Let me be the devil's advocate: why would you need full Internet routing?
Taking reasonably sized neighborhoods of your upstreams (AS paths up to X AS
numbers) plus a default to your best upstream might do the trick.
Ivan
http://www.ioshints.info/about
http://blog.ioshints.info/
> -Origin
Brian Raaen wrote:
Hate to say it, but also some of the cost on the circuits can be blamed
on uncle Sam. ATM circuits are currently tariffed that same way are
voice circuits. These tariffs are not charged to Ethernet because it is
a 'data circuit'. At least that was the case a little while back.
I'm wondering if anyone has any experience with UTOPIA or Veracity out
in Utah, specifically if they are known for frequent unannounced
maintenance outages and/or crappy network uptime? I'm having problems
getting a scheduled data transfer to run on a pretty regular basis and
am trying to figur
Brian Raaen wrote:
>> Hate to say it, but also some of the cost on the circuits can be blamed
>> on uncle Sam. ATM circuits are currently tariffed that same way are
>> voice circuits. These tariffs are not charged to Ethernet because it is
>> a 'data circuit'. At least that was the case a little wh
Prices of terrestrial SDH/SONET cards are very low for transport providers. For
customers I believe there is a greater divergenc between the Ethernet and
SONET/SDH costs.
A strong hunch based on what clients tell me Cisco charges for SONET/SDH
interfaces.
Roderick S. Beck
Director of Europe
I need to resolve some issues that we are having with you guys but there is
a lack of timelyness with your contact forms, 28 days is simply unacceptable
:(
Sorbs was shut down just about that time ago ..
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Ronald Cotoni wrote:
> I need to resolve some issues that we are having with you guys but there is
> a lack of timelyness with your contact forms, 28 days is simply unacceptable
> :(
>
--
Suresh Ramasubramanian (o
Ronald Cotoni wrote:
> I need to resolve some issues that we are having with you guys but there is
> a lack of timelyness with your contact forms, 28 days is simply unacceptable
> :(
You might also try on the spam-l.org mailing list.
~Seth
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Ronald Cotoni wrote:
> I need to resolve some issues that we are having with you guys but there is
> a lack of timelyness with your contact forms, 28 days is simply unacceptable
> :(
>From www.sorbs.net:
"It comes with great sadness that I have to announce the im
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Christopher
Morrow wrote:
> >From www.sorbs.net:
> "It comes with great sadness that I have to announce the imminent
[snip]
You might want to read the June 25th update they made to the
announcement, as shown on the very same page.
"
SORBS has had 2 offers of hosti
On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:34:58 -0500
James Hess wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Christopher
> Morrow wrote:
> > >From www.sorbs.net:
> > "It comes with great sadness that I have to announce the imminent
> [snip]
>
> You might want to read the June 25th update they made to the
> announce
Yes, they are really bad. It is actually quite silly that a blacklisting
service is that slow on responding to problems.
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 11:45 AM, John Peach wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:34:58 -0500
> James Hess wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Christopher
> > Morrow wr
On 7/11/09 11:05 AM, Ronald Cotoni wrote:
Yes, they are really bad. It is actually quite silly that a blacklisting
service is that slow on responding to problems.
I find it unacceptable that people demand instant service from a company
they don't have prior business arrangements/relationship
On Jul 11, 2009, at 1:11 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote:
On 7/11/09 11:05 AM, Ronald Cotoni wrote:
Yes, they are really bad. It is actually quite silly that a
blacklisting
service is that slow on responding to problems.
I find it unacceptable that people demand instant service from a
company the
Hi Brielle.
Do they take two weeks to put a spammer on the list?
Regards,
John
John Souvestre - New Orleans LA
> -Original Message-
> From: Brielle Bruns [mailto:br...@2mbit.com]
> Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2009 12:12 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Can someone from SOR
That's good to know.
I'll avoid using it.
--nvieira
- "Brielle Bruns" wrote:
> Average turn around time for the AHBL is around two weeks if we don't have an
> established contact and procedure with.
Sadly, this is for remote hosts. I have no idea why someone would use such
services as there are too many false positives. It is like using an IDS
that is 2 weeks behind on it's definition. That brings up the point of
false positives and outdated information blocking legitimate users, perhaps
ma
Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
Given that you said AHBL requires two weeks to remove good IP addresses
unless there is an "established contact", I'll be sure never to use said
list. Suppose my business partner gets listed? Am I to ruin our
relationship for two weeks because you are busy or don't l
On Sat, 2009-07-11 at 11:11 -0600, Brielle Bruns wrote:
> On 7/11/09 11:05 AM, Ronald Cotoni wrote:
> > Yes, they are really bad. It is actually quite silly that a blacklisting
> > service is that slow on responding to problems.
>
> I find it unacceptable that people demand instant service from a
I wouldn't condone usage of SORBS' lists, because they sometimes use
robots to automatically list things that have little rational basis
for being listed, which causes problems. But it may be hard to
convince your mail recipients to avoid the same.
Commonly, providers may give un-assigned s
Nuno Vieira - nfsi wrote:
That's good to know.
I'll avoid using it.
Holy crap, what's with all the AHBL hate? At the very least they have a
responsive human and - last time I checked - they don't require an
exchange of money to get off the list. I'd hazard a guess that "two
weeks" includes
On Sat, 11 Jul 2009, Seth Mattinen wrote:
Nuno Vieira - nfsi wrote:
That's good to know.
I'll avoid using it.
Holy crap, what's with all the AHBL hate? At the very least they have a
responsive human and - last time I checked - they don't require an exchange
of money to get off the list.
- Original Message -
From: "Seth Mattinen"
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2009 3:40 PM
Subject: Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?
Nuno Vieira - nfsi wrote:
That's good to know.
I'll avoid using it.
Holy crap, what's with all the AHBL hate? At the very least they have
On 7/11/09 12:47 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
Given that you said AHBL requires two weeks to remove good IP addresses
unless there is an "established contact", I'll be sure never to use said
list. Suppose my business partner gets listed? Am I to ruin our
relationship for two weeks because you
On 7/11/09 3:30 PM, Micheal Patterson wrote:
"Proxy removal is functioning (sort of). Any other type of removal is no
longer possible.
Do not contact us about removals."
That's quoted from their web site. No method of communications except
through the proxy, which is only "sort of" working. So,
On Jul 11, 2009, at 5:37 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote:
Further, there is such thing as a local whitelist of IP addresses.
Easier to just not use the BL.
Besides, there are plenty of useful blacklists with very low FP rates
who are responsive. Why use one that has high FP and is
unresponsive?
On Jul 11, 2009, at 4:40 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
Nuno Vieira - nfsi wrote:
That's good to know.
I'll avoid using it.
Holy crap, what's with all the AHBL hate? At the very least they
have a responsive human and - last time I checked - they don't
require an exchange of money to get off the
>> IPv6 is going to explode the routing table in the next 5 years.
> More like, ipv4 is going explode the routing table in the next 5
> years?
more like the routing table will continue to grow, mostly proportional
to growth in multi-homed sites and richer inter-provider topology.
randy
On Sat, 11 Jul 2009, Ronald Cotoni wrote:
Sadly, this is for remote hosts. I have no idea why someone would use such
services as there are too many false positives.
Desperation in trying to limit the amount of spam delivered.
It is like using an IDS that is 2 weeks behind on it's definition
29 matches
Mail list logo
