Anyone have experience with Firehost? I have a personal site that I am
considering hosting with them and due to the content, am worried about
security but don't want to spend the cycles building NIDs and HIDs for
myself. I due need PCI compliance as well. If things take off, I'll look
at a ded
Singapore, with a fallback / DR location in say Hong Kong.
[Or vice versa depending on what parts of south east asia you want ..
for india, singapore would be your best bet]
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 5:20 AM, Michael DeMan wrote:
>
> For reference, generally the WikiPedia entry on South East Asia
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 22:51:52 EDT, Chris Griffin said:
> PrefixesChange ASnum AS Description
> 19227 115->19342 AS15557 LDCOMNET NEUF CEGETEL (formerly LDCOM
> NETWORKS)
Somehow, I get the feeling that a network engineer at AS15557 is about to have
a very bad
Anyone else notice a rather large jump in the global table size? We just
gained around 20K prefixes in just the last few hours.
From http://www.cidr-report.org/as2.0/#General_Status
Top 20 Net Increased Routes per Originating AS
Prefixes Change ASnum AS Description
Hi All,
I guess this is a bit off-topic since this is the North American network
operators group, but I was wondering if anybody had much experience with fiber
infrastructure in the South East Asia area.
For reference, generally the WikiPedia entry on South East Asia describes the
service deli
Dear Colleagues,
The Internet Society has announced that it is inviting applications for its
latest Internet Society Fellowships to the IETF, part of its Next Generation
Leaders (NGL) programme (www.InternetSociety.org/Leaders). The Fellowship
programme allows engineers from developing countrie
On Wed, 2011-06-15 at 17:52 +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> "Our object is to design a communication system which can grow smoothly to
> accommodate several buildings full of personal computers and the facilities
> needed for their support."
>
> Ethernet: Distributed Packet Switching for Lo
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 08:05:14AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> You tell named to listen on IPv6 (listen-on-v6). It already uses IPv6
> to make queries unless you turned it off on the command line with "named -4".
> To go IPv6 only on a dual stack machine use "named -6".
> You add records to
In message <4df91ab3.6020...@mompl.net>, Jeroen van Aart writes:
> Leo Bicknell wrote:
> > but it all doesn't matter because the network team hadn't actually
> > made IPv6 work yet as there was no business case.
>
> Ahhh, ok, well at least I know I did it right the first time.
>
> > No, I'm not
Leo Bicknell wrote:
but it all doesn't matter because the network team hadn't actually
made IPv6 work yet as there was no business case.
Ahhh, ok, well at least I know I did it right the first time.
No, I'm not cynical. :)
It probably reflects daily practice for many big organisations, sadl
In a message written on Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:32:09PM -0700, Jeroen van Aart
wrote:
> Seth Mattinen wrote:
> >listen-on-v6 { any; };
>
> Yeah that's what I did. But I keep reading about how these big name
> companies messed it up in some subtle or not so subtle way and I keep
> thinking I mus
On 6/15/2011 12:32, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Seth Mattinen wrote:
>> listen-on-v6 { any; };
>
> Yeah that's what I did. But I keep reading about how these big name
> companies messed it up in some subtle or not so subtle way and I keep
> thinking I must have missed something. Because surely those
Seth Mattinen wrote:
listen-on-v6 { any; };
Yeah that's what I did. But I keep reading about how these big name
companies messed it up in some subtle or not so subtle way and I keep
thinking I must have missed something. Because surely those big
companies can't find it that difficult, can th
On 6/15/2011 12:14, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Octavio Alvarez wrote:
>> In fact. Although a website of mine worked flawlessly in a dual-stack
>> but it did NOT in an IPv6-only environment. Unfortunately, the problem
>> has to be fixed in the DNS provider, which though supporting
>> records was
Octavio Alvarez wrote:
In fact. Although a website of mine worked flawlessly in a dual-stack
but it did NOT in an IPv6-only environment. Unfortunately, the problem
has to be fixed in the DNS provider, which though supporting
records was enough to "support IPv6".
Why not run your own namese
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 05:26:19PM +, Nathan Eisenberg said:
>Could a human being from SORBs please contact me off-list? Your robot isn't
functional, and you are listing one of our ARIN allocations as dynamic, when it
is not.
>
>(Yes, I know that 'no one uses' SORBs. Customers don't c
EHLO Folks,
Can someone from Eircom please contact me?
--
Landon Stewart
SuperbHosting.Net by Superb Internet Corp.
Toll Free (US/Canada): 888-354-6128 x 4199
Direct: 206-438-5879
Web hosting and more "Ahead of the Rest": http://www.superbhosting.net
On 06/15/2011 11:45 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 15 jun 2011, at 18:39, Leo Bicknell wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something, but the last update on this was RFC
5006 I think, which is marked as "experimental", and I thought the
IETF still had a working group discussing it.
You missed the up
Could a human being from SORBs please contact me off-list? Your robot isn't
functional, and you are listing one of our ARIN allocations as dynamic, when it
is not.
(Yes, I know that 'no one uses' SORBs. Customers don't care.)
Nathan
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 19:04:44 +0200, sth...@nethelp.no said:
> How big is huge? To some degree it depends on how broadcast "chatty"
> the protocols used are - but there's also the matter of having a
> size which makes it possible to troubleshoot. Personally I'd prefer
> an upper limit of a few hund
i guess you have a lot of ibgp sessions ..:-)
bgp finite state model
http://www.inetdaemon.com/tutorials/internet/ip/routing/bgp/operation/finite_state_model.shtml
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:C5Rq3DV63akJ:citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.71.3908%26rep
> > Ethernet is not designed for huge LANs. If you want that you need
> > to make significant changes - http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mas90/MOOSE/
>
> Hm:
>
> "Our object is to design a communication system which can grow smoothly to
> accommodate several buildings full of personal computers and the
IPv4? IPv6?
are you planning to do NAT or PAT?
Are you using a bogous ASN 64512 through 65534 to be used for private purposes?
/30 -> 4 addresses/2 hosts -> you can't do a mesh configuration w/ that subnet
mask..
--- On Wed, 6/15/11, James Grace wrote:
> From: James Grace
> Subj
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:47 AM, James Grace wrote:
> Hey All,
>
> So we're running out of peering space in our /24 and we were considering
> using private /30's for new peerings. Are there any horrific consequences to
> picking up this practice?
>
You can reclaim space by switching your peeri
On 15/06/2011 17:47, James Grace wrote:
So we're running out of peering space in our /24 and we were considering
using private /30's for new peerings. Are there any horrific
consequences to picking up this practice?
yes. it causes nasty problems if you use urpf (as you should), in
particular
On Jun 15, 2011, at 12:47 PM, James Grace wrote:
> So we're running out of peering space in our /24 and we were considering
> using private /30's for new peerings. Are there any horrific consequences to
> picking up this practice?
"Horrific"? How about: "Most peers won't bring up a session."
Hey All,
So we're running out of peering space in our /24 and we were considering using
private /30's for new peerings. Are there any horrific consequences to picking
up this practice?
Cheers,
James
On 15 jun 2011, at 18:39, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> Maybe I'm missing something, but the last update on this was RFC
> 5006 I think, which is marked as "experimental", and I thought the
> IETF still had a working group discussing it.
You missed the upgrade to proposed standard:
http://tools.ietf.or
In a message written on Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:22:12AM -0500, Jima wrote:
> Oh, oops; you did touch upon this. You might want to let the people
> who've implemented RDNSS in software know that the IETF is working on
> it. I'm sure that'll be a relief.
Maybe I'm missing something, but the las
On 15 jun 2011, at 16:52, Tony Finch wrote:
> Ethernet is not designed for huge LANs. If you want that you need
> to make significant changes - http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mas90/MOOSE/
Hm:
"Our object is to design a communication system which can grow smoothly to
accommodate several buildings full
Mine got delivered to my office yesterday! :)
Dennis Burgess, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net
LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training - Author of "Learn RouterOS"
> -Original Message-
On 06/14/2011 03:25 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
I urge everyone in this thread to try a simple experiment. Configure
an IPv6 segment in your lab. Make sure there is no IPv4 on it, not
on the router, and that the IPv4 stack (to the extent possible) is
disabled on the hosts. Now try to use one of th
Ricky Beam wrote:
>
> And IPv6 has been designed (poorly, it would now appear) for huge "LAN"s
> -- LANs are supposed to be /64, after all.
Ethernet is not designed for huge LANs. If you want that you need
to make significant changes - http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mas90/MOOSE/
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.
On Jun 14, 2011 10:36 PM, "Ryan Finnesey" <
ryan.finne...@harrierinvestments.com> wrote:
>
> I think this would be helpful.
>
Agreed. You don't need anybody's permission, kick it off.
The last v6day was an isoc effort, there can be a separate nanog effort or
your own.
Cb
> Cheers
> Ryan
>
>
> --
On 06/12/2011 03:31 PM, Tom Hill wrote:
On Sun, 2011-06-12 at 14:46 -0400, Deric Kwok wrote:
We will apply ipv6 from ARIN and try to use it in hosting business
1/ Can we use it in our current AS which is using ipv4? If not. Do we
have to apply new AS?
No, you can route IPv6& IPv4 from the sa
finally after waiting for it 4ever
Joshua
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 6:06 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> (that's next winter, right?)
>
> I've just seen a TV ad for Duke Nukem Forever, in a Hulu airing of
> The Daily Show.
>
> Cheers,
> -- jr 'Finally??' a
> --
> Jay R. Ashworth Baylin
36 matches
Mail list logo
