- Test - lists.nanog.org

RIPE Whois RPSL Migration
by RIPE NCC 21 Dec '00

21 Dec '00

[ Apologies for duplicate mails ] RIPE Whois RPSL Migration The RIPE Database re-implementation project is nearing completion. A key feature of the new database is the implementation of RPSL, to replace the old RIPE-181 standard. RPSL is similar, but not identical, to RIPE-181. The RIPE NCC expects that many programs that use the RIPE Whois database will continue to operate properly without modification. However, some programs may have problems parsing the RPSL format, or be confused by differences in behaviour. We would like to ensure that the transition to RPSL is as easy as possible. Therefore, we are working with the RIPE community to provide resources you can use to check any programs or scripts that you have that use the RIPE Whois database. Please visit our Migration page for further information: http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/pub-services/db/rpsl/index.html This page will be updated regularly with the latest information. We will provide additional tools and information as they become available. The actual timeline of when the RPSL server will replace the existing RIPE-181 server will be decided at the RIPE-38 meeting. If you want input on when the change will occur, then you should either attend this meeting or post your comments on the RIPE DB mailing list. http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/current/ripe-38/index.html http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/db/index.html Regards, The RIPE Database Group. RIPE NCC

1 0

Re: ICQ down?
by Hank Nussbacher 21 Dec '00

21 Dec '00

At 09:05 21/12/00 -0500, Ken Fischer wrote: Typo to the list. Spelled correctly to the pgm. -Hank >I don't use ICQ anymore, so I can't test it... >but make sure that you are going to the correct company >(try icq.mirabilis.com) > ^ >#whois mirabalis.com >Organization: > Simpson Thacher & Bartlett > 425 Lexington Avenue > New York, NY 10017 > US > > Registrar..: Register.com (http://www.register.com) > Domain Name: MIRABALIS.COM ><snip> > >#whois mirabilis.com >Domain Name: MIRABILIS.COM > >Registrant: > ICQ, Inc. > 22000 AOL Way > Dulles, VA 20166 > US ><snip> > >Best regards, > >-- >Ken Fischer, CCNA <kenf(a)junebug.org> >PGP Fingerprint: 9523 54B6 D67B BBFB 53B3 2F3B 7E81 0891 C495 CB50 > > >On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Hank Nussbacher wrote: > > > > > Anyone know what is the status with ICQ? No ability to connect to their > > servers at icq.mirabalis.com, icq.mirabalis.com, etc. > > > > Thanks, > > Hank > > > >

1 0

RE: [OT] Re: Port scanning legal
by Roeland Meyer 20 Dec '00

20 Dec '00

The relevant parts show that Larry Sheldon is the scum-bag that posts private mail to public lists. Some have sent private email accusing me of spamming NANOG. I assure you that this is not the case. No, I didn't do BCC either. The following headers should prove that I had nothing to do with it and that I have been the victim of a prankster, named Larry Sheldon. I will consider further action after the holidays. I apologize to you all for Larry's inappropriate behavior. It wasn't me. Of course, I didn't get a NANOG copy of the re-broadcast message either. If Vladis hadn't sent me a copy of the original headers, I would never have known. -- ROELAND M.J. MEYER Managing Director Morgan Hill Software Company, Inc. TEL: +001 925 373 3954 FAX: +001 925 373 9781 http://www.mhsc.com mailto: rmeyer(a)mhsc.com > From: Valdis.Kletnieks(a)vt.edu [mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu] > Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 7:48 AM > Received: from mailjay.creighton.edu (mailjay.creighton.edu > [147.134.2.126]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id > A17965DE60 for <nanog(a)merit.edu>; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 09:46:13 > -0500 (EST) > Received: from bluejay.creighton.edu (bluejay.creighton.edu > [147.134.2.20]) by mailjay.creighton.edu (8.9.3 > (PHNE_18546)/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA17601 for > <nanog(a)merit.edu>; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 08:46:10 -0600 (CST) > Received: (from lsheldon@localhost) by bluejay.creighton.edu > (8.9.3 (PHNE_18979)/8.9.3) id IAA22185 for nanog(a)merit.edu; > Wed, 20 Dec 2000 08:46:00 -0600 (CST) > Received: from mailjay.creighton.edu (mailjay.creighton.edu > [147.134.2.126]) by bluejay.creighton.edu (8.9.3 > (PHNE_18979)/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA20544 for > <lsheldon(a)bluejay.creighton.edu>; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 00:45:36 > -0600 (CST) Here is where it was recieved by Larry's host. Above this point was all Larry. > Received: from condor.mhsc.com (condor.lvrmr.mhsc.com > [199.108.175.226]) by mailjay.creighton.edu (8.9.3 > (PHNE_18546)/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA18345 for > <lsheldon(a)creighton.edu>; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 00:45:35 -0600 (CST) > Received: by condor.mhsc.com with Internet Mail Service > (5.5.2650.21) id <ZHMGC6PK>; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 22:40:33 -0800 > Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 22:40:33 -0800 > From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer(a)mhsc.com> > Subject: RE: [OT] Re: Port scanning legal > Sender: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu > To: "'Adam Rothschild'" <asr(a)latency.net>, Larry Sheldon > <lsheldon(a)creighton.edu> > Cc: tim(a)yocum.org

2 1

FDDI to FE?
by Reid B. Fishler 20 Dec '00

20 Dec '00

Howdy all. We are about to install a new VXR, however it came to our attention that FDDI is not compatable with it at all. Unfortunately, we need to connect FDDI to this router. Has anyone seen a cheap switch or converter that has both FDDI and Fast Ethernet on it? I know I can do a 4700, but thats large, expensive and clunky...Any ideas? Reid Fishler Lightning.net

6 5

RE: Port scanning legal
by Roeland Meyer 20 Dec '00

20 Dec '00

I've pinged IP addrs that I later found out were MIL addrs. Nothing happened. Duh! There are a LOT of IP addrs that aren't in the DNS. How is one to know? I don't know about you, but I flunked telepathy in High School and did worse in clarvoyance. In fact, psionics wasn't wasn't something I was generally good at. That's why I went into engineering. Could it be, that is why ping and traceroute were invented? The argument against port-scanning applies equally well to just about every diagnostic tool we use. Be careful what you wish for, we might all get stuck with it. Then, where would we be? > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:goemon@sasami.anime.net] > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 11:46 AM > To: Shawn McMahon > Cc: 'nanog(a)merit.edu' > Subject: Re: Port scanning legal > > > > On Tue, 19 Dec 2000, Shawn McMahon wrote: > > Better lock me up; I can't count the number of times I've nmap-ed > > somebody just to find out what OS they were using, either > for personal > > curiosity, or as part of an argument. > > Cool. Since you're obviously in the right, how about scanning some > U.S. military networks and letting us all know what OS they are using? > > If you like, I'll start an argument with you so you have the > justification > you need to portscan. > > -Dan > >

5 4

RE: Port scanning legal
by Larry Sheldon 20 Dec '00

20 Dec '00

Im glad you finally found something worthwhile to talk about. Shall we quote it several more times just to make the mpoint? > > And your sig is downright enormous. > > -Dan > > On Tue, 19 Dec 2000, Larry Sheldon wrote: > > > > > Y'all have gotten tedious. > > -- > > -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- > > . . > > - L. F. (Larry) Sheldon, Jr. - > > . Unix Systems and Network Administration . > > - Creighton University Computer Center-Old Gym - > > . 2500 California Plaza . > > - Omaha, Nebraska, U.S.A. 68178 Two identifying characteristics - > > . lsheldon(a)creighton.edu of System Administrators: . > > - 402 280-2254 (work) Infallibility, and the ability to - > > . 402 681-4726 (cellular) learn from their mistakes. . > > - 402 332-4622 (residence) - > > . http://www.creighton.edu/~lsheldon Adapted from Stephen Pinker . > > -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- > > > -- -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- . . - L. F. (Larry) Sheldon, Jr. - . Unix Systems and Network Administration . - Creighton University Computer Center-Old Gym - . 2500 California Plaza . - Omaha, Nebraska, U.S.A. 68178 Two identifying characteristics - . lsheldon(a)creighton.edu of System Administrators: . - 402 280-2254 (work) Infallibility, and the ability to - . 402 681-4726 (cellular) learn from their mistakes. . - 402 332-4622 (residence) - . http://www.creighton.edu/~lsheldon Adapted from Stephen Pinker . -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

3 2

(Somewhat OT) "Scary, Sneaky HR46"
by Marius Strom 20 Dec '00

20 Dec '00

It's somewhat off topic, but somewhat on-topic due to the wiretapping, forfeiture, and encryption sections: http://cryptome.org/hr46.htm -- Marius Strom <marius(a)marius.org> Professional Geek/Unix System Administrator URL: http://www.marius.org http://www.marius.org/marius.pgp 0x55DE53E4 "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a mini-van full of DLT tapes traveling down the highway at 65 miles per hour..." -Andrew Tanenbaum, "Computer Networks"

1 0

[OT] Stupid list participant
by Adam Rothschild 20 Dec '00

20 Dec '00

Seems Larry know how to use the "bounce" function in his mail client to make it look like I'm sending dupes to the list. Very impressive. Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id D7E445DDD0; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 09:45:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailjay.creighton.edu (mailjay.creighton.edu [147.134.2.126]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85CF15DDE1 for <nanog(a)merit.edu>; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 09:45:17 -0500 (EST) [...] From: Adam Rothschild <asr(a)latency.net> To: Larry Sheldon <lsheldon(a)creighton.edu> NANOG admins, could you please block this fool from relaying msgs to the list? Thanks, -adam

1 0

Port scanning legal
by Edward S. Marshall 20 Dec '00

20 Dec '00

http://www.securityfocus.com/templates/article.html?id=126 A quick quote from the article: A tiff between two IT contractors that spiraled into federal court ended last month with a U.S. district court ruling in Georgia that port scanning a network does not damage it, under a section of the anti-hacking laws that allows victims of cyber attack to sue an attacker. Last week both sides agreed not to appeal the decision by judge Thomas Thrash, who found that the value of time spent investigating a port scan can not be considered damage. "The statute clearly states that the damage must be an impairment to the integrity and availability of the network," wrote the judge, who found that a port scan impaired neither. This may have ramifications for both security professionals and abuse desk personnel; this ruling would seem to make it clear that you cannot claim time spent investigating abuse issues as damage. The complete finding is here: http://pub.bna.com/eclr/00434.htm Any armchair lawyers on the list want to take a crack at this? -- Edward S. Marshall <emarshal(a)logic.net> http://www.nyx.net/~emarshal/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [ Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas. ]

14 13

RE: [OT] Re: Port scanning legal
by Roeland Meyer 20 Dec '00

20 Dec '00

> Perhaps we should organize a central repository of e-mail addresses of > known net.k00ks, to help craft some filters accordingly? Wow! How about a .KOOKS TLD in the ORSC roots? What a concept! <g> NOTE: This DIDN'T go to NANOG.

1 0