On Tuesday 07 Feb 2006 22:08, Florian Weimer wrote:
As far as I can tell, the filters at AOL are far less problematic than
crude filters at smaller sites which simply use SORBS or
bl.spamcop.net.
Not here, no one cares if some small bit player has stupid filters, but when a
significant
Hello.
For the last couple of days we have intermittently been
experiencing a (1gbps) denial of service attack. I want to
apologize to anyone whose DNS servers have been (ab)used in
the attack, and let you know what is occurring.
The attacker is forging our source address on dns requests,
and
On 7-Feb-2006, at 23:25, Martin Hannigan wrote:
You keep saying EMIX
and you're confusing me. Peering or no? IX naturally insinuates
yes regardless of neutrality.
I'm not sure how to be more clear about this. EMIX is the name of a
transit service offered by Emirates Telecom.
Joe
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006, william(at)elan.net wrote:
And when ISP A buys access from ISP B for purpose of getting to ISP C is
that peering or transit?
I thought it was generally accepted that peering is the exhange of
routes that are not re-sent to other organisations.
Transit is when one
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 04:37:31AM +, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
I had thought Josh's paper (or maybe not josh, whomever it was) said
something along the lines of:
1) if more than one announcement prefer 'longer term', 'older', 'more
usual' route
2) if only one route take it and run!
Here is what we propose in PGBGP. If you have a more specific route
and its AS Path does not contain any of the less specific route's
origins, then ignore it for a day and keep routing to the less
specific origin. If it's legitimate the less specific origin should
forward the data on for the
Does anyone know if ATT (the old one, AS7018) has customer trigged
blackhole routing? I looked in the copy of the BGP policy I have
from 04/2005, and see nothing about it, and cannot find the updated
online version.
Off-list replies welcome.
Can anyone shed some light on the current Cogent latency issues? The scoreboard
is lit up like a Tree ... Thanks.
Joe
At 11:53 AM 08/02/2006, Joseph Nuara wrote:
Can anyone shed some light on the current Cogent latency issues? The
scoreboard is lit up like a Tree ... Thanks.
http://status.cogentco.com
Cogent Network Status/DNS Server Status Description: Welcome to
Cogent Communications' Network Status
Fiber cut ...
http://status.cogentco.com/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Joseph Nuara
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 11:53 AM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Cogent
Can anyone shed some light on the current Cogent latency issues?
Heard rumor of a fiber cut near chicago..
Brance
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Joseph Nuara
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 11:53 AM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Cogent
Can anyone shed some light on the current Cogent latency
Heya,
I'm not sure what's going on, but we were seeing problems on outbound traces
on their DC-JFK-BOS stretch (we're connected to them in Boston) but it looks
like it might have cleared itself up a few mintues ago.
Eric :)
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006, william(at)elan.net wrote:
And when ISP A buys access from ISP B for purpose of getting to ISP C is
that peering or transit?
I thought it was generally accepted that peering is the exhange of routes
that are not re-sent to
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006, william(at)elan.net wrote:
So what exactly is definition of transit that does not make it peering?
Transit is the exchange of TRANSITIVE routes to destinations which are not
the downstream customers of either of the two parties to the transaction.
And when
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Martin Hannigan wrote:
Guys, are you being semantic?
Yes, we're doggedly insisting that words mean what they're defined to
mean, rather than the opposite.
You keep saying EMIX
and you're confusing me. Peering or no? IX naturally insinuates
yes
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006, william(at)elan.net wrote:
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006, Bill Woodcock wrote:
different definitions. If you say transit is peering, just not by our
definitions, then you're into 1984 territory.
So what exactly is definition of transit that does not make it peering?
And
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 10:45:47AM -0800, Bill Woodcock wrote:
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Martin Hannigan wrote:
Guys, are you being semantic?
Yes, we're doggedly insisting that words mean what they're defined to
mean, rather than the opposite.
You keep saying EMIX
and
On Feb 8, 2006, at 12:30 PM, william(at)elan.net wrote:
Transit is when one entity sends the routes on to other
organsiations, often with money involved.
More commonly understood is that transit involves one ISP sending all
of its BGP routes and allowing any traffic to be send from ISP A
At 01:45 PM 2/8/2006, Bill Woodcock wrote:
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Martin Hannigan wrote:
Guys, are you being semantic?
Yes, we're doggedly insisting that words mean what they're defined to
mean, rather than the opposite.
You keep saying EMIX
and you're confusing me. Peering
With 802.1w how normal is it for an environment with 8 switches ~300
ports with to exhibit 1-3 seconds of packet losss/latency/jitter
everytime any port transitions to STP forwarding and causes topology
change notices to ripple through the entire stp domain?
The ports causing this are connected
20 matches
Mail list logo
