Wow, what a lot of NANOG traffic about IPv6 readiness for SMTP!
Please explain my misunderstanding on the following:
1. IPv6 is a Routing Layer Protocol (with some associated helpers, like RA,
ND, DHCP-PD, and the like).
2. SMTP is an Application Layer Protocol, supposedly independent of Rou
On Dec 9, 2013, at 4:06 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> On Dec 9, 2013, at 3:51 PM, Cutler James R
> wrote:
>
>> This is disappointing to me as a user but good for me as an Apple stockholder
>
> I stopped using their [network] hardware and shifted to using real
> Ac
On Dec 9, 2013, at 3:37 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, Cutler James R wrote:
>
>> My conclusion is that Apple does not yet support IPv6 in any fashion for
>> Wireless Guest networks.
>
> Works for me on 7.7.2 on the latest hardware (802.1ac vers
On Dec 9, 2013, at 12:32 PM, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Cutler James R
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I opted for my minimal-effort solution. I installed a Motorola SB6121 and a
>> 5th gen Airport Extreme and turned them on. Of course I
On Dec 9, 2013, at 12:32 PM, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Cutler James R
> wrote:
>
>> According to Comcast’s DOCSIS Devices page,
>> http://mydeviceinfo.comcast.net/?s=i&so=1&e=0&d3=1&tier=-1&sc=84, the Cisco
>>
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
> http://comcast6.net/ tells me that the local cmts is v6 enabled. my
> modem, a cisco dpc3008, is in the supported products list. so how do
> i turn the sucker on?
According to Comcast’s DOCSIS Devices page,
http://mydeviceinfo.comcast.net/?s=
On Dec 3, 2013, at 12:04 AM, Eric Oosting wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 11:11 PM, Rob Seastrom wrote:
>
>>
>> "Ricky Beam" writes:
>>
>>> On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 08:39:59 -0500, Rob Seastrom
>> wrote:
So there really is no excuse on AT&T's part for the /60s on uverse
>> 6rd...
>>> ...
>>
On Dec 2, 2013, at 5:14 PM, Tony Hain wrote:
> Ricky Beam wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 08:39:59 -0500, Rob Seastrom
>> wrote:
>>> So there really is no excuse on AT&T's part for the /60s on uverse
> 6rd...
>>
>> Except for a) greed ("we can *sell* larger slices") and b) demonstrable
> user
>>
On Nov 6, 2013, at 9:02 AM, Livingood, Jason
wrote:
> Reverse DNS for (typical) residential customer IPv6 addresses is dead,
> people just haven¹t come to grips with it just yetŠ ;-)
>
>
> When publicly-reachable services in home networks are created that may be
> a different matter of course.
On Oct 9, 2013, at 12:35 PM, Blair Trosper wrote:
> Does anyone know why (or can someone from Comcast explain why) there is no
> PTR on their residential/business IPv6 addresses?
Which IPv6 addresses:
1 delegated WAN address?
2 end systems on delegated LAN prefix or with static assignments?
I try not to think about sinners too much when planning networks. Subnets are
more interesting.
Maybe many of you like spending time maintaining NAT configurations and
creatively masking as determined by today's end system count on each subnet.
This all, of course, in the interest of maximum ad
On Sep 26, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Mark Lancaster wrote:
> I have heard a lot of questions and debate about whether the iOS updates
> download automatically:
>
> “Available updates download automatically if your device is connected to
> Wi-Fi and a power source.”
>
> http://support.apple.com/kb/HT462
On Sep 19, 2013, at 3:10 PM, Fred Reimer wrote:
> I was making the wrong assumption that people understood how
> the Internet works.
Absolutely!
Most "people" understand that the internet works by use of a browser and are
content with that knowledge. Much like most motor vehicle operators und
On Sep 19, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Warren Bailey
wrote:
> Why does apple feel it is okay to send every mobile device an update on a
> single day?
Apple does not "send" updates. The user device must request an update.
--As a side note, IOS 7 fixes/improves iDevices in multiple areas, making it a
c
On Jun 26, 2013, at 1:52 PM, "Adam Greene" wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
> mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
> relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago.
>
>
>
> Is this a common situ
A domain name without a terminal dot is a relative domain name.
-- An application requesting name to address translation gets to decide if a
search list is to be used, including the default of dot.
A domain name with a terminal dot is a Fully Qualified Domain Name.
-- An application requesti
On Jan 30, 2013, at 12:43 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> As a product of having a motorola sb6121 and a netgear wndr3700 both of which
> I bought at frys I have ipv6 in my house with dhcp pd curtesy of commcast. If
> it was any simpler somebody else would have had to install it.
>
Except that Appl
On Nov 26, 2012, at 7:47 PM, "Dobbins, Roland" wrote:
> On Nov 27, 2012, at 7:27 AM, Cutler James R wrote:
>
>> Have you looked at the current Apple software? It pretty much "just works"
>> on IPv6.
>
> Yes, but it doesn't do or enable anyt
On 11/26/2012 03:18 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
>
> Apple and Microsoft are application developers as well as OS vendors. How
> much of a priority do you think IPv6 capabilities are to their application
> development organizations? How much of a priority do you think IPv6
> capabilities are to
On Oct 7, 2012, at 4:56 PM, George Herbert wrote:
> Ancedotally, for users of an e-gadget company's website, cellphone
> company's outbound web proxies, internet games company, and
> image-intensive home furnishings website, the CGNs delivered content
> faster than the main website could, regardle
On Oct 6, 2012, at 2:35 PM, Barry Shein wrote, in part:
>
> We can map from host names to ip addresses to routing actions, right?
>
> So clearly they're not unrelated or independent variables. There's a
> smooth function from hostname->ipaddr->routing.
I would suggest that this is a bit optimis
On Oct 4, 2012, at 4:00 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Cutler James R
> wrote:
>> On Oct 3, 2012, at 6:49 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
>>> In 100 years, when we start to run out of IPv6 addresses, possibly we
>>> will have learned o
On Oct 3, 2012, at 6:49 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> On 10/3/12, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>> So the address space for IPv8 will be...
>>
>
> In 100 years, when we start to run out of IPv6 addresses, possibly we
> will have learned our lesson and done two things:
>
> (1) Stopped mixing the Host ide
On Oct 3, 2012, at 4:17 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
Is anyone aware of any historical documentation relating to the
choice of 32
>>> bits for an IPv4 address?
> ...
>> Actually that was preceded by RFC 760, which in turn was a derivative
>> of IEN 123. I believe the answer to the original qu
On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:41 PM, Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
>
> The proper approach is to ask the vendor for RFC 1149 trasport for the BGP
> session, and whether it terminates in a shared cage, or if a fully private
> one is required. Including an 'envionmental impact statement'. Explaining
> that th
On Sep 27, 2012, at 12:12 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
>
> On Sep 27, 2012, at 11:34 , Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 08:55:58AM -0600, Miguel Mata
>> wrote
>> a message of 30 lines which said:
>>
>>> Guys,
>>
>> No gals on NANOG?
>
> Many. Although in fairness, so
On Sep 20, 2012, at 10:56 AM, "Naslund, Steve" wrote:
>
> Wouldn't you say that there is a very real expectation that
> when you request address space through ARIN or RIPE that it would be
> routable?
I certainly would not say that.
I would say that I get addresses from the RIRs to avoid add
On Sep 19, 2012, at 1:42 PM, Jo Rhett wrote:
>
> And second, have you ever worked on a private intranet that wasn't connected
> to the internet through a firewall? Skipping oob networks for equipment
> management, neither have I.
Yes, for many years. External connections only via Application
On Sep 19, 2012, at 9:24 AM, John Osmon wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 12:07:33AM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote:
>> Assume you have a public IPv4 assignment, and someone else
>> starts routing your assignment... "legitimately" or not, RIR allocation
>> transferred to them, or not.
>>
>> There migh
On Sep 18, 2012, at 1:55 PM, Joe Hamelin wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Cutler James R wrote:
> > ...waste of NANOG list bandwidth.
>
> I sure get a chuckle when I read this on a list for people that swing around
> 10Gb/s pipes all day.
That's why I i
On Sep 18, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Jason Baugher wrote:
> On 9/18/2012 11:47 AM, Cutler James R wrote:
>> On Sep 18, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Jason Baugher wrote:
>>> What about network-based objects outside of our orbit? If we're talking
>>> about IPv6 in the long-term,
On Sep 18, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Jason Baugher wrote:
>
> What about network-based objects outside of our orbit? If we're talking about
> IPv6 in the long-term, I think we have to assume we'll have networked devices
> on the moon or at other locations in space.
>
> Jason
Practical considerations
On Sep 5, 2012, at 5:12 PM, Izaac wrote:
>
>Since tcp25 filtering has been so successful, we should deploy
> filters for everything except tcp80 and tcp443 and maaaybe tcp21 --
> but NAT already does so much to enhance the user experience there
> already. And what with ISP customers us
IP which is typical
> then you would lose that revenue if they converted to IPv6. If you didn't
> charge for IPv4 then you have nothing to to lose.
>
> Otis
>
> From: Cutler James R [mailto:james.cut...@consultant.com]
> Sent: Fri 8/3/2012 3:48 PM
> To: Otis L. Surratt, J
On Aug 3, 2012, at 3:22 PM, "Otis L. Surratt, Jr." wrote:
> Anyone charging end users for IPv6 space yet? :p
>
>
> Otis
>
I can't imagine that this would be anything but counterproductive. End users
are not interested in IPv6 - most would not recognize IPv6 if it fell out of
their screen.
Examination of the raw messages confirms phishing messages. Visible URLS do
not match effective URLs.
On Jun 11, 2012, at 2:07 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
> I think it's a troll, trying to shock you into clicking on something.
James R. Cutler
james.cut...@consultant.com
-top posted by OS X Mail
On Jun 6, 2012, at 9:53 AM, Anton Smith wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Potentially silly question but, as Bill points out a LAN always occupies a
> /64.
>
> Does this imply that we would have large L2 segments with a large
> number of hosts on them? What about the age old discussion about
> keeping b
On Jun 5, 2012, at 5:23 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On 6/5/12, David Hubbard wrote:
>> Does anyone have suggestions on good books to really get
>> a thorough understanding of v6, subnetting, security practices,
>> etc. Or a few books. Just turned up dual stack with our
>> peers and a test netwo
On Feb 17, 2012, at 1:35 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Feb 17, 2012, at 6:52 AM, -Hammer- wrote:
>
>> Let me simplify that. If you are over 35 you know how to troubleshoot.
>>
> Is this a statement or something to be added to the list of misconceptions
> that are commonplace out there?
>
> Not tr
On Dec 23, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Paul Stewart wrote:
> In my opinion they are only "somewhat reliable" if they are on your network
> or very close to your network -we operate one of the speedtest.net sites and
> for our own eyeball traffic find it to be a "reasonable indicator" of what
> kind of spee
On Nov 17, 2011, at 3:47 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Richard Golodner"
>
>>> 1. Why was such a list created?
>>> 2. Why was I automatically subscribed to it?
>>> 3. Why was this done without notice to the community?
>
>> This has a lot of us wondering the sa
I have not found a fiber-to-Ethernet adapter for sufficiently low cost. If I
ever do, backyard Gigabit, here I come.
On Aug 12, 2011, at 9:57 PM, Chaim Rieger wrote:
> What nobody wired their abode with fiber ?
>
> Am i the only one here
James R. Cutler
james.cut...@consultant.com
smim
On Aug 4, 2011, at 7:08 PM, Dan Armstrong wrote:
>
> On 2011-08-04, at 6:43 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 4, 2011, at 2:55 PM, Dan White wrote:
>>
>>> On 04/08/11 14:32 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Aug 4, 2011, at 2:08 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Mes
On Jul 12, 2011, at 11:02 AM, Thomas Donnelly wrote:
> I received no spam, and had I received 2 pieces, it may have been slightly
> irritating.
>
> What is irritating is the sheer number of people complaining about it. Can we
> stop please? I think they get it.
>
> -=Tom
>
Tom, you are one
> James R. Cutler james.cutler at consultant.com
> Fri Feb 6 18:00:52 UTC 2009
>
> DHCP items are end system considerations, not routing network
> considerations.
>
> The network operations staff and router configuration engineers do not
> generally concern themselves with end systems.
>
>
On Jun 10, 2011, at 10:21 PM, George Herbert wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>> And like I said before, we have more pressing things to do than tinker some
>>> more with DHCPv6.
>>
>> Meh... We can achieve a big win for relatively low cost very quickly and
>> mak
On Apr 1, 2011, at 1:28 PM, Dorn Hetzel wrote:
> I'm thinking both TCP and UDP, and for ICMP don't NAT's use the sequence
> number field to keep them separate ?
>
In my experience, the Avian Carriers usually eat the NATs.
James R. Cutler
james.cut...@consultant.com
On Feb 28, 2011, at 1:29 PM, Bret Clark wrote:
> On 02/28/2011 01:17 PM, Leigh Porter wrote:
>>
>> VoIP at the last mile is just too niche at the moment. It's for people on
>> this list, not my mother.
>>
>> --
>> Leigh
>>
>>
> Baloney...if that was the case, then all these ILEC's wouldn't b
On Feb 10, 2011, at 12:15 AM, Ricky Beam wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Feb 2011 16:42:14 -0500, Nathan Eisenberg
> wrote:
>> What do you mean, lit up? You mean they're not in the routing tables that
>> you get from your carriers? I'd argue that's no indication of whether
>> they're in use or not.
>
All this talk about CPE is wasted until folks like ATT have someone on the
retail interface (store, phone, or, web) who even knows what is this "IPv6"
thing. Exploring this issue with DSL providers and Uverse is like that old
exercise with combat boots. It feels much better when I stop.
James
On Feb 2, 2011, at 10:23 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> Who ever puts NTP addresses in DHCP? That doesn't make any sense. I'd rather
> use a known NTP server that keeps correct time.
Been there. Done that. Made perfect business sense. The NTP servers were ours
and kept excellent time.
Oh, w
ect sense to engineering and support may give security, management,
> and/or marketing heart palpitations.
>
> Just my $0.02 (probably overvalued).
>
>> Hope that helps!
>>
>> G
>>
>> ---
>> Gary Steers
>> Sharedband NOC/3rd Line Support
>>
On Jan 25, 2011, at 3:50 PM, Nick Olsen wrote:
> Whats the rule of thumb for naming gear these days
> (routers,switches...etc). Or is there one?
Pick a scheme which:
1. Uses simple memorable names.
2. Makes business sense to you.
3. You know how to manage (database, publication, updates, etc.
I
On Jan 21, 2011, at 4:45 PM, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
>> NTP isn't going to be the only "ripple".
>
> Most of the "brand name" GPS NTP solutions have a clock
> with is more than stable enough to survive without GPS
> lock for 45 minutes(*). Some of the more expensive units with
> temperature cont
On Jan 21, 2011, at 4:23 PM, Michael Holstein wrote:
>
>> I'd be curious to see what effects (if any) those who use
>> GPS-disciplined NTP references in Southeastern Georgia see from this
>> experiment.
>>
>
> Aren't CDMA BTS clocked off GPS?
>
> NTP isn't going to be the only "ripple".
>
>
That seems to be "Off Topic".
The operational implications for most of us is, most likely, much more
technical bookkeeping and data storage.
On Dec 16, 2010, at 2:24 PM, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
>
> What is in the best interests of the customer?
>
> Nathan
James R. Cutler
james.cut...@consult
I have a quibble with this discussion. When I defined a "byte" as "a mouthful
of bits" to my boss back in 1977, he nearly fired me on the spot. He did not
care about PDP-10 , much less PDP-11, data constructs.
By now, octet has become essentially synonymous with byte and nibble with
4-bits. C
Jack,
I agree that whois is hard. Please explain how you knew to query AS701 when
Serg asked about AS702.
computer:~ me$ whois as702
No match for "AS702".
>>> Last update of whois database: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 13:47:47 UTC <<<
Regards.
Cutler
On Oct 26, 2010, at 9:22 AM, Jack Carrozzo
Routers are not a good choice for time servers as it complicates configuration
and, to some extent, constrains deployment methodology for routers to be
effective with time service. We don't run DNS on routers, it is a service. Time
service via NTP is a service as well. The NTP daemon in a router
Regarding leap seconds:
A modern OS kernel using the NTP daemon to control time will always experience
monotonic time. Negative leap seconds should result in the local clock slowing
slightly until the local time matches the NTP-derived time.
This is in strong contrast to what can happen when nt
Time Service is more complicated than just having a single NTP server. But it
can be useful and is not really a luxury.
Two primary reasons for local time service are to reliably serve a network that
is relatively or completely isolated from the general internet, and, to provide
a local time so
On Apr 29, 2010, at 4:11 PM, Olsen, Jason wrote:
I'm a bit surprised that after the furor here on NANOG when the story
first broke (in 2008) that there's been no discussion about the recent
outcome of his trial (convicted, one count of felony network tampering).
===
I'm not surprised. It has littl
No. You get a different set of problems, mostly administrative.
On Apr 21, 2010, at 1:53 PM, Dave Sparro wrote:
> On 4/21/2010 8:46 AM, Jim Burwell wrote:
>>
>> Despite it doing the job it was intended to do, I've always seen NAT
>> as a bit of an ugly hack, with potential to get even uglier w
The last time I discussed IP Address needs with a company the builds
automobiles, they wanted forty million addresses for robots, sensors, and the
like for manufacturing. A single /8, were it available, would only yield about
20% of that requirement.
On Apr 2, 2010, at 6:46 PM, Owen DeLong wr
I also just got a fresh box of popcorn. I will sit by and wait for Jeroen to
do a business analysis and tell me the return on investment. (Assuming that he
can find any legal grounds for demanding return of legacy /8 allocations.)
All of the analysis results I have seen mention figuratively bea
65 matches
Mail list logo
