Re: Google Public DNS Problems?

On 5/1/13 12:38 PM, Blair Trosper wrote: > That's all well and good, but I certainly wouldn't expect "nslookup > gmail.com " or for "nslookup google.com" to return > SERVFAIL > > Do you have traceroutes to 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4?

Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?

LSN is not trivial. Here is some unverified calculations I did on the problem of scaling nat. One of my colleagues here (Shane Alcock) did some research into "Service Provider NAT" based off passive traces from a New Zealand Residential ISP[1]. By passively looking at connections he inv

Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN ... anycast

I think for very small/small networks anycast requires a lot of overhead and understanding. If your big enough to do anycast and/or loadbalancing it's not hard for you to put all three addresses onto one device. Anycast isn't really hard - same address, multiple places, routers see wha

Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN ... anycast

TJ wrote: WRT "Anycast DNS"; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53? You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation and load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using :::1 FWIW - I think simple anycast fits that bill. I think for very small/small

Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN

WRT "Anycast DNS"; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53? You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation and load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using :::1 I personally would suggest getting a well known ULA-C allocation assigned to IANA, then use :::1 :::2 a

Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN

trej...@gmail.com wrote: WRT "Anycast DNS"; Perhaps a special-case of ULA, FD00::53? You want to allow for more than one for obvious fault isolation and load balancing reasons. The draft suggested using :::1 I personally would suggest getting a well known ULA-C allocation assigned to

Re: {SPAM?} Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN

David W. Hankins wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 03:57:40PM -0400, Ray Soucy wrote: Really. How do we deal with rouge DHCP on the wireless LAN, obviously this is such a complex issue that we couldn't possibly have a solution that could be applied to RA. There are some wireless equipmen

Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN

bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:22:52AM +1300, Perry Lorier wrote: You could imagine extending this to other services such as NTP, but I'm not sure that you really would want to go that far, perhaps using DNS to lookup "_ntp._udp.local IN SRV"

Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN

bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 12:02:14PM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: On 22 okt 2009, at 01:55, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: so your not a fan of the smart edge and the stupid network. I'm a fan of getting things right. A serv

Re: Consistent asymetric latency on monitoring?

Rick Ernst wrote: Resent, since I responded from the wrong address: --- The basic operation of IP SLA is as surmised; payload with timestamps and other telemetry data is sent to a 'responder' which manipulates the payload, including adding its own timestamps, and returns the altered payload.

Re: Consistent asymetric latency on monitoring?

Rick Ernst wrote: Although the implementation is Cisco-specific, this feels more appropriate for NANOG. We've started rolling out a state-wide monitoring system based on Cisco's "IP SLA" feature set. Out of 5 sites deployed so far (different locations, different providers), we are consistently

Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN

What it does deprive them of, with increasing layers of NAT or proxy service, is "dial-in" access. Many do not require this feature. The cost of providing it is increased support costs; debugging two networks and three or four protocols. Today, even debugging IPv4 problems with customers is p

Re: Important New Requirement for IPv4 Requests

Large data sets? So you are saying that 512-byte packets with no windowing work better? Bill, have you measured this? Time to download a 100mb file over HTTP and a 100mb interface: 20 seconds. Time to download a 100mb file over FTP and a 100mb interface: ~7 minutes. And yes, that was F

Re: IPv6 routing /48s

Having no route is not a problem, you should get a destination unreachable directly and all is fine because IPv4 should be used as a fallback. The big problem is when you have a route to them, but they don't have a route back. You don't get destination unreachables, but instead get timeou

Re: IPv6 Wow

Alain Durand wrote: On 10/23/08 6:39 PM, "Tony Hain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: A properly implemented client will do the longest prefix match against that set, so a 6to4 client will go directly to the content provider's 6to4 router, while a native client will take the direct path.

Re: DNS Hijacking by Cox

doing it[1]. If you're interested in finding people that Undernet detects as being open proxies or such like, put an IDS rule looking for ":[^ ]* 465 [^ ]* :AUTO ". I'm not so sure Undernet is the only IRC network to ever begin a banned reason message with the word "AUTO". I suspect it woul

Re: DNS Hijacking by Cox

James Hess wrote: On 7/22/07, Steven M. Bellovin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I would suggest not underestimating the ingenuity and persistence of the bad guys to escalate the neverending war, when a new weapon is invented to use against them. If there's a way around it, history has shown, the

Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: This is useless. Users need to use the same name for both IPv4 and IPv6, they should not notice it. And if there are issues (my experience is not that one), we need to know them ASAP. Any transition means some pain, but as sooner as we start, sooner we can sort it ou