Hi, NANOGers.
Does anyone have a reliable contact at dns2go.com? I have tried all of
the usual aliases with no success. :(
Thanks,
Rob.
--
Rob Thomas
http://www.cymru.com
ASSERT(coffee != empty);
Dear Nicolas;
1.) We can do it, but we will charge for it.
2.) Better lists for such discussion are
IPMulticast from ServiceNetworks.com (for commercial issues)
http://www.servicenetworks.com/SNEditorial/forums.asp#IPMulticast
MBoned (for deployment issues).
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
3.) You should
Well, it only took the press 9 days to get a story out, I guess
that isn't all bad. The Washington Post now has a story on this
issue:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45819-2002Dec27.html
It claims AOL wants $75000/month. If we use the $50/meg Andrew
Partan posted that would be
On Sat, Dec 28, 2002 at 04:43:18PM -0500, Leo Bicknell wrote:
- Peering should cost significantly less than transit. At least
half, probably less. If you have 1.5 Gig, getting $50 a meg
transit is trivial today. I can't imagine any company paying
$50 a meg for peering, no matter
In a message written on Sat, Dec 28, 2002 at 05:52:30PM -0500, Richard A Steenbergen
wrote:
- Peering should cost significantly less than transit. At least
half, probably less. If you have 1.5 Gig, getting $50 a meg
transit is trivial today. I can't imagine any company paying
$50
While back, I mentioned some hardened microwave dishes at ATT
CoG facilities. I got lots of interest.
Here's a few more pictures for the still curious...
http://longlines.addr.com/documents/EW0869/EW0869-43.html
--
A host is a host from coast to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
no one will talk to a host
On Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:34:01 -0500, Leo Bicknell wrote:
All in all, I find ratios an extremely poor way of validating a
peer. I can think of many cases where it is in both parties interest
to peer, but where the traffic might be extremely unbalanced. Yes,
the fact that it is unbalanced can
Speaking of this whole Cogent/AOL/Level3 mess.. sigh.
I got tired of trying getting anything out of Cogent. So, here's list of
questions perhaps someone might be able to answer.
1. I'm sure some of you are customers of Level3, and I'm sure
you do see 1-2 sec latency w/ Cogent, what's the
On Sat, Dec 28, 2002 at 08:24:16PM -0600, Basil Kruglov wrote:
2. I think I asked this before, why wouldn't Cogent prepend
customer prefixes to Level3 or set BGP4 community for multihomed sites,
homed w/ Cogent + someone else.
You got your answer to this before, what part wasn't clear?
On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
Consider this example: If I buy 100Mbit of transit from
AboveNet in IAD, odds are you're gonna peer off 75% of
my traffic locally, without it ever having touched
expensive longhaul circuits. If I buy 100Mbit of paid
peering, odds are you're
On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Scott Granados wrote:
It is likely that in many settings during power failures transition from ac
street power to ac generator power will have some lag and during that time
your hardware could loose power. This of course depends on ups systems in
use and many factors.
... trying to even out a perceived inequity ...
peering is a business decision. if it's possible to force another network
into the role of customer, then that's seen by many as good business since
revenue increases. paid peering or even settlements are not about
inequity, perceived or
Thus spake ip dude [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hello NANOG group. I am trying to make a case for using DC power
supplies versus AC power supplies for typical IP networking
equipment. Is there any published whitepapers detailing this subject?
Do you have any suggestions to aide my argument?
Most of
13 matches
Mail list logo
