- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

Re: [nznog] QSI / "industry" DSL problems caused by 3.5mbitupgrades?
by Matt Camp 26 Apr '06

26 Apr '06

Indeed, I've now heard from around 8 or 9 Quicksilver users from all over the country, all of whom are getting SERIOUSLY bad speeds anywhere near peak times. I'm talking getting down around 200-300kbit on average, sometimes down as low as 60kbit. But it's not just the throughput... latency is floating from 70ms up to around 4400ms... floating WILDLY... enough that it makes SSHing over the dsl connection very difficult. But mainly my point was that Quicksilver are trying to tell their users that it's and industry-wide problem affecting all ISPs, and there is nothing that Quicksilver can do to fix it (apart from sending endless screenshots of their bandwidth tester, which they are apparently forwarding to telecom). The fact that people can get good speeds using an xtra username, and crap using a qsi one on the same line indicates that this is NOT the per-exchange congestion problem seen in some areas (Mt Eden, for example) At this point in time I'd just like someone to admit that perhaps they don't have enough bandwidth, and just give us a realistic eta on when that can be resolved. Trying to pass the blame just pisses more people off. > > >> Remember.. your speed is NOT guaranteed, but if you are buying a 3.5M >> connection >> >> and can NEVER get 3.5M.... > > I think you guys are missing the point in his email. > > [snip] > whereas I am currently getting...7.5kB/s, and it's been that way for 3 > days. > [/snip] > > That sounds like a serious problem rather than a "I never get 3.5M" > problem. > > > > _______________________________________________ > NZNOG mailing list > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog >

1 0

Re: [nznog] QSI / "industry" DSL problems caused by 3.5mbitupgrades?
by Simon Allard 26 Apr '06

26 Apr '06

> Remember.. your speed is NOT guaranteed, but if you are buying a 3.5M > connection > > and can NEVER get 3.5M.... I think you guys are missing the point in his email. [snip] whereas I am currently getting...7.5kB/s, and it's been that way for 3 days. [/snip] That sounds like a serious problem rather than a "I never get 3.5M" problem.

2 1

Re: [nznog] QSI / "industry" DSL problems caused by 3.5mbit upgrades?
by Scott Weeks 25 Apr '06

25 Apr '06

----- Original Message Follows ----- From: "Craig Whitmore" <lennon(a)orcon.net.nz> > http://www.nzdsl.co.nz/graphs/) This is about 50000 > recorded tests from Could you let me know what program you used to graph this and how you collected the data? Thanks, scott

1 0

Someone from CallPlus
by Shane Hobson 25 Apr '06

25 Apr '06

Please, would someone from CallPlus be able to contact me off list regarding Hamilton City Council ? Regards Shane Hobson 07 838 6725 021 742 634

1 0

ANZ problems? Phishing redirect attack?
by Paul Adshead 23 Apr '06

23 Apr '06

Is anyone else having issues getting to http://www.anz.co.nz or http://www.anz.com (- see attached for what is served up here)? Especially Telecom-fibre-connected parties? Funnily enough there's no problem when connecting from an Xtra dial-up - work that out... There are no known phishing-redirect attempts or similar in progress for ANZ are there? Cheers, Paul.

3 2

Re: [nznog] Port 25
by Mark GOLDFINCH 23 Apr '06

23 Apr '06

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hi Steve, The reason why paradise.net said it was not possible at the time was because for two reasons: 1) Our MTA at the time did not support OMDR or any similar features to achieve delivery of mail using OMDR or other features to acheive the same means. 2) Later we developed our own Dynamic SMTP MTA which delivers mail to customer's dynamically assigned IP address after verifying that we indeed have the correct customer on the expected RAS port. OMDR requires quite a bit of compliance from the customer point of view. Our own Dialup SMTP solution required very little support from the customer's point of view other than having an SMTP server listening on their dialup connection. I'm thinking that this day in age with DDNS and broadband connections becoming far more relevant that SMTP delivery to dynamic IP addresses is becoming less of an issue. But then perhaps I'm mistaken. - -- Mark Goldfinch Senior Systems Administrator IS: Unix Systems TelstraClear Ltd > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Lang [mailto:steve(a)spl.co.nz] > Sent: Wednesday, 19 April 2006 20:59 > To: Simon > Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: Re: [nznog] Port 25 > > > Dare I suggest something worth talking about amongst the recent > flaming.... but.... > > Some time ago, I was asking about ISP's that provided ODMR > services. RFC > 2645 (http://www.rfc-archive.org/getrfc.php?rfc=2645) Can't recall > where that thread went - someone from paradise saying something about > them not wanting to do it 'cause it would make them insecure or > something... Didn't make sense at the time. > > In any case, this would appear to be to be a good solution. > The RFC has > been around for a long time (1999), and it appears that there may be > more than just a couple of clients/servers. > > But, I still can't find anyone that supports it. Any clues who might? > Anyone from ISP land that want's to create an ODMR service? > Don't need a > static IP, should work with everyone etc. etc. > > Cheers - > > Simon wrote: > > Just a quick email to the list to find out what other service > > providers are doing regarding XTRA blocking port 25 when > your company > > does not provide internet connections, so many of your customers are > > using xtra as a service provider but not for other services wuch as > > mail. > > > > Many of my customers are XTRA customers, but are also vodafone etc > > etc, so an external autheticated mail server is a huge > bonus for them. > > Use secure port? > > > > Regards, > > > > Simon > > > > _______________________________________________ > > NZNOG mailing list > > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog > > > > _______________________________________________ > NZNOG mailing list > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.0.5 (Build 5050) iQEVAwUBREwdjFJxzSk14MzBAQi77wf7BTyKlx1UQra8IlLVzx38PIZtdaEkPWIb ZKfXGNQRsEhoUkTfAm3oZE0gkdmAoa3uBHzWl9ITFBiiS8OAqSmBokNack2lpN1z ZIVFuSHvFDR+S8OGMp9C27QSLz0QFb0972ikIzvVUGPXttkLe9ywlUpqJHIjQbTh RfW1DzpYbC6olVb7wizksT9ZIravDzgDOUmKXXUMfTcKPNXiQvrhT3uXhJX+XIJk l1da+ttyh6JYRTDJTvwAq4rx4ICr1F8RbdcTpnkoSnXC9zlqXxp+ZLhIek8NJVga tFvamDlSG6BD2DJXJ0w1V7FUhPSI5eKc9U4YCcX8CjZDes4Lnz0U4Q== =XQZ1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: [nznog] SCC cable cut in the US
by Ewen McNeill 22 Apr '06

22 Apr '06

In message <444AD782.3090505(a)saarinen.org>, Juha Saarinen writes: >http://cgi.internode.on.net/advisories/item.html?id=3679 >Is this affecting NZ at all? Ihug customers? You realise that event was Friday? Internode is Australian based, in Adelaide IIRC, and their times are about 2.5 hours behind ours. And yes, some transit out of New Zealand was also affected on Friday afternoon, showing unusually high latency to the US. It was resolved by Saturday morning. Ewen

2 1

SCC cable cut in the US
by Juha Saarinen 22 Apr '06

22 Apr '06

http://cgi.internode.on.net/advisories/item.html?id=3679 Is this affecting NZ at all? Ihug customers? -- Juha Saarinen www.geekzone.co.nz/juha www.computerworld.co.nz

1 0

Port 25 blocking and a request for advice, on behalf of NZNOG.
by James Clark 21 Apr '06

21 Apr '06

Kia ora Wietse, [NZNOGgers - Please read this email and the next before you flame me. I won't see the flames until very late tomorrow :) I hope to not be flamed over this. Yes I deserved it earlier, I'll let you have that one.] You're about to be Cc-ed on a tale from me to the NZNOG mailing list. It involves the word Postfix a fair bit, Postfix rocks. Thank's for all the hard work you've put in to your MTA, it's a gem. I won't build an MTA with anything else, it suits me. So, yeah. Thanks. I hope you enjoy the soon to follow tale. Heck, maybe you won't, it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things ;) Xtra is planning to block port outbound 25 outbound, no doubt a few other xSPs will follow suite at around the same time. Big business is what it is. The people that work at are good people. I personally like to support the underdog and I get on my soapbox occasionally. Xtra is New Zealand's largest ISP, a monolithic monopoly that's in bed with Microsoft ( www.xtramsn.co.nz ) and it's got it's hand playing very heavily in Parliment. What Xtra does impacts New Zealands Internet very heavily. This email is a request for your advice, for me personally and I suppose (as is in the subject heading) a request on behalf of NZNOG. I hope it is well recieved. I was wondering if you might perhaps take the time to chime in and let the NZNOG community know that blocking port 25 isn't a _solution_. One of the root motivators for implementing the block is the sheer number of their customers that have computers which run "rooted" Microsoft OSes. My angle is that blocking port 25 will not _solve_ the root cause of the problem. I believe that Xtra are in a good position to put some pressure on Microsoft with regards to rolling out a much better _solution_ , for example: Transparently scanning customer email for virus / blatant-spam related content. Then identifying and contacting those customers, to sort out their issues. Something that could be fairly easily implemented - it would just cost money, probably lots of it. Xtra and Microsoft are in a good position with regards to finance, as we all know. And this could be opted out of (easily), so the clueful can carry on living under the radar (the pleasant side of the radar). The devil is in the detail... I can imagine it'd be a logistical nightmare. However, I know the above is possible, I scripted something in Perl to do just this, when I worked for Wave Internet (a local ISP). The script did the above (example) automatically minus the automated contacting of customers, that was done manually but the script notified the support team of who was an offender. It also just scanned the Postfix's logs, not port 25 outbound for the entire op etc. I wasn't that savvy at the time. It would not just help the problem it would also curb the expense that is passed on to the customer. I've talked to a handful of customers while at Wave on the helpdesk that had footed thousands of dollars in bills due to trojans etc (Porn dialers, mass mailers etc). Those poor souls didn't get much sympathy from any party, just our condolences, it was the Telco that won in the end. I'm sure everyone on the NZNOG list would value your input on this issue, some may disagree with you. I know some have disagreed with me :) Heck, you may even support the blocking of port 25, though I suspect not[1]. Perhaps you won't, it doesn't matter. There's no harm in asking for the advice of someone that's well respected in the MTA building business. I've done a list subscribe request, on your behalf, to make it easier for you if you'd like to make a difference - either for or against my opinion which is: "Blocking port 25 is bad for the Internet (as a whole).". I know my initial post (to NZNOG) wasn't recieved too well. The thread started here: http://list.waikato.ac.nz/pipermail/nznog/2006-April/011325.html My rant here: http://list.waikato.ac.nz/pipermail/nznog/2006-April/011325.html I broke a few of the NZNOG rules and ruffled some feathers. Oh well, them's the breaks when the soapbox comes out :) A reminder. NZNOGgers - Please read the next email before you flame me. I won't see the flames until very late tomorrow :) Wietse, the next email from me will provide even more background. I can imagine that we'd all look forward to hearing your opinion on the matter. Thanks for your time so far. Perhaps we'll hear from you :) If you happened to have already deleted the subscribe request: http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog [1] Sorry, I don't currently have time for _lots_ of list reading etc just a few key announcements and NZNOG, where I typically lurk. I don't *know* your view, I'd typed up to [1] before going "duh, Google...". So I carried on. -- Cheers, James Clark.

5 5

"JPMorgan Chase" phishing....
by Paul Adshead 20 Apr '06

20 Apr '06

Looks like another phishing attempt you may want to block... Cheers, Paul. ---------- *From:* Chase Security Department[SMTP:CONFIRM(a)CHASE.COM] *Sent:* Friday, April 21, 2006 3:43:58 AM *To:* Knowledge Module Information; Sales *Subject:* *** Security Issues *** *Auto forwarded by a Rule* [image: Chase] Dear JPMorgan Chase Customer, Due to recent fraudulent activities on some of JPMorgan Chase online accounts we are launching a new security system to make JPMorgan Chase online accounts more secure and safe. Before we can activate it we will be checking all JPMorgan Chase online accounts to confirm the authenticity of the holder. We will require a confirmation that your account has not been stolen or hacked. Your account has not been suspended or frozen. To confirm your account status please Login<http://85.13.77.2/.secure/chase/myaccounts.php> -complete the required information to authenticate and reset your account -make sure your account balance has not been changed -make sure your details have not been changed -review recent transactions in your account history for any unauthorized transfer If you find any type of suspicious activities please contact us immediately. Please include in your message your account number, your account name and the unauthorized transfer date & time. Please do not reply to this message. For any inquiries, contact Customer Service. JPMorgan Chase Copyright (c) 2006

2 1