Maybe they are adjusting in preparation for Aug 1.
http://techcrunch.com/2013/06/21/google-makes-google-news-in-germany-opt-in-only-to-avoid-paying-fees-under-new-copyright-law/
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Warren Bailey
wrote:
> Seems to be isolated to the mobile site, if anyone finds it of
Hi,
From public routing data we can see a total of 2,419 /25s prefixes
announced from at least one of the monitors active in RIPE RIS and
RouteViews.
None of the /25s are actually advertised by all these monitors i.e. the
/25s reach some but not all the ASes which take part in these projects.
Mobile page works fine via the same comcast circuit as previously mentioned
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:37 AM, Joly MacFie wrote:
> Maybe they are adjusting in preparation for Aug 1.
>
>
> http://techcrunch.com/2013/06/21/google-makes-google-news-in-germany-opt-in-only-to-avoid-paying-fees-under-
Subject: Re: PDU recommendations Date: Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 09:32:00PM -0400
Quoting shawn wilson (ag4ve...@gmail.com):
> So, that's not a very good endorsement :)
>
> Idk why you'd use a fuse in a PDU.
MCB units age. Especially with vibration. A 10A MCB becomes a 9A MCB after
some miles.
F
John Levine wrote:
> I realize it's not quite that simple due to issues of longer prefixes
> taking precedence over shorter ones, but it is my impression that
> there's a lot of sloppiness.
16M /24 is just a cheap 16M entry SRAM.
However, 16M /32 means 4G entry SRAM or 16M entry CAM.
16M entry
Daniel Suchy wrote:
>> There are techniques to fix that. For example, Simple Virtual Aggregation
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6769
> I'm not sure, if hardware vendors will implement something like this. I
> expect they'll sell you router with larger hardware FIB instead.
As the RFC says:
> route reflectors should be in the data plane, ...
I believe in modern networks data-plane and control-plane(s) should be
separated as it provides for great scalability and versatility the drawback
of course is a more complex system to manage.
adam
>> route reflectors should be in the data plane, ...
> I believe in modern networks data-plane and control-plane(s) should be
> separated as it provides for great scalability and versatility the
> drawback of course is a more complex system to manage.
more complex systems scale poorly, break easil
> there is massive increase in IPv6 adoption (from 1.5% to 1.7%) in the
> past few days.
luckily i had my seatbelt fastened
randy
+1. It's especially helpful for wireless troubleshooting in a campus
environment. You can get a lot of info from the AP, but tend not to know what
the client is seeing and it's great for catching transient events (oh, whenever
the elevator goes by...)
Eric
On Jun 22, 2013, at 12:29 AM, "Carl
Le 22/06/2013 00:27, Jakob Heitz a écrit :
> There are techniques to fix that. For example, Simple Virtual Aggregation
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6769
The principle behind this RFC is that RAM (RIB) is cheap, CAM (FIB) is
not. But it's mostly intended for SDN developpments.
You need a full R
-Original Message-
From: Randy Bush [mailto:ra...@psg.com]
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 2:32 PM
To: Adam Vitkovsky
Cc: 'John van Oppen'; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Multihop eBGP peering or VPN based eBGP peering
>>> route reflectors should be in the data plane, ...
>> I believe in modern
On Jun 22, 2013, at 16:16 , Grzegorz Janoszka wrote:
> On 22-06-13 17:30, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> Looking at the number of autonomous systems in the IPv6 routing table and
>> the total number of routes, it looks like it will shake out somewhere in the
>> neighborhood of 3-5 prefixes/ASN. Since th
For a reason that I'm unable to ascertain, GoGo In-Flight Internet can
route to my university's network blog, but not to my specific college's.
Does anyone have a contact there that I could reach out to and work to
figure this out with?
Thanks!
--Matt Simmons
--
LITTLE GIRL: But which cookie
And by "blog", of course I meant "block". Sorry!
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Matt Simmons <
standalone.sysad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For a reason that I'm unable to ascertain, GoGo In-Flight Internet can
> route to my university's network blog, but not to my specific college's.
>
> Does any
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Andy B. wrote:
> If there is a YAHOO! Postmaster contact available, can you please
> contact me off list?
>
> I need to investigate a customer's "TS03" listing of a very large
> netblock (/16) and I'm afraid regular Yahoo! forms are leading me
> nowhere but frustr
Hello,
On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 13:56:02 -0600
Michael McConnell wrote:
> As the IPv4 space get smaller and smaller, does anyone think we'll see a
> time when /25's will be accepted for global BGP prefix announcement. The
> current smallest size is a /24 and generally ok for most people, but the
> cr
I'm not going to even ask or look at who is accepting /26's
-jim
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Paul Rolland wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 13:56:02 -0600
> Michael McConnell wrote:
>
> > As the IPv4 space get smaller and smaller, does anyone think we'll see a
> > time when /25's w
Does anyone on list have experience with the APC AP7920 switched rack PDU, or
any of the horizontal rack mountables with management? We're looking at these
for our remote sites.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 24, 2013, at 6:10 AM, Måns Nilsson wrote:
> Subject: Re: PDU recommendations Date: Sun,
We seem to always get calls from uplogix.. Check them out if you are
considering managing pdu's etc. Their gear is pretty stout, and they have good
to great support.
Sent from my Mobile Device.
Original message
From: Ryan - Lists
Date: 06/24/2013 11:43 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: Må
On Jun 24, 2013, at 13:29 , Paul Rolland (ポール・ロラン) wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 13:56:02 -0600 Michael McConnell
> wrote:
>> As the IPv4 space get smaller and smaller, does anyone think we'll see a
>> time when /25's will be accepted for global BGP prefix announcement. The
>> current smallest s
Hi,
Yes.
They are good.
Nothing I would deploy in a large data center but for a few racks
they are perfect.
Beware that they are not built to be connected straight to the
internet =D.
The management module can reset depending on packet payload and
overall traffic. They
Heh, I wouldn't dream of putting this type of device on the net - nothing
good can come from that.
On Jun 24, 2013 3:04 PM, "Alain Hebert" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Yes.
>
> They are good.
>
> Nothing I would deploy in a large data center but for a few racks
> they are perfect.
>
> Bew
Oh, absolutely. These would be secured on a separate, private network with very
specific access controls.
These remote sites are more "branch" than data center. Looking at a very
limited amount of equipment (1-2 open telco racks/site).
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 24, 2013, at 3:01 PM, Alain Heb
- william.allen.simpson wrote: -
And at $189,950 MSRP, obviously every ISP is dashing out the door
for a pair for each and every long haul fiber link. ;-)
It's the same as buying, say, .nanog... >;-)
--- g...@gdt.id.au wrote:
From: Glen Turne
On 6/24/13 12:55 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
- william.allen.simpson wrote: -
And at $189,950 MSRP, obviously every ISP is dashing out the door
for a pair for each and every long haul fiber link. ;-)
It's the same as buying, say, .nanog... >;-)
-
On Sun, 23 Jun 2013 11:37:43 -0400, shawn wilson
wrote:
However, I figured I'd see if there was a better brand /
specific model recommendations for quality or bang / buck?
On Sun, 23 Jun 2013 12:02:27 -0400, Michael Loftis
wrote:
(knock on wood) nothing in the
last 6-7 years has caused an
joe...@bogus.com wrote:
From: joel jaeggli
> That's why I'm trying to follow up on the original question. Is
> there something similar the global public can use to secure their
> connections that is not government designed. This is even more
> important on microwave
I was wondering if anyone had experience with Geist's outlet monitoring
product?
I recently started using there basic PDU's and so far so good. But am
wondering if anyone has feed back on Geist's outlet monitoring product.
Mark Keymer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 24/06/2013 19:29, Paul Rolland (???) a écrit :
> Well, /25 are already in the routing table. I can even find a few
> /26 !!
So did I :
http://lg.ring.nlnog.net/adv/lg02+lg01/ipv4?q=where%20net.len=26
But guess what ? They didn't stop there !
> -Original Message-
> From: Scott Weeks [mailto:sur...@mauigateway.com]
> joe...@bogus.com wrote:
> From: joel jaeggli
>
> > That's why I'm trying to follow up on the original question. Is
> > there something similar the global public can use to secure their
>
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Jamie Bowden wrote:
> Actually, you CAN do that, but you have to apply for ITAR exceptions. EXIM
> is complex and you really want a good legal team who are familiar with it
> hand holding you through it (and on extended retainer going forward...).
We used
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:14:19PM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Jamie Bowden wrote:
>
> > Actually, you CAN do that, but you have to apply for ITAR exceptions. EXIM
> > is complex and you really want a good legal team who are familiar with it
> > hand ho
Does anyone have an explanation for the IPv6 hopopt appearing as protocol
value 0 in http://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers?
--Dave
* David Edelman
> Does anyone have an explanation for the IPv6 hopopt appearing as protocol
> value 0 in http://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers?
It's defined in RFC 2460, section 4.3. Which is linked to from the
reference column of the page you linked to...
Tore
On 6/24/13 1:19 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
joe...@bogus.com wrote:
From: joel jaeggli
That's why I'm trying to follow up on the original question. Is
there something similar the global public can use to secure their
connections that is not government designed. This is
How do I convince my peers to accept /25's ?? :D
--
Michael McConnell
WINK Streaming;
email: mich...@winkstreaming.com
phone: +1 312 281-5433 x 7400
cell: +506 8706-2389
skype: wink-michael
web: http://winkstreaming.com
On Jun 24, 2013, at 12:53 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> On Jun 24, 2013,
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:25 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> Securing the link layer however is not a replacement for an end to end
> solution so just because it's protecting the air interface(s) doesn't really
> mean somebody not looking at the traffic elsewhere.
it's fair to say, I think, that if yo
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Christopher Morrow
wrote:
> it's fair to say, I think, that if you want to say something on the
> network it's best that you consider:
> 1) is the communication something private between you and another party(s)
> 2) is the communication going to be seen by ot
39 matches
Mail list logo
