On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Frank Bulk wrote:
> I don't think a muni can prevent the ILEC from installing fiber in their
> RoW
First off, IANAL, Secondly, I've had a reasonable amount of experience
with Village and Municipal Law.In short, the statement above is
incorrect, in so muc
I don't think a muni can prevent the ILEC from installing fiber in their RoW
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Jay Ashworth [mailto:j...@baylink.com]
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 2:59 PM
To: NANOG
Subject: Re: Muni Fiber
- Original Message -
> From: "Ray Soucy"
> On Mon, Mar
--- On Tue, 3/27/12, Tom Daly wrote:
> From: Tom Daly
> Subject: Re: Force10 E Series at the edge?
> To: "Brent Roberts"
> Cc: "NANOG"
> Date: Tuesday, March 27, 2012, 8:59 PM
> Brent,
> Your options include, for smaller boxes:
>
> - Brocade CER series, but make sure you the -RT versions due
Brent,
Your options include, for smaller boxes:
- Brocade CER series, but make sure you the -RT versions due to RAM (haven't
tried, though)
- Juniper MX (MX80 is working well for us)
- Cisco ASR1006 (heard a lot about BGP price issues)
But for 300mb/sec, what not OpenBSD + Quagga?
Tom
-
Hi,
The IANA AS Numbers registry has been updated to reflect the allocation of
three blocks to the RIPE NCC in March 2012.
59392-60415 Assigned by RIPE NCC 2011-03-21
60416-61439 Assigned by RIPE NCC 2011-03-21
198656-199679 Assigned by RIPE NCC 2011-03-21
You can find the registry at:
http:/
I was very happy with the E300 as a data center core switch handling multiple
full feeds (around 15) with about 10x the traffic you are talking about. The
only problem I had was that Force10 didn't have a useful (basically forklift)
upgrade to get more IPv4 prefixes, and the more I talked to th
Have you look at Juniper's MX stuff.
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Roberts, Brent <
brent.robe...@progressive-solutions.com> wrote:
> Is anyone running an E300 Series Chassis at the internet edge with
> multiple Full BGP feeds? 95th percent would be about 300 meg of traffic.
> BGP session coun
Is anyone running an E300 Series Chassis at the internet edge with multiple
Full BGP feeds? 95th percent would be about 300 meg of traffic. BGP session
count would be between 2 and 4 Peers.
6k internal Prefix count as it stands right now. Alternative are welcome.
Thought about the ASR1006 but I
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> That said, what I'm more baffled about is that FTTH is not standard
> in greenfield housing developments. Even in FIOS territory many
> developers install copper (as the developer installs it, not Verizon).
> I've seen at least one story of
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 1:45 AM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Jacob Broussard
> wrote:
> > Who knows what technology will be like in 5-10 years? That's the whole
> > point of what he was trying to say. Maybe wireless carriers will use
> > visible wavelength lasers t
In a message written on Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:47:10PM -0400, Jared Mauch
wrote:
> I would like to see part of any road reconstruction projects the requirement
> to install conduit or other fiber optic cabling. This would cause most areas
> to organically receive this upgrade along the way. I
On Mar 27, 2012, at 10:02 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>> 2015 - First communities coming online, 100M to the home (probably Gigabit
>> line rate, but throttled).
>
In most cases I've seen, the 100m fiber hardware is more expensive than the 1G,
or the same price.
The challenge here is getting th
had this issue ? I have not tried any work arounds as of yet
> just gathering info
>
Jim
Try a tunnel?
Tom
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 7138 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://mailman
>
> Politically the makings of a similar situation already exist.
> Goverment has swung the USF funds to fuel rual broadband, strongly
> favoring FTTx where it makes sense. While companies like Verizon
> enjoy not having to share their fiber lines now, these same forces
> will conspire to drive u
Actual public financed non-muni fiber is skipping the easy parts and deploying
only a few of the hard parts.
(current actual results of USF)
How is that an improvement?
Owen
On Mar 25, 2012, at 8:47 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> Well, for my part, /most of the poiny/ of muni is The Public Good; if
"Politically and legally are another matter" being key ;-)
It was a long hard fight even in Maine to get a dark fiber utility (over a
year of going before the legislature). The ILEC lobbyists are very
influential and want to maintain the status quo at all costs.
A lot of the examples you listed
Good luck with that. I have three plants in China and China Telecom loves
batting down our VPN tunnels. They've left the current solution alone for a
few months now. It appears they try to do DPI on SSL/IPSec to see if it's a
VPN tunnel. I placed our SSL OpenVPN tunnel inside of a GRE tunnel. For s
On Mar 27, 2012, at 10:16 AM, Jim Gonzalez wrote:
> Hello,
>
>One of my customers has workers in China. There outlook web
> access is blocked by the China Firewall. I was just wondering if anyone had
> this issue ? I have not tried any work arounds as of yet just gathering info
On 03/27/12 09:39, Leigh Porter wrote:
Are there any issues with general https there also?
--
Leigh
-Original Message-
From: Lyle Giese [mailto:l...@lcrcomputer.net]
Sent: 27 March 2012 15:39
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: OWA blocked by China
On 03/27/12 09:16, Jim Gonzalez wrote:
Are there any issues with general https there also?
--
Leigh
> -Original Message-
> From: Lyle Giese [mailto:l...@lcrcomputer.net]
> Sent: 27 March 2012 15:39
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: OWA blocked by China
>
> On 03/27/12 09:16, Jim Gonzalez wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> >
On 03/27/12 09:16, Jim Gonzalez wrote:
Hello,
One of my customers has workers in China. There outlook web
access is blocked by the China Firewall. I was just wondering if anyone had
this issue ? I have not tried any work arounds as of yet just gathering info
Thanks in advance
- Original Message -
> From: "Ray Soucy"
> Ignoring the fact that we haven't reached our limits with fiber yet
> ...
Not close, and we're at 100G already.
> The next major speed boost for broadband will be over fiber. And because
> the bottleneck at that point becomes equipment, we'll c
Hello,
One of my customers has workers in China. There outlook web
access is blocked by the China Firewall. I was just wondering if anyone had
this issue ? I have not tried any work arounds as of yet just gathering info
Thanks in advance
Jim Gonzalez
Ray Soucy wrote:
If people got serious about FTTH, I think a _very_ optimistic timeline
would be something like:
Not optimistic at all, technically or operationally. Politically and
legally are another matter:
2015 - First communities coming online, 100M to the home (probably Gigabit
line
Ignoring the fact that we haven't reached our limits with fiber yet ...
If you're talking broadband, I think it's pretty reasonable to suggest that
a fiber plant will last 20 years with minor maintenance just given the
history of how long we've used copper.
When its 2012 and you have people who a
25 matches
Mail list logo
