- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

RE: [nznog] Spam sorkshop live media streams are now live.
by Craig Humphrey 23 Jun '04

23 Jun '04

A good salary and the party line.... > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Mott [mailto:peter.mott(a)2day.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 2:26 PM > To: jonny(a)citylink.co.nz > Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: Re: [nznog] Spam sorkshop live media streams are now live. > > jonny(a)citylink.co.nz wrote: > > > Rich's video streams of the spam workshop are now up and running. > > > > http://www.r2.co.nz/20040624/ > > > > Knock yourself out :) > > Indeed, what is the women from Microsoft on for crying out loud! > > regards > > -- > Peter Mott > Chief Enthusiast > 2DAY INTERNET LIMITED > http://www.2day.com

1 0

NZNOG 2005 in Hamilton - Format
by Donald Neal 23 Jun '04

23 Jun '04

NZNOG People, Last Wednesday I wrote to the list: >Planning is now under way for the next NZ Network Operators' >Group conference. This is to be hosted by the WAND group >(Thanks again, guys!) at The University of Waikato's main >campus in Hamilton in the first week of February 2005. >If you have an opinion on the form this should take, please >speak up now. If not, you're likely to end up with something >bearing a strong resemblance to this year's gathering, with >tutorials on Wednesday and a stream of presentations on >Thursday and Friday. (That's 2-4 February.) My thanks to the one person who provided feedback. Next year's format is likely to bear a close resemblance to this year's, give or take changes dictated by the content being presented. - Donald Neal Donald Neal | Bubble and squeak Technical Specialist | - Boiled mouse. Operations Engineering | [Martin Neal] Integration & Services Division +----------------------- Alcatel NZ Ltd - Telecom's network operations manager ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

whois reverse lookups?
by Dan Clark 23 Jun '04

23 Jun '04

Is it just me or are reverse lookups just not working against IP Space? bash-2.05# whois 203.97.66.1 whois: connect(): Operation timed out Is this all dealt with via APNIC? Cheers Dan

4 5

SNORT IDS Collaborators
by James Spooner 22 Jun '04

22 Jun '04

Hi All We are looking to speak with those of you who have a SNORT deployed on a decent-size production network. In particular we are looking for real-world configurations and the opportunity to analyse the performance of our SNORT based products on a diverse range of networks. Anyone interested can contact me off-list. Best Regards James -- James Spooner, BCMS email: james(a)endace.com VHDL Firmware Development voice: +64 7 834 6721 Endace Technology fax: +64 7 858 5095 Hamilton, New Zealand mobile: +64 2 144 7638

1 0

Domainz Invoice PDFs
by Steve Withers 22 Jun '04

22 Jun '04

Just received a Domainz invoice e-mail with attached PDF file. Like last year, the PDF file is not readable in Acrobat or Ghostview. That took a few days to fix as I recall. I've sent it back and asked them to look into it. Others may see this. Steve

1 0

[OT] registrars
by PhoneNet 22 Jun '04

22 Jun '04

Need pointers to reputable domain registrar able to handle .nz, .au and the usual international (com, ca, uk) ... the one I use is able to all but au and nz Ian Phonenet/Webhostnz

1 0

Changes to announcements to the APE and WIX route servers
by Andy Linton 21 Jun '04

21 Jun '04

When you're announcing to the list that you are making changes to your BGP announcements it would help if people would: 1) State which AS these announcements are coming from. This helps me double check I'm making changes to the right route objects. 2) State which routers the BGP sessions are on. This helps me double check I'm making changes to the right route objects. 3) Give a list of all the prefixes you want announced in CIDR format. I'm happy to see a mention of the changes as well but having the complete list means I can be sure it's right. Posting the Cisco prefix list doesn't really help me that much as tthe route servers don't get configured by me cutting and pasting. Others may have different requirements but this info would really help me. For example, something like: We've added the following block to our announcement to the APE route servers: 222.222.222.0/24 Our AS is 34567 and the complete list we're announcing from 192.203.154.150 is: 222.222.219.0/24 222.222.221.0/24 222.222.222.0/24 ---- You can check what we think your filter lists look like by going to: http://www.ape.net.nz/cgi-bin/ShowRoutes.cgi http://www.wix.net.nz/cgi-bin/ShowRoutes.cgi

2 2

Trademe route announcement to WIX route servers
by Andy Linton 20 Jun '04

20 Jun '04

The guys at Trademe (www.trademe.co.nz) have asked me to point out that they are now announcing their own network numbers via their own AS to the WIX route servers. They've discontinued use of all other numbers. The AS is: 24078 Their router is: 202.7.1.67 The network block is: 202.21.128.0/24 If you peer with the WIX route servers (and if you don't I'd encourage you to do so) and for some reason you're not allowing this network block through your BGP filters, I'd recommend that you do. Trademe move a whole heap of traffic and optimising your path to them would be 'a good thing'. If you're not connected to WIX then your path to them will be via your upstream ISP which in many cases will see your traffic head to Auckland before coming back down to Wellington.

1 0

Reminder: Anti Spam Workshop
by David Farrar 20 Jun '04

20 Jun '04

InternetNZ has had around 55 registrations for the anti spam legislative options workshop next Thursday. If there is anyone else intending to attend, please can you register by the end of Monday (we need to change logistics if we end up with more than 70). There seems to be a good range of people attending with around 25+ from ISPs, Telcos and Network Operators; a dozen from Government Departments and agencies; half a dozen from business and even a couple of lawyers! One can register online at https://secure.internetnz.net.nz/membership/anti-spam040519.html The latest agenda is attached (as rtf) for those interested. DPF -- David Farrar e-mail: david(a)farrar.com blog: http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz msn: dpf666(a)hotmail.com icq: 29964527

2 4

HEADSUP: Upcoming Webcast
by Richard Naylor 19 Jun '04

19 Jun '04

There will be a dual webcast of 5 streams each on Tuesday 22 June. This will be between approximately 2pm and 5pm. The venue will be Parliament's debating chamber for the first reading of the NZ Sign Language Bill. The dual webcast features 2 distinct webcasts. One webcast will be of the MPs debate, the other will be of the Sign Language Interpreters, interpreting the debate. Both webcasts will carry audio of the debate. Traffic volumes are not expected to be high, but ISP Help Desks may receive calls for assistance from hearing impaired clients. There is also significant international interest in the issue. After the event, the material will be available for later viewing. rich

1 0

Woosh\Walker Wireless Prefix List Update
by Beatty Lane-Davis 17 Jun '04

17 Jun '04

Hi Everyone, Woosh Wireless has obtained some more addresses from the generous folks at APNIC that we'll be announcing to all our valued peers at APE, the magic number we'll be advertising is: 202.74.192.0/19 Cheers, b blanedavis(a)woosh.com +64.21.544.716

1 0

SMTP Servers and Reverse DNS Lookup
by Rawiri Blundell 17 Jun '04

17 Jun '04

I brought this to the attention of the applicable people, apparently you caught us at a bad time - we're in a transitional stage. Run a dig now, it should all resolve to TClear I'm told Hope I dont stuff this up.. my very first mailman post ever. Rawiri Blundell ComputerLand Technical Support Analyst http://wellington.nzwireless.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------- Tony Wicks Tue Jun 15 15:01:02 NZST 2004 Here is an example for a company that **should** know better - [root(a)s... <http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog> root]# dig computerland.co.nz mx ; <<>> DiG 9.2.1 <<>> computerland.co.nz mx ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 15150 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;computerland.co.nz. IN MX ;; ANSWER SECTION: computerland.co.nz. 86400 IN MX 5 smtp.computerland.co.nz. computerland.co.nz. 86400 IN MX 10 mta.xtra.co.nz. ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: computerland.co.nz. 86400 IN NS alien.xtra.co.nz. computerland.co.nz. 86400 IN NS terminator.xtra.co.nz. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: smtp.computerland.co.nz. 86400 IN A 203.167.229.7 ;; Query time: 297 msec ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) ;; WHEN: Tue Jun 15 15:00:23 2004 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 143 [root(a)s... <http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog> root]# dig -x 203.167.229.7 ; <<>> DiG 9.2.1 <<>> -x 203.167.229.7 ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 61325 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;7.229.167.203.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: 229.167.203.in-addr.arpa. 1800 IN SOA dns1.clear.net.nz. hostmaster.clear.net.nz. 2004051709 10800 3600 604800 1800 ;; Query time: 30 msec ;; SERVER: 203.98.6.51#53(203.98.6.51) ;; WHEN: Tue Jun 15 15:00:38 2004 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 108 [root(a)s... <http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog> root]#

1 0

Fwd: Asia Pacific Peering Guidebook Reviewer Request
by Joe Abley 16 Jun '04

16 Jun '04

Begin forwarded message: > From: "William B. Norton" <wbn(a)equinix.com> > Date: 16 June 2004 12:49:01 EDT > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Cc: wbn(a)equinix.com > Subject: Asia Pacific Peering Guidebook Reviewer Request > > > Hi all - > > If you have no interest in Internet Peering in Asia, read no further. > Otherwise,... > > Over the last year I have been working with the Peering Coordinator > Community, particularly those that have built into and throughout > Asia, to document what is *different* about peering in Asia as > compared to say the U.S. and Europe. In February of this year I > pulled together a group of Peering Coordinators for the APRICOT > Peering Track. I asked them to share Peering processes that they found > different, interesting, counter intuitive, or unexpected. This white > paper documents the lessons learned and insights gained from Peering > Coordinators experienced with peering in Asia. > > The Asia Pacific Peering Guidebook follows the path set by "The > Evolution of the US Peering Ecosystem" white paper that I presented at > the last NANOG, but focuses on the common dynamics and experiences > that folks shared with me over the last year and at the APRICOT > Peering Track. First, the paper documents what I call the "Foreign > Tier 1 Peering Dynamic" that casts a Tier 1 ISP in one Peering > Ecosystem as a Tier 2 ISP in another. We focus on the motivations, the > reasons why this occurs as ISPs expand globally. > > Next, Peering Coordinators shared five reasons that they expanded > into/within Asia: > 1) Incumbent Tier 1 ISPs to peer their routes outside their home market > 2) Meet US Tier 1 ISP Peering Prerequisites > 3) Customers want them in Asia > 4) Global Marketing Benefits > 5) Sell transit in a more attractive transit market > > using four methods of interconnection: > 1) Extend into foreign country > 2) reciprically peer in each others coountry > 3) Half-Circuit peering > 4) Buy an ISP with Tier 1 peering in the foreign ecosystem > > The Peering Coordinators shared nine lessons, things they wish they > had known before expanding into Asia: > 1) Tier 1 ISPs will not want to peer in their home market > 2) There are several challenges peering in Asia > 2a) Peering Process is different - peering@ does not uniformly work > 2b) Many language zones > 2c) Many time zones - logisitics issues here > 2d) Oceans add cost, latency - transpacific transport prices estimated > in the paper > 2e) local loops still a major expense > 2f) transit prices highly variable across countries in Asia - transit > street prices quoted > 3) Creative peering deals > 4) Watch for Inadvertent Tromboning > 5) Local Presence is required > 6) Separation of Int'l Transit from Domestic Transit in some markets > 7) Content that transcends the language barrier is not allowed to be > hosted in country > 8) No true regional content in Asia > 9) Content Peering works in Asia > 10) Understand the Internet Peering Ecosystem prior to building in > > On this last point, the paper enumerates several data points including > naming the Tier 1's, the emerging broadband players, the peering > inclinations, etc. for Hong Kong, Tokyo, Sydney and Singapore. Some of > the Yahoo!Broadband activities for example in Japan show that some > places in Asia are leap-frogging the US in terms of next-gen access > bandwidth. How would you like 40Mbps DSL access for $50/mo or FTTH for > $100/mo? > > I'm at the point where I'd like to do a dozen or so final paper > walk-throughs, where I email the white paper and walk interested folks > through the paper to solicit comments and suggestions. I've found > that talking people through the paper is this is the most effective > way for me to make sure the paper (and subsequent presentation) flow > well, and also increases the likelihood of me getting some feedback. > > If you have any interest in the topic and can spare about 30 minutes > for a walkthrough over the next few weeks, send me a note and let's > schedule a time I can talk you through the paper. I'm also planning a > group walk through (a concall basically) towards the end of the month. > > As with all the Peering White Papers, this one will be made freely > available to the community when it is finished. > > Bill > > Here are the other Peering White Papers that are available (google for > "William B. Norton" to find them on the web, or email wbn(a)equinix.com > with the white paper title in the subject line and I'll send you the > latest version of the white paper.) > > 1. Interconnection Strategies for ISPs documents two dominant > methods ISPs use to interconnect their networks. Over 200 ISPs helped > create this white paper to identify when Internet Exchange Points make > sense and the Direct Circuit interconnect method makes sense. > Financial Models included in the paper quantify the tradeoffs between > these two methods. All relevant data points are footnoted as to > source. > 2. Internet Service Providers and Peering answers the questions: > "What is Peering and Transit? What are the motivations for Peering? > What is the ISP Peering Coordinators Process for obtaining peering? > What are criteria for IX selection?" > 3. A Business Case for Peering builds upon the previous white > papers but focuses on the questions important to the Chief Financial > Officer: "When does Peering make sense from a financial standpoint? > When do all the costs of Peering get completely offset by the cost > savings?" > 4. The Art of Peering: The Peering Playbook builds on the > previous white papers by asking the Peering Coordinators to share the > "Tricks of the Trade", methods of getting peering where otherwise they > might not be able to get peering. These 20 tactics range from the > straight forward to the obscure, from the clever to the borderline > unethical. Nonetheless, Peering Coordinators might be interested in > field-proven effective ways of obtaining peering in this highly > controversial white paper. > 5. The Peering Simulation Game finishes up my half day Peering > Tutorial by engaging the audience in the role of the Peering > Coordinator. Each ISP in turn rolls the dice, expands their network, > collects revenue for each square of customer traffic, and pays transit > fees to their upstream ISP. They quickly learn that if they peer with > each other, the costs of traffic exchange are much less, but they need > to negotiate how to cover the costs of the interconnect. ISP Peering > coordinators have commented on how close the peering simulation game > is to reality in terms of the dialog that takes place. > 6. Do ATM-based Internet Exchange Points Make Sense Anymore? > Applies the "Business Case for Peering" financial models to ATM and > Ethernet-based IXes using current market prices for transit, > transport, and IX Peering Costs. > 7. The Evolution of the U.S. Peering Ecosystem, introduces and > focuses on several fundamental changes in the Peering Ecosystem > spurred by several events following the telecom collapse of 1999/2000. > 8. The Art of Peering: The IX Playbook follows the same tact as > The Peering Playbook; we first introduce the framework theory of how > and why IXes are valuable from an economic perspective. We then > enumerate about a dozen tactics IXes use to get over the "Start Up > Hump", to build a strong critical mass of participants, and finally, > defense tactics to maintain that population. (To be released at a > future date.) >

1 0

CallPlus prefix list update
by Steve Hawken 16 Jun '04

16 Jun '04

Hi, For networks peering with CallPlus AS 9790 please update your prefix list as below: ip prefix-list callplus-networks description callplus networks contact noc(a)callplus.co.nz ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 5 permit 202.0.151.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 10 permit 202.36.244.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 15 permit 202.37.129.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 20 permit 202.49.34.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 25 permit 202.49.62.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 30 permit 202.50.109.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 35 permit 202.50.170.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 40 permit 202.180.64.0/18 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 45 permit 203.97.152.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 50 permit 203.100.223.208/20 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 55 permit 203.184.0.0/18 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 60 permit 203.215.142.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 65 permit 210.55.111.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 70 permit 210.55.254.0/24 Cheers, Steve Steve Hawken Senior Network Engineer DDI ++ 64 9 919 6038 Mobile ++ 64 21 778 891 Email steveh(a)callplus.co.nz <mailto:steveh(a)callplus.co.nz>

1 0

NZNOG 2005 in Hamilton
by Donald Neal 15 Jun '04

15 Jun '04

Planning is now under way for the next NZ Network Operators' Group conference. This is to be hosted by the WAND group (Thanks again, guys!) at The University of Waikato's main campus in Hamilton in the first week of February 2005. If you have an opinion on the form this should take, please speak up now. If not, you're likely to end up with something bearing a strong resemblance to this year's gathering, with tutorials on Wednesday and a stream of presentations on Thursday and Friday. (That's 2-4 February.) Don't rush to volunteer to present just yet - we should have a proper Call for Presenters out around the end of this month - but now is the time for people who are likely to attend to suggest topics they'd like to know more about, people they'd like to hear from, or changes to the way things have been done in the past. Please post suggestions either to me or to the list as seems appropriate. I'll try to provide a digest of responses by next Friday, 25 June. - Donald Neal Donald Neal | Bubble and squeak Technical Specialist | - Boiled mouse. Operations Engineering | [Martin Neal] Integration & Services Division +----------------------- Alcatel NZ Ltd - Telecom's network operations manager ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Dynamic address space in SORBS causes mail rejection
by Richard Cox 15 Jun '04

15 Jun '04

On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:14:12 +1200 "Craig Box" <craig(a)itpartners.co.nz> wrote: | While we're on the subject of mail rejections, I look after a couple | of sites on a TelstraClear Tempest connections, both with IP addresses | on 203.97.48.0/21. Unfortunately, spam DNS blacklist SORBS list them | as being on Dynamic IP space: | | 203.97.48.x found in Dynamic IP Space (Cable, DSL & Dial Ups) | Address or Block: 203.97.48.0 / 21 | Information: Dynamic IP address, use your ISPs mail server | | ..and as such a number of sites (a number growing by about one a day, | just the ones I get told about) are blocking mail based on the SORBS | listing. The point being that the inbound mail administrators have the right to decide whether to accept connections from hosts in dynamic-IP ranges. | Some months ago I got in touch with TC's faults desk and they | claim to have emailled off to SORBS to have this reclassified. | | Nothing changed, so I got in touch with our local tech contact at TC; | he said he'd fire it off to the ISP guys but I've not heard back from | him either. All true. On Jan 30 The Telstra Abuse Desk wrote to SORBS about the block being labelled as "dynamic" and asked for "a copy of the headers of the spam". SORBS replied, explaining that the DUHL list identified their IP's DHCP status, not that any spam had been sent. Telstra Abuse Desk didn't respond to that reply. On March 11 Mark Seward wrote in again from Telstra, asking for the block status to be changed: SORBS replied, explaining that for security reasons such a request would need to come from the designated APNIC PoC for the IP block (which currently would be netobjs(a)clear.net.nz) However that reply got an auto-response saying that Mark Seward was no longer with Telstra, and mail should now go to Peter Ambrose and/or Sid Jones, so SORBS dutifully forwarded the previous correspondence to those two people, hoping they'd get the appropriate person to write in to authorise the change. But nothing further was heard until April 7 when Jason, as "isp.duty(a)team.telstraclear.co.nz" wrote in asking how to get the block's status changed, and he was sent a similar answer to that which had gone to Mark Seward, Peter Ambrose, and Sid Jones: but still nothing was heard from the designated PoC. | I've asked around about this and the best suggestions are "you're an | ISP customer, you should be smarthosting through an ISP mail server." | Problems with this include the fact that we no longer have any control | over retry/routing/any of the niceties of controlling your own outbound | SMTP; the fact that clear.net.nz mailservers are currently being eaten | by Zafi and mail delivery will probably slow down; and the fact that | we "just plain shouldn't have to." If you're on static IP, then as you say, you shouldn't have to. TelstraClear should have been able to follow the simple instructions to get this changed, normally a very straightforward process! | I'm not sure where to go from here. It's possible that if I ask TC | to set the PTR for each affected customer to smtp.$CLIENT and then | manually request that it's removed from SORBS, it may be done. If an IP is to send mail, that is a good suggestion in its own right. DNS should also have a sensible TTL - at least 12 hours is reasonable. -- Richard Cox

1 0

Akamai outage
by Juha Saarinen 15 Jun '04

15 Jun '04

http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/06/15/HNakamaioutage_1.html Not sure if NZ is affected too, but have noticed that Windows Update is unusually slow. -- Juha

2 1

Dynamic address space in SORBS causes mail rejection
by Craig Box 15 Jun '04

15 Jun '04

Hi everyone. While we're on the subject of mail rejections, I look after a couple of sites on a TelstraClear Tempest connections, both with IP addresses on 203.97.48.0/21. Unfortunately, spam DNS blacklist SORBS (http://www.dnsbl.au.sorbs.net/) list them as being on Dynamic IP space: 203.97.48.x found in Dynamic IP Space (Cable, DSL & Dial Ups) Address or Block: 203.97.48.0 / 21 Information: Dynamic IP address, use your ISPs mail server ...and as such a number of sites (a number growing by about one a day, just the ones I get told about) are blocking mail based on the SORBS listing. Some months ago I got in touch with TC's faults desk and they claim to have emailled off to SORBS to have this reclassified. Nothing changed, so I got in touch with our local tech contact at TC; he said he'd fire it off to the ISP guys but I've not heard back from him either. I've asked around about this and the best suggestions are "you're an ISP customer, you should be smarthosting through an ISP mail server." Problems with this include the fact that we no longer have any control over retry/routing/any of the niceties of controlling your own outbound SMTP; the fact that clear.net.nz mailservers are currently being eaten by Zafi and mail delivery will probably slow down; and the fact that we "just plain shouldn't have to." We have a hosted mail server of our own that we could use as a smarthost, however it will be a significant increase in load on this machine where we have a perfectly good mail server sitting at the clients site. I agree completely about customers not running mail service on dial-up lines, but a Tempest connection with a static IP address is a business service, not a 56k modem with an infected Windows box behind it. I'm not sure where to go from here. It's possible that if I ask TC to set the PTR for each affected customer to smtp.$CLIENT and then manually request that it's removed from SORBS, it may be done. Their FAQ (http://www.dnsbl.au.sorbs.net/DUL-FAQ.html) suggests I'm more likely to be asked to have my ISP ask. I'd like to see TC deal to this, perhaps by putting more information in the WHOIS db about what space is static and what is dynamic, and possibly changing PTR records appropriately. According to the DNSBL faq, the contact listed in the RIR can have it changed - it would be really nice if this problem could go away. If there are any other suggestions that anyone has about how to deal with this problem, please let me know. Regards, Craig Box Phone 07 957 2653 IT Partners Ltd Fax 07 957 2659 PO Box 9361 Mobile 021 475 869 Hamilton, New Zealand _________________________________________________________________ #include <standard-disclaimer.h> _________________________________________________________________

1 0

Map/schematic over NZ Internet connectivity?
by Juha Saarinen 15 Jun '04

15 Jun '04

Has the NZ Internet connectivity been mapped out yet? Maybe I'm not googling right, but I can't find any resource which lists national and international connectivity for New Zealand. -- Juha

6 9

RE: [nznog] TelstraClear Inhternational / National Traffic billing
by Donald Neal 15 Jun '04

15 Jun '04

> On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Joe Abley wrote: > > > On 15 Jun 2004, at 08:22, Drew Broadley wrote: > > > > > The end is nigh. > > > > The doomsaying is all very dramatic, but where's the reasoning? > > > > If it suddenly costs money to talk to networks which are > customers of > > TCL, it surely makes *more* sense to peer with them > directly, not less. Indeed. Peering by US content providers is one of the big changes identified in http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0405/pdf/norton.pdf . Perhaps sadly, one of the possible futures for the US identified by the author in answer to questions about his presentation at the most recent NANOG was the New Zealand model, in which charges aren't made for national traffic. - Donald Neal Donald Neal | Bubble and squeak Technical Specialist | - Boiled mouse. Operations Engineering | [Martin Neal] Integration & Services Division +----------------------- Alcatel NZ Ltd - Telecom's network operations manager ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

TelstraClear Inhternational / National Traffic billing
by neil gardner 15 Jun '04

15 Jun '04

Hi guys - I just spent 5 minutes talking to Telstra in between 45 minutes of working while on hold... The question I asked was: If TelstraClear go ahead with cutting the links to a couple of big national network access points (I was speaking to a non-tech), what will happen to the national / international traffic billing. This person had zero clue but came back ten minutes later and stated she'd been talking to someone that knew exactly what I was talking about. His statement was that "Shortly the International / National traffic distinction will be phased out and there will be only one class of traffic. The cost will be similar to the current International rate. But don't worry since it only matters if you go over your limit" (The lady relayed his comment and that's as close to a direct quote as I can recall) Does this mean that TelstraClear are going to adopt the Telecom Jetstream traffic charging model? Anyone in the know care to correct me if I was given false information by junior Telstra Staff? Or, horribly, was this statement correct? (I specifically wanted to know what would happen to my national / international charging if TelstraClear cut their peering, and it appears they do in fact have a plan to make sure the consumer experiences no confusion over what's National or International traffic) Cheers - Neil G NOTICE: This message contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify Allied Telesyn Research Ltd immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender has the authority to issue and specifically states them to be the views of Allied Telesyn Research.

11 14

Re: [nznog] SMTP Servers and Reverse DNS Lookup
by Juha Saarinen 14 Jun '04

14 Jun '04

neil gardner wrote: > Um, no false positives? doesn't that mean you manually inspect all your > logs of dropped connections? Doesn't, by extension, that mean you might > as well let all the stuff through and check them at the client end? :-) Yes, I do check the logs, which is a lot easier than it may appear. No, it doesn't mean I might as well let the stuff through... -- Juha

1 0

Re: [nznog] SMTP Servers and Reverse DNS Lookup
by neil gardner 14 Jun '04

14 Jun '04

Um, no false positives? doesn't that mean you manually inspect all your logs of dropped connections? Doesn't, by extension, that mean you might as well let all the stuff through and check them at the client end? :-) Cheers - N >>> Juha Saarinen <juha(a)saarinen.org> 15/06/2004 3:30:14 p.m. >>> neil gardner wrote: > http://www.cs.niu.edu/~rickert/cf/bad-ehlo.html > > Decent understandable writeup of the "You should send the right info" > and "Don't drop email if you get the wrong info" arguments... ... and having said all that, I admit to dropping some some messages based on HELOs. Mainly viruses and spamware connections, with no false positives yet. Touch wood. -- Juha NOTICE: This message contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify Allied Telesyn Research Ltd immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender has the authority to issue and specifically states them to be the views of Allied Telesyn Research.

2 1

Re: [nznog] SMTP Servers and Reverse DNS Lookup
by neil gardner 14 Jun '04

14 Jun '04

http://www.cs.niu.edu/~rickert/cf/bad-ehlo.html Decent understandable writeup of the "You should send the right info" and "Don't drop email if you get the wrong info" arguments... Cheers - N. >>> Juha Saarinen <juha(a)saarinen.org> 15/06/2004 2:56:14 p.m. >>> Regan Murphy wrote: > Is this sort of configuration becoming standard for organistions? Some admins think it's BOFH to do stuff like that, in the mistaken belief that it's RFC-compliant. It's a bit like fundamentalists interpreting various religious scriptures, but if they want to drop legitimate email, their choice I say. -- Juha _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog NOTICE: This message contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify Allied Telesyn Research Ltd immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender has the authority to issue and specifically states them to be the views of Allied Telesyn Research.

2 1

SMTP Servers and Reverse DNS Lookup
by Regan Murphy 14 Jun '04

14 Jun '04

I was having problems sending mail to an organisation and eventually worked out that the host name and reverse dns entry did not match and therefore mail transfer was refused: ------- 220 mail.xxxbar.co.nz ESMTP NetIQ MailMarshal (v5.5.5.8) Ready ehlo hellmouth.oaxxxsystems.co.nz 554 No SMTP service here ------- As soon as I corrected my server to use the correct host name to match the reverse (vampire.oaxxxsystems.co.nz) then mail was allowed to go through. I would assume this was a recent change by the receiving organisation as I have not had problems sending them emails before. Is this sort of configuration becoming standard for organistions? I would expect that may create problems for smaller organisations sending email directly from their in-house hosted mail server for which they have no control over reverse-dns entries. -- Regards, Regan

5 5