If you are going to deploy MACSEC, my advice is test, test, and test,
especially (but not only) if you have different vendors'
implementations of MACSEC on either end of the link.
Test that MACSEC comes up.
Test that it recovers from link flaps.
Test key rotation.
Test recovery from link flaps
> I tend also to hang a good gps off a second usb port, if available.
> There's a topic for geeks - does anyone else really know (or care)
> what time it really is?
if so i can't imagine why (no, no)
we've all got time enough to cry
(oddly apropos for the topic of power outages)
[...]
note that if your ups has a usb port, you can attach a raspberry pi
and run upsmon to be told (among other things) when the battery
requires replacement rather than rely on hearing the beeps. good for
the out-of-the-way closets with network gear.
Do you see the same behavior when you execute your dig query without
the trailing dot?
Thanks,
Stephen
> > On Sep 6, 2019, at 3:11 PM, Chip Marshall via NANOG wrote:
> >
> > Hello, I'm seeing an oddity when doing DNS lookups for www.google.com from
> > our
> > London datacenter, and I'm curiou
> Hello,
>
> We are now looking for indications for a managed top of rack switch for a
> network research testbed.
> For the last 3-4 years we have been using a product from a local
> (Brazilian) provider, but their OpenFlow support did not evolve in the last
> years, and now we are looking for a n
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Mike. wrote:
> >
> > The shaperprobe test program from M-Lab is not working. The problem
> > appears to be a routing loop in google's realm. Emails to m-lab over
> > the past month were not effective in resolving the issue.
> >
> > shaperprobe: http://www.meas
> > Forgetting all of the theoretical constructs for a moment, has anyone
> > here personally encountered an operational scenario in which ICMP
> > redirects solved a problem for you that you would otherwise have found
> > difficult or intransigent? Without naming names, would you describe
> > the
> Earth is a single point of failure, where is your backup site?
This reminds me of the 1996 thread about how MAE-East still had no
generator. Same topic, roughly, some of the same people (hi, Sean).
Sure, the line about the Earth SPOF is catchy, but in terms of more
likely scenarios: how many pe
> We got to go through all the badness that was the ATM NAPs (AADS,
> PacBell NAP, MAE-WEST ATM).
>
> I think exactly for the reason Leo mentions they failed. That is, it
> didn't even require people to figure out all the technical reasons they
> were bad (many), they were fundamentally doomed
> Stephen, that's a straw-man argument. Nobody's arguing against
> VLANs. Paul's argument was that VLANs rendered shared subnets
> obsolete, and everybody else has been rebutting that. Not saying that
> VLANs shouldn't be used.
I believe shared VLANs for IXP interconnect are obsolete. Whether t
> I'll get off my soap-box now and let you resume your observations that
> complexity as a goal in and of itself is the olny path forward. What
> a dismal world-view.
No-one is arguing that complexity is a goal. Opportunities to
introduce gratuitous complexity abound, and defen
> Not sure how switches handle HOL blocking with QinQ traffic across trunks,
> but hey...
> what's the fun of running an IXP without testing some limits?
Indeed. Those with longer memories will remember that I used to
regularly apologize at NANOG meetings for the DEC Gigaswitch/FDDI
head-of-line b
> > Azher,
> >
> > Thanks for the link. I don't currently have a Linux box I can stick on
> > the network, but I'm trying to get one built.
>
> All you need on the client side is a browser with Java support (and in
> your case, a gigabit NIC). Ahzer mentioned using Vista/Firefox in his
> reply,
> Azher,
>
> Thanks for the link. I don't currently have a Linux box I can stick on
> the network, but I'm trying to get one built.
All you need on the client side is a browser with Java support (and in
your case, a gigabit NIC). Ahzer mentioned using Vista/Firefox in his
reply, I've used both M
> On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 12:05:41PM -0500, Peter Beckman wrote:
> > I'm OK to that IP as well, but when I query www.google.com, I get multiple
> > IPs, but here are the ones that in in 147:
> >
> > DNS Server IP Route (for me)
> > 205.234.170.217 (tiggee)74.125.79
15 matches
Mail list logo
