On 5/Apr/15 02:35, Mike Hammett wrote:
> Okay, so I decided to look at what current IXes are doing.
>
> It looks like AMS-IX, Equinix and Coresite as well as some of the smaller
> IXes are all using /64s for their IX fabrics. Seems to be a slam dunk then as
> how to handle the IPv6. We've got
IPv4 and IPv6 subnets are different. While a single IPv4 is taken to be a
single device, an IPv6 /64 is designed to be treated as an end user subnet.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3177 section 3.
On 05/04/2015 9:05 am, "Mike Hammett" wrote:
> That makes sense. I do recall now reading about havi
> On Apr 4, 2015, at 7:28 PM, Charles Gucker wrote:
>
> I've been involved in IX renumbering efforts because exchange(s)
> decided to use /25's instead of /24's.It's painful because
> troubleshooting can be a little difficult as differing subnetmasks are
> in play. If you have the address
Hi folks,
As you may know if you've played around with recent Apple Airports (Express at
least) in bridge mode with "guest network" turned on, they seem to know about
802.1q and have fairly reasonable or at least defensible behavior out of the
box - that is to say they move the "native" SSID a
I've been involved in IX renumbering efforts because exchange(s)
decided to use /25's instead of /24's.It's painful because
troubleshooting can be a little difficult as differing subnetmasks are
in play. If you have the address space, use a /24.ARIN has IPv4
address space specifically res
Mike,
I think it's fine to cut it up smaller than /24, and might actually help in
keeping people from routing the IX prefix globally.
-Laszlo
On Apr 5, 2015, at 12:35 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
> Okay, so I decided to look at what current IXes are doing.
>
> It looks like AMS-IX, Equinix and
Okay, so I decided to look at what current IXes are doing.
It looks like AMS-IX, Equinix and Coresite as well as some of the smaller IXes
are all using /64s for their IX fabrics. Seems to be a slam dunk then as how to
handle the IPv6. We've got a /48, so a /64 per IX. For all of those advocatin
On Sat, 2015-04-04 at 18:02 -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
> That makes sense. I do recall now reading about having that 8 bit
> separation between tiers of networks. However, in an IX everyone is
> supposed to be able to talk to everyone else. Traditionally (AFAIK),
> it's all been on the same subnet.
That makes sense. I do recall now reading about having that 8 bit separation
between tiers of networks. However, in an IX everyone is supposed to be able to
talk to everyone else. Traditionally (AFAIK), it's all been on the same subnet.
At least the ones I've been involved with have been single
On Sat, 04 Apr 2015 16:06:02 -0500, Mike Hammett said:
> I am starting up a small IX. The thought process was a /24 for every IX
> location (there will be multiple of them geographically disparate), even
> though
> we nqever expected anywhere near that many on a given fabric. Then okay, how
> do
I am starting up a small IX. The thought process was a /24 for every IX
location (there will be multiple of them geographically disparate), even though
we never expected anywhere near that many on a given fabric. Then okay, how do
we do v6? We got a /48, so the thought was a /64 for each. That o
On Sat, Apr 04, 2015 at 07:43:52PM -, John Levine wrote:
> I get a cert good through Dec 31.
Yeah, seems to be fixed now.
Vurt:~ job$ echo QUIT | openssl s_client -verify 6 -connect smtp.gmail.com:465
-showcerts | openssl x509 -noout -dates
verify depth is 6
depth=2 /C=US/O=GeoTrust
I get a cert good through Dec 31.
Certificate:
Data:
Version: 3 (0x2)
Serial Number: 4993746626803195625 (0x454d5a195ce8dee9)
Signature Algorithm: sha1WithRSAEncryption
Issuer: C=US, O=Google Inc, CN=Google Internet Authority G2
Validity
Not Befo
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Google Apps
> Date: 4 April 2015 20:05:33 BST
> To: col...@mx5.org.uk
> Subject: Google Apps Status Alert
>
>
>
> Status: Service disruption
> We expect to resolve the problem affecting a majority of users of Gmail at
> April 4, 2015 1:0
It appears something Google allowed to happen in 2008 has happened
again:
# openssl s_client -starttls smtp -connect smtp.gmail.com:587
CONNECTED(0003)
depth=3 C = US, O = Equifax, OU = Equifax Secure Certificate Authority
verify return:1
depth=2 C = US, O = GeoTrust Inc., CN = GeoTrust Global
Dont' worry, it will calm down as the InternetOfThings takes off... :-S
---
Cumprimentos / Best regards
Marco Teixeira
---
On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 4:14 AM, Curtis Maurand wrote:
> The number of infected hosts out there is just astounding. I have bots
> attacking a server from all over the wo
16 matches
Mail list logo
