On 19/08/2011, at 4:18 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
It'd really suck for end users to start actively avoiding IPv6 connectivity
because it keeps breaking and for organisations that have active records
to break peoples connectivity to their resources.
+1 -- I'm all for publishing records
ing about security as it
applies to LANs with rfc 1918 address space behind a firewall and haven't
rethought security as it applies to IPv6.
Greg
--
--
=
Carlos M. Martinez-Cagnazzo
http://www.labs.lacnic.net
=
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
On 11/08/2011, at 1:33 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> On Aug 10, 2011, at 7:45 PM, Mark Newton wrote:
>
>>
>> On 11/08/2011, at 8:42 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>>
>>> I suppose that limiting enough households to too small an allocation
>>> will have that effect. I would rather we steer the internet
idates, with /56 being
slightly preferred.
I am most curious as to why a /60 prefix is not considered when trying
to address this problem. It provides 16 /64 subnetworks, which seems
like an adequate amount for an end user.
Does anyone have opinions on the BCP for end user addressing in IPv6?
--
M
On 03/08/2011, at 11:25 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Mikael Abrahamsson"
>
>> On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>
>>> Europe is a little odd in that way, especially DE and NO in that there
>>> seems to be this weird FUD running around claiming that sta
uting
tables in some places), but the reality is we've been somewhat wedged and a
static range proves to be a better outcome.
FWIW - we're doing IPv6 to customers, today, from our production BNG/BRAS/LNS
(whatever you want to call them).
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
Peering Manage
rket. Tools like peeringdb.com<http://peeringdb.com>
and bgp.he.net<http://bgp.he.net> will tell you how everyone's connected.
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
Peering Manager and Team Lead - Commercial and DSLAMs
Internode /Agile
Level 5, 150 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA
On 10/02/2011, at 4:39 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> In message , Jason Fesler
> wri
> tes:
>>> In my recent probe of route servers, I found 22 legacy /8's that were partly
>>
>>> or completely unused. I'm a little surprised ARIN/ICANN thinks it's a waste
>>
>>> of time to even try to reclaim
On 05/02/2011, at 8:57 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:
As has been noted previously, it's all about your frame of
reference. If the US is removed from the Internet, it does not
mean the Internet stops working; from the perspective of the
rest of the world, the Internet is still there.
I suspect you'l
On 04/02/2011, at 3:43 PM, Paul Ferguson wrote:
Also, make sure you have staff attorneys well-versed in Internet law --
you'll need them either way.
The Internet has it's own law now?
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
Peering Manager and Team Lead - Commercial and DSLAMs
Internode /Agi
On 28/01/2011, at 10:46 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>> d.
>>
>> Please direct any comments, flames, etc directly to me instead of the
>> list. I've added enough noise already :-)
>
> Note you can have totally broken IPv6 connectivity and still be
> fine on World IPv6 day. You just need applicati
On 05/12/2010, at 2:29 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
> On 12/4/10 10:52 PM, Ben Jencks wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 22:40, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
>>> Probably a case of something being blindingly obvious but...
>>>
>>> I have seen plenty of information on IPv6 from a internal network
>>> standpo
On 30/11/2010, at 6:17 PM, Kevin Blackham wrote:
> On Nov 29, 2010, at 15:57, William Warren
> wrote:
>
>> I think Karl Denninger has this one called right:
>> http://market-ticker.org/post=173522
>
> I don't think so. Let's do a little math exercise:
>
> Comcast charges me $75/mo for my pip
On 04/04/2010, at 7:54 PM, IPv3.com wrote:
> As the "NANOG Community" Moves to IPv6...
> ...
> it might be a Public Service to post the IPv4 /8s made available.
> ...
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/
MMC
nce is really noise.
Bring on Vendor equipment with SFP+ optic support for 10G - AU$1199 for 10G-LR
SFP+!
($AU = Australian Dollar which is about US 91c)
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
Peering Manager and Team Lead - Commercial and DSLAMs
Internode /Agile
> I guess Cisco's 800's are out of the "Consumer Grade" price range, but
> any comments
> about v6 support on them and how they compare with other options.
>
> Just looking for feedback about good options for sort remote/branch/home
> office.
>
> Regards
&
DHCPv6 PD is pretty crucial.
I'd love to see the code in an ADSL box (hint hint hint DLINK).
MMC
Frank Bulk wrote:
Give their emulator a try:
http://support.dlink.com/emulators/dir615_revC/310NA/login.htm
Perhaps this is a dumb question, but without DHCPv6 IA_PD support, how are
"other" lar
Mohacsi Janos wrote:
According to Apple the latest Apple Airport Extreme does support
DHCPv6 prefix delegation and native IPv6 uplink not only 6to4.
Airports don't support DHCPv6 PD yet. I'm led to believe that they may
in the future from my Apple friends but not yet.
MMC
any leads to information about such products (In production
> or planned production)?
>
> We are thinking that most vendors are going to wait until Ma and Pa home
> user are screaming for them.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> --
> Wade Peacock
> Sun Country Cablevision Ltd
&g
On 03/12/2009, at 11:24 AM, Fred Baker wrote:
> There are specifications for them being developed in the IETF, BBF, and Cable
> Labs. Basically, all of the usual suspects are interested in having product
> that meets needs.
I challenge the usual suspects to deliver actual working dual stack IP
>> - Original Message -
>> From: Shane Ronan
>> To: nanog
>> Sent: Thu Nov 26 13:38:43 2009
>> Subject: Happy Thanksgiving
>>
>> Happy Thanksgiving
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
Peering Manager and Team Lead - Commercial and DSLAMs
Internode /Agile
Amen to that Randy.
MMC
Randy Bush wrote:
This would be a big mistake. Fate sharing between the device that
advertises the presence of a router and the device that forwards packets
makes RAs much more robust than DHCPv4.
No, what we want are better first hop redundancy protocols, and DH
I'm guessing that the top 20 unstable ASes are Korean or Asian is
related to the cable cuts in Asia?
cidr-rep...@potaroo.net wrote:
BGP Update Report
Interval: 13-Aug-09 -to- 20-Aug-09 (7 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds
Congrats Rod.
Southern Cross and Nortel have been trialing 40Gbps waves on the 8000km
segment from Hawaii to New Zealand.
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/152866,southern-cross-trials-40gbps-nortel-kit.aspx
The 8000km segment is a LONG way - a very long way but it should mean
stability for any
Maybe there's just a lot of congestion and it's not actually down?
Happens here (Australia) on some mobile networks at large events - just
not enough bandwidth to go around and so you can't make calls and sms
are delayed. Given that there's a lot of protests etc and a lot of
people out and ab
Jay Hennigan wrote:
Most of the rest of the world has 240v as conventional domestic power,
and most server rooms or datacenters supporting >2KVA single devices
have 208 or 240v available, so it makes sense for manufacturers of
high-power gear to save the money on copper and connectors and in
James Hess wrote:
A /62 takes care of that unusual case, no real need for a /56 for
the average residential user; that's just excessive. Before wondering
about the capabilities of home routers.. one might wonder if there
will even be _home_ "routers" ?
I think you'd want to do a /60 so
tion on e-
mail spam(CNN)
With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too
many apples.
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
Networks, Internode/Agile
Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: m...@internode.com.auWeb: http://www.on.net
Direct: +61-8-8228-2909 Mobile: +61-419-900-366
Reception: +61-8-8228-2999Fax: +61-8-8235-6909
http://www.peeringdb.com/view.php?asn=15169
On 20/04/2009, at 7:22 AM, John Martinez wrote:
Anyone have any contact information for the google noc or adsense noc?
Thanks in advance.
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
Networks, Internode/Agile
Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Arnold Nipper wrote:
On 17.04.2009 20:52 Paul Vixie wrote
Large IXP have >300 customers. You would need up to 45k vlan tags,
wouldn't you?
Not agreeing or disagreeing with this as a concept, but I'd imagine that
since a number of vendors support arbitrary vlan rewrite on ports that
in
Charles Wyble wrote:
So allow me to think out loud for a minute
1) Why wasn't the fiber protected by some sort of hardened/locked
conduit? Is this possible? Does it add extensive cost or hamper normal
operation?
Some people do lock their vaults/pits/manholes. But, to be honest, I'm
not
Everything is a tunnel...
Tube man. Everything is a tube... and Al Gore invented tubes.
MMC
Nick
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft Internode/Agile Peering and Core Networks
also seem frustrated with this situation.
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft Internode/Agile Peering and Core Networks
lly_ want Geoff Houston to be right about
deploying IPv6?
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft Internode/Agile Peering and Core Networks
r etc)?
To put it into context - the approach of stuffing other people's ASes in
a path to prevent them learning it is wide spread, especially in Asia -
I've seen AS-SETs with all sorts of Tier1/2 ASes even though I know that
they have no transit relationship with them!
MMC
--
M
failure. (We already have a class of customer with statically assigned
addresses or ranges).
The indication so far seems to be that on this list at least people
don't see IPv6 statics for all as the general option. This gives me a
bit more hope.
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Inte
Tell ya what Owen,
When you can show me residential grade CPE which has a DECENT stateful
firewall then PLEASE let me know.
Needs to do other things well, not crash, not cost hundreds of
dollars, supportable, does VOIP, WIFI etc are manufacturer supported
etc. Of course, it needs to do I
roads are
implemented poorly. IPv6 is design to do everything for everyone, but
the reality is the implementations aren't there or it's not practical.
Mobile just creates more mess, I'm trying to make this simple and make
it work.
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/A
or domestic DSL/Cable users - please don't tell me
all about how cool NetScreen/PIX/ASA/ is for
enterprise).
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
Level 4, 150 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: m...@internode.com.au Web: http://www.on.net
Direct: +61-8-
:
On Thu, 5 Feb 2009, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
DHCP(v6). Setting the idea in people's heads that a /64 IS going
to be their own statically is insane and will blow out provider's
own routing tables more than is rational.
Routing table size will be a function of the number of
Hmm,
Apologies for that - wasn't meant to goto the list. Was a bit "frank".
MMC
On 05/02/2009, at 2:59 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
Hi James,
I don't think anyone really has done it large scale properly.
I've had basically nothing from anyone.
Given my know
Hello Matthew , See way below ...
On Thu, 5 Feb 2009, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
Scott Howard wrote:
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore >wrote:
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft >wrote:
but my point was that people are starting to assume that v
Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 11:58:33AM +1030, Matthew
Moyle-Croft wrote:
My FEAR is that people ("customers") are going to start assuming that v6
means their own static allocation (quite a number are assuming this).
This means that I have
I've said and clarified). But I think
the reality is that in the provider world, no matter what people here
say, customer demand for an unchanging IPv6 range will increase not
decrease - driving up provider routing size and complexity.
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networ
might look like? Especially
with growth etc.
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
Level 4, 150 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: m...@internode.com.au Web: http://www.on.net
Direct: +61-8-8228-2909 Mobile: +61-419-900-366
Reception: +61-8-8228-2999
Scott Howard wrote:
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
but my point was that people are starting to assume that v6 WILL mean
static allocations for all customers.
By design IPv6 should mean _less_
ng problem.
This is my fear.
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
Level 4, 150 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: m...@internode.com.au Web: http://www.on.net
Direct: +61-8-8228-2909 Mobile: +61-419-900-366
Reception: +61-8-8228-2999 Fax: +61-8-8235-6909
is means that I have a problem with routing table size etc if I have
to implement that.
I'm still not convinced though that, given DHCPv6 is going to be a
reality for DNS assignment etc, that stateless autoconfig is needed and
thus /64 doesn't have to be the smallest we assign.
e addresses
statically in DNS etc as our customers are want to do).
Has anyone out there actually done an implentation, across DSL of PD?
If you have PLEASE let me know on list/off list/by dead letter drop in a
park. Especially interested in CPE etc.
Regards,
Matthew
Mark
--
Matthew
Anthony Roberts wrote:
On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 11:08:44 +1030, Matthew Moyle-Croft
wrote:
Let's face it - the current v6 assignment rules are to solve a 1990s set
of problems. A /64 isn't needed now that we have DHCP(v6).
It's needed to prevent people from NATing in
wrote:
History never repeats,
I tell myself before I go to sleep.
Followed on the same album by a song called "My Mistake".
MMC
(Who's trying to implement v6 native for DSL customers but finds that the world
doesn't
have useable solutions yet for DSL CPE, BRAS, IPv6 all
two border router's
and support a small ISP (2 customers), also an opensource
solution would be great!
Regards,
Bruce
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft Internode/Agile Peering and Core Networks
Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: m...@internode.com.auWeb:
Surely the whole point of this is that the end users (the eyeballs)
get the best experience they can as they're the ultimate consumer. So
working with everyone in the chain between the content owner and the
eyeballs is important.
If you're a content owner then you want the experience to be
Martin Hannigan wrote:
I'm not sure if I support off shoring or not as
related to quality, but there is certainly a a business case to to be made
supporting it as this thread ending up pointing out. There are trade offs
which matter more to some than others.
I'm quite fascinated by some of t
times.
Gadi.
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft Internode/Agile Peering and Core Networks
Chris Lewis wrote:
Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
The difficulty is that local blocking is only useful to block C&C
communications from infected machine in _your_ netblock. It doesn't at
all stop inbound port 25 connections from infected machines elsewhere.
Yeah - got it. It
Thanks for that Paul,
It's a pity - the slightly hazy Sunday afternoon brain was hoping, for
once, for an easy fix!
MMC
Paul Ferguson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Is th
o our mail clusters. Although the last might leave
customer mail servers vunerable, but at least no one could accuse us of
filtering them (sore point in Oz at the moment!).
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
I think it's a really odd reinterpretation of telephony concepts. In
telephony interconnects are typically settlement based, sender pays
receiver, in the settlement based world it seems to have gotten confused.
"in the settlement FREE world it see
overage.
Is this really going to make a substantial kind of difference?
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
Feel free to discuss).
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
But yes, how to get native to residential users is still not hammered
out.
It's been an issuing weighing our our minds for a while. We've gone
dual stack but getting it into the last mile (ADSL) is quite hard and
running a tunnel server is ugly.
Main issue is BRAS
Joe Provo wrote:
A couple to add:
- failure scoping: issues on a remote network can be better isolated
from the rest of your traffic (or completely if it is the peer).
Related to this is ability to contact the right people more quickly.
If you've got a problem with/on someone's network
w well it works providing a nice clean feed
and who's better at it? ;-)
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft Internode/Agile Peering and Core Networks
ath either submarine or terrestrial.
Before SEA-ME-WE4 and 3 there was SEA-ME-WE and SEA-ME-WE2. SEA-ME-
WE had an inservice date of 1986.
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft Internode/Agile Peering and Core Networks
Level 4, 150 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]W
Mezei wrote:
Did western europe ever really have a primary route via the USA to
reach
asia ?
Yes, I think so. If I remember correctly, before FLAG started laying
cables, there was no terrestrial route to Asia from Europe that
didn't involve North America.
Joe
--
Matthew M
On 15/09/2008, at 10:46 AM, Jean-François Mezei wrote:
Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
Most Asian providers (at least Northern Asia) use USA, Atlantic
path to
get to Europe. The capacity going Westt isn't that high in
comparision,
so the extra latency hit is well offset by the much re
speed
circuits, but we've got almost 4 (as of next year) cables going North
and East out of Sydney. So most Europe traffic to/from Australia is
via the USA.
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
Level 4, 150 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: [EM
al ones as was implied by that article.
We have connectivity to Japan to reduce latency to Asia from Australia
(ie. remove the trombone via the US) - this is purely an
engineering/commercial decision to improve latency.
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
I don't think any of this will be because of sinister reasons, just
for good engineering reasons and probably just to guarantee, without a
doubt, that your circuit does NOT go through One Wilshire!
Just to ensure no confusion - this was just about redundanc
ank Nussbacher wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/30/business/30pipes.html?partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
-Hank
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
Level 4, 150 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.on.net
Direct: +61-8
*Hobbit* wrote:
> How do you alert mail server operators who are smarthosting their
> e-mail through you that their outbound messages contain spam?
You don't let them falsify their envelope or headers to contain
fields utterly unrelated to your own infrastructure, for starters.
They try it
things like the Australian Systems Administrator's
Guild etc)
MMC
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Moyle-Croft [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2008 12:41 AM
To: Bill Stewart
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: ingress SMTP
Hi Bill,
Bill Stewart wrote:
Nathan Ward wrote:
On 13/09/2008, at 5:48 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
Arnaud de Prelle wrote:
I think that most of us (me included) are already using it but the
problem is that they don't have BGP collectors everywhere in the world.
This is in fact a generic issue for BGP monitoring
Hear hear for Gadi and others offering these tools.
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
ily turn
the filtering off via the portal we have.
We have no issues with customers running servers - most people don't,
and those who do value the ability to do so.
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
Level 4, 150 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: [
> I'd love to know what magical mystical protection your routers have that will
> enable them to avoid the same fate as every other device and operating system
> has. There's only one thing up there that doesn't have known rootkits
> in the wild. Yet.
>
The question isn't IF routers have secur
>
> It is alright to have feelings.
>
> Gadi.
So I ask again, expecting nothing but another flippant answer:
Do you actually have live examples of this or able to demonstrate it or
are you just theorising about it all?
MMC
___
NANOG mailing lis
> The question is who can't afford for these things to happen...
>
> Gadi.
>
>
I can't help but feel you're pushing fear to further some other interest
here Gadi.
Do you actually have live examples of this or able to demonstrate it or
are you just theorising about it all?
MMC
_
Simon Lockhart wrote:
>
> How long before we need to install Anti-virus / Anti-root-kit software on
> our routers?
>
Nah - we'll just replace them all with Macs. They don't need anti-virus ...
:-)
MMC
> Simon
>
___
NANOG mailing list
NANOG@nano
Paul Wall wrote:
> What if some good comes from this "root kit"?
>
I'm sure it'll be good for a number of security providers to hawk their
wares.
If the way of running this isn't out in the wild and it's actually
dangerous then a pox on anyone who releases it, especially to gain
publicity at
Nathan Ward wrote:
> If the foreign AS really wants to send you routes that way, they can
> do it regardless of how you stop your advertisements being accepted by/
> reaching them. We're hardly talking high security here.
>
> ip route 1.1.1.1 works a treat.
>
I'm not quite sure of your po
> If you really need to, you can get a similar effect by using ASPATH
> poisoning; just prepend your AS paths with the ASes you don't want
> those prefixes hitting.
>
> ..
>
> Nothing really about how it works in a MLPA IXP though.
>
It'd work, but it's a pretty evil thing to do and it's
Kai Chen wrote:
>
>> There is the model where all partcipants peer through agency of 3rd party.
>> That tends to be looked on as an extremely bad idea, but some regulatory
>> environments encourage or enforce that sort of behavior particularly around
>> the monopoly PTT.
>>
>
>
> I don't know
SNSP = Simple Network Selection Protocol
Alexander Harrowell wrote:
> NCAP - Network Capability (or Cost) Announcement Protocol.
>
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
> (I know, rep
s
through your network to avoid congestion on certain links - that's a win
for everyone. You could get webbrowsers to look at it when you've got
multiple A records to chose which one is best for things like Flash
video etc.
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
L
hat normal
resolvers don't capture this).
The great thing is that you can use it for other things.
MMC
--
Matthew Moyle-Croft - Internode/Agile - Networks
Level 5, 150 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.on.net
Direct: +61-8-8228-2909
87 matches
Mail list logo
