On 2/02/2012 11:44 a.m., Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
On 02/02/2012, at 6:59 AM, Mark Foster wrote:
On 01/02/12 23:49, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
On 01/02/2012, at 9:15 PM, Mark Foster wrote:
(still, to this day, finding providers in the USA and Canada who muck with TCP coming out of NZ due to the poor reputations of our more Asian-centric counterparts also taking APNIC delegations). Can you explain this a bit more?
In recent times (and longer ago, and across most of my previous jobs in the last 10 years or so) I have frequently found that American organisations find it easier to block large parts of APNIC in the guise of 'security' and overlook the fact that they do business with .nz and .au. Apparently it's easier to block at the /8 or even /16 than it is to apply other measures to protect ones network.
Is it specific to email?
We've seen this for general web content - being unable to view files from remote servers from blocking provider, and users within / beyond that provider being unable to access content from things within our numbers. For example, we can't access this image: www.tourtech.ca/pub/SOPMix.JPG [1], the reason given was 'Ahhh, maybe you are on the RIPE or APNIC networks, you can't see the server from there.' [2] [1] From page at http://forum.cockos.com/showpost.php?p=891942&postcount=8 [2] http://forum.cockos.com/showpost.php?p=892075&postcount=12 Cheers, Gerard