In article
you
write:
>What would it take to test for BCP38 for a specific AS?
Well, if a certain browser vendor let the browser deduce the
external IP address, then send out a UDP DNS PTR query for
.in-addr.browser-vendor.com to say, a large DNS
resolving cluster they also happen to be running
On 24/11/15 22:47, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Nov 24, 2015, at 11:27 , Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
In article you write:
Unfortunately, PD is really still in its infancy in terms of development
and real running code for complete implementations throughout any
sort of site hierarchy.
Well, it
In article you write:
>Unfortunately, PD is really still in its infancy in terms of development
>and real running code for complete implementations throughout any
>sort of site hierarchy.
Well, it works for us. Connect a second router (Fritz!box) behind
the primary one and it works. We can't see
In article
you
write:
>It seems to be a pretty "hot button" issue, but I feel that modern hardware
>is more than capable of pushing packets. The old wisdom of "only hardware
>can do it efficiently" is starting to prove untrue. 10G might still be a
>challenge (I haven't tested), but 1G is not e
In article
you
write:
>- Original Message -
>> From: "Doug Barton"
>
>> > Depends on how big your "deployment" is. For a small office -- say,
>> > 100 PCs or less; something that will fit in what I will catch schidt
>> > for referring to as a "Class C" :-) -- with a single current
>> >
In article you write:
>
>In message
>,
> William Herrin writes:
>> The thing is, Linux doesn't behave quite that way.
>>
>> If you do an anonymous connect(), that is you socket() and then
>> connect() without a bind() in the middle, then the limit applies *per
>> destination IP:port pair*. So, y
In article you write:
>linux has become a fad in the vendor community. it seems to lend
>legitimacy to their products in some way, witness this discussion.
>but linux has the gpl poison. so, any code that they wish to keep
>proprietary is in userland.
Which isn't really a problem, none of the c
In article you write:
>There are better ways to avoid neighbor exhaustion attacks unless you
>have attackers
>inside your network.
You mean filtering. I haven't tried it recently, but a while ago
I put an output filter on a Juniper router that allowed just
the lower /120 out of a /64 on an interf
In article
you
write:
>For simplicity and a wish to keep a mapping to our IPv4 addresses,
>each device (router/server/firewall) has a static IPv6 address that
>has the same last digits as the IPv4 address, only the subnet is
>changed.
>You can say it's a IPv4 thinking model, but it's easier to r
In article ,
Andreas Echavez wrote:
>Does anyone here have experience running copper 10Gbase-T networks? It
>seems like the standard just died out.
Well, our new supermicro servers come with 10Gbase-T standard on
the motherboard.
>For us it would make a lot of sense
>for our applications -- eve
In article
you write:
>On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Nick Colton wrote:
>> We were seeing similar issues with low leases, moved the dhcpd.leases file
>> to a ramdisk and went from ~200 leases per second to something like 8,000
>> leases per second.
>
>Yes, blame RFC2131's requirement that a
In article <051001cbbcf0$c33e8b20$49bba160$@org> you write:
>PPPOE vs DHCP
>Allows full authentication of customers (requires username/password)
You probably want to authenticate on circuit id, not username/password.
ATM port/vpi/vci for ATM connections, or PPPoE circuit id tag added
by the DSLAM
In article ,
Scott Helms wrote:
>Few home users have a stateful firewall configured and AFAIK none of the
>consumer models come with a good default set of rules much less a drop
>all unknown.
The v6 capable CPEs for home users I've seen so far all include
stateful firewalling with inbound defa
In article you write:
>> Just as a pointer - one of the largest and most utilized IX (AMS-IX) has
>> their platform built on Brocade devices.
>
>Brocade device's pre Foundry purchase correct? I can't see anyone that
>large using Foundry in large deployments..
Well the ams-ix has been using Found
In article you
write:
>On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:32 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>> Which at a minimum is why you want to police the number of nd messages
>> that the device sends and unreachable entries do not simply fill up the
>> nd cache, such that new mappings in fact can be learned because there
In article
you write:
>If there is an inexpensive CPE with an implementation of DHCPv6 PD
>that works without issues,
>I would love to hear about who makes it, and what the device is...
AVM Fritzbox 7270/7340/7390
Draytek Vigor 2130/2750
Those are the ones I tested, there are lots more, but ac
In article
you write:
>On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 19:52, Ben Jencks wrote:
>> DHCPv6-PD (prefix delegation) with the relay installing static routes
>> is probably the most straightforward way.
>
>Apparently that has it's own problems right now actually:
>http://blog.ioshints.info/2010/10/dhcpv6-rela
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Andy Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 30 Oct 2008, at 13:03, HRH Sven Olaf Prinz von CyberBunker-Kamphuis
>MP wrote:
>> (the amsix with their many outages and connected parties that rely
>> primarliy on it's functionality is a prime example here)
>
>I run i
18 matches
Mail list logo
