http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/175172.html Leaders of the nation's largest corporations are designing a new communications network that would alert them immediately to a terrorist attack and enable them to instantly talk with one another and government officials about how to respond. Interesting idea. It would be nice if ISPs also had a way to instantly talk with one another. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/infrastructure/comments/Donelan.htm
Sean Donelan wrote:
Interesting idea. It would be nice if ISPs also had a way to instantly talk with one another. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/infrastructure/comments/Donelan.htm
Once upon a time, kc had a MOO -- we used to hang out there and discuss things in real time.... -- William Allen Simpson Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 03:55:26PM -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote:
Sean Donelan wrote:
Interesting idea. It would be nice if ISPs also had a way to instantly talk with one another. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/infrastructure/comments/Donelan.htm
Once upon a time, kc had a MOO -- we used to hang out there and discuss things in real time....
Indeed. Once upon a time... one wonders why that is no longer the case. It isn't as if a MOO (or any other flavor of favorite server) takes up much. Is nobody offering, or is nobody using what's offered? If it's just a matter of nobody offering, after all, even I can fix that... -- *************************************************************************** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com lucifer@lightbearer.com http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 06:06:54PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 03:55:26PM -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote:
Sean Donelan wrote:
Interesting idea. It would be nice if ISPs also had a way to instantly talk with one another. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/infrastructure/comments/Donelan.htm
Once upon a time, kc had a MOO -- we used to hang out there and discuss things in real time....
Indeed. Once upon a time... one wonders why that is no longer the case. It isn't as if a MOO (or any other flavor of favorite server) takes up much. Is nobody offering, or is nobody using what's offered?
If it's just a matter of nobody offering, after all, even I can fix that...
Or just put up an IRC server, as long as you don't link it to EFNet noone will packet it. :) If thats too much trouble, try an AIM chat room. I don't think its worth making a whole mud over (no offense to MOO :P). -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)
Once upon a time, kc had a MOO -- we used to hang out there and discuss things in real time....
Indeed. Once upon a time... one wonders why that is no longer the case. It isn't as if a MOO (or any other flavor of favorite server) takes up much. Is nobody offering, or is nobody using what's offered?
If it's just a matter of nobody offering, after all, even I can fix that...
I've actually had the MOO software compiled installed for a while, just haven't gotten around to had the time to play with it...If anyone wants to tell me how to set it up/secure it, i'll be glad to leave it there... Jeff
Once upon a time, kc had a MOO -- we used to hang out there and discuss things in real time....
Indeed. Once upon a time... one wonders why that is no longer the case. It isn't as if a MOO (or any other flavor of favorite server) takes up much. Is nobody offering, or is nobody using what's offered?
It'd be great if we had our own Slashdot site, with sections for outage reports, bulletins, and threaded discussions that were spun off from the main NANOG list because they were only of interest to a small group. The Slashdot source is available but the install sounds fairly complex - multiple perl modules, mySQL, etc. We've thought about developing a prototype at Merit, but volunteers would certainly be welcome.
Hello Susan, I assist in setting up Slashdot style sites all the time, and would be happy to put something together, if there is enough interest. That being said, mailing lists do not always translate well into forum sites. In fact, the result is usually an unused forum that does not server a real purpose. I'd like to see what type of interest, if any, there is in a forum style site. In order to avoid wasting bandwidth, you are welcome to reply to me private with a +/-1 and I will be happy to post the results. Thursday, March 14, 2002, 8:58:13 AM, you wrote: SH> It'd be great if we had our own Slashdot site, with sections for outage SH> reports, bulletins, and threaded discussions that were spun off from the SH> main NANOG list because they were only of interest to a small group. The SH> Slashdot source is available but the install sounds fairly complex - SH> multiple perl modules, mySQL, etc. We've thought about developing a SH> prototype at Merit, but volunteers would certainly be welcome. allan -- allan allan@allan.org http://www.allan.org
Congress to Enter ICANN Fray By Declan McCullagh
2:00 a.m. March 14, 2002 PST
WASHINGTON -- Official Washington's post-Sept. 11 preoccupation with heightened security measures has finally extended to the underlying structure of the Internet.
The U.S. Congress is planning oversight hearings to investigate the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the troubled nonprofit organization tasked by the Clinton administration with overseeing domain names and Internet addresses.
One reason for the heightened scrutiny of ICANN is a controversial proposal that the group's president circulated in advance of this week's meeting in Accra, Ghana. The turmoil it created exposed how public support for ICANN -- never all that strong -- has waned since the organization's creation in 1998.
For U.S. politicos who have erected their political careers on promises of stability and security, the prospect of radical changes to a body that oversees the sensitive areas of addresses and domain names is something less than palatable.
"More fundamental questions also need to be addressed, such as whether ICANN is even the most appropriate organization to be tasked with such a critical mission, which is central to our national security," wrote Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Montana) in a letter asking for hearings.
Another reason for the hearings, which the House Commerce committee has promised and the Senate Commerce committee is weighing, are long-standing complaints about ICANN's lack of accountability. It has refused to let one of its own board members review its financial information, and many anti-tax Republicans remember ICANN's abortive plans to levy fees on anyone who owns a domain name.
< snip >
When did the Internet become CENTRAL to national security???? Mildly important? Sure. Central? No way! I think Senator Burns is mistaking national security for political security therefore he must DO SOMETHING about the problems at ICANN. Senator Burns, put down the microphone and back away from the cameras! <snip>
"More fundamental questions also need to be addressed, such as whether
ICANN
is even the most appropriate organization to be tasked with such a critical mission, which is central to our national security," wrote Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Montana) in a letter asking for hearings.
< snip >
On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 01:20:55PM -0800, Larry Diffey wrote:
When did the Internet become CENTRAL to national security???? Mildly important? Sure. Central? No way! I think Senator Burns is mistaking national security for political security therefore he must DO SOMETHING about the problems at ICANN.
The day that more than a few businesses started making it part of their core process. Guess what, folks? Those customers you value so much, the ones who pay your salary - they depend on you. Turn a major portion of the network off, and you won't kill the economy as we know it; but there sure as well would be a Film At 11, and a whole lot of companies scrambling to figure out what the hell to do to keep functioning (not to mention some few stock markets, monetary exchanges, and a number of other places who would continue to function, but only in a lesser capacity). The government quite values business. They pay for most of their campaigns. And, hell, for that matter, the country's economy *is* a matter of national concern. Does this mean the whole bit with ICANN is warranted? I couldn't really say. But it does mean that we *are* on the radar for these folks. Many folks have made predictions that the Internet would not be allowed to run unregulated once it became as crucial as the technophiles envisioned it to be; this sort of questioning is *exactly* what you should have been expecting. Whether it goes further, I will not attempt to predict, but the fact that it has arrived should not be suprising anyone who's even mildly aware of the world outside the innards of a router. -- *************************************************************************** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com lucifer@lightbearer.com http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 15:02:57 PST, Tony Hain <alh-ietf@tndh.net> said:
fact that it has arrived should not be suprising anyone who's even mildly aware of the world outside the innards of a router.
Do you expect to find people like that reading this list. ;)
I'm sure that at least 75% of the readers of this list could identify a backhoe in a lineup of construction equipment. ;)
When did the Internet become CENTRAL to national security???? Mildly important? Sure. Central? No way! I think Senator Burns is mistaking national security for political security therefore he must DO SOMETHING about the problems at ICANN.
I suppose it depends on what you define as national security. The smooth running of government is important to national security and you will find that in nearly every facet of government the Internet has started to play a major part, atleast for email, but much more in some cases. The problem with this is that most of these changes haven't been as well co-ordinated as they might have been, so when there is no Internet figure out the processes to get basic things done doesn't exist. The deployment of email for many organisations has been unplanned i.e. it was switched on one day. The backup systems/processes for when its down don't exist anymore or aren't kept uptodate. Even international inter-government issues are dealt with over the Internet now. So in my view the Internet is important to national and probably global security. Which I think everyone on this list should be somewhat happy about. Regards, Neil.
It'd be great if we had our own Slashdot site, with sections for outage reports, bulletins, and threaded discussions that were spun off from the main NANOG list because they were only of interest to a small group. The
I've setup a server for Slashdot before. It's a very customized install meant to support lots of traffic. I have another similiar system easier to run/install that may be suitable, if I set it up, would ya'll like to play?
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Steve Feldman wrote:
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 03:55:26PM -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote:
Once upon a time, kc had a MOO -- we used to hang out there and discuss things in real time....
It's still there, but doesn't see much activity these days. Steve
Yep, IPNMOO is still around, and some people use it. NANOG is the closest thing we have to a "all-hands" channel, but lots of people don't like the signal to noise ratio. I have my nocwire list, but its mostly just interesting things sean saw on the net. Individual engineers use IRC, AIM, etc to communicate with people they know. Its informal, but so far it has served us well.
Also sprach Sean Donelan
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Steve Feldman wrote:
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 03:55:26PM -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote:
Once upon a time, kc had a MOO -- we used to hang out there and discuss things in real time....
It's still there, but doesn't see much activity these days.
Yep, IPNMOO is still around, and some people use it. NANOG is the closest thing we have to a "all-hands" channel, but lots of people don't like the signal to noise ratio. I have my nocwire list, but its mostly just interesting things sean saw on the net. Individual engineers use IRC, AIM, etc to communicate with people they know.
Its informal, but so far it has served us well.
It might be worthwhile to post a pointer to this MOO. There have been several posts about it, but no pointers on how to access it. I only have very limited experience with MUD's/MOO's/whatever, but I'm certainly willing to give it a shot if it helps inter-provider communication. -- Jeff McAdams Email: jeffm@iglou.com Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848 IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456
google: ipnmoo (it's not really hiding) it's many years old, and inspired by the spirit originally intended by craig's ipn-list. (i.e., it wasn't kc's idea) it's still supported (at the very least) but i don't consider it a reasonable substitute for the Right Way. but then i don't see any other Reasonable Substitutes for the Right Way (i.e.., beyond nanog-mailinglist) gaining any traction, so i probably shouldn't be so hard on it. http://www.caida.org/projects/ipnmoo/ telnet://ipnmoo.caida.org:4766/ (note i moved it from www.caida.org:4766; i'll get the web page fixed tomorrow) k On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 10:33:28PM -0500, Jeff Mcadams wrote: Also sprach Sean Donelan
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Steve Feldman wrote:
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 03:55:26PM -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote:
Once upon a time, kc had a MOO -- we used to hang out there and discuss things in real time....
It's still there, but doesn't see much activity these days.
Yep, IPNMOO is still around, and some people use it. NANOG is the closest thing we have to a "all-hands" channel, but lots of people don't like the signal to noise ratio. I have my nocwire list, but its mostly just interesting things sean saw on the net. Individual engineers use IRC, AIM, etc to communicate with people they know.
Its informal, but so far it has served us well.
It might be worthwhile to post a pointer to this MOO. There have been several posts about it, but no pointers on how to access it. I only have very limited experience with MUD's/MOO's/whatever, but I'm certainly willing to give it a shot if it helps inter-provider communication. -- Jeff McAdams Email: jeffm@iglou.com Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848 IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Sean Donelan wrote: :http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/175172.html : Leaders of the nation's largest corporations are designing a new : communications network that would alert them immediately to a terrorist : attack and enable them to instantly talk with one another and government : officials about how to respond. I get threat updates a few times a day from various sources as a part of my job, and what I have noticed is that the most valuble updates are the ones where someone has put a few hours worth of analysis into them.
From this article, the value of this service is a central point of co-ordination, not unlike CERT, FIRST or (I think) the NIPC at the FBI.
Nanog is actually a pretty effective forum for these issues as, it is an ongoing way of maintaining connections between decision makers and subject matter experts. :Interesting idea. It would be nice if ISPs also had a way to :instantly talk with one another. :http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/infrastructure/comments/Donelan.htm What if someone were to offer one of those CNN satellite video terminals at a reasonable rate with a package including a sat/cell phone, conference bridge numbers, with alternates and backups etc..? The service would have to be offered by someone with the credibility to assess threats, and be able to co-ordinate response once subscribers started calling in. It is one thing to get people on the phone, it is another to co-ordinate emergency management strategy with people who are busy, don't have security expertise, and may not have been briefed on the complexity of the situation. Personally, I think the NIPC is probably the only group with the mandate and access to expertise neccesary for something like this for the ISP and telcom world, outside the industries themselves. Could a service like this could sustain itself profitably? Could a private industry consortium have broad enough influence to be effective? This is a complicated issue. Maybe I'm off base, but Nanog is actually really good. Combined with Bugtraq, Incidents, and a virus alert service, Nanog plays a vital role. Their only limitation is that they are on the Internet. :) -- batz
participants (18)
-
Allan Liska -
batz -
Jeff Mcadams -
Jeffrey Meltzer -
Joel Baker -
k claffy -
Larry Diffey -
mike harrison -
neil＠DOMINO.ORG -
Richard A Steenbergen -
Richard Forno -
Robert A. Hayden -
Sean Donelan -
Steve Feldman -
Susan Harris -
Tony Hain -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu -
William Allen Simpson