> From: Jay Ashworth [mailto:j...@baylink.com]
> - Original Message -
> > From: "TJ"
> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Owen DeLong
> wrote:
> > > "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a 747 full of DLT cartridges."
> > XKCD is all over this: http://what-if.xkcd.com/31/
> > :)
> I ha
I know a few of you guys are using MikroTik offerings in the enterprise, so
I hope to pick your brain(s). I have many, many RB433UAH's deployed
worldwide as simple WAPs. I've been looking to move to 802.1x EAP-TLS via an
external FreeRadius server. I have our HP Procurves using the FreeRadius
serve
Hi all,
As advised a month or so ago, the following public comment period is open:
http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/root-zone-consultation-08mar13-en.htm
We have received a small number of responses which are accessible from that
page.
The topic at hand and the specific questions
I think that is .2% - .3%, no?
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Joe Abley wrote:
>
> On 2013-04-02, at 18:18, John Kristoff wrote:
>
> > I would expect from stubs this will be close enough to zero to be
> > effectively zero. At least I would hope so.
>
> This (below) is one of four resolvers,
On 2013-04-03, at 11:25, Jerry Dent wrote:
> I think that is .2% - .3%, no?
Oh, you're right -- it does seem substantially closer to zero when you put the
decimal point in the right place :-)
Joe
- Original Message -
> From: "Joe Abley"
> On 2013-04-03, at 11:25, Jerry Dent wrote:
>
> > I think that is .2% - .3%, no?
>
> Oh, you're right -- it does seem substantially closer to zero when you
> put the decimal point in the right place :-)
Huh?
23 in 1000 is in fact 2.3%.
Cheer
Mikrotik... 'The Dude'
http://www.mikrotik.com/thedude
Ruff, Ruff...!
Network IPdog
Ephesians 4:32 & Cheers!!!
A password is like a... toothbrush ;^)
Choose a good one, change it regularly and don't share it.
-Original Message-
From: Beavis [mailto:pfu...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday
> The topic at hand and the specific questions that have been
> asked as part of the consultation are important ones;
Do it when you feel like, nobody should notice. Anything
this important should be routine procedure, make it daily.
> the decisions taken will have operational consequences to any
On 2013-04-03, at 12:52, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Joe Abley"
>
>> On 2013-04-03, at 11:25, Jerry Dent wrote:
>>
>>> I think that is .2% - .3%, no?
>>
>> Oh, you're right -- it does seem substantially closer to zero when you
>> put the decimal point in the
His sample was 10K not 1000. Look higher.
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Joe Abley wrote:
>
> On 2013-04-03, at 12:52, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>
> > - Original Message -
> >> From: "Joe Abley"
> >
> >> On 2013-04-03, at 11:25, Jerry Dent wrote:
> >>
> >>> I think that is .2% - .3%, no?
The problem with 'The Dude' is that won't run on any of the platforms I have.
Owen
On Apr 3, 2013, at 09:55 , Network IPdog wrote:
> Mikrotik... 'The Dude'
> http://www.mikrotik.com/thedude
>
>
> Ruff, Ruff...!
>
> Network IPdog
>
> Ephesians 4:32 & Cheers!!!
>
> A password is like a...
In europe? He probably was thinking of a Volvo 245...
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 4:40 AM, Jamie Bowden wrote:
> > From: Jay Ashworth [mailto:j...@baylink.com]
> > - Original Message -
> > > From: "TJ"
>
> > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Owen DeLong
> > wrote:
>
> > > > "Never underes
I don't /think/ Andy was over there that far back.
George Herbert wrote:
>In europe? He probably was thinking of a Volvo 245...
>
>
>On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 4:40 AM, Jamie Bowden wrote:
>
>> > From: Jay Ashworth [mailto:j...@baylink.com]
>> > - Original Message -
>> > > From: "TJ"
>>
>
We had some issues with apple devices recently on a new MT using WPA2 and
preshared key - might not be the same but...
The preamble mode was important plus the auth types needed to drop any older
auth options types as apple seems to only accept the latest versions
We had iphones, macbook airs a
On 04/02/2013 10:13 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
On 4/2/13 2:24 PM, Carlos Alcantar wrote:
You might want to consider putting up a speedtest server internal to your
network. I know there is a fee but well worth it I believe. You will
still need to take the results with a grain a salt but you will
On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 14:07:48 -0700, Mike said:
> These speedtests are pure unscientific bs and I'd love to see them
> called out on the carpet for it.
As far as I know, it's possible for the end-to-end reported values to be
lower than your immediate upstream due to issues further upstream.
But i
We host one of the gazillion speed test sites and for networks that are
close to us we find it "reasonably accurate" .. a good benchmark at least ..
Even our installers in the field use it as a "reference point" YMMV
obviously
Paul
-Original Message-
From: valdis.kletni...@vt.
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 05:48:00PM -0400, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 14:07:48 -0700, Mike said:
>
> > These speedtests are pure unscientific bs and I'd love to see them
> > called out on the carpet for it.
>
> As far as I know, it's possible for the end-to-end reported v
On 3 Apr 2013, at 22:48, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> (If anybody's got evidence of it reporting more than the link is technically
> capable of, feel free to correct me...)
I've seen speedtest.net give results significantly greater than the physical bw
of the client's network link.
Nick
Try it with upwards of 900ms of variable latency.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
Original message
From: Nick Hilliard
Date: 04/03/2013 3:04 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth
On 3 Apr 2013, at 23:20, Warren Bailey
wrote:
> Try it with upwards of 900ms of variable latency.
The last crazy result I got was 146mbit/s on a hardwired 100 mbit link and
1-2ms latency to the speedtest.net server I was using at the time (same data
centre). Testing this sort of thing with
They may do some magic with bandwidth delay products.. If that was the case,
they may have written it for a standard latency versus something that is
unreasonable by interweb standards.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
Original message
From: Nick Hilliard
Date: 04/03/20
Having trouble reaching route-views.linx.routeviews.org from AS3582.
I'm assuming that some folks stopped carrying
this particular linx.net address prefix
as of this morning. ?!?
$ whois -h whois.cymru.com " -v 195.66.241.146"
AS | IP | BGP Prefix | CC | Registry |
Al
Hi John,
On Apr 4, 2013, at 12:52 AM, John Kemp
wrote:
> Having trouble reaching route-views.linx.routeviews.org from AS3582.
>
> I'm assuming that some folks stopped carrying
> this particular linx.net address prefix
> as of this morning. ?!?
Indeed LINX has taken steps recently to reduce th
On 3 Apr 2013, at 23:41, Warren Bailey
wrote:
> They may do some magic with bandwidth delay products.. If that was the case,
> they may have written it for a standard latency versus something that is
> unreasonable by interweb standards.
I don't know how they calculate bandwidth, but I was su
I noticed it too this morning from a AS3549 customer. Level 3 LG shows
no route for 195.66.232.0/22 on North American sites.
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 6:52 PM, John Kemp
wrote:
>
> Having trouble reaching route-views.linx.routeviews.org from AS3582.
>
> I'm assuming that some folks stopped carrying
I can run two speedtest.net session side by side on my home network on one
laptop, and over VPN to my employer's Long Island locale on a second,
pointed at the same speedtest server, over the same wifi and ADSL and have
the VPN connection report speeds that are (a) 50% better on VPN than not;
and,
--- n...@foobar.org wrote:
From: Nick Hilliard
>> They may do some magic with bandwidth delay products.. If that was the case,
>> they may have written it for a standard latency versus something that is
>> unreasonable by interweb standards.
I don't know how they calculate bandwidth, but I
On 4/3/13 2:52 PM, Paul Stewart wrote:
> We host one of the gazillion speed test sites and for networks that are
> close to us we find it "reasonably accurate" .. a good benchmark at least ..
>
The speedtest.net that's hosted on one of my directly connected transits
is consistently wrong, which
(a) may be valid.
(b) is fishy
(a) may be valid because it may be that your ISP has a better set of peering
relationships towards your VPN server and your company's ISP has better
peering relationships towards the Speedtest server than your ISP has
towards the Speedtest server.
I'm not saying tha
I'm shocked Ookla hasn't been eaten by some major ISP. Speed tests are the root
of most complaints. Your link is congested (oversubed) and you then attempt to
completely saturate your bandwidth to tell your provider what a suck job they
are doing. I can't imagine wireless isps or those with limi
On 4/3/13 6:25 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
> I'm shocked Ookla hasn't been eaten by some major ISP. Speed tests are
> the root of most complaints. Your link is congested (oversubed) and you
> then attempt to completely saturate your bandwidth to tell your provider
> what a suck job they are doing. I c
On Apr 2, 2013, at 9:16 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Steven Bellovin"
>
>> DLT? I first heard it as a station wagon full of (9-track, 1600 bpi,
>> that having been the state of the art) mag tapes on the Taconic Parkway,
>> circa 1970. I suspect, though, that
I guess the Speedtest servers near metro areas do probably get pretty beat up.
Has anyone paid the Ookla ransom for their own public server? I'd be really
curious to see what they peak at.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
Original message
From: Seth Mattinen
Date: 04/03
Steve, would you post that on a webpage somewhere? :-)
- jra
Steven Bellovin wrote:
>
>On Apr 2, 2013, at 9:16 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>
>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Steven Bellovin"
>>
>>> DLT? I first heard it as a station wagon full of (9-track, 1600 bpi,
>>> that having been
On 4/3/13 6:25 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
I'm shocked Ookla hasn't been eaten by some major ISP. Speed tests are the root
of most complaints. Your link is congested (oversubed) and you then attempt to
completely saturate your bandwidth to tell your provider what a suck job they
are doing. I can'
On 4/3/13 3:20 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
Try it with upwards of 900ms of variable latency.
on linux
tc qdisc add dev eth0 root netem delay 900ms 150msdistribution normal
and then you can slowly test the internet to your hearts content.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
Original
On Wed, 3 Apr 2013, joel jaeggli wrote:
Telling people to get by with even less instrumentation then they have
already doesn't win you any friends. The solution to bad instruments is
better instruments not breaking flow meter off the well.
I have pitched the idea in the IETF to have TCP stack
I have paid the ransom. Actually we pay it on a recurring basis even. ;)
As for what it peaks at, good question. The infrastructure we run it on is
going to be the problem at some point, although currently has not proven to
be a limiting factor to the best of my knowledge. Our customers see val
The only reliable way to really test performance is to saturate the
pipe (Iperf) and have a sufficiently well provisioned target. NDT does
a good job using short non-saturation tests, but it is susceptible to
slow start and other challenges. In general, NDT results will be more
conservative than be
40 matches
Mail list logo
