- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

LACNIC ASN allocation
by Rob Thomas 13 Nov '02

13 Nov '02

Hi, NZNOG folks. [ Apologies to those of you who have seen this post in other fora. ] IANA has allocated a range of AS numbers to LACNIC, the new Latin American and Caribbean RIR, http://lacnic.net. This allocation was made as of 12 November 2002. The new LACNIC range is: 27648 - 28671 Allocated by LACNIC (November 2002) This changes the formerly IANA held range as follows: (was) 27648 - 32767 Held by the IANA (now) 28672 - 32767 Held by the IANA You may wish to adjust any filters accordingly. I have updated my bogus ASN monitoring, which can be found here: http://www.cymru.com/BGP/asnbogusrep.html The master list of ASNs can be found here: http://www.iana.org/assignments/as-numbers Thanks, Rob. -- Rob Thomas http://www.cymru.com ASSERT(coffee != empty); - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

FW: Important Informational Message - root.zone change
by David Farrar 07 Nov '02

07 Nov '02

Not sure how this is meant to circulate around but nznog seems a sensible list to pass this onto. DPF > ------ Forwarded Message > From: "John Crain" <crain(a)icann.org> > Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 15:26:17 -0800 > To: <dnsop(a)cafax.se> > Subject: Important Informational Message - root.zone change > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > *****PLEASE NOTE***** > This is an important Informational Message to the internet community: > > November 5, 2002, the IP address for J.root-servers.net will > change in the authoritative NS set for "dot". The change will > be reflected in zone serial # 2002110501. > > The new set of servers authoritative for "dot" will be: > A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 198.41.0.4 > H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 128.63.2.53 > C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 192.33.4.12 > G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 192.112.36.4 > F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 192.5.5.241 > B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 128.9.0.107 > J.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 192.58.128.30 > K.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 193.0.14.129 > L.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 198.32.64.12 > M.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 202.12.27.33 > I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 192.36.148.17 > E.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 192.203.230.10 > D.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 128.8.10.90 > > This WILL require a change to your root hints file. The new > file will be available via anonymous ftp from > rs.internic.net:/domain/named.root as well as > ftp.internic.net:/doamin/named.root starting 11/5/02 1700UTC (12pm > EST/9am PST). > > Both the new and old j.root-servers.net IP space will provide > answers in parallel for the foreseeable future. > > _________________________________________ > > John Crain > Manager of Technical Operations > ICANN/IANA > > crain(a)icann.org > 1AF4 F638 4B2D 3EF2 F9BA 99E4 8D85 69A7 > > _________________________________________ > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: PGP Personal Security 7.0.3 > > iQA/AwUBPcb++9Gxp5XUiliSEQI5wwCfXE2Dhz0XJCGJagRgPDz7y2A85ekAoIPb > 0ufIR65iR8KVhqKCFbeUoxsc > =GVDN > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > #---------------------------------------------------------------------- > # To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request(a)cafax.se>. > > ------ End of Forwarded Message > > - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

3 2

[OT] RFV - bank.nz
by Lin Nah 07 Nov '02

07 Nov '02

Hi All The banks have been trying to get this for ages despite being told it isn't needed. This is the 3rd time they are trying and I assume they want to try and try and try again for 1000 times till they get it. That is IMHO not the way to do things. I strongly urge everyone to vote agaist the formation of bank.nz regards Lin ps If you would like curry and beer this thursday night, see if there's anything happening in your town at thursdaynightcurry.com If not start up one for your town. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2002 08:28:47 +1300 From: David Farrar <secretary(a)internetnz.net.nz> Reply-To: public-discuss(a)internetnz.net.nz To: public-announce(a)internetnz.net.nz Subject: [public-announce] RFV - bank.nz RFV - Request For Votes - bank.nz InternetNZ (www.internetnz.net.nz) is conducting a vote to gauge whether there is support for the creation of a new second level domain in the *.nz namespace - namely bank.nz. The details of the application and the entire process can be found at http://www.internetnz.net.nz/dns/2nd-level-domains/ and it is being considered based on the policy adopted in May 1997 for considering new second level domains. The application from New Zealand Bankers' Association and the InternetNZ policy can be found at this link. Voting for this application will last 14 days from the date of the start. The vote will start November 3 2002 at 23:59 and closes November 17, 2002 at 23:59. The application must receive at least 200 votes and at least 70% support for it to enter the next phase which is a formal submission process. This vote will not determine if .bank.nz 2LD is implemented, only to see if it has wide enough support for it to continue in the approval process. Voting is available via a website or email and details of voting can be found at http://www.internetnz.net.nz/dns/2nd-level-domains/2ld021103-voting_details… Please note to be able to vote you have to have an valid email address and a NZ located postal address. Any missing information on the ballot will result in the ballot being ruled invalid. Please check to make sure all the required information is included on your ballot. Voting opens online at http://vote.internetnz.net.nz at 2359 Nov 3. An e-mail ballot can be cast by filling in the form below and sending it to vote-bank(a)internetnz.net.nz (reply should work but check). Delete two of the three voting options plus all text before and after the ballot. --BEGININNG OF BALLOT-- Name : E-mail address : NZ postal address : I VOTE FOR THE CREATION OF .BANK.NZ I VOTE AGAINST THE CREATION OF.BANK.NZ I ABSTAIN --END OF BALLOT-- Any inquiries should be sent to the Voting Officer at vote-help(a)internetnz.net.nz -- David Farrar, Secretary, InternetNZ secretary(a)internetnz.net.nz or david(a)farrar.com _______________________________________________ public-announce mailing list public-announce(a)internetnz.net.nz http://listserver.internetnz.net.nz/mailman/listinfo/public-announce - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

4 3

RE: Tranzpeer prefix list update
by Maurice Wilkinson 03 Nov '02

03 Nov '02

Matthew These prefixs were already present with GGI and Xtra ip prefix-list tranzpeer-networks seq 180 permit 203.215.142.0/24 ip prefix-list tranzpeer-networks seq 185 permit 203.215.143.0/24 Maurice -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Poole [mailto:matthew.poole(a)attica.co.nz] Sent: Mon 4/11/2002 2:42 p.m. To: NZNOG Cc: Subject: Tranzpeer prefix list update ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ N��r��y��|��צj)m�f��h��b��F��'�^��ay�ʇ��z��i�.�˛��m��

1 0

RE: [OT] RFV - bank.nz
by Donald Neal 03 Nov '02

03 Nov '02

> -----Original Message----- > From: Lin Nah [mailto:lin(a)darkmere.gen.nz] > Sent: Monday, 4 November 2002 15:02 > To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: [OT] RFV - bank.nz > > > Hi All > The banks have been trying to get this for ages despite being told > it isn't needed. This is the 3rd time they are trying and I assume > they want to try and try and try again for 1000 times till > they get it. > > That is IMHO not the way to do things. I strongly urge everyone to > vote agaist the formation of bank.nz > > regards > Lin No, this is indeed off topic for this list. - Donald Neal NZNOG List Administrator/Muggins ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Tranzpeer prefix list update
by Matthew Poole 03 Nov '02

03 Nov '02

To all those who peer with us, please add the following two networks: 203.215.142.0/24 203.215.143.0/24 Full list attached. Thanks -- Matthew Poole Network Engineer CallPlus, AKL, NZ DDI +64 9 919 6036 Fax +64 9 919 6037 Cell +64 21 224 6927

1 0

Filtering of WIX prefixes
by Sam Sargeant 31 Oct '02

31 Oct '02

I've run up against a frustrating problem and some advice would be appreciated. We have a /29 via AT&T here in Wellington. We advertise this /29 to the WIX route servers. Via WIX, we receive a prefix from a national ISP[1]. Any attempts to send traffic to this ISP fall silently into the bit-bucket. >From what I understand, the ISP does not accept any prefix from WIX that is larger than a /24. Given our traffic is being sent directly to their WIX router (layer-2 headers confirm this), I believe their ingress filtering is dropping this traffic since the return-path doesn't match. If I filter the ISP's prefix, the transit is handled by AT&T and everything works just fine. Effectively, the only way I can talk to them is to go "the long way". Now, I have no major problem with any AS saying "our policy states we only accept prefixes smaller than /24". What frustrates me is that the ISP is seemingly saying : ISP> Hello Wellington! If you have any packets for this prefix, send them to me! US > Excellent! Here, have some traffic for one of your hosts. ISP> What? Who are you? I think I'll drop this. [ ... ] ISP> Send me your traffic Wellington! >From what I can tell, there are 30 prefixes advertised on WIX that are >/24, and these amount to ~672 hosts. If I'm correct (and I'll admit I'm making an educated guess here), then all of those hosts are unable to talk to this ISP. So, my options are: 1. Stop playing with pissant /29's on WIX. 2. Get the ISP to change their ways. 3. Filter the ISP's prefixes that I receive from WIX. I think the most likely option is #3. However how am I to know what other networks do the same thing? Shall I troll every single WIX network to check I can talk to them, then build a filter-list based on that? Ugly. Sam. ----- [1] Since I have disagreed with the ISP in question, and they haven't been forthcoming in getting it resolved, I've elected not to name them. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

6 5

Lame reports - thanks!
by Rob Thomas 30 Oct '02

30 Oct '02

Hi, NZNOG folks. [ Apologies to those of you who have seen this post in other fora. ] [ Apologies as well for all of the spam today. :) ] My thanks to the increasing number of you who submit lame delegation logs to me. This helps to increase the reach and usefulness of the Weekly Lame Name Server Report page: http://www.cymru.com/DNS/lame.html You will find a (much better bandwidth) mirror of the site here: http://bgp.lcs.mit.edu/dnsmirror/lame.html If you have logs you can share, anonymously or with full credit, feel free to send them to lamer(a)cymru.com. Be the first in your ASN to fill my lamer file system. :) Thanks! Rob. -- Rob Thomas http://www.cymru.com ASSERT(coffee != empty); - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

IANA IPv4 allocation list format change
by Rob Thomas 30 Oct '02

30 Oct '02

Hi, NZNOG folks. [ Apologies to those of you who have seen this post in other fora. ] For those of you who don't know, the format of the IANA IPv4 allocation list has changed. It now lists each prefix as a distinct /8, instead of hyphenated ranges of prefixes. This change took place on 25 October. If you are parsing this file automagically, you may wish to modify your scripts. My own script claimed that several new allocations had been made. It's fixed now. :) http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space My thanks to the IANA folks for this change! Thanks, Rob. -- Rob Thomas http://www.cymru.com ASSERT(coffee != empty); - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: Any isps support ODMR - RFC2645?
by Steve Lang 23 Oct '02

23 Oct '02

Hiya. Thanx for the detailed reply, what you say makes much more sense. Interesting that Telecom don't send framed-ip, that'd be annoying. Are they still using the merit Radius code? But it's probably their NAS that is sending the Start prior to the ipcp negotiating IP Addr. Bugger. Then there is the issue of running servers etc, as you point out, I don't want to start that flame war again, and I don't want to run internet reachable SMTP servers @ home either. The previous discussions on this make several points, some of which are: 1) POP3, and in particular multi-drop POP mailboxes are problematic, and 2) running SMTP servers (even if legal) is problematic over intermittant/dialup/dynamic connections. Unfortunately there's nothing in-between, and something in-between is entirely valid for 'power' home users. And to make it worse, Paradise don't have a consistent, unique mail header to really make multi-drop pop mailboxes work. This is well within what paradise can do, and despite asking this particular question several times, they just don't seem to provide that facility. Oh to find a better solution, ODMR isn't. As someone pointed out, maybe UUCP? Cheers- > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Goldfinch [mailto:mark.goldfinch(a)team.telstraclear.co.nz] > Sent: Thursday, 24 October 2002 11:52 p.m. > To: Steve Lang > Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: RE: Any isps support ODMR - RFC2645? > > > > On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Steve Lang wrote: > > > Yes, I Emailed postmaster(a)paradise.net.nz. To quote: > > > > "It's basically due to our DSMTP authentication being based around our > > dial-in RADIUS, and not our ADSL RADIUS. Given the choice between the > > two options, we decided to provision DSMTP for dial-in as it is > > recognised as more of a stop-gap method of mail delivery somewhere in > > between POP and a dedicated mail server." etc. And a statement to the > > fact that you're not meant to run servers behind Jetstart connections > > etc. > > While this isn't quite correct the end result is the same. > > The technical reason why this cannot happen is because our dsmtp radius > processing is only interested in Start and Stop accounting records. > > An example Jet* radius accounting record: > > Mon Oct 14 19:49:11 2002 > User-Name = "someusername" > NAS-Identifier = "GLF_RAN_01" > Service-Type = Framed-User > Framed-Protocol = PPP > NAS-Port = 540475748 > Acct-Session-Id = "20370164-3DAA68E6" > Acct-Authentic = RADIUS > Acct-Status-Type = Start > User-Id = "someusername" > User-Realm = "paradise.net.nz" > Proxy-State = 0 > Proxy-State = 0 > Timestamp = 1034578151 > > you may note that there is a distinctive lack of Framed-IP-Address field > present in this record. This is well known for Telecom's Jet* > infrastructure and has been noted in this forum beforehand. > Framed-IP-Address fields are present in the (approximately) 30 second post > connection and then hourly Alive records as well as Stop records. > > Now it is true that it would be somewhat simple to make Alive records be > treated in (almost) an identical fashion as Start records in this case, > but I really must question whether it is in our best interests to do so. > TelstraClear (or one of its legacy companies) will have signed an > agreement with Telecom surrounding the conditions and services which we > will offer JetStart to our customers. If we should be penalised the > implications for us would be somewhat larger than most other ISPs (other > than perhaps Xtra). > > Unfortunately if Telecom does not want business customers (or services > deemed to be of business grade) present on JetStart they probably have the > means to make us (and in turn our customers) very unhappy. > > Now of course I could be very wrong and Telecom could have had a recent > change of heart and are these days more than happy for us to hookup > businesses via JetStart. Please I would be more than happy to be proved > wrong. > > > Short of ringing them up, and demanding to speak to someone else, which > > I don't have time to do, what options are there? I know, move my > > business somewhere else? > > Good luck in finding a solution, yes it somewhat sucks that broadband > options are somewhat limited in this country, but it isn't just the > customer's who have few options. > > And on that note this thread is now probably heading quite off-topic. > > > Best Regards, > > --- > Mark Goldfinch > Senior Systems Administrator > TelstraClear Ltd > > > > > - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Any isps support ODMR - RFC2645?
by steve＠spl.co.nz 23 Oct '02

23 Oct '02

Hiya. I've been investigating multi-drop mailboxes etc., for home use. The concept of On Demand Mail Routing (ODMR - RFC2645) came up. Do any ISP's in NZ support this? There is RFC2645 which seems to cover what I'm after in such a way as to easily support smtp queueing over dynamic internet connections etc. (jetstart to be precise) I've asked Paradise, and they aren't/can't oferring such a thing. Is anyone here offering this? Paradise also don't seem to have a useable header for calculating the original recipient in all cases. Do any other ISP's have a reliable consistent header that is accurate, not duplicated and contains the correct values even when bcc'd from Mail Lists? I'd seriousely consider changing providers if I can confirm one of the above. Cheers - - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

8 16

Non email popup spam
by Orcon Support - Jay Best 23 Oct '02

23 Oct '02

Have had a few of our dialup customers complaining about this one.. SNIP from geek tools--------- New "Messenger spam" invades desktops Just when you thought e-mail spam was bad enough, along comes Direct Advertiser software, which can send pop-up messages directly to users' desktops. These pop-up messages appear even if the user is not in e-mail or an Internet browser. The software utilizes Microsoft's Messenger Windows service, which is turned on by default (on WinNT, 2000, and XP systems) and used by administrators to send messages to users on the network. This is different from the MSN Messenger instant message software. http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2002Oct/gee20021017016848.htm Kindest Regards Jay Best Orcon Internet - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

7 6

Hosting a file
by Mark Davies 22 Oct '02

22 Oct '02

Hi, Somewhat off topic but is there someone out there that can host a couple of 1.8MB files that have just been mentioned on slashdot. Our server is not coping very well :-( cheers mark - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

VoIP Tolls
by Matthew G Brown 21 Oct '02

21 Oct '02

Anyone offering VoIP tolls for National calling ? . Curious as I just got my last phone bill and OUCH! Sorry for the OT Matthew G Brown B & R Holdings LTD DDI: 027 4807731 Email: Matt(a)Brh.Co.Nz " Offsite Internet Backup & Wireless Network Dev " http://www.backupserver.co.nz http://www.brh.co.nz IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail is confidential, and is for the intended recipient only. Access, disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on any of it, or by anyone else is prohibited. Please delete this email if obtained in error and e-mail confirmation to the sender. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com) Version: 6.0.404 / Virus Database: 228 - Release Date: 15/10/2002 - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Orcon Internet Prefix List Update (#2)
by Craig Whitmore 20 Oct '02

20 Oct '02

Sorry about not including this one as well from this morning.. For all those peering with Orcon Internet (AS17746) at APE, please update your Filter Lists to: Add: 202.175.128.0/21 A Full prefix list is included as attachment. Thanks Craig Whitmore Orcon Internet http://www.nzdsl.co.nz

1 0

Orcon Internet Prefix List Update
by Craig Whitmore 20 Oct '02

20 Oct '02

For all those peering with Orcon Internet (AS17746) at APE, please update your Filter Lists to: Add: 202.49.250.0/24 A Full prefix list is included as attachment. Thanks Craig Whitmore Orcon Internet http://www.nzdsl.co.nz

1 0

Re: Contacting ISP re: CC fraud
by Saby Singh 16 Oct '02

16 Oct '02

1 0

APNIC Training/IX tutorial in New Zealand - Dec 2002
by Champika Wijayatunga 16 Oct '02

16 Oct '02

Dear all, APNIC is pleased to announce that we are planning to have an APNIC member training course on IP Address Management: Asia Pacific Policies and Procedures (Conducted by APNIC) and a tutorial on IX (conducted by Bill Woodcock, Packet Clearing House,USA) in Wellington, New Zealand on 09 December 2002. The APNIC training courses are currently offered on a sponsored basis to APNIC members and it is subsidised for them. But non-members are also welcome and however, they are usually charged a slightly higher fee. Basically these charges are to recover our costs on a non-profit basis. Previously this training course fee has ranged from 'No charge' to USD75.00 (charged in local currency) depending on the location & the sponsorships. Training materials, Lunch and refreshments will be provided. We would like to get your input regarding this training. We greatly appreciate if you could answer the following few questions and send it to us. Please note that this is NOT a registration form. This information is considered for our evaluation purposes only. * Your name & e-mail id: * Your company / APNIC Account name: * Are you interested in attending this training? Yes/No * How many participants will attend from your organisation? * Would you like to assist us in sponsoring this training? Yes/No If so in which way? (ex: providing a training venue, lunch & refreshments for the participants etc.) If you are interested in sponsorships please let us know, so that we can update you about the sponsorship benefits. * Any suggestion for a hotel/training centre? * Are you aware of any Internet related conference happening in New Zealand during December 2002 ? * Other comments Thank you for your cooperation ! We look forward to hearing from you soon. Warmest Regards, Champika. _____________________________________________________________________ Champika Wijayatunga, Training Manager <champika(a)apnic.net> Asia Pacific Network Information Centre phone: +61 7 3858 3100 http://www.apnic.net fax: +61 7 3858 3199 _____________________________________________________________________ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: Contacting ISP re: CC fraud
by Donald Neal 16 Oct '02

16 Oct '02

I suspect that this thread has now exhausted its operational relevance. - Donald Neal NZNOG List Owner/Administrator/Muggins ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re: Contacting ISP re: CC fraud
by Mark Foster 16 Oct '02

16 Oct '02

And FWIW I agree, and thanks to those who emailed me offlist with similar echoed comments. :P My thinking was. 1) I dont like the use of Fraudulent Credit Cards regardless of who theyre being used with... 2) If The ISP is deemed to be the appropriate contact for a genuine crime then.. well.. *shrug* Of course the logical cause of action is obvious, but then again, when the NZCC have already pretty much told you what they think of you, its not suprising that the appropriate authorities havnt yet been invoked... ? At 01:21 p.m. 17/10/2002 +1300, Glen Wilson wrote: >The stick approach always has postive results. > >Glen Wilson >Senior Engineer and Administrator >Network Operations Shift Supervisor >Ihug, Auckland, New Zealand > >On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Steve Phillips wrote: > > > At 13:03 17/10/2002 +1300, Mark Foster wrote: > > >This stuff strikes me as obvious enough - as a sysadmin I would expect a > > >lot of this is fairly logical proceedure for dealing with network abuse. > > > > He runs one of the biggest SPAM/MLM schemes in New Zealand, so its not > > surprising he doesn't know how "whois" works and doesn't trust that a > > remote ISP will actually respond to "abuse@" complaints (hell, we know HIS > > one didn't eh seeby ?) > > > > Maybe he just needs to be beaten about the head a few times with a very > > large clue stick. > > > > -- > > Steve. > > > > - > > To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > > where the body of your message reads: > > unsubscribe nznog > > > >- >To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz >where the body of your message reads: >unsubscribe nznog - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

7 7

Contacting ISP re: CC fraud
by Barry ＠ CASHevolution Support 16 Oct '02

16 Oct '02

Hi there guys, Hope you can possibly help. I have a situation where a member using a yahoo email account has located a credit card list and is utilizing it on our website. The person has used over 200 credit card numbers and many have been successful. I have log's of IP addresses and traced it to the following IP block owner. Instituto Tecnologico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey REDMEX-BNETS (NET-148-203-0-0-1) 148.203.0.0 - 148.250.255.255 Universidad Autonoma De Ciudad Juarez UACJ (NET-148-210-0-0-1) 148.210.0.0 - 148.210.255.255 Some of the IP addresses are as follows: 148.210.126.238 148.210.126.228 146.210.116.193 Doing a traceroute only gave me their ISP's uplink reverse, AT&T. How can I get in touch with this ISP to ensure this person is caught. Kindest Regards Barry Murphy Systems Administrator http://www.cashevolution.com <http://www.cashevolution.com/>

4 3

Domestic Prefix list update again AS7657
by Leon Chang 10 Oct '02

10 Oct '02

Hi people, Sorry we have to update this again as yesterday's list missed out a network: ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 37 permit 202.49.144.0/24 FYI, the complete list is attached below. ip prefix-list ihug-networks description ihug peering prefix-list contact: noc(a)ihug.co.nz ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 5 permit 202.36.94.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 10 permit 202.37.136.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 15 permit 202.37.182.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 20 permit 202.37.187.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 25 permit 202.37.194.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 30 permit 202.49.59.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 35 permit 202.49.88.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 37 permit 202.49.144.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 40 permit 202.49.148.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 45 permit 202.49.176.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 50 permit 202.49.180.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 55 permit 202.49.186.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 60 permit 202.49.240.0/22 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 65 permit 202.49.249.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 70 permit 202.50.84.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 75 permit 202.50.103.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 80 permit 202.50.255.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 85 permit 203.109.128.0/17 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 90 permit 203.118.128.0/18 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 95 permit 203.173.128.0/17 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 100 permit 210.55.184.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 105 permit 210.55.202.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 110 permit 210.55.248.0/21 le 24 -- Leon Chang, CCNP, CCDP Senior Network Engineer The Internet Group Ltd. (IHUG), Auckland, New Zealand AS7657 PH: +64 9 359 2710 --------------------------------------------------------------------- - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Prefix list update for Ihug AS7657
by Leon Chang 09 Oct '02

09 Oct '02

We have tidied up our peering prefix list a bit and added a new network 203.118.128.0/18. Can our domestic peers please update their current prefix-list. Regards, Leon Chang ip prefix-list ihug-networks description ihug peering prefix-list contact: noc(a)ihug.co.nz ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 5 permit 202.36.94.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 10 permit 202.37.136.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 15 permit 202.37.182.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 20 permit 202.37.187.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 25 permit 202.37.194.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 30 permit 202.49.59.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 35 permit 202.49.88.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 40 permit 202.49.148.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 45 permit 202.49.176.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 50 permit 202.49.180.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 55 permit 202.49.186.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 60 permit 202.49.240.0/22 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 65 permit 202.49.249.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 70 permit 202.50.84.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 75 permit 202.50.103.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 80 permit 202.50.255.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 85 permit 203.109.128.0/17 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 90 permit 203.118.128.0/18 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 95 permit 203.173.128.0/17 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 100 permit 210.55.184.0/24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 105 permit 210.55.202.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list ihug-networks seq 110 permit 210.55.248.0/21 le 24 -- Leon Chang, CCNP, CCDP Senior Network Engineer The Internet Group Ltd. (IHUG), Auckland, New Zealand AS7657 PH: +64 9 359 2710 --------------------------------------------------------------------- - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

nameserver redundancy (of debatable on-topicness)
by Joe Abley 09 Oct '02

09 Oct '02

Morning, I'm looking for an ISP with a presence in Wellington who would like to swap 5U of colo somewhere close to the WIX for something similar in Auckland, close to the APE. Gear to be colo'd is a rack-mount nameserver plus UPS plus router; traffic to the nameserver will be overwhelmingly domestic, mainly DNS, plus a tiny dribble of management traffic. Reason for looking is to increase nameserver diversity. If anybody is interested, please drop me some private mail. Thanks! Joe - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

KCBBS / APE routing loop
by James Spooner 08 Oct '02

08 Oct '02

On behalf of a KCBBS customer... traceroute to 202.27.195.82 (202.27.195.82), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets 1 mid-e1-int (210.55.255.62) 8.859 ms 0.394 ms 0.363 ms 2 a3-0-29.tkcr1.global-gateway.net.nz (202.37.247.153) 12.388 ms 48.227 ms 90.343 ms 3 A5-0-0-19.akcr5.global-gateway.net.nz (202.50.245.105) 58.507 ms 118.496 ms 100.527 ms 4 telstraclear1.ape.net.nz (192.203.154.32) 115.903 ms 82.286 ms 62.978 ms 5 netgate.ape.net.nz (192.203.154.48) 28.580 ms 17.625 ms 19.105 ms 6 telstraclear1.ape.net.nz (192.203.154.32) 23.076 ms 22.687 ms * BGP Path: 202.27.192.0/21 202.37.247.153 IGP 0 100 SEQ 4648 4768 9303 9303; No global-gateway traffic seems to be getting to KCBBS, other APE peers (ICONZ) seem fine. International also working (according to route-server.cerf.net) Is somebody leaking routes at APE ? Cheers James - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Intel HAM modem strings ?
by Simon Byrnand 07 Oct '02

07 Oct '02

Not sure if this is ontopic, but I'll give it a go anyway ;-) Does anyone know of an init string for Intel HAM based modems that will force them to connect using only V34 ? (That works ?) People on rural lines often can't get reliable connections using V90 or 56Flex, but forcing the modem to use V34 usually makes a huge improvement. For the common Rockwell and Lucent based modems its easy, for example -V90=0S38=0 for LT winmodems and +MS=V34 for most Rockwell based modems. So far I've been totally unable to find a string that actually works for the Intel HAM based modems, and they seem to be worse than other modems when it comes to not falling back automatically on poor lines. (Read: they wont even connect at all on typical rural lines where Lucent/Rockwell modems will at least get some kind of connection, albeit dodgy) Any pointers ? (Sorry if this is offtopic, but I thought it was an issue that most ISP's will have had to deal with at some time or another) Regards, Simon Byrnand iGRIN Internet - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

DRS Outage
by Tim John 07 Oct '02

07 Oct '02

Hi all, Many of you may already know that the Shared Registry System is to be implemented this weekend, 12th - 14th October 2002. As a result, the DRS will be taken down at 10:00 hrs on Saturday and will not be available until 01:00 hrs on the following Monday. A manual zone build will be pushed at 10:00 on Saturday and there will not be another zone push until 11:00 on Monday 14th. No domain registrations or modifications will be allowed during the outage period. There is currently a note from the Domain Name Commissioner (DNC) and this can be found at the Domainz website under 'Info/Media Center' or on the DNC's site - http://www.dnc.net.nz. We apologies for this inconvenience but look forward to using the new Registry system early next week. Regards, Tim Tim John IT Manager Managing New Zealand's National domain name Registry E-mail: tim.john(a)domainz.net.nz Web: www.domainz.net.nz Fax: (04) 473 - 4569 Phone: (04) 473 - 4567 DISCLAIMER: The content of this email is confidential and may contain legally privileged information intended only for the individual or entity named above. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that the use, distribution and publication of the above information is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please contact Domainz by returning the email and destroying the original. Thank you. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Mailwasher (again)
by Simon Lyall 07 Oct '02

07 Oct '02

Sorry to divert people from the Microsoft bashing but I'd thought I'd bring this up again. I mentioned a few months ago about Mailwasher forging bounces, anyway I was hoping they would go away or their latest version would fix the problem but it doesn't appear that way. Checking our outgoing queues around 50% of emails waiting to go out appear to be mailwasher forgeries ( bounces from our mail servers are elsewhere) and I'm getting a little worried. I really try hard to get customer email delivered and I don't what "normal" email to get delayed when it gets stuck behind mailwasher junk. Just wondering what others are doing? Private email is okay. I'm trying to avoid blocking or deleting them if I can. One suggestion was to forward them all to feedback(a)mailwasher.net :) . The other problem is that it is fairly hard to actually pick these messages out from others in the queue safely. Maybe I can sic the fraud squad on Mr Bolton for forging my email address. FDrom their FAQ: Q. How does MailWasher bounce messages? A. MailWasher uses an algorithm to determine the best route to send the bounced message back (from, reply to, return path) and actually sends the bounce back via your isp's postmaster, so it looks exactly like it has come from your isp and not from you at your address. If the spammer has used a fake address, then your bounce message will itself be bounced back to the postmaster and you won't receive the bounced bounce email. -- Simon Lyall. | Newsmaster | Work: simon.lyall(a)ihug.co.nz Senior Network/System Admin | Postmaster | Home: simon(a)darkmere.gen.nz ihug, Auckland, NZ | Asst Doorman | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

11 22

Re: Mailwasher (again)
by Simon Byrnand 02 Oct '02

02 Oct '02

At 11:11 3/10/02 +1200, Simon Lyall wrote: >On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Simon Byrnand wrote: >> I have to agree here. By definition email should have a return address if >> it is "genuine". If the domain name of the "from" address doesn't even >> exist, then its almost a sure bet that the email is bogus, and I see no >> reason it should be accepted. Most MTA's seem to default to this action as >> well. > >I guess you don't get email from people who post to newsgroups, most of >them use bogus addresses so if they reply via email to a post the address >will not be legit ( john(a)notihug.co.nz.nospam sort of thing ). Most newsreaders I've seen that have email integrated allow you to set a different email address for posting to the news group than for sending email. Even Outlook Express does this. People writing newsreaders know that fake address are almost mandatory to avoid being spammed....Newsreaders that don't have integrated email will be launching the normal email program with normal email address. You definately have a point, but I've honestly never come across this actually happening before. >Checking around I also came across: > >From: Promos(a)Glengarry Wines > >Which appears to be a legit little mailout sent last week from >e-wine(a)Glengarry.co.nz . I didn't see any others in the search. Are you talking about the envelope-sender address or the "From:" header ? It looks like you're talking about the From: header here. I'm (and presumably Chris was) talking about the envelope from address, as exchanged at the beginning of the SMTP transaction... >Our spam filtering also has a "No MX for From address" rules that helps >block those. Still if you feel comfortable blocking customer's email on >that basis I guess it's your choice. It's not part of a spam filter, its just a standard sendmail setting, which defaults to on. (I could turn it off if I wanted to) You made me curious though, so I did a quick survey of the ISP's listed in iMAG to see if they'd accept a message with a bogus domain as an envelope from address: (not a very scientific survey, but..) Actrix: Yes Baycity: No Clear Net: No Ezysurf: No E3: No HyperNet: Yes Iconz: No Igrin: No Ihug: Yes Inspire: No Iprolink: Yes Jafa Net: No Kc Computer: No Maxnet: Yes Net4U: Yes Orcon: Yes paradise.net: No Planet: No Quik: No Quicksilver: No Slingshot: Yes Valuenet: Yes Watchdog: Yes Wave: No Worldnet: Yes Xtra: Yes Zip Internet: Yes Thats 13 Yes's, and 14 No's. A couple of remarks - a few are actually virutal ISP's sharing the same mailserver so that would skew the results a bit, also I only checked the primary MX. I also suspect that it really comes down to the defaults of the mailserver in question rather than a thought-out policy, as most (but not all) the servers that rejected the bogus message were sendmail, or looked like sendmail, and that is the default of sendmail. (As an aside, I noticed more than one who were running ancient versions of sendmail that have, umm, known bugs.... ahem :) Regards, Simon Byrnand iGRIN Internet - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: [NZNET] RE: Virus alert
by Saby Singh 02 Oct '02

02 Oct '02

1 0

Re: [NZNET] RE: Virus alert
by Mark Foster 01 Oct '02

01 Oct '02

On Wed, 2 Oct 2002 01:52:46 +1200 (NZST), Lin Nah <lin(a)darkmere.gen.nz> wrote : > Having said all that, I will admit that I work for an ISP that sets up > its customers on Outlook or OE. I think most of us know why that > happens. If you don't you can email me for a longer spiel 8) > Should we be doing more to educate our users? The answer would be yes. > I would like to find out what other NZ ISPs are doing in this area > with the hope of learning what works and what won't. A small clarification, I nearly posted this yesterday but it didnt seem appropriate or required at the time... Im one of the helpdesk team at the ISP Lin also works for. Our helpdesk is familiar with Outlook Express but that doesnt mean we're close minded about it. We regularly support clients who use other mailing software and as long as the software is reasonably generic we manage. We dont force our clients to use OE, but we do suggest it to our clients *because its there*. The differentiation is important, and stereotyping against helpdesk types isnt going to help. We all start somewhere. :-) I run Eudora in Sponsored mode and find it more than adequate - never caught anything through that, and I have never run resident antivirus either. (I manually scan my system from time to time using F-Prot for DOS.) Prior to using Eudora I used Netscape Messenger (4.x) and found this was also pretty good, although the limitation to only one mailbox is what forced me to migrate. Now that Netscape 7 is out I may consider switching back soon.... I think most ISP helpdesks crewed by reasonable people will accept that their clients dont *have* to use Outlook Express, and the only reason they may encourage their clients to use it is that especially for the less-than- technically-savvy sort, OE is easy to setup, and provided with all versions of Windows from 98 upward. If you work for an ISP and you dont have support staff familiar with a broader range of email clients than Outlook and Outlook Express, I would seriously suggest some more training is in order: Eudora, Netscape Messenger and Pegasus come to mind as alternatives, but theres obviously a lot more. </end rant> Mark. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: [NZNET] RE: Virus alert
by Donald Neal 01 Oct '02

01 Oct '02

I'm not really happy that this sort of posting meets the AUP, which talks about discussion between operators. There are cetainly announcements which may be of value to the list, but these seem to me to be characterised by not being present on a routine basis in other forums. I think that to allow announcements of this kind would have an unacceptable effect on the signal to noise ratio of the list. Unless people particularly want to see these here, I intend in future to treat them as outside the AUP. - Donald Neal NZNOG List Administrator > E-Secure-IT has just received this field report: > > While it does all the normal mass mailing stuff, own smtp engine, > harvests address lists etc this one did something really weird that > I've never seen before- it sent a postscript print job to > every printer > it could find. > > The scary thing was it even picked up printers attached to parallel > ports and which were not shared and sent the print job to them too. > I know it tries to access network shares, but looks like it tries to > access print q's also, be interested to see if anyone else has > seen this? > > FYI can confirm that NAV sigs of 30/9 do detect and clean. > > Arjen > www.e-secure-db.us ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

The New Zealand Network Operators' Group
by Donald Neal 01 Oct '02

01 Oct '02

The New Zealand Network Operators' Group The New Zealand Network Operators' Group (NZNOG) has no king, president or formal membership. At present it consists of the subscribers to this mailing list, which anyone is free to join. This posting, or one like it, is sent to all subscribers each month. Operators' Contact List See http://www.usenet.net.nz/noc/ for operational contact details for most New Zealand ISP's. These are intended for use by other network operators rather than by most customers. Auckland Peering Exchange See http://www.ape.net.nz/ for details of the Auckland Peering Exchange and those connected there. About This Mailing List This list has around 370 subscribers, increasing by a few each month. You may only post to the list from an address subscribed to one of the lists described below. The NZNOG mailing list is provided through a server at The University of Waikato, and is administered by an employee of Telecom NZ Ltd. Neither of these organisations, nor the administrator, is responsible for its content. NZNOG Mailing List Acceptable Use Policy The NZNOG mailing list exists to provide a forum for the exchange of technical information and the discussion of implementation issues that require cooperation among New Zealand network service providers. In order to continue to provide a useful forum for discussion of relevant technical issues, users of the list are asked to respect the following guidelines. 1. Discussion will focus on Internet operational and technical issues. 2. Discussion related to meetings of network service providers is appropriate. 3. Discussion unrelated to these topics is not appropriate. 4. Postings to multiple mailing lists are discouraged. 5. Postings that include foul language, character assassination, and lack of respect for other participants are unacceptable. 6. Blatant product or service marketing is unacceptable. 7. Postings of a political, philosophical or legal nature are discouraged. 8. Postings to the list should be in ASCII or MIME encoded as text/plain. Attachments should not be sent to the list. To present a document, a suitable URL may be referred to. For documents of general interest, the use of proprietary file formats is discouraged. 9. Breaches of list etiquette should be dealt with privately with the offending list user, and should not result in complaints being sent to the list. 10. A person repeatedly breaching list etiquette shall receive warnings from the list administrator. A further breach after the second such warning within thirty days shall result in the offender being unsubscribed from the list. Other action may also be taken to block postings to the list by the offender. Any such unsubscription is to be immediately announced to the list. Mailing List Archives A full archive is available at http://list.waikato.ac.nz/archives/nznog/ Any message sent to the list will be archived and made available on the web automatically. Changes are not made to the archive on request, though the administrator remains happy to assist the Office of the Privacy Commissioner should any complaint be laid with that office. Subscribing to the List To subscribe to the NZNOG list, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz, where the body of the message reads subscribe nznog Digest Mailing List If you don't wish to receive postings as they are sent, you can instead subscribe to the nznog-digest mailiing list, on which all postings are sent out in a single "digest" every couple of days. Post-only Mailing List An address from which you wish to post, but which will not receive messages from the list, may be subscribed to nznog-postonly. You will presumably want to have another address subscribed to the main nznog list. Donald Neal NZNOG Mailing List Owner/Administrator/Muggins ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: [NZNET] RE: Virus alert
by Arjen De Landgraaf 01 Oct '02

01 Oct '02

E-Secure-IT has just received this field report: While it does all the normal mass mailing stuff, own smtp engine, harvests address lists etc this one did something really weird that I've never seen before- it sent a postscript print job to every printer it could find. The scary thing was it even picked up printers attached to parallel ports and which were not shared and sent the print job to them too. I know it tries to access network shares, but looks like it tries to access print q's also, be interested to see if anyone else has seen this? FYI can confirm that NAV sigs of 30/9 do detect and clean. Arjen www.e-secure-db.us - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Updated ASN allocation to ARIN
by Rob Thomas 01 Oct '02

01 Oct '02

Hi, NZNOG folks. [ Apologies to those of you who have seen this post in other fora. ] A range of ASNs have been allocated to ARIN as of September 2002. The range is 26624 - 27647. You may wish to adjust your filters. The definitive list can be found here: http://www.iana.org/assignments/as-numbers I have updated my bogus ASN monitoring to reflect these changes. You can see the list of networks that leak bogus ASNs here: http://www.cymru.com/BGP/asnbogusrep.html Thanks, Rob. -- Rob Thomas http://www.cymru.com ASSERT(coffee != empty); - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re: [NZNET] RE: Virus alert
by Joe Abley 01 Oct '02

01 Oct '02

[I keep trying to redirect this noise somewhere else. Seems like some peoples' mail clients don't respect standard headers, or something] On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 04:47:16PM +1200, James Spooner wrote: > Are you in fact an expert on car safety, or do you buy/travel in a car based > on what you know about car safety? I'm no expert. > If in fact you do, does this not make you a parallel to someone using > windows and outlook express, who 'should know better'. > > Why do you think you travel in a particular car, is it perhaps because it's > available and it gets you from A to B? Sure. I don't make a habit of travelling in cars which are not licenced to drive on the road, though, and that affords me some safety without needing first-hand, expert knowledge of the dangers involved. > I think that the Car vs Computer parallel in fact works in favour of windows > in this case Joe. I don't follow you. There are safeguards set up to ensure people don't drive in unsafe cars, regardless of how little they personally know about car safety. There are no safeguards set up to encourage people not to use unsafe mail clients. The regular virus bulletins could say "as with this other large list of security problems, this one can be avoided simply by using a different mail client", but they don't. ISPs could stop shipping OE, or could find ways to encourage users to install different mail clients, but they don't. > Check my headers if you wonder which client I use :) So why do you use it? Joe - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

4 6

RE: Virus alert
by Arjen De Landgraaf 30 Sep '02

30 Sep '02

Hi Joe, We could state that in our advisories, However, wouldn't it be on the same line as: Avoid car accidents, disable all petrol and diesel? Personally I would love to have the death rate on the road reduced to 0. If this is realistically achievable right now is another question. The reality is that Microsoft and all its products are a very large part of the global business world right now. Just as unsafe cars. We can make them somewhat safer by awareness and vigilance, just as driving a car. That is not to say that we don't agree with you, but the other side of the coin is that there are plenty of "non-windows" threats around; SSL, apache etc also have their own vulnerabilities. Arjen -----Original Message----- From: Joe Abley [mailto:jabley(a)automagic.org] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 3:40 PM To: Arjen De Landgraaf Cc: 'Simon Byrnand'; nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: Virus alert On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 03:16:57PM +1200, Arjen De Landgraaf wrote: > From www.e-secure-it.us > > DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF BUGBEAR, HOW TO RECOGNISE AND FIRST AID KIT. It continues to amazme me that the preventative measure "do not use microsoft e-mail clients", or even "do not use windows" is never suggested as part of these bulletins. I think ISP and IT helpdesks of the world would do everybody a big favour if they just stopped supporting mail clients which make it so trivial to execute encapsulated scripts. "I propose that we deploy Microsoft Outlook". "You're fired. Never insult us with your presence again." Mmm. "I have a problem with my e-mail." "Does it say Outlook Express at the top of the window?" "Yes." <click> brrrrrrr Reply-To set :) Joe - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

7 8

RE: [NZNET] RE: Virus alert
by Darryl Munro 30 Sep '02

30 Sep '02

On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 03:58:36PM +1200, Arjen De Landgraaf wrote: > Hi Joe, > > We could state that in our advisories, > However, wouldn't it be on the same line as: > > Avoid car accidents, disable all petrol and diesel? >No; I think it would be more along the lines of "do not drive vehicles >which are unsafe". LOL or could we also say "do not do those drugs as they are unsafe" > The reality is that Microsoft and all its products are > a very large part of the global business world right > now. Just as unsafe cars. We can make them > somewhat safer by awareness and vigilance, > just as driving a car. >Not quite. We reduce the problem of unsafe cars by passing laws which >seek to enforce minimum standards for cars. If nobody took any steps to >get unsafe cars off the road, more people would die. The same could be said of the Internet, as more and more countries pass legislation on what is and isn't acceptable use of this medium. If nobody took any steps to pass and police these laws then more software vulnerabilities would be discovered and exposed by, what can arguably be explained as the biggest pain in our collective IT butt, Hackers, or did I mean developers that move from the standard to claim their own. >If the most popular car on the road had a defect which routinely caused >people to die, I don't think people would say "the reality is that the >car in question has a large market share, so it's really not practical >to encourage people not to drive it." Fix the defect and do a recall on the car in question, it is not a question of practicality more one of morality, and we all know that practicality and morality are clouded when it comes to the bottom line. Darryl Joe - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: Virus alert
by Arjen De Landgraaf 30 Sep '02

30 Sep '02

>From www.e-secure-it.us DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF BUGBEAR, HOW TO RECOGNISE AND FIRST AID KIT. Bugbear / Tanatos This virus is written in MSVC and packed with UPX. It shuts down anti-virus and firewall software designed to block out intruders and can spread by dropping copies of itself into folders on shared networks, which are commonly used at corporations and large organizations. The worm's most interesting feature is a Trojan horse component called PWS-Hooker that secretly watches every keystroke on an infected computer, and stores the captured information on the computer in encrypted form. The data can be accessed later by the virus writer or anyone else who happens upon the infected computer, or it can be e-mailed to the author. Bugbear might be spreading because it is cleverly crafted and difficult to spot with the naked eye. It arrives in a victim's e-mail inbox with a subject line chosen randomly from dozens of possibilities, including: Possible message subject lines include the following (however, other random subject lines are also possible): 25 merchants and rising Announcement bad news CALL FOR INFORMATION! click on this! Correction of errors Cows Daily Email Reminder empty account fantastic free shipping! Get 8 FREE issues - no risk! Get a FREE gift! Greets! Hello! Hi! history screen hmm.. I need help about script!!! Interesting... Introduction its easy Just a reminder Lost & Found Market Update Report Membership Confirmation My eBay ads New bonus in your cash account New Contests new reading News Payment notices Please Help... Re: $150 FREE Bonus! Report SCAM alert!!! Sponsors needed Stats Today Only Tools For Your Online Business update various Warning! wow! Your Gift Your News Alert The message body varies and may contain fragments of files found on the victim's system. The attachment name also varies, but may contain the following strings: Card Docs image images music news photo pics readme resume Setup song video The actual infected file arrives as an attachment, which also has a random name. And Bugbear's first task, upon infection, is to disable all installed antivirus software. It's throwing a lot of things at people to see if it can find something to slip under the radar. Once activated, the virus shuts down scores of vital processes used by Windows and by antivirus software, records user keystrokes, opens a backdoor to the infected machine for use by attackers, and attempts to mail copies of itself out to other users, randomly generating new subject lines and virus executable names as it does W32/Bugbear-A is an internet worm which spreads via SMTP and also attempts to spread via network shares. The worm copies itself to the Windows system folder as a file with a random four-letter name and an EXE extension and adds to the following registry entry to run this file on the next reboot: HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce W32/Bugbear-A also drops a copy of itself in the Windows start up folder so that is run on system restart. The worm drops a randomly-named DLL file, which is related to logging keystrokes, in the Windows system folder. It can also terminate certain firewall and antivirus programs. How to recognise: The virus file is attached to e-mails with a wide variety of subject lines : Attachment Length: 50,688 bytes (UPXed) or 50,664 bytes The subject line, name of the attachment and text in the body of the message can vary, and the attachment name typically has a double extension, such as .xxx.pif, .xxx.scr etc IF YOU ARE INFECTED: Symptoms: Method Of Infection This virus spreads over the network (via network shares) and by mailing itself (using it's on SMTP engine). It attempts to terminate the process of the following security programs: ACKWIN32.exe F-AGNT95.exe ANTI-TROJAN.exe APVXDWIN.exe AUTODOWN.exe AVCONSOL.exe AVE32.exe AVGCTRL.exe AVKSERV.exe AVNT.exe AVP32.exe AVP32.exe AVPCC.exe AVPCC.exe AVPDOS32.exe AVPM.exe AVPM.exe AVPTC32.exe AVPUPD.exe AVSCHED32.exe AVWIN95.exe AVWUPD32.exe BLACKD.exe BLACKICE.exe CFIADMIN.exe CFIAUDIT.exe CFINET.exe CFINET32.exe CLAW95.exe CLAW95CF.exe CLEANER.exe CLEANER3.exe DVP95_0.exe ECENGINE.exe ESAFE.exe ESPWATCH.exe FINDVIRU.exe FPROT.exe IAMAPP.exe IAMSERV.exe IBMASN.exe IBMAVSP.exe ICLOAD95.exe ICLOADNT.exe ICMON.exe ICSUPP95.exe ICSUPPNT.exe IFACE.exe IOMON98.exe JEDI.exe LOCKDOWN2000.exe LOOKOUT.exe LUALL.exe MOOLIVE.exe MPFTRAY.exe N32SCANW.exe NAVAPW32.exe NAVLU32.exe NAVNT.exe NAVW32.exe NAVWNT.exe NISUM.exe NMAIN.exe NORMIST.exe NUPGRADE.exe NVC95.exe OUTPOST.exe PADMIN.exe PAVCL.exe PAVSCHED.exe PAVW.exe PCCWIN98.exe PCFWALLICON.exe PERSFW.exe F-PROT.exe F-PROT95.exe RAV7.exe RAV7WIN.exe RESCUE.exe SAFEWEB.exe SCAN32.exe SCAN95.exe SCANPM.exe SCRSCAN.exe SERV95.exe SPHINX.exe F-STOPW.exe SWEEP95.exe TBSCAN.exe TDS2-98.exe TDS2-NT.exe VET95.exe VETTRAY.exe VSCAN40.exe VSECOMR.exe VSHWIN32.exe VSSTAT.exe WEBSCANX.exe WFINDV32.exe ZONEALARM.exe TROJAN: Port 36974 open Existence of the following files (* represents any character): %WinDir%\System\****.EXE (50,688 or 50,684 bytes) %WinDir%\******.DAT %WinDir%\******.DAT %WinDir%\System\******.DLL %WinDir%\System\*******.DLL %WinDir%\System\*******.DLL This worm emails itself to addresses found on the local system. The worm copies itself to the Windows system folder as a file with a random four-letter name and an EXE extension and adds to the following registry entry to run this file on the next reboot: HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce When run on the victim machine it copies itself to %WinDir%\System as ****.EXE (where * represents random character). For example in testing: Win98 : C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\FYFA.EXE 2k Pro : C:\WINNT\SYSTEM32\FVFA.EXE The following Registry key is set in order to hook next system startup: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion RunOnce "%random letters%" = %random filename%.EXE (Win9x) The worm copies itself to the Startup folder on the victim machine as ***.EXE (where * represents random character), for example: Win98 : C:\WINDOWS\Start Menu\Programs\Startup\CUK.EXE 2k Pro : C:\Documents and Settings\(username)\Start Menu\Programs\Startup\CYC.EXE Trojan component The worm opens a port on the victim machine - port 36794 and searches for various running processes, stopping them if found. The list of processes includes many popular AV and personal firewall products. This remote access server allows an attacker to upload, and download files, run executes, and terminate processes. It drops a DLL on the victim machine - keylogger related. This DLL is detected as PWS-Hooker.dll. Network share propagation The worm attempts to copy itself to the Startup folder of remote machines on the network (as ***.EXE - described above). Outgoing messages look to make use of the Incorrect MIME Header Can Cause IE to Execute E-mail Attachment vulnerability (MS01-020) in Microsoft Internet Explorer (ver 5.01 or 5.5 without SP2). FIRST AID KIT: AS EMERGENCY MEASURE - Remove, Disable or encrypt all local email addresses (addressbook etc) TO PREVENT FROM SPREADING (BEFORE YOU ARE INFECTED) INCOMING EMAILS: Filter on attachment length 50,688 bytes (UPXed) or 50,664 bytes Filter out attachments, especially .pif, .scr (By the way, you should filter out all attachments anyway) Nail down your Network shares - it replicates itself through them. Make sure all USER PC's have IE updated with latest security patches It takes advantage of a known vulnerability in Microsoft's Internet Explorer versions 5.01 and 5.5 that allows attackers to embed malicious code in the header of an improperly formatted HTML message that could cause e-mail clients such as Outlook to automatically launch attached executable files. Microsoft addressed the issue in Service Bulletin MS01-020 and issued a patch for the vulnerability in March of 2001. Trojan: Port 36974 open - CHECK ON THIS PORT!!!! Existence of the following files (* represents any character): %WinDir%\System\****.EXE (50,688 or 50,684 bytes) %WinDir%\******.DAT %WinDir%\******.DAT %WinDir%\System\******.DLL %WinDir%\System\*******.DLL %WinDir%\System\*******.DLL FURTHER INFORMATION ON PWS-HOOKER: Type: Zoo Trojan Horse Infection Length: variable Systems Affected: Windows 3.x, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Me Trojans in this family can record your keystrokes and store this information in encrypted form. The Trojan sends this encrypted file and the IP address of the compromised computer to email addresses that are defined by the hacker. The following is a description of a specific PWS.Hooker.Trojan variant that can be dropped by the W32.Badtrans.gen(a)mm worm. When the Trojan runs, it does the following: It copies itself as C:\%System%\Kern32.exe. NOTE: %System% is a variable. The Trojan locates the \Windows\System folder (by default this is C:\Windows\System or C:\Winnt\System32) and copies itself to that location. It also drops C:\%System%\Hksdll.dll. This file is a component of, and is detected as W32.Badtrans.gen(a)mm. The Trojan adds the value kernel32 C:\%System%\kern32.exe to the registry key HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce This causes the Trojan to run then next time that you start Windows. Arjen de Landgraaf www.e-secure-db.us www.e-secure-it.us -----Original Message----- From: Simon Byrnand [mailto:simon(a)igrin.co.nz] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 3:14 PM To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Virus alert For those that havn't noticed yet, a new virus has just come out which is spreading extremely rapidly. Depending on what antivirus software you use its called "W32.Bugbear(a)mm" (Norton Antivirus) or "I-Worm.Tanatos" (Kaspersky) - it may go under different names on other scanners. Both Norton and Kaspersky have only added detection of it in the last 12 hours AFAIK, and it looks like it has been in the wild in NZ at least 24 hours before updates to most scanners were able to detect it. (On topic bit :) The thing that's interesting about this particular virus is that it actively scans netblocks for machines listening on port 137 (Windows file/printer sharing) using simple incremental scans, so its quite easy to spot machines that are infected. Apparently it also sends information about the compromised machine to a pre-defined email address, and also opens a backdoor listening on TCP port 36794. As well as that, it uses the I-Frame exploit to automatically infect machines with unpatched versions of Outlook Express, and has the ability to automatically close all commonly used virus scanners whenever you try to run them. Based on the massive flood of this virus we've seen today it looks like a Klez killer has arrived..... (its outnumbering Klez by about 16 to 1 in our stats today) More info: http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.bugbear(a)mm.ht… Regards, Simon Byrnand iGRIN Internet - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Virus alert
by Simon Byrnand 30 Sep '02

30 Sep '02

For those that havn't noticed yet, a new virus has just come out which is spreading extremely rapidly. Depending on what antivirus software you use its called "W32.Bugbear(a)mm" (Norton Antivirus) or "I-Worm.Tanatos" (Kaspersky) - it may go under different names on other scanners. Both Norton and Kaspersky have only added detection of it in the last 12 hours AFAIK, and it looks like it has been in the wild in NZ at least 24 hours before updates to most scanners were able to detect it. (On topic bit :) The thing that's interesting about this particular virus is that it actively scans netblocks for machines listening on port 137 (Windows file/printer sharing) using simple incremental scans, so its quite easy to spot machines that are infected. Apparently it also sends information about the compromised machine to a pre-defined email address, and also opens a backdoor listening on TCP port 36794. As well as that, it uses the I-Frame exploit to automatically infect machines with unpatched versions of Outlook Express, and has the ability to automatically close all commonly used virus scanners whenever you try to run them. Based on the massive flood of this virus we've seen today it looks like a Klez killer has arrived..... (its outnumbering Klez by about 16 to 1 in our stats today) More info: http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.bugbear(a)mm.ht… Regards, Simon Byrnand iGRIN Internet - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: domain renewal fee
by Donald Neal 24 Sep '02

24 Sep '02

> From: Andy Gardner [mailto:andy(a)navigator.co.nz] > Sent: Wednesday, 25 September 2002 08:59 > To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: RE: domain renewal fee > > > At 8:52 AM +1200 9/25/02, Donald Neal wrote: > >Discussion of the value of InternetNZ's involvement with > ICANN looks to me > >to be way outside that policy. > > Not when you consider that ICANN is attempting to dictate > policy to APNIC. Discussion of APNIC: In Discussion of InternetNZ's air fares/hotel bills: Out - Donald Neal ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: domain renewal fee
by Donald Neal 24 Sep '02

24 Sep '02

> From: Juha Saarinen [mailto:juha(a)saarinen.org] > Sent: Wednesday, 25 September 2002 08:47 > To: DPF > Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: Re: domain renewal fee [...] > > Hummm... $73,423 is the actual figure, so each meeting costs just over > $18,000, or $9,000 per person. > > Are the meetings worth that kind of expenditure? Could subscribers please remember that the AUP for this list reads in part: 1. Discussion will focus on Internet operational and technical issues. 2. Discussion related to meetings of network service providers is appropriate. 3. Discussion unrelated to these topics is not appropriate. ... 7. Postings of a political, philosophical or legal nature are discouraged. Discussion of the value of InternetNZ's involvement with ICANN looks to me to be way outside that policy. I believe any operational content of this thread has now been exhausted. - Donald Neal ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Re: domain renewal fee
by Juha Saarinen 24 Sep '02

24 Sep '02

On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Keith Davidson wrote: > While I assume this was a little tongue in cheek, it should be noted > that the amount spent by InternetNZ on ICANN travel is less than 50 > cents per domain name per year. Oh no... you mean the rest ($91.50) is blown on gerbil-fuelled orgies and Bonzai Buddy licenses? No wonder .nz names are so expensive! ;-) -- Juha Saarinen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

5 5

Re: domain renewal fee
by David Farrar 24 Sep '02

24 Sep '02

> On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 05:32:25AM +0000, David Farrar wrote: > > > Afternoon, > > > > > > Just wondering if anyone knows why the annual renewal fee has gone up > > > for .nz domains? Got a piece of a tree in the mail the other day > > > mentioning that renewals have gone up a few bucks a year. Granted other > > > costs have gone down, but for those who already have domains are going > > > to wear the punch. > > > > The issue is slightly complex. At present the .nz registry is with DOMAINZ and > > they have a range of fees depending if you are an accredited provider or if you > > register direct through their website. DOMAINZ is also the sole Registrar. > > > > I've heard the palava about the SRS coming online for a trial month, > then going live, however, where's the complexity which causes the > renewal fee to go up by 10 bucks a year? The renewal fee isn't going up by $10 a year. DOMAINZ at present charge what I would call a combined registry/registrar fee of $44 (or $74 for new customers) for those who register directly through them. Under the SRS the registry fee will be $24 and each registrar will charge their own registrar fee on top of that. DOMAINZ have signalled their prices and services, other registrars will vary no doubt. The idea behind the SRS is that registrants will be able to choose the registrar which offers what they want - price will be a factor in this but so will other considerations such as service, billing terms, bundling of other services etc. >I could justify keeping a couple of lines in a text file for a year for a few >hot breakfasts, but not the increase the fee's gone up to. You are right that the variable cost of registering a domain name is very low. There have been significant costs involved in setting up the SRS, consultation on business and technical rules etc and that is why the registry fee has been set at $2/month to cover depreciation etc. A major cost is actually paying for DNS Name Server Operations incidentially. I personally hope that after a short while this fee will track downwards once costs of running the new registry are known as opposed to projections. DPF - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

10 11

RE: domain renewal fee
by Steven Heath 24 Sep '02

24 Sep '02

On 24 Sep 2002, at 22:04, John Rothlisberger wrote: > Steven Heath wrote: > > >Street price is about $40 in NZ... street price for a .com is about > >$15 US... I dont really see a great deal of price difference. > > You obviously haven't heard of GoDaddy (http://registrar.godaddy.com/) > - USD$8.95 for a .com, .net or .org domain. Go daddy, go! Actually I have and also at least one .nz provider selling at $29.95 NZ. I was just using 'street price' which is $40 NZ or $15 US for .com. The wholesale .com cost is $6.. godaddy sells for $2.95 higher than their buy cost. Cant see that going in long term. SPH - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Re: domain renewal fee
by Andy Linton 23 Sep '02

23 Sep '02

On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Keith Davidson wrote: > I'd wait anyway, until after the SRS rolls out - and see what kind of deal > you could strike with a Registrar. Yes, that's fine but this year I've just had to renew my registration with the incumbent and I'm kind of stuck with that until August next year. andy - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re: domain renewal fee
by Juha Saarinen 23 Sep '02

23 Sep '02

On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Keith Davidson wrote: > You pay $92 per domain name? I can cut you a deal for a 20% discount for > you if you want to swap name agents?? No, I can't afford .nz names being a broke and unbribed hack. Current Fees($NZ) New Domain Name Fee $44 New Nameholder Fee $30 New Secondary DNS Fee $18 Exclusive of GST Too expensive by the looks of it. > InternetNZ does not use Bonzai Buddy as the purple clashes with the > office decor. > > The orgies continue unabated of course... OK, I've got first dibs on this story. All your gerbil multimedia is belong to me. -- Juha Saarinen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 2

Re: domain renewal fee
by David Farrar 23 Sep '02

23 Sep '02

> Afternoon, > > Just wondering if anyone knows why the annual renewal fee has gone up > for .nz domains? Got a piece of a tree in the mail the other day > mentioning that renewals have gone up a few bucks a year. Granted other > costs have gone down, but for those who already have domains are going > to wear the punch. The issue is slightly complex. At present the .nz registry is with DOMAINZ and they have a range of fees depending if you are an accredited provider or if you register direct through their website. DOMAINZ is also the sole Registrar. InternetNZ is 90% through implementing a shared registry system which will go live later this year. Only Registrars will be able to access the registry and there will be a standard fee of $2+GST per month per name. DOMAINZ will continue as a registrar offering registration services. From late this year there will also be other competing registrars whom you can choose to register through, if you so wish. There will no doubt be a variety of prices charged, lenths of terms available and other choices such as bundling of services etc. DPF - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

domain renewal fee
by Chris Hellberg 23 Sep '02

23 Sep '02

Afternoon, Just wondering if anyone knows why the annual renewal fee has gone up for .nz domains? Got a piece of a tree in the mail the other day mentioning that renewals have gone up a few bucks a year. Granted other costs have gone down, but for those who already have domains are going to wear the punch. Cheers, Chris - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

newzealand.com UDRP attempt coming up!
by Andy Gardner 23 Sep '02

23 Sep '02

http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/cases/2002/d0600-0799.html Check out case D2002-0754 newzealand.com We're not told who is attempting to get the name. They keep all the case details secret until the decision is made, and then you only get to see what the "arbitor" decides you NEED to see. Perhaps a journalist here might like to contact the current name holder and ask him? It would be interesting to find out exactly who thinks they have enough rights over the term "New Zealand" to be allowed to wrestle it out of someone elses hands via the UDRP. Once they've got newzealand.com I guess nz.com will be their next target. -- Andrew P. Gardner barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP? We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare? Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 2

NZNOG conference 2003
by Chris Hellberg 17 Sep '02

17 Sep '02

Roger, I've lost the origional email about the conference, but what I'd like to see next year is someone involved from the early days of the NZ interweb. Somone who flicked the switch on the 4K8 link to NZ, or who ran the origional NZ DNS or similar would be interesting - grey hair types preferred ;) Cheers, Chris - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

11 17

Mail blip today?
by Simon Lyall 16 Sep '02

16 Sep '02

Did anybody else see a big jump in mail volume (as in bits/second) between 4pm and 5pm today? I think it was a combination of mailouts by travel.co.nz's (90-something kilobytes) and finewineonline.co.nz (1.6 Meg of "I accidentally included our logo" ) but it might be something else I missed that was affecting only us. -- Simon Lyall. | Newsmaster | Work: simon.lyall(a)ihug.co.nz Senior Network/System Admin | Postmaster | Home: simon(a)darkmere.gen.nz ihug, Auckland, NZ | Asst Doorman | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: NZNOG conference 2003
by Frank March 16 Sep '02

16 Sep '02

> -----Original Message----- > From: Don Stokes [SMTP:don(a)daedalus.co.nz] > Sent: Tuesday, 17 September 2002 16:41 > To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: Re: NZNOG conference 2003 > > Some of the ex-DSIR people might be fun to have along -- these folks > were doing serious vendor-independent networking back when nobody much > else knew what it was, and developed the Ace/Network Dynamics/Securicor > 3net/Allied Telesyn routers which many ISPs used for many years. > The key guy at Allied Telesyn is the General Manager, Geoff Peck. He was deeply involved in all of the above which evolved out of the DSIR National Computer Network developments in the late 70s. Frank March Specialist Advisor, IT Policy Group Ministry of Economic Development, PO Box 1473, Wellington, NZ Ph: (+64 4) 474 2908; Fax: (+64 4) 471 2658 Any opinions expressed in this message are not necessarily those of the Ministry of Economic Development. This message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivery to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error and that any use is strictly prohibited. Please contact the sender and delete the message and any attachment from your computer. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Peering at APE
by Craig Whitmore 15 Sep '02

15 Sep '02

Can people peering with Orcon Internet (AS17746 192.203.154.66) at APE, please peer with 192.203.154.67 as well with the same prefix-list as the 1st. Also if you wish to MSDP and/or MBGP peer please let me know. Please let me know when/if you have set this up. Thanks Craig Whitmore Orcon Internet http://www.orcon.net.nz - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: BGP Private ASes
by Andy Linton 12 Sep '02

12 Sep '02

I'm pleased to see this thread generate lots of discussion and I've thought some more about my position on this. I think the community should look at a number of things: 1) I think from postings from Philip Smith, Joe Abley, myself (and others) it's clear there is a mechanism for applying for globally unique ASNs and it is possible to get them assigned where need can be demonstrated. There may be an additional cost associated with this. Clearly such an ASN can be used anywhere on the net including Citylink or the APE. This should be the preferred option for anyone who wants to peer in whatever form with more than one other entity. Private ASNs should be reserved for use between two entities. This may well cover Simon's WIX route reflectors. Perhaps ISPs, telcos, and other organisations like Citylink should create mechanisms (if they don't already have them) to enable their customers to obtain ASN numbers from APNIC where those customers need an ASN. (My cynical mind makes me suspect that there may be some resistance to this as it may be perceived that customers are using this to avoid charging, connect to another provider etc. Please prove me wrong! Public declarations on this list might help.) 2) Additionally there is a mechanisms also identified in previous postings for obtaining IPv4 address space for multihoming. Explore those mechanisms if you *need* address space. 3) It would be good if we could work together to make the WIX model work efficiently. Some larger providers might wish that there were only larger providers peering at the WIX. That clearly isn't the case so it would be good to see them sit down with Simon Blake and work out how to get efficient and redundant peering working. 4) Ditto the APE. 5) If people want address the related but separate problem of using RPSL and the routing registry mechanism to express their public policy (and automatic generation of filter lists etc) then start trying to understand policy in terms of the provisions of RFC2622 and RFC2650. I'm happy to work on this with people when I get back to NZ in November. Others have said the same but I'll let them put their hands up. If you intend to do this please strongly consider using the APNIC service coming shortly. I posted yesterday that the service was hosted in Brisbane and mirrored at RIPE. They are also investigating the deployment of redundant services using anycast on four separate continents. How redundant do you need the service to be? andy - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Updated BGP monitoring
by Rob Thomas 12 Sep '02

12 Sep '02

Hi, NZNOG listfolk. [ Apologies to those of you who have received this note in other fora. ] I have updated my BGP monitoring to include ASN analysis. This includes the count of unique ASNs, the count of ASNs that originate at least one prefix, the average path length, the maximum path length, and the bogus ASNs. You will find it all here: http://www.cymru.com/BGP/index.html The bogus ASN page, complete with a colorful graph, can be found here: http://www.cymru.com/BGP/asnbogusrep.html Comments and feedback are always welcome! My thanks to those who donate peering and gear to my monitoring efforts. :) Thanks, Rob. -- Rob Thomas http://www.cymru.com ASSERT(coffee != empty); - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re: BGP Private ASes
by Ewen McNeill 12 Sep '02

12 Sep '02

Andy Linton sent me this response, which he tells me he intended for nznog as well. Below is Andy's response, and then my reply to Andy's response. Both are at least as relevant to the list as discussing Klez all day :-) Andy's response: On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Ewen McNeill wrote: > In message <NABBJDOPDKGCDCNBNEDOCEPKFAAA.ascott(a)cisco.com>, "Arron Scott" writes: > >I get endless number of customers who want to peer with more than one ISP at > >a time, usually with the intention of resiliency at both the institutional > >and upstream provider levels. [... Want Class C, public AS, advertised > >prefix... ] > >Now ... what I was thinking is ... can we do this without the rare (and > >increasingly difficult to obtain) Public AS numbers. There are proposals to increase the size of the AS numbers from 16 to 32 bits but that soesn't solve the immediate difficulties in getting an AS number. > > I'm also in touch with clients that would like to do this -- they don't > especially care about the Class C, or Public AS, etc, but they would like > some resiliency for any disconnections from their provider or routing > issues for their provider, often because they have clients that have > that as a tick-box feature. I've heard some very interesting discussions about flap damping at the RIPE meeting this week. See http://psg.com/~randy/020910.zmao-flap.pdf. The important thing to note is that the thing that is damped is prefixes so dual homing may not give you all you hope for if flap damping is in use. > >Could we have a publically agreed on pool of Private AS numbers that > >enterprises can use to peer with service providers. The pool would > >administered by a "impartial" group (maybe WIX/APE). The AS number > >would then be stripped by both higher-order ISPs and and the IP > >address potentially unsuppressed by the ISP who owns the IP address aggregate. > > If I'm not mistaken about what you mean, this is what WIX (the route > reflectors) are trying to do. Dean Pemberton and I have been talking with Simon about trying to get WIX and APE whois servers running so that people could start registering routes and AS policy for RPSL use in NZ. Using these to allocate locally scoped private ASes for use on the WIX and APE would be a doddle. > The WIX approach seems to work, but: > - it appears some providers do not peer with the WIX route reflectors, > or do so only to advertise their routes, not to allow in extra routes > > - most providers filter "long" prefixes (and most enterprises without > public ASes tend to have only long prefixes). Certainly it's my > impression that pretty much all providers filter anything longer than > /24, and some appear to even filter /24, /23, /22, etc, meaning the > prefixes advertised by enterprises are likely to be filtered. It seems difficult to believe that the relatively small additional number of prefixes being announced by the enterprises on the WIX is significant. The total number of prefixes is around the 250 mark and many of those come from the "providers" anyway. Filtering out the few dozen prefixes that are /25 or greater would seem to have little impact on table size and the kosher ones could easily handled in a prefix-list. > So from an enterprise point of view WIX (the route reflectors) are useful > for picking up direct routes to providers POPs, but this tends to lead to > asymetric routes to/from the providers (and hence no real resiliency). So it would be nice to get the providers to use them. Some of them resist but surely this is an issue that could be driven by their respective customers. E.g. "As my provider I need you to provide a resilient efficient local mesh at WIX and APE. Perhaps I should consider moving to a provider who...." > > And it's useful for enterprise to enterprise peering (indeed one of my > clients connected to the WIX route reflectors soley for the enterprise > to enterprise peering; at the request of the other enterprise). > > The WIX route reflectors (according to the route table on a router > peering with them) appears to have about 50 systems peering with it > at present. > > But without providers willing to (a) peer with the route reflectors, and > (b) accept long prefixes (at least locally), it's probably not going to > be of general use for resiliency. > > To be of much general use providers would have to be willing to at least > accept /24 prefixes locally, even if they're part of a larger supernet > advertised by another provider. Longer prefixes would be desirable, > because otherwise anyone wanting resilency with CIDR space would need > to beg for a class-C sized CIDR chunk. See above --------------------------------------------------------------------------- And my response to Andy: In message <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209111930390.1763-100000(a)wark.lionra.net.nz>, Andy Linton writes: >On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Ewen McNeill wrote: >> I'm also in touch with clients that would like to do this [advertise >> their blocks to multiple providers for resiliency] > >I've heard some very interesting discussions about flap damping at the >RIPE meeting this week. [...] The important thing to note is that the >thing that is damped is prefixes so dual homing may not give you all >you hope for if flap damping is in use. For both the clients I have in mind most of their benefits would be gained in about the first 5 hops or so (ie, within New Zealand), as that is the main market they're serving. So how important flap damping was to that would largely depend on how soon it was applied. >Dean Pemberton and I have been talking with Simon about trying to get WIX >and APE whois servers running so that people could start registering >routes and AS policy for RPSL use in NZ. Using these to allocate locally >scoped private ASes for use on the WIX and APE would be a doddle. This would definitely be a good thing. RPSL (from your talk at the Uniforum conference) looks like a Good Thing (tm), and a whole lot more sensible than the alternatives (yet more prefix listson nznog!). Scoped private ASes would also solve the immediate problem -- probably for Aaron too (hence my suggestion you mention this on nznog, and/or directly to Aaron). >It seems difficult to believe that the relatively small additional number >of prefixes being announced by the enterprises on the WIX is significant. WIX is worth about 300 prefixes or so on an average day, and "generally" includes the POPs of most NZ providers. For an organisation hosting a lot of content, there's definitely a win for them in sending traffic "directly" to the POPs (and bypassing the ticket counter at their ISP :-) ). If those routes were symmetric, then there'd also be a resiliency win. >The total number of prefixes is around the 250 mark and many of those come >from the "providers" anyway. Filtering out the few dozen prefixes that are >/25 or greater would seem to have little impact on table size and the >kosher ones could easily handled in a prefix-list. Last I spoke to Simon about it, he was starting to put filters in on the expected prefixes from each peer with the WIX route reflectors -- which would make it possible to have a pretty "exact" set of expected prefixes. There are 27 prefixes in WIX (right now) longer than /24. Some of them are as long as /30s, and there's a bunch of /29s. One of the clients I have in mind has a /27 CIDR block. They're starting to run out of public address space (despite using RFC1918 everywhere it can be used, and lots of NAT), and will probably try asking for more space. But even that more space is likely to be only another /28, another /27, or maybe if they're very lucky one /26. My point here is that while there might not be very many prefixes longer than /25 in WIX now, that's sort of a self-fulfilling prohpehcy, because prefixes longer than /24 (or /23, /22, /21, etc -- I haven't managed to find out what's considered "best practice" by NZ providers) are being filtered out already by lots of people. So "what's the point?". If the answer is "everyone use RPSL, and persuade people to accept all properly described RPSL lists" then I'm all for it. If the answer is "only providers get to do peering", then that's tantamount to "only people with public ASes get to do peering". And may well lead to a bunch of people chasing public ASes (and provider independant space for that matter) when they don't otherwise need them. Ewen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

8 13

Re: BGP Private ASes
by Andy Linton 11 Sep '02

11 Sep '02

On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Ewen McNeill wrote: > In message <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209120130270.2162-100000(a)wark.lionra.net.nz>, Andy Li > nton writes: > >I meant to post to all concerned. Do you want to forward my mail and your > >response to get this rolling again? > > Done. Joe Abley seems to be suggesting that public ASes can be obtained > (at least by providers for their customers) for the purposes that Aaron > is talking about, perhaps along with provider independent space with a > long prefix. But something tells me that won't scale to everyone on > Citylink getting provider independent space and their own AS... I agree with Joe that it is possible to get a public AS and some address space for mulithoming but we'd be talking about a 50% increase in NZ's AS number assignment. (APNIC have currently allocated 89 AS numbers to NZ + some earlier allocations from the US registries and we'd need 42+ private AS replacements for Citylink alone). The policy for AS numbers is effectively described at http://www.apnic.net/docs/drafts/apnic-draft-asn-v002.txt The problem I see with say Citylink customers applying under this schema is that assigning them an AS number does nothing to reduce the size of global address tables and the number will not be used to describe diverse routes in the global routing fabric. So private AS numbers seem like the 'right thing'. Where people really do want to multihome for global connectivity there is a mechanism - see the above and for multihoming IPv4 address space see http://www.apnic.net/info/faq/multihoming_faq.html But people should note - there is a cost in dollars and renumbering effort. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re: BGP Private ASes
by Ewen McNeill 11 Sep '02

11 Sep '02

In message <NABBJDOPDKGCDCNBNEDOCEPKFAAA.ascott(a)cisco.com>, "Arron Scott" writes: >I get endless number of customers who want to peer with more than one ISP at >a time, usually with the intention of resiliency at both the institutional >and upstream provider levels. [... Want Class C, public AS, advertised >prefix... ] >Now ... what I was thinking is ... can we do this without the rare (and >increasingly difficult to obtain) Public AS numbers. I'm also in touch with clients that would like to do this -- they don't especially care about the Class C, or Public AS, etc, but they would like some resiliency for any disconnections from their provider or routing issues for their provider, often because they have clients that have that as a tick-box feature. >Could we have a publically agreed on pool of Private AS numbers that >enterprises can use to peer with service providers. The pool would >administered by a "impartial" group (maybe WIX/APE). The AS number >would then be stripped by both higher-order ISPs and and the IP >address potentially unsuppressed by the ISP who owns the IP address aggregate. If I'm not mistaken about what you mean, this is what WIX (the route reflectors) are trying to do. Enterprises on Citylink with an appropriate connection, but without public ASes are assigned a private AS, advertise their routes to the WIX route reflectors with that private AS, and the WIX route reflectors then advertises those to all other peers. APE may also have a similar setup, but my impression is that APE is mostly bilaterial peering, and it's mostly treated as a peering point, rather than a multilateral route exchange. The WIX approach seems to work, but: - it appears some providers do not peer with the WIX route reflectors, or do so only to advertise their routes, not to allow in extra routes - most providers filter "long" prefixes (and most enterprises without public ASes tend to have only long prefixes). Certainly it's my impression that pretty much all providers filter anything longer than /24, and some appear to even filter /24, /23, /22, etc, meaning the prefixes advertised by enterprises are likely to be filtered. So from an enterprise point of view WIX (the route reflectors) are useful for picking up direct routes to providers POPs, but this tends to lead to asymetric routes to/from the providers (and hence no real resiliency). And it's useful for enterprise to enterprise peering (indeed one of my clients connected to the WIX route reflectors soley for the enterprise to enterprise peering; at the request of the other enterprise). The WIX route reflectors (according to the route table on a router peering with them) appears to have about 50 systems peering with it at present. But without providers willing to (a) peer with the route reflectors, and (b) accept long prefixes (at least locally), it's probably not going to be of general use for resiliency. To be of much general use providers would have to be willing to at least accept /24 prefixes locally, even if they're part of a larger supernet advertised by another provider. Longer prefixes would be desirable, because otherwise anyone wanting resilency with CIDR space would need to beg for a class-C sized CIDR chunk. Simon Blake (Citylink) could probably speak more about what WIX's route reflectors do, and how well it's worked (or not worked) in practice. Ewen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Mail relaying on the wane?
by Juha Saarinen 11 Sep '02

11 Sep '02

http://www.imc.org/ube-relay.html Didn't Joe Abley do a survey for NZ ages ago? -- Juha Saarinen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

BGP Private ASes
by Arron Scott 11 Sep '02

11 Sep '02

Hi all, I expect this is probably flame bait, but I keep hitting the same question in customer-land almost every week, and wondered if there were at least a different (if not necessarily smarter) way of dealing with the problem. Maybe this is already been done to some extent, and maybe we just need to formalise some of this. Anyway ... I get endless number of customers who want to peer with more than one ISP at a time, usually with the intention of resiliency at both the institutional and upstream provider levels. So what they usually want is a Public AS number and a class C which is advertised as a long prefix to the Internet via two upstreams such as Telecom GGI and TelstraClear, often with an intermediary ISP as their direct peer. Now ... what I was thinking is ... can we do this without the rare (and increasingly difficult to obtain) Public AS numbers. Could we have a publically agreed on pool of Private AS numbers that enterprises can use to peer with service providers. The pool would administered by a "impartial" group (maybe WIX/APE). The AS number would then be stripped by both higher-order ISPs and and the IP address potentially unsuppressed by the ISP who owns the IP address aggregate. One possible hiccup I see is between NZ peers, and whether there would be a problem when for instance the TelstraClear network sees the network as one AS hop direct to the customer, and one AS hop via Telecom (and vice-versa). However, on the otherside I also wondered whether this could be used on the APE and WIX for customer to customer peering, providing more rapid peering relationship growth in NZ. Any thoughts ... or have I, in my two years of vendor-land, turned into a BGP zombie who can no longer fathom the depths of BGPs arcane and sometimes infuriating nuances ? Arron Scott *********************************************************************** Arron Scott (CCIE #4099) Phone: +64-9-3551951 Systems Engineer Mobile: +64-27-4883163 Cisco New Zealand mailto:ascott(a)cisco.com http://www.cisco.com *********************************************************************** - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

3 2

RE: So cool a flash,enjoy it
by Donald Neal 10 Sep '02

10 Sep '02

> From: Chris Wedgwood [mailto:cw(a)f00f.org] > Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 15:42 > On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 12:15:57PM +1200, Donald Neal wrote: > > > This message was bounced by teletech.co.nz on the ground that it > > contained offensive language. I felt that whoever on the list is > > using this company's mail service should know that. > > *PLEASE* tell me this is a joke and you forgot the smiley? > > > --cw No smiley, no joke. I posted this as a notice to whoever the affected person is. I'm inclined to view further discussion as not appropriate for the list. - Donald Neal ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: So cool a flash,enjoy it
by Donald Neal 10 Sep '02

10 Sep '02

> -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Abley [mailto:jabley(a)automagic.org] > Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 12:02 [...] > The best AV solution I can think of is for all possible holes and > exploits in Microsoft mail clients to be exploited as soon as > possible, and as violently as possible. Maybe if that happens fewer > people will run stupid Microsoft mail clients, and the whole issue > will just go away. > > By making half-hearted attempts at stripping virus-infected bits > from e-mail, you're just interfering with the natural order of > things and prolonging the life of **** software. > > > Joe > - This message was bounced by teletech.co.nz on the ground that it contained offensive language. I felt that whoever on the list is using this company's mail service should know that. - Donald Neal ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

3 2

Re: So cool a flash,enjoy it
by Ewen McNeill 10 Sep '02

10 Sep '02

In message <9146DBDC8503D411B18A204C4F4F50200A65DB(a)172-16-1-2.static-dialup.xtra.co.nz>, James Guidera writes: >>[Joe Abley says: don't strip the viruses, let the natural order prevail] > >There is no point blaming the mail client. No matter who makes the mail >client, if it is popular it will be open to attach. Be it Notes, GroupWise, >Outlook. Whoever is the biggest and most common would be the target. There is every point in blaming the mail client -- it's the "automagically do stuff" behaviour of the mail clients which makes all of these viruses spreading around possible. The "automatically run programs when clicked on" is bad enough (where programs == "anything executable", including "documents" with embedded programming languages and auto execute features); the preview bugs are even worse. There were far far fewer mail viruses in the days when you had to work rather hard to run a program sent to you by mail (eg, cut out encoded section, manually feed to uudecode or unshar it, compile the source, and run it). cat, more, less and other similar mail clients have far fewer security problems. Even telnet has fewer security problems as a mail client (although it does suffer from plain text passwords over the wire). And mail/mailx don't have that many security problems on the _reading_ side (on the sending side they're a bit of a festering pile of security holes). There might be an argument that only mail clients vulnerable to being infected will be popular (the converse of what you're suggesting) -- because they're more point'n'drool. However I'm with Joe: if you let the viruses do their thing, preferably as dramatically as possible, then the natural order will prevail eventually, as people get tired of reinstalling their machine for the third time that week (and/or confidental documents leaking and/or their clients shunning them). To bring it vaguely back on topic: mail scanners at ISPs (eg, the Xtra ones) would do need to either forward on the bones, or bounce the whole message back to the "sender" -- silently dropping things is bad, as it just hides the problem (and can hide more stuff). For messages which appear to be viruses that send their own mail (ie, spreading as worms), I'd personally go for just bouncing the whole message back. (Yes I know Klez, et al, forge the from address too, so you can't usefully bounce it -- but the recipient doesn't want it either. I'm going to get stray Klez as either "sender" or recipient whichever way you go.) Ewen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

3 2

Re: So cool a flash,enjoy it
by Simon Byrnand 10 Sep '02

10 Sep '02

At 13:40 10/09/02 +1200, simon wrote: [snip] Normally I wouldn't reply to this sort of thing on list, but I've already received about 10 replies to this message which I did *not* send. Half of them were virus scanner reports, the other half were people saying "huh?", or "who are you?". For those that didn't bother to check the headers, here are the last few: Received: from mta204-rme.xtra.co.nz (mta204-rme.xtra.co.nz [210.86.15.147]) by mailserv.waikato.ac.nz (8.11.3/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g8A1eL732069 for <nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz>; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 13:40:21 +1200 Received: from mta2-rme.xtra.co.nz ([210.86.15.140]) by mta204-rme.xtra.co.nz with ESMTP id <20020910014016.CDID5662.mta204-rme.xtra.co.nz(a)mta2-rme.xtra.co.nz> for <nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz>; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 13:40:16 +1200 Received: from Anqm ([203.96.107.54]) by mta2-rme.xtra.co.nz with SMTP id <20020910013935.DSEG19105.mta2-rme.xtra.co.nz(a)Anqm> for <nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz>; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 13:39:35 +1200 The message clearly comes from an Xtra user, presumably infected with a virus. Which begs an interesting question, why did Xtra's much-touted virus scanner let it through ? :) Regards, Simon Byrnand (The real one :) - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

12 32

RE: So cool a flash,enjoy it
by James Guidera 10 Sep '02

10 Sep '02

There is no point blaming the mail client. No matter who makes the mail client, if it is popular it will be open to attach. Be it Notes, GroupWise, Outlook. Whoever is the biggest and most common would be the target. -----Original Message----- From: Donald Neal [mailto:Donald.Neal(a)telecom.co.nz] Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 12:16 p.m. To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: RE: So cool a flash,enjoy it > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Abley [mailto:jabley(a)automagic.org] > Sent: Wednesday, 11 September 2002 12:02 [...] > The best AV solution I can think of is for all possible holes and > exploits in Microsoft mail clients to be exploited as soon as > possible, and as violently as possible. Maybe if that happens fewer > people will run stupid Microsoft mail clients, and the whole issue > will just go away. > > By making half-hearted attempts at stripping virus-infected bits > from e-mail, you're just interfering with the natural order of > things and prolonging the life of **** software. > > > Joe > - This message was bounced by teletech.co.nz on the ground that it contained offensive language. I felt that whoever on the list is using this company's mail service should know that. - Donald Neal ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- "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." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

3 2

Updated DNS monitoring, take 2
by Rob Thomas 05 Sep '02

05 Sep '02

Hi, NZNOG folks. [ Apologies to those of you who see this note in other fora. ] Rodney Joffe (thanks, Rodney!) correctly pointed out that my gTLD monitoring was only tracking the Verisign gTLD (com, net, org) name servers. I have now added the other TLDs to the mix. It can all be found in two places: http://www.cymru.com/DNS/ http://bgp.lcs.mit.edu/dnsmirror/ I will shortly have an additional web server on a much faster set of links, as well as another mirror. For the impatient, I recommend the MIT site. Don't forget to check the Lame Report while you're there. :) Comments and feedback are always welcome! Thanks, Rob. -- Rob Thomas http://www.cymru.com ASSERT(coffee != empty); - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: input required - Conference 2003
by Stephen Andrew 05 Sep '02

05 Sep '02

No - I'd suggest Alan Brown moderate. That should be fun. -- Andrew > -----Original Message----- > From: Roger De Salis [mailto:roger(a)desalis.gen.nz] > Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 7:36 PM > To: Simon Lyall > Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: Re: input required - Conference 2003 > > > You can moderate the plenary session.... > > Simon Lyall wrote: > > > > On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Juha Saarinen wrote: > > > Dan Bernstein? > > > > Why don't we invite Richard Stallman, Patrick O'Brien, Alan > Brown, Maurice > > Williamson and Roger Sheppard at the same time? . That way > we can get them > > all in one go. > > > > :-) > > > > -- > > Simon Lyall. | Newsmaster | Work: > simon.lyall(a)ihug.co.nz > > Senior Network/System Admin | Postmaster | Home: > simon(a)darkmere.gen.nz > > ihug, Auckland, NZ | Asst Doorman | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz > > - > To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > where the body of your message reads: > unsubscribe nznog -- \_ Roger De Salis rdesalis(a)fx.net.nz </' FX Networks +64 25 481 452 /) Wellington, New Zealand roger(a)desalis.gen.nz (/ ` DSL - the 56k modem technology of 2004 - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog This email with any attachments is confidential and may be subject to legal privilege. If it is not intended for you please reply immediately, destroy it and do not copy, disclose or use it in any way. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

input required - Conference 2003
by Roger De Salis 04 Sep '02

04 Sep '02

I think many of you enjoyed Paul Vixie's visit this year. Does anyone have any suggestions for a speaker next year? I have polled several of the "nog" informally, but I'd like to get a wider view. R -- \_ Roger De Salis rdesalis(a)fx.net.nz </' FX Networks +64 25 481 452 /) Wellington, New Zealand roger(a)desalis.gen.nz (/ ` DSL - the 56k modem technology of 2004 - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

4 4

(no subject)
by Mohamad Simawy 04 Sep '02

04 Sep '02

auth 3b71458c subscribe nznog mohamad(a)zip.co.nz

1 0

shopping for a new gig
by David Anso 04 Sep '02

04 Sep '02

Does anyone know of jobs going for IP/Lucent/Linux/perl/database/network type engineers, preferably in Auckland or Wellington (but my arm is pretty twistable atm). It's time for some different challenges I feel. --- David Anso Systems/Network Administrator ZIP Internet/ZIPFone/Zip Kiosks - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re: Did Domainz apologise in public to Strongnet?
by Roger De Salis 04 Sep '02

04 Sep '02

Au contraire. I have an apology from Strongnet to DOmainz for using an old zone file (we had withdrawn the Zone Xfers by this time) for spamming the Asia Online customer base, when Asia online were in difficulties. The mild apology was accompanied by an assurance from Strongnet that this zone information would not be used for this purpose again. I let the matter rest at that point. I could dig out the relevant emails if further info is wanted, but I regarded it as a individual matter, rather than one that needed a wide audience. /R Juha Saarinen wrote: > > Hi Roger, > > That's what Seeby of Orcon and Bruce Morris of Cardlink (a > Strongnet/Orcon customer) both claim. > > However, I can find no traces of the public apology anywhere... would you > happen to know where it was posted? > > Cheers, > > -- > Juha Saarinen -- \_ Roger De Salis rdesalis(a)fx.net.nz </' FX Networks +64 25 481 452 /) Wellington, New Zealand roger(a)desalis.gen.nz (/ ` DSL - the 56k modem technology of 2004 - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

WTB: DSP & Modem Cards for the MAX 6000
by David Anso 04 Sep '02

04 Sep '02

Hi Guys I'm looking for DSP Cards (such as the MXV-SL-DSP16) for MultiVoice on the MAX 6000 and Modem Cards for some of our other 6000's. If you've got either of the above spare that you're willing to sell or trade (for Beer or other), please drop me a line. You may even be able to twist my arm for a beer or two at the exchange point. Cheers David Anso Zip Internet - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re: [OT] Did Domainz issue a public apology to Strongnet?
by Steve Phillips 03 Sep '02

03 Sep '02

At 14:42 4/09/2002, Juha Saarinen wrote: >Sorry about the non-beer content, but I've been told twice now that >Domainz issued a public apology to Strongnet about the suspension from the >NZ DNS last year. If there was a public apology then I must have missed it :-) Who told you they had apologised ? surely this person would know where you can find said apology ? -- Steve. -- Steve Systems Admin, ICONZ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

[OT] Did Domainz issue a public apology to Strongnet?
by Juha Saarinen 03 Sep '02

03 Sep '02

Sorry about the non-beer content, but I've been told twice now that Domainz issued a public apology to Strongnet about the suspension from the NZ DNS last year. Unfortunately, I cannot find any mention of the apology. Is anybody able to shed some light on this for me? -- Juha Saarinen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Progress of .geek.nz, and NO more 2ld submissions
by Dean Pemberton 30 Aug '02

30 Aug '02

Hi All. Just got this back from InternetNZ re the .geek.nz submission. Interesting to note two things. 1) My request to have .geek.nz processed at the same time as .bank.nz was rejected. They can only apparently handle one at a time. 2) There will be no more 2ld's until they finish a full review. Got in just in time but there will be no .celt.nz =( Dean ----- Forwarded message from Sue Leader <exe.dir(a)internetnz.net.nz> ----- To: Dean Pemberton <dean(a)deanpemberton.com> From: Sue Leader <exe.dir(a)internetnz.net.nz> Subject: Re: .geek.nz Cc: dnc(a)dnc.org.nz X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) Hi Dean The .nz Oversight Ctte (NZOC) reported on their planned work schedule at today's Council Meeting. NZOC noted that the review of both the new 2LD creation process and the surrounding discussions about the nature of the space itself, was high on their priority list after the SRS is implemented. On that basis, and in line with the sequential process adopted for .maori.nz/.bank.nz, the Council passed the following resolution: MOVED: Streatfield/Bourne 'THAT (a) a moratorium start today on all new 2LD applications (no more will be received) because of the upcoming review of 2nd level domains by NZOC (b) that .bank.nz continues (c) that .geek.nz proceeds sequentially after .bank.nz is concluded CARRIED ABSTENTION De Salis/Davidson Given that the review of the 2LD process will involve public consultation, and given the nature of your community of interest, the consultation would benefit from the input of your knowledge, experience and expertise. We will keep you posted on the progress on .bank.nz. I am unable to give you a precise time frame, as the Request For Discussion (RFD) for .bank.nz opened on August 26 and will not conclude before October 25, nor later than Nov 24. At that stage the straw poll will be arranged, which runs for a two week period, finishing around 9 December. Until then, we will not know whether that application moves into the next stage of public submissions, a period which runs for another 30-60 days. Note, that should .bank.nz fail to meet the threshold in the straw poll, that would mean that the .geek.nz proposal would move into the RFD stage in mid-December, a timing which may not give the proposal as much attention as might otherwise be the case. The timing is negotiable with the proposer. cheers Sue ----- End forwarded message ----- - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

4 4

Mailwasher Update?
by Mark Foster 29 Aug '02

29 Aug '02

IDG Article mentions NZNOG as well (apologies if its been seen already) http://www.idg.net.nz/webhome.nsf/UNID/CAE93CFD0D72B2A7CC256C21001B3127!ope… - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: bank.nz maori.nz geek.nz
by Frank March 28 Aug '02

28 Aug '02

> -----Original Message----- > From: Steven Heath [SMTP:sheath(a)paradise.net.nz] > Sent: Tuesday, 27 August 2002 16:19 > To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: Re: bank.nz maori.nz geek.nz > > Other than InternetNZ sitting on this application for 3.5 months > InternetNZ has > done nothing wrong. In late May I presented a paper to council about > reviewing > the 2LD name space and it was assigned to the .nz oversight committee to > look > at where it has rotted ever since not even appearing on its agenda. > Actually, this *is* on the agenda of the .nz Oversight Committeen (NZOC). At present the NZOC is focused closely on the SRS rollout and urgent policy development associated with that. Details are available at www.dnc.org.nz. Partly because of the need for urgency, but also because Rose Percivall and others widely consulted over the SRS implementation over a number of months, there is minimal public input at this stage but once the SRS implementation is rolling forward, and subject to approval from the Council of InternetNZ, a review will be initiated for all current policies, including the process for allocation or extension of the SLD space, and public participation will be a critical part of that review. Frank March Chair, .nz Oversight Committee > - > To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > where the body of your message reads: > unsubscribe nznog Any opinions expressed in this message are not necessarily those of the Ministry of Economic Development. This message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivery to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error and that any use is strictly prohibited. Please contact the sender and delete the message and any attachment from your computer. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

4 4

Updated DNS monitoring
by Rob Thomas 28 Aug '02

28 Aug '02

Hi, NZNOGers. [ Apologies to those of you who have received this note in other fora. ] I've crafted several enhancements to my DNS monitoring suite. I am now monitoring the gTLD name servers, and you can see the data here: http://www.cymru.com/DNS/gtlddns.html (graphs) http://www.cymru.com/DNS/gtlddnstext.html (text) I have enhanced the root and gTLD name server monitoring. Now instead of only graphing hourly query response, I am also graphing hourly ICMP 8 0 ("ping") response. This may provide some additional insight during periods of high latency; it may instead be specious as all get out. ;) You will find it here: http://www.cymru.com/DNS/index.html On a related note... Are you lame? Being lame means I will pick on you during my next presentation. Avoid this shame! :) Take a look at the lame server report below. It is updated weekly. My thanks to those who donate to the data. http://www.cymru.com/DNS/lame.html Comments, feedback, donated data, and peering sessions are always welcome! Thanks, Rob. -- Rob Thomas http://www.cymru.com ASSERT(coffee != empty); - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: RFD - proposal to create '.bank.nz'
by Juha Saarinen 27 Aug '02

27 Aug '02

Actually... I want to cash in on this. Gimme 'americascup.nz' now! -- Juha Saarinen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

5 5

Re: [members-announce] RFD - proposal to create '.bank.nz'
by David Farrar 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

Andy wrote: > At 7:16 AM +1200 8/27/02, DPF wrote: > >On Mon, 26 Aug 2002 10:53:21 -0500, Andy Gardner > ><andy(a)navigator.co.nz> wrote: > > > >> > >>How about this: > >> > >>Once the SRS is running and has passed tests (tests conceived by someone > >>other than a baboon), .nz's SLD is opened up to allcomers? > > > >That exact proposition (plus other possible changes) is planned to > >indeed be the subject of consultation and review next year. Andy > >Linton amongst others has been pushing for this for some time and it > >was going to be reviewed and considered this year but as you > >suggested, we decided it was best to wait until the SRS is in place. > > > >It is pretty rare for a ccTLD to abolish a 2LD structure > > Who said anything about abolishing co/net/org etc? > > Open up the SLD to allcomers, but leave the existing registrations in > place. People will be free to continue their .co.nz, can register new names > in .co.nz if they want, but also have the choice of *.nz Yep that would be the way to do it. I suspect in reality though this would effectively kill co.nz etc as the vast majority of registrants would want to go from say telecom.co.nz to telecom.nz. DPF - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

6 8

Re: bank.nz maori.nz geek.nz
by Ewen McNeill 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

In message <Pine.LNX.4.44.0208271600320.2972-100000(a)wark.lionra.net.nz>, Andy Li nton writes: >On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Ewen McNeill wrote: >> And then someone could build a directory service over the top of that >> offering a one-to-many mapping. > >And as Chris pointed out that's (almost) already been done by Google (or >whoever you deem to be search engine of the moment). Google is the best-substitute-for-a-directory-service which we have at the moment. It's not exactly ideal. Your point that we could be focusing on a new directory service is definitely a good one. Although I personally think if we're going to take that approach to a logical conclusion we should completely devalue domain names (making them provider assigned arbitrary strings) to take the rest of the argument out of them. Half-measures seem like a recipie for additional problems. >Imagine this debate being held over 0800 numbers: Except that the other prefixes that you talk about are purely arbitrary in the 0800-etc case, and the second level domain suffixes being suggested here are at least somewhat meaningful divisons. The equivilent to suggesting 801, 802, et al (which incidentally do exist in another form, viz 0800, 0508, in NZ, and others in the US) would be someone suggesting co1.nz, co2.nz, co3.nz etc. I don't think anyone's seriously suggested co1.nz yet. >Also nice to note the categories before and after BANKS: Balloons-Hot Air >and Banners. There's some food for thought in the Yellow Pages categories. :-) >And the justification would be the same as that of the banks. And of >course 'celts.nz' can use many of the arguments put forward by 'maori.nz'. And celts.nz has my support. When are you submitting the proposal? I'll pledge $10 towards the $1000 fee for celts.nz as well (I've already pledged $10 for geeks.nz for Dean). Ewen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

bank.nz maori.nz geek.nz
by Roger De Salis 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

The value of the namespace arises from both being simple and logical. It is very hard to see how a 2LD can be justified to support the wishes of the 5 real banks, and ~20 wannabe banks, or broking houses, or insurance houses, who like to think they are bank like. 25 entries is not likely to stress the .co.nz namespace (which is surely the only reason for considering another 2LD.) In the mind of the applicant, why would banks be (at internet level) any more or less special than any other commercial entity. Sure this would lead to .legal.nz, .treaty.nz, and a variety of other groups who for whatever (spurious?) reason somehow think they are "special". I propose to make a submission against .bank. R Ewen McNeiil wrote:- > (b) I don't have a major problem with any of the suggestions > I've seen on either nznog or isocnz-members, providing it's > intended there be a moderately logical hierachy underneath it. asjl wrote:- > Given that the vast majority of registrants are in 'co.nz' > anyway - the last number I saw was around 95%, I really find > it hard to see what value the structure has anyway. -- \_ Roger De Salis rdesalis(a)fx.net.nz </' FX Networks +64 25 481 452 /) Wellington, New Zealand roger(a)desalis.gen.nz (/ ` DSL - the 56k modem technology of 2004 - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

10 11

Re: bank.nz maori.nz geek.nz
by Ewen McNeill 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

In message <20020827043811.GZ83446(a)buffoon.automagic.org>, Joe Abley writes: >On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 04:16:06PM +1200, Ewen McNeill wrote: >> In message <20020827040606.GX83446(a)buffoon.automagic.org>, Joe Abley writes: >> [Why moderate 2ld but not 3ld?] >> It's higher up the delegation hierachy, so there are more people that >> might want it. > >I don't see that. Seems to me that the people who really care about >what names they get will register the names wherever they can. Does this mean that I can start selling names under newtld.naos.co.nz for the same sort of prices as names under co.nz get? Somehow I think not. Like it or not, there are advantages to shorter names, particularly where they're being printed on business cards, displayed in adverts, etc, with the expectation that people will type them in. Hence [a-z].co.nz, and [a-z][a-z].co.nz are all taken, for instance, but not all [a-z]{5}.co.nz are taken. >That being the case, there are probably the same number of people who >want $name.co.nz as there are who would want $name.nz. I disagree. I'm sure there'd be more people wanting $name.nz than $name.co.nz; possibly an order of magnitude more (but we might be talking a base smaller than 10...). While obviously the "land grab" could be managed, arguably that's exactly what the existing policy does -- manage the land grab. It's rather overmanaged for my tastes though. >> >[Why $foo-the-movie.nz rather than $foo.movie.nz] >> >Why do you need one? >> >> Because otherwise I think (a) a structured set of second level domains >> makes much more sense than the alternatives; and (b) we should approve >> any request that has a reasonable sub-delegation policy. > >There might be an appearance of structure in the way things are >currently organised, but I would suggest that close scrutiny of the >names registered within the current hierarchy don't illustrate the >point particularly well. I quite agree. At this point there are two ways to go -- (a) make more hierachy in such a way that people can be persuaded to use it (bank.nz, et al), or (b) give up. If we give up, then it'll be impossible to get any sort of hierachy again later. >I almost agree with your point (b), except that in my mind there >is no unreasonable sub-delegation policy, and consequently no need >for any "we" or "approve". I take it that you don't consider "we won't sub-delegate" to be an unreasonable policy, even for a much wanted name that would otherwise be an expected delegation point. (I do for "much wanted" names.) I'm afraid I have too little faith in human nature to think that the result of "any policy is okay" would be anything other than "no one plays nicely". >> We could all vote "yes" for bank.nz and never have to hear about the >> deleation of bank.nz again. Imagine that. :-) > >Why settle for a temporary cessation of symptoms when there's a >permanent cure for the disease? "I'm sorry sir, the legs will have to come off." "Which one?" "Both of them." Ewen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re: bank.nz maori.nz geek.nz
by Ewen McNeill 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

In message <20020827030232.GT83446(a)buffoon.automagic.org>, Joe Abley writes: >On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 12:04:10PM +1200, Roger De Salis wrote: >> It is very hard to see how a 2LD can be justified >> to support the wishes of the 5 real banks, and ~20 wannabe banks, >> or broking houses, or insurance houses, who like to think they >> are bank like. > >It's harder for me to figure out why anybody needs to be put in the >position of having to justify it. [no technical reason, etc] IMHO the reason for requiring a justification for creating 2lds is to ensure that they are created with some thought as to how they will be sub delegated, so that you can actually _have_ national.bank.nz, et al, rather than just having one organisation getting "bank.nz" and everyone else needing to get other variations (national-bank.nz, asb-bank.nz, whatever). The current process is, IMHO, way way over the top for what is required. Really all that we need to know is (a) there is a plan for sharing the name (ie, sub delegations), and (b) there isn't a much more logical unit of delegation to use instead (eg, "sport" might be more considered logical than "rugby-league"). FWIW, Dean's geek.nz seems more than adequately documented for these purposes to me, and I've already encouraged him to submit it. The alternative that some are suggesting (a free for all in the second level domain space) would basically ensure that the same "land grab" that happened in .com happens in .nz; and ensure that we have to have dozens of variations on $foo-movie $foo-the-movie movie-$foo (etc) to work around the collapsed namespace. ("national" being an obvious example.) As I said earlier today, I've yet to hear a compelling argument that $foo-the-movie.nz (and variations thereupon) is somehow better than $foo.movie.nz If we collapse the namespace so that it becomes "whatever you can get" under .nz, then we might as well give up any pretense that they're "obvious" and hand them out like ASNs. At least there'd be less call for "special" names -- once 42 and a few others had been handed out. And then someone could build a directory service over the top of that offering a one-to-many mapping. Ewen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

5 4

Re: bank.nz maori.nz geek.nz
by David Farrar 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

Juha wrote: > Michael Newbery wrote: > > http://www.cs.rice.edu/~ssiyer/minstrels/poems/395.html > > > > It seemed appropriate... > > Heh. > > > This seems to be two debates: > > 1. Do we need to open up the 2LD? As in totally open it up. Open > > slather. > > 2. Iff we don't want to open it up, do we need the .bank.nz domain? > > Isn't it more likely that openly commercial new 2lds like bank.nz are simply > attempts at bringing in revenue for InternetNZzzz....? Hmmn 17 names at $24 a year each will be a grand total of $408 a year extra income. Not a huge incentive. Opening up the 2LD space to anyone would generate a huge amount of extra revenue though. In fact it would arguably be possible to then set the registry fee at a lower level than the generic top level domains of US$6 (we are about to move to US$11.16 for .nz). DPF - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Re: bank.nz maori.nz geek.nz
by Ewen McNeill 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

In message <20020827040606.GX83446(a)buffoon.automagic.org>, Joe Abley writes: >On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 03:51:16PM +1200, Ewen McNeill wrote: >> IMHO the reason for requiring a justification for creating 2lds is to >> ensure that they are created with some thought as to how they will be >> sub delegated, [....] > >Nobody gave any thought to how domains under neos.co.nz might be >delegated before they agreed to delegate the name to you. I don't >really see why bank.nz should be any different. I assume you mean naos.co.nz; neos.co.nz is held by Eyecatchers Design Ltd. It's higher up the delegation hierachy, so there are more people that might want it. (A more obvious example in my case would be mcneill.gen.nz which I also hold -- and in that instance you might well argue that someone _should_ have considered how it'd have been delegated first, and I'd agree with you.) >> The alternative that some are suggesting (a free for all in the second >> level domain space) would basically ensure that the same "land grab" >> that happened in .com happens in .nz [....] > >I'm not sure that domain fever is still at the pitch it was a few >years ago. Certainly a couple of the new gTLD registry operators >seem to be disappointed that it isn't. Perhaps not. But I'm fairly sure there'd be land grab all the same. At very least, those that think that the Banker's Association would be the ones to get bank.nz (and the same for all the other obvious delegations) show an, umm, touching faith in human nature. >> As I said earlier today, I've yet to hear a compelling argument that >> $foo-the-movie.nz (and variations thereupon) is somehow better than >> $foo.movie.nz > >Why do you need one? Because otherwise I think (a) a structured set of second level domains makes much more sense than the alternatives; and (b) we should approve any request that has a reasonable sub-delegation policy. >> If we collapse the namespace so that it becomes "whatever you can get" >> under .nz, then we might as well give up any pretense that they're >> "obvious" and hand them out like ASNs. At least there'd be less call >> for "special" names -- once 42 and a few others had been handed out. > >That's a strange comparison. ASNs are a mucher scarcer resource >than names, they're much more expensive and difficult to get hold >of, and you get whatever number the RIR decides to give you, >regardless of preference. That was precisely my point. That if we're going to give up any pretence of structure, we might as well go the whole hog and make them be arbitrary tokens that you get give by someone when you want a fixed arbitrary token. (The scarcity of obtaining ASNs is only because of the small number space for them; we could make it many times bigger and that problem would go away too.) >> And then someone could build a directory service over the top of that >> offering a one-to-many mapping. > >We could turn one largely flat namespace into another largely flat >namespace, and *never have to hear about delegation of bank.nz >again*. Imagine that :) We could all vote "yes" for bank.nz and never have to hear about the deleation of bank.nz again. Imagine that. :-) Ewen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

RFD - proposal to create '.bank.nz'
by Sue Leader 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

Greetings Request for Discussion [RFD] Proposal (2002) to Create New Second Level Domain - ".bank.nz" InternetNZ is calling for public discussion regarding the request for a new second level domain name (2LD) of '.bank.nz'. Discussion is open for a period of 60-90 days from August 26 2002. Discussion will be open for at least 60 days (until October 24) but the period may end earlier than 90 days (Nov 23) if, in the opinion of the Domain Name Commissioner (http://www.dnc.org.nz) substantive discussion has ceased. Anyone who is interested in participating in the discussion is encouraged to read the proposal, which can be found at: http://www.internetnz.net.nz/dns/2nd-level- domains/banknz02/2ld02proposal-banknz.pdf Obviously the Internet community is free to discuss this application anywhere and at anytime and are encouraged to do so. However, you may wish to subscribe to the discussion mailing list - send an email to public-consult-request(a)internetnz.net.nz and put "subscribe" in the subject line to see what others are thinking and saying. For information on the policy and history of Second Level Domains please refer to: http://www.internetnz.net.nz/dns/2nd-level-domains/ cheers Sue -- Sue Leader - Executive Director InternetNZ Voice: +64-4-472-1600 Fax: +64-4-495-2115 [Note new number] Level 4, Economous Building, 4 Bond Street (P.O.Box 11-881) Wellington http://www.internetnz.net.nz - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

10 14

Re: [members-announce] RFD - proposal to create '.bank.nz'
by Lin Nah 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

I am glad others have followed up to this. I actually almost replied and deleted what I wrote What do they think has changed this time? Do they think putting in a request over and over again that people will eventually vote for it? Or will they now try to have a concerted effort where people (such as bank employees) will be encouraged to vote for it? This is a waste of time. I am surprised they didn't decide to go for the .bank TLD after failing on this .nz 2LD. I would like to know if the anyone within the present ISOCNZ council supports this proposal. If yes, why. If no, why AND if there's a unanimous no, why is our time wasted by this RFD? lin - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

11 16

Wanted: Cisco AS5200
by J S Russell 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

Now, don't laugh, I but I'm trying to locate a Cisco AS5200 chassis, functional, with no modems/dsps/other modules installed. (Though, if it comes with any line cards, they'll be gratefully put on a shelf and pointed at from time to time) This is for a personal project, not an Iconz project, so if anyone has one (and I know someone must) spare, that they might want to exchange for money or beer or curry or similarly priced spare technojunk, please contact me. JSR -- John S Russell | Big Geek | Fun will now commence. "The enemy of my enemy is still my enemy." - Drago Museveni C.Y. 8427 - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Auckland Thursday Night Curry.
by Simon Lyall 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

Some people here might be interested in this. Auckland Thursday Night Curry will next be held this Thursday the 29th. Forwarded details are below and current planning is to meet every 2 weeks. There is a (low volume) mailing list, to subcribe send email to majordomo(a)paradise.gen.nz with: subscribe curry in the body of the message. ----forwarded email---- The place we are trying this time is Raviz Indian Cuisine 15 Mt Eden Rd, Mt Eden. It is opposite Galbraiths 7:30pm start as usual a. Parking There's a pay and display park at the corner of Mt Eden and Symonds St, next to Galbraiths. The pay bit ends at 8pm. So you can put in a few coins for the last half hour (or take a gamble). Hopefully there'll be parks there. Otherwise try the parks along the streets, side street etc. b. Kingfisher They have kingfisher but not strong don't think we mind. c. menu Apart from the usual stuff (korma, vindaloo, tika, navabi etc), there's a few ne ones (new for me anyway) like Mango Chicken, Tikka Sawadee, and Tikka Banaras. I'll leave the other new ones for you to discover when you show up Can you please email Lin Nah <lin(a)darkmere.gen.nz> if you can definately make it. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

6 5

Re: [members-announce] RFD - proposal to create '.bank.nz'
by David Farrar 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

NOTE: This may be getting off topic for nznog - happy to leave nznog off any future replies if requested and keep this debate on INZ lists only. Bart wrote: > At 20:11 26/08/02 GMT, David Farrar wrote: > >Yep that would be the way to do it. I suspect in reality though this would > >effectively kill co.nz etc as the vast majority of registrants would want > to go > >from say telecom.co.nz to telecom.nz. > > Considering how small New Zealand is, it would have made sense to stick to > ..nz; > In the Netherlands they work happely with .nl and that country has a > population 15 million. > > If you would open it up now a lot of new income would be generated > ofcourse, as all major domain holders would have to use it, but also could > not afford to close down the .co.nz version either :) Let the money flow! > Actually, I would like to see it; First one in use would be bart.nz Opening up the 2LD would indeed be very profitable for INZ and Registrars as registrations would probably come close to doubling (hopefully INZ would lower the registry fee if this was the case). A lot of that money could be tied up in lawsuits if for example the owner of coke.co.nz missed out by a millisecond (assume first in first served with a known start date/time) at registering coke.nz they would get very upset with someone. You can mitigate this by allowing preferential rights to holders of name.co.nz, name.org.nz to register name.nz but I believe there are seveal thousand clashes where different registrants have different 2LD variations of a 3LD name. Example is national.org.nz is National Party and national.co.nz is the BNZ so no easy way to decide who gets first dibs to national.nz. None of these issues are unsolvable but one has to tread damn carefully to avoid death by 100 lawsuits. DPF - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: RFD - proposal to create '.bank.nz'
by Juha Saarinen 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Ben Martel wrote: > The most obvious reason was to follow the .uk model. Remember the Queen and > all that! Yes, yes, I *know* that already. But, cf. "co.uk" with "co.nz". Isn't the latter just a tiny bit anarcho-syndicalist and anti-capitalist? I'm reminded of Jello Biafra's bid for the San Francisco mayoralty -- one of his policies were to make businessmen wear clown suits during working hours. -- Juha Saarinen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: [members-announce] RFD - proposal to create '.bank.nz'
by Zanetti David 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

Apologies in advance for poor formatting and/or other Outlook-isms. From: Ewen McNeill [mailto:ewen(a)naos.co.nz] > In message <a0511173fb98fff084e9f(a)[10.0.1.3]>, Andy Gardner writes: > >How about this: > > > >Once the SRS is running and has passed tests (tests conceived by someone > >other than a baboon), .nz's SLD is opened up to allcomers? > > Each time someone proposes a SLD, someone (often several people) raise > the idea of a "free for all" in the SLD space. > > What no one has explained to me is: what is so much better > about nationalbank.nz than national.bank.nz or for that matter > matrix-the-movie.com than matrix.movie (to pick an example I find > particularly grating). [clip a fresh dose of sanity] Hear hear! Finally a sane point of view. > I should, however, note that (a) I think it should be a lot easier to > get more SLDs (I do think they should be moderated, but I also think a > 3-6 month proposal phase is _way_ too long; 3-6 _weeks_ would be > better), and (b) I don't have a major problem with any of the > suggestions I've seen on either nznog or isocnz-members, providing it's > intended there be a moderately logical hierachy underneath it. I'd support this, it is too long a process. I don't want to see it totally open slather, but since the whole vote thing can be easily rigged, it's of little value. Council should ask around, and then decide, and not a lot else should need to be done. -- David Zanetti <david.zanetti(a)nzpost.co.nz> Security Engineer, New Zealand Post Desk: +64-4-496-4005 Mobile: +64-25-832-572 "Hope.. is a dangerous thing" This email with any attachments is confidential and may be subject to legal privilege. If it is not intended for you please reply immediately, destroy it and do not copy, disclose or use it in any way. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re: [members-announce] RFD - proposal to create '.bank.nz'
by Ewen McNeill 26 Aug '02

26 Aug '02

NOTE: it's rather odd to have this discussion being crossposted to two member-posting-only mailing lists. Perhaps it would be better at, eg, public-consult(a)internetnz.net.nz which was mentioned in the original announcement that .bank.nz was being raised again. In message <a0511173fb98fff084e9f(a)[10.0.1.3]>, Andy Gardner writes: >How about this: > >Once the SRS is running and has passed tests (tests conceived by someone >other than a baboon), .nz's SLD is opened up to allcomers? Each time someone proposes a SLD, someone (often several people) raise the idea of a "free for all" in the SLD space. What no one has explained to me is: what is so much better about nationalbank.nz than national.bank.nz or for that matter matrix-the-movie.com than matrix.movie (to pick an example I find particularly grating). You don't get rid of the name space problem by getting rid of name spaces; you just move it around. And you move it around so that you end up with more ad-hoc variations than you would have, if you'd had a SLD. Not to mention that there are technical advantages from multiple SLDs, due to the way the DNS was designed (it was designed to be a deep hierachy). I should, however, note that (a) I think it should be a lot easier to get more SLDs (I do think they should be moderated, but I also think a 3-6 month proposal phase is _way_ too long; 3-6 _weeks_ would be better), and (b) I don't have a major problem with any of the suggestions I've seen on either nznog or isocnz-members, providing it's intended there be a moderately logical hierachy underneath it. Ewen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Next generation of SPAM
by Philip D'Ath 20 Aug '02

20 Aug '02

Take a look at: http://www.directadvertiser.com/ It may become the next generation of SPAM. What these people appear to be doing is using Windows Messenger (note, not the same as MSN messenger) [aka, this method uses "net send ..."] to send advertising to people's desktop. The recipient of such a message gets a dialog pop up on their screen. Nothing amazing in the method - but they have wrapped it up in a simple interface so that anyone can do it. I think this is going to mainly affect dial up users with no firewall, as it shouldn't work through PAT connections [aka JetStream/Start] or firewalls. Philip D'Ath, BCMS, MCP, CCNA, CCDA. http://www.ifm.net.nz/ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

9 17

Re: Next generation of SPAM
by Juha Saarinen 20 Aug '02

20 Aug '02

On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Adrian Smith wrote: > It appears to be using UDP on port 135, > > which according to www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers is for > > epmap 135/tcp DCE endpoint resolution > epmap 135/udp DCE endpoint resolution If I read it right (too lazy to do a tcpdump), it depends on which version of Windows, and whether or not you've killed off NetBIOS over TCP/IP in favour "direct hosted SMB" http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;EN-US;Q204279& -- Juha Saarinen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re: Next generation of SPAM
by Adrian Smith 20 Aug '02

20 Aug '02

It appears to be using UDP on port 135, which according to www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers is for epmap 135/tcp DCE endpoint resolution epmap 135/udp DCE endpoint resolution Adrian Smith >>>> "Juha Saarinen" <juha(a)saarinen.org> 21/08/2002 11:53:38 >>> >Gordon Smith wrote: >> Looks like a copy of an open source tool that was around some time >> ago. Also has bogus domain registration details, and the address on >> the site is in spammer paradise (Florida). >> >> I believe that the MS NET SEND command relies on NetBIOS over TCP, so >> having something like this at the borders should make it a non-issue: >> >> access-list 101 deny tcp any any eq 137 >> access-list 101 deny tcp any any eq 138 >> access-list 101 deny tcp any any eq 139 >You might have to add TCP and UDP 445 to that list, for Win2K/XP. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

peer (fwd)
by Matt Camp 18 Aug '02

18 Aug '02

Tim assures me he's fixed it this time..... As before, please apply this to any domestic peering session with either AS4768 or AS7714.

2 1

Noshade size
by nznog 18 Aug '02

18 Aug '02

------------------ Virus Warning Message ------------------ word is removed from here because it contains a virus. ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ Virus Warning Message ------------------ Found virus WORM_KLEZ.H in file word The uncleanable file is deleted. For more information regarding Xtra's anti-virus email filter please visit http://xtra.co.nz/anti-virus Please do not reply to this mailbox, as it is not managed. Any enquiries regarding anti-virus should be directed to anti-virus(a)xtra.co.nz -------------------------------------------------------------

1 0