It is not true. Many tier-2 ISP specializes in very ghigh quality Internet
access, so mnasking problems of big ISP (who in reality never can provide
high quality Internet at all). Good example - Internap.
So, it is not about tier-1 vs tier-2, it is about ISP specialized on cheap
acvcess and ISP
One question - which percent of routing table of any particular router is
REALLY used, say, during 1 week?
I have a strong impression, that answer wil not be more than 20% even in
biggerst backbones, and
will be (more likely) below 1% in the rest of the world. Which makes a hige
space for
Randy; we are living on Earth with small size (only 6,000 km in radius), so
we will never see unlimited grouth in multihomed networks.
It is not a problem. We are not building Internet for the whole universe.
Good old Moore can deal with our planet very well.
I repeated many times - IPv6 idea of
We do not think, that _it wil be IPv6_. IPv6 is a good example of _second_
system, and do not looks as _succesfull_ for now.
And it is not definitely _LAST PROTOCOL_.
It _can be_ IPv6, true. But it can be other protocol (or just workaround for
IPv4, as we had CIDR and CLASSLESS) instead.
-
On 24/10/05, Alexei Roudnev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We do not think, that _it wil be IPv6_. IPv6 is a good example of _second_
system, and do not looks as _succesfull_ for now.
And it is not definitely _LAST PROTOCOL_.
enter jim fleming (or those chinese guys, more recently) with ipv9
srs
Hello List,
Need an advice on what type of equipment/manufacturer would one use to
multiplex 2 or 4 ADSL lines?
E.g we need to get 2 ADSL line to act as one. Something like Etherchanel
with Ciscos.
Any advise?
Thanks a lot in advance.
--
With best regards,
GRED-RIPE
the market wouldn't
feel the need to have to dual home.
the internet model is to expect and route around failure.
Seems to me that there is some confusion over the meaning
of multihoming. We seem to assume that it means BGP multihoming
wherein a network is connected to multiple ASes and
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Gregory Edigarov wrote:
Hello List,
Need an advice on what type of equipment/manufacturer would one use to
multiplex 2 or 4 ADSL lines?
E.g we need to get 2 ADSL line to act as one. Something like Etherchanel
with Ciscos.
Are all these DSLs parallel to each other
william(at)elan.net wrote:
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Gregory Edigarov wrote:
Hello List,
Need an advice on what type of equipment/manufacturer would one use
to multiplex 2 or 4 ADSL lines?
E.g we need to get 2 ADSL line to act as one. Something like
Etherchanel with Ciscos.
Are all these
--On October 24, 2005 10:01:21 AM +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the market wouldn't
feel the need to have to dual home.
the internet model is to expect and route around failure.
Seems to me that there is some confusion over the meaning
of multihoming. We seem to assume that it means
On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 02:24 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
SNIP
3.Most multihoming today is done using BGP, but, many other
solutions exist with various tradeoffs. In V6, there is
currently only one known (BGP) and one proposed, but,
unimplemented (Shim6) solution under
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Gregory Edigarov wrote:
Let's think I will answer yes to the questions one at a time. :-)
I do not have the formal task description yet, so I am merely looking for
opinions on options available,
so I could start making decisions.
If you have direct connection
The way around it is to stop growing the DFZ routing table by the size
of the Prefixes. If customers could have PI addreses and the DFZ
routing table was based, instead, on ASNs in such a way that customers
could use their upstream's ASNs and not need their own, then, provider
switch would
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 12:22:59PM +0300, Gregory Edigarov wrote:
| Let's think I will answer yes to the questions one at a time. :-)
| I do not have the formal task description yet, so I am merely looking
| for opinions on options available,
| so I could start making decisions.
We use
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 11:23:38PM -0700, Alexei Roudnev wrote:
It is not true. Many tier-2 ISP specializes in very ghigh quality Internet
access, so mnasking problems of big ISP (who in reality never can provide
high quality Internet at all). Good example - Internap.
Masking problems of
--On October 24, 2005 10:44:31 AM +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One way to do this is for two ISPs to band together
in order that each ISP can sell half of a joint
multihoming service. Each ISP would set aside a
subset of their IP address space to be used by many
such multihomed customers.
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 04:07:03PM -0500, John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote:
Dear John,
No, why don't you stop insulting people, Niels. You attack Peter because
of his involvment in the Inclusive Namespace. FYI: Public root servers
are online and available. Maybe the h-root ops should ask the
[re-ordered front-posting]
24 okt 2005 kl. 11.35 skrev Jeroen Massar:
The multihoming that people here seem to want though is the Provider
Independent one, and that sort of automatically implies some routing
method: read BGP.
On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 11:40 +0200, Peter Salanki wrote:
Or
On 24/10/2005 10:22, Gregory Edigarov wrote:
william(at)elan.net wrote:
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Gregory Edigarov wrote:
Need an advice on what type of equipment/manufacturer would one use
to multiplex 2 or 4 ADSL lines?
E.g we need to get 2 ADSL line to act as one. Something like
Etherchanel
We do not think, that _it wil be IPv6_. IPv6 is a good example of
_second_
system, and do not looks as _succesfull_ for now.
And it is not definitely _LAST PROTOCOL_.
enter jim fleming (or those chinese guys, more recently) with ipv9
No, enter the National Science Foundation...
* Daniel Roesen:
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 09:48:58PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
This isn't the first time this has happened to an ISP. 8-(
Indeed.
Are there any configuration tweaks which can locally confine such an
event? Something like the hard prefix limit for BGP, perhaps.
JunOS:
Dear colleagues,
I'm at a loss here. My current project is to find good transit providers
in those regions: South America, Eastern Europe, Africa, Asian-Pacific.
Requirements are simple:
- good regional connectivity/peerings
- fair reach to mainland Europe (London, Amsterdam, Frankfurt)
For Africa, check out Equant and BTOn 10/24/05, Elmar K. Bins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear colleagues,I'm at a loss here. My current project is to find good transit providersin those regions: South America, Eastern Europe, Africa, Asian-Pacific.Requirements are simple:
- good regional
Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
On Sun, 23 Oct 2005, Daniel Roesen wrote:
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 11:59:15AM +0200, Peter Dambier wrote:
I means, here in germany we cannot see h.root-servers.net
Here is my traceroute to h.root-servers.net right now:
So, where do you see a problem related
Sabri Berisha wrote:
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 04:07:03PM -0500, John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote:
Peter Dambier did post nonsense. In fact, it was total nonsense since
the AMS-IX is not present in any KPN datacentre, *and* it is impossible
for end-hosts to connect to the AMS-IX directly.
Part
AfNOG and AfriNIC Joint Announcement: Meetings in May 2006
7th AfNOG Meeting
AfriNIC-4 Meeting
The African Network Operators' Group (AfNOG) and the African Network
Information Centre (AfriNIC) are pleased to announce that the 7th AfNOG
Meeting and the AfriNIC-4
Hmmm ... I suppose I would prefer this community not be made an explicit
source of information for a reporter. Implicitly, if reporters must hang
off this thread, they should be able to discern impact from perspective
given here. However, if questions like the one(s) asked below became
standard
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 02:40:14PM +0200, Peter Dambier wrote:
Sabri Berisha wrote:
Dear Peter,
Peter Dambier did post nonsense. In fact, it was total nonsense since
the AMS-IX is not present in any KPN datacentre, *and* it is impossible
for end-hosts to connect to the AMS-IX directly.
Hmmm ... I suppose I would prefer this community not be made an explicit
source of information for a reporter.
You're about 10 years too late. Reporters have been lurking
on the NANOG list for at least that long. Only the newbie
reporters post info requests to the lists. The pros send
private
I know of one host here in germany who can see h.root-servers.net.
That host is living in a KPN data centre directly connected to
Amterdam
IX.
Your own traceroute clearly shows that your host is not directly
connected to the AMS-IX. Nor does the KPN datacenter it resides in. The
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 03:06:35PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear Michael,
This is a good example of a useless argument caused when one
person is speaking from a customer viewpoint and one customer
is speaking from an operator viewpoint.
Last time I checked, the O in [EU|NA|AFRI]NOG
It would be very helpful for operators to advise on any status they
are seeing. Hopefully someone from the Nap Of The Americas can also
provide some information.
Right now XO says they are experiencing some outages. I have not see
any outages from other providers but I am sure they
I have some customers down, probably due to power outages or Bell
issues, as I'm getting AIS on their ports. Otherwise, we're operational
on generator power. Hopefully, Wilma will move out soon so we can get
our techs back in and see what the neighborhood looks like. I just hope
they're pretty
I have a couple of customers hosted at Verio in Boca Raton. We're
seeing routing issues inside Verio and no response from DNS, web and
SMTP servers.
--Chris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
techlist
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:32:23 -0400
From: techlist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: [nanog] Hurricane Wilma
It would be very helpful for operators to advise on any status they
are seeing. Hopefully someone from the Nap Of The Americas can also
provide some information.
Who is your transport into the NAP? Is it Bellsouth?
One interesting effect during the last hurricane was that Broward
county customers (Ft Lauderdale is in that county) had no dial tone
service but dsl was working. Someone mentioned they lost the
tandem. The comment was made that voip
(oops--sent this out last night, but forgot to change the
sender to the subscribed-to-nanog address first,
gomennasai minnasan)
Matt
I took some notes at the NANOG community meeting
tonight, and thought I'd share them with the list members
in the spirit of transparency--apologies for the
thanks!
for the terminally bored, the foils i used are at
http://rip.psg.com/~randy/051023.nanog-sc.pdf
randy
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 01:25:23PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
Are there any configuration tweaks which can locally confine such an
event? Something like the hard prefix limit for BGP, perhaps.
JunOS:
set protocols ospf prefix-export-limit n
set protocols isis level n
Not delusional ... just prefer it not be an explicit thread to all of
the community ... or ... consistent w/ your observation below (ref.
lurking) ...
-gh
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005
XO NOC says they have outages in the S FL area. At the NAP there are definitely at least some customers down starting at just before 8am. Last hurricane there were many people without dialtone in Broward. I can tell you that since I experienced it. I do not have any details on the cause
* Daniel Roesen:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 01:25:23PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
Are there any configuration tweaks which can locally confine such an
event? Something like the hard prefix limit for BGP, perhaps.
JunOS:
set protocols ospf prefix-export-limit n
set protocols isis
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Kim Onnel wrote:
For Africa, check out Equant and BT
For eastern europe I'm really at a loss, and Africa seems to lack regional
connectivity. All I can found is local stuff.
It's a whole continent. Some countries have more isp's, richer
international connectivity and
I am greatful to Geoff for his consistant ability to get me interested in
breaking things... so, for the assembled mutlitude, what would the impact
on various peers be if I was to change my orign AS (ok, so i'll have to
change the router code on my end to support this) from
4554
One way to do this is for two ISPs to band together
in order that each ISP can sell half of a joint
multihoming service. Each ISP would set aside a
subset of their IP address space to be used by many
such multihomed customers. Each ISP would announce
the subset from their neighbor's space
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:53:12 CDT, John Dupuy said:
In fact, this is technically feasible right now with IPv4. Does anyone know
of a pair of ISPs doing this?
technically feasible and business case reasonable are two different things.
Under what conditions does this sort of cooperation with a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:53:12 CDT, John Dupuy said:
In fact, this is technically feasible right now with IPv4. Does anyone know
of a pair of ISPs doing this?
technically feasible and business case reasonable are two different things.
Under what conditions does
On 24-Oct-2005, at 11:21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 12:53:12 CDT, John Dupuy said:
In fact, this is technically feasible right now with IPv4. Does
anyone know
of a pair of ISPs doing this?
technically feasible and business case reasonable are two
different things.
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Gary Hale wrote:
Hmmm ... I suppose I would prefer this community not be made an
explicit source of information for a reporter. Implicitly, if
reporters must hang off this thread, they should be able to
discern impact from perspective given here. However, if
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote something
about prepending 2 bytes of zeros:
Hi,
I am greatful to Geoff for his consistant ability to get me interested in
breaking things... so, for the assembled mutlitude, what would the impact
on various peers be if I was to change my
At 03:46 AM 25/10/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am greatful to Geoff for his consistant ability to get me interested in
breaking things... so, for the assembled mutlitude, what would the impact
on various peers be if I was to change my orign AS (ok, so i'll have to
change the router code
If there is a Road Runner mail server admin on the list,
could you please contact me off-list.
Jeffrey Sharpe
CyberLynk Helpdesk and Support
414.858.9335 or 800.942.8022
Cell: 262.488.0242
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thus spake [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the market wouldn't
feel the need to have to dual home.
the internet model is to expect and route around failure.
Seems to me that there is some confusion over the meaning
of multihoming. We seem to assume that it means BGP multihoming
wherein a network is
Stephen Sprunk wrote:
[snip]
Other people use this term in very different ways. To some people
it means using having multiple IP addresses bound to a single
network interface. To others it means multiple websites on one
server.
That is virtual hosting in a NANOG context. Some undereducated
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 13:31:17 PDT, Crist Clark said:
Stephen Sprunk wrote:
[snip]
Other people use this term in very different ways. To some people
it means using having multiple IP addresses bound to a single
network interface. To others it means multiple websites on one
server.
Hi
Thanks to everyone who sent helpfull advice for tracking this down.
I wanted to follow up and say that I tried every test imaginable and nothing
was found.
finnaly I got a period were I could do without skype and found that when
skype was off.. No more pings were going out at random
On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 10:01 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Other people use this term in very different ways. To some people
it means using having multiple IP addresses bound to a single
network interface. To others it means multiple websites on one
server.
Do you not mean a single host
On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 02:24 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
As I understand it, the term multihoming in a network operations
context is defined as:
(A multihomed network is)
A network which is connected via multiple distinct
paths so as to eliminate or reduce the likelihood that a single
Thank you Michael,
for throwing light into this.
Yes, I see, Sabri and me are on two different rails, one leading north,
the other one leading east. I hope Sabri still has got all his hairs.
I am counting mine now.
Kind regards and thank you again,
Peter Dambier
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I
Said the flowerpot: Oh no, not again...
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8DEL2TO7.htm?
campaign_id=apn_tech_downchan=tc
-C
in an unusual fit of effacacy, i brought up an open jabber server today
and created a persistent conference room. i'm not a fan of the monolithic
public jabber.org server.
if you have a jabber account somewhere, you can join the conference room:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
if you don't have a jabber
On Oct 23, 2005, at 11:33 PM, Alexei Roudnev wrote:
One question - which percent of routing table of any particular
router is
REALLY used, say, during 1 week?
I have a strong impression, that answer wil not be more than 20%
even in
biggerst backbones, and
will be (more likely) below
As of the last time that I looked at it (admittedly quite awhile
ago), something like 80% of the forwarding table had at least one
hit per minute. This may well have changed given the number of
traffic engineering prefixes that are circulating.
Tony
Yea, but that's just me pinging
The Voice over IP Security Alliance (VOIPSA) is pleased to announce the
first draft release of the VoIP Security Threat Taxonomy. The draft is
available at http://www.voipsa.org/Activities/taxonomy.php and your comments
are greatly appreciated. In fact, we've opened up the online wiki
Many thanks for doing this Paul. As far as me monitoring, I've never had
any luck getting a jabber client going so help would be welcome. And, if
anyone in the audience sees a question come in, don't hesitate to go up to
the mike and ask it.
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, Paul Vixie wrote:
in an
I believe RFC1122 was written in the days when there was a one-to-one
correlation
between IP addresses and interfaces, and, you couldn't have one machine with
multiple addresses on the same network. Obviously, also, we are talking
about
network multihoming, not host multihoming in a NANOG
... shim6 doesn't fit into the definition does it? Its seems to be a
question of multihomed networks Vs. multihomed hosts (although the
effect may be the same at the end of the day).
Yes... The network is still multihomed, but, instead of using routing to
handle the source/dest addr.
jabber update. folks have reported some unreachability, but being network
admins, did not say ping worked (or not) and didn't send a traceroute. if
they'd done either, i'd've asked what server were you logged into, since
the connection that's failing is server-to-server (from the server where
* Chris Woodfield:
Said the flowerpot: Oh no, not again...
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8DEL2TO7.htm?
campaign_id=apn_tech_downchan=tc
I don't understand what VeriSign receives in return for their kowtow
(under the agreement, they basically waive any right to criticize
69 matches
Mail list logo
