Re: How Skype uses the network [was: News item: Blackberry services down worldwide]
Howdy, On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote: On Oct 13, 2011, at 7:26 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote: On 10/13/11 3:30 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: In fact, Skype, just as a for instance, is worse on hotel wifi as launching the app on a laptop makes you a middle node for some conversations. Per the Skype IT administrator guide, a Skype node will not become a supernode unless it has a public IP address and meets the memory, bandwidth, and uptime requirements. It will not become a relay node unless it has a public IP address and is directly reachable from the Internet. It is very unlikely that launching the Skype app on a laptop on hotel wi-fi would meet these requirements. In the last 5 seconds, without touching Skype or having any active voice or chat sessions open, my computer has had communication with 14 IP addresses. Here is a sample of some: For IT administrators (which probably qualifies most people on this list) there is a detailed 26 page guide to how Skype communicates on a network, when you may become a supernode, and how to configure the program (including to never become a supernode) using GPO (registry switches) or XML files at http://download.skype.com/share/business/guides/skype-it-administrators-guide.pdf. There is a summary of the Supernodes section (concentrating on how to stop supernodes happening if you have no control of the client) at http://www.skype.com/intl/en-us/security/universities/. Anybody who might end up with Skyoe clients on their network might want to give it a gander, as it has some useful info on things like network impact (along with a lot of stuff that nobody cares about and you can skip). HTH, Alex
RE: [OT] Overture's Ethernet over bonded Copper products
We've used them extensively in our network for years (we have about 2,600 of them in the network). They actually used to be Ceterus devices (it's possible that Hatteras merged with Ceterus or something, but I'm not up on my vendor acquisition current events). We mostly use the UTS 810 and UTS-900 models. To be honest with you they work fine, but once something goes wrong, it's pretty bad because they are kind of flaky. We've had to simply reboot a lot of them to get the problem fixed, rather than actually figuring out what is really wrong with them and fixing that so it doesn't happen again. We get lots of trouble tickets for speed issues from customers who have them on their circuits, that's for sure. If I were you I'd probably go with Aktino products. We have a ton of those too, and I've never really had a problem with them. Thanks, _ Allen -Original Message- From: nanog-requ...@nanog.org [mailto:nanog-requ...@nanog.org] Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 6:20 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: NANOG Digest, Vol 45, Issue 46 Send NANOG mailing list submissions to nanog@nanog.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to nanog-requ...@nanog.org You can reach the person managing the list at nanog-ow...@nanog.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of NANOG digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: Weekly Routing Table Report (ML) 2. RE: [OT] Overture's Ethernet over bonded Copper products (Scott Berkman) 3. BGP Update Report (cidr-rep...@potaroo.net) 4. The Cidr Report (cidr-rep...@potaroo.net) 5. Re: How Skype uses the network [was: News item: Blackberry services down worldwide] (Matthew Kaufman) -- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 15:41:23 -0400 From: ML m...@kenweb.org To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Weekly Routing Table Report Message-ID: 4e989063.9010...@kenweb.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On 10/14/2011 03:21 PM, Routing Analysis Role Account wrote: List of Unregistered Origin ASNs (Global) - Bad AS Designation Network Transit AS Description 15132 UNALLOCATED 12.9.150.0/24 7018 ATT WorldNet Servic 32567 UNALLOCATED 12.14.170.0/244323 Time Warner Telecom 32567 UNALLOCATED 12.25.107.0/244323 Time Warner Telecom 25639 UNALLOCATED 12.41.169.0/247018 ATT WorldNet Servic 13317 UNALLOCATED 12.44.10.0/24 7018 ATT WorldNet Servic 23502 UNALLOCATED 12.44.44.0/24 7018 ATT WorldNet Servic 17300 UNALLOCATED 12.45.103.0/247018 ATT WorldNet Servic 17300 UNALLOCATED 12.45.110.0/24 701 UUNET Technologies, 16476 UNALLOCATED 12.46.27.0/24 7018 ATT WorldNet Servic 32873 UNALLOCATED 12.46.100.0/23 10912 InterNAP Network Ser Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-badAS Prefixes from private and non-routed address space (Global) --- Prefix Origin AS Description 128.0.80.0/2430977 JSC Yugra-Telecom 128.0.81.0/2430977 JSC Yugra-Telecom 128.0.82.0/2430977 JSC Yugra-Telecom 128.0.83.0/2430977 JSC Yugra-Telecom 128.0.84.0/2430977 JSC Yugra-Telecom 128.0.85.0/2430977 JSC Yugra-Telecom 128.0.86.0/2430977 JSC Yugra-Telecom 128.0.87.0/2430977 JSC Yugra-Telecom Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-dsua Advertised Unallocated Addresses NetworkOrigin AS Description 24.225.128.0/18 36377 Comcast Telecommunications, I 24.225.192.0/23 36377 Comcast Telecommunications, I 24.225.192.0/18 36377 Comcast Telecommunications, I 24.225.224.0/21 36377 Comcast Telecommunications, I 24.225.237.0/24 36377 Comcast Telecommunications, I 24.225.248.0/21 36377 Comcast Telecommunications, I 41.222.79.0/24 36938UNKNOWN 41.223.92.0/22 36936UNKNOWN 62.61.220.0/24 24974 Tachyon Europe BV - Wireless 62.61.221.0/24 24974 Tachyon Europe BV - Wireless Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-add-IANA Maybe I'm just not in the know on this but if these prefixes/ASes shouldn't be seen on the internet, shouldn't there be more of a public flogging to remove them? -- Message: 2 Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 16:45:45 -0400 From: Scott Berkman sc...@sberkman.net To: 'Graham Wooden' gra...@g-rock.net, nanog@nanog.org
Re: Weekly Routing Table Report
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011, ML wrote: On 10/14/2011 03:21 PM, Routing Analysis Role Account wrote: List of Unregistered Origin ASNs (Global) - Maybe I'm just not in the know on this but if these prefixes/ASes shouldn't be seen on the internet, shouldn't there be more of a public flogging to remove them? Been there. Done that. See from 2003: http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog27/presentations/hank.pdf I had been doing this for over a decade and gave up a few years ago. Bottom line: No one gives a sh*t. Consider it all part of the background noise the Internet generates. Regards, Hank
Re: [routing-wg] The Cidr Report
From what I learned at the latest NANOG it's very clear that nobody reads this any more. Is there any good reason to persist in spamming the nanog list with this report? thanks, Geoff
Re: [routing-wg] BGP Update Report
While I am at it, does anyone read this report, or is this weekly report also just part of the spam load on this list? regards, Geoff
Re: [routing-wg] The Cidr Report
Does anyone give a s**t about this any more? From what I learned at the latest NANOG it's very clear that nobody reads this any more. Is there any good reason to persist in spamming the nanog list with this report? thanks, Geoff
Re: [routing-wg] The Cidr Report
From what I learned at the latest NANOG it's very clear that nobody reads this any more. some read it. we are the frustrated ones. no one seems to act on it. Is there any good reason to persist in spamming the nanog list with this report? not clear, sad to say. i really think that the only way to reduce fragging is filtering. maybe a bgp blackhole feed for frags for which there are covering prefixes? randy
Re: [routing-wg] BGP Update Report
On 10/15/2011 4:26 AM, Geoff Huston wrote: While I am at it, does anyone read this report, or is this weekly report also just part of the spam load on this list? I read both of them, and also the Weekly Routing Report. I will regret the loss, and consider all three to be far more valuable than 90% of the traffic on the list. -- Last week we lost a giant in the world of computing. Last weekend we lost the giant on whose shoulders he stood. Rest in peace, friend. (Tim Pierce, on the deaths of Dennis Ritchie and Steve Jobs)
Re: [routing-wg] BGP Update Report
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 22:26:36 +1100 Geoff Huston g...@apnic.net wrote: While I am at it, does anyone read this report, or is this weekly report also just part of the spam load on this list? If you don't want them, filter them to /dev/null. regards, Geoff -- John
Re: [routing-wg] BGP Update Report
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011, Lynda wrote: On 10/15/2011 4:26 AM, Geoff Huston wrote: While I am at it, does anyone read this report, or is this weekly report also just part of the spam load on this list? I read both of them, and also the Weekly Routing Report. I will regret the loss, and consider all three to be far more valuable than 90% of the traffic on the list. +1 The reports are also useful to do a double-check on changes I've made from the perspective of others (even if they are automated tools). wfms
Re: [routing-wg] The Cidr Report
On Oct 15, 2011, at 3:29 PM, Randy Bush wrote: From what I learned at the latest NANOG it's very clear that nobody reads this any more. some read it. we are the frustrated ones. Some read it. I think everyone on NANOG is frustrated (or not paying attention). I would suggest that you keep sending it, but I have no way to motivate you to do so other than to confirm I do read it. no one seems to act on it. It is useful even just as data to show others, whether they act on that data or not. Is there any good reason to persist in spamming the nanog list with this report? not clear, sad to say. i really think that the only way to reduce fragging is filtering. maybe a bgp blackhole feed for frags for which there are covering prefixes? If history is any guide, this will not work. Someone will listen, and those who do not will lose customer (i.e. money). The Internet is a business, and therefore money talks. To date, no one has been able to prove to the bean counters that more prefixes means less profit. For instance, I spoke to someone at the conference whose company is spewing 1000s of prefixes they do not have to. That person said well, FIB compression makes everything OK, so it doesn't matter, right? (paraphrased). This is a company who tells others you have to pay me to use my resources, yet feels absolutely no qualms about using other networks' resources for free. Hypocrisy is live well on the Internet. (I know you are all shocked.) -- TTFN, patrick
Re: Apple updates - Effect on network
Matt Taylor writes: Would love to see some bandwidth graphs. :) Here's one from another network. attachment: akamai-week.pngGuess it was a good idea to upgrade that Akamai cluster's uplink to 10GE, even though 2*GE (or was it 4*GE) looked sufficient at the time. Remember folks, overprovisioning is a misnomer, it should be called provisioning for robustness and growth. -- Simon.
Re: [routing-wg] BGP Update Report
+1 good to get a view from multiple sources even if they are automated. Should be easy enough to filter for those that do not want them. 2011/10/15 William F. Maton Sotomayor wma...@ottix.net On Sat, 15 Oct 2011, Lynda wrote: On 10/15/2011 4:26 AM, Geoff Huston wrote: While I am at it, does anyone read this report, or is this weekly report also just part of the spam load on this list? I read both of them, and also the Weekly Routing Report. I will regret the loss, and consider all three to be far more valuable than 90% of the traffic on the list. +1 The reports are also useful to do a double-check on changes I've made from the perspective of others (even if they are automated tools). wfms
Re: [routing-wg] The Cidr Report
Geoff Huston writes: Does anyone give a s**t about this any more? I do; I check the weekly increase every week, and check who the top offenders are. If someone from my vicinity/circles is on the list (doesn't happen frequently; more often for the BGP updates report than for CIDR), I may send them a note and ask what happened. From what I learned at the latest NANOG it's very clear that nobody reads this any more. Reads may be an exaggeration, but I'm sure some look at it. Is there any good reason to persist in spamming the nanog list with this report? I think it still provides an incentive for people not to mess things up too badly; and a chance of some mishaps to be noticed quicker, with a little help from your friends. -- Simon.
Re: Please change Mailman back to NOT force the rewrite for Reply-to
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 13:51:55 -0700 Lynda shr...@deaddrop.org wrote: I see that someone has instructed Mailman to munge the reply-to. Please don't do that. I was about to make a *private* reply to someone, and realized that the setting had changed, and that I was trapped into replying to the list. Normally I'd have just made this point privately, and perhaps only on Futures, but since it seems to be a recent change, I'm doing the public service of pointing it out, while asking that it be adjusted back. I don't see that; I have to specifically choose to reply to the list. Maybe someone, like me, sets their own reply-to to the list. -- John
Re: Please change Mailman back to NOT force the rewrite for Reply-to
John Peach (john-nanog) writes: Normally I'd have just made this point privately, and perhaps only on Futures, but since it seems to be a recent change, I'm doing the public service of pointing it out, while asking that it be adjusted back. I don't see that; I have to specifically choose to reply to the list. Maybe someone, like me, sets their own reply-to to the list. From the headers. X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: nanog@nanog.org List-Id: North American Network Operators Group nanog.nanog.org Mutt asks me, but other mailers might not. Cheers, Phil
Re: Please change Mailman back to NOT force the rewrite for Reply-to
On Oct 15, 2011, at 5:17 PM, Phil Regnauld wrote: John Peach (john-nanog) writes: Normally I'd have just made this point privately, and perhaps only on Futures, but since it seems to be a recent change, I'm doing the public service of pointing it out, while asking that it be adjusted back. I don't see that; I have to specifically choose to reply to the list. Maybe someone, like me, sets their own reply-to to the list. From the headers. X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: nanog@nanog.org List-Id: North American Network Operators Group nanog.nanog.org Mutt asks me, but other mailers might not. Yes, he said he set reply-to himself. Look at your own post, it has no such header. -- TTFN, patrick
Re: Please change Mailman back to NOT force the rewrite for Reply-to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/15/11 5:17 PM, Phil Regnauld wrote: John Peach (john-nanog) writes: Normally I'd have just made this point privately, and perhaps only on Futures, but since it seems to be a recent change, I'm doing the public service of pointing it out, while asking that it be adjusted back. I don't see that; I have to specifically choose to reply to the list. Maybe someone, like me, sets their own reply-to to the list. From the headers. X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: nanog@nanog.org List-Id: North American Network Operators Group nanog.nanog.org Mutt asks me, but other mailers might not. I think you missed John's last sentence, Phil... For instance, on *this* email, and *your* email, a reply goes to the individual. I have to specifically put the list address in. Perhaps Lynda hit someone's manually-set Reply-to header and thought it was set by Mailman... Best, - --Glenn -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk6Z+XYACgkQf5MxTDXTimFXRgCfUTlQmwPfqL6atcwoGyRi5ERq +7IAoIyILrdRDekx0tnxLw6qV/FhqelS =1Vrf -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [routing-wg] The Cidr Report
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011, Simon Leinen wrote: Ditto here. -Hank Geoff Huston writes: Does anyone give a s**t about this any more? I do; I check the weekly increase every week, and check who the top offenders are. If someone from my vicinity/circles is on the list (doesn't happen frequently; more often for the BGP updates report than for CIDR), I may send them a note and ask what happened. From what I learned at the latest NANOG it's very clear that nobody reads this any more. Reads may be an exaggeration, but I'm sure some look at it. Is there any good reason to persist in spamming the nanog list with this report? I think it still provides an incentive for people not to mess things up too badly; and a chance of some mishaps to be noticed quicker, with a little help from your friends.
Re: Please change Mailman back to NOT force the rewrite for Reply-to
On 10/15/2011 3:23 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote: - Original Message - From: Lyndashr...@deaddrop.org I see that someone has instructed Mailman to munge the reply-to. Please don't do that. I was about to make a *private* reply to someone, and realized that the setting had changed, and that I was trapped into replying to the list. It's you, Lynda. Really. :-) Well, *now* I know it's not mailman, but it's not me, either. Not exactly. What I noticed was that *some* of the email to Nanog, today, had this set, but not all. I was very confused (it's not the first time I've been confused, of course). Your message, frex, did not have reply-to munged; I had to do it by hand (since Zimbra 6 is still too stupid; I've had that bug open for over 2 years now; maybe 7 fixes it). One reply to you did, but the rest did not. Yeah, Mr Peach set an evil trap for me. I'd been about to send him a private email (on something of absolutely no importance), and when I realized it went back to Nanog, was puzzled enough to check to see whether it had been changed. Cleverly, I tested replies to a couple of other emails, and as luck would have it, one was my own (and tbird has a stupid habit of knowing that if it's a mailing list, I surely meant to send it to the list), and the other two were both to Mr Peach. Sorry for noise. Back to making sure Geoff H believes us, and keeps right on sending the reports. -- Last week we lost a giant in the world of computing. Last weekend we lost the giant on whose shoulders he stood. Rest in peace, friend. (Tim Pierce, on the deaths of Dennis Ritchie and Steve Jobs)
Re: Apple updates - Akamai effect
Simon Leinen wrote: Guess it was a good idea to upgrade that Akamai cluster's uplink to 10GE, even though 2*GE (or was it 4*GE) looked sufficient at the time. Remember folks, overprovisioning is a misnomer, it should be called provisioning for robustness and growth. If I may change the thrust a bit, this is of interest to me. Just because we're in the midst of similar - changing from 2xGE to 10GE and increasing the number of Akamai nodes. Anyone have similar stats on that sort of conversion, and what to expect? From what I can tell, there's a fair bit of local, off-net traffic coming to ours, so I'm curious what the turn-up may look like. This may be just idle curiosity, but what the hey.
Re: [routing-wg] The Cidr Report
I read it every week. It's a finger on the pulse of a system on which I am totally dependent... Geoff Huston g...@apnic.net wrote: Does anyone give a s**t about this any more? From what I learned at the latest NANOG it's very clear that nobody reads this any more. Is there any good reason to persist in spamming the nanog list with this report? thanks, Geoff
Re: [routing-wg] The Cidr Report
I read it every week. It's a finger on the pulse of a system on which I am totally dependent... the email i want to see here is i wuz a polluter, but i read the cidr report, i haz seen the light, and i'm gonna stop polluting. no, i am not holding my breath. randy
Re: [routing-wg] The Cidr Report
those who read it and follow routing best practicez will continue to do those, those who havent yet given a shit wont get a sudden dose of exlax after seeing their asn in it. --srs (iPad) On 16-Oct-2011, at 5:47, joe...@bogus.com joe...@bogus.com wrote: I read it every week. It's a finger on the pulse of a system on which I am totally dependent... Geoff Huston g...@apnic.net wrote: Does anyone give a s**t about this any more? From what I learned at the latest NANOG it's very clear that nobody reads this any more. Is there any good reason to persist in spamming the nanog list with this report? thanks, Geoff
Re: Apple updates - Akamai effect
On Oct 15, 2011, at 20:06, J na...@namor.ca wrote: Simon Leinen wrote: Guess it was a good idea to upgrade that Akamai cluster's uplink to 10GE, even though 2*GE (or was it 4*GE) looked sufficient at the time. Remember folks, overprovisioning is a misnomer, it should be called provisioning for robustness and growth. If I may change the thrust a bit, this is of interest to me. Just because we're in the midst of similar - changing from 2xGE to 10GE and increasing the number of Akamai nodes. Anyone have similar stats on that sort of conversion, and what to expect? From what I can tell, there's a fair bit of local, off-net traffic coming to ours, so I'm curious what the turn-up may look like. It sounds like you have what Akamai calls an AANP deployment. In general, that should not serve users outside your network. There are reasons it can, and you should talk to Akamai about it if you think it is. If you have questions about an on-net node, feel free to email Akamai's Network Support group, netsupp...@akamai.com. They are only M-F, but they can answer any questions you have. -- TTFN, patrick
13 years ago today - October 16, 1998...
we lost Jon. It feels like just yesterday. http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2468.html
Re: 13 years ago today - October 16, 1998...
Yes..and we all owe him a debt of gratitude. --- On Sat, 10/15/11, Rodney Joffe rjo...@centergate.com wrote: From: Rodney Joffe rjo...@centergate.com Subject: 13 years ago today - October 16, 1998... To: nanog@nanog.org Date: Saturday, October 15, 2011, 7:14 PM we lost Jon. It feels like just yesterday. http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2468.html
Re: 13 years ago today - October 16, 1998...
- Original Message - From: Rodney Joffe rjo...@centergate.com Subject: 13 years ago today - October 16, 1998... we lost Jon. It feels like just yesterday. http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2468.html My path didn't cross Jon's much... but he was nice enough to reserve the really cool RFC number that graces my AFJ contribution from 1997 -- 3 or 4 RFCs with higher numbers came out in March. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
Re: [Nanog] Ballot Confirmation
On 10/15/11 11:21 PM, Randy Epstein repst...@hostleasing.net wrote: Betty, I believe there was a problem with the voting system this past election. Proposed amendment 1, which I voted NO on, did not register. It does not show a vote in the ballot confirmation email (well, it just doesn't say what I did), but I know I voted NO. Further, what makes this even more suspicious is that 0 people voted no on this one, yet 8 voted no on the 2nd. Yet, the yes votes on both were 79 and 78 respectively. Results: Member structure ratification 79 yes 0 no Committee Structure Simplification Rationale 78 yes 8 no Can anyone investigate this? I'm just concerned that there might be a problem in the future, and I'd like to find out what happened here. Regards, Randy On 10/9/11 11:15 PM, Nanog h...@www.nanog.org wrote: Ballot Cast: Bylaw Changes Cast by: Randy Epstein 1. Membership structure ratificationp Rationale: The membership structure as specified in the original bylaws made a lot of people unhappy, so the board used its power to temporarily amend the bylaws to institute the now-current membership structure, under which all current NANOG voters have become members. That amendment now needs to be ratified by the membership, to avoid the membership structure reverting to its previous state./P Proposal: That the membership ratify the bylaw amendment enacted by the Board on January 4, 2011, establishing the now-current NANOG membership structure. /P The amendment is as follows: - Replace the current section 5 in its entirety with:/P 5. Membership/P 5.1 Membership Qualifications - Membership in NewNOG is open to any individual with an interest in Internet operations, engineering, or research and who wishes to further education and knowledge sharing within the Internet operations community. Any individual may become a member of NewNOG by completing an application and payment of dues./P 5.2 Membership Classes - There shall be only one class of membership, with all the rights and privileges specified in these Bylaws./P 5.3 Membership Dues - The Board of Directors shall specify the cost of annual membership dues. The Board may establish discounts for members meeting certain criteria, or for members wishing to pay for more than one year in advance./P 5.4 Rights and Benefits of Members - Members in good standing shall be entitled to these privileges: /P* Vote in all NewNOG elections. * Run as a candidate for the Board of Directors * Serve on an administrative committee, as defined in section 9 * Other privileges as specified by the Board of Directors/P 5.5 Policies and Procedures - The Board of Directors shall establish and publish policies and procedures for implementation of the membership program. /P 2. Committee Structure Simplification Rationale:/P Substantial portions of the roles of the Event Logistics committee and the Budget and Finance committee are now being carried out by the Executive Director and staff, with oversight by the Treasurer and other board members. This amendment eliminates the permanent status of those committees, and allows the board discretion to create new ad hoc committees as needs change./P The amendment would: - Eliminate the finance and event committees as standing committees - Allow the board to create other ad-hoc committees as needed to perform specific tasks - Clarify that all committee chairs are given non-voting ex-officio seats on the board, which are not counted towards a quorum - Fix a few other minor language issues and typos/P Proposal: - In section 8.6, replace the text at least four members with at least four voting members./P - Replace section 9 introductory text with: The Board of Directors will create three standing committees to fulfill the NewNOG mission. Those committees will be the Program Committee, the Communication Committee, and the Membership and Development Committee. The Board may also at its discretion create ad hoc committees to carry out other functions as needed. All members of committees must be Members in Good Standing of NewNOG. The chairperson of each committee will serve ex officio in a non-voting role on the Board of Directors, in order to facilitate communication between the groups./P - In section 9.1.2, replace the word Council with Committee./P - In section 9.2.3, replace the misspelled word Acceptible with Acceptable./P - In section 9.2.5, delete the sentence: /P The chairperson of the Communications Committee will serve ex officio in a non-voting role on the Board of Directors, in order to facilitate communication between the two groups./P - In section 9.3.1, delete the sentence:/P The chairperson of the Membership and Development Committee will serve ex officio in a non-voting role on the Board of Directors, in order to facilitate communication between the two groups./P - Replace section 9.4 with:/P 9.4 Ad Hoc Committees/P The Board of Directors may from time to time create ad
Re: [routing-wg] BGP Update Report
I read them all too. BUT, I get some 5 or 6 copies of them from all the lists I am on. I would rather subscribe to a list that was just for those. …Skeeve -- Skeeve Stevens, CEO - eintellego Pty Ltd ske...@eintellego.netmailto:ske...@eintellego.net ; www.eintellego.net Phone: 1300 753 383 ; Fax: (+612) 8572 9954 Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellego twitter.com/networkceoau ; www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve PO Box 7726, Baulkham Hills, NSW 1755 Australia -- eintellego - The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - HP Networking - Cisco - Brocade On 16/10/11 7:24 AM, Lynda shr...@deaddrop.orgmailto:shr...@deaddrop.org wrote: On 10/15/2011 4:26 AM, Geoff Huston wrote: While I am at it, does anyone read this report, or is this weekly report also just part of the spam load on this list? I read both of them, and also the Weekly Routing Report. I will regret the loss, and consider all three to be far more valuable than 90% of the traffic on the list. -- Last week we lost a giant in the world of computing. Last weekend we lost the giant on whose shoulders he stood. Rest in peace, friend. (Tim Pierce, on the deaths of Dennis Ritchie and Steve Jobs)
Re: [routing-wg] BGP Update Report
John, Bit hard for Geoff to devnull them, he is the author ;-) …Skeeve -- Skeeve Stevens, CEO - eintellego Pty Ltd ske...@eintellego.netmailto:ske...@eintellego.net ; www.eintellego.net Phone: 1300 753 383 ; Fax: (+612) 8572 9954 Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellego twitter.com/networkceoau ; www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve PO Box 7726, Baulkham Hills, NSW 1755 Australia -- eintellego - The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - HP Networking - Cisco - Brocade On 16/10/11 7:30 AM, John Peach john-na...@johnpeach.commailto:john-na...@johnpeach.com wrote: On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 22:26:36 +1100 Geoff Huston g...@apnic.netmailto:g...@apnic.net wrote: While I am at it, does anyone read this report, or is this weekly report also just part of the spam load on this list? If you don't want them, filter them to /dev/null. regards, Geoff -- John
Re: [routing-wg] BGP Update Report
I agree with Skeeve that it hits a number of lists, but I think that is a good thing and is of value. I agree with others who have said that there is any amount of worthless noise on lists and we can just filter if not required. Personally iirc, it was this content that led me to find Geoff's web site and follow on to a number of other very useful resources when I first started learning about this space. We need to remember that not every person in this space enters from University but some migrate to it because of other drivers. Hence some of these resources, that those of you with decades of experience, wonder about the value of, actually have far more value than just their core content. (Hope that makes sense.). D On 16/10/2011 4:48 p.m., Skeeve Stevens wrote: I read them all too. BUT, I get some 5 or 6 copies of them from all the lists I am on. I would rather subscribe to a list that was just for those. …Skeeve -- Skeeve Stevens, CEO - eintellego Pty Ltd ske...@eintellego.netmailto:ske...@eintellego.net ; www.eintellego.net Phone: 1300 753 383 ; Fax: (+612) 8572 9954 Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellego twitter.com/networkceoau ; www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve PO Box 7726, Baulkham Hills, NSW 1755 Australia -- eintellego - The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - HP Networking - Cisco - Brocade On 16/10/11 7:24 AM, Lyndashr...@deaddrop.orgmailto:shr...@deaddrop.org wrote: On 10/15/2011 4:26 AM, Geoff Huston wrote: While I am at it, does anyone read this report, or is this weekly report also just part of the spam load on this list? I read both of them, and also the Weekly Routing Report. I will regret the loss, and consider all three to be far more valuable than 90% of the traffic on the list. -- Last week we lost a giant in the world of computing. Last weekend we lost the giant on whose shoulders he stood. Rest in peace, friend. (Tim Pierce, on the deaths of Dennis Ritchie and Steve Jobs) -- Don Gould 31 Acheson Ave Mairehau Christchurch, New Zealand Ph: + 64 3 348 7235 Mobile: + 64 21 114 0699
Re: [routing-wg] BGP Update Report
On 10/15/2011 10:48 PM, Skeeve Stevens wrote: I read them all too. BUT, I get some 5 or 6 copies of them from all the lists I am on. I would rather subscribe to a list that was just for those. +1. Or an rss feed or something. That way interested folks could easily pull the data and stay up to date. -- Charles N Wyble char...@knownelement.com @charlesnw on twitter http://blog.knownelement.com Building alternative,global scale,secure, cost effective bit moving platform for tomorrows alternate default free zone.
Re: [routing-wg] BGP Update Report
BUT, I get some 5 or 6 copies of them from all the lists I am on. I would rather subscribe to a list that was just for those. procmail is your friend # prevent dupes # :0 Whc: msgid.lock | formail -D 65536 msgid.cache :0 a:0 $TRASH
[routing-wg] The Cidr Report
I may not read it for the purpose of aggregation, but it is useful data to me for other purposes. As long as there is one person talking and at least one person listening, a thread is in order, and it isn't spam. On Oct 15, 2011 3:25 PM, Geoff Huston g...@apnic.net wrote: From what I learned at the latest NANOG it's very clear that nobody reads this any more. Is there any good reason to persist in spamming the nanog list with this report? thanks, Geoff
Re: [routing-wg] The Cidr Report
Ditto, and I do find it informative. Jim On Oct 15, 2011, at 10:35 PM, Kyle Creyts kyle.cre...@gmail.com wrote: I may not read it for the purpose of aggregation, but it is useful data to me for other purposes. As long as there is one person talking and at least one person listening, a thread is in order, and it isn't spam. On Oct 15, 2011 3:25 PM, Geoff Huston g...@apnic.net wrote: From what I learned at the latest NANOG it's very clear that nobody reads this any more. Is there any good reason to persist in spamming the nanog list with this report? thanks, Geoff
