- Test - lists.nanog.org

ISP Domain Auction
by Dorian Kim 13 Feb '96

13 Feb '96

Hmm.. so when do you think we'll see ISP IP block auction? -dorian ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 16:19:12 -0800 From: domains(a)mrls.com Subject: ISP Domain Auction The following internet domain names are hereby submitted for auction to the highest bidder: astrology.com apparelservices.com britishtrade.com businesssfinancing.com cambodia.com canadatrade.com checks.com closeouts.com czechoslovakia.com deutschland.com diets.com egypt.com exerciseequipment.com exporttrade.com finland.com giftwares.com golfequipment.com guatemala.com greatbritain.com guadalajara.com homebasedbusinesses.com importtrade.com jerusalem.com koreatrade.com mailinglists.com manufacturing.com maritimeworld.com mexicotrade.com moneymanager.com moneysources.com nicaragua.com norway.com oceanshores.com offprice.com offpriceclothes.com pageants.com pilgrimage.com ports.net poulsbo.com puertorico.com riverrafting.com romania.com sanpedrosula.com seniorcitizens.com shipping.net skiresorts.com snohomish.com soulmate.com sweaters.com teenager.com teenagers.com tegucigalpa.com thailandtrade.com usedfurniture.com **************************************************************************** Offers begin at $100.00 per domain. Final bids must be received by 03/31/96 11:59pm PDT To submit a bid on one of these domain names, return this mail or visit http://brokeragent.com.

8 9

route flaps at MAE-E
by tonyb 13 Feb '96

13 Feb '96

Is anyone seeing severe route flaps at MAE-EAST at the moment.? We are having some problems with BGP peering reloading, anyone over there know anything ? Thanks Tony Barber Phone : +44(0)1223 250122 Network Support UnipalmPIPEX **** Please send ALL support related email to support(a)pipex.net ****

1 0

Re: FIX/NAP Connections (fwd)
by kc＠upeksa.sdsc.edu 13 Feb '96

13 Feb '96

please take to heart so we can get real benefits of multicast at the rather strained interconnection points -- k Forwarded message: >From nobody Mon Feb 12 13:52:53 1996 X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.4 10/10/95 To: Peter Lothberg <roll(a)stupi.se> Cc: Phil Dykstra <phil(a)arl.mil>, mbone(a)ISI.EDU Subject: Re: FIX/NAP Connections In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 10 Feb 1996 21:40:06 PST." <CMM.0.90.0.824017223.roll(a)Junk.Stupi.SE> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 11:54:12 PST From: Bill Fenner <fenner(a)parc.xerox.com> Message-Id: <96Feb12.115421pst.177478(a)crevenia.parc.xerox.com> I would like to push for native peering rather than tunnels wherever possible. Native peering allows the Ethernet/FDDI/whatever-physical-medium to do your packet replication for you, so instead of 10 tunnels to 10 providers meaning 10 copies of each packet, you can have a single interface on a shared medium and have only one copy of each packet. Now, this has its own expenses; if your existing routers don't support multicast (or don't support it well) then you need to put another two-interface box at the NAP & give it an interface on your router like Peter was describing. My vision of how things might work is something like T3 to provider A _____________ ________/___ | A mrouter | -------- | A router | ---- Gigaswitch port ------------- ------------ / \ T1 to provider B / \ T3 to provider C ____/____ _____/____ ____\_____ _______/___ |B Router| -- |B Mrouter| |C Mrouter| ------- | C router | --- Gigaswitch port --------- -------\--- --/-------- ------------ \______/ (I hate drawing ASCII diagrams). Basically, there is a single FDDI ring (well, it could even be an ethernet, given the quantity of multicast traffic we are currently seeing) where each mrouter has an interface and everyone peers for multicast traffic. Then each of these multicast routers has a private interface with the provider's unicast router in order to carry tunnels into the provider; this could also be an ethernet, because this box should only have one tunnel to the provider's internal multicast topology. There is no real reason for the seperate subnet, other than isolation of resources, and assuming that the gigaswitch handles multicast properly. This kind of thing is happening at MAE-East; PSI, Digex, Sprint and Sura are peering natively. I would like to see it happen at every provider interconnect. Bill

1 0

Re: More on MTU discovery...
by Brett D. Watson 13 Feb '96

13 Feb '96

> > Based on the number of replies, it sounds like there is quite a lot of > interest in this subject. I didn't want to call out any sites in > particular, because I didn't want to pick on any providers. I sent > mail to three people with problems this morning at around the same > time I sent the nanog mail, and have so far only heard a response back > from one. > > The one who responded turned out to be exactly what Matt suggested -- > mismatched ATM MTUs on Cisco routers. Apparently the Cisco default is > something like 4470 even though ATM default MTU is supposed to be > 9180. > > The other two sites haven't responded. The IP hop in question in both > cases was, I believe, a cisco router (based on the prompt I got when I > telnetted to them). However, since I know that in most cases Ciscos > seem to do the right thing, I suspect that these sites have other > problems down at layer two. Lots of people out there make bridging > products who have never heard of RFC1191... i would be one of those two sites, and i responded tonight. the mtu problem you found (and matt found it because he worked for this particular customer this weekend) was on the customer end of one of our links. i couldn't quite figure out what you wanted me to do about it. i'll just say for the record that it seems to be a problem between the customer's vendors' router and our router :) the customer is aware of the problem and is following up with their vendor. i was a little taken back by your note which basically sounded like: "you've got an obvious problem, you need to fix it quick as everyone depends on this resource" that may not be what you meant, but it sounded that way. -brett > If I hear back from the providers for the other two sites, I'll post > the answers to the list. > > --Jamshid

1 0

subnet routes
by asp＠uunet.uu.net 13 Feb '96

13 Feb '96

I happened to check to see how many subnet routes there are out there (subnets of classical A/B/C nets being injected into the global BGP tables). There are a lot of them... Of these, there are 47 that are longer than a /24. 2 /25 23 /26 4 /27 4 /28 2 /29 12 /30 --asp(a)uunet.uu.net (Andrew Partan) Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path *>i9.2.0.0/16 192.41.177.140 10 100 0 690 1324 1747 i *>i9.20.0.0/17 137.39.32.226 100 100 0 1849 i *>i128.197.5.0/24 192.233.33.10 10 100 0 560 ? *>i129.55.15.0/24 192.233.33.10 10 100 0 560 ? *>i129.83.103.0/24 192.233.33.10 10 100 0 560 ? * i129.159.147.0/24 192.157.69.30 7 100 0 1800 2874 i * i129.159.148.0/24 192.157.69.30 7 100 0 1800 2874 i *>i130.205.64.0/18 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i131.117.0.0/17 192.41.177.141 10 100 0 1673 1128 5400 559 i *>i132.235.204.0/24 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i * i135.14.65.0/24 192.157.69.9 10 100 0 1239 1791 3111 i *>i138.108.100.0/24 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i139.196.0.0/24 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i140.188.86.0/24 192.41.177.235 10 100 0 174 ? *>i140.188.129.0/24 192.41.177.235 10 100 0 174 ? *>i140.188.198.0/24 192.41.177.235 10 100 0 174 ? * i140.218.0.0/18 204.123.0.4 10 100 0 200 1842 i * i140.218.64.0/18 204.123.0.4 10 100 0 200 1842 i * i140.218.128.0/19 204.123.0.4 10 100 0 200 1842 i * i140.218.192.0/18 204.123.0.4 10 100 0 200 1842 i * i141.204.13.0/24 192.157.69.9 10 100 0 1239 1982 ? * i144.199.161.0/24 192.157.69.9 10 100 0 1239 1792 1238 i * i144.228.29.0/24 192.157.69.9 10 100 0 1239 1790 ? * i144.228.104.0/24 192.157.69.9 10 100 0 1239 ? *>i145.17.100.0/24 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 2855 2856 i *>i145.72.32.0/19 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 2855 2856 i *>i145.72.64.0/19 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 2855 2856 i *>i145.224.10.0/24 137.39.32.226 100 100 0 1849 i * i145.228.2.0/24 192.157.69.4 10 100 0 690 1324 1663 i * i145.228.7.0/24 192.157.69.4 10 100 0 690 1324 1663 i * i145.228.8.0/24 192.157.69.4 10 100 0 690 1324 1663 i * i145.228.21.0/24 192.157.69.4 10 100 0 690 1324 1663 i * i145.228.41.0/24 192.157.69.4 10 100 0 690 1324 1663 i * i145.228.210.0/24 192.157.69.4 10 100 0 690 1324 1663 i * i145.228.213.0/24 192.157.69.4 10 100 0 690 1324 1663 i * i145.228.218.0/24 192.157.69.4 10 100 0 690 1324 i *>i145.228.221.0/24 192.41.177.140 10 100 0 690 1327 i * i145.228.233.0/24 192.157.69.4 10 100 0 690 1324 1663 i * i145.246.16.0/24 192.157.69.30 11 100 0 1800 1755 2855 2856 i * i145.246.17.0/24 192.157.69.30 11 100 0 1800 1755 2855 2856 i *>i146.153.100.0/22 192.233.33.10 10 100 0 560 ? *>i146.188.254.0/24 137.39.32.226 100 100 0 1849 i *>i147.116.63.0/24 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i147.116.64.0/23 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i147.116.160.0/21 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i147.116.168.0/22 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i * i147.186.219.64/26 192.157.69.30 7 100 0 1800 2874 i * i148.94.38.0/24 192.157.69.9 10 100 0 1239 5714 i *>i148.185.45.0/24 137.39.32.226 100 100 0 1849 i *>i148.252.1.0/24 137.39.32.226 100 100 0 1849 i * i149.20.9.0/28 204.123.0.4 10 100 0 200 i *>i149.20.17.0/24 192.41.177.150 10 100 0 4136 3673 i * i149.212.64.0/20 192.157.69.30 7 100 0 1800 1759 544 i *>i150.66.64.0/18 192.41.177.241 10 100 0 1239 1790 2514 i *>i150.66.128.0/17 192.41.177.241 10 100 0 1239 1790 2514 i *>i151.185.7.0/24 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 279 ? *>i151.185.10.0/24 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 279 ? * i152.125.208.0/24 192.157.69.9 10 100 0 1239 1791 2933 i *>i152.129.186.0/24 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 4478 i *>i152.148.50.0/24 192.41.177.145 10 100 0 3830 ? *>i152.158.0.0/17 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2686 i *>i152.158.192.0/18 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i152.163.141.0/24 192.157.69.4 10 100 0 690 1327 i * i152.163.150.0/24 192.157.69.4 10 100 0 690 1327 i * i155.39.191.0/24 198.32.136.20 10 100 0 2685 i *>i155.140.123.0/24 137.39.32.226 100 100 0 1849 i *>i155.140.124.0/24 137.39.32.226 100 100 0 1849 i *>i155.174.11.0/24 192.41.177.241 10 100 0 1239 1982 ? *>i155.174.14.0/24 192.41.177.241 10 100 0 1239 1982 ? *>i155.174.15.0/24 192.41.177.241 10 100 0 1239 1982 ? * i155.174.50.0/24 192.157.69.9 10 100 0 1239 1982 ? *>i156.114.200.0/24 192.41.177.145 10 100 0 4200 2529 i *>i158.47.0.0/18 192.41.177.141 10 100 0 1673 1128 5400 137 5441 5444 i *>i158.47.64.0/19 192.41.177.141 10 100 0 1673 1128 5400 137 5441 5444 i *>i158.47.96.0/19 192.41.177.141 10 100 0 1673 1128 5400 137 5442 i *>i159.134.248.0/21 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 5466 i * i159.189.128.0/19 198.32.136.12 10 100 0 3561 279 2048 {33802} ? *>i159.245.84.0/22 137.39.32.226 100 100 0 1849 i *>i159.245.104.0/22 137.39.32.226 100 100 0 1849 i * i160.8.106.0/24 192.157.69.30 7 100 0 1800 2874 i * i160.8.110.0/23 192.157.69.30 7 100 0 1800 2874 i * i161.52.192.0/19 192.157.69.30 57 100 0 1800 1653 2843 2845 i *>i161.223.220.0/22 192.41.177.6 10 100 0 86 ? *>i161.223.224.0/24 192.41.177.6 10 100 0 86 ? *>i164.103.3.0/24 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i164.131.247.0/24 192.41.177.240 5 100 0 1800 3215 i * i165.87.194.0/24 198.32.136.20 10 100 0 2685 i *>i165.215.64.0/18 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 4183 i *>i165.215.191.0/24 192.41.177.135 10 100 0 4445 5090 i *>i166.38.40.0/24 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i166.45.0.0/19 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 4292 i *>i166.147.0.0/18 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i166.147.64.0/18 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i166.147.192.0/18 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i166.150.0.0/18 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i166.150.64.0/18 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i166.150.128.0/18 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i166.150.192.0/18 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i166.151.0.0/18 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i166.151.64.0/18 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i166.151.128.0/18 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i *>i166.151.192.0/18 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 i * i167.170.6.0/23 192.157.69.30 7 100 0 1800 1755 3300 3302 3313 ? *>i169.132.34.0/24 192.41.177.80 10 100 0 4136 5000 i *>i170.115.170.0/23 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 1746 i *>i170.115.172.0/22 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 1746 i *>i170.115.176.0/20 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 1746 i *>i170.115.192.0/21 192.41.177.180 10 100 0 3561 1746 i *>i170.194.51.0/24 137.39.32.226 100 100 0 1849 i *>i171.25.128.0/20 192.41.177.240 16 100 0 1800 1755 3300 3301 ? *>i171.25.144.0/21 192.41.177.240 16 100 0 1800 1755 3300 ? *>i171.25.152.0/21 192.41.177.240 16 100 0 1800 1755 3300 ? * i192.108.200.0/29 192.41.177.240 16 100 0 1800 1880 i * i193.232.91.176/30 192.41.177.241 10 100 0 1239 1790 2854 ? * i193.232.91.184/30 192.41.177.241 10 100 0 1239 1790 2854 ? * i193.232.91.200/30 192.41.177.241 10 100 0 1239 1790 2854 ? * i193.232.91.232/30 192.41.177.241 10 100 0 1239 1790 2854 ? * i193.232.91.64/30 192.41.177.241 10 100 0 1239 1790 2854 ? * i193.93.51.48/30 192.233.33.10 10 100 0 560 i * i194.142.136.8/30 192.157.69.30 7 100 0 1800 1759 i * i194.72.26.204/30 192.41.177.141 10 100 0 1673 1128 5400 ? * i198.81.0.32/27 192.41.177.141 10 100 0 1673 1664 i * i200.255.253.240/28 192.157.69.9 10 100 0 1239 1790 4230 i * i200.255.253.32/27 192.157.69.9 10 100 0 1239 1790 4230 i * i202.135.0.0/26 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i202.135.0.128/26 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i202.135.0.192/26 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i202.135.0.64/26 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i202.135.1.0/26 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i202.135.1.128/26 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i202.135.1.192/26 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i202.135.1.64/26 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i202.135.18.0/28 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i202.135.4.0/26 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i202.135.4.128/26 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i202.135.4.192/26 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i202.135.4.64/26 192.41.177.110 10 100 0 2685 2687 i * i202.47.8.128/26 192.41.177.241 10 100 0 1239 3550 i * i202.47.8.192/26 192.41.177.241 10 100 0 1239 3550 i * i202.47.8.64/26 192.41.177.241 10 100 0 1239 3550 i * i204.137.135.0/28 192.41.177.170 10 100 0 3830 ? * i204.150.100.0/26 149.20.64.1 10 100 0 1280 1957 690 1321 i * i204.150.102.0/26 149.20.64.1 10 100 0 1280 1957 690 1321 i * i204.150.96.0/26 149.20.64.1 10 100 0 1280 1957 690 1321 i * i204.150.97.0/26 149.20.64.1 10 100 0 1280 1957 690 1321 i * i204.150.98.0/26 149.20.64.1 10 100 0 1280 1957 690 1321 i * i204.150.99.0/25 149.20.64.1 10 100 0 1280 1957 690 1321 i * i204.152.42.32/27 192.41.177.73 10 100 0 568 6082 i * i204.152.42.64/27 192.41.177.73 10 100 0 568 6082 i * i204.157.1.0/30 192.41.177.170 10 100 0 3830 ? * i204.157.228.0/30 192.41.177.170 10 100 0 3830 ? * i204.235.94.128/29 192.41.177.150 10 100 0 4136 i * i205.180.0.4/30 192.233.33.10 10 100 0 560 ? * i205.230.110.128/25 137.39.207.2 1 100 0 4592 i * i206.15.99.48/30 192.233.33.10 10 100 0 560 ? * i207.130.1.192/26 192.157.69.9 10 100 0 1239 1790 ? * i207.130.2.192/26 192.157.69.9 10 100 0 1239 1790 ?

1 0

Customers Didn't Know
by Simon Chan 13 Feb '96

13 Feb '96

> On Mon, 12 Feb 1996, mike wrote: > > > Shouldn't we here see how we get our act together, e.g. peering (why in > > this community are there people not peering, putting up 'rules' etc, when > > peering would just make everyone happy since the routing landscape is way > > simpler when there are lots of direct links), and of course, the same > > always: instead of creating unnecessary friction to put into the address > > allocation mechanism a measure to satisfy building up ISP/NSP businesses. > > I agree that there might some people need more restrictive routing, but > > restrictions must always be implemented in a way not to create injustice > > or even only extra problems. > > Well, the prefix-filtering policies of the unnamed ISP you mention above > is definitely a problem. However, I don't see it as a problem for me, > because most ISP's are sensible enough to route that kind of traffic. > > I look at it as a problem for customers who use that unnamed ISP. Those > customers should contact their providers and pressure them to get > alternative links (or, in the case they are a direct customer of this unnamed > ISP, change to another provider or obtain another link and become > multi-homed). > > I think that right now, we shouldn't be too concerned with "CIDRize or > DIE!". At this point, we should be helping other entities out--you're > not FORCING them to renumber by making their networks non-routable > within one organization--you're screwing your customers out of optimal > connectivity to any particular site. > > The Internet has gotten too much away from the original purpose, to share > information. It has gone to a vast commercial marketing symbol, where > most companies really don't care about other entities--"Why should we > help this group? They're customers of ISP X!" > > Now, if there's a sincere need to filter, say, because you still use > AGS+'s with CSC/3's and 16 MB of RAM and your poor 1988-age equipment > can't handle it, then fine... > > /cah > > I agree. Internet should belong to everyone. However, I felt pity to those still using that ISP X as their Internet access provider. At the last Comnet Conference at Washington DC (1/30-2/1), I happened to run into a few exhibitors at the floor who were customers to this ISP X. To my surprise, none of them were aware of the fact that they were restricted to reach out potential customers who insist on using their own long prefix IP address. They all expressed serious concern of such limitation and felt angery at the arbitrary restriction by their service supplier. I think ISP X is going to have some explanation to do. ISP X definitely cannot claim itself offering universal connectivity in the Internet world. Its customers cannot reach out and touch anyone they wish. There is potential legal liability due to loss of business opportunity if the customer can establish misrepresentation by ISP X, or perhaps show gross disregard of negligence as compared to the industrial standard. Afterall, ISP X is the only one departing from the industrial norm. I get the feeling that all this matter can be resolved simply by someone informing the customers of ISP X's unilateral practice decision which resulted in their accessibility limitation. Who knows, may be all ISP's other than ISP X will benefit from the windfall of the exodus customers who felt being cheated for the service they've contracted. Better yet, I think ISP X is creating seed for a class action suit. SC

1 0

Any men out there !.
by come＠get.me 13 Feb '96

13 Feb '96

Hi there. I am Mary Jane. I am Filipino and I live in Manila, the capitol of the Philippines. The original pearl of the orient. In this land we have many of the world's most beautiful sights. Perhaps the most beautiful sight to behold are the girls like me, with smiles to die for. Can you imagine, long black silky fine hair, brown sharp knowing eyes, a mixture of Latin and Asian features on top of my 5'6" body with my legs taking up most of that and with 37/24/36 curves not even the safest car in the world can handle. I am quite young, I am not going to let you know how young, but I am old enough and I would like to take you, my American dream man, on a tour of this beautiful Country. My beautiful young friends are all here waiting for you if I am busy or not here when you call and I believe we can give you memories never to be forgotten. Call us when you are free and ready to let your imagination run riot. 011 63988 2225001 011 63988 2225002 011 63988 2225003 011 63988 2225004 011 63988 2225005 011 63988 2225006 011 63988 2225007 011 63988 2225008 011 63988 2225009 011 63988 2225010

1 0

LAST CALL NANOG Registration
by Pam Ciesla 12 Feb '96

12 Feb '96

Due to the large volume of attendees registration for the NANOG Meeting on February 15 & 16 will be closed at 12:00PM EST on Tuesday, 2/13. Pam Ciesla

2 1

Re: ISP Domain Auction
by Kent W. England 12 Feb '96

12 Feb '96

At 10:47 AM 2/12/96 +0100, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > > > randy(a)psg.com (Randy Bush) writes: > > > > My personal opinion is that the IANA should recommend that the InterNIC > > simply unregister the names. > > > > randy > >I second that, especially for the country names. > >Daniel > > If you read the fine print on the InterNIC application for changing domain names, the InterNIC reserves the right to review the entire application as a new application if the change requests a change to the Organization information. Therefore, a straightforward attempt to transfer a .COM domain name to another entity results in a new application for that name. This makes it smoother to do coordinated transfers, but if InterNIC re-considers the transfer it makes the rights about what Sean said he would bid in an earlier message. ($1) By the way, domain names are not uniquely speculated. About two years ago, a company widely circulated an offer to sell 1-800-INFO-HIWAY for about US$20,000. I passed. --Kent

1 0

More on MTU discovery...
by Jamshid Mahdavi 12 Feb '96

12 Feb '96

Based on the number of replies, it sounds like there is quite a lot of interest in this subject. I didn't want to call out any sites in particular, because I didn't want to pick on any providers. I sent mail to three people with problems this morning at around the same time I sent the nanog mail, and have so far only heard a response back from one. The one who responded turned out to be exactly what Matt suggested -- mismatched ATM MTUs on Cisco routers. Apparently the Cisco default is something like 4470 even though ATM default MTU is supposed to be 9180. The other two sites haven't responded. The IP hop in question in both cases was, I believe, a cisco router (based on the prompt I got when I telnetted to them). However, since I know that in most cases Ciscos seem to do the right thing, I suspect that these sites have other problems down at layer two. Lots of people out there make bridging products who have never heard of RFC1191... If I hear back from the providers for the other two sites, I'll post the answers to the list. --Jamshid

1 0