RE: Vonage SUED over not clearly informing customers re 911 service lacking

2005-03-24 Thread Network.Security
Re: Your Call Will Go To A General Access Line at the Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP). This is different from the 911 Emergency Response Center where traditional 911 calls go. In talking with my local PSAP about VoIP services and this particular issue, they (PSAPs collectively) are fairly

RE: US slaps fine on company blocking VoIP

2005-03-07 Thread Network.Security
Do you also offer premium 80 traffic? Or guaranteed delivery of UDP? Unbundled services will give the best price, and good service. Maybe we won't get the service anytime soon, but 2 out of the magical 3 isn't bad. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: More on Vonage service disruptions...

2005-03-02 Thread Network.Security
So...how much of the revenue stream is built around the actual facilities (i.e. copper, fiber, etc) ownership monopoly? Shouldn't senior staff recognize the short-sightedness of building one revenue stream from two distinct sources: one content delivery and one plant ownership? Sell access

RE: UN Panel Aims to End Internet Tug of War by July

2005-02-25 Thread Network.Security
Invented is irrelevant. Effective mgmt is what counts. Having said that, things seem to work fine as is, and in the end if we ask large (aka fortune 100) multi-internationals if the ITU (UN) should try and manage, and glean off another nickel or two, the inet...hmmm...answer? No way, money

Large Enterprise IP mgmt

2005-01-19 Thread Network.Security
The archives didn't show a hit for IP address management when it comes to a large MS AD shop. We went from NetID to home-grown scripts... Men and Mice have given some presentations on their tool. Any others out there that do not force a switch to some other vendor's DNS/DHCP servers? Just

RE: Opinions of recent ITU Comments on the Management of IP Addresses

2004-11-23 Thread Network.Security
Interesting flow...who then enforces ITU rules? With what binding authority? Better yet, let the free market run the business. Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Owen DeLong Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 11:23 AM To: Iljitsch van

RE: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested

2004-11-09 Thread Network.Security
Depending on putting devices on 1918 for security is dangerous. - Simon J. Lyall. Agreed. RFC 1918 is a good idea, it's not the law, and with that ISP's are not required to do anything about 1918 addr's if they choose not to. We receive a disturbingly large amount of traffic sourced from the