North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: InterNIC - We put the "I" in incompetent.

  • From: John Fraizer
  • Date: Sun Mar 14 23:56:44 1999

At 12:43 PM 3/14/99 -0800, I Am Not An Isp wrote:
>first post that I stated a traceroute shows both IPs have the same last
>router hop and are likely on the same subnet.

Correct.  Both machines actually do live in close proximity to each other.

>Add to that the fact that there are load balancing techniques which use
>duplicated IP addrs in different geographical regions and you once again
>have no proof - just an implication.

Not that fancy.  Not yet.  If the internic would process get with it and
process our update, it would show two additional nameservers on the domain
however.  (On different networks, which are in different geographical regions.)

>Before anyone else pounces on this, YES, I believe it is likely that these
>two machines (if it is two machines) are sitting next to one another and
>the original poster should get more diverse DNS.  The point of my post is

See previous sentence.

[[email protected] /]# /sbin/route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
NS1.ENTERZONE.N *      UH    0      0        0 eth0:0    *        U     0      0      218 eth0   *        U     0      0       16 eth1       *            U     0      0     1288 lo
default         Border-Core0-Fa         UG    0      0   431211 eth0

[[email protected]:/]# /sbin/route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
NS2.ENTERZONE.N *      UH    0      0        0 eth0:0    *        U     0      0      869 eth0   *        U     0      0        4 eth1       *            U     0      0     1111 lo
default         Border-Core0-Fa         UG    0      0   262383 eth0

>that people who just look at IP addresses (or a single traceroute ;) and
>make sweeping generalizations might find their assumptions disproven.

In this case, they were correct.  I suppose they would have felt better if
we had something like:


Sure does look more impressive, doesn't it.  Sheesh people.  The last time
I checked, I wasn't providing primary of secondary name service for any of
your domains.  We've never been dark outside of scheduled maintenance, not
even as a result of TIFF or BIFF.  I feel very lucky in that statement.  I
suppose it is a testament to the guys at FNSI.

>Sorry about being pedantic, but I've dealt with one too many users who just
>assume stuff based on tools like traceroute without understanding the
>underlying technology (asymmetry, load balancing, etc.).  I really think
>anyone on this list should *not* have to be educated the way lusers do.

I was told by a wise individual that the only use for assumption is to make
an ASS out of U and ME.  From what I've observed, there are a few
individuals on the list, myself included at times, that need no help in
this category.  Leave the assumptions, snide remarks about another operator
having less than sufficient clue, etc out of it.

Since we're talking about my nameservers and I've told you everything there
is to know about them, there should be no more need for discussion of this
matter on the list.

ML.ORG is gone.  Check out http://www.EZ-IP.Net - It's *FREE*
Get your *FREE* Parked Domain account at http://www.EZ-Hosting.Com
John Fraizer                      |    __   _                 |
The System Administrator          |   / /  (_)__  __ ____  __ | The choice
mailto:[email protected] |  / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / |  of a GNU
http://www.EnterZone.Net/         | /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ | Generation
PGP Key fingerprint =  7DB6 1CA2 DAA6 43DA 3AAF  44CD 258C 3D7E B425 81A8