I don't think IP Infustion makes hardware - their OCNOS software runs on
many third-party white-box platforms from the likes of EdgeCore and
UfiSpace.
There may well be a device that suits the OP's requirements amongst the
supported hardware list.
I refer you to this handy table:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2022 at 01:23, Mark Tinka wrote:
> We've seen proposals from Huawei, for example, where OLT shelves can
> support both GPON and XG-PON line cards.
>
I've been installing PON equipment for 2+ years where all the ports can be
fitted with optics (SFPs) that support both GPON and
On Mon, 16 May 2022 at 18:52, Randy Carpenter wrote:
> My hope for a successor (MX205 ?) would be more flexibility and 25G ports.
> 4x100G+8x25G would be awesome.
>
>
I was hoping the MX304 would be the upgrade, but it seems like overkill -
2U, modular with dual processors, up to 96 x 10/25 GbE,
On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 at 15:57, Dave Bell wrote:
>
> On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 at 15:31, Ca By wrote:
>
>> UDP is broken
>>
>
> I would argue that UDP isn't broken. Networks which drop it
> indiscriminately are broken.
>
Does this errant network behaviour not impact RTP applications like video
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 16:43, Paul Ebersman wrote:
>
> first personal connection was a dedicated dialin using a telebit
> trailblazer at 9600 bps. that was a benefit of work.
>
Got to respect a modem with firmware that recognised hosts talking UUCP
protocol and optimised for it!
Aled
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 12:53, Bryan Holloway wrote:
>
> I seem to also recall that you couldn't use a 56k modem unless the
> far-end was digital.
>
Exactly so - the connection to the telephone network needed to be as
"clean" as possible for the modem to achieve the best rate, which was only
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 12:13, Rob Pickering wrote:
> Wasn't the 56/64k thing a result of CAS (bit robbed) signalling which was
> a fudge AT did to transport signalling information in-band on T1s by
> stealing the low order bit for OOB signalling (it wasnt actually every low
> order bit, but
On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 14:43, Randy Bush wrote:
> > Why does a new organisation need to have any global IPv4 addresses of
> > their own at all?
>
> if all folk saying such things would make their in- and out-bound mail
> servers v6-only, it would reduce confusion in this area.
>
> randy
>
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 at 19:59, Edward Dore <
edward.d...@freethought-internet.co.uk> wrote:
> I just grabbed the following from our routers connected to LINX LON1, LINX
> LON2, LINX Manchester and LONAP (so this data is very UK centric):
>
...
>1 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION
>
Kudos to
On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 at 10:14, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
> On 2/Sep/19 11:02, Aled Morris via NANOG wrote:
> > The forthcoming Juniper ACX700 sounds like a good fit for metro
> > Ethernet with 4x100G and 24x10G in a shallow 1U hardened form factor.
>
> Do you know what ch
The forthcoming Juniper ACX700 sounds like a good fit for metro Ethernet
with 4x100G and 24x10G in a shallow 1U hardened form factor.
Aled
On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 at 14:49, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> Will any of these (including MAP-E) support such nasty (in terms of
> burying IP addresses in data payloads) protocols as FTP and SIP/SDP?
>
I'm a fan of these solutions that (only) use NAT44 in the CPE as this is
exactly what they're
The biggest tragedy here is that Amazon now have yet another block of IPv4
which means the migration to IPv6 will be further delayed by them and
people who "can't see the need" because their AWS server instance can get
an IPv4 address.
All of this puts more pressure on the access networks to keep
On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 21:52, wrote:
> Thanks to everybody that recommended Fiberstore and Flexoptics.
>
> Unfortunately Fiberstore is what led me to ask about alternative
> suppliers. Fiberstore actually ships in their Bidi SFPs from Asia and lead
> times are one to two weeks. Flexoptics is
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 17:58, Naslund, Steve wrote:
> I hope you are as critical of your hardware vendor that cannot accept BGP4
> compliant attributes or have you just not updated your code? You can black
> hole anything you want but as long as the “Internet” is sending you an RFC
> compliant
On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 at 20:49, wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 19:26:41 +, Chris Kimball said:
> > Would a raspberry pi work for this?
> >
> > Could 3D print a nice case with your logo for it.
>
> The Pi has a bandwidth limit at 300mbits/sec due to a USB port being used.
>
I've been using
You can hide your secret message by writing:
dash dash space return
Followed by your message.
It’ll be hidden from all but the Internet illuminati
Aled
On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 at 22:00, cosmo wrote:
> Sudden plot-twist!
>
> A small elite group of NANOG participants have been using
On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 at 06:48, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
> It is possible one should not choose this system over a traditional approach,
> but the people screaming "rip it out" are out of line IMHO. It would be a
> huge expense to rewire a building with copper and they already got a working
>
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 21:16, Tony Wicks wrote:
>
> I remember working for this little company called EDS... Some bright spark
> decided that ATM to the desktop was the future (not this ethernet (or even
> token ring) thing) and subsequently converted several thousand head office
> machines to
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 17:30, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
> There’s only so much space in conduits, risers and ducts. At some point,
> scale would press this up against physical infrastructure realities depending
> on how far the active gear at the head end is from the subscriber.
A point made
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018 at 21:42, Tom Hill wrote:
> Chicken & egg: someone has to move first... And I don't see the ASR9k
> and Juniper MX BUs rushing to support 25 & 50G.
>
Juniper have launched a Trident based switch with 48 x 25G ports (the
QFX5120-48Y.)
But I agree the commercials aren't as
On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 05:54, Brandon Martin
wrote:
> I was of the impression that there was a draft or similar for
> single-topology (IPv4+IPv6) OSPF. Did anything ever come of that?
>
>
Juniper support IPv4 families ("realms") in OSPFv3.
Aled
On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 at 13:56, Ca By wrote:
> You should provide your users ipv6, opendns supports ipv6 and likely will
> not have this issue you see
>
OpenDNS does not support IPv6 for their customisable services "Home" etc.
which I believe is the service the OP is using as he refers to the
23 matches
Mail list logo
