[HECnet] Cisco DECnet routers and NML

On May 5, 2020, at 9:51 PM, Thomas DeBellis <tommytimesharing at gmail.com> wrote: Blocking NTP?? Boy, that's pretty anti-social...

Perhaps they only wanted queries to go to internal NTP servers and not outside to non-ISP servers? One reason for this is if you get an 'accurate' clock and declare yourself a level-1 node, you get wind up getting hit with a lot of traffic. > On 5/5/20 7:32 PM, Peter Lothberg wrote: > Blocking NTP? So how do you get time? (udp 123) > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "bqt" <bqt at softjar.se> > To: "hecnet" <hecnet at Update.UU.SE> > Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2020 6:23:20 PM > Subject: Re: [HECnet] Cisco DECnet routers and NML > > They are unfortunately mostly incompetent, set to watch over even more > incompetent people hooking up to the internet. So they try to do what > they think is right, but it's a royal pain for people who actually do > know what they are doing, and who want to do some things... > > (I will not even tell you how much problems I have with mail in > different directions...) > > Johnny > >> On 2020-05-06 00:15, Supratim Sanyal wrote: >> it's important we watch our blood pressure. I got this gem back. Trying >> to figure out why SNMP is not working based on this list ... >> >> Support Ticket #62899404 has been updated >> >> Description: >> Hello Supratim, >> We've been implementing measures to avoid cyber attacks from and or to >> our network, For this reason, ports: >> 23,123,7722,389,135,137-139,445,69,514,161-162,6667 have been blocked. >> >> --- >> Supratim Sanyal, W1XMT >> 39.19151 N, 77.23432 W >> QCOCAL::SANYAL via HECnet <http://www.update.uu.se/~bqt/hecnet.html> >> >> >> On May 5, 2020, at 6:05 PM, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com >> <mailto:mcguire at neurotica.com>> wrote: >> >>> On 5/5/20 5:22 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >>>>>> The Cisco DECnet router implementation does not speak "decnet >>>>>> management" as >>>>>> we all knew. The way we are using them the tunnel end-points are on >>>>>> the Internet. >>>>>> >>>>>> Most of the information "missing" is actually available through the >>>>>> SNMP MIB, >>>>>> so if we could agree on a common read-only community and publish >>>>>> the IP addresses >>>>>> of those routers it would be possible to complete Paul's map.. >>>>>> >>>>> I would definitely be up for that. Maybe "hecnet-ro" for the >>>>> community name? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, Tim. >>>> Unfortunately this doesn't seem to be feasible. The issue is that my >>>> ISP blocks SNMP outbound -- I have no idea why they would so such a >>>> thing. And as far as I can tell there isn't any way to tell Cisco to >>>> accept incoming SNMP requests on any port other than the standard one. >>> I would be on the phone with them cursing a blue streak. I mean, do >>> they sell you a damn net connection, or not? There's life outside of >>> port 80! Wow. >>> >>> One thing you might be able to do is create a port mapping coming into >>> whatever terminates the "web browsing connection" from your upstream >>> provider, on some port that they don't presume to block, forwarding back >>> to port 161 on the Cisco. >>> >>> -Dave >>> >>> -- >>> Dave McGuire, AK4HZ >>> New Kensington, PA >