On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 12:15 PM Amos Rosenboim via NANOG
wrote:
> Roland,
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> As much as I love to be a network purist who hates state maintenance in
> the core of the network, the sad reality is that these devices are there
> and will remain there for the foreseeabl
On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 6:17 AM Livingood, Jason via NANOG
wrote:
> *> *My experience over a home internet fiber connection wasn’t great
> (like everyone else’s) but my son was watching it over his mobile device
> without any issues.
>
> That may be an interesting data point – because mobile netw
On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 6:21 AM Steven Wallace wrote:
> Greeting,
>
> Internet2 uses Cloudflare’s https://rpki.cloudflare.com/rpki.json as an
> alternate source for RPKI-ROA information. We recently discovered that this
> file omits IPv4 ROAs longer than /24. It would be helpful if it included
>
leaks have come from
> non-transit networks reliant on IRR managed prefix lists.
>
Can you be more specific?
Was it malicious?
Who in the usa was impacted ?
Keep mind rpki only solves misorigination.
> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 5:21 PM Ca By wrote:
>
>>
>>
>
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 2:02 PM Sean Donelan wrote:
>
> Sigh, industry hasn't solved spoofing and routing insecurity in two
> decades. If it was easy, everyone would have fixed it by now.
>
> Industry has been saying 'don't regulate us' for decades.
I hope the regulations are more outcome focu
On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 5:40 AM Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Forrest Christian (List Account)
> said:
> > I have a feeling that I might be stepping into a can of worms by asking
> > this, but..
> >
> > What's the current thinking around reverse DNS on IPs used by typical
> > residenti
Folks,
I reached out to Brightcloud directly and they cant fix this and it has
been 3 weeks. What can i say besides don’t use them.
https://whois.domaintools.com/172.59.72.103
They are locating 172.32.0.0/11 , which belongs to T-Mobile USA for 10+
years… to China. There is no reason for them t
> **ROA Auto-renewal**
>
> After the May software release, any ROA created via ARIN Online or the new
> RESTful provisioning endpoint will be automatically renewed, meaning all
> newly created ROAs will persist indefinitely until they are manually
> deleted. ARIN will also apply the auto-renew feat
On Fri, Apr 7, 2023 at 6:47 AM Tim Burke wrote:
> I thought so too, but we already send good geofeed data to Maxmind, and
> queried their DB to verify.
>
The worst of the worst is brightcloud / opentext
They randomly assigned my arin ip space to china 2 weeks ago
This space has
1. Not change
On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 6:23 AM Jared Mauch wrote:
> The common tech is 100G-LR4 these days - I'm wondering how many operators
> are supporting the LR1 to allow its use on 400G and future 800G optics as
> those use breakout to support 100G ports.
>
> Would you rather do a 400G port on a router vs
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 9:17 AM Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG
wrote:
> The technology for IPv6 client to connect IPv4 web server on Internet is
> just not specified in IETF.
>
> Ed/
>
Ed, you seem to be not so familiar with the this ietf body of work
RFC6877
“ 464XLAT is a simple and scalable
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 7:59 AM Edvinas Kairys
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We're considering to buy some Cisco boxes - NCS-55A1-24H. That box has
> 24x100G, but only 2.2mln route (FIB) memory entries. In a near future it
> will be not enough - so we're thinking to deny all /24s to save the memory.
> What
On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 6:20 AM Mike Hammett wrote:
> Sorta like in the IP world, if everyone did BCP38/84, amplification
> attacks wouldn't exist. Not everyone does, so...
>
Tragedy of the commons
Furthermore, those customers are paying to not be policed.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intellig
have an roa expire, and a well documented process
will create a lot of confidence.
As where an expired roa outage will cause a company to never use rpki
again.
>
>
> *From: *NANOG on behalf of Ca
> By
> *Date: *Friday, September 9, 2022 at 10:12 AM
> *To: *John Sweeting
>
On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 5:21 AM John Sweeting wrote:
> You can contact the ARIN Helpdesk at +1-703-227-0660. Someone will also be
> sending you an email off list.
>
John
Where is ARIN’s documented procedure for how hosted ROAs handle renewal
prior to expiration ?
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > O
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 10:58 AM Rob Robertson
wrote:
> The Zayo/as6461 network will shortly start dropping all RPKI-invalid route
> announcements that we receive from our peers. This should be rolled
> out over our network in the next week or so.
>
> While we will still continue to accept existi
>
> It's not devices. It's software and what's worse protocol specifications
> that are implemented in this software.
>
> And we still didn't get the memo in 2022. Some colleagues think that
> having builtin 5x Amplification in protocols freshly out just this ye
On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 7:23 PM Christopher Wolff
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Has anyone proposed that the adoption of billions of IoT devices will
> ultimately ‘break’ the Internet?
>
> It’s not a rhetorical question I promise, just looking for a journal or
> other scholarly article that implies that
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 5:39 AM wrote:
> You keep using the term “imaginary” when presented with evidence that does
> not match your view of things.
>
> There are many REAL scenarios where single flow high throughout TCP is a
> real requirements as well as high throughput extremely small packet si
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 7:26 AM Raymond Dijkxhoorn via NANOG
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > If, for any reason, you want to opt out from us using your ASN
> > for our experiments, you can do so in the following form before May 9:
> >
> > https://forms.gle/ZvZaodndPhCqMvR89
>
> > If I am interpreting thi
On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 6:22 AM Philip Homburg
wrote:
> >If by ?straightforward transition plan? one means a clear and rational
> set of
> >options that allows networks to plan their own migration from IPv4-only
> to IPv
> >6, while maintaining connectivity to IPv4-only hosts and with a level of
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 7:15 AM Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
> Dear Ca By:
>
> 1)It appears that you are reading the Google graph too optimistically,
> or incorrectly. That is, the highest peaks of the graph are about 38%. The
> average of the graph is about 36%. Citing "over
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 12:45 PM Josh Luthman
wrote:
> >but nowadays, some are going all v6.
>
> Where is there v6 only services/content?
>
V6 only to 100m+ Smartphones and now coming up on millions of home
broadband , we out here
https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/deploy360/2014/case-st
On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 11:56 PM Saku Ytti wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 at 21:00, Joe Greco wrote:
>
> > I really never thought it'd be 2022 and my networks would be still
> > heavily v4. Mind boggling.
>
> Same. And if we don't voluntarily agree to do something to it, it'll
> be the same in 2042
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 6:06 AM Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
> On 1/25/22 15:45, Masataka Ohta wrote:
>
> > As is stated in free part of the article that:
> >
> > The country’s three biggest carriers, AT&T, Verizon and
> > T-Mobile, have offered 5G connectivity but in practice
> > this diffe
.
There are many large companies that could do a lot to make things more
secure, but it is more profitable for them when things are a bit broken and
they can charge more for a solution
Jean
>
>
>
> *From:* NANOG *On Behalf Of *Ca
> By
> *Sent:* December 9, 2021 9:36 AM
>
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 1:07 AM Arne Jensen wrote:
> Den 08-12-2021 kl. 15:32 skrev Niels Bakker:
> > * darkde...@darkdevil.dk (Arne Jensen) [Wed 08 Dec 2021, 15:23 CET]:
> >> To me, that part of it also points towards a broken implementation at
> >> CloudFlare, letting a bogus (insecure) response
On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 6:35 AM Niels Bakker wrote:
> * darkde...@darkdevil.dk (Arne Jensen) [Wed 08 Dec 2021, 15:23 CET]:
> >To me, that part of it also points towards a broken implementation at
> >CloudFlare, letting a bogus (insecure) responses take effect anyway.
>
> Or they prefer allowing pe
On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 6:07 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> On 11/26/21 1:44 PM, Jean St-Laurent via NANOG wrote:
>
> Here are some maths and 1 argument kicking ass pitch for CFO’s that use
> iphones.
>
> *Apple tells app devs to use IPv6 as it's 1.4 times faster than IPv4*
>
>
> https://www.zdnet.
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 9:28 AM Masataka Ohta <
mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
> Ca By wrote:
>
> > First, consider that the 3 major cell carriers in the usa each have
> > 100 million customers. Also, consider they all now have a home
> > broadband an
architecture look like for a mobile
> carrier these days?
>
> Mike
>
>
> On 10/23/21 8:13 AM, Brian Johnson wrote:
>
>
>
> On Oct 23, 2021, at 8:30 AM, Ca By wrote:
>
> 87% of mobiles in the usa are ipv6
>
> https://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/
&g
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 8:48 AM Bryan Fields wrote:
> On 10/22/21 11:13 AM, Job Snijders via NANOG wrote:
> > Another aspect that flabbergasts me anno 2021 is how there *still* are
> > BGP peering disputes between (more than two) major global internet
> service
> > providers in which IPv6 is 'hel
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 11:47 AM Max Tulyev wrote:
> We have 2 ports from Telia, one in Kiev (Ukraine) and one in New York
> (USA). I have seen both ports simultaneously dropped traffic volume for
> about one hour today.
>
> It was not critical (for us), as traffic was shifted to another links,
>
>
>
>
>
> This has nothing to do with IPv6, of course, other than that modern phones
> use
> VoLTE so within a mobile carrier's network your voice call is probably
> handled
> using IPv6 transport.
>
> Good point John.
A lot of folks missed that ipv6 absorbed the scale growth in mobile, and
mobile
On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 2:31 PM Ca By wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 1:54 PM Andy Ringsmuth wrote:
>
>> *Sigh*
>>
>> I hear you. Have IPv6 at home perfectly fine via Spectrum.
>>
>> At work however, my provider (Allo Communications in Lincoln, Neb.
re now
selling them back to us.
>
>
> Andy Ringsmuth
> 5609 Harding Drive
> Lincoln, NE 68521-5831
> (402) 304-0083
> a...@andyring.com
>
> “Better even die free, than to live slaves.” - Frederick Douglas, 1863
>
> > On Aug 5, 2021, at 3:19 PM, Ca By wrote
On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 1:09 PM Tony Wicks wrote:
> Contact eddie at iptrading.com , I have used their
> services several times and never had any issues.
>
>
>
Yep, this what it has come to.
“I got a guy”
Just keep buying addresses and slamming in NAT boxes folks …
Here is a meme
https://img
On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 12:34 PM Eric Germann via NANOG
wrote:
> Does anyone have a pointer to a good resource for current best practices
> for deployment of DNSSEC, preferably newer than RFC6781?
>
> What algorithms do you typically sign with (RSASHA256, ECDSAP256SHA256,
> both, something other)
On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 6:36 AM Tom Beecher wrote:
> As long as that IP space was isolated to the .mil network, it was private
>> space, as far as the Internet was concerned.
>>
>
> The DoD allocation of 11/8 predates the concept of 'private network space'.
>
> 11/8 was first assigned to the DoD
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 5:29 AM Douglas Fischer
wrote:
> P.S.: Forking thread from CGNAT.
>
> Hello Jordi!
>
> Since our last heated talk about transitions methods(Rosario, 2018?), I
> must recognize that the intolerance to other scenarios other than
> dual-stack had reduced(mostly because of imp
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 10:52 AM Mike Hammett wrote:
> This is from the perspective of an eyeball network. I understand that
> content networks would have different objectives and reasons. For instance,
> I have little to no reason as an eyeball network to exchange traffic with
> any other eyebal
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 6:11 AM Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Ca By writes:
>
> > The 3 cellular networks in the usa, 100m subs each, use ipv6 to uniquely
> > address customers. And in the case of ims (telephony on a celluar), it is
> > ipv6-only, afaik.
>
> I certainly
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 5:50 AM Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Ca By writes:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 4:32 AM Valdis Klētnieks <
> valdis.kletni...@vt.edu>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 04:04:43 -0800, Owen DeLong said:
> >> > Please ex
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 4:32 AM Valdis Klētnieks
wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 04:04:43 -0800, Owen DeLong said:
> > Please explain to me how you uniquely number 40M endpoints with RFC-1918
> without running out of
> > addresses and without creating partitioned networks.
>
> OK.. I'll bite. What
e subordinate
> resources from ARIN -> this-org
> in it... so at least the content of this file is generated/maintained
> by the parent (RIR in this case).
>
> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020, 6:55 AM Ca By wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello folks,
> >>
> >> I use ARIN hosted RPKI to publish ROAs
> >>
> >> The ROAs have an expire date
> >>
> >> How do i rotate the cert to push out the expiration date? Does ARIN do
> this for me?
> >>
> >> Thanks!
>
Hello folks,
I use ARIN hosted RPKI to publish ROAs
The ROAs have an expire date
How do i rotate the cert to push out the expiration date? Does ARIN do
this for me?
Thanks!
On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 8:14 AM Christopher J. Wolff
wrote:
> Dear Mr. Curtis and Nanog;
>
> Thank you for your responses. Yes, I am investigating the feasibility of
> public internet access to help with Digital Divide issues in light of the
> COVID-19 pandemic as well as the challenges of secur
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 6:00 PM Randy Bush wrote:
> > Would your arin approach of netrange work in all regions?
>
>
>
> no. to the best of my knowledge, other regional registries and
>
> independent irr registries use rpsl; i.e. inetnum: and remarks:.
>
Radb only supports
route
-route6
-aut-
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 5:53 PM Randy Bush wrote:
> >> the edit buffer, yet to be published, has
>
> >>
>
> >>Currently, the registry data published by ARIN is not RPSL;
>
> >>therefore, when fetching from ARIN whois, the "NetRange" attribute/
>
> >>key must be treated as "inetnum" an
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 3:02 PM Randy Bush wrote:
> the edit buffer, yet to be published, has
>
>
>
>Currently, the registry data published by ARIN is not RPSL;
>
>therefore, when fetching from ARIN whois, the "NetRange" attribute/
>
>key must be treated as "inetnum" and the "Comment"
On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 4:43 PM Randy Bush wrote:
> hi ca
>
>
>
> > I gave your I-D a try in the real world, and it does not work with a
>
> > major player.
>
>
>
> i.e. arin and radb, your region, which does not do rpsl as others do.
>
> we know this, which is why the OP $subjest was
>
>
>
> "
On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 1:13 PM Randy Bush wrote:
> hi camron
>
> sad to say, the days of faxing around number assigments have passed.
> the kiddie googlers who wrote the geofeeds rfc probably have not even
> seen a fax machine. they just did not like having a hundred gnomes in
> the basement de
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 1:49 PM Randy Bush wrote:
> would folk familiar with the north american RIR and IRR registries be
>
> kind enough to suggest how this might adapt? thanks.
>
>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-ymbk-opsawg-finding-geofeeds-02.txt
>
> has been successfully submitted by Randy
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 1:00 AM Brian Johnson
wrote:
> I hope I’m not adding to any confusion. I find this conversation to be
> interesting and want it to be productive. I have not deployed 464XLAT and
> am only aware of android phones having a proper client.
Platforms with CLAT include:
Andro
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 9:17 AM Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On 24/Aug/20 17:21, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote:
>
>
>
> > You probably mean 464XLAT
>
> >
>
> > Ask you vendors. They should support it. Ask for RFC8585 support, even
> better.
>
> >
>
> > If they don't do, is because they
On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 6:51 AM Brian wrote:
> Is there anyway to deploy ipv6 and push ipv4 traffic end to end across
> the ipv6 network. With out having an ipv4 address for everything that is
> ipv6? If someone could reach out off list if there is a real solution to
> deploy ipv6 as almost midd
> case solved.
>
> Cheers,
> R.
>
>
My feedback is the local_pref is complete for this behavior of setting an
outbound, including being non-transitive
FB uses local-pref for this afaik
https://research.fb.com/blog/2017/08/steering-oceans-of-content-to-the-world/
>
&g
On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 4:34 AM Robert Raszuk wrote:
> All,
>
> Watching this thread with interest got an idea - let me run it by this
> list before taking it any further (ie. to IETF).
>
> How about we learn from this and try to make BGP just a little bit safer ?
>
> *Idea: *
>
> In all stub (non
nd export policies based on known accepted
> practices.
>
> Another solution could be having the BGP daemon disclose the make, model
> family, and exact model of hardware it is running on, to BGP peers, and add
> more knobs into policy creation to match said values, and take action
>
On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 7:21 AM Etienne-Victor Depasquale
wrote:
> The surprise for me regards Intel's (and the entire Cloud Native Computing
> Foundation's?) readiness to move past network functions run on VMs
> and towards network functions run as microservices in containers.
>
> See, for exampl
On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 4:21 AM Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
> What I meant by "TOTALLY avoidable" is that "this particular plane
> crash" has happened in the exact same way, for the exact same reasons,
> over and over again.
>
> Aviation learns from mistakes that don't generally recur in the exact
> sam
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 2:18 PM Brian Johnson
wrote:
> Has anyone implemented a MAP-T solution in production? I am looking for
> feedback on this as a deployment strategy for an IPv6 only core design. My
> concern is MAP-T CE stability and overhead on the network. The BR will have
> to do overloa
On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 8:04 PM James Breeden wrote:
> I have been doing a lot of research recently on operating networks with
> partial tables and a default to the rest of the world. Seems like an easy
> enough approach for regional networks where you have maybe only 1 upstream
> transit and some
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 7:17 PM Brandon Martin
wrote:
> On 4/29/20 10:12 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> >> What allows them to work with v6 in such an efficient manner?
> > A piece of client software is installed on every phone that presents
> > an IPv4 address to the phone and then translates packe
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 7:46 PM Masataka Ohta <
mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
> Ca By wrote:
>
> >>>You can't eliminate that unless the CPE also knows what internal
> port
> >>> range it's mapped to so that it restricts what range it
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 1:06 AM Masataka Ohta <
mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
> Brandon Martin wrote:
>
> >> If you mean getting rid of logging, not necessarily. It is enough if
> >> CPEs are statically allocated ranges of external port numbers.
> >
> > Yes, you can get rid of the loggi
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 3:14 PM Compton, Rich A
wrote:
> Good luck with that. 😊 As Damian Menscher has presented at NANOG, even
> if we do an amazing job and shut down 99% of all DDoS reflectors, there
> will still be enough bandwidth to generate terabit size attacks.
> https://stats.cybergreen
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 8:27 AM Dovid Bender wrote:
> We have customers in CT with the same issues. When did this start?
>
Seems to have started 5 years ago when we ran out of ipv4 and all comers
needed to embrace ipv4 life-support mechanisms
https://www.arin.net/vault/announcements/2015/201509
an be discussed here.
>
Watch what others are talking about and add to it. Nobody else here is
doing conversations like you.
> Pengxiong
>
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 12:34 PM Ca By wrote:
>
>> This topic is out of scope for the list. Please stop emailing these
>>
This topic is out of scope for the list. Please stop emailing these baiting
questions.
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 12:27 PM Pengxiong Zhu wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> We got plenty of positive responses in our last email regarding China's
> slow transnational network. Many are suggesting it is likely influ
h, not changing ipv4 filters, Sorry pool. Burned once, twice shy.
There is no simple way to do router filters based on ntp app modes.
I suggest people be aware of time.google.com
And time.cloudflare.com
CB
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:17 AM Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 9:03 AM Compton, Rich A
wrote:
> Yes, we still see lots of UDP amplification attacks using NTP monlist. We
> use a filter to block UDP src 123 packets of 468 bytes in length (monlist
> reply with the max 6 IPs).
>
> -Rich
+1 , still see, still have policers
Fyi, ipv6 n
On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 8:51 AM Livingood, Jason <
jason_living...@comcast.com> wrote:
> > Folks saw congestion from a massive free content drop this past week.
> > But as folks had called out, that was the CDN angle of distributing that
> content rather than the actual game play. There is a rathe
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 2:22 PM Hunter Fuller wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 2:42 PM Jared Mauch wrote:
> > I can already hear the QUIC WG types blaming the network in abstentia,
> because well, why would an operator want to keep their network functioning?
> :-)
>
> In fairness, it's not actua
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:41 AM Dave Bell wrote:
>
> Not indiscriminate.
>>
>
> Indiscriminate - done at random or without careful judgement.
>
> Considering that Daniel is complaining that QUIC is broken, it certainly
> seems like some network operators are subjecting all UDP traffic on their
>
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:19 AM Blake Hudson wrote:
>
>
> On 2/19/2020 3:21 PM, Daniel Sterling wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 3:34 PM Blake Hudson wrote:
> >> Yeah, that was a nice surprise to find that my tethered LTE connection
> >> was out performing my wired cable modem service. Of cou
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 9:56 AM Dave Bell wrote:
>
> On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 at 15:31, Ca By wrote:
>
>> UDP is broken
>>
>
> I would argue that UDP isn't broken. Networks which drop it
> indiscriminately are broken.
>
Not indiscriminate.
As Google was informe
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 8:34 AM Tom Beecher wrote:
> I only wish I were insane; but from where I'm sitting, QUIC has broken
>> my internet, and the resolution is blocking QUIC.
>>
>
> The QUIC protocol itself isn't breaking anything ; some middlebox is
> breaking QUIC. It's likely collateral dama
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 5:44 PM Daniel Sterling
wrote:
> I've AT&T fiber (in RTP, NC) (AS7018) and I notice UDP QUIC traffic
> from google (esp. youtube) becomes very slow after a time.
>
> This especially occurs with ipv4 connections. I'm not the only one to
> notice; a web search for e.g. "Extr
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 2:17 PM William Herrin wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 2:11 PM Ca By wrote:
> > You are not using ipv4 today.
> >
> > The scenario you describe, using facetime (iOS) on T-Mobile US, you are
> not using ipv4 on the device. T-Mobile does not assign
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 1:54 PM Sabri Berisha wrote:
> - On Jan 3, 2020, at 1:00 AM, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
>
> > On 2/Jan/20 21:02, Sabri Berisha wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Maybe you're just dating yourself here :) I use video calling on an
> almost
> >> daily basis with my family l
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 12:56 AM Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
> On 1/Jan/20 17:35, Brandon Butterworth wrote:
>
> >
> > If the mobile companies are providing the WiFi routers they can
> > control it (see LTE WiFi attempt) and one day replace it with
> > 5G or 6G in all the things. If they make a better j
On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 3:51 PM Christopher Morrow
wrote:
> Oh good :) someone coaxed cameron out of the holiday keg :)
>
I can only take reading how others imagine it may work for so long
> On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 6:32 PM Ca By wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 2:41 PM Christopher Morrow
wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 4:11 PM Brian J. Murrell
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2019-12-30 at 09:50 -0500, Shane Ronan wrote:
> > >
> > > Also, keep in mind that 10 years ago, you didn't know you would want
> > > or
> > > need 25mbits to your
*Sent: *Friday, November 29, 2019 10:29:17 AM
> *Subject: *Re: RIPE our of IPv4
>
>
> > On Nov 27, 2019, at 4:04 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> On 28 Nov 2019, at 06:08, Brian Knight wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 2019-11-26 17:11, C
ongtail. The majority of
real bits/s and dollars are in ipv6. Ymmv. But i reject vehemently the
notion that v6 vanity project with no obvious business case / roi (Another
misstatement by Sabri).
If your business is dysfunctional, that is a different issue from ipv6
being dysfunctional.
> scott
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 12:15 AM Sabri Berisha
wrote:
> - On Nov 26, 2019, at 1:36 AM, Doug Barton do...@dougbarton.us wrote:
>
> > I get that some people still don't like it, but the answer is IPv6. Or,
> > folks can keep playing NAT games, etc. But one wonders at what point
> > rolling out
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 9:18 PM Michael Crapse wrote:
> IPv6 is a lot more granular when it comes to geolocation data. It is also
> very very unlikely that the block has been used before, and you never know
> what the previous owner did or what geolocation/VPN blacklists it was added
> to. Let me
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 6:05 AM David Funderburk
wrote:
> One of our customers office number is coming across as 'Survey Call' on
> T-Mobile cell phones. I know with certainty it's with 'T-Mobile' phones.
> I don't have another contact on another network that I know I can try. How
> do we get t
I just hope the next fire is not sparked by a diesel generator that is
running because commercial power is off.
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 3:48 PM Sean Donelan wrote:
>
>
> AT&T statement:
>
> Like all PG&E customers, we are also affected by this power shutdown.
> Overall our network continues to p
On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 12:40 PM John R. Levine wrote:
> In article ,
> Stephen Satchell wrote:
> > My AT&T cell phone has both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. The IPv4 address
> > is from my access point; the IPv6 address appears to be a public address.
>
> My AT&T cellphone (via MVNO Tracfone) has a
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 1:54 PM John Levine wrote:
> In article <804699748.1254612.1570037049931.javamail.zim...@baylink.com>
> you write:
> >Tools. Are. Neutral.
> >
> >Any solution to a problem that involves outlawing or breaking tools will.
> >Not. Solve. Your. Problem.
>
> I think in the outsi
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:23 AM Stephane Bortzmeyer
wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 12:11:32PM +0200,
> Jeroen Massar wrote
> a message of 101 lines which said:
>
> > - Using a centralized/forced-upon DNS service (be that over DoT/DoH
> > or even plain old Do53
>
> Yes, but people using a pu
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 7:27 PM Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> I've been embroiled in my first house-move in 28 years, and just got back
> to the table. I don't see any threads here about whatever this
> thing-which-
> appears-to-me-to-be-a-monstrosity; has it been discussed here and I missed
> it?
>
See below for high value of the list, both items are very pleasing
On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 6:10 AM Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> On 05/09/2019 08:09, Kasper Adel wrote:
>
> No. This is art & tech from 12 years ago:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y36fG2Oba0
>
> -Hank
>
> In SPRING a time when segm
On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 2:58 AM Todd Underwood wrote:
>
> that's unkind and is taking advantage of the attention and goodwill of
> the community here. this is becoming a pattern.
>
+1 on this noisy pattern. Hire an consultant to google these things for
you.
>
Paging someone at Centurylink to fix your looking glass.
https://lookingglass.centurylink.com
None of the functions in any of the cities work
Your network is kind of a big deal, so please try to provide visibility to
your routing state so the rest of us can do our day-job, on Sunday
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 5:17 AM Lee Howard wrote:
>
> On 8/2/19 1:10 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote:
>
> The cost of sharing IPs in a static way, is that services such as Sony
> Playstation Network will put those addresses in the black list, so you need
> to buy more addresses. This hasn
at's it.
>
>
> --- cb.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Ca By
>
> My understanding is that is not currently commonly the
> case
>
>
> https://www.worldipv6launch.org/apps/ipv6week/measurement/images/graphs/T-MobileUSA.png
>
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Jerry Cloe wrote:
> There's already widespread use (abuse ?) of DOD /8's. T-Mobile commonly
> assigns 26/8 space (and others) to customers and nat's it.
>
>
My understanding is that is not currently commonly the case
https://www.worldipv6launch.org/apps/ipv6week/m
1 - 100 of 337 matches
Mail list logo
