- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Bet on with my boss
by Pawlukiewicz Jane 21 Jun '02

21 Jun '02

Oh you made me laugh ... thanks, Jane "Sam Hayes Merritt, III" wrote: > > On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Pawlukiewicz Jane wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > How important is the phone to you? I mean, given some situation that > > arises, can we solve it without the phones? > > > > Just curious. > > > > You can ignore me if you want. That's okay. > > > > Jane > > To me, personally, as an individual and not speaking as an > admin, i could give a damn. Try not to use the flipping things > except very rarely, irritating nuisances they are. > > To me, speaking as someone who works as a clec/cable company/isp, > they're purty damn important. Phones can save lives. Without them, > its damn hard to reach emergency service so nearly every house now > has one. But the internet, you can get by just fine without it now. > It doesn't yet have a killer app ;) > > sam

1 0

I've been informed that I'm off-topic and off-charter
by Steven J. Sobol 21 Jun '02

21 Jun '02

so I will no longer post about SPEWS here. Of course, I find it exceedingly interesting that Ms. Harris decided to yell at me and apparently not at any of the other 30+ people participating in the thread. Nor can I find any comments in the charter or on the web site about whether spam or DNS blacklists are on-topic or off-topic for this mailing list. And I don't expect Susan to reply to the private e-mail I sent her reiterating those two exact points. **SJS -- Steve Sobol, CTO JustThe.net LLC, Mentor On The Lake, OH 888.480.4NET - I do my best work with one of my cockatiels sitting on each shoulder - 6/4/02:A USA TODAY poll found that 80% of Catholics advocated a zero-tolerance stance towards abusive priests. The fact that 20% didn't, scares me...

4 3

Re: SPEWS?
by Dave Israel 21 Jun '02

21 Jun '02

I'll probably get flamed for saying this, but the fact of the matter is, if SPEWS behavior is abusive towards a network, that network does have a limited recourse: null-route SPEWS. Thus, the more providers they anger, the less network they can reach. Some users may complain, but if SPEWS is abusing your customer base, I think it's a valid response. It's a powerful threat, and incentive for SPEWs to play fair. On 6/20/2002 at 20:33:43 +0100, Chrisy Luke said: > > Steven J. Sobol wrote (on Jun 20): > > If the offending ISP does not respond, and you have exhausted all avenues > > available to you to get the ISP to get its customer to stop spamming - > > whether by TOS'ing the customer, education or whatever - then escalation > > may work if the collateral damage caused by escalation is enough to get > > the spammers' neighbors to complain to the ISP. > > Can't find the terrorists you're looking for so start killing bystanders > until someone submits? Sounds militia to me. > > The service providers are not the enemies. If you treat them like enemies > then enemies they will become. > > Perhaps we should move mail transfer to a peering model. You wanna send > email to my SMTP server? Where's the peering contract? BGP-equivalent for > SMTP anyone? > > -C > (tired of getting bounces for email I never sent!)

2 1

Any opinions regarding Telehouse ?
by joe mcguckin 21 Jun '02

21 Jun '02

We're seriously considering moving out of 1 Wilshire, due to Carlyle's factor of eight fee increase for meet-me room cage rents and their practice of insisting on charging us for items our contract specifically says we can't be charged for. One leading candidate for our new 'home' in LA is Telehouse. Any opinions about them? Thanks, Joe

5 4

heh - ScanMail Message: To Sender, sensitive content found and action t aken. (fwd)
by Stephen J. Wilcox 21 Jun '02

21 Jun '02

Looks like all those nasty words 'terrorism' 'militia' 'killing' and of course 'blacklist' have tripped someones content alarm ;) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 16:01:39 -0500 From: System Attendant <NT-1-SA(a)mail.eatel.com> To: 'Stephen J. Wilcox' <steve(a)opaltelecom.co.uk> Subject: ScanMail Message: To Sender, sensitive content found and action t aken. Trend SMEX Content Filter has detected sensitive content. Place = Geo.; nanog(a)nanog.org; Sender = Stephen J. Wilcox Subject = RE: SPEWS? Delivery Time = June 20, 2002 (Thursday) 16:01:38 Policy = Custom Action on this mail = Quarantine message Warning message from administrator: Sender, An email you have sent was stripped. If this email was worked related please contact the helpdesk.

3 2

query about determining ingress interface
by Rajesh Talpade 21 Jun '02

21 Jun '02

Hi Is there a way for an ISP to determine the ingress router interface at its network border that will carry IP traffic _from_ an IP address not owned by it? I don't want to assume the path is the same in both directions, and tools such as CAIDA's skitter plot paths from specific sources. One approach might be deriving network paths from CAIDA's data, perhaps someone has already done this? Thanks. Rajesh.

5 6

Re: SPEWS?
by Steven J. Sobol 20 Jun '02

20 Jun '02

On Thu, 20 Jun 2002, Gerardo A. Gregory wrote: > I think this is just plain lazzines...there is no other way to view it. So if you have a problem with someone dumping crap onto your network and you've done everything you can to get the provider to stop the offender, and they won't, what would you do then? Ignore it? > Along the lines of SPEWS is spambag.org > this idiot, because there is no other way to describe him, has blocked > SPRINTLINK netblocks in huge chunks, and then raves on like a lunatic on how > he justifies his actions (I wonder if it because he realizes what a lazy, > good for nothing "administrator" he is, since he seems so emotional in > letting you know that he is a "professional" administrator) Yeah. I know the guy who runs spambag. He is very aggressive about blocking. He also doesn't advertise that his block list is usable for anyone besides himself. So what's your point? Sprint has cleaned up a lot. They used to be absolutely horrible WRT hosting spammers and abusers, which I'm sure is why spambag lists all of Sprint. I wouldn't use any list that lists an entire backbone, myself. But guess what... it's his server and he is allowed to protect it in whichever way he deems appropriate. > He doesnt realize that he only hurts himself....we where going to one of his > sites for a mail server solution, as soon as I read all his ravings I just > cruised somewhere else..to hell with him and his lazy administration skills. Your choice. > I still believe the guy blocked sprintlink because he cant really > subnet...he has no concept of math, that and lazzines. Nah, he's a decent programmer; I've used some of his stuff before. And a *ton* of spam used to come from Sprint. Like I said... they've made good efforts to clean up recently... but... The fact remains that there are a number of people who run very aggressive block lists (much more so than SPEWS). I can think of spambag and at least one or two others. (xbl.selwerd.cx comes to mind.) None of these people advertise that anyone else should use their lists. They're personal lists. Read the spambag.org homepage and it states very clearly that it's a personal list. SPEWS is a completely different animal, as I don't believe it was ever meant to be a personal list; it was meant to be used by others... -- Steve Sobol, CTO JustThe.net LLC, Mentor On The Lake, OH 888.480.4NET - I do my best work with one of my cockatiels sitting on each shoulder - 6/4/02:A USA TODAY poll found that 80% of Catholics advocated a zero-tolerance stance towards abusive priests. The fact that 20% didn't, scares me...

2 1

Re: SPEWS?
by Lou Katz 20 Jun '02

20 Jun '02

It seems to me that this issue is being highly obfuscated. SPEWS publishes a list. It is the ISP of your MAIL RECIPIENT that CHOOSES to use it. Take up the issue with them. It was their choice to use it - no one forced them to. I recently pointed out to the sendmail folks that their blacklist rejection message was misleading, and I believe they changed it. The mail is not being blocked by SPEWS. It is being blocked/refused as local policy by the ISP, who chooses to use the SPEWS list as part of their decision policy. -- -=[L]=-

1 0

RE: Bandwidth Monitoring by IP
by Daniska Tomas 20 Jun '02

20 Jun '02

you will get the accounting cache exhausted soon if you don't poll&clean it frequently... -- Tomas Daniska systems engineer Tronet Computer Networks Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia tel: +421 2 58224111, fax: +421 2 58224199 A transistor protected by a fast-acting fuse will protect the fuse by blowing first. > -----Original Message----- > From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.Nether.net] > Sent: 20. júna 2002 17:17 > To: Mitchell, Dan > Cc: 'nanog(a)merit.edu' > Subject: Re: Bandwidth Monitoring by IP > > > > interface (gig|fast)ethernet1/0 > ip account mac (in|out) > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 08:48:34AM -0400, Mitchell, Dan wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > Does anyone know of a low-cost solution for monitoring > bandwidth by IP? My > > original thought was 1 switch port = 1 IP, but in the case > of virtual IP's > > on a single port, that just wouldn't work. I'm seeing more > and more of a > > demand for a basic BW report by IP, so our customers can > bill their customer > > accordingly. > > > > Any recommendations? > > > > Thanks, > > Dan > > > > Dan Mitchell > > Internet Systems Engineer - Boston > > AllegianceInternet / Hosting.com > > 781.478.1857 Direct Line > > dan.mitchell(a)hosting.com > > -- > Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared(a)puck.nether.net > clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements > are only mine. >

2 1

Bandwidth Monitoring by IP
by Mitchell, Dan 20 Jun '02

20 Jun '02

Hi all, Does anyone know of a low-cost solution for monitoring bandwidth by IP? My original thought was 1 switch port = 1 IP, but in the case of virtual IP's on a single port, that just wouldn't work. I'm seeing more and more of a demand for a basic BW report by IP, so our customers can bill their customer accordingly. Any recommendations? Thanks, Dan Dan Mitchell Internet Systems Engineer - Boston AllegianceInternet / Hosting.com 781.478.1857 Direct Line dan.mitchell(a)hosting.com

6 5