Re: Estimate of satellite vs. Land-based traffic
On 2009-01-07, at 01:00, JF Mezei wrote: Northern communities in Canada's arctic rely exclusively on satellite for voice/data. Ditto most Pacific Island nations... Not a lot of data flowing comparatively, but it is their only option so it is more of a mission critical thing than a backup. ... although most Pacific Islanders I have met who are not on cable routes are somewhat tolerant about multi-week outages, perhaps because the alternative to tolerance is not obvious. Joe
Re: Estimate of satellite vs. Land-based traffic
French Polynesia has no fiber links at all and relies exclusively on satellite and maybe radio for internet access. It looks, though, like they may finally get fiber sometime in the next decade : http://www.newstin.com/tag/us/95233925 Marshall On Jan 7, 2009, at 1:00 AM, JF Mezei wrote: Northern communities in Canada's arctic rely exclusively on satellite for voice/data. Not a lot of data flowing comparatively, but it is their only option so it is more of a mission critical thing than a backup.
RE: Estimate of satellite vs. Land-based traffic
I lived in a Caribbean country where, at the time, most of their LD traffic was over satellite. While people didn't like it, there were times that there was no public off-island access for a few hours at a time. It's just a fact of life, and people get used to it. Those who don't buy a satellite phone. Frank -Original Message- From: Paul Donner [mailto:pdon...@cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 2:00 AM To: Sean Donelan Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Estimate of satellite vs. Land-based traffic Satellites often sit at the edge of the network. The orbital last mile for individual users as well as in-country (Africa for e.g.) ISPs and Enterprise networks. When they go, often there is no backup (except maybe another satellite connection). Sean Donelan wrote: On Tue, 6 Jan 2009, Paul Donner wrote: WRT Kevin's query, if you are concerned about a solar incident and it's affects on satcom, you might want to take a look at what user base (e.g. which mobile users and what impact loss of comm will have on what they are doing) is affected rather than understanding the volumes that are affected as this might provide a much more thorough understanding of any impact. But that is merely my two cents worth. Yep, consider the Galaxy IV satellite incident. The loss of a single satellite had a significant impact on its user population for several days/month. Other satellites can be moved into an orbital slot, and dishes can be re-pointed; but Galaxy IV lead to some interesting (i.e. unexpected to some users) failures. I'm not sure how many hospitals realized their in-house pager systems relied on a satellite.
RE: Estimate of satellite vs. Land-based traffic
It depends on where in some cases. Take Greenland for example. Prior to Tele Greenland possibly completing the Greenland Connect cable[1] real soon now (Halifax to Nuuk, Nuuk to Iceland, branched to Qaqortoq, with xcon to UK and Denmark) I seem to recall that a large amount of their capacity was via satellite from Godthab(Nuuk) to Denmark. In this case, you're likely talking 100%. Almost all of your remote cases are going to be in a similiar situation ie. Svarlsbad, most stuff above t~N60^ parallel (or so) etc. [1] Tele Greenland IT News Item (see last paragraph, Brian Buus Pedersen is Tele's CEO) Best, Martin Hannigan -- Martin Hannigan http://www.verneglobal.com/ Senior Director e: hanni...@verneglobal.com Verne Global Datacenters c: +16178216079 Keflavik, Icelandf: +16172347098 From: kevin.sm...@dca.state.fl.us [kevin.sm...@dca.state.fl.us] Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 15:34 To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Estimate of satellite vs. Land-based traffic All, Participting in a severe solar event EXERCISE. Can anyone give me an educated guesstimate of the percentage of backbone traffic that is satellite dependent vs. that which is totally land-based? Thanks Kevin Smith Information Systems Services Department of Community Affairs kevin.sm...@dca.state.fl.us [preferred] 850.922.9921 [voice] 850.487.3376 [fax] -- Sent from a BlackBerry Wireless Handheld Florida has a broad public records law and all correspondence, including email addresses, may be subject to disclosure.
Re: Estimate of satellite vs. Land-based traffic
When I was working with Svalbard, Internet connectivity was through a satellite link at about 2.5 degrees elevation looking through a notch in the mountains. I don't think it has changed Regards Marshall On Jan 7, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote: It depends on where in some cases. Take Greenland for example. Prior to Tele Greenland possibly completing the Greenland Connect cable[1] real soon now (Halifax to Nuuk, Nuuk to Iceland, branched to Qaqortoq, with xcon to UK and Denmark) I seem to recall that a large amount of their capacity was via satellite from Godthab(Nuuk) to Denmark. In this case, you're likely talking 100%. Almost all of your remote cases are going to be in a similiar situation ie. Svarlsbad, most stuff above t~N60^ parallel (or so) etc. [1] Tele Greenland IT News Item (see last paragraph, Brian Buus Pedersen is Tele's CEO) Best, Martin Hannigan -- Martin Hannigan http://www.verneglobal.com/ Senior Director e: hanni...@verneglobal.com Verne Global Datacenters c: +16178216079 Keflavik, Icelandf: +16172347098 From: kevin.sm...@dca.state.fl.us [kevin.sm...@dca.state.fl.us] Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 15:34 To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Estimate of satellite vs. Land-based traffic All, Participting in a severe solar event EXERCISE. Can anyone give me an educated guesstimate of the percentage of backbone traffic that is satellite dependent vs. that which is totally land-based? Thanks Kevin Smith Information Systems Services Department of Community Affairs kevin.sm...@dca.state.fl.us [preferred] 850.922.9921 [voice] 850.487.3376 [fax] -- Sent from a BlackBerry Wireless Handheld Florida has a broad public records law and all correspondence, including email addresses, may be subject to disclosure.
Re: Estimate of satellite vs. Land-based traffic
When I was working with Svalbard, Internet connectivity was through a satellite link at about 2.5 degrees elevation looking through a notch in the mountains. I don't think it has changed It has. Svalbard now has undersea cable connection to the Norwegian mainland. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svalbard_Undersea_Cable_System Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sth...@nethelp.no
Re: Single carrier multi-circuit asynchronous routing issue
On 7 jan 2009, at 21.05, Niels Bakker wrote: * aaron.milli...@bright.net (Aaron Millisor) [Wed 07 Jan 2009, 20:53 CET]: [..] If I were to prepend the network 1.1.1.0 to come in on 'sprint 1', but have a route to 2.2.2.0 via 'sprint 2' so that traffic comes in on one circuit but returns on the other, routing is broken. If I change my route so that packets directed to 2.2.2.0 return on the same circuit that the traffic is received on, everything works fine. You might be running into uRPF (unicast reverse path forward verification). -- Niels. Strict-mode uRPF will couse this, I am sure sprint support can help you with it.. -- Anders Lindbäck anders.lindb...@dnz.se
Re: Ethical DDoS drone network
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Roland Dobbins rdobb...@cisco.com wrote: In my experience, once one has an understanding of the performance envelopes and has built a lab which contains examples of the functional elements of the system (network infrastructure, servers, apps, databases, clients, et. al.), one can extrapolate pretty accurately well out to orders of magnitude. It's one of those things where the difference between theory and practice is smaller in theory than it is in practice, though... But yeah, sometimes things like load balancers fail, or routers run out of table space, or whatever. I've had enough enterprise customers worry about what will happen to their VPN sites if some neighborhood kid annoys his gamer buddies and gets a few Gbps of traffic to knock down their DSLAM and its upstream feeds or whatever. The problem is that many organizations don't do the above prior to freezing the design and initiating deployment. Back in the mid-90s I had one networking software development customer that had a room with 500 PCs on racks, and some switches that would let them dump groups of 50s of them together with whatever server they were testing. That was a lot more impressive back then when PCs were full-sized devices that needed keyboards and monitors (grouped on KVMs, at least), as opposed to being 1Us or blades or virtual machines. Thanks; Bill Note that this isn't my regular email account - It's still experimental so far. And Google probably logs and indexes everything you send it.
Re: Estimate of satellite vs. Land-based traffic
At least in the US, satellite use is fairly limited compared to fiber and copper, mainly in the following areas - TV broadcast - Data and voice to remote areas (a few hundred Alaska villages, some connectivity up to oil drilling areas in Alaska, though there's also fiber, plus some Internet in non-wired parts of the US. I'm not aware of regular telco use of satellites for service in the middle 48 states. Is Alohanet or something like it still running in Hawaii?) - Some emergency backup applications such as restoration for carriers (redundant cables are nice, but you need access in multiple failure scenarios such as floods and earthquakes.) - Specialized enterprise applications (some years ago, VSAT was fairly common for credit-card support at gas stations, malls, etc. I know one grocery store chain that finally moved to terrestrial in the late 90s, forced by Microsoft application protocols that couldn't handle the VSAT latency.) -- Thanks; Bill Note that this isn't my regular email account - It's still experimental so far. And Google probably logs and indexes everything you send it.
