's network? >> >> >> --- On Sun, 3/29/09, Ken Gilmour <ken.gilmour(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> From: Ken Gilmour <ken.gilmour(a)gmail.com> >>> Subject: Fiber cut on Irish Sea >>> To: nanog(a)nanog.org >>> Date: Sunday, March 29, 2009, 4:55 PM >>> Hi There, >>> >>> Since we use a vendor of "the vendor" of two >>> Irish sea submarine >>> cables I am wondering if anyone has first hand information >>> on the >>> fiber cut this morning? Does anyone have a status update on >>> what is >>> happening? I am getting some Chinese whispers going on >>> here. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Ken >> >> >> >> > > > > Sent wirelessly via BlackBerry from T-Mobile.

23 31

Can you see these AS links:)
by Kai Chen 01 Apr '09

01 Apr '09

Hello folks, As part of a research project here at Northwestern, we have found quite a few unexpected AS-level links that do not appear in public available BGP tables. We really need your help in validating them; for anyone who knows links associated with any AS, if you can assist us with this please contact us off list. Thanks! - Kai

5 5

Google Over IPV6
by Robert D. Scott 01 Apr '09

01 Apr '09

http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/ http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/032509-google-ipv6-easy.html Any one making use of Google IPV6? Robert D. Scott Robert(a)ufl.edu Senior Network Engineer 352-273-0113 Phone CNS - Network Services 352-392-2061 CNS Phone Tree University of Florida 352-392-9440 FAX Florida Lambda Rail 352-294-3571 FLR NOC Gainesville, FL 32611 321-663-0421 Cell

26 33

Hotmail/MSN/Live help?
by Weier, Paul 31 Mar '09

31 Mar '09

My mail server is currently being blocked by Windows/Live/Hotmail even though I am (and have been for years) a member of Microsoft's JMRP and SNDS services. Not sure what changed after years of peaceful co-existence. Could someone from Windows Live Hotmail please contact me off list? TIA -- Paul Senior System Administrator Internet Broadcasting paul(a)ibsys.com Visit us at: www.ibsys.com This message may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you receive this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the message and any attachment; and be advised that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance upon the content is prohibited. --

1 0

TWC outage
by Adam Greene 31 Mar '09

31 Mar '09

Seems to be an outage with Time Warner Cable in the upstate New York area ... As far as I can tell, it's on AS7843. I'm awaiting callback from an engineer for details .... Adam -- Webjogger (845) 757-4000 ASN 20208 ====== C:\>tracert www.authorize.net Tracing route to www.authorize.net [64.94.118.77] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 38 ms 1 ms 2 ms 10049.webjogger.net [204.8.80.49] 2 6 ms 6 ms 7 ms cpe-24-29-112-25.nyc.res.rr.com [24.29.112.25] 3 8 ms 7 ms 6 ms gig-12-2-nycmnyrdc-rtr1.nyc.rr.com [24.29.104.97] 4 7 ms 7 ms 8 ms gig1-0-0-nwrknjmd-rtr1.nyc.rr.com [24.29.130.182] 5 7 ms 7 ms 6 ms ae-4-0.cr0.nyc30.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.78] 6 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms ae-1-0.pr0.nyc20.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.163] 7 8 ms 9 ms 8 ms 66.109.9.210 8 * * * Request timed out. 9 * * * Request timed out. 10 * * * Request timed out. 11 * * * Request timed out. 12 * * * Request timed out. 13 * * * Request timed out. 14 * * * Request timed out. 15 * * * Request timed out. 16 * * * Request timed out. 17 * * * Request timed out. 18 * * * Request timed out. 19 * * * Request timed out. 20 * * * Request timed out. 21 * * * Request timed out. 22 * * * Request timed out. 23 * * * Request timed out. 24 * * * Request timed out. 25 * * * Request timed out. 26 * * * Request timed out. 27 * * * Request timed out. 28 * * * Request timed out. 29 * * * Request timed out. 30 * * * Request timed out. Trace complete.

2 2

Cacti Graphing
by Joseph Nzioka 31 Mar '09

31 Mar '09

Hi All, Has any one on this list graphed alcatel-lucent service routers succesfully using Cacti and if yes would you be kind enough to provide the base template or the how to.? -- Kind Regards ............................................ Joseph Nzioka, Cell:+254 735 452050 Cell:+254 711 968429

3 2

Earthlink help needed
by Mike Lewinski 31 Mar '09

31 Mar '09

One of our mail servers can't talk to any of the earthlink MX servers and after two weeks of trying I've got a queue full of undeliverable mail to their subs. Previous attempts at getting help via postmaster(a)earthlink.net are unanswered. INOC-DBA has no directory entry for them. This old NANOG post (http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg01582.html) has a valid phone number but invalid extension. So I hit 0 and got a tech anyway. That tech instructed me to forward on my concerns to blockedbyearthlink(a)abuse.earthlink.net which I did, but nothing more than an auto-response has come back a week later now (and yes, I followed the instructions in the auto-responder and re-submitted in the requested format). Everything I've read indicates that if we are being blocked deliberately I should be getting a 550 SMTP error back. We do not even get a SYN/ACK back (nor ICMP unreachable/prohibited, nor RST) so no SMTP errors are generated from their servers. The MX are all pingable and traceable, so its not a routing problem AFAICT. The mailman server here has paranoid rDNS setup, does not appear on any blacklists, and has never been the subject of any spam complaints. It runs a listserv for a professional legal association which charges members a fee before they are allowed to join the list, so the possibility of unwanted third parties being subscribed is very near zero. TIA and sorry for the noise. We tried having an Earthlink subscriber work this from the other angle. All she got was "Earthlink has been blocking port 25 for years you should now this by now!" Mike Lewinski -- mike(a)rockynet.com POTS: 303-629-2860 INOC-DBA: 13345*mjl

2 2

Re: Earthlink help needed
by grinch＠panix.com 31 Mar '09

31 Mar '09

I, for one, appreciate this type of feedback. Rgs, ------Original Message------ From: Mike Lewinski To: NANOG Subject: Re: Earthlink help needed Sent: Mar 30, 2009 5:15 PM Within an hour of making this post I received a call from a very helpful engineer at Earthlink. The problem has been identified and a resolution is in the works. Mike Mike Lewinski wrote: > One of our mail servers can't talk to any of the earthlink MX servers > and after two weeks of trying I've got a queue full of undeliverable > mail to their subs. > > Previous attempts at getting help via postmaster(a)earthlink.net are > unanswered. INOC-DBA has no directory entry for them. This old NANOG > post (http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg01582.html) has a > valid phone number but invalid extension. So I hit 0 and got a tech > anyway. That tech instructed me to forward on my concerns to > blockedbyearthlink(a)abuse.earthlink.net which I did, but nothing more > than an auto-response has come back a week later now (and yes, I > followed the instructions in the auto-responder and re-submitted in the > requested format). > > Everything I've read indicates that if we are being blocked deliberately > I should be getting a 550 SMTP error back. We do not even get a SYN/ACK > back (nor ICMP unreachable/prohibited, nor RST) so no SMTP errors are > generated from their servers. The MX are all pingable and traceable, so > its not a routing problem AFAICT. > > The mailman server here has paranoid rDNS setup, does not appear on any > blacklists, and has never been the subject of any spam complaints. It > runs a listserv for a professional legal association which charges > members a fee before they are allowed to join the list, so the > possibility of unwanted third parties being subscribed is very near zero. > > TIA and sorry for the noise. We tried having an Earthlink subscriber > work this from the other angle. All she got was "Earthlink has been > blocking port 25 for years you should now this by now!" > > Mike Lewinski > -- > mike(a)rockynet.com > POTS: 303-629-2860 > INOC-DBA: 13345*mjl > Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

1 0

RE: The Confiker Virus hype and measures
by Skywing 30 Mar '09

30 Mar '09

Actually, I can't remember the last cable/DSL ISP that I had seen solicit offers for service that didn't offer some level of free bundled AV. Most conventional AV software is oriented towards checking files for "badness" before the access is allowed, which doesn't really apply to the ms08-067 infection vector so much - at least, not in my experience with what most AV software does. That is more the domain of signature-based IPS's. But I think the real morale of the story is that end users want to see their computer like an every-day person sees a car: as a tool that works to get from A to B, and not what a mechanic would see a car as. Users don't want to have to deal with the nitty-gritty details of maintenance. Hence, why automatic updates are a good thing (*if implemented properly) in some cases (i.e. where there's no sysadmin to manage things). The AV folk have done that for a long time and it's been reasonably well accepted. - S -----Original Message----- From: Stasiniewicz, Adam <stasinia(a)msoe.edu> Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 09:11 To: nanog(a)nanog.org <nanog(a)nanog.org>; 'Gadi Evron' <ge(a)linuxbox.org>; 'Joe Blanchard' <jbfixurpc(a)gmail.com> Subject: RE: The Confiker Virus hype and measures To the main stream media: Please leave your tin foil hats at the door... To my fellow NANOGers: I look at this virus from two perspectives. First the home computers (and small businesses without any real IT staff). And second the larger organizations with dedicated IT staff. Home Users: Many will agree that a large percent (>50%) of home computers are infected with some sort of malware. Everything from tracking cookies, to spam drones, to botnet clients. Home users are often too cheap/lazy to get antivirus/firewall protections. And many are scared to get updates from Microsoft because of some unrealized danger this might pose. As I see it, the virus is adding at most 9(?) million to the probable 175 million (350/2 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_broadband_users> ) malware infested hosts out there. In fact, it will probably be much less than that, as the people who are getting infected by this virus, are probably already affected by other malware. Everyone Else: If SQL Slammer has taught us anything, it is the importance of patch management and firewalls. And the unending stream of new malware has also taught us the importance of anti-virus software. With all the media hype and removal tools being made, there is no good reason any IT shop should be affected in any meaningful way. Invariably we will hear the stories of places that do get affected, but I doubt it will be anything overly large. So from a network operational perspective, unless the virus author decides to launch a DDOS on a single target (and one is either that network or its upstream) I predict this will have little, if any, effect. My $0.02, Adam Stasiniewicz -----Original Message----- From: Gadi Evron [mailto:ge@linuxbox.org] Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 7:44 AM To: Joe Blanchard Cc: nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: The Confiker Virus hype and measures Joe Blanchard wrote: > Anyone have a copy of this? Would like to analyze it and understand its > propagation. > > Thanks > -Joe I'm sure someone sent you a sample by now. As to the malware itself... I haven't personally been following conficker as I've been busy with other issues (as much as possible, anyway, with all the hype it's hard to escape), but I've been asking questions. I can try and speak on the matter from what I've learned by asking. Conficker is a real problem, but will the world end on April Fools? The answer I gather to be the most accurate is: "The conficker threat will be exactly the same as it is today, on April 1st." Perhaps putting a date on the threat makes people feel more comfortable. What if something happens on April 3rd? Whether we would be warned or not, we'll all likely ignore it if April 1st comes and goes quietly. As to the unknown, the author's mind, who can really tell what they will do come the 1st? But some of the hype I've seen is truly ridiculous. I am sure some of the protected hosting companies sold quite a bit with their "we defend against conficker" products. Is conficker a problem? Yes. Can we potentially face hardship on the 1xt? Yes. Is the rest complete bull? Yes. Gadi.

1 0