On 7/11/14 11:20 AM, Blake Hudson wrote:
>
> Verizon Policy Blog wrote:
>
>> There was, however, congestion at the interconnection link to the
>> edge of our network (the border router) used by the transit providers
>> chosen by Netflix to deliver video traffic to Verizon’s network.
>
> In what wor
On 7/11/14 2:01 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Blake Hudson wrote:
>> joel jaeggli wrote the following on 7/11/2014 1:39 PM:
>>
>>> CDN's choose which exit the use all the time, it's kinda the raison de
>>> etré.
On 7/14/14 10:06 AM, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
>> If Netflix were a good citizen, it would (a) let ISPs cache content; (b)
>> pay them
>> equitably for direct connections (smaller and more remote ISPs have higher
>> costs
>> per customer and should get MORE per account than Comcast, rather than
>> receivi
On 7/16/14 3:30 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/07/14/this-is-why-the-government-should-never-control-the-internet/
> In a common hypothetical they cite, ISPs would slow — or buffer —
> traffic for Netflix unless it unfairly pays for more access
On 7/15/14, 10:04 AM, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Brett Glass wrote:
>
>> At 08:48 AM 7/15/2014, Naslund, Steve wrote:
>> I disagree with some of your other points, but on this we agree. And
>> caching is the best way. Netflix refuses to allow it.
>
>
> BTW, with the
On 7/22/14, 10:12 AM, Ca By wrote:
> On Jul 22, 2014 7:04 AM, "Jared Mauch" wrote:
>>
>> Verizon wireless has other transits apart from 701.
>>
http://bgp.he.net/AS6167
> That's interesting that they have a different capacity management strategy
> for the competitive wireless market than they ha
dynamic dns update has been done by hosts for some time...
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2136.txt
On Jun 12, 2011, at 5:38 AM, Fabio Mendes wrote:
> 2011/6/11 Matthew Palmer
>
>>
>> The router isn't assigning an address, it's merely telling everyone on the
>> segment what the local prefix and de
On Jun 12, 2011, at 10:04 AM, Christopher J. Pilkington wrote:
> On Jun 11, 2011, at 7:07 PM, Roy wrote:
>
>> On 6/11/2011 4:29 PM, Christopher Pilkington wrote:
>>> Options seem to be limited to HughesNet and dial for the moment, but
>>> things may change if I put a tower on the property. Hughe
The slides are full screen on the FLV video.
On Jun 13, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Matt Hite wrote:
> Now if only the slides were the full screen and the talking head was
> in the corner... otherwise the quality is fantastic!
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
>> Much better now. Pr
On Jun 13, 2011, at 12:50 PM, Ricky Beam wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 09:45:01 -0400, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>> In a message written on Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 01:04:41PM +0200, Iljitsch van
>> Beijnum wrote:
>>> Like I said before, that would pollute the network with many multicasts
>>> which can s
On Jun 14, 2011, at 10:38 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:04:11 EDT, Ray Soucy said:
>
>> A better solution; and the one I think that will be adopted in the
>> long term as soon as vendors come into the fold, is to swap out
>> RFC1918 with ULA addressing, and swap out
On Jun 13, 2011, at 5:41 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> On Jun 12, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
>
>> On 12 jun 2011, at 15:45, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>>
Like I said before, that would pollute the network with many multicasts
which can seriously degrade wifi performance.
>
On Jun 15, 2011, at 10:21 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 19:04:44 +0200, sth...@nethelp.no said:
>
>> How big is huge? To some degree it depends on how broadcast "chatty"
>> the protocols used are - but there's also the matter of having a
>> size which makes it possible
https://www.arin.net/resources/request/reassignments.html
On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:34 AM, Deric Kwok wrote:
> Hi
>
> My boss wants me to resign part of ip /25 to customer
>
> For the whois record to this customer, how can I do it?
>
> Thank you
>
On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:57 AM, Darden, Patrick S. wrote:
>
> The short answer is you can't. ARIN only cares about /24s or bigger. If the
> network were a /24 or larger, then your customer would need to get an ASN
> (autonomous system number) and then you could register the network to them.
ne
On Jun 17, 2011, at 5:33 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "John Levine"
>
>> I happen to agree that adding vast numbers of new TLDs is a terrible
>> idea more for administrative and social than technical reasons, but
>> this is the first you've heard about it, you
On Jun 17, 2011, at 3:13 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Patrick W. Gilmore"
>
>> As for calling ICANN stupid, thinking this will help fracture the
>> 'Net, I think you are all confused. I think the NANOG community has
>> become (OK, always was) a bit of an echo
life safety systems run over the internet and pstn all the time if you want to
talk about need.
Replace need with business requirement, and you're most of the way there...
This discussion was going on this list 10-15 years ago and the numbers being
squabled over were three orders of magnitude l
On Jun 22, 2011, at 4:06 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Owen DeLong wrote:
>> We're going to have to either find a way to convince consumers to change
>> direction, or, we're going to have to develop new methods and techniques
>> that will scale to fully replace antennas, satellite, and cable bec
On Jun 24, 2011, at 6:50 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 09:10:53AM +, Bjoern A. Zeeb
> wrote:
>> If you want to do it, make sure you do understand the restrictions that
>> apply to IPv6 addresses, like U/G bits, etc. Too many people unfortunately
>>
On Jun 25, 2011, at 4:47 PM, Andrew D Kirch wrote:
> On 6/25/2011 7:43 PM, Paul Graydon wrote:
>> Take a guess what the datacenter our equipment is currently hosted in uses.
>> Yet another reason to be glad of a datacenter move that's coming up.
>>
> Why can't we just all use DC and be happy?
On Jun 25, 2011, at 6:03 PM, Deric Kwok wrote:
> Hi
>
> Can we use same AS to advertise different networks in different location?
>
> We would like to use Seattle as production network and New York as testing
>
> eg:
> Seattle: network 66.49.130.0/24
>
> New York: network 67.55.129.0/24 and i
I'd consult the list archive, since theres a couple recent and fairly lengthy
threads on this.
joel
On Jul 5, 2011, at 8:56 AM, chavan sanjay wrote:
> Hi Team,
>
> Can anyone enlighten me on the pros and cons of MX 80 platform
>
> Thanks
>
> Sanjay C.P.
>
> --- On Tue, 7/5/11, nanog-requ.
On Jul 10, 2011, at 11:57 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> On Jul 10, 2011, at 12:23 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>>> Consider, for example, RFC 3484. That's the one that determines how an
>>> IPv6 capable host selects which of a group of candidate
On Jul 11, 2011, at 8:13 AM, William Herrin wrote:
>
>
> Today's RFC candidates are required to call out IANA considerations
> and security considerations in special sections. They do so because
> each of these areas has landmines that the majority of working groups
> are ill eq
On Jul 11, 2011, at 12:18 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>> On Jul 11, 2011, at 8:13 AM, William Herrin wrote:
>>>>>>> Today's RFC candidates are required to call out IANA considerations
>>>>>
On Jul 11, 2011, at 3:37 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 11, 2011, at 12:18 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>>>> On Jul
On Jul 12, 2011, at 12:40 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
> Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In short, make it easy for the operators to participate at the right
>> time in the process. It will be better for everyone!
>
> Unfortunately, where you want to be inserted into the process is when
> everybody has
> s
On Jul 12, 2011, at 12:53 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> On Jul 12, 2011, at 8:43 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Ronald Bonica wrote:
>>> Leo,
>>>
>>> Maybe we can fix this by:
>>>
>>> a) bringing together larger groups of clueful operators in the IETF
>>> b) deci
On Jul 12, 2011, at 7:20 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> On Jul 12, 2011, at 2:21 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 12, 2011, at 12:53 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 12, 2011, at 8:43 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
>>>
>
On Jul 12, 2011, at 8:46 PM, Larry J. Blunk wrote:
>
> I've have some concerns with AMS based on my experience
> with the IETF mailing list. It has had ongoing issues with
> out-of-sequence delivery. Based on the Received headers, it's
> seems pretty clear the re-ordering is occurring internal
On Jul 12, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> In message <56e0fb8f-bb53-4db0-829b-39dfbab48...@bogus.com>, Joel Jaeggli
> write
> s:
>>
>> On Jul 12, 2011, at 12:53 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>
>>> =20
>>> On Jul 12, 2011, at 8:4
On Jul 12, 2011, at 10:59 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> I didn't claim it would work with existing CPE equipment. Declaring
> 6to4 historic won't work with existing CPE equipment either.
If the hosts behind it stop using 2002::/16 addresses as a product of a
software update which seems rather m
On Jul 20, 2011, at 3:37 PM, Walter Keen wrote:
> We've recently setup ISC DHCPd with failover for lease information, and
> LDAP as a configuration source (mostly because of our need for
> dynamically adding dhcp reservations for cable modems, etc) -- we don't
> have any performance issues thu
On Jul 20, 2011, at 6:25 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> SSDs can be a good alternative these days as well. Some of them have gotten
> to be quite fast. Sure, you'll have to replace them more often than spinning
> media,
> but,
Actually the the scale of writes associated with this application is unlik
given how often the cellular address changes on my Verizon 4g router not to
mention the external ip address on their LSN I think I can speculate...
joel
On Jul 26, 2011, at 12:11 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
> Hi Cameron,
>
> What about routers ? In some locations, users may have only the
My measured availability for a automatic reverse ssh tunnel connection made
through a 4g radio in the field was 52%. this was vs 95% on the lab/office
environment with the same equipment. That particular experiment I declared a
failure.
There was never a closer truism than ymmv.
joel
On Jul 2
On Jul 27, 2011, at 5:05 PM, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:15:04 -0500, David E. Smith wrote:
>>>
> I think on cheap platforms, they have wirespeed gigabit only on switching
> functions, but rest will suck. Their top products can do more, but they are
> still cannot b
On Aug 2, 2011, at 10:17 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>
>> en1: flags=8863 mtu 1500
>> ether 60:33:4b:01:75:85
>> inet6 fe80::6233:4bff:fe01:7585%en1 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x5
>> inet 192.168.191.223 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.191.255
>> inet6 fd92:7065:b8e::6233:4bff:f
On Aug 2, 2011, at 2:42 PM, james machado wrote:
>>> Lets look at some issues here.
>>>
>>> 1) it's unlikely that a "normal" household with 2.5 kids and a dog/cat
>>> will be able to qualify for their own end user assignment from ARIN.
>>>
>>
>> Interesting...
>>
>> I have a "normal household
On Aug 2, 2011, at 3:37 PM, james machado wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes I am saying a household that mulithomes is abnormal and with
>>> today's and contracted monopolies I expect that to continue. You are
>>> not a normal household in that 1) you multihome 2) you are willing to
>>> pay $1500+ US a
On Aug 2, 2011, at 9:56 PM, Mark Newton wrote:
>
> On 03/08/2011, at 1:20 PM, Jima wrote:
>
>> Alas, I will maintain that any household that multi-homes at this stage is,
>> indeed, abnormal.
>
>
> I'll go out on a limb and suggest that most people loathe their telcos with
> an undying venom
On Aug 5, 2011, at 3:56 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
> Let's clarify -- /48 is much preferred by Owen,
It's is also supported by RIR policy, and the RFC series. It would unfair to
characterize owen as the only holder of that preference.
> but most ISPs seem to be
> zeroing in on a /56 for production.
On Aug 5, 2011, at 9:17 AM, Brian Mengel wrote:
> In reviewing IPv6 end user allocation policies, I can find little
> agreement on what prefix length is appropriate for residential end
> users. /64 and /56 seem to be the favorite candidates, with /56 being
> slightly preferred.
>
> I am most cu
This is one of the reasons that I thought a useful output from the opsec or idr
working group would be a documented set of community functions. Not mapped to
values mind you. but I really like to say to providers "do you support rfc blah
communities" or "what's your rfc blah community mapping" r
On Aug 7, 2011, at 3:09 PM, Jonathon Exley wrote:
> This has probably been said before, but it makes me uncomfortable to think of
> everybody in the world being given /48 subnets by default.
> All of a sudden that wide expanse of 2^128 IP addresses shrinks to 2^48
> sites. Sure that's still 655
On Aug 8, 2011, at 5:14 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> I'm sure there will be platforms that end up on both sides of this question.
I know of no asic in a switch that claims to support ipv6 that does it this
way... That would tend to place you at a competitive disadvantage to
broadcom/marvell/fulcru
On Aug 10, 2011, at 6:52 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 2011-08-11 12:45, james machado wrote:
>
>> what is the life expectancy of IPv6? It won't live forever and we
>> can't reasonably expect it too. I understand we don't want run out of
>> addresses in the next 10-40 years but what about
On Aug 10, 2011, at 6:43 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> I mean really, why
> wouldn't the life safety system in a car dynamically acquire its
> globally-addressable IPv6 addresses from the customer's cheap home
> Internet equipment? So they'll each need their /64's which means the
> car as a whole n
On Aug 11, 2011, at 3:19 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> The only reason in my opinion to run IS-IS rather than OSPF today is
>> due to the fact that IS-IS is decoupled from IP making it less
>> vulnerable to attacks.
>
> how about simpler and more stable?
not rooted to a particular area.
supports mo
On Aug 16, 2011, at 11:52 PM, Måns Nilsson wrote:
> Subject: Re: Verizon Business - LTE? Date: Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:49:38AM
> -0400 Quoting chris (tknch...@gmail.com):
>> Overall, IMO the trends are just seem to be going backwards. We have more
>> speed but we can use it less? What kind of te
On Aug 16, 2011, at 9:40 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:53:24 EDT, Christopher Morrow said:
>
>> anyway, they do these donkey things because they can :( people have no
>> real option (except not to play the game, ala war games).
>
> My brother recently tried to get
On Aug 20, 2011, at 10:29 PM, Tammy A. Wisdom wrote:
> I completely agree... the real issue here is the system is flawed and
> RIPE/ARIN/APNIC etc have zero actual authority over actual routing. Yet
> another reason they aren't worth the money we flush down the toilet for them
> to do absolut
On 8/28/11 12:29 , John Levine wrote:
>> It looks like the DHS, FEMA got this emergency wrong... by the time
>> it got to NYC it was the equivalent of a normal day in Scotland. I
>> live in Scotland...
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/actualmonthly/
22.5cm seems to be the max for the month
On 8/30/11 02:21 , Michael J McCafferty wrote:
> All,
> Orange innerduct/split-loom tubing for multi-mode, yellow for
> single-mode... Where's the aqua for the aqua OM3 fiber?
> I feel like the Ethernet fashion police, but it's a horrible color
> clash for aqua fiber dressed in yellow o
On 9/3/11 04:20 , Skeeve Stevens wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I've been thinking about the impact that iCloud (by Apple) will have
> on the Internet.
>
> My guess is that 99% of consumer internet access is Asymmetrical
> (DSL, Cable, wireless, etc) and iCloud when launched will 'upload'
> obscene amount
On 9/7/11 09:02 , Michael Holstein wrote:
>
>> I would love a world where engineering was consulted by marketing :(
>>
>
> Wouldn't be a problem is management invested based on engineering's
> recommendations.
>
> There are few problems that money can't solve .. in this case, it's
> "sure, we
On 9/7/11 09:37 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 09:28:28 PDT, Joel jaeggli said:
>
>> The way to achieve a return on invested capital is to attract and retain
>> customers who pay for a service which they find compelling.
>
> Only true if long-te
On 9/8/11 08:49 , Lyle Giese wrote:
> Can we really push an IPv6 agenda for CDN's when IPv6 routing at high
> backend levels is still not complete? I certainly don't have the
> 'clout' to push that, but full routing between Cogent and HE needs to be
> fixed.
It's your job to run your network such
On 9/10/11 23:30 , Damian Menscher wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Marcus Reid wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 09:17:10AM -0700, Network IP Dog wrote:
>>> I like this response; instant CA death penalty seems to put the
>>> incen
On 9/14/11 14:24 , Don Gould wrote:
> * Did you know that Cisco has a 100Gb solution?
need more L3 1u TORs with 4 x 40 and 48 x 10...
On 9/16/11 13:50 , Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
>>> As an ISP, ARIN will not give you any space if you are new. You
>>> have to already have an equivalent amount of space from another
>>> provider.
>>
>> does arin *really* still have that amazing barrier to market
>> entry?
>
> Yes. If you want PI sp
On 9/16/11 11:42 , Steve Bohrer wrote:
> My general question is "what meaning do I give to lossy traceroutes,
> even when pings show no problem."
>
> Can I expect that backbone routers should never give me timeouts on a
> traceroute through them, so, lots of asterisks from these systems
> indicate
given that as 729 maxes out at 800cpi there are probably slightly kinky
ways to attack the problem, e.g. someone doing it with disk packs.
http://chrisfenton.com/cray-1-digital-archeology/
there's still plenty of equipment that can wrap 1/2" tape around a spindle.
On 9/19/11 21:14 , valdis.kletn
On 9/19/11 18:49 , Richard Barnes wrote:
> And if they turn up the voltage on the fence high enough, dinner could be
> cooked by the time the crew gets there!
montana experience says:
cows have rather thick skin, sheep come with insulation, and bison will
go through anything that gets in their wa
routeviews says the /9s have been announced for a while
the route object for 4.0.0.0/9 was last updated 20060203
On 9/20/11 10:13 , Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> Did Level3 withdraw 4.0.0.0/8 today and start announcing it as two /9s?
>
> -Hank
>
On 9/20/11 10:22 , Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Sep 2011, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
>
> Newbie question:
>
> If I do:
> route-views>sho ip bgp 4.0.0.0
> BGP routing table entry for 4.0.0.0/9, version 821994
>
> why do I see the /9 and not the /8 by default? If I do a specific
> lookup fo
On 9/29/11 17:46 , Robert Bonomi wrote:
>> From: Nathan Eisenberg
>> Subject: RE: Synology Disk DS211J
>> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 21:58:23 +
>>
>>> And this is why the prudent home admin runs a firewall device he or she
>>> can trust, and has a "default deny" rule in place even for outgoing
>
On 9/30/11 14:59 , Jones, Barry wrote:
> I can't tell you the kind of servers, but I can say that I was
> recently in Prineville, OR, where FB is building a data center (and a
> second data center). I was used to the ol data centers - you know,
> where there's raised floors, cabinets, cool air, a g
On 9/30/11 15:19 , Steven G. Huter wrote:
>>> I can't tell you the kind of servers, but I can say that I was
>>> recently in Prineville, OR, where FB is building a data center (and a
>>> second data center). I was used to the ol data centers - you know,
>>> where there's raised floors, cabinets, co
On 9/30/11 15:58 , Seth Mattinen wrote:
> On 9/30/11 3:41 PM, Michael Painter wrote:
>> Steven G. Huter wrote:
>>> this August 2011 article in the Economist outlines some relevant info
>>> about the prineville, oregon FB datacenter.
>>>
>>> http://www.economist.com/node/21525237
>>>
>>> steve
>>
>>
On 10/2/11 15:25 , Jimmy Hess wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 4:53 PM, wrote:
>> On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 08:38:36 PDT, Michael Thomas said:
>>> I'm not sure why lack of TLS is considered to be problem with Facebook.
>>> The man in the middle is the other side of the connection, tls or otherwise.
>> O
On 10/2/11 15:43 , Joel jaeggli wrote:
> On 10/2/11 15:25 , Jimmy Hess wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 4:53 PM, wrote:
>>> On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 08:38:36 PDT, Michael Thomas said:
>>>> I'm not sure why lack of TLS is considered to be problem with Facebook.
>
On 10/5/11 10:05 , Michael Sinatra wrote:
> The thread on f-root reminded my of an anecdotal datum regarding DNSSEC
> in China. I was in China back in August, staying at the Green Lake
> Hotel in Kunming, Yunnan Provence. When connecting to the hotel in-room
> network (there was no wireless but a
On 10/7/11 08:26 , Paul Graydon wrote:
> On 10/6/2011 8:02 PM, John Levine wrote:
>>> DISCLAIMER:...
>> Wow. I was thinking about answering the question, but now I don't dare.
>>
>> Regards,
>> John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for
>> Dummies",
>> Please consider th
On 10/7/11 11:31 , Arturo Servin wrote:
>
> What do you mean with "purchasing or renting IPv4".
>
> Last time that I check it was not possible in the RIR world.
If you're not a legitimate business why would you bother with commonly
accepted policy?
> If you mean "hijacking" un
On 10/9/11 05:10 , Martin Millnert wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> IPv4 addresses will never run out in a strict sense of the word, it
>> will just become increasingly more difficult to reassign IPv4 address
>> space to those who need it.
>
> If you by difficult
On 10/10/11 17:12 , Randy Carpenter wrote:
>
> Very nice. I wonder if this is an option we could try to use in
> future meetings. It makes sense, really, since we already have decent
> connectivity for the conference areas, and we wouldn't be destroying
> the hotel's outside connection (only their
On 10/10/11 21:25 , Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> I don't think it is. I think that you can negotiate and I will point out
>> that the hotel
>> here has wanted our business enough that they have now scrambled to make
>> life significantly bett
On 10/10/11 07:00 , Owen DeLong wrote:
> It would be wise for NANOG to approach future venues and specifically
> discuss these things with the hotel IT departments in question ahead
> of time so that they have some remote chance of being prepared.
The hotel IT department is the guy who runs the a
On 10/12/11 07:47 , andrew.wallace wrote:
> Guys the outage has moved to U.S and Canada, I think we need to look at this
> perhaps being sabotage.
>
> http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-20119163-266/blackberry-service-issues-spread-to-u.s-and-canada/
North American outages of the blackberry platf
On 10/27/11 20:24 , Ryan Finnesey wrote:
> If I want to get a block of IP's issued for a network within Mexico who do I
> talk with? I have been told arin does not cover Mexico. It was my
> understand arin covers North America.
mexico moved to the lacnic region with the formation of the lacnic r
Email as facility is a public good whether it constitutes a commons or
not... If wasn't you wouldn't bother putting up a server that would
accept unsolicited incoming connections on behalf of yourself and
others, doing so is generically non-rival and non-excludable although
not perfectly so in eith
On 10/31/11 05:59 , Owen DeLong wrote:
> Ideally, you should put a /48 at each location.
>
> Owen
>
> On Oct 31, 2011, at 12:56 AM, Dmitry Cherkasov wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Please advice what is the best practice to use IPv6 address block
>> across distributed locations.
>>
>> Recently we obtain
On 10/31/11 03:43 , Jeroen Massar wrote:
> On 2011-10-31 08:56 , Dmitry Cherkasov wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Please advice what is the best practice to use IPv6 address block
>> across distributed locations.
>
> You go to multiple RIRs and get multiple prefixes.
>
> Heck, you apparently can even get
The cellular radios firmware doesn't support ipv6(on your iPhone)...
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 4, 2011, at 4:45 PM, Pete Carah wrote:
> On 11/04/2011 06:04 PM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
>> FYI.
>>
>> T-Mobile USA now has opt-in beta support for an Android phone on IPv6,
>> more info here https://s
On 11/7/11 08:37 , Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> On Nov 7, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Richard Golodner wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 11:09 -0500, Todd Snyder wrote:
>>> Can anyone point to any authoritative updates about this?
>>
>> I think Jared's suggestion was about as close as your going to get for
On 11/14/11 10:24 , Joe Greco wrote:
>> Sure, anytime there's an attack or failure on a SCADA network that
>> wouldn't have occurred had it been air-gapped, it's easy for people to
>> knee-jerk a "SCADA networks should be airgapped" response. But that's
>> not really intelligent commentary unless
On 11/19/11 01:35 , Fearghas McKay wrote:
>
> On 17 Nov 2011, at 12:58, A. Chase Turner wrote:
>
>> I am seeking a $100 turnkey micro hardware appliance to plug into a LAN hub
>> (behind a consumer-level cable modem) whose only purpose in life is to send
>> heartbeat (and simple quality of serv
On 11/21/11 14:18 , Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
>> Look at the number that are refusing to make generous prefix
>> allocations
>> to residential end users and limiting them to /56, /60, or even worse,
>> /64.
>
> Owen,
>
> What does Joe Sixpack do at home with a /48 that he cannot do with a /56 or a
On 11/22/11 08:16 , Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Owen DeLong"
>
>> As in all cases, additional flexibility results in additional ability
>> to make mistakes. Simple mechanical lockouts do not scale to the
>> modern world. The benefits of these additional capabiliti
On 11/25/11 12:02 , Jay Hennigan wrote:
> On 11/25/11 11:34 AM, Joel jaeggli wrote:
>
>> Cars generically cause at lot more deaths than faulty traffic
>> controllers 13.2 per 100,000 population in the US annually.
>
> The cars don't (often) cause them. The drivers d
On 11/29/11 09:30 , Owen DeLong wrote:
> I believe those have been obsoleted, but, /64 remains the best choice, IMHO.
operational practice has moved on.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6164
> Owen
>
> On Nov 29, 2011, at 9:00 AM, McCall, Gabriel wrote:
>
>> Note that /127 is strongly discouraged
On 12/6/11 00:50 , Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Alex Le Heux:
>
>> The RIPE NCC is aware that 128.0.0.0/16 is configured as a martian by
>> default in (some) Juniper OS, even though RFC 5735 and RFC3330 outline
>> that this /16 should no longer be reserved as specialised address
>> space.
>
> Would
On 11/29/12 23:18 , Joakim Aronius wrote:
> I am all for being anonymous on the net but I seriously believe that
> we still need to enforce the law when it comes to serious felonies
> like child pr0n, organized crime etc, we can't give them a free pass
> just by using Tor. I dont think it should b
On 12/5/12 9:09 AM, Ray Soucy wrote:
This would be outgoing connections sourced from the IP of the proxy,
destined to whatever remote website (so 80 or 443) requested by the
user.
Essentially it's a modified Squid service that is used to filter HTTP
for CIPA compliance (required by the governme
On 12/17/12 9:01 AM, James Wininger wrote:
Hello all,
Looking for input from "providers" as well as "consumers" of data center space
and facilities. Specifically speaking to the types of available physical cross connects.
Are there data centers out there that are "fiber only"? That is to say t
the 8p8c connector is durable.
The connector predates twisted pair ethernet by a decade or more.
you could also ask about 1/4" TRS which is still in use albiet not in
phone systems for about 100 years longer.
On 12/20/12 10:20 AM, Michael Thomas wrote:
I was looking at a Raspberry Pi board
On 12/19/12 7:02 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
On (2012-12-19 09:53 -0500), Jason Lixfeld wrote:
Perhaps in simpler terms, a CRC error is a localized thing and would
never be forwarded from one device to another.
It would be forwarded in cut-through switching.
I have cut-through switches (arista) that
On 12/27/12 9:04 AM, mike wrote:
I reloaded their app (yes, I know... sew me) and got this warning:
IP address: 2600:100f:b119:c6bc:bd6f:fabb:ff30:2a3d
Estimated location: Livingston, NJ, US
That's a rather good estimation of where many verizon wireless customers
appear to come from.
201 - 300 of 977 matches
Mail list logo
