On 5/30/24 6:56 AM, Mehmet wrote:
This is within LA metro
We got bit by this overnight.
Customers transiting our network on the west coast of North America may
have experienced Latency and Packet Loss. This was due to a fiber cut in
our vendors network around the Los Angeles area. The vendor
On 10/4/23 6:15 PM, Sabri Berisha wrote:
If this is true, and I will take your word for it, that is outrageous.
Why is this outrageous?
My wife is a teacher who works with special needs kids, and her phone
went of twice (the second time 15 minutes after the first). This was
very disruptive a
On 10/4/23 1:45 PM, Aaron de Bruyn via NANOG wrote:
I was kinda surprised that none of my NOAA weather radios went off. I
sorta assumed they'd be tied into the whole "national" alert setup.
That surprises me.
Did the newer alert not get bridged into the same system that NOAA
radios use?
Is
On 10/4/23 1:21 PM, Sabri Berisha wrote:
So, this "worked". Despite me ensuring that my settings for Amber
Alerts, Emergency Alerts, Public Safety Alerts, and Test Alerts are
all off, my phone went nuts.
I'm in a similar situation.
Makes me wonder what I have to do to opt out of this. We all
On 9/26/23 11:41 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
Same, although for about 15 years now. One suggestion I'd make is
to use IPv6 and get a dedicated /64 (free on request) - it can help
a little with "unclean neighborhood" reputation (an issue with any
VPS as they can't police everything).
+1 for the de
On 9/1/23 12:16 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
and i just have to wonder about sending passords over the net in
cleartext in 2023. really?
There's a reason that I have configured all the Mailman mailing lists to
not send me monthly password reminders.
I do wish that such was the default. Sadly it w
On 8/21/23 7:09 PM, Diogo Montagner wrote:
I would first try to understand what you are trying to achieve. JUNOS is
very flexible on this front and I am wondering why you think yacc is the
right way to achieve what you are trying to do.
Drive by comment:
Perhaps the OP is trying to parse a (p
On 7/26/23 2:51 PM, Antonio Querubin wrote:
Wondering if anyone can shed some light on American Internet Services
going offline.
I saw a short (< 5 minute) blip with them earlier today. I don't
remember what time it was.
Are you still seeing problems?
Their nameservers (ns1/2.axscn.net) a
On 7/18/23 7:02 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
malware email is so common i normally do not warn of it. but, in
this case, the attacker is extracting quotes from nanog and luring
folk into clicking. e.g.
I've been getting messages like those described on again and off again
for quite a while. -- I
On 7/14/23 4:05 PM, Darin Steffl wrote:
This screams of entitlement. If you can't afford $250 a year for ARIN,
you probably shouldn't be starting a new business. Sorry
Why do you assume that I was even thinking about cost.
I was talking purely about understanding and how it could go either way
On 7/14/23 12:04 PM, Robert Webb wrote:
For all of you who have historical knowledge of how ARIN has/does
operate, throw that out the window and look at it from a newcomer
point of view and the wording being taken at face value.
Drive by comment:
I can see how someone not in the know -- like m
On 3/9/23 2:19 PM, Christopher Munz-Michielin wrote:
Not this exact scenario, but what we see a lot of in my VPS company is
people sending spam by using our VPS' source addresses, but routing
outbound via some kind of tunnel to a VPN provider or similar in order
to bypass our port 25 blocks.
On 3/9/23 1:39 PM, William Herrin wrote:
I would hope folks are implementing uRPF on commodity broadband
connections. That's one place it works great.
I would hope so too.
I also would hope that uRPF was enabled by default on SOHO routers.
And yet ... I'm routinely disappointed.
CADIA has a
On 3/8/23 5:35 AM, Lukas Tribus wrote:
Perhaps I should have started this topic with a very specific example:
- ISP A has a residential customer "Bob" in RFC6598 space
- ISP A CGNATs Bob if the destination is beyond it's own IP space
- ISP A doesn't CGNAT if the destination is within its IP spac
On 3/8/23 6:17 AM, Victor Kuarsingh wrote:
This was the intention of the RFC. As this space was intended to be
used with an AS's network to service CGN needs. That CGN boundary
likely ends before a given customer and/or neighboring network, so it
would make sense that downstream and neighbori
On 3/7/23 4:34 PM, Lukas Tribus wrote:
I'm trying to educate people that bogon lists do not belong on hosts,
firewalls or intermediate routers, despite Team-cymru's aggressive
marketing of the opposite, quote:
I don't have any problem with bogon lists being on hosts or intermediate
routers.
On 2/27/23 1:13 AM, Rolf Winter wrote:
But feedback from the operational community on this would be
valuable. Our reverse traceroute currently restricts the server to
trace back to the issuing client. We did this for security reasons.
I understand the motivation for your team's caution / secur
On 2/25/23 3:09 AM, Tore Anderson wrote:
I suggest you get in touch with the fine folks at NLNOG RING and ask it
they would be interested in setting this up on the 600+ RING nodes all
over the world. See https://ring.nlnog.net/.
Similarly you might reach out to RIPE and inquire if they are inte
On 1/31/23 2:33 PM, Gabriel Kuri via NANOG wrote:
Apparently the local infrastructure crew thinks it's OK to leave cable
running between two cans in a residential neighborhood since at least
July 2022. But it's OK, because they've cautioned them off with orange
cones, right ?
Multiple calls t
On 12/1/22 10:21 AM, Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote:
The WAF is under control of the site, but many sites blindly implement
the recommendations of the WAF provider.
I have heard tell of a CDN / WAF that is generally held in good regard
having a free tier that many people use that is much less fle
On 11/8/22 10:53 PM, William Herrin wrote:
Hi Grant,
Hi Bill, and everyone else who replied.
Two problems here:
Thank you for taking the time to reply and help me understand the
shortcomings of uRPF better.
I wonder if Feasible Path uRPF or Enhanced Feasible Path uRPF might help
the sit
On 11/8/22 2:01 PM, Matthew Petach wrote:
You're thinking about it from the upstream perspective, where a route
could be accepted but depreferenced and thus not actively used.
Think about it from the downstream network's perspective, though.
If you're my upstream, and I don't want to use your l
On 11/8/22 1:01 PM, William Herrin wrote:
Hi Grant,
Hi Bill,
Two words: asymmetric routing.
ACK
Useful automated reverse path filtering can ONLY be used when there
is exactly ONE valid path to which and from which packets can be
received. This is where strict mode uRPF actually works.
On 11/8/22 6:28 AM, Douglas Fischer wrote:
I also have this concern about Spoofing coming from Downstreams.
+1
And after a lot of struggle I can say that using uRPF in strict mode per
interface doing FIB lookup is not a good idea!
Maybe it's the lack of caffeine, but would someone please re
On 10/17/22 10:54 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
That said, it would be a worthwhile project to collect the places
in which this source can be supplemented with additional information
(a.k.a. grains of salt).
Agreed.
I believe there is much discussion to this effect on the Internet
History maili
On 10/16/22 8:28 PM, Joseph wrote:
A good book on the topic of the early internet is "Where Wizards Stay Up
Late" by Katie Hafner and Matthew Lyon. A large part of the book covers
happenings at Bolt Beranek and Newman, and there are plenty of mentions
of Jon Postel.
+1 (with an extremely larg
On 7/15/22 11:18 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
May I request information substantiating the risk.
Have you ever walked away from your terminal without locking it? Or
seen anyone else do it?
Unless you are within Sudo's grace period (defaults to five minutes) the
person at your keyboard won't be abl
On 5/11/22 10:53 AM, Job Snijders via NANOG wrote:
This knob slightly increase your own memory consumption, but makes your
router more “neighbourly”! :-)
I question how accurate "slightly" is.
My understanding is that soft reconfiguration inbound (whatever the
syntax for a given IOS is) cause
On 5/5/22 6:07 AM, Joe Greco wrote:
Greetings -
Hello,
Aside: Any greeting more cheerful / up beat seems ... misplaced.
Recently, a court issued a troubling set of rulings in a default decision
against "Israel.TV" and some other sites.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.n
On 4/14/22 2:05 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
I know I'm discussing what some consider ancient technology. I counter
that it meets or exceeds the needs of many, many people.
As people say, "if it isn't broken, don't fix it". -- That being said,
I believe the third stanza is missing; "Optimize it."
On 3/31/22 8:40 AM, Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
3) So, it is possible that the site with the reported "PoE induced"
issues may be somehow experiencing the above related phenomena. This
kind of situations are almost impossible to duplicate at another site.
It has to be diagnosed with pains-taking
On 3/29/22 3:46 PM, Joe Greco wrote:
So if you want the $100 test to eliminate PoE electrical effects, get
a pair of media converters and run fiber between them. Put the CPE on
the far end. Optimize as appropriate if you have SFP-capable switches.
I second this.
I'd also be willing to get a
On 3/29/22 2:19 PM, Aaron de Bruyn via NANOG wrote:
When you hear hoof beats, look for horses, not zebras.
As someone with a family member that is a zebra from a health
perspective, I follow up with:
Yes, /look/ for horses when you hear hoof beats, but -- and this is the
important thing --
On 3/21/22 12:56 PM, Jay Hennigan wrote:
If their intent is not to have data available for analysis, and it sure
sounds like it is, they aren't going to log flows or netstat. Data will
be in RAM during the TCP session, then poof.
I largely agree regarding persistent storage.
However, that doe
On 3/21/22 11:30 AM, TJ Trout wrote:
We have carefully engineered our apps and VPN servers to categorically
eliminate sensitive information. As a result, ExpressVPN can never be
compelled to provide customer data that does not exist.
I understand and appreciate your architecture.
However, the
On 3/21/22 10:21 AM, Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
1) " so it's not a chore to tell what thread you're even replying
to? ": I am lost by your statement.
Abe, all of your replies that I've seen in the past few days have been
brand new threads (or possibly replies to yourself).
None of your r
On 3/11/22 9:39 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
I am not really convinced that IPv4 can be
ignored/marginalized/obsoleted without penetration reaching over 90%,
globally.
I feel like that's an unfair characterization / summarization.
The VAST MAJORITY of the pro IPv6 discussions that I see are targetin
On 3/9/22 1:01 PM, Jay Hennigan wrote:
It's not just equipment vendors, it's ISPs.
I completely agree.
I get why line of business applications; e.g. billing, provisioning,
repair, haven't been updated to support IPv6.
But I believe that any network equipment vendor that is (or has been for
On 3/9/22 10:46 AM, David Conrad wrote:
Not disagreeing (and not picking on you), but despite hearing this
with some frequency, I haven’t seen much data to corroborate these
sorts of statements.
My team ran into a bug in Cisco IOS-XR a few years ago wherein IPv6
connected BGP had problems whe
On 3/2/22 8:53 AM, Matt Hoppes wrote:
My (unpopular opinion) Russia does not deserve any amenities of the
modern world. They have made their bed and now they have to sleep in it.
I think it's very important to differentiate between Russia as the
governmental entity and Russia as the body of g
Hi Bill,
On 2/12/22 8:55 PM, William Herrin wrote:
It's tunnel mode plus a tunneling protocol plus some implicit routing
and firewalling which gets in the way of dynamic routing.
I assume you meant to say that it's /transport/ mode plus a tunneling
protocol.
I wonder if you are thinking mor
On 2/11/22 12:35 PM, William Herrin wrote:
The thing to understand is that IPSec has two modes: transport and
tunnel. Transport is between exactly two IP addresses while tunnel
expects a broader network to exist on at least one end.
That is (syntactically) correct. However, it is possible to
On 2/11/22 7:58 AM, Jon Lewis wrote:
8.8.8.8 is already anycasted. What if each large ISP (for whatever
definition of large floats your boat) setup their own internal
instance(s) of 8.8.8.8 with a caching DNS server listening, and handled
the traffic without bothering GOOG?
I've pontificated
On 2/9/22 1:29 PM, Lady Benjamin Cannon of Glencoe wrote:
Exactly. 8.8.8.8 isn’t going down anytime soon, also is geographically
redundant; even if half the internet is dead, it’ll still be there.
It’s somewhat hard to duplicate that cheap.
And yet here we are having a thread where part o
On 2/8/22 4:13 PM, Mark Delany wrote:
Hard to disagree with "their network, their rules", but we're talking
about an entrenched, pervasive, Internet-wide behaviorial issue.
The entrenched, pervasive, Internet-wide behavior used to be to use any
convenient SMTP server to relay mail too.
The e
On 2/8/22 3:48 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
I was more here to find ammunition to show someone that they were doing
something wrong than to build anything myself.
I've long referred to finding rules / RFCs / documents / test results /
etc. as loading small 22 caliber shells for the powers that be t
On 1/17/22 3:39 PM, Jordan wrote:
One of these, the one originally used for DSL, would always go down
for both voice and data when the SLC lost power-- no DC, no dialtone,
no DSL, while the other two remained up. Despite several claims of
a resolution, this was never properly fixed
I never h
On 1/17/22 2:24 PM, Aaron C. de Bruyn via NANOG wrote:
My "small" (< ~5,000 customers) ISP won't uncheck that box for me no
matter how much I beg, plead, or offer to bring them snacks for their
office.
Chuckle.
They keep mumbling stuff about FCC requirements which I suspect is just
handwavin
On 10/20/21 3:26 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
Just as an interesting aside if you're interested in the history of
networking, When Wizards Stayed Up Late is quite elucidating.
+10 to Where Wizards Stay Up Late.
I recently re-acquired (multiple copies of) it. (Multiple because I
wanted the same
On 9/24/21 11:53 AM, b...@uu3.net wrote:
Well, I see IPv6 as double failure really.
I still feel like you are combining / conflating two distinct issues
into one generalization.
First, IPv6 itself is too different from IPv4.
Is it? Is it really? Is the delta between IPv4 and IPv6 greate
On 9/24/21 10:37 AM, Andrey Khomyakov wrote:
So ultimately my question to you all is how much do you care about the
speed of racking and unracking equipment and do you tell your suppliers
that you care? How much does the time it takes to install or replace a
switch impact you?
I was having a
On 9/24/21 3:01 AM, b...@uu3.net wrote:
Oh yeah, it would be very funny if this will really happen (new protocol).
Im not happy with IPv6, and it seems many others too.
Is your dissatisfaction with the IPv6 protocol itself or is your
dissatisfaction with the deployment / adoption of the IPv6 p
On 9/22/21 10:45 AM, Lady Benjamin Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE wrote:
Half-penny pinching “mah powah” landlords are especially annoying in a
cosmic sense
I know someone who had a bit of a different experience.
Someone, purportedly the telco but I'm not sure who, had telco equipment
in a building
On 9/6/21 5:04 AM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen via NANOG wrote:
Well, I come from a software background, so in my world the whole
thing is held together by duct tape and string anyway ;)
Don't forget bailing wire.
And while I can agree in principle, the nice thing about hacks is that
you can actua
On 9/5/21 3:28 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
I looked up CGN's this morning and the thing that struck me the most was
losing port forwarding. It's probably a small thing to most people but
losing it means to get an incoming session it always has to be mediated
by something on the outside. Yuck. S
Hi Toke,
On 9/5/21 3:07 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen via NANOG wrote:
Well, that's what I used to do back when I didn't have native v6 and
ran into this issue: block v6 at the DNS level. I.e., simply filter
out all records for offending service providers. Pretty simple
to setup on your home
On 9/5/21 12:48 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
There we get to the heart of things.
The problem is not with IPv6 or your ISP (*), but with the Netflix software.
Hum
Doing happy eyeballs and selecting an IP address out of the ones
available that they *then* reject because they don’t like it:
On 9/4/21 11:43 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
Municipal fiber.
;-)
Which is the point, you cannot capitalise offering IPv6, so offering
it is bad for business. People who have adopted IPv6 have eaten into
their margins for no utility.
I don't understand. :-/
I view IPv6 as the biggest mistake of
On 9/4/21 2:44 PM, Jeroen Massar via NANOG wrote:
SixXS shut down 4 years ago, to get ISPs to move their butts... as
long as there are tunnels, they do not have a business case.
I saw that.
See also https://www.sixxs.net/sunset/ and the "Call Your ISP for
IPv6" thing in 2016: https://www.sixx
Hi,
Does anyone have any recommendation for a viable IPv6 tunnel broker /
provider in the U.S.A. /other/ /than/ Hurricane Electric?
I reluctantly just disabled IPv6 on my home network, provided by
Hurricane Electric, because multiple services my wife uses are objecting
to H.E.'s IPv6 address
On 7/22/21 10:56 AM, Andy Ringsmuth wrote:
The outage appears to have, ironically, taken out the outages and
outages-discussion lists too.
I received multiple messages from the Outages (proper) mailing list,
including messages about the Akamai issue.
I'd be surprised if the Outages Discussio
On 6/3/21 8:44 AM, William Herrin wrote:
rp_filter is great until your network is slightly less than a
perfect hierarchy. Then your Linux "router" starts mysteriously
dropping packets and, as with allow_local, Linux doesn't have any
way to generate logs about it so you end up with these mysteri
On 6/2/21 4:35 AM, Jean St-Laurent via NANOG wrote:
Maybe you can explore the in kernel feature call RP filter or reverse
path filter. In router gear it's called uRPF.
cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/default/rp_filter
+100 to rp_filter
There are 2 modes: Loose or strict.
If your server is BGP
On 6/2/21 12:39 AM, William Herrin wrote:
I think you may be misunderstanding BCP 38. BCP 38 is about limiting
-source- addresses. What you've described is bogon filtering on
destination IP addresses. As far as I know, there's no BCP on bogon
filtering although BCP 84 offers some relevant advic
On 3/23/21 4:16 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
But they still have the originating domain's From: address.
My opinion is that messages from the mailing list should not have the
originating domain in the From: address. The message from the mailing
list should be from the mailing list's domain.
N
On 3/23/21 1:40 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
The big problem with mailing lists is that they screw up security by
changing the subject/body and breaking DKIM signatures.
What you are describing is a capability, configuration, execution issue
with the mailing list manager software.
Said another
On 3/23/21 12:41 AM, Cynthia Revström via NANOG wrote:
And while Discord is not at all a replacement for mailing lists in my
opinion, I think it's important to realize that it (and other chat based
things like it) have their place, especially among the younger groups.
I believe that chat / IM
My interpretation of Scott's message was "what's happening to the
existing archived content?".
On 3/22/21 4:08 PM, David Siegel wrote:
We are not anticipating any material impacts to any subscribers, whether
real people or list archivers.
Does that mean that the existing archives will both re
On 3/22/21 8:00 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
most discussion in the WISP space has moved to Facebook
So ... a walled garden.
I have a severe problem with professional communities /requiring/ me to
have a Facebook, et al., account to participate in community discussions.
What am I supposed to do
On 3/21/21 8:03 AM, Noah wrote:
Well baby boomers & gen-x will struggle to dump mail...I mean it simple
and just works.
Indeed.
There's also the fact that it comes to you as opposed to you going to it.
We were trying to get a community of newbie techies mostly millennials &
gen-z to actively
On 3/20/21 8:54 AM, Valdis Klētnieks wrote:
And adding "topic" tags to the subject line doesn't actually help the
food-fight scenario, as those can break out even in [TOPIC] tagged
threads. To tilt it the rest of the way from sub-optimal to outright
pessimal is the fact that some subscribers m
On 3/20/21 9:54 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
That seems like a reasonable proposal. NANOG-OffTopic, NANOG-Discuss,
NANOG-BizDev, NANOG-xyz, something (more more than one something).
The NANOG list seems to be leveraging Mailman, which does support topics.
The topic feature allows you to subscribe t
On 3/11/21 2:28 PM, Jared Brown wrote:
Out of interest, why does it take multiple weeks to edit a GEO IP entry?
I have no idea /why/. I only know that it /is/.
I /assume/ -- from a place of ignorance about the innards of the process
-- that there is validation and manual approval. I also /a
On 3/11/21 1:05 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
His email: Mar 8, 2021, 10:08 AM (3 days ago)
The current date and time: 3:03 PM Thursday, March 11, 2021 (EST)
The process takes multiple weeks.
You do the math.
My email with recommendations: 10:23 AM Thursday, March 11, 2021 (MST)
The current date
On 3/11/21 12:57 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
The lack of response to the problem from Google's team is the
knowledge that we're working with.
It may be the knowledge that /you/ are working with. /I/ am working
with different knowledge.
As stated in another reply, "I know / have witnessed multip
On 3/11/21 12:28 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Based on how difficult it is to correct their data for them at no
charge, I'm not sure he's entirely wrong in that statement.
Difficult of doing something is not directly related to people's
willingness / desire to do it.
I can guarantee you that ther
On 3/11/21 2:36 AM, William Guo wrote:
but they don't wanna improve it for some reason.
That is both unfair and wrong.
I know for a fact that they do want their internal GeoIP to be as
accurate as possible and that they do want to improve the inaccuracies
if and when possible.
I have perso
On 2/26/21 12:10 PM, b...@uu3.net wrote:
Hmm right... Somehow I tought that having that special Null MX will
silently discard message... I dont know why...
It's Friday. I'm presuming that many of us have had a long week and are
ready for the weekend. ;-)
So, RFC 7505 is pretty much even p
On 2/26/21 11:46 AM, b...@uu3.net wrote:
Well, I bet my legacy system will bounce it for example...
What specifically is the bounce?
I thought the purpose of the Null MX was to do two things:
1) Provide as an MX that can't be connected to.
2) Serve as a signal to things that know how to int
On 1/20/21 3:50 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote:
Around 300MB/day.
Interesting.
I see 50-70 MB / day for text only newsgroups.
Perhaps I want to step up to more than text only on some of my servers.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
On 1/14/21 3:07 PM, J. Hellenthal via NANOG wrote:
Check out sendgrid.net
Be mindful that there is and has been a concerted effort to block parts
of SendGrid. There's even a relatively new RBL -- which started because
of SendGrid -- specifically for blocking some of their worse customers.
M
On 11/20/20 4:27 PM, Lady Benjamin PD Cannon wrote:
Hi all, we never intended to spam the list, that was a total screw-up on
our part, one I take full responsibility for. A list of exclusions got
included. Please accept my sincere apologies.
...
Again, sorry for including the list in our l
On 11/20/20 4:41 PM, Matt Erculiani wrote:
Ben is fairly regular on this list and I can't imagine she did this on
purpose.
How does one /accidentally/ harvest email addresses and /accidentally/
add them to a Mailchimp list and /accidentally/ send emails with full
header personalization?
Thi
On 9/21/20 11:03 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
Reminder: forwarding these sorts of things (with full headers please) to:
nanog-spamm...@firemountain.net
will cause them to be compiled into a list.
Why not a nanog.org address?
Is this simply being aggregated by a NANOG member / subscriber
On 6/26/20 1:42 PM, Sabri Berisha wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
This is the part that matters the most. I'm sure they're willing.
Let's agree to disagree on Netflix's willingness.
I'm also sure that in the past, enough people have abused their
trust.
I question the veracity of that statement.
Since t
On 6/26/20 3:21 PM, William Herrin wrote:
Hi Grant,
Hi,
Philosophically, Netflix agrees with you.
My interactions with and observations of Netflix make me want to
disagree with you.
Unfortunately they have to keep the studios happy or many of their
content contracts evaporate.
I fail
On 6/26/20 12:08 PM, Brandon Jackson via NANOG wrote:
Correct they block HE.net's tunnel broker IP's because they practically
are at least for the sense of geo restrictions "VPN" that can be used to
get around said geo restriction.
I want to agree, but I can't. Move up the stack. I pay my bi
On 3/31/20 10:06 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Not pretty, but at least it could fit 4 xterms on-screen. In that
sense, it was almost as functional as my ragingly fast desktop is
these days.
Link - Terminal forever <3
- http://www.commitstrip.com/en/2016/12/22/terminal-forever/
--
Grant. . . .
On 3/25/20 11:27 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
nntp is a non-scalable protocol which broke under its own weight.
That statement surprises me. But I'm WAY late to the NNTP / Usenet game.
Threaded news-readers are a great way of catching up with large mailing
lists if you're prepared to put in the
On 3/25/20 3:47 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
some of us still do uucp, over tcp and over pots.
My preference is to do UUCP over SSH (STDIO) over TCP/IP. IMHO the SSH
adds security (encryption and more friendly authentication (keys / certs
/ Kerberos)) and reduces the number of ports that need to b
On 3/25/20 5:39 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:> One of the tools that we've
had for a very long time but which is
often overlooked is NNTP. It's an excellent way to move information
around under exactly these circumstances: low bandwidth, lossy
connections -- and intermittent connectivity, limited res
On 3/22/20 1:11 PM, John Kristoff wrote:
Owen DeLong wrote:
Maybe it’s time to revisit inter-domain multicast?
Uhmm... no thank you. :-)
As someone who 1) wasn't around during the last Internet scale foray
into multicast and 2) working with multicast in a closed environment,
I'm curios:
On 3/17/20 11:35 AM, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
But I dont expect me to go to my desk any time since now in
one month to press the button on the phone to set the voicemail active.
My office had problems with multiple workstations needing someone to
kick them. My team had someone volunteer to g
On 3/17/20 11:35 AM, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
But I dont expect me to go to my desk any time since now in
one month to press the button on the phone to set the voicemail active.
My office had problems with multiple workstations needing someone to
kick them. My team had someone volunteer to g
On 2/15/20 2:03 PM, Yang Yu wrote:
I asked NANOG several times to keep YouTube stream videos up until
edited videos are published (usually a week later), never got a
response on why they are not doing it.
Live streams through YouTube are quite different than videos uploaded to
YouTube.
YouT
On 1/10/20 11:01 AM, Ross Tajvar wrote:
Couldn't you just get a VPS with Vultr and set up BGP on it?
The last time I looked — it's been a while — doing that was not an
option for me.
I'll look again to see what the current status is.
Thank you for the pointer.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
On 1/10/20 10:36 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
Much safer, but for me personally, still more downside than upside.
Fair.
I wish that I could get my hands on a DFZ BGP feed. !R to unprovisioned
IPs. }:-)
But that's not easily accessible for mere mortals.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
smime.p7s
On 1/10/20 10:07 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
I'd like to remind people not to bogonise unallocated, more downside than
upside. Particularly if it's CLI jockey network, no one will update the
config once you change your employer. Even if it's toolised, once that
tool breaks, no one will fix it, if ther
On 11/4/19 1:55 AM, Chris Knipe wrote:
We are experiencing a situation with a 3rd party (direct peer), wanting
to advertise DoD address space to us, and we need to confirm whether
they are allowed to do so or not.
That sounds like someone is squatting on DoD IP space, likely for
something lik
On 10/27/19 4:27 PM, Joe Maimon wrote:
I would be happy to get /29's missing 3 /28's missing 5, etc...
Are you good with rounding up to the next larger network if you have
~62% of the members?
This is not punitive, its about scale.
ACK
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
smime.p7s
Descripti
1 - 100 of 187 matches
Mail list logo
