- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Top Level Domain Finder Tools
by Simon Higgs 19 Mar '01

19 Mar '01

At 11:29 PM 3/17/01 +0000, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote: >the collisions dont seem to be being avoided > >Checking (AlterNIC) nameserver ny.alternic.org for .SHOP >Checking (NEWNET) nameserver ns0.newdotnet.net for .SHOP >Checking (NS) nameserver ns.autono.net for .SHOP > >See - you open it up and it all falls apart > >These "finder tools" are bobbins, they just query against a botched >together list of servers. The tools are designed to find the existing collisions and prevent future collisions. So there's nothing wrong with the tools. They're working! The result, as you correctly point out, is that the "botched together list of servers" are now visible to everyone and will need to be fixed somehow. That is the entire point of making the tools available. >.. also ORSC sounds techie friendly - it has the word open in so it must >be good - but c'mon theres no difference between it and new.net or >whoever? I wouldn't put any money down on that bet. ORSC is a non-profit Delaware corp., and it's only product is a published root zone which it gives away for free. New.net is a for-profit/VC-funded registry/registrar operation. Not quite the same thing at all. >having said that maybe it would be better than icann.. only >problem is who has to give them the authority and make everyone abide by >it? You do, along with everyone else that has control over where their DNS points (per RFC2826). >Steve > >On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, Patrick Corliss wrote: > > > > > Simon Higgs <simon(a)higgs.com> wrote: > > On Sunday, March 18, 2001 8:12 AM (AEST) > > > > > TLD Finder Tools (collision avoidance tools) are available for people to > > > see which TLDs are already "in play": > > > > > > > > > ORSC have a Top Level Domain Finder which queries the ORSC root zone: > > > http://tldfind.open-rsc.org/ > > > > > > Planet Communications & Computing Facility (PCCF - who run the .GOD > > > registry) have a TLD Finder which queries multiple roots: > > > http://www.pccf.net/cgi-bin/root-servers/whereis-tld?+ > > > > > > > AlterNIC's newest tool > > http://www.alternic.org/tldfinder.html > > Best Regards, Simon Higgs -- It's a feature not a bug...

2 1

RE: Multiple Roots are "a good thing" - Karl Auerbach
by Roeland Meyer 19 Mar '01

19 Mar '01

> yes, and multiple directory services are a great thing. > However, when I dial > +1.310.642.0351 it reaches the same number no matter where the call > originates, in what phone network, who my LD carrier is, who > my local telco > is, or how many switches it passes through on the way. Actually (and this is why I hate analogies), I have folks calling my home number, for someone else who previously was assigned that number, all the time. I've had that number over five years. We've had that discussion before, wrt rat-holing net-blocks. What if the netblock gets assigned to someone else? The other counter is that the number is the equivalent of the IP addr. You dial direct, you get the same phone. Use an older phonebook and you may have a different number. Two different phonebooks, yielding two different numbers, owned by the same person, is no problem either. Two different phonebooks, yielding two different numbers, owned by different persons, is probably a court case anyway. At the least, it's a trademark violation. It can all be drawn with a Karnaugh map.

1 0

RE: RACO looking for you
by Segal, Mark 19 Mar '01

19 Mar '01

I'm good jim... :).. So RACO using nanog to find jason now.. :) Mark -- Mark Segal Director, Data and Internet Planning Axxent Corp. Tel: (416)907-2858 > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Mercer [mailto:jim@reptiles.org] > Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2001 2:25 PM > To: Jason Lixfeld > Cc: 'nanog(a)nanog.org' > Subject: RACO looking for you > > > > > peter/michelle want to talk to you. > > i hear you are using up all your vacation. how is that going? > > 8^) > > -- > [ Jim Mercer > jim(a)pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis.ca ] > [ Reptilian Research -- Longer Life through Colder > Blood ] > [ aka jim(a)reptiles.org +1 > 416 410-5633 ] >

2 1

draft-netrail-packet-over-aol-dialup-00.txt
by Omachonu Ogali 19 Mar '01

19 Mar '01

missng@subtopia$ traceroute www.dsli.com traceroute: Warning: Multiple interfaces found; using 207.99.106.2 @ hme0:2 traceroute to www.dsli.com (207.31.125.10), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 nac-gw.colo1.psnynj.informationwave.net (207.99.106.1) 1.254 ms 0.771 ms 0.626 ms 2 209.123.11.153 (209.123.11.153) 1.558 ms 1.752 ms 1.517 ms 3 global-crossing.transit.nac.net (207.99.10.2) 1.661 ms 2.550 ms 1.644 ms 4 s3-0-1-45M.br1.NYC2.gblx.net (206.132.29.161) 2.750 ms 3.759 ms 3.864 ms 5 pos2-1-155M.cr2.NYC2.gblx.net (206.132.249.193) 3.274 ms 3.072 ms 4.230 ms 6 pos1-0-622M.cr1.ATL1.gblx.net (206.132.115.94) 23.473 ms 22.354 ms 22.223 ms 7 pos4-1-0-155M.br1.ATL1.gblx.net (208.178.116.26) 22.105 ms 22.887 ms 21.876 ms 8 t3-1-0-3--0.pr1.Atlanta.GA.us.netrail.net (205.215.1.65) 24.902 ms 24.610 ms 25.988 ms 9 ge-2-1-0--0.tr1.Atlanta1.GA.us.netrail.net (205.215.60.193) 24.914 ms 27.209 ms 26.658 ms 10 at-0-2-0--4.tr1.Miami2.FL.us.netrail.net (209.44.75.77) 53.625 ms 53.938 ms 54.092 ms 11 DSLICorp-10M.Miami2.FL.US.netrail.net (205.215.25.38) 60.638 ms 55.186 ms 66.316 ms 12 ACA80105.ipt.aol.com (172.168.1.5) 68.131 ms 57.195 ms 66.348 ms 13 IWC-W21A.MIA.netrail.net (207.31.90.5) 61.419 ms 61.708 ms 61.906 ms 14 user.dsli10.com (207.31.125.10) 60.042 ms 59.769 ms 76.960 ms Umm...either NetRail is passing traffic through an AOL dialup with amazing compression and keeping latency down, or someone looked at 192.168 and 172.16 and decided to add a netblock to RFC1918 without letting anyone else know... -- Omachonu Ogali missnglnk(a)informationwave.net http://www.informationwave.net

3 2

Re: Multiple Roots are "a good thing" - Karl Auerbach
by Steven M. Bellovin 18 Mar '01

18 Mar '01

In message <20010318204704.40B8D8C(a)proven.weird.com>, Greg A. Woods writes: > >[ On Sunday, March 18, 2001 at 14:23:26 (-0500), Miles Fidelman wrote: ] >> Subject: Re: Multiple Roots are "a good thing" - Karl Auerbach >> >> I would suggest that telephone books/directories are not an appropriate >> analogy. Rather, DNS is a lot closer to the internal plumbing of the net - >> more akin to Signalling System #7. I'd guess that for 95% or more of phone >> calls, the caller already knows the numeric phone number in question - >> while for the Internet, very few people give their email addresses as >> mfidelman(a)207.226.172.79 or http://207.226.172.79. Telephone directories >> are optional in most cases, DNS is not. > >You are absolutely correct. :-) > >Telephone directories are most definitely *not* like the DNS. A domain >name is more like a telephone number itself, and as you say the IP >numbers are more like the underlying circuit routing glue in something >like SS#7. We really do not have a "telephone directory" for the >Internet (unless you count WHOIS/RWHOIS). Right. And even for phone numbers, there's a single authority controlling the space. Internationally, it's the ITU; within the U.S./ Candadian zone, it's the North American Number Plan Administrator. And its problem has been too little supervision -- see http://www.bergen.com/biz/codes18200103181.htm --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb

1 0

RE: Multiple Roots are "a good thing" - Karl Auerbach
by Roeland Meyer 18 Mar '01

18 Mar '01

> From: woods(a)weird.com [mailto:woods@weird.com] > Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2001 12:01 PM > The correct way to fight against a DNS root controlled by someone you > don't like is not to propose multiple DNS roots, but rather > to campaign for a democratic root. That campaign has been on-going for quite a few years. It continues to go nowhere. The rest of us are begining to get fed-up with the anti-progress. Kent Crispin repeatedly claims that ICANN is a corporation and not a democratic entity. In this case he is correct. I disagree with him that this is a desired outcome. Crispin and Crocker are of the opinion that (non-democratic) status quo is acceptable. > Auerbach's proposal is not > technically sound and > is political suicide. As someone who spoke with Karl before he wrote that proposal, there was a lot involved that wasn't published.

1 0

Re: Multiple Roots are "a good thing" - Karl Auerbach
by Miles Fidelman 18 Mar '01

18 Mar '01

On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, Matt Levine wrote: PLEASE, I didn't say this. > > On Fri Mar 16 08:48:04 2001, > > Miles Fidelman <mfidelman(a)civicnet.org> wrote: a whole bunch of stuff of mine as in here and quoted the following was someone else's comments > > > > It wasn't that many years ago in the United States when there was one big, > > monolithic telephone company. > > > > It was taken as gospel by many that the stability of the telephone network > > depended on there being one unified, monolithic telephone company. I'd never say anything this transparently wrong. ************************************************************************** The Center for Civic Networking PO Box 600618 Miles R. Fidelman, President & Newtonville, MA 02460-0006 Director, Municipal Telecommunications Strategies Program 617-558-3698 fax: 617-630-8946 mfidelman(a)civicnet.org http://civic.net/ccn.html Information Infrastructure: Public Spaces for the 21st Century Let's Start With: Internet Wall-Plugs Everywhere Say It Often, Say It Loud: "I Want My Internet!" **************************************************************************

1 0

Anyone at the @Home NOC?
by Jason Lixfeld 18 Mar '01

18 Mar '01

To anyone from @Home who reads this, please email me asap as your peering session at TorIX has been down since Saterday AM. All attempts at contacting you have failed. Thx. .

2 1

Multiple Roots are "a good thing" - Karl Auerbach (fwd)
by David Lesher 18 Mar '01

18 Mar '01

Somewhat OT, perhaps, But I can't let this pass: > It wasn't that many years ago in the United States when there was one big, > monolithic telephone company. HorsePucky. There were in the 80's roughly 1100 independent telcos in the US. (Can anyone say "REA"?) There was also GTE & AllTel (who were quietly buying up many of the 1100...) and don't forget ConTel. Now? We are far far closer to err.. quad-opoly control of the PSTN and the last mile than back then. -- 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

Looking for Brooks Fiber contact
by Hank Nussbacher 18 Mar '01

18 Mar '01

The info in both whois.radb.net and whois.networksolutions.com results in a dead end. The NOC list at http://puck.nether.net/netops/nocs.cgi doesn't list Brooks Fiber either. Please send me some contact info at Brooks. Thanks, Hank ><hostmaster(a)BFP.NET>: Name service error for domain 209.160.3.4.BFP.NET: Host > found but no data record of requested type > ><rtarbert(a)bfp.net>: Name service error for domain 209.160.3.4.BFP.NET: Host > found but no data record of requested type > >Received: from docking.att.net.il (docking.interall.co.il [192.115.216.97]) > by biff.att.net.il (Postfix) with ESMTP > id 7C08910F4; Sun, 18 Mar 2001 09:58:37 +0200 (IST) >Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010318102139.00acd4a0(a)max.ibm.net.il> >X-Sender: hank(a)max.ibm.net.il >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 >Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 10:23:17 +0200 >To: hostmaster(a)BFP.NET, rtarbert(a)bfp.net >From: Hank Nussbacher <hank(a)att.net.il> >Subject: Global routing table bloat - AS6499 >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > >AS6499 has been lately seen to be sending out too many prefixes not based >on CIDR boundries, thereby increasing the global router table size: > >ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description >AS6499 170 60 110 64.7% Brooks Fiber Properties, Inc. > >See http://www.mcvax.org/~jhma/routing/ and >http://www.employees.org:80/~tbates/cidr-report.html >for further details. > >I hope you can take the time to add the appropriate BGP filters so that >the we all do not suffer from global router table bloat. > >Thanks, >Hank >

3 2