On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 19:42:07 -0400, Laszlo Hanyecz
wrote:
It looks to me like Lorenzo wants the same thing as most everyone here,
It doesn't look like that from my chair. He doesn't want to implement
DHCPv6 (and has REFUSED to do so for YEARS now) because he cannot find
solutions for ever
* Baldur Norddahl
> The high tech solution is stuff like MAP where you move the cost out
> to the CPE. But then you need to control the CPE - if you have that
> then great. You would still want to sell a non-NAT (and MAP is NAT)
> to users that require a public IPv4 address, so you still need to
On Jun 11, 2015, at 9:06 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
>> You don't get to just say "I'm not going to implement this because I don't
>> agree with it," which is what Google is doing in the case of Android.
>
> Actually, you DO get to just say that. Anyone can, but especially
> something as big as Google
On Thu, 2015-06-11 at 20:51 -0400, Ray Soucy wrote:
> DHCPv6 is a tool, just as SLAAC is a tool. IPv6 was designed to support
> both options because they both have valid use cases.
Yes, a thousand times yes.
> You don't get to just say "I'm not going to implement this because I don't
> agree wit
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Laszlo Hanyecz wrote:
> Lorzenzo is probably not going to post anymore because of this.
Oh, I imagine we'll all need to take a time-out after this thread;
I know it's got my back fur all riled up, too. :(
> It looks to me like Lorenzo wants the same thing as mos
"Your phone doesn't work with our network, so you should buy one that does"
vs
"Hey we can't connect, fix your network"
Kind of similar to the streaming video vs eyeball network thing.. blaming the
bad user experience on the other guy.
-Laszlo
On Jun 12, 2015, at 2:18 AM, Matthew Petach wrot
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
> Ray,
>
> please do not construe my words on this thread as being Google's position
> on anything. These messages were sent from my personal email address, and I
> do not speak for my employer.
>
> Regards,
> Lorenzo
Ah, Lorenzo, Lorenzo..
On Jun 12, 2015, at 12:51 AM, Ray Soucy wrote:
> That's really not the case at all.
>
> You're just projecting your own views about not thinking DHCPv6 is valid and
> making yourself and Lorenzo out to be the some sort of victims of NANOG and
> the ...
>
DHCPv6 and Android are just collat
In message <2f1701d0a4aa$617b98f0$2472cad0$@acm.org>, "Paul B. Henson" writes:
> > From: Laszlo Hanyecz
> > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:42 PM
> >
> > from the university net Nazis
>
> Wow, it must be nice to live in a fairyland utopia where there is no DMCA,
> no federal laws such as HEOA, an
Well, most systems implemented DHCPv6 support a long time ago. Despite
other efforts to have Google support DHCPv6 for Android, nothing has
happened. There is nothing wrong with using NANOG to call out a major
vendor for this, even if they are a significant sponsor.
Just because you don't agree
Yeh, we get it. Repeating yourself is not helpful. The horse is dead
Please move your android feature request to a forum more fit for your
request.
On Thursday, June 11, 2015, Paul B. Henson wrote:
> > From: Laszlo Hanyecz
> > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:42 PM
> >
> > from the univers
> From: Laszlo Hanyecz
> Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:42 PM
>
> from the university net Nazis
Wow, it must be nice to live in a fairyland utopia where there is no DMCA,
no federal laws such as HEOA, and a wide variety of other things you clearly
know nothing about that require universities to b
That's really not the case at all.
You're just projecting your own views about not thinking DHCPv6 is valid
and making yourself and Lorenzo out to be the some sort of victims of NANOG
and the ...
> university net nazis
Did you really just write that?
What we're arguing for here is choice, the e
In message <9da9c5b8-e60c-4462-873a-ea5052128...@heliacal.net>, Laszlo Hanyecz
writes:
> Lorzenzo is probably not going to post anymore because of this.
>
> It looks to me like Lorenzo wants the same thing as most everyone here,
> aside from the university net nazis, and he's got some balls to co
Lorzenzo is probably not going to post anymore because of this.
It looks to me like Lorenzo wants the same thing as most everyone here, aside
from the university net nazis, and he's got some balls to come defend his
position against the angry old men of NANOG. Perhaps the approach of attacking
Hi,
The price for IPv4 is about $10 per address. I do not expect that to become
much more expensive in the short term, especially not in the Arin region
where there is such abundance of allocated address space that could be
freed for a quick dime.
So is $10 one time fee for new users too much?
W
I am thinking now that our best option would be to go duel-stack lite
(RFC6333), after reading what you fellows have to say about 464XLAT. I feel as
though I should add that our peer networks (one was started at the end of 2013)
are implementing IPv4 only networks; they are pressuring management
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 3:10 PM, David Mandelberg wrote:
> On 2015-06-11 07:30, Russ White wrote:
>>>
>>> There have been suggestions that a key-per-AS is easier to manage than a
>>> key-per-router, like in provisioning.
>>
>>
>> Two points --
>>
>> First, if a single person with console access le
On 2015-06-11 07:30, Russ White wrote:
There have been suggestions that a key-per-AS is easier to manage
than a
key-per-router, like in provisioning.
Two points --
First, if a single person with console access leaves the company, I
must
roll the key for all my BGP routes, with the attendant
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Nicholas Warren
wrote:
> I figured that duel-stack would be the way to go, but I worry that ARIN might
> not give us space for duel stack out of their reserved pool
> (https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four10), and that this .13 of a /8
> won't make it to ne
I figured that duel-stack would be the way to go, but I worry that ARIN might
not give us space for duel stack out of their reserved pool
(https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four10), and that this .13 of a /8 won't
make it to next year. I suppose that would be a question for the ARIN mailing
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Nicholas Warren
wrote:
> Sincere apologies if this e-mail is inappropriate for this audience,
Hi Nich,
Looks like the correct audience to me.
> We are (going to be) a startup ISP building a new network from the
> ground up. [...] The main reason we are even con
I mean marketing/salesman like pitch. When you have something so new and
familiarity is always the desire of the day by IT managers (hence, all the
cisco only fans), it's better to be upfront and pitch it as new and
improved before others decide to call it something else and choose a
different netw
We have had IPv6 enabled on our campus network since 2008 (including
wireless). We started with SLAAC and did some experimenting with DHCPv6 PD
over wireless but haven’t implemented DHCPv6 as a production service yet.
I thought that one thing that might push us towards DHCPv6 was desk VoIP
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Bob Evans wrote:
> Actually , there is no better audience that I know of to ask this
> question. And my information might be more marketing related and hardware
> skeptical.
>
> My IPv6 direction choice was much easier than yours. You need to figure
> out how to bu
As someone who is under 35, this comment strikes a chord with me. I
started
self-studying networking when I was 15ish, yet I had to wait until I
was 26
before I could get a full time job in the industry. I even had to move
out
of my home country. Getting a solid start in the industry was
ex
A network needs users or it is useless. I am curious as to how your native IPv6
network communicated with (if at all) the v4 world. Has anyone confronted you
about your network being IPv6? I might have problems with reading
comprehension, but in your statement " So you might position to pitch up
+1 for experience.. being able to teach yourself just about anything drops
you into the top 20% of any industry (with maybe a few exceptions). one
thing I noticed is that the best professionals I met out there are just as
good with people as they are with routers and console screens. IT is
usually
On Jun 11, 2015 7:07 AM, "jim deleskie" wrote:
>
> There is a good reason there aren't LOTS of "good" neteng in the 30-35 or
> under 30 range with lots of experience. Its call the hell we went though
> for a while after 2000 working in this industry. Many of us lost jobs and
> couldn't find new
I wrote:
> valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>
>> It only "just works" if your upstream device doesn't check/care that
>> you're emitting multiple MAC addresses from the same device.
>
> What if a Wifi router checks that a device authenticated by a
> student's account uses only one IPv4, one IPv6 a
25 year old neteng reporting in. I got into networking when I wanted to play
Quake against my brother and trying to share a single dial-up connection
between all the computers in the house.
Well I still have a long way to go (employed full time in IT for just over 6
years), I think I am ahead
Actually , there is no better audience that I know of to ask this
question. And my information might be more marketing related and hardware
skeptical.
My IPv6 direction choice was much easier than yours. You need to figure
out how to build an IPv4 network today from scratch in a world where the
IP
On Wednesday, June 10, 2015, Alex White-Robinson wrote:
> Matthew Petach > wrote:
>
> > On a slightly different note, however--while it's good to
> > have an appreciation of the past and how we got here,
> > I think it's wise to also recognize we as an industry
> > have some challenges bringing n
I really wonder how people get into this field today. It has gotten
incredibly complex and I've been learning since before I was a teenager
(back when it was much more simple).
I'm 31 now, but I started getting into computers and specifically
networking at a very young age (elementary school). W
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 14:24:31 +0200, Ruairi Carroll
said:
> What I found is that back in early-mid 00's, the industry was a
> black box. Unless you knew someone inside of the industry...
I suspect this is partly a result of the consolidation that went
on. In the mid 1990s when I started
On 11 June 2015 at 06:46, Alex White-Robinson wrote:
> Matthew Petach wrote:
>
> > On a slightly different note, however--while it's good to
> > have an appreciation of the past and how we got here,
> > I think it's wise to also recognize we as an industry
> > have some challenges bringing new b
On 11/Jun/15 10:33, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>
>
> Quagga's IS-IS will get a lot better in the fall because funding has
> been provided to fix things important to IETF HOMENET working group
> requirements for IGP.
>
> This will not fix things across the entire Quagga IS-IS code base, but
> thi
> There have been suggestions that a key-per-AS is easier to manage than a
> key-per-router, like in provisioning.
Two points --
First, if a single person with console access leaves the company, I must
roll the key for all my BGP routes, with the attendant churn, etc. I can't
imagine anyone depl
> Not liking the solution is not a reason to abandon the problem. This
sounds
> like "I don't like eating right and exercising, so keeping my weight under
> control is the wrong question"
Two points.
First, I did NOT say, "I don't like this." What I did say was technically
precise, and, I think
There is a good reason there aren't LOTS of "good" neteng in the 30-35 or
under 30 range with lots of experience. Its call the hell we went though
for a while after 2000 working in this industry. Many of us lost jobs and
couldn't find new ones. I know talented folks that had to go to delivering
On 11 Jun 2015, at 14:51, John Levine wrote:
> to recognize people who are trying to hide their actual location.
Precisely.
---
Roland Dobbins
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Mark Tinka wrote:
We run Quagga on Anycast servers (DNS, NTP, TACACS+, e.t.c.) using
OSPFv2|v3, largely because Quagga's IS-IS support is terrible.
Quagga's IS-IS will get a lot better in the fall because funding has been
provided to fix things important to IETF HOMENET w
regarding DDoS. Please contact me off-list.
--
-=[L]=-
Reassembled from random thought waves
"We have a saying here on Jupiter -- everybody talks about the Great Red
Spot but nobody does anything about it." - Lauren Weinstein
On 10/Jun/15 21:56, Robert Drake wrote:
>
>
> When we first were moving to IPv6 in the core network we evaluated
> IS-IS because it was what we were using for IPv4 and we would have
> preferred to run a single protocol for both. We had problems with
> running a mix of routers where some supporte
In article you write:
>
>On 10 Jun 2015, at 18:56, John Levine wrote:
>
>> I presume there is no need to explain why this would be of interest.
Gee, I appear to have presumed wrong. My concrete application is
vetting updates to the abuse.net contact database, to recognize people
who are trying t
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> It only "just works" if your upstream device doesn't check/care that
> you're emitting multiple MAC addresses from the same device.
What if a Wifi router checks that a device authenticated by a
student's account uses only one IPv4, one IPv6 and one MAC
addresses?
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Victor Kuarsingh wrote:
> Nanog Folks:
>
> Philip Matthews and I are co-authors on an active draft within the IETF
> related to IPv6 routing design choices. To ensure we are gathering
> sufficient data we are looking for an expanded set of input from operator
> for
I'm curious. What reading and comprehension level does one need to be
considered a network heavy? No snark, I really would like to know.
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 6:01 AM Mark Foster wrote:
>
>
> On 11/06/2015 4:46 p.m., Alex White-Robinson wrote:
> > Matthew Petach wrote:
> >
> >> On a slightly di
On 10/Jun/15 02:59, Victor Kuarsingh wrote:
>
>
> I would agree with statements form Joel earlier with respect to cases
> where early vendor support may have influenced some network zones
> (inside a given AS) to support a different IGP (his case of OSPFv3 for
> devices which lacked IS-IS suppo
On 10/Jun/15 01:41, Joe Abley wrote:
> No, not at all. I thought Victor was asking "what IGP" and "how many
> routers use it in your network". I assumed he was interested in
> whether the size of the network influenced the IGP choice.
It did for us - IS-IS here with a couple hundred routers (and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/Jun/15 00:00, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>
> But in that case, don't they usually say "The heck with it" and continue
> using 2 separate ASN numbers?
We tried the multiple AS thing once, many years ago at $previous_job.
It's cool on pape
51 matches
Mail list logo
