- Test - lists.nanog.org

NANOG MEETING OCTOBER 27 & 28
by Pam Ciesla 04 Sep '97

04 Sep '97

Be sure to checkout the airfare discounts that are being offer for this meeting. Info can be found on the the NANOG Webpage http://www.nanog.org. Any questions please contact me. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Pam Ciesla 313-936-0172 - phone Merit Network, Inc. 313-647-3185 - fax University of Michigan 4251 Plymouth Road Bldg. I, Suite C Ann Arbor, MI 48105-2785 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

1 0

Re: FBI calls for mandatory key escrow
by Mark_Kaepplein＠BayNetworks.COM 04 Sep '97

04 Sep '97

Politicians themselves proved there is no need for backdoors. Cryptography information is published in cleartext, yet is still not understood by them. They have the legal language, and to keep outsiders at bay, require a license to use it! Encrypt pornography? Its too slow already to un-uuencode and un-jpeg the stuff! Wider spread use of encryption would be good for Intel. The 85% of PC users needing faster and faster computers just so games run better can better justify the expense with needing fast decryption. The FBI doesn't want porn files, they want the customer lists of those doing business: pornographers, bookies, drug dealers, pimps. I wish customer lists of the real scumbags, like Cyberpromo were available!

1 0

RE: FBI calls for mandatory key escrow; Denning on export ctrls
by Jordan Mendelson 04 Sep '97

04 Sep '97

On Wednesday, September 03, 1997 7:34 PM, Charles Sprickman [SMTP:spork@inch.com] wrote: > > > MR. FREEH: > > We work, as you know, particularly in the > > pedophile cases, with on-line services who give us, > > For God's sake, what is the obsession with pedophiles?? How many > pedophiles pgp encode their porn?? Seriously, they try to grasp at the smallest things. If I lock my porn in a 40 ft thick steel safe, does that mean I have to give uncle sam a key if they ask? US Government restrictions (and a few other anal countries out there), are getting silly. When the law is being made by people who don't understand the problem, people who don't understand the benefits, and people who have no clue what they are making the laws for, then we have a serious issue on our hands and it's time we start thinking about getting some knowledgable people into office. Makes you just want to move to Mars and start all over doesn't it? Jordan -- Jordan Mendelson : www.wserv.com/~jordy/ Web Services, Inc. : www.wserv.com

3 2

! Hello, Internic ?
by Alex Rubenstein 04 Sep '97

04 Sep '97

So I go to check on a domain. [root@tempest not-done]# whois evolving.org [rs.internic.net] fwhois: connect: No route to host HuH! I try it again, to make sure I am not nutz. [root@tempest not-done]# whois evolving.org [rs.internic.net] fwhois: connect: No route to host Hrmph. traceroute to rs.internic.net (198.41.0.12), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 nac-den1-e1-10Mb (207.99.2.251) 3.055 ms 2.994 ms 8.383 ms 2 nac-nyc3-s1-107-768k (207.99.8.121) 21.83 ms 19.578 ms 7.899 ms 3 nac-nyc1-fa0-100Mb (207.99.0.201) 37.015 ms 29.305 ms 23.439 ms 4 nac-nyc1-fa0-100Mb (207.99.0.201) 21.792 ms !H What?! So I nyc1>sho ip bgp 198.41.0.12 BGP routing table entry for 198.41.0.0/22, version 1646816 Paths: (1 available, no best path, advertised over IBGP, EBGP) 3847 701 6245, (aggregated by 6245 207.152.190.10) (history entry) 207.240.48.49 from 207.240.48.49 (207.240.48.1) Origin IGP, external, atomic-aggregate Dampinfo: penalty 1306, flapped 3 times in 00:11:18 Maybe my connection is hosed? Lets look at digex: BGP routing table entry for 198.41.0.0/22, version 3052988 Paths: (3 available, no best path, advertised over IBGP) 3561 6245, (aggregated by 6245 207.152.190.10) (history entry) 192.41.177.181 from 192.41.177.181 (204.70.7.53) Origin IGP, metric 11, localpref 100, external, atomic-aggregate Community: 2548:668 Dampinfo: penalty 561, flapped 1 times in 00:12:29 701 6245, (aggregated by 6245 207.152.190.10) (history entry) 192.41.177.248 from 192.41.177.248 (137.39.3.57) Origin IGP, metric 1, localpref 100, external, atomic-aggregate Community: 2548:668 Dampinfo: penalty 965, flapped 2 times in 00:10:01 1 6245, (aggregated by 6245 198.41.0.1) (history entry) 198.32.186.2 from 198.32.186.2 (4.0.0.10) Origin IGP, metric 180, localpref 100, external, atomic-aggregate Community: 2548:668 Dampinfo: penalty 835, flapped 2 times in 00:12:46 Sheesh.

1 0

Re: FBI calls for mandatory key escrow; Denning on export ctrls
by irwin＠niwot.scd.ucar.EDU 04 Sep '97

04 Sep '97

Just remember: "When encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption."

6 5

Outage of the year
by Bill McCauley 03 Sep '97

03 Sep '97

Hi, The following post has more actual operational content than some recent posts, but mostly this is for general amusement. We had a T1 tail circuit to a customer fail on Tuesday afternoon. The circuit seemed OK, and we were unable to reach the customer by phone. After a 45 minute outage or so, the circuit came back up. Today, the customer called us to explain what had happened. Seems that a homeless person set fire to themselves under overhead wiring. The flames shot up high enough to ignite the overhead wiring, taking power out to a three square block area including our customer. The fire department had to extinguish both the flaming homeless person and the overhead wiring. The customer has been up steadily since. Status of the homeless individual is unknown. Fortunately, the customer called and explained this to our NOC and not the reverse. If we'd had to explain this to them, I'd have told the NOC to make something up. This is my nominee for most unusual outage cause of 1997. Regards, Bill McCauley GeoNet Communications

1 0

Re: Anyone Deployed Ascend's GRF IP Switch?
by Gary Zimmerman 02 Sep '97

02 Sep '97

Nathan and Rob, We have several of the Ascend routers deployed also. I can tell you from our experience Ascend has improved the boot times, but we need to really discuss what type of customers you have. If you have BGP customers, this takes minutes up to about 8 or 9 with our current load. If you are talking static, 1 to 3 minutes. We watch these figure very close here at SAVVIS. It just takes time to get the cutomers BGP session back active. We are working with Ascend on several issues including BGP sessions and customer load order. More memory and a faster processors do help as we and Ascend continue to work to make it a better product. Gary Zimmerman V.P. Network Engineering SAVVIS Communication Corp. http://www.savvis.com Office: 314.719.2423 ---------- > From: Nathan Stratton <nathan(a)netrail.net> > To: Rob Skrobola <rjs(a)ans.net> > Cc: Jessica Yu <jyy(a)ans.net>; Damon Hammis <damonh(a)netrex.com>; nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: Anyone Deployed Ascend's GRF IP Switch? > Date: Tuesday, September 02, 1997 8:58 AM > > > On Tue, 2 Sep 1997, Rob Skrobola wrote: > > > Believe it. Three words: Per prefix policy.. And yes, it does have a > > signifigant effect on time to full reachability of any router. > > We do prefix policy filtering on all our routers, and yes it will effect > the time to full reachability of ANY router. What we were talking about > was how long did it take for a GRF to boot up. Someone said it took 10 min > or longer from a cold start for the system boot up. I agreed that the GRF > did take a long time to boot, but that ascend had worked on that and it > boots much faster now. > > > Nathan Stratton President, CTO, NetRail,Inc. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Phone (888)NetRail NetRail, Inc. > Fax (404)522-1939 230 Peachtree Suite 500 > WWW http://www.netrail.net/ Atlanta, GA 30303 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > "No king is saved by the size of his army; no warrior escapes by his > great strength. - Psalm 33:16 >

1 0

Re: ISP's as Common Carriers?
by bajaj＠bellcore.com 02 Sep '97

02 Sep '97

> > Does anyone have any pointers to information (hopefully FCC > documents) that classify ISP's as Common Carriers? > > Thanks in advance > > --Eric > -- > Eric Wieling (eric(a)ccti.net) Corporate Communications Technology > Sales: 504-585-7303 (sales(a)ccti.net) Support: 504-525-5449 (support(a)ccti.net) > > A BellSouth Communications Specialist. No, I don't work for BellSouth, I'm > just on the phone with them so much that I'm an expert at getting them to do > things. > In regards to access charge reform, the FCC ruled, tentatively, that ISPs would not be subject to local access charges currently being assessed on long-distance carriers. See www.fcc.gov/isp.html Shikhar

1 0

ISP's as Common Carriers?
by Eric Wieling 02 Sep '97

02 Sep '97

Does anyone have any pointers to information (hopefully FCC documents) that classify ISP's as Common Carriers? Thanks in advance --Eric -- Eric Wieling (eric(a)ccti.net) Corporate Communications Technology Sales: 504-585-7303 (sales(a)ccti.net) Support: 504-525-5449 (support(a)ccti.net) A BellSouth Communications Specialist. No, I don't work for BellSouth, I'm just on the phone with them so much that I'm an expert at getting them to do things.

1 0

Huge *nix Ports Archive Now Here
by Derek Reynolds 02 Sep '97

02 Sep '97

Hi there. I have finnaly posted all of the programs i have ported via cygwin. I have also made an archive of other *nix ports to win32 environment. Please check it out: http://www.h0ar.org/myn ^------------- Its a Zero, not an OH.. If there is anything i am missing please let me know. If you have any ported programs that you think should be on here, please email me startnet(a)nation.org with the location to where it can be downloaded (its an archive). Thanks Derek Reynolds

1 0