https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/114865/hetzner-and-other-traffic-passing-cogent-rerouted-over-moscow#latest
A report that all Cogent traffic got re-routed into Moscow. Looks
innocent but happened right after UA blocked RU websites (e.g.,
VKontakte, Yandex, etc)
Any thoughts ?
--
Regards,
On Tue, 23 May 2017 10:10:25 +0300, Scott Christopher said:
> https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/114865/hetzner-and-other-traffic-passin
g-cogent-rerouted-over-moscow#latest
>
> A report that all Cogent traffic got re-routed into Moscow. Looks
> innocent but happened right after UA blocked RU we
Hello,
We are a group of networking researchers from UFRGS, UCLouvain and KAUST.
We are working towards an approach to make interconnection agreements
between networks more dynamic. The current approach for establishing
agreements is cumbersome, typically requiring lengthy discussions. To
accommod
Pedro de Botelho Marcos wrote:
> The current approach for establishing
> agreements is cumbersome, typically requiring lengthy discussions.
i'm not sure the available data supports this conclusion:
> http://berec.europa.eu/eng/document_register/subject_matter/berec/download/0/6574-2016-survey-of-
This sounds something like the MEF Third Network type stuff I mean the
ability to setup connection dynamically across network boundaries on-the-fly,
via an ordering system... that has always sounded awesome to me... and I've
wondered how we could actually get there one day. Sounds like a lo
On Tue, 23 May 2017 15:07:14 -0300, Pedro de Botelho Marcos said:
> Dynamic agreements offer many opportunities. For example, consider
> acquiring extra "bandwidth as a service" that is available on demand just
> when one needs it, similarly to how one might spin up extra VMs in the
> cloud to han
> A report that all Cogent traffic got re-routed into Moscow. Looks
> innocent but happened right after UA blocked RU websites (e.g.,
> VKontakte, Yandex, etc)
a peering war between the martians and the venusians?
> This sounds something like the MEF Third Network type stuff I mean
> the ability to setup connection dynamically across network boundaries
> on-the-fly, via an ordering system... that has always sounded awesome
> to me... and I've wondered how we could actually get there one day.
to me, this
you just won the internet.
On May 22, 2017 4:59:59 PM PDT, Chris Hartley wrote:
>Well, I have some thicker sand blast resist that has very poor
>adhesion. I
>could see trying that for, as you say, simple designs. More complex
>designs could theoretically have tabs added connecting smaller featu
You need an extra 9 lines to handle the overrun.
On May 23, 2017 12:10:52 PM PDT, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>On Tue, 23 May 2017 15:07:14 -0300, Pedro de Botelho Marcos said:
>
>> Dynamic agreements offer many opportunities. For example, consider
>> acquiring extra "bandwidth as a service" th
> > This sounds something like the MEF Third Network type stuff I mean
> > the ability to setup connection dynamically across network boundaries
> > on-the-fly, via an ordering system... that has always sounded awesome
> > to me... and I've wondered how we could actually get there one day.
> t
Looking at bgplay data, Hetzner possibly had some outages at the time?
Cogent isn't quick at withdrawing routes and will often blackhole inside
their network, but i can't see a large leak/hijack as happened.
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:32 AM, wrote:
> On Tue, 23 May 2017 10:10:25 +0300, Scott Chr
> On May 23, 2017, at 2:07 PM, Pedro de Botelho Marcos
> wrote:
>
> consider
> acquiring extra "bandwidth as a service" that is available on demand just
> when one needs it,
Wasn't this the initial promise of SDN? Hand wave. Magically connected
endpoints. All QoS'd and bandwidth-guaranteed co
>> to me, this was the dream of optical switching and gmpls (which is
>> not mpls)
> And, pray tell, what is the use of me setting up "peering" between
> myself and a network on the other side of the world when the data
> still has to flow over the same connections, merely encapsulated
> inside a t
> >> to me, this was the dream of optical switching and gmpls (which is
> >> not mpls)
> > And, pray tell, what is the use of me setting up "peering" between
> > myself and a network on the other side of the world when the data
> > still has to flow over the same connections, merely encapsulated
>
>> read "which is not mpls" a few more times. than maybe read a bit on
>> gmpls and optical switching. you may find
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalized_Multi-Protocol_Label_Switching
>> a reasonable place to start.
> Ok, but does this still not pre-suppose that an appropriate physical
>
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> Pedro de Botelho Marcos wrote:
> > The current approach for establishing
> > agreements is cumbersome, typically requiring lengthy discussions.
>
> i'm not sure the available data supports this conclusion:
>
> > http://berec.europa.eu/eng/do
17 matches
Mail list logo
