- Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: Block all servers?
by Eric Kuhnke 14 Oct '03

14 Oct '03

The TOS/AUP for most residential broadband connections already allows the ISP to shut off service or do anything they want to the customer without prior notice. It has been this way for at least 3 or 4 years, since the advent of @Home. Take a look at the TOS/AUP for Comcast, Shaw Cable, MSN DSL or similar... >Second, in the acceptable use policy for high speed connections, require >a "licence" of some kind. We have licenses/permits for our cars, our >dogs, our burglar alarms, for going fishing,..... Why not for broadband. >Actually I can see many reasons both to do it and not to do it, so this >is clearly an area where debate is reasonable.

13 24

Level3 direct sales rep in SJC area?
by Steve Francis 14 Oct '03

14 Oct '03

Anyone have a good level3 sales rep in the SJC area they can refer me to? We currently have a gigabit level3 circuit out of Equinix SJC, but through a reseller, as we were too small for level3 to talk to directly. (We only push about 50Mbps through level3 right now.) Of course, this means our support goes through the reseller too, and consequently sucks. So if we cannot get direct level3 support, we won't be renewing that contract. If we can, we want to consider getting it at another site, and possibly using some other services. So, if anyone has a good level3 contact, please send me their contact info. Thanks

1 0

Re: ix's & prefix registration
by Suresh Ramasubramanian 14 Oct '03

14 Oct '03

Niels Bakker <niels=nanog(a)bakker.net> writes: > AMS-IX does not, nor does it require its members to peer with anybody > (including the exchange-supporting network infrastructure). AMS-IX > believes that the decision to peer is up to the individual members. NIXI (http://www.nixi.org) - the national internet exchange of india - seems to enforce a mandatory multilateral peering policy (though their policy, and their setup, sure sounds like a godawful mess, right about now) :( Quoting from their membership agreement (a word doc at http://www.nixi.org/NIXI%20T&C_%20ver_%202.doc) - > Peering Policy of NIXI > > NIXI has adopted a Multilateral peering policy . Member ISPs shall > not refuse to accept traffic from other members. --srs

1 0

domainmonger.com with wildcard NS?
by Rick Ernst 14 Oct '03

14 Oct '03

This was brought to my attention by a friend. It looks like ns1.domainmonger.com and ns2.domainmonger.com are doing wildcard A records for all zones, including those that already exist. If you go to their site and try to register a domain, it properly shows if the domain exists or not. I'm trying to figure out what the reasoning is behind this. My friend alo pointed out this CERT alert, but I'm not sure how it relates: http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/109475 Rick ------- ; <<>> DiG 9.2.3rc4 <<>> @ns1.domainmonger.com www.esdfsadfsdftreet.com a ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 50340 ;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.esdfsadfsdftreet.com. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.esdfsadfsdftreet.com. 1200 IN A 216.52.102.86 ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: com. 1200 IN NS ns1.domainmonger.com. com. 1200 IN NS ns2.domainmonger.com. ;; Query time: 37 msec ;; SERVER: 216.98.150.33#53(ns1.domainmonger.com) ;; WHEN: Tue Oct 14 09:59:24 2003 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 107 ----- ; <<>> DiG 9.2.3rc4 <<>> @ns2.domainmonger.com www.legendz.com a ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 40110 ;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.legendz.com. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.legendz.com. 1200 IN A 216.52.102.86 ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: com. 1200 IN NS ns1.domainmonger.com. com. 1200 IN NS ns2.domainmonger.com. ;; Query time: 91 msec ;; SERVER: 216.122.4.81#53(ns2.domainmonger.com) ;; WHEN: Tue Oct 14 10:01:28 2003 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 98

3 4

ix's & prefix registration
by joshua sahala 14 Oct '03

14 Oct '03

hello to all i was wondering if there were some published docs online regarding the registration of route objects and membership at an ix - specifically, do ixp's around the world require that their members register all of their route objects prior to being allowed to exchange traffic at the ix? if so, how do you/they monitor this? is it left up to the other providers at the ix to verify that they are peering with someone who registers their objects? is this something that an ix could/should worry about? i know that many providers around the world are increasingly requiring registration, and that many build their filters from these registrations, but i have been unable to find anything wrt internet exchanges. replies on or off, i will summarize thanks /joshua "Walk with me through the Universe, And along the way see how all of us are Connected. Feast the eyes of your Soul, On the Love that abounds. In all places at once, seemingly endless, Like your own existence." - Stephen Hawking -

7 6

RE: domainmonger.com with wildcard NS?
by Mike Damm 14 Oct '03

14 Oct '03

This is for domain parking. Users can configure their domains (or use a default I assume) to use these name servers, which in turn point everything to a parking page. My guess is the parking page is a) down b) fat fingered IP c) intentionally left blank. I have seen hosting companies do this to automatically point all domains to their hosting machines without the need for zone maintenance. -Mike -----Original Message----- From: Rick Ernst [mailto:erond@legendz.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 10:07 AM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: domainmonger.com with wildcard NS? This was brought to my attention by a friend. It looks like ns1.domainmonger.com and ns2.domainmonger.com are doing wildcard A records for all zones, including those that already exist. If you go to their site and try to register a domain, it properly shows if the domain exists or not. I'm trying to figure out what the reasoning is behind this. My friend alo pointed out this CERT alert, but I'm not sure how it relates: http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/109475 Rick ------- ; <<>> DiG 9.2.3rc4 <<>> @ns1.domainmonger.com www.esdfsadfsdftreet.com a ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 50340 ;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.esdfsadfsdftreet.com. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.esdfsadfsdftreet.com. 1200 IN A 216.52.102.86 ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: com. 1200 IN NS ns1.domainmonger.com. com. 1200 IN NS ns2.domainmonger.com. ;; Query time: 37 msec ;; SERVER: 216.98.150.33#53(ns1.domainmonger.com) ;; WHEN: Tue Oct 14 09:59:24 2003 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 107 ----- ; <<>> DiG 9.2.3rc4 <<>> @ns2.domainmonger.com www.legendz.com a ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 40110 ;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.legendz.com. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.legendz.com. 1200 IN A 216.52.102.86 ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: com. 1200 IN NS ns1.domainmonger.com. com. 1200 IN NS ns2.domainmonger.com. ;; Query time: 91 msec ;; SERVER: 216.122.4.81#53(ns2.domainmonger.com) ;; WHEN: Tue Oct 14 10:01:28 2003 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 98

1 0

Frustrating loss of connectivity...FOLLOWUP
by Robert A. Hayden 14 Oct '03

14 Oct '03

I'd like to take a moment to quickly publicly thank Darryl, Kevin and Roy from Level 3 that jumped on this issue right away tearing through logs and historicals and then watching the suspect link and providing me the debugging information. In addition, I also was contacted by Todd from Covad and he provided some suggestions and information we'll be able to use to properly open a case and get it referred in the correct directions. THANKS GUYS! - Robert

1 0

RE: Extreme BlackDiamond
by sthaug＠nethelp.no 14 Oct '03

14 Oct '03

> > Aren't most of the 6500 blades the same as the 7600 ones anyway? Between > > these two IMHO we are looking at a blurry distinction between a router > > with very good switching capabilities and a L3 switch with very good > > routing capabilities. > > Does the 7600 have the same BGP Scanner problem as the 6509 does? 7600 runs the same code as 6500 with native IOS. It *is* the same box, as has been repeatedly pointed out. Maybe you could expand on the BGP scanner problems - we haven't seen them all the time we've been running 6500 native with full routes (about 1.5 years now). Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug(a)nethelp.no

7 7

Re: i'd like to know your opinions on the com/net wildcard issue
by Kevin Oberman 14 Oct '03

14 Oct '03

> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 16:17:14 -0500 > From: "Pete Templin" <pete.templin(a)texlink.com> > Sender: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu > > > That suggests that it's an ASL (Analog Subscriber Line)... When the signal is placed on the wire, it is very analog. the digital signal is modulated onto the wire and demodulated off of it and the box that connects to the phone line at each end is properly and fairly commonly called a DSL modem. If the path was entirely digital, it would be a CODEC (CODer/DECoder). It is a modem. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman(a)es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634

2 1

RE: Extreme BlackDiamond
by Temkin, David 14 Oct '03

14 Oct '03

... And seeing as that all most switches are is a glorified multiple port bridge, feel free to go to your 7500 and make it a switch by placing "bridge-group 1" on every port, and if you want to get really crazy and make it a L3 switch, go all out and put in a "bridge 1 route ip". :-) -----Original Message----- From: Michel Py [mailto:michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us] Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 7:02 PM To: Richard A Steenbergen; Mikael Abrahamsson Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: RE: Extreme BlackDiamond > Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > So a 7500 with a fast cache is a L3 switch? :) Of course. It does wire-speed switching with one and Possibly more CX-EIP6 if you enable dCEF :-) Michel.

1 0