onnectivity (they acquired Ebone not too long ago).
Rob. I fully agree: operational importance, in deed and afaik, for
commercial as well as for R&E. Let's hope for some 11th hour fix...
mh
>
> Rob
>
--
Michael Hallgren, http://m.hallgren.free.fr/, MH2198-RIPE
>Please correct me if I am wrong. This is not allowing the practice of
>selling IPs or ASes,
I've never really come around to fully understand the notion (more and
more common, it seems) of _selling_ such..? (Maybe I'm an idealist :)
> but it encourages those of us who have acquired other
>comp
>
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2005, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
>
> > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Sean Donela n writes:
> > >
> > >On Mon, 14 Nov 2005, Blaine Christian wrote:
> > >> We are talking about an infrastructure that does not lend itself
> > >> very well to market forces. In many places
> -Message d'origine-
> De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De
> la part de Randy Bush
> Envoyé : mardi 22 novembre 2005 09:35
> À : Edward W. Ray
> Cc : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Objet : RE: route-views.routeviews.org down?
>
>
> > 1555 ms55 ms55 ms www.routeviews
> >
> >
> > Was that a device trying to phone home and get it's configs?
> > Cisco, Nortel, etc. phone home and get configs via tftp.
> >
> > Vonage doesn't need to phone home for config. The device is
> programmed
> > (router) and it registers with the call manager.
> > If you analyze the trans
ssh, or other schemes of enhanced security...?
mh
> -Message d'origine-
> De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De
> la part de Daniel Golding
> Envoyé : mardi 15 février 2005 23:39
> À : Jason L. Schwab; Martin Hannigan
> Cc : nanog@merit.edu
> Objet : Re: Vonage complains a
>
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
>
> > > On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Something else to consider. We block TFTP at our border for
> > > > > security reasons and we've found that this prevents
> Vonage from
> > > > > working.
> >
> > > Vonage de
>
> > ssh, or other schemes of enhanced security...?
>
> We have some that use https, but that is as about as secure
> as it gets. We also encrypt config files, so that helps.
>
Likely (at least for the time being :) better than nothing (or of
course use of naked protocols). My (inherited)
[...]
> > the lower range controlled by ARIN. No idea why ARIN doesn't have a
> record
> > for it...they only carry records for ASN 16779, which is Telstra-USA.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> I noticed that as well. But a quick google shows that Telstra is most
> definitely AS1221. Maybe they forgot to ren
>That's a little odd, considering that's included in a range of AS' that
>RIPE shows as delegated to ARIN. Anyone have any ideas?
>
aut-num AS1221, inverse
[...]
remarks AS assigned by the former InterNIC
[...]
source APNIC
mh
>Derek
> -Original
>
> > aut-num AS1221, inverse
> > as-name ASN-TELSTRA
> > descrTelstra Pty Ltd
> > descrLocked Bag No. 5744
> > descrGPO, Canberra, ACT, 2601
> > country AU
> > admin-c GH105-AP, inverse
> > tech-c
> >
> > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 01:09:54PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > > Has anybody mentioned the benefits of ISIS as an IGP to them.
> > > > Link-state protocols are evil, and when they break, they *really*
break.
> > > > I still do not see a compeling argument for not using BGP a
>Um. Set up more than one reflector
yes... and align your setup with your physical topology(so making it
useful);
use other proto for mapping your infra, etc, etc,..
mh
On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Peter van Dijk wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 a
Hi,
FYI,
I'm currently sitting as customer to 5511, and I see your two mentioned
addresses behind AT&T (NY peering FT-AT&T), NAC.
mh
-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de
Gerald
Envoye : samedi 31 aout 2002 16:55
A : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Obje
Hi Yu,
>Hi nanog,
>
>Have any idea of the current popular trouble ticket system for the NOC ?
>The system used to accept, dispatch, close, store and search trouble
>ticket
>or customer case ? It's pretty much a NOC work flow system, but more
>focused
>on IP NOC.
>
>So what's the popular one ? Ho
.ro -- try their London or Amsterdam guys. In an earlier life --
Teleglobe -- I
found them quite responsive (at least EU daytime :).
Cheers
mh
-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de
Sorin Constantinescu
Envoye : jeudi 26 septembre 2002 20:21
> On Sat, 1 Mar 2003, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
>
> > Who actually uses RADB to build filters other than Verio? While my
> > experience with other providers is limited Verio is the only one (of the
> > ones we have used) who used RADB entries for BGP peers.
>
> AFAIK, Level3 and C&W.
Teleglobe as we
>
> Per Gregers Bilse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On May 28, 10:37am, "Sam Stickland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Are there any BGP extensions that would cause a BGP
> speaker to foward
> >> all of it's paths, not just it best? I believe quagga had
> made some
> >> recent attempts
> >
Hi,
>
> Hi James,
> i would agree except NAC seems to have done nothing
> unreasonable and are executing cancellation clauses in there
> contract which are pretty standard. The customer's had plenty
> of time to sort things and they have iether been unable to or
> unwilling to move out in t
> -Message d'origine-
> De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De
> la part de Eric Pylko
> Envoyé : lundi 5 juillet 2004 22:02
> À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Objet : Announcing a /19 from a /16
>
>
> Hi-
>
> I'm working on a project within a large corporation and asked
> thei
> >
> > Hi-
> >
> > I'm working on a project within a large corporation and asked
> > their network folks about getting a /19 from one of their
> > /16s. I wanted it to avoid NAT and any possible overlapping
> > from using RFC1918 addresses. This project gets connected to
> > the internet
test
you're looking for, not "their"
>
> Hey, Mr. Spelling Bee, it is *their*, not there. So, you
> can't make an argument that is valid and focus on the spelling?
>
> This thread has gotten a bit long in the tooth, so I'm
> waiting for Godwin's law to ta
Hi guys,
What's the currently efficient/preferred way of updating (replacing, rather
than
adding) a record at http://puck.nether.net/netops/ :: NOC Telephone List ?
Cheers,
mh
--
Michael Hallgren, http://m.hallgren.free.fr/, mh2198-ripe
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 07:40:46PM +0200, Michael Hallgren wrote:
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > What's the currently efficient/preferred way of updating
> (replacing, rather
> > than
> > adding) a record at http://puck.nether.net/netops/
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Deepak Jain wrote:
>
> >
> > > I strongly approve of such requirement. I know that it is in
> the peering
> > > agreements of several carriers, but they often don't check or enforce
> > > this. Many register customer routes and ASes. If routes and policies
> > > were
>
> *sigh* So why did Richard Callahan even bother soliciting advice the first
> place? They are demonstrating they have no concern in operating a decent
> mail system, even after many kind folks here provided them all
> the info they
> needed.
>
> I've had two confirmations dropped so far today.
>
> Businesses that ask for email addresses know that a significant percentage
> of people can't type their own email address correctly. Each of those
> results in a bounce, or an undeliverable message sitting in an mqueue
> somewhere. It would not surprise me if they also reduced their
> Timeout
.. but anyway: someone informed on planned role of
policyanalysismarket.org ?
Out of curiosity,
mh
OK. As I said, I was merely curious (in particular of the
analytical content..), since rumors running. Many thanks
for URL.
mh
> -Original Message-
> From: Lapinski, Michael (Research) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 10:30 PM
> To: 'Michael
ndor, than asking the
highway provider to patch my way along.. building cotton walls.. ('cause
I wouldn't want my highway provider limit my driving experience in the
case I eventually run into a better performing car..). More subtle highway
speed versus security considerations... neglected, of course :)
mh
--
Michael Hallgren, http://m.hallgren.free.fr/, mh2198-ripe
>
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 04:55:44PM +0300, Petri Helenius wrote:
> >
> >
> > Does anyone know, either on the east coast US, London, Stockholm,
> > Copenhagen, Amsterdam or Helsinki transit providers which would allow
> > edge/handoff interface control to different traffic classes using BGP
>
> You mean like Level3?
>
Well,... proxying (in any shape) should, hopefully, not happen prior to
having a decent downstream trust relation onboard... (?)...
mh
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Steven M. Bellovin
> Sent: Wedne
>
> Deaggregation is at an all time high, I have raised this
> publically in some forums and IXP ops lists. Response is
> poor, action is non-existent.
>
> The only way I can see to do anything about this is for
> upstreams to educate their customers and others to pressure
> their peers.
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2004, at 6:33 AM, Michael Hallgren wrote:
>
> >> and that a large driver is to
> >> make your network look larger than it is...
> >>
> >
> > What audience??
>
> Unfortunately, I've seen Peering Policies which requir
>
> Global Crossing has this, already in production.
Idem, Teleglobe,
mh
> I was on the phone with Qwest yesterday & this was one of
> this things I asked about. Qwest indicated they are going to
> deploy this shortly. (i.e., send routes tagged with a
> community which they will set to nul
>
> uRPF in the core seems like a bad plan, what with diverse
> routes and such.
> Loose-mode might help SOME, but really spoofing is such a low
> priority issue why make it a requirement? Customer triggered
> blackholing is a nice feature though.
>
Shared view,
mh (Teleglobe, btw)
> -
37 matches
Mail list logo
