Compass Networks Email Servers IP addresses on RBL List again
It looks like Compass have got one of their email servers IP addresses on a RBL IP list . 203.152.112.39 The tester i am using is http://www.fortiguardcenter.com/antispam/antispam.html#spamlookup Could some body let them know please, so I stop getting complaints from my partner about the stupid anti-spam system flagging legitimate emails wrong. Regards Robert Cotter ________________________________ This email is for the intended recipient(s) only. Be advised that if you have received this email in error that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. The sender cannot guarantee that this email or any attachment to it is free of computer viruses or other conditions which may damage or interfere with data, hardware or software with which it might be used. If you have received this email in error, please notify Distribution Central on +61 2 8986 5000 or notify sender.
On 11/01/2009, at 8:22 PM, Robert Cotter wrote:
Could some body let them know please
http://www.compass.net.nz/contact.asp -- Nathan Ward
I just wanted to get other peoples opinion on this. We've had examples of this in the past, but also two within the last week. Do people think that the NZNOG list should be used as a first point of call for issues? or as a last resort for issues? I'd actually be in favour of Donald putting in the AUP that issues which have not been raised with the appropriate organisations first should not be posted to the NZNOG list. This would mean that you should call/email/whatever a companies NOC/Helpdesk and log a call before you post to the list. That way people get a chance to fix issues before they become public knowledge. I'm sure we'd all like that courtesy. Comments? Thoughts? Flames? Dean
That's the generally accepted result on the NANOG list - which is to try all usual avenues first. I'd also suggest it's why everyone should have a peeringdb entry to have an ability to discover NOC contact details quickly. MMC Dean Pemberton wrote:
I just wanted to get other peoples opinion on this.
We've had examples of this in the past, but also two within the last week. Do people think that the NZNOG list should be used as a first point of call for issues? or as a last resort for issues?
I'd actually be in favour of Donald putting in the AUP that issues which have not been raised with the appropriate organisations first should not be posted to the NZNOG list. This would mean that you should call/email/whatever a companies NOC/Helpdesk and log a call before you post to the list. That way people get a chance to fix issues before they become public knowledge. I'm sure we'd all like that courtesy.
Comments? Thoughts? Flames?
Dean
_______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
-- Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks Level 4, 150 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia Email: mmc(a)internode.com.au Web: http://www.on.net Direct: +61-8-8228-2909 Mobile: +61-419-900-366 Reception: +61-8-8228-2999 Fax: +61-8-8235-6909
Matthew, Hit www.nznog.org lately? There is a NOC contact list. I for one dont understand why people dont try the 'usual means' first... especially people on this list, who are supposed to be network operators themselves... Cheers Mark. On Sun, 11 Jan 2009, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
That's the generally accepted result on the NANOG list - which is to try all usual avenues first.
I'd also suggest it's why everyone should have a peeringdb entry to have an ability to discover NOC contact details quickly.
MMC
Dean Pemberton wrote:
I just wanted to get other peoples opinion on this.
We've had examples of this in the past, but also two within the last week. Do people think that the NZNOG list should be used as a first point of call for issues? or as a last resort for issues?
I'd actually be in favour of Donald putting in the AUP that issues which have not been raised with the appropriate organisations first should not be posted to the NZNOG list. This would mean that you should call/email/whatever a companies NOC/Helpdesk and log a call before you post to the list. That way people get a chance to fix issues before they become public knowledge. I'm sure we'd all like that courtesy.
Comments? Thoughts? Flames?
Dean
_______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
-- Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks Level 4, 150 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia Email: mmc(a)internode.com.au Web: http://www.on.net Direct: +61-8-8228-2909 Mobile: +61-419-900-366 Reception: +61-8-8228-2999 Fax: +61-8-8235-6909
_______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
Mark Foster wrote:
Matthew, Hit www.nznog.org lately? There is a NOC contact list. I haven't - useful to know but I'll add it to the many disparate lists I have. Peeringdb is just a well known one around the world.
Given Internode has no NZ presence (yet) is there any objection to having us listed? I've had people from NZ recently contact me regarding IPv6/4 routing issues etc. MMC
On 11/01/2009, at 9:19 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
That's the generally accepted result on the NANOG list - which is to try all usual avenues first.
I'd also suggest it's why everyone should have a peeringdb entry to have an ability to discover NOC contact details quickly.
While I agree with having peeringdb entries, we also have a list of NZ NOC type contacts on the NZNOG webpage. If you are not listed or your details are out of date please let us know, details are on the page. http://www.nznog.org/?page_id=6 -- Nathan Ward
With most of the contacts on the NZNOG NOC list, if you call them, things will get dealt with waaay quicker than posting on here. Posting here should be the last resort IMO. Cheers, Bill -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Ward [mailto:nznog(a)daork.net] Sent: Sunday, 11 January 2009 9:31 p.m. To: nznog Subject: Re: [nznog] NZNOG list as NZNOC list..... On 11/01/2009, at 9:16 PM, Dean Pemberton wrote:
Comments? Thoughts? Flames?
Seems reasonable. The use of SHOULD instead of MUST is preferable, because there are no doubt exceptions. -- Nathan Ward _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
Dean Pemberton wrote:
Comments? Thoughts? Flames?
1. A "NZNog Chat" list would be useful. The enum debate doesn't really need to be on the operational list. 2. I find posts about emails, and the like, useful. Gives me a heads up that others are already having issues. Case like this one, the NOC should already know and have fixed it. Xtra anyone? For the sake of 1 or 5 emails / week on stuff like this, I say "no problem". Sure, if we start seeing 10 a day, then it's time to sort something out. 3. With respect to the NOC list. Some will recall sometime ago that it just wasn't up to date. It took weeks to get it sorted and even then, ppl aren't always responding to their noc enquiries. 2c Cheers Don
On 12/01/2009, at 11:21 AM, Don Gould wrote:
3. With respect to the NOC list. Some will recall sometime ago that it just wasn't up to date. It took weeks to get it sorted and even then, ppl aren't always responding to their noc enquiries.
Gerald updates it pretty quickly now. The old NOC list was a hobby of Simon's. We now treat it as a part of the NZNOG website, so update it fast. -- Nathan Ward
Dean Pemberton wrote:
I just wanted to get other peoples opinion on this.
We've had examples of this in the past, but also two within the last week. Do people think that the NZNOG list should be used as a first point of call for issues? or as a last resort for issues?
I'd actually be in favour of Donald putting in the AUP that issues which have not been raised with the appropriate organisations first should not be posted to the NZNOG list. This would mean that you should call/email/whatever a companies NOC/Helpdesk and log a call before you post to the list. That way people get a chance to fix issues before they become public knowledge. I'm sure we'd all like that courtesy.
I support Dean on this - I occasionally have the feeling that people seem to think there's some sort of kudos in posting a message saying "Look how clueful I am - I've spotted obscure bug #3456 in ISP X's network". If we add that condition to the AUP then perhaps we could complement it with a page on http://www.nznog.org/ which provides suitable contact information for NZ ISPs etc. Details of the link to that page could be in the monthly posting. I had a script at Citylink which trolls the APNIC database on a weekly basis for the APE and WIX peers (e.g. http://ape.nzix.net/peers.html and http://wix.nzix.net/peers.html) On the basis that every ISP (even those who don't peer multilaterally at the APE and WIX) has an AS number (or two) we could do something like that. People could type in their AS number, the script would mail the nominated Tech contact(s) who would acknowledge and the details would get added. Or some other complicated nonsense. (:-)
Andy Linton wrote:
I support Dean on this - I occasionally have the feeling that people seem to think there's some sort of kudos in posting a message saying "Look how clueful I am - I've spotted obscure bug #3456 in ISP X's network".
If we add that condition to the AUP then perhaps we could complement it with a page on http://www.nznog.org/ which provides suitable contact information for NZ ISPs etc. Details of the link to that page could be in the monthly posting.
And of course that page is already there. Doh!
participants (8)
-
Andy Linton -
Bill Walker -
Dean Pemberton -
Don Gould -
Mark Foster -
Matthew Moyle-Croft -
Nathan Ward -
Robert Cotter