- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: ARIN whois
by Jesse Schachter 24 Nov '99

24 Nov '99

On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Dean Anderson wrote: > > This has already been discussed with the FBI, and with attorneys. We > are right hands down. The difficulty is doing the collections > (actually, finding assets that can be seized) from people who don't want > to pay. But I have insurance industry contacts (the insurance industry > really knows how to find peoples assets) and some collection agencies > willing to take the task. You can be right all you want. But how much money are you going to get out of these people? Forget about the fact that you have no legal contract with them, direct or implied. You're trying to get money out of people who can't even afford to pay for legitimate advertising, and have to resort to illegal free advertising. You're going to collect, at most, a broken down trailer home. Last time I checked, there is a minimum of 2-3 years worth of waiting involved in getting an FBI investigation into bullshit computer crimes like this. You could stop the problem in a lot less than 2-3 years if you had any kind of clue as to what you're doing. Why don't you stop helping the spammers to ruin the Internet by being an open relay... Read "System Administration for Dummies", and learn how to run a mail server? The bottom line is, you're ignorance is causing the problem, not the spammers. _.,+=~`^"-.,_.,+=~`^"-*.,_.,+=~'`^"-.,_.,+=~`^"-.,_.,+=~`^"-.,_.,+=~`^"-., Jesse Schachter .,. Systems Administrator The Protosource Network .,. Main Number: (888) 643-8558 <JSchachter(a)PSNW.COM> .,. Fax: (559) 490-8630 _.,+=~`^"-.,_.,+=~`^"-.,_.,+=~`^"-.,_.,+*=~`^"-.,_.,+=%~`^"-.,_.,+=~`^"-.,

1 0

DACS failures and manual reprogramming
by Sean Donelan 23 Nov '99

23 Nov '99

I've asked this before, but have never heard a convincing answer. The story is Bell Atlantic has several Alcatel technicians going around and reprogramming the DACS in Northern New Jersey. Why when DACS fails do most telephone companies have to reprogram them manually? Don't they have a download and upload configuration telco's could save somewhere else, and just upload the config when restoring service. It isn't unique to BellAtl, I've experienced the same thing with MCI, Southerwestern Bell, PacBell, and other phone companies. The manual reprogramming seems to drag restoration times out to 18-24 hours. Yeah, I know, I'm the one to talk about backups. I can't even keep my e-mail.

1 0

More mail trouble, save me from MIS departments everywhere
by Sean Donelan 23 Nov '99

23 Nov '99

I know, be careful what you ask for, you might get it. I asked for my mailbox to be restored, which the MIS folks did. Unfortunately they wiped out the current mailbox while restoring the old mailbox. So now I have my old messages back, but lost all the new mail. For those that asked, this mailbox does not involve my current employer, it is my personal mailbox hosted by another provider. Sorry to keep doing this. I'm going to start printing my e-mail on paper, then I only need to worry about the F451 problem. If you sent me mail about the Y2K mailing list between 6am CST Monday Nov 22 and 6am CST Tuesday Nov 23, would you please send me another note. You don't need to send me anything if sent me something outside of that 24 hour period. During that 24 hour period I received about 60 messages, including several from international ISPs. I didn't want someone to think I was ignoring them. In particular, there were two people who offered to let me uses their facilities for hosting the mailing list.

1 0

Re: Outage scale
by Sean Donelan 23 Nov '99

23 Nov '99

> Reacting to "2000 ds3s" as a large number. > We are approaching the day when we will see a million ds3 backhoe cut. At 45 > terabits, this is within the range of lab WDM systems (>1Tb per strand.) We > are still years away from seeing these widely deployed in the ground, but the > scale of outages is going to go way up. > Oddly, it is also possible that the impact of such an outage may go down. If > the bandwidth prices get cheaper, then it becomes more reasonable to have high > levels of diversity. We all understand the difficulties in keeping that > diversity real in the current world. Doubtful. Diversity requires the one thing which they aren't making more, land. The general pattern has been to put more bandwidth into fewer paths, roll everything onto the new technology, remove the old "obsolete" path from service and use it for something completely different. Putting in a single OC-192 doesn't cost much more than putting in a OC-3 fiber. But if you are only using 14% of your OC-192 path, why would any bean counter let you put in a second OC-192? Just put your protect circuit in the unused part of your existing OC-192 path (duh!) Bell Atlantic has a great FCC outage report where they say there are no recommendations for SONET diversity. Hanging both halves of the ring from the same pole doesn't violate any SONET constraints. Southwestern Bell has almost a half dozen different outages this year isolating dozens of towns in most cases due to single transmission facility failures in their new fiber optic lines. Heck, the last New Jersey outage even took out some of the state's NAWAS (Nuclear Attack Warning) circuits in northern New Jersey. Fortunately the Russians are our friends now. I think diversity will go down as one of those great unsolved problems, along with the Halting Problem.

1 0

RE: ARIN whois
by Jeff Harper 23 Nov '99

23 Nov '99

A humble suggestion at this point would be to take the argument between you two into private e-mails. Thanks, Jeff Harper -----Original Message----- From: Dean Anderson [mailto:dean@av8.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 10:57 AM To: Daniel Golding Cc: Kai Schlichting; nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: ARIN whois No. I don't think it is ethically questionable. Each relay has started with NOQUEUE log entries. The relayer is telneting to port 25, and getting the following message: telnet odie 25 Trying 198.3.136.141... Connected to odie.av8.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220-odie.av8.com ESMTP Sendmail; Tue, 23 Nov 1999 11:53:11 -0500 (EST) 220-Authorized Users Only 220-Notice: Unauthorized use billed at $1 per message, $10 per bounce, 220-$90/hr for cleanup. 220 Unauthorized use over $5000 defined as criminal by 18 USC 1030(6). Around 11:38 PM 11/22/1999 -0500, rumor has it that Daniel Golding said: > >Dean, > >Have you considered that, while your stand may be legally correct, it is >ethically questionable? By leaving your relays open, you invite abuse and >facilitate the theft of other networks' resources. I can not imagine what >legitimate purpose you might have for such a practice. Perhaps the most >disturbing aspect of this is your steady beat on the drum of law and >order, combined with your strange zeal to block out IP addresses from a >large block of law abiding folks. > >I can only wish you luck in your endevour to have Federal law enforcement >officials deliver warrant on international spammers. Clearly, those folks >don't have enough to do, and need the extra work. > >- Daniel Golding > >On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Dean Anderson wrote: > >> >> These are coming from Mass, Cleveland, Ohio, and Virginia. >> >> We use our relays for legitimate business purposes. They are not "accidentally left open". We are not going to close them. We are going to pursue abusers civilly and criminally. The FBI assures me that it does not matter criminally that access comes from international sources. >> >> Much of the activity appears to be comming from alleged ANTI-SPAMMERs such as Chris Neill, and Alan Brown and Ron Guillemette who have been inciting attacks against us, posting to alt.2600 and advertising our service. Inciting criminal acts is a criminal act too, I'm pretty sure. We make sure to mention them prominently. >> >> --Dean >> >> Around 11:18 PM 11/21/1999 -0500, rumor has it that Kai Schlichting said: >> > >> >At 09:16 PM 11/21/99 -0500, Dean Anderson wrote: >> > >> >>Can someone send me a list of *all* AOL netblocks? ARIN's whois only gives back a handful. >> >> >> >>I want to block _all_ AOL netblocks, but its tough to find out what they are. >> >> >> >>Thanks to a few malicious, radical antispammers (Chris Neill, Alan Brown, etc) we are getting hit with a large number of criminal mail relays. Mostly coming from AOL addresses. We have about a half dozen individual criminal complaints underway. >> > >> >Don't kid us, Dan. Close your fucking relays (not that any of them talk to >> >my hosts anyhow). If this has to be drummed into your bonehead again: THEY >> >WILL FIND YOUR RELAYS ON THEIR OWN, AND THEY WILL ABUSE THEM, NO MATTER >> >HOW LOUD YOU SCREAM. THEY SIT IN CHINA, PAKISTAN AND KOREA, AND THERE IS >> >NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT THEM SHORT OF CALLING THE WHITEHOUSE AND GETTING >> >THESE PLACES INVADED. Alternatively, you could come to your senses and >> >shut the literal front door of your house now that you've finally noticed >> >the first unsavory characters passing by. A couple years after the rest >> >of us, no doubt. >> > >> >And they won't need ORBS or any other service to locate you, either. >> >Stop complaining. No more secrets (now that's from Scott Yelich's tagline). >> > >> >bye,Kai >> > >> >-- >> >kai(a)conti.nu "Just say No" to Spam Kai Schlichting >> >Palo Alto, New York, You name it Sophisticated Technical Peon >> >Kai's SpamShield <tm> is FREE! http://SpamShield.Conti.nu >> >| | >> >LeasedLines-FrameRelay-IPLs-ISDN-PPP-Cisco-Consulting-VoiceFax-Data-Muxes >> >WorldWideWebAnything-Intranets-NetAdmin-UnixAdmin-Security-ReallyHardMath >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com >> LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 0

Re: ARIN whois
by Dean Anderson 23 Nov '99

23 Nov '99

Its not there to scare them. It just notifies them what the fees and facts are. They can't argue they didn't know what the costs were. Nor can they argue the service was offered for free. Nor can they claim the fees are punitive or otherwise specific to their particular use. Anyone, regardless of race, creed, or commercial orientation who uses our services without authorization agrees to these fees. $90/hr is our regular rate for sysadmin work. We bill quite a bit each year at this rate. The $1 and $10 fees are quite reasonable in comparision to prices of making a stock trade off the street without signing up for some deep discount service. Making a stock trade and processing messages and bounces I think are very similar in computer resources. UCC2 makes agreements between electronic agents binding. And when the unauthorized relayers are tried criminally, they can't claim they didn't intend to commit a crime. Intent, I'm told, makes a big difference in how things get treated. Well, they can try to claim it was free, and they didn't know what cost was, or that more than a certain amount was a crime, but their arguments are made weaker. I didn't get the reference to guns. I must be tired... Do you mean that telling people the consequences of gun crimes is pointless? Whether it actually prevents the crime or not, at least in some cases intentionally disregarding the law is supposed to be punished more severely than merely breaking the law. So you should try to make sure if they do the crime, they get the most severe punishment. If they think twice, and don't do the crime, you won't ever know, will you? --Dean Around 03:18 PM 11/23/1999 -0500, rumor has it that Daniel Golding said: >Dean, > >My apologies. Your scary message will surely stop spammers dead in their >tracks. Please let me know if you intend to every own a gun store. I will >have to make plans to leave the country... > >- Dan Golding > >-------------------------------------------------------------- > >On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Dean Anderson wrote: > >> No. I don't think it is ethically questionable. Each relay has started with NOQUEUE log entries. The relayer is telneting to port 25, and getting the following message: >> >> telnet odie 25 >> Trying 198.3.136.141... >> Connected to odie.av8.com. >> Escape character is '^]'. >> 220-odie.av8.com ESMTP Sendmail; Tue, 23 Nov 1999 11:53:11 -0500 (EST) >> 220-Authorized Users Only >> 220-Notice: Unauthorized use billed at $1 per message, $10 per bounce, >> 220-$90/hr for cleanup. >> 220 Unauthorized use over $5000 defined as criminal by 18 USC 1030(6). >> >> Around 11:38 PM 11/22/1999 -0500, rumor has it that Daniel Golding said: >> > >> >Dean, >> > >> >Have you considered that, while your stand may be legally correct, it is >> >ethically questionable? By leaving your relays open, you invite abuse and >> >facilitate the theft of other networks' resources. I can not imagine what >> >legitimate purpose you might have for such a practice. Perhaps the most >> >disturbing aspect of this is your steady beat on the drum of law and >> >order, combined with your strange zeal to block out IP addresses from a >> >large block of law abiding folks. >> > >> >I can only wish you luck in your endevour to have Federal law enforcement >> >officials deliver warrant on international spammers. Clearly, those folks >> >don't have enough to do, and need the extra work. >> > >> >- Daniel Golding >> > >> >On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Dean Anderson wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> These are coming from Mass, Cleveland, Ohio, and Virginia. >> >> >> >> We use our relays for legitimate business purposes. They are not "accidentally left open". We are not going to close them. We are going to pursue abusers civilly and criminally. The FBI assures me that it does not matter criminally that access comes from international sources. >> >> >> >> Much of the activity appears to be comming from alleged ANTI-SPAMMERs such as Chris Neill, and Alan Brown and Ron Guillemette who have been inciting attacks against us, posting to alt.2600 and advertising our service. Inciting criminal acts is a criminal act too, I'm pretty sure. We make sure to mention them prominently. >> >> >> >> --Dean >> >> >> >> Around 11:18 PM 11/21/1999 -0500, rumor has it that Kai Schlichting said: >> >> > >> >> >At 09:16 PM 11/21/99 -0500, Dean Anderson wrote: >> >> > >> >> >>Can someone send me a list of *all* AOL netblocks? ARIN's whois only gives back a handful. >> >> >> >> >> >>I want to block _all_ AOL netblocks, but its tough to find out what they are. >> >> >> >> >> >>Thanks to a few malicious, radical antispammers (Chris Neill, Alan Brown, etc) we are getting hit with a large number of criminal mail relays. Mostly coming from AOL addresses. We have about a half dozen individual criminal complaints underway. >> >> > >> >> >Don't kid us, Dan. Close your fucking relays (not that any of them talk to >> >> >my hosts anyhow). If this has to be drummed into your bonehead again: THEY >> >> >WILL FIND YOUR RELAYS ON THEIR OWN, AND THEY WILL ABUSE THEM, NO MATTER >> >> >HOW LOUD YOU SCREAM. THEY SIT IN CHINA, PAKISTAN AND KOREA, AND THERE IS >> >> >NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT THEM SHORT OF CALLING THE WHITEHOUSE AND GETTING >> >> >THESE PLACES INVADED. Alternatively, you could come to your senses and >> >> >shut the literal front door of your house now that you've finally noticed >> >> >the first unsavory characters passing by. A couple years after the rest >> >> >of us, no doubt. >> >> > >> >> >And they won't need ORBS or any other service to locate you, either. >> >> >Stop complaining. No more secrets (now that's from Scott Yelich's tagline). >> >> > >> >> >bye,Kai >> >> > >> >> >-- >> >> >kai(a)conti.nu "Just say No" to Spam Kai Schlichting >> >> >Palo Alto, New York, You name it Sophisticated Technical Peon >> >> >Kai's SpamShield <tm> is FREE! http://SpamShield.Conti.nu >> >> >| | >> >> >LeasedLines-FrameRelay-IPLs-ISDN-PPP-Cisco-Consulting-VoiceFax-Data-Muxes >> >> >WorldWideWebAnything-Intranets-NetAdmin-UnixAdmin-Security-ReallyHardMath >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com >> >> LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com >> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com >> LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 0

Re: How does Murphy know, need mail access east and west coast
by Dean Anderson 23 Nov '99

23 Nov '99

I am willing to setup on East Coast with someone on West Coast. I can do everything but standby generator. Have 2 APC Matrix 5000 with XR battery packs and a tonload of 1KVA UPS's tho. Could purchase more battery packs to extend uptime on 5KVa which run routers. Have local modems on site, and 20 state dialin (outsourced). And Internet access to POP & IMAP. --Dean Around 08:31 PM 11/22/1999 -0800, rumor has it that Sean Donelan said: > >How does Murphy know when to strike. > >Argh, I went almost 15 years without losing a single mail message. Less than >two months of using a "modern" mailer and they're all gone. I want my VAX/VMS >back. > >Everyone who sent me mail about needing a reporting channel for the Y2K >rollover on New Year's, could you please send me another message. I had >not copied the names down before my mailbox disappeared. > >Thanks. > >Yes, I was thinking about a backup. I sent this message early this morning, >before I lost all my mail. > >Sean Donelan [05:19 AM 11/22/99 -0800] wrote: >>Perhaps a strange request but I'm looking for two mail accounts I can >>access via a dialup (Shell or PPP) and Internet (POP3 or IMAP). >> >>Here are the requirements: >> >>One server on the Eastern US power grid >>One server on the Western US power grid >>Each served via a minimum of two backbone providers (I prefer >> the east and west server be on seperate backbones) >>Each acting as a secondary MX and DNS server for the other >>Mail server will accept mail addressed with a designated domain name >>Mail will be sent using a designated domain name >>Dialup access will be via a dial access server using at most >> a LAN connection to the mail server (no WAN links) >>The facility housing the mail server will have a UPS and >> standby generator >>Inbound mail: a minumum of 50mb mail storage >>Outbound mail: 1,000 5kb messages every four hours (LISTSERV and LSMTP >>or similar) >> >>I estimate I need the mailboxes from approximately December 1 through >>January 15. > > > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 0

Re: ARIN whois
by Dean Anderson 23 Nov '99

23 Nov '99

No. I don't think it is ethically questionable. Each relay has started with NOQUEUE log entries. The relayer is telneting to port 25, and getting the following message: telnet odie 25 Trying 198.3.136.141... Connected to odie.av8.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220-odie.av8.com ESMTP Sendmail; Tue, 23 Nov 1999 11:53:11 -0500 (EST) 220-Authorized Users Only 220-Notice: Unauthorized use billed at $1 per message, $10 per bounce, 220-$90/hr for cleanup. 220 Unauthorized use over $5000 defined as criminal by 18 USC 1030(6). Around 11:38 PM 11/22/1999 -0500, rumor has it that Daniel Golding said: > >Dean, > >Have you considered that, while your stand may be legally correct, it is >ethically questionable? By leaving your relays open, you invite abuse and >facilitate the theft of other networks' resources. I can not imagine what >legitimate purpose you might have for such a practice. Perhaps the most >disturbing aspect of this is your steady beat on the drum of law and >order, combined with your strange zeal to block out IP addresses from a >large block of law abiding folks. > >I can only wish you luck in your endevour to have Federal law enforcement >officials deliver warrant on international spammers. Clearly, those folks >don't have enough to do, and need the extra work. > >- Daniel Golding > >On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Dean Anderson wrote: > >> >> These are coming from Mass, Cleveland, Ohio, and Virginia. >> >> We use our relays for legitimate business purposes. They are not "accidentally left open". We are not going to close them. We are going to pursue abusers civilly and criminally. The FBI assures me that it does not matter criminally that access comes from international sources. >> >> Much of the activity appears to be comming from alleged ANTI-SPAMMERs such as Chris Neill, and Alan Brown and Ron Guillemette who have been inciting attacks against us, posting to alt.2600 and advertising our service. Inciting criminal acts is a criminal act too, I'm pretty sure. We make sure to mention them prominently. >> >> --Dean >> >> Around 11:18 PM 11/21/1999 -0500, rumor has it that Kai Schlichting said: >> > >> >At 09:16 PM 11/21/99 -0500, Dean Anderson wrote: >> > >> >>Can someone send me a list of *all* AOL netblocks? ARIN's whois only gives back a handful. >> >> >> >>I want to block _all_ AOL netblocks, but its tough to find out what they are. >> >> >> >>Thanks to a few malicious, radical antispammers (Chris Neill, Alan Brown, etc) we are getting hit with a large number of criminal mail relays. Mostly coming from AOL addresses. We have about a half dozen individual criminal complaints underway. >> > >> >Don't kid us, Dan. Close your fucking relays (not that any of them talk to >> >my hosts anyhow). If this has to be drummed into your bonehead again: THEY >> >WILL FIND YOUR RELAYS ON THEIR OWN, AND THEY WILL ABUSE THEM, NO MATTER >> >HOW LOUD YOU SCREAM. THEY SIT IN CHINA, PAKISTAN AND KOREA, AND THERE IS >> >NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT THEM SHORT OF CALLING THE WHITEHOUSE AND GETTING >> >THESE PLACES INVADED. Alternatively, you could come to your senses and >> >shut the literal front door of your house now that you've finally noticed >> >the first unsavory characters passing by. A couple years after the rest >> >of us, no doubt. >> > >> >And they won't need ORBS or any other service to locate you, either. >> >Stop complaining. No more secrets (now that's from Scott Yelich's tagline). >> > >> >bye,Kai >> > >> >-- >> >kai(a)conti.nu "Just say No" to Spam Kai Schlichting >> >Palo Alto, New York, You name it Sophisticated Technical Peon >> >Kai's SpamShield <tm> is FREE! http://SpamShield.Conti.nu >> >| | >> >LeasedLines-FrameRelay-IPLs-ISDN-PPP-Cisco-Consulting-VoiceFax-Data-Muxes >> >WorldWideWebAnything-Intranets-NetAdmin-UnixAdmin-Security-ReallyHardMath >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com >> LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

3 2

RE: ARIN whois
by Derek J. Balling 23 Nov '99

23 Nov '99

At 08:38 PM 11/23/99 +0300, Alex P. Rudnev wrote: >If you protect yourself from open relays too hard, you really protect yourself >from the usefull mail. It's reality. Useful mail doesn't come from open relays. At least not in the manner in which I (and others) define useful. >The best way to stop the SPAM is to turn your computer off. There is many >reasons why someone hold open relay; while this relay don't send you spam, >it's >not your business... many providers simpli filter open relay detectors out >(such >as ODBS), moreover, an attempt to use this _crazy_ (active) lists results >in the >loss e-mail and can't be used by the serious companies. You think too far into the box. The best way to stop spam is to turn off the spammers' computers. D

2 1

outage scales
by Jerry Scharf 23 Nov '99

23 Nov '99

Reacting to "2000 ds3s" as a large number. We are approaching the day when we will see a million ds3 backhoe cut. At 45 terabits, this is within the range of lab WDM systems (>1Tb per strand.) We are still years away from seeing these widely deployed in the ground, but the scale of outages is going to go way up. Oddly, it is also possible that the impact of such an outage may go down. If the bandwidth prices get cheaper, then it becomes more reasonable to have high levels of diversity. We all understand the difficulties in keeping that diversity real in the current world. jerry

1 0