* Truman Boyes (tru...@suspicious.org) wrote:
>
> an SRX 3400/3600 you can scale up the performance of IPSEC VPN
> throughput with additional SPCs. You should be able to scale to over
> 6Gbps of IPSEC with enough SPCs.
>
> Truman
Yes, the SRX line of products is the most future-proof way to go
On 12/11/2009, at 5:45 AM, Brad Fleming wrote:
On Nov 11, 2009, at 3:25 AM, a...@baklawasecrets.com wrote:
Hi,
I have a requirement to encrypt data using IPSEC over a p-t-p gig
fibre
link. In the past I've normally used Juniper to terminate VPNs, as I
have found them excellent devices
On 11/11/09 12:48 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
Since people need to *explicitly* choose using the OpenDNS servers, I
can hardly see how anybody's wishes are foisted on these people.
If you don't like the answers you get from this (free) service, you
can of course choose to use a different service -
It is wise to stack the deck in your favor, but you'll never really
know how much real redundancy you've purchased:
http://www.atis.org/ndai/ATIS_NDAI_Final_Report_2006.pdf
David
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 3:41 PM, wrote:
> I suppose I could take the whole resilience thing further and further
I suppose I could take the whole resilience thing further and further and
further. One of the replies used a phrase which I thing captured the problem
quite nicely: "diminishing returns".
Basically I could spend lots and lots of money to try and eliminate all single
points of failure. Clearl
Folks,
The NANOG 48 Call for Presentations is now available at
http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog48/index.php. Please
take a look at the important dates, and submit your
proposals at http://pc.nanog.org.
Look forward to seeing you all in Austin.
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:48:39 +0100, Florian Weimer said:
> > Since people need to *explicitly* choose using the OpenDNS servers, I
> > can hardly see how anybody's wishes are foisted on these people.
> >
> > If you don't like the answers you get from this (free) service, you
> > can of course choos
> > Since people need to *explicitly* choose using the OpenDNS servers, I
> > can hardly see how anybody's wishes are foisted on these people.
> >
> > If you don't like the answers you get from this (free) service, you
> > can of course choose to use a different service - for instance your
> > ISP'
On Nov 11, 2009, at 3:48 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> Since people need to *explicitly* choose using the OpenDNS servers, I
>> can hardly see how anybody's wishes are foisted on these people.
>>
>> If you don't like the answers you get from this (free) service, you
>> can of course choose to use
Run your own nameservers or get a different ISP that doesn't force you to be
filtered :-)
-Original Message-
From: Florian Weimer [mailto:f...@deneb.enyo.de]
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 12:49 PM
To: sth...@nethelp.no
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: What DNS Is Not
> Since people
> Since people need to *explicitly* choose using the OpenDNS servers, I
> can hardly see how anybody's wishes are foisted on these people.
>
> If you don't like the answers you get from this (free) service, you
> can of course choose to use a different service - for instance your
> ISP's name serve
Greetings,
Im sure someone here is GREAT with connecting to Japan so I ask the
following:
We have a POP in 600 West 7th street, Los Angeles.
What provider can I cross-connect to there to get better performance
to Japan?
Are there Japanese providers on net in that building?
Anyone want t
Hi,
Thanks for the pointers to the Juniper devices. I think I'm really thinking
about layer2 encryption, rather than do the encryption using IPSEC. I feel
that as its a p-t-p fibre link, this makes
most sense in terms of throughput and least impact on the network. Operating
at layer3 the IP
The thing to remember about redundancy is that it's a statistical game
rather than a magic formula.
You can be reasonably sure that any single component will go down at some
point. Nothing works perfectly. Few things last forever.
If you have two fairly reliable components, and if they're s
On Nov 11, 2009, at 3:25 AM, a...@baklawasecrets.com wrote:
Hi,
I have a requirement to encrypt data using IPSEC over a p-t-p gig
fibre
link. In the past I've normally used Juniper to terminate VPNs, as I
have found them excellent devices and the route based VPN
functionality
very usef
Dylan Ebner wrote:
IF you only have one entrance, all you connections are going to run through
that conduit, and that makes you susceptable to a rouge backhoe.
Not just the rouge ones. The big yellow ones are far more common and
can do just as much damage.
--
Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Ne
You question has many caveats. Just having two providers does not necessarily
get you more resiliency. If you have two providers and they are terminating on
the same router, then you still have a SPOF problem. You also need to look at
pysical paths as well. If you have two (or three) providers
Hi,
After recent discussions on the list, I've been thinking about the affects
of multiple BGP feeds to the overall resilience of Internet connectivity
for my organisation. So originally when I looked at the design
proposals, there was a provision in there for four connections with the
same
I also suggest reading the Wikipedia page on Cogent.
-Scott
-Original Message-
From: Jay Moran [mailto:jay+na...@tp.org]
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 10:12 AM
To: a...@baklawasecrets.com
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Transit from Cogent - thoughts?
Adel,
Perhaps the be
You can run L2TPv3 (available on IOS routers) between sites, not sure
about the throughput though.
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 2:01 AM, wrote:
>
>
> On second thoughts, thinking about this I am probably looking for some
> kind of Layer2 encryption devices. This will make things a lot easier
> for
Adel,
Perhaps the best way for you to get an answer to your question without the
entire list erupting for no good reason is to click on the following link
which will show all messages from the NANOG mailing list about Cogent. Then
you can make your decision based on past conversations as opposed t
Cogent has been brought up several times over the last year. I suggest
searching http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/nanog/users/
Otherwise you've just reopened a can of worms again.
On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 15:04 +, a...@baklawasecrets.com wrote:
>
> Contemplating using Cogent Communic
Contemplating using Cogent Communications for transit as pricing looks
favourable. Just trying to get a feel for what sort of a reputation they
have in the network operators community. I'm sure people have horror
stories for every provider, but just trying to get a general idea of what
sort o
On second thoughts, thinking about this I am probably looking for some
kind of Layer2 encryption devices. This will make things a lot easier
for the deployment. Any experiences, thoughts on these types of devices,
would be much appreciated.
Adel
On Wed 9:25 AM , a...@baklawasecrets.com se
Hi,
I have a requirement to encrypt data using IPSEC over a p-t-p gig fibre
link. In the past I've normally used Juniper to terminate VPNs, as I
have found them excellent devices and the route based VPN functionality
very useful. However looking at their range, only the ISG will do a gig
of
25 matches
Mail list logo
