- Test - lists.nanog.org

Portable Fire Suppression
by Christopher J. Wolff 07 Jun '02

07 Jun '02

Greetings; I would like to protect an unattended server enclosure in a remote location with some variety of fire suppression device. I imagine that some enterprising soul has invented a fire extinguisher with a nozzle that opens at a preset temperature (i.e. exploding head). Thank you in advance for any advice you can provide. Regards, Christopher J. Wolff, VP CIO Broadband Laboratories http://www.bblabs.com

1 0

Re: Bogon list
by Daniel Senie 07 Jun '02

07 Jun '02

At 05:26 AM 6/7/02, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote: >On Thu, 6 Jun 2002, Stephen Griffin wrote: > > > > > In the referenced message, Sean M. Doran said: > > > Basically, arguing that the routing system should carry around > > > even more information is backwards. It should carry less. > > > If IXes need numbers at all (why???) then use RFC 1918 addresses > > > and choose one of the approaches above to deal with questions > > > about why 1918 addresses result in "messy traceroutes." > > > > > > Fewer routes, less address consumption, tastes great, less filling. > > > > > > Sean. > > > > Do you: > > 1) Not believe in PMTU-D > >RFC1918 does not break path-mtu, filtering it does tho.. Though many people either miss the point or don't care, RFC 1918 is also BCP 5. Last I checked, BCP stood for "Best Current Practice." So you've got a BCP document saying the addresses listed in RFC 1918 should not be present on the public network. So yes, filtering is required by RFC 1918, and so use of the private IP address blocks does break Path MTU discovery. Some folks find the private address space specified in RFC 1918 convenient, but ignore the stipulations on use contained in the same document. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Daniel Senie dts(a)senie.com Amaranth Networks Inc. http://www.amaranth.com

2 1

Cisco quality
by Ralph Doncaster 07 Jun '02

07 Jun '02

For those saying Cisco is so great, it's still fucked up pretty bad. IOS 12.1 and later doesn't allow an MTU > 1460 on L2TP, while 12.0.7(T) works fine with a 1492 MTU that my PPPoE customers expect. Every rev I've tried from 12.0 and up has problems with CEF when using ISL VLAN sub-interfaces, and without CEF, mac-accounting is screwed up. Now if they charged 1/5th of what they do, I'd say you're getting reasonable value for your dollar... Ralph Doncaster principal, IStop.com div. of Doncaster Consulting Inc.

8 7

NAS filed chp 11
by Christopher X. Candreva 07 Jun '02

07 Jun '02

http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/020605/200206051047000419_1.html ========================================================== Chris Candreva -- chris(a)westnet.com -- (914) 967-7816 WestNet Internet Services of Westchester http://www.westnet.com/

7 6

LINX-accredited certs
by Andy Harding 07 Jun '02

07 Jun '02

at the risk of re-igniting the formal- vs. cert-educated thread, I wonder whether anyone has seen the new (to me at least) LINX-accredited certs? http://www.linx.org/training/index.thtml http://www.s-nt.co.uk/ looks (to me) like an interesting concept - ie ISP-industry-oriented rather than vendor-specific - although I'm not sure it would get offered outside the UK it may be vendor-independant, but I'd put good money on the lab kit being vendor-c 2500s ;-) -andy

4 3

Re: Re: Re: KPNQwest ns.eu.net server.
by Arnold Nipper 07 Jun '02

07 Jun '02

Hallo Sabine, lange nichts gehoert ... On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 09:51:11AM +0200, Sabine Dolderer/Denic wrote: > > > > At least each IXP member would have direct connectivity to such > > infrastructural services (DNS, NTP, WHOIS, NNTP??) and thereby their > > customers would benefit from it. > > I agree that IXPs would be very gould locations as they offer network > diversity, but there is one question still open and that is who will be the > one running the and monitoring the server. And we at DENIC have seen in the > last years an increasing demand in running the servics by ourself as only > then we have the complete control and information about statistics, network > attacks, performance ... > Keep it simple ... the IXPs (e.g. Euro-IX) could/should provide the basis. I.e. taking care for excellent colo, sufficient connectivity, one-stop-shop etc. Interested parties would install the services by themselves and would be responsible to run them. Parties could be CENTR, DE-NIC, ICANN, EUxxx and so on. I would like to know more about the CENTR sss iniative. Whom should I contact? Arnold -- Arnold Nipper Email: arnold.nipper(a)de-cix.net DE-CIX, The German Internet Exchange Mobile: +49 172 2650958

1 0

Re: Re: KPNQwest ns.eu.net server.
by Nipper, Arnold 07 Jun '02

07 Jun '02

As a lot of people are offering secondary services: may be it's a good idea to place infrastructural services at IXP. IXP seem to be more stable than any ISPs and often more neutral than ISPs. Comments? Arnold -- Arnold Nipper, DE-CIX, the German Internet Exchange email: arnold.nipper(a)de-cix.net mobile: +49 172 2650958 handle: an6695-ripe ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sabine Dolderer/Denic" <dolderer(a)denic.de> To: "Jan-Ahrent Czmok" <czmok(a)gatel.net> Cc: <apnic-talk(a)lists.apnic.net>; <apops(a)lists.apnic.net>; <ddiaz(a)ripe.net>; <joao(a)ripe.net>; <lir-wg(a)ripe.net>; <nanog(a)merit.edu>; <randy(a)psg.com>; <routing-wg(a)ripe.net>; <tech-l(a)ams-ix.net> Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 9:43 AM Subject: Re: Re: KPNQwest ns.eu.net server. Hello, DENIC runs currently several secondarys (not only DE but also for some other TLDs) in different places worldwide. We are willing to offer secondary service for other ccTLDs. But there will be because of security/stability reasons a limit on the number of ccTLDs we want to run on a single machine. Sabine -- Sabine Dolderer DENIC eG Wiesenhüttenplatz 26 D-60329 Frankfurt eMail: Sabine.Dolderer(a)denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235 0 Fax: +49 69 27235 235 Jan-Ahrent Czmok An: Joao Luis Silva Damas <joao(a)ripe.net> <czmok@gatel. Kopie: randy(a)psg.com, ddiaz(a)ripe.net, routing-wg(a)ripe.net, net> lir-wg(a)ripe.net, tech-l(a)ams-ix.net, apops(a)lists.apnic.net, Gesendet von: nanog(a)merit.edu, apnic-talk(a)lists.apnic.net owner-lir-wg@ Thema: Re: KPNQwest ns.eu.net server. ripe.net 06.06.2002 01:29 PostedDate: 06.06.2002 01:29:37 $MessageID: <20020606012937.2c476312.czmok(a)gatel.net> From: owner-lir-wg(a)ripe.net SendTo: Joao Luis Silva Damas <joao(a)ripe.net> CopyTo: randy@psg.com;ddiaz@ripe.net;routing-wg@ripe.net;lir-wg@ripe.net;tech-l@ams- ix.net;apops@lists.apnic.net;nanog@merit.edu;apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net Subject: Re: KPNQwest ns.eu.net server. Received: from smtp.denic.de ([194.246.96.22]) by notes.denic.de (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.8) with ESMTP id 2002060601283597:15602 ; Thu, 6 Jun 2002 01:28:35 +0200 Received: from postman.ripe.net (postman.ripe.net [193.0.0.199]) by smtp.denic.de with smtp id 17FkCg-0004uX-00; Thu, 6 Jun 2002 01:28:34 +0200 Received: (qmail 11455 invoked by alias); 5 Jun 2002 23:28:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 11452 invoked by uid 66); 5 Jun 2002 23:28:15 -0000 Delivered_To: lists-lir-wg-out(a)lists.ripe.net PRINCIPAL: Jan-Ahrent Czmok <czmok(a)gatel.net> In_Reply_To: <p05111700b92449b9ddee(a)[193.0.1.81]> References: <200206051725.g55HPlA05396(a)birch.ripe.net> <E17Ff8f-0003So-00(a)roam.psg.com> <p05111700b92449b9ddee(a)[193.0.1.81]> Organization: Global Access Telecommunications Inc. $Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.6claws16 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-debian-linux-gnu) X_Ncc_RegID: de.gatel MIME_Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk X_Loop_Detect: RIPE NCC SMTPOriginator: owner-lir-wg(a)ripe.net RouteServers: CN=notes/O=Denic RouteTimes: 06.06.2002 01:28:36-06.06.2002 01:28:38 DeliveredDate: 06.06.2002 01:28:38 DENICDOCOPENCOUNT: 1 $MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on notes/Denic(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 06.06.2002 01:28:36;MIME-CD by Notes Client on Sabine Dolderer/Denic(Release 5.0.6a |January 17, 2001) at 06.06.2002 09:32:28;MIME-CD complete at 06.06.2002 09:32:28 BlindCopyTo: WebSubject: Re: KPNQwest ns.eu.net server. On Thu, 6 Jun 2002 01:08:46 +0200 Joao Luis Silva Damas <joao(a)ripe.net> wrote: > > At 11:04 -0700 5/6/02, Randy Bush wrote: > > > Given the current situation of KPNQwest and the possibility > >> of its services going offline sometime soon, the RIPE NCC in > >> agreement with KPNQwest will be temporally hosting this > >> server (ns.eu.net) in its premises. > > > >nice emergency hack and sorry to whine. but i used them both > >to get diversity. > > Hi Randy, > > there are 16 ccTLDs for which ns.ripe.net and ns.eu.net are both > secondary. So we will definitely request those ccTLDs to look for a > new host as soon as possible. Hi Randy, hi Joao, dear routing-wg, probably my Company (GATEL, AS13129) is able to host a secondary server for the ccTLDs. The question is rather what are the hardware "requirements" for the secondary server. We have sufficient bandwidth capacity available and rack space as well. > The rest can take bit more time to think what they want to do since > ns.eu.net will keep running. Well done ! Congrats for the good ideas and coordination work. > > We are offering secondary service on ns.ripe.net for any ccTLD that > we weren't sencodaring for, as are other people. > > The idea is not to have ns.eu.net running for ever, just to enable > people to have time to take rational decisions, without the fear of > having the server going away because of some unexpected turn of > events. > > > > >when in less of a panic, please move it to moscow or something. > > Panic? what panic? this is just common sense > right. it's not panic. --jan -- Jan Ahrent Czmok - Senior Network Engineer - Access Networks Global Access Telecommunications, Inc. - Stephanstr. 3 - 60313 Frankfurt voice: +49 69 299896-35 - fax: +49 69 299896-66 - email: czmok(a)gatel.de

9 8

Fw: [swinog] Contact @ AOL?
by Pascal Gloor 07 Jun '02

07 Jun '02

Please reply to him directly, thanks, Pascal ----- Original Message ----- From: "Benoit Panizzon" <panizzon(a)woody.ch> To: <swinog(a)swinog.ch> Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 9:32 PM Subject: [swinog] Contact @ AOL? > Does somebody have any contact to an AOL hostmaster or abuse person? > > Since about three months I get multiple attempts to send spam via a > Formmail installation every day from the AOL.COM IP-Range. I forward the > logs to abuse(a)aol.com nearly every day but I never get any human answering > my emails. I also called AOL in Germany but they don't know who I should > contact or how I should escalate that problem. (They just told me > abuse(a)aol.com are the only ones known to care about such problems). > > PS: It's a secured Formmail and those attempts were all unsuccessfull, so > no need to tell me it's not secure ;-) > > Benoit Panizzon > > ASCII-Ribbon Campaign > """"""""""""""""""""" > No HTML or WORD in Mails > HTML is for WEB, Word is for Micro$oft. > ** Get stoned - drink wet concrete > > ---------------------------------------------- > swinog(a)swinog.ch Maillist-Archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/swinog%40swinog.ch/ >

1 0

it's official
by smd＠clock.org 06 Jun '02

06 Jun '02

i hate spamarrest. i really do. i hate it. as if i don't get enough junk mail from the nanog list itself, and the advertisers who troll it. you don't know who you are, but lots of the rest of us do. Sean.

3 2

Diagnostic Tools
by Pawlukiewicz Jane 06 Jun '02

06 Jun '02

Hi, I'm new here but I already have a quick question. What are the best diagnostic tools available to network operators today? Thanks for any info, Jane

4 5