- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Remote Operations question
by Alex Rubenstein 08 Mar '97

08 Mar '97

Leviton has some stuff the we use, they have some things that can do 20 amps. The better question; why? What is the 7513 doing that you need it to be rebooted? I can be paid to go do it for you; lets say, $500 ea time? :-) At 04:18 PM 3/8/97 -0700, Rodney Joffe wrote: >Is anyone using any kind of out of band controlled power system that >will support remote power cycling of multiple devices with high power >ratings? I'd like to be able to cycle individual components in our racks >at NAPs (especially MAE E!) including 7513s. All the devices we've >found are limited to 15 amps total. I think a 7513 requires 20amps on >its own. > >Thanks > >Rodney Joffe >Genuity Inc., a Bechtel company >http://www.genuity.net > > >

1 0

Remote Operations question
by Rodney Joffe 08 Mar '97

08 Mar '97

Is anyone using any kind of out of band controlled power system that will support remote power cycling of multiple devices with high power ratings? I'd like to be able to cycle individual components in our racks at NAPs (especially MAE E!) including 7513s. All the devices we've found are limited to 15 amps total. I think a 7513 requires 20amps on its own. Thanks Rodney Joffe Genuity Inc., a Bechtel company http://www.genuity.net

1 0

Re: Class "B" forsale (fwd)
by Chris A. Icide 08 Mar '97

08 Mar '97

A few things come to mind as I follow this thread, and I've pondered shooting myself in the foot instead of adding to the thread, but the foot injury seems that it might be worse than jumping in here, so here goes. Someone mentioned the infamous (and seriously outdated) playing in the sandbox idea. This tends to work good when all the people in the theoretical sandbox are friends and neighbors, and have some kind of "interest" in the well being of the sandbox. When someone decides that they can get in the sandbox, mess around, and make a bit of money, then leave the sandbox to never come back, they will. On another note, if they find they can come in the sand box, and bully the other sandbox members and get thier way, they will. The sand- box has gotten huge, and crowded. Rules are an interesting thing. If a rule isn't enforced, the only people who will follow that rule are those who benefit from it (pardon me if I insulted anyone here by insinuating that they would only follow a rule if it benefited them - Let's just assume a clear conscious is benefit enough for some, and not run off on a tangent). If I don't benefit from a rule (or law), and it's not enforced, then what stops me from breaking the rule (especially if there is a large benefit at the end of that tunnel)? When a product has a value, a black market will arise where no "white" market is available. The black market will remain in tact until either the white market is able to supply the required product/service at an equivalent volume and price. If it's easier or cheaper (or both) for me to go to the black market and buy my product, why buy from the white? I would propse that this is in fact happening, and will continue to happen until there is some negetive incentive. Now I don't even imagine to propose any comprehensive solution for this. However let me toss an idea on the table. If in fact ARIN does come into being as an organization supported and funded by an for the commuity of IP users, then those IP users could work in cooperation with ARIN (and the other NIC's) to police the usage of IP's. For example, the NICs could maintain a database online that could monitor the current BGP tables. If the NIC determines that an unallocated IP block is in use, they could then insert a prefix entry into the table, seriously degrading the value of that IP block. This could also be used in a gross way to evaluate usage of prefixes, and unauthorized changes to prefixes. Again, this is only an idea that I toss on the table, but I do stand by the fact that unless there is a negetive incentive, there are those who will do anything that is beneficial to them. Chris A. Icide Sr. Engineer Nap.Net, L.L.C. At 09:38 AM 3/9/97 Time, Joseph T. Klein wrote: >More than a few people have hoarded, sold, and exchanged >Class Bs for profit. Such exchanges should be given the >same value as the deed to the Brooklyn Bridge and lunar >land parcels. > >The result of a few gaining money for B space has been >to encourage people to horde it. >-- >From: Joseph T. Klein, Titania Corporation http://www.titania.net >E-mail: jtk(a)titania.net Sent: 09:38:37 CST/CDT 03/09/97 > >"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary >safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." > -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 > >

1 0

The nice mrtg guy
by Tobias Oetiker 07 Mar '97

07 Mar '97

>> >> So who actually measures their network performance and how? >> >> randy >> > >SNMP queries with a heavily-modified version of MRTG >from the nice guy in Germany. Works very nicely. The nice guy is from Switzerland and he is called Tobi Oetiker ... If you want the latest mrtg, go to http://www.ee.ethz.ch/~oetiker/webtools/mrtg more about the nice guy is on his homepage the nice guy ... -- ______ __ _ /_ __/_ / / (_) Oetiker, Timelord & SysMgr @ EE-Dept ETH-Zurich / // _ \/ _ \/ / TEL:+41(0)1-6325286 FAX:+41(0)1-6321194 /_/ \___/_.__/_/ oetiker(a)ee.ethz.ch http://www.ee.ethz.ch/~oetiker

1 0

BGP stability
by scott＠Sonic.NET 07 Mar '97

07 Mar '97

Hi. I'd like to point something out: by not tieing IGP to EGP, folks have a responsibility. Ideally, the purpose of BGP is to announce the availability of networks -- if your network can't deliver traffic to a remote network, you shouldn't be announcing via BGP. Unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world. To improve stability of the global BGP mesh, folks have decided not to tie BGP to their IGP -- and personally, I think that's a darned good idea. But this decision has a cost: when making a change that will affect routing (such as a router upgrade), these folks can't rely on IGP to straighten out their network's reachability matrix. It seems to me that responsible folks would emply manual intervention to ensure that their BGP announcements would match the state of their network. For instance: when upgrading a router, I think the responsible folks would determine the the "top" of that router's topology, shut down BGP into that topology, do the upgrade, and then reenable BGP. In other words, if you're running your BGP on "manual," and you manually do stuff to affect your network, please make the manual changes to ensure BGP knows about the state of your network. This only means one "flap", and it will make the world a nicer place. -Scott

1 0

measurement
by randy＠psg.com 07 Mar '97

07 Mar '97

So who actually measures their network performance and how? randy

4 4

Re: Paul Vixie did not spam you (this is an automated response)
by Peter Galbavy 06 Mar '97

06 Mar '97

cc'ed to nanog@ FYI Paul Vixie wrote: > Today I started receiving a massive number of e-mail bounces and complaints > about spam. I immediately realized that someone had abused the network in my > name; sure enough, I shortly received the evidence shown below. I apologize > for this form letter response, but I'm expecting another 10,000 complaints and > I do not plan to send personalized replies to each one. [Posting from home, since thats where I get nanog@, but posting with my work hat on - Reply-To: set to peter(a)demon.net] Please note that we were hit by the same spammer. The original message went out, claiming it was from one of our customers (another thread last week) when in actual fact it is from an address block assigned the enterprise.net. I understand that this ISP (Enterprise in the UK) has made a statement to the effect that they in turn have traced this to a Compuserve location. Since the only Recieved: header with anything useful in it has one of their IP addrs in, this is difficult to check. Just for some background, the spammer proceeded to set the Reply-To: address to a range of mail-news gateways (demon.service(a)news.demon.co.uk was one) and really wound people up. This range of gateways have now been permanently closed, which is in itself a great shame. I would advise other out there to check if they have similar legacy newsgroup@ type gateways operating and close them to reduce the backlash of this type of spam. Regards, -- Peter Galbavy @ Home in Wonderland http://www.wonderland.org/ http://www.whirl-y-gig.org.uk/ http://www.demon.net Be remembered not for your final destination, but for your journey.

3 2

RE: Paul Vixie did not spam you (this is an automated response)
by Ry Jones 06 Mar '97

06 Mar '97

These are the same guys that the WA state AG shut down for mail fraud. I'm suprised they have the nuts to pop up again; this topic was beat to death on Seattle.General about 5 or 6 months ago. ---------- From: Geoff White[SMTP:geoffw@precipice.v-site.net] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 1997 4:14 AM To: peter(a)demon.net Cc: Paul Vixie; geertj(a)ripe.net; nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: Paul Vixie did not spam you (this is an automated response) On Thu, 6 Mar 1997, Peter Galbavy wrote: > cc'ed to nanog@ FYI > > Paul Vixie wrote: > > Today I started receiving a massive number of e-mail bounces and complaints > > about spam. I immediately realized that someone had abused the network in my > > name; sure enough, I shortly received the evidence shown below. I apologize > > for this form letter response, but I'm expecting another 10,000 complaints and > > I do not plan to send personalized replies to each one. > > [Posting from home, since thats where I get nanog@, but posting > with my work hat on - Reply-To: set to peter(a)demon.net] > > Please note that we were hit by the same spammer. The original > message went out, claiming it was from one of our customers (another > thread last week) when in actual fact it is from an address block > assigned the enterprise.net. We have also been hit by the same spammer, he is using exchangecurrency(a)forprofit.com as his reply-field (which is one of my clients) Apparently one of the people at forprofit.com send a message to on of the spammers "superiors" (I think he just sent the message to the NOC contact of the host on a reply field that was sent to him :) and shortly after that, their domain name was showing up in the reply field of the spam. I am flushing all mail heading for exchangecurrency(a)forprofit.com to /dev/null. I've done a little research, aparently the original postings were using a domain... precipice:{root}67-> whois moneyworld.com Financial Connections, Inc (MONEYWORLD-DOM) 2508 5th Ave, #104 Seattle, WA 98121 Domain Name: MONEYWORLD.COM Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact, Billing Contact: Williams, Bob (BW747) willie(a)MONEYWORLD.COM 206 269 0846 Record last updated on 13-Oct-96. Record created on 26-Oct-95. Domain servers in listed order: NSH.WORLDHELP.NET 206.81.217.6 NSS.MONEYWORLD.COM 205.227.174.9 No answer at the number and apparently non of these DNS machines are currently on the net... hmm. This guy is causing my mail queues to fill up with a ton of bounces and flames and I don't appreciate it one bit. The guys at forprofit have some friends at the FBI, but they say that everytime they try to go after these guys, the ISPs won't co-operate :) Geoff White Virtual Sites http://www.v-site.net (415)437-4600 fax (415)437-4601

2 1

Re: 03/05/97 Internet Routing Problems
by Paul Ferguson 06 Mar '97

06 Mar '97

At 03:00 PM 3/6/97 GMT, stats(a)merit.edu wrote: > >Reserved Network and Host Announcements >--------------------------------------- >0/0 at PacBell from MIBX (6218) ASPATH=6218 Incomplete >0/0 at PacBell from MIBX (6218) ASPATH=6218 Incomplete >10/8 at PacBell from MIBX (6218) ASPATH=6218 IGP FYI. This is a prinicpal example of why people should be filtering on both inbound & outbound announcements of default & RFC1918 address space. - paul

5 4

in-addr problems
by William S. Duncanson 06 Mar '97

06 Mar '97

> Has anyone noticed lately that there have been a lot of problems getting > in-addr information on ms.uu.net ip addresses? At first I thought it was a > problem with a.root-servers.net, but it appears to be on the MSN/UUNet > side. We've had numerous customers of theirs complain that they could not > get to some of our sites, or that it was taking a lot longer than usual. > We looked at the logs, and sure enough, we're getting "refused connect from > aaa.xxx.yyy.zzz: gethostbyaddr() failed" messages from the IP addresses > that they're coming from. So, the question is, should we disable this > temporarily, or just wait for UUNet/MSN to get their act together? > > William S. Duncanson > william(a)neosoft.com > NeoSoft Operations > (888) NEOSOFT or (713) 968-5800 >

1 0