Re: [uknof] Mailing List transfer to netUK
--- Begin Message --- On 10/03/2024 15:49, Peter Robinson wrote: Will there be a link to the new list(s) here once those are available? I've not seen a link anywhere, but I may have missed it. I think you are looking for: members-subscr...@lists.uknog.org <mailto:members-subscr...@lists.uknog.org> members-unsubscr...@lists.uknog.org <mailto:members-unsubscr...@lists.uknog.org> -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB t...@kooky.org --- End Message ---
Re: [uknof] CGNAT Solutions
--- Begin Message --- On 07/07/2023 12:49, Brian Candler wrote: The bigger problem I see is the complete unwillingness of the majority of content providers to make their content accessible over v6, even though in some cases it's only a few clicks for them to do it. They *could* do it, but they don't. And an unwillingness from content providers to allow ICMP on IPv6. (one of the cloud did (maybe still does) block ICMP on IPv6 by default. Thus people who try to do the right thing and add IPv6 and records just get bitten in the bum from complaints from people when it doesn't work on IPv6 on mobile phones, tunnels ... ) Tim --- End Message ---
Re: [uknof] CGNAT Solutions
--- Begin Message --- On 05/07/2023 16:11, Paul Bone wrote: Particularly interested in scalable solutions from a few hundred subscribers up to tens of thousands – but I suspect that may well involve hardware upgrades to do cost effectively. (more thoughts) For just IPv4: It is just an IPtables rule on whatever terminates sessions (PPP or vlans or whatever) from your customers? with -s 100.64.0.0/10 ??? Thus you don't end up with 1 massive thing that can fail, and has a very similar number of single points of failure to actually providing connectivity? Presuming enough customers sessions per box to reasonably average it out. Also you will have to be doing some filtering at this point for to makesure the customer only using IPs they are meant to (BCP38) And you aren't going to jump to zillions of customers on CGnat on day 1. You will just start dishing out a 100.64.0.0/10 to new customers? So you can see how the load works out and if necessary add more boxes? Because if you have $one_massive_blob CG_nat box then you've got to have all kind of clever (bodge) routing to get to it, and back. And a state based failover? And 1 massive point of failure. Tim --- End Message ---
Re: [uknof] CGNAT Solutions
--- Begin Message --- On 05/07/2023 16:11, Paul Bone wrote: I have used several different vendors with varying success, but just wondering what people are using for CGNAT solutions and how many subscribers? I've solved 'network funnies' a few times in small companies by making sure IPv6 is working. You'd be surprised how many times 'x doesn't work' has been purely caused by the 'consumer' router running out of go at a few thousand sessions. And I was surprised just how many sessions your corporate PC user just has running all the time. And quadruple zillion this is you have loads of people watching TV. Or have a voip call centre. So in the sceneiro where somebody pops in with (say) a PBX to test which boots up and network (and port) scans a few thousand IPs to try and discover voip phones to configure on the network, which burns IPv4 ports in the nat. Well, because facebook and google still work, the 'internet' isn't down. I'm also just trying to work out in my head also whether you could make something 464xlat style which avoids double nat where you own the CPE. Tim --- End Message ---
Re: [uknof] Full table routers
--- Begin Message --- On 28/06/2023 10:27, John P Bourke wrote: Any recommendations for full table routers. We don’t need more than 10G. I used Debian + FRR on HP proliants. With startech Nics with intel chipset. Unusual, but did the trick. Help that there was a whole stack of the same hardware running services in the same place. They take a while to boot, but you can make it faster and I think the newer variants are better. Software wise, takes a bit of getting used to. Sometimes conflict between FRR and what Debian wants to do for network setup. Also you can use CAKE :) Also run any scripts or monitoring you want onboard (like counting the BFD flaps per hour to watch the problems that go away and come back very quickly) See also distributions that bundle FRR more specifically for networking rather than a general distribution. -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB t...@kooky.org +44 7966479015 --- End Message ---
Re: [uknof] Monitoring if leased lines are down via an NNI
--- Begin Message --- On 12/04/2023 13:34, Steven Maddox via uknof wrote: Sure but there is no static route required here, or in fact any layer 3 routing. We'd want it to entirely control if layer 2 pseudowire is, or is not, allowed to form to that unit. What is the MTU on the underlaying paths? Do you have room for using VXLan over IPv6? Then run BGP + BFD (or even OSPF6) to arrange the traffic to the vxlan end IPv6 point. (yes, you can do it with IPv4 but 6 is easier and you can It's easy if the main problem is a link dropping. It is harder if you want to have no single point of failure in terms of kit on the way. My usecase of an above setup was to bridge a layer 2 wifi vlan (and others) between 2 buildings over a 1 gig ish primary and a 80 meg ish secondary point to point link. The gig side affected by the occasional truck in the way. Worked a dream. Also see https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/issues/3369 - request for BFD for a static route in FRR. There are links to some other implementations and usecases. Tim --- End Message ---
Re: [uknof] Three stops roaming - advice for new mobile provider
--- Begin Message --- On 29/03/2023 19:35, Stephen Wilcox wrote: I spend most of my time outside the UK and while I do have a local SIM, I need my UK number to be active as a bare minimum so I can access UK Gov, banking, basically anything with 2FA which is UK specific. Not to mention it's been my main contact number for over 20 years. My friends who emigrated, they ported their mobile numbers to AAISP as a way to hold them. -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB t...@kooky.org +44 7966479015 --- End Message ---
Re: [uknof] Gamma Contact (Hosted PBX)
On 12/06/2020 21:06, kevin@wisp.engineer wrote: You'll find that VoIP over 4G is very much a 50/50 chance.. Mostly due to how it's all natted etc, I've got people working at home fine on 4G. For weeks. Presume the end device is a SIP desk phone? Usual suspects (Paul, Peter, Alan already alluded, but I thought i'd make 1 list) Gamma a big company, with a lot of customers. Surprised they have issues, but a lot of steps in the chain. 1) Nat time outs faster than nat refresh in CGnat. (best fix is to move to SIP over TLS) 2) same device from a different IP address. (suppose, CGnat) Some mobile devices move IPv4s a lot. So make a call, and the RTP appears on a different IP address to the SIP just before it. Lots of firewalls can't cope with this. (Seems to be a common problem in the US as mobile providers got to 464xlat. ) 3) double nat - nat in hotspot, and then nat in the CGnat in the network (carrier can't cope) 4) SIP ALG in the hotspot. or in the CGnat. 5) Setting the SIP registration timer too fast - so due to a bit of packet loss, doesn't get a chance to re-register before expiry. And retry in the phone too slow too. 6) (not gamma) people who use qualify in asterisk. A feature which should be deleted. 7) Bufferbloat - so get timeouts. I'd pop out to amazon and buy a Three pre-pay sim. And then set the APN to 3internet which gives you a public IPv4 address. And try that. Unless you already have a APN on your existing sims that give a public IP. Or try an AAISP SIM. Also worth checking what device he's using for 4G. Lot of people have a `just for backup` device but it's 7 years old, maybe not a UK version, doesn't have all the 4G frequency bands, which can cause naff performance. And put in a support call with Gamma and see what they say??? -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB t...@kooky.org +44 7966479015
Re: [uknof] BT Net Lease line issues.
On 28/05/2020 16:29, Wojciech Lesiak wrote: I have double checked it and can't see any. Just to let you know that parallel download is closing the circuit. Does the far end have 2 routers into a switch? Is one router at 1G, and one at 400M. And by fluke 2 downloads comes over 2 routers? I'd test for bufferbloat too. How much does the ping time go up when you are doing a single download? How much for multiple? I had a leased line with all kind of go slows and latency. Turned out to be bufferbloat caused by an optic not compatible with whatever it was plugged into. Actually improved download speeds and latency by using fq_codel with ECN on ingress. (The ISP fixed their end eventually) Is there a chance that in going from 500 to 1000, then the slowdown from say the ISPs 10G network to your 1G network has moved from something fair with small buffers, to something unfair with a massive buffer? (usually see this at lower speeds though) -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB t...@kooky.org +44 7966479015
Re: [uknof] test website with an IPv6 address
On 27/05/2020 17:28, Greg Choules wrote: Good evening all. I am looking for a simple web page that can be reached over IPv6, for use by an intermittent test tool. There are a couple of caveats: 1. It must be HTTP only with no redirect to HTTPS (you'll see why). 2. It must not care about the domain used in the GET. This is because I want to configure my own records with specific TTLs, for the DNS element of the test tool. http://ip6.provu.co.uk - returns nothing but the IP address you came from. 2001:41c9:2:d2::40:1 Just moved onto a dedicated IP - for some reason it wasn't, when I have a zillion IPs to go at. Presume you aren't going to do more than a 200k hits a day? See also http://ip.provu.co.uk/ (iframe that give IPv4, IPv6 and IP whatever) and http://ip4.provu.co.uk/ - not currently on a dedicated IP. http://ipa.provu.co.uk (and thanks that my Three phone sometimes has IPv6, and sometimes doesn't) -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB t...@kooky.org +44 7966479015
Re: [uknof] Thought for the day: announce the end of IPv4 internet connections by 2026
On 26/05/2020 22:59, Pete Stevens wrote: I wonder what the absolute minimum set if before $ultra-cheap-broken-isp just goes ipv6+nat64 and doesn't care about breaking other stuff. Free broadband that comes with your mobile contract / cornflakes could be a candidate. I'd suggest the big porn sites might need IPv6 for that to float. Slightly different scenario for sweeping up sites to have IPv6 on server side: It might one day that 464xlat fails at $massive_mobile_isp - most punters still happy because facebook and google still up. And the headline reads `twitter down on $massive_mobile_isp' And people phone $small_supplier and say `Can't get on your website from my mobile, and its your fault because google and facebook still work` -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB t...@kooky.org +44 7966479015
Re: [uknof] Thought for the day: announce the end of IPv4 internet connections by 2026
On 25/05/2020 20:02, Paul Mansfield wrote: Looking back at Y2K, would all that effort have been put in to kill off old services and tidy up all the cr*p if there hadn't been a fixed deadline? As to the Jan 19 2038 problem, how many of us hope to be retired by then, or will we be dragged out of retirement?! That's not actually 100% true. There was a look of activity and a lot of IT refresh. But a lot blundered on. In 2006 I was in my local hospital and watched my friend working at a PC with a sticker on it saying `not Y2K compliant, not the be used after 1st Jan 2020' A company I did some work for spent £45k on a new manufacturing system. The supplier would not certify as Y2K compliant. And then when they realised the old one still worked, they used the old one What I'm getting at, is that Personally. I've been pestering suppliers for IPv6 for over 12 years. Some delivered, some haven't. There are people buying devices today they probably expect to last 10 years, which can't do IPv6. On 26/05/2020 09:33, Tom Bird wrote: The 3 men and a dog local IT companies that set their shitty draytek router up don't understand it. Yes, they turn it off. No business need. And breaks dual WAN failover from 2 consumer ISPs. And really easy to login to the printer by typing 192.168.1.27. Really hard to remember 2001:678:424:b201:70c9:54ff:fe8a:68bf. (I've taken my printers away from IPv6 for this exact reason) (one of my friends is tech lead at an IT installations company. He wants to test IPv6 incase a customer asks. But neither his co-lo provider (zen) or leased line provider (talk talk) will do IPv6. (I'll sort him some VPN)) On the other hand if you enable it on things like student halls and public wifi hotspots then it takes a *lot* of the load off your NAT devices and this is really great. I agree. I think this one of the true business drivers. Dual stack saves IPv4 nat ports. And I think a single point of failure for many networks. Ditto for the mobile networks doing 464 xlat. You get IPv6, facebook and google goes V6, way less ports in CGNAT. This is working on my Three mobile iPhone today, in the UK and just works. And not something I asked for. (might not be xlat, but looks like it. I don't think it is NAT64, because DNS lookups seem ok. I've working v6 and v4 with no v4 IP address.) I think Mythic beasts have proved that IPv4 addresses per server not strictly necessary for hosting websites which are still accessible over IPv4. Again, a business reason to save cost. And CDNs can offer content on IPv6 only hosts as consumer IPv6 takes off; More hosts on IPv6 than IPv4. The other one is the really big companies. They want IPv6 to avoid overlapping RFC1918 networks. If you include government in that, then it might push devices to support IPv6. So there are ways for content hosters to save IPv4 addresses. And ways for eyeball networks to save IPv4 addresses. And there will always be some website not on IPv4. And some ISP that doesn't offer IPv6, and some installer who turns off IPv6 And as such, there are many ways to stretch out IPv4. As the value of IPv4 space goes up, more people might find ways to release what they don't need. And I don't know what the answer looks like. -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB t...@kooky.org +44 7966479015
Re: [uknof] Public IPv4 Addresses Required
On 06/05/2020 16:41, Paul Bone wrote: Public IPv4 addresses direct on PCs, Mobile Devices on Guest Wifi Networks, internal Printers I have seen this with my own eyes. There is nothing wrong with this. And the universities aren't going to change this unless there is an economic driver to do it. And if the university was going to stay IPv4 only and do RFC1918, they would need a massive Carrier grade nat infrastructure. These guys have big connections and so would be really expensive. And loads of ports. You can't stick 5000 users behind 1 IPv4 and have it work. Plus these guys have loads of departments who run their own networks, vlans, partner institutions scope for conflict between 1918 space is massive. And nat introduces single points of failure, unless you spend even more money. What might happen is something like this: 1) university deploys IPv6 (presume dual stack) 2) Cost of CG nat comes lower as bandwidth use and number of ports in use on IPv4 reduces. (because many of the big bandwidth hogs are V6 enabled) 3) Price of IPv4 keeps rising 4) There becomes an point where the sale price of IPv4 becomes 10 times higher than the hassle of renumbering, natting and IPv6ing. And the uni might sell some space. But they will still have an IPv4 network which wasn't as good as it was before. (there are probably loads of other orgs sat on IP space who would sell first) Otoh, one could just find a strugging hosting company with some IPv4 allocations. Buy them. Do a Mythic and find the users who don't really need a IPv4 address. Reuse and sell on. (except it looks like Mythic have already practiced at this, so others can play catchup at the back. There's a uknof talk or 2 all about it. ) It's kind of like the same story as a housing developer who buys a knackered bit of waste land and builds 50 flats. In summary, there is an IPv4 market. Just like there is a market for land/housing. And a market for gas (there didn't used to be a market for wholesale gas in europe, but that's another story) -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB t...@kooky.org +44 7966479015
Re: [uknof] Public IPv4 Addresses Required
On 06/05/2020 16:41, Jonathan McDowell wrote: I'm more disappointed at how software companies don't push for v6 on their developer setups. How do we expect solid code out there that doesn't fall over or just have UI glitches when it experiences v6, if the developer and QA have never had a v6 setup? I have the opposite. Some things don't work on IPv4. Had IPv6 for too long. Internal and dev systems. -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB t...@kooky.org +44 7966479015
Re: [uknof] VM Network 27/04 since 5pm
On 29/04/2020 11:51, Chris Russell wrote: nope, fibre break. Besides, VM have had some level of v6 on some of their connections for yonks (including mine) - seems to have changed though from DSLite to 6to4: I agree about historically. Sometime between 2008 and 2012. Virgin media, using whatever CPE they just sent to customers had `working` 6to4. (at a friends house, got asked to look at a work thing, needed to access a v6 only test server, was just thinking how to VPN or tunnel and it just worked. After, a bit of digging and realised it was 6to4 and based on the IPv4 address) Tim -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB t...@kooky.org +44 7966479015
Re: [uknof] Mikrotik custom front panels
On 19/04/2020 12:07, Paul Thornton wrote: Happy lockdown Sunday everyone, I've been trying to find somewhere that can custom-produce branded replacement front panels for the 1U rackmount Mikrotik routers for a customer. This has not been very successful. Try these guys: http://www.montgomeryengravers.com/printed-labels-signs/ They can make printed plastic sheet with holes or clear bits in the right places. I've a friend who uses them to make the front panels/key pads for their small run electronics items. And they were very helpful for a colleague's product recently, but we ended up not using them because we needed to do something really awkward and their machine didn't quite do it. -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB t...@kooky.org +44 7966479015
Re: [uknof] COVID-19 offers of help and network changes
On 16/03/2020 20:01, Gavin Henry wrote: Has anyone seen any big demands yet? I've been following NANOG and the Italian graphs. ProVu (voip kit supplier) seeing massive demand for 5v power supplies. Currently have alternatives for most things. Would appear that most people realised the office Power over Ethernet does not work at home. -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB t...@kooky.org +44 7966479015
Re: [uknof] 1Gbps CPE
On 01/07/2019 13:48, CharlesA @ BitBahn.io wrote: I have personally used all of these, and they do deliver true Gbps connectivity, just don’t go to heavy on firewalling and queues. Do Mikrotik have any adaptive queuing? As in, avoiding bufferbloat? Tim
Re: [uknof] IPv6 default on EE
On 19/11/2018 17:58, Catalin Dominte wrote: I went on the laptop and set IPv6 for the connection to Link Local Only as apple removed the off setting too. Everything now goes via IPv4 and I can now do my job again and connect to resources via VPN tunnels on IPv4.Not ideal, I know, but I cannot just drop IPv4 for now. What kind of VPN? Because (correct me if I'm wrong) most PPTP, L2TP and IPSec need some helper to get through NAT. So maybe normal IPv4 stuff would just work, but in the process of the upgrade they have broken or lost the NAT helpers you were used to having before? Tim Bray
[uknof] Heart internet email
Hi, Anybody from Heart Internet around? Who has a few minutes to investigate problem. Having problem delivering email to 79.170.44.48. '451 Temporary local problem - please try later', for days. Feels like greylisting that never actually releases. Tim Bray
Re: [uknof] Good ISPs in the UK
On 24/09/17 21:24, JASON BOTHE wrote: > I am currently looking for recommendations on well connected ISPs in the UK. > We are currently using Claranet and Exp-E but are wondering if there is a > better tiered ISP to be connected to that can offer a low price/per/mb cost. > Any recommendations are welcome. As Marek said, what kind of services? And also what's the problem with the current providers. We used Claranet for datacentre connectivity for a number of years, and they were absolutely awesome. Definitely above the good category. Tim
Re: [uknof] Fibre to remote areas
On 16/08/17 22:19, Neil J. McRae wrote: > We have some stupid things such as EO lines that we need to do more to solve > (but requires co-op from others who would rather they keep you on a slower > platform). And yes over time I believe we will move away from ADSL as a > solution. But remember some customers are only just getting ADSL2 now such > are the economics of build. I thought EO lines were just a doomed outcome. But I just yesterday ordered an FTTC on what was an exchange only line. A new cabinet has appeared in the BT exchange car park. It looks very new. So a solution is possible. Albeit, a silly one. I'm sure VDSL inside the building would be easier. Tim
Re: [uknof] Fibre to remote areas
On 23/08/17 01:29, Phillip Baker wrote: > In fairness, while BT were a bit glacial at this sort of thing (and > have recently made strides to improve on this), freeholders and their > solicitors really are often just clueless/deluded/slow bastards in > equal measure because there's just not enough competition in their > line of work to compel them not to be. Even getting a single leased > line in to one commercial tenant can be hard enough, much less doing > an entire estate, especially if you're going to have to drill/cut > holes in communal areas. And drilling holes in communal areas probably under a bit more scrutiny after Grenfell. There's also a big difference between getting a formal wayleave (for a commercial service). And then having guys on the ground who know all the security staff in all the blocks, and then just getting on with it (for consumer services). Tim
Re: [uknof] US based cisco distributor
On 09/11/16 22:17, Panny Malialis wrote: I think they deserve a serious plug for that: http://www.tomaxtechnology.com/ That's not me. -- Tim Bray t...@kooky.org | +44 7966 479015 | http://www.kooky.org Huddersfield, UK
Re: [uknof] US based cisco distributor
On 09/11/16 12:05, Panny Malialis wrote: Someone somewhere is milking the sterling situation bigtime. It's worse than Marmite! [very angry face emoji] A lot of companies can't cope with price changes. So they have probably just whacked up the price to makesure they don't lose out if prices go up again. I'm surprised you can't just buy from a UK cisco distributor. Expect to pay some import duty and VAT on kit coming from the US. For kit that is ultimately priced in dollars, prices have been volatile. And we also buy a lot of kit in euros, but ultimately that is priced in dollars as you pay for stuff made in China in Dollars. And pretty much all components of anything electronic (this CPU, flash memory, ram) are price in dollars. I know some people who need minimum 2 weeks notice of a price change to update prices their systems. I also think a lot of people thought the currency dips were temporary, and so hung at on at old prices, only to find they have lost a money on orders. I know some of the big distributors work on a daily dollar rate. So prices stay the same all day today, and change tomorrow. Ok if you placing big kit orders, but hard if you an an etailer pricing thousands of orders for drop shipping. If you are buying from such a distributor (and run at low margin), and selling thousands of products, then you need to pull the pricelist every morning and change all your prices. And probably, don't accept any orders from customers from last order time day before, until you get the pricelist in the morning. Add in that cisco always has loads of deals. Discounts for certain partners. And the deals are never in the price feeds. So probably safer for a lot of web shops to just whack 30% extra on the price to makesure they don't lose out. *** There is always grey market cisco kit around. They are globally sold products. Always in another country there is an account manager a bit short of target, or a special deal on something. Somebody has spares that end up on ebay or amazon. I would guess that as prices have gone up, the stock people have laying around has moved as people scramble to fulfil orders. Cisco dead against this. But if you are small guy, just want something with minimum fuss, then you would just buy online and have done. -- Tim Bray t...@kooky.org | +44 7966 479015 | http://www.kooky.org Huddersfield, UK
Re: [uknof] IPv6 adoption approaching 16% in UK
On 07/11/16 20:31, a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
suckers? you mean those that already have a better understanind of the protocol,
have the required extra monitoring, scripts etc, understand client
behaviours etc - that hardware cycle occurs anyway - and when VM finally get
around
to deploying it, they'll see that most of their traffic as an eyeballs network
will
be IPv6 - all that youtube, google, netflix etc - just needs the client to
actually
have IPv6 connectivit
I agree about the extra experience. I'm not an IPv6 deployment expert,
but I've used IPv6 everyday for 10 years now. I don't know that much,
but I know a lot more than most. There is a big skills gap for V6 on
the on premise side.
This is how I see it.
1) The Zen, SKY and BT rollout will switch on the home users and micro
businesses. (VM and talktalk the same, when it happens). The kind of
people who just use the ISP supplied router. They connect a wifi cable
or read the wifi password off the router and google works. The
business reason is that if they need to CG Nat in future, it can be a
smaller CG Nat. And see content below. v6 will just work for these
people and they won't know the difference.
(I suspect that many 5 to 15 users small business customers have `crappy
internet` which is actually caused by their current basic NAT router not
supporting enough sessions through the NAT. I've seen this in the wild
a few times. And I've had friends ring me to try and help with funny
issues which I'm sure could be port starvation.)
2) Big businesses will switch it on if they have a need. The obvious
need being less port contention at NAT gateways. Or a more routed
network with more diversity. Or fixing conflicts in 1918 space for
internal services. These guys plan their networks and will know what
they are doing.
3) The content providers will roll it out as a way to save address
space. If you are a massive content provider with thousands of servers,
then a chunk can be dual stacked and a chunk can be IPv6 only. If the
content provider happens to be an eye ball network too, then no NAT
between content and eye ball. (I'd be interested to hear from somebody
from SKY (or maybe BT TV stuff) whether this works in practice.)
The Mythic beasts IPv6 hosting system I think is a massively good idea
for smaller content hosters.
4) The deployment lag is going to be the thousands of middle sized
businesses. So above the level of an ISP bundled router, but below the
level of an in-house network team. Somebody with 50 PCs connected to a
Sonicwall firewall. At the level where they want to pay £2.5k plus
installation for security peace of mind.
The current installers of such devices typically have no IPv6 knowledge,
and are frankly scared of IPv6 breaking something. They run away when
they have to type in a funny long number. Plus when something doesn't
work, they don't have the knowledge or experience to fix it.
It will come out in the wash because the people who need IPv6 will find
an willing installer and ditch the appliances with poor V6 support. And
the better installers will realise that one natted IPv4 between 50 busy
office users will not cut the mustard anymore. And the others will
bumble on as before.
When I mean port starvation, just look at your desktop now
on linux, run both these commands. (Needs both flavours, even if your
machine is only IPv4 connected. I think it depends how the application
opens the socket)
netstat -n -A inet
netstat -n -A inet6
or
{ netstat -n -A inet6 && netstat -n -A inet; } | wc -l
and -2 from the output.
On windows
netstat -n
And just see how many sockets you have open. Mine says 87 now, and not
really got that many browser tabs open.I've seen consumer firewalls
wimp out at 800 or so sessions .
--
Tim Bray
t...@kooky.org | +44 7966 479015 | http://www.kooky.org
Huddersfield, UK
Re: [uknof] RIPE policy change for new LIR formation
On 02/09/16 12:39, Keith Mitchell wrote: > I did suggest to the RIPE NCC about a decade ago they should subscribe > to Companies House online access to search/verify such things. It's pretty open data. If you sign up for an API key you are away. You don't need to use the API. Like we can pull images of companies filings - we used to pay a credit checking company for these. https://developer.companieshouse.gov.uk/api/docs/ Tim
Re: [uknof] Bandwidth Shaping?
On 06/07/16 20:42, Richard Spragg wrote: I’m looking for some advice - a client of ours has enquired about bandwidth shaping for their multi-tenanted office building. We supply them with ISP and they have around 20-30 companies onsite. They are looking to tier the provision, mostly as a revenue generator. I would ask what they have onsite at the moment. Because they presumably have a 100meg connection in, and somehow that gets into the offices of 2o0ish tenants. I ask because lots of enterprise type switches can do basic rate limiting. HP instructions: http://www.hp.com/rnd/support/manuals/pdf/release_06628_07110/Bk2_Ch4_Rate_Limiting.pdf Or they could just be really noddy and change the port to 10 Meg :) The above isn't going to be very pretty, but it might be a solution which is low cost, doesn't introduce another SPOF Tim
Re: [uknof] IPv6 usage explosion
On 24/05/16 09:01, James Bensley wrote: > Lots of technical hurdles like buggy routers/switches/firewalls, buggy > applications or applications that simply don't support IPv6 or have > some IPv4 hard coded parts etc, that all adds up to management saying > "you see, it will take too much time/money/whatever, get back to > writing that report on how many reports you've been writing." I would urge to start working on these now. If you use this excuse forever, you won't move on. (ok, if you do have a big IPv6 lab setup, keep going) If you start working through the problems one at a time, you will gain IPv6 experience. At some time in the future, a customer will say `We need IPv6`. Or you will be looking at a problem, and just wishing you could use IPv6 to do it. Start skilling up now. And business is more fun if you keep thinking of little improvements, new ideas, new mini ways to impress a customer. Anyway, it is fun to do http://uid0.com/ip6dc/provu.co.uk [Maybe in 3 years, a CEO of a customer will ring you and say `Everytime I try to watch the footie on Sky player, it stops working. It works fine at home, and it works in Bob's office. And I rang Sky, and they said IPv6 is better for watching footie, they have more servers. At that stage, a competitor might say `We do IPv6 as standard` and you will be back of queue] Tim
Re: [uknof] 10gb switch
On 18/09/15 13:11, Tom Smyth wrote: > HI lads, > what is the stability like in cumulus what is the uI /cli like ? does > it have a nice cli ? or does it depend on openflow controlers and stuff > like that ? > that was the one thing I was worried about when looking at 10 g > switches... I was told it looks just like a debian box. So if you've every used a Debian box as a router (I do) then very very straight forward. But if you are used to Cisco CLI, then I imagine is hard to get the hang of. I discounted cummulus for the OP - the I thought the power requirements are higher than what they asked for. Tim
Re: [uknof] 10gb switch
On 17/09/15 21:12, Brian Candler wrote: > I have good experience with Netgear XSM7224S (only used for layer 2), > but that's considerably more expensive. We stock some netgear here. That is the product I came across, but we don't stock it. Looks to be just the job, but about £4000+ though. If it is for more than one, I could get somebody to price them up. You should have grabbed the guy at google yesterday. Tim
Re: [uknof] Giffgaff SIM - Manchester...
On 20/01/14 18:36, Rob Lister wrote: It needs to be a giffgaff SIM and has to be in Manchester, so I can transfer my existing number to it online, otherwise gg say it takes working 2-3 days to post me another one, by which time I'll be back in London Where I have a stash of giffgaff SIMs... Can you not get giffgaff sims from any newsagent? The one near work has a large selection of sims. Tim
Re: [uknof] Giffgaff SIM - Manchester...
Got a sim for rob. Will be at uknof tomorrow morning with it. Tim Bray On 20 Jan 2014, at 18:36, Rob Lister r...@lonap.net wrote: It needs to be a giffgaff SIM and has to be in Manchester, so I can transfer my existing number to it online, otherwise gg say it takes working 2-3 days to post me another one, by which time I'll be back in London Where I have a stash of giffgaff SIMs... Just on the offchance somebody's got one sitting in their bag, it'll save a couple of days without my phone number working, and I'll buy beers/pay cash or whatever :) I bought an emergency replacement phone this afternoon in Manchester with a PAYG SIM with different number though... Lost phone is phone locked and SIM locked. Also it can be remotely locked + nuked via Android Device Manager. Was going to wait a bit to see if it turns up or is handed in anywhere (it has/had my business card on the back of it.) Cheers, Rob On Mon, Jan 20 at 6:24:16 PM, Charl Tintinger wrote: You can get a lost and stolen sim sent out from giffgaff (no capitals!) on next day delivery if needed On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Rob Lister r...@lonap.net wrote: Hello, Has anyone going to Manchester got a spare unactivated Giffgaff SIM with them I can have? My phone somehow went missing between the station and the hotel :-( -- Rob Lister r...@lonap.net LONAP Ltd
Re: [uknof] Local VAR for APC kit
On 12/09/13 23:18, Dave Temkin wrote: Hi all- Can someone suggest a VAR in the UK that stocks APC gear (such as cabinets, PDUs, etc.)? (we only sell a handful of this kind of gear, but get asked from time to time, and we don't sell enough to be competitive.) Nobody really stocks. Everybody gets on next day from distribution. There might be some specialised APC people who do stock, but I don't know one. I'd just go straight to the distributor, which is as listed http://www.apc.com/site/Yourbusiness/index.cfm/distributors/ Micro-P, Ingrams or Computer2000 will generally sell to anybody with a company name. At some level of discount. But, sometimes just easier to buy through etail because they get better discount than you can. http://www.ebuyer.com/ list APC kit. Personally, I prefer the riello gear. Tim
Re: [uknof] Recommendations for VOIP provider in the UK
On 12/06/13 11:58, Nigel Titley wrote: Does anyone have recommendations for helpful and reliable VOIP services providers in the UK. We're currently on a Gradwell hosted PABX solution but it's been getting more and more unreliable and we are now starting to get customer complaints: queued calls are being dropped before the phones ring, phones unregister randomly and I get emails telling me phones have unregistered when they haven't, I can't block incoming SIP hack attempts because Gradwell can't guarantee what IP address incoming calls will come from, they don't do IPv6 etc Gradwell are good guys. I know they had a bit of a platform move hipcup. But I'm sure general issues can be worked through. Which phones are you using? Managed by gradwell? All up to date firmwares etc?If you have snoms, then loads of diagnostics can be done to work out whether some SIP Alg or network issue. Randomly un-registering phones could simply be your phones are set to a too short registration expiry and a too long registration retry. SIP registration can be vulnerable to losing 1 packet out of 4 in the exchange. So a failed SIP registration doesn't get retried before the original registration has expired.This is very common, and usually in the face of registration problem people seem to have this habit of setting the SIP expiry to a very low value like 60 seconds. Out of the box Snom phones have a retry interval of 5 minutes. If you set your SIP expiry to 1 minute, then a single packet lost could mean 4 minutes of no registration before it retries. I'm not going to recommend a VoIP provider because lots of them are my customers and I don't like to recommend one above another. The ITSPA members list is a good place to start http://www.itspa.org.uk/members.shtml Some people on here are more wholesale. Tim
Re: [uknof] 2013 Submarine Cable Map
On 06/02/13 18:40, Mike Hughes wrote: Did the Manx Electricity folks ever manage to (commercially) light up the fibre cable that was run in with the AC Interconnector between Blackpool and the Isle of Man? A fibre cable was put in at the same time as the Interconnector - partly because it was needed to carry the SCADA data between the electricity landing stations. The plan was to sell the spare capacity on the fibre cable on the open market. I was told that the fibre in the power cable had been sold to boeing. That might be completely duff info. -- Tim Bray t...@kooky.org | +44 7966 479015 | http://www.kooky.org Huddersfield, UK
