Re: Consumer products with baked-in VLAN tagging
On Apr 8, 2015, at 1:58 PM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote: I do wish they had bufferbloat-fighting queue managment on the ISP side, it is otherwise pretty good hardware. As you're well aware since your name is in the acknowledgements, there's been some effort in this direction at CL. If the problem gets solved in the CMTS and the CM, what the router does is kind of beside the point (unless we've progressed to wanting to do it on the wireless side too). Do they also supply that vlan to the ethernet? You mean to the southbound ethernet when running as a router instead of to the northbound ethernet while running as a bridge? No idea. That's not my normal use case. How is their ipv6 with comcast? Beats me. No Comcast handy to test with. I *can* tell you that a freshly factory reset Airport Express 802.11n (2nd Generation) aka A1392 - the currently for sale $99 one - does pretty much exactly what you would hope when plugged into a freshly rebooted cablemodem on Another Pretty Darned Big MSO. That is to say, it gets a PD /64 and you're off to the races with native IPv6 on the wireless side. No warranties expressed or implied, but it seems to do what it says on the tin. A similar test with a freshly factory reset Airport Extreme 802.11n (3rd Generation) aka A1301 is disappointing; default configuration is IPv6 link local only and although there is a knob to put it into native/automatic IPv6 configuration it doesn't work as advertised. But hey, it was discontinued five and a half years ago at this point so what do you want? I figured that a test with an even older example I have sitting around in the junk box (A1143) would be similarly unsatisfying. I'd really like to try these native IPv6 tests with my Verizon FIOS at home, but I think I already know the outcome... -r
Consumer products with baked-in VLAN tagging
Hi folks, As you may know if you've played around with recent Apple Airports (Express at least) in bridge mode with guest network turned on, they seem to know about 802.1q and have fairly reasonable or at least defensible behavior out of the box - that is to say they move the native SSID as untagged, and the guest SSID tagged 802.1q VLAN 1003. This behavior does not appear to be field-modifyable. So, who else has seen this sort of behavior from other consumer devices, running mixed tagged/untagged VLANs in a non-reconfigurable way? I'd be grateful for any and all pointers. Thanks, -r
Re: ARIN's RPKI Relying agreement
On Dec 4, 2014, at 1:34 PM, Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote: On Dec 4, 2014, at 10:17 AM, George, Wes wesley.geo...@twcable.com wrote: WG] Has there been any actual discussion about how much nobody would have to pay for ARIN (or another party) to fix the balance of liability and provide a proper SLA that led to no, I don't want to pay for that responses from those who are expressing the concern, or is this just conjecture on your part? I’ve asked a lot of people, “Would you be willing to pay ARIN for RPKI services,” and the answer has always been “no.” Until I get a “yes,” it’s hard to put a number (other than zero) on how the market values RPKI. So, asking how much more risk ARIN is willing to take on seems a little premature. I suspect you would get a similar answer if you asked people Would you be willing to pay ARIN for whois services or would you be willing to pay ARIN for in-addr.arpa services. I've always been under the impression that the fees charged annually to my orgid were in part to cover the costs associated with running the registry, which by definition involves a certain amount of risk. Am I mistaken? -r
Lightly used IP addresses
At the risk of getting called out for posting possibly operationally significant stuff in the middle of a massive retrospective about WCOM's acquisitions, here's a circleid post from a couple days ago from John Curran at ARIN. http://www.circleid.com/posts/psst_interested_in_some_lightly_used_ip_addresses/ Discuss. :-) Sent at 55 MPH or slower from my iPhone
Postel Scholarship: Please re-submit applications
Dear Colleagues, A technical malfunction may have resulted in the loss of some applications for the 2010 Jon Postel Network Operator's Scholarship. If you submitted an application in the past weeks, we ask you to resubmit your application. We apologize for the inconvenience. The deadline for submissions for the Jon Postel Scholarship has been extended to 23:59:59 UTC on 20 June 2010. If you have questions, please contact postel...@nanog.org. Again, on behalf of the Postel Network Operator Scholarship committee, we are sorry for the inconvenience. -Rob Seastrom
Postel Network Operator's Scholarship nominations now open
[Sent to multiple lists; apologies for the duplicates] On behalf of the North American Network Operators Group (NANOG) and the American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN), I would like to take this opportunity to draw your attention to the 2009 Postel Network Operator's Scholarship. The Postel Network Operator's Scholarship targets personnel from developing countries who are actively involved in Internet development, in any of the following roles: * Engineers (Network Builders) * Operational and Infrastructure Support Personnel * Educators and Trainers Successful applicants will be provided with transportation to and from the NANOG/ARIN joint meeting in autumn, and a reasonable (local host standard) allowance for food and accommodation. In addition, all fees for participation in the conferences, tutorials, and social events will be waived. The final grant size is determined according to final costs and available funding. Successful applicants will be advised at least 2 months prior to the fall meeting date. Applications from qualified individuals are now being accepted. The deadline for application is 1 June 2009, and the awardees will be informed by 3 July 2009. To apply for the fellowship please read http://www.nanog.org/scholarships/postel.php and submit your application via email to postel...@nanog.org. Kind regards, -Rob Seastrom, on behalf of the Postel Scholarship Selection Committee
