Simply Top Ad

Friday, April 15, 2011

APNIC IPv4 Address Pool Reaches Final /8

As of Friday, 15 April 2011, the APNIC pool reached the Final /8 IPv4 address block, bringing us to Stage Three of IPv4 exhaustion in the Asia Pacific.

Last /8 address policy

IPv4 requests will now be assessed under section 9.10 in "Policies for IPv4 address space management in the Asia Pacific region".

APNIC's objective during Stage Three is to provide IPv4 address space for new entrants to the market and for those deploying IPv6.

From now, all new and existing APNIC account holders will be entitled to receive a maximum allocation of a /22 (1024 addresses) from the Final /8 address space.

http://www.apnic.net/services/services-apnic-provides/helpdesk/faqs/ipv4-stage3-faq

http://www.apnic.net/publications/news/2011/final-8

Monday, April 11, 2011

More registrar hunting

Still looking for the perfect registrar.

After asking around on the AAISP IRC channel #A&A, someone mentioned an outfit called Portfast.

Portfast appears to be a provider of hosting, virtual servers, and domain names. They offer native IPv6 (cool), they have a good name (Portfast), and they operate out of a .CO.UK domain name (portfast.co.uk) which is something I like to see. They appear to offer a no-nonsense service, and have sensible prices.

.UK domains are priced at £6+VAT per 2 years and .EU domains are priced at £9+VAT per year.

I liked what I saw so gave them a phone call. The phone was answered quickly, and the first person I spoke to had the technical ability to use the phrase "regular expression" in the conversation, and also the ability to recognise (in about one minute of conversation, starting from cold) that I would be able to understand that phrase. With other companies, this sort of ability doesn't manifest until about third-line support. I liked what I heard, so thought I'd give them a shot.

I have now taken my .CO.UK and my .EU over to Portfast.

There was no charge for taking the .CO.UK over. There was an annual renewal charge of £9+VAT for taking over the .EU, but that is par for the course because EURid charges registrars for transfers.

The .CO.UK went over fine. But the .EU appears to have hit a snag in that all the nameservers were lost in the transfer. This meant that there were no nameservers registered, which of course will have broken the domain name's operation. Fortunately Portfast offers on-line nameserver setting, and it seems these are pushed through to the EURid WHOIS and EURid nameservers within a matter of seconds, so it was easy enough to get things going again.

I asked Portfast about the loss of nameservers, and they replied quickly to indicate that this was not something that they expected to happen, and that their systems were specifically programmed not to touch the nameserver configuration over a registrar transfer. So a bit of a mystery there.

There is still a snag though. Portfast offers on-line configuration of IPv6 glue for .UK domain names. But for .EU domains, on-line configuration of glue records for .EU domains only goes as far as IPv4 glue and does not include IPv6 glue. To Portfast's credit, this is not a limitation imposed by them but rather by OpenSRS who Portfast use to register .EU domain names.

(It is not unreasonable for registrars to subcontract .EU domain name registrations to other registrars because of the somewhat onerous terms imposed upon registrars by EURid, for example the lodging of a €10,000 deposit.)

OpenSRS do not currently support the setting up of IPv6 glue on .EU domain names via an automation interface. So .EU domain name resellers using OpenSRS cannot reasonably offer automated IPv6 glue configuration to their customers.

(Despite APNIC being a mere 10 days away from running out of IPv4 addresses completely, the world does not seem to have realised that the time for saying "Oh we'll be handling IPv6 at ... [waves hand in a dismissive fashion] ... some point in the future" has long since passed.)

So I am currently pursuing the possibility of having Portfast pursue OpenSRS to set up IPv6 glue manually.

So far, OpenSRS has replied to say that they don't support IPv6 glue on .EU domain names. Unfortunately for them, I do not believe they have the option of taking this this position because under the registrar agreement they have with EURid, they will be obliged to offer all services to customers that EURid provides. I've submitted a request to Portfast that OpenSRS be asked again, and where we are now is that that request is currently outstanding.

Thus far Portfast has been entirely helpful and professional.

So at the minute it seems that Portfast per se are absolutely fine.

The problem I have left is that OpenSRS appear to be being a bit dim.

Results so far:


CompanySummary
AAISPReasonable level of technical competence within the organisation, and reasonably easy to get through to technically competent people on the phone. However they do not support on-line configuration of nameservers — you have to submit a support ticket, which is quite pants. Nor do they support automated registration of new domain names — you have to put in a support ticket, which is utterly hopeless if you are looking to "grab" a domain name. A generalised lack of automation on domain name handling — "all handled through tickets". Support tickets would be fine, however it typically take 1+ business days before you even get the initial response on a ticket. UK domain names quite pricey at £12+VAT per year. I don't know if they even provide .EU domain names. Recommendation: Not good for domain name registrations on their own, but OK if buying registrations along with other services, and you aren't cost conscious.
NamesCoTechnically incompetent. Don't touch with a bargepole
Nominate a.k.a. BB-OnlineTechnically incompetent. Don't touch with a bargepole
PortfastTechnically competent in and of themselves. Very reasonable pricing. Portfast handles IPv6 glue on .UK domain names "natively" through their on-line system. Unfortunately Portfast uses OpenSRS for .EU domain names, and it remains to be seen how OpenSRS will behave on IPv6 glue for .EU domain names. Recommendation: Seems to be good for .UK domain name registrations; the jury is still out on .EU domain name registrations.

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

Where have all the good DNS registrars gone?

I have been trying to register a couple of domain names, a .CO.UK and a .EU, and have them set up with my name servers with Glue Records (IPv4 and IPv6).

Should be simple right? But it has so far turned out to be a mammoth task.

I started out by looking for a not-too-expensive registrar who could cope with .CO.UK and .EU names, and who would process the initial registration automatically (and immediately), as opposed to requiring a message to be submitted to a human for processing whenever they saw fit.

After searching around, I landed on NamesCo. Their automated system processed the initial registrations straight off.

Unfortunately they rather messed-up the registrant's (i.e. my) e-mail address as recorded with EURid, putting their own e-mail address instead of mine — VERY naughty. Also it look a LOT of jumping up on down on them via several support tickets to get this fixed. In the end it looked like they had to do (what EURid call) a "trade", presumably at their expense, to get the domain ownership transferred to me. Eh? Yes. From EURid's point-of-view, the domain wasn't actually registered to me at all! So it looks like NamesCo were being extremely naughty and registering names requested by customers to themselves — seems to me to be really quite illegal.

Anyway, I eventually got around to wanting the nameservers and Glue Records set up. So I put in two support tickets, one for each domain name.

The .CO.UK was processed correctly within one business day and I was all set.

After a while, they came back to tell me that the .EU was done. I checked. It wasn't. I queried. A different person waded in on the support ticket and made a comment that was total nonsense. I queried. They made another nonsense comment. This went back and forth a few times before the original person re-surfaced and told me to disregard all the comments from the other person, and made a comment which made sense. Professional? Not really.

This first person made some enquiries, and finally came to the conclusion that they could not support IPv6 Glue Records on .EU domain names because the company which actually processed their .EU registrations (Register.IT) did not support IPv6 Glue Records on .EU domain names.

This was bad as it was. But it was made even worse by the fact that I had deliberately asked, in a support ticket a few weeks earlier, whether they supported IPv6 Glue Records for .EU domain names. Their reply was that their ability to support IPv6 Glue Records was limited only by the ability of the relevant registry to support them. So having said "yes", they now said "no".

I checked the sample agreement which is agreed between EURid and registrars. In section 2.5 it says that registrars must offer all the services to end-users that EURid offers. I also telephoned EURid in Belgium (English +32 2 401 27 60) and asked them if they supported IPv6 Glue. The chap I spoke with didn't know, but he telephoned me back later to say that they did. So it would seem that Register.IT is actually obliged to support IPv6 Glue on .EU domains, but doesn't. So what is that? Probably a civil wrong toward EURid. Ah well.

Eventually I decided that NamesCo was not for me and started to have a look round for another registrar. After looking around I found that AAISP have a domain name "aaisp.eu", and that was registered through an outfit called Nominate.

"Nominate"? Odd. Sounds like some kind of play on "Nominet", and really quite a silly name. Ordinarily I would not have any truck with a company which (a) has such a silly name and (b) appears to be deliberately trying to confuse people into thinking it might be some other organisation (Nominet). But, I thought, hey ho, if it's good enough for AAISP, it's good enough for me.

So I spoke with Nominate to see if (a) they did deal directly with the registries Nominet and EURid, and (b) if they would support IPv6 Glue. They said that they did deal directly with those two registries. On the subject of IPv6 Glue, they said that whilst it was not something they had done much of, they did have access to most registries, and doing "unusual" things with domain registration was something that was well within the sort of thing that they would do.

So I took a chance and promptly transferred my .CO.UK and .EU to Nominate.com.

Nominate.com duly took over the domain names. I then asked them to set up the .EU with the desired nameservers and Glue Records. Within a short while they had managed to get those set up correctly. Fantastic.

At this point both domains were set up and from a DNS point of view, all correct and returning the correct nameservers and Glue Records, including IPv6 Glue Records. In addition, the information recorded with the registries legally identifying me as the registrant owner was correct. Fantastic.

So Nominate were starting to look reasonbly good.

However their web control panel does leave quite a bit to be desired. For example the Postal/geographic address bit doesn't really have the right layout for UK postal addresses, and unless you have an unusually brief address you end up having to cram it in and shove bits of the address into what is really the wrong box.

Also, Nominate are incapable of accepting e-mail addresses which don't happen to fit into their own private definition of what is acceptable. RFC5322 doesn't seem to have reached as far as Longfield, Kent, and they will not accept an e-mail address with a plus symbol in it. Clang!

Even worse was the reason they cited. Something to do with their system treating e-mail addresses as regular expressions! Bizarre! So if the e-mail address contains a plus symbol, this will be interpreted as "match one or more of the previous entity"!

Now, I can tell you, as an I.T. professional with 20 years experience in the business, that this is HIDEOUSLY, HEINOUSLY BROKEN, and indicates that their technical staff (if they have any at all) are hideously incompetent and any company that is this technically incompetent should not be touched with a bargepole.

So in summary: I'm still looking for a DNS registrar which is at least a quarter decent. If you do have any suggestions, please do let me know.

Results so far:


CompanySummary
NamesCoTechnically incompetent. Don't touch with a bargepole
Nominate a.k.a. BB-OnlineTechnically incompetent. Don't touch with a bargepole

Humax Foxsat-HDR won't record two channels at once — FIXED

A few years ago, I installed a Sky free-to-view system for a relative. This involved installing a Sky minidish on the outside of the house with a single LNB and a single cable coming down to a Sky digibox. This was just a straight standard definition receiver box — I think it even pre-dated Sky HD services in any case. There was no record facility so it, so only one cable was required. The Sky digibox was acquired second-hand via eBay. I think I originally set it up with one of those viewing cards which was no charge per month and let you watch just the basic channels.

This all worked fine. After a while the situation meant that the relative wanted to have a basic package from Sky, which they got, and were paying fees monthly to Sky. After another while, they decided they didn't want to pay Sky anything, so changed their package again down to a no-charge-per-month package.

This was fine for a while. Then the digibox started playing up. It would work for a while, then go downhill with the picture breaking up. If switched off overnight, it would then work for a few hours the next day before going downhill again.

I was called in to fix it — a 100-mile trek. I reasoned that as it worked for a while after powering up, it must be the digibox, perhaps something like it was overheating. So I swapped in another digibox, the same make and model, which I had lying around after having had my own installation upgraded to Sky Plus.

With the other digibox swapped in, everything looked fine. 100 miles back home. But then it started doing the same problem as the first one had. So I wondered if perhaps it was something else.

In the initial installation, I didn't really know what I was doing, and had bought the dish and cable as a kit. There was 20m of cable (aluminium foil screened I believe) in the kit, which wasn't really long enough to reach, so I had routed the cable in a way which left it a bit exposed to the elements and not thoroughly clipped down. So I wondered if the cable had deteriorated. So, after another 100 mile trek back to site, I tried putting in a short temporary cable (using proper copper-foil-screened foam dielectric cable) from the dish to the box, and I also tried a third digibox (my Sky Plus box from home).

Neither of the Sky digiboxes would work on any cable, but the Sky Plus box worked on all cables. So I reasoned that my second "test" digibox was broken in the same way as the first digibox.

So this would require changing the box. I advised my relative that they might want to take this opportunity to upgrade to a recording Freesat system and to get a Humax Foxsat-HDR.

Now, at the time they only had one cable coming down from the dish, and of course a Foxsat-HDR, to work fully, would need two cables.

So the plan was for them to get a Humax Foxsat-HDR, install it themselves on a single cable, and then I would come back another time to arrange a second cable. 100 mile trek back home again. As it was, the original cable was not long enough and was not routed optimally, so I decided to put in two new cables.

So eventually I found the time to put in two new cables from the dish to the Foxsat-HDR. 100 mile trek back to site again. This time I used proper copper-foil screened, foam dielectric cable, with brown outer insulation to match the colour of the house, clipped on with matching brown clips. The cable was also routed properly so as to be out of the elements, no tight corners, and clipped all the way. Much better.

Connected it up to the Foxsat-HDR. The box said that it could see good signal on both inputs. "So", I thought "Job Done". 100 mile trek back home again.

I spoke to my relative in the meantime to help get them into being able to record programmes, which eventually I was able to do. After a while they discovered that they were not able to record two high definition programmes at once. I was puzzled by this, but put it down to the data rate on high definition programming being too high to cope with another stream at the same time.

After another long while, it transpired that they could not even record two standard definition channels at the same time. Very puzzling. After all, I had checked the box and made sure that both inputs were showing a good signal.

After a while it was time to visit again. I had a play with the box. Sure enough there was still a really good signal on each receiver channel (something like strength 90%, quality 100%). But if I told it to record a programme, then I went to watch something else, I would find that many of the channels were "greyed out" and unable to be selected. Puzzling.

I had a sniff round on the web and found that this problem could happen because of the box only using one receiver input. But … but … I checked, and the box was showing two good signals, so surely it couldn't be that.

Then eventually I found a suggestion that the box only "decided" how many cables it was going to use at initial set-up time, i.e. the thing which it usually only does once when you first set the box up. So, for example, it would not do it on a soft power-up time, or even on a hard power-up. Only when the box is initially set up. As I had not thought I would need to do this when I had first put the two-cable feed in place, the box would then only be using one of the inputs.

The solution suggested was to do a "factory reset" on the box. I was concerned that this would erase all stored programmes, something which people would not normally want to do. But I thought I'd go and have a look.

I went into the "factory reset" option on the box, and thankfully it presented a clear message on-screen to say to the effect that recorded programmes would not be removed.

So I went through factory reset, and the box went through its initial set-up, and I had to re-enter the postcode etc.. Crucially, at one point it put up a message to the effect of "Detected cables: two". This then told me that it was detecting the number of cables connected.

After that, I could tell the box to record a programme, then go and watch another programme, and all channels were available, i.e. none were "greyed-out" as before. I could also record two programmes at once.

So it looks like the engineers at Humax have decided that the number of cables is pretty much fixed, and they haven't really catered for the case of someone starting with one cable and later upgrading to two cables.

I am surprised that the box does not re-detect the number of cables more easily. It even shows the signal strength and quality on both cables, so it knows that the signal is there. Also there seems to be no option anywhere in the menus to re-detect the number of cables. The only way is to do factory reset and go through initial set-up.

Update 2011-03-14: It turns out you can change the number of cables without having to do a factory reset. The cable configuration can be changed through a hidden menu.

So it is both (a) hard to even tell that it hasn't detected the second cable, and (b) even when you do figure this out, it's a bit hard to discover how to fix it.

Once you know, it's easy. But the knowledge is "magic" and not easily discoverable.

Hopefully by posting this article, it may save some people some trouble.

If you found this article helpful, please consider donating 0.25 U.S. Dollars or 0.25 Euro.

Phrases to help people find this page:

  • Humax Foxsat HDR some channels are grey
  • Humax Foxsat HDR won't record two channels at once
  • Humax Foxsat HDR won't use second cable
  • Humax Foxsat HDR won't use second receiver
  • Humax Foxsat HDR won't let me record one channel and watch another
  • Humax Foxsat HDR problems

Friday, February 18, 2011

How not to respond to people chasing you up

How not to respond to people chasing you up:

Yes I was going to look at your issue but it slipped my mind. I'll have a look at it now.

I do have other things to do besides this.

What's wrong with this? Look at it from the point of view of the person doing the chasing. After they read the first paragraph, they have something, and they're reasonably happy. Then the person being requested continues with a comment which may be true, but comes across as a snidey remark implying that the request is of low importance. Simply omitting the second paragraph would have made the world a better place.

If we really want to include the sentiment about the person requested being busy, at least try to close on a positive note:

Yes. I have a number of things on at the minute and your issue just slipped my mind.

I will look at it now and aim to provide you with an update by the end of the day.

There. That manages to convey the sentiment that you are busy, without appearing snidey, and also finishes on a positive note and gives a reasonably firm timescale by which the requestor might expect to see further progress.

Thursday, February 10, 2011

cahoot is now total rubbish

Have been using cahoot for a bank for a few years now.

To begin with, they were really good. But in recent times they have gone downhill, and are now complete rubbish.

The on-line banking regularly does not work and says "service is suspended. We are currently updating our systems. This takes approximately 5 minutes. Please wait until the cahoot service is resumed. Thanks for your patience."

Now cahoot is just a branch of Santander. Despite Santander being part of the Faster Payments Service, cahoot does not support Faster Payments, and there are apparently no plans to do so. So it seems if I want 20th century banking, cahoot should be my first choice. No thanks.

Another thing they have started doing is to "accidentally" block my on-line access. When I phone them up to report this, they act like they don't know what it is and say they will have to call me back. After about half a day, they phone back and say it was "mysteriously" blocked for no reason that they can determine. They then say that they can restore access, but first they have to "take me through security". They then tell me that they are restoring access. This seemingly takes about ten minutes, during which time they make various noises to indicate they are going through umpteen different things on their computer. They then tell me that it is done. What confuses me is why they didn't just do it before calling me back, and why I have to sit on the phone listening to them operate their computer for ten minutes. Bizarre.

cahoot now appear to have totally lost the plot and seem to be completely incompetent.

So I am now in the process of moving to another bank.

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

IPv4 address pool final allocations ceremony

Here is the video for the IPv4 address pool final allocations ceremony:

ICANN IPv4 Ceremony | Miami

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9AzSl2MdFk

And whilst we're at it, let's have the IPv6 news conference:

ICANN IPv6 News Conference | Miami, Florida

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gveJs6YRYXU