Nanogers- Specifically Enterprise nogers. Not sure if you are aware of
this IETF draft on RH0. Its in last call. So if you want to voice your opinion
on whether you feel everyone should stop the traffic
"that has RH0 headers"
from moving on or just ignor
Barrett Lyon wrote:
>
> On Sep 18, 2007, at 1:30 PM, David Conrad wrote:
[..]
>> On Sep 18, 2007, at 5:45 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>>> Please please please, for the sake of a semi-'standard', please only use
[..]
>> What RFC (or other standards publication) is this documented in?
>
> Where did th
On Sep 18, 2007, at 1:30 PM, David Conrad wrote:
HI,
On Sep 18, 2007, at 5:45 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Please please please, for the sake of a semi-'standard', please
only use
the following forms in those cases:
www.
www.ipv6.
www.ipv4.
Don't come up with any other variants. The above f
Yep - Chicago also.
On Wednesday 19 September 2007 12:25:53 W. Kevin Hunt wrote:
> I'm in Louisiana and just lost my OC12 to Bwing/L3. Circuit didn't die,
> actually received a BGP message to terminate the session.
>
> Anyone else seeing anything or got an update? ALL the numbers I have to L3
>
I can ping 65.89.42.1 from here and it seems to be going through level3.
traceroute to 65.89.42.1 (65.89.42.1), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 wookie-02.core..net () 0.454 ms 0.458 ms 0.320 ms
2 wookie-01-fe-2-0.core..net (xx) 0.678 ms 0.648 ms
0.559 ms
3 ge-5-
It's back up in Ohio, as of 2:05 PM EDT.
On Sep 19, 2007, at 1:33 PM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Is anyone reporting Level3 outages in Ohio or DC ?
One of my clients is down, and L3 is not answering the phones (!)
traceroute 65.89.42.1
(From Cogent in Tyson's Corner)
traceroute to 65.89.42.1
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007, W. Kevin Hunt wrote:
I'm in Louisiana and just lost my OC12 to Bwing/L3. Circuit didn't die,
actually received a BGP message to terminate the session.
Looks like a change management Oops. I'm sure they are putting things
back as fast as they can.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
FYI -/
- Original Message
Subject: [Outages] FW: SMC INITIAL OUTAGE NOTIFICATION: MULTIPLE
fBroadwing Markets
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:50:58 -0500
From: W. Kevin Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
City/State: Mo
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007, Jerry B. Altzman wrote:
>
> on 2007-09-19 13:25 W. Kevin Hunt said the following:
> > I?m in Louisiana and just lost my OC12 to Bwing/L3. Circuit didn?t die,
> > actually received a BGP message to terminate the session.
> >
> > Anyone else seeing anything or got an update?
Same thing in Chicago.
Brian Knoll
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Ross Vandegrift
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 12:34 PM
To: W. Kevin Hunt
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: Level3 or Broadwing or other issues in Dallas ?
On Wed,
Is anyone reporting Level3 outages in Ohio or DC ?
One of my clients is down, and L3 is not answering the phones (!)
traceroute 65.89.42.1
(From Cogent in Tyson's Corner)
traceroute to 65.89.42.1 (65.89.42.1), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 dmz-mct2.multicasttech.com (63.105.122.1) 0.367 ms
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 12:25:53PM -0500, W. Kevin Hunt wrote:
> I'm in Louisiana and just lost my OC12 to Bwing/L3. Circuit didn't die,
> actually received a BGP message to terminate the session.
>
> Anyone else seeing anything or got an update? ALL the numbers I have to L3
> are busy...
Seei
on 2007-09-19 13:25 W. Kevin Hunt said the following:
I’m in Louisiana and just lost my OC12 to Bwing/L3. Circuit didn’t die,
actually received a BGP message to terminate the session.
Anyone else seeing anything or got an update? ALL the numbers I have to
L3 are busy...
Same same for our
I'm in Louisiana and just lost my OC12 to Bwing/L3. Circuit didn't die,
actually received a BGP message to terminate the session.
Anyone else seeing anything or got an update? ALL the numbers I have to L3
are busy...
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007, Alex Thurlow wrote:
> >How much traffic can a modern intel board with a core 2 duo handle
> >with $EL_GENERIC_UNIX_OS ?
> The PCI-Express bus tops out at 2.5 Gbps I believe, and they (Vyatta
> router salespeople to be specific) say you should be able to reach
> that. At
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007, Seth Mattinen wrote:
> >If there's interest I'll hack up a FreeBSD nanobsd image with ipv6
> >support, a routing daemon (whatever people think is good enough)
> >and whatever other stuff is "enough" to act as a 6to4 gateway.
> >You too can build diskless core2duo software ro
Point taken.
I assumed my version of whois was up to date and my google results
only showed it being unallocated.
FWIW, OSX my default whois was 4.7.17, which I assumed was up to date.
Updated to 4.7.20 and charter appears.
Apologies for the time waster.
On 9/19/07, Joe Provo <[EMAIL PROTEC
Guys,
I hate to send this to nanog, and please direct all replies offlistbut
this is a flat out last ditch effort to keep from losing a customer.
I need about 12u of space @ 380 S. Lake Destiny Rd, Orlando FL and AC
power for it (details on that not yet known, 10 dell PE1950s), and I n
Adrian Chadd wrote:
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
location would be enough. If I had some old 7200s lying around I'd
use those, in locations where replacing drives isn't a huge deal a
BSD box (Linux if you insist) would be a good choice because they
give you a bigger C
--- NetSecGuy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> :~> whois 97.81.31.19
> Unknown AS number or IP network. Please upgrade this
> program.
>
> Is this a function of whois hardcoded to no do
> lookups for this
> address space? I can't seem to find any info about
> the range, beyond
> "registered but
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 10:28:52AM -0400, NetSecGuy wrote:
>
> :~> whois 97.81.31.19
> Unknown AS number or IP network. Please upgrade this program.
>
> Is this a function of whois hardcoded to no do lookups for this
[snip]
You are running some old version of whois - thanks for providing
no OS
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> location would be enough. If I had some old 7200s lying around I'd
> use those, in locations where replacing drives isn't a huge deal a
> BSD box (Linux if you insist) would be a good choice because they
> give you a bigger CPU for your mo
Hi,
On 19/09/2007, at 4:28 PM, NetSecGuy wrote:
:~> whois 97.81.31.19
Unknown AS number or IP network. Please upgrade this program.
Is this a function of whois hardcoded to no do lookups for this
address space? I can't seem to find any info about the range, beyond
"registered but unallocate
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 09:03:35AM +0100, Andy Davidson wrote:
> On 19 Sep 2007, at 06:22, chk 543 wrote:
> >Is there a standard prefix length most providers filter on, or is
> >there a way to find out what each provider filters on? We have been
> >assigned a /22 and are wondering if we will h
My whois program returns:
97.81.31.19
Host unreachable
97.81.24.0 - 97.81.31.255
Charter Communications
12405 Powerscourt Dr.
St. Louis
MO
63131
United States
IPAddressing
+1-314-288-3889
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Abuse:
+1-314-288-3111
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
KNG-TN-97-81-24
Created: 2007-04-11
Updated:
# whois 97.81.31.19 0.0% 1
58.3 58.3 58.3 58.3 0.0?
Charter Communications NETBLK-CHARTER-NET (NET-97-80-0-0-1)
97.80.0.0 - 97.90.255.255
Charter Communications KNG-TN-97-81-24 (NET-97-81-24-0-1)
On 19-sep-2007, at 11:58, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are you saying that 6to4 relay servers should be dedicated to that
task?
No, of course not. However, even though today IPv6 traffic is fairly
minimal for pretty much everyone, it has the potential to grow
quickly
:~> whois 97.81.31.19
Unknown AS number or IP network. Please upgrade this program.
Is this a function of whois hardcoded to no do lookups for this
address space? I can't seem to find any info about the range, beyond
"registered but unallocated". I figured whois would at least return
something
On 18-sep-2007, at 23:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:29:38 +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum said:
they can't do it in hardware or with decent speed in software) but
there are no cheap(er) Juniper boxes that are suitable for deployment
as a 5 - 200 Mbps tunnel box, in my opinion
> Just stumbled upon this article
http://www.networkworld.com/news/tech/2007/090507-tech-uodate.html
>Suggested here is that Dual Stack is more attractive than tunneling. Is
the advise here based on real life experience or is it a matter of what
is good for the goose may not be good for the gande
Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> ... is it reasonable to assume clock synchronization in the rest
>> of our design?
> In general, it is not. I can't think of any existing protocol that
> does, actually.
Kerberos.
--
Jeff McAdams
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safe
> When I wrote my book, I mostly looked at Cisco for this, and
> apart from Cisco to FreeBSD and Linux. The logic is that on a
> Cisco, you can build a good tunnel box (6to4 or manual
> tunnels) on a C7200 or some other box that has a decent CPU
> that can do the tunneling in software. Quite p
top posting to keep you alert!
there are folks who syncronize clocks so that logs make sense.
and those that do, tend to pick a common TZ... there is nothing
like syncronizing logs from routers in Nepal, India, China, and LA
UTC can be your friend...
wrt acces to clock source - i'd be h
On 19 Sep 2007, at 06:22, chk 543 wrote:
Is there a standard prefix length most providers filter on, or is
there a way to find out what each provider filters on? We have been
assigned a /22 and are wondering if we will have any issues with
this block.
There are no hard and fast rules,
34 matches
Mail list logo
