Yes re: Iridium. Contrary to what the Chief Huckster may say, inter-sat
comms are not some revolutionary thing that he invented.
It’s also not likely to function anything like they show in marketing
promos, with data magically zipping around the constellation between nodes
in different inclination
may have
on that if they can share.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 2:38 AM Jorge Amodio wrote:
>
> Solved years ago …
>
> https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/ielaam/92/8502886/8412572-aam.pdf
>
> -Jorge
>
> On Jan 23, 2023, at 1:30 AM, Raymond Burkholder
> wrote:
>
>
&g
of a difference to affect a typical
>> optical receiver" investigation ended as I'm mobile right now and can't do
>> the rest of the work very easily. I'd be curious if the relative speed
>> would be enough to cause enough shift to move it out of the pass b
17:27, Tom Beecher wrote:
>
> > What I didn't think was adequately solved was what Starlink shows in
> > marketing snippets, that is birds in completely different orbital
> > inclinations (sometimes close to 90 degrees off) shooting messages to
> each
> > othe
>
> - If origin makes a ROA only for covering prefix (say /24) then the /28
> announcement would be considered invalid by ROV and (even more likely)
> dropped. Also you get more instances of `invalid' announcements, making
> adoption of ROVs and ROAs harder.
>
AS 10 creates an ROA for X.X.X.X/24 ,
>
> One would also think that large OTT content providers which publish
> Android and IOS apps could
>
You said the magic word ; could.
It's the natural extension of MBA Math ; If you can pay for something 'as a
service' , it's going to be cheaper than paying people to develop it in
house. Th
ll
receive complimentary tickets to the conference. For past presentation
please see the archives at https://www.youtube.com/user/chicagonog/videos
The program committee is looking forward to your submission and attendance.
Thank you,
Tom Kacprzynski
CHI-NOG Program Committee Chair
>
> Don't expect too much when you need a Google account to answer a survey :)
>
I was also off put by some of the financial questions in there.
On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 1:57 PM Denis Fondras wrote:
> Le Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 11:16:13AM -0700, Chris Grundemann a écrit :
> > Update: The survey has
n FOO
, you could save X if you used BAR".
On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 4:12 PM Chris Grundemann
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 12:15 PM Tom Beecher wrote:
>
>>
>> I was also off put by some of the financial questions in there.
>>
>
> The financial questions (2
This isn't the mailing list you are looking for.
On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 10:51 AM Randazzo, Alessio (CSI) <
alessio.randa...@fao.org> wrote:
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> I'm Alessio Randazzo, a member of the IT-Security Team of Food and
> Agriculture of the United Nations. Nice to e-meet you!
> It has
>
> Fair play, Tom. All I can say is that after 20 years of working on, in,
> and around the Internet, I'm sure as hell not going to ruin my reputation
> now.
>
Apologies if I implied anything like that. Wasn't my intent to do so.
> And whether we engineers like it
>
> It would be quite a bad idea to drop 100.64/10 on a firewall or
> servers, when legitimate traffic can very well hit your infrastructure
> with those source IPs.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
Don't use bogon lists in places you shouldn't use bogon lists.
On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 5:10 PM Lukas Tribus wr
>
> They talk about bogon prefixes "for hosts", provide configuration
> examples for Cisco ASA firewalls,
>
Which are perfectly valid use cases for some networks / situations.
On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 6:35 PM Lukas Tribus wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 at 00:05, William Herrin wrote:
> > Hi Lukas,
>
> That doesn't mean publically available blocklists need to misrepresent
> their use-case.
>
>
Respectfully, this is exceptionally ignorant.
Team Cymru is not misrepresenting anything. They are very specific and
detailed about which addresses the bogons and fullbogons lists contain.
They also cl
Given the list of things on these two prefixes alone, I would venture to
guess it's not a misjudgement.
https://check.spamhaus.org/listed/?searchterm=5.178.2.1
https://check.spamhaus.org/listed/?searchterm=80.66.64.1
On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 3:47 PM Brandon Zhi wrote:
> Hello guy,
>
> We recen
Jeff,
Since you are using bridge mode, try adjusting down the MTU supported
through the network. We have observed that a realistic MTU for Verizon 5G
home internet is about 1428 bytes.
Good luck,
Tom
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 8:00 AM wrote:
> Send NANOG mailing list submissions
>
> Well, those prefixes are not for their VPS hosting service (which cause a
> lot of complaint). Just like there are many IP addresses under the
> telecommunication company, the entire ASN cannot be "blocked" just because
> there is a complaint on one IP address
>
I can drop all prefixes from an
Anyone have any thoughts on this CUPS thing? I have a customer asking, but
it seems the lack of CP resiliency and additional latency between the DP
and CP make this a really dumb idea. Has anyone tried it? Does it make
any sense?
Thanks!
What is it about the architecture that makes it a preferred solution. I
get that centralizing the user databases makes sense, but why the control
plane. What benefit does that have?
-- Tom
On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 2:17 PM wrote:
> The CUPS makes a lot of sense for this application. Late
; Yours,
>
> Joel
> On 3/22/2023 5:53 PM, Tom Mitchell wrote:
>
> What is it about the architecture that makes it a preferred solution. I
> get that centralizing the user databases makes sense, but why the control
> plane. What benefit does that have?
>
> -- Tom
>
&g
/
Registration is still open, but ending soon. For more details please see
https://chinog.org/chi-nog-11/registration/
Thank you
Tom Kacprzynski
April this year.
--
Tom
* * *
> > 14 * * *
> > 15 * * *
> > 16 * * *
> > 17 * * *
> > 18 * * *
> > 19 *^C
> >
> > ping6 dfw.source.kernel.org
> > PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2603:8080:REDACTED --> 2604:1380:4641:c500::1
> > ^C
> > --- dfw.source.ker
>
> My issue was just trying to convince Spectrum to look into the problem in
> the first place, I brought the Atlas probe receipts because it’s such a
> helpful tool, but wasn’t able to get through to anyone helpful (acct mgr,
> noc email, even the escalation list) until I started lighting fires f
>
> For those that like FRR:
> https://thehackernews.com/2023/05/researchers-uncover-new-bgp-flaws-in.html
All 3 of those CVEs look like they were fixed and backported into 8.2
through 8.4 at least 6 months ago.
On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 5:54 AM Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> On 02/05/2023 17:56, Warre
No argument there at all. Just felt like there was enough FUD in that link
it was worth calling out that specific.
On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 2:39 PM Glenn Kelley
wrote:
> Tom - you are correct
>
> Of course - who keeps things like BGP Route Servers and FRR up to date -
>
> cough co
>
> Well, ISP is typically plan something for a year. It is more than enough
> for both.
>
s/more/should be/
The economics are such these days that in many circumstances, bean counters
don't want to hear about payback in years, they want to hear it in
quarters. Short term financial thinking is d
>
> I think we all appreciate how open source projects work. Calling out
> their limitations is as old as mailing lists. I don't code. I test a
> lot, and continue to test IS-IS in FRR on FreeBSD every year or so. I'll
> keep testing and giving feedback at least once or twice a year. If it's
> stil
On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 9:00 AM Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
> On 5/9/23 14:32, Tom Beecher wrote:
>
>
> Except you didn't exactly "call out limitations". You simply said :
>
> IS-IS in Quagga and FRR are not yet ready for business, is what I would
>> caution.
>
round the situation, but they have to manage that. Someone has to do work
somewhere.
On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 11:55 PM William Herrin wrote:
> On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 6:40 PM Tom Beecher wrote:
> >> The implication being that while it might work, it would make
> administration of
rked for this scenario, the
next release could change to a value that doesn't.
On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 12:46 AM Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
> On 5/10/23 03:40, Tom Beecher wrote:
>
> >
> > Adjusting a single tunable is 'onerous'? Ok.
>
> In the contex
Two simple rules for most large ISPs.
1. If they can see it, as long as they are not legally prohibited, they'll
collect it.
2. If they can legally profit from that information, in any way, they will.
Now, ther privacy policies will always include lots of nice sounding
clauses, such as 'We don't
>
> I did see an article about Team Cymru selling netflow data from ISPs to
> governments though.
>
Team Cymru sold the same thing to the FBI Cyber Crimes division that any of
us could purchase if we wanted to pay for it.
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 8:52 AM Rishi Panthee
wrote:
> I’ve got Akvorado
Looking for a technical contact at MTN South Africa, not having a lot of
success through standard pathways.
If you are from MTN, or know someone, please let me know offlist.
Thanks.
a
pair of static link-local neighbour addresses under 'ospfv3 1 ipv6 bfd
...'? Something like fe80::1 and fe80::2? As opposed to relying on
autoconf addresses.
--
Tom
Lanner NCA-1516
-- Tom
On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 9:15 AM Michel Blais
wrote:
> Pretty sure Ufispace S9502-12SM + IPInfusion OcNOS would work. VxLAN is
> supported in the IP Base licence. CRS license must be avoided for VxLAN.
> Look at the OcNOS feature matrix to make sure.
>
>
Bill-
Don't say, "We'll keep it up for as long as we feel like it, but at
> least a year." That's crap.
>
30% of the root servers have been renumbered in the last 25 years.
h : 2015
d: 2013
l : 2007
j : 2002
For these 4 cases, only a 6 month transition time was provided, and the
internet as we
>
> I have not heard of any mention of Starlink having caps as part of their
> service. Having said that, for services like this, things change as the
> number of customers using them rises.
>
They were proposing data caps to roll out this year, but they abandoned
that in lieu of a 'priority tier.
>
> Won't Starlink and other LEO configurations be that backstop sooner
> rather than later?
>
Unlikely. They will remain niche. The economics don't make sense for those
services to completely replace terrestrial only service.
On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 4:17 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> On 6/16/23
of a cuckoo bird but say what you will he
> does have big ambitions.
>
Ambition is good. But reality tends to win the day. As does math.
On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 4:38 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> On 6/17/23 1:25 PM, Tom Beecher wrote:
>
> Won't Starlink and other LEO co
not be true. Rumor has it, they are piggybacking on other payloads which
> pay for the launches, particularly government contracts.
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 17, 2023, at 5:54 PM, Tom Beecher wrote:
>
>
>
>> As I mentioned elsewhere, I'm not sure that the current econ
gt; they are fully deployed I don't know but it's bound to be a lot more
> possible subs than they have now.
>
> I mean, this could be a spectacular flop like Iridium but a lot has
> changed in 20 some years not least of which is the cost of launch.
>
> Mike
> On 6/
e in orbit.
On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 7:09 PM Dave Taht wrote:
> I am happy to see the conversation about starlink escaping over here,
> because it is increasingly a game-changing technology (I also run the
> starlink mailing list, cc´d)...
>
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 3:56 PM
home Internet will.
>
>
>
> On Jun 17, 2023, at 7:04 PM, Tom Beecher wrote:
>
>
>
>> You’re assuming the launches are costing them something, which in fact
>> may not be true. Rumor has it, they are piggybacking on other payloads
>> which pay for the launc
elf is borderline negligent, but still absolutely mind
boggling.
On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 8:04 PM Dave Taht wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 5:16 PM Tom Beecher wrote:
> >>
> >> Also: they plan to use Starship when it's available which has 10x more
> capacity. If
ervice sucked, but part of that is because the markets
> never materialized to justify funding to improve it.
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 5:16 PM Dave Taht wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 5:41 PM Tom Beecher wrote:
>> >>
>> >> You are also assumin
e under-serviced places.
> > Cheaper, easy maintenance, less centralization.
> >
> > We also need orbit for more importand sats out there than internet.
> > GPS, earth monitoring infra, space telescopes, R&D.
> >
> >
> > -- Original message ---
>
> To summarise, if there is no longer a need, please
> do either one of the following three things:
>
> 1| send it back to the RIR;
> 2| change the word *lease* to *transfer* and
> announce your willing to transfer the INRs you hold.
> 3| do not hesitate to discuss your alternatives with
> the RI
>
>
> The issue being a newcomer and not fully versed on the levels, I never
> made the connection of the /36 to the 2X-Small Category. A simple addition
> of adding in a reference to that category would make it a lot more clear..
>
The service levels are defined right there in the chart above the
>
> In short--I'm having a hard time understanding how a non-paying entity
> still has working connectivity and BGP sessions, which makes me suspect
> there's a different side to this story we're not hearing yet. ^_^;
>
I know Cogent has long offered very cheap transit prices, but this seems
ver
>
> measure the quality of their connections
Really depends on what you are trying to measure. Some metrics are going to
be great at telling you the quality and performance of the network at L3,
but thanks to the Stupid Content Provider Tricks that we use, won't tell
you anything about the L4/L7
>
> It should be a huge embarrasment to the designers. They survive on low
> price and unique features. It would be quite amazing to have a CLI without
> the nonsense.
>
That ship sailed years ago. Even though the legal precedent was set after
Cisco vs Arista that CLI elements that are of common ,
ices they did
BECAUSE of that concern. I have no knowledge there. I do know that Much
Larger Vendors have absolutely made tradeoffs because they didn't want to
deal with legal actions from Another Large Vendor or Patent Troll, so it's
not exactly uncommon.
On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 5:43
Thanks for that link.
This is jumping out at me though :
Their interior routing protocol used amongst their mesh of routers was
> IS-IS which was using authentication. The authentication [section 4.19]
> was described having a "password validity start date" of 01 July 2012.
> Thus, any routers w
>
> So, probably not a failure "caused by GPS", rather one caused by poor
> design (only two clock sources) combined with unsupported and buggy
> devices.
100% correct. From the PDF :
4.31 JT summarised its findings in relation to the ‘Panic Timer’ on the
> Cisco IOS XR NTP Client, namely that:
>
> I meant ix internet exchange path visualization and an online tool to take
> a look at it in (near) real time!
I'm still not sure I follow your question.
Are you asking 'How does IX-FOO connect to IX-BAR?' Or are you asking 'What
ASNs connect to IX-FOO AND IX-BAR?'
On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 7
>
> So, while this all sounds good, without any specifics on vendor, box,
> code, code revision number, fix, year it happened, current status, e.t.c.,
> I can't offer any meaningful engagement.
>
If you clicked Matt's link to the Google search, you could tell from the
results what vendor , model,
>
> We already
> have cron jobs running on the switches that tftp the config file
> to a server, and I'd prefer to leverage off that.
>
Use the same cron jobs to save a copy as xml/json and pull the file off.
On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 7:52 PM Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TFX/VE6BBM) <
lyn...@orthanc.ca> w
11:48 PM Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
> On 8/21/23 17:44, Tom Beecher wrote:
>
> So, while this all sounds good, without any specifics on vendor, box,
>> code, code revision number, fix, year it happened, current status, e.t.c.,
>> I can't offer any meaningful engagement.
>
> What would have been nice is if Juniper oversubscribed the face plate of
> this platform, as most people are more likely to run out of ports than
> they would the 400Gbps forwarding capacity of Trio.
>
You're restricted to 400G because they did fixed lane allocations to the EA
chip on the PFE
>
> On another note, the potential issue we might run into is pressure on
> control plane memory on the MX204 for us that run BGP Add-Paths. You can
> always upgrade the RE on an MX240/480/960, but the MX204 is fixed (and
> last time I checked, fiddling with Juniper RE memory was generally
> frowne
.
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 5:39 PM Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
> On 8/25/23 19:16, Tom Beecher wrote:
>
> > In my experience and testing with them, you have a decent bit of
> > headroom past the published RIB/FIB limits before they'll fall over.
>
> They are holding up
>
> I would agree with that. We've had gear with 40-gig ports for many years
> (>6)? Never found a CDN or transport network that would do 40.
Many 40G hardware options never made a ton of economic sense in CDN land
with shared ASIC lanes for 40G and 100G ports. Using anything 40G blocked
the asso
>
> Or do the sensible thing and just drop the announcement and log the
> problem.
>
Which is exactly what an RFC7606 compliant device will do for an unknown
path attribute.
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7606#page-5
o Treat-as-withdraw: In this approach, the UPDATE message containing
>
> vendors should adopt RFC7606
>
Yes
and not be absolutely awful at responding to vulnerability reporting.
1. This isn't exactly new. It's been possible to do this since the original
days of BGP.
2. Probably not wise to assume that's accurate just because he thinks that
is true.
On Wed, A
>
> But there's obviously not been enough thought applied to realize that
> optional transitive attributes must be considered evil by default. They
> can only be used after extremely careful parsing.
>
> ...
> I was hoping we'd moved past that point in the software development
> history.
>
There
>
> Cogent support has been about as bad as you can get. Everything is great,
> clean your fiber, iperf isn’t a good test, install a physical loop oh wait
> we don’t want that so go pull it back off, new updates come at three to
> seven day intervals, etc. If the performance had never been good t
>
> For example Juniper offers true per-packet, I think mostly used in
> high performance computing.
>
At least on MX, what Juniper calls 'per-packet' is really 'per-flow'.
On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 10:17 AM Saku Ytti wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sept 2023 at 17:10, Benny Lyne Amorsen
> wrote:
>
> > TCP lo
ime I used it
much. stateful was hit or miss ; sometimes it tested amazing, other times
not so much. But it wasn't a primary requirement so I never dove into why
On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 12:04 PM Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
> On 9/6/23 17:27, Tom Beecher wrote:
>
> >
> > At leas
>
> What network does Nanog-news operate?
>
> Marketing email doesn’t belong on an operational list. Even if its NANOG
> marketing itself. (Ack Kentik non involvement).
>
This is the right comment.
The NANOG Mailing List Usage Guidelines (
https://www.nanog.org/resources/usage-guidelines/ ) a
nd technical content only'. We can't ban
people for trying to sneak marketing stuff through here (and we have) , and
then turn right around and do it ourselves.
On Sat, Sep 9, 2023 at 12:48 PM Ryan Hamel wrote:
> Martin and Tom,
>
> How is it a private marketing initiative e
>
> I hope this is not the start of a new pattern of behaviour because that
> would not be…good to put it mildly.
>
What exactly is "not good" about ARIN emailing about the ARIN Public Policy
and Members meeting, to email addresses on file related to ARIN assigned
resources?
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023
Edward-
Tracker issues aside, as I called out earlier in the thread, by our own
rules the newsletters should not be sent to this list in the first place.
Citing NANOG Mailing List Usage Guidelines (
https://www.nanog.org/resources/usage-guidelines/ ) :
Posts to NANOG’s Mailing List should be fo
Mr. Isaacson's tweet (or X , or whatever the hell it is now ) is
essentially saying Russia invading Ukraine was *not* a major war, but
Ukraine attacking back to defend itself would be. Exceptionally dumb
comment.
I also find it exceptionally rich that Musk uses their 'Terms of Service'
as a shield
My understanding has always been that 30ms was set based on human
perceptibility. 30ms was the average point at which the average person
could start to detect artifacts in the audio.
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 8:13 PM Dave Taht wrote:
> Dear nanog-ers:
>
> I go back many, many years as to baseline
Appliance virtualization is perfectly acceptable for a lot of things. But
there are large sets of problems that you will never catch that way.
To the OP :
With respect to 'strategies' :
1. Test something to make sure it works.
2. Then test it to see where and how it breaks.
Lots of people do #1
This entire thread could easily have been simply :
"Hey all! I'm having some challenges reaching a live person in the abuse
groups for X, Y, and Z. Can anyone help with a contact, or if anyone from
those companies sees this, can you contact me off-list?"
Calling everyone an idiot in the midst of
Taking a quick look, seems like reachability to the first /24 at least is
ok, so I don't think you have a problem there.
You may have picked up a subnet with some nuggets of abuse history in
there, it's quite common on the secondary V4 market.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 10:05 AM John Alcock wrote:
On 25/03/2019 09:17, Sean Donelan wrote:
> Its always a bad idea to do packet filtering at your bgp border.
Wild assertion. Why?
DoS mitigation, iACLs, BGP security... I can think of lots of very
sensible reasons.
--
Tom
I will personally always prefer hardware based methods where the private
key data is never exposed over pure software based methods.
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 9:32 AM Mauricio Rodriguez
wrote:
> My understanding is that 2-factor is one of the primary drivers for
> webauthn. I feel that hardware d
.
Packet filtering is more computationally taxing than just routing is. Your
edge equipment is likely going to be built for maximum routing efficiency.
Trying to bite off too much filtering there increases your risk of legit
traffic being tossed on the floor.
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 6:41 AM Tom
"It seems your position is 'i don't know how ACL
works on my platforms and i don't trust myself to write ACL, so i
should not do them',"
That is not my position at all, but thanks.
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 12:43 PM Saku Ytti wrote:
> Hey Tom,
>
> >
I’m in Spectrum land, née Time Warner, née Rigas Cash Extraction Machine...
errr Adelphia. ( Buffalo / WNY )
We’ve had native v6 for quite a few years up here.
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 16:55 Seth Mattinen wrote:
> On 3/31/19 13:31, David Hubbard wrote:
> > Things are no better in Spectrum land;
historical data is great, but I guess what I am really asking
is - how do you anticipate the load that your eyeballs are going to bring
to your network, especially in the face of transport tweaks such as QUIC
and TCP BBR?
Tom
er what the value of trying to predict utilization is anyway,
especially since bandwidth is so cheap. But I figure it can't hurt to ask a
group of people where I am highly likely to find somebody smarter than I am
:-)
--
-------
I wouldn't expect them to build out anything until they got some usage data
to determine the build/buy economics.
On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 3:02 PM Jared Geiger wrote:
> An article mentioned BAMTech's platform which is what NHL, MLB, and HBO GO
> are built on. The bits from the first two come from
I’m curious what the service is that 50Mbps avg over a 24 hr window is an
investigative threshold.
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 17:57 Peter Phaal wrote:
> Tony,
>
> You might find the following article useful in identifying features to
> consider when evaluating sFlow analyzers:
> https://blog.sflow.
"Can anyone confirm that these are indeed managed by the Chinese ISPs (even
though they are physically located in the US according to the traceroute
and RTT analysis)?"
If a router is part of the CU AS, it's owed and managed by them. Physical
location isn't really relevant to your question.
On Tu
The Stackexchange post does NOT say that they got their own AP. It says
they got their own DOCSIS Modem / Router / Wifi combo device. That's an
important distinction.
When I worked at Adelphia many years ago, the only distinction between
customer owned CPE and company owned CPE was billing. All mo
Obviously violates every standard “don’t resell the service” clause. ( But
these are also the same TOSes that tell me I can’t VPN into the office , so
they can pound sand. :p )
Doing this makes about as much sense as running a TOR exit node to me. Too
much exposure to someone doing something dumb
As much as it pains me to Devil's Advocate for Comcast... Has anyone proven
that they are storing this PSK in cleartext? From the original
StackExchange post :
" When I went to the account web page, it showed me my password. I changed
the password and it instantly showed the new password on the ac
It seems like just another example of liability shifting/shielding. I'll
defer to Actual Lawyers obviously, but the way I see it, Packetstream
doesn't have any contractual or business relationship with my ISP. I do.
If I sell them my bandwidth, and my ISP decides to take action, they come
after me
olation of the ToS, and if
they continue, their account might be canceled. Be a nicer method than just
0 to canceled in one go.
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 8:12 AM Matthew Kaufman wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 1:09 PM Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. <
> amitch...@isipp.com> wrote:
>
&g
I respect the viewpoints of those who made comments about your sig, but I
do not agree.
There are many things to be annoyed about. I don’t think your email
signature is one of them.
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 17:16 Ross Tajvar wrote:
> I want to clarify that while I didn't say anything (since it w
Passes the backhoe test, but might have an issue with the Die Hard Elevator
Shaft Fight Scene checks.
:)
On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 07:34 william manning
wrote:
> for our PCI-DSS audit, the rational for at least -one- local source,
> instead of depending on pool.ntp.org, was "backhoe fade".
> it wa
Yeah, I wouldn't worry about the services themselves. This is all legal
maneuvering due to the financial engineering that was being done.
They won't be going dark or anything. Absolutely worst case they may have
to sell some markets off to another carrier, but IF that gets there it's
many years aw
grate properly when some hedgy is riding you over that extra 0.45%! )
Support on 'legacy' always tends to suffer.
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:29 AM Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Tom Beecher said:
> > They won't be going dark or anything. Absolutely worst case they may
PHB? Then make it a cost argument.
"If you plan an implement V6 today, will will cost N. If you delay until
you discover V6 only services, it will cost 3-5xN to implement quickly,
with additional risk of additional costs because quicker implementations
are likely to miss something along the way."
At a previous company , about 10-ish years ago, had the same problem due to
equipment limitations, and wasn't able to get dollars to upgrade anything.
The most effective thing for me at the time was to start dumping any prefix
with an as-path length longer than 10. For our business then, if you we
There are sometimes legitimate reasons to have a covering aggregate with
some more specific announcements. Certainly there's a lot of cleanup that
many should do in this area, but it might not be the best approach to this
issue.
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 5:30 AM Alejandro Acosta <
alejandroacostaal.
401 - 500 of 1187 matches
Mail list logo
