Re: BBC reports Kenya fiber break

[Dmitry Burkov]

On Mar 1, 2012, at 10:12 AM, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:

> 
> we had an instance of "B" root there for a season.  connectivity was a 
> problem and
> we pulled the node in 2001.
> 
> /bill

You should install it on sattelite

dima

> 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 09:45:16PM -0800, Bill Woodcock wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA256
>> 
 On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Justin M. Streiner
  wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Rodrick Brown wrote:
> 
>> There's about 1/2 a dozen or so known private and government research
>> facilities on Antarctica and I'm surprised to see no fiber end points on
>> that continent? This can't be true.
> 
> 
> Constantly shifting ice shelves and glaciers make a terrestrial cable
> landing very difficult to implement on Antarctica.  Satellite connectivity
> is likely the only feasible option.  There are very few places in
> Antarctica that are reliably ice-free enough of the time to make a viable
> terrestrial landing station.  Getting connectivity from the landing 
> station
> to other places on the continent is another matter altogether.
>> 
>> There were INOC-DBA phones at several of the Antarctic stations, for quite a 
>> few years.  We could see connectivity to them go up and down as the 
>> satellites rose above the horizon and set again.
>> 
>>-Bill
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
>> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
>> Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
>> 
>> iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJPTwztAAoJEG+kcEsoi3+HpgwP/2wjrnyjCoBrLgQYC/rsjVYe
>> uE8X9ZcnkAkBYI5Q3Aa3ZeVYNbUaX6OChgnsXlt+1v962Lja+V78QuthVDRCJ1Dp
>> Z5T+XtiIQB4u11lhN55mx8cPXbAKubGCduyCzjBBi+QqE5ayqqCocBHAItxYOMd7
>> RRS5ijNUKVMtGIWWWHAdMFAdGuy3zOIt/9oWkq9jJo30RJkEVR6pi7b/sGmM7rjX
>> XLVc1RPtCmtDkALohRyQOPrMJ2k7284fJ49t2P2Z/8yBbvJtGRmRBkTiUNis0wtx
>> Ndxed96TaNwwF3snE/zAxu6xCZnjR5trzC586b3ULS2sGSSo2W63AjOqzpMtb8HG
>> /hlK2GuaAe1vy9Qa+6XDwVJZqbkzPKzrNv7A3RjNvFkTapPGwk1FI7SBO46CUqHh
>> y2xED78JrIcoKTbC927eWrrArFGRe4ujx+w2D5enlZJT/vGonDScsE/ISAxITbCx
>> QHbtoAWIjVbraN1UZx+g9hvYOb3AT04zkTImQCj0Kj42COx729WvR7anrkwNNAJV
>> uqQyLK2wyS9ItyG3U54tECeGVeK0nn9Gyuhp9wdIKI4Qs+JHxXb2eHFqzbn9OZHB
>> O7PhbBTW3h+viNUkK2NnoiFbQP3E3ZzzNAKjTN9hWa15uGOKum5xUxSZFCD47BuD
>> J2CjI8dx5PhmLTbcZS4C
>> =M/np
>> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>> 
>> 
> 

Re: rpki vs. secure dns?

[Dmitry Burkov]

Danny, 
just one more comment.

So named vendor's support can be the worst case when there are no practical 
ways to deploy and it is  absolutely
not clear - should we follow this hierarchical model - I think it is  the key 
point as we pushed ourselves by inertia to this way of thinking.


Imho - it is way to nowhere in such form

We need more flexible, distributed architecture behind - no matter - which 
interests will be lobbied as we have got already.



On Apr 30, 2012, at 6:53 PM, Danny McPherson wrote:

> 
> On Apr 28, 2012, at 6:34 AM, Alex Band wrote:
> 
>> All in all, RPKI has really good traction and with native router support in 
>> Cisco, Juniper and Quagga, this is only getting better. 
> 
> We should be more careful with statements such as this, they're conflating 
> important things that add to the confusion in this area.
> 
> None of these implementations support "RPKI" today.  What they support is a 
> new protocol for onboarding routing policy data (some call this a [VRP],  
> essentially prefix,origin bindings) into soft state in a router.
> 
> -danny
> 
> [VRP] https://ripe64.ripe.net/presentations/74-120417.sidr-origin.pdf
> 

Re: rpki vs. secure dns?

[Dmitry Burkov]

Randy -
you know that I'm enough stupid- means straightforward - 

may be the way is not only technical (recomendations design) - but also to 
combine with some policy changes as
splitting allocations and assignments (may be changing who is responsible for 
what?)

Or we follow the traditional way(means hierarchy) or we are capable to 
introduce one more 
level for flexebility - we should be honest that all techinical design just 
follows some political or quasi-political decisions.
But I think it can be changed.

Dima
On Apr 30, 2012, at 7:46 PM, Randy Bush wrote:

>> We need more flexible, distributed architecture behind - no matter -
>> which interests will be lobbied as we have got already.
> 
> as i agree that there is a problem, i *very* eagerly await your proposal
> 
> randy

Re: F-ckin Leap Seconds, how do they work?

[Dmitry Burkov]

On Jul 5, 2012, at 1:35 PM, Vadim Antonov wrote:

> On Wed, 2012-07-04 at 20:48 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> 
>> Given that we don't seem to be able to eliminate the absurdity of DST,
>> I doubt that either of those proposals is likely to fly.
> 
> Russian govt. did eliminate DST.
> 
> http://www.rt.com/news/daylight-saving-time-abolished/

:)
http://themoscownews.com/vote/20120629/189902272-results.html

> 
> --vadim
> 

Re: US House to ITU: Hands off the Internet

[Dmitry Burkov]

John,
I  like your approach - simply no comments


 I think the way as your legislation guys decided to follow can be absolutely 
wrong.

My opinion that the real problem laid in financial issues with developing 
countires and US native commercial  interests that you (not you personally - of 
course) aimed to protect

All this discussion have only  financial background - no more.

Dima
PS 
You can reference not only to magazines - but more on  House of Representatives 
which expressed their opinions more openly.

On Aug 4, 2012, at 12:47 AM, John Curran wrote:

> On Aug 3, 2012, at 2:06 PM, "Patrick W. Gilmore"  wrote:
> 
>> [Feels operational to me.]
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The U.S. House of Representatives voted late Thursday to send a message to 
>> the United Nations' International Telecommunication Union that the Internet 
>> doesn't need new international regulations. The vote was unanimous: 414-0
>> 
>> Unanimous?  I didn't think this congress could agree the earth is round 
>> unanimously.
> 
> It is can be useful (particularly during an election year) to make 
> certain that there is no doubt regarding the resolve of government 
> with respect to positions being taken in international negotiations. 
> 
> In this case, I believe that the message is now quite clear...
> 
> :-)
> /John
> 
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> ARIN
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: US House to ITU: Hands off the Internet

[Dmitry Burkov]

The real issue is not laid in their economics - but in ours - our legacy 
players(mobile are the same)
We simply try to hide our own problems behind their issues and use them again  
to protect our market interests
- no more.


On Aug 4, 2012, at 2:03 AM, John Curran wrote:

> On Aug 3, 2012, at 5:57 PM, Dmitry Burkov 
> wrote:
> 
>> My opinion that the real problem laid in financial issues with developing 
>> countires 
> 
> Dmitry - 
> 
>  There is a very real financial issue that developing countries face 
>  with affording the infrastructure that their citizens want to use
>  (and often used to access to VoIP and streaming media services)
> 
>  I do think that there needs to be ample discussion of these concerns,
>  but do not assume that a regulatory regime is the only available 
>  solution the issues raised.
> 
> FYI,
> /John
> 
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> ARIN
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: US House to ITU: Hands off the Internet

[Dmitry Burkov]

in my stupid opinion it is the problem of a new global still developing global 
market - key dominated players are from  our countries - which see on them as 
on strategical national strategic assets. Should I explain more?
Or it is already clear?

I classified censorship and IPR protection in the same manner or I mistaken?


On Aug 4, 2012, at 2:44 AM, Dmitry Burkov wrote:

> The real issue is not laid in their economics - but in ours - our legacy 
> players(mobile are the same)
> We simply try to hide our own problems behind their issues and use them again 
>  to protect our market interests
> - no more.
> 
> 
> On Aug 4, 2012, at 2:03 AM, John Curran wrote:
> 
>> On Aug 3, 2012, at 5:57 PM, Dmitry Burkov 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> My opinion that the real problem laid in financial issues with developing 
>>> countires 
>> 
>> Dmitry - 
>> 
>> There is a very real financial issue that developing countries face 
>> with affording the infrastructure that their citizens want to use
>> (and often used to access to VoIP and streaming media services)
>> 
>> I do think that there needs to be ample discussion of these concerns,
>> but do not assume that a regulatory regime is the only available 
>> solution the issues raised.
>> 
>> FYI,
>> /John
>> 
>> John Curran
>> President and CEO
>> ARIN
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Re: ARIN / RIR Pragmatism (WAS: Re: RADB)

[Dmitry Burkov]

it's just a consequence that our initial idea was just about to protect 
allocations of our members - not about secure routing at all

On 26 Oct 2014, at 14:40, John Curran  wrote:

> On Oct 26, 2014, at 6:46 AM, Randy Bush  wrote:
>> 
>> 20% coverage in lacnic low?  how do ipv6 and dnssec compare (which is
>> damned sad)?  over 2,000 in ripe and over 8%?  how does that compare to
>> ipv6?  
>> 
>> arin, 388 and 0.7%, a joke.
> 
> LACNIC numbers (as a percent) are quite good, but my question 
> was why only RIPE has the very impressive total count of ROAs.
> You can clearly point to ARIN's legal treatment of the risks involved, 
> but that is not applicable in the APNIC case
> 
> You don't feel there's any correlation between RIPE's IRR approach 
> and their RPKI success?   
> 
> /John
> 
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> ARIN

Re: ARIN / RIR Pragmatism (WAS: Re: RADB)

[Dmitry Burkov]

John 
- it is not about RPK
I - our initial goal was to deploy some kind of certification to resources 
allocated to our members

Dmitry

If we use for it some SIDR developments - may be - it is a mistake or 
misentrepration - but what's true that we never thougy
On 26 Oct 2014, at 14:40, John Curran  wrote:

> On Oct 26, 2014, at 6:46 AM, Randy Bush  wrote:
>> 
>> 20% coverage in lacnic low?  how do ipv6 and dnssec compare (which is
>> damned sad)?  over 2,000 in ripe and over 8%?  how does that compare to
>> ipv6?  
>> 
>> arin, 388 and 0.7%, a joke.
> 
> LACNIC numbers (as a percent) are quite good, but my question 
> was why only RIPE has the very impressive total count of ROAs.
> You can clearly point to ARIN's legal treatment of the risks involved, 
> but that is not applicable in the APNIC case
> 
> You don't feel there's any correlation between RIPE's IRR approach 
> and their RPKI success?   
> 
> /John
> 
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> ARIN

Re: Feds disable movie piracy websites in raids

[Dmitry Burkov]

On 02.07.10 0:27, Randy Bush wrote:

The question is because gTLDs operations are in the USA, does it mean
that the USA have control over all those domain names?
 

the usg controls the cctlds too.

   


you know better...

randy

   

Re: The Economist, cyber war issue

[Dmitry Burkov]

On 02.07.10 2:01, Randy Bush wrote:

There is a part 2 as well
 

and this is a bug or a feature?

   

I see it is a feature ...