folks would: 1) introduce another cooling system
(with all the necessary redundancy), and 2) put pressurized
water in the immediate vicinity of any computer equipment.
/John
failure modes in that setup will be quite the
adventure, which depending on your availability target may be
a non-issue or a great reason to consider moving to new space.
/John
Paul,
Using a multi-stage filter system with the large partical filters in front and
an ionizing stage to remove smaller but still large enough particals to cause
dust. Clean room filters would be an overkill.
John (ISDN) Lee
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Mar 16, 2008, at 2:36 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
I think it was Abovenet that blackholed a /24 of (I want to say MAPS,
but that's not right) an anti-spam-RBL sometime pre-1999?
ORBS, and the only reason it became such a big deal was that Abovenet
was the upstream of ORBS' upstream.
a better method of
providing their services to each other and the public.
John (ISDN) Lee
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Glen Kent
Sent: Sat 3/15/2008 2:19 AM
To: NANOG list
Subject: Transition Planning for IPv6 as mandated by the US Govt
Hi,
I was just
to the details, but if
someone else knows where it is it'd be good to know.
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0710/presentations/Kapela-lightning.pdf
-John
to continue to grow.
/John
you add both together with smaller size lines and
transistors on the chips, I would project SOHO prices of 250 - 350 $ US to
start with for v4 v6 and dropping from there.
John (ISDN) Lee
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Frank Bulk - iNAME
Sent: Wed 3/12/2008
to agree to run smokeping and monitor each other. That's a great tool for
visualizing changes in latency and works just as well with ICMP as with
HTTP.
--
John A. Kilpatrick
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Email| http://www.hypergeek.net/
[EMAIL PROTECTED
Anyone else seeing the radb whois server as being down?
-John
Yep, works from my other desk machine... Same subnet, different IP as
well.
I note it appears to be breaking their web whois queries as well as I
get a connect failed: Connection timed out notice on any of the
webform updates.
John
-Original Message-
From: Mike Tancsa [mailto
Anyone aware if this is causing any bleedover to Sprint? Seeing massive delays
(~280+ ms) and drops between Relay, MD (144.232.15.2) and San Jose
(144.232.8.145).
Also seeing same from fort worth (144.232.9.192) to ana (144.232.20.64).
Cisco.com is a good destination to try.
On Thu, 28 Feb
, anyone having issues.
Anyone got more info?
Thanks,
John
On Feb 25, 2008, at 1:22 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
except that even the 'good guys' make mistakes. Belt + suspenders
please... is it really that hard for a network service provider to
have a prefix-list on their customer bgp sessions?? L3 does it, ATT
does it, Sprint does it, as do
to a large number of their customers, our
feed appears to be that way (or they apply RADB filters instantly which
would be a bit impressive).
John van Oppen
Spectrum Networks LLC
206.973.8302 (Direct)
206.973.8300 (main office)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 11:20:53AM -0800, Jay Hennigan wrote:
Rod Beck wrote:
I am suggesting a Certified Drinkers Event in the hotel bar Sunday evening.
Any Hash House Harriers in our midst?
The thought of the cross-section of society that would partake in both
NANOG and H^3 is rather
the report anyway. It
is an interesting read.
John
Scott Weeks wrote:
These statements (and others in it) are very telling about the type of report
this is:
...percent of Internet content was classified as unwanted...
...hosting source of adult, socially deviant and criminal content
On Feb 6, 2008, at 12:48 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
IPv6 capable nameservers are supposed to use EDNS (see IPv6
node requirements). The roots can be tuned to preference
A vs records. Most/all currently maintained caching
servers support EDNS now or the next
Sent: Tue 2/5/2008 2:49 PM
To: John Lee
Subject: Jeanette Symons
Hi John,
You may remember me. I am Sasha Match. Steve Speckenbach was my late husband.
I saw your posting online about Jeanette's death and several people were
requesting information
.
John Lee
to know the
quality of their services...
John
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 10:25:17AM -0800, Mike Lyon wrote:
Anyone ever heard of these peeps?
http://www.qualitytech.com/
Feedback on any of their services?
-Mike
into there on a Sat. night.
Thought ATT said they were doing maintenance *next* week...
John
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 05:51:59AM +, Paul Ferguson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -- randal k [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anybody have any insight into what's happening to ATT
On Jan 16, 2008, at 4:37 PM, Mike Donahue wrote:
2. What's the technical terminology for the request for ATT to
simply
start advertising our netblock called? I'm wondering if they're not
understanding our request.
According to the cached copy of ATT's bgp4policy.doc at:
Anyone have any detail on the apparent GBLX fiber cut between Seattle
and northern California? The outage has been ongoing since
mid-morning.
Thanks,
John van Oppen
Spectrum Networks LLC
206.973.8302 (Direct)
206.973.8300 (main office)
Yep, it is sure little or no maintenance is being performed. :)
John
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Leigh Porter
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2007 4:06 PM
To: Crawford, Scott
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: v6 subnet size for DSL
being scanned, tested and exploited. Plugging
the words 'rfi' and 'scanner' into a search engine for further detail.
John
Wilshire within a few hours.
John Savageau
Managing Director
CRG West, One Wilshire
Los Angeles
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Steven Haigh
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 2:33 PM
To: NANOG List
Subject: Re: Oregon storms affect trans
those sorts of texts as useful so I can't
really speak to any of the multitude available.
John
On Nov 27, 2007, at 4:04 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Jared Mauch:
Within the next 2 major software releases (Microsoft OS) they're
going to by default require signed binaries. This will be the
only viable
solution to the malware threat. Other operating systems may follow.
be the difference.
Others?
John
At 12:38 AM 11/6/2007, Adam Rothschild wrote:
On 2007-11-05-10:51:58, Gregory Boehnlein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm considering dropping Cogent completely [...]
Always a good idea.
1. Level 3
2. MCI/Verizon
3. ATT
I'm looking for comments from actual
ideas.
Yes, let's let the IETF go off for 7 years to debate and try to put
into an RFC something else that won't actually be used. Sorry Sean,
you've lost me on this one. :-)
John
experience? I did one a couple years and I haven't
heard of things improving markedly since then, but then I am still
recovering from having drunk from that jug of kool-aid. :-)
John
much
kiss of death unless you have a very good answer.
John
On Oct 15, 2007, at 7:41, Wolfgang Tremmel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cix.net wrote:
Am 15.10.2007 um 07:09 schrieb Bradley Urberg Carlson:
I have a few customers' customers, who appear at a local IX. Due
to the MLPA-like nature of the IX, I hear their prefixes both at
the IX and via my
On Oct 15, 2007, at 9:48 AM, Mike Leber wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Bradley Urberg Carlson wrote:
I have a few customers' customers, who appear at a local IX. Due to
the MLPA-like nature of the IX, I hear their prefixes both at the IX
and via my own transit customers. I normally use
today with NAT
and it only gets worse as utilization increases.
/John
for a model which works
3 years from now, when the need to deploy IPv6 is clear and present.
At that point, there's high value in having a standard NAT-PT / ALGs
approach for providing limited IPv4 backwards compatibility.
/John
At 5:36 AM -0400 10/2/07, John Curran wrote:
...
tunnelling is still going to require NAT in the deployment mode once
IPv4 addresses are readily available.
c/are/are no longer/
(before my morning caffeine fix)
/John
NAT-PT for this purpose, despite
the fact that it meets their needs?
/John
Standard or just be a very
widely deployed Historic protocol?
Oh wait, wrong mailing list... ;-)
/John
IPv6 support, which is something we've
lacked to date.
/John
this particular carrier got stung...
;-)
/John
At 4:47 PM -0400 9/17/07, Martin Hannigan wrote:
On 9/17/07, Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 17-sep-2007, at 19:06, Martin Hannigan wrote:
Getting back to my original discussion with Barrett, what should we do
about naming? I initially though that segregating v6 in a
),
but caution is required when the name has multiple services running.
/John
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 05:51:38PM -0400, Alex Pilosov wrote:
[...]
Analog modem and voice line and TAP software (like sendpage or qpage)
I like the TAP route with qpage.
I was starting to get spam via my provider's e-mail to SMS gateway. They were
kind enough to disable it, and we use TAP
At 9:21 PM -0400 9/3/07, Joe Abley wrote:
Is there a groundswell of *operators* who think TCP should be replaced, and
believe it can be replaced?
Just imagine *that* switchover, with the same level of
transition planning as we received with IPv6...
;-)
/John
At 7:40 PM -0700 9/3/07, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
John Curran wrote:
At 9:21 PM -0400 9/3/07, Joe Abley wrote:
Is there a groundswell of *operators* who think TCP should be replaced, and
believe it can be replaced?
Just imagine *that* switchover, with the same level of
transition planning as we
A new version (v 5.4.1) of the Multi-Router Looking Glass has been released.
Version 5.4.1 includes some minor updates I've made over the past year or so
and also includes traps to prevent your looking-glass from being used to
exploit the recent flaw discussed at http://tinyurl.com/2x8jpx
All
per month for the same customer growth.
Is the equipment being installed *today* and over the next two
years capable of sustaining 50K new routes per month, and if so,
for how long?
Thanks,
/John
At 4:47 AM + 8/30/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 06:48:43PM -0400, Jon Lewis
At 9:12 AM -0400 8/30/07, William Herrin wrote:
On 8/30/07, John Curran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I.E. If at some time unknown around 2010, ISP's stop receiving
new allocations from their RIR, and instead use of many smaller
recycled IPv4 address blocks, we could be looking at a 10x to
20x
At 2:14 PM -0400 8/30/07, Deepak Jain wrote:
John --
Great panic starting question.
Sorry, not my intent. I'm just trying to get a handle on the
state of the art of what's available today, and whether it has
some really excellent scaling properties in case we see a much
more granular block
router.
--
John A. Kilpatrick
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Email| http://www.hypergeek.net/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Text pages| ICQ: 19147504
remember: no obstacles/only challenges
On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 07:12:54AM -0400, Jason LeBlanc wrote:
OT: He probably meant MOP and LAT are not routable, man that brings back
memories.
Yeah, I realy did, but my fingers typed 'decnet isn't routable' because
that how the folks I worked with at the time described the issue. I was
and on those we either did not deploy IPv6 or moved the routing off
for both v4 and v6 to the nearest core router that could handle v6 for
any vlans that required the v6 capability.
John van Oppen
Spectrum Networks LLC
206.973.8302 (Direct)
http://spectrumnetworks.us
-Original Message-
From
be a
Cisco one.
--
John A. Kilpatrick
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Email| http://www.hypergeek.net/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Text pages| ICQ: 19147504
remember: no obstacles/only challenges
customers per month globally
and if we get to the point where they are not coming out of
hierarchical PA space, the new monthly routing growth will
increase dramatically.
/John
On 8/27/07 7:36 PM, Chris L. Morrow
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and here I always looked at the 6500 as a switch...
It switches, it routes, it makes julienne fries...
--
John A. Kilpatrick
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Email| http://www.hypergeek.net
they really are Cat 6500s. I don't mind if
they make a 7600-only train as long as the 7600s can still run 6500 code
then at least it makes them useful. Just not as edge routers. I bet
Juniper is lulzing this hardcore.
--
John A. Kilpatrick
[EMAIL PROTECTED
Is anyone out there setting up routing boundaries differently for
IPv4 and IPv6? I'm setting up a network where it seems to make
sense to route IPv4, while bridging IPv6 -- but I can be talked
out of it rather easily.
Years ago, I worked on a academic network where we had a mix
of IPX, DECnet,
it.
The scams will change, but they'll still be scaming.
On 12 Aug 2007 13:41:17 -, John Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to but I don't know of a practical way to measure the
impact of domain tasting on my services: how can I do 6 million
whois lookups to analyse a day's logs to find what
.
John
for the answers. Whichever one answers first is
the closest. What am I missing?
Regards,
John Levine, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for
Dummies,
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor
More Wiener schnitzel, please, said Tom, revealingly.
high, and will likely approach 100%. The alternative is carriers
having to explain to the analyst community that they lack a business
plan for new data customer growth once large IPv4 blocks are no longer
generally available.
/John
need to add IPv6 to
the public-facing servers that you'd like to still be Internet
connected.
/John
and then still have to face the problem.
/John
At 12:30 PM +0100 7/25/07, Stephen Wilcox wrote:
Hi John,
I fully agree on that.. but I am disagreeing as to the timescales.
There is some opinion that when IANA hands out the last of its IP blocks
things will change overnight, and I dont see any reason for that to be the
case. I think
they can afford the actual global cost of routing
table entry, or whether it will even be accountable. ISP's
can figure out the cost of obtaining IPv4 blocks, but the
imputed cost of injecting these random blocks into the DFZ
routing table is harder to measure and inflicted on everyone
else.
/John
way. Whether the large
CDNs deploy v6, if v6 can be purchased in volume as transit are likely to be
the major factors..
Steve -
Are you unable to make your public facing servers IPv6-reachable?
/John
for your public
facing servers, then it would be best to explain how global
routing is supposed to work when ISP's aren't using
predominantly hierarchical address assignments for their
growth.
/John
Funny story about that and the EPO we have here...
We have chilled water cooling in our server rooms. A couple of years
ago we told the facilities guys there was sand in the lines. They
didn't believe us. This went back and forth for a few months until
the lines finally ground to a halt.
such, particularly in the presence of
UPS gear which can be energized unbeknownst to fire fighting personnel.
If you don't have water-based fire suppression, have normally unoccupied
spaces, and are continuously manned, it's sometimes possible to pass on
having an EPO. YMMV by inspector.
/John
of IPv4 address blocks that have
allowed their ongoing growth in the past. Continuation of
the ISP industry is predicated on enabling IPv6 for public-facing
sites over the next few years.
/John
At 1:41 AM -0400 7/24/07, Durand, Alain wrote:
John,
Thank you for writing this down, this will help
power's back! So they cancel it.
*sigh*
John
1: ...but not crossed tight enough.
On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 08:36:59PM -0400, Raymond L. Corbin wrote:
They should have generators running...I can't foresee any good
datacenter not having multiple generators to keep their customers
servers online
language inappropriate in public... ;-)
Thanks!
/John
it
that this will change over time...
/John
Is there any indication that they've done anything other than make
themselves authoritative for those DNS names and simply sent you to
their IRC server instead? If so, what they have done is pretty much
legal (mostly because I'm quite sure there is something in their ToS
which you implicitly
At 9:59 AM -0700 6/28/07, Randy Bush wrote:
If you have a plan for continued operation of the Internet
during IPv4 depletion, please write it up as an RFC.
if you have a simple and usable plan for ipv6 transition, please write
it up in any readable form!
randy
Will do,
/John
At 6:09 PM +0100 6/28/07, Stephen Wilcox wrote:
Hi John,
I am not offering an elegant technical solution that would be worthy of an
RFC number! :) But I am saying that the Internet of today will evolve
organically and that there are a number of ways you can get by with what we
have
major revenue for
the traditional router crowd. Net result is there hasn't
been much IPv6 attention in that market...
/John
,
normally this is where Jeroen Masseur jumps in with GRH data and
pointers.
In lieu of missing protections for route hijacking there are arguments
to be made for announcing more specifics. As will there be arguments
over where that line should be drawn and who gets to draw it. :-)
John
and their friends mass merchandise domains as a fashion
accessory, but it's much too late to put that genie back in the
bottle.
Regards,
John Levine, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for
Dummies,
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor
More Wiener
for liability can result in a
real administrative burden of paperwork before getting the
green light to terminate. I don't know if that's the case here,
but would recommend against jumping to greed as the only
possible reason for hesitation in moving against such folks.
/John
On May 16, 2007, at 9:20 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
What should I expect?
I am seeing ~350 from a vendor provided mpls cloud to a site in
Sukhrali Chowk, Gurgaon, Haryana, India
Depends entirely on your provider's path as some (less than
useful) data points, from Cambridge MA to
anyone can recommend some british colo companies would appreciate it
Sent from Wireless BlackBerry
From my Globix days a few years back, our LHR prices were about 1.5-2x
US prices. That seemed to be in-line with our competitors at the time.
John
--
John Kinsella - Chief Scientist
Kliosoft
After the silliness over at godaddy.com a few months back,
http://nodaddy.com popped up. Lists a few alternative registrars that are a
little more grounded when it comes to customer service.
John
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 05:02:51PM -0400, Peter Beckman wrote:
Try DNSmadeEasy.com, cheesy name
(quoting kind soul who pointed out my Stupid)
On Thu, 3 May 2007, John Kinsella wrote:
After the silliness over at godaddy.com a few months back,
http://nodaddy.com popped up. Lists a few alternative registrars that are a
little more grounded when it comes to customer service.
Uh
On Apr 23, 2007, at 1:28 PM, David Lemon wrote:
www.homedepot.ca
Akaimai
It's Akamai, and I'm contacting you off-list
On Apr 23, 2007, at 2:19 PM, John Payne wrote:
On Apr 23, 2007, at 1:28 PM, David Lemon wrote:
www.homedepot.ca
Akaimai
It's Akamai, and I'm contacting you off-list
Just for clarification (as I've already been ping'd off list)... I
was merely correcting the typo in the OPs post :p
let me
know.)
-John
is a guarantee of exemption from a sufficiently perverse or
hostile email administrator, but being in the middle of a well managed /20
works pretty well for me.
R's,
John
you in one, you need a better ISP.
That's life.
Regards,
John Levine, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for
Dummies,
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor
More Wiener schnitzel, please, said Tom, revealingly.
to be sure you never hear from
non-technical users who don't understand your bounce message, and from
people like me who don't feel like jumping through your hoops,
particularly in a case like this where we're responding to a question
you asked.
R's,
John
if you assume that everyone who writes to you is so desperate to send
you mail that they are willing to make what may be an international call
in the middle of the night. I have not found that to be a very realistic
assumption.
Regards,
John Levine, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Primary Perpetrator
often take more than six weeks for the cardholder to notice a
bogus charge and complain, I suspect you'd see some pushback on a
waiting period that long.
R's,
John
for a refund? The motivation for tasting is typosquatting and
monetization, parking web pages full of pay per click ads on them.
Tasting is a bad idea that should go away, but phishing isn't the
reason.
R's,
John
to $100,
and make them all take a month to get into the DNS. The whole idea that
everyone needs a 2LD is utterly broken. But good luck putting that
genie back into the bottle.
R's,
John
five nines reliability and you can bet I will
complain loudly and bitterly when I call in an outage at 3 AM and get
the answering machine.
R's,
John
redeeming value at all.
R's,
John
(beyond some registrars' reluctance to do
takedowns), and those probably are paid for with stolen plastic.
R's,
John
they had good Blink) and friends happily blinking away.
What we really need is a datacenter with lit floor tiles. ;)
John(damn I've been in a DC with clear floor tiles...why didn't I think
of this then?)
1 - 100 of 950 matches
Mail list logo
