- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: cyberpromotions
by Sanjay Dani 23 Apr '97

23 Apr '97

>He can sign all of the deals that he wants. If he doesn't stop >his illegal tactics of theft of services, he will be out >of business -- we have contacted the local police department >after the 3rd or 4th time he used our mail relay -- they >believe that charges of theft of service will stick. We are >holding off civil suits against cyberpromotions and their clients >until criminal charges have been brought. Once he has been >charged with criminal theft of service, we will sue both cyber >promotions and their clients for damages. Great way to go! IMO, this is the best way to hit where it hurts and punish the real offender instead of arm-twisting or hacking into ISP's in the chain. >> And in Interactive Week today, I see Cyber Promotions just signed a >> three year deal with UUNet/Worldcom. Someone was quoted as saying they >> will have the capacity to "send 111 average-sized email messages per >> second". <sarcasm> I'm eager to see which of the anti-spam preachers will be the first to stop peering with and/or taking transit from UUnet (WCOM) in order to stay "clean". </sarcasm> Sanjay.

1 0

Re: Response from Cyber Promotions (fwd)
by Darrell Fuhriman 23 Apr '97

23 Apr '97

Charles Sprickman <spork(a)inch.com> writes: > And in Interactive Week today, I see Cyber Promotions just signed a > three year deal with UUNet/Worldcom. Someone was quoted as saying they > will have the capacity to "send 111 average-sized email messages per > second". They're merely buying worldcom circuits, not IP service. Earlier today, I was bitching about Inter@ctive Week not following up on the story and simply believing what Cyber Promo put on their web page. Darrell

1 0

cyberpromotions
by dgraves＠netreach.net 23 Apr '97

23 Apr '97

He can sign all of the deals that he wants. If he doesn't stop his illegal tactics of theft of services, he will be out of business -- we have contacted the local police department after the 3rd or 4th time he used our mail relay -- they believe that charges of theft of service will stick. We are holding off civil suits against cyberpromotions and their clients until criminal charges have been brought. Once he has been charged with criminal theft of service, we will sue both cyber promotions and their clients for damages. He speaks of first amendment rights -- he should pay more attention to laws regarding simple thievery. They will be his downfall. > From owner-nanog(a)merit.edu Wed Apr 23 01:04:41 1997 > Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 00:54:33 -0400 (EDT) > From: Charles Sprickman <spork(a)inch.com> > To: MarkG <ceo(a)netconcept.com> > Cc: Daniel Senie <dts(a)openroute.com>, nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: Response from Cyber Promotions (fwd) > Mime-Version: 1.0 > > And in Interactive Week today, I see Cyber Promotions just signed a > three year deal with UUNet/Worldcom. Someone was quoted as saying they > will have the capacity to "send 111 average-sized email messages per > second". > > Lovely. > > ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ > Charles Sprickman Internet Channel > INCH System Administration Team (212)243-5200 > spork(a)inch.com access(a)inch.com > > > On Mon, 21 Apr 1997, MarkG wrote: > > >Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 21:18:46 -0700 > >From: MarkG <ceo(a)netconcept.com> > >To: Daniel Senie <dts(a)openroute.com> > >Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu > >Subject: Re: Response from Cyber Promotions (fwd) > > > >We hate SPAM more than anyone, We have a site at "http://usemail.net/NoSpam/ > >" to help us fight these #$%@ spammers > >feel free to copy this site and/or provide links..... > > > >Lets repay all their "caring" ...... > > > > > > > > > > >

1 0

Re: Ascend GRF400
by Alex Rubenstein 22 Apr '97

22 Apr '97

I think AGIS does in Washington; check with them. At 08:09 AM 4/22/97 -0700, Dirk Harms-Merbitz wrote: > >Has anybody used an Ascend GRF400 in a production environment? > >Dirk > >

4 3

Re: Ascend GRF400
by Alex Rubenstein 22 Apr '97

22 Apr '97

whi4>mae-east.agis.net Trying mae-east.agis.net (192.41.177.145)... Open Ascend Embedded/OS 1.1 (washington5.agis.net) (ttyp1) Does this answer your question? At 02:57 PM 4/22/97 EDT, David Davis wrote: >In-fact an Ascend salesguy said something about MAE-EAST.agis.net now being or shortly becoming a GRF-400. Can anyone lend credence to that claim? > >-Dave > >> >> >> I think AGIS does in Washington; check with them. >> >> >> At 08:09 AM 4/22/97 -0700, Dirk Harms-Merbitz wrote: >> > >> >Has anybody used an Ascend GRF400 in a production environment? >> > >> >Dirk >> > >> > >> > >

2 1

Re: Sean Doran and ATM.
by Scott Huddle 22 Apr '97

22 Apr '97

smd(a)cesium.clock.org -scott At 10:27 AM 4/22/97 -0400, Charles F. Crizer Jr. wrote: >I really hate to ask, but does anyone know how to find Sean Doran of >Sprint infamy? > >I really need to follow up on some comments he made one day about ATM. > >If you do, please just e-mail me. > >-------------------------------------------------------------------- > Charles F. Crizer Jr. KF4MNE > Senior Systems Engineer ccrizer(a)dyncon.net > Certified Novell Administrator http://www.cais.com/dyncon >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >Copyright 1997 Charles F. Crizer Jr. All Rights Reserved. > > >

1 0

Re: NSI SAYS FCC SHOULD ASSUME INTERNET REGISTRATION FUNCTIONS
by Hank Nussbacher 22 Apr '97

22 Apr '97

On Mon, 21 Apr 1997, Charles R. Hoynowski wrote: If not interested in IAHC/eDNS/etc - hit d now. If I was NSI I would be doing exactly the same thing. No better way to slow things down then to punt it into the US govt arena. This will give NSI monopoly control until the US govt completes its impact papers and congressional hearings and appoints some committees to review the whole matter. All the while, NSI keeps being a monopoly. > > NSI SAYS FCC SHOULD ASSUME INTERNET REGISTRATION FUNCTIONS > Network Solutions Inc., which currently registers all top-level domain > names under contract to the National Science Foundation, has suggested that > the Federal Communications Commission temporarily assume that function > until an international legal authority can be created to manage the system. > The transition period would allow for public comment on the plan in order > to incorporate any new processes or structures deemed necessary. The plan > is in contrast to an earlier proposal announced by the Internet > International Ad Hoc Commission to create seven new shard generic top-level > domains to be administered by 28 new registrars. NSI's president says the > IAHC plan risks Internet instability, creates "too much bureaucracy," and > will contribute to increased domain name legal disputes. (BNA Daily Report > for Executives 16 Apr 97) > > > > > _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/ _/ _/ Charles R. Hoynowski, Net Admin > _/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/_/ Etak, Inc., 1430 O'Brien Drive, > _/_/_/ _/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/ Menlo Park, CA 94025 > _/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ Voice:415-617-4458 Fax:617-0161 > _/_/_/_/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ Email: charles(a)etak.com > Hank Nussbacher IAHC member [the views expressed above belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the other IAHC members]

3 2

Re: "Which Internet?"
by Dimitri Krinos 22 Apr '97

22 Apr '97

Mr Seastrom, How many times have you seen people on the NANOG list publicly condemn notes such as yours that are taken to the NANOG list before being taken through proper network operations channels? I really get tired of listening to these sorts of notes when they involve other providers so I would appreciate if you have a response to this message, that you take it up with me (or our NOC) offline instead of involving the whole NANOG community. Regarding the incident you complain about, first of all, you called the wrong number. Advantis has many other networks to support besides our Internet service. You talked to someone in first line support who was trying to help you get to the NOC that manages our Internet service. I don't know all the specifics of your conversation with this person, but from the tone of your note, I suspect you may have had something to do with the argument since you didn't understand that we do in fact have several inter networks to support. In the future, try NOC(a)IBM.NET and you will get to the bottom of the problem. Secondly, we brought up peering *yesterday* with your upstream provider and a typo was made in the configuration which resulted in your getting the extra routes. This situation was promptly fixed once it really got to the NOC. Why you seem to have the need to publicly criticize our network with false statements such as 'this condition has persisted for several months' is beyond me. In the future, you may want to try being a bit more patient. Sincerely, Dimitri Krinos Network Architecture IBM Global Services At 08:38 PM 4/21/97 -0400, Robert E. Seastrom wrote: > >Whilst investigating why my routing table size suddenly jumped by 5k >routes, I discovered that Advantis (AS 2685 at MAE-E, origin AS 3082) >was leaking all sorts of more-specifics for various networks into the >bgp mesh. Yeah, I know I should be running bogon filters... > >Anyway, I called up their NOC to complain, and when I explained the >situation I was asked which Internet I was calling about. Then when I >asked to be transferred to a supervisor, the "support" person became >argumentative and didn't want to transfer me. I had to be rudely >direct and demand to be transferred before I was put on hold for five >minutes and then informed that the supervisor was out to dinner. > >Come on Advantis, get it together. > > ---Rob > > At 09:03 PM 4/21/97 -0400, you wrote: > >I have just been informed by a couple of people that this condition >has persisted for several months. One of my upstreams must not be >filtering Advantis' crapola. > >And so I say once again: Come ON advantis, get it together! > > > ---Rob >

2 1

Get me off this list....
by Richard Johnson 22 Apr '97

22 Apr '97

How would I go about it???? Richard Johnson System Administrator WPLJ/WABC Radio

2 1

NSI SAYS FCC SHOULD ASSUME INTERNET REGISTRATION FUNCTIONS
by Charles R. Hoynowski 22 Apr '97

22 Apr '97

NSI SAYS FCC SHOULD ASSUME INTERNET REGISTRATION FUNCTIONS Network Solutions Inc., which currently registers all top-level domain names under contract to the National Science Foundation, has suggested that the Federal Communications Commission temporarily assume that function until an international legal authority can be created to manage the system. The transition period would allow for public comment on the plan in order to incorporate any new processes or structures deemed necessary. The plan is in contrast to an earlier proposal announced by the Internet International Ad Hoc Commission to create seven new shard generic top-level domains to be administered by 28 new registrars. NSI's president says the IAHC plan risks Internet instability, creates "too much bureaucracy," and will contribute to increased domain name legal disputes. (BNA Daily Report for Executives 16 Apr 97) _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/ _/ _/ Charles R. Hoynowski, Net Admin _/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ Etak, Inc., 1430 O'Brien Drive, _/_/_/ _/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/ Menlo Park, CA 94025 _/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ Voice:415-617-4458 Fax:617-0161 _/_/_/_/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ Email: charles(a)etak.com

1 0