- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Director Database Marketing (Herndon VA US)
by William Allen Simpson 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

Actually, there is a nice US Supreme Court ruling that any documents under the _control_ of the agency _are_ subject to FOIA. The database that moved from SRI to NSI did so as part of a contract with NSF (and DARPA before them). Therefore, the control argument should hold. But you'd have to test it in court. WSimpson(a)UMich.edu Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32

2 1

TCG Chicago
by Bradley Reynolds 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

TCG is currently experiencing a major fibre cut in chicago. Their NCC could not give me a firm commit to the number of ds3s which have been affected, but estimates already range over 100. TCG was unable to provide an estimated time of completion on the emergency maintenance. BR

1 0

MAE-EAST / MAE-WEST Interfaces
by Jan Czmok 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

Hi! Does anybody know if the statement "mfs can offer atm ds3 connection to the mae-west and mae-east ehternet from colo space" issued by a german salesperson is true. According to the www.mfst.com webpage i only see possiblities for 10 Mbit Ethernet, HSSI or FDDI. Any help is appreciated! Jan -- Jan Czmok, IPF.NET Senior Network Engineer email: czmok(a)ipf.de, Phone +49 69 17084-52

6 6

Re: MAE-EAST / MAE-WEST Interfaces
by dlr＠bungi.com 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

[In the message entitled "Re: MAE-EAST / MAE-WEST Interfaces" on Sep 4, 1:11, "David Diaz/I.P.O.F.-Netrail, Inc." writes:] > Ive heard different stories. Of course UUNET. There was an anouncement > from Quest.net (not Quest) a small ISP in Ft Lauderdale that was connecting > to ATM MAE Dallas. ATM MAE-W is not up. MAE-E ATM is in test mode with a > handfull of people. Im still asking for exactly who is there. > > If anyone has see the MAE ATM doc they are charging for setup of PVC, $50 a > shot a side, and also any config changes they make. They dont understand > NAPs are not under Tarrif. Pacbell does not charge for these services. > However they are still in flux so we'll see what the final policies are. > > Has anyone had any feedback from their MFS/Worldcom reps? Has anyone > experienced any problems during the testing? Issues with the Stratacom? > Uhh - I think that the mae-w atm is up... MTU 4470 bytes, sub MTU 4470, BW 156250 Kbit, DLY 80 usec, rely 255/255, load 14/255 Encapsulation ATM, loopback not set, keepalive set (10 sec) Encapsulation(s): AAL5, PVC mode 256 TX buffers, 256 RX buffers, 2048 maximum active VCs, 1024 VCs per VP, 10 current VCCs VC idle disconnect time: 300 seconds Last input never, output 00:00:00, output hang never Last clearing of "show interface" counters 1d19h Queueing strategy: fifo Output queue 0/300, 0 drops; input queue 0/300, 0 drops 5 minute input rate 1083000 bits/sec, 1017 packets/sec 5 minute output rate 8819000 bits/sec, 1569 packets/sec 106741382 packets input, 2409410335 bytes, 0 no buffer Received 0 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants 0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored, 0 abort 217158168 packets output, 665172079 bytes, 0 underruns 0 output errors, 0 collisions, 0 interface resets 0 output buffers copied, 0 interrupts, 0 failures m -- Dave Rand dlr(a)bungi.com http://www.bungi.com

1 0

Re: Director Database Marketing (Herndon VA US)
by Jim Fleming 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

-----Original Message----- From: William Allen Simpson <wsimpson(a)greendragon.com> To: nanog(a)merit.edu <nanog(a)merit.edu> Date: Friday, September 04, 1998 12:50 AM Subject: Re: Director Database Marketing (Herndon VA US) >Actually, there is a nice US Supreme Court ruling that any documents >under the _control_ of the agency _are_ subject to FOIA. > >The database that moved from SRI to NSI did so as part of a contract >with NSF (and DARPA before them). Therefore, the control argument >should hold. But you'd have to test it in court. > Some folks are already there... http://name.space.xs2.net/law/answers/ Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.com

1 0

Re: NSI Bulletin 098-010 | Update on Whois
by Sean Donelan 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

>years. No matter what. October will be an >interesting month for people in operations. Every month is an interesting month in operations. I expect nothing less for October. On the other hand, I may not notice because I'll be pulling my hair out prepping for the the CCIE lab test that month. I assume Decemeber won't be much better when I take it a second time, blech. -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

1 0

RSCs Circa 10/1/1998
by Jim Fleming 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

-----Original Message----- From: Owen DeLong <owen(a)DeLong.SJ.CA.US> To: nanog(a)merit.edu <nanog(a)merit.edu>; salo(a)networkcs.com <salo(a)networkcs.com> Date: Thursday, September 03, 1998 11:43 AM Subject: Re: Director Database Marketing (Herndon VA US) (http://www.saic.com/career/jobs/c5 > >> >> And, what makes you think that NSI doesn't have intellectual property >> rights to the whois database. Again, please frame your answer in the >> context of the applicable Federal law and regulations, probably the >> FARs and the contract or cooperative agreement between NSI and the NSF. >> >Under both common law and various federal regulations, NSI has posession >of that data because of a federal contract supported and (previously) >paid for by taxpayers. Keep in mind that some of that data finds its way to the legacy Root Name Server Cluster (RSC) that doubles as the .COM TLD Name Server Cluster. At the end of this month, the U.S. Government will no longer have control of this RSC. NSI will have control by virtue of the fact that they control the server that the others pull BOTH the root zone from as well as the COM zone (plus a few others including IN-ADDR.ARPA). Hopefully, NSI will work with the other RSC owner/operators to coordinate not only the legacy RSC but also the other numerous RSCs in operation around the world. The TLDs that are already in 99% of the other RSCs can now be easily added to the legacy RSC next month. The diverse group of organizations shown below can vote on which TLDs to support and publish their list, just like other RSCs. In my opinion, I think that the IETF should encourage people to evolve that legacy RSC away from being an RSC. It can remain as the .COM TLD Cluster. There is one sticky point in that which is that some of the servers are U.S. Government property. It may not be prudent for NSI to be running relying on those servers to support their .COM enterprise. I think there are federal laws against using government computers for private business. 1. A - Network Solutions, Inc. (A) 2. B - University of Southern California (ISI2) 3. C - Performance Systems International Inc. (C-NYSER) 4. D - University of Maryland (UMD-TERP) 5. E - NASA Ames Research Center (NS-NASA) 6. F - Internet Software Consortium (ISC) 7. G - DOD Network Information Center (DIIS-NS) 8. H - Army Research Laboratory (B) 9. I - [No name] (NORDU) (Sweden) 10. J - Network Solutions, Inc. (J) 11. K - European Regional Internet Registry/RIPE NCC (K) 12. L - University of Southern California (L) 13. M - WIDE Project (M) (JAPAN) >Network Solutions, Inc. (A) > 505 Huntmar Park Drive > Herndon, VA 22070 > > Hostname: A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET > Address: 198.41.0.4 > System: SUN running SUNOS > > Host Administrator: > Kosters, Mark A. (MAK21) markk(a)NETSOL.COM > (703) 925-6874 (FAX) (703) 742-5427 > > Record last updated on 31-Aug-95. > Database last updated on 19-Aug-98 04:28:03 EDT. > >University of Southern California (ISI2) > Information Sciences Institute > 4676 Admiralty Way > Marina del Rey, CA 90292 > > Hostname: B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET > Address: 128.9.0.107 > System: ? running ? > > Host Administrator: > Koda, Jim (JK7) koda(a)ISI.EDU > 310) 822-1511 > > Record last updated on 12-Aug-95. > Database last updated on 19-Aug-98 04:28:03 EDT. > >Performance Systems International Inc. (C-NYSER) > > Hostname: C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET > Address: 192.33.4.12 > System: SUN running UNIX > > Coordinator: > Administration, PSINet Domain (PDA4) psinet-domain-admin(a)PSI.COM > (703) 904-4100 (FAX) 610-825-8616 > > domain server > > Record last updated on 17-Apr-96. > Database last updated on 19-Aug-98 04:28:03 EDT. > >University of Maryland (UMD-TERP) > Computer Science Center > College Park, MD 20742 > > Hostname: D.ROOT-SERVERS.NET > Address: 128.8.10.90 > System: MICROVAX-II running UNIX > > Coordinator: > Sneeringer, Gerry (GS307) sneeri(a)NI.UMD.EDU > (301) 405-2996 > > domain server > > Record last updated on 12-Aug-95. > Database last updated on 19-Aug-98 04:28:03 EDT. > > >NASA Ames Research Center (NS-NASA) > Mail Stop 233-8 > Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000 > USA > > Hostname: E.ROOT-SERVERS.NET > Address: 192.203.230.10 > System: SUN running SUNOS > > Coordinator: > Operations, Nsi Network (NNO2) noc(a)NSIPO.NASA.GOV > (800) 424-9920 (415) 604-0063 (FAX) (415) 604-0063 > > domain server > > Record last updated on 07-Nov-97. > Database last updated on 19-Aug-98 04:28:03 EDT. > >Internet Software Consortium (ISC) > > Hostname: F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET > Address: 192.5.5.241 > System: DEC ALPHA running BIND 4.9.5 > > Host Administrator: > Vixie, Paul (PV15) paul(a)VIX.COM > +1.650.779.7001 (FAX) +1.650.779.7055 > > Domain Server > > Record last updated on 09-Oct-96. > Database last updated on 19-Aug-98 04:28:03 EDT. > >DOD Network Information Center (DIIS-NS) > MS CV-50 > 7990 Boeing Court > Vienna, Va 22183-7000 > > Hostname: G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET > Address: 192.112.36.4 > System: SUN running UNIX > > Coordinator: > McCollum, Robert W (RM584) bobm(a)NIC.MIL > (703) 821-6214 (FAX) (703) 821-6161 > > Root Domain Server > > Record last updated on 21-Apr-97. > Database last updated on 19-Aug-98 04:28:03 EDT. > >Army Research Laboratory (B) > Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5066 > > Hostname: H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET > Address: 128.63.2.53 > System: SUN running UNIX > > Host Administrator: > Fielding, James L. (JLF) jamesf(a)ARL.MIL > (410)278-6829 (410)278-6642 (FAX) (410)278-5077 > > Record last updated on 17-Aug-95. > Database last updated on 19-Aug-98 04:28:03 EDT. > >[No name] (NORDU) > > Hostname: I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET > Address: 192.36.148.17 > System: SUN-4/60 running UNIX > > Coordinator: > Liman, Lars-Johan (LL846) LIMAN(a)SUNET.SE > +46 8 790 65 60 (FAX) +46 8 24 11 79 > > Record last updated on 09-Jan-97. > Database last updated on 19-Aug-98 04:28:03 EDT. > >Network Solutions, Inc. (J) > 505 Huntmar Park Drive > Herndon, VA 22070 > > Hostname: J.ROOT-SERVERS.NET > Address: 198.41.0.10 > System: ? running ? > > Host Administrator: > Kosters, Mark A. (MAK21) markk(a)NETSOL.COM > (703) 925-6874 (FAX) (703) 742-5427 > > Record last updated on 17-Jan-97. > Database last updated on 19-Aug-98 04:28:03 EDT. > >European Regional Internet Registry/RIPE NCC (K) > > Hostname: K.ROOT-SERVERS.NET > Address: 193.0.14.129 > System: ? running ? > > Host Administrator: > RIPE NCC (RIPE-NCC) ops(a)RIPE.NET > http://www.ripe.net >Fax- ïvxt > >University of Southern California (L) > Information Sciences Institute > 4676 Admiralty Way > Marina del Rey, CA 90292 > > Hostname: L.ROOT-SERVERS.NET > Address: 198.32.64.12 > System: ? running ? > > Host Administrator: > Manning, Bill (WM110) bmanning(a)ISI.EDU > 310-322-8102 > >WIDE Project (M) > 5322 Endo Fujisawa 252 > JAPAN > > Hostname: M.ROOT-SERVERS.NET > Address: 202.12.27.33 > System: ? running ? > > Host Administrator: > Kato, Akira (AK3) kato(a)WIDE.SFC.KEIO.AC.JP > 81 466 49 1100 > > @@@@@@@@@@@ Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.com

2 1

The .COM Servers
by Jim Fleming 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

It is somewhat of a coincidence that the .COM TLD Name Servers just happen to have the same owner/operators as the legacy Root Name Servers. In fact, even the same hardware is used. In this discussion one can set that minor detail aside and imagine that the following 13 servers support the .COM zone which has millions of entries. >1. A - Network Solutions, Inc. (A) >2. B - University of Southern California (ISI2) >3. C - Performance Systems International Inc. (C-NYSER) >4. D - University of Maryland (UMD-TERP) >5. E - NASA Ames Research Center (NS-NASA) >6. F - Internet Software Consortium (ISC) >7. G - DOD Network Information Center (DIIS-NS) >8. H - Army Research Laboratory (B) >9. I - [No name] (NORDU) (Sweden) >10. J - Network Solutions, Inc. (J) >11. K - European Regional Internet Registry/RIPE NCC (K) >12. L - University of Southern California (L) >13. M - WIDE Project (M) (JAPAN) With the end of the U.S. Government involvement with the InterNIC and the .COM zone, how do the above companies plan to transition to industry self-regulation ? What company will be handling the .COM registrations ? Has the IETF arranged for a transition ? With less than 30 days, has the IETF thought about this ? One last topic. Apparently NSI does not want the .COM zone contents to be freely transferred to other companies. The above organizations obviously have to have a copy to operate their servers to support NSI. In some cases above, people apparently can copy the .COM data base freely and in other cases they are blocked. Is there a common policy or RFC that directs the companies above to prevent the transfer of the .COM data base to other parties ? If the parties above allow people to freely copy the .COM data base to other parties, then are they not helping to encourage companies to develop mailing lists for SPAM ? Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.com

1 0

Re: NSI Bulletin 098-010 | Update on Whois
by Jim Fleming 03 Sep '98

03 Sep '98

-----Original Message----- From: Sean Donelan <SEAN(a)SDG.DRA.COM> <snip> > >Giving NSI the benefit of the doubt, I assume NSI will transfer the >database to whatever the successor organization (or organizations) >is, as NSI has previous done with the .GOV data, and NET-BLK data. > The NSF has announced that they do not intend to be involved any longer. There is no successor. NSI will have no choice but to take on the burden of the .COM domain and the millions of customers that have selected names there because the NSF blocked other companies from adding TLDs to the legacy Root Name Servers controlled by the U.S. Government. That control should end at the end of this month and NSI will be able to add new TLDs. The other RSCs should be able to help NSI determine which TLDs should be added. If NSI does not add new TLDs, then the letters C O and M might as well be combined with the period to form a root of the name space called COM. That could render the other TLDs moot if software developers start to drop the COM. and make the assumption that TLDs are really just the SLD names under .COM. That will effectively create a root with several million TLDs, which is more or less what is happening today because the .COM zone is still hosted on the legacy Root Name Servers. It is surprising that NSI has not moved the .COM zone by now. Because of the GRS people, it may now be impossible to move it. Instead, a new RSC may have to be constructed for ISPs to use with references to the .COM servers. Or, people can just switch to one of the many RSCs that have been working for years. No matter what. October will be an interesting month for people in operations. Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.com

1 0

Re: Crazy flying netbios packets
by Dean Anderson 03 Sep '98

03 Sep '98

Has anyone done an estimate on how much traffic is USEFUL? --Dean At 01:35 PM 9/3/98 +0000, Leigh Porter wrote: >Pete Ashdown wrote: > >> Has anyone done any estimates on how much net-wide traffic is useless >> netbios udp? Are there any suggestions for cutting large chunks of this >> out of my network without punishing SAMBA and other users who need it? > >Has anybody done an estimate on how much net-wide traffic is useless ;-) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Plain Aviation, Inc dean(a)av8.com LAN/WAN/UNIX/NT/TCPIP http://www.av8.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

2 1