On 07/23/2014 06:51 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 07/23/2014 06:05 PM, Scott Helms wrote:
>> The problem is marketing/spin/lobbying is both cheaper and more effective
>> in most scenarios.
>
> No, the problem is that those companies don't define "the problem" the
> same way that we do. :)
+1
I wou
On 07/23/2014 06:05 PM, Scott Helms wrote:
The problem is marketing/spin/lobbying is both cheaper and more effective
in most scenarios.
No, the problem is that those companies don't define "the problem" the
same way that we do. :)
Doug
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> [snip]
> > Who's gonna depeer Cogent *now*?
>
> Probably noone... at least not without compromising and first
> peering with Netflix.
>
> It would be interesting if Google, Wikimedia,
The problem is marketing/spin/lobbying is both cheaper and more effective
in most scenarios.
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Rich Kula
Have you checked out Staminus? It's run by Matt Mahvi (a constant NANOG
attendee). We have a customer that uses Staminus and they have done great.
--
Kate Gerry
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Abuse Contact
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 4:26
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
[snip]
> Who's gonna depeer Cogent *now*?
Probably noone... at least not without compromising and first
peering with Netflix.
It would be interesting if Google, Wikimedia, CBS/ABC, CNN, Walmart,
Espn, Salesforce, BoFa, Weather.com, Dropbox
A shameless flog as it seems like it could be of interest to some
folks...
We have been assessing v6 adoption from a bunch of angles lately. We
have written up a paper on the results of our analysis that will be
presented next month at SIGCOMM. This is an update and extension of the
analysis th
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 09:55:39AM -0500, Steven Saner wrote:
[...]
> Now, it is tempting to suggest that the electric cooperative should take
> on the project.
I've seen that exact scenario happen in rural New Mexico. The Co-op
members wanted dial-up access, and couldn't get it. They asked the
On 7/23/2014 10:24 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Funny story. There are a huge number of independent telcos in Iowa. The
reason: early on, farmers discovered that you could turn pairs of barbed
wired strands into party lines. Things developed from there.
In California in the 1960s Pacific had tar
I actually use GigeNET at the moment for DDoS protection and they're
terrible. Their trigger detection is terrible at picking up attacks and my
attack is barely ever mitigated because of it.
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Christopher Morrow <
morrowc.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 20,
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 03:50:40PM -0500, Blake Hudson wrote:
> I would love to see the Verizon blog response on that...
I would love to see Verizon invest the resources (both financial and
personnel) that are being deployed to update their blog, lobby Congress,
lobby the FCC, astroturf, issue pre
On Jul 23, 2014, at 4:33 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Shawn Morris wrote:
>> What responsibility does Verizon have to maintain this ratio?
>
> Anybody else think peering ratios miss the point? Netflix is
> theoretically in a position to have their app generate e
William Herrin wrote the following on 7/23/2014 3:33 PM:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Shawn Morris wrote:
What responsibility does Verizon have to maintain this ratio?
Anybody else think peering ratios miss the point? Netflix is
theoretically in a position to have their app generate empty
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Shawn Morris wrote:
> What responsibility does Verizon have to maintain this ratio?
Anybody else think peering ratios miss the point? Netflix is
theoretically in a position to have their app generate empty
back-traffic at a rate that maintains any necessary peerin
What responsibility does Verizon have to maintain this ratio? Are they
being faithful to the agreement when they make no effort to compete in
the wholesale market? What content players buy transit from Verizon to
reach networks other than Verizon's?
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 03:25:49PM -0600,
That answer seem overly simple: Comcast's answer was Comcast and
Verizon's answer was Verizon... Seems that is what is occurring for both
of these parties.
The debate has been over whether this is fair (keeping in mind that
Netflix has a standing offer to peer at their own cost to any ISP with
On Jul 23, 2014, at 1:18 PM, Adam Rothschild wrote:
> Comcast’s position is that they could buy transit from some obscure networks
> who don’t really have a viable transit offering, such as DT and China
> Telecom, and implement some convoluted load balancing mechanism to scale up
> traffic.
>
...damn; hit Adam in the replies but missed the list...:
> With this war of blog posts — perhaps Netflix should ask this question:
>
> Who can we buy transit from who has sufficient peering capacity to reach
Comcast’s and Verizon’s customers?
Netflix switching transit providers seems like a bad i
Comcast’s position is that they could buy transit from some obscure networks
who don’t really have a viable transit offering, such as DT and China Telecom,
and implement some convoluted load balancing mechanism to scale up traffic.
(I believe this was in one of Jason Livingood’s posts to broadba
With this war of blog posts — perhaps Netflix should ask this question:
Who can we buy transit from who has sufficient peering capacity to reach
Comcast’s and Verizon’s customers?
-P
On Jul 23, 2014, at 1:00 PM, Adam Rothschild wrote:
> I think the confusion by Jay and others is that there is
I think the confusion by Jay and others is that there is a plethora of
commercial options available for sending traffic to Comcast or Verizon, at
scale and absent congestion. I contend that there is not.
I, too, have found Netflix highly responsive and professional, as a peering
partner...
$0
Hey everybody,
So all this talk about monopolies, small ISPs vs the big bad netflix ,
muni fiber etc etc has been interesting. Lots and lots of talk, lots of
interesting links etc.
I'm an action/results oriented individual, and have been working on
actually building out a grassroots ISP, in
On 7/23/14 5:30 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
The people involved in the bond arrangements
almost invariably see having the city the layer 3 provider as more reliable
path to getting repaid than an open system.
I assumed this was true, that bonds with the revenue stream based upon
rights-of-way lease
I would email their Network Support group, netsupport-...@akamai.com.
--
TTFN,
patrick
On Jul 23, 2014, at 11:33 , Payam Poursaied wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Can someone from Akamai contact me offlist. Specially those who deal with
> infrastructure.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
Hi Everyone,
Can someone from Akamai contact me offlist. Specially those who deal with
infrastructure.
Regards
Most likely Netflix writes policies to filter known cogent conflict
peers...Chances are they use cogent to reach the cogent customer base and
other peers. I know from experience that peering directly with Netflix
works very wellthey don't depend heavily on transit delivery if direct
peering is
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> If I were Netflix, why would I buy all my transit from Cogent[1], given
> Cogent's propensity for getting into peering fights with people *already*,
> even before *I* start sending them 1000:1 asymmetric outbound traffic?
Did they not buy fr
Steven Saner wrote:
In the US, in midwest rural areas at least, you see do quite a few
cooperatives in the realm of things like power distribution. It isn't
quite the same as neighbors getting together to build a network, but it
has some of the same elements. I live outside of the city and I am a
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>> IIRC, going from 1pr to 3pr raised my build cost about 12ish %, going to
>> 6pr would have been another 12%, cause you have term equipment costs to
>> think about in addition to the fiber cost, which is delta.
25% of a lot of money is a lot more money.
> If I were Netflix, why would I buy all my transit from Cogent[1], given
> Cogent's propensity for getting into peering fights with people *already*,
> even before *I* start sending them 1000:1 asymmetric outbound traffic?
Perhaps Netflix expect this to be an ongoing problem with moree ISPs
aski
On 07/23/2014 07:58 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Scott Helms wrote:
>
>> for a more open approach. The people involved in the bond arrangements
>> almost invariably see having the city the layer 3 provider as more
>> reliable
>> path to getting repaid than an open system.
While thinking about this double play over the weekend, a very interesting
chain of thoughts occurred to me.
If I were Netflix, why would I buy all my transit from Cogent[1], given
Cogent's propensity for getting into peering fights with people *already*,
even before *I* start sending them 1000:1
On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Jay Ashworth wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Barton"
I was planning AE, and to deploy 3 pair per drop, except on multiunit
building, where my overbuild ratio would be between 1.6 and 1.2 or
so.
Heh, great minds think alike, as I was contemplating the s
- Original Message -
> From: "Doug Barton"
> > I was planning AE, and to deploy 3 pair per drop, except on multiunit
> > building, where my overbuild ratio would be between 1.6 and 1.2 or
> > so.
>
> Heh, great minds think alike, as I was contemplating the same issue that
> Keenan raised
On Jul 23, 2014 12:34 AM, "Dorian Kim" wrote:
>
> On Jul 23, 2014, at 3:23 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:
>
> >> We don't have a direct customer relationship with NTT so am hoping
> >> someone on this list may be able to pass this information along or
> >> investigate on our behalf.
> >>
> >> Ray
> >>
Mikael,
Fiber length is least representative measure of work as it relates to
putting fiber in the ground. Now, its impressive that they did anything
but if a professional crew took more than a couple of months to do this
they'd be out of a job. I
'd be much more impressed by a lower distance c
On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Scott Helms wrote:
They are also running into serious problems trying to scale and while
getting 400 homes wired up is laudable, having it take more than two years
is not impressive at all.
I am impressed by it. 200km of fiber is not easy to do.
--
Mikael Abrahamssone
Mikael,
Its an interesting idea and I'd like to see some communities try it here.
Having said that, I anticipate that B4RN style networks will run into some
substantial maintenance and reliability issues over time. I love the quote
in the economist from the farmer's wife who learned (assuming au
On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Scott Helms wrote:
for a more open approach. The people involved in the bond arrangements
almost invariably see having the city the layer 3 provider as more reliable
path to getting repaid than an open system.
Another model is the one described for instance in
https://ww
That's not an excuse, its simply the political reality here in the US.
There is a narrow place band on the size scale for a municipality where
its politically acceptable in most places AND there is a true gap in
coverage. In nearly all of the larger areas, though there are some
exceptions, there
Am 23.07.2014 09:23, schrieb Matthew Petach:
> So, Verizon is saying that Level3 into them is congested, NTT into
> them is congested...sounds like there might be a bit of a trend
> happening here.
They (Verizon) should issue a list of those which are _not_ congested. I
guess the list would be rat
On Jul 23, 2014, at 3:23 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:
>> We don't have a direct customer relationship with NTT so am hoping
>> someone on this list may be able to pass this information along or
>> investigate on our behalf.
>>
>> Ray
>>
>>
> I'm sure there's NTT folks watching the thread go
> pas
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
> [...]
> Further update -- Verizon indicates that the issue is related to
> saturation on a peering link between themselves and NTT. Verizon is
> pointing to the NTT side as the source of the saturation / congestion.
>
So, Verizon is sayin
43 matches
Mail list logo