- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

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