- Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: Stealth Blocking
by Roeland Meyer 26 May '01

26 May '01

> From: Mitch Halmu [mailto:mitch@netside.net] > Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 2:48 PM > > On Thu, 24 May 2001, Matt Cramer wrote: > I will give you a solid reason why we won't try this, quoting > research > with POP-before-SMTP conducted by the founder of MAPS TSI, > Chip Rosenthal > http://users.laserlink.net/~chip/relay-pres-9910/ > > You don't have to believe me that our clients will not accept > that, take > his words instead: > > "Our users hated it - particularly those using MS Outlook" > > No need to describe what happens when your clients hate your > service... On that same page, I found this very interesting. The part about false positive, to normal relay testing, got my attention. Guys, there are more cases that may look like an open relay, but really aren't. <quote> Escalating Credentials Curently deployed in Laser Link network Amalgamation of two mechanisms: POP-before-SMTP Rate limiting Count mail from originating IP address ... Disadvantages: Complex implementation Will users accept upper limit? False positive to conventional relay testing </quote>

4 3

E-mail vs. FTP -- ***RTF RFC***
by E.B. Dreger 26 May '01

26 May '01

Greetings all, Section 7.3.3 of RFC1341 addresses the external storage, expiry, et cetera issues. Not perfect, but a good first pass... and almost ten years old, too. ((( Thanks to Valdis for pointing this out! ))) We could probably kludge FTP as an interim measure: * MTA intercepts attachments, and spools them separately. * "access-type: ftp" with, e.g., username "msg12345recipient67890" and password "mi93et490" and "expiration: Mon, 28 May 2001 00:00:00 +0000". The specific parameters would be generated on a per-message basis. * Mail admins can enforce quotas. Nothing new. The arguments in favor of electronic transfer are on the grounds of timely communication. One could argue that somebody not checking mail for a week doesn't deserve to receive their attachment without a second "transmission". The proxy MTA could insert a human-readable expiration notice or whatever other user-friendly prompting is deemed to be a good idea. * We could also forget the MIME method, and put in a human-readable link to get the attachment, a la electronic greeting cards. This would allow immediate use of non-registered access-type methods. Eventually, I'd like to see this done via HTTP/1.1 using chunked transfers. However, no current MUAs will support a non-existant HTTP method or any X-Experimental methods. For something that would work *right now*, I think that RTF RFC and going from there is the right way... Does anybody know what MUAs follow the RFC for external message content? A little smtpd and ftpd hacking could yield something workable PDQ. Eddy --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. EverQuick Internet Division Phone: (316) 794-8922 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT) From: A Trap <blacklist(a)brics.com> To: blacklist(a)brics.com Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature. These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots. Do NOT send mail to <blacklist(a)brics.com>, or you are likely to be blocked.

1 0

RE: EMAIL != FTP
by Roeland Meyer 26 May '01

26 May '01

> From: Stephen J. Wilcox [mailto:steve@opaltelecom.co.uk] > Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 5:05 AM > > Incorrect, IE: > > Right click over the link, "Save Target as" > > sure the browser wont display it correct but you can save it fine. Our Secretary/Treasurer has been using Windows for over 10 years. She's just now discovering the joys of "Right click".

1 0

Re: PacBell Frame Relay Outage?
by owen＠dixon.delong.sj.ca.us 26 May '01

26 May '01

The only balls I've seen from SBC lately are the ones they use when they go in front of the PUC (takes balls to ask for some of what they do), and the ball of water in their commercials for their super reliable data services. I noticed their commercials appeared to be MIA most of yesterday. :-) Owen > On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 12:48:40PM -0700, Sean Donelan wrote: > > > > Pacbell statement at 11:04am PDT: > > > > Some customers in California and Reno may be unable to access the > > Internet at this time do to an equipment problem. Our Engineering > > Team is working to resolve this issue. We apologize for any > > inconvenience this may cause and thank you for your patience. > > How delightfully non-descriptive. I hope it was at least "due" to an > equipment problem. > > Wouldn't it be easier if they just issued a magic 8ball instead of a > statement? > > "When will my internet be up?" > "Reply hazy, try again" > > -- > Richard A Steenbergen <ras(a)e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras > PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6) > > >

1 0

Re: EMAIL != FTP
by David Lesher 26 May '01

26 May '01

A) A friend got bit badly by the "anything I can attach I will" syndrome. He was in the UK, and the usual USG local POP (from PSI) was FUBAR. So he called back to DC to get urgent mail. Some MITRE genius had attacked a 10+meg PowerPointless file to his message to 100+ folks, including Friend. Friend err (rather you & I) paid a VERY large phone bill for that braindeadness. B) I'm intrigued by the proposal for pseudo attachments. Hmm, what's really needed? 1) User still points & clicks. 2) MUA uploads attachment to its designated server. 3) MUA attaches URL & password to message. 4) Recipient gets mail and grabs attachment. 5) Server knows who has gotten file, keeps track. 6) 24 hours after last recipient has claimed it, or {say} 1 week later, it deletes it. Replaces with "it's expired, have it resent" for whenever. (Gee, this sounds like news and history files...) All this needs to work is for say Eudora and Mutt to both offer it. Once a critical mass of sysadms deploy same, and crank down the limit to 100K, more will. (I say Eudora because M$ will resist anything that interoperates....) -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz(a)nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

1 0

Re: EMAIL != FTP
by David Lesher 26 May '01

26 May '01

> i've seen queues backing up because the bank of 1200 bps modems weren't > enough, and queues backed up because a series of 400Meg messages kept failing > halfway through delivery. Doesn't anyone here recall the infamous OSU/Compuserve ftp-by-mail debacle...??? It totally killed OSU's mail system. In a case of fiction portends reality, Karl Kleinpaste solved it by applying a Net-trueism; he wrote the backlog off to 9-track tapes and DROVE them across town.... -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz(a)nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

2 1

RE: EMAIL != FTP
by Roeland Meyer 26 May '01

26 May '01

> From: Jim Mercer [mailto:jim@reptiles.org] > Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 5:47 PM > On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 11:22:15AM -0400, deeann mikula wrote: > you are helping to create a society of users who think that > Netscape/Explorer > is the internet, with no concept of any of its other applications. You miss the point. It's what the users want. They are not interested in maximizing efficiency <gasp>. They are into what works. They don't give a flip how. > > unfortunately, i have accepted the fact that there is no stopping > > customers from emailing 10MB (and larger!) files, they can > just go to > > our competition if we prevent it. > > that would be my tactic, but then i'm my own boss, so i can make those > decisions. > > i get the impression that you (or someone else on the > "pro-ftp-by-email" side) > is "just and employee" and has to do as they are told. When I started my own company, the first time, I was under the nieve impression that I was my own boss and could do whatever I wanted. Guess what? I wound up with more bosses then you could shake a stick at. They're called CUSTOMERS. EVERYONE has a boss! If you don't, then you are already richer than Gates or broke as hell. Fifteen years later (and lots of peaks and valley's) have not changed my mind on that. Owning your own company just makes you feel the pain that much more directly. > well, have a bit of guts, and try to explain to management what the > implications (both current and local as well as future and > far-reaching) of such policies are. Everyone learns to pick their battles. This issue is so far down the priority list with ALL of my clients that you'd need a Saturn V booster, just to find the bottom of the well. Since they pay me to know better, they would simply question my sanity ... and proceed to find some one that will do the job they wanted to get done. > when 100 customers leave because 1 customer hosed your mail > server, then maybe > they will start listening to tachnical advice, as opposed to > relying solely > on marketing advice. The smart ones find a way to have the cake AND eat it.

1 0

RE: Email Parcel Post is Good!
by owen＠dixon.delong.sj.ca.us 26 May '01

26 May '01

> ... and you expect to get this disk from Livermore to Chicago, in 5 minutes, > ... how? > > Business moves at Internet speeds these days, in case you hadn't noticed. > > To put it in a way even understandable to techies; > > Collaborrative document, updated and swapped between 4 authors, and > reviewed by two others, widely separated geo-physically. Revised and > rewritten 5 times per day, for a week (Not counting NetMeetings). Trust me, > management does work this way. > Network Shared storage is the correct solution for most of these issues. Runtime with network shared storage is also 1 week. > Process run-time, with email = 1 week; with FedEx = 1 month. > > Process cost (transit only), with email <= $20, with FedEx = $4500 (FedEx = > very happy) > Let's see... 4 authors * 35 revisions (7 days 5 revisions each, or 35 days, 1 revision each, assuming revisions wouldn't be reduced by latency) = 140 fedex packages. According to FedEx web site, from 95121 (San Jose, CA) to 20170 (Herndon, VA), it's: $18.34 standard overnight (w/unscheduled pickup) $20.94 priority overnight (w/unscheduled pickup) I get $2567.60 and $2931.60, respectively. Still well over the $20 that it costs with network shared storage or email, but definitely significantly less than your fedex estimate. In fact, I couldn't get close to your estimate on the fedex web site. I was able to find 8am delivery at $6000+, but that's way more than your $4500, and not overly useful in this situation. Admittedly, I didn't try HI to VA, so maybe that's where you got your quote. OTOH, most businesses have contracts with fedex and pay substantially less than the one-time rates I just listed. > Real cost; Deal is blown out because deliverable is three weeks late. > Instant lost revenue. > > > my opinion. > > opinion: invalid. > > Fact: Using e-mail instead of bulk file transfer or network shared storage is an inefficient use of bandwidth with little or no gain in user convenience and only an artificial sense of security. Owen

1 0

Email Parcel Post is Good!
by Cutler, James R 26 May '01

26 May '01

Various people are alleged to have said things like: "file transfer by email is evil" ========================================================= Business Response: "Parcel Post" is just as valid for electronic media as it is for physical media. Of course it would be stupid, most of the time, to use email to transfer the Windows 2000 Service Pack 2 (~100 Megabytes), but it can be done. (It truth, I have never mailed an attachment larger than 50 Megabytes.) The business arguments for casual exchange of documents using email are, I believe, strong. Creation of an FTP site or a Web site is NOT a good idea for the casual user, even ignoring the difficulty of explaining how to make one work using a transient IP address. Security and support are difficult enough today without adding that complication. Arbitrarily denying the use of email for file transfer is, in and of itself, tortuous interference with legitimate business of others. - James R. Cutler - EDS 800 Tower Drive, Troy, MI 48098 1 248 265 7514 james.cutler(a)eds.com

4 3

Re: EMAIL != FTP
by Richard A. Steenbergen 25 May '01

25 May '01

On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 03:11:13PM -0400, Wojtek Zlobicki wrote: > > Last time that I checked, adding a drive to a raid array or NETAPP was > a great deal more than $99. Lets not count the cost of upgrading a HD > in a lowly Linux box (not bashing Linux here). IDE is also not > sufficient enought in order to sustaint the write rate of that these > servers demand (let alone the IO). 5200 RPM drivers are not a > solution for ISPs. Ack. I promised myself I was going to stay out of this thread but I don't think I'm going to be able to resist. If you're going to insult IDE you should at least know what you're insulting it for. Your average 60gig ($140) or 80gig ($200) 5400rpm IDE Maxtor drive will have no problems reading or writing at 30MB/s sustained. I have built software IDE raid setups that have no problem reading at 50MB/s sustained with boatloads of CPU to spare, and are not light on the seek ability especially as the number of drives increase. Your average 7200rpm IBM 75gig drive (a bit more expensive, $250/ea) will perform a lot better then that. I'm looking at an extremely loaded web server right now pushing over 90Mbit/s at over 600 hits/sec and over 400 drive seeks per second, off a 500gig raid-5 built entirely from cheap 7200rpm IDE drives. That's not your multi-terabyte mail and news server for hundreds of thousands of users, but I bet you its a lot cheaper. The only area where IDE really loses is logistics and cable management, if you're going to keep drives balanced on seperate IDE channels. With UDMA/66 controllers at $14/ea from Fry's, there is no technical reason you can't get some great performance out of IDE drives at extremely cheap prices. If you want to take it a step more towards business, look into 3Ware products for IDE drives. Don't forget what the I in RAID stands for. But enough about off-topic stuff, I don't want to distract from the next line of discussion which will be if you didn't write your email in vi you shouldn't have the right to send it. -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras(a)e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)

1 0