- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

RE: [nznog] Slightly OT: Petition to ban someone from the 'net
by Donald Neal 25 Jan '05

25 Jan '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: Antonio Broughton [mailto:anacarda(a)flerwin.net] > Sent: Wednesday, 26 January 2005 10:58 a.m. > To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: Re: [nznog] Slightly OT: Petition to ban someone > from the 'net > > Matthew Poole wrote: > > That's exactly what I thought. Not to mention that you could get 50 > > signatures simply by standing on the corner of Queen St and > Wellesly St at > > lunchtime. > > This person is apparently adamant (aren't they all?) that > such a thing > > exists. To the point that she's out seeking further details. > > > > ahhh there we go then... a female... 'nuff said... :) I think we can leave that thread there. - Donald Neal NZNOG Liat Administrator/Muggins Donald Neal |A prophecy is a guess that comes Technical Specialist |true. If it doesn't come true, it's NGN Operations |a metaphor. - G'Kar, Babylon 5 Integration & Services Division +----------------------------------- Alcatel NZ Ltd - Telecom's network operations manager ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

How to stop spam
by Juha Saarinen 25 Jan '05

25 Jan '05

http://www.circleid.com/article/917_0_1_0_C/ Some interesting discussion there. -- Juha

2 1

HEADS UP - Upcomming Webcasting Activity
by Richard Naylor 24 Jan '05

24 Jan '05

Next week is the 2005 Premiere Yearling Sale and the event will be webcast live. The dates are Monday 31 Jan through to Friday 4 Feb inclusive. 1000Hrs to 1700Hrs There will be test streams running on Sunday 30 Jan at various times (ie when we get it going). The event web site is www.nzb.co.nz, with the streams originating from R2.co.nz - There will be 5 bit rates (streams) so that users get a choice of stream quality, affordability, etc. The webcast will include the Select Yearling Sale (ie cheaper horses), which is the thursday and friday. At this stage, the Festival Yearling Sale (ie even cheaper horses), on Sunday and Monday 6, 7 February, is *NOT* being webcast. These events are not huge in terms of viewer numbers, but with large sums of money involved ISP Help Desks may receive a few calls from "excited" clients, needing to watch in a hurry etc. (About $60M changes hands during the event - must put my hand out....) The event web page at R2 is http://www.r2.co.nz/20050131 details of the streams etc will be available on that page. The Premiere Sale (first 3 days) is also broadcast on Trackside TV, and SkyTV. Thanks you for your assistance; I hope there aren't too many calls for you. Richard

1 0

Philip Hazel public presentation
by Craig Box 24 Jan '05

24 Jan '05

Hi everyone, As Philip Hazel is in town for the NZNOG conference, the Waikato Linux Users Group have arranged for him to present a public meeting the night before his tutorial (1st February). The talk is entitled "Exim and PCRE: How free software hijacked my life" [1]. Philip will present a non-technical talk on the history of the Exim and PCRE software projects, how they got started, where they are now, and where they are currently going. We thank the NZNOG conference for sponsoring Philip to NZ, but attendance at NZNOG isn't required for attending this talk, so I figured some people here might be interested or know people who are (especially if they were going to a different tutorial). The meeting will start at 7:30pm, in the LitB[2] building at Waikato University. All are welcome, although non members are encouraged to make a gold coin donation. Tea/coffee/biscuits/juice will be provided after the meeting. Hamilton is only a short amble from Auckland and is lovely this time of year. For those unfamiliar with the WLUG, especially people involved in Linux support or administration, you might like to check our wiki out at http://www.wlug.org.nz/. Regards, Craig Box Waikato Linux Users Group Secretary [1] For more information on Philip and the meeting, see http://www.wlug.org.nz/MeetingTopics.2005-02-01 [2] For a map, see http://www.wlug.org.nz/LitB

1 0

Virus Filtering by ISPs vs the need to receive security/abuse traffic
by Mark Foster 21 Jan '05

21 Jan '05

This is one that i've come across from time to time and often pondered myself - Obviously virus traffic can fluctuate up and down and become an annoyingly high percentage of an ISPs total mail load. Thus AV filtering which drops these messages is beneficial and can be provided as a benefit to customers, etc... So what happens to role accounts like, heaven forbid, abuse@ ? And for that matter, if the messages are dropped, is there any logged trace of the fact the message was sent in the first place? The reason I ask is that i've seen at least one ISP to whom i've reported viral infections to recently actually reject the report, because of the 'illegal file attatchment' (where the criteria used was the file extension... not even viral code within the attatchment)... So I had to manually copy/paste headers only to get my point across. The argument can be made that headers are all thats required, and that the actual payload isnt needed - but what if theres occaision where you want said payload? (To provide actual evidence of the infection, to identify what variant of the virus is infected, to help build filters ...?) Do ISPs out there regularly exclude their security team or at least build in means for one-off exceptions on an as-required basis? Do ISPs that drop viral (or suspected viral) traffic do anything to report said infection, or do they just drop the virus and pretend it never happened? (Doesn't actually fix the problem, does it...) Appreciate your thoughts. Mark.

4 5

I guess somebody needs a Beer.
by Simon Lyall 20 Jan '05

20 Jan '05

Sounds like a few people out there had a rough few days. I found this linked at the top of the paradise homepage. http://www2.paradise.net.nz/security_update/news.html Security Update Security issue - email and web hosting A small number of Paradise.net customers may have have experienced email delays and web-hosting problems on Thursday January 20th and Friday January 21st. Early Thursday morning some Paradise email was delayed. Our security people detected a security threat and disconnected a server to preserve the integrity of Paradise.net. This server will be reconnected shortly and backlogged email should be delivered this afternoon (Friday January 21). As part of our security precautions we also disconnected hardware which hosts Paradise web pages. We have been working round the clock to ensure the hardware can be reconnected with no risk to Paradise.net or Paradise users. We expect to restore web pages this evening. We know that an external party has attempted to interfere with Paradise.net. This attempt was picked up and immediate steps were taken to avoid any further impact on Paradise.net customers. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience these very necessary steps have caused. Our approach, as always, is to take firm steps to preserve the security of Paradise.net and protect our customers. the team at Paradise.net -- Simon J. Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.

2 1

Mystery compound in beer fights cancer
by Andy Linton 20 Jan '05

20 Jan '05

Seems that research into this topic is warranted at NZNOG. http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6895

6 7

Notification of NZRR Database changes
by NZRR Database Notifications 20 Jan '05

20 Jan '05

Dear Colleague, This is to notify you that some object(s) in NZRR database which you either maintain or are listed as to-be-notified have been added, deleted or changed. These objects are used to configure the various NZIX route servers (http://nzix.net/) so you can expect the relevant servers to be reloaded in the near future. The reloading of the servers is staggered over a period of time so that if you are peering with both servers at an exchange, you can maintain at least one BGP session at all times and consequently a full set of routes. The update causing these changes had the following mail headers: - From: Andy Linton <asjl(a)citylink.co.nz> - Cc: - Subject: - Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:15:27 +1300 (NZDT) - Msg-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0501211313160.7621(a)jennings.citylink.co.nz> NZRR Database Notification Department --- OBJECT BELOW DELETED: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS23959 descr: Route set advertised to WIX by Catalyst-IT - AS23959 members: 202.49.159.0/24^24-29, 202.46.190.0/24^24-29, 202.20.6.0/24^24-29, 203.167.212.32/29, 203.167.247.160/29, 202.7.4.64/29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: andrew(a)catalyst.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20040120 changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20040628 source: NZRR

1 0

RE: [nznog] National BGP routing
by Gordon Smith 19 Jan '05

19 Jan '05

> Why are inconsistent AS-paths bad? Operationally, I mean. (I > hadn't had any operational mishaps in all my years at UUNET > because of inconsistent AS-paths, so I'm wondering if > something else causes an issue now?) > > Technically there is nothing wrong with them. As you > observed, it's simply an organisation multihoming using a > private ASN - hopefully their upstreams are stripping out the > private ASN before they propogate the originated prefixes > further. (Mind you, I find it rare for two ISPs to agree > which private ASN to use for a mutual customer to multihome - > often so much easier to obtain a real one.) > > And yes, people can quite easily use public ASNs. It's simply > a case of an APNIC member obtaining an ASN so their customer > can multihome. And that can't be too hard, right? > > philip > -- > Hi Philip, You're quite right. Technically, you can still be pass traffic to the client's endpoint, although the path selected may not be optimal. What can cause issues is if you then start creating routing policies on your route reflectors based on AS-path, especially if you don't have a direct peer with both of the providers that are carrying that customer's traffic. With multiple peering points, you can end up backhauling the traffic over your own links because the routing decisions passed via your IGP are no longer necessarily optimal e.g. I may wish to pass a 10Mbit stream from a Wellington customer to somewhere else in Wellington, via another provider, but the route reflectors see that destination as having a shorter AS path via Auckland. We don't have a destination AS that a metric can be applied to. We can of course apply different costs to the WAN links (and should have done), but the fine-grained control of traffic isn't achievable because the router can't be given much to go on. Policy routing and tagging is an option, but relies on the destination site, who is not necessarily a customer of ours, informing us of changes in their topology so our rules can be updated. APNIC have always been very good when it comes to getting ASN's; I've always found the justification of additional address space to be an ordeal though :-) In my opinion, it would be far more preferable if APNIC allocated an ASN when a customer was given an independent address assignment. After all, the reason that most want independantly allocated space is to multihome... Cheers, Gordon

3 2

National BGP routing
by Gordon Smith 18 Jan '05

18 Jan '05

I'm sure I can't be the only one that notices the BGP inconsistancies in their route tables.... Seeing the latest NZRR update prompted me to check the BGP tables again... We do not and will not accept route advertisements containing private AS numbers from our peers. The reason we don't is the same reason we don't route RFC1918 space externally... If a customer has their own address space and wants to multi-home, they should also have their own AS. Advertising up private AS numbers that should really remain within the network isn't a solution. Inconsistant AS-paths are bad enough, without creating additional problems... At least we're only seeing 5 class C's being advertised at the APE with inconsistant AS-paths at the moment. Perhaps BGP routing could be a topic for discussion at NZNOG 2005? Cheers, Gordon

3 2