Well put, and point taken :-).
Sam
>
> On Jun 25, 2013, at 6:34 PM, s...@wwcandt.com wrote:
>
>> I believe that if you encrypted your links sufficiently that it was
>> impossible to siphon the wanted data from your upstream the response
>> would
>> be for the tapping to move down into your data cen
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 10:52:37 -0400, Anthony Williams
said:
> Alex:
> You should also get this posted to the NTP.ORG community.
> http://www.pool.ntp.org
It's been marked as inactive since the end of last year
(http://support.ntp.org/bin/view/Servers/InactiveTimeServers). I
don't know if it
On 26 June 2013 04:10, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
>
> On Jun 26, 2013, at 12:37 AM, <
> valdis.kletni...@vt.edu> wrote:
>
> > I wonder how long it will take before anybody actually updates their
> config. I once pulled a stratum-2 out of the clocks.txt file - and was
> still seeing
> > several hund
Ilan:
I passed along your request on the UUNET end and the cache has now
been flushed on the US side. I might have to do some POC digging on the
UK side.
jobvite.com@198.6.100.25 (UUNET (US)):
jobvite.com.300 IN SOA ns-1989.awsdns-56.co.uk.
awsdns-hostmaster.amazon.com. (
Thank you very much good sir. We appreciate it.
-Ilan
On Jun 26, 2013, at 6:12 AM, Anthony Williams wrote:
>
> Ilan:
>
> I passed along your request on the UUNET end and the cache has now
> been flushed on the US side. I might have to do some POC digging on the
> UK side.
>
>
> jobvite.co
Please contact off line
Thank you,
Atif
416.986.6207
Can someone from Twitter contact me off list.
Thanks.
I wonder if anyone has gear in
TELEHOUSE Seoul
Seoul Financial Center
Taepyeongno 1-ga 84
Jung-gu, Seoul, Korea 100-170
and would be interested in exchanging a low bandwidth/utilization
ethernet cross connect strictly for OOB management purposes to aid in
troubleshooting and monitoring during
Hello,
If anyone on the list is from Google and involved with their GeoIP service,
could you please contact me off list? I've been trying to get one IP address
modified from Canada to the US. Every other main GeoIP has the location
correctly, except Google. I've filled out their correction f
Hi,
We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago.
Is this a common situation? Does the customer risk having that space
reclaimed by Paetec at
On Jun 26, 2013, at 1:52 PM, "Adam Greene" wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
> mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
> relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago.
>
>
>
> Is this a common situ
We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago.
Is this a common situation? Does the customer risk having that space
reclaimed by Paetec at some point,
On 2013-06-26, at 13:52, "Adam Greene" wrote:
> We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
> mid-90's
I think it's correct to say that the only entities that can assign PI IPv4
space are RIRs and the IANA. If I'm right, what you're talking about is PA
space, rega
Our entire organization and three of my other accounts are getting this
pop-up when sending a message:
Oops... a server error occurred and your email was not sent. (#793)
But, as usual, everything is "totally fine" according to the GApps status
page:
http://www.google.com/appsstatus#hl=en&v=stat
Joe,
On Jun 26, 2013, at 11:18 AM, Joe Abley wrote:
>> We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
>> mid-90's
> I think it's correct to say that the only entities that can assign PI IPv4
> space are RIRs and the IANA.
Nope. Historically, there was no distinction
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Adam Greene wrote:
> We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
> mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
> relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago.
>
> Is this a common situation?
It was back i
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago.
Is this a common situation? Does the customer risk hav
yes?
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Jeff Harper wrote:
> Hello,
>
> If anyone on the list is from Google and involved with their GeoIP service,
> could you please contact me off list? I've been trying to get one IP address
> modified from Canada to the US. Every other main GeoIP has the lo
Jon,
On Jun 26, 2013, at 12:17 PM, Jon Lewis wrote:
>>> We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
>>> mid-90's
>> They should plan to renumber out of that space in the very near future.
It'd be nice for routing system hygiene, but there probably is no requirement
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Jon Lewis wrote:
> It's got to be PA space. Paetec isn't in a position to assign PI space.
No distinction is drawn between PA and PI for ARIN-region address
space assigned prior to ARIN's inception in 1997. That's "legacy"
address space.
Since the end of filteri
We're also seeing the same, twitter users are also reporting a lot of
problem.
https://twitter.com/search/realtime?q=google%20apps&src=typd
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Blair Trosper <
blair.tros...@updraftnetworks.com> wrote:
> Our entire organization and three of my other accounts are get
been getting it for a few days (weeks?) already now...
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Jamie Gwatkin wrote:
> We're also seeing the same, twitter users are also reporting a lot of
> problem.
>
> https://twitter.com/search/realtime?q=google%20apps&src=typd
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:57 PM, B
f the assignment predated ARIN, then its not clear if current ARIN policy
is applicable.
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 02:18:54PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
>
> On 2013-06-26, at 13:52, "Adam Greene" wrote:
>
> > We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
> > mid-90's
>
We just released a new version of the RIPE NCC RPKI Validator with some major
new functionality.
The application has always been able to determine the RPKI validity state of a
BGP announcement, but it was only visible in the UI. Many users have asked us
to expose this functionality through an
Thanks everyone.
It sounds like (a) customer needs to clarify contract terms with Paetec, and
(b) unless they have an ongoing relationship, the best long-term plan is to
renumber.
I did check reg dates on the blocks, and it is much more recent than the
customer led me to believe (or than I inter
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, William Herrin wrote:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Jon Lewis wrote:
It's got to be PA space. Paetec isn't in a position to assign PI space.
No distinction is drawn between PA and PI for ARIN-region address
space assigned prior to ARIN's inception in 1997. That's "le
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 14:06:10 -0400, "Justin M. Streiner" said:
> > We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
> > mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
> > relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago.
> >
> > Is this a common situa
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Jon Lewis wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, William Herrin wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Jon Lewis wrote:
>>>
>>> It's got to be PA space. Paetec isn't in a position to assign PI space.
>>
>>
>> No distinction is drawn between PA and PI for ARIN-region
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 01:57:10PM -0500, Blair Trosper wrote:
> But, as usual, everything is "totally fine" according to the GApps status
> page:
> http://www.google.com/appsstatus#hl=en&v=status&ts=1372272841152
Status pages, at least for any service big enough to matter, are nothing
more than a
This was resolved 8 min after the initial email.
http://www.google.com/appsstatus#hl=en&v=issue&ts=1372341599000&sid=1&iid=3ec67925039e152c4ab58a809c97ee24
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Matt Palmer wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 01:57:10PM -0500, Blair Trosper wrote:
> > But, as usual, ev
30 matches
Mail list logo
