Ray,
"Anycast is generally not well-suited for stateful connectivity (e.g. most
things TCP)."
I don't know anything that would support that claim. I have been using for
years BGP anycast for audio and video streaming, always in TCP (RTMP, HLS,
WMS, and even the good and old ShoutCast) and works
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 4:13 AM, Kurt Kraut via NANOG wrote:
> Ray,
>
>
> "Anycast is generally not well-suited for stateful connectivity (e.g. most
> things TCP)."
>
> I don't know anything that would support that claim. I have been using for
> years BGP anycast for audio and video streaming, alw
I gave a pretty broad answer because the question was about hosting mail
servers using anycast.
I don't think what I was getting at in regards to stateful vs. stateless
was incorrect, but I was talking about the application level not the nature
of the protocol and throwing TCP in there confused th
On 18 Jun 2015, at 7:51, Ray Soucy wrote:
You can certainly do anycast with TCP, and for small stateless
services it
can be effective. You can't do anycast for a stateful application
without
taking the split-brain problem into account.
It's really difficult to apply broad "can" or "can't",
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 09:08:13AM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
> On 18 Jun 2015, at 7:51, Ray Soucy wrote:
>
> >You can certainly do anycast with TCP, and for small stateless services it
> >can be effective. You can't do anycast for a stateful application without
> >taking the split-brain problem int
On Jun 17, 2015 8:56 PM, "Ronald F. Guilmette"
wrote:
>
>
> *) The Director of the Office of Personnel Management, Ms. Katherine
> Archueta was warned, repeatedly, and over several years, by her
> own department's Inspector General (IG) that many of OPM's systems
> we
If anyone can message me off list it would be great.
We were originally told the service would be shut off in July. All of the
accounts were disabled June 9.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
We worked with dozens of service providers to get their email services
migrated, AFAIK no one got an extension. I was told directly that it was
possible to have an extension because Google was pulling down the entire
system. I'd advise:
1) Make sure your domain TTL's are fairly low so you can c
That's all we're after, customers' emails.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jun 18, 2015 12:12 PM, "Scott Helms" wrote:
> We worked with dozens of service providers to get their email services
> migrated, AFAIK no one got an extens
Have to agree with Shawn on this.
If you watch her testimony in front of Congress, it is clear that she was
completely flustered at the inability to hire competent people, and the
lack of her superiors to prioritize the modernization project she had so
passionately advocated for.
When I've worked f
Josh,
>From what I have been able to see from an outsider's point of view, they
tore down the virtual machines that held those emails and while I doubt
they scrubbed the hard drives, they're not available in "commercially
reasonable way".
No ISP I've worked with has been able to get access to ema
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 8:54 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette
wrote:
> My apologies in advance to any here who might feel that this is off
> topic... I don't personally believe that it is. Frankly, I don't
> know of that many mailing lists where the subscribers are likely to
> care as much about network s
On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 16:34:46 -, Cryptographrix said:
> From the sound of it, she ran into the ceiling of available workers that
> were willing to work for the pay grade that the government offers for those
> positions, which is usually much less than private industry offers and - as
> a conseq
Ray Soucy writes:
> You can certainly do anycast with TCP, and for small stateless services it
> can be effective. You can't do anycast for a stateful application without
> taking the split-brain problem into account.
In my experience, the thing that makes anycast work *well* is having
the con
Having worked for several departments like this, I can assure you her
flustsration was not about her "inability to hire competent people" or "the
lack of her superiors to prioritize the modernization project". Unless you
have worked for the Federal Government it's almost impossible to understand
t
There was an inquiry about this just the other day. They got theirs turned back
on. Check the archives for the Google contact.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: "Scott Helms"
To: "Josh Luthman"
Cc: "NANOG list
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 8:54 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette
wrote:
> I've just started a new Whitehouse Petition, asking
> that the director of OPM, Ms. Archueta, be fired for gross incompetence.
Hi Ronald,
The core problem here is that the Authority To Operate (ATO) process
consumes essentially the en
Absolutely Bill,
That is always the case with the government (I have worked with them a lot).
They build lots and lots of procedure and process and dumb standards (mandatory
POSIX compliance?!?!?, that was a good one) when step one would have been to
get current firewall technology in place,
--- b...@herrin.us wrote:
From: William Herrin
The core problem here is that the Authority To Operate (ATO) process
consumes essentially the entire activity of a USG computing project's
security staff. The non-sensical compliance requirements, which if
taken literally just about prevent you fro
In message
Cryptographrix wrote:
>If you watch her testimony in front of Congress,...
I did, actually. And it pissed me off so much that I started the
petition (to get her fired).
I encourage everybody to watch the video of her congressional testimony
on Tuseday. She how she tries to stonew
Based on prior work in this space, the problems are as follows:
0. Political appointees don't stick around for long, therefore they can
always point to the last guy as the problem. They are also gone, before
impact of lack of security focus impact their jobs.
1. Executives and middle managers
--- r...@tristatelogic.com wrote:
From: "Ronald F. Guilmette"
I _do_ understand the point you are making. But if you are charged with
the safekeeping of untold millions of extraordinarily detailed personal
data files, and if you don't have the resources to do your job properly,
wouldn't the Rig
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 04:34:46PM +, Cryptographrix wrote:
> Have to agree with Shawn on this.
> If you watch her testimony in front of Congress, it is clear that she was
> completely flustered at the inability to hire competent people, and the
> lack of her superiors to prioritize the moderni
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Nick B wrote:
> Having worked for several departments like this, I can assure you her
> flustsration was not about her "inability to hire competent people" or "the
> lack of her superiors to prioritize the modernization project". Unless you
> have worked for the F
While risking being slightly off topic: Does anyone use anycast dhcp servers?
Have you run into any problems considering synching the leases?
On 18 Jun 2015, at 15:43, Jonas Björk wrote:
While risking being slightly off topic: Does anyone use anycast dhcp
servers?
Have you run into any problems considering synching the leases?
Since DHCP uses broadcast and multicast addresses when a client is
discovering a server, it's not obvious
On 18/06/2015 20:51, Joe Abley wrote:
> Since DHCP uses broadcast and multicast addresses when a client is
> discovering a server, it's not obvious why you'd have to.
most non trivial (i.e. routed networks) would use dhcp relay, in which case
anycast dns could be argued to make some sense. TBH, t
Den 18/06/2015 21.52 skrev "Joe Abley" :
>
> On 18 Jun 2015, at 15:43, Jonas Björk wrote:
>
>> While risking being slightly off topic: Does anyone use anycast dhcp
servers?
>> Have you run into any problems considering synching the leases?
>
>
> Since DHCP uses broadcast and multicast addresses whe
> Because clients will switch to unicast for renewal. Also clients will stay
> with the current server forever, so you might have a bad distribution of
> load between the servers. If one server was down everyone will switch to
> the other and never go back until forced.
Why wouldn't they go back
On 6/18/2015 16:25, Jonas Björk wrote:
Because clients will switch to unicast for renewal. Also clients will stay
with the current server forever, so you might have a bad distribution of
load between the servers. If one server was down everyone will switch to
the other and never go back until f
> On Jun 18, 2015, at 11:29 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
>
>> On 6/18/2015 16:25, Jonas Björk wrote:
>>
>>> Because clients will switch to unicast for renewal. Also clients will stay
>>> with the current server forever, so you might have a bad distribution of
>>> load between the servers. If one se
18.06.2015 18:00, shawn wilson wrote:
I'd actually be interested in a discussion of how much you can possibly
> improve / degrade on a network that big from a management position.
That's quite an interesting topic, isn't it ?
Dilbert still has his job so it might as well be immutable. :-)
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:00:00AM -0400, shawn wilson wrote:
> If the argument is that she should've shut down the network or parts of it
> - I wonder if anyone of you who run Internet providers would even shut down
> your email or web servers when, say, heartbleed came out - those services
> aren
On 2015/06/19 4:43, Jonas Björk wrote:
While risking being slightly off topic: Does anyone use anycast dhcp servers?
Have you run into any problems considering synching the leases?
In general, multiple anycast servers on a link, which is the anycast
model of IPv6, is a bad idea, because broadca
On 6/18/2015 16:40, Jonas Björk wrote:
On Jun 18, 2015, at 11:29 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
On 6/18/2015 16:25, Jonas Björk wrote:
Because clients will switch to unicast for renewal. Also clients will stay
with the current server forever, so you might have a bad distribution of
load between
On 06/18/2015 10:15 AM, Nick B wrote:
I wish I had some simple solution, but I don't, it's going to require
years, probably decades, of hard work by a motivated and skilled team.
Also, a stable of unicorns.
Not to mention an Act of Congress. Oh, wait...
Hi
We are profiling equipment and design for an expected high user density
network of multiple, close nit, residential/hostel units. Its going to be
8-10 buildings with possibly a over 1000 users at any given time.
We are looking at Ruckus and Ubiquiti as options to get over the high
number of dev
With that many users I cannot recommend Ubiquiti, Ruckus would be the way
to go.
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 1:58 AM Sina Owolabi wrote:
> Hi
>
> We are profiling equipment and design for an expected high user density
> network of multiple, close nit, residential/hostel units. Its going to be
> 8-10
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Stephen Satchell wrote:
> On 06/18/2015 10:15 AM, Nick B wrote:
>
>> I wish I had some simple solution, but I don't, it's going to require
>> years, probably decades, of hard work by a motivated and skilled team.
>> Also, a stable of unicorns.
>>
>
> Not to mentio
39 matches
Mail list logo
