On Dec 31, 2008, at 15:28, Kevin Oberman wrote:
We use CDMA clocks and last leap second it took weeks for all of the
cell sites to adjust the last one. As a result, I have set all of our
clocks for manual leap second and set them to adjust tonight at
midnight
(UTC).I'll take a look in about
It was my understanding that (most) cable modems are L2 devices -- how it is
that they have a buffer, other than what the network processor needs to
switch it?
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Leo Bicknell [mailto:bickn...@ufp.org]
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 9:10 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
S
Hi,
On 2009-3-16, at 7:09, Leo Bicknell wrote:
My wish is for the vendors to step up. I would love to be able to
configure my router/cable modem/dsl box with "queue-size 50ms" and
have it compute, for the current link speed, 50ms of buffer.
if the vendors got active and deployed better queuei
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 09:09:35AM -0500, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> The result is that if the vendor targeted 100ms of buffer you now
> have 400ms of buffer, and really bad lag.
Well, this is one of the reasons why I hate the fact that we're
effectively stuck in a 1500 MTU world. My customers are vast
Joe Provo wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 12:14:08PM -0400, Steve Bertrand wrote:
> [snip]
>> Are there any potential dangers of publishing our information before we
>> use it that I may be overlooking?
>
> In case you are worried about folks who filter, recall that the IRR
> uniqueeness is base
Robert,
Check out Wataniya and Zain, the two are the regional wireless
providers and in my experience, at least in Kuwait, they offer aircard
service. The catch is that you have to have a local ID card (this was
the rule in Kuwait, not sure of Iraq). You can get around this by
buying the service f
Hi,
Our half or dozen or so iPhone users are experiencing issues with
accessing our corporate website and email services.
I spoke to AT&T's support who after a few minutes told me it wasn't an
ATT problem and forwarded me to Apple who said it was an issue with
the website and were unable
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 12:14:08PM -0400, Steve Bertrand wrote:
[snip]
> Are there any potential dangers of publishing our information before we
> use it that I may be overlooking?
In case you are worried about folks who filter, recall that the IRR
uniqueeness is based upon the Prefix/length, ori
A unit within the University has need to get reliable network connectivity
to Iraq, more specifically Baghdad. I was wondering if any nanogers have any
recommendations and/or contacts with providers in the area. Wired or
Wireless. Off-list is fine.
TIA
Robert D. Scott rob...@ufl.e
p...@mindfury.net wrote:
...which is better?
Neither (both) is better, depending on the scenario. This is especially
true when mixing in MPLS and other features.
My question is, which is the correct method of implementing this? Should
we be redistributing static and connected routes on ou
On Tuesday 17 March 2009 12:33:30 am Pete Templin wrote:
> Any NANOGers running an MPLS network and choosing instead
> to redistribute the relevant connected routes from the
> peering edge into their network (either via IGP or BGP),
> thereby allowing label switching all the way to the PE
> (and t
Mark Tinka wrote:
On Tuesday 17 March 2009 12:20:08 am p...@mindfury.net
wrote:
My question is, which is the correct method of
implementing this? Should we be redistributing static
and connected routes on our borders into IGP, and not
using next-hop-self? Or should we not redistribute and
us
On Tuesday 17 March 2009 12:20:08 am p...@mindfury.net
wrote:
> My question is, which is the correct method of
> implementing this? Should we be redistributing static
> and connected routes on our borders into IGP, and not
> using next-hop-self? Or should we not redistribute and
> use next-hop-
...which is better?
We recently ran into what looks like an implementation flaw in our network
design. After moving two GbE connections with Savvis (same edge device on
both ends) into EBGP-multihop, we were encountering problems with iBGP
churn.
The network design is two buildings in the same A
I'm still working on trying to get my primary provider to BGP peer with
us, but in the meantime, I'd like to pro-actively publish our objects
and route policy to the IRR.
My primary provider is currently advertising our IPv4 routes for us from
their AS.
Are there any potential dangers of publishi
In a message written on Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 10:15:37AM +0100, Marian
??urkovi?? wrote:
> This however doesn't seem to be of any concern for TCP maintainers of #2,
> who claim that receiver is not supposed to anyhow assist in congestion
> control. Instead, they advise everyone to use advanced queu
Briefly? They're correct - the rx advertised window has nothing to do
with congestion control and everything to do with flow control.
The problem you've described *is* a problem, but not because of its
effects on congestion control -- the problem it causes is one we call
a lack of agility:
This is, believe it or not, a feature of the device you are using.
On Sun, March 15, 2009 01:55, Andy Bierlair wrote:
> Im trying to run netflow on one of our Cisco core routers (SUP720 3BXL),
> but I think I am hitting some limitations because of this:
> %EARL_NETFLOW-SP-4-TCAM_THRLD: Netflow T
Hi all,
TCP window autotuning is part of several OSs today. However, the actual
implementations behind this buzzword differ significantly and might impose
negative side-effects to our networks - which I'd like to discuss here.
There seem to be two basic approaches which differ in the main princ
19 matches
Mail list logo
