Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-10-02 Thread Wayne E. Bouchard
Pretty much no matter who you use, this can easily be done in an hour or so if people really want it to and the right techs are available. If there's a pre-existing agreement, this can go to mere minutes. The setup doesn't take long. it's usually the business stuff that drags it out. On Thu, Oct

Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-10-02 Thread Brandon Galbraith
On 10/2/08, Jean-François Mezei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Question: > > Is it possible to setup an akamai feed in hours once you know your > website is to be swamped ? > > Obviously, the system managers there might not have been warned in > advance that the politicians would place a huge loa

Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-10-02 Thread Jean-François Mezei
William Allen Simpson wrote: > But I can dig and traceroute. I'm pretty sure this isn't an ideal (or > standard conforming) setup. But it shouldn't have been swamped, as seems to > be akamaized. I don't have traceroutes kept, but during that night when Pelosi announced the bill was available f

Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-10-02 Thread John Schnizlein
This will be my last response on this despite whatever spin follows. On 2008Oct2, at 4:08 PM, William Allen Simpson wrote: John Schnizlein wrote: I connected the internal network of the US House of Representatives to the Internet when I worked there, and operated it through both Democratic

Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-10-02 Thread William Allen Simpson
John Schnizlein wrote: I connected the internal network of the US House of Representatives to the Internet when I worked there, and operated it through both Democratic and Republican control. Aha, I wondered who was to blame Of course, my Member was on the Internet before the House, as ME

Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-10-02 Thread John Schnizlein
Is this really technical discussion of operation of networks? I connected the internal network of the US House of Representatives to the Internet when I worked there, and operated it through both Democratic and Republican control. I never saw any snooping by either party of the network tr

RE: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-10-02 Thread Mick Bergman
ssage- From: Joseph S D Yao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 11:54 AM To: Ernie Rubi Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov What makes you thing that .gov's "have" anything at all? They have to buy any bandwidth they have (other th

Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-10-02 Thread Joseph S D Yao
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 12:41:12AM -0400, Ernie Rubi wrote: > Hi folks, just musing... > > From an ops perspective, wonder just how much traffic caused: > > "This morning, our engineers sounded the alarms ... and we have > installed a digital version of a traffic cop. We enacted stopgaps that

Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-10-02 Thread Suresh Ramasubramanian
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 3:48 PM, William Allen Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The clerk and primary DNS systems seem to be 143.231.x.x/16, with diverse > paths. The secondary NS is on 143.228.x.x/16, so it seems to be > reasonably well done. Not talking about network redundancy here .. but I

Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-10-02 Thread William Allen Simpson
Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 2:17 PM, chris neill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Give me a break. You're telling me the White House's mail servers are even on the same network as their web servers? What, is this 1997? Well, I do know that there's two ways you can contact y

Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-10-01 Thread Suresh Ramasubramanian
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 2:17 PM, chris neill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Give me a break. You're telling me the White House's mail servers are even > on the same network as their web servers? What, is this 1997? > Well, I do know that there's two ways you can contact your congressman - * Feedba

Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-10-01 Thread Suresh Ramasubramanian
Some political action groups probably decided to step up the astroturfing. You know, enter your email address here and we'll send out some boilerplate nonsense to a bunch of congressmen and senators. Block or firewall the worst of them, whether left or right leaning, and I guess that should leave

Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-09-30 Thread Jean-François Mezei
Ernie Rubi wrote: > From an ops perspective, wonder just how much traffic caused: > > "This morning, our engineers sounded the alarms ... More of a case of a worldwide press conference broadcasted live by news networms around the world when Nancy Pelosi stated that "as of now, the recovery pl

RE: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-09-30 Thread Sargun Dhillon
I'm surprised it isn't outsourced to some managed (hosting) provider, or a CDN.. Like Akamai or LLNW. It would surely be far more efficient for their purposes. Also, if you've planned your network correctly QoS/Shaping will not negatively effect your network. You always engineer your outer edg

Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov

2008-09-30 Thread Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr.
Ernie Rubi wrote: whaddayathink? I think the house is run by the same folks that can't run a party-line vote. I'm surprised they have electric power.