Bill,
To be brief, but hopefully not too fleeting, the majority of the
standards orgs - ITU, MEF - use packet loss to derive availability.
Loss% = the % of packets which were transmitted but not received by the
destination host. As for availability, loss is measured across some
time period. If
I think the desired goal here is to separate the access SLA from
the backbone SLA. That is, consider a simple picture:
Network Cloud--Provider Edge Router-Local Loop-Customer Router
Network availability is the % of the time the customer router and
provider edge router can
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Cisco Security Advisory: Cisco IOS Software Border Gateway Protocol
4-Byte Autonomous System Number
Vulnerabilities
Advisory ID: cisco-sa-20090729-bgp
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-sa
Now, having said all that, and having been one of the people who've
attempted to communicate sane, rational, technical ideas to marketing
and legal the chance that anything sane made it in the actual contract
is, well, nil.
I disagree.
If someone takes the trouble to publish a technical
Hi All,
We're making progress...
I registered the domains voiceops.org and voiceops.net. No matter what the
final name becomes, at least we've got some domains that aren't too hard on the
eyes.
Some noble souls have already volunteered to host it on a proper mailman server.
Nothing is set
We use the BRIX active measurement system (BRIX now owned by EXFO) which
gathers round trip time, packet loss, and jitter randomly every minute
24x7x365 for our major backbone links to calculate SLAs. Network
Availability can be measured empirically using BRIX calculated values
of packet loss, and
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Bill Woodcockwo...@pch.net wrote:
Am I over-thinking this?
The SLA's I've looked at promise me that if their service is hard down
for a week (with no ambiguity whatsoever) they'll credit my bill for
upwards of 2% of the $50k/year or so I spend on the Internet
William Herrin wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Bill Woodcockwo...@pch.net wrote:
Am I over-thinking this?
The SLA's I've looked at promise me that if their service is hard down
for a week (with no ambiguity whatsoever) they'll credit my bill for
upwards of 2% of the $50k/year
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 4:19 PM, JC Dilljcdill.li...@gmail.com wrote:
William Herrin wrote:
The SLA's I've looked at promise me that if their service is hard down
for a week (with no ambiguity whatsoever) they'll credit my bill for
upwards of 2% of the $50k/year or so I spend on the Internet
Brandon Butterworth wrote:
NAVOG works for me.
I'd prefer Voice Operators' Group Online Network
brandon
*claps*
On 29.07.2009, at 22:52, Jason LeBlanc wrote:
Brandon Butterworth wrote:
NAVOG works for me.
I'd prefer Voice Operators' Group Online Network
brandon
*claps*
Imagine the poetry you have to listen to when _those_ guys put you on
hold...
On 30/07/2009, at 7:59 AM, Jim Wininger wrote:
I have a question about the subnet size for BGP peers. Typically
when we
turn up a new BGP customer we turn them up on a /29 or a /30. That
seems to
be the norm.
We connect to many of our BGP peers with ethernet. It would be a
simple
/29's here for everyone great for troubleshooting and any future
additions typically required...;)
-Original Message-
From: Jim Wininger [mailto:jbot...@gmail.com]
Sent: July 29, 2009 4:00 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Subnet Size for BGP peers.
I have a question about the subnet
Imagine two of your clients are competitors, they probably don't want to
be on the same IP range. And yes, when you sell your service to several
customers, you don't want one of them blowing up all the other's SLA.
IXs use /24, as far as I know, and peers connected there can usually use
md5
--- On Wed, 7/29/09, Scott Weeks sur...@mauigateway.com wrote:
From: Scott Weeks sur...@mauigateway.com
Subject: Re: Fwd: Dan Kaminsky
To: andrew.wallace andrew.wall...@rocketmail.com
Date: Wednesday, July 29, 2009, 10:10 PM
--- andrew.wall...@rocketmail.com
wrote:
LAS VEGAS — Two noted security professionals were targeted this week
by hackers who broke into their web pages, stole personal data and
posted it online on the eve of the Black Hat security conference.
boring.
randy
Randy Bush wrote:
LAS VEGAS — Two noted security professionals were targeted this week
by hackers who broke into their web pages, stole personal data and
posted it online on the eve of the Black Hat security conference.
boring.
randy
Two noted security professionals, and
LAS VEGAS — Two noted security professionals were targeted this week
by hackers who broke into their web pages, stole personal data and
posted it online on the eve of the Black Hat security conference.
boring.
Two noted security professionals, and Kevin Mitnick, whom no one gives a
damn
- Original Message -
From: Jim Wininger jbot...@gmail.com
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 3:59 PM
Subject: Subnet Size for BGP peers.
I have a question about the subnet size for BGP peers. Typically when we
turn up a new BGP customer we turn them up on a /29 or a
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009, Benjamin Billon wrote:
Who knows any other good way to lose IP addresses?
I know how to not lose them:
int lo30
ip address 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0
int gi2.10
encap dot1q 10
desc cust 1
ip address unnumbered lo30
int gi2.11
encap dot1q 11
desc cust 2
ip address
20 matches
Mail list logo
