- Test - lists.nanog.org

DNS
by Bill Unsworth 25 Jul '97

25 Jul '97

I am not a techie :-)) but it seems to me that the real power re DNS lies not with adhoc committees but with the ISPs. If we collectively choose to point our DNS at other than Internic then new domains will exist without ad-hoc committees, government interference etc. Obviously there is concern about some of the current attempts to provide DNS not being really answerable to the ISP community and hence their lack of success. What do you think? Action by NANOG members to get out of the current poor situation rather than leaving it to fate? Bill U-NET Limited - Global Transit Division mailto:world@u-net.net http://world.u-net.net Tel 44 1925 484444 Fax 44 1925 484466

1 0

re: nanog mailing list
by Jason Storm 24 Jul '97

24 Jul '97

My apologies to the wide variety of people aparently offended by my request for subscription, and many thanks to the people who pointed me towards the proper subscription channels. I recall being told this list was private and required references, my mistake. Jason Storm

1 0

Judge Deferes AlterNIC Action
by Randall S. Benn 24 Jul '97

24 Jul '97

Appologies in advance for the politics, but I thought many would be interested. http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/5414.html Regards, Randy

2 1

Re: Non-ISP companies multi-homing?
by John J. Buxbaum 24 Jul '97

24 Jul '97

Mark, You have been told by the State who you have to use as a provider? -----Original Message----- From: Mark Bixby <markb(a)spock.dis.cccd.edu> To: netops <netops(a)flycast.com> Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu <nanog(a)merit.edu> Subject: Re: Non-ISP companies multi-homing? >netops writes: >> >> Does anyone know of any non-ISP companies that have decided to >> multi-home? Is this a major trend for non-ISP companies running >> mission-critical applications on the Internet? > >We will be going multi-homed in about 2 weeks because the state of California >has mandated that all community colleges sign up with 4C.net, but we don't >want to give up our existing CERF.net connection. >-- >Mark Bixby E-mail: markb(a)cccd.edu >Coast Community College Dist. Web: http://www.cccd.edu/~markb/ >District Information Services 1370 Adams Ave, Costa Mesa, CA, USA 92626-5429 >Technical Support +1 714 438-4647 >"You can tune a file system, but you can't tune a fish." - tunefs(1M) >

2 1

Re: Non-ISP companies multi-homing?
by John J. Buxbaum 24 Jul '97

24 Jul '97

Bruce, I have several customer who are multi-homed, some of which are ISP"s but not all. I am seeing this a coming trend for customers who wish to have redundant internet access. A bit pricey i bet, but maybe easier on the nerves :) John Buxbaum AT&T CBB -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Benda <bruce(a)clari.net> To: netops <netops(a)flycast.com> Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu <nanog(a)merit.edu> Subject: Re: Non-ISP companies multi-homing? >> Does anyone know of any non-ISP companies that have decided to >> multi-home? Is this a major trend for non-ISP companies running >> mission-critical applications on the Internet? >> >> So far, I only know of a couple, with PointCast being one of them. > >We're multi-homed to BBN, Exodus (co-located too), and PBI. >

2 1

Notification of LINX maintenance
by Paul Thornton 24 Jul '97

24 Jul '97

Apologies for being slightly off topic, and I know it isn't in North America :-) The London Internet Exchange (LINX), the primary UK interconnect point, is being physically relocated this weekend, from Saturday 26 June 23:00 GMT to Sunday 27 June 05:00 GMT. There should not be any major impact, but paths to K.ROOT-SERVERS.NET may change as various peering sessions go down and come back up. This is just a 'heads up' posting so you are aware that it is happening. Some of the routing between UK ISPs may be affected, although a lot of effort has been put into ensuring that there is minimal impact to any external networks. For more information, see http://www.linx.net/moveinfo.html (this is aimed at the customers of our members, but does give an overview of what is happening) Paul -- Paul Thornton, Network Engineer, London Internet Exchange Ltd. Tel: 07000 783797 Mobile: +44 467 372205

1 0

Re: Non-ISP companies multi-homing?
by jrg＠blodwen.demon.co.uk 24 Jul '97

24 Jul '97

netops(a)flycast.com (netops) writes: > Does anyone know of any non-ISP companies that have decided to > multi-home? Is this a major trend for non-ISP companies running > mission-critical applications on the Internet? Yes. I know some people in the UK that are multi-homed, too (though there's probably not too many over here.) James.

1 0

NANOG mailing list
by Jason Storm 24 Jul '97

24 Jul '97

Hi! Im currently employed as technical support for hooked.net/well.com, and I am in training for systems admin. I am hoping to be included in the NANOG mailing list, as it often seems to address issues that affect the performance of these ISP's long before I am able to get the scoop, basically. For myself and for the 15,000 customers I offer my services to, please tell me what information is needed to gain access to this list. I have several references available on request. Hope to hear from you soon, Jason Storm Tech Support Hooked.net/Well.com staffjs(a)hooked.net, jms(a)well.com

3 2

Re: Kashpureff Black List (REALLY AN OPERATIONAL QUESTION)
by Eric Germann 24 Jul '97

24 Jul '97

However, a coordinated effort to block them all could, correct? Kind of like the sanity filters at customer borders. Don't allow traffic into your network that doesn't originate from their assigned network numbers. If everyone were to block the ranges no one would get polluted... So is it my understanding that it is technically possible, but logistically impossible to coordinate? If we were to block them, then we wouldn't have to worry about every idiosyncracy of BIND, both known and yet to be found. At 09:13 AM 7/23/97 -0500, Karl Denninger wrote: >On Wed, Jul 23, 1997 at 09:53:42AM -0400, Eric Germann wrote: >> would an anti-kashpureff bgp feed fix the dns pollution problems similar to >> the anti spam black list. If yes, is it collusion which would be >> prosecutable? If no, what are the TECHNICAL reasons it wouldn't work. >> >> Eric > >No, because *ANY* nameserver which gets the pollution can then pollute you. > >Since you can't cut off EVERY nameserver with such a feed, it is pointless >to attempt it. > >-- >-- >Karl Denninger (karl(a)MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity >http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service > | 99 Analog numbers, 77 ISDN, http://www.mcs.net/ >Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| NOW Serving 56kbps DIGITAL on our analog lines! >Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal > >

2 1

Re: Non-ISP companies multi-homing?
by jprovo＠ma.ultranet.com 24 Jul '97

24 Jul '97

netops writes: > > Does anyone know of any non-ISP companies that have decided to > multi-home? Is this a major trend for non-ISP companies running > mission-critical applications on the Internet? Yes, several. As far as I can see, yes. The question I'd ask would be why does it matter if an AS is "ISP" or "non-ISP"? The domain of clueful people is far and away NOT limited to the domain of ISP networkers. If an organization is sizeable enough and knows what it is doing, or can hire or rent someone who does, more power to them. Cheers, Joe (affiliation for identification, not endorsement; disclaim, disclaim) -- Joe Provo, Network Architect 800.763.8111 x3006 Network Operations Center Fax 508.229.2375 UltraNet Communications, Inc. <jprovo(a)ultra.net>

1 0