- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

LACNIC ASN allocation
by Rob Thomas 13 Nov '02

13 Nov '02

Hi, NZNOG folks. [ Apologies to those of you who have seen this post in other fora. ] IANA has allocated a range of AS numbers to LACNIC, the new Latin American and Caribbean RIR, http://lacnic.net. This allocation was made as of 12 November 2002. The new LACNIC range is: 27648 - 28671 Allocated by LACNIC (November 2002) This changes the formerly IANA held range as follows: (was) 27648 - 32767 Held by the IANA (now) 28672 - 32767 Held by the IANA You may wish to adjust any filters accordingly. I have updated my bogus ASN monitoring, which can be found here: http://www.cymru.com/BGP/asnbogusrep.html The master list of ASNs can be found here: http://www.iana.org/assignments/as-numbers Thanks, Rob. -- Rob Thomas http://www.cymru.com ASSERT(coffee != empty); - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

FW: Important Informational Message - root.zone change
by David Farrar 07 Nov '02

07 Nov '02

Not sure how this is meant to circulate around but nznog seems a sensible list to pass this onto. DPF > ------ Forwarded Message > From: "John Crain" <crain(a)icann.org> > Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 15:26:17 -0800 > To: <dnsop(a)cafax.se> > Subject: Important Informational Message - root.zone change > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > *****PLEASE NOTE***** > This is an important Informational Message to the internet community: > > November 5, 2002, the IP address for J.root-servers.net will > change in the authoritative NS set for "dot". The change will > be reflected in zone serial # 2002110501. > > The new set of servers authoritative for "dot" will be: > A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 198.41.0.4 > H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 128.63.2.53 > C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 192.33.4.12 > G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 192.112.36.4 > F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 192.5.5.241 > B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 128.9.0.107 > J.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 192.58.128.30 > K.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 193.0.14.129 > L.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 198.32.64.12 > M.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 202.12.27.33 > I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 192.36.148.17 > E.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 192.203.230.10 > D.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. 5w6d16h IN A 128.8.10.90 > > This WILL require a change to your root hints file. The new > file will be available via anonymous ftp from > rs.internic.net:/domain/named.root as well as > ftp.internic.net:/doamin/named.root starting 11/5/02 1700UTC (12pm > EST/9am PST). > > Both the new and old j.root-servers.net IP space will provide > answers in parallel for the foreseeable future. > > _________________________________________ > > John Crain > Manager of Technical Operations > ICANN/IANA > > crain(a)icann.org > 1AF4 F638 4B2D 3EF2 F9BA 99E4 8D85 69A7 > > _________________________________________ > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: PGP Personal Security 7.0.3 > > iQA/AwUBPcb++9Gxp5XUiliSEQI5wwCfXE2Dhz0XJCGJagRgPDz7y2A85ekAoIPb > 0ufIR65iR8KVhqKCFbeUoxsc > =GVDN > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > #---------------------------------------------------------------------- > # To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request(a)cafax.se>. > > ------ End of Forwarded Message > > - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

3 2

[OT] RFV - bank.nz
by Lin Nah 07 Nov '02

07 Nov '02

Hi All The banks have been trying to get this for ages despite being told it isn't needed. This is the 3rd time they are trying and I assume they want to try and try and try again for 1000 times till they get it. That is IMHO not the way to do things. I strongly urge everyone to vote agaist the formation of bank.nz regards Lin ps If you would like curry and beer this thursday night, see if there's anything happening in your town at thursdaynightcurry.com If not start up one for your town. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2002 08:28:47 +1300 From: David Farrar <secretary(a)internetnz.net.nz> Reply-To: public-discuss(a)internetnz.net.nz To: public-announce(a)internetnz.net.nz Subject: [public-announce] RFV - bank.nz RFV - Request For Votes - bank.nz InternetNZ (www.internetnz.net.nz) is conducting a vote to gauge whether there is support for the creation of a new second level domain in the *.nz namespace - namely bank.nz. The details of the application and the entire process can be found at http://www.internetnz.net.nz/dns/2nd-level-domains/ and it is being considered based on the policy adopted in May 1997 for considering new second level domains. The application from New Zealand Bankers' Association and the InternetNZ policy can be found at this link. Voting for this application will last 14 days from the date of the start. The vote will start November 3 2002 at 23:59 and closes November 17, 2002 at 23:59. The application must receive at least 200 votes and at least 70% support for it to enter the next phase which is a formal submission process. This vote will not determine if .bank.nz 2LD is implemented, only to see if it has wide enough support for it to continue in the approval process. Voting is available via a website or email and details of voting can be found at http://www.internetnz.net.nz/dns/2nd-level-domains/2ld021103-voting_details… Please note to be able to vote you have to have an valid email address and a NZ located postal address. Any missing information on the ballot will result in the ballot being ruled invalid. Please check to make sure all the required information is included on your ballot. Voting opens online at http://vote.internetnz.net.nz at 2359 Nov 3. An e-mail ballot can be cast by filling in the form below and sending it to vote-bank(a)internetnz.net.nz (reply should work but check). Delete two of the three voting options plus all text before and after the ballot. --BEGININNG OF BALLOT-- Name : E-mail address : NZ postal address : I VOTE FOR THE CREATION OF .BANK.NZ I VOTE AGAINST THE CREATION OF.BANK.NZ I ABSTAIN --END OF BALLOT-- Any inquiries should be sent to the Voting Officer at vote-help(a)internetnz.net.nz -- David Farrar, Secretary, InternetNZ secretary(a)internetnz.net.nz or david(a)farrar.com _______________________________________________ public-announce mailing list public-announce(a)internetnz.net.nz http://listserver.internetnz.net.nz/mailman/listinfo/public-announce - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

4 3

RE: Tranzpeer prefix list update
by Maurice Wilkinson 03 Nov '02

03 Nov '02

Matthew These prefixs were already present with GGI and Xtra ip prefix-list tranzpeer-networks seq 180 permit 203.215.142.0/24 ip prefix-list tranzpeer-networks seq 185 permit 203.215.143.0/24 Maurice -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Poole [mailto:matthew.poole(a)attica.co.nz] Sent: Mon 4/11/2002 2:42 p.m. To: NZNOG Cc: Subject: Tranzpeer prefix list update ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ N��r��y��|��צj)m�f��h��b��F��'�^��ay�ʇ��z��i�.�˛��m��

1 0

RE: [OT] RFV - bank.nz
by Donald Neal 03 Nov '02

03 Nov '02

> -----Original Message----- > From: Lin Nah [mailto:lin(a)darkmere.gen.nz] > Sent: Monday, 4 November 2002 15:02 > To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: [OT] RFV - bank.nz > > > Hi All > The banks have been trying to get this for ages despite being told > it isn't needed. This is the 3rd time they are trying and I assume > they want to try and try and try again for 1000 times till > they get it. > > That is IMHO not the way to do things. I strongly urge everyone to > vote agaist the formation of bank.nz > > regards > Lin No, this is indeed off topic for this list. - Donald Neal NZNOG List Administrator/Muggins ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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

Tranzpeer prefix list update
by Matthew Poole 03 Nov '02

03 Nov '02

To all those who peer with us, please add the following two networks: 203.215.142.0/24 203.215.143.0/24 Full list attached. Thanks -- Matthew Poole Network Engineer CallPlus, AKL, NZ DDI +64 9 919 6036 Fax +64 9 919 6037 Cell +64 21 224 6927

1 0

Filtering of WIX prefixes
by Sam Sargeant 31 Oct '02

31 Oct '02

I've run up against a frustrating problem and some advice would be appreciated. We have a /29 via AT&T here in Wellington. We advertise this /29 to the WIX route servers. Via WIX, we receive a prefix from a national ISP[1]. Any attempts to send traffic to this ISP fall silently into the bit-bucket. >From what I understand, the ISP does not accept any prefix from WIX that is larger than a /24. Given our traffic is being sent directly to their WIX router (layer-2 headers confirm this), I believe their ingress filtering is dropping this traffic since the return-path doesn't match. If I filter the ISP's prefix, the transit is handled by AT&T and everything works just fine. Effectively, the only way I can talk to them is to go "the long way". Now, I have no major problem with any AS saying "our policy states we only accept prefixes smaller than /24". What frustrates me is that the ISP is seemingly saying : ISP> Hello Wellington! If you have any packets for this prefix, send them to me! US > Excellent! Here, have some traffic for one of your hosts. ISP> What? Who are you? I think I'll drop this. [ ... ] ISP> Send me your traffic Wellington! >From what I can tell, there are 30 prefixes advertised on WIX that are >/24, and these amount to ~672 hosts. If I'm correct (and I'll admit I'm making an educated guess here), then all of those hosts are unable to talk to this ISP. So, my options are: 1. Stop playing with pissant /29's on WIX. 2. Get the ISP to change their ways. 3. Filter the ISP's prefixes that I receive from WIX. I think the most likely option is #3. However how am I to know what other networks do the same thing? Shall I troll every single WIX network to check I can talk to them, then build a filter-list based on that? Ugly. Sam. ----- [1] Since I have disagreed with the ISP in question, and they haven't been forthcoming in getting it resolved, I've elected not to name them. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

6 5

Lame reports - thanks!
by Rob Thomas 30 Oct '02

30 Oct '02

Hi, NZNOG folks. [ Apologies to those of you who have seen this post in other fora. ] [ Apologies as well for all of the spam today. :) ] My thanks to the increasing number of you who submit lame delegation logs to me. This helps to increase the reach and usefulness of the Weekly Lame Name Server Report page: http://www.cymru.com/DNS/lame.html You will find a (much better bandwidth) mirror of the site here: http://bgp.lcs.mit.edu/dnsmirror/lame.html If you have logs you can share, anonymously or with full credit, feel free to send them to lamer(a)cymru.com. Be the first in your ASN to fill my lamer file system. :) Thanks! Rob. -- Rob Thomas http://www.cymru.com ASSERT(coffee != empty); - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

IANA IPv4 allocation list format change
by Rob Thomas 30 Oct '02

30 Oct '02

Hi, NZNOG folks. [ Apologies to those of you who have seen this post in other fora. ] For those of you who don't know, the format of the IANA IPv4 allocation list has changed. It now lists each prefix as a distinct /8, instead of hyphenated ranges of prefixes. This change took place on 25 October. If you are parsing this file automagically, you may wish to modify your scripts. My own script claimed that several new allocations had been made. It's fixed now. :) http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space My thanks to the IANA folks for this change! Thanks, Rob. -- Rob Thomas http://www.cymru.com ASSERT(coffee != empty); - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

RE: Any isps support ODMR - RFC2645?
by Steve Lang 23 Oct '02

23 Oct '02

Hiya. Thanx for the detailed reply, what you say makes much more sense. Interesting that Telecom don't send framed-ip, that'd be annoying. Are they still using the merit Radius code? But it's probably their NAS that is sending the Start prior to the ipcp negotiating IP Addr. Bugger. Then there is the issue of running servers etc, as you point out, I don't want to start that flame war again, and I don't want to run internet reachable SMTP servers @ home either. The previous discussions on this make several points, some of which are: 1) POP3, and in particular multi-drop POP mailboxes are problematic, and 2) running SMTP servers (even if legal) is problematic over intermittant/dialup/dynamic connections. Unfortunately there's nothing in-between, and something in-between is entirely valid for 'power' home users. And to make it worse, Paradise don't have a consistent, unique mail header to really make multi-drop pop mailboxes work. This is well within what paradise can do, and despite asking this particular question several times, they just don't seem to provide that facility. Oh to find a better solution, ODMR isn't. As someone pointed out, maybe UUCP? Cheers- > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Goldfinch [mailto:mark.goldfinch(a)team.telstraclear.co.nz] > Sent: Thursday, 24 October 2002 11:52 p.m. > To: Steve Lang > Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: RE: Any isps support ODMR - RFC2645? > > > > On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Steve Lang wrote: > > > Yes, I Emailed postmaster(a)paradise.net.nz. To quote: > > > > "It's basically due to our DSMTP authentication being based around our > > dial-in RADIUS, and not our ADSL RADIUS. Given the choice between the > > two options, we decided to provision DSMTP for dial-in as it is > > recognised as more of a stop-gap method of mail delivery somewhere in > > between POP and a dedicated mail server." etc. And a statement to the > > fact that you're not meant to run servers behind Jetstart connections > > etc. > > While this isn't quite correct the end result is the same. > > The technical reason why this cannot happen is because our dsmtp radius > processing is only interested in Start and Stop accounting records. > > An example Jet* radius accounting record: > > Mon Oct 14 19:49:11 2002 > User-Name = "someusername" > NAS-Identifier = "GLF_RAN_01" > Service-Type = Framed-User > Framed-Protocol = PPP > NAS-Port = 540475748 > Acct-Session-Id = "20370164-3DAA68E6" > Acct-Authentic = RADIUS > Acct-Status-Type = Start > User-Id = "someusername" > User-Realm = "paradise.net.nz" > Proxy-State = 0 > Proxy-State = 0 > Timestamp = 1034578151 > > you may note that there is a distinctive lack of Framed-IP-Address field > present in this record. This is well known for Telecom's Jet* > infrastructure and has been noted in this forum beforehand. > Framed-IP-Address fields are present in the (approximately) 30 second post > connection and then hourly Alive records as well as Stop records. > > Now it is true that it would be somewhat simple to make Alive records be > treated in (almost) an identical fashion as Start records in this case, > but I really must question whether it is in our best interests to do so. > TelstraClear (or one of its legacy companies) will have signed an > agreement with Telecom surrounding the conditions and services which we > will offer JetStart to our customers. If we should be penalised the > implications for us would be somewhat larger than most other ISPs (other > than perhaps Xtra). > > Unfortunately if Telecom does not want business customers (or services > deemed to be of business grade) present on JetStart they probably have the > means to make us (and in turn our customers) very unhappy. > > Now of course I could be very wrong and Telecom could have had a recent > change of heart and are these days more than happy for us to hookup > businesses via JetStart. Please I would be more than happy to be proved > wrong. > > > Short of ringing them up, and demanding to speak to someone else, which > > I don't have time to do, what options are there? I know, move my > > business somewhere else? > > Good luck in finding a solution, yes it somewhat sucks that broadband > options are somewhat limited in this country, but it isn't just the > customer's who have few options. > > And on that note this thread is now probably heading quite off-topic. > > > Best Regards, > > --- > Mark Goldfinch > Senior Systems Administrator > TelstraClear Ltd > > > > > - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0