Current status...
102 votes cast as of
Merit Network Inc.
Merit/NANOG Project Manager
___
NANOG-announce mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce
Hello.
I've ran into a puzzling scenario and I thought I'd ask around to see if
anyone else has an idea.
I have a customer who operates a server on our network who informed me
that a customer of his out of Ireland is having connectivity issues to
it. The ISP in question is Eircom, and the b
apologies if this is off-topic, but the elections are really important
and many people on the list are not at the conference so i thought a
short reminder might be useful:
nanog is holding elections for steering committee members right now
and charter ammendments right now.
more information:
ht
We've had one presentation on the "unfairness" of p2p traffic, which
(the presenter says) will eventually swamp us.
Then just now, we had the presentation & subsequent discussion re: ipv6
adoption.
Just wondering: what if we gave ipv6 traffic "mucho priority" over ipv4
traffic, then tell our us
Scott Doty wrote:
> After all, if most p2p traffic is v4, prioritizing ipv6 (as a general
> concept) should improve the user experience.
How long do you think it will take for the P2P software authors to
transition over to IPv6? I'll bet that P2P users will be a lot more
likely to use IPv6 over Au
Actually, I seem to recall some postings to the list stating that many of the
popular bittorrent clients already do IPv6 if available. So that would seem to
be a good recipe for allowing P2P users to prioritize ahead of regular traffic.
- S
-Original Message-
From: Niall Donegan [mailt
http://www.hughes.com.au/products/traffacct/
Built specifically for byte accounting for billing purposes and can poll
a number of devices. Built for billing and free
(though not maintained it 'just works').
Brent
Brent Paddon
Director | Over the Wire Pty Ltd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.overthew
On 15/10/2008, at 6:19 AM, Scott Doty wrote:
Just wondering: what if we gave ipv6 traffic "mucho priority" over
ipv4
traffic, then tell our user communities that ipv6 provides a better
quality network experience, including (hopefully) faster page loads, &
lower video game pings?
I think b
HD Stream is now back online. It'll be online until 5PM PST (the
tutorals are not broadcast).
-Tk
First, the good news: so far, the NANOG conference has been very
valuable and
content-rich, covering a lot of issues that need to be discussed. For
that, I am grateful.
But now, the bad news(?): Maybe it's just me & my paranoia, but do I detect
an inkling of "murk spam" going on with some pr
On 15/10/2008, at 8:56 AM, Niall Donegan wrote:
Scott Doty wrote:
After all, if most p2p traffic is v4, prioritizing ipv6 (as a general
concept) should improve the user experience.
How long do you think it will take for the P2P software authors to
transition over to IPv6? I'll bet that P2P use
If P2P became IPV6, and therefore universally endpoint addressable, and
therefore seeded by every download, as opposed to solely seeded by those
who have enough clue to configure the inbound ports through their IPV4
NAT, then the bandwidth problem should solve itself, at least for the
widely popula
12 matches
Mail list logo
