ong as they are *internal* that's
A-OK. The distance outside of one's AS one can expect
"interesting" TE to travel is equivalent to the reach
of your $s and/or contracts.
Cheers,
Joe
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
onsidered in
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-as-path-prepending/
where a decent low number (5) is propsed.
Chers,
Joe
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
Telia getting back to its spambone roots
[routes?] with a nod to Aleron.
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
; should be sure to compare hard-landing (ARIN) and
soft-landing RIRs.
Cheers,
Joe
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
've built quite a library of procmail filters directing problematic
posters and threads to null or review-when-needed bin. Automated
tagging could be helpful to facilitate such, but that mediation
would need some investment and maintenance.
Cheers,
Joe
--
Posted from my personal accou
Considering threads about DOD address squatters, it would
be a useful beaconing-and-cleaning project before putting
to market. I guess it'd be north of $10B and even for the
USG that's not small potatos...
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Pro
based
upon their tolerance of risk.
If someone chooses to operate in a region without backing that
choice with sufficient resources, perhaps it isn't a wise choice?
Cheers,
Joe
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 11:27:12PM +0100, Bryan Holloway wrote:
> There's a pretty big difference between imparting knowledge and inciting
> violence.
Not to mention it is was a COINTELPRO work product.
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 12:49:52PM -0800, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
[snip]
> Are the days of such an environment gone forever?
We can only hope so.
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
certainly makes
this an appropriate response. I will always applaud an
organization enforcing its anti-abuse policies.
Similarly, Cogent has been banned from peeringdb multiple
times for the exact same behavior. Repeated warnings had
no impact and without the bans, the behavior was not adjusted.
Cheers,
Joe
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
he ARIN PDP since March of this year.
See https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_5/
Most recent related PPML thread:
https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2019-July/067241.html
Cheers,
Joe
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
27;netstat -z', especially when having "application vs network"
arguments for poorly instrucmented applications.
Cheers,
Joe
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 09:58:20AM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
> Hey Joe,
>
> On 12 Jun 2019, at 12:37, Joe Provo wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 04:10:00PM +, David Guo via NANOG wrote:
> >> Send abuse complaint to the upstreams
> >
> > ...and then
l account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
and most specifically on that page
"16. ARIN-Prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation"
Cheers,
Joe
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
ow of one.
> >> >
> >> > It seems like a good idea.
> >> >
> >> > BGP-multi-hop might be a reasonable way to collect them.
> >> >
> >> > If others agree that it???s a good idea, and it???s not stepping on
> >> > anyo
bors in a number of cases, enumerting ASNs one will
[de]preference from a certain set of peers or will drop entirely
for example.
Often such policies exist but aren't published. ;-)
Cheers!
Joe
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
from 2828 (it might
have been the concentric days) and others in the hallways
at NANOG.
Cheers,
Joe
* Barring those who never cared about forwarding quality or
path integrity and would say "LOL someone gives me free
transit to you".
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Discl
s is pretty old territory, and should be part of any
providers' M&P for handling PI space.
Cheers,
Joe
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
c is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb /
> > >> netflix / apple / amazon ??? but your mix may vary.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are
> > >>>>> wondering what the best options are out there?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be
> > >>> plum
> > >>>>> out... Any recommendations?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> Ryan Gard
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> Have you considered IPv6?
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Mark Andrews, ISC
> > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> > PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
> >
> >
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
ad been used for a while before the codification
but I don't have a good citation. IAB minutes of 1992 speak of
the practice and the tut-tutting of not wanting people to do
it, but not citing specific numbers and math.
Cheers!
Joe
--
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:00:36PM -0400, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Consider the following scenario:
>
> - Customer A is a customer of SP A
> - SP A is a customer of SP B
> - SP B has a traffic engineering community implementation
>
> With regards to using BGP communities for TE:
>
> - Do
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 04:38:52PM -0400, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 22:11:47 +0300, Max Tulyev said:
> > Is it possible in general to measure the quality of Internet access? And
> > if yes - how?
>
> First, *define* "quality". Raw bandwidth to a test server? Raw bandwi
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:50:17AM +0200, Job Snijders wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 08:48:11AM -0400, Joe Provo wrote:
[snip]
> > It is useful to note that AS_PATH if often also involved on egress
> > decisions.
>
> You say 'often', but I don
On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 11:48:36AM +, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) wrote:
> Thanks for the inputs about the inter-AS messaging and route-leak prevention
> techniques between neighboring ASes. Certainly helpful information and also
> useful
> for the draft (draft-ietf-idr-route-leak-detection-mit
On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 05:54:18PM +0200, Job Snijders wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 11:41:52AM +, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) wrote:
> > I am a co-author on a route-leak detection/mitigation/prevention draft
> > in the IDR WG in the IETF:
> > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-route
No, we examined this back in 2007. See your favorite cache site
for http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/240-e
--
RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / CotSG / Usenix / NANOG
On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 12:53:07AM +0900, Paul S. wrote:
> Do these people never check what exactly they end up originating
> outbound due to a config change, if that's really the case?
Of course not because their neighbors are allowing it to
pass; so as with all hijacks, deaggregation, and othe
This has always been the case, and traffic splay and origin/sink
management has been more important than cost savings since at
least 2002? Maybe 2001. Definitely before 2004.
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 08:42:06PM -0700, wbn wrote:
> Hi fellow NANOGers -
>
> I recently spent some time with peering
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 10:42:55AM -0800, Paul Ferguson wrote:
[snip]
> Taken to the logical extreme, the "right thing" to do is to deny any
> spoofed traffic from abusing these services altogether. NTP is not the
> only one; there is also SNMP, DNS, etc.
...and then we're back to "implement BCP3
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 12:26:01AM +0200, Niels Bakker wrote:
[snip]
> Also, if you don't have data, best to keep your opinion to yourself,
> because you might well be wrong.
The deuce you say! Replacing uninformed conjecture and conspiracy
theories with actual data? Next thing you know there
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 03:22:41PM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 14:14 , Joe Provo wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 01:18:04PM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> >> On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:54 , Joe Provo wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jun 10, 20
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 01:18:04PM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:54 , Joe Provo wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:36:44AM -0500, Dennis Burgess wrote:
>
> >> I have a network that has three peers, two are at one site and the third
> >
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:36:44AM -0500, Dennis Burgess wrote:
> I have a network that has three peers, two are at one site and the third
> is geographically diverse, and there is NO connection between the two
> separate networks.
So, you have two islands? Technically, that would be separate
ASN
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 01:10:48PM +1000, Julian DeMarchi wrote:
> On 01/10/2013 01:06 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> > Who uses it? Or did you see your IP listed in one of those multiple dnsbl
> > query sites and contacted them on general principles even though you didn't
> > see any actual b
On Fri, Aug 03, 2012 at 01:01:35PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
[snip]
> If you're that concerned about calling 911 for a heat stroke, why don't
> you maintain a POTS line?
Choices are great but carry responsibility and result in
consequences. Some folks don't like to hear that, or just
can't be
While we will expect to see the Patrick S. Ryan & Jacob Glick
paper linked on
http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog55/abstracts.php?pt=MTk0OCZuYW5vZzU1&nm=nanog55
at some point, folks wanting a head start on digesting it can
hit http://ssrn.com/abstract=2077095
Interestingly enough, http://wcitle
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 04:27:29PM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> err, last 3 times I asked this I was shown the error of my ways, but
> here goes...
>
> 209.250.228.241 - seems to not have any records in ARIN's WHOIS
> database, everythign seems to roll up to the /8 record :(
>
> I see this
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:17:25PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> On Jun 8, 2012, at 1:41 PM, Alec Muffett wrote:
>
> >> PS: when security is hard, people simply don't do it. Blaming the victim
> >> of poor engineering that leads people to not be able to perform best
> >> practices is not the answ
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 01:13:45PM -0400, Manish Karir wrote:
>
> All,
>
> We are working on a project with the University of Michigan related
> with studying the evolution of .com/.net zones
> Does anyone have copies of .com / .net zone files around the
> beginning of 2011?
> Any help would be g
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 06:08:47PM -0400, alex-lists-na...@yuriev.com wrote:
> Hello,
>
> If anyone has a contact in the Google Group that deals with Google's
> Public DNS servers ( i.e. the 8.8.8.8/8.8.4.4 creatures ) could that person
> kindly drop me an email off list?
>
> I believe there mig
Last post on this topic for me. You seem to wish to argue
against the lessons of history and the reality of running
a network on the global Internet.
On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 09:27:36AM +0200, Daniel Suchy wrote:
> On 06/02/2012 02:53 AM, Joe Provo wrote:
> > Cost and performance were m
On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 08:03:50PM +0200, Daniel Suchy wrote:
> On 06/01/2012 07:38 PM, Joe Provo wrote:
> > You clearly did not read the previous posts involving actual historical
> > evidence [and apparently ongoing] of remote networks attempting action
> > at a dista
On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 10:19:16AM +0200, Daniel Suchy wrote:
> On 05/31/2012 07:06 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> > On (2012-05-31 08:46 -0700), David Barak wrote:
> >
> >> On what precisely do you base the idea that a mandatory
> >> transitive attribute of a BGP prefix is a "purely advisory flag
> >> wh
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:26:29PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> On 31/05/2012 11:23, Daniel Suchy wrote:
> > In my experience, there're not so many service providers
> > doing that.
>
> Plenty of providers do it. IIWY, I would universally rewrite origin at
> your ingress points to be the same; o
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 02:43:50PM -0400, William Herrin wrote:
> On 5/1/12, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> > On May 1, 2012, at 13:26 , William Herrin wrote:
> >> If I'm willing to go to your location, buy the card for your router
> >> and pay you for the staff hours to set it up, there should be *n
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 07:31:26PM -0400, Jon Lewis wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2012, Joe Provo wrote:
>
> >uRFP was a trivial, 0-impact feature on the cisco VXR-based CMTS
> >platform. Assert a simple statement in the default config (along
> >with 'ips classless'
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 08:45:12AM -0700, David Conrad wrote:
> Leo,
>
> On Mar 28, 2012, at 8:13 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> >> #1) Money.
> >> #2) Laziness.
>
> > While Patrick is spot on, there is a third issue which is related
> > to money and laziness, but also has some unique aspects.
> >
>
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 09:29:29AM -0800, Radke, Justin wrote:
> How can I easily view the current peering relationship of a particular AS?
> Assume the AS you are researching does not have a looking glass and you are
> not going to do lookups from the top 10 providers route servers to get some
> g
On Thu, Feb 09, 2012 at 01:28:07AM +0530, Anurag Bhatia wrote:
[snip]
> I have never did such setup, but I assume it works as you say. I wonder how
> it finds a US based system from IP quickly (since it's DNS server)?
Drop "ip geolocation" or "internet geolocation" into Your Favorite
Search Eng
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 07:53:53AM +, George Bonser wrote:
> > Back in the old days, people cared about policing bad behavior.
>
> And I believe that is all that is needed today. We simply, as a
> community, need to decide that we aren't going to tolerate such
> behavior. It really is that
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 08:02:28PM -0200, Alvaro Pereira wrote:
> And note that the Juniper EX2500 does not run JUNOS, it is just an OEM box
> from someone else...
Blade Networks, now IBM.
>
> Alvaro
>
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 10:23, Tim Vollebregt wrote:
>
> > 2,5MB shared approximately.
>
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 04:37:35PM +0200, Gregory Edigarov wrote:
[snip]
> > can anybody recomend a piece of software, that could "graph" a live
> > network scanning it via snmp.
> > requirements are:
> > 1. must produce a text output suitable for postproduction. graphviz is
> > an ideal, xml - acc
On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 02:41:40PM +0200, Grzegorz Janoszka wrote:
>
> Telia (AS1299) stopped announce some prefixes to us, ie 83.8.0.0/13. Is
> it another internet depeering? Do you also see it?
"There are more routing policies on the Internet, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
On Sat, Aug 06, 2011 at 01:25:18PM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Joe Provo wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Aug 06, 2011 at 10:41:10AM -0400, Scott Helms wrote:
> > > Correct, I don't believe that any of the providers noted are actually
> > [snip
On Sat, Aug 06, 2011 at 10:41:10AM -0400, Scott Helms wrote:
> Correct, I don't believe that any of the providers noted are actually
[snip]
Belief has nothing to do with it. The article is vaguely referring
to 'search' and incorrectly jumps to https. Disappointing that
nanog readers can't read h
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 05:04:51PM -0700, Bino Gopal wrote:
> http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20768-us-internet-providers-hijacking-users-search-queries.html
It is more than slightly misleading to say "hijacking search
queries"; paxfire is evil as it hijacks dns and breaks NXDOMAIN
and the
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 08:13:46PM -0500, Benson Schliesser wrote:
[snip]
> It's obvious that ARIN, as well as other whois database providers,
> should pay attention to the proceedings. But under what premise
> might ARIN act as a party to this lawsuit?
The proper question might be that if neithe
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 01:27:29PM +, Tony Finch wrote:
> Jay Nakamura wrote:
>
> > 666,624 is kind of odd number, isn't it? That comes out to a
> > /13,/15,/19,/21 and a /22.
>
> >From the court documents I gather that it is a collection of miscellaneous
> blocks that Nortel acquired over
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 10:43:09PM -0500, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> An armed FBI special agent shows up at your facility and tells your ranking
> manager to "shut down the Internet".
legal paperwork or pound sand. [very small hurdle, pathetic how many
LEOs seek to avoid it] The rest of it waits for
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 10:31:43PM -0600, Jeremy wrote:
> Has there been any discussion about allocating the Class E blocks? If this
> doesn't count as "future use" what does? (Yes, I realize this doesn't *fix*
> the problem here)
https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/240-e
Last real message? 31 Oct
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 07:13:53PM -0500, Lars Carter wrote:
[snip]
> There are two companies, Company A and Company B, that are planning to
> continuously exchange a large amount of sensitive data and are located in a
> mutual datacenter. They decide to order a cross connect and peer privately
> f
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 12:46:39PM -0800, JC Dill wrote:
[snip]
> Your lmgtfy link's search finds 5 year old press releases about
> discussions to PLAN overbuilding in various locations. What I want are
> the Names of Specific Locations (in the SF Bay Area) where such
> overbuilds are currently
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:46:10AM -0800, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 02:31:09PM -0500, Joe Provo
> wrote:
> > Everywhere that had enough paying-humans-per fiber-mile, so primarily
> > the Northeast corridor (Metro DC through Metro Bost
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:16:30AM -0800, Leo Bicknell wrote:
[snip]
> So from about 1996 to 2000 we had competition. They then figured out
> how to rig the system so there is no effective competition, and so far
> the government has been A-Ok with that.
You also miss the part about the capital m
Recent IETF announce message
(http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg08209.html)
indicates comments should get in by the 19th. IMO a decent "update
your expectations" document with a refreshingly healthy nod to
netowkr realities. I'm sure they'd love more operator input,
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 05:49:53PM -0500, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Matthew Petach wrote:
>
> > fair game for reverse billing. ?If it does, it's going to completely
> > eliminate "transit" as a commercial offering; instead, we'll
> > all be stuck doing settlement
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 08:03:27PM -0800, Leo Bicknell wrote:
[snip]
> If the FCC wanted to do something useful they would look at the
> combined ratio of all /customers/ of an ISP, and then require their
> peering policy to allow for around 2x of that.
[snip]
...or maybe not get involved in peeri
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 04:49:48PM -0600, Aaron Wendel wrote:
> A customer pays them for access to the Internet. If that access demands
> more infrastructure then Comcast needs to build out the infrastructure and
> pass on the costs to the customers demanding it.
s/Comcast/Level3/
> I think it s
On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 06:27:13PM -0500, James Jones wrote:
> Remember not everyone who is on this list is a network operator
> and sometimes their misguided statements make it here.
It is an operations list; stick to the topic [reachabinility and
the fragmentation of dns or bgp data in this ca
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 03:39:31PM -0500, Greg Whynott wrote:
[snip]
> i have my maxas-limit set to 10 based on an article I was reading.
> perhaps I should up that a bit.
That article was deeply mistaken. 50 was reasonable for older IOS with
bugs back in ... 2001-2003? I think. under the auspic
...and I used to live in parts of Virginia where rednecks took
out signs with shotguns and no doubt now [if not run out by
gentrification] take out fiber.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 01:59:03PM -0700, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
[snip]
> Long story short, you can't account for stupid.
...and
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 01:40:10PM +, Julien Gormotte wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:28:09 -0400, Rodrick Brown
> wrote:
> > Its unrealistic to believe payment for priority access isn't going to
> > happen this model is used for many other outlets today I'm not sure why
> so
> > many are agai
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 09:34:40AM -0600, Danny McPherson wrote:
>
> On Jul 20, 2010, at 1:26 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
>
> > On (2010-07-19 23:45 -0500), Brad Fleming wrote:
> >
> > Hey,
> >
> >> : for local rtbh
> >> : for local + remote rtbh
> >>
> >> I didn't have much reason fo
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 09:34:53PM +0300, Kasper Adel wrote:
> Thanks for all the people that replied off list, asking me to send them
> responses i will get.
[snip]
> Which is useful but i am looking for more stuff from the best people that
> run the best NOCs in the world.
>
> So i'm throwing th
On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 03:50:25PM -0500, Dale Cornman wrote:
> Has anyone ever heard of a multi-homed enterprise not running bgp with
> either of 2 providers, but instead, each provider statically routes a block
> to their common customer and also each originates this block in BGP?
Yes; tends
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 12:58:43PM -0400, Bill Bogstad wrote:
[snip]
> be attractive to at least some of them. Come up with some kind of
> logo for the program "IPv6 READY!". Make it a bandwagon thing so
> that vendors who aren't part of the program look behind the times.
Wheels, they get re-in
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 01:20:04AM -0400, Anton Kapela wrote:
> So, this week, I actually read the update report. Noting the stats below (..a
> flap/update once per minute? please, fix your CPE router), I have but one
> humble request:
>
> Could the settlement-free members of the DFZ please cons
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 02:04:39PM +0200, jul wrote:
> Hello,
>
> While watching some parked domains, I recently observed one which has a
> TXT field containing some crypto value, something like a ssh key/RSA 512
> or 1024 output (only the crypto part 'cvxvcvcxvcxv=' ).
If the TXT data is a large
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 09:30:38PM +, Paolo Lucente wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:20:41PM +0100, Arnold Nipper wrote:
> > On 11.03.2010 16:29 Dylan Ebner wrote
> >
> > > Do the Arista switches support netflow? From a management perspective
> > > netflow can be vital. This is something we
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 02:16:30AM -0700, Sean Reifschneider wrote:
> I've wondered about this for years, but only this evening did I start
> searching for details. And I really couldn't find any.
>
> Can anyone point me at distant history about how 4.2.2.2 came to be, in my
> estimation, the mos
On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 09:21:52PM -0500, Chadwick Sorrell wrote:
> Hello NANOG,
>
> Long time listener, first time caller.
[snip]
> What measures have you taken to mitigate human mistakes?
>
> Have they been successful?
>
> Any other comments on the subject would be appreciated, we would like
>
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 04:08:28PM -0800, Seth Mattinen wrote:
> In the past I've always used /30's for PTP connection subnets out of old
> habit (i.e. Ethernet that won't take unnumbered) but now I'm considering
> switching to /31's in order to stretch my IPv4 space further. Has anyone
> else d
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 05:13:39PM -0800, George Bonser wrote:
[snip]
> Some of that water is dirtier than the rest. I wouldn't want to be the
> person who gets 1.2.3.0/24
Yeah, I encountered some lovely wireless hotspots that use "visit
http://1.1.1.1/ to log out". Seem some vendors encourage th
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:19:32PM -0500, Jared Mauch wrote:
[snip]
> Apparently I forgot the tag, but really, if you have sane
> CoPP policies, you are mostly protected. If the vendor does not
> provide this capability, please STOP BUYING THEIR CRAP.
Another fine example of broken fate-sharing
On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 01:09:26PM -0500, Randy Bush wrote:
> > I _do_ create action plans and _do_ quarterback each step and _do_
> > slap down any attempt to deviate.
>
> imagine a network engineering culture where the concept of 'attempt to
> deviate' just does not occur.
Whimsical deviations
On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 01:51:05PM -0500, Kain, Becki (B.) wrote:
>
> when is the European Union going to sue them for anti-trust, ala
> Microsoft?
More optional anycasted resolvers are somehow bad? [well, for
simpleminded geolocation maybe] Just another pair to slot
alongside L3's and OpenDN
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 09:41:09AM -0600, Joe Greco wrote:
[attributions lost]
> > >>> I'm reasonable certain a customer of ours who is using one of our
> > >>> netblocks is using a different reverse path to reach us. How might I
> > >>> figure out who is allowing them to source traffic from IPs
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 09:37:03PM +0100, Andy B. wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Quick question: Would you buy transit from someone who does not
> support BGP communities?
No.
--
RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE
)
before the Steering Committee meets on 3 November.
Cheers!
Joe Provo
--
RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE
___
NANOG-announce mailing list
nanog-annou...@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce
[tangent of interst for the archives]
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 02:07:42PM -0500, Joe Greco wrote:
[snip]
> If I'm assigned 24.1.2.3 by Comcast, and Comcast filters my ingress to
> prevent me from emitting other addresses, you claim that's fine because
> it's BCP38.
>
> There's a problem: I can va
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 04:19:23PM -0500, Lee Riemer wrote:
> Isn't blocking any port against the idea of Net Neutrality?
Which demonstrates just how relevant to reality such things are.
--
RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE
Hey folks,
Just a reminder that the NANOG Election polls will be closing at 09.15 EDT.
If you are listed here
http://www.nanog.org/governance/elections/2009elections/2009_voters.php
you can vote, no matter where in the world you are. Ballot is here:
https://nanog.merit.edu/election/
MLC nomina
home and avoid contact
with others and do attend remotely via the streams. Keep an eye on
the agenda for links! http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog47/agenda.php
Your help in making the NANOG (and ARIN) meetings enjoyable for all
attendees is appreciated.
Cheers!
Joe Provo
for the Steering
the 2009/2010 NANOG SC closes
Thu 2009-10-22 SC appoints new PC
Thu 2009-10-29 MLC nominations close, candidate information posted
Tue 2009-11-03 SC appoints new MLC
Cheers!
Joe Provo
for the NANOG Steering Committee
--
RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE
[comment: subject is irksome - "Unroutable"? That is meaningless]
On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 05:20:23PM -0400, Peter Beckman wrote:
> I can't reach 83.222.0.0/19 from Verizon, but I can via Cox Communications
> Business Fiber as well as Level3. Dies at a peering point it seems:
>
> HOST: home
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 12:58:01PM -0500, Clue Store wrote:
[snip]
> would like to go with , but I have had some in the industry say this is not
> as good as running an IGP with the customer.
Name and shame. TTBOMK, no-one who thought walking that road was a
Good Idea did so for long after start
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 09:37:22AM +0200, Ivan Pepelnjak wrote:
> > Anybody have a handy route-map that will deny anything with a
> > as-path longer than say 15-20? ;-)
>
> http://wiki.nil.com/Filter_excessively_prepended_BGP_paths
It will still be a while before we see unbroken 4byte AS behavio
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 03:37:07PM -0600, randal k wrote:
> Yep, we started seeing this right around 12:20pm MST. We saw it from a
> customer's rapidly-flapping BGP peer. We told them to configure bgp
> maxas-limit, but apparently CRS1s don't have that command.
>
> Anybody have a handy route-map t
1 - 100 of 138 matches
Mail list logo
