Re: PAIX
Thus spake Jere Retzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Coast-to-coast guaranteed latency seems too low in most cases that I've seen. Not calling CEOs and marketers liars but the real world doesn't seem to do as well as the promises. Someone in the engineering group of a promising local ISP once told me their billing and capacity planning model was designed for them to fail every customer SLA and still turn a profit. Interpret that how you wish. As VOIP takes off local IP exchanges will continue/increase in importance because people won't tolerate high latency. Any point in the US is within 25ms RTT (or less) of a major exchange; eliminating this 25ms of latency will have no effect on VoIP unless you're already near the 250ms RTT limit for other reasons. What percentage of your phone calls are local? Who cares? I'm billed by the airtime I consume, not by the distance my call goes. Hawaii and the local pizza place cost me the same amount. - Yes, we do various kinds of video over Internet2. Guess what? Packet loss is very important. Fewer hops mean fewer lost packets. You've been listening to the MPLS/ATM crowd too long. Congestion, not hops, causes packet loss. - Unfortunately, these applications do not work with today's local broadband networks one reason being the lack of local interconnection. People have quit believing the Radio Shack ads. We have the technology to make these applications work if we'd stop arguing that no one wants to use them. Of course no one wants to use them they know they won't work! These apps are broken because the interested parties aren't interested. Ask any doctor if he wants to give up physically seeing his patients -- there are laws in most states outlawing doctors talking to patients unless they are physically present, not to mention most doctors refuse to even digitize their records or use Palm Pilots to look up forgotten symptoms or treatments. Blaming broadband for the failure of your killer apps is not going to help. S
RE: free network monitoring/management tools
Joshua, Hate to give the std answer, but I suggest a review of the archives over the past 2 months--this thread was just recently re-hashed. Also, there was a presentation on Managing IP Networks with Free Software at NANOG 26. Check it out here: http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0210/ppt/stephen.pdf -Wayne -Original Message- From: Joshua Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 10:56 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: free network monitoring/management tools hello to all, i would appreciate your your knowledge and experiences regarding freely available tools for network monitoring and management (all cisco now, some other stuff later). i would prefer free tools as i have no budget :) i am looking for the following (it will be running on either freebsd or redhat): AAA - i have been trying to find a tacacs+ daemon/program that doesn't require me to also learn *sql to set up the backend database (if this is the only choice, then i can learn it) config monitoring/management - rancid or rtrmon are the two that i have found. any preferences on one over the other in terms of ease of use, ability to modify/improve, efficiency, etc? network/syslog monitoring - some of the likely candidates i have found are nagios or netsaint, jffnms, nmis, opennms, or maybe snip (formerly nocol) - i need something that is fairly easy to setup and use, and it doesn't have to do a whole lot (just some basic notifications for now). decent documentation is also necessary, and a pretty map would be nice for my noc, but this isn't a prereq. my scripting/programming skills are rudimentary, so it would be ideal if it was at least partially plug-and-play (i know i know, sorry). i would appreciate any input (i am still reading through the archives for useful tidbits), and i, of course, will gladly summarize for the list. thanks in advance joshua Walk with me through the Universe, And along the way see how all of us are Connected. Feast the eyes of your Soul, On the Love that abounds. In all places at once, seemingly endless, Like your own existence. - Stephen Hawking -
Re: Next NANOG meeting/stats
The next NANOG meeting will be held February 9-11, 2003, in Arizona, where it will be warm and sunny. Is this date absolutely set in stone? First Halloween, now Valentine's Day. and it butts right against nordnog, essentially preventing attendance at both. As Nordnog organizer I agree. - kurtis -
Re: Next NANOG meeting/stats
and it butts right against nordnog, essentially preventing attendance at both. As Nordnog organizer I agree. And the new date for nordnog is? - kurtis - --Johnny
Re: Next NANOG meeting/stats
None of the below events are related to network operations. Nordnog is. If these are the dates that Nanog goes for, I assume that Nordnog will have to reschedule. Nanog is large enough to attract people from all over the world and the scheduling of Nanog influences a lot of peoples agendas. - kurtis - On lördag, nov 16, 2002, at 00:57 Europe/Stockholm, Martin J. Levy wrote: While we are at it... Those that still believe in using Sneaker-Net will be attending the following convention... Western Shoe Association (WSA) Las Vegas 8-11 Feb 2003 ...I don't think we have people that are members of both WSA NANOG. Also, I know that we have had NANOG's that overlap the World Series (Baseball) and the Superbowl (American Football), but for cricket lovers... Cricket World Cup 2003 begins on 9 Feb Johannesburg South Africa. ...so that excludes most of the network operators within the British Empire from attending. While talking about sports, if you leave NANOG on the Tuesday and fly that night to Auckland, NZ you will have just enough time to sleep off the jet-lag and witness... The America's Cup series begins in Auckland February 15, 2003 (Saturday). ... keep in mind you would loose a day flying over the International Date line. (you would loose Feb 12'th so you would still have Valentines day available). Finally... Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams (FIRST) 10 and 11-Feb-2003 FIRST Technical Colloquium Location: Europe, to be decided ...which means that there will be no-one available from the US Government to talk about how to secure the Internet. That reason alone should warrant a change of date! :-) Martin --- At 05:32 PM 11/15/2002 -0500, Randy Bush wrote: The next NANOG meeting will be held February 9-11, 2003, in Arizona, where it will be warm and sunny. Is this date absolutely set in stone? First Halloween, now Valentine's Day. and it butts right against nordnog, essentially preventing attendance at both. randy
Re: Simulated disaster exercise? Re: PAIX
It should also be noted that the CAIDA study only examined the core giant cluster of the Internet. In other words they only looked at the most interconnected part of the Internet not the whole Internet. While you could argue only the core matters, the methodological approach gives you much different results. You are ignoring the places that were disconnected or balkanized in other studies (Albert et al 2000, Cohen et al 2002...etc.) CAIDA are the data gurus, so I'm sure there is good justification for this, it is just not outline in their paper - http://www.caida.org/analysis/topology/resilience/ - Original Message - From: Sean Donelan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 0:55 am Subject: Re: Simulated disaster exercise? Re: PAIX On Sun, 17 Nov 2002, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: The usual response was it only affected the public exchange fabric, not any private point-to-point circuits between providers through the same facility. But if we're going to compare this to MAE Gigaswitch failures, shouldn't we be talking apples to apples and oranges to oranges? No. The world has changed. If people are buying tangerines and grapefruitnow, that's what we should be talking about, not apples and oranges. If most of today's Internet exchange is via private connections, those are the connections we should be looking at. The fine folks at Caimis and Caida have done some analysis, and identifiedthe nodes which make up the core of the Internet. They've also identified the most connected core nodes. The good news is the networkdoesn't go non-linear until more than 25% of the nodes are removed.
Re: Next NANOG meeting/stats
] None of the below events are related to network operations. Nordnog is. Just a small point of order: FIRST is definitely related to network operations, albeit with a focus on secure network operations. :) -- Rob Thomas http://www.cymru.com ASSERT(coffee != empty);
Re: PAIX
My apologies. This was not intended to go out to the list. - Dan On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Daniel Golding wrote: Paul, Not sure if you are currently in a position to answer this... With the impending SD buyout of some of PAIX's assets, do you see PAIX Atlanta as a going concern? I know SD owns an adjacent floor at 56 Marieta. Do you think they will hold on to both? I am curious, as my company has a POP in PAIX Atlanta, and we are starting to do some contigency planning. Thanks, Daniel Golding On 17 Nov 2002, Paul Vixie wrote: speaking of paix, for those of you in atlanta (ietf) this week, i'm going to do a couple of site walkthroughs. send me e-mail if interested. -- Paul Vixie
Re: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.
Simply not true. See the kidnap case that was solved with cooperation between the Swedish and French police. The kidnapers in France was extradited to Sweden although they where arrested in France because they received the ransom there. Where was the crime commited though? If the kidnapping was in Sweden then that was within the rules. Neil. -- Neil J. McRae - Alive and Kicking [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PAIX
daniel wrote: With the impending SD buyout of some of PAIX's assets, do you see PAIX Atlanta as a going concern? I know SD owns an adjacent floor at 56 Marieta. Do you think they will hold on to both? until the bankruptcy court's auction runs its course, we don't know who the new owner of PAIX will be. in any case, i can't speak for SD at this time. I am curious, as my company has a POP in PAIX Atlanta, and we are starting to do some contigency planning. it's very likely that SD would like to talk you about those plans, and that with appropriate NDA's in place, they would tell you more about PAIX-ATL1's likely future under their ownership. paul re: speaking of paix, for those of you in atlanta (ietf) this week, i'm going to do a couple of site walkthroughs. send me e-mail if interested. -- Paul Vixie
Re: PAIX
You should move to the Atlanta NAP. It is designed to withstand a plane crashing into the building. BTW, Netrail still owes me money. - Nathan Stratton On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Daniel Golding wrote: Paul, Not sure if you are currently in a position to answer this... With the impending SD buyout of some of PAIX's assets, do you see PAIX Atlanta as a going concern? I know SD owns an adjacent floor at 56 Marieta. Do you think they will hold on to both? I am curious, as my company has a POP in PAIX Atlanta, and we are starting to do some contigency planning. Thanks, Daniel Golding On 17 Nov 2002, Paul Vixie wrote: speaking of paix, for those of you in atlanta (ietf) this week, i'm going to do a couple of site walkthroughs. send me e-mail if interested. -- Paul Vixie Get your free encrypted email at https://www.hushmail.com
Re: PAIX
Get over Netrail already Nathan. Enough years have passed... -ren At 08:48 AM 11/18/2002 -0800, you wrote: You should move to the Atlanta NAP. It is designed to withstand a plane crashing into the building. BTW, Netrail still owes me money. - Nathan Stratton On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Daniel Golding wrote: Paul, Not sure if you are currently in a position to answer this... With the impending SD buyout of some of PAIX's assets, do you see PAIX Atlanta as a going concern? I know SD owns an adjacent floor at 56 Marieta. Do you think they will hold on to both? I am curious, as my company has a POP in PAIX Atlanta, and we are starting to do some contigency planning. Thanks, Daniel Golding On 17 Nov 2002, Paul Vixie wrote: speaking of paix, for those of you in atlanta (ietf) this week, i'm going to do a couple of site walkthroughs. send me e-mail if interested. -- Paul Vixie Get your free encrypted email at https://www.hushmail.com
Re: PAIX
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 08:48:54 PST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: You should move to the Atlanta NAP. It is designed to withstand a plane crash ing into the building. I think Daniel Golding was more worried about an accountant crashing into the building msg06799/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: What? : Delivery Status Notification (Failure) (fwd)
On Sat, Nov 16, 2002 at 12:28:56PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: anyone else receiving a large number of bounces from nanog deliveries to the below address dated over the past 3 months? anyone at shure.com care to stop it as they're still coming! over a dozen in the past 24 hours, and still coming. Rather annoying. -- -= Scott Francis || darkuncle (at) darkuncle (dot) net =- GPG key CB33CCA7 has been revoked; I am now 5537F527 illum oportet crescere me autem minui msg06800/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: PAIX
Thus spake David Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] I agree with everything said Stephen except the part about the medical industry. There are a couple of very large companies doing views over an IP backbone down here. Radiology is very big on networking. They send your films or videos over the network to where the Radiologist is. For example one hospital owns about 6 others down here, and during off hours like weekends etc, the 5 hospitals transmit their films to where the 1 radiologist on duty is. I meant my reply to be directed only at telemedecine, where the patient is at home and consults their general practitioner or primary care physician via broadband for things like the flu or a broken arm. While there's lots of talk about this in sci-fi books, there's no sign of this making any significant inroads today, nor does it qualify as a killer app for home broadband. I do work with several medical companies who push radiology etc. around on the back end for resource-sharing and other purposes. This is quite real today, and is driving massive bandwidth upgrades for healthcare providers. However, I don't think it qualifies under most people's idea of telemedecine. S
Re: PAIX
Is this sort of radiology data sent over private lines or the public internet? What are the bandwidth demands? Not a good reason for extensive local peering, but a very interesting application. - Dan On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Stephen Sprunk wrote: Thus spake David Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] I agree with everything said Stephen except the part about the medical industry. There are a couple of very large companies doing views over an IP backbone down here. Radiology is very big on networking. They send your films or videos over the network to where the Radiologist is. For example one hospital owns about 6 others down here, and during off hours like weekends etc, the 5 hospitals transmit their films to where the 1 radiologist on duty is. I meant my reply to be directed only at telemedecine, where the patient is at home and consults their general practitioner or primary care physician via broadband for things like the flu or a broken arm. While there's lots of talk about this in sci-fi books, there's no sign of this making any significant inroads today, nor does it qualify as a killer app for home broadband. I do work with several medical companies who push radiology etc. around on the back end for resource-sharing and other purposes. This is quite real today, and is driving massive bandwidth upgrades for healthcare providers. However, I don't think it qualifies under most people's idea of telemedecine. S
Re: PAIX
Stephen Sprunk wroteI meant my reply to be directed only at "telemedecine", where the patient is athome and consults their general practitioner or primary care physician viabroadband for things like the flu or a broken arm. While there's lots of talkabout this in sci-fi books, there's no sign of this making any significantinroads today, nor does it qualify as a "killer app" for home broadband. Cost and trouble has been too high. Widespread broadband could change this. Assisted living facilities, with wealthy retired baby boomers will be a high payoff market. We're already seeing some clinics and physicians who encourage e-mail with patients. Video is far better to assess the patient's attitude/condition even without any instrumentation
Re: PAIX/industry specific exchange pts
Actually I got to sit with a company deploying this as a product, and I was impressed. Right now, it's all run over *gulp* dsl. But they are moving towards tunnels on the open internet. My cousin actually does work in the field and when it's working, it's impressive. When there is a glitch such as a power failure (U can tell something isnt setup right if this affects their network) they have MIS issues and have to volkswagon it over to the main location. On the one had it makes me nervous that it's not rock solid, on the other hand if it means a senior doctor has a shot at looking at me pics, ultrasound videos etc, before they do something, then Im happier. Somehow I think it's really used in some locations to cut back on expensive staff. Still, not a need for an exchange pt. Perhaps a medical exchange point??? Perhaps that's the next thread? Goes against my philosophy of aggregation is the key to life But could there be medical or industry specific exchanges just like there are industry networks??? dave At 11:42 -0600 11/18/02, Daniel Golding wrote: Is this sort of radiology data sent over private lines or the public internet? What are the bandwidth demands? Not a good reason for extensive local peering, but a very interesting application. - Dan On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Stephen Sprunk wrote: Thus spake David Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] I agree with everything said Stephen except the part about the medical industry. There are a couple of very large companies doing views over an IP backbone down here. Radiology is very big on networking. They send your films or videos over the network to where the Radiologist is. For example one hospital owns about 6 others down here, and during off hours like weekends etc, the 5 hospitals transmit their films to where the 1 radiologist on duty is. I meant my reply to be directed only at telemedecine, where the patient is at home and consults their general practitioner or primary care physician via broadband for things like the flu or a broken arm. While there's lots of talk about this in sci-fi books, there's no sign of this making any significant inroads today, nor does it qualify as a killer app for home broadband. I do work with several medical companies who push radiology etc. around on the back end for resource-sharing and other purposes. This is quite real today, and is driving massive bandwidth upgrades for healthcare providers. However, I don't think it qualifies under most people's idea of telemedecine. S
Re: PAIX
Any idea how large these images are? I seem to recall that they are massive, given ultra-hi-rez data (Are they attaching them to lookOut mail ;-?) And the radiologist may look for a few seconds at best so he is NOT going to want to wait -- A host is a host from coast to [EMAIL PROTECTED] no one will talk to a host that's close[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead20915-1433
Re: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.
Simply not true. See the kidnap case that was solved with cooperation between the Swedish and French police. The kidnapers in France was extradited to Sweden although they where arrested in France because they received the ransom there. Where was the crime commited though? If the kidnapping was in Sweden then that was within the rules. Well, good question. I am no lawyer but the kidnapping was in Sweden and the ransom was payed and received in France. Not sure what that means in legal terms. But perhaps we should get back to some operational discussion. - kurtis -
Re: PAIX
I just asked, and you can video clip images,...85megs is typical At 12:46 -0500 11/18/02, David Lesher wrote: Any idea how large these images are? I seem to recall that they are massive, given ultra-hi-rez data (Are they attaching them to lookOut mail ;-?) And the radiologist may look for a few seconds at best so he is NOT going to want to wait -- A host is a host from coast to [EMAIL PROTECTED] no one will talk to a host that's close[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead20915-1433 -- David Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Email] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Pager] Smotons (Smart Photons) trump dumb photons
Re: PAIX
Thus spake Daniel Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is this sort of radiology data sent over private lines or the public internet? What are the bandwidth demands? Not a good reason for extensive local peering, but a very interesting application. I've only seen companies pushing this data around between their own sites; for instance a remote clinic with just general practitioners may send films to a central hospital for analysis, or one hospital may send films to another hospital when their staff radiologist is out to lunch or on vacation. BW, of course, depends on how fast you want the transfers to go. The film files are in the hundreds of MB range, and providers are upgrading from FT1 FR to FT3 ATM at major sites. S
Re: PAIX
David Diaz replied to my comments Concerning latency Well the bingo latency number used a lot in voice is 50ms. Im simplifing without getting into all the details, but that's an important number. As far as VoIP goes, I think higher latency is ok, it's more important to have "consistent" latency. Fluctuating latency really affects VoIP more then a higher consistent latency. There are a lot of people doing VoIP and traditional voice on satellites and the latency there is huge. Here's an example. Without naming networks, I recently subscribed to DSL at the Oregon coast because the local phone company, which is also a national network provider advertised that they use a particular ISP, who we have in the NWAX exchange in Portland. I thought, well I should be able to get a good connection back to Oregon Health and Sciences University (OHSU), and if so this will be a good path for the physicians in that coastal community who have wanted to particpate in our grand rounds and other continuing medical education programs. They also have wanted to let the public participate in our "healthy chats" program. These events are live and interactive. So, I was very optimistic and set up my connection. I was shocked to learn, however that the DSL provider routes all the bits from that location to Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas before letting them find their way to their eventual destination. Rather than a nice direct route to OHSU, the route was 19 hops via Texas and Silicon Valley (Palo Alto and San Francisco) before getting to Portland. The average latency, which I duplicated consistently with multiple destinations in the Portland area is 180 msec and I have seen packet loss hitting 30% every minute or two. There is absolutely no way that this connection would be able to handle an interactive application. Yes, people have tolerated 500 msec latency on satellite links but only because they really had no choice. Dave Diaz continued Fewer hops = less packet loss? There has been a lot of discussion on the list about that. I still dont see it although it does push latency up a bit. Truth is that there are a lot of tunnels or express routes build in, so we arent seeing all the hops nowadays. I think that's more for sales and marketing as people keep judging networks by hops in a traceroute. See above. Partly, I think it is just the odds of encountering congestion goes up exponentially with the number of hops. No engineering reason other than if you have5% likelihood of hitting congestion on any one hop and then you have 19 your odds of hitting congestion are much higher. Combine that with a persistent connection for an interactive video session and you will find, as I did that every couple minutes you have a spike that causes fits with your video. Dave Diaz continued An IP backbone is a bad place for live TV. Delayed or on demand tv yes. Live tv plays to the benefits of One to Many broadcast ability of satellite as Doug Humphrey will tell you. So a feed from a DSS dish into your local cache would work well. It still can be done at a per city peering point to better feed the broadband users. If we fix the IP backbones for interactive TV then broadcast should be a piece of cake. While I agree with a later post that questioned convergence for the sake of convergence, the benefits of IP+Ethernet are that it is an order of magnitude cheaper and you eliminate the need for any local "head end" equipment, manipulation by local stations, etc, etc. Ultimately, the only stuff that will originate locally is local news and content. Jere
Re: PAIX
Vadim Antonov wrote: People are doing various kinds of video over Internet 1; works fine.Then I must be doing it all wrong because I've never had much luck. Maybe it is a function of the origin and destination location + network. Since Portland is not a top 25 market our service has never been very good that's why we started an exchange
Re: PAIX
Stephen Sprunk wrote: Any point in the US is within 25ms RTT (or less) of a major exchange; eliminating this 25ms of latency will have no effect on VoIP unless you're already near the 250ms RTT limit for other reasons. 25 MS is assuming that the only delay is due to the speed of light. Add equipment, especially routers or other gear that requires manipulating packets and the delays add up quickly. I once read that the most people wil tolerate on a regular basis is around 150-180 ms. I think that is much too high for regular use
Re: PAIX
Unnamed Administration sources reported that Stephen Sprunk said:
BW, of course, depends on how fast you want the transfers to go. The film files
are in the hundreds of MB range, and providers are upgrading from FT1 FR to FT3
ATM at major sites.
The answer is not wait at all...
See, over the last 20 years, radiologists went from being the
butt of MD jokes to being high demand subspecialists. They can
look at a view and charge {say} $100 for a glance.
If they can do say 5/minute, great. Ten, better. But in any case,
no way will [s]he cool heels waiting for an image to paint.
You want a buffer locally of the next n just to be sure.
They might send, oh, 6 scans; he looks at the first and says
Forget the rest, this guy's got {Mumble}, call the surgeon.
(Or Call the morgue, this guy will be there shortly..)
--
A host is a host from coast to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
no one will talk to a host that's close[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead20915-1433
Re: PAIX
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:13:48AM -0800, Jere Retzer wrote: Stephen Sprunk wrote: Any point in the US is within 25ms RTT (or less) of a major exchange; eliminating this 25ms of latency will have no effect on VoIP unless you're already near the 250ms RTT limit for other reasons. 25 MS is assuming that the only delay is due to the speed of light. Add equipment, especially routers or other gear that requires manipulating packets and the delays add up quickly. I once read that the most people wil tolerate on a regular basis is around 150-180 ms. I think that is much too high for regular use True. As far as VoIP goes, take 2 (digital/pcs/gsm/whatnot) cell phones (preferably on different carriers, or even the same if you want to see it) and call the other phone. Check out the delay in there. People who think that VoIP needs low delay don't realize the [presumably compression and other dsp related] delays introduced that people will be able to withstand. - jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from [EMAIL PROTECTED] clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
CogentCo
I am testing a Cogent 100mbps connection with a simple web based speed test check.. Can I beg those of you on real high bandwidth connections various places on the 'net to run the speed test check on: http://speedy.higherbandwidth.net It logs your IP and speed.. I am trying to determine how good this connection is. During the day it seems awfully slow from a lot of places that I have access to. It also appears to block Gnutella and similar protocols. Any comments regarding using Cogent as an upstream would be appreciated (in private?). This is a 'freebie' for a few more days... Mike Harrison Real job: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 423-266-6536 Helping test a city sponsored metronet: www.metronetchattanooga.com
Re: PAIX
Jared Mauch wrote: True. As far as VoIP goes, take 2 (digital/pcs/gsm/whatnot) cell phones (preferably on different carriers, or even the same if you want to see it) and call the other phone. Check out the delay in there. People who think that VoIP needs low delay don't realize the [presumably compression and other dsp related] delays introduced that people will be able to withstand. - jared It's not compression only, at least GSM (which I'm familiar with) runs it's audio packetized. Or should we call them cells since they are all the same size? Pete
Re: PAIX
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, David Lesher wrote: Depends. They can also be small. I recently was given 1 hour to ship X-rays and composite MRIs for a 2nd opinion. I was told by the radiologist to take the printed pix, get a late model digital camera and hold the pix up a window with no tree or electrical wires in the background and no direct sunlight and take a digital picture. The 800K files were sent via my home ADSL and worked quite well. -Hank Any idea how large these images are? I seem to recall that they are massive, given ultra-hi-rez data (Are they attaching them to lookOut mail ;-?) And the radiologist may look for a few seconds at best so he is NOT going to want to wait -- A host is a host from coast to [EMAIL PROTECTED] no one will talk to a host that's close[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead20915-1433
Re: Internet Software Consortium expands DNS ''Root Server'' Footprint
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 18 November 2002 04:37 am, Stephen Sprunk wrote: The article has moved to: http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/f_headline.cgi?bw.111702/223210010 We (ISC) also have it now on our web site: http://www.isc.org/ISC/news/pr-11172002.html Best Wishes - - -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Internet Software Consortium - OpenPGP E8048D08 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE92TT2PtVx9OgEjQgRAjqJAKCAN6/EAClTDv9o5j6i8CcrNi2fVQCfRm9+ ZSoVasW8Nq8P/5XJf5528HI= =wuQ5 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: PAIX
Jere Retzer wrote: Vadim Antonov wrote: People are doing various kinds of video over Internet 1; works fine. Then I must be doing it all wrong because I've never had much luck. Maybe it is a function of the origin and destination location + network. Since Portland is not a top 25 market our service has never been very good -- that's why we started an exchange The unfortunate development in the video market has been high deployment of two applications which do streaming without too much regard to how the underlying network works. One sends a high number of fragmented packets and the other is highly suspectible to retransmission collapse where retransmission requests and retransmissions actually overload the already congested path by a margin. Additionally, the deployment habit of content providers to prefer HTTP instead of RTP/UDP makes monitoring and improving on these services and their performance quite challenging. Pete
Re: PAIX
Title: Re: PAIX Well... remember it's speed of light THROUGH fiber which isnt the same, its actually a bit slower then c Coast to coast you should see 35 - 65ms depending on the route. We've all had this thread about router overhead. If there is a congestions point in the middle with buffering and traffic level priorities running, then you are right. Otherwise I dont think you should see 150-180ms. In the real world however, yes, off several dsl links Im seeing those levels to various sites, I think it's more a factor of congested peering links or traffic aggregation at a hub. People arent spending the money to upgrade links right now. At 10:13 -0800 11/18/02, Jere Retzer wrote: Content-Type: text/html Content-Description: HTML Stephen Sprunk wrote: Any point in the US is within 25ms RTT (or less) of a major exchange; eliminating this 25ms of latency will have no effect on VoIP unless you're already near the 250ms RTT limit for other reasons. 25 MS is assuming that the only delay is due to the speed of light. Add equipment, especially routers or other gear that requires manipulating packets and the delays add up quickly. I once read that the most people wil tolerate on a regular basis is around 150-180 ms. I think that is much too high for regular use -- David Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Email] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Pager] Smotons (Smart Photons) trump dumb photons
Re: PAIX
David Diaz I just asked, and "you can video clip images,...85megs is typical"At 12:46 -0500 11/18/02, David Lesher wrote:Any idea how large these images are? I seem to recall thatthey are massive, given ultra-hi-rez data(Are they attaching them to lookOut mail ;-?)And the radiologist may look for a few seconds at best so heis NOT going to want to wait Try asking any radiologist, cardiologist, oncologist how much quality is good enough and they will probably say "it depends." Digital mammography is potentially hundreds of megabytes and you sure don't want to miss (or insert any extra) white spots! What we're seeing is higher and higher resolution combined with "longitudinal" (ie, over time) recording and in some cases additional 'dimensions' added using color and so on, and on top of that the ability to look at various depths, rotate, three spatial dimensions. So, for example a live echocardiogram today will use color as an indication of the "force" of the heart beat. MRIs typically record data at three dimensions. As we approach micron-level resolution the file size grows into the petabytes. No, I did not make a mistake there. Currently, no one even stores these but they will want to in time. Given our demands for instant feedback on our health these kinds of applications will eventually become more real time. One internationally recognized teaching hospital in the upper midwest advertises that all their x-rays are read by a radiologist within 30 minutes.
Re: PAIX
Actually the way it seems to work is head over to the local server,
and the radiologist goes through several patients at a time, taking
not of any notations the techie made on the film. I do not think
most are emergencies or code blues, just someone coming in with a
pain etc. 5min probably wont make a difference. If they are really
showing those kind of problems then of course the doctor is called in
from home by the attending.
Still for remote clinics etc, it's a powerful resource. Maybe for
second opinions when something isnt clear when surgery is needed
immediately or not.
I also know that certain places do not have good health care like
indian reservations say in Alaska. This way an expert can really
help even if not local.
The internet it's not just for spam anymore ;-)
ss
At 13:19 -0500 11/18/02, David Lesher wrote:
Unnamed Administration sources reported that Stephen Sprunk said:
BW, of course, depends on how fast you want the transfers to go.
The film files
are in the hundreds of MB range, and providers are upgrading from
FT1 FR to FT3
ATM at major sites.
The answer is not wait at all...
See, over the last 20 years, radiologists went from being the
butt of MD jokes to being high demand subspecialists. They can
look at a view and charge {say} $100 for a glance.
If they can do say 5/minute, great. Ten, better. But in any case,
no way will [s]he cool heels waiting for an image to paint.
You want a buffer locally of the next n just to be sure.
They might send, oh, 6 scans; he looks at the first and says
Forget the rest, this guy's got {Mumble}, call the surgeon.
(Or Call the morgue, this guy will be there shortly..)
--
A host is a host from coast to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
no one will talk to a host that's close[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead20915-1433
Re: PAIX
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, David Diaz wrote: In the real world however, yes, off several dsl links Im seeing those levels to various sites, I think it's more a factor of congested peering links or traffic aggregation at a hub. People arent spending the money to upgrade links right now. I should move to whichever shangri-la you reside in; How about 4 seconds from a sfba SBC dsl link to www.pbi.net: http://snark.net/~mrtg/www.pbi.net.html Correlating data to other points on the net seems to suggest the problem isn't congested peering :) http://snark.net/~mrtg/ matto Shame on you, pacbell. [EMAIL PROTECTED]darwin Flowers on the razor wire/I know you're here/We are few/And far between/I was thinking about her skin/Love is a many splintered thing/Don't be afraid now/Just walk on in. #include disclaim.h
Re: PAIX
David Diaz Actually the way it seems to work is head over to the local server, and the radiologist goes through several patients at a time, taking not of any notations the techie made on the film. I do not think most are emergencies or code blues, just someone coming in with a pain etc. 5min probably wont make a difference. If they are really showing those kind of problems then of course the doctor is called in from home by the attending.Still for remote clinics etc, it's a powerful resource. Maybe for second opinions when something isnt clear when surgery is needed immediately or not.I also know that certain places do not have good health care like indian reservations say in Alaska. This way an expert can really help even if not local.The internet it's not just for spam anymore ;-) In Internet2, we're starting to see the Internet used for real time distributed "tumor board" meetings. The way this works, you have some oncologists (cancer specialists) and radiologist, and the attending physicians for some cancer patients. The group consults on the appropriate treatment program for the patients. Using the Internet, it is possible to bringsome pretty heavy expertise to the discussion, which is important for smaller communities that do not have access to these experts.
Re: PAIX
Wow, well Im in the SE. Matter of fact, I did get adsl and sdsl from 2 different providers on the same line. Maybe I can multihome ;-) Telocity seems to be doing a decent job lately, however they seemed to be doing some maint yesterday as it was the 1st time I noticed any issues. Oh Telocity is dtv owned now. It would be curious to see how the cable/dsl providers are doing lately. I know cox has a buildout going to ashburn and will be doing peering. Wonder if that is going to help or hurt latency and packet loss. Depends if they decide not to continue upgrading their transit circuits (it would seem to me). I usually say more peering is a good thing. Hopefully the new broadband players will have a more open peering policy and KEEP it that way. Seems once people get close to tier1 they close it again. Like a 2yr window opening and closing. d At 11:29 -0800 11/18/02, just me wrote: On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, David Diaz wrote: In the real world however, yes, off several dsl links Im seeing those levels to various sites, I think it's more a factor of congested peering links or traffic aggregation at a hub. People arent spending the money to upgrade links right now. I should move to whichever shangri-la you reside in; How about 4 seconds from a sfba SBC dsl link to www.pbi.net: http://snark.net/~mrtg/www.pbi.net.html Correlating data to other points on the net seems to suggest the problem isn't congested peering :) http://snark.net/~mrtg/ matto Shame on you, pacbell. [EMAIL PROTECTED]darwin Flowers on the razor wire/I know you're here/We are few/And far between/I was thinking about her skin/Love is a many splintered thing/Don't be afraid now/Just walk on in. #include disclaim.h
Re: PAIX
Thus spake Jere Retzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Stephen Sprunk wrote: Any point in the US is within 25ms RTT (or less) of a major exchange; eliminating this 25ms of latency will have no effect on VoIP unless you're already near the 250ms RTT limit for other reasons. Can you please upgrade to a MUA with standard quoting semantics? 25 MS is assuming that the only delay is due to the speed of light. No. I'm asserting that every populated area in the U.S. is within 25ms ping time of a major exchange, absent congested pipes. Add equipment, especially routers or other gear that requires manipulating packets and the delays add up quickly. If your router(s), switch(es), or firewall(s) need more than 1ms to forward a packet, it's time to select a new vendor. It's 20 hops between my home and work box, including 2900mi of fiber, a couple firewalls, and a DSL link -- and that's only 80-90ms. We clearly don't need an exchange for every 100km2 to get acceptable RTT. What we need are uncongested pipes. I once read that the most people wil tolerate on a regular basis is around 150-180 ms. I think that is much too high for regular use ITU G.113 says users won't even notice the latency until it his 250ms. Do you have scientific studies that show 150-180ms is problematic? I'm sure the ITU (and a few hundred telcos) will be interested. Business experience shows users will tolerate over 1000ms latency if there's an economic incentive. There are many companies doing voice-over-internet that operate networks this way, and they're making a lot of money doing it. S
Re: Simulated disaster exercise? Re: PAIX
In the 1990's the MAEs and Gigaswitches would give us an unscheduled failure of a major exchange point on a regular basis, which let us demostrate our disaster recovery capabilities. With the improved reliability, i.e. the PAIXes haven't had a catastrophic failure, we haven't had as many opportunities to demonstrate how well we can handle a disaster at those locations. Without creating an actual disaster, what if all the providers turned off their BGP sessions with other providers at a PAIX (or Equinix or LINX or where ever), both through the shared switch and private point-to-point links, for an hour. More than likely no one would notice, but then we would have some hard data. Individually providers have tested parts of their own network, but I haven't heard of any coordinated efforts to test recovery across all the service providers in a particular location. This was more or less done in Sweden two weeks ago. In Stockholm there are two sites located in Government own locations. We migrated one of these sites to a new location, and then shut down one of the halves for around 8 hours. Best regards, - kurtis -
Re: CogentCo
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 14:46:51 -0500 (EST), Mike (meuon) Harrison wrote: It also appears to block Gnutella and similar protocols. You should never sign an IP access agreement that doesn't give you access to the filtering rules that affect your traffic. Ideally, you should strongly avoid agreements that don't let you opt out of filtering you don't want. Here's the type of language we typically insist on. If a provider won't agree to this type of language, odds are very high they plan to filter your in strange ways or aren't serious about providing business-class IP services. 1) XX agrees to provide with information about any filtering rules that apply to traffic to or from . Such information shall include a precise description of what types of traffic the filter affects. 2) Where possible, XX agrees to provide with 2 business days advanced notice to any planned filtering changes. In the event that XX makes an emergency or expedited filtering change that affects traffic to or from , XX agrees to notify as soon as practical. 3) In the event XX makes a filtering change that affects traffic to or from , and such change is not justified by technical necessity or emergency, XX agrees to, at 's request, either remove the filter or exempt traffic to and from 's network from the filter. To qualify as an emergency filter, a filter must be temporary. Technical necessity includes, but is not limited to, the following types of filtering: A) Dropping packets with invalid source addresses. This would include RFC1918 or unassigned addresses. B) Dropping packets at the request of the originator or recipient of those packets. The following types of filtering are not considered technical necessity: A) Blocking specific ports or protocols because an exploit or attack might use them in the absence of knowledge of a specific attack source or destination. This would including blocking a particular TCP or UDP port in response to its being used by a trojan or probe. B) Blocking specific types of packets (by port or protocol) even though they are technically valid IP packets with valid source and destination addresses for purposes of disabling particular applications or protocols. This would include, for example, blocking packets with an IP type of 255 (raw IP). A dialup account is one thing. But 100Mbps business-class access is another story. You should know exactly what's happening to *your* traffic. DS
Re: [RE: free network monitoring/management tools]
wayne, i actually already had that link, and had gone through the archives, but was looking for some 'reviews' of different products (if i wasn't clear on that point, please accept my apologies) - i have gotten some great info and recommendations thus far (thank you to everyone). i will do a write-up when i get some testing done later this week joshua Gustavus, Wayne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joshua, Hate to give the std answer, but I suggest a review of the archives over the past 2 months--this thread was just recently re-hashed. Also, there was a presentation on Managing IP Networks with Free Software at NANOG 26. Check it out here: http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0210/ppt/stephen.pdf -Wayne -Original Message- From: Joshua Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 10:56 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: free network monitoring/management tools hello to all, i would appreciate your your knowledge and experiences regarding freely available tools for network monitoring and management (all cisco now, some other stuff later). i would prefer free tools as i have no budget :) i am looking for the following (it will be running on either freebsd or redhat): AAA - i have been trying to find a tacacs+ daemon/program that doesn't require me to also learn *sql to set up the backend database (if this is the only choice, then i can learn it) config monitoring/management - rancid or rtrmon are the two that i have found. any preferences on one over the other in terms of ease of use, ability to modify/improve, efficiency, etc? network/syslog monitoring - some of the likely candidates i have found are nagios or netsaint, jffnms, nmis, opennms, or maybe snip (formerly nocol) - i need something that is fairly easy to setup and use, and it doesn't have to do a whole lot (just some basic notifications for now). decent documentation is also necessary, and a pretty map would be nice for my noc, but this isn't a prereq. my scripting/programming skills are rudimentary, so it would be ideal if it was at least partially plug-and-play (i know i know, sorry). i would appreciate any input (i am still reading through the archives for useful tidbits), and i, of course, will gladly summarize for the list. thanks in advance joshua Walk with me through the Universe, And along the way see how all of us are Connected. Feast the eyes of your Soul, On the Love that abounds. In all places at once, seemingly endless, Like your own existence. - Stephen Hawking - Walk with me through the Universe, And along the way see how all of us are Connected. Feast the eyes of your Soul, On the Love that abounds. In all places at once, seemingly endless, Like your own existence. - Stephen Hawking -
Re: PAIX
I definitely would NOT want to see my doctor over a video link when I need him. The technology is simply not up to providing realistic telepresense, and a lot of diagnostically relevant information is carried by things like smell and touch, and little details. So telemedicine is a poor substitute for having a doctor on site; and should be used only when it is absolutely the only option (i.e. emergency on an airplane, etc). (As a side note - that also explains reluctance of doctors to rely on computerized diagnostic systems: they feel that the system does not have all relevant information (which is true) and that they have to follow its advice anyway, or run a chance of being accused of malpractice. This is certainly the case with textbooks - if a doctor does something clearly against a textbook advice, with negative outcome, lawyers have a feast - but doctors never get rewarded for following their common sense when outcome is positive. And automated diagnostic systems are a lot more specific with their recommendations than textbooks!). Emergency situations, of course, require some pre-emptive engineering to handle, but by no means require major investment to allow a major percentage of traffic to be handled as emergeny traffic. As with VoIP, simple prioritization is more than sufficient for telemedicine apps. (Note that radiology applications are simply bulk file transfers, no interactivity). --vadim On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Stephen Sprunk wrote: Thus spake David Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] I agree with everything said Stephen except the part about the medical industry. There are a couple of very large companies doing views over an IP backbone down here. Radiology is very big on networking. They send your films or videos over the network to where the Radiologist is. For example one hospital owns about 6 others down here, and during off hours like weekends etc, the 5 hospitals transmit their films to where the 1 radiologist on duty is. I meant my reply to be directed only at telemedecine, where the patient is at home and consults their general practitioner or primary care physician via broadband for things like the flu or a broken arm. While there's lots of talk about this in sci-fi books, there's no sign of this making any significant inroads today, nor does it qualify as a killer app for home broadband. I do work with several medical companies who push radiology etc. around on the back end for resource-sharing and other purposes. This is quite real today, and is driving massive bandwidth upgrades for healthcare providers. However, I don't think it qualifies under most people's idea of telemedecine. S
Re: PAIX
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Jere Retzer wrote: Maybe it is a function of the origin and destination location + network. Since Portland is not a top 25 market our service has never been very good that's why we started an exchange Yep, Intenet service quality is very uneven; and it does not seem to be an easily quantifiable factor allowing consumers and businesses to select a provider. So, all providers looking the same, they choose the lowest-priced ones, thus forcing providers to go air transport way (i.e. untimately destructive price wars). With full understanding of political infeasibility of proposed, I think that the best thing ISPs could do is to fund some independent company dedicated to publishing comprehensive regional ISP quality information - in a format allowing apple-to-apple comparison. Then they could justify price spread by having facts to back them up. --vadim
some of these are worse than others
in the last few months since i most recently cleared out the database, my test network (a defunct /16) has received 3.8M http transactions containing 460K distinct worm bodies sent from 137K source addresses. the top 8, by quantity, are: srcaddr | count |first|last -++-+- 61.137.107.137 | 300772 | 2002-11-05 13:29:26 | 2002-11-14 03:19:42 210.82.7.205| 72755 | 2002-11-13 14:12:00 | 2002-11-14 11:23:07 210.12.30.12| 32450 | 2002-11-01 08:34:09 | 2002-11-01 09:04:10 24.193.82.174 | 31996 | 2002-10-30 11:56:58 | 2002-10-30 13:07:11 131.204.108.181 | 22524 | 2002-11-18 17:33:04 | 2002-11-18 18:05:13 24.76.78.204| 22305 | 2002-10-30 12:13:39 | 2002-10-30 13:26:52 80.11.57.19 | 11379 | 2002-11-01 09:34:01 | 2002-11-01 10:49:20 63.142.226.235 | 10178 | 2002-11-08 12:51:44 | 2002-11-08 13:42:06 if you see one of your own up there, please put your hands on some lineman's shears and Do The Right Thing.
Re: [Re: PAIX]
for my voip network/peers, i can withstand rtt's of around 600ms - granted the quality sucks at that sort of latency, but data/ip routes into some of the less-than-developed places in the world are crap at best, and any phone is better than none Jared Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:13:48AM -0800, Jere Retzer wrote: Stephen Sprunk wrote: Any point in the US is within 25ms RTT (or less) of a major exchange; eliminating this 25ms of latency will have no effect on VoIP unless you're already near the 250ms RTT limit for other reasons. 25 MS is assuming that the only delay is due to the speed of light. Add equipment, especially routers or other gear that requires manipulating packets and the delays add up quickly. I once read that the most people wil tolerate on a regular basis is around 150-180 ms. I think that is much too high for regular use True. As far as VoIP goes, take 2 (digital/pcs/gsm/whatnot) cell phones (preferably on different carriers, or even the same if you want to see it) and call the other phone. Check out the delay in there. People who think that VoIP needs low delay don't realize the [presumably compression and other dsp related] delays introduced that people will be able to withstand. - jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from [EMAIL PROTECTED] clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine. Walk with me through the Universe, And along the way see how all of us are Connected. Feast the eyes of your Soul, On the Love that abounds. In all places at once, seemingly endless, Like your own existence. - Stephen Hawking -
Re: PAIX
Vadim Antonov wrote:I definitely would NOT want to see my doctor over a video link when I needhim. The technology is simply not up to providing realistic telepresense,and a lot of diagnostically relevant information is carried by things likesmell and touch, and little details. So telemedicine is a poor substitutefor having a doctor on site; and should be used only when it isabsolutely the only option (i.e. emergency on an airplane, etc).If you are really ill, this is true but there are always gray areas that go into the decision whether the 'illness' is worth a visit. Physicians often order things for patients they know based upon a phone call or even e-mail if they feel reasonably comfortable. I think that there are lots of situations that a physician would recommend "just keep Johnny home for a couple days, give him plenty of fluids and [fill in the blank] call me in two days if he isn't feeling better." Having live video of Johnny is a pretty good supplement to voice, or for that matter the receptionist could record the video call for the physician and he could play it back when he has a few minutes. It's potentially even more important with elderly shut-ins, because bringing them in can be difficult and expensive and their immune systems are typically weaker so you should try to minimize their exposure to people with contagious diseases. Jere
Re: PAIX
A much more real world example is in Heart medicine. I worked on a system that used ds1's between hospitals. Say you have hospital A which is a major institution and h ou have hospital B which is more remote and has fewer skilled Doctors etc. Using a standard such as Dicom a Dr in Hospital B. can send your cath image to a specialist in Hospital A. That specialist can do a study and determine with the primary Doctor in hospital B. the best course of action. Also, should it be critical your x-rays or cath images have already arrived at Hospital A. while you are in the air being rapidly transported to A from B. The team can already be planning and up o spead on your condition by the time you arrive saving in this case minutes and minutes and seconds count. Your Doctor in B. also can be kept up to speed and have his reco records updated from A s well. Its a very real situation one that Heartlab Inc. helped design and worked really well. Also don't forget that most Major hospitals use ATM even to the desk top. They can provide telemedicine services very easily over the wide area but in many cases these are not over the public IP backbone but rather over their own network. On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Jere Retzer wrote: Vadim Antonov wrote: I definitely would NOT want to see my doctor over a video link when I need him. The technology is simply not up to providing realistic telepresense, and a lot of diagnostically relevant information is carried by things like smell and touch, and little details. So telemedicine is a poor substitute for having a doctor on site; and should be used only when it is absolutely the only option (i.e. emergency on an airplane, etc). If you are really ill, this is true but there are always gray areas that go into the decision whether the 'illness' is worth a visit. Physicians often order things for patients they know based upon a phone call or even e-mail if they feel reasonably comfortable. I think that there are lots of situations that a physician would recommend just keep Johnny home for a couple days, give him plenty of fluids and [fill in the blank] ¯ call me in two days if he isn't feeling better. Having live video of Johnny is a pretty good supplement to voice, or for that matter the receptionist could record the video call for the physician and he could play it back when he has a few minutes. It's potentially even more important with elderly shut-ins, because bringing them in can be difficult and expensive and their immune systems are typically weaker so you should try to minimize their exposure to people with contagious diseases. Jere
Re: some of these are worse than others
Which signature database you use to match these or just log the 404's ? Pete - Original Message - From: Paul Vixie [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 11:31 PM Subject: some of these are worse than others in the last few months since i most recently cleared out the database, my test network (a defunct /16) has received 3.8M http transactions containing 460K distinct worm bodies sent from 137K source addresses. the top 8, by quantity, are: srcaddr | count |first|last -++-+- 61.137.107.137 | 300772 | 2002-11-05 13:29:26 | 2002-11-14 03:19:42 210.82.7.205| 72755 | 2002-11-13 14:12:00 | 2002-11-14 11:23:07 210.12.30.12| 32450 | 2002-11-01 08:34:09 | 2002-11-01 09:04:10 24.193.82.174 | 31996 | 2002-10-30 11:56:58 | 2002-10-30 13:07:11 131.204.108.181 | 22524 | 2002-11-18 17:33:04 | 2002-11-18 18:05:13 24.76.78.204| 22305 | 2002-10-30 12:13:39 | 2002-10-30 13:26:52 80.11.57.19 | 11379 | 2002-11-01 09:34:01 | 2002-11-01 10:49:20 63.142.226.235 | 10178 | 2002-11-08 12:51:44 | 2002-11-08 13:42:06 if you see one of your own up there, please put your hands on some lineman's shears and Do The Right Thing.
Re: CogentCo
It also appears to block Gnutella and similar protocols. You should never sign an IP access agreement that doesn't give you access to the filtering rules that affect your traffic. Ideally, you should strongly We have not signed a thing. If I even attempted to explain the complex political fiasco that got us here, even Nanog members would be shocked. And as interested parties are on this list (I got a call already) and monitoring this discussion, I'll refrain. Theoretically, the other end of this 100mbps connection is Gig-E and is costing $20-30g/month.. we are testing it for suitability for our purposes... so far it is not making the grade. We've been spoiled by a UUnet and ATT connection. :) For those that wanted the bad (140 lines of perl) speed check CGI, it's: http://speedy.higherbandwidth.net/speed.zip No, it's not secure or very bright.. It's a quick idiot check and is very useful, especially when it can use an suid'd MTR. And lastly, THANK YOU for all the testing, the marvelous traceroutes and data collected and the personal (mostly off-list) e-mails regarding Cogent. --Mike-- alpha/beta-testing metronetchattanooga.com
Bin Laden Associate Warns of Cyberattack
Might be of interest: http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/story/0,10801,76000,00.html
Re: Bin Laden Associate Warns of Cyberattack
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Might be of interest: http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/story/0,10801,76000,00.html There are millions of Muslims around the world involved in hacking the Pentagon and Israeli government sites, said Bakri. Uh huh. -Dan -- [-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]
Re: [Re: Bin Laden Associate Warns of Cyberattack]
and millions of others hacking at everything else...sounds like fear mongering to me - guess we will probably be seeing a 'new' cyber security bill soon Dan Hollis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Might be of interest: http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/story/0,10801,76000,00.html There are millions of Muslims around the world involved in hacking the Pentagon and Israeli government sites, said Bakri. Uh huh. -Dan -- [-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-] Walk with me through the Universe, And along the way see how all of us are Connected. Feast the eyes of your Soul, On the Love that abounds. In all places at once, seemingly endless, Like your own existence. - Stephen Hawking -
Re: PAIX
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Jere Retzer wrote: It's potentially even more important with elderly shut-ins, because bringing them in can be difficult and expensive and their immune systems are typically weaker so you should try to minimize their exposure to people with contagious diseases. What happened to the gool ol' house calls? --vadim
RE: some of these are worse than others
If you don't mind partitioning yourself, 80.49% (the top 3) of these come from a subset of APNIC space ... Understand Paul, I'm not advocating you partitioning yourself, given what you do. Its just an interesting data point. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Paul Vixie Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 4:31 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: some of these are worse than others in the last few months since i most recently cleared out the database, my test network (a defunct /16) has received 3.8M http transactions containing 460K distinct worm bodies sent from 137K source addresses. the top 8, by quantity, are: srcaddr | count |first|last -++-+- 61.137.107.137 | 300772 | 2002-11-05 13:29:26 | 2002-11-14 03:19:42 210.82.7.205| 72755 | 2002-11-13 14:12:00 | 2002-11-14 11:23:07 210.12.30.12| 32450 | 2002-11-01 08:34:09 | 2002-11-01 09:04:10 24.193.82.174 | 31996 | 2002-10-30 11:56:58 | 2002-10-30 13:07:11 131.204.108.181 | 22524 | 2002-11-18 17:33:04 | 2002-11-18 18:05:13 24.76.78.204| 22305 | 2002-10-30 12:13:39 | 2002-10-30 13:26:52 80.11.57.19 | 11379 | 2002-11-01 09:34:01 | 2002-11-01 10:49:20 63.142.226.235 | 10178 | 2002-11-08 12:51:44 | 2002-11-08 13:42:06 if you see one of your own up there, please put your hands on some lineman's shears and Do The Right Thing.
Even the New York Times withholds the address
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/19/nyregion/19FUEL.html The New York Times is withholding the addresses of the buildings at the request of city officials, who cited their importance to international telecommunications and their potential as terrorist targets. While almost everyone on this list knows which building is the subject of the article, we can discuss the issue without discussing the particular building. On-site fuel storage is one of those double-edge swords. Without on-site fuel there are several ordinary disasters which would be worsened if the telecommunications infrastructure went dark. For example, during ice stores, hurricanes, etc we want telecom facilities to stay up for one, two or three days, depending on how long you believe it will take for the roads to be passible for fuel trucks or the power to be restored. On the other hand, storing 72-hours of fuel in a building is a lot of fuel. NORAD has a million of gallons of fuel to run for at least 30 days inside the mountain. Hospitals, police stations, etc have a similar problem. Natural gas, fuel cells, more batteries each have their own issues. Less fuel, more risk of a community's 9-1-1 service being interrupted. More fuel, more risk of a catastrophic building fire.
