[HECnet] Cisco DECnet routers and NML

[Johnny Billquist]

I think they just meant TCP. I'm not sure those clowns would even 
understand that UDP is a separate name space, separate protocol, and 
their firewall rules are not actually applying...
(Well, ok, I would hope they understood as much, but I've had to fight 
ISPs enough to last me a lifetime...)

   Johnny

On 2020-05-06 01:32, 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
> 
> 


-- 
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                   ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol