January 2009 - NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

The New Zealand Network Operators' Group
by Donald Neal 04 Jan '09

04 Jan '09

The New Zealand Network Operators' Group The New Zealand Network Operators' Group (NZNOG) has no king, president or formal membership. It consists of the subscribers to this mailing list. The group is intended to facilitate discussion among operators of networks in New Zealand on matters relevant to network operators as described in the list's Acceptable Use Policy. That policy appears later in this posting. Conference Our next conference is to be hosted by FX Networks in Auckland on 28-30 January 2009. See http://2009.nznog.org/ for more information and to register. Other Meetings See http://thursdaynightcurry.com/ if you live in or near Auckland, Hamilton or Wellington. Operators' Contact List See http://www.nznog.org/?page_id=6 for operational contact details for most New Zealand ISP's. These are intended for use by other network operators, not by most customers. Internet Exchanges See http://www.nzix.net/ for details of exchanges in operation. About This Mailing List This list has around 1000 addresses subscribed. You may only post to the list from a subscribed address. A number of people subscribe addresses which do not receive email purely to allow posting from them. You may choose to receive postings as they come in, or just to receive daily "digests". See the bottom of the page http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog/ to change the form in which you receive postings. The NZNOG mailing list is provided through a server at The University of Waikato, and is administered by employees of APN Online, Citylink, and The University of Waikato. None of these organisations, nor any administrator, is responsible for its content. NZNOG Mailing List Acceptable Use Policy The NZNOG mailing list exists to provide a forum for the exchange of technical information and the discussion of implementation issues that require cooperation among New Zealand network service providers. In order to continue to provide a useful forum for discussion of relevant technical issues, users of the list are asked to respect the following guidelines. 1. Discussion will focus on Internet operational and technical issues. 2. Discussion related to meetings of network service providers is appropriate. 3. Discussion unrelated to these topics is not appropriate. 4. Postings to multiple mailing lists are discouraged. 5. Postings that include foul language, character assassination, and lack of respect for other participants are unacceptable. 6. Blatant product or service marketing is unacceptable. 7. Postings of a political, philosophical or legal nature are discouraged. 8. Postings to the list should be in ASCII or MIME encoded as text/plain. Attachments should not be sent to the list. To present a document, a suitable URL may be referred to. For documents of general interest, the use of proprietary file formats is discouraged. 9. Breaches of list etiquette should be dealt with privately with the offending list user, and should not result in complaints being sent to the list. 10. A person repeatedly breaching list etiquette shall receive warnings from the list administrator. A further breach after the second such warning within thirty days shall result in the offender being unsubscribed from the list. Other action may also be taken to block postings to the list by the offender. Any such unsubscription is to be immediately announced to the list. Mailing List Archives A full archive is available at http://list.waikato.ac.nz/pipermail/nznog/ . Any message sent to the list will be archived and made available on the web automatically. Changes are not made to the archive on request, though the administrators remain happy to assist the Office of the Privacy Commissioner should any complaint be laid with that office. One way to search the archive is to use google and prefix your search with site:list.waikato.ac.nz . Subscribing to the List See http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog to subscribe. Donald Neal NZNOG Mailing List Owner/Administrator/Muggins -- Donald Neal | "Careful design and strict discipline are Research Officer | necessary to prevent this sort of mess WAND | from escaping the development laboratory The University of Waikato | and infesting the production environment." | - D. Russell

1 0

Any Juniper heads out there?
by Nick Larsen 04 Jan '09

04 Jan '09

Hi All, I have a Juniper J2320 running JunOS 9.0 R2.10 Enhanced Services, on which I'm trying to configure as an IKE gateway in hopes that I can connect using NetScreen-Remote or some other IPsec software from various DSL links (Dynamic IKE endpoints and NAT traversal). Is anyone familiar with Juniper and IPsec/IKE? Any tips welcome. Regards, Nick Larsen PS: I have looked at many pieces of documentation, but they're either for static endpoints, or using X-Auth with RADIUS. Or perhaps I'm just being blind.

1 0

Re: [nznog] enum
by James Jones 03 Jan '09

03 Jan '09

On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 7:09 AM, James Jones <james(a)freedomnet.co.nz> wrote: > Due to a funds shortage I will not be attending NZNOG09. I really wish > I could go!!! If some how you still wanted to do it I could make > myself available by phone if you guys could find a speaker phone....:) > > On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 7:07 AM, Dean Pemberton <nznog(a)deanpemberton.com> wrote: >> Don Gould wrote: >>> >>> How about outlining how you'd like to see the system used in NZ? I would like to see like to see the system being used by providers first. Also I would like to see used by end users, with no restrictions. If you put you number in the registery you need to be able to accept the call from anyone. >>> >>> How about putting a shout out for support for your ideas? It needs to operate like an open source project where we have volenteers that help keep the servers running. It would need take donations for providers and end users possible to help offset server and colo costs. On ther surface I would like to see run like e164.org, but have it a little more robust and production worthy. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> /me puts on his Org Committee hat >> >> I'm sure even at this late stage we could find space for an enum talk or >> panel discussion. >> Is this something that people are interested in? Anyone want to volunteer? >> James are you registered for the conference? >> >> >> Dean >> _______________________________________________ >> NZNOG mailing list >> NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz >> http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog >> > > > > -- > James Jones > Managing Director > Freedom Networks > +64 6 3678300 > +1 413 771 1402 > james(a)freedomnet.co.nz > -- James Jones Managing Director Freedom Networks +64 6 3678300 +1 413 771 1402 james(a)freedomnet.co.nz

2 1

Re: [nznog] enum presentation: was: enum
by Ewen McNeill 03 Jan '09

03 Jan '09

In message <4960FAF6.1070202(a)deanpemberton.com>, Dean Pemberton writes: >Don Gould wrote: >> How about outlining how you'd like to see the system used in NZ? >> How about putting a shout out for support for your ideas? > >/me puts on his Org Committee hat >I'm sure even at this late stage we could find space for an enum talk or >panel discussion. The Network Systems Miniconf (one of the tutorials on Wednesday) would be happy to provide time for a enum talk and/or panel discussion if someone would volunteer to lead it off. (The topic seems very relevant to the "layer 7" approach of the miniconf, schedule we are planning is very flexible so we can allow time to discuss the issue in detail.) An offer to lead a session about enum and/or indications that this would be a useful topic welcomed. Details below (as per earlier post); suggestions of other topics also still welcomed. Ewen -=- cut here -=- From: Ewen McNeill <ewen(a)naos.co.nz> To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 14:22:29 +1300 Subject: [nznog] NZNOG 2009 Network Management Miniconf If you've registered for NZNOG 2009 (http://2009.nznog.org/register) you will have seen that we are holding another network administrators miniconf on the Wednesday tutorial day. We'd like to try a different format this year and have a few BoF-style sessions on various ISP systems/network management topics, each with a brief introductory talk followed by an extended discussion period (10-30 minutes depending on interest in the topic). We would like suggestions for topics of interest to anyone planning on coming to the miniconf. We would also welcome any offers to speak for a few minutes (5-15 minutes) on a topic as a lead into discussion. This is your opportunity to find out what your peers at other ISPs have found does or does not work. Some topics that have been mentioned in informal discussion, or happened in previous years: - system configuration automation (puppet, bcfg, cfengine, etc) - system/network monitoring (nagios, etc, especially scalability) - mail systems/spam filtering/webmail But there are plenty of other possible topics so let us know what is relevant to you at present. Please send topic suggestions and offers to talk to: <talks09(a)nznog.miniconf.org> Simon Lyall and Ewen McNeill Network Administrators Miniconf -=- cut here -=-

1 0

Re: [nznog] enum
by James Jones 03 Jan '09

03 Jan '09

oops..sent correction On 2008-12-23, at 09:16, Leo Vegoda wrote: > On 23/12/2008 5:34, "David Farrar" <dpf(a)ihug.co.nz> wrote: > >> There's been some discussions and trials in the past between >> InternetNZ and the Telco Carrier Forum. As far as I know there are no >> current plans to delegate the domain. >> >> It is worth noting that the ITU will only delegate the domain if >> instructed to by the MED, so the MED would need to be satisfied with >> whomever is proposed to operate it. > > I suppose we'll find out soon enough: > > http://www.ripe.net/maillists/ncc-archives/enum-announce/2008/msg00011 > .html Impressive nameserver diversity in that proposal: nserver: enum1.freedomnet.co.nz nserver: enum1.freedomnet.co.nz Joe _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog -- James Jones Managing Director Freedom Networks +64 6 3678300 +1 413 771 1402 james(a)freedomnet.co.nz

24 47

Re: [nznog] enum
by James Jones 03 Jan '09

03 Jan '09

I am trying as much info as posibble. I would like to see open enum system, in which anyone can register their numbers. I would like to see it back by providers as well. I really don't want anything in return, execcpt to able to have cheaper call routing for everyone. Steve I can understand your dubiousness in regards to the application. I am not trying to hide anything. Also to clarify, I am a contractor for ALU, but I am not tied Telecom. -----Original Message----- From: "Steve Phillips" <steve(a)focb.co.nz> To: "nznog" <nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz> Sent: 1/5/09 1:45 AM Subject: Re: [nznog] enum Don Gould wrote: > I'm sorry but I really feel a call to order is required here! Certainly. > I've read over half the posts in this thread and see no reason for false > accusations. False accusations ? the thing I'm finding is that people are asking for more information and we are getting 'yes yes, we will give you the information if you ask for it !' which isn't actually giving anyone anything about the intentions behind the application. This is very typical of commercial entities (and infact, anyone trying to divert attention away from something) when they are about to do something that will not necessarily be in the publics best interest. This has been an exceedingly common tactic in the NZ Internet industry since it started. The lack of any positive from JONES JAMES F and the ability to silently sidestep any real questions on his companies intentions for the enum allocation raise warning bells in my mind. I guess you've got a different outlook. Good for you, at least you're still smiling as you get shafted. > How about outlining how you'd like to see the system used in NZ? I really don't think it will ever get used, which is probably for the best. I also think allocating/activating it with no set plan as to how this is going to be implemented is dangerous. All it would take is a reasonably large carrier (verizon ? etc..) to perform a lookup, get a response and incorrectly route a call and you'd end up with chaos (keeping in mind that this is _supposed_ to be an official way route PSTN allocated numbers via IP). How are number allocations going to be handled ? how about coping with number portability ? do we sub delegate based on the NAD ? if the NAD has control then why is a private/commercial entity looking after the allocation ? is this entity going to charge to gain access to this system (even tho its open ! yay for word games) and if so, how much and will any charges slow adoption ? oh, and answering Craigs questions would also be nice. > How about putting a shout out for support for your ideas? I dont have any ideas other than 'it should be allocated to the MED/DNC/Peter Mott in order to stop this sort of thing from happening. > Seems to me that there are people here who are just jealous that > someone's trying to do something with this enum stuff. Yup, what a wonderful conclusion you've come to. I'd just like to make sure that a system such as enum, that is seen as a standard (with a low uptake, granted) does not fall in to the hands of some crowd that will in all likely-hood exploit it to make $$, prove to me that this is NOT the case and i'll happily shut up. (and yeah, I know there are checks around the allocations and I would _hope_ that they all work swimmingly, but call be a skeptic - especially when there are names such as Alcatel-Lucent and Telecom NZ behind the application based on the original e-mail sent to the list) > How about getting this thread moving back in a positive direction rather > than a pointless flame?! I find anything questioning why a public standard falls under the control of an unknown commercial entity, in order to line someones pockets, to have a reasonably valid point. If you see this as being pointless, then feel free to use your delete button or ignore the thread. I know, doom and gloom - but I have yet to meet anyone that can predict the future and looking back after the fact and saying 'oops, we maybe shouldn't have done that' doesn't really help things move forward. The NZ Internet industry has done that too often in the past, why are we doing it again now ? -- Steve.

1 0

Report on IPv4 address list
by Ian McDonald 02 Jan '09

02 Jan '09

Thought this might interest a few people: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20090102-the-year-in-ipv4-addresses-al… -- Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4/, http://www.jandi.co.nz Blog: http://iansblog.jandi.co.nz

2 1