- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: On-going Internet Emergency and Domain Names
by Fergie 03 Apr '07

03 Apr '07

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - -- David Conrad <drc(a)virtualized.org> wrote: >On Apr 2, 2007, at 7:12 PM, Joseph S D Yao wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 05:33:08PM -0700, David Conrad wrote: >>> I think this might be a bit in conflict with efforts registries have to >>> reduce the turnaround in zone modification to the order of tens of >>> minutes. >> >> Why is this necessary? Other than the cool factor. > >I think the question is "why should the Internet be constrained to engineering decisions made in 1992?" > For me, it's more of a matter of "Is the Internet actually a bigger cesspool than it was ten years ago?" and the answer I keep hearing from every corner is a resounding "Yes". $.02, - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.6.0 (Build 214) wj8DBQFGEbXnq1pz9mNUZTMRAmdfAJ0W1L5jl5qjl6YNJQZCfJa/CZnwfQCgy7xd FXLYVmJDk2xTJGqgVNRt6Eg= =WXoe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

1 0

Re: On-going Internet Emergency and Domain Names
by Fergie 03 Apr '07

03 Apr '07

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - -- David Conrad <drc(a)virtualized.org> wrote: >On Apr 2, 2007, at 4:56 PM, Douglas Otis wrote: >> The recommendation was for registries to provide a preview of the >> next day's zone. > >I think this might be a bit in conflict with efforts registries have to reduce the turnaround in zone modification to the order of tens of minutes. > I'm not even sure how to respond to that one. :-) - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.6.0 (Build 214) wj8DBQFGEaSsq1pz9mNUZTMRAofwAJ44O+cHJ8K5+Ini4Ub8Q5fpBYXpwQCeKUno QLU8T4gI9IgFRRBX0J9UV2A= =oDm8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

1 0

Re: Google TiSP (BETA), new FREE in-home wireless broadband service
by Johnny Eriksson 03 Apr '07

03 Apr '07

> http://www.google.com/tisp/ A Client-Sewer implementation? --Johnny

1 0

Support at LimeLight
by Chris L. Morrow 02 Apr '07

02 Apr '07

Could Jack please ping me off-list? :) I seem to have broken something of yours. -Chris ( a jack-a-like at llnw would also work fine)

1 0

RE: On-going Internet Emergency and Domain Names
by dlr＠bungi.com 02 Apr '07

02 Apr '07

[In the message entitled "RE: On-going Internet Emergency and Domain Names" on Mar 31, 15:26, Matt Ghali writes:] > > On Sat, 31 Mar 2007, Fergie wrote: > > > So very clever. > > > > If you're not part of the solution... etc. > > I feel so worthless standing next to you, the Solver. > Guys. We *all* (everyone reading this) have a role to play in dealing with problems on the Internet. There is *no* "one true solution" to what amounts to criminal activity - not on the Internet, and not in real life. We, collectively, have enabled a new frontier of civilization. The Internet is ever growing and changing, and we, collectively, need to address problems as they come up. The dominant OS vendor is currently part of the issue, certainly. But if that dominant OS vendor were (insert your favorite UNIX OS vendor), the same problems would exist. We are not fighting technology. We are dealing with very well organized, smart, and well-funded people. We need to focus on solutions that we can deploy, which will address the problems at hand, as we discover them. That means we will deploy things that do not solve underlying prolems, but address the symptoms as best we can, to prevent the entire mess from falling down. That means that we must look at short-range solutions to address things in near-real-time, and we need to look at changing the legal system to catch up. We also need to look at the policies which enable people to abuse the systems we have deployed. And we need to look at user education. And fixing the operating systems. And improving infrastructure, so we can deal with 15 Gbps attacks. And... There is no "one true solution" to this. That means you, as network operators, need to look at what makes sense *today*, and *DEPLOY IT*. "Someone else" isn't going to solve these issues, and waiting for them is folly. Do what you can, today, to address the problems you know about. Do what you can, today, to protect your users. Do what you can, today, to stop malicious behaviour from leaving your network. Do what you can, today, to improve your internal organization to ensure that these task can be done without a 6 month delay. Please - we all need to work on this together. But we need to do it now. --

8 10

CNNOG 4: Call for Presentations - June 22-23 2007 - Beijing, China
by Li Hua 02 Apr '07

02 Apr '07

*Call for Presentations--CNNOG 4 & NSP-SEC-China Summit** * The China Network Operators' Group (CNNOG) and first nsp-sec-china summit will hold its 4th meeting June 22-23, 2007, in Beijing, China. The meeting will be hosted by BUPT. <http://www.bupt.edu.cn/cin/index.htm> CNNOG conferences provide a forum for information exchange among network operators, engineers, and researchers. Meetings are held 1-2 times each year, and include panels, presentations, tutorial sessions, and BOFs. The CNNOG community is invited to attend and participate in this forum, which offers numerous opportunities to share ideas, explore research and development, and interact with leaders in this important field of network operations. Vendors are encouraged to work with operators to present deployment experiences with the vendor's products and interoperability. *General Session* The community is invited to develop present talks on topics relevant to the CNNOG community, including: - *Network Operations* - Present-day operational case studies - Everyday life in the NOC and tools of interest - Exchange point technologies and implementation - Peering/colocation coordination issues - State of OAM tools for IP and MPLS networks - Disaster recovery and planning - - * SP Security* - ISP security best practice - Anti-DDOS,SPAM - Botnet tracking - SP Forensics - - * Deployment Experience* - VoIP deployment, architecture, peering, and interconnect - Anycast - IPTV - wireless - 3G - - *Research, and New Technology* - Approaches to securing the global routing system (e.g., s*BGP and/or other tools) - Routing system scalability - Capacity planning standards and tools - Inter-provider MPLS/QoS/PCE - IPv6: economics, deployments, and adoption rates - Approaches to IPv6 scalability, e.g., Shim6 *Talks* A general session talk should be on a topic of interest to the general CNNOG audience, and may be up to 30 minutes long. *Lightning Talks* A lightning talk is a very short presentation or speech by any attendee on any topic relevant to the CNNOG audience. These are limited to ten minutes; this will be strictly enforced. If you have a topic that's timely, interesting, or even a crackpot idea you want to share, we encourage you to consider presenting it. Signups for lightning talks will be accepted during the CNNOG meeting. *Tutorials* Proposals are also invited for tutorial sessions from the introductory through advanced level on all related topics, including: - Disaster Recovery Planning - Troubleshooting BGP - Best Practices for Determining Traffic Matrices - Options for Blackhole and Discard Routing - BGP/MPLS Layer 3 VPNs *BOFs* BOFs (Birds of a Feather sessions) are 90-minute informal sessions on topics which are of interest to a portion of the CNNOG community. A typical BOF session includes some presentations, but usually is focused on community discussion and interaction. Frequent BOF topics include: - Peering - ISP Security - Tools A BOF session is 90 minutes. * * *How to Present* The primary speaker, moderator, or author should submit presentation information to CNNOG4(a)gmail.com *All submissions must include:* - Author's name(s) - Preferred contact email address - Submission category (General Session, Panel, Tutorial, Research Forum, or BOF) - Presentation title - Abstract - Slides (attachment or URL), in PDF (preferred) or Powerpoint format (Slides are optional for BOFs.) *The deadline for proposals is Thursday, May 31, at 11:59pm.* A limited number of slots may be available after that date for topics that are exceptionally timely, important, or critical to the operation of the Internet. Submissions will be reviewed by the CNNOG Program Committee, and presenters will be notified of acceptance by June 10. Final versions for posting are due on June 15. Website: http://www.cnnog.org/cnnog4

1 1

Google TiSP (BETA), new FREE in-home wireless broadband service
by Dennis Dayman 02 Apr '07

02 Apr '07

http://www.google.com/tisp/

2 1

OT: yenzero.com: 216.12.200.18: ev1servers.com
by Matthew Walker 01 Apr '07

01 Apr '07

I hate having to post here, but I'm getting the lack of response from EV1servers. I tried e-mailing abuse, but they continue to keep the worm hosted on the servers. Can someone at Ev1Servers shutdown this worm, or will millions of sites have to be infected before some action is actually taken? http://www.google.com/serch?hl=en&q=yenzero http://yenzero.com/wp-admin/borek.txt http://yenzero.com/c.in??

1 0

Re: On-going Internet Emergency and Domain Names
by Fergie 01 Apr '07

01 Apr '07

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - -- Mattias Ahnberg <mattias(a)ahnberg.pp.se> wrote: >Fergie wrote: >> I would posit that it does when criminals are able to abuse the >> system. > >Almost any system can be abused by people with bad intentions. I >am a strong advocate to not holding back on features, tools, new >technologies or whatever merely because someone could abuse with >it. The problem is the abuser, not the tool. We need to stop the >abusers, not the tools. > >We should certainly always attempt to improve the tools, better >the routines and so forth but always keep in mind that no matter >what we do they will adapt and find another angle. > >If we add a 24h period to domain registrations, what harm will it >REALLY do to the abusers? They will just register a myriad of the >domains they want, have them stored and push them out when needed >instead of at once. > >If we add some checkups on who registers a domain name, they will >get middlemen to do it for them. Just look at the captcha stuff >added on various sites to prevent spammers that lead to spammers >paying people small amounts of money for each captcha solved, or >put up fake pr0n sites where the visitors got free images when >they solved a captcha (that was linked from the actual site). > >If we block low TTL from functioning we would break tools that >use the low TTL setting for fast changing environments, load >balancing or whatever and we would also block ourselves from a >quick merger from one system to another for our customers. > >I don't want to sound all negative to efforts suggested that we >may have use for in a _current_ problem; but we should consider >what they will do next when we make major changes to a general >system that will likely bother ourselves more than them. These are all very good, legitimate questions -- I do not profess to have answers to them all. The one thing that seems to be missing, however, is accountability and an ability to stem the abuses in the domain registry system. - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.6.0 (Build 214) wj8DBQFGD+flq1pz9mNUZTMRAtr7AJ9LCQi1B+BLPkVJQ5X76KXx9qTDLwCgx3nL tBYpzk7SoFgAr2ff/aYd5lI= =FElG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

1 0

Re: On-going Internet Emergency and Domain Names
by Paul Vixie 01 Apr '07

01 Apr '07

> From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker(a)bbiw.net> > To: Paul Vixie <paul(a)vix.com>, nanog(a)merit.edu, Gadi Evron <ge(a)linuxbox.org> > Subject: Re: On-going Internet Emergency and Domain Names > > offlist. actually, not, according to the headers shown above. > Paul Vixie wrote: > > a push-pull. first, advance the current effort to get registrars and > > dynamic-dns providers to share information about bad CC#'s, bad customers, > > bad domains, whatever. arrange things so that a self-vetting society of > > both in-industry and ombudsmen have the communications fabric they need to > > behave responsibly. push hard on this, make sure everybody hears about it > > and that the newspapers are full of success stories about it. > > IP Address blacklists are a sufficiently solid staple of email anti-abuse > effort, that I suspect similar approaches, for other information tidbits, > would be quite useful. as the inventor of the internet's first ip address blackhole list (not "blacklist"), i agree that it's a solid staple, but i'm not sure it was the most effective 10-year plan we could have made at the time, had we been making 10-year plans. > This is less about "shaming" and more about filtering. In this case, > filtering at DNS registration time, ISP account setup, or the like. agreed. i'd be happy to see the DNS registration "front end" (one of its "edges") gain some kind of reputation filtering. i just don't want to see "core"-level filtering like we did in e-mail, unless it's at the customer- facing ("edge") level, like Trend ICSS offers. > The difficulties, here, are to a) establish a credible organization for > creating and maintaining the list(s), b) getting folks to submit data to > it, and c) getting folks to use it. those are Gadi's three areas of strength and i'd help him if he did this. > Since there is quite a lot of track-record on doing this -- both well and > poorly -- the challenge here is all about implementation, rather than > design, of the service. having designed a reputation system inadequately once upon a time, i think it's important to get both the design and implementation right.

1 0