Slashdot: Providers Ignoring DNS TTL?

Sun May 1 21:21:56 UTC 2005

DA> Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 00:57:46 -0400 (EDT)
DA> From: Dean Anderson

DA> But for the record, you misrepresent my SMTP AUTH claims:

Someone needs to put down the crackpipe.  At least do a Google search or
three to find out what I really say before putting words in my mouth.
e.g., I specifically cited laws and cases that appear to apply to
blacklists... now you claim I stated DNSBLs are exempt?  Someone needs
to put down the crackpipe.

See threads like "ORBS (Re: Scanning)" on NANOG, or "Port 25 Email
blocked by ISP" on cobalt-users.  You might find major discrepencies
between what you claim I say and what I really say.  Someone needs to
put down the crackpipe.

You object to SMTP+AUTH because it isn't standard:

http://www.merit.edu/mail/archives/nanog/199-11/msg00263.html
http://www.merit.edu/mail/archives/nanog/199-11/msg00289.html

You complain that SMTP+AUTH "doesn't scale"... yet viewing open relay
logfiles for abusers scales?!  Someone needs to put down the crackpipe.

Yet you cite RFC1546 as the One True Anycast.  Is RFC1546 a standard?
What does its first paragraph say, again?

DA> You really haven't been paying attention: There's no chance of that at
DA> all:  It isn't possible to build "vixie-cast" clusters that work around
DA> PPLB. There are no topologies which include diverse paths that avoid
DA> problems.

http://www.merit.edu/mail/archives/nanog/msg07220.html

Read what I said.  Did I say "vixie-cast" clusters?  Did I specify a
particular topology, or suggest choosing topologies that work?  Even
when the thread is is plain sight for all to reference, you fail to cite
correctly.  Someone needs to put down the crackpipe.

You claim PPLB over widely diverging paths will become increasingly
common.  If that actually happened, guess what would happen to unicast
TCP?  Guess what would happen to many UDP-based protocols over unicast?

If you believe that PPLB problems are "vixiecast"-specific, I have a
challenge for you:  Connect two routers in series with multiple links.
Run PPLB between them, using different latency/jitter/packetloss over
each link.  Do this for your production traffic.

DA> > DA> What can be expected from dumb people?
DA> >
DA> > Frequent NANOG posting.
DA>
DA> There are other symptoms. Like being wrong alot, or being completely
DA> unable to correctly state someone else's position.

You've done a fantastic job of demonstrating both.  As much as I'd love
to have another protracted flamefest with you, NANOG is hardly the
place, and I'm putting more priority on real work.  Maybe one day my
income will be proportional to how many characters I stuff in NANOG
readers' mailboxes, but right now it's based on providing services.

If a sane discussion of anycast is on-topic[1], I'll join.  Barring
that, I'm done posting to this thread.

[1] Moderators?  Is that operational enough, or too far in the
    "research" realm?

Eddy
--
Everquick Internet - http://www.everquick.net/
A division of Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - http://www.brotsman.com/
Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building
Phone: +1 785 865 5885 Lawrence and [inter]national
Phone: +1 316 794 8922 Wichita
________________________________________________________________________
DO NOT send mail to the following addresses:
davidc at brics.com -*- jfconmaapaq at intc.net -*- sam at everquick.net
Sending mail to spambait addresses is a great way to get blocked.
Ditto for broken OOO autoresponders and foolish AV software backscatter.