- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

Re: Frame-Relay Packet Loss
by Sahil Gupta - Net4U Limited 01 Apr '02

01 Apr '02

Funnily enough when we ping a machine of his, we seem to be jumping up and down in the ping rates. At times as low as 4ms and as high as 55ms over a direct frame.. What could it be? RAM? On Mon, 1 Apr 2002, Craig Spiers wrote: > If he pings www.net4u.co.nz and gets no packet loss, his circuit is fine.. > > If he pings www.winz.co.nz and gets packet losss the problem is between you > and winz.co.nz > > > Quoting Sahil Gupta - Net4U Limited <sahil(a)sahil.net.nz>: > > > As below with "###" > > > > On Sun, 31 Mar 2002, Malcolm Lockyer wrote: > > > > > > > > Let me just jump in here, since I was on site.. > > > > > > On Sun, 31 Mar 2002, Craig Whitmore wrote: > > > > > > > A few things which may help (not in any order) > > > > > > > > 1) Look at Stats of Frame-Relay Connection (Any Errors??) (Geting Telecom > > to > > > > do BIR TEST) > > > > > > Don't know - forgot the router's ip address, so I can't telnet in and > > > check - sahil will though. (just do a show frame-relay pvc right?) > > > > > > > 2) Are they getting what they are paying for? Are they getting CIR > > before > > > > before any errors occur? Remember the 384K is not promised, only 64K is > > > > promised, any extra bandwidth depends on ALOT of things. > > > > > > Don't know - originally it was being traffic shapped at 384K - which I > > > thought could give the same behavior (ie - the cisco over subscribes the > > > bandwidth). After removing the traffic shaping - the pings were a little > > > lower. > > > > ### I think that the guy needs to up his PVC, I feel he is pushing through > > more than the CIR of the circuit and the circuit seems to be falling close > > to the CIR most of the times. > > > > > > > > > 3) Define "Packet loss"? slow downloads? > > > > > > Well - we've only heard from the asian guy (no offence, but kinda a > > little > > > bad at english) that they get packet losses up to 45%, and when they get > > > packet loss the whole internet is "slow", and people get the "cannot find > > > server errors". > > > > ### He gets packet losses the moment they begin to download, he > > unfortunately pings "www.winz.co.nz" and "www.net4u.co.nz". While he > > pings www.net4u.co.nz he doesn't get any packet loss even while > > downloading, only thing when he jumps out of our network and onto the WWW > > he begins facing packet loss i.e. while pinging www.winz.co.nz > > > > > > > > > 4) Check Settings on Routers on either end (Are both ends different > > hardware > > > > (Any compatibility issues between hardware))? > > > > > > Nope - there is a cisco 2501 and a 2503. > > > > > > > 5) Check Telecom has Circuit defined right.. > > > Dunno - we should ask though. > > > > ###I think Telecom have set it right. Only thing using MRTG I have seen > > them pull upto 440k. Which is why I decided to traffic-shape their link > > as it was affecting other users. > > > > > > > > > 6) Are routers running at high CPU? For example 2500's can't handle > > much > > > > bandwidth thru them without going Kaput and slowing things down > > > > > > Umm.. both the routers were running at about 45ish% cpu usage. However, > > > there was very little ram on the 2503 (4mb) - and it is handling about a > > > meg of shaped traffic now - could that be it? > > > > ###Today, I went and swapped the 2 DRAM Chips around (BTW, Malcolm that > > bent case isn't shutting.. you may need to come around) it seems better, > > but not the BEST. I have also ordered in some 16MB Parity Kingston RAM, > > I'll give that a go. > > > > > > > > > 7) Check External Devices (ethernet convertor on 2500/Serial > > > > Cables/Ehternet) > > > > > > The AUI trancivers seem fine. > > > > > > > 8) On Frame Relay connections, you have not "over subscribed" the Access > > (ie > > > > trying to total of 2M CIR's over a 1M Circuit)? > > > > > > Well - its possible with the traffic shaping rules we were using (ie - > > > shaped to the PIR - when it is running a 25% CIR) > > > > ###Nope, definately NOT. Our end has 3 PVC's off our 1Meg Access and > > they sum up to 1024k > > > > > > > > > 9) MTU set right on both ends? > > > > > > Dunno - Sahil - check > > > > > ### They both say "0 01" > > > > > > Thats just some info about what happenes - any more ideas? > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Craig Whitmore > > > > Orcon Internet > > > > http://www.orcon.net.nz > > > > > > > > > > > --snip-- > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > Malcolm Lockyer > > > > > > -- > > > owner/founder/managing director > > > > > > -= Nuron Net =- > > > You're on the net! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > > where the body of your message reads: > > unsubscribe nznog > > > > > > - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Re: Frame-Relay Packet Loss
by Sahil Gupta - Net4U Limited 31 Mar '02

31 Mar '02

I think he has a weird feeling that www.winz.co.nz is good old "Work and Income New Zealand" On Sun, 31 Mar 2002, Keith Davidson wrote: > > ### He gets packet losses the moment they begin to download, he > > unfortunately pings "www.winz.co.nz" and "www.net4u.co.nz". While he > > pings www.net4u.co.nz he doesn't get any packet loss even while > > downloading, only thing when he jumps out of our network and onto the WWW > > he begins facing packet loss i.e. while pinging www.winz.co.nz > > Why on earth is he pinging my network? > > Keith Davidson > > > - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

3 4

Frame-Relay Packet Loss
by Sahil Gupta - Net4U Limited 31 Mar '02

31 Mar '02

Hello there, We currently have a Frame-Relay Customer, they seem to be experiencing packet loss (upto 45%) when they begin a download. However it isn't the case on our end. Any pointers? They are running a 64/384k PVC and are an Intenret Cafe. Cheers, Sahil - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

4 4

OT: Old Stuff
by Malcolm Lockyer 29 Mar '02

29 Mar '02

Hello all, Sorry for the off topic post, and comerical nature of this post. But, I'm looking at doing a project about the devaluation of equipment. How routers/switches/hubs etc. etc. which cost $$$'s of dollars, then become almost worthless only a few years latter. So for the project it would be good to have some old gear on hand. So - I was wondering if people had old cisco switches/routers/anything, or any other branded equipment - thats old/broken/not relyable anymore that they wouldn't mind parting with. If you are in the hamilton/Auckland area, I'll come and get gear, or pay for shipping. I'm even happy to give a couple of dollars for stuff that still works okay. Thanks alot! - it'd be very thankful for ANYTHING. (BTW - please message me off list). Best regards, Malcolm Lockyer -- owner/founder/managing director -= Nuron Net =- You're on the net! - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Prefixes, and gonzo...
by James Tyson 29 Mar '02

29 Mar '02

Okay, it's official, I am a gonzo. I admit it freely. This is the classic example of when your brain fried, and working on completely new configs for about 10 routers at once. Anyay, I think all the emails from people saying "Hey, what about...." have finished coming in. Here's the *actual* prefix list for our networks (must rememember the customers edition): ip prefix-list callplus-networks contact noc(a)noc.attica.net.nz ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.14.252.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.49.62.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.49.82.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.49.250.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.50.60.0/22 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.50.170.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 210.55.111.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 210.55.158.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 210.55.254.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.180.116.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.37.129.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.180.64.0/18 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 192.100.53.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.27.48.0/21 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.27.56.0/22 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.36.204.0/23 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.49.152.0/21 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 202.154.128.0/19 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 203.96.16.0/20 le 24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks permit 203.96.48.0/20 le 24 Please don't ask me to convert it into JunOS speak, my brain is fried. -- Cheers. --- James Tyson Moebius Systems Ltd http://www.moebius.co.nz/ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Anti-spammers...
by Terence Giufre-Sweetser 28 Mar '02

28 Mar '02

Anyone interested in formalizing an affiliation with the various anti-spam lobbies around the globe, and set up branch of CAUCE? or CaUBE.au? http://www.caube.org.au/join.htm --- Terence C. Giufre-Sweetser +---------------------------------+--------------------------+ | TereDonn Telecommunications Ltd | Phone +61-[0]7-32369366 | | 1/128 Bowen St, SPRING HILL | FAX +61-[0]7-32369930 | | PO BOX 1054, SPRING HILL 4004 | Mobile +61-[0]414-663053 | | Queensland Australia | http://www.tdce.com.au | +---------------------------------+--------------------------+ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

New Prefix List
by James Tyson 26 Mar '02

26 Mar '02

Hi Folks. Just letting you all know that we will be doing some major work on the Attica/Callplus network over the easter weekend, and you can all expect to see your APE and WIX peering sessions die at some stage in the early hours of Saturday morning. Also, here is our current prefix-list if your interested: ip prefix-list callplus-networks contact noc(a)noc.attica.net.nz ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 5 permit 202.14.252.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 10 permit 202.49.62.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 15 permit 202.49.82.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 20 permit 202.49.250.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 25 permit 202.50.60.0/22 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 30 permit 202.50.170.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 35 permit 210.55.111.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 40 permit 210.55.158.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 45 permit 210.55.254.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 50 permit 202.180.116.0/24 ip prefix-list callplus-networks seq 55 permit 202.180.64.0/18 Joy! -- Cheers. --- James Tyson Moebius Systems Ltd http://www.moebius.co.nz/ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 1

NZNOG, UniForum and the Conference
by Donald Neal 25 Mar '02

25 Mar '02

The UniForum NZ board met on Saturday, 16th March, and spent most of its time discussing matters related to the upcoming conference. NZNOG has been proceeding on the basis that it is going to be holding a gathering which is to take the form of a stream at that conference, to be held in Auckland in July. NZNOG seems to me to have a strong programme lined up, and there have been many expressions of interest in attending. But given the fact that we've never done this before, it is hard to be precise about how many people we can expect to turn up. At which point things have the potential to get a bit more complex. Two views were expressed at the meeting of the relationship between UniForum NZ and the conference. The majority view held that UniForum holds the conference in part to attract membership. Also, a surplus made on the operation of a conference for a society's members is not taxed, while a surplus made on a conference attended by non-members has a tax status which is not clear. UniForum NZ has in the past included a year's subscription in the non-member registration rate for its conferences, so that in fact only members attended. The minority view - held by me and by one other board member also from outside Wellington - held that UniForum NZ exists primarily in order to provide the conference. Since NZNOG's involvement contributes substantially to the conference, it is therefore a good thing. Attracting UniForum membership is good, but not the purpose of the conference. The board decided that all attendees at the upcoming conference should be members of UniForum NZ. This has the potential to be a problem, but it is not yet clear to me how large a problem. No final decision has yet been made on registration charges for this year's conference, but a figure for ordinary registrants of around $200 per day including morning and afternoon teas and lunch seems likely. Arrangements regarding dinner are still being considered. An "early bird" registration offer of noticeably less than that is planned. At present, UniForum NZ's annual subscription is $85 including GST. To add this figure to the sort of registration charge previously discussed on this list would make a noticeable difference to the amount people are being asked to pay. Among the issues now being considered by UniForum NZ is what sort of organisation it wants to be. If it decides to take something like the minority view of itself, it has the option of cutting its overheads and reducing its annual subscription to something low enough that bundling it in with a conference registration would not be a problem. This will be considered in the next couple of months, but I cannot predict the outcome of that consideration. This discussion came as something of a surprise to me, but it appears that Linux User Group members with whom this has been discussed do not have a problem with this level of registration charge. The first question then becomes how much money NZNOG people are willing to part with to attend. $200 per day is not bad when compared to commercial training of any kind, but is significantly more than the amounts that have been discussed on this list in the past. A rate well below that is to be available to those who register early. I'd like to hear (to me, not the list please) from anyone who'd plan to attend at a cost of around $200 for two days but have a problem paying more than that, and from anyone who'd attend at a cost of around $300 for two days but have a problem paying more than that. And what happens if I hear from lots of people? I'm not sure. For now I simply intend to see how many people get back to me over the next couple of days. -- Donald Neal Special Operations Network Delivery Telecom New Zealand Ltd ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you." ============================================================================== - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Spoofed mail
by Matt Camp 21 Mar '02

21 Mar '02

Is anyone else getting strange spoofed mail from saarinen.org, or mail from there destined to lists with your own address as the spoofed source? Email to Juha isn't getting any sort of response, so I figure he's either been hax0red, or needs a beating with the clue stick. (possibly both?) Either way, Make It Stop. Now. ---------------- Return-Path: <owner-nznet-gargoyle-noise-gargoyle=noise.net.nz(a)noise.net.nz> Delivered-To: gargoyle-noise-gargoyle(a)noise.net.nz Received: (qmail 28603 invoked by uid 30); 20 Mar 2002 22:16:36 -0000 Delivered-To: nznet(a)paradise.gen.nz Date: 20 Mar 2002 22:16:36 -0000 Message-ID: <20020320221636.28602.qmail(a)tombstone.b.org.nz> From: gargoyle(a)tombstone.b.org.nz Cc: recipient list not shown: ; Received: (qmail 28590 invoked from network); 20 Mar 2002 22:16:33 -0000 Received: from saarinen.org (HELO ehlo) (203.79.82.14) by tombstone.paradise.gen.nz with SMTP; 20 Mar 2002 22:16:33 -0000 test Sender: owner-nznet(a)noise.net.nz Precedence: bulk Reply-To: nznet(a)noise.net.nz Return-Path: <testy(a)test.com> Delivered-To: gargoyle-noise-gargoyle(a)noise.net.nz Received: (qmail 11126 invoked from network); 21 Mar 2002 01:50:48 -0000 Received: from saarinen.org (HELO helo) (203.79.82.14) by tombstone.paradise.gen.nz with SMTP; 21 Mar 2002 01:50:48 -0000 test --- Matt Camp - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

3 4

Re: Spoofed mail
by Mark Foster 20 Mar '02

20 Mar '02

Amazing the influence 'script kiddies' have had on the way we diagnose problems, isnt it? :P At 14:40 21/03/02 +1200, Matt Camp wrote: >Ok, problem resolved... no script kiddies in sight, just some mail servers >refusing to do TLS happily, and majordomo adding headers when it should >be. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Matt, could you please call me?
by Juha Saarinen 20 Mar '02

20 Mar '02

Do a whois on my domain for the number. Can't email you... Sorry for the OT post, but I have no other way of contacting Matt. -- Juha Take off every sig! - 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: The SRS and Lame Delegations
by Ewen McNeill 18 Mar '02

18 Mar '02

NOTE: I've been trying to avoid being drawn into this discussion, as I'm working with the registry implementation team at present, but I feel I should comment on this. In message <Pine.LNX.4.44.0203191150120.1813-100000(a)belsay.lionra.net.nz>, Andy Linton writes: >I'd argue that unless the name appears in the DNS it shouldn't appear in >the registry as its appearance of the name in the DNS that gives the >registry any authority it has. I'm generally of this view too. While I'm not totally against "database only" registrations, I tend to prefer that registrars that are "parking" names (for want of a description), do so by putting up DNS entries that point at a "this name is reserved for $foo" type webpage. (This also simplifies the code at the registry.) A lot of people typically check for name availability by looking for NS records, or web pages, or MX records for the zone; and I haven't yet seen a strong reason why this should be defeated. >I'd like to see the registry operate on the principle that the names >registered are listed in both the registry's database and the DNS (plus or >minus the next scheduled update). This implies that the nameservers should >be operational and checked at the time of resistration. However it doesn't imply that it should be the registry that does this checking that the nameservers are operational. The SRS (business framework) relies on the registrars Doing The Right Thing (tm) in various instances, and it seems to me that ensuring the nameservers are working is another thing that the registrars should be doing. Much of the "nameserver isn't ready yet" type concerns could be "solved" by simply requiring registrars to ensure that the nameserver is ready by the next zone build. (Then a registrar that is doing a registration against their own nameservers can simply schedule their nameserver reload to happen shortly before the registry zone build happens. Registrations against external name servers would probably need checking before registration, by the registrar, as they are now.) Some appropriate entity (perhaps the registry, but perhaps more appropriately the DNS manager) should be responsible for "quality checking" delegations, by periodically doing a zone walk and looking for lame delegations. When found the DNS manager could take the issue up with the appropriate registrar (in terms of "being a good registrar"). Registrars may wish to walk their own portion of the delegations periodically as part of being a good registrar/keeping their registrants in line. FWIW, I can't help thinking that this has been discussed a few times before in the past. Ewen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

3 3

RE: The SRS and Lame Delegations
by Zanetti David 18 Mar '02

18 Mar '02

From: Peter Mott [mailto:peter.mott(a)2day.com] > [1] Registrar should be able to register a name without specifying any name > servers Since Peter has raised this, how does everyone else feel about allowing registars to reserve names on behalf of nameholders in this way. Should the name have no entry in the zone, something explanatory like a TXT record, or should we not allow this at all, and that only fully delegated names be allowed? -- David Zanetti <david.zanetti(a)nzpost.co.nz> Security Engineer, New Zealand Post Desk: +64-4-496-4005 Mobile: +64-25-832-572 "Hope.. is a dangerous thing" This email with any attachments is confidential and may be subject to legal privilege. If it is not intended for you please reply immediately, destroy it and do not copy, disclose or use it in any way. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

5 5

The SRS and Lame Delegations
by Zanetti David 17 Mar '02

17 Mar '02

Thorny issue I'm sure everyone has a view on: Should the SRS test given nameservers for a name for authorativeness at submission (ie, check for lame delegations), and if so, should it require all provided nameservers to give authorative answers, or a minimum number (suggest please :) ). If it does perform such checks, how often should it repeat them? Agreement by all is not being sought, just arguments either way. -- David Zanetti <david.zanetti(a)nzpost.co.nz> Security Engineer, New Zealand Post Desk: +64-4-496-4005 Mobile: +64-25-832-572 "Hope.. is a dangerous thing" This email with any attachments is confidential and may be subject to legal privilege. If it is not intended for you please reply immediately, destroy it and do not copy, disclose or use it in any way. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

6 5

Re: The SRS and Lame Delegations
by David Farrar 17 Mar '02

17 Mar '02

> Thorny issue I'm sure everyone has a view on: > > Should the SRS test given nameservers for a name for authorativeness at > submission (ie, check for lame delegations), and if so, should it require > all provided nameservers to give authorative answers, or a minimum number > (suggest please :) ). If it does perform such checks, how often should it > repeat them? > > Agreement by all is not being sought, just arguments either way. Would another issue be whether the registry should do this checking at all, or should it be a policy requirement of registrars to check for this? DPF - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re: Spam on the increase again
by Simon Byrnand 11 Mar '02

11 Mar '02

At 12:50 12/03/02 +1300, Simon Lyall wrote: >On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Simon Byrnand wrote: >> I've been trialing orbz and ordb in the last couple of months (not related >> to orbs) and they've been very good. Naturally I've kept a very close eye >> on it, but I've only had 2 instance where genuine mail wasn't getting >> through that I know of - and in both cases they WERE actually open relays. >> I was easily able to add an exclusion for those two servers until they got >> off their ass and fixed their open relay. (Both did after a couple of >> weeks) Both also have good and fast removal policies so they're not the >> sort of list that once you get on you can never get off...(ala the original >> orbs :) > >I find orbz a bit of a pain, they are very fast to add us when a customer >is open relay and using us as a smart-host. I've now got them notifying >me/noc directly so that as soon as then add us (provisionally I think) we >get notified and can (a) block the customer from our mail servers (b) >notify orbz to retest (c) contact the customer. If you're only a smart host for your customer who is actually the open relay, then at worst you should find yourself on their "outputs" list, but not on the "inputs" list. I only use the inputs list, which is what they recommend for exactly that reason...if others use the outputs list they do so at their own peril. Yeah, it might be a bit of a pain for you, but it has served its purpose - it's alerted you to an open relay within your netblock which more than likely has already passed some spam. (Otherwise nobody would have bothered to submit it to orbz in the first place) Actually I think they should notify the netblock owners by default rather than being "opt in", as it would get a lot more open relays fixed, but they say that would constitute spam ;) >With respect to NZ spammers we had a problem with one going around all the >Cyber Cafes and using computers there to send email, we have put in a >block for those however. I understand the spammer in question (various >e-gold (or something) related scams) was causing problems with other >people as well. Heh. I don't think I've come across that one. Yet... Regards, Simon - 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: Spam on the increase again
by Simon Byrnand 11 Mar '02

11 Mar '02

At 14:00 11/03/02 +1300, David Robb wrote: >On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Simon Byrnand wrote: > >> I don't know if anyone else has noticed the same thing, but spam seems to >> be on a major increase again, that makes last time (a few months ago when I >> started a thread about it then) seem like nothing by comparison. I've also >> read a couple of articles in the online press bemoaning the latest resurgence. > >I've seen a fairly large amount all with a similar pattern - all claiming >to be from [random characters](a)yahoo.com. Yep, I was seeing a lot of that too... Regards, Simon - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Spam on the increase again
by Simon Byrnand 11 Mar '02

11 Mar '02

I don't know if anyone else has noticed the same thing, but spam seems to be on a major increase again, that makes last time (a few months ago when I started a thread about it then) seem like nothing by comparison. I've also read a couple of articles in the online press bemoaning the latest resurgence. I'm curious to know what (if anything) other ISP's are doing to try and counter the flood of spam that seems to be happening lately. Last time around I was mainly finding out about specific spam from customers forwarding it to me, this time around I'm receiving it myself as well, and in fairly large quantities. :-( So much so that I decided to go through and identify the source of my last weeks spam, including all the stuff in my postmaster bounce box for the last week. (Yeah, ok, I probably had too much time on my hands, but it was really frustrating me :) Double bounces are extremely common with spam, because all it takes is a spammer sending to a local address that doesn't exist anymore, (which happens frequently, because they like to target multiple envelope addressees with the same message and never remove anyone off their lists) using a reply to address which is fake. (Which is the case 95% of the time, including the infamous "Reply with the word REMOVE to be removed" messages) Because of that nearly every double bounce is spam, all nicely sorted for me including headers :) I ended up adding over 100 entries to my manual blocklist just in the one session...in a way its just a futile outlet for frustration, but I did find some interesting statistics: * The bulk of the spam for the last week (by message count) was sent by just a few (<20) sources, with one particular case where the same source was spamming the same 30 addresses nearly every hour. (Eeek) Most of the other sources were only one message a piece. (In other words they were probably randomly used relays, rather than the original source, since a number of the messages were identical although the last hop relay was different) * Almost every message has the return address forged, (surprise ;-) usually to a well known domain, like yahoo.com. * A large percentage have ip's that don't resolve. Together with setting the HELO response to the name of the domain they're impersontating, it can be easy to overlook their forgery in the Recieved by lines, eg: Received: from bigpond.com.au ([211.251.218.2]) It's not until you remember that the hostname should be within the parenthesis that you realise its fake.. :) * Some spammers seem to group email addresses together by domain name and send them as one message (presumably to save bandwidth, by letting the destination MTA handle the multiple delivery) but in doing so they often also list all the email addresses in the CC: field which looks VERY bad to any customer receiving that mail. (They think a group of email addresses have been "sold" to spammers, when its really just "normally" harvested addresses being sorted by domain) * Most ip addresses seemed to be either schools or businesses in Korea, or ADSL addresses in the US, Australia or the Netherlands. Very few (maybe 5%) of the spam actually came legitimately through the mailserver of the domain it purported to be from. Anyone else have any similar experiences ? Anyone else keeping track on spam or trying to fight it in any way ? While I'm on the subject, what is the accepted contact address these days for reporting spam to (NZ) ISP's ? postmaster@ or abuse@ or ? I forwarded a copy of spam that originated at an NZ ISP to postmaster@ their domain but havn't heard back yet. I realise that the postmaster address can be a bit over-used since thats where most MTA's like to send their delivery notifications etc to.... Regards, Simon Byrnand iGRIN Internet - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

3 2

Phew looks like we were lucky
by Dean Pemberton 09 Mar '02

09 Mar '02

Wow, I just read this really interesting article in Infotech this morning. It was written by this internet expert, and he was saying that a bunch of 'techies' came really close to breaking the New Zealand internet. That it might have impacted my ability to dial up. He also suggests that the government might like to step in and take over. http://www.stuff.co.nz/inl/index/0,1008,1112116a1983,FF.html It must be true if it got printed. Dean (I thought sarcastic irony was better than a venomous attack on this occasion) - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

23 66

Re: Phew looks like we were lucky
by Ewen McNeill 09 Mar '02

09 Mar '02

Apologies for the mostly-off-topic post. In message <20020225230605.GA17795(a)tapu.f00f.org>, Chris Wedgwood writes: >On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 11:57:39AM +1300, Juha Saarinen wrote: > JCM was devised as a method of limiting broadband service uptake > >Until I see proof of this, I'm going to call BULLSHIT. FWIW, I'm inclined to agree (that it's bullshit). The JCM (and similar systems which have been in use in New Zealand for a long time) are attempts to limit demand to a level where the supply can be made at a similar cost to what is being paid. So that increases in bandwidth required to supply the demand can be met out of revenue. >I wish people in New Zealand would stop pretending bandwidth is cheap >and/or cost almost zero and expecting vast amounts of resource for >little cost. It doesn't work that way. Anywhere. >From my point of view bandwidth is very cheap now. Of course this is coming from first connecting to the Internet when we were being charged around $600/MB ($0.60 per kilobyte) for (international) traffic. Now I'm paying, what, about $0.20 per megabyte (less in some instances) for international traffic. That's about 1/3000th of the cost a bit of 10 years ago (about 13 years ago now IIRC). Sure there's lots of things one could do if someone were handing out bandwidth for free. There's lots of things one could do if someone were handing out money for free too. That doesn't meant it's a good idea to get fixated on them, and blame the people not giving things away for free for "holding you back" or whatever. The Paradise.Net charging model (for want of a better term) where plans include some amount of traffic "for free" (ie, in the base cost) may have some of the effects that people are hoping for in their "fixed price, all you can eat" plans, but without the horrendous downside effects of "all you can eat" plans (on everyone else, the provider, etc). This is particularly true where the plan includes more traffic than most people can sensibly use in the period (eg, the Paradise.Net plans that have 10GB of traffic included in them). (A friend of mine with a 10GB traffic plan has been trying _very_ hard to use it all up in a month, without succeeding.) My plan at home (a mere 1GB of traffic included) is plenty fine for me; I've never ever hit the limit (in the 18 months I've had the connection), and only rarely think about not doing something "because of the traffic charges". (About the only thing I actively avoid doing is downloading ISO images of (free) software releases.) If somehow I could get more than 128kbps upstream I'd be really happy. (2Mbps downstream is very nice; but 512kbps downstream was fine. 512kbps upstream would be really nice. Anyone lurking from TSNZ take note: I'll pay real money (up to about 50% more for the connection) for a better upstream on my cable connection. I don't even care if it's not backed by international bandwidth; I want this extra upstream bandwidth for local (NZ-wide) use.) Ewen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

10 17

RE: ihug problems this morning.
by Simon Lyall 07 Mar '02

07 Mar '02

On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Grant Zanetti wrote: > On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, J S Russell wrote: > > They have multiple Leons now. :) > It's our version of redundancy. Actually ihug's version of redundancy is when people lose their jobs and get a few week's pay as compensation. Seriously though the Herald article this morning is "a pack of lies" , it's a usual Foreman beatup which appears to use our MOTD page as the sole source of information. Once again people are advised to stear clear of this guy, he appears to be only interested in writting "National Enquirer" type headlines. -- Simon J. Lyall. | Very Busy | Mail: simon(a)darkmere.gen.nz "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

4 4

RE: ihug problems this morning.
by Stephen Andrew 07 Mar '02

07 Mar '02

> -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Bordignon [mailto:michael.b(a)infometrics.co.nz] > Sent: Thursday, 7 March 2002 13:19 > To: 'Juha Saarinen' > Cc: NZNog > Subject: RE: ihug problems this morning. > > > maybe someone tripped over the phone cord to the paradise dialup.. What? Leon?? You there leon??? -- Andrew. > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Juha Saarinen [mailto:juha(a)saarinen.org] > > Sent: Thursday, 7 March 2002 1:14 PM > > To: Simon Lyall > > Cc: NZNog > > Subject: Re: ihug problems this morning. > > > > > > On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, Simon Lyall wrote: > > > > > People might have noticed that we have been having > > problems this morning. > > > > Someone standing in front of the transponder again? ;-) 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

3 2

Annoying spammers...
by Mark Derricutt 07 Mar '02

07 Mar '02

'lo, dont usually post here (not being a net.admin and all), but recently I'd been getting alot of spam from a "Gordon Hooper" advertising "DHS Clubshop", I've also been receiving spam directly from mail.clubshop.com. Gordon seems to be a kiwi, posting from a kiwi ISP. I mailed abuse@ and got no response, then spoke to someone on the support desk who seemed very keen to put a stop to his spamming, forwarded the messages to him but no response, so am posting here to see if anyone here knows anything about his spamming history, or if someone from his ISP is watching and can "deal" to it. Headers from one of the spam items: Return-path: <gordonnz1(a)hotmail.com> Envelope-to: mark(a)talios.com Delivery-date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 17:01:44 +1300 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] ident=root) by se7en.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16gHlI-0002zv-00 for <mark(a)talios.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2002 17:01:44 +1300 Received: from wibble.net by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.3.3) for mark(a)talios.com (multi-drop); Thu, 28 Feb 2002 17:01:44 +1300 (NZDT) Received: from tyler.snap.net.nz ([202.37.101.20]) by wibble.net (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with ESMTP id PAA12878 for <mark(a)talios.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2002 15:11:48 +1300 X-Authentication-Warning: wibble.net: Host [202.37.101.20] claimed to be tyler.snap.net.nz Received: from p75-tnt1.snap.net.nz ([203.97.29.75] helo=hotmail.com) by tyler.snap.net.nz with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 16gG2t-000555-00 for <mark(a)talios.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2002 15:11:47 +1300 Message-ID: <2862710-22002242821256860(a)hotmail.com> X-EM-Version: 6, 0, 0, 4 X-EM-Registration: #00F06206106618006920 X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: gordonnz1(a)hotmail.com From: "Gordon Hooper" <gordonnz1(a)hotmail.com> To: "Mark Derricutt" <mark(a)talios.com> Subject: Hi Mark another month is ending!!! Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 15:12:56 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by wibble.net id PAA12878 X-UIDL: 85b20affc9efbb0214c79d7ba39a7e8f -- \m/ -- "...if I seem super human I have been misunderstood." (c) Dream Theater mark(a)talios.com - ICQ: 1934853 JID: talios(a)myjabber.net - 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: ihug problems this morning.
by Michael Bordignon 06 Mar '02

06 Mar '02

maybe someone tripped over the phone cord to the paradise dialup.. > -----Original Message----- > From: Juha Saarinen [mailto:juha(a)saarinen.org] > Sent: Thursday, 7 March 2002 1:14 PM > To: Simon Lyall > Cc: NZNog > Subject: Re: ihug problems this morning. > > > On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, Simon Lyall wrote: > > > People might have noticed that we have been having > problems this morning. > > Someone standing in front of the transponder again? ;-) > > -- > Juha - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

ihug problems this morning.
by Simon Lyall 06 Mar '02

06 Mar '02

People might have noticed that we have been having problems this morning. Mostly fixed now except for our APE link. :( -- 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

2 1

Semi OT: Anybody using the EIGRP protocal?
by Malcolm Lockyer 04 Mar '02

04 Mar '02

Hello all.. I was messing 'round on amazon (reading all the book exerpts :P) and in a cisco book I found some stuff about EIGRP routing protocal. What I read about it, it sounded really good, like had all the benifits of OSPF and uses less CPU power, and easier to setup etc. So, I was just curious, is anybody in NZ using EIGRP? Oh, and I'm a stupid newbie, so I'm sorry if the next few questions are kind silly, but, I guess everybody has gotta start somewhere.. :P I've only worked with cisco 2500's, so this may be totally off for the newer routers, but... When configuring the 2503 and 2514 with IOS 12.0, it seems that the only protocals it, "likes" is RIP and IGRP, say if I wanted to use EIGRP is it just a matter of saying somthing like "ip EIGRP" on the interfaces, or do you have to do somthing like upgrade to an IOS with EIGRP included? Also I was wondering, say I had a mid sized network, and I decided that I wanted to use, EIGRP protocal on my network. But, say, I was getting internet delivered over frame relay, and that service provider was using, say RIP. Would that work? Or do you need to do somthing special to the routers to allow somthing like that, data moving between routing protocals?? Thanks Malcolm _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

5 4

Conference papers
by Dean Pemberton 04 Mar '02

04 Mar '02

Remember people - If you want to present a paper at the conference and have not mailed me about it (after the CFP and too the special email address) then you are not down on the list. I know that I could just copy over the original list, but it was really only to gauge interest, and lets face it if you can't handle mailing me again then what hope do I have of getting a paper out of you =) So here we go again, Mail suggestions/abstracts to nznog2002(a)deanpemberton.com Thanks Dean - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Telecom broadband trial in Dunedin(?)
by Juha Saarinen 04 Mar '02

04 Mar '02

Is there any information about that, on the Web? -- Juha Take off every sig! - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

FW: CALL FOR PAPERS for the APT workshop on "Networking Strategie s for Regional Internet Traffic Routing Arrangements" 9 - 11 May, Republi c of Palau
by Frank March 03 Mar '02

03 Mar '02

Marginally OT perhaps but may be of interest to list members nevertheless. Those who remember the international internet charging issue/fiasco (which, by the way is still doing its merry rounds within APEC TEL and ITU Study group 3 but with little prospect of getting anywhere, fortunately) may be interested to know that it all started within the APT. If anyone wants more details please contact me directly and I will pass on the MS word docs attached originally which I have deleted in deference to the AUP for this list. 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 > From: Pornpan [SMTP:pornpan(a)aptsec.org] > Sent: Monday, 25 February 2002 20:48 > To: companies(a)aptsec.org; affiliates(a)aptsec.org; associates(a)aptsec.org; > members(a)aptsec.org > Cc: V.P. SINHA; Joon-Won LEE; Mick MILLINGTON; Chaiyuth SUKSIRI; > aptsg(a)aptsec.org > Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS for the APT workshop on "Networking > Strategies for Regional Internet Traffic Routing Arrangements" 9 - 11 May, > Republic of Palau > > Our ref.: APT/SG/General/2002-13 > > February 25, 2002 > > Subject: > CALL FOR PAPERS > for the APT workshop on "Networking Strategies for Regional Internet > Traffic Routing Arrangements" > 9 - 11 May, Republic of Palau > > > Dear Sir/Madam, > > We refer to our letter of invitation to you for the APT workshop on > "Networking Strategies for Regional Internet Traffic Routing Arrangements" > which will be held from 9 to 11 May 2002 at the Palasia Hotel, Koror, > Republic of Palau. > > We have also sent a "Call for Papers" for the workshop alongwith the > invitation letter. We are again sending the "Call for Papers" for your > consideration. Please find attached the "Call for Paper" and the tentative > program for the workshop. > > The workshop which will be of 2 ½ days duration will bring the Service > Providers, regulators, administrations and other concerned parties of the > Asia-Pacific region to discuss on the suitable architecture for regional > Internet traffic routing arrangements. > > This workshop will have an impact on the future of Internet traffic > routing of the Asia-Pacific region, as it will be discussing the setting > up of an Internet hub in the Asia-Pacific region. Therefore, we highly > encourage participation from experts from your administration/organization > who are skilled in the areas of Internet Networking and Routing. > > Please request the expert to send the presentation title, abstract and > biodata by 15 March 2002 to the APT Secretariat, Bangkok, at > aptsg(a)aptsec.org <mailto:aptsg(a)aptsec.org> or fax +662 573 7479/574 4226 > for our evaluation purposes. > > The presentation should be sent to the above address by 5 April 2002. > > The expert can choose one of the topics below for the presentation with > respect to the architectural alternatives for the Asia-Pacific Internet > traffic routing arrangements: > > * Issues to be considered for a regional Internet traffic routing hub > * Services issues (DNS forwarders, mirror sites, WWW caches) > * QoS/Network Management issues (Latency, QoS, regional Network > Management, etc.) > * Peering issues (inter and intra-region) > * Charging, regulatory issues > > We look forward to hearing from you soon. > > With best regards, > > Yours sincerely, > (Sgnd) > Hugh Railton > Deputy Executive Director > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Asia-Pacific Telecommunity > 12/49 Soi 5 Chaengwattana Road > Bangkok 10210, Thailand > Tel: +66 2 573 0044 > Fax: +66 2 573 7479 > URL: <http://www.aptsec.org/> > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > km/ps > > Attachments: > 1) Call for Paper > 2) Tentative Program 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

The New Zealand Network Operators' Group
by Donald Neal 03 Mar '02

03 Mar '02

The New Zealand Network Operators' Group The New Zealand Network Operators' Group (NZNOG) has no king, president or formal membership. At present it consists of the subscribers to this mailing list, which anyone is free to join. Operators' Contact List See http://www.usenet.net.nz/noc/ for operational contact details for most New Zealand ISP's. These are intended for use by other network operators rather than by most customers. Auckland Peering Exchange See http://www.ape.net.nz/ for details of the Auckland Peering Exchange and those connected there. About This Mailing List This list has around 320 subscribers. February 2002 was the first month I can remember during which that number didn't increase. You may only post to the list from an address subscribed to one of the lists described below. (Non-member postings continue to be bounced, but not as often as spam.) The NZNOG mailing list is provided through a server at The University of Waikato, and is administered by an employee of Telecom NZ Ltd. Neither of these organisations, nor the administrator, is responsible for its content. NZNOG Mailing List Acceptable Use Policy The NZNOG mailing list exists to provide a forum for the exchange of technical information and the discussion of implementation issues that require cooperation among New Zealand network service providers. In order to continue to provide a useful forum for discussion of relevant technical issues, users of the list are asked to respect the following guidelines. 1. Discussion will focus on Internet operational and technical issues. 2. Discussion related to meetings of network service providers is appropriate. 3. Discussion unrelated to these topics is not appropriate. 4. Postings to multiple mailing lists are discouraged. 5. Postings that include foul language, character assassination, and lack of respect for other participants are unacceptable. 6. Blatant product or service marketing is unacceptable. 7. Postings of a political, philosophical or legal nature are discouraged. 8. Postings to the list should be in ASCII or MIME encoded as text/plain. Attachments should not be sent to the list. To present a document, a suitable URL may be referred to. For documents of general interest, the use of proprietary file formats is discouraged. 9. Breaches of list etiquette should be dealt with privately with the offending list user, and should not result in complaints being sent to the list. 10. A person repeatedly breaching list etiquette shall receive warnings from the list administrator. A further breach after the second such warning within thirty days shall result in the offender being unsubscribed from the list. Other action may also be taken to block postings to the list by the offender. Any such unsubscription is to be immediately announced to the list. Mailing List Archives A full archive is available at http://list.waikato.ac.nz/archives/nznog/ Any message sent to the list will be archived and made available on the web automatically. Changes are not made to the archive on request, though the administrator remains happy to assist the Office of the Privacy Commissioner should any complaint be laid with that office. Subscribing to the List To subscribe to the NZNOG list, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz, where the body of the message reads subscribe nznog Digest Mailing List If you don't wish to receive postings as they are sent, you can instead subscribe to the nznog-digest mailiing list, on which all postings are sent out in a single "digest" every couple of days. Post-only Mailing List An address from which you wish to post, but which will not receive messages from the list, may be subscribed to nznog-postonly. You will presumably want to have another address subscribed to the main nznog list. Other Activities Work is now under way towards a conference and social gathering to be held at the Auckland Airport Centra on 11 and 12 July 2002. Speakers, organisational workers and sponsors have stepped forward, but more are being sought. Voice over IP, wireless networking and IPv6 seem to be among the topics in which there's most interest. Donald Neal NZNOG Mailing List Owner/Administrator/Muggins This email message is a public document. I don't speak for Telecom and they don't speak for me. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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: Confidential DRS post implementation review now public
by Robert Gray 02 Mar '02

02 Mar '02

Peter Mott wrote: >Today I received in the post the above 55 page document marked >"commercial in confidence" within an envelope marked >"private and confidential" Sadly the "commercial in confidence" was left in in error. Copies distributed in future will not contain this qualification. The intent (as stated inthe accompanying letter and in the Board commentary) is to make the review available to interested parties in the public interest. -- Robert Gray bob(a)brockhurst.co.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: Semi OT: Anybody using the EIGRP protocal?
by Thomas Salmen 01 Mar '02

01 Mar '02

Enabling eigrp is the same as with most other routing protocols: router eigrp 10 network 10.1.0.0 network 192.168.5.0 network x.x.x.x We don't use EIGRP ourselves, and I don't have a huge amount of experience with it personally (other than lab study). I'm not aware of anyone using it (not that this means anything - as far as I know everyone in the country could be). EIGRP is often referred to as a balanced-hybrid routing protocol, in that it displays properties of both distance vector and link state protocols. Unlike distance-vector (eg RIP), EIGRP does not indiscriminately fire routing updates across the 'net; unlike link-state protocols, EIGRP treats everything as one large area. Because of this, EIGRP can become more troublesome to manage in larger internetworks: care must be taken to design a network which does not destabilise easily. OSPF does a nice job of reducing this complexity by making it intuitive to break a network into individual areas, and (essentially) routing between them; the process with EIGRP is rather more manual. Routing information can be summarised at router interfaces, creating a similarly hierarchical topology. Good initial network design can eliminate many problems from the beginning. PS - like I said, I don't have a lot of experience with EIGRP first-hand - most of what I say here is inferred through study or research. Regarding your last question: if you only have the one connection to the outside world (eg your hypothetical frame), you don't need to run any routing protocol over it. Your router (the 2500) only needs a default router pointing to the appropriate next hop - how the next hop decides how to forward packets you send it is irrelevant, as far as you are concerned. You can be using RIP, your provider could use OSPF. Just as long as they get where they are supposed to. Of course, the situation becomes far more interesting with two upstream pipes... -- Regards, Thomas Salmen Network Manager Radionet Ltd. 72 Paul Matthews Road Albany, Auckland, New Zealand Ph: +64 9 4140 300 -----Original Message----- From: Malcolm Lockyer [mailto:hivemindhivemind(a)hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, 2 March 2002 7:47 p.m. To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Semi OT: Anybody using the EIGRP protocal? Hello all.. I was messing 'round on amazon (reading all the book exerpts :P) and in a cisco book I found some stuff about EIGRP routing protocal. What I read about it, it sounded really good, like had all the benifits of OSPF and uses less CPU power, and easier to setup etc. So, I was just curious, is anybody in NZ using EIGRP? Oh, and I'm a stupid newbie, so I'm sorry if the next few questions are kind silly, but, I guess everybody has gotta start somewhere.. :P I've only worked with cisco 2500's, so this may be totally off for the newer routers, but... When configuring the 2503 and 2514 with IOS 12.0, it seems that the only protocals it, "likes" is RIP and IGRP, say if I wanted to use EIGRP is it just a matter of saying somthing like "ip EIGRP" on the interfaces, or do you have to do somthing like upgrade to an IOS with EIGRP included? Also I was wondering, say I had a mid sized network, and I decided that I wanted to use, EIGRP protocal on my network. But, say, I was getting internet delivered over frame relay, and that service provider was using, say RIP. Would that work? Or do you need to do somthing special to the routers to allow somthing like that, data moving between routing protocals?? Thanks Malcolm _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Porirua Jetstream
by Steve Winter 01 Mar '02

01 Mar '02

Hi, I'm a 'sometimes' end user of Jetstream, who has been 'enjoying' the recent thread... Now I say sometimes because I have been unable to connect for the last approx. 20 hours...my ISP, who shall at this time remain nameless, has recently informed me that this is a Telecom problem within the entire Porirua basin... As the same 'tech' person is the one who assured me that to reboot an external router I had to restart my computer, and also asked me to tell him what results I got from a tracert to their server were, when I had just spent 5 min explaining that I had no internet connection, in all honesty I have little faith in the accuracy of this statement... :-) A web search turns up nothing useful...just wondered if anyone on the list can confirm or deny... Kind regards Steve - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Scheduled: Work on ihug to APE link 3pm Friday.
by Simon Lyall 01 Mar '02

01 Mar '02

Just a note that we will be doing some work on our link to APE at 3pm this afternoon. Hopefully it should only take a minutes but be might see the odd error. We have also been adjusting our wellington setup this afternoon if people notice any changes to our WIX advertising. This should all be stable soon. -- 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

5 5

Re: Telecom mail server problems
by Donald Neal 28 Feb '02

28 Feb '02

>>> "Chris Wedgwood" <cw(a)f00f.org> 02/28/02 10:05 >>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 05:24:02PM +1300, Jean-Francois Pirus wrote: >> FYI: I had to disable ECN on our mail servers to be able to send >> mail to telecom.co.nz. So that's still an ongoing problem. >Their problem, not yours. Unless you think that you should be conservative in what you send (see RFC3168). - Donald Neal -- Donald Neal Special Operations Network Delivery Telecom New Zealand Ltd ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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

Juniper Networks(r) Routers: The Complete Reference
by Dean Pemberton 28 Feb '02

28 Feb '02

I knew keeping quiet about Rogers 10GigE vendor spam was going to pay off eventually. This is not so much vendor spam as a Public Service announcement. =) The first Juniper Networks Reference book has just been released. It was written by some of our best engineers (read as: HEAPS better than me), and it aims to be as the title says "The Complete Reference". One of the Authors is Jeff Doyle. You might remember him from such small books as "Routing TCP/IP Volume 1 and 2". So either keep a lookout at your local bookstore, make an order, or here is the amazon URL. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0072194812/qid=1014934141/sr=8-1/ref… - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

NZNOG 2002: Call for Papers
by Donald Neal 28 Feb '02

28 Feb '02

A gathering of the New Zealand Network Operators' Group is planned for 11 and 12 July 2002, to be part of the UniForum NZ conference being held at the Auckland Airport Centra Hotel (in Kirkbride Rd, Mangere). A number of people and organisations have offered to provide content, but other offers are still welcome. If you'd like to present a paper, a tutorial, a practical demonstration, or indeed something else on a topic likely to interest NZNOG subscribers, we'd like to hear from you. Among subjects in which people have expressed interest are: IPv6 implementation, Multicasting; Quality of Service; Voice over IP and Wireless and community networking, but other suggestions are welcome. Material to be presented may be either leading-edge or more introductory. If you or your company is able to offer a presentation, or if you'd like to add a request for a topic to be discussed, please email nznog2002(a)deanpemberton.com . The sooner we hear from you, the more likely we can do something about it. - Donald Neal -- Donald Neal Special Operations Network Delivery Telecom New Zealand Ltd ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you." ============================================================================== - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Telecom mail server problems
by Jean-Francois Pirus 27 Feb '02

27 Feb '02

FYI: I had to disable ECN on our mail servers to be able to send mail to telecom.co.nz. So that's still an ongoing problem. jfp. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jean-Francois Pirus <jfp(a)clearfield.com> Clearfield Software Ltd Phone (+64-9) 358 2081 4th Floor 8-10 Whitaker Place Fax (+64-9) 358 2083 P O Box 2348 Auckland, New Zealand ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - 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: Outage on APE this evening
by Simon Blake 27 Feb '02

27 Feb '02

On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 02:18:36PM +1300, Peter Mott said: > I take it you have a quick means of restoring the current image if the box > displays sillyness on reload? I've got a goodly number of identical switches in Wellington all running the same code release, so I've no reason to believe the 3524's in the Sky tower will display altitude sickness. I've also discovered that if you delete all the HTML off the flash, you can fit two images on (the old and the new), which does give us a way back if they display Auckland specific silliness. In addition, we'll have a tech on standby - he needs to be on site to install gigabit between the switches (part of the reason for the upgrade is to install an IOS release that supports copper GBICs). So if I do royally putz something up (fairly unlikely, given that I've done about 60 of these upgrades in the last two months), we'll have somebody there to type stuff into the boot loader and reinstantiate the old image. Cheers Si - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Outage on APE this evening
by Simon Blake 27 Feb '02

27 Feb '02

Hi Folks. A quick heads up, there will be an outage of approximately 75 seconds on each of the APE switches tomorrow (Fri Mar 1) morning at 6am (timing is negotiable, if anybody has a good reason to have it earlier or later). This is to upgrade IOS on each box (to the same level as the same switches in Wgtn). Cheers Si - 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: Greater Government Control of Icann sought by Icann)
by Andy Linton 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

You might like a view from a senior IETF figure. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 21:33:53 -0800 From: Randy Bush <randy(a)psg.com> Subject: Re: ICANN reformation from: <http://www.icann.org/general/lynn-reform-proposal-24feb02.htm> [ and the announcement <http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-24feb02.htm> ] "It is now more than three years since the creation of ICANN, and there are some real accomplishments: the introduction of a competitive registrar market, the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy, the creation of seven new global Top Level Domains." <flame> the registrar market is not usefully competitive. the seven new tlds are a failure. the udrp is kind of a success, but it took tanks and guns to keep icann's lawyer from handing it to washington trademark lobbiests and the recording industry. and the new gtlds are failures, many are not even working and neustar had another big layoff last week. the story i get is that the board, after much 'discussion' has let this brilliant idea float. at least the following were arguments o icann is running out of money o icann needs $20m, half, $10m, is to run the root servers o the dnso has been a failure o governments will give icann money imiho, o again, icann is more interested in, and totally focused on, arranging power rather than providing simple stewardship and service. icann is brilliant at rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic. the problem is they have the internet on board. o why does icann have to spend $10m to run the root servers when it never usd to cost anything? they're run voluntarily. heck, i know isps who give free circuits to them! o icann could be run for $1-2m/yr - scale down operations and fancy meetings *completely*, meet at ripe, inet, ... - get back to simple stewardship and management - *earn* the cooperation of cctlds, registries, and they can support a *small* icann, ... o the idea that governments will give icann money is probably flawed. the criminal mob would be more likely to do so, and would likely extract less of a price. o explaining reality to the current icann powers that be is extremely hard. explaining it to governments, who, under this plan, would be given vast power, will be virtually impossible. clueless bureaucrats can actually *break* the internet. o the failure of the dnso is merely the failure of one of icann's sillinesses. it is no loss, it is a demonstration of a fatal misunderstanding of reality. o icann only needs to - coordinate allocation of address space to the RIRs - maintain the root zone file - slowly try to get MsOU with the folk icann actually serves one computer scientist used to do this as a part time job. how much of a mountain can we make of a molehill? o the board should immediately install a president, or whatever the position is called, who actually remembers how to serve the internet simply, with constructive cooperation, and less than $20m/yr. as no one with clue will want to do this job for a long time, it likely needs to be a pro tem appointment. o if the president pro tem is not technical, get a cto or vp tech pro tempore. it will need an understanding of the technology to scale icann back without damaging anything. o there is one good thing for scaling icann down now. the pressure for new gtlds has to be less, seeing the great financial boon the seven new ones have not seen. o another is that the constituencies are tired, years of doing nothing but spending money on fancy hotels and creating massive hot air. years of the icann process may have actually filtered some clue into the players. i suspect that only the combined voices of the isps, ietf, registries, etc. can insert some rationality into this craziness. get icann under control, shrink it back down to something small, and SERVE the internet, stop trying to rule it. </flame> randy -- you are free to redistribute this message - 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: Phew looks like we were lucky
by Richard Naylor 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

At 01:06 p.m. 27/02/2002 +1300, Juha Saarinen wrote: >On Wed, 27 Feb 2002, Richard Naylor wrote: > > > However, its not that bad. Remember we are DEREGULATED. That means YOU can > > dig up the road. Just fill in the form, comply with the specs and get out > > your shovel. Hook up 12 people and get an operators licence. your own > > letter from the GG. > >I was told that it's not that simple. You need permits, and you have to >pay the local council a hefty sum for the "ground lease" (or a similar >term). The permits are typically called street opening notices. You follow the local code of practice and you should be sweet. The ground lease idea is something that councils are trying on at the moment, just like building owners are trying to get operators to pay them for the cables being in buildings. So just watch how useful a building (or city) is like without services. AKL people know what it was like without power. >This might be a peculiarity for Auckland city, however. Akl CC doesn't get the program. Which is why AKL is referred to as a "bandwidth desert" - and that gets us back to the beginning of the topic. rich richard.naylor(a)citylink.co.nz - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Lets fix what we don't like! (was: Phew looks like we were lucky)
by Malcolm Lockyer 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

But who isn't owned by telecom these days? I mean, southern cross etc. If your not getting your bandwidth via jetscam (ie. TC) then what is it being delivered over? Unless you wanna get frame to clear, and pay a $K or so every month, which you can only get someplaces anyway. Looking at that, there pretty much isn't any alternitives for a lowly hamiltonian, so, the only thing I can do is use jetscam and pay $.2/meg, or go back to dial-up, and 5K/sec d/l's, which I can't stand *anymore*. Oh for the days of fiber to every house! :D The thing I don't get about this, is, if TC found the money to lay copper all those years ago for phones, and, with ppl payin' somthing like $30/month. I understand that there has got somthing behind it to supply bandwidth, etc. but if you compare laying fiber to homes to telephones 30 odd years ago (which is when lots of the current phone stuff started to go in (I think, I could be wrong). I don't really understand how it could cost soo much to lay glass? I understand that it costs a whole bunch for the southern cross cables, but there are ways around it. Get some crazy contract to get tc to lay fiber everywhere, so do somthing like for example have , a couple of big grunty transparent proxies, on gig ethernet, so, all the stuff it has, comes through at say, 10-100mbit/s, but if not, it tribbles through at say, 1/10gig (which is still okay - but 'cause lots of ppl using it the cost would be spread out), then have local traffic commin' through at 10-100mbit/s anyway 'cause local is almost dirt cheap. Or purhaps, some private company, get together a couple of mill from somewhere, and lay some new fiber strands (just string it behind a boat, with sinkers! :P) across the ocean, charge HEAPS less for bandwidth, so that nobody uses the TC one, so they sell it in a hope to get any money back, then we could take over their multi-billion dollar cable!! :D:P I know that last one is a little silly, but, doable. All I'm saying is we should stop sitting 'round and complaining about how much tc charge for jetscam, and do somthing about it! So, who's with me? Lets change what we don't like, and revolutionise how ppl deliver and charge for fast net!!!!!!!!!!! :D Malcolm >From: Rodger Donaldson <rodgerd(a)diaspora.gen.nz> >Reply-To: rodgerd(a)diaspora.gen.nz >To: Mark Foster <blakjak(a)blakjak.net> >CC: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz >Subject: Re: Phew looks like we were lucky > >On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 12:36:37PM +1300, Mark Foster wrote: > > > > > From my point of view bandwidth is very cheap now. Of course this is > > >coming from first connecting to the Internet when we were being charged > > >around $600/MB ($0.60 per kilobyte) for (international) traffic. Now >I'm > > >paying, what, about $0.20 per megabyte (less in some instances) for > > >international traffic. > > > > My problem with this is that you pay $0.20/meg for *traffic* regardless >of > > its target. > >No, you don't, unless you've chosen Telecom as a provider. You pay one >tenth for domestic traffic, last I looked at my pricing plan. Ewen's >talking about TelstraNameOfTheWeek cable modems. > > > Bandwidth has dropped in cost, but we download more, and faster, >nowadays. > >Oddly enough, you may find some relationship between these facts. > >-- >Rodger Donaldson rodgerd(a)diaspora.gen.nz --snip-- _________________________________________________________________ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Traffic Shaping
by Sahil Gupta - NET4U 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

Hello, Would anyone know how to rate Morpheus and IRC etc as low priority traffic and capped to 128k on a Cisco 2501 with IOS 11.1? Regards, Sahil Gupta NET4U Limited ------------------------------------ NET4U -- www.net4u.co.nz Home of the new - $24.95 128k ADSL Nationwide Internet Service Provider ------------------------------------ - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

9 12

Re: Forum for Discussion
by Andrew Garrett 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

Refer to your .sig. At 03:37 PM 2/27/02 +1300, CamSpanker wrote: >You mean *web* forums? >I wasn't aware that anyone except internet newbies used them.. > >Food for thought. > >Cheers. > >James Tyson. > "Upgrade your grey matter, 'coz one day it may matter." > >- >To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz >where the body of your message reads: >unsubscribe nznog - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Forum for Discussion
by Taylor Wilkins 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

Is there a suitable forum run in NZ to discuss NZ networking or networking in general? For gaming there is http://www.nzgames.com/forums/ , http://forums.gamer.net.nz/ and http://www.gpforums.co.nz/ If there is currently none would anyone wish to set one up? Cheers, Taylor - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Greater Government Control of Icann sought by Icann
by Mike Sutton [ awacs ] 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

BBC report this today: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1841000/1841216.stm Full text of the ICANN CEO proposal can be found at: http://www.icann.org/general/lynn-reform-proposal-24feb02.htm and a diagram of the proposed new structure at: http://www.icannchannel.de/lynn-proposal.pdf Is this linked to the timing of Jim Higgins Opinion... http://www.stuff.co.nz/inl/index/0,1008,1112116a1983,FF.html State Control of Icann State Control of NZ Domain Whose encouraging running this line... Cabinet ? What do you think Michael Sutton http://www.awacs.co.nz - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

FW: Trapped in a glut of surplus bandwidt with no apparent way o ut
by Frank March 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

A further addition to the interesting debate we have been having on Internet 2/broadband. OT perhaps, and relating to the US/Canadian scene, but fascinating. This is taken from the CYBERTELECOM list. <sample quote> Demand will not skyrocket until the LEC controlled copper based local loop is by passed and either fiber or multi-megabit per second wireless reaches the vast majority of homes and businesses. </sample quote> 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 > -----Original Message----- > From: Gordon Cook [SMTP:cook(a)COOKREPORT.COM] > Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2002 11:14 > To: CYBERTELECOM-L(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM > Subject: Trapped in a glut of surplus bandwidt with no apparent way > out > > from pages 31 -33 of may 2002 cook report - published yesterday. > more detail at http://cookreport.com/11.02.shtml > > We find that we are trapped between the jaws of huge ununsed capacity > and content owners protection of intellectual property at any cost. > The politics and economics of our slavish obedience to the "free > market" is constricting the availability of bandwidth by placing > marketing and policy in the hands of those who expect pay-per-use > demand that lives in a walled garden to define and drive the > development of broadband services. > > Only about 5 or 6 percent of the long haul inter city fiber installed > has been lit or will be lit in the foreseeable future. Of the fiber > that is lit by 80 wavelength capable boxes only about 8% of what > these boxes are capable of is in use. Each incremental wavelength > used costs only a few thousand dollars per line card per a couple of > dozen boxes to install. Adding ten gigabits to a backbone is > relatively trivial and compared to the original cost of building and > lighting the incremental cost of doing so is very small. Currently > only about four to eight wavelengths per carrier are lit. > > Consider demand. Just as the demand for dark fiber IRUs has peaked > and fallen off, the demand for wavelengths may now be peaking. Until > the fiber owners start publishing verifiable numbers every quarter on > how many wavelengths they have "sold" via IRU and via lease there is > no credible way to judge changing trends in supply and demand. > > Now we can safely assume that with phone network use having peaked > there will be little in the way of additional demand there. Assuming > that data still doubles every year in North America, you may be able > to sell an aggregate of 20 to 25 new lambdas this year to handle > carrier data growth. But with fifteen American carriers and six > Canadian each with 80 wavelength capable systems you have an easily > provisioned supply of more than 1600 lambdas perhaps only 150 of > which are lit. The problem is that without complete disclosure from > each carrier there is no way of knowing exactly what capacity is > actually in use. > > Nevertheless our experts are all in agreement that used capacity is > only a tiny fraction of what's available. Whether the amount is 4 > percent or 12 percent, under current circumstances, makes little > difference. In short we likely have at least a five or six year > window with current growth before, with the addition of new lambdas, > we fill the capacity of the fibers that have been lit. Sales of dark > fiber IRUs have basically ended leaving long haul growth dependent on > lambdas sales. > > But who will buy? Prices are getting cheap enough for enterprise > networks to consider using lambdas. But right now even the largest > enterprise networks are mostly 155 megabits with a very few 2.5 > gigabit links here and there. Most enterprises don't have the means > of connecting 2.5 gigabits to a campus let along ten. This leaves > other carriers who have a fraction of the capital they once did and > whose need for new capacity has slackened. > > Bill St Arnaud put it this way: "However, even given a rapid growth > in data traffic, I think in the long haul it will be another 3 years > before we see any new fibers lit, another 10 years before new fibers > are blown in existing conduit and another and 15 years before new > conduit is trenched in the ground." The situation seems dire and will > determine the fate of many carriers. Policy makers and financial > markets are being called on to make judgments but neither policy > makers nor financial markets can see the carriers' resources. With > the small resources at our command, The COOK Report certainly cannot > do a definitive census of the carriers. But even if increased > resources could be brought to bear, it is unlikely that carriers > would admit to a highly embarrassing situation. > > We are stuck with a conundrum where until the debt is wiped off > carrier books or until demand skyrockets you have the entire industry > embedded in a continued downward spiral that results in more and more > bankruptcies. Demand will not skyrocket until the LEC controlled > copper based local loop is by passed and either fiber or > multi-megabit per second wireless reaches the vast majority of homes > and businesses. Even then the demand may still be too easily filled > by capacity on hand, until and unless the Canadians can make it > possible to extend a wavelength to every home and business. > > The technology has indeed overwhelmed the global infrastructure and > its installed economic base and rendered it not economically > sustainable. Canada looks to be following a strategy of enabling more > uses for bandwidth while the United States follows a course of > laissez faire in which the market knows best theory is freed to allow > the concentration of media and carriers to consolidate an > infrastructure duopoly where cable and DSL are the only officially > blessed avenues to broadband. The US policy seems likely to be one of > handing the market to huge and powerful old technology companies. The > funny thing is that if Googin is right those companies will fail. > > -- > ======================================================== > The COOK Report on Internet, 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA (609) > 882-2572 (phone & fax) cook(a)cookreport.com Subscription info & > prices at http://cookreport.com/subscriptions.shtml Summary of > content for 10 years at http://cookreport.com/past_issues.shtml > The Future of the Industry - Googin & > Odlyzko on telco viability - April issue available at > http://cookreport.com/11.01.shtml > ======================================================== 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

Re: Phew looks like we were lucky
by Richard Naylor 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

At 07:33 p.m. 26/02/2002 +1300, you wrote: >I'm sure this is a lot different for you as a primarily layer 2 provider, >whereas people like us have to provide all sorts of crazy services, like >MPLS VPN's, AVVID, etc over the circuits we provide to customers we have >to have a lot more intelligence closer to the edge of the network than >Citylink appears to be. >So, whilst I agree that its about architectures, it's also about services. >Some architectures are better than others for different things, but I >guess you knew that. yes - but I didn't want to get into that detail. Remember that in Wn we INSIST that a customer have a router at the edge. Its just that we make them buy it. THats because when we started (with $85K) routers were expensive and we avoided that outlay.. We still insist on routers and in AKL we provide them as a part of the connection. rich richard.naylor(a)citylink.co.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: Traffic Shaping
by Denis Gordon 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

Sahil, If ICQ traffic uses fixed well known IP address and/or sockets then you can cap bandwidth with the "traffic-shape" IOS interface command. I don't know if this is the case or not. For example, here's how we cap SMTP traffic at 128K. First setup an extended access-list defining the IP addresses/sockets you want to cap. ! SMTP mail no access-list 125 access-list 125 permit tcp any any eq smtp access-list 125 permit tcp any eq smtp any The apply it to your interfaces - interface serial0 traffic-shape group 125 128000 interface ethernet0 traffic-shape group 125 128000 This will cap all SMTP at 128K in & out. regards Denis Gordon Network Administrator Information Systems Technical Support Dunedin City Council 50 The Octagon, PO Box 5045, Dunedin, New Zealand Ph: +64-3-474 3566 Fax: +64-3-474 3503 Mobile: 025 845 583 Email: denis(a)dcc.govt.nz WWW: http://www.CityOfDunedin.com/ -----Original Message----- From: Dean Pemberton [mailto:dean(a)flatnet.gen.nz] Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2002 10:24am To: Sahil Gupta - NET4U Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: Traffic Shaping I didn't think a 2501 passed packets any faster than that anyway? Dean (Ok that was low. Really low. But I think this groups needs some humour at the moment, so I'm gonna let it slide) On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 09:02:25PM +0000, Sahil Gupta - NET4U wrote: > Hello, > Would anyone know how to rate Morpheus and IRC etc as low priority traffic > and capped to 128k on a Cisco 2501 with IOS 11.1? > > Regards, > > Sahil Gupta > NET4U Limited > > ------------------------------------ > NET4U -- www.net4u.co.nz > Home of the new - $24.95 128k ADSL > Nationwide Internet Service Provider > ------------------------------------ > > - > To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > where the body of your message reads: > unsubscribe nznog - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1