Reading through that, there are some definitions I think could be done
better.
In section 4.2 you have:
Downstream:
In a direct relationship between two ASes the one receiving upstream
from the other. (See: [RFC9234], also known as the customer in a
customer-provider relationship.)
Upstream:
On 17 July 2018 at 15:41, Mike Hammett wrote:
> 10G to the home will be pointless as more and more people move away from
> Ethernet to WiFi where the noise floor for most installs prevents anyone
> from reaching 802.11n speeds, much less whatever alphabet soup comes later.
>
>
That's unless 802.1
On 22 October 2016 at 16:40, marcel.duregards--- via NANOG
wrote:
> What about BCP38+84 on 30 tier-1 instead of asking/hoping 55k others
> autonomous-system having good filters in place ?
The originating ISPs are in a far better position to check that traffic
isn't from spoofed address ranges t
On 22 October 2014 11:34, wrote:
> Before leaving Debian, things to think:
> - will systemd be officialy the only system available ?
> - if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ?
>
And one other thought... is it really that bad?
Personally I like it a lot better than sysV plus inittab plus dae
On 9 October 2014 05:40, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> In message <
> 482678376.131852.1412829159356.javamail.zim...@snappytelecom.net>,
> Faisal Imtiaz writes:
> > >Only short sighted ISP's hand out /56's to residential customers.
> >
> > I am curious as to why you say it is short sighted? what is the
On 14 July 2014 13:44, Dave Temkin wrote:
> With multiple different encodes (driven by
> differing DRM and device types) the odds of two people watching the exact
> same thing are relatively low. The law of large numbers rules the game.
>
> -Dave
What are the chances of performing transcoding o
On 19 June 2014 18:19, wrote:
>
>
My WNDR3800 running cerowrt is quite able to use up the /60 Comcast hands me
> (it burns 6 /64s by default the instant you turn it on, and can burn more
> if
> you start doing VLAN'ing or other config stuff).
>
>
How does it use those 6 /64s? That seems to be ge
On 19 June 2014 13:18, STARNES, CURTIS
wrote:
>
> I have to agree with Dan on this one,
> Look at the numbers (especially for small to mid-sized business and
> residential):
>
> /56 = 256 /64's subnets
> /60 = 16 /64's subnets
>
> http://www.sixscape.com/joomla/sixscape/index.php/ipv6-training-ce
On 18 June 2014 19:05, Owen DeLong wrote:
> OTOH, it's far better than those ridiculous providers that are screwing
> over their customers with /56s or even worse, /60s.
>
> Sad, really.
>
> Owen
>
>
Is giving a /56 to residential customers REALLY "screwing them over"?
It may be a failure of ima
On 17 June 2014 23:39, John Levine wrote:
> In article obd...@mail.gmail.com> you write:
> >+1+1+1 re living room
>
> My cable company assigns my home network a /50. I can figure out what
> to do with two of the /64s (wired and wireless networks), but I'm
> currently stumped on the other 16,382
I'm using Graphite (http://graphite.readthedocs.org) - I plan on blogging
how I'm doing it at some point, but it's not all that difficult.
Dan
On 27 May 2014 20:41, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:28:30PM -0700,
> Ca By wrote
> a message of 9 lines which said:
>
> >
On 16 January 2013 16:31, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, fredrik danerklint wrote:
>
> From the article:
>>
>> "Faced with the shortage of IPv4 addresses and the failure of IPv6 to
>> take off, British ISP PlusNet is testing carrier-grade network address
>> translation CG-NAT, w
It seems to me that there's a big problem with using this for rights
enforcement.
If the header is added by the user's device, then on certain operating
systems it will be trivial for the user to set this to whatever they want
it to be - which would defeat the purpose.
If the header is added by de
On 13 January 2012 01:57, Paul Graydon wrote:
> On 01/12/2012 03:51 PM, chaim.rie...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> On 1/12/2012 4:43 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
>>> Something to think about before attempting to centrally manage, your
>>> systems actually have to be centrally manageable -- that doesn't happen
>
On 12 January 2012 21:02, Paul Stewart wrote:
> Hey folks. just curious what people are using for automating updates to
> Linux boxes?
>
> Today, we manually do YUM updates to all the CentOS servers . just an
> example but a good one. I have heard there are some open source solutions
> similar to
15 matches
Mail list logo
