Not sure if you have this already, but their phone number is +1
866-899-8998.
On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 10:41 AM Mark Stevens wrote:
> Verizon Wireless had a serious 4G/LTE issue affecting the Thingspace
> product that cause a complete outage for many of our customers.
> It would b
Verizon Wireless had a serious 4G/LTE issue affecting the Thingspace
product that cause a complete outage for many of our customers.
It would be greatly appreciated if someone from the Verizon NRB (Network
Repair) group would connect with me offline the routing and filtering
issues we saw
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Whelan"
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2021 12:00:00 PM
Subject: Verizon Wireless
Hello everyone, I know this is a long shot, but I'm hoping someone on here
works for Verizon Wireless or knows someone that is in a positi
Hello everyone, I know this is a long shot, but I'm hoping someone on here
works for Verizon Wireless or knows someone that is in a position to assist
us. Recently, a change to call routing occurred and Verizon Wireless calls
are now being delivered across our tandem instead of a SIP
November 5, 2020 2:26:25 PM
Subject: Verizon or Verizon Wireless contact
Looking for a contact with a clue at Verizon/Wireless who can help me with a
problem, to wit, Verizon is blocking calls from our landline customers to one
of their local wireless prefixes. We've got the error
Looking for a contact with a clue at Verizon/Wireless who can help me with
a problem, to wit, Verizon is blocking calls from our landline customers to
one of their local wireless prefixes. We've got the error that the Verizon
switch gives ("Welcome to Verizon your call can not be co
Good morning,
If a Verizon Wireless engineer covering NJ/NYC could contact me offline
it would be much appreciated.
We are currently seeing one way voice paths from VZW in 3 NJ tandems.
Thanks
Mark
Hi!
I'm dealing with an issue with the mnc480.mcc311.3gppnetwork.org zone
and need to talk to someone at Verizon Wireless.
Any direct contacts or pointers would be very much appreciated.
Thanks!
AlanC
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Is there anyone from Verizon Wireless that I can talk to regarding IPv6
deployment? I am getting nonsensical answers from my local contacts.
Please contact me off-list.
thanks,
-Randy
Hello all,
I'm looking for a contact within Verizon Wireless US networking operations.
Please contact me at this address.
thanks,
Sean Fitzgerald
Verizon Wireless has been pushing their clients away from static IPv4 for some
time. I inquired last year about getting one for a specific project and was
told it would be a large upfront cost, limited to certain accounts and required
justification.
I imagine in the years coming this will
On 08/03/2017, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Seems to me that the only people who get static, wireless, IP addresses
> are people who put sensors on vehicles and IoT applications. Who gets a
> static IP for a phone? This might cause some serious heartburn for my
> previous employer - who built CAD sys
On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 10:58 PM, wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Mar 2017 22:08:59 -0500, Christopher Morrow said:
> > > previous employer - who built CAD systems for transit buses.
> > on the bright side they can just get fios or dsl (depending on location)
> ..
> > you know you can still get v4 there, and
On Wed, 08 Mar 2017 22:08:59 -0500, Christopher Morrow said:
> > previous employer - who built CAD systems for transit buses.
> on the bright side they can just get fios or dsl (depending on location) ..
> you know you can still get v4 there, and won't even have to worry about
> that pesky new fang
On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 7:10 PM Christopher Morrow
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Miles Fidelman >
> wrote:
>
> > Seems to me that the only people who get static, wireless, IP addresses
> > are people who put sensors on vehicles and IoT applications. Who gets a
> > static IP for a phon
On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Miles Fidelman
wrote:
> Seems to me that the only people who get static, wireless, IP addresses
> are people who put sensors on vehicles and IoT applications. Who gets a
> static IP for a phone? This might cause some serious heartburn for my
> previous employer -
On 3/8/17 6:13 PM, Luke Guillory wrote:
My customer got the email and the only service they have is wireless. Also
notice the email address.
From: Verizon Wireless
mailto:verizonwirele...@email.vzwshop.com>>
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 8, 2017, at 6:44 PM, Keith Stokes
mail
My customer got the email and the only service they have is wireless. Also
notice the email address.
From: Verizon Wireless
mailto:verizonwirele...@email.vzwshop.com>>
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 8, 2017, at 6:44 PM, Keith Stokes
mailto:kei...@neilltech.com>> wrote:
You said th
until the address is relinquished
by the user (i.e., when the user moves the device off the Verizon Wireless
network).
•
IPv4-only devices are not compatible with Persistent Prefix IPv6 addresses.
---
Keith Stokes
gt; >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > •
> >
> > Unlike IPv4, which is limited to a 32-bit prefix, Persistent Prefix IPv6
> has
> > 128-bit addressing scheme, which aligns to current international
> agreements and
> > standards.
> >
> >
> >
> &
efix IPv6 has
> 128-bit addressing scheme, which aligns to current international agreements
> and
> standards.
>
>
>
> •
>
> Persistent Prefix IPv6 will provide the device with an IP address unique to
> that
> device that will remain with t
that device that will remain with that device until the address is relinquished
by the user (i.e., when the user moves the device off the Verizon Wireless
network).
•
IPv4-only devices are not compatible with Persistent Prefix IPv6 addresses.
Good afternoon all,
If there is a Verizon wireless back-haul transport engineer on the list
that can reach out to me offline, it would be great.
Topic: bad trunks in the New Brunswick NJ Tandem office.
Thanks
Mark
Could someone from Verizon Wireless please contact me off-list?
Thanks,
Matt
--
Matt Larson
VP of Research
Office of the CTO, ICANN
+1 240 459-9562 (mobile)
Confirming problems making or receiving calls to phone numbers with a Florida
LATA, no matter where those phones actually reside. (In this case, SW PA.)
Verizon wireless website shows "temporarily unavailable while we upgrade our
systems" on selected My Vz pages.
..Allen
> On
estamp of this email, tho, we did
>> confirm 911 was unaffected, at least in the North Florida territory.
>>
>> Sent via EnguiFi LTE Mobile
>> On Jun 14, 2016 7:15 PM, "Allen Kitchen"
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Confirming problems making or receiving calls t
t least in the North Florida territory.
>
> Sent via EnguiFi LTE Mobile
> On Jun 14, 2016 7:15 PM, "Allen Kitchen"
> wrote:
>
> > Confirming problems making or receiving calls to phone numbers with a
> > Florida LATA, no matter where those phones actually reside.
aking or receiving calls to phone numbers with a
> Florida LATA, no matter where those phones actually reside. (In this case,
> SW PA.) Verizon wireless website shows "temporarily unavailable while we
> upgrade our systems" on selected My Vz pages.
>
> ..Allen
>
>
right now, wish me luck! Time to
jump into the sharks. Haha.
Alex
(VZW tech)
All statements and opinions are my own and do not reflect that of Verizon
Wireless or its subsidiaries.
On Jun 14, 2016 6:35 PM, "Kraig Beahn" wrote:
Looks like Verizon Wireless 4G voice, intermittent data se
H 45373
On Jun 14, 2016 6:45 PM, "Robert Webb" wrote:
Seeing no issues in WV. Speeds are 50/10.
On Jun 14, 2016 6:35 PM, "Kraig Beahn" wrote:
Looks like Verizon Wireless 4G voice, intermittent data services and some
3g voices services are currently non-functional, specifica
10.
> On Jun 14, 2016 6:35 PM, "Kraig Beahn" wrote:
>
> > Looks like Verizon Wireless 4G voice, intermittent data services and some
> > 3g voices services are currently non-functional, specifically in the SE,
> > however, seeing reports nationwide as well.
> >
> >
> > --
> >
>
Seeing no issues in WV. Speeds are 50/10.
On Jun 14, 2016 6:35 PM, "Kraig Beahn" wrote:
> Looks like Verizon Wireless 4G voice, intermittent data services and some
> 3g voices services are currently non-functional, specifically in the SE,
> however, seeing reports nationwide as well.
>
>
> --
>
Looks like Verizon Wireless 4G voice, intermittent data services and some
3g voices services are currently non-functional, specifically in the SE,
however, seeing reports nationwide as well.
--
> On Sep 22, 2015, at 4:24 PM, Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Mark Stevens wrote:
>> The TAG unique identifier is being changed and this only happens through VZ
>> LTE networks, not wired networks or even other cellular data networks
>> (Sprint, ATT, T-Mobile)
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Mark Stevens wrote:
> The TAG unique identifier is being changed and this only happens through VZ
> LTE networks, not wired networks or even other cellular data networks
> (Sprint, ATT, T-Mobile)
> Their phones are IPV6 so the packets are getting converted to IPV4
The TAG unique identifier is being changed and this only happens through
VZ LTE networks, not wired networks or even other cellular data networks
(Sprint, ATT, T-Mobile)
Their phones are IPV6 so the packets are getting converted to IPV4 so it
is either happening there or there is a global ALG in
I've seen this behavior before (a few years back). Moved off of VzW for
this reason (i'm lazy to implement workarounds).
IIRC when i investigated, the ALG was trying to not do something nefarious
but just poorly implemented.
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Christopher Morrow <
morrowc.li...@gma
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Christopher Morrow
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Mark Stevens wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Has anyone seen that something (most likely an alg) on Verizon's LTE/4G
>> network is rewriting SIP headers,in particular From Tag identifiers? We
>> cannot make a
Message--
From: Mark Stevens
Sender: NANOG
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Verizon Wireless LTE/4G and SIP Header Manipulation
Sent: Sep 22, 2015 12:03
Hi All,
Has anyone seen that something (most likely an alg) on Verizon's LTE/4G
network is rewriting SIP headers,in particular Fro
Send all of your signaling over TLS and they won't be able to see or modify it.
Steven Naslund
Chicago IL
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mark Stevens
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 11:03 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Verizon Wireles
TLS would be perfect but it is not viable at this point. I guess with
Verizon being what they are, it is time to start working on a SIP over
TLS implementation.
On 9/22/2015 12:24 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
On 9/22/15 9:03 AM, Mark Stevens wrote:
Hi All,
Has anyone seen that something (most li
On 9/22/15 9:03 AM, Mark Stevens wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Has anyone seen that something (most likely an alg) on Verizon's LTE/4G
> network is rewriting SIP headers,in particular From Tag identifiers? We
> cannot make a SIP call from our cellphones (using cellular data) beyond
> 30 seconds because the
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Mark Stevens wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Has anyone seen that something (most likely an alg) on Verizon's LTE/4G
> network is rewriting SIP headers,in particular From Tag identifiers? We
> cannot make a SIP call from our cellphones (using cellular data) beyond 30
> secon
Hi All,
Has anyone seen that something (most likely an alg) on Verizon's LTE/4G
network is rewriting SIP headers,in particular From Tag identifiers? We
cannot make a SIP call from our cellphones (using cellular data) beyond
30 seconds because the TAGs are rewritten and the destination Asterisk
Hi there,
If any Verizon wireless network engineers are on nanog, could you please
email me offline concerning network traffic delays?
Thanks
Mark
Can someone from Verizon contact me off-list? We're seeing DNS resolution
issues to Earthlink domains from Verizon Wireless customers, and have only
gotten the run around from our "usual" Verizon NOC contacts
Malcolm Staudinger
Information Security Analyst | EIS
EarthLink
www.e
If there's anyone from the IP-side of Verizon Wireless, if you could
contact me off-list, that would be awesome! Saves me hours of pointless
phone calls. :)
Thanks!
--
*Scott Morris*, CCIE/x4/ (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
CCDE #2009::D,
CCNP-Data Center, C
covered a somewhat-exigent issue which affects
> confidentiality for Verizon Wireless customers. (PSTN / Voice)
>
> I'm failing at trying to find a Verizon Wireless security contact
> through normal means. If someone can provide a contact off-list it
> would be much appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Nick
>
>
Hi all,
I just discovered a somewhat-exigent issue which affects
confidentiality for Verizon Wireless customers. (PSTN / Voice)
I'm failing at trying to find a Verizon Wireless security contact
through normal means. If someone can provide a contact off-list it
would be much appreciated.
T
I've used digi.com before, does the job.
--
Joe Hamelin, W7COM, Tulalip, WA, 360-474-7474
t: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 6:10 PM
To: David Hubbard; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Verizon wireless (cdma/LTE) compatible ethernet connectable OOB
access device.
OpenGear does make good, low footprint, low power consumption console
servers.
I think they have an IPSec stack too.
Note: They make
s but an LTE would make
>it a lot nicer since then you could do more interactive
>things like remote desktop, heavy web traffic and other
>things that you might also want in a bind.
>
>David
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Eric J Esslinger [mailto:eesslin...@f
> From: Eric J Esslinger [mailto:eesslin...@fpu-tn.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 5:47 PM
> To: 'nanog@nanog.org'
> Subject: Verizon wireless (cdma/LTE) compatible ethernet
> connectable OOB access device.
>
> We have Verizon Wireless as our provider of
We have Verizon Wireless as our provider of choice for our company, and I've
convinced those who are they that I need a completely OOB method for getting
back in the NOC, as we don't have a full time NOC staff and internet coverage
can be spotty around here in general, as we'
Interesting, curious... but meaningful?
To my mind Google's language seems to be focused on wireline issues,
which I guess are probably quite a bit easier for Verizon Wireless to
accommodate.
Conversely, VW's emphasis on continuing self-regulation of wireless
access would see
-Original Message-
From: David Ulevitch [mailto:dav...@everydns.net]
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 1:37 PM
To: NANOG list
Subject: Verizon Wireless (AS22394) network engineering contact needed
I'm having some trouble reaching a capable network engineer who runs
Verizon Wir
I'm having some trouble reaching a capable network engineer who runs
Verizon Wireless (AS22394). The contact on the ARIN address space I
have issues with does indeed pick up the phone but is not someone who is
aware of what BGP is.
Additionally, VZW is not listed on the NOC contacts
Greetings,
Can a Verizon Engineer contact me off list in regards to their 3G Air Cards?
Thanks much.
- Chandler
Hello all,
Does anyone have a contact within Verizon Wireless data (ie: EV-DO) that
could help with some... odd (for lack of a better word) connection
problems from an EV-DO modem?
I think there may be some sort of packet filtering going on, but I can't
tell for sure. It's kind
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Dave Temkin wrote:
> Exactly. I've seen this as well in both instances but haven't seen it on
> mobile phones. It's something so obscure that you're going to have to
> really want it to turn it on. I don't think the Port 25 example holds much
> water here.
Ma
Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Feb 10, 2009, at 5:52 PM, Dave Temkin wrote:
Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:31:38PM +0100, Matthias Leisi wrote:
Mark Andrews schrieb:
I don't see any reason to complain based on those numbers.
It's just a extremely high growth period d
On Feb 10, 2009, at 5:52 PM, Dave Temkin wrote:
Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:31:38PM +0100, Matthias Leisi wrote:
Mark Andrews schrieb:
I don't see any reason to complain based on those numbers.
It's just a extremely high growth period due to technology
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:52:52 PST, Dave Temkin said:
> Why must it be always "real" versus NAT? 99% of users don't care one
> way or another. Would it be so hard for the carrier to provide a switch
> between NAT and "real" IP if the user needs or wants it?
You're almost always better off not p
Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:31:38PM +0100, Matthias Leisi wrote:
Mark Andrews schrieb:
I don't see any reason to complain based on those numbers.
It's just a extremely high growth period due to technology
change over bring in new functionalit
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:31:38PM +0100, Matthias Leisi wrote:
> Mark Andrews schrieb:
> > I don't see any reason to complain based on those numbers.
> > It's just a extremely high growth period due to technology
> > change over bring in new functionality.
>
> OTOH, Verizon is not the
On Feb 10, 2009, at 5:31 PM, Matthias Leisi wrote:
Mark Andrews schrieb:
I don't see any reason to complain based on those numbers.
It's just a extremely high growth period due to technology
change over bring in new functionality.
OTOH, Verizon is not the only provider
Mark Andrews schrieb:
> I don't see any reason to complain based on those numbers.
> It's just a extremely high growth period due to technology
> change over bring in new functionality.
OTOH, Verizon is not the only provider of smartphone connectivity in the
world. Most of them
We're not a big verizon wireless customer, (we have been allocated a /25
for remote data access devices). We run multi-homed BGP with vw. vw says
that they must advertise 48 summarized prefixes to us, instead of just
the /25. The 48 prefixes are apparently advertised to all of the
de-aggre
Network' Wireless using IPv6?
> > > there should be a FOIA-like method to see large
> > > allocation justifications
> > Realistically, I suppose Verizon Wireless is big enough to dictate to
> > the manufacturers of handsets and infrastructure, "you must suppor
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 9:24 PM, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
> Sure, smart phones are becoming more popular.
My ancient and crufty Nextel iDEN i530 phone, manufactured circa
2003, with a monochrome 4-line text display, and about as "dumb" as
they get, gets assigned an IP address. Now, that IP address
David Conrad wrote:
On Feb 8, 2009, at 7:37 PM, Aaron Glenn wrote:
so if they don't deploy IPv6 then ('extremely high growth period'),
when will they?
Hint: how many of the (say) Alexa top 1000 websites are IPv6 enabled?
haha, I went insane for a moment and though you said Freenix top 1000,
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 1:08 AM, Paul Wall wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Aaron Glenn wrote:
>> NAT? why isn't Verizon 'It's the Network' Wireless using IPv6?
>> there should be a FOIA-like method to see large
>> allocation justifications
>
> Probably because Verizon Business isn't using
t; and obvious reality that there is no current explanation for Verizon
> Wireless needing 27M IPs.
27 million IP addresses for 45 million customers with addressable
devices sounds well within ARIN's justification guidelines.
Just because most of your customers are trying to pull the wool
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Aaron Glenn wrote:
> NAT? why isn't Verizon 'It's the Network' Wireless using IPv6?
> there should be a FOIA-like method to see large
> allocation justifications
Probably because Verizon Business isn't using it, unless you count a
couple of lab GRE tunnels.
Drive
ch is necessarily going to
be inherently customer-visible for all stages of progress.
- S
-Original Message-
From: Aaron Glenn [mailto:aaron.gl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 10:37 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless
On Sun, Feb 8,
e of their customers.
- S
-Original Message-
From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnk...@iname.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 10:48 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless
This discussion about smartphones and the like was presuming that those
devices all
On Feb 8, 2009, at 7:37 PM, Aaron Glenn wrote:
so if they don't deploy IPv6 then ('extremely high growth period'),
when will they?
Hint: how many of the (say) Alexa top 1000 websites are IPv6 enabled?
Regards,
-drc
08, 2009 3:58 PM
To: Eliot Lear
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless
On Sun, 08 Feb 2009 22:45:51 +0100
Eliot Lear wrote:
> On 2/8/09 5:32 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> > Lastly, you've assumed that only a "smart phone" (not that the
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
>I don't see any reason to complain based on those numbers.
>It's just a extremely high growth period due to technology
>change over bring in new functionality.
so if they don't deploy IPv6 then ('extremely high growth
o see large
> > allocation justifications
> Realistically, I suppose Verizon Wireless is big enough to dictate to
> the manufacturers of handsets and infrastructure, "you must support IPv6
> by X date or we will no longer buy / sell your product." I wonder if
> any wir
> Does ARIN lack sufficient resources to vet jumbo requests?
I am fairly confident ARIN followed their policies.
The existing policies allow anyone (including Verizon)
to make a request for (and receive) a /9 with appropriate
justification.
If you do not like the policies, please participate
in
On Sun, 2009-02-08 at 14:37 -0800, Aaron Glenn wrote:
> NAT? why isn't Verizon 'It's the Network' Wireless using IPv6?
> there should be a FOIA-like method to see large
> allocation justifications
Realistically, I suppose Verizon Wireless is big enough to dictate to
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Jeffrey Lyon
wrote:
> Whatever happened to NAT?
>
> Jeff
NAT? why isn't Verizon 'It's the Network' Wireless using IPv6?
there should be a FOIA-like method to see large
allocation justifications
Of course, my iPhone is currently showing an IP address in 10/8, and
though my EVDO card shows a global address in 70.198/16, I can't ssh to
it -- a TCP traceroute appears to be blocked at the border of Verizon
Wireless' network. But hey, at least I can ping it. (Confirmed by
tcpdump on m
On 2/8/09 5:32 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
Lastly, you've assumed that only a "smart phone" (not that the term
is well defined) needs an IP address. I believe this is wrong.
There are plenty of simpler phones (e.g. not a PDA, touch screen,
read your e-mail thing) that can use cellular data to WEP br
> 2) If one company is likely to need four more /8's, and there are now
>32 in the free pool man is IPv4 in trouble.
It's going to happen soon enough anyway.
>At this point it
>would only take eight companies the size of verizon wireless to
>exhaust the
Leo Bicknell:
Lastly, you've assumed that only a "smart phone" (not that the term
> is well defined) needs an IP address. I believe this is wrong.
> There are plenty of simpler phones (e.g. not a PDA, touch screen,
> read your e-mail thing) that can use cellular data to WEP browse,
> or to fetch
I have no personal knowledge of this situation, so this is wild
speculation.
http://news.cnet.com/verizon-completes-alltel-purchase/
Verizon Wireless is going to be soon selling operations in 105
markets. It may well be that the IP addresses for those markets
will be transfered to the new
Exactly.
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> Eliot Lear wrote:
> > On 2/8/09 3:24 AM, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
> >> Sure, smart phones are becoming more popular. It's reasonable to assume
> >> that virtually all cell phones will eventually have an IP address almost
> >> all the
Eliot Lear wrote:
> On 2/8/09 3:24 AM, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
>> Sure, smart phones are becoming more popular. It's reasonable to assume
>> that virtually all cell phones will eventually have an IP address almost
>> all the time.
>
> The numbers I keep seeing for so-called "smartphones" in the pre
On 2/8/09 3:24 AM, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
Sure, smart phones are becoming more popular. It's reasonable to assume
that virtually all cell phones will eventually have an IP address almost
all the time.
The numbers I keep seeing for so-called "smartphones" in the press for
U.S. and Europe are 49
>> I have trouble understanding why an ARIN record for a network regularly
>> receiving new, out-sized IPv4 allocations on the order of millions of
>> OrgName:Cellco Partnership DBA Verizon Wireless
>> CIDR: 97.128.0.0/9
>> Comment:Verizon Wirel
we
> really do run out of v4 IPs.
>
> I have trouble understanding why an ARIN record for a network regularly
> receiving new, out-sized IPv4 allocations on the order of millions of
> addresses at once would publish a remark like the one below, indicating
> that Verizon Wireless
Any cell phone that uses data service to download a ringtone, wallpaper,
picature, use their TV/radio webcast service, or their walkie talkie feature
will use an IP address.
In addition to that Verizon wireless sells their EVDO aircards for laptops.
Given the size of their customer base it is
ending a lot on Tylenol and booze when we
> really do run out of v4 IPs.
>
> I have trouble understanding why an ARIN record for a network regularly
> receiving new, out-sized IPv4 allocations on the order of millions of
> addresses at once would publish a remark like the one below, indicati
for a network regularly
receiving new, out-sized IPv4 allocations on the order of millions of
addresses at once would publish a remark like the one below, indicating
that Verizon Wireless has about 2 million IPs allocated.
OrgName:Cellco Partnership DBA Verizon Wireless
CIDR: 97.128.0.0
96 matches
Mail list logo
