IJCN Call For Paper

***Apologies for cross-postings*** FINAL CALL FOR PAPER Submission deadline; September 30 2010 The 2nd volume and 5th Issue of International Journal of Computer Networks (IJCN) http://www.cscjournals.org/csc/description.php?JCode=IJCN BRIEF DESCRIPTION AND OBJECTIVES The Internati

Re: ip block history.

There has been a suggestion in the ARIN region for a whowas service. - Suggestion 2008.15 – WHOWAS service. Implementation to be completed as part of ARIN Online - ---CJ On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Greg Whynott wrote: > probably an odd question … > > we have been assigned a few

Re: ip block history.

RIPE has been developing a couple of projects to support this sort of history searching: Internet Resource Database (INRDB): Resource EXplainer (REX): On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 5:46

IANA DNSSEC Testbed has been Decommissioned

Colleagues, Following advanced notice sent to this list on 2010-08-03, the IANA testbed was shut down on 2010-09-03. For more details on the IANA DNSSEC testbed, see . For more details on DNSSEC deployment in the Root Zone, see . Queries to the

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

On Sep 14, 2010, at 9:30 32PM, Barry Shein wrote: > > On September 14, 2010 at 00:49 williams.br...@gmail.com (Bruce Williams) > wrote: >> >> And what does this "appeal to the ancient wisdom" have to do with >> technology and business today anyway? > > The article claimed that AT&T is claimin

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

On September 14, 2010 at 00:49 williams.br...@gmail.com (Bruce Williams) wrote: > > And what does this "appeal to the ancient wisdom" have to do with > technology and business today anyway? The article claimed that AT&T is claiming (to the FCC I think it was) that net non-neutrality was an ea

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 08:06:03 -0700 Leo Bicknell wrote: > In a message written on Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 09:44:40AM -0500, Brian Johnson > wrote: > > OK... so doesn't this speak to the commoditization of service providers? > > I'm against more regulation and for competition. > > Competition would

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

On Sep 14, 2010, at 11:57 AM, Dave Sparro wrote: > On 9/14/2010 1:08 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> >> On Sep 14, 2010, at 8:47 AM, Dave Sparro wrote: >> >>> On 9/13/2010 12:05 PM, William Herrin wrote: It's a question of double-billing. I've already paid you to send and receive pack

Re: ip block history.

Thanks for the pointers Joel! google knows all, scary isn't it? -g On Sep 14, 2010, at 5:01 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote: > assuming the whois data has been cleaned up the next resource to look at > is: > > routeviews or ris table dumps to see where or if it was advertised in > the past, and from w

Present at The Tools Track at NANOG 50

Dear all, The Tools track at NANOG Atlanta is a chance to talk about and discover non-commercial network tools of interest to network operations. If you have open-source or non-commercial software that you wrote or use and is relevant to NANOG, consider presenting at this NANOGs Tools Track

RE: ip block history.

I second this... ~Jay Murphy IP Network Specialist NM State Government "We move the information that moves your world." “Good engineering demands that we understand what we’re doing and why, keep an open mind, and learn from experience.” “Engineering is about finding the sweet spot between what

Re: ip block history.

assuming the whois data has been cleaned up the next resource to look at is: routeviews or ris table dumps to see where or if it was advertised in the past, and from where. google and rbl lists are also worth querying in that context. joel On 9/14/10 1:51 PM, Greg Whynott wrote: > probably an o

Re: ip block history.

that will show past whois records or just current? I didn't see any options for historic records on arin, thanks by the way. -g On Sep 14, 2010, at 4:56 PM, Murphy, Jay, DOH wrote: > www.Whois.net; whois.arin.net, etc. > > ~Jay Murphy > IP Network Specialist > NM State Government > "We m

[NANOG-announce] Call for Nominations - Communications Committee

Hello: Nominations for the NANOG Communications Committee are now open. This is a great way to become involved and serve the NANOG community. From the website: "The Communications Committee is a group of five individuals from the NANOG community who together are responsible for the administrat

RE: ip block history.

www.Whois.net; whois.arin.net, etc. ~Jay Murphy IP Network Specialist NM State Government "We move the information that moves your world." “Good engineering demands that we understand what we’re doing and why, keep an open mind, and learn from experience.” “Engineering is about finding the swee

ip block history.

probably an odd question … we have been assigned a few large blocks of IPs, and while configuring BGP i got to wondering what these block's history might be. who had them in the past,etc.. is there a publicly accessible db or similar which tracks that type of information, or is that li

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

On 9/14/2010 4:02 PM, Nathan Eisenberg wrote: The consumers are saying "I want faster, as long as I don't have to pay more." Content providers are saying, "If consumers had faster, I'd be able to invent 'Killer App'. I sure wish the ISPs would upgrade their networks." ISPs are saying, "Why shoul

RE: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

> The consumers are saying "I want faster, as long as I don't have to pay more." > Content providers are saying, "If consumers had faster, I'd be able to invent > 'Killer App'. I sure wish the ISPs would upgrade their networks." > ISPs are saying, "Why should we upgrade our networks, nobody is wil

perl lib for management of NX-OS ?

Hi All, I have an XMLRPC server/API that I implemented (written in perl) to manage most of the cisco kit on the network, with most of the "worker" methods using Net::Telnet::Cisco. Our new datacenter, however, has Cisco Nexus equipment which totally breaks the API since Net::Telnet::Cisco do

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

Dave Sparro wrote: I just don't see a way to get passed the current impasse. The consumers are saying "I want faster, as long as I don't have to pay more." Content providers are saying, "If consumers had faster, I'd be able to invent 'Killer App'. I sure wish the ISPs would upgrade their netw

Re: Reverse DNS for IPv6 client networks

On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 02:27:59PM +0200, Elmar K. Bins wrote: > Are you creating DNS entries somehow (reverse and, ultimately, forward), > are you using BIND "generate" statements, are you using wildcards...or > are you just ignoring this for the "dynamic boxes"? I haven't had my coffee yet this

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

On 9/14/2010 1:08 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: On Sep 14, 2010, at 8:47 AM, Dave Sparro wrote: On 9/13/2010 12:05 PM, William Herrin wrote: It's a question of double-billing. I've already paid you to send and receive packets on my behalf. Detuning my packets because a second party hasn't also paid

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

>> Would you object to an ISP model where a content provider could pay to get >> an ISP subscriber's package upgraded on a dynamic basis? >> > Yes... Because the reality is that it wouldn't be an upgrade. It would be a > euphemism for downgrading the subscriber's experience with other content >

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

On Sep 14, 2010, at 8:47 AM, Dave Sparro wrote: > On 9/13/2010 12:05 PM, William Herrin wrote: >> >> It's a question of double-billing. I've already paid you to send and >> receive packets on my behalf. Detuning my packets because a second >> party hasn't also paid you is cheating, maybe fraudul

RE: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

> Would you object to an ISP model where a content provider could pay to get an > ISP subscriber's package upgraded on a dynamic basis? Yes - and the reason is extremely simple. There are a lot of ISPs and a lot of plans. If I'm an entrepreneur looking to build Hulu from the ground up in a pre

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:47:38 EDT, Dave Sparro said: > Would you object to an ISP model where a content provider could pay to > get an ISP subscriber's package upgraded on a dynamic basis? > > It would look something like my Road Runner PowerBoost(tm) service, only > it never cuts off when the c

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Dave Sparro wrote: > On 9/13/2010 12:05 PM, William Herrin wrote: >> >> It's a question of double-billing. I've already paid you to send and >> receive packets on my behalf. Detuning my packets because a second >> party hasn't also paid you is cheating, maybe frau

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

On 9/13/2010 12:05 PM, William Herrin wrote: It's a question of double-billing. I've already paid you to send and receive packets on my behalf. Detuning my packets because a second party hasn't also paid you is cheating, maybe fraudulent. Would you object to an ISP model where a content provi

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

On 9/13/10 5:39 PM, Sean Donelan wrote: On Mon, 13 Sep 2010, Barry Shein wrote: In the "early internet", let's call that prior to 1990, the hierarchy wasn't price etc, it was: 1. ARPA/ONR (and later NSF) Research sites and actual network research 2. Faculty with funding from 1 at major universi

Re: Reverse DNS for IPv6 client networks

On (2010-09-14 14:27 +0200), Elmar K. Bins wrote: > I as a networking droid have not much quarrel with that, but I am interested > in how or whether at all others handle this. About year ago I spent half and hour hacking together base36 and rfc2289 stateless DNS for IPv6. I'm not making any state

Re: Reverse DNS for IPv6 client networks

On Sep 14, 2010, at 5:27 AM, Elmar K. Bins wrote: > Hi guys, > > I am looking for operational experience here. > > We have just turned up IPv6 in our "guest wireless", by way of using RA > for address distribution and DHCPv6 for the DNS server address (stupid, yup). > > Apart from the dhcp6 pa

Re: Reverse DNS for IPv6 client networks

On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 02:38:35PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote: > Instead of handpicking names or letting people insert data into your DNS > servers, some people are deploying PowerDNS with custom backends for > this that either convert the IPv6 address into a 128bit hex number, > optionally strippi

Re: Reverse DNS for IPv6 client networks

On 9/14/10 5:38 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote: > Instead of handpicking names or letting people insert data into your DNS > servers, some people are deploying PowerDNS with custom backends for > this that either convert the IPv6 address into a 128bit hex number, > optionally stripping the first 64 bits a

Re: Reverse DNS for IPv6 client networks

On 2010-09-14 14:27, Elmar K. Bins wrote: > Hi guys, > > I am looking for operational experience here. > > We have just turned up IPv6 in our "guest wireless", by way of using RA > for address distribution and DHCPv6 for the DNS server address (stupid, yup). Unfortunately not a lot of gear under

Reverse DNS for IPv6 client networks

Hi guys, I am looking for operational experience here. We have just turned up IPv6 in our "guest wireless", by way of using RA for address distribution and DHCPv6 for the DNS server address (stupid, yup). Apart from the dhcp6 part seemingly not working on Juniper ISGs (or maybe it's my windows *

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

* Leo Bicknell: > Rather than network neutrality, I'd simply like to see truth in > advertising applied. If my provider advertises "8 Mbps" service > then I should be able to get 8 Mbps from Google, or Yahoo, or you, > or anyone else on the network, provided of course they have also > purchased a

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

Since I am a dinosaur and remember what was going on then ( one of many on this list I am sure ) 1) There was no clue that what we have today would develop. 2) General solutions to what were then abstract problems caused a lot of "open" things to be thrown around. And what does this "appeal to t

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?

On Sep 14, 2010, at 1:37 AM, Michael Dillon wrote: > And let's not forget that the article which came up with the title of this > thread equates IETF with "Internet Founders" and is talking about the 1990s > and the introduction of diffserv. If that's the case, the proceedings of ISOC's INET '