eone
operates a network doesn't mean they know how all types of networks operate (or
are available).
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
- Original Message -
From: "Steve Naslund"
To: nanog@nanog.org
ing in cable service where the city gets their share of the money for
essentially locking out the competition.
Steven Naslund
Chicago IL
>-Original Message-
>From: UpTide . [mailto:upt...@live.com]
>Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 10:55 AM
>To: Naslund, Steve
>Subject
contracts instead of
an open infrastructure because they get the big payday.
Steven Naslund
Chicago IL
>-Original Message-
>From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 10:43 AM
>Cc: nanog@nanog.org
>Subject: Re: F
@nanog.org
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 10:39:43 AM
Subject: RE: Free access to measurement network
Not if you are in an RLEC controlled territory you can't. They are protected
monopolies by definition. You could do fixed wireless but not real cost
effective to deploy in low density rura
most areas.
Steven Naslund
Chicago IL
>-Original Message-
>From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 10:28 AM
>Cc: nanog@nanog.org
>Subject: Re: Free access to measurement network
>
>Anyone can roll th
aslund
Chicago IL
>-Original Message-
>From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 11:05 AM
>Cc: nanog@nanog.org
>Subject: Re: Free access to measurement network
>
>BTW: There are no government-enforced monop
.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
- Original Message -
From: timrutherf...@c4.net
To: "Mike Hammett"
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 10:25:37 AM
Subject: RE: Free access to measurement network
T
the
real value in.
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 11:05 AM
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Free access to measurement network
BTW: There are no government-enforced monopolies anywhere in the US
ot;Mike Hammett"
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 10:03:52 AM
Subject: RE: Free access to measurement network
Yes, the fact that both the city I work in and the town I live in have local
govt-enforced monopolies reinforces the statement that I've (and all the ot
-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 10:23 AM
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Free access to measurement network
It's a consumer thing. If consumers wanted more options, they would be
supporting those options with their wallets. They don't.
---
: "Mike Hammett"
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2017 1:46:19 PM
Subject: Re: Free access to measurement network
On 12/16/17, Mike Hammett wrote:
> That project was paid for by ARRA funds and ran out.
>
> The FCC picked up the ball by expanding the scope o
dwest Internet Exchange
>
> The Brothers WISP
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Lee"
> To: "Mike Hammett"
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 2:16:38 PM
> Subject: Re: Free access to measurement network
>
> On
> My point was that consumers voted out thousands of independents by
> taking service from incumbents instead of independents. Thousands have
> closed up shop. Where independents are available, it's still tough
> getting customers if the incumbents have a service that mostly works
> (over say 5 to
--
From: "Lee"
To: "Mike Hammett"
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 2:16:38 PM
Subject: Re: Free access to measurement network
On 12/16/17, Mike Hammett wrote:
> It's a consumer thing. If consumers wanted more options, they would be
> supp
iginal Message -
>
> From: "Max Tulyev"
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 4:43:54 AM
> Subject: Re: Free access to measurement network
>
> So for my point of view, better solution is to push some law that ease
> access to the buildings fo
nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 9:58:19 AM
Subject: Re: Free access to measurement network
Mike,
On Dec 16, 2017, 4:23 PM +0100, Mike Hammett , wrote:
> It's a consumer thing. If consumers wanted more options, they would be
> supporting those options with their
You been in contact with the guys at Samknows.com ?
On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 at 15:09, Janusz Jezowicz
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Feel free to shoot me down if you think I am posting against the rules of
> this mailing list but I think it may be helpful for some guys here.
>
> We have over 1000 routers depl
Mike,
On Dec 16, 2017, 4:23 PM +0100, Mike Hammett , wrote:
> It's a consumer thing. If consumers wanted more options, they would be
> supporting those options with their wallets. They don’t.
The report Valdis quoted said "More than 129 million people are limited to a
single provider for broadb
ev"
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 4:43:54 AM
Subject: Re: Free access to measurement network
So for my point of view, better solution is to push some law that ease
access to the buildings for ISPs.
15.12.17 19:40, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu пише:
> On Fri, 15
So for my point of view, better solution is to push some law that ease
access to the buildings for ISPs.
15.12.17 19:40, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu пише:
> On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 07:47:42 -0500, Dovid Bender said:
>> What kind of internet are these devices on? With Net Neutrality gone here
>> in the US
On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 07:47:42 -0500, Dovid Bender said:
> What kind of internet are these devices on? With Net Neutrality gone here
> in the US it would be a good way to measure certain services such as SIP to
> see which ISP's if any are tampering with packets.
Given previous history, the answer w
Are these your customer-owned routers?
-mel beckman
> On Dec 15, 2017, at 5:24 AM, Janusz Jezowicz wrote:
>
> Since these are mostly end-user routers they are on regular ISPs (like
> Comcast, Verizon etc). I believe this could be quite suitable for
> monitoring net neutrality. Feel free to pin
What kind of internet are these devices on? With Net Neutrality gone here
in the US it would be a good way to measure certain services such as SIP to
see which ISP's if any are tampering with packets.
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Janusz Jezowicz
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Feel free to shoot me d
I would love access to this.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Dec 14, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Janusz Jezowicz wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Feel free to shoot me down if you think I am posting against the rules of
> this mailing list but I think it may be helpful for some guys here.
>
> We have over 1000 routers
this sounds like ripe-atlas... only less nodes?
Seems interesting, you should publish an API ... oh you do:
http://probeapi.speedchecker.xyz/
you might consider donating your data to the measurement-lab.org people ...
eh?
I wonder if/how the QOE tests could inform things like the FTC's efforts a
25 matches
Mail list logo
