On 16 Feb 2021, at 20:37, John Kristoff wrote:
I'd like to start a thread about the most famous and widespread
Internet
operational issues, outages or implementation incompatibilities you
have seen.
Which examples would make up your top three?
My absolute top one happened 1995. Traffic e
Tracing it back to the originator of the route is of course a good first
step.
I would send an FYI to the RIR that allocated the prefix; preferably
after the initial investigation established that it was not a genuine
mistake. In that message I would make very clear if any action is
requested
On 10 Mar 2021, at 16:42, Andy Ringsmuth wrote:
Sad to see of course, but also a little surprising that fire
suppression systems didn’t, well, suppress the fire.
Maybe the innovative ‘green’ design had something to do with the
rapid spread of the fire and the way fire suppression was engin
On 11 Mar 2021, at 11:46, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
… Further I conjecture that a halon system would not be feasible in
such a structure. …
Several of you have pointed out to me at varying level of politeness
that ‘halon’ is no longer used. Sometimes I cannot hep but reveal my
age
On 11 Mar 2021, at 21:43, Randy Bush wrote:
... but in a week or two
i hope he can tell us results of more analysis. …
Actually just *the way* in which OVH communicates about this gives hope
that we will indeed hear a useful analysis. It may be fortunate that
this happened before they we
I do not live in the US and I do not pay US taxes. So I have no opinion
on the original question. Let me offer an observation:
I live in NL and I have two strands of glass plus coax into my house in
a rural village in the ‘far south’. I do not live at the end of a 50
mile dirt road but for
On 14-03-2022 05:06, Fred Baker wrote:
... Where IPv6 has a problem today is with enterprise. IMHO, this is basically
because enterprise is looking at the bottom line. If ISPs were to do what
Mythic Beasts says they do, which is charge their users for address space, IPv6
is virtually free wh
Full match with my recollection about the cause for this sub optimal outcome.
Happens to the best of us.
One has to remember that at the time we did not consider it a forgone
conclusion that the products of the IETF woukd be the foundation of the Net.
Daniel (age 63, memory not totally unreli
On 05/10/2017 07:40, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> Does anyone have a pointer to an *authoritative* source on why
>
> 10/8
> 172.16/12 and
> 192.168/16
>
> were the ranges chosen to enshrine in the RFC? ...
The RFC explains the reason why we chose three ranges from "Class A,B &
C" respectively: CIDR h
On 05/10/2017 13:28, Randy Bush wrote:
>>> The answer seems to be "no, Jon's not answering his email anymore".
>
> jon was not a big supporter of rfc1918
If I recall correctly not one of the authors was a "big supporter". Some
things are not full of beauty and glory; yet they have to be done.
I r
> On 27.03.2014, at 22:27, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> ...and this is aside from daniel's global measurement empire. not sure it
> is a registry's job to do this, but it is a serious contribution to the
> internet. ...
there is the 'measurement analysis and tools' working group
http://www.ripe.
On 28.05.14 8:55 , Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
> ... you discover that local connectivity is through HE and Los Nettos.
Ouch! I just got hit by my own wrong default of excluding hops with no
response. There is no direct link to HE evident from the traceroutes. I
wish ICMP "TTL
On 11.12.14 21:22 , Randy Bush wrote:
note that free.fr does this in france. we both provide and use it
there. works out quite well.
Another data point: several cable broadband providers do this in NL. My
personal experience is with Ziggo. Imho they do it right:
- opt-in, at least
On 17.04.15 3:49 , Randy Bush wrote:
>> in any case the idea still seems silly.
>
> not if you need to appear to be DOING SOMETHING!!!
>
>
Of course there is that. But in order to be appear to be doing something
one has to pledge to do BCP38 and various other things I would consider
BCP. All
On 08.04 14:36, Brielle Bruns wrote:
>
> I'm starting to wonder if someone is 'testing the waters' in China to
> see what they can get away with. I hate to be like this, but there's a
> reason why I have all of China filtered on my routers.
Beware of prejudice influencing observations and their
:-) ;-) ;-)
And now for the political analysis in our morning programming
broadcasted to North America:
Beware of unintentionally helping the Chinese government to implement
the Great Firewall by blocking packet flow right there in the land of
Free Speech(TM).
The satisfaction of vigorously lo
has to operate in.
Daniel Karrenberg
IP address expert
Not my words, but not wrong either.
contributions: RFC2050/BCP012, RFC1918/BCP005, address policies in RIPE region
...
founding CEO of first RIR
"Prediciting the future is easy..., getting it right is the dificult part."
that
its actions are unlawful.
Frustration is a bad advisor when trying to stop crime, unrelenting
application of due process is the only way ... frustrating as it may be.
Daniel Karrenberg
Chief Scientist RIPE NCC
Speaking only for himself as is customary here.
PS: This is old news, compare
ht
RIS Routing History for AS1712 since 2001:
AS FromTo avg #peers
12.196.66.0/23 AS1712 20091026 08:00Z 20091026 16:00Z 88
137.194.0.0/16 AS1712 20011220 16:00Z 20031231 16:00Z 39
20040101 00:00Z 20040312 16:00Z 54
On 24.11 08:48, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
>
> RIS Routing History for AS1712 since 2001:
>
> ...
>
> PS: And yes we are going to make the REX tool for querying ASes available
> soon.
> Keep watching labs.ripe.net.
OK, by popular demand: Before we release the nicely pres
On 25.11 06:21, Randy Bush wrote:
> > Of course if it was already assigned when IANA said that (no dates on
> > the link above) then maybe the fault is more IANA's for telling another
> > RIR that they could allocate an ASN that another RIR already allocated.
>
> i suspect that, in the erx proj
21 matches
Mail list logo
