[144579] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: NANOG Digest, Vol 44, Issue 55 - Re: ouch..
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sutton, Allen)
Wed Sep 14 11:46:43 2011
From: "Sutton, Allen" <Allen.Sutton@CenturyLink.com>
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 10:45:12 -0500
In-Reply-To: <mailman.7604.1316001353.1873.nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Well, I'm not surprised at all, being that Cisco also does this to Alcatel-=
Lucent:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DuX3zvjX3c5Q
I think Cisco is just running scared now. If they didn't charge so much fo=
r their products, they wouldn't have this problem. In addition, I think th=
ey also thought that they would be # 1 forever and that nobody could touch =
them, so they just stopped trying to stay ahead of the competition.
_________________________________
Allen
-----Original Message-----
From: nanog-request@nanog.org [mailto:nanog-request@nanog.org]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 7:56 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: NANOG Digest, Vol 44, Issue 55
Send NANOG mailing list submissions to
nanog@nanog.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
nanog-request@nanog.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
nanog-owner@nanog.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "R=
e: Contents of NANOG digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. RE: NAT444 or ? (Dan Wing)
2. ouch.. (Martin Hepworth)
3. Re: ouch.. (Vlad Galu)
4. Re: ouch.. (Nick Hilliard)
5. Re: ouch.. (Brian Raaen)
6. Re: ouch.. (Always Learning)
7. Re: ouch.. (Frank Habicht)
8. HP A-series, H3C, Huawei and their capabilities in real-life
(Mark Smith)
9. RE: ouch.. (Erik Bais)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 22:28:17 -0700
From: "Dan Wing" <dwing@cisco.com>
To: "'Owen DeLong'" <owen@delong.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: NAT444 or ?
Message-ID: <0a4d01cc729f$1bc0abc0$53420340$@com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii"
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen@delong.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 9:43 PM
> To: Dan Wing
> Cc: 'Leigh Porter'; 'David Israel'; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: NAT444 or ?
>
> >>
> >> Good point, but aside from these scaling issues which I expect can
> be
> >> resolved to a point, the more serious issue, I think, is
> applications
> >> that just do not work with double NAT. Now, I have not conducted
> >> any serious research into this, but it seems that
> >> draft-donley-nat444- impacts does appear to have highlight issues
> >> that may have been down
> to
> >> implementation.
> >
> > Draft-donley-nat444-impacts conflates bandwidth constraints with CGN
> > with in-home NAT. Until those are separated and then analyzed
> carefully,
> > it is harmful to draw conclusions such as "NAT444 bad; NAT44 good".
> >
>
> Continuing to make this claim does not make it any more true.
>
> Draft-donley took networks and measured their real-world functionality
> without NAT444, then, added NAT444 and repeated the same tests.
> Regardless of the underlying issue(s), the addition of NAT444 to the
> mix resulted in the forms of service degradation enumerated in the
> draft.
I disagree it reached that conclusion. That may have been its intent.
> Further, I would not ever say "NAT444 bad; NAT44 good". I would say,
> rather, "NAT44 bad, NAT444 worse". I think that's a pretty safe and
> non-harmful thing to say.
Yes, your statement is completely accurate. I agree that IPv4 address shar=
ing causes additional problems (which encompasses all forms of
IPv4 address sharing), and CGN causes additional problems.
> >> Other simple tricks such as ensuring that your own internal
> >> services such as DNS are available without traversing NAT also help.
> >
> > Yep. But some users want to use other DNS servers for performance
> > (e.g., Google's or OpenDNS servers, especially considering they
> > could point the user at a 'better' (closer) CDN based on Client IP),
> > to avoid ISP DNS hijacking, or for content control (e.g., "parental
> > control" of DNS hostnames). That traffic will,
> necessarily,
> > traverse the CGN. To avoid users burning through their UDP port
> > allocation for those DNS queries it is useful for the CGN to have
> > short timeouts for port 53.
> >
> If the user chooses to use a DNS server on the other side of a NAT,
> then, they are choosing to inflict whatever damage upon themselves.
> I'm not saying that short UDP/53 timeouts are a bad idea, but, I am
> saying that the more stuff you funnel through an LSN at the carrier,
> the more stuff you will see break. This would lead me to want to avoid
> funneling anything through said NAT which I could avoid. Then again, I
> run my own authoritative and recursive nameservers in my home and
> don't use any NAT at all, so, perhaps my perspective is different from
> others.
Yeah, you are probably of about 1000 or maybe 3000 people in the world that=
do that. Seems to be a minority.
> >> Certainly some more work can be done in this area, but I fear that
> the
> >> only way a real idea as to how much NAT444 really doe break things
> will
> >> be operational experience.
> >
> > Yep. (Same as everything else.)
> >
>
> I'm sure that will happen soon enough. I, for one, am not looking
> forward to the experience.
Neither am I.
But if major content providers cannot provide AAAA on their properties, and=
if ISPs and CPE vendors do not make IPv6 available and working, and if web=
browsers don't adopt faster fallback to IPv4 when IPv6 is borked .... We =
will all be behind NATs.
-d
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 11:42:35 +0100
From: Martin Hepworth <maxsec@gmail.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: ouch..
Message-ID:
<CAGDKorJEvBHG21zOtmoS634pCKgGb2o96ahCuePKqmunSX402Q@mail.gmail.com=
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
http://www.overpromisesunderdelivers.net/
--
Martin Hepworth
Oxford, UK
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:51:00 +0200
From: Vlad Galu <galu@packetdam.com>
To: Martin Hepworth <maxsec@gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: ouch..
Message-ID: <E963444C-A6C5-4399-AB1D-806F59C63389@packetdam.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Diso-8859-1
On Sep 14, 2011, at 12:42 PM, Martin Hepworth wrote:
> http://www.overpromisesunderdelivers.net/
Saying the other brand sucks doesn't make yours any better. Besides, there =
are other big players on the market. Terribly lame of Cisco...
Vlad Galu
galu@packetdam.com
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 11:54:59 +0100
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: ouch..
Message-ID: <4E708803.5040506@foobar.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
On 14/09/2011 11:42, Martin Hepworth wrote:
> http://www.overpromisesunderdelivers.net/
Wow, classy.
Nick
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 07:15:08 -0400
From: Brian Raaen <nanog@rhemasound.org>
To: Martin Hepworth <maxsec@gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: ouch..
Message-ID: <20110914111508.GA6498@brian>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii
Looks like some random person registered this one. The domain and ip do no=
t look related to cisco even though someone has falsely pasted their logo a=
ll over the site.
whois overpromisesunderdelivers.net
Whois Server Version 2.0
Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.
Domain Name: OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET
Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com
Name Server: NS35.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Name Server: NS36.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Status: clientRenewProhibited
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Updated Date: 05-sep-2011
Creation Date: 05-sep-2011
Expiration Date: 05-sep-2012
Registrant:
Domains by Proxy, Inc.
DomainsByProxy.com
15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States
Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET
Created on: 05-Sep-11
Expires on: 05-Sep-12
Last Updated on: 05-Sep-11
Administrative Contact:
Private, Registration OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET@domainsbyproxy.c=
om
Domains by Proxy, Inc.
DomainsByProxy.com
15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States
(480) 624-2599 Fax -- (480) 624-2598
Technical Contact:
Private, Registration OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET@domainsbyproxy.c=
om
Domains by Proxy, Inc.
DomainsByProxy.com
15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States
(480) 624-2599 Fax -- (480) 624-2598
Domain servers in listed order:
NS35.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
NS36.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
braaen@brian:~$ dig OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET
; <<>> DiG 9.7.3 <<>> OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 40339
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET. IN A
;; ANSWER SECTION:
OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET. 3364 IN A 98.129.229.190
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET. 3364 IN NS ns36.domaincontrol.com.
OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET. 3364 IN NS ns35.domaincontrol.com.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
ns35.domaincontrol.com. 3046 IN A 216.69.185.18
ns36.domaincontrol.com. 3046 IN A 208.109.255.18
braaen@brian:~$ dig -x 98.129.229.190
; <<>> DiG 9.7.3 <<>> -x 98.129.229.190
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 26507
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;190.229.129.98.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
229.129.98.in-addr.arpa. 300 IN SOA ns.rackspace.com. hostmaste=
r.rackspace.com. 1314291452 3600 300 1814400 300
---
Brian Raaen
Network Architect
Zcorum
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 11:42:35AM +0100, Martin Hepworth wrote:
> http://www.overpromisesunderdelivers.net/
>
>
> --
> Martin Hepworth
> Oxford, UK
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:20:15 +0100
From: Always Learning <nanog@u61.u22.net>
To: Brian Raaen <nanog@rhemasound.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: ouch..
Message-ID: <1315999215.15630.3.camel@m6.u226.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
On Wed, 2011-09-14 at 07:15 -0400, Brian Raaen wrote:
> Looks like some random person registered this one. The domain and ip
> do not look related to cisco even though someone has falsely pasted
> their logo all over the site.
(1) If Cisco were responsible, would they want to advertise the fact ?
(2) If Cisco feel their intellectual and copyright property is being
abused, Cisco lawyers would have the Cisco name and branding removed in
seconds !
Paul,
England,
EU.
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:20:56 +0300
From: Frank Habicht <geier@geier.ne.tz>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: ouch..
Message-ID: <4E708E18.3070006@geier.ne.tz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
Main cisco page has a link to it...
Frank
On 9/14/2011 2:15 PM, Brian Raaen wrote:
> Looks like some random person registered this one. The domain and ip do =
not look related to cisco even though someone has falsely pasted their logo=
all over the site.
>
>
>
> whois overpromisesunderdelivers.net
>
> Whois Server Version 2.0
>
> Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
> with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
> for detailed information.
>
> Domain Name: OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET
> Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
> Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
> Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com
> Name Server: NS35.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
> Name Server: NS36.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
> Status: clientDeleteProhibited
> Status: clientRenewProhibited
> Status: clientTransferProhibited
> Status: clientUpdateProhibited
> Updated Date: 05-sep-2011
> Creation Date: 05-sep-2011
> Expiration Date: 05-sep-2012
>
> Registrant:
> Domains by Proxy, Inc.
> DomainsByProxy.com
> 15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
> Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
> United States
>
> Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
> Domain Name: OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET
> Created on: 05-Sep-11
> Expires on: 05-Sep-12
> Last Updated on: 05-Sep-11
>
> Administrative Contact:
> Private, Registration OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET@domainsbyproxy=
.com
> Domains by Proxy, Inc.
> DomainsByProxy.com
> 15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
> Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
> United States
> (480) 624-2599 Fax -- (480) 624-2598
>
> Technical Contact:
> Private, Registration OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET@domainsbyproxy=
.com
> Domains by Proxy, Inc.
> DomainsByProxy.com
> 15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
> Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
> United States
> (480) 624-2599 Fax -- (480) 624-2598
>
> Domain servers in listed order:
> NS35.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
> NS36.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
>
>
>
> braaen@brian:~$ dig OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.7.3 <<>> OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET
> ;; global options: +cmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 40339
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2
>
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET. IN A
>
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET. 3364 IN A 98.129.229.190
>
> ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
> OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET. 3364 IN NS ns36.domaincontrol.com.
> OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET. 3364 IN NS ns35.domaincontrol.com.
>
> ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
> ns35.domaincontrol.com. 3046 IN A 216.69.185.18
> ns36.domaincontrol.com. 3046 IN A 208.109.255.18
>
>
> braaen@brian:~$ dig -x 98.129.229.190
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.7.3 <<>> -x 98.129.229.190
> ;; global options: +cmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 26507
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0
>
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;190.229.129.98.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR
>
> ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
> 229.129.98.in-addr.arpa. 300 IN SOA ns.rackspace.com. hostmas=
ter.rackspace.com. 1314291452 3600 300 1814400 300
>
>
>
> ---
> Brian Raaen
> Network Architect
> Zcorum
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 11:42:35AM +0100, Martin Hepworth wrote:
>> http://www.overpromisesunderdelivers.net/
>>
>>
>> --
>> Martin Hepworth
>> Oxford, UK
>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:27:20 +0300
From: Mark Smith <markrefresh12@gmail.com>
To: NANOG@nanog.org
Subject: HP A-series, H3C, Huawei and their capabilities in real-life
Message-ID:
<CAE79DorP-waM_EdHQJvQMw+mftM+BAv35tGhTz7TeYJTy-ON1Q@mail.gmail.com=
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
Hi list
Does anyone have (or know somebody who has) real-life experience of HP
A-series (former Huawei and H3C) high-end routers in service provider
environment? From the specs they look very good (both features and
performance) but the specs don't tell everything and nothing can
replace real-life experience.
The features I'm interested in include (not in any specific order)
- v4 and v6 routing
- BGP (full feed)
- OSPF and IS-IS
- MPLS(-TE) P/PE functionality (RSVP, L3VPN, VPLS)
For example this box
http://h17007.www1.hp.com/us/en/products/routers/HP_A8800_Router_Series/ind=
ex.aspx
Any info or pointers greatly appreciated.
Rgds,
Mark
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:55:47 +0200
From: "Erik Bais" <ebais@a2b-internet.com>
To: "'Frank Habicht'" <geier@geier.ne.tz>, <nanog@nanog.org>
Subject: RE: ouch..
Message-ID: <00a601cc72d5$3dc653b0$b952fb10$@com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii"
Hi Frank,
http://blogs.cisco.com/tag/overpromise/
Quote from the blog: "Some vendors have repeatedly over-promised and under
delivered, and still somehow receive credit for their vision! (You can read
more about one vendor's repeated broken promises here.)"
http://www.overpromisesunderdelivers.net/
https://twitter.com/#!/CiscoSystems/status/113226120601677825
https://twitter.com/#!/CiscoNL/statuses/113577908525744129
Personally I think this is a pathetic action from Cisco, however I'm not
surprised by them doing it ...
Regards,
Erik Bais
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Habicht [mailto:geier@geier.ne.tz]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 1:21 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: ouch..
>
> Main cisco page has a link to it...
>
> Frank
>
> On 9/14/2011 2:15 PM, Brian Raaen wrote:
> > Looks like some random person registered this one. The domain and ip
> do not look related to cisco even though someone has falsely pasted
> their logo all over the site.
> >
> >
> >
> > whois overpromisesunderdelivers.net
> >
> > Whois Server Version 2.0
> >
> > Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
> > with many different competing registrars. Go to
> http://www.internic.net
> > for detailed information.
> >
> > Domain Name: OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET
> > Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
> > Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
> > Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com
> > Name Server: NS35.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
> > Name Server: NS36.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
> > Status: clientDeleteProhibited
> > Status: clientRenewProhibited
> > Status: clientTransferProhibited
> > Status: clientUpdateProhibited
> > Updated Date: 05-sep-2011
> > Creation Date: 05-sep-2011
> > Expiration Date: 05-sep-2012
> >
> > Registrant:
> > Domains by Proxy, Inc.
> > DomainsByProxy.com
> > 15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
> > Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
> > United States
> >
> > Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
> > Domain Name: OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET
> > Created on: 05-Sep-11
> > Expires on: 05-Sep-12
> > Last Updated on: 05-Sep-11
> >
> > Administrative Contact:
> > Private, Registration
> OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET@domainsbyproxy.com
> > Domains by Proxy, Inc.
> > DomainsByProxy.com
> > 15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
> > Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
> > United States
> > (480) 624-2599 Fax -- (480) 624-2598
> >
> > Technical Contact:
> > Private, Registration
> OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET@domainsbyproxy.com
> > Domains by Proxy, Inc.
> > DomainsByProxy.com
> > 15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
> > Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
> > United States
> > (480) 624-2599 Fax -- (480) 624-2598
> >
> > Domain servers in listed order:
> > NS35.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
> > NS36.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
> >
> >
> >
> > braaen@brian:~$ dig OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET
> >
> > ; <<>> DiG 9.7.3 <<>> OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET
> > ;; global options: +cmd
> > ;; Got answer:
> > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 40339
> > ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2
> >
> > ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> > ;OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET. IN A
> >
> > ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> > OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET. 3364 IN A 98.129.229.190
> >
> > ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
> > OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET. 3364 IN NS
> ns36.domaincontrol.com.
> > OVERPROMISESUNDERDELIVERS.NET. 3364 IN NS
> ns35.domaincontrol.com.
> >
> > ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
> > ns35.domaincontrol.com. 3046 IN A 216.69.185.18
> > ns36.domaincontrol.com. 3046 IN A 208.109.255.18
> >
> >
> > braaen@brian:~$ dig -x 98.129.229.190
> >
> > ; <<>> DiG 9.7.3 <<>> -x 98.129.229.190
> > ;; global options: +cmd
> > ;; Got answer:
> > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 26507
> > ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0
> >
> > ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> > ;190.229.129.98.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR
> >
> > ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
> > 229.129.98.in-addr.arpa. 300 IN SOA ns.rackspace.com.
> hostmaster.rackspace.com. 1314291452 3600 300 1814400 300
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Brian Raaen
> > Network Architect
> > Zcorum
> > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 11:42:35AM +0100, Martin Hepworth wrote:
> >> http://www.overpromisesunderdelivers.net/
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Martin Hepworth
> >> Oxford, UK
> >
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3895 - Release Date: 09/13/11
End of NANOG Digest, Vol 44, Issue 55
*************************************
