- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Alternative to BGP-4 for multihoming?
by Steven M. Bellovin 01 Mar '00

01 Mar '00

In message <3.0.5.32.20000301174204.0081c280(a)max.ibm.net.il>, Hank Nussbacher w rites: > > Radware has a product called Linkproof and claims that it negates the need > for BGP-4 and portable IP addresses: > > http://www.radware.com/product/lproof/Default.htm > > I have a customer that requires multihoming and they want to use Linkproof > and I want them to do BGP-4. Does anyone have any experience using this as > an alternative to BGP-4? The Web page states that the device uses NAT. I can't speak for others, but NAT is against my religion.... --Steve Bellovin

1 0

show interface switch
by ww 01 Mar '00

01 Mar '00

There used to be an undocumented command in Cisco IOS that would provide statistics about how packets were being dealt with -- namely 'show interface switch'. A sample output of the command: Ethernet1/1 Throttle count: 0 Protocol Path Pkts In Chars In Pkts Out Chars Out Other Process 451 54909 24890 1493400 Cache misses 0 Fast 0 0 0 0 Auton/SSE 0 0 0 0 IP Process 17354 2180875 123854 12437965 Cache misses 18678 Fast 13066464 788505528 11642545 4290345939 Auton/SSE 0 0 0 0 Trans. Bridge Process 0 0 104 6240 Cache misses 0 Fast 549 38962 63 8268 Auton/SSE 0 0 0 0 DEC MOP Process 0 0 414 31878 Cache misses 0 Fast 0 0 0 0 Auton/SSE 0 0 0 0 Spanning Tree Process 0 0 584 35040 Cache misses 0 Fast 0 0 0 0 Auton/SSE 0 0 0 0 ARP Process 75404 4531576 149 8940 Cache misses 0 Fast 0 0 0 0 Auton/SSE 0 0 0 0 CDP Process 35 10885 533 168537 Cache misses 0 Fast 0 0 0 0 Auton/SSE 0 0 0 0 For certain this command exists in versions of 11.X vintage, although it seems to have disappeared in 12.X. Does anyone know why it has been abandoned? These are usefull statistics from a debugging perspective (i.e. why is this router crumbling under high traffic load? because it's process switching all of its packets) and I don't think that it's possible to garner them from netflow. Has it been replaced by another undocumented command? Cheers, Will Waites ww(a)pandora.styx.org

4 3

~ EveryBody Loves Chocolate! ~
by candyman＠pplmail.com 01 Mar '00

01 Mar '00

1 0

Retracing Sender's SMTP IP Address using MS Exchange 5.5
by Toplez Razer 29 Feb '00

29 Feb '00

Dear Folks, We receive an e-mail that we want to reply back, but the sender's SMTP is NOT registered in DNS. Let's say the sender is who(a)xyz.com. Let's assume xyz.com is being resolve with its ISP DNS 150.150.150.1. But there is no MX for xyz.com in this DNS. Our e-mail is MS Exchange 5.5. Can we trace the sender's SMTP IP address? Is there better way than to peel off the original header packet to see the sender IP? Thanks, Audie Onibala ____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1

3 2

RE: Need routing engineer from Verio
by Rizzo, Mark 29 Feb '00

29 Feb '00

Yes, I did send to peering and noc a few minutes later. I was not sure how quickly the peering email addressed was polled so I was looking for some help sooner from a clueful person on this list. (Which I have mostly received, minus the few requisite hate mails) Mark EA.COM -----Original Message----- From: TTSG [mailto:ttsg@ttsg.com] Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2000 2:53 PM To: rbush(a)bainbridge.verio.net Cc: MRizzo(a)eahq-exchange.ea.com; nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: Need routing engineer from Verio > > > > Hello, I need to contact someone from Verio that can help me sort out a > > routing issue between Verio and my company. > > posted two minutes after mail sent to peering(a)verio.net and no mail sent to > noc(a)verio.net. brilliant. > Ya blame him? With the response times and cluelessness factor I've run into with various Verio departments, I'm suprised he bothered at all. Tuc/TTSG

12 13

RE: [long] Re: DDoS: CAR vs TCP-Intercept vs NetFlow
by Paul Ferguson 29 Feb '00

29 Feb '00

At 10:45 PM 02/28/2000 -0500, Vijay Gill wrote: >Routers from Cisco and other vendors have the ability to detect the >signature patterns of a denial-of-service attack, and the routers can >filter out that traffic, Farnsworth said. An unfortunate misquote. Add another scar to my cisco skin... - paul

2 1

DDoS: CAR vs TCP-Intercept vs NetFlow
by Rubens Kuhl Jr. 29 Feb '00

29 Feb '00

Have anyone performed an evalution of rate-limiting SYN packets (CAR) versus using TCP-Intercept ? What responds better to a DDoS attack (assume SYN-flooding only) ? What uses more router resources ? For better performance of CAR or TCP-Intercept, NetFlow switching (ip route-cache flow) should also be used, besides CEF ? Rubens Kuhl Jr.

4 7

To AOL engineers (icq services)
by Dmitry Safronov 28 Feb '00

28 Feb '00

Hello , Maybe some people from AOL routing engineers are reading this list... The following question for them... From adresses 195.161.0.0/16 and 213.24.0.0/16 we cannot connect to http port on your web sites: www.icq.com www.icq.net www.mirabilis.com and ICQ servers. But from my client's addresses (other blocks) we can. It seems like AOL filtered out our address blocks with port 80. Could anyone from AOL engineers help to solve the situation? Best regards, _____________________________________________________________________ Dmitry Safronov Rostelecom/Internet Centre Tel: +007 (095) 334-9983 Fax: +007 (095) 339-2415

1 0

Need routing engineer from Verio
by Rizzo, Mark 27 Feb '00

27 Feb '00

Hello, I need to contact someone from Verio that can help me sort out a routing issue between Verio and my company. Thanks, Mark Rizzo EA.COM

3 2

Fwd: [cfgeeks] TOOLS FOR VANDALS
by Shawn McMahon 26 Feb '00

26 Feb '00

I told you guys, but only some of you listened. It is not only possible to launch an attack like this from home user's PCs, "rewted" by amateurs, but it looks like a part of this was indeed done that way. This mess is gonna suck to clean up. Thanks, Microsoft, for all your help. Too bad you were helping the wrong effing side... >From: "Kevin P. Inscoe" <kevin(a)inscoe.org> >Reply-To: cfgeeks(a)onelist.com >Subject: [cfgeeks] TOOLS FOR VANDALS > >From: "Kevin P. Inscoe" <kevin(a)inscoe.org> > >TOOLS FOR VANDALS >San Jose, California-based Finjan software says that new hacker software >called Trinoo "zombie" can be run from ordinary PCs running Microsoft >Windows and will not require high-end Unix workstations of the sort that >have been involved in previous vandal attacks made through the Internet >against corporate and government computers. Vandals would be able to >launch >distributed denial-of-service attacks much more easily, preventing >people >from visiting the targeted sites. (Bloomberg News/New York Times 25 Feb >2000) >http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/02/biztech/articles/25hack-pc.html > >~kevin >-- >Kevin P. Inscoe Unix System Engineer & Specialist >Deltona, FL Itinerary at http://www.inscoe.org/where >e-mail: kevin [at] inscoe [dot] org >http://www.inscoe.org 28.9492N 81.1955W >http://www.inscoe.org/comp http://www.inscoe.org/radio > >Where the Central Florida geeks hang out... >http://www.onelist.com/community/cfgeeks >Kevin Inscoe (kevin(a)inscoe.org) - Listmom

2 1