On Apr 15, 2008, at 9:43 AM, William Herrin wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 8:34 AM, Rich Kulawiec [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Automation is far less important than clue. Attempting to
compensate
for lack of a sufficient number of sufficiently-intelligent,
experienced,
diligent staff with
On Apr 15, 2008, at 10:31 AM, William Herrin wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Marshall Eubanks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 15, 2008, at 9:43 AM, William Herrin wrote:
That is one place that modern antispam efforts fall apart. It's the
same problem that afflicts tech support
On Apr 10, 2008, at 9:35 AM, William Waites wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 08:55:21AM -0400, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 06:32:53PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
for a measurement experiment, i would like O(100k) *headers* from
spam
from europe and a similar sample from the
On Apr 8, 2008, at 7:57 PM, Deepak Jain wrote:
There is no reason to assume these are civilian satellites. Any one
of a number of affected or interested countries could have provided
the imagery (or ship information) to Reliance. Its not saying *who*
analyzed the images. ;)
Then
On Apr 7, 2008, at 11:36 AM, Thomas Kernen wrote:
Bill Woodcock wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Glen Kent wrote:
says the solemn headline of Telegraph.
.. and we in Nanog are still discussing IPv6! ;-)
It's because we don't have a hadron demolition derby to power our
American
On Apr 7, 2008, at 1:00 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 20:21:26 +0530
From: Glen Kent [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says the solemn headline of Telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/06/ninternet106.xml
Also related to this
On Mar 25, 2008, at 11:15 AM, Brian Raaen wrote:
Russia (or the USSR at that time) used to use liquid graphite to
cool their
nuclear reactors, even thought it was flammable of course that
was what
they were using in Chernobyl.
The RBMK-1000 used graphite for moderation and water
The interesting thing is how in a way we seem to have come full
circle. I am sure lots of people can remember large rooms
full of racks of vacuum tube equipment, which required serious power
and cooling.
On one NASA project I worked on, when the vacuum tube stuff was
replaced by solid
On Mar 18, 2008, at 3:58 PM, Andy Davidson wrote:
On 7 Mar 2008, at 23:57, Scott Weeks wrote:
Might as well do TCP 20, 21 and 23, too. Woah, that slope's
getting slippery!
Oh, no, this one again.
*** The Internet Is Not The Web. ***
Could someone put that onto a t-shirt ?
If it
On Mar 9, 2008, at 3:21 PM, David Conrad wrote:
Hi,
On Mar 8, 2008, at 2:40 PM, William Norton wrote:
I was quite surprised to see the large number of Mac laptops at
NANOG 42. I didn't do a formal count but it seemed like about
1/4 to 1/3 of the laptops in use were Macs.
...You know,
On Feb 28, 2008, at 3:58 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I was wondering if anyone knew of server hotel locations in Sweden
I would recommend Netnod in Sweden. Kurtis Lindqvist is a good
contact there.
Regards
Marshall
or
Greece.
More generally, if there is a good resource for me
Not at Switch and Data, Tyco Road, Tysons Corner.
Regards
Marshall
On Feb 10, 2008, at 11:27 AM, Andre Reid wrote:
Hi All,
Anyone having issues with Cogent right now?
I'm seeing problems in DC area, opening a ticket with them right now.
Thx,
Andre
Andre Reid
617/904-5018
[EMAIL
Hello;
There are some things you need to think through. (I am CTO at
Iformata Communications, and this
is our core competency.)
- Point to point only, or multipoint ? Multipoint will mean MCU's.
- Webcams or professional gear (like Polycom HDX 8000 HD video) or
telepresence ? (Over
an
Dear Sean;
Do you know how Syria, Jordan and Lebanon get their connectivity ?
They have dropped off the map today for us. (Or maybe yesterday - I
wasn't able to pay any attention to this yesterday.)
Our Egyptian audience remains very low, while Iran still seems to be
unaffected.
What I see from our Cogent transit is that Egypt has completely
fallen off the map, with a normally consistent traffic gone to zero,
but traffic to Iran, Iraq, the GCC, India and Pakistan and even Yemen
doesn't seem to be affected, at least not noticeably.
Regards
Marshall
On Jan 31,
OK, I give and admit my ignorance. What does MLP mean in this
context ?
A google search for Australia mlp reveals many hits for My Little
Pony,
which somehow I doubt is the intended meaning on this list.
A proper reference would be appreciated.
Regards
Marshall
On Jan 21, 2008, at
On Jan 19, 2008, at 3:25 PM, Rod Beck wrote:
If service is metered, it doesn't imply 25 cents a minute. It would
probably be based on bytes transferred and would probably be less
expensive for the bulk of users than the current flat rate pricing.
If the cable companies are telling the
On Jan 20, 2008, at 12:06 PM, Joe Greco wrote:
However, if you look, all the prepaid plans that I've seen look
suspiciously
like predatory pricing. The price per minute is substantially
higher than
an equivalent minute on a conventional plan. Picking on ATT, for a
minute,
here, look at
On Jan 13, 2008, at 3:50 PM, Joe Greco wrote:
It may. Some of those other things will, too. I picked 1) and
2) as
examples where things could actually get busy for long stretches of
time.
The wireless ISP business is a bit of a special case in this
regard, where P2P traffic is
On Dec 27, 2007, at 11:19 PM, Mark Smith wrote:
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 12:57:45 +0900
Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ever calculated how many Ethernet nodes you can attach to a
single LAN
with 2^46 unicast addresses?
you mean operationally successfully, or just for marketing
On Dec 27, 2007, at 9:50 PM, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
Leo Bicknell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In a message written on Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 10:57:59PM +0100,
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
It is wih IPv6: you just connect the ethernet cable and the RAs take
care of the rest. _You_ _really_
On Oct 25, 2007, at 6:49 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 24-okt-2007, at 17:39, Rod Beck wrote:
A simpler and hence less costly approach for those providers
serving mass markets is to stick to flat rate pricing and outlaw
high-bandwidth applications that are used by only a small
On Oct 25, 2007, at 12:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rep. Boucher's solution: more capacity, even though it has
been demonstrated many times more capacity doesn't actually
solve this particular problem.
Where has it been proven that adding capacity won't solve the P2P
bandwidth problem?
On Oct 25, 2007, at 1:09 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
I have raised this issue with P2P promoters, and they all feel
that the
limit will be about at the limit of what people can watch (i.e., full
rate video for whatever duration they want to watch
On Oct 23, 2007, at 7:18 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 22-okt-2007, at 18:12, Sean Donelan wrote:
Network operators probably aren't operating from altruistic
principles, but for most network operators when the pain isn't
spread equally across the the customer base it represents a
On Oct 23, 2007, at 9:07 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 23-okt-2007, at 14:52, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
I also would like to see a UDP scavenger service, for those
applications that generate lots of bits but
can tolerate fairly high packet losses without replacement. (VLBI
Note that this is from 2006. Do you have a link to the actual paper, by
Terry Shaw, of CableLabs, and Jim Martin of Clemson ?
Regards
Marshall
On Oct 21, 2007, at 1:03 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6332098.html
The short answer: Badly. Based on the
On Oct 10, 2007, at 10:38 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cogent is experiencing two problems right now. Their automated
message reports that they have a backbone problem causing latency,
but they also seem to be experiencing peering problems with Sprint.
Are you sure that this is not
On Oct 10, 2007, at 10:51 AM, Basil Kruglov wrote:
On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 at 09:38:42AM -0500,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cogent is experiencing two problems right now. Their automated
message
reports that they have a backbone problem causing latency, but
they also
seem to be experiencing
On Oct 10, 2007, at 5:18 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, Joe Greco wrote:
One of the biggest challenges for the Internet has got to be the
steadily
increasing storage market, combined with the continued development of
small, portable processors for every application,
On Sep 22, 2007, at 5:26 AM, Rod Beck wrote:
It is not obvious to me that there is a Pacific cable capacity
glut. For example, I sold a DS3 from LA to Hong Kong for $6K MRC
whereas the last time a wholesale TransAtlantic DS3 rivaled that
figure was 2001.
Not to mention that the
Dear Randy;
On Sep 20, 2007, at 11:44 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
a respected researcher (with a grad student) i trust wants to
obtain trouble ticket logs from different networks to understand the
nature of failures in ISP networks. we hope that this analysis will
help us develop troubleshooting
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
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
On Aug 21, 2007, at 12:55 PM, David Lesher wrote:
Speaking on Deep Background, the Press Secretary whispered:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Or there might suddenly be a reason/market for properly
physically diverse
paths which provide partial 1:1 (ie, some services are
Not seeing any Cogent problems in Tyson's Corner, Virginia
Regards
Marshall
On Aug 20, 2007, at 3:21 PM, Mike Tancsa wrote:
Does anyone have any details about the Cogent outage that started
this morning (9am GMT-400) and is still continuing ? If its a
fibre cut between Montville
is the total bandwidth consumed ?
Are they truly packet fragments ?
Thankfully it sounds quite easy to build a filter for.
Just please don't filter out all video !
--
Leigh
Regards
Marshall
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Are you sure you don't have a customer watching streaming video ?
Regards
On Aug 14, 2007, at 3:50 AM, Paul Ferguson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -- Marshall Eubanks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 14, 2007, at 12:19 AM, Paul Ferguson wrote:
I was just struck by a couple of statistics:
[snip]
In January 2007, according to PIR five
On Aug 14, 2007, at 8:56 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd suggest:
1) one week latency between registration and entry into the
TLD nameservers.
2) 50% (of 1-year registration fee) 'penalty' for
cancelling the registration
before it hits the TLD servers.
3) $250 'surcharge' (to
Are you sure you don't have a customer watching streaming video ?
Regards
Marshall
On Aug 14, 2007, at 7:20 PM, Miguel Mata wrote:
I'm being attacked with UDP fragments having a payload 1472 bytes.
Seems
like a DDoS that only likes to suck bandwidth.
Anyone on the same coaster? drop me
On Aug 13, 2007, at 4:58 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:52:37 -, Chris L. Morrow said:
I'm really not sure, but I can imagine a slew of issues where
'marketting'
doesn't plan properly and corp-ID/corp-branding end up trying to
register
and make-live a domain at
On Aug 14, 2007, at 12:19 AM, Paul Ferguson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I was just struck by a couple of statistics:
[snip]
In January 2007, according to PIR five registrars deleted 1,773,910
domain
names during the grace period and retained 10,862. That same
Is anyone else having trouble with Level 3 in New York ? We have
circuits down, etc.
Regards
Marshall
My Gig-E Cogent link (Tyco Rd, Vienna Virginia) seems to be fine now.
There was scheduled maintenance 3:00 AM - 7:00 AM, followed by a lot
of ~ 5 second drops of packet transit. Haven't had any issues since ~
9:00 AM EDT.
Regards
Marshall
On Jul 27, 2007, at 11:10 AM, David Coulson
On Jul 24, 2007, at 5:34 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 24-jul-2007, at 15:27, Prof. Robert Mathews (OSIA) wrote:
Looking at this issue with an 'interoperability lens,' I remain
puzzled by a personal observation that at least in the publicized
case of Duke University's Wi-Fi net
On Jul 12, 2007, at 7:16 PM, Robert Blayzor wrote:
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
I have to disagree, considering the amount of people I've had to
convice that this really is a single 50GHz wave using 40G per
second over DWDM system designed for 10G and that it was router
LC - optical
On May 24, 2007, at 7:09 AM, Bill Woodcock wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2007, Alexander Harrowell wrote:
a) it wasn't really that serious, b) it was serious
but mitigation was successful, or c) being well-mitigated (BCP38 and
the like) from the word go, its seriousness or otherwise wasn't
but not unreasonable.
Regards
Marshall Eubanks
Going east from NY, you'd add 70 or 80ms to that - and a quick look
suggests routes going west instead. (Test from home to .IN NS goes
London
- NY - West Coast - Singtel - India, for ~370ms)
It's starting to head a bit towards walkie-talkie mode for VoIP
On Apr 19, 2007, at 12:52 PM, David Temkin wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Warren Kumari
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 12:01 PM
To: Robert E. Seastrom
Cc: Leigh Porter; Jay Hennigan; Andre Oppermann; nanog@merit.edu
Subject:
On Apr 15, 2007, at 1:49 AM, Petri Helenius wrote:
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
I advise people doing streaming to not use MTU's larger than ~1450
for these sorts of reasons.
The unfortunate side-effect of that is that most prominent
streaming apps (don't know about Youtube though
Hello;
On Apr 14, 2007, at 3:38 AM, Peter Dambier wrote:
Fred Baker wrote:
...
1500 byte MTUs in fact work. I'm all for 9K MTUs, and would
recommend them. I don't see the point of 65K MTUs.
...
Well, with almost everybody using PPP0E in germany and at least half
of europe our mtu is
On Mar 28, 2007, at 5:12 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
You might want to look at this classic by Stanislav Shalunov
http://shlang.com/writing/tcp-perf.html
The description on this website is very good.
Disclaimer: I'm a FreeBSD TCP/IP network stack kernel hacker
On Mar 14, 2007, at 3:02 AM, David Lesher wrote:
{re: BPL will bring competition...}
I am totally baffled by all the hype over BPL.
What is true is the utilities would wet their pants over having
same. Not for offering Internet access, but so they could read
every electric meter in
On Feb 28, 2007, at 5:01 PM, Steve Meuse wrote:
It's about revenue recovery. If you provide your own free wifi,
they are losing potential business. It's usually part of the
negotiation with the Hotel.
Yes, some Hotels will indeed want revenue recovery for this - they
will
And be sure to check out the I2 netflow reports :
http://netflow.internet2.edu/weekly/
Marshall
On Feb 18, 2007, at 10:54 AM, Andrew Lee wrote:
Hi Chris
Your statement makes something of a presumption as to the architecture
of a network. In many networks, edge aggregation devices do not
.
McLean
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Todd
Vierling
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 12:02 AM
To: Suresh Ramasubramanian
Cc: Marshall Eubanks; Carl Karsten; NANOG
Subject: Re: wifi for 600, alex
On 2/14/07, Suresh Ramasubramanian [EMAIL
On Feb 14, 2007, at 3:49 PM, Carl Karsten wrote:
Carl Karsten wrote:
Hi list,
I just read over: http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0302/ppt/joel.pdf
because I am on the PyCon ( http://us.pycon.org ) team and last
year the hotel supplied wifi for the 600 attendees was a disaster
(they probably
On Feb 12, 2007, at 4:31 AM, Alexander Harrowell wrote:
On 2/12/07, Gadi Evron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a very smart person said a couple of weeks ago when this same
argument
was made: are you willing to do tech-support for my mother is she uses
linux?
Gadi.
Name anyone
Hello;
On Feb 12, 2007, at 11:15 AM, Alexander Harrowell wrote:
-- Forwarded message --
From: Alexander Harrowell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Feb 12, 2007 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: death of the net predicted by deloitte -- film at 11
To: Paul Vixie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul, that's
On Jan 25, 2007, at 3:56 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:
On Jan 25, 2007, at 12:49 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:
The main issue with Flourinert is price -- I wanted some to cool a
20W IR laser -- I didn't spend that much time looking before I
just decided to switch to distilled water, but I was
Hello;
On Jan 22, 2007, at 6:52 PM, Daniel Golding wrote:
One interesting point - they plan to use Broadband over Power Line
(BPL) technology to do this. Meter monitoring is the killer app for
BPL, which can then also be used for home broadband, Meter reading
is one of the top costs
The IETF in Vancouver was a disaster (the floors were transparent to
RF), but Jim Martin and Joel
Jaeggli and company have done an excellent job and the 802.11x has
been quite good since.
And the IETF is 1200 people all of whom use laptops all the time.
Marshall
On Jan 23, 2007, at 8:45
On Jan 21, 2007, at 12:05 AM, Brian Wallingford wrote:
That's news?
The same still happens with much land-based sonet, where diverse
paths
still share the same entrance to a given facility. Unless each end
can
Entrances, ha. Anyone remember that railroad tunnel in Baltimore ?
And I
Hello;
On Jan 20, 2007, at 1:37 PM, Rodrick Brown wrote:
On 1/20/07, Mark Boolootian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cringley has a theory and it involves Google, video, and
oversubscribed
backbones:
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070119_001510.html
The following
On Jan 20, 2007, at 4:36 PM, Alexander Harrowell wrote:
Marshall wrote:
Those sorts of percentages are common in Pareto distributions (AKA
Zipf's law AKA the 80-20 rule).
With the Zipf's exponent typical of web usage and video watching, I
would predict something closer to
10% of the users
On Jan 17, 2007, at 12:19 PM, David Freedman wrote:
I'm interested as to why RIRs dont set the minimum PI allocatable
to /24 in order to fit with the current trend.
In the 2002-3 micro-assignment policy, the RIR's assign a minimum of
a /22. As far as I know, all of the PI
/24's are
Furlongs per fortnight.
On Jan 16, 2007, at 3:46 PM, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
Joel Jaeggli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is it just me or is this article a migraine inducing mix of
metric and
English measures?
you're lucky they also didn't use nautical miles and fathoms (1.829
meters in
Of course, this below is for inter-domain. There is no shortage of
multicast walled garden
deployments.
Regards
Marshall
On Jan 12, 2007, at 7:44 PM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
On Jan 12, 2007, at 10:05 AM, Frank Bulk wrote:
If we're becoming a VOD world, does multicast play any
On Jan 12, 2007, at 11:27 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007, Gian Constantine wrote:
I am pretty sure we are not becoming a VoD world. Linear
programming is much better for advertisers. I do not think content
providers, nor consumers, would prefer a VoD only service. A
On Jan 13, 2007, at 6:12 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
On Jan 12, 2007, at 11:27 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007, Gian Constantine wrote:
I am pretty sure we are not becoming a VoD world. Linear
programming is much better for advertisers. I do not think
content
Dear Mikael;
On Jan 13, 2007, at 6:45 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
For the US, an analysis by Kenneth Wilbur
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=885465 ,
table 1, from this recent meeting in DC
http://www.web.virginia.edu
On Jan 13, 2007, at 7:36 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
A technical issue that I have to deal with is that you get a 30
minute show (actually 24 minutes of content) as 30 minutes, _with
the ads slots included_. To show it without ads, you
P.S. Of course, I do not agree we are moving to a pure VOD world. I
agree with Michal Krsek in this regard.
Frank
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of
Michal Krsek
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 2:28 AM
To: Marshall Eubanks
Cc: nanog
On Jan 10, 2007, at 5:42 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
between handling 30K unicast streams, and 30K multicast streams
that each have only one or at most 2-3 viewers?
My opinion on the downside of video multicast is that if you want
it
On Jan 10, 2007, at 11:19 PM, Thomas Leavitt wrote:
It seems to me that multi-cast is a technical solution for the
bandwidth consumption problems precipitated by real-time Internet
video broadcast, but it doesn't seem to me that the bulk of current
(or even future) Internet video traffic
On Jan 9, 2007, at 1:04 PM, Gian Constantine wrote:
You are correct. Today, IP multicast is limited to a few small
closed networks. If we ever migrate to IPv6, this would instantly
change.
I am curious. Why do you think that ?
Regards
Marshall
One of my previous assertions was the
Dear Valdis;
On Jan 9, 2007, at 10:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 11:29:32 EST, Gian Constantine said:
If you considered my previous posts, you would know I agree streaming
is scary on a large scale, but unicast streaming is what I reference.
Multicast streaming is the
On Jan 9, 2007, at 8:40 PM, Gian Constantine wrote:
It would not be any easier. The negotiations are very complex. The
issue is not one of infrastructure capex. It is one of jockeying
between content providers (big media conglomerates) and the video
service providers (cable companies).
On Jan 10, 2007, at 1:49 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Dear Valdis;
On Jan 9, 2007, at 10:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 11:29:32 EST, Gian Constantine said:
If you considered my previous posts, you would know I agree
streaming
is scary on a large scale, but unicast
Dear Sean;
On Jan 8, 2007, at 2:34 AM, Sean Donelan wrote:
On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, Joe Abley wrote:
Setting aside the issue of what particular ISPs today have to pay,
the real cost of sending data, best-effort over an existing
network which has spare capacity and which is already supported
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marshall Eubanks
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 7:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Andrew Odlyzko; nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a
day, continuously?
On Jan 6, 2007, at 10:19 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh
Dear Michael;
On Jan 7, 2007, at 8:18 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That might be worse for download operators, because people may
download
an hour of video, and only watch 5 minutes :/
So, from that standpoint, making a video file available for download
is wasting order of 90% of the
Dear Colm;
On Jan 7, 2007, at 8:50 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 08:46:41PM -0600, Frank Bulk wrote:
What does the Venice project see in terms of the number of upstreams
required to feed one view,
snip
Supposedly FTTH-rich countries contribute much more
to P2P
Dear Alexander;
On Jan 7, 2007, at 8:59 AM, Alexander Harrowell wrote:
In the mobile world, there is a lot of telco-led activity around
providing streaming video (TV), which always seems to boil down
to the following points:
We (AmericaFree.TV) simulcast everything in 3GPP and 3GPP2 at
Dear Gian;
On Jan 7, 2007, at 10:27 AM, Gian Constantine wrote:
You know, when it's all said and done, streaming video may be the
motivator for migrating the large scale Internet to IPv6. I do not
see unicast streaming as a long term solution for video service. In
the short term, unicast
Hello;
On Jan 6, 2007, at 1:52 AM, Thomas Leavitt wrote:
If this application takes off, I have to presume that everyone's
baseline network usage metrics can be tossed out the window...
Thomas
You should probably do that anyway, if you are worried about Venice,
because Venice is just
Note that 220 MB per hour (ugly units) is 489 Kbps, slightly less
than our current usage.
The more popular the content is, the more sources it can be pulled
from
and the less redundant data we send, and that number can be as low as
220MB per hour viewed. (Actually, I find this a tough
On Jan 6, 2007, at 9:35 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 09:25:27AM -0500, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Note that 220 MB per hour (ugly units) is 489 Kbps, slightly less
than our current usage.
Oh I should be clear too. We use SI powers of 10, just like for
bandwidth
or worse, it may even be better, but it's
different.
And as long as you can make a profit from broadcasting / streaming...
Andrew
Regards
Marshall
On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Note that 220 MB per hour (ugly units) is 489 Kbps, slightly less
=20
than our current
On Jan 6, 2007, at 10:19 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 09:09:19AM -0600, Andrew Odlyzko wrote:
2. The question I don't understand is, why stream?
There are other good reasons, but fundamentally; because of live
telivision.
In these days, when a terabyte disk for
They are seen here, through Cogent :
* 194.60.78.0 38.101.161.1164001 0 174
13237 41961 i
* 194.60.204.0 38.101.161.1164001 0 174
13237 41961 i
* 194.153.114.038.101.161.1164001 0 174
13237 41961 i
Regards
Marshall
Yes, I should have made that clear, not received through Level 3 at
AS 16517. (But, Cogent has them.)
On Jan 4, 2007, at 11:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And aren't seen through gblx. I also think I can't see those prefixes
through verizon.
Also not seen via Telia (1299) or Level3
Run successfully on Mac OS X and Fedora Core
Regards
Marshall
On Jan 2, 2007, at 12:04 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
if you have a bsd, linux , or probably cygwin machine, would you
please run the attached script once as a favor to a research
project?
it simply does a traceroute to a eight targets
In the spirit of trust, but verify, I preferred to read the script.
Regards
Marshall
On Jan 2, 2007, at 12:44 PM, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 2 Jan 2007 07:16:42 -1000
Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED
Here is a true story. Pardon me for being a little vague about details.
Client in argument about (large) expense payments with former
employee (FE) (not me, BTW).
FE wants payment, client says
money is not owed. I am in no position to judge correctness of either
argument.
FE used to have
Hello;
On Dec 20, 2006, at 11:20 PM, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 22:48:06 -0500
Edward Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, granted anyone looking for myspace might meet that demographic,
but how many neophytes would use Google for a IP Who Is search?
That's the listing
.
Regards
Marshall Eubanks
On Dec 8, 2006, at 10:54 AM, Dave Raskin wrote:
Hello, I have been directed to this list by IANA when I asked the
following question:
I am researching ways of device/machine discovery on the
network. This
is similar to the Discovery phase of UPnP devices
Seems relevant.
Begin forwarded message:
From: IESG Secretary [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: November 29, 2006 10:32:38 AM EST
To: IETF Announcement list ietf-announce@ietf.org
Subject: The IESG Approved the Expansion of the AS Number Registry
Original Message
Subject: The IESG
. Is it possible that an academic AS
is a provider for some commercial ASes? If so, does it happen often?
It may happen, but probably not often.
Thank you in advance for your comments.
Maciej Kurant
Hope this helps.
Regards
Marshall Eubanks
a mailing list and a web site
devoted to this. Mailing list information and presentations and
documents can be found at
http://www.multicasttech.com/mpi/
If you interested, you are welcome to join and contribute.
Regards
Marshall Eubanks
1 - 100 of 284 matches
Mail list logo
