On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 09:03:59AM -0500, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
...
I would think that ICANN is off topic for NANOG?
...
(a) Why would you think that? I would have thought it spot on.
(b) Would that prevent discussion here? ;-)
--
Joe Yao
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/12/13/
telecoms_want_their_products_to_travel_on_a_faster_internet/
My commentary is reserved at this point... but, it does make me
shudder.
Before you complain... It did not require a subscription when I
first saw it.
On Dec 13, 2005, at 2:56 PM, Blaine Christian wrote:
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/12/13/
telecoms_want_their_products_to_travel_on_a_faster_internet/
My commentary is reserved at
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Blaine Christian wrote:
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/12/13/
telecoms_want_their_products_to_travel_on_a_faster_internet/
My commentary is reserved at this point... but, it does make me
shudder.
Comcast has been advertising in press releases
Title: Message
We need to move our
Primary DNS server from legacy IP space provided by our upstreams toour
ARIN Assigned IP space. I am looking for advice and any gotchas. I
couldn't find any white papers to this affect or archived articles or
postings. If someone does have a resource for
I would think you would want to drop your DNS record TTLs for all
domains being moved to something very low several days before the
switch-over period.
On 12/13/05, Eric Kagan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We need to move our Primary DNS server from legacy IP space provided by our
upstreams to
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104STORY=/www/story/12-12-2005/0004231957EDATE=
Unlike traditional Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) offerings that
run on the public Internet, Comcast Digital Voice calls originate and
travel over Comcast's advanced, proprietary
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sam Cr
ooks writes:
I would think you would want to drop your DNS record TTLs for all
domains being moved to something very low several days before the
switch-over period.
More precisely, you want to change the TTL on the NS records, which are
in the parent zone.
hey is any one seeing a slow google to day... packet loss 22 hops...
visual traceroute show that it goes from chicago to los angeles to singapore
to italy to amsterdam and then finally to google in sunnyvale ca.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ping google.com
PING google.com (72.14.207.99): 56 data bytes
64
On Tuesday 13 December 2005 02:46 pm, you wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ping google.com
PING google.com (72.14.207.99): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 72.14.207.99: icmp_seq=1 ttl=243 time=447.727 ms
64 bytes from 72.14.207.99: icmp_seq=2 ttl=244 time=445.543 ms
64 bytes from 72.14.207.99:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Chris Stone wrote:
On Tuesday 13 December 2005 02:46 pm, you wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ping google.com
PING google.com (72.14.207.99): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 72.14.207.99: icmp_seq=1 ttl=243 time=447.727 ms
64 bytes from 72.14.207.99: icmp_seq=2 ttl=244
Erik Sundberg wrote:
hey is any one seeing a slow google to day... packet loss 22 hops...
visual traceroute show that it goes from chicago to los angeles to singapore
to italy to amsterdam and then finally to google in sunnyvale ca.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ping google.com
PING google.com
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 03:46:43PM -0600, Erik Sundberg wrote:
hey is any one seeing a slow google to day... packet loss 22 hops...
visual traceroute show that it goes from chicago to los angeles to singapore
to italy to amsterdam and then finally to google in sunnyvale ca.
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 05:02:42PM -0500, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
You'd be better off with an AS-PATH, but just follow the chain... Savvis
- Singtel - Pakistan Telecom - Seabone - Google. Where I'm from, we
call that a routing leak. Doesn't take too much work to guess where
either.
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
Oh and FYI it is still going on, though the route just changed 4 mins ago:
[BGP/170] 00:04:21, localpref 200
AS path: 7473 17557 17557 17557 17557 5400 15169 I
Singtel - Pakistan Telecom - British
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
[BGP/170] 00:04:21, localpref 200
AS path: 7473 17557 17557 17557 17557 5400 15169 I
Singtel - Pakistan Telecom - British Telecom - Google. AS17557 is
leaking its BGP table, and AS7473 is not
Sean,
I think you are skirting the real issue here.
Prioritizing traffic in order to provide reliable transport for isochronous
services is one thing; Using QoS features to de-prioritize traffic from a
competitor or a company who refuses to pay to access your customers is
something completely
--- Joe McGuckin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What good is 6Mbit DSL from my ISP (say, SBC for
example) if only a small
portion of the net (sites that pay for non-degraded
access) loads at a
reasonable speed and everything else sucks?
There are two possible ways of having a tiered system
-
What good is 6Mbit DSL from my ISP (say, SBC for example) if only a
small
portion of the net (sites that pay for non-degraded access) loads at a
reasonable speed and everything else sucks?
One might argue that in such a situation, the end user is getting
less value than they
did
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Tony Li wrote:
What good is 6Mbit DSL from my ISP (say, SBC for example) if only a
small
portion of the net (sites that pay for non-degraded access) loads at a
reasonable speed and everything else sucks?
One might argue that in such a situation, the end user is
I know I would.
Regards
Marshall
On Dec 13, 2005, at 11:17 PM, Tony Li wrote:
What good is 6Mbit DSL from my ISP (say, SBC for example) if only
a small
portion of the net (sites that pay for non-degraded access) loads
at a
reasonable speed and everything else sucks?
One might argue
One might argue that in such a situation, the end user is getting
less value than they
did previously. End users might then either demand a price break or
might vote with
their connectivity.
the last 2 times this has come up I think there was the suggestion that
given other options at
Thus spake Christopher L. Morrow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Tony Li wrote:
What good is 6Mbit DSL from my ISP (say, SBC for example) if
only a small portion of the net (sites that pay for non-degraded
access) loads at a reasonable speed and everything else sucks?
One might
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Thus spake Christopher L. Morrow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
users might switch to alternate access methods. That works as
long as there are alternate access methods, and as long as the
telecom's don't 'cabal' and all do the same hideously bad thing...
24 matches
Mail list logo