Noel Chiappa writes:
From: Joe Touch to...@isi.edu
what people want (ISP operators, or at least some of them), was an
artificial way to differentiate home customers from commercial
providers.
I.e., they wanted to create a differentiation that wasn't part of the
Internet architecture, so they
Randy Bush writes:
so your criteria acctually open and continual availability, and
availability of export. i think these would apply well to ietf or
whatever services as well.
Right. As a data point, I haven't been able to access the archived
Meetecho streams from past IETF meetings lately,
,
Simon
Simon Leinen simon.lei...@switch.ch ha scritto:
[...]
Right. As a data point, I haven't been able to access the archived
Meetecho streams from past IETF meetings lately, e.g.
http://recordings.conf.meetecho.com/Recordings/watch.jsp?recording=IETF84_TSVAREAchapter=part_3
[...]
Fred Baker writes:
On Oct 4, 2007, at 11:56 AM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
The problem is the amount of time it is taking to moderate mail
sent by non subscribers.
yes. For example, every email from @cisco.com is dkim-signed. The
IETF can automagically dump any such email that is not
Danny McPherson writes:
Really? How many ISPs are you aware of that have
*decommissioned* every piece of routing gear in their
network in the past 7 years?
I think we're an ISP (AS559), and we don't have any equipment that
would be unable to filter against spoofed source addresses.
In fact I
I'm a bit wary to step in this discussion, but anyway. Here's a little
input from an operator who has been using various variants of Netflow
over the years. Netflow is rather like IPFIX over UDP as far as
congestion (non-)handling is concerned.
Lars Eggert writes:
On 2007-9-6, at 14:51, ext
Darryl \(Dassa\) Lynch writes:
Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
There is a major difference between a NAT box plugged into
the real Internet and a NAT box plugged into another NAT
box. It is a pretty ugly one for the residential user.
I'm afraid it is already happening on a large scale in some
Tony Hain writes:
On top of that look closely at the graph I referenced yesterday and
you will note that the RIPE region is burning through space the
fastest. The last I looked Geoff's numbers showed the APnic region
having the fastest growth in the routing system, so where are all
those
Hallam-Baker, Phillip writes:
Incidentally, it does need to be [EMAIL PROTECTED] and not
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Google, Yahoo and co need to stop
trying to turn us into serfs by refusing to allow us to own our own
online identity. Stop trying to make a service sticky by making it
costly to switch
Stephane Bortzmeyer writes:
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 12:42:17PM -0800,
Ned Freed [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 35 lines which said:
The privileged port concept has some marginal utility on multiuser
systems where you don't Joe-random-user to grab some port for a
well known service.
John C Klensin writes:
I hypothesize that there have been few complaints this week for the
same reason that the absence of jabber room reminders may not have
been noticed -- I've only occasionally found the network stable
enough in the meeting sessions to make use of jabber rooms effective
Simon Leinen writes:
Anyway, I finally learned how to configure filters on my Linux
laptop, and found that the following command (as root) makes my box
ignore RAs from that particular address:
ip6tables -A INPUT -s fe80::204:23ff:fe7a:fb3e \
--protocol ipv6-icmp --icmpv6-type router
I partly share Jordi's concerns about the newfangled IETF WLAN.
While the network basically worked reliably for me once I nailed my
adapter to 802.11a, it was truly disappointing to see IPv6 being
turned off a(between Monday and Tuesday IIRC). I wonder whether the
decision to turn off IPv6 was
Brian E Carpenter writes:
Simon Leinen wrote:
I wonder whether the
decision to turn off IPv6 was just part of a general feature-shedding
strategy to stabilize the network,
This is my understanding
Thanks, I suspected as much. So here's a plea to consider un-shedding
that particular feature
Eliot Lear writes:
I'll remove it from the list with the expectation that the new MIB
will obsolete the old one. However, I note that is currently not
stated in the header of the draft.
I think RFC1269 (BGP-3 MIB) can safely be dropped even today, because
nobody is using BGP-3 anymore, and as
Iljitsch van Beijnum writes:
But all of this is only delaying the inevitable (not that that can't
be useful sometimes): at some point, we need to move away from the
premise that all default-free routers must know about all reachable
prefixes.
But isn't this the *definition* of a default-free
Graham Klyne writes:
The integer value is the number of seconds after midnight UTC,
January 1, 1970.
NEW:
The integer value is the number of seconds, ignoring leap seconds,
after midnight UTC, January 1, 1970.
This slipped under my radar until this announcement.
Has there been
ned freed writes:
In many situations around the world in developing countries, it is
totally impossible to send a 10MB e-mail because the link will be
at least break once in the time it takes to send 10MB. As e-mail
does not resume...
FWIW, RFC 1845 specifies such a mechanism for SMTP. There
Trond Skjesol writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
they are working on it. I'll get to mention that responses are nice.
OK, hope they will succeed.
aolMe too!/aol
My laptop builds a 6to4 tunnel when it doesn't receive a global IPv6
address, but unfortunately the next instance of the anycast
Bill Manning writes:
perhaps the reason there has not been more participation in your survey is
associated w/ the following:
A problem occurred in a Python script. Here is the sequence of
function calls leading up to the error, in the order they occurred.
this error could be due to the fact
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
The following URL points to a Web page with a single-page index to all
RFCs, with hyperlinks to those that are online, and (if you support
Javascript) display of RFC titles on mouse-over:
http://sunsite.cnlab-switch.ch/ftp/doc/standard/rfc/mini-index.html
I've
Ole J Jacobsen writes:
Yep, works fine for me, Stef. Time to switch providers?
:-)
Time to disable ECN?
$ telnet www.isoc.org 80
Trying 206.131.249.182...
^C
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; su
Password:
# ndd -set /dev/tcp tcp_ecn_permitted 0
# telnet www.isoc.org 80
Joe Abley writes:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-turk-bgp-dos-04.txt
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/routing-discussion/current/msg00688.html
draft-marques-idr-flow-spec-00.txt seems to be sort-of a generalized
version of this (which doesn't necessarily mean that
Randy Bush writes:
Note that getting 802.11a works even better.
until everybody does, and 'everbody' is twice
as many people as now
I think 802.11a should be able to support more than twice as many
users than 802.11b. At least in the US, the band reserved for 802.11a
has more channels
Yakov Shafranovich writes:
Just to follow up on this - I just spoke to an engineer at Verisign
and he informed me that the SMTP daemon is being replaced in a few
hours with an RFC-compliant one. As for not giving a warning - this
came from a higher policy level at Verisign and he is just an
this will be fixed, and
Alcatel would be well-advised to turn off the ns-required option
until it is.
--
Simon Leinen.
SWITCH
---End Message---
On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 12:11:15 -0800 (PST), Spencer Dawkins
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
To echo the favorable review of Steve's presentation: It's at
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/01aug/slides/plenary-1/index.html,
and is well worth the few minutes it takes to read/re-read...
If you have a bit
own OID subtree in the enterprise-specific
space (1.3.6.1.4.1.YOUR-PRIVATE-ENTERPRISE-NUMBER).
--
Simon Leinen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SWITCH http://www.switch.ch/misc/leinen/
Computers hate being anthropomorphized.
"ln" == Lyndon Nerenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes (for a larger value of "all" than RealPlayer
supports). vic/vat/rat are portable to many UNIX variants, and also
run under Windows. I think that MacOS is the only orphan in this
scenario, but ISTR there are protocol proxies available
29 matches
Mail list logo
