Its quite easy to get MPLS-VPN connectivity into China (Pacnet, Singtel,
CPCNet, etc, will offer), but at a price.
Suzhou and Shenzhen are easily in reach of all the above listed providers.
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Warren Bailey <
wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com> wrote:
> We tried
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Tom Paseka wrote:
> > Its quite easy to get MPLS-VPN connectivity into China (Pacnet, Singtel,
> > CPCNet, etc, will offer), but at a price.
>
> mpls != ipsec ... perhaps the OP w
protocols bgp {
group akamai {
neighbor x.x.x.x {
family inet {
unicast;
}
family inet6 {
unicast;
}
}
}
}
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Pete Ashdown wrote:
> I've got a peer who wishes me to send my IPv6 annou
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> I would push back for a slightly different reason...
>
> Any inability to forward IPv6 might not impact the IPv4 peering session and
> you might run into a situation where the peering session stays up and
> continues
> exchanging routes, but t
You won't be able to get many choices there. Given its a Hutchison
building, thought about Hutchison?
You'll need a local loop otherwise, coverage is probably not easy too and
being a hutch building, you wont get much choice.
Other recommendations (if you forget about local loop issues), Pacnet,
Looks like google cache.
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 2:08 PM, César de Tassis Filho
wrote:
> Not sure, but it looks like some Google Global Cache inside an ISP.
>
> César
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Grant Ridder >wrote:
>
> > Whois record isn't Google.
> >
> >
> > inetnum:116.92.0
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 7:38 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Jared Mauch"
>
> > b) locking down your recursive servers to networks you control
>
> Sure. But OpenDNS, Google, and the other providers of recursive servers
> for edge cases can't do that anymore?
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Matthew Petach wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 6:06 PM, John Levine wrote:
> >>As a white-hat attempting to find problems to address through legitimate
> means, how
> >>do you …
> >
> > You make friends with people with busy authoritative servers and see
> > who'
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>
> But hey, this is a good thing because a DDOS caused issues, right?
> Well, not so much. Even if the exchange does not advertise the
> exchange LAN, it's probably the case that it is in the IGP (or at
> least IBGP) of everyone connected to i
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>>> Even if the exchange does not advertise the exchange LAN, it's
>>> probably the case that it is in the IGP (or at least IBGP) of
>>> everyone connected to it,
>
> yikes! this is quite ill-advised and i don't know anyone who does
> this, but i
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:33 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> Everything in China is behind their content filter. Only parts of Hong
> Kong are sometimes not yet. As far as it is known they do not 'allow'
> things but block specific things.
All* of Hong Kong and Macau are not behind the chinese firewa
from the website:
This website has been moved to http://ers.trendmicro.com.
Please update your bookmarks with this URL.
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
wrote:
>
> Maps was taken over by trend micro years back, maybe they just retired the
> old domain?
G'day!
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:18 PM, Attila Vekas wrote:
> Regards,
>
> Attila Vekas
>
> Telstra
I'd say its AS23148 / Terremark with a bogon filter.
your fixed line traceroute shows the next-hop being the connection
between level3 and AS23148.
>10 208 ms 191 ms 208 ms
>l3-peer.eq
Be conservative in what you send, be liberal in what you accept
^http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robustness_principle
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Jason Iannone
wrote:
> There was once a fairly common saying attributed to an early
> networking pioneer that went something like, "be generous in
you won't find internet packets going that way though (most of the time).
You can buy a L2vpn, p2p, etc, that will though.
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 2:51 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> On 4/1/15 3:14 AM, Piotr wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > There is some telecom, isp which have route from EU to AU via east o
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> On Jun 20, 2013, at 01:30 , Grant Ridder wrote:
>
> > Yelp is evidently also affected
>
> Not from here.
>
Patrick:
$ dig NS yelp.com @8.8.8.8 +short
ns1620.ztomy.com.
ns2620.ztomy.com.
Some DNS servers have the bad records - TLD fo
KINX is the best bet. http://idc.kinx.net/eng/
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Shahid Shafi wrote:
> I am wondering if anyone has experience hosting services in South Korea,
> who did you choose for colocation services and in what city?
>
> thanks,
> shahid
>
Most of the performance hit is because of commercial actions, not
censorship.
When there is a tri-opoly, with no opportunity of competition, its easily
possible to set prices which are very different than market conditions.
This is what is happening here.
Prices are set artificially high, so thei
I am not worried. Residential ISPs are usually at peak in the late evening.
They have loads of capacity during the day.
On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:35 PM Jared Mauch wrote:
> I do worry if the broadband networks have the capacity. WFH traffic is
> usually different from regular consumer traffic. M
Paying for "peering", doesn't stop you being a tier-1.
Being a Tier-1 means you are "transit free" (technical term, not
commercial). No one is transiting your routes to other Tier-1 providers.
On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 11:04 AM Rubens Kuhl wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Looking at the article on Tier 1 networks
the memo:
https://web.archive.org/web/20230523204911/http://www.geektools.com/
On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 1:27 PM Randy Bush wrote:
> ```
> % host whois.geektools.com
> Host whois.geektools.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
> ```
>
> i guess i missed the memo :(
>
> randy
>
a Verizon downstream BGP customer is leaking the full table, and some more
specific from us and many other providers.
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 7:56 AM Robbie Trencheny wrote:
> *1147 UTC update* Staring at internal graphs looks like global traffic is
> now at 97% of expected so impact lessening.
In terms of bits, MOST Hong Kong traffic does NOT traverse HKIX.
However, Hong Kong ISPs, almost entirely communicate with each other of
HKIX.
Sources like Akamai and Google, however, do not typically traverse HKIX.
These are the majority of traffic.
99% of Hong Kong is connected to HKIX, by tra
HKBN are great, highly recommend them
Traxcomm (owned by the MTR/subways)
Towngas (fiber in the natural gas lines)
Superloop - new entrant. good guys.
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 7:09 AM, Matthew Walster
wrote:
> On 8 May 2018 at 18:58, wrote:
>
> > Can anyone recommend wave providers on the Hong
This looks like a route that has been cached by some ISPs/routers even
though a withdrawal has actually happened.
If you actually forward packets a long the path, you'll see its not
following the AS Path suggested, instead the real route that it should be.
Bouncing your session with 4637 would lik
Hi,
I've been casually observing the connectivity to Bitcanal / AS3266 /
AS197426 since the thread started.
After GTT shared that bitcanal had been disconnected, bitcanal was only
visible behind Cogent. But the Cogent path now also seems to have been
disconnected. After Cogent they popped up behi
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
We regularly see poorly configured "optimizers" or networks hijacking our
prefixes (originating /25's, /24 of /23's etc).
Thankfully, most of the time filters are in place to stop them leaking
badly, but I agree, these are toxic.
-Tom
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 6:06 AM, Job Snijders wrote:
> Dear
Hi,
Cloudflare does deploy caches, however we usually look to do so in unique
locations, ie. where an ISPs network isn't already in reach of one of our
existing deployments/peering points.
You can email peer...@cloudflare.com directly if seeking this.
-Tom
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 7:22 AM, Marco
Looks to be edited from their original tweet.
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:07 AM, wrote:
> * milln...@gmail.com (Martin Millnert) [Fri 12 Jun 2015, 12:54 CEST]:
>>
>> Also, possible explanation for why nobody's fixing it:
>> https://twitter.com/TMCorp/status/609167065300271104 :)
>
> https://sconte
You'll find as well, a lot of hosts (eg, I know at least Windows XP)
won't forward to Class E destinations.
-Tom
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Ray Soucy wrote:
> There is already more than enough address space allocated for NAT, you
> don't need to start using random prefixes that may or may
Can someone from Comcast please reach out? Looks like you're black holing
some prefixes.
-Tom
32 matches
Mail list logo
