Cogent is great if you treat them as a path. I wouldn't use Cogent in place
of single homing a service provider though due to how they run their
network and the subsequent peering disputes that arise. Don't get me wrong,
I like Cogent, they definitely have a good use case, just be cognizant of
how
Pretty much this. It's your business model to have your email be
deliverable, while it is not my business model that your mail is received.
If I get spam outside of obvious cases of receiver issues, I just block.
I'm not going to bother to jump through hoops to report issues you should
be dealing w
The problem isn't the consumer devices. The problem is most of the open
source router software developers don't see ipv6 as a priority, or
something even worth "wasting time" on.
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>
> On Dec 11, 2013, at 1:46 PM, "Kinkaid, Kyle" wrote:
>
> >
All I remember from the TNT days is the meltdown when Code Red happened.
Why exactly an access platform should melt down when a worm occurs still
bothers me.
-Blake
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:44 AM, wrote:
> Dell - Internal Use - Confidential
>
> I personally never ran the Ascend gear (outside
Regardless of the carriers, you'll find most ASs on the internet only
listen to /48 or larger. So even if you get your prefixes accepted by your
provider, don't assume you can get anywhere, or have your packets not fall
in to uRPF blackholes randomly without a larger aggregate announcement.
-Blake
gt; /48, and would like to disaggregate as part of a traffic engineering
> strategy?
>
> Moreiras.
>
> On 18/12/13 14:32, Blake Dunlap wrote:
> > Regardless of the carriers, you'll find most ASs on the internet only
> > listen to /48 or larger. So even if you get your prefixes
Pretty much what everyone else said. I'm a huge linux person, almost
everything I use is linux, run full Myth set up etc, but I wouldn't use it
for a high PPS situation like this. It's just asking for suffering later,
at the worst possible times.
-Blake
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Shawn Wil
The better question is are you using RIP or ICMP to set gateways in your
network now?
If you don't use those now, why is RA a better solution in ipv6?
-Blake
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Ryan Harden wrote:
> On Dec 30, 2013, at 12:58 PM, Lee Howard wrote:
>
> >>
> >>
> >> 'Rewrite all of
The cynic in me says that cisco switch/router gear isn't part of that
report on clandestine backdoors, because they don't need said clandestine
backdoors to access them...
-Blake
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 8:54 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
>
> On Dec 31, 2013, at 9:41 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> > y
The reason RIP isn't used to hand out routes is not based on age, or
protocol design. It's based on the fact that we don't want host segment
routes (usually only default) to be announcement based, because that leads
to problems and uncomfortable meetings with VPs. DHCP will happily give out
a corre
This is quite similar to experiences we have had with them. Again the only
carrier we have dropped for technical reasons.
Blake Dunlap
> -Original Message-
> From: Jo Rhett [mailto:jrh...@netconsonance.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 9:59 PM
> To: David Hubbard
> Cc:
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 22:34, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Owen DeLong"
>
> > If you're determined to destroy IPv6 by bringing the problems of NAT
> > forward with you, then, I'm fine with you remaining in your IPv4
> > island. I'm willing to bet that most organi
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 11:38, wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 18:14:00 EST, david raistrick said:
>
> > Er. That's not news. That's been the state of the art for what, 15+
> > years or so now? SIP (because it's peer to peer) and P2P are really the
> > only things that actually give a damn about
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 15:52, Dorn Hetzel wrote:
> >
> >
> > p.s. with apologies to any honest marketers. All 2 of you..
> >
> >
> What's the difference between a used car salesman and a network equipment
> salesman?
>
> The used care salesman knows when he's lying to you :)
>
The required sof
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 21:11, Joly MacFie wrote:
> I had dual ISDN from nynex in the 90s. 128k woohoo! It cost me $500+/mth.
>
> j
>
I still have 128k ISDN in one site in rural TN, and it's the POP for my
WISP! I'd spring for a whopping 256k, but I can't justify the cost. Been
running on my rem
I'm sorry, but IPv4 DHCP was a wonderful solution to many issues, which are
very very difficult in IPv6. RA is a solution looking for an actual problem.
That being said, I like having the option of RA, but it is only useful in a
very small subset of use cases, many it actually causes issues, instea
101 - 116 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
