- Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: Exodus / Clue problems
by John Fraizer 16 Nov '98

16 Nov '98

Why on earth would anyone let any of the following networks in to their network at the border? 10.0.0.0/8 172.16.0.0/12 192.168.0.0/16 Hell, for that matter, I block anything claiming to be from our networks as well. There's no way they'll be originating from the outside unless it's spoofed. Nothing and I mean NOTHING claiming to be from any of them at your border is valid. At 09:36 PM 11/15/98 -0500, Adam Rothschild wrote: >On Sun, 15 Nov 1998, Dave Van Allen wrote: > >> Same here, dozens of times in a few seconds just now, to all listed >> nameservers... I can't imagine what "process" could do this >> unintentionally. Exodus??? You home? > >Interesting you mention this. I've noticed the following on a FreeBSD >2.2.6 box, running BIND 8.1.2... > >server# netstat >Active Internet connections >Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address (state) >tcp 0 0 server.4375 172.16.1.1.1984 >SYN_SENT >tcp 0 0 server.ftp server.4374 >TIME_WAIT > >Internal addr space... port 1984.. cute. > > > ------- John Fraizer | __ _ The System Administrator | / / (_)__ __ ____ __ | The choice mailto:John.Fraizer@EnterZone.Net | / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / | of a GNU http://www.EnterZone.Net/ | /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ | Generation A 486 is a terrible thing to waste...

5 4

Re: Hold on to your news servers
by Scott Gifford 16 Nov '98

16 Nov '98

>> I think a lot of people hope you are reconsidering your plans to do this. >> It's a nice idea, and your motivation is good. It just won't work in >> practice. So, in my nicest and most appreciative tone, I would like to ask >> you on behalf of myself and many people who are also appreciative of your >> efforts and your motives to reconsider and abandon this plan. > >I'd be happy to abandon it if something that accomplishes the same job, or >substantially the same job, shows up before it goes online. Have you considered using NoCeM's to do this? This would be much more opt-in, as somebody would have to specifically configure NoCeM to accept your key. It is also much more efficient than cancels, at least propogation-wise. Just a thought from a news administrator who doesn't want to be processing 300,000+ cancels a day all of a sudden, -------Scott.

1 0

Exodus / Clue problems
by TTSG 16 Nov '98

16 Nov '98

Hi, Sorry to cross post, but is there anyone monitoring this list from Exodus with 1/2 a clue who might be able to help me? I called the NOC with an in-progress abuse and was told : 1) We don't know who owns that IP 2) We can't get into our own routers 3) We don't have a ticket system 4) The abuse people have a ticket system, but only if we can associate it to a customer (See #1) 5) We don't know how often the "abuse@" is checked 6) Email us the logs, and thanks for calling. AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tuc/TTSG

20 32

Re: Exodus / Clue problems
by John Fraizer 16 Nov '98

16 Nov '98

At 05:18 PM 11/16/98 -0500, Daniel Senie wrote: >Actually, the blocks are mine, not theirs. If you use a traceroute on a >system which uses ICMP ECHO packets to do the trace, instead of the >older Unix implementations which use random UDP ports, your traceroute >will get to my site without trouble. The traceroute I am running is current as it gets, for the unix world that is. I have found that most sites won't block UDP near as often as they block ICMP and this, I have much more success with this traceroute than say, the tracert program on winblows boxes. > >I hadn't thought about the PMTU failure this causes. Not nice at all. Most people don't think about it. It can cause you problems though. Especially when in most cases, when PMTU can't be determined, it is defaulted to 1500. >The problem with this is I can't do traceroutes out, then, because all >the responses from the 10.x.x.x/8 and 172.16.0.0/16 machines get caught >in the filters. Sure you can. Any decent NAT or MASQ system will take care of that for you. Case in point: root> ifconfig eth0 eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:A0:C9:06:7C:82 inet addr:192.168.101.250 Bcast:192.168.101.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:5427402 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 TX packets:4912650 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 Interrupt:9 Base address:0xff40 root> route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.101.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 62 eth0 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 19 lo 0.0.0.0 192.168.101.48 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 412 eth0 root> traceroute mae-east.psi.net traceroute to mae-east.psi.net (192.41.177.245), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 barrister (192.168.101.48) 0.467 ms 0.363 ms 0.346 ms 2 38.1.1.1 (38.1.1.1) 154.795 ms 139.175 ms 139.722 ms 3 38.17.10.1 (38.17.10.1) 139.654 ms 139.077 ms 139.712 ms 4 leaf2.nc.us.psi.net (38.1.46.2) 179.613 ms 179.044 ms 159.642 ms 5 rc1.nc.us.psi.net (38.1.26.1) 299.494 ms 188.930 ms 169.680 ms 6 core.net223.psi.net (38.1.2.6) 209.555 ms 178.857 ms * Note: I am quite amazed to only see ONE "*" in that trace considering the network that box is attached to. >> than your own. I Hope nothing happens that would require your PERSONAL >> attention while you're at some convention, on vacation, etc. > >Fortunately I have enough of an operation to have a direct dial-in to my >network so that I can get in even if the ISP link is down, but I agree >with your assessment. I think most of us can do that. The difference is that I use the dialin for security to get devices that I can NOT install SSH on. For everything else, it is a backup link. It would be quite costly for me to dial into the box from the Philippines while I'm over there, even if I could find a decent phone line to do so. The satellite link while slower than I would like, works quite well though. I suppose that you could also telnet/ssh to a "real" IP address behind your router and then telnet to the router though. >> ...and one last point... >> >> - Have someone loan them a clue about why they should NOT use RFC1918 space >> in the way your isp is doing so. > >Agree. Unfortunately, when selecting ISPs, this was not an aspect I >expected I'd have to worry about, and so I didn't ask. It certainly goes >on my list for the next negotiation, though. I never asked FNSI either. I guess that considering how many providers actually do this, I was lucky to find one that actually knows better. ------- John Fraizer | __ _ The System Administrator | / / (_)__ __ ____ __ | The choice mailto:John.Fraizer@EnterZone.Net | / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / | of a GNU http://www.EnterZone.Net/ | /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ | Generation A 486 is a terrible thing to waste...

1 0

RE: Exodus: this is bad
by Chris Mauritz 16 Nov '98

16 Nov '98

The jerkoff is trying from 207.104.58.91 too. I've just filtered it as well. Check out /var/log/secure on oven. C Chris Mauritz Director, Systems Administration Rare Medium, Inc. chrism(a)raremedium.com -----Original Message----- From: Adam Rothschild [mailto:asr@millburn.net] Sent: Monday, November 16, 1998 5:31 PM To: nanog(a)merit.edu; list(a)inet-access.net Subject: Exodus: this is bad Hrrrm, I'm seeing 38.29.63.195 trying to telnet to every IP addr in one of my Exodus /24's... (around 4.30p EST) Anyone notice any similar behaviour?

2 1

new version of caida tool for capacity planning/trend analysis
by k claffy 16 Nov '98

16 Nov '98

heads up to ISPs into operational measurement of workload characteristics cflowd 2.0 code is now available for use in analyzing export-flows from ciscos http://www.caida.org/Tools/Cflowd/ software collects output from cisco's netflow export then aggregates the data in ISP-engineering relevant ways as-to-as matrices ( --> peering engineering) net-to-net matrics ( --> peering/routing engineering ) port and protocol tables ( --> capacity engineering, what traffic is your infrastructure supporting, how is it changing, how much of it elastic/optimizable/ hyperzealous/cache-able/etc ) other stuff ( and continually adding features for members, plus src available for your own footloose entertainment ) cflowd 2.0 is a redesign of cflowd 1.3b2 and includes arts++ for storage as well as significant improvements in user interfaces and functionality. details on the code and mail lists are available at the website, or by contacting cflowd's developer, daniel mcRobb, at dwm(a)caida.org think you'll like always seeking your feedback/experience, k

1 0

Re: Hold on to your news servers
by John Fraizer 16 Nov '98

16 Nov '98

THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! At 03:07 PM 11/16/98 -0600, Karl Denninger wrote: >Given that a large number of people have threatened to commit felonious acts >(ping floods, etc) against these machines, I believe being "furtive" is >quite appropriate. THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! When and if they do ping -f karls.server.that.shouldnt.be.a.nanog.issue.com, THAT will be something to discuss on NANOG. Take the lame-%^*## news server griping, bickering, pissing and moaning to another list. Preferrably /dev/null. THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! Sheesh! Can't you people read? THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! THIS IS NOT A NANOG ISSUE! ------- John Fraizer | __ _ The System Administrator | / / (_)__ __ ____ __ | The choice mailto:John.Fraizer@EnterZone.Net | / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / | of a GNU http://www.EnterZone.Net/ | /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ | Generation A 486 is a terrible thing to waste...

1 0

Re: Exodus / Clue problems
by John Fraizer 16 Nov '98

16 Nov '98

>Define "network border." I used to block all traffic from or to RFC1918 [root@Overkill /]# traceroute mae-east.fnsi.net traceroute to mae-east.fnsi.net (192.41.177.11), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets -----> 1 border-core0-eth1.Columbus.EnterZone.Net (209.41.244.1) 0.538 ms 0.444 ms 0.411 ms | 2 core1-eth0-ENTERZONE.Columbus.fnsi.net (209.115.127.21) 0.916 ms 0.783 ms 0.774 ms | ---> 3 border1-atm6.Vienna.fnsi.net (206.183.239.90) 23.132 ms 23.797 ms 23.829 ms | | | |-- That is the network border of my provider at mae-east. | |---- That is the network border for MY network. The DEMARC where my network ends and my providers begins. I can't tell you precisely where yours is since @home has decided to block the traceroute. [root@Overkill /]# traceroute www.senie.com traceroute: Warning: Multiple interfaces found; using 209.41.244.2 @ eth0 traceroute to fennel.senie.com (204.69.207.2), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 border-core0-eth1.Columbus.EnterZone.Net (209.41.244.1) 0.542 ms 0.438 ms 0.411 ms 2 core1-eth0-ENTERZONE.Columbus.fnsi.net (209.115.127.21) 0.896 ms 0.768 ms 0.731 ms 3 core1-atm0.Cleveland.fnsi.net (209.115.127.102) 12.083 ms 9.756 ms 9.316 ms 4 border1-atm6.SanJose.fnsi.net (206.183.239.94) 66.729 ms 65.678 ms 63.696 ms 5 bb2.mae-w.home.net (198.32.136.70) 67.027 ms 65.376 ms 76.126 ms 6 172.16.2.250 (172.16.2.250) 90.842 ms 78.524 ms * 7 172.16.2.58 (172.16.2.58) 146.095 ms 130.080 ms * 8 10.0.248.34 (10.0.248.34) 118.753 ms 125.679 ms 128.392 ms 9 10.252.48.218 (10.252.48.218) 156.053 ms !X * * 10 10.252.48.218 (10.252.48.218) 129.488 ms !X * 146.837 ms !X Bad idea in my book. By the way, you might want to ask them about all of those *'s. Nasty, nasty, nasty. In addition, path MTU discovery won't work on your network because of the RFC1918 addresses. Don't get me wrong. I personally use RFC1918 addresses within my network. Those are NON-EXPOSED hosts however and there is no need for path discovery to take place. In your case, your provider wanted to save 4 IP addresses, a /30. >addresses, but my present upstream is using 10.0.0.0/8 and >172.16.0.0/16, at least, for their internal use. So, the IP address of >the WAN interface on my router connecting to them has a 10.0.0.0/8 >address. If I block incoming traffic to 10.0.0.0/8, they can't monitor >my net. Find out from them SPECIFICALLY which machine they want to monitor your router from and open your router up to that IP address individually. Block the rest of them. > >It appears this is becoming the preferred way for ISPs to limit their >use of address space for internal-only functions. While this makes sense The key phrase here is "internal-only." I would hardly consider your router or any router between yours and the rest of the world to be considered "internal-only." >at some levels, attached corporate networks may have already used those >addresses. The result is some level of confusion, though for the most >part it doesn't break too many things. Mostly, it's just annoying since >firewalls can't filter out stuff they'd otherwise limit. I can find no good reason for joe blow fortune 1000 company to use anything other than RFC1918 addresses on their INTERNAL network and run NAT or set up a proxy or something. I can also not find any good reason to use RFC1918 space between routers. It breaks too many things. I want to see you poll or for that matter, log into your router from any other network than your own. I Hope nothing happens that would require your PERSONAL attention while you're at some convention, on vacation, etc. > >In cases where ISPs use RFC1918 addresses within their networks, they >really should: > >- Tell their downstream customers WHICH of these blocks are in use. > >- Provide filters at peering points that ensure RFC1918 addresses from > outside the ISP's space do not come in from outside. > >- Provide Ingress filtering at all downstream customer ports to ensure > only valid source IP addresses come from their customers. > ...and one last point... - Have someone loan them a clue about why they should NOT use RFC1918 space in the way your isp is doing so. ------- John Fraizer | __ _ The System Administrator | / / (_)__ __ ____ __ | The choice mailto:John.Fraizer@EnterZone.Net | / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / | of a GNU http://www.EnterZone.Net/ | /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ | Generation A 486 is a terrible thing to waste...

2 1

Re: Hold on to your news servers
by Dean Anderson 16 Nov '98

16 Nov '98

At 01:59 PM 11/16/1998 -0600, Karl Denninger wrote: >Uh, excuse me, but I don't have any affiliation with MCS nor do they have >anything to do with this service. If you want to do nothing other than >piss them off or get thrown in their admin's "ignore this kook" list, go >ahead. Affiliation? You get service from them. That's enough if you are sourcing this through that link. If you don't use this link for your news feed, then complaints ought to be dismissed. Properly so. I've got no bones about a truely personal link. >Who I buy my *personal* service from is none of your business. Nor your >concern, since that *personal* service obviously can't be the source of >this. Ok, Fine. your MCS service is personal. We'll be able to find out who is providing your commercial service once you get going. >Besides, I've already told the world that I intend to colocate the servers >at various points around the country, and that I have offers from people >to do that - who are WELL AWARE of what I'm up to. "Well Aware" is not the same as "Good Judgement". I'm sure a lot of people will be complaining to them soon enough. Hopefully, they are reading this list or other lists, and are reconsidering their offers. I think a lot of people hope you are reconsidering your plans to do this. It's a nice idea, and your motivation is good. It just won't work in practice. So, in my nicest and most appreciative tone, I would like to ask you on behalf of myself and many people who are also appreciative of your efforts and your motives to reconsider and abandon this plan. --Dean ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

2 1

Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited
by John Fraizer 16 Nov '98

16 Nov '98

Hook em up Paul... If I need to receive mail from them, I'll temp-disable RBL on the box. As it stands, I received over 30 copies of that garbage from them. >> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 08:50:26 PST >> To: rbl(a)maps.vix.com >> Subject: Paul - value call on this >> >> Technically, this is an opt-out customer-relationship spam. >> >> I think it is a special case, because _there is no where else to go_. >> >> 208.226.58.70 should be RBL'ed, IMHO. Help me. >> >> > Return-Path: owner-admin1(a)LISTS.NETSOL.COM >> > Received: from pasteur.netsol.com ([208.226.58.70]) by ns2.galaxy-net.net >> > (8.8.7/8.6.9) with ESMTP id QAA00585; Tue, 10 Nov 1998 16:50:06 -0800 (PST) >> > Received: from pasteur (pasteur [208.226.58.70]) >> > by pasteur.netsol.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA23788; >> > Tue, 10 Nov 1998 19:40:31 -0500 (EST) >> > Received: from LISTS.NETSOL.COM by LISTS.NETSOL.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release >> > 1.8c) with spool id 0342 for ADMIN1(a)LISTS.NETSOL.COM; Tue, 10 Nov >> > 1998 15:01:15 -0500 >> > Received: (from listmngr@localhost) by pasteur.netsol.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id >> > PAA18548 for admin1(a)lists.netsol.com; Tue, 10 Nov 1998 15:01:14 >> > -0500 >> > (EST) >> > X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] >> > MIME-Version: 1.0 >> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> > Message-ID: <199811102001.PAA18548(a)pasteur.netsol.com> >> > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 15:01:14 -0500 >> > Reply-To: admin-remove(a)LISTS.NETSOL.COM >> > Sender: Owner-Admin <owner-admin(a)LISTS.NETSOL.COM> >> > From: List Manager Account <listmngr(a)LISTS.NETSOL.COM> >> > Subject: Network Solutions' E-Commerce Update >> > To: ADMIN1(a)LISTS.NETSOL.COM >> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >> > >> > ########################### >> > >> > Dear Customer, >> > >> > You are a valued customer and we want to help increase and >> > protect the value of your domain name. As a free added benefit of >> > your domain name registration, we would like to send you our >> > "E-Commerce Update" from time to time. In these updates, we will >> > try to identify helpful information and news that you can use to >> > enhance the value of your Web address. If you do not wish to >> > receive this newsletter in the future, simply respond to this >> > e-mail with the word "remove" in the first line of the message. >> > If you have any questions or comments, please send them to >> > hostmaster(a)internic.net. >> > >> > Network Solutions - the world's leading provider of domain name >> > services -- together with VeriSign -- the world's leading Web >> > security provider -- has published a new informative guide to >> > on-line security, "Securing Your Web Site for Business." >> > >> > "Securing Your Web Site for Business" outlines the options you >> > have to secure and protect your Web site. By downloading your >> > free copy (http://www.verisign.com/nsi/whitepaper) you will be >> > able to learn how easy it is to secure your site in order to >> > protect yourself and your customers. >> > >> > Issues covered in "Securing Your Web Site for Business" include: >> > >> > * Why on-line security problems could slow the growth of your >> > business >> > * How to maximize your on-line security at a low cost >> > * How to accept credit cards and sell products on-line---securely >> > * What a Digital ID is >> > * Why you need a Digital ID >> > * How to obtain a Digital ID for your Web site >> > >> > As an additional service to our customers, Network Solutions and >> > VeriSign bring you a special free trial version Secure Server ID. >> > VeriSign Secure Server IDs are the security solution currently >> > used by over 90 percent of Web sites conducting secure online >> > commerce and this free trial will allow you to experience how >> > easy Web site security can be. Please visit us at >> > http://www.verisign.com/nsi/trial to start experiencing the >> > benefits of on-line security today. >> > >> > We would also like to take this opportunity to remind you of the >> > importance of keeping your Network Solutions domain name records >> > up to date. Incorrect data can result in your next invoice being >> > delivered to the wrong location, and may cause delays when you >> > request other services such as a Secure Server Digital ID. To >> > review your domain name records and the associated information go >> > to http://www.internic.net/verisign/update.html. >> > >> > Thank you for being a Network Solutions customer. We look forward >> > to serving your future domain name needs. >> > >> > Sincerely, >> > >> > Doug Wolford >> > Senior Vice President >> >> ------- End of Forwarded Message >> > > ------- John Fraizer | __ _ The System Administrator | / / (_)__ __ ____ __ | The choice mailto:John.Fraizer@EnterZone.Net | / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / | of a GNU http://www.EnterZone.Net/ | /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ | Generation A 486 is a terrible thing to waste...

1 0