- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

Old Newby
by Allister Clarke 11 Jan '07

11 Jan '07

Hello. I am back. Last posted while at Waikato uni in 2002. Hello Lindsay if you are still around? Al.

1 0

Notification of NZRR Database changes
by NZRR Database Notifications 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

Dear Colleague, This is to notify you that some object(s) in NZRR database which you either maintain or are listed as to-be-notified have been added, deleted or changed. These objects are used to configure the various NZIX route servers (http://nzix.net/) so you can expect the relevant servers to be reloaded in the near future. The reloading of the servers is staggered over a period of time so that if you are peering with both servers at an exchange, you can maintain at least one BGP session at all times and consequently a full set of routes. --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route-set: AS9560:RS-ROUTES:AS17746 descr: advertised to AS9560 by Orcon Internet Ltd - AS17746 members: 60.234.0.0/16^16-29, 202.150.96.0/19^19-29, 203.99.0.0/19^19-29, 202.126.192.0/20^20-29, 203.96.192.0/20^20-29, 219.88.128.0/20^20-29, 219.88.240.0/20^20-29, 210.54.56.0/21^21-29, 210.54.148.0/22^22-29, 210.55.12.0/22^22-29, 202.37.82.0/23^23-29, 202.0.151.0/24^24-29, 202.36.170.0/24^24-29, 202.37.19.0/24^24-29, 202.37.78.0/24^24-29, 202.37.173.0/24^24-29, 202.37.194.0/24^24-29, 202.49.187.0/24^24-29, 202.49.233.0/24^24-29, 202.49.246.0/24^24-29, 202.50.164.0/24^24-29, 202.50.167.0/24^24-29, 202.50.246.0/24^24-29, 202.174.160.0/24^24-29, 203.86.200.0/24^24-29, 210.54.12.0/24^24-29, 210.55.1.0/24^24-29, 210.55.8.0/24^24-29, 210.55.199.0/24^24-29, 202.27.188.128/25^25-29, 210.55.0.0/25^25-29, 210.55.180.128/26^26-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: karl.skewes(a)team.orcon.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20060728 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route-set: AS9560:RS-ROUTES:AS17746 descr: advertised to AS9560 by Orcon Internet Ltd - AS17746 members: 60.234.0.0/16^16-29, 202.150.96.0/19^19-29, 203.99.0.0/19^19-29, 203.96.192.0/20^20-29, 219.88.128.0/20^20-29, 219.88.240.0/20^20-29, 210.54.56.0/21^21-29, 202.127.8.0/22^22-29, 210.54.148.0/22^22-29, 210.55.12.0/22^22-29, 202.37.82.0/23^23-29, 202.36.170.0/24^24-29, 202.37.19.0/24^24-29, 202.37.173.0/24^24-29, 202.37.194.0/24^24-29, 202.49.187.0/24^24-29, 202.49.233.0/24^24-29, 202.49.246.0/24^24-29, 202.50.167.0/24^24-29, 202.50.246.0/24^24-29, 202.174.160.0/24^24-29, 203.86.200.0/24^24-29, 210.54.12.0/24^24-29, 210.55.1.0/24^24-29, 210.55.8.0/24^24-29, 210.55.199.0/24^24-29, 202.27.188.128/25^25-29, 210.55.0.0/25^25-29, 210.55.180.128/26^26-29, 210.55.193.64/27^27-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: thomas.salmen(a)team.orcon.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20070111 source: NZRR

1 0

Notification of NZRR Database changes
by NZRR Database Notifications 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

Dear Colleague, This is to notify you that some object(s) in NZRR database which you either maintain or are listed as to-be-notified have been added, deleted or changed. These objects are used to configure the various NZIX route servers (http://nzix.net/) so you can expect the relevant servers to be reloaded in the near future. The reloading of the servers is staggered over a period of time so that if you are peering with both servers at an exchange, you can maintain at least one BGP session at all times and consequently a full set of routes. --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route-set: AS9560:RS-ROUTES:AS9889 descr: advertised to AS9560 by Maxnet - AS9889 members: 123.100.64.0/18^18-29, 202.89.32.0/19^19-29, 203.89.160.0/19^19-29, 202.55.96.0/20^20-29, 210.55.100.0/22^22-29, 210.55.104.0/22^22-29, 192.138.251.0/24^24-29, 202.6.5.0/24^24-29, 202.6.116.0/24^24-29, 202.27.204.0/24^24-29, 202.36.70.0/24^24-29, 202.36.227.0/24^24-29, 202.37.72.0/24^24-29, 202.37.181.0/24^24-29, 202.49.141.0/24^24-29, 202.150.102.0/24^24-29, 203.97.42.0/24^24-29, 210.54.13.0/24^24-29, 210.54.142.0/24^24-29, 210.55.169.0/24^24-29, 210.55.214.0/24^24-29, 210.55.230.0/24^24-29, 203.167.219.56/29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: simon.allard(a)maxnet.co.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061011 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route-set: AS9560:RS-ROUTES:AS9889 descr: advertised to AS9560 by Maximum Internet Ltd - AS9889 members: 123.100.64.0/18^18-29, 202.89.32.0/19^19-29, 203.89.160.0/19^19-29, 202.55.96.0/20^20-29, 210.55.100.0/22^22-29, 210.55.104.0/22^22-29, 192.138.251.0/24^24-29, 202.6.5.0/24^24-29, 202.6.116.0/24^24-29, 202.27.204.0/24^24-29, 202.36.70.0/24^24-29, 202.36.227.0/24^24-29, 202.37.72.0/24^24-29, 202.37.181.0/24^24-29, 202.49.141.0/24^24-29, 202.150.102.0/24^24-29, 203.12.15.0/24^24-29, 203.97.42.0/24^24-29, 210.54.13.0/24^24-29, 210.54.142.0/24^24-29, 210.55.169.0/24^24-29, 210.55.214.0/24^24-29, 210.55.230.0/24^24-29, 203.167.219.56/29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: noc(a)maxnet.co.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20070111 source: NZRR

1 0

Greylisting New Zealand whitelist
by Simon Lyall 08 Jan '07

08 Jan '07

Andy wrote: > You can see the routes advertised at the APE and WIX on the pages: > but it does provide a couple of lists that by some definition are in NZ. I don't know what "some definition" is but by most definitions there are quite a few non-NZ IPs there ( Specificly things like 203.59.0.0/17 that ihug advertising on behalf of iinet). Anyway, you don't want random IPs home luser IPs for greylisting, you want IPs that are sending you non-spam email. -- Simon J. Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.

9 13

[NZNOG 07 Conference] Registrations over the Holiday Period
by Mark Foster 08 Jan '07

08 Jan '07

Folks, Unfortunately it seems there was a glitch in the backend of nznog.org during the Christmas period. Anyone who registered for NZNOG during the holiday period _and did not receive an emailed confirmation__ - could you please re-register via http://www.nznog.org. If you are in any way in doubt, could you register again anyway. We'll be watching for duplicates. Sorry for the trouble. Regards Mark

2 1

Greylisting New Zealand whitelist
by Gerard Creamer 08 Jan '07

08 Jan '07

Hi there, Is there a list of NZ networks or mail hosts that are considered OK for whitelisting in an email greylisting implementation? I realise that there are trust issues etc etc but what I want to do is have domestic mail from known providers (ie ISPs and hosting providers) essentially unhindered by the usual time delay of greylisting. We're using qmail, and the greylisting options are a bit basic. If there isn't a list would I be correct in assuming that moving to postfix and using postgrey with its database learning / remembering option would be a smart move? I realise that this is verging on off topic, but my googling has netted ziltch. Regards, Gerard

4 3

[NZNOG 07 Conference] Registration Reminder
by Mark Foster 07 Jan '07

07 Jan '07

Good morning all, I imagine many of you are back at work now, so it seems timely... *** NZNOG Accommodation *** If at all possible, would people intending to attend NZNOG 07 who are looking to take advantage of the Hostel Accommodation please book _this week_. If you are unable to book this week for some reason but would still like to make use of the Hostel facility, could you please fillin the contact-us form ( http://www.nznog.org/contact.html ) and let us know what your requirements are likely to be, in order that we can plan around it. I would encourage people to make their bookings sooner rather than later, as this will greatly assist us in the planning of this event. The timing is unfortunate, and for this we apologise, but remember that conference is not far away... ! For further info check out http://www.nznog.org Cheers all, Mark For the Org Committee...

1 0

Network Systems Miniconference
by Nigel Roberts 03 Jan '07

03 Jan '07

The link for this is broken on nznog.org: http://www.nznog.org/networksystemsminiconference.html So those in the know, what's this all about then? Happy new year, Nigel

4 3

Re: [nznog] Bus/Train to NZNOG
by Martin Kealey 03 Jan '07

03 Jan '07

Darn, I'm going to have to get to Curry more often... this is much the same idea I had. Count me in, plus 2 others from Ihug. How many people have you heard from so far? I ask because we're hoping we can get Ihug to pay for a bus, which means it'll be very cheap for the individuals travelling. If we get enough we'll get a coach (in which case it WILL be cheap, because I'll be driving). As I see it, the only snag is agreeing on dates & times; my preference would be for a longer period -- go for the first tutorial, back after taking a weekend tour of the town (and visiting friends) -- but it's not essential. -Martin > -----Original Message----- > From: Joel van Velden [mailto:joel(a)tpnz.co.nz] > Sent: Tuesday, 19 December 2006 12:01 > To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: [nznog] Bus/Train to NZNOG > > Hi all > > The idea was floated at last weeks Curry in Auckland about > hiring a bus > to travel to NZNOG, as there would possibly be quite a number > of people > between Auckland and Palmerston North interested in a less > stressful and > cheaper means of getting there. > > I have no idea of what numbers would be required at this stage or what > the cost would be. Obviously it would be cheaper than flying, but take > longer to get there. > > The other alternative might be to group-book the train, which has > tables, not sure about AC power, you can walk around, is apparently > newly-refurbished, but probably takes a little longer than a bus, and > possibly more expensive. > > Is anyone is interested? > Contacting me off-list would be best. > > Regards, > Joel van Velden > > _______________________________________________ > NZNOG mailing list > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog > >

1 0

Re: [nznog] Telstra's Outage
by jdmwoolley＠ihug.co.nz 01 Jan '07

01 Jan '07

Steve Wray wrote: > Redundancy isn't really what I mean; more > forward-thinking. So if a TelstraClear engineer thought about it really hard the truck would have missed the fibre? Personally, I don't think the power of prayer is a valid network protection scheme. Though when I used to work there, it was useful on occassion ;) > From what I've heard out of Telstra people -- and > thats just the faults and 'helpdesk' people, the > attitude seems to be that a 'truck hitting a > pole' is not something that could have been > foreseen and that therefore there was no point in > having a contingency plan to deal with it. > > To me, this just seems wrong-headed. > > My question for Telstra is, was there a plan? How > well did it work out? > If they didn't have a plan or if it didn't work out > well, how are they going to address this in future? > And the answers I've been getting back from Telstra > people are rather disconcerting. A quick talk about how things are done in a Telco may be in order. 1. You need money to do everything. This includes laying fibre, writing plans and taking a toilet break. 2. There are two types of money to be spent - OPEX and CAPEX (OPerational expenditure and CAPital expenditure). 3. OPEX is evil. Accountants see it as a black hole that money is thrown down. It is not an investment. It is paying some guy for something you already own. OPEX is constantly cut. Many things that should be done as OPEX are classed as CAPEX by squinting your eyes and with the aid of smoke and mirrors. 4. CAPEX is ok - it is investing money in something with the expectation of a return at some point in time. Dig a hole, lay a cable, charge people to use it, eventually they've paid you more than it cost you to lay - this is CAPEX. You need a business case to spend CAPEX. This will consist of all likely and unlikely costs and revenues; and consequently a best, worst and expected-case return on investment. If the company thinks this is the best way to spend it's money it will do it. If it thinks it can make a larger profit or the same profit in a shorter time frame elsewhere it will do that. This is The Way It Works(tm) for a Telco and most businesses. If you can write a business case showing that getting 1000 monks in Tibet to pray for the safety of TelstrClear's network will turn a profit then they will do it. If prayer wasn't what you meant by "forward-thinking", and redundancy wasn't it then I'm at a loss. What else could they do? Not lay the fibre there? That location was probably the place that brought the best return on investment to justify the CAPEX. Could there have been a better place to put it - probably. Do companies have the time to second guess every decision made? Or will someone else beat you to the punch if you do that? Sorry for the massive rant, but berating a company, any company, for doing their best to fix a fault caused by some truck driver who was likely high on P at the time just seems like cynical people trying to complain about nothing to me. Sure, if you were one of the people affected it must've really sucked. In the end them's the breaks. On a lighter note, Merry Christmas to everyone - try to shake off the cynicism and anger that accumulated through the year at the beach this summer! Jonathan

5 5

Virus alert
by Lesley Walker 28 Dec '06

28 Dec '06

Looks like there's a new email worm/virus epidemic on the go. We've quarantined over 1100 incoming emails since 2pm, and we normally only get a trickle. ClamAV reports "postcard.exe contains Trojan.Downloader-388", and the subject line is "Happy New Year". Just what we all need. :-( Lesley W (Happy to be running Ubuntu)

3 2

Re: [nznog] Telstra's Outage
by Steve Wray 28 Dec '06

28 Dec '06

(sorry about lack of threading etc, I clipped the text out of the web-based archive) Jonathan wrote: > David Robinson wrote: >> >> "For a start, it takes more than two fibre cuts in the > North Island to >> disrupt us" >> >> And also remember back early in the year when one slip on the Hutt >> motorway took out all services in Wellington. >> >> What is so wrong with Telstra's network that single events can affect >> so many people, when supposable it takes more than two fibre cuts to >> disrupt them? > > This post you've quoted was related to the core network - > i.e. the bits that connect Wellington to Auckland etc. This > is a fault in the access network i.e. the bit that connects > Mary and Bob (or in this case Kandallah) to the core > network. NO operator has full redundancy in the access > network for residential services. What amazes me is that Telstra maintain that a truck hitting a pole was a *completely* unforseeable event and that even in retrospect they could not have been expected to have forseen that *one* *day* a truck would hit a 'single-point-of-failure pole' and that they could not have been expected to have planned for it. I ask you, is that really reasonable? I thought that engineers were the types of folk would look at diagrams of such a network and say: "well this pole is a single point of failure and its right by a road. Sooner or later its going to get hit by something, we'd better plan for that". I don't get the feeling that TC *had* planned for it... though maybe they did and if they hadn't planned for it we'd be disconnected till the new year... Insights anyone? Also, is there anywhere which keeps a log of outages experienced by NZ ISP's, how long they last etc? Thanks

4 4

Connection reliability (was Re: Telstra's Outage)
by Matthew Poole 21 Dec '06

21 Dec '06

On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, David Robb wrote: > On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, Simon Allard wrote: > >> You can't expect good uptimes and run your business which requires high >> availability internet on a $39.95 DSL account. > > Good, Fast, Cheap. Pick any two. > Where Good==Reliable, I assume? Since the relative goodness of broadband products for most consumers is often associated with their fastness and cheapness, with reliability (provided one can actually pass packets, of course) being an unconsidered factor. I do agree with Dean that we know you can't reasonably expect multiple nines of reliability from a residential service, but we, as geeks, have far different expectations from the average consumer. Plus, with NZ's high incidence of home-based businesses, how many users have actually had ANY choice of carrier until quite recently? I can probably get Woosh at home, and we have a Telecom landline. What are my other choices? TCL is still delivering over TCNZ's cable, so that's a non-starter. I could maybe get hooked into Vector's fibre, though I don't think it comes quite far enough down Great South Rd. And I'm in a better position than a lot of residential users, who can't get Woosh and aren't even close to someone's fibre network. When people have no choice, is it any wonder that they expect the earth for nothing? Nobody's telling them about the limitations of the one service they can afford, and nobody's offering them anything with better reliability for a reasonable price - what would one pay for a 2Mbps frame connection that, while unquestionably giving better upstream performance, comes in, at best, at half the downstream speed of a DSL connection? Many, many multiples of $40/month, that's for sure. Total no-brainer. We can sneer at the great unwashed, but the reality is that the marketroids aren't offering anything to fill the gaping void between DSL and frame/ISDN (does anyone even use ISDN for data anymore?). PS: Why pay metric boatloads for something like frame when Telecom won't give you credit if their network fails? Nobody got a cent out of them after the rat and the errant backhoe took out much of the country for several hours, so what's the point in handing them extra? Pardon the pun. -- Matthew Poole "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."

16 20

Re: [nznog] Telstra's Outage
by Simon Allard 20 Dec '06

20 Dec '06

Actually, I think it's the other way around. The reason NZ has 3rd rate broadband, is customers expect the world for free. You can't expect good uptimes and run your business which requires high availability internet on a $39.95 DSL account. I agree with everything Dean said, and I bet I am not the only one. -----Original Message----- From: John @ netTRUST [mailto:john(a)nettrust.net.nz] Sent: Thursday, 21 December 2006 11:19 a.m. To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] Telstra's Outage > Nothing used to piss me off more than the cable customer who used to > compain (without logging trouble tickets BTW) that thier home business > was losing money because their cable modem was down.... > > You buy a residential service - thats what you get. This type of arrogance from a NOC is why NZ has 3rd rate broadband. ADSL and cable are widely marketed to businesses and indeed business connections usually makes up the lions share of revenuw generated by these services. Let's hopen they keep you, and others with the same opinion, in the back room as far from customers as possible -or- put another way you should be using your l33t skills to substantally improve the reliability rather then having too much time on your hands digging for excuses. _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

13 17

Re: [nznog] Telstra's Outage
by jdmwoolley＠ihug.co.nz 20 Dec '06

20 Dec '06

John @ netTRUST wrote: > antedotal evidence Erm, perhaps you meant anecdotal? http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/antedotal http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/anecdotal (sorry, couldn't resist - beer!)

1 0

Telstra's Outage
by David Robinson 20 Dec '06

20 Dec '06

Hi, With Telstra's outage taking out the Northern and Western suburbs of Wellington. For what I gather it was a single truck crash bringing down the overhead wires. A single truck crash is a single point of failure, but I remember this email http://list.waikato.ac.nz/pipermail/nznog/2005-June/010158.html which says: "For a start, it takes more than two fibre cuts in the North Island to disrupt us" And also remember back early in the year when one slip on the Hutt motorway took out all services in Wellington. What is so wrong with Telstra's network that single events can affect so many people, when supposable it takes more than two fibre cuts to disrupt them? David

6 5

Re: [nznog] Telstra's Outage
by jdmwoolley＠ihug.co.nz 20 Dec '06

20 Dec '06

David Robinson wrote: > > "For a start, it takes more than two fibre cuts in the North Island to > disrupt us" > > And also remember back early in the year when one slip on the Hutt > motorway took out all services in Wellington. > > What is so wrong with Telstra's network that single events can affect > so many people, when supposable it takes more than two fibre cuts to > disrupt them? This post you've quoted was related to the core network - i.e. the bits that connect Wellington to Auckland etc. This is a fault in the access network i.e. the bit that connects Mary and Bob (or in this case Kandallah) to the core network. NO operator has full redundancy in the access network for residential services. If you want that, you need to pay through the nose to get a business service, even then most services give you only a single copper pair/fibre/cable to your premises which is still a single point of failure. Jonathan

6 5

Re: [nznog] Telstra's Outage
by Scott Weeks 20 Dec '06

20 Dec '06

--- dave.robinson(a)gmail.com wrote: From: "David Robinson" <dave.robinson(a)gmail.com> With Telstra's outage taking out the Northern and Western suburbs of Wellington. For what I gather it was a single truck crash bringing down the overhead wires. A single truck crash is a single point of failure, but I remember this email http://list.waikato.ac.nz/pipermail/nznog/2005-June/010158.html which says: "For a start, it takes more than two fibre cuts in the North Island to disrupt us" And also remember back early in the year when one slip on the Hutt motorway took out all services in Wellington. What is so wrong with Telstra's network that single events can affect so many people, when supposable it takes more than two fibre cuts to disrupt them? ------------------------------------------------------------------- Both fibers are hanging on the same poles? ;-) scott ps. to be ontopic... beer :) _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

1 0

NZNOG 2007 conference registrations are now open
by Jonny Martin 19 Dec '06

19 Dec '06

(Apologies for duplicates...) Hi All. The New Zealand Network Operators Group (NZNOG) is holding it's annual conference from January 31st to February 2nd 2007 in Palmerston North, New Zealand. Registrations are now open at http://www.nznog.org/registernow.html We encourage you to register early. NZNOG conferences are always lively, educational, and offer a great chance to network with peers from both within NZ and See you there! Jonny.

3 2

International problems via Global-Gateway
by robbie.gernandt＠apn.co.nz 19 Dec '06

19 Dec '06

Hi there Anyone experiencing problems with International connectivity via Global-Gateway? We can't get to www.google.co.nz and a few other sites at the moment I'm still waiting for a response from Global-gateway... PS! International traffic via TelsraClear is fine regards Robbie ******************************************************************************** NOTICE This email and any attachments are confidential. They may contain privileged information or copyright material. If you are not an intended recipient, you should not read, copy, use or disclose the contents without authorisation and we request you contact us at once by return email. Please then delete the email and any attachments from your system. We do not accept liability in connection with computer viruses, data corruption, delay, interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised amendment. Any views expressed in this email and any attachments do not necessarily reflect the views of the company. ********************************************************************************

4 3

Notification of NZRR Database changes
by NZRR Database Notifications 18 Dec '06

18 Dec '06

Dear Colleague, This is to notify you that some object(s) in NZRR database which you either maintain or are listed as to-be-notified have been added, deleted or changed. These objects are used to configure the various NZIX route servers (http://nzix.net/) so you can expect the relevant servers to be reloaded in the near future. The reloading of the servers is staggered over a period of time so that if you are peering with both servers at an exchange, you can maintain at least one BGP session at all times and consequently a full set of routes. --- OBJECT BELOW CREATED: aut-num: AS9733 as-name: NZRR-AS9733 descr: Netspace Services Limited descr: WIX peering at '202.7.0.242' descr: see Citylink RT job #7787 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR import: from AS9439 accept ANY AND NOT fltr-bogons export: to AS9439 announce AS9733 notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: operations(a)netspace.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061219 source: NZRR --- OBJECT BELOW CREATED: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS9733 descr: Route set advertised to AS9439 by Netspace Services Limited - AS9733 members: 203.118.134.64/26^26-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: operations(a)netspace.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061219 source: NZRR

1 0

Notification of NZRR Database changes
by NZRR Database Notifications 17 Dec '06

17 Dec '06

Dear Colleague, This is to notify you that some object(s) in NZRR database which you either maintain or are listed as to-be-notified have been added, deleted or changed. These objects are used to configure the various NZIX route servers (http://nzix.net/) so you can expect the relevant servers to be reloaded in the near future. The reloading of the servers is staggered over a period of time so that if you are peering with both servers at an exchange, you can maintain at least one BGP session at all times and consequently a full set of routes. --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS9503 descr: advertised to AS9439 by FX Networks - AS9503 members: 131.203.0.0/16^16-29, 161.29.0.0/16^16-29, 161.65.0.0/16^16-29, 202.53.176.0/20^20-29, 202.174.160.0/20^20-29, 202.191.32.0/20^20-29, 210.48.160.0/20^20-29, 202.46.176.0/21^21-29, 202.78.240.0/21^21-29, 203.190.208.0/21^21-29, 202.59.4.0/22^22-29, 202.124.106.0/23^23-29, 192.88.85.0/24^24-29, 192.133.31.0/24^24-29, 202.20.97.0/24^24-29, 202.27.208.0/24^24-29, 202.36.119.0/24^24-29, 202.36.183.0/24^24-29, 202.46.190.0/24^24-29, 202.50.247.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: noc-minor(a)fx.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061010 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS9503 descr: advertised to AS9439 by FX Networks - AS9503 members: 131.203.0.0/16^16-29, 161.29.0.0/16^16-29, 161.65.0.0/16^16-29, 202.53.176.0/20^20-29, 202.174.160.0/20^20-29, 202.191.32.0/20^20-29, 210.48.160.0/20^20-29, 202.46.176.0/21^21-29, 202.78.240.0/21^21-29, 203.190.208.0/21^21-29, 202.37.48.0/22^22-29, 202.59.4.0/22^22-29, 202.124.106.0/23^23-29, 192.88.85.0/24^24-29, 192.133.31.0/24^24-29, 202.20.97.0/24^24-29, 202.27.208.0/24^24-29, 202.36.119.0/24^24-29, 202.36.183.0/24^24-29, 202.46.190.0/24^24-29, 202.50.247.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: noc-minor(a)fx.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061218 source: NZRR --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS23655 descr: advertised to AS9439 by Snap Internet Limited - AS23655 members: 132.181.0.0/16^16-29, 202.124.96.0/19^19-29, 203.86.192.0/20^20-29, 210.5.48.0/21^21-29, 202.49.92.0/22^22-29, 202.50.104.0/22^22-29, 202.50.124.0/22^22-29, 202.27.186.0/23^23-29, 202.36.178.0/23^23-29, 202.36.218.0/23^23-29, 202.36.220.0/23^23-29, 202.37.100.0/23^23-29, 202.37.124.0/23^23-29, 202.49.90.0/23^23-29, 202.49.120.0/23^23-29, 210.55.30.0/23^23-29, 210.55.206.0/23^23-29, 192.156.225.0/24^24-29, 202.36.170.0/24^24-29, 202.49.115.0/24^24-29, 202.49.125.0/24^24-29, 202.49.187.0/24^24-29, 202.50.117.0/24^24-29, 202.50.169.0/24^24-29, 203.96.112.0/24^24-29, 210.54.15.0/24^24-29, 210.55.4.0/24^24-29, 210.55.7.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: noc(a)snap.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061019 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS23655 descr: advertised to AS9439 by Snap Internet Limited - AS23655 members: 132.181.0.0/16^16-29, 123.255.0.0/18^18-29, 202.124.96.0/19^19-29, 203.86.192.0/20^20-29, 210.5.48.0/21^21-29, 202.49.92.0/22^22-29, 202.50.104.0/22^22-29, 202.50.124.0/22^22-29, 202.27.186.0/23^23-29, 202.36.178.0/23^23-29, 202.36.218.0/23^23-29, 202.36.220.0/23^23-29, 202.37.100.0/23^23-29, 202.37.124.0/23^23-29, 202.49.90.0/23^23-29, 202.49.120.0/23^23-29, 210.55.30.0/23^23-29, 210.55.206.0/23^23-29, 192.156.225.0/24^24-29, 202.36.170.0/24^24-29, 202.49.115.0/24^24-29, 202.49.125.0/24^24-29, 202.49.187.0/24^24-29, 202.50.117.0/24^24-29, 202.50.169.0/24^24-29, 203.96.112.0/24^24-29, 210.54.15.0/24^24-29, 210.55.4.0/24^24-29, 210.55.7.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: mark.petrie(a)snap.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061218 source: NZRR

1 0

Notification of NZRR Database changes
by NZRR Database Notifications 13 Dec '06

13 Dec '06

Dear Colleague, This is to notify you that some object(s) in NZRR database which you either maintain or are listed as to-be-notified have been added, deleted or changed. These objects are used to configure the various NZIX route servers (http://nzix.net/) so you can expect the relevant servers to be reloaded in the near future. The reloading of the servers is staggered over a period of time so that if you are peering with both servers at an exchange, you can maintain at least one BGP session at all times and consequently a full set of routes. --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route-set: AS9560:RS-ROUTES:AS24324 descr: advertised to AS9560 by - AS24324 members: 124.157.64.0/19^19-29, 202.49.128.0/21^21-29, 218.185.224.0/21^21-29, 202.27.83.0/24^24-29, 202.36.75.0/24^24-29, 202.36.154.0/24^24-29, 202.37.168.0/24^24-29, 202.49.183.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: smc(a)bclnz.com mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061018 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route-set: AS9560:RS-ROUTES:AS24324 descr: advertised to AS9560 by Kordia (former BCL) - AS24324 members: 124.157.64.0/19^19-29, 202.68.80.0/20^20-29, 202.20.0.0/21^21-29, 202.49.16.0/21^21-29, 202.49.128.0/21^21-29, 218.185.224.0/21^21-29, 202.27.88.0/23^23-29, 192.173.17.0/24^24-29, 202.27.83.0/24^24-29, 202.27.90.0/24^24-29, 202.36.75.0/24^24-29, 202.36.137.0/24^24-29, 202.36.154.0/24^24-29, 202.36.173.0/24^24-29, 202.37.168.0/24^24-29, 202.37.197.0/24^24-29, 202.49.106.0/24^24-29, 202.49.158.0/24^24-29, 202.49.183.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: smc(a)kordia.co.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061214 source: NZRR

1 0

Notification of NZRR Database changes
by NZRR Database Notifications 13 Dec '06

13 Dec '06

Dear Colleague, This is to notify you that some object(s) in NZRR database which you either maintain or are listed as to-be-notified have been added, deleted or changed. These objects are used to configure the various NZIX route servers (http://nzix.net/) so you can expect the relevant servers to be reloaded in the near future. The reloading of the servers is staggered over a period of time so that if you are peering with both servers at an exchange, you can maintain at least one BGP session at all times and consequently a full set of routes. --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route-set: AS9560:RS-ROUTES:AS9503 descr: advertised to AS9560 by FX Networks - AS9503 members: 131.203.0.0/16^16-29, 161.29.0.0/16^16-29, 161.65.0.0/16^16-29, 202.53.176.0/20^20-29, 202.174.160.0/20^20-29, 202.191.32.0/20^20-29, 210.48.160.0/20^20-29, 202.46.176.0/21^21-29, 202.78.240.0/21^21-29, 203.190.208.0/21^21-29, 202.59.4.0/22^22-29, 202.124.106.0/23^23-29, 192.88.85.0/24^24-29, 192.133.31.0/24^24-29, 202.20.97.0/24^24-29, 202.27.208.0/24^24-29, 202.36.119.0/24^24-29, 202.36.183.0/24^24-29, 202.46.190.0/24^24-29, 202.50.247.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: noc-minor(a)fx.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061010 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route-set: AS9560:RS-ROUTES:AS9503 descr: advertised to AS9560 by FX Networks - AS9503 members: 131.203.0.0/16^16-29, 161.29.0.0/16^16-29, 161.65.0.0/16^16-29, 202.53.176.0/20^20-29, 202.174.160.0/20^20-29, 202.191.32.0/20^20-29, 210.48.160.0/20^20-29, 202.46.176.0/21^21-29, 202.78.240.0/21^21-29, 203.190.208.0/21^21-29, 202.37.48.0/22^22-29, 202.59.4.0/22^22-29, 202.124.106.0/23^23-29, 192.88.85.0/24^24-29, 192.133.31.0/24^24-29, 202.20.97.0/24^24-29, 202.27.208.0/24^24-29, 202.36.119.0/24^24-29, 202.36.183.0/24^24-29, 202.46.190.0/24^24-29, 202.50.247.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: noc-minor(a)fx.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061214 source: NZRR

1 0

Outside broadcast of broadband march on Parliament
by Andy Linton 13 Dec '06

13 Dec '06

Richard has asked me to post this - mail him if you think it's off topic! http://www.r2.co.nz/meta/videonow.asx

3 2

APNIC fee structure
by Elly Tawhai 13 Dec '06

13 Dec '06

Hi, The APNIC fee structure is currently under review. As the fee structure is determined by the membership, we would like to encourage the NZNOG community to share their thoughts on our mailing list: wg-apnic-fees(a)apnic.net We would like to acknowledge the valuable contribution Andy has already made to the APNIC fee discussion mailing list. We are aware that the topic has recently been raised on the NZNOG mailing list, and we urge any interested parties to also provide input to the APNIC discussion. Contributing to the APNIC fees mailing list will enable you to participate in the official fee structure policy review process. We look forward to hearing from the NZNOG community. Regards, Elly APNIC

3 3

Notification of NZRR Database changes
by NZRR Database Notifications 13 Dec '06

13 Dec '06

Dear Colleague, This is to notify you that some object(s) in NZRR database which you either maintain or are listed as to-be-notified have been added, deleted or changed. These objects are used to configure the various NZIX route servers (http://nzix.net/) so you can expect the relevant servers to be reloaded in the near future. The reloading of the servers is staggered over a period of time so that if you are peering with both servers at an exchange, you can maintain at least one BGP session at all times and consequently a full set of routes. --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS23754 descr: Route set advertised to AS9439 by Cafenet-Free - AS23754 members: 198.48.3.192/26^26-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: noc(a)citylink.co.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061122 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS23754 descr: advertised to AS9439 by CityLink - AS23754 members: 198.48.0.0/22^22-29, 202.8.44.0/22^22-29, 202.7.6.0/23^23-29, 97.64.46.0/24^24-29, 198.32.71.0/24^24-29, 202.7.5.0/24^24-29, 203.118.144.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061214 source: NZRR

1 0

Vodafone Issues
by Ernest Cunningham 13 Dec '06

13 Dec '06

Hi all, If somebody from Vodafones mac savy tech department could contact me off list I need some help with an issue I am having with my MacBook Pro + HSDPA Express Card (connections are fine, it is a more technical issue I have to do with unexplained network activity). Ernest Cunningham

2 1

XTRA mail servers
by Tom 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

on 7/12/2006 2:10 PM Simon wrote: > We are having some major issues over the past week when forwarding > mail to xtra. Mainly: > > - delivery temporarily suspended: connect to mta.xtra.co.nz > - connect to mta.xtra.co.nz[210.54.141.1]: server dropped connection > without sending the initial SMTP greeting > > Has anyone seen any of these issues and knows anything about them? I've been seeing similar issues, such as 2006-12-07 14:13:36 1Gs4Fp-0000gi-Vv SMTP error from remote mail server after initial connection: host mta.xtra.co.nz [210.54.141.1]: 421 Service not available 2006-12-07 14:13:36 1Gs4Fq-0000hO-Ut mta.xtra.co.nz [210.54.141.1] Connection refused 2006-12-07 12:03:52 1Gs4YH-0002YT-Qz mx1.xtra.co.nz [210.54.141.1] Connection reset by peer 2006-12-07 12:34:26 1Gs4Ll-00049D-Hg Remote host mx1.xtra.co.nz [210.54.141.1] closed connection in response to initial connection same issues, mail isn't getting delivered until a force mail queue run is done, clients are moaning...as usual :( tom

6 5

APNIC member survey: Still open for participation
by Elly Tawhai 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

Apologies for duplicate postings -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [apnic-talk] [Apnic-announce] APNIC Member Survey Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2006 12:00:02 +1000 From: dg(a)apnic.net Reply-To: apnic-talk(a)apnic.net To: apnic-announce(a)apnic.net Dear APNIC members and friends, As you may know, since 1999 the APNIC Executive Council has commissioned a regular survey of the APNIC community. Three surveys have been held so far, providing crucial input on APNIC's performance, development and future direction. Today we are pleased to announce the fourth survey of APNIC members and stakeholders. As in the past, this survey will be conducted independently from the APNIC secretariat, by the international firm KPMG. In this manner the process is assured to be neutral and objective, ensuring the highest quality result. Once again Dr John Earls of KPMG has developed the survey format and questions, with input from a large group of selected validators from the APNIC community. Dr Earls will receive and process all survey responses, and will guarantee the anonymity of all respondents. His report will be presented at the APNIC Annual Members Meeting in March 2007. We hope that you will participate in this important exercise, whether or not you are an APNIC member, or have participated in a previous APNIC survey. To express our appreciation for your time and effort, APNIC will provide a special reward to 3 randomly picked respondents. This reward, an APNIC meeting fellowship package, will include complimentary meeting registration plus USD $500.00 towards expenses, and can be used at either of the APNIC Open Policy Meetings in 2007. To participate in the survey, please visit the APNIC website and follow the instructions at: http://www.apnic.net/survey/2007 With sincere thanks in advance for your assistance, Paul Wilson Director General Akinori Maemura Chair, Executive Council. ________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson email: pwilson(a)apnic.net Director General, APNIC sip: apnic(a)voip.apnic.net http://www.apnic.net phone: +61 7 3858 3100 ________________________________________________________________________

1 0

IPv4 Exhaustion
by Philip D'Ath 11 Dec '06

11 Dec '06

I attended a very interesting presentation today by Tony Bain, one of the key IETF IPv6 chairs. He says that the rate of /8's being allocated is increasing exponentially at that moment (22 were allocated in 18 months [till July 2005], leaving just 64 available worldwide), and the prior estimate of when IPv4 address was going to be exhausted of 2020 has been revised to 2009 - as in three years away, and that IPv4 address space is likely to take on a much more commercially tradable value as it becomes very rare (like oil). For existing players in the market this doesn't mean much. However for expanding networks this is going to put a serious crimp in their plans. I polled a lot of players in the NZ market about 6 months ago and plans for IPv6 deployment were almost non-existent. There is an older article he wrote here: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_8-3/ipv4. html We really need large commercial transit players like Global Gateway, TelstraClear, AT&T, UUNet, AsiaNetCom, and Sprint to start offering dual stack IPv6 connections to downstream ISPs, and for ISPs to start allowing clients to connection via IPv6, including via DSL. We really need to get critical infrastructure, like DNS, fully IPv6 enabled. The .nz domain isn't even reachable via IPv6 addresses yet. Now I know the shared registry system has IPv6 support now, but it is limiting in that you must still supply IPv4 addresses. You can't supply only IPv6 glue records. What happens when you can't get IPv4 addresses to use for glue? Also the majority of the registries out their offer very poor IPv6 support - as in no IPv6 connected DNS servers, and an inability to easily add IPv6 AAAA records.

14 23

Moving DNS providers - best practice.
by Simon Lyall 10 Dec '06

10 Dec '06

After a few recent instances I am getting sick of companies who transfer their DNS/Servers from one provider to another and then wonder why the old data is still cached by 3rd parties for 24 hours (or whatever). How do people feel about a "best practice" document on this that we could encourage people to follow ( perhaps the DNC could publish) for people moving their domain between providers. Just the basics like, dropping the TTLs, getting all the servers data in the right order etc? Similar to this: http://www.onr.com/services/data_center/colocation/transfer_tips.html Thoguhts? -- Simon J. Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.

14 21

NO contact list
by Gerard Creamer 10 Dec '06

10 Dec '06

There now appear to be two versions of this list. http://www.tcn.bowenvale.co.nz/content/view/49/40/ and http://www.usenet.net.nz/noc/index.html We have recently been assigned a public AS and I thought we should probably go on the list - as we're growing our things breaking will have a wider impact and other NOs might want to get hold of us. I have no issue with being woken up in the middle of the night when our things break. I have a strong objection to being woken up when someone elses things break. Personally I like the (mostly) unlinked anonymity of the list at usenet.net.nz, as it's less likely to be some kid who has no idea what an AS is calling at 2am because the gaming server they're using in suddenly unreachable (probably due to some reason other than our network being broken). Sure, the kid might ultimately pay my wages, but they're sure as hell not my customer... I emailed Simon Lyall yesterday to ask to go on the list at usenet.net.nz - is this still going to be considered the NO list? I know there's no king and all that jazz, but some direction for a newbie AS NO would be appreciated... For the record, here's our guff: Name Netspace Services Limited Domains netspace.net.nz ASN(s) 9733 Phone Number(s) +64 4 917 8098, 0800 NETSPACE (0800 638 772) Clueful People Gerard Creamer Direct Email noc(a)netspace.net.nz Hours Office Thanks, Gerard

5 5

XTRA mail servers
by Simon 07 Dec '06

07 Dec '06

Hi There :) We are having some major issues over the past week when forwarding mail to xtra. Mainly: - delivery temporarily suspended: connect to mta.xtra.co.nz - connect to mta.xtra.co.nz[210.54.141.1]: server dropped connection without sending the initial SMTP greeting Has anyone seen any of these issues and knows anything about them? I just trying to contact XTRA's administrators, but no response. I have had a good response back from the corporate side of XTRA, which is assuring. Regards and Thanks, Simon

11 12

Re: [nznog] NZNOG 2007: CFP: Network Systems Administration MiniConf
by Ewen McNeill 07 Dec '06

07 Dec '06

In message <20061122214213.8BB2A43E17(a)wat.la.naos.co.nz>, Ewen McNeill writes: > Call for Presentations for > NZNOG 2007: Network Systems Administration Mini-Conference >[....] >Some possible topics: >- Email servers and spam filtering techniques >[....] >Please send all proposals and questions to <talks(a)nznog.miniconf.org> At the risk of distracting everyone from arguing about responsible use of the list, I'd just like to point out that we still have room for a couple more talks at the Sysadmin Miniconf (on the first day of NZNOG 2007). And that we'd particularly welcome a proposal on, eg, best practices in running a mail server, or coping with the ever increasing volume of spam without rejecting all the legitimate mail. Proposals of other relevant talks (see the original CFP) are also welcomed, but be quick as we'd like to finalise the programme before Christmas so the speakers know what their summer homework is. Ewen

1 0

Re: [nznog] Xtra Email Administrators
by Martin Kealey 07 Dec '06

07 Dec '06

<metoo/> Given that (apparently) along with many other ISPs, Ihug also seem to have trouble with Xtra's inbound mailservers, perhaps I should say "could someone from Xtra please contact me ON list". (Yes we're all on fire trying to deal with Image Spam, but refusing valid mail just makes it worse...) -Martin -- Martin D Kealey, ihüg Systems Engineer

7 7

Xtra Email Administrators
by Simon 06 Dec '06

06 Dec '06

Would someone from the xtra email team please be able to contact me offlist? Much appreciated. Simon

20 35

INFO: Contact for xtra email admins
by Lin Nah 06 Dec '06

06 Dec '06

IN case this is lost amongst the flurry of flames, here's who to contact. It does appear lost as someone did ask again about 20 mins after Ted posted this (mind you I have only date stamps to go by). Lots of you are still flaming about it. May I also point out that Ted has in the past responded to this list stating he's happy to be contacted about this. eg http://list.waikato.ac.nz/pipermail/nznog/2005-August/010430.html http://list.waikato.ac.nz/pipermail/nznog/2005-January/009460.html regards lin ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 13:52:23 +1300 From: Ted Grenfell <Ted.Grenfell(a)telecom.co.nz> To: Simon <greminn(a)gmail.com>, nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] Xtra Email Administrators So as always, you're all welcome to call me direct if you've an Xtra query that you don't want to send via postmaster etc. -- Kind Regards, Ted Grenfell Online Services Mgr (acting) T +64 9 359 5854 (extn 93254) F +64 9 377 0781 M +64 27 443 5455 E ted.grenfell(a)telecom.co.nz W www.telecom.co.nz Level 11, Telecom House, 8 Hereford Street, Private Bag 92028, Auckland CBD, New Zealand ________________________________ "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002." > -----Original Message----- > From: Simon [mailto:greminn(a)gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, 7 December 2006 12:42 p.m. > To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: [nznog] Xtra Email Administrators > > Would someone from the xtra email team please be able to contact me > offlist? > > Much appreciated. > > Simon > > _______________________________________________ > NZNOG mailing list > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

1 0

Re: [nznog] XTRA mail servers
by James Tolchard 06 Dec '06

06 Dec '06

On 07/12/2006, at 2:10 PM, Simon wrote: > We are having some major issues over the past week when forwarding > mail to xtra. Mainly: > > - delivery temporarily suspended: connect to mta.xtra.co.nz > - connect to mta.xtra.co.nz[210.54.141.1]: server dropped connection > without sending the initial SMTP greeting > > Has anyone seen any of these issues and knows anything about them? We are also seeing issues since late November. I emailed postmaster(a)xtra from elsewhere on 1 December, with no response so far. Typical log: Dec 7 14:19:26 skinner postfix/smtp[19226]: connect to mta.xtra.co.nz [210.54.141.1]: server dropped connection without sending the initial greeting (port 25) Typical telnet: $ telnet mta.xtra.co.nz 25 Trying 210.54.141.1... Connected to mta.xtra.co.nz. Escape character is '^]'. Connection closed by foreign host. $ The above is the most common behaviour, but apparently the connection does stay open properly from time to time (I had to send a bunch in a row to get this): Dec 7 14:28:34 skinner postfix/smtp[19322]: 187FFA9EF2B: to=<jkhhlkhkjh(a)xtra.co.nz>, relay=mta.xtra.co.nz[210.54.141.1], delay=27, status=bounced (host mta.xtra.co.nz[210.54.141.1] said: 550 Invalid recipient: <jkhhlkhkjh(a)xtra.co.nz> (in reply to RCPT TO command)) We also sometimes get "421 Service not available" before it drops the connection, and sometimes we even get connection refused. But when we're really lucky: 220 mta01.xtra.co.nz ESMTP server ready Thu, 7 Dec 2006 14:41:34 +1300 220 mta06.xtra.co.nz ESMTP server ready Thu, 7 Dec 2006 14:43:01 +1300 So, yeah, it looks like something might be up. Cheers -- James Tolchard System Administrator Christ's College Canterbury Phone: +64 3 364 6806

1 0

Null route on AT9812T router
by James Neil Tyson 06 Dec '06

06 Dec '06

If anyone knows how to add a null static route on an Allied Telesyn AT9812T router please email me offlist. I hate these damn things.

1 0

Re: [nznog] CHIX
by Stewart Fleming 05 Dec '06

05 Dec '06

DPE is also up and running in Dunedin and has first connections from January 2007. We requested a name change to DIX so that we could hook up CHIX with DIX, but the request was again denied.

2 1

Re: [nznog] Charging for IPv6
by Alex Hague 05 Dec '06

05 Dec '06

David Zanetti wrote: > I just don't see anything today I would bother demanding native v6 > transit for. So long as that't the case, I can live with tunnels for the > lab/play phase of things. How about an IPv6 wireless mesh as a reason to adopt... this is purely hypothetical, but say in the Auckland (/ Wellington / where ever) CBD there was an IPv6 wireless mesh, peered locally on the IPv6 peering exchange. New sources of local content may begin to appear such as bands providing live streams via the mesh of their gigs at the local bars / pubs / clubs etc. Current non-internet content providers such as radio stations might decide to provide their own streams. ISPs wishing to be WISPs would need to adopt v6. The benefits from what I know of IPv6 (which I'm still doing my homework on - so turn the flame jets down a notch) would be that all addresses on the mesh could be internet routable, and because of the local nature of the mesh most content would probably have local relevance rather than anything further a field, so with good local peering (which is relatively inexpensive) it would be completely feasible to deliver high speed local content. While I know that this is hypothetical, do you think it might provide an incentive for people to start using IPv6 to access the content? Furthermore, people might actually have a reason to request v6 from ISPs and ISPs wishing to provide services to mesh users would have a reason to go v6 ($$$)... Cheers, Alex -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.6/568 - Release Date: 4/12/2006

3 2

Any mail admins from sbc.sbcglobal.net on here?
by Paul Adshead 05 Dec '06

05 Dec '06

Please contact me off list.

1 0

CHIX
by Russell Tester 05 Dec '06

05 Dec '06

Does anyone know if CHIX is alive, was it ever alive or are there any plans to revive it in the future? Regards, Russell Tester Severworks Ltd

4 3

Re: [nznog] CHIX - who'd sign up tomorrow?
by Erin Salmon 04 Dec '06

04 Dec '06

Hi, Last I heard (about 2 years ago) it was to be hosted between Snap Internet and University of Canterbury. We have been eager to peer since before a chix was ruminated, and remain so. Unleash would be happy to put forth a small amount of rackspace for the purpose if others want to get some informal peering going. We also have tall buildings at our disposal for those out there who are wirelessly inclined. My motivation is to eliminate costly backhaul to other main centres and create a marketplace, if you will, for bandwidth down here. Christchurch could use some life breathed into its Internet. Expressions of interest? Erin -----Original Message----- From: "Nathan Ward" <nznog(a)daork.net> To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Sent: 6/12/06 12:24 a.m. Subject: Re: [nznog] CHIX http://nzix.net/ The following exchanges are under construction: * Christchurch Internet Exchange * Southland Internet Exchange The "Who uses .." list shows nothing. Also, your sig is misspelt. On 6/12/2006, at 12:19 AM, Russell Tester wrote: > Does anyone know if CHIX is alive, was it ever alive or are there any > plans to revive it in the future? > > Regards, > > Russell Tester > Severworks Ltd > > _______________________________________________ > NZNOG mailing list > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog > > !DSPAM:22,457555d3143831749460768! > > > _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

1 0

FW:Electricity Reforms Act and Diesel Generators
by Jeremy Simons 02 Dec '06

02 Dec '06

Statement from TeamTalk Kordia supplies services to TeamTalk and we have a longstanding relationship with Kordia. They are one of our preferred suppliers and we are happy with our commercial arrangements. TeamTalk did not authorise the release of any Kordia material. The statement in question was sent to a junior member of TeamTalk's staff who contrary to company policy copied it to Jonathan Brewer of Araneo. We are treating the matter very seriously and are taking steps to ensure that such a breach of policy does not occur again. It is important to note that the item quoted was one paragraph from a complex 25-page document and was taken out of context. We value our relationship with Kordia and regret that this incident has occurred Jeremy Simons General Manager - Operations TeamTalk Limited ____________________________________________ Jeremy Simons General Manager - Operations TeamTalk Limited How Work Gets Done Phone: ++64 4 802 1478 Mobile: ++64 21 715 390 Fax: ++64 4 802 1490 <mailto:jsimons(a)teamtalk.co.nz> Mail to: jsimons(a)teamtalk.co.nz Disclaimer: The information in this electronic mail message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this Internet electronic mail message by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful. TeamTalk Limited accepts no responsibility for any effects this email message or attachments has on the recipient network or computer system.

7 7

Re: [nznog] FW: Electricity Reforms Act and Diesel Generators
by Dean Pemberton 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

> List moderator, is it possible to remove this list from the archives? I think we've been through this before, and the answer is no. There is all sorts of things in the archives that people would like to have removed. The answer has always been no. Infact way back in time there was a HUGE argument about it. Where people offered to just make alternative, REAL versions of the archives with the removed posts. It got really nasty. Dean (In his ad-hoc role as NZNOG historian)

5 4

FW: Electricity Reforms Act and Diesel Generators
by Jonathan Brewer 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

Hi Folks, I'm afraid my question may have breached a confidentiality agreement and we are getting angry phone calls from our supplier, so please disregard my email earlier today and delete any references to it from your inbox if that is possible. List moderator, is it possible to remove this list from the archives? Thanks, Jonathan Brewer > ______________________________________________ > From: Jonathan Brewer [mailto:jon.brewer(a)araneo.net.nz] > Sent: Thursday, 30 November 2006 9:42 a.m. > To: 'nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz' > Subject: Electricity Reforms Act and Diesel Generators > > Hi Folks, > > We telehouse at a number of facilities throughout New Zealand. We > typically provide our own batteries and contract for use of an on-site > diesel generator. At most sites we are not able to put in our own > generator. > > We were recently informed by Kordia (BCL) that they can no longer allow us > to use standby generator power at their sites due to the Electricity > Reforms Act. > > "BCL is deemed to be a Line Company under the Electricity Reforms Act and > therefore is unable to also be classified as a Generator. On that basis, > BCL is no longer able to provide you with Standby Generator Power for > upgrades to existing or new services." > > This effectively bars us from providing carrier grade telecommunications > services from BCL sites. > > One might say "use different sites" or "build your own towers", but these > are not options as these towers were built by the government before the > times of the Resource Management Act in unique locations where new towers > cannot be built. > > Can they do this? Are they doing this to everyone, or just us? > > Thanks, > > Jonathan Brewer

3 2

Re: [nznog] THE SKY IS FALLING ( was Re: IPv4 Exhaustion)
by Scott Weeks 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

: The past 10+ years of work on IPv6 nee IPng have taught : many lessons about what will and will not work (and more : importantly what will be accepted or not). Exactly. I NEED to multihome. I won't accept not being able to do that. No provider is going to be good enough that I trust ALL of my connectivity with them and no one else. That settles it right there. A protocol should not dictate my business practice. : ps - the 100-million number likely came from Alain Durand's : presentation "Managing 100+ Million IP Addresses" WRT "Managing 100+ Million IP Addresses", I see the following chart. (apologies for the formatting. It's on page 6 at www.nanog.org/mtg-0606/pdf/alain-durand.pdf >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Triple Play Effect on the Use of IP Addresses 2005 2006+ HSD only Triple Play Cable Modem 1(private only) 1 Home Computer/Router 1 1 eMTA (Voice adaptor) 0 1 – 2 Set Top Box (STB) 0 2 Total number of IP addresses(assume 2.5 1 – 2 8 – 9 STB per household) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What STB needs 2 IPs per box? The way we're doing it is one private IP per STB and one STB per television set, so that's 2-3 private IPs per household. One public IP per customer for Internet and we're not going for VoIP until later. Perhaps they have one STB per household no matter the number of television sets? Also, I see they have 20-30 ASNs. Are all 20M customers going to be in one AS? I wouldn't expect that. Finally, with VPRNs addresses could be reused. Just put the customers in different VPRNs and duplicate the address scheme. It's 'divide and conquer' methodology. I'm a noobie to VPRNs, so flame me if this isn't feasible. I have doused my flameproof underpants with beer, so I'm protected... :-) scott --- jejs+lists(a)sahala.org wrote: From: "joshua sahala" <jejs+lists(a)sahala.org> To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: [nznog] THE SKY IS FALLING ( was Re: IPv4 Exhaustion) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 10:42:35 +1300 (NZDT) I find it slightly ironic that those screaming the loudest for IPv6 seem to have the most poorly researched assertions regarding the death of IPv4. (I am of course ignoring the obvious stupidity of things like IPv8/9/16) Who are the loudest proponents of IPv6? I tend to agree with the evaluation presented in Todd Underwood's blog: vendors, consultants, and the protocol designers themselves... (http://www.renesys.com/blog/2006/03/bashing_ipv6_at_telecomnext.shtml) If IPv6 is the answer, what was the question again? Perhaps it is time to accept that IPv6 is the wrong answer (or we need to start asking better questions), take the lessons learned from its failure, and start again. The past 10+ years of work on IPv6 nee IPng have taught many lessons about what will and will not work (and more importantly what will be accepted or not). There are many fundamental problems with the protocol that no amount of marketecture or hand-waving will fix; the least of which is a lack of end-users calling for a v6 address for their toaster/television/mechanical tie rack. These issue must be addressed, either in IPv6 (not likely), or in IPng-NG :) </soapbox> /joshua ps - the 100-million number likely came from Alain Durand's presentation "Managing 100+ Million IP Addresses" (it says ~20-million customers + kit == 100-million) -- A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. - Douglas Adams - _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

9 15

Electricity Reforms Act and Diesel Generators
by Jonathan Brewer 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

Hi Folks, We telehouse at a number of facilities throughout New Zealand. We typically provide our own batteries and contract for use of an on-site diesel generator. At most sites we are not able to put in our own generator. We were recently informed by Kordia (BCL) that they can no longer allow us to use standby generator power at their sites due to the Electricity Reforms Act. "BCL is deemed to be a Line Company under the Electricity Reforms Act and therefore is unable to also be classified as a Generator. On that basis, BCL is no longer able to provide you with Standby Generator Power for upgrades to existing or new services." This effectively bars us from providing carrier grade telecommunications services from BCL sites. One might say "use different sites" or "build your own towers", but these are not options as these towers were built by the government before the times of the Resource Management Act in unique locations where new towers cannot be built. Can they do this? Are they doing this to everyone, or just us? Thanks, Jonathan Brewer

3 2

[Fwd: Re: Charging for IPv6]
by Gerard Creamer 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

On 30/11/2006 11:36 a.m., Andy Linton wrote: > For us having this address space from APNIC pushes us into the next tier of > membership and costs us an additional US$2500 a year. We have had a very > serious discussion here about returning this to APNIC and getting a reduction > in our charges. We recently got our first allocation from APNIC, and I was surprised that we had to choose 4 or 6 and had to pay more for both - as Andy says, are we being encouraged to do this or not? We are still small, so the additional cost is prohibitive. I would have thought there would be an associated IP6 allocation with every IP4 allocation, but I guess I was naive. Gerard

1 0

Re: [nznog] Charging for IPv6
by jdmwoolley＠ihug.co.nz 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

> A rough eyeball of the DSC stats for the last day or so > seems to indicate a little over 50% A queries and about > 10% AAAA. > Now THAT is an interesting statistic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it means that a fair proportion of the queries coming in are TRYING to use v6, but presumably either aren't given a v6 address back or are unable to access it once obtained. Given that Vista will default to using v6 and fall back to v4 and the above statistic, one could surmise that if v6 was deployed, it would almost immediately get a fair portion of traffic. Indeed, when I tried pinging between two boxes at home that I had put Vista RC1 on I got a reply from a v6 address. Even though I'd specified the v4 address in the ping command Jonathan

1 0

Re: [nznog] THE SKY IS FALLING ( was Re: IPv4 Exhaustion)
by Scott Weeks 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

--- mjl(a)luckie.org.nz wrote:----------------------- From: Matthew Luckie <mjl(a)luckie.org.nz> > This was discussed earlier in the recent flurry of email on the > subject. Also, this is why I was asking about VPRNs. However, I > missed the part on why STBs need unique IPs or why they need 2 per > box. : http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0606/real/100million.ram : : the answer to the second question is about a minute in. ---------------------------------------------------- Geez, I'm trying to listen, but the quality is so bad I can hardly understand it. Does anyone know where a 'clean' copy of the speech is? scott

2 1

Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion
by Scott Weeks 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

> The major driver will be customer demand (read: $$$$), or the network : Funnily enough, I was reading this only yesterday: : : http://www.microsoft.com/technet/windowsvista/network/ipv6wv.mspx : : Have a look a the "Business Drivers" section especially. It's just funny numbers: "A recent report from NIST3 estimates that IPv6 could provide a US$10 billion per year benefit to the U.S. and the Japanese government estimates that IPv6 could generate a value of US$1.55 trillion." They give a reference to footnote 3. I searched footnote 3 (www.microsoft.com/technet/windowsvista/network/ipv6wv.mspx) for the word trillion and only get one match: "The 128-bit address header in IPv6, in contrast, provides approximately 3.4x1038 addresses, enough to assign trillions of addresses to each person now on earth or even to every square inch of the earth’s surface." So, to segway into pet peeve of mine, this is the reason to allocate very large (for example: allocation of IPv4 /8 blocks to everyone that asked in the not so distant past) blocks of v6 space. Heck, no one will EVER need that much IP space! <8-) Show me the money, not funny numbers... scott Oops, I forgot: beer :-)

18 27

Another Topic
by Peter Youngquest 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

Hey All I am personally bored with the IPV4-6 discussion, but while everyone is up and talking. What is everyones opinion in regard to PBT. Does this have a place, can it work happily as a feeder into an MPLS cloud or will it remove the need for MPLS. Rgds Peter

4 5

Re: [nznog] THE SKY IS FALLING ( was Re: IPv4 Exhaustion)
by Scott Weeks 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

--- richardn(a)cs.waikato.ac.nz wrote:---------------------- From: Richard Nelson <richardn(a)cs.waikato.ac.nz> While not wanting to spoil a good discussion with facts, there is a presentation on Comcast's plans for IPv6 from a recent NANOG here: http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0606/durand.html The summary is 20 million customers * 2.5 set-tops/customer * 2 IPs/box = 100million IPs. The network design requires unique IPs. The ran out of 10net in 2005 and have got a large part of 73net from ARIN. Their long term solution (new services = more IPs/customer) is IPv6. ----------------------------------------------------------- This was discussed earlier in the recent flurry of email on the subject. Also, this is why I was asking about VPRNs. However, I missed the part on why STBs need unique IPs or why they need 2 per box. scott

3 2

Re: [nznog] THE SKY IS FALLING ( was Re: IPv4 Exhaustion)
by Scott Weeks 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

--- aj(a)sneep.net wrote: From: Alastair Johnson <aj(a)sneep.net> Scott Weeks wrote: : Finally, with VPRNs addresses could be reused. Just put : the customers in different VPRNs and duplicate the address : scheme. It's 'divide and conquer' methodology. I'm a : noobie to VPRNs, so flame me if this isn't feasible. I have : doused my flameproof underpants with beer, so I'm protected... :-) :: Oh yes. This is a valid methodology. Also, you don't :: really need every subscriber to be uniquely addressed across :: your entire network - to the closest PoP site or Super-PoP site :: is sufficient, depending on your topology. :: :: Of course, from your Ethernet switch/DSLAM/FTTx node/whatever, :: you know where and who the subscriber is, so you're not reliant :: on IP addressing to authorize content access, either.... Thanks for the answer. So, it seems that all customer's STBs could be put in as many VPRNs as necessary to divide them into groups such that RFC1918 space is never exhausted and each customer could get one (or as many as they request) IP address that's publically routable for their internet connectivity. Thus, if the Very Giant ISPs designed their network in this manner, IPv4 would take them as far as they need. Yes? scott

3 2

Re: [nznog] THE SKY IS FALLING ( was Re: IPv4 Exhaustion)
by Scott Weeks 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

--- gerard(a)face.co.nz wrote: From: Gerard Creamer <gerard(a)face.co.nz> On 30/11/2006 7:41 a.m., Scott Weeks wrote: > Thanks for the answer. So, it seems that all customer's STBs could be put in as many VPRNs as necessary to divide them into groups such that RFC1918 space is never exhausted and each customer could get one (or as many as they request) IP address that's publically routable for their internet connectivity. Excuse my ignorance, but I'm having trouble finding useful information on what a VPRN (Virtual Private Remote Network) is - I could guess, based on my understanding of VPNs and NAT (as it appears to be used as a NAT replacement in context??), but that might be dangerous - any pointers to useful resources would be appreciated. ---------------------------------------------- My apologies, it stands for Virtual Private Routed Network. It's also known by many other names: RFC2547bis, IP Based Virtual Private Network; BGP/MPLS VPNs, Layer 3 VPNs, etc. Here's a link that looks good, though I haven't read it yet: www.spirentcom.com/documents/760.pdf scott

1 0

VPRN
by Gerard Creamer 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

On 30/11/2006 7:41 a.m., Scott Weeks wrote: > Thanks for the answer. So, it seems that all customer's STBs could be > put in as many VPRNs as necessary to divide them into groups such that > RFC1918 space is never exhausted and each customer could get one (or > as many as they request) IP address that's publically routable for > their internet connectivity. Excuse my ignorance again, but I'm having trouble finding useful information on what a VPRN (Virtual Private Remote Network) is - I could guess, based on my understanding of VPNs and NAT (as it appears to be used as a NAT replacement in context??), but that might be dangerous - any pointers to useful resources would be appreciated. Thanks, Gerard

1 0

Re: [nznog] THE SKY IS FALLING ( was Re: IPv4 Exhaustion)
by chris＠chrishellberg.com 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

My mail app doesn't do quoting sorry :( Peter, Agree, it's not black and white and you raise many pertinent questions. But one of the governing factors should be that a shortage of addresses[1] shouldn't restrict my network design. Not saying that you need to be wasteful. Just that NAT or some proxy equivalent shouldn't be the the solution to the address squeeze[1]. /Chris [1] maybe there is an address shortage, maybe there isn't..not terribly important for this point. ----- Original Message ---- From: Peter Youngquest <peter(a)mynetworks.co.nz> To: NZNOG <nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 8:50:35 PM Subject: Re: [nznog] THE SKY IS FALLING ( was Re: IPv4 Exhaustion) As much as I find this topic boring :-) I doubt the answer is as black and white as some would like. Exposing the evolving subscriber premise to the "world" as such may reduce some problems but obviously increases others. I think it is fair to say alot of this is a balancing game. If you expose the subscriber premise to the service core (CSCF sort of area) you increase loading at the service core. This is not a good thing considering the stability of these pieces of the network at this stage. No vendor rants to that statement pls. IMS/SIP gateways are being developed that reduce Service Core loading but still how much of the home is exposed and how much isn't. Also there are a number of initiatives working currently to further define the home, how the CPE will interact with upstream - each other, QoS on the home segment etc etc If the subscriber premise is exposed to network and as Dave pointed out earlier there are a number of less than trivial considerations. Address management, device management, Security,introducing new devices to the home (another Dick Smith VoIP phone), point of demarcation etc etc. Also is there a need to expose all the devices globally. STBs would only need visibility to the service providers, VoIP phones to the SBC/SBG, fridge to the mail server :-D Also there are the various styles of network connectivity: - single pipe, MUX UNI that will have impact on the addressing schemes. To state that having "20million subs and requiring v6 for management" as a poster child for v6 is not a good look. There are other ways of approaching this - distribution and hierarchy to me sounds feasible. Last time I looked the sky is above us. What is happening is we are moving into an interesting time where the evolution of the subscriber premise will very much determine how the networks will look. Rgds Peter

3 2

Re: [nznog] THE SKY IS FALLING ( was Re: IPv4 Exhaustion)
by chris＠chrishellberg.com 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

I quite like the idea of being able to give every device behind a CPE a globally routable address. If there is a way to avoid NAT in the first place (also 1918 if that's how you're forced to do CPE management), v6 seems like an obvious alternative. Unless I'm mistaken that the RIR would happily allocate enough addresses for a /29 per household? The content is what drives the business decisions, so if the problem of accessing V4 content were magic-ed away, I'm not seeing why the bashing on V6. Should I come to more nznogs for the answer? /Chris ----- Original Message ---- From: Alastair Johnson <aj(a)sneep.net> To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 1:50:24 PM Subject: Re: [nznog] THE SKY IS FALLING ( was Re: IPv4 Exhaustion) Philip D'Ath wrote: > I don't know how more obvious it can be made. > > It's solving the looming problem of the IPv4 address pool being > exhausted in the next 3 to 6 years. > > Is not complete lack of Internet connectivity for new customers not a > good enough reason? I think the subject line says it all, on that particular topic. V6 seems to largely be a problem looking for a solution at this point in time. Need to support 25 million CPE devices? There are ways to do that, and many vendors are falling over themselves to help you. STBs? No problem. Triple/quad/quinta-plays? Got it covered. While I don't doubt that IPv6 will eventually become the widespread protocol, do you REALLY see that happening before 2020-ish? At which point the carriers will be able to make a premium selling v4 service, because by gosh there will be a lot of legacy networks out there needing it. But that's a completely separate topic. aj. _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

2 1

Posting and quoting
by Ian Batterbee 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

Hi everyone, It would be greatly appreciated if everyone posting would make the effort to remove any unnecessary quoted text from their reply before hitting send, as it is quite hard to spot the bits that are new when reading the list in digest form, with the same paragraphs repeating again and again at the end of postings. I realise some people are already doing this. Feel free to flame me for making a such a request, but address such flames to /dev/null Thanks

1 0

Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion
by Scott Weeks 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

--- andrew(a)etc.gen.nz wrote: : There are some DSL providers in some Asian countries : who are very interested in IPv6 because they've almost : exhausted 10/8 and weren't able to receive a public /8.[1] I can't imagine any Asian country's ISP that has used 16777216 IPs. Even so, they could still have 1114112 more IPs by using 192.168/16 and 172.16/12. Do you have a pointer to which provider this is? scott --- andrew(a)etc.gen.nz wrote: From: Andrew Ruthven <andrew(a)etc.gen.nz> To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 09:17:18 +1300 On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 08:12 +1300, Robert Gray wrote: > Philip D'Ath wrote: > > > I think the board of directors will flip, and tell you to find a > > solution, as not growing the business will not be considered an option. There are some DSL providers in some Asian countries who are very interested in IPv6 because they've almost exhausted 10/8 and weren't able to receive a public /8.[1] > I'd check that the board were happy that your customers won't be able to > host web sites or email servers that can be seen in v4 space or even run > p2p apps with v4 customers. > > When I looked at v6 some 10 years ago (I bought a book) it seemed to me > that the world all had to change together and that's not a cutover I can > see working too well. There is an education network in Catalonia that is IPv6 only[2]. They are using proxies to allow access to the traditional IPv4 Internet for specific applications. So there is no need for the entire world to cutover at once. And as Philip says, dual-stack is probably the method that a lot of companies that are transitioning will use. Cheers! [1] This was in March in this year, so they've probably exhausted it by now. [2] http://www.iepg.org/november2004/deploying_5000_ipv6_sites.pdf - This slideshow is from 2004, but Jordi was saying during March that they had rolled out the network. I haven't been able to find anything to back this up... -- Andrew Ruthven, Wellington, New Zealand At home: andrew(a)etc.gen.nz | This space intentionally | left blank. _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

2 1

Re: [nznog] THE SKY IS FALLING ( was Re: IPv4 Exhaustion)
by Scott Weeks 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

Thanks Joe, I must've misunderstood other mailing list's discussions. I thought small-fry ISPs were forced to have only one upstream and only the biggies were able to have more than one. I mean to multi-home to many different providers and an IX or two just like I do today, BTW. Thanks for setting me on the right thought-path and apologies to the list for any confusion. scott --- jabley(a)ca.afilias.info wrote: From: Joe Abley <jabley(a)ca.afilias.info> To: surfer(a)mauigateway.com Cc: <nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz> Subject: Re: [nznog] THE SKY IS FALLING ( was Re: IPv4 Exhaustion) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 19:10:53 -0500 Scott! On 28-Nov-2006, at 18:07, Scott Weeks wrote: > : The past 10+ years of work on IPv6 nee IPng have taught > : many lessons about what will and will not work (and more > : importantly what will be accepted or not). > > Exactly. I NEED to multihome. I won't accept not being able to do > that. No provider is going to be good enough that I trust ALL of > my connectivity with them and no one else. That settles it right > there. A protocol should not dictate my business practice. You can multi-home in v6 in precisely the same way as you do in v4 if you're an ISP, under all RIR policies. This also goes for anybody who qualified for v4 PI assignments in the ARIN region (so, end users too, at least those who qualify for sufficient addresses to want to multi-home with PI v4 space). Other regions will presumably follow suit if their respective memberships want that to happen. The ability to multi-home using PA v6 space (as is commonly done in the v4 network) depends on deployed filtering practice. Currently, it doesn't work very well; however, if there was pressure from an actual customer base, it could well be that it would work more often. Neither of these require any additional protocol development or implementation effort, and both ought to be very familiar to anybody who is multi-homed using v4. Nothing until this sentence has had anything to do with shim6, for example. There are lots of arguments for why v6 won't/shouldn't/can't succeed as a replacement for v4, but multi-homing is barely one of them. Joe

1 0

Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion
by Scott Weeks 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

--- pid(a)ifm.net.nz wrote: From: Philip D'Ath <pid(a)ifm.net.nz> : : 17 million addresses is simply not enough for a country the size of the : US (and many others). They already have 100 million set top box's : deployed. :-) RFC1918 space is used within a network only. Not across networks. So, one network's IPTV customer can have the same STB IP address as another's when the RCF1918 space is used. You stream from your head-end to your customers only, so there's no need for public IP addressing. The traffic stays within a particular network. That is, unless you're talking about broadcasting on the internet to any STB in the world, or something like that. : Sorry, didn't realise you intended the email to be private. It seemed : of a nature that would interest other people in this thread. It's ok. I was unsure if everyone wanted to hear my non-beer-goggled responses. Responses are so much more interesting when typed while one's beer-goggled... ;-) scott -----Original Message----- From: Scott Weeks [mailto:surfer(a)mauigateway.com] : The release of IP based set top box's and : the like is going to make the problem worse. :: Do you mean for IPTV? I use 1918 space for them and :: a public IP for the DSL router. I haven't used extra :: IPs for triple play stuff. --- pid(a)ifm.net.nz wrote: From: Philip D'Ath <pid(a)ifm.net.nz> : : Think 20 years down the track. : : Mobile phones and IP set top boxes are likely to : EXCEED the size of the RFC1918 address space. : There simply wont be enough of it. Well, I guess I don't mind a private email going public... There're about 17891328 RFC1918 IPs. Let's say you're going to use 7891328 IPs for internal addressing issues. That still leaves 10 million STB IP addresses for your network. scott --- pid(a)ifm.net.nz wrote: From: Philip D'Ath <pid(a)ifm.net.nz> To: surfer(a)mauigateway.com Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: RE: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 07:47:59 +1300 Think 20 years down the track. Mobile phones and IP set top boxes are likely to EXCEED the size of the RFC1918 address space. There simply wont be enough of it. -----Original Message----- From: Scott Weeks [mailto:surfer(a)mauigateway.com] Sent: Wednesday, 29 November 2006 7:24 a.m. To: Philip D'Ath Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion Hello, : The release of IP based set top box's and : the like is going to make the problem worse. Do you mean for IPTV? I use 1918 space for them and a public IP for the DSL router. I haven't used extra IPs for triple play stuff. scott --- pid(a)ifm.net.nz wrote: From: Philip D'Ath <pid(a)ifm.net.nz> To: jamie.baddeley(a)vpc.co.nz Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 21:33:07 +1300 The number of mobile devices with IP addresses now exceeds the number of traditional internet hosts. The gap between these two is growing. Mobile carriers have a more urgent need to use IPv6. The release of IP based set top box's and the like is going to make the problem worse. -----Original Message----- One question that I'd have is how much of that IPv4 space is used, planned to be used, or will never be used? And then I'd ask that same question to APNIC members in NZ who've got IPv4 assignments. And then I'd ask the cellular providers who shall remain unnamed that recently started announcing a /16 of v4 what their expectations of that v4 assignment lifetime is. That's 'the canary in the mine' IMHO. > > Notwithstanding, its still pretty hard to find an upstream provider offering > end to end IPv6 in or from NZ. > > Some of the debate on IPv4 exhaustion is pretty abstract, with some > alarmists saying the end is nigh, others saying that shortage of space will > lead to a secondary and valuable market for selling the space etc. > > It occurs to me that IPv6 is inevitable, its not a question of if, but a > question of when. I agree. Though there comes a point where the When is so far away, it starts to look like an If :-) > > To that end, is there an enthusiasm within the NOG for NZ to be leaders, or > are we content to be followers in the transition? That's a fair question. Whilst there's seems to be no real solid business case to deploy it in the short term or a reason to entertain the idea, frankly at this point in proceedings being a watcher, or follower as you put it, is probably a sensible thing to do for *some* operators. Now if we could convince *the rest of the world* to pay NZ to be a self contained, network of networks v6 test-bed that is an entirely different matter. That would certainly be worth leading on, and I'd be fairly excited about that. jamie _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

5 4

Re: [nznog] Fwd: RE: IPv4 Exhaustion
by Scott Weeks 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

--- ender(a)paradise.gen.nz wrote: From: David Robb <ender(a)paradise.gen.nz> On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Scott Weeks wrote: > Comcast has all of them in one AS? Similarly, China will have all 1B > customers in one AS? If not, they can use the same 1918 space in each > one. Also, Comcast are not going to have 100M IPTV subscribers. I got > this from www.ncta.com/ContentView.aspx?contentId=2685 : Which is more complicated? Managing overlapping address blocks, : probably in a system which was never designed to do that, or : moving to a unique IP address per endpoint? (Also probably in a : system which was never designed for IPv6) I would think moving a network that supports many tens of millions of customers to IPv6 would be more complicated than readdressing 1918 space (probably via DHCP) to be non-overlapping. scott

1 0

Fwd: RE: IPv4 Exhaustion
by Scott Weeks 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

Oops, I didn't send this one to the list. scott --- pid(a)ifm.net.nz wrote: : Let's take a specific example. Comcast have 100 million : customers on their own, in their one single network. : This is a single operator. : : Lets assume that in 10 years time China has 1 billion : set top box's. : : RFC1918 is not big enough. IPv4 is barely big enough. : It has to go to IPv6. Comcast has all of them in one AS? Similarly, China will have all 1B customers in one AS? If not, they can use the same 1918 space in each one. Also, Comcast are not going to have 100M IPTV subscribers. I got this from www.ncta.com/ContentView.aspx?contentId=2685 "In 2001, partly in response to those demands, AT&T agreed to fold its cable systems with those of Comcast Corp., creating the largest ever cable operator with more than 22 million customers." "Cable’s high-speed Internet service ended the quarter (Third Quarter of 2005) with 24.3 million subscribers, and the number of digital cable customers had grown to 27.6 million." This is in the US only, though. scott -----Original Message----- From: Scott Weeks [mailto:surfer(a)mauigateway.com] Sent: Wednesday, 29 November 2006 8:59 a.m. To: Philip D'Ath Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: RE: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion --- pid(a)ifm.net.nz wrote: From: Philip D'Ath <pid(a)ifm.net.nz> : : 17 million addresses is simply not enough for a country the size of the : US (and many others). They already have 100 million set top box's : deployed. :-) RFC1918 space is used within a network only. Not across networks. So, one network's IPTV customer can have the same STB IP address as another's when the RCF1918 space is used. You stream from your head-end to your customers only, so there's no need for public IP addressing. The traffic stays within a particular network. That is, unless you're talking about broadcasting on the internet to any STB in the world, or something like that. : Sorry, didn't realise you intended the email to be private. It seemed : of a nature that would interest other people in this thread. It's ok. I was unsure if everyone wanted to hear my non-beer-goggled responses. Responses are so much more interesting when typed while one's beer-goggled... ;-) scott -----Original Message----- From: Scott Weeks [mailto:surfer(a)mauigateway.com] : The release of IP based set top box's and : the like is going to make the problem worse. :: Do you mean for IPTV? I use 1918 space for them and :: a public IP for the DSL router. I haven't used extra :: IPs for triple play stuff. --- pid(a)ifm.net.nz wrote: From: Philip D'Ath <pid(a)ifm.net.nz> : : Think 20 years down the track. : : Mobile phones and IP set top boxes are likely to : EXCEED the size of the RFC1918 address space. : There simply wont be enough of it. Well, I guess I don't mind a private email going public... There're about 17891328 RFC1918 IPs. Let's say you're going to use 7891328 IPs for internal addressing issues. That still leaves 10 million STB IP addresses for your network. scott --- pid(a)ifm.net.nz wrote: From: Philip D'Ath <pid(a)ifm.net.nz> To: surfer(a)mauigateway.com Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: RE: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 07:47:59 +1300 Think 20 years down the track. Mobile phones and IP set top boxes are likely to EXCEED the size of the RFC1918 address space. There simply wont be enough of it. -----Original Message----- From: Scott Weeks [mailto:surfer(a)mauigateway.com] Sent: Wednesday, 29 November 2006 7:24 a.m. To: Philip D'Ath Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion Hello, : The release of IP based set top box's and : the like is going to make the problem worse. Do you mean for IPTV? I use 1918 space for them and a public IP for the DSL router. I haven't used extra IPs for triple play stuff. scott --- pid(a)ifm.net.nz wrote: From: Philip D'Ath <pid(a)ifm.net.nz> To: jamie.baddeley(a)vpc.co.nz Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 21:33:07 +1300 The number of mobile devices with IP addresses now exceeds the number of traditional internet hosts. The gap between these two is growing. Mobile carriers have a more urgent need to use IPv6. The release of IP based set top box's and the like is going to make the problem worse. -----Original Message----- One question that I'd have is how much of that IPv4 space is used, planned to be used, or will never be used? And then I'd ask that same question to APNIC members in NZ who've got IPv4 assignments. And then I'd ask the cellular providers who shall remain unnamed that recently started announcing a /16 of v4 what their expectations of that v4 assignment lifetime is. That's 'the canary in the mine' IMHO. > > Notwithstanding, its still pretty hard to find an upstream provider offering > end to end IPv6 in or from NZ. > > Some of the debate on IPv4 exhaustion is pretty abstract, with some > alarmists saying the end is nigh, others saying that shortage of space will > lead to a secondary and valuable market for selling the space etc. > > It occurs to me that IPv6 is inevitable, its not a question of if, but a > question of when. I agree. Though there comes a point where the When is so far away, it starts to look like an If :-) > > To that end, is there an enthusiasm within the NOG for NZ to be leaders, or > are we content to be followers in the transition? That's a fair question. Whilst there's seems to be no real solid business case to deploy it in the short term or a reason to entertain the idea, frankly at this point in proceedings being a watcher, or follower as you put it, is probably a sensible thing to do for *some* operators. Now if we could convince *the rest of the world* to pay NZ to be a self contained, network of networks v6 test-bed that is an entirely different matter. That would certainly be worth leading on, and I'd be fairly excited about that. jamie _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

2 1

Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion
by Scott Weeks 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

-----Original Message----- From: Scott Weeks [mailto:surfer(a)mauigateway.com] : The release of IP based set top box's and : the like is going to make the problem worse. :: Do you mean for IPTV? I use 1918 space for them and :: a public IP for the DSL router. I haven't used extra :: IPs for triple play stuff. --- pid(a)ifm.net.nz wrote: From: Philip D'Ath <pid(a)ifm.net.nz> : : Think 20 years down the track. : : Mobile phones and IP set top boxes are likely to : EXCEED the size of the RFC1918 address space. : There simply wont be enough of it. Well, I guess I don't mind a private email going public... There're about 17891328 RFC1918 IPs. Let's say you're going to use 7891328 IPs for internal addressing issues. That still leaves 10 million STB IP addresses for your network. scott --- pid(a)ifm.net.nz wrote: From: Philip D'Ath <pid(a)ifm.net.nz> To: surfer(a)mauigateway.com Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: RE: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 07:47:59 +1300 Think 20 years down the track. Mobile phones and IP set top boxes are likely to EXCEED the size of the RFC1918 address space. There simply wont be enough of it. -----Original Message----- From: Scott Weeks [mailto:surfer(a)mauigateway.com] Sent: Wednesday, 29 November 2006 7:24 a.m. To: Philip D'Ath Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion Hello, : The release of IP based set top box's and : the like is going to make the problem worse. Do you mean for IPTV? I use 1918 space for them and a public IP for the DSL router. I haven't used extra IPs for triple play stuff. scott --- pid(a)ifm.net.nz wrote: From: Philip D'Ath <pid(a)ifm.net.nz> To: jamie.baddeley(a)vpc.co.nz Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 21:33:07 +1300 The number of mobile devices with IP addresses now exceeds the number of traditional internet hosts. The gap between these two is growing. Mobile carriers have a more urgent need to use IPv6. The release of IP based set top box's and the like is going to make the problem worse. -----Original Message----- One question that I'd have is how much of that IPv4 space is used, planned to be used, or will never be used? And then I'd ask that same question to APNIC members in NZ who've got IPv4 assignments. And then I'd ask the cellular providers who shall remain unnamed that recently started announcing a /16 of v4 what their expectations of that v4 assignment lifetime is. That's 'the canary in the mine' IMHO. > > Notwithstanding, its still pretty hard to find an upstream provider offering > end to end IPv6 in or from NZ. > > Some of the debate on IPv4 exhaustion is pretty abstract, with some > alarmists saying the end is nigh, others saying that shortage of space will > lead to a secondary and valuable market for selling the space etc. > > It occurs to me that IPv6 is inevitable, its not a question of if, but a > question of when. I agree. Though there comes a point where the When is so far away, it starts to look like an If :-) > > To that end, is there an enthusiasm within the NOG for NZ to be leaders, or > are we content to be followers in the transition? That's a fair question. Whilst there's seems to be no real solid business case to deploy it in the short term or a reason to entertain the idea, frankly at this point in proceedings being a watcher, or follower as you put it, is probably a sensible thing to do for *some* operators. Now if we could convince *the rest of the world* to pay NZ to be a self contained, network of networks v6 test-bed that is an entirely different matter. That would certainly be worth leading on, and I'd be fairly excited about that. jamie _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

2 1

Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion
by Philip D'Ath 27 Nov '06

27 Nov '06

Think 20 years down the track. Mobile phones and IP set top boxes are likely to EXCEED the size of the RFC1918 address space. There simply wont be enough of it. -----Original Message----- From: Scott Weeks [mailto:surfer(a)mauigateway.com] Sent: Wednesday, 29 November 2006 7:24 a.m. To: Philip D'Ath Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion Hello, : The release of IP based set top box's and : the like is going to make the problem worse. Do you mean for IPTV? I use 1918 space for them and a public IP for the DSL router. I haven't used extra IPs for triple play stuff. scott --- pid(a)ifm.net.nz wrote: From: Philip D'Ath <pid(a)ifm.net.nz> To: jamie.baddeley(a)vpc.co.nz Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv4 Exhaustion Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 21:33:07 +1300 The number of mobile devices with IP addresses now exceeds the number of traditional internet hosts. The gap between these two is growing. Mobile carriers have a more urgent need to use IPv6. The release of IP based set top box's and the like is going to make the problem worse. -----Original Message----- One question that I'd have is how much of that IPv4 space is used, planned to be used, or will never be used? And then I'd ask that same question to APNIC members in NZ who've got IPv4 assignments. And then I'd ask the cellular providers who shall remain unnamed that recently started announcing a /16 of v4 what their expectations of that v4 assignment lifetime is. That's 'the canary in the mine' IMHO. > > Notwithstanding, its still pretty hard to find an upstream provider offering > end to end IPv6 in or from NZ. > > Some of the debate on IPv4 exhaustion is pretty abstract, with some > alarmists saying the end is nigh, others saying that shortage of space will > lead to a secondary and valuable market for selling the space etc. > > It occurs to me that IPv6 is inevitable, its not a question of if, but a > question of when. I agree. Though there comes a point where the When is so far away, it starts to look like an If :-) > > To that end, is there an enthusiasm within the NOG for NZ to be leaders, or > are we content to be followers in the transition? That's a fair question. Whilst there's seems to be no real solid business case to deploy it in the short term or a reason to entertain the idea, frankly at this point in proceedings being a watcher, or follower as you put it, is probably a sensible thing to do for *some* operators. Now if we could convince *the rest of the world* to pay NZ to be a self contained, network of networks v6 test-bed that is an entirely different matter. That would certainly be worth leading on, and I'd be fairly excited about that. jamie _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

1 0

[semi-ot] 0800 number ownership
by Jasper Bryant-Greene 27 Nov '06

27 Nov '06

Hi all, excuse the OT post, but not sure where else to turn. Not really something the helpdesks wish to help with. I currently have 0800 service provided by a company called Supra Limited, run by a certain airline-company-hoax-monger from Nelson [1]. I have serious concerns about the stability of this company. Given that this company does not answer its phones at any time of day or night, does not return emails, and the owner appears to be an 18-year-old who has disappeared off the face of the earth, is there a way to get my 0800 number back? It's still working, but as far as I'm concerned these guys could stop paying the bills at any time, and then it will be down while I sort things out. Any ideas, anyone that can help? Replies off-list. Once again, excuse the OT post. [1] http://www.google.co.nz/search?q=Lamar+Hargreaves should provide some hilarity. -- Jasper Bryant-Greene Director Album Limited jasper(a)albumltd.co.nz +64 21 708 334 / 0800 425 286 http://www.albumltd.co.nz/

3 2

Re: [nznog] Observation
by Martin Kealey 27 Nov '06

27 Nov '06

> > Just an observation: if ISPs are planning on introducing measures such > > as hardware spam filters that drop connections without the standard SMTP > > response code, or greylisting, or similar measures likely to have > > widespread effect, a simple post to this list detailing what is about to > > happen would probably save a lot of people a lot of time :) LARTs will be applied in appropriate places... :-) > And/or they could just answer postmaster@, like good little > mail admins. As of my arrival, that is being done here at Ihug; I apologise on behalf of my predecessors for not doing so. And now that I've cleared out the 119000 messages in the postmaster mailbox, you might get some answers. :-) -Martin

1 0

Observation
by Jasper Bryant-Greene 27 Nov '06

27 Nov '06

Just an observation: if ISPs are planning on introducing measures such as hardware spam filters that drop connections without the standard SMTP response code, or greylisting, or similar measures likely to have widespread effect, a simple post to this list detailing what is about to happen would probably save a lot of people a lot of time :) -- Jasper Bryant-Greene Director Album Limited jasper(a)albumltd.co.nz +64 21 708 334 / 0800 425 286 http://www.albumltd.co.nz/

2 1

Ihug mail admins
by TreeNet Admin 26 Nov '06

26 Nov '06

Could one of you in charge of the ihug mail servers please contact me. You may need to use abuse(a)treenetnz.com. AYJ Treehouse Networks Ltd.

3 2

Searching For ...
by David Farrar 26 Nov '06

26 Nov '06

To keep this slightly on-topic I'll promise to shout a beer at the next NZNOG Conference to anyone who can supply an e-mail address or other contact details for any of the people below. Rex Croft, ex Wai Uni Alan Marsden, ex pl.net Chris Tyler, ex-Xtra Peter Whimp, ex Tuia Patrick O'Brien, ex Domainz Tim & Nick Wood, ex Ihug Responses directly to me would be great. Many thanks David Farrar

3 2

Xtra mail admin
by Jasper Bryant-Greene 26 Nov '06

26 Nov '06

Can a mail admin from Xtra please contact me off list. Thanks -- Jasper Bryant-Greene Director Album Limited jasper(a)albumltd.co.nz +64 21 708 334 / 0800 425 286 http://www.albumltd.co.nz/

1 0

Re: [nznog] [Fwd: [Computer-support] Greylisting - one day after]
by Richard 23 Nov '06

23 Nov '06

Hi Russell Russell Fulton wrote: > This might be of interest to NZNOG members -- we have just > implemented grey listing for some addresses and the results have been > dramatic to say the least... Likewise, I've been using greylisting on my various domains, some of which have been receiving spam for many years, for a year or so now. The initial results were staggering, but in recent months I've started to get a trickle comiag through again - looks like the scum are searching for open relays again. Still, at least *that* problem isn't as big as it once was. Cheers Richard -- Richard Stevenson Freelance Unix geek 027 285 5873

7 7

ihug email
by Jasper Bryant-Greene 22 Nov '06

22 Nov '06

Could someone from ihug please contact me off-list regarding your email servers. Thanks -- Jasper Bryant-Greene Director Album Limited jasper(a)albumltd.co.nz +64 21 708 334 / 0800 425 286 http://www.albumltd.co.nz/

1 0

Government changes 2.3 GHz rules (and other bands)
by Ian McDonald 22 Nov '06

22 Nov '06

>From http://www.beehive.govt.nz/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=27807 Government promotes wireless broadband investment The government's decision to reallocate spectrum for wireless broadband is another essential step in providing New Zealanders with better, more competitive access to broadband, says Communications Minister David Cunliffe. The decision will see spectrum in the 2.3 GHz range – suitable for such emerging wireless broadband applications as WiMAX – put up for auction in early 2007. While current right-holders do not have to give up their rights before they expire in 2010, some may choose to do so. It is expected that some of the 2.3 GHz spectrum could be available for development immediately after the auction, enabling early development of new broadband wireless services. Other decisions include making a 16MHz block as a "managed park" suitable for local and regional broadband operations, and developing policies to facilitate future use of other spectrum suitable for broadband wireless access (BWA). Along with the other recent measures to develop a vibrant, competitive ICT sector, the availability of additional broadband wireless spectrum will help unlock the potential of these new technologies, and aid New Zealand's economic transformation into an innovative and creative knowledge-based economy. "This decision reflects the fairest and most effective way of giving new and existing wireless broadband services providers the opportunity to develop this very important spectrum for broadband in New Zealand," Mr Cunliffe said. "BWA technology for this band is only just starting to become available. It is critical that we create the right conditions for its future deployment by giving a wide range of players the opportunity and the certainty they need to make a long-term investment." "How we run the process and allocate the rights will obviously be critical. A spectrum cap of 30 MHz per operator – which generally accepted industry standards indicate would be ample – would ensure at least three separate lots of spectrum will be on offer. Successful purchasers will be required to implement services within a specified period." This announcement reaffirms a 2004 government decision that existing rights would not be renewed when they expire in 2010. It follows public consultation in which industry feedback showed strong support for immediate reallocation of this spectrum. Background information: Summary of decisions Allocation of the 2.3 GHz spectrum Up to eight 10 MHz-wide management rights in the 2.3 GHz band will be reallocated by auction as soon as is practicable. A 16 MHz block will be made available as a managed spectrum park from 2010, or earlier if available. The Ministry of Economic Development expects to conduct the auction in the first quarter of 2007, with the following conditions: * a spectrum cap of 30 MHz per operator will apply for two years from the date of allocation; and * right-holders will be required to implement services within a specified period or face revocation. Subject to discussions with right-holders for early relinquishment of their current 2.3 GHz spectrum rights, some of the auctioned spectrum rights will be available for use immediately after the auction, while a smaller amount may not become available until current rights expire in 2010. Transition plan for 2.5 GHz spectrum Spectrum at 2.5 GHz is suitable for BWA technology in a manner equivalent to the 2.3 GHz band, but the band is currently used for television outside broadcasting (e.g. linking back to the studio). The ministry will develop and implement a transition plan, in consultation with stakeholders, to make this band available for future BWA allocation, once technical parameters have been determined at the World Radio Conference in 2007. New General User Licences at 5.4 GHz and 60 GHz The ministry intends to create a general user licence ('public park' licence) to facilitate the deployment of BWA services at 5.4 GHz by June 2007, subject to suitable protection for existing radar applications in the band. A general user licence will also be issued for BWA services at 60 GHz by June 2007, with conditions that balance technical neutrality with spectrum utility and efficiency. 70, 80, 90 GHz and other bands There are at present no policies for licensing of the 70, 80 and 90 GHz bands, but interest in using these bands for BWA is becoming evident. In anticipation of future demand, the ministry is developing policy proposals for these bands. There is some interest in other bands, including projected changes to the existing 921 to 929 MHz general user licence and the 10.5 GHz bands. Policy and technical work for these bands is continuing. -- Ian McDonald Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4 Blog: http://imcdnzl.blogspot.com WAND Network Research Group Department of Computer Science University of Waikato New Zealand

1 0

NZNOG 2007: CFP: Network Systems Administration MiniConf
by Ewen McNeill 22 Nov '06

22 Nov '06

Call for Presentations for NZNOG 2007: Network Systems Administration Mini-Conference In conjunction with the NZNOG 2007 conference (http://www.nznog.org/) we will be holding a network systems administration mini-conference on the tutorial day, Wednesday 2007-01-31. The NZNOG 2007 conference will be held in Palmerston North between 2007-01-31 and 2007-02-02. Registration at the NZNOG 2007 conference is a mandatory prerequisite for attendence at the mini-conference; we expect there will be no additional charge. The mini-conference's focus is on "Layer 7" issues to do with network and ISP operations, including providing customer services (email, DNS, etc) and provisioning and management topics. We are now seeking proposals for presentations at the mini-conference. We have openings for: - 50-60 minute full presentations - 25-30 minute half presentations - 5-10 minute "lightning talks" Presentations are expected to be directed at a technical audience, and focused on a system administration area related to network or ISP operations. Some possible topics: - Email servers and spam filtering techniques - DNS servers, registry systems - server security and best sysadmin practices in an internet provider environment - VoIP servers - network management / monitoring tools - RADIUS/TACACS - Netflow, routing, and traffic analysis tools - server tuning for high performance networking - provisioning tools - honeypots and other security techniques - network based storage - high availability and disaster recovery for network services - virtual machine technology for network services - *nix based routing and fire-walling - tools you need that you may not know about We are happy to discuss the suitability of other topics with intending presenters. Timeline: - proposals due by 2006-12-04 - selection advised by 2006-12-11 - draft program published by 2006-12-18 - presentations 2007-01-31 Please send all proposals and questions to <talks(a)nznog.miniconf.org> Simon Lyall and Ewen McNeill, Conveeners

1 0

Notification of NZRR Database changes
by NZRR Database Notifications 21 Nov '06

21 Nov '06

Dear Colleague, This is to notify you that some object(s) in NZRR database which you either maintain or are listed as to-be-notified have been added, deleted or changed. These objects are used to configure the various NZIX route servers (http://nzix.net/) so you can expect the relevant servers to be reloaded in the near future. The reloading of the servers is staggered over a period of time so that if you are peering with both servers at an exchange, you can maintain at least one BGP session at all times and consequently a full set of routes. --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: aut-num: AS23754 as-name: NZRR-AS23754 descr: CityLink admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR import: from AS9560 accept ANY AND NOT fltr-bogons export: to AS9560 announce AS23754 import: from AS9439 accept ANY AND NOT fltr-bogons export: to AS9439 announce AS23754 import: from AS24385 accept ANY AND NOT fltr-bogons export: to AS24385 announce AS23754 import: from AS7657 accept {0.0.0.0/0} export: to AS7657 announce AS23754 notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: asjl(a)citylink.co.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20050801 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: aut-num: AS23754 as-name: NZRR-AS23754 descr: CityLink descr: WIX peering at '202.7.0.32' descr: see Citylink RT job #7338 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR import: from AS9560 accept ANY AND NOT fltr-bogons export: to AS9560 announce AS23754 import: from AS9439 accept ANY AND NOT fltr-bogons export: to AS9439 announce AS23754 import: from AS24385 accept ANY AND NOT fltr-bogons export: to AS24385 announce AS23754 import: from AS7657 accept {0.0.0.0/0} export: to AS7657 announce AS23754 import: from AS9439 accept ANY AND NOT fltr-bogons export: to AS9439 announce AS23754 notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: asjl(a)citylink.co.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061122 source: NZRR --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS23754 descr: advertised to AS9439 by CityLink - AS23754 members: 198.48.0.0/22^22-29, 202.8.44.0/22^22-29, 202.7.6.0/23^23-29, 97.64.46.0/24^24-29, 198.32.71.0/24^24-29, 202.7.5.0/24^24-29, 203.118.144.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: asjl(a)citylink.co.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061116 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS23754 descr: Route set advertised to AS9439 by Cafenet-Free - AS23754 members: 198.48.3.192/26^26-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: noc(a)citylink.co.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061122 source: NZRR

1 0

Re: [nznog] [Fwd: Re: [Fwd: [Computer-support] Greylisting - one day after]
by Russell Fulton 15 Nov '06

15 Nov '06

> > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [nznog] [Fwd: [Computer-support] > Greylisting - one day after] > Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:08:46 +1300 > From: Jasper Bryant-Greene <jasper(a)albumltd.co.nz> > Organisation: Album Limited > To: Richard <richard(a)alternativeuniverse.net> > CC: Russell Fulton <r.fulton(a)auckland.ac.nz>, > nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > References: <2.1.1-1800921-393-A-OEWW(a)222.154.242.106> > > > > Question around this - we are currently looking at > implementing it, but > we have three mail servers behind a load balancer. The software we're > looking at is postgrey (as we use Postfix), but it uses BDB database > files... > > Which means each server has an individual greylisting > database, and mail > could potentially (worst case) be bounced three times before getting > through. Has anyone solved this problem already? With BDB database files you really don't have a lot (any?) options. You could put the file on a NFS share and let all 3 servers use it, but locking issues and overall BDB speed would probably impact your performance greatly. The best solution in this case would be to bring a new server that will run a real database (MySQL, Oracle). If you use a greylisting package that supports these databases (gld does), you can have all servers point to this server and use one central greylisting database. Of course, this way you have a single point of failure (while gld will allow e-mails to flow if the database is not available, you loose greylisting, of course). We at the moment have local MySQL databases on each server. This means that the greylisting delay could be longer, but as we don't have real load balancer but use DNS only, so far this hasn't been the case. As far as I can see, actually, remote MTAs always came back to exactly the same server they were originally greylisted on, probably due to DNS caching on their side. Bojan

2 1

Notification of NZRR Database changes
by NZRR Database Notifications 15 Nov '06

15 Nov '06

Dear Colleague, This is to notify you that some object(s) in NZRR database which you either maintain or are listed as to-be-notified have been added, deleted or changed. These objects are used to configure the various NZIX route servers (http://nzix.net/) so you can expect the relevant servers to be reloaded in the near future. The reloading of the servers is staggered over a period of time so that if you are peering with both servers at an exchange, you can maintain at least one BGP session at all times and consequently a full set of routes. --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS23754 descr: advertised to AS9439 by CityLink - AS23754 members: 198.48.0.0/22^22-29, 202.8.44.0/22^22-29, 198.32.71.0/24^24-29, 203.118.144.0/24^24-29, 202.7.4.32/28^28-29, 202.7.7.88/29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: noc(a)citylink.co.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20050926 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS23754 descr: advertised to AS9439 by CityLink - AS23754 members: 198.48.0.0/22^22-29, 202.8.44.0/22^22-29, 202.7.6.0/23^23-29, 97.64.46.0/24^24-29, 198.32.71.0/24^24-29, 202.7.5.0/24^24-29, 203.118.144.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: asjl(a)citylink.co.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061116 source: NZRR

1 0

Notification of NZRR Database changes
by NZRR Database Notifications 15 Nov '06

15 Nov '06

Dear Colleague, This is to notify you that some object(s) in NZRR database which you either maintain or are listed as to-be-notified have been added, deleted or changed. These objects are used to configure the various NZIX route servers (http://nzix.net/) so you can expect the relevant servers to be reloaded in the near future. The reloading of the servers is staggered over a period of time so that if you are peering with both servers at an exchange, you can maintain at least one BGP session at all times and consequently a full set of routes. --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route-set: AS9560:RS-ROUTES:AS23754 descr: advertised to AS9560 by CityLink - AS23754 members: 198.48.0.0/22^22-29, 202.8.44.0/22^22-29, 202.7.6.0/23^23-29, 198.32.71.0/24^24-29, 202.7.5.0/24^24-29, 203.118.144.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: asjl(a)citylink.co.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20050624 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route-set: AS9560:RS-ROUTES:AS23754 descr: advertised to AS9560 by CityLink - AS23754 members: 198.48.0.0/22^22-29, 202.8.44.0/22^22-29, 202.7.6.0/23^23-29, 97.64.46.0/24^24-29, 198.32.71.0/24^24-29, 202.7.5.0/24^24-29, 203.118.144.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: asjl(a)citylink.co.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20061116 source: NZRR

1 0

[Fwd: [Computer-support] Greylisting - one day after]
by Russell Fulton 15 Nov '06

15 Nov '06

Hi Folks, This might be of interest to NZNOG members -- we have just implemented grey listing for some addresses and the results have been dramatic to say the least... Russell -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [Computer-support] Greylisting - one day after Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:50:26 +1300 From: Bojan Zdrnja <b.zdrnja(a)auckland.ac.nz> To: Computer Support <computer-support(a)list.auckland.ac.nz> Hi All, Yesterday at 12:00 (mid day) I enabled greylisting on our e-mail cluster. At the moment we are greylisting only machines that don't have reverse DNS entries, or match one of our predefined name regular expressions (these are matching on modem/dialup/cable/adsl machines). The results of this has been amazing - we are seeing a dramatic decrease in processed spam (almost 10 times!). I'm hoping that you are seeing effects of this in your mailboxes as well - there should be overall less spam (marked and unmarked). I'm attaching two graphs that are showing this. The first graph (total-messages.PNG) shows total messages received after I turned on greylising. Green are legitimate messages, blue is spam, red are infected messages. The second graph (CPU-groucho.PNG) shows CPU utilization on groucho (smtpa - the first SMTP machine). For some reason spammers like to hit this machine the most so you can see last 7 days. Now, this works great at the moment but spammers will adapt and improve their software. My wild guess is that this will help for maybe 6 months to a year, but it will definitely give us some time to prepare for future spam waves. Bojan

2 1

Re: [nznog] [Fwd: [Computer-support] Greylisting - one day after]
by Mark Seward 15 Nov '06

15 Nov '06

On 11/16/06, Daniel <daniel(a)fx.net.nz> wrote: > > Which means each server has an individual greylisting database, and mail > > could potentially (worst case) be bounced three times before getting > > through. Has anyone solved this problem already? .. > http://sqlgrey.sourceforge.net/ We have postfix+sqlgrey deployed across several mail hosts. It would be nice to have a replicated postgres behind it but otherwise it does the job very nicely. Also seen here: Similar dramatic reduction in inbound crap and recent increase in abuse of relays behind legit whitelisted hosts. Cheers, Mark.

1 0

Inbound mail filtering at Ihug
by Martin Kealey 14 Nov '06

14 Nov '06

Hi folks, Just a heads-up: We've recently tightened up the reverse & forward DNS tests applied by our inbound SMTP servers (zuul.ihug.co.nz); sending hosts with mismatched DNS entries are now likely to have all messages rejected. If you need an exception to this rule please let us know (presumably by phone...) -Martin Kealey (Systems Engineer, ihüg)

3 2

Re: [nznog] Inbound mail filtering at Ihug
by Martin Kealey 14 Nov '06

14 Nov '06

Ok, before I get a complete deluge of replies... Personally I agree that dropping connections without explanation is, to say the least, unhelpful. I only started here on Monday so some things might take longer than you'd expect, but I'm already looking into this and other outstanding email issues. -Martin

1 0

Invite to IPV6 Industry Update
by Martyn Pratt (marpratt) 14 Nov '06

14 Nov '06

Hi all, for those with an interest in IPv6, Tony Hain co-chair of the IETF working group developing IPv6 Transition tools will be speaking in Wellington and Auckland, please see below for more details . If anyone would like more info please feel free to contact me directly. Cheers Martyn Industry Update-IPV6 Please join us for an informative update from visiting Cisco Senior Technical Leader Tony Hain on IPV6 Developments and Trends Wellington Event When: Friday 1st December Where: Hotel Intercontinental, Thordon Room, Grey Street What Time: 9am to 10.30am RSVP: Trafong(a)cisco.com Please reply by Tuedsay 21st Nov and advise city in response Auckland Event When: Tuesday 28th November Where: Cisco Auckland Boardroom, L25 ASB Building, 135 Albert St What Time: 3pm- 4pm RSVP: Trafong(a)cisco.com Please reply by Tuedsay 21st Nov and advise city in response More about Tony Hain Tony is currently the Senior Technical Leader, IPv6 technologies with Cisco Systems. In addition to providing guidance to the various internal product teams, he was also co-chair of the IETF working group developing IPv6 Transition tools. His IETF participation since 1987 includes a term on the Internet Architecture Board from 1997 - 2001. Named an IPv6 Forum Fellow in 2004, he is currently serving as Technology Director on the forum's North American IPv6 task force steering committee ________________________________ <http://www.cisco.com/> Martyn Pratt Systems Engineer, New Zealand Cisco Systems, Inc. ________________________________ Contact Information: e-mail: Phone: DDI: Mobile: Web: martyn.pratt(a)cisco.com +64 9 355 1950 +64 9 355 1975 +64 21 504 632 www.cisco.com ________________________________

1 0

Speedtest for every ISP for ispmap.co.nz
by Barry Murphy 14 Nov '06

14 Nov '06

Howdy, Could someone from each ISP send me a link to a speedtest on one of your servers, that is if you have a speed test site for your ISP, this will be linked from http://www.ispmap.co.nz/searchisp.php to your speed test site. Secondly if you have tr.php (from http://tr.meta.net.nz) please advise the link at the same time so we can do something like http://www.ispmap.co.nz/yourIP.php (the traceroute to your IP) from each ISP's page. The idea is to allow users to speed test their connection and run traceroute tests to themselves from multiple providers. To make like easier for myself, please reply with the following: ISP Name: Speedtest URL: Traceroute URL: Are these run by the ISP (yes) or a third party (no): Please reply offlist. Thanks Regards Barry Murphy -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

1 0

ihug email issues
by Quintin Russ 13 Nov '06

13 Nov '06

Hi, Can someone from ihug please contact me offlist regarding ihug mail servers dropping connection from our servers. Thanks, Quintin

2 2

Notice of maintenance work on ns2.dns.net.nz
by DNS 12 Nov '06

12 Nov '06

Please note we will be doing some maintenance work on the machine that serves ns2.dns.net.nz between 19:00 and 21:00 on Monday the 30th of October. During this time ns2.dns.net.nz may not be available. Throughout this period the other six .nz zone servers (ns1,3,4,5,6,7) will be available. Please contact me if you have any questions. Dave Baker .nz Registry Services support(a)nzrs.net.nz

1 1

OT - Brother HL2700CN w Linux reports please
by John ＠ netTRUST 12 Nov '06

12 Nov '06

Any feedback on this printer's operation with Linux / CUPS using the network interface? Thanks.

2 1

Re: [nznog] More quotes for internet access needed...
by Gerard Creamer 07 Nov '06

07 Nov '06

Apologies - I didn't mean to be unclear in my post, or to speak untruths about radio. I thought the query was regarding connectivity to a home. I have worked with radio links a number of time in commercial settings and it's always been fabulous - both fast and very reliable, and it's great to see a number of purveyors of high class services getting established in this field. Every time I've tried to get radio going to a residential address (ie, in a suburb or regional centre) it's only been possible using products that sadly don't fall under the 'fast and reliable' umbrella. If you are lucky enough to be able to subscribe to a decent provider then be thankful and take the opportunity - I know I would if I could. Cheers, Gerard On 7/11/2006 10:29 p.m., Jonathan Brewer wrote: > Hi Folks, > > Since this is a technical list, I thought I'd contribute some data to answer > Gerard's comment: > > "Wireless has too high a latency" > > I left a ping running for the last hour across our gigabit wireless link > between Sky Tower and ANZ Centre in Auckland. Here are the results: > > 3904 packets transmitted, 3904 packets received, 0% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max = 1/1.0/5 ms > > A couple points: > > 1. It's raining in Auckland. The unloaded link without the rain is > down around .5ms > 2. Under load in the rain it looks more like 1/3/8 ms. > 3. Yes, it really is wireless, not laser. Tx low 58.1 GHz, Tx high > 62.9 GHz. > > Cheers, > > Jon > > ------------------------- > Araneo Limited > 230B Left Bank > 116 Cuba Street > Wellington 6011 > > Ph: 04 978 7350 > Fx: 04 978 7355 > Mb: 021 345 054 > > http://www.araneo.net.nz/ > ------------------------- > >

2 1

More quotes for internet access needed...
by Jasper Bryant-Greene 06 Nov '06

06 Nov '06

Unrelated but similar request to Ernest's earlier today: I have a requirement for decent high-speed Internet access at my residence in Edgeware, Christchurch. National bandwidth is a priority (preferably 10Mb+, and preferably symmetrical), international doesn't have to be anything too flash. The premises we will be performing most data transfers to is dual-homed with TC and Telecom, so no particular preferences there for this end. I live maybe 25m from the closest TC cable, which would probably be close enough speed-wise, but there's another property between me and that cable, so I can't get hooked up. What, if any, are my options? If any providers able to help could email me quotes off-list I'd be appreciative. -- Jasper Bryant-Greene Director Album Limited jasper(a)albumltd.co.nz +64 21 708 334 / 0800 425 286 http://www.albumltd.co.nz/

9 8

Quotes for internet access needed
by Ernest Cunningham 06 Nov '06

06 Nov '06

Hi all, We are currently evaluating our internet access needs and are looking for quotes from those who can provide internet access that meets the following requirements: - ≥ 10 mbit/symetrical National / International - Approx. 100 gig monthly traffic allowance (estimate current average monthly usage to be about 30% international / 70 % national traffic) - Multiple static IP addresses (currently have 5 and use 3) - Customisable traffic shaping (no one tcp data stream to use more than 2mbit/sec at any time etc) - Additional high speed internet access for staff residences for remote development and server administration etc. (5-15 staff) - Office location is Christchurch CBD. - We host client database and web solutions so connection needs to be reliable. (read: Telecom ADSL will not cut the mustard). Please email me off list if you can help. Kind regards, Ernest Cunningham

1 0

How many bytes is 50mb?
by Don Gould 04 Nov '06

04 Nov '06

Does anyone know what the conventions are in NZ? I'm writting a small data control system and I need to know how ISPs count data here. I know the convention for a gig is 1000 mb. I don't know how people are counting mbs thou. Cheers Don -- Don Gould www.thinkdesignprint.co.nz - www.tcn.bowenvale.co.nz - www.bowenvale.co.nz - www.hearingbooks.co.nz - www.buxtonsquare.co.nz - SkypeMe: ThinkDesignPrint - Good ideas: www.solarking.co.nz

3 2

[Sort of OT] NZ FreeBSD mirror needed
by Juha Saarinen 30 Oct '06

30 Oct '06

Hello my beery little friends, Dan Langille wrote on the NZFUG list: "Hi folks, The computer running http://www.nz.freebsd.org/ is dying. The www mirror needs a new home. Any volunteers? I think this port does that for you: http://www.freshports.org/net/cvsup-mirror/ The NZ website is not a high volume website... It's just good to have the thing up and running." And I thought maybe a NZ ISP might be able to assist here. A cvsup and ftp mirror would be good too, if possible. Details on mirroring here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/hubs/index.html And Andrew Thompson @ FreeBSD says there's a prebuilt system available if anyone wants to host it, or ISPs are welcome to use their own. Off list replies please. -- Juha Saarinen www.geekzone.co.nz/juha | Skype: juha_saarinen blogs.pcworld.co.nz/pcworld/techsploder www.computerworld.co.nz | MSN: juha_saarinen(a)msn.com Subtle recursive jokes in .sigs are not funny.

1 0

Re: [nznog] [Fwd: Re: NZNOG '06 videos]
by Richard Naylor 28 Oct '06

28 Oct '06

>On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 18:29 +1300, Jeremy Naylor wrote: >>Hey guys, >>Just a quick note to let you know that the videos for the talks at NZNOG >>'06 are now available. >>Sorry for the delay with them. >>They're at: http://www.r2.co.nz/20060323 > >Is there any easy way to download them without resorting to using >mplayer -dumpstream? If theres enough interest or demand, I put a copy onto an HTTP server. See if theres interest on nznog. Rich

1 0

Fwd: The Postel Network Operator's Scholarship
by Joe Abley 27 Oct '06

27 Oct '06

Begin forwarded message: > From: Joe Abley <jabley(a)ca.afilias.info> > Date: 13 October 2006 10:30:13 EDT (CA) > To: nanog-announce(a)nanog.org > Subject: The Postel Network Operator's Scholarship > > The Internet Society (ISOC) a 501c(3) corporation (http:// > www.isoc.org/isoc/general/trustees/incorp.shtml) has agreed to > accept a restricted donation from an anonymous source to be known as > the "Postel Network Operator's Scholarship." > > The Scholarship will be awarded annually to a recipient selected by a > "Selection Committee" consisting of a representative of the then > serving Board of ARIN (The American Registry of Internet Numbers - > http://www.arin.net) and a representative of the then serving > Steering Committee of NANOG (The North American Network Operator's > Group - http://www.nanog.org) > > The award is intended to enable a deserving network operator who > would not otherwise be able to attend the Joint Meeting to do so, and > whose attendance at the Joint Meeting will continue to build on the > legacy of Jon's lifetime contribution to the Internet. > > The Selection Committee will develop an open and public application > process, and will "whimsically" select the annual recipient > exclusively in response to the question: "What Would Jon Do?" if he > were asked to select a recipient. There are no criteria or > restrictions or other requirements, including but not limited to > nationality, location, age, or gender. > > The scholarship will cover the costs of travel from the recipient's > home city to the Joint Meeting. It will also cover the costs of > Hotel accommodation at the Conference Hotel. It will include a daily > stipend for food, beverages, and incidentals. It is expected that > the attendence fee for the meetings will be waived by ARIN and NANOG. > > The membership of the Selection Committee shall not be changed except > in the event that the membership of either the Board (in the case of > ARIN) or the Steering Committee (in the case of NANOG) ceases to be > based on the popular vote of the community each serve; in which case > the member whose process changes will be replaced by a similar body > that is based on the popular vote of the community that was served by > the ineligible member, and which will be appointed at the sole > discretion of the Board of Trustees of the Internet Society, and > under the same terms as the initial Selection Committee. > > At its option, the Internet Society may increase or decrease the > number of recipients each year based on the current state of the > Scholarship Fund, and the variable costs of travel and accommodation. >

1 0

Re: [nznog] Moving DNS providers - best practice.
by Peter Mott 26 Oct '06

26 Oct '06

On 27/10/2006, at 3:23 PM, Mark Foster wrote: > Ask them do a whois on the domain, and then point out that if they are > carrying Authoritive NS records for a domain which the rootservers are > pointing elsewhere - whois tells you this - they are breaking the DNS. One could also encourage folks to use different name servers for caching and not allow recursion on their authoritative servers. That way if they claim to be authoritative and they are no longer, nobody cares. I seem to remember having a discussion about this very thing with a large provider about 6 years ago and they were not interested in any form of co-operation that would prevent client internet experience being broken when a change of delegation took place. They didn't have the capacity to understand the problem let alone a resolve to solve it. I wonder if anything has changed :-) regards Peter Mott -/-

2 1