- Test - lists.nanog.org

All in favor or.....
by Jim Popovitch 26 Oct '15

26 Oct '15

All in favor of 9x5 network operations say aye. Geeze..... -Jim P.

4 5

SPAM solutions (to prevent mass emails from ever happening again)
by David Bass 26 Oct '15

26 Oct '15

Considering the latest mass SPAM attack I have determined that action must be taken to prevent this from ever happening again! It is obvious that email servers are to blame, as without them SPAMmers would not be able to carry out their vicious attacks. We therefore must outlaw all email servers, except those run by government agencies who specialize in running email servers. I vote that we start a petition to outlaw email servers...WHO'S WITH ME?

1 0

Can someone do something about this "Fw: New message" spam?
by Paul S. 26 Oct '15

26 Oct '15

Hi, Can someone from the moderator team take a look? This has been going on for a while.

3 2

Roku Admin
by Dennis Burgess 26 Oct '15

26 Oct '15

Can a Roku admin hit me off list please :) Thanks, [DennisBurgessSignature] www.linktechs.net<http://www.linktechs.net/> - 314-735-0270 x103 - dmburgess(a)linktechs.net<mailto:dmburgess@linktechs.net>

1 0

Fw: new message
by Ricky Beam 26 Oct '15

26 Oct '15

Hey! New message, please read <http://bio-oil-reviews.com/other.php?j> Ricky Beam

4 3

old message
by Jim Mercer 26 Oct '15

26 Oct '15

as opposed to the new message, which is getting old. --jim -- Jim Mercer Reptilian Research jim(a)reptiles.org +1 416 410-5633 Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming "Wow! What a Ride!" -- Hunter S. Thompson

1 0

Fw: new message
by Alessandro Ratti 26 Oct '15

26 Oct '15

Hey! New message, please read <http://thomasanthonyguerriero.co/object.php?96yce> Alessandro Ratti

2 2

[Discussion] MTU mismatch and impact of data-plane traffic
by Mohamed Kamal 25 Oct '15

25 Oct '15

Suppose you have the below network topology, where PE is connected to P1, P1 is connected to P2 and P2 is connected to GW, all through 1G links. [PE]-1500------------1500-[P1]-1600------------1600-[P2]-1500------------1600-[GW] The numbers represent the MTU values configured in the following order; PE's egress interface to P1, P1 ingress interface, P1 egress interface, P2 ingress, P2 egress and eventually GW ingress. Q1: What do you think would be the impact in terms of data-plane traffic (HTTP/s browsing, Video streaming etc), traversing this network, in the direction from the Internet and going to the PE router? My answer is: If there is a client running Win7 on a machine trying to access a web server out there, the TCP MSS would be adjusted to around 1260-1460 bytes depending on the Operating System's MTU value. Hypothetically, the first packet from the web server destined to the client would be 1460-bytes and will reach the ingress interface of the GW. The GW would receive it in the input_buffer of the ingress interface, strip off the Ethernet header, and move it to the output buffer of the egress interface whose MTU is 1600. Since the largest MSS is 1460, and there is always a one-to-one mapping between segments received from the TCP module and the packets constructed in the IP module, I believe that the largest IP packet would be 1480. GW would cram the Ethernet frame with the 1480-bytes of IP payload data and send it to the P2, which would in the other end, pass it on its way. Q2: However, what about larger MSS sizes? example; above 1500? and larges chunks of payload from a connectionless protocols that don't exchange MSS? UDP for example? or Google's QUIC (which is HTTP over UDP)? -- Mohamed Kamal

1 0

Spamhaus contact needed
by Jason Baugher 25 Oct '15

25 Oct '15

Sorry to clutter up this list with an email issue, but hopefully someone is here from Spamhaus that can contact me off-list. I have a customer whose IP keeps getting listed in the CBL, and even after doing packet captures of everything in and out of their network, I still can't find a reason for it. Thanks

4 7

New version grepcidr 2.991
by John Levine 25 Oct '15

25 Oct '15

I have made some minor changes to and fixed some bugs in my updated version of grepcidr. It will now match CIDR ranges in the input, so you can look either for CIDRs that are completely contained in pattern ranges, or that overlap any pattern range. It handles both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. The pattern matching uses a state machine that is quite fast, so it can handle large numbers of patterns and large input files. It's here: http://www.taugh.com/grepcidr-2 R's, John

1 0