> customers' domains. Panix.com says its domain name was locked, and
> that despite this, it was still transferred. (r)I seem to recall someone saying it wasnt locked, now theyre
saying it was?
The information we have so far, indicates that it was not on Registrar
LOCK at the registry at the time of the transfer.
Regards,
Bruce Tonkin
Bruce,
It is well known that the date of transfer of the panix.com domain from
Dotster to Melbourne IT was on January 15 (EST). Can you tell us the date
when the transfer request was initially solicited by the client of Melbourne
IT's reseller?
-Richard
Bruce Tonkin wrote:
The information we have so far, indicates that it was not on Registrar
LOCK at the registry at the time of the transfer.
No, the information we have so far is that it *WAS* supposed to be on registrar-lock! Quoting Alexis Rosen, forwarded by TLS, Sun, 16 Jan 2005 07:08:59 +0000:
... Our understanding is that we had locks on all of our domains. However, when we looked, locks were off on panix.net and panix.org,
which we own but don't normally use.
[Your Honor, maybe she locked the door, but the door company didn't
install it correctly, otherwise I couldn't have ripped it off the hinges
and gone in and raped her; it's the door company's fault.]
Stop blaming the victim! Stop blaming anybody else.
This was a Mel-IT error.
And not to forget that Panix was the 1st victim ever of a SYN attack in Sept 1996:
http://www.panix.com/press/synattack.html
http://www.panix.com/press/synattack2.html
Seems like someone out there just luvs Panix! 
-Hank
And not to forget that Panix was the 1st victim ever of a SYN attack in
Sept 1996:
http://www.panix.com/press/synattack.html
http://www.panix.com/press/synattack2.html
And due to coordinated action between members of the
NANOG mailing list and the FIREWALLS mailing list,
within 24 hours, there were patches made available for
Linux and various BSD kernels that mitigated these
attacks.
This type of an event shows the real power of the NANOG
mailing list to communicate in a crisis. If only we could
extend this communication to other media (INOC-DBA) and
to include representatives of more network operators.
I hope that the NANOG reform discussion spends a good
bit of its time on articulating a vision for the future
of a membership-based NANOG organization, and not worry
so much about past problems.
--Michael Dillon
That is something I am working on, as it strikes me as a really good
way to bring more asian operators into the mainstream.
A clueful contact at an ISP prevents people dropping in blackhole
routes and access.db entries for huge netblocks when they see the
first sign of abuse from out of there ... which would be a very good
thing.
INOC-DBA does get talked about on several other operator lists like
apricot and sanog .. but there's not nearly enough adoption yet. I'm
still hopeful about seeing it grow in popularity and get some critical
mass.