I just talked to Lin Du (who I worked with when I was at Woven), who is the
current CEO of Pica8. Don't know anything about the product, but this didn't
seem like Lin's style. Turns out Fontaine GUILLAUME has registered
pic8@gmail.com, has no relation to the company - and is trying to
Oh good lord, when will that guy ever stop.
On 01-Nov-2010, at 2:52 PM, Christopher LILJENSTOLPE wrote:
I just talked to Lin Du (who I worked with when I was at Woven), who is the
current CEO of Pica8. Don't know anything about the product, but this didn't
seem like Lin's style. Turns out
Hahah. I love it when my hunch is correct. I swear that he ate lead paint chips
as a kid.
The b will be visiting soon I bet
Tammy A Wisdom
Summit Open Source Development Group
-Original Message-
From: Christopher LILJENSTOLPE c...@asgaard.org
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 17:52:23
To:
Juniper srx runs JunOS.
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Jeffrey Lyon
jeffrey.l...@blacklotus.net wrote:
Juniper Netscreen does, in case the OP is looking for alternatives.
Best regards, Jeff
--
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.li...@gmail.com)
Since there's a thread here, I'll mention rDNS for residential users.
I'm not sure there's consensus about whether forward and reverse ought
to match (how strong a should is that?). I know you can't populate
every potential record in a reverse zone, as in IPv4. You can generate
records on the
Define long prefix length. Owen has been fairly forceful in his
advocacy of /48s at every site. Is this too long a prefix? Should
peers only except /32s and shorter?
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 1:12 PM, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
On Oct 31, 2010, at 9:01 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
off topic…
you recently converted from token ring to ethernet? i had no idea there was
still token ring networks out there, or am i living in a bubble?
-g
On Oct 31, 2010, at 9:07 PM, Paul WALL wrote:
I don't know what the big deal is. I've rolled at least 20 of these
switches into my
On 01 Nov 2010 10:08, Jason Iannone wrote:
Define long prefix length. Owen has been fairly forceful in his
advocacy of /48s at every site. Is this too long a prefix? Should
peers only except /32s and shorter?
One assumes unpaid peers will accept prefixes up to the maximum length
the RIR
Asia Pacific Regional Internet Conference on Operational Technologies
(APRICOT)
15 - 25 February 2011, Hong Kong
http://www.apricot2011.net
CALL FOR PAPERS
===
The APRICOT 2011 Programme Committee is now seeking contributions for
Presentations and Tutorials for APRICOT 2011.
We are
On Mon, 1 Nov 2010 10:24:31 + (GMT)
Tim Franklin t...@pelican.org wrote:
Surely your not saying we ought to make getting PI easy, easy enough
that the other options just don't make sense so that all residential
users get PI so that if their ISP disappears their network doesn't
break?
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 5:28 AM, Mark Smith
na...@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org wrote:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:32:39 -0400
Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 3:10 PM, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
On Oct 31, 2010, at 6:45
On Nov 1, 2010, at 2:28 AM, Mark Smith wrote:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:32:39 -0400
Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 3:10 PM, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
On Oct 31, 2010, at 6:45 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
If Woody had gone straight to
This isn't to do with anything low level like RAs. This is about
people proposing every IPv6 end-site gets PI i.e. a default free zone
with multiple billions of routes instead of using ULAs for internal,
stable addressing. It's as though they're not aware that the majority
of end-sites on the
oops, I clipped a little too much from the message before replying...
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 5:28 AM, Mark Smith
na...@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org wrote:
Permanent connectivity to the global IPv6 Internet, while common,
should not be essential to being able to run
On 01/11/2010 15:21, Greg Whynott wrote:
you recently converted from token ring to ethernet? i had no idea
there was still token ring networks out there, or am i living in a
bubble?
Sadly, you're living in a bubble. As long as there are banks and very
large commercial institutions, there
Halloween is over, why do you have to keep saying scary things like that..
(even if it is true, unfortunately)
-Richard
-Original Message-
From: Nick Hilliard [mailto:n...@foobar.org]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 12:48 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Token ring? topic hijack:
On Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:20:41 -0700
Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Nov 1, 2010, at 2:28 AM, Mark Smith wrote:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:32:39 -0400
Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 3:10 PM, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
On Oct
Hi,
2) ULA brings with it (as do any options that include multiple
addresses) host-stack complexity and address-selection issues... 'do I
use ULA here or GUA when talking to the remote host?'
There's an app for that (or rather a library routine called
getaddrinfo() and an optional
EXFO also sells the BRIX SLA verifier, which calculates RTT, packet
loss, and jitter for various applications running on top of the link
layer.
-Original Message-
From: Tim Jackson [mailto:jackson@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 6:54 PM
To: Diogo Montagner
Cc:
Gary E. Miller wrote:
See also sipcalc.
Thanks, I wasn't aware of the various commandline tools available yet.
Except the dig option to convert IPv6 rDNS. But the tool I mentioned
also creates a whole zone file for you based on what you entered, which
I then used to correct the zone file I
Karl Auer wrote:
On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 18:48 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
Uh, no... You're misreading it.
Yes - I read the ISP bit, not the end user bit.
It cost me $625 (or possibly less) one-time when I first got it.
That was with the waivers in force. It will soon cost a one-time US
It cost me $625 (or possibly less) one-time when I first got it.
one time? truely one time? no other fees or strings?
randy
On Mon, 2010-11-01 at 15:26 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Karl Auer wrote:
That was with the waivers in force. It will soon cost a one-time US
$1250. We could argue till the cows come home about what proportion of
the population would consider that prohibitive but I'm guessing that
even
In message aanlktinumzyp9qe0i5phyz72al3xyctvaqhjzhutk...@mail.gmail.com, Mich
el de Nostredame writes:
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Jeroen van Aart jer...@mompl.net wrote:
I battled for a few hours getting IPv6 rDNS to work. The following tool
proved to be quite helpful:
Who if anyone is the Equinix of Candia?
Cheers
Ryan
On Nov 1, 2010, at 9:07 AM, Mark Smith wrote:
On Mon, 1 Nov 2010 10:24:31 + (GMT)
Tim Franklin t...@pelican.org wrote:
Surely your not saying we ought to make getting PI easy, easy enough
that the other options just don't make sense so that all residential
users get PI so that if
Equinix at 151 Front?
Drive Slow,
Paul Wall
On 11/1/10, Ryan Finnesey ryan.finne...@harrierinvestments.com wrote:
Who if anyone is the Equinix of Candia?
Cheers
Ryan
--
Sent from my mobile device
If you mean Canada, Equinix bought out Switch Data so Equinix is directly
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 1, 2010, at 8:04 PM, Ryan Finnesey
ryan.finne...@harrierinvestments.com wrote:
Who if anyone is the Equinix of Candia?
Cheers
Ryan
Yes sorry it has been a long day. Canada. Is the only Switch Data
center in Toronto?
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Karch [mailto:kevinka...@vackinc.com]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 9:16 PM
To: 'David DiGiacomo'
Cc: Ryan Finnesey
Subject: RE: Equinix of Candia?
We do have
Equinix only has one center within Toronto.Is there someone with a
larger number of centers across the country?
-Original Message-
From: Paul WALL [mailto:pauldotw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 8:56 PM
To: Ryan Finnesey; NANOG list
Subject: Re: Equinix of Candia?
We have national coverage on several cities with common companies with the
same company.
Please let me know your locations of interest.
Kevin L. Karch
Network Specialist
Direct: 847-833-8810
Fax: 847-985-5550
Email: kevinka...@vackinc.com
Web: www.vackinc.com
The Optical Network Specialists
On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 06:31:34PM -0700, Ryan Finnesey wrote:
Equinix only has one center within Toronto. Is there someone with a
larger number of centers across the country?
I'm assuming when you say like Equinix you mean a carrier neutral colo
where you can buy from, sell to, and
Thank you Richard your reply was very helpful.
Cheers
Ryan
-Original Message-
From: Richard A Steenbergen [mailto:r...@e-gerbil.net]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 10:37 PM
To: Ryan Finnesey
Cc: NANOG list
Subject: Re: Equinix of Candia?
On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 06:31:34PM -0700, Ryan
On Nov 1, 2010, at 4:19 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
On Mon, 2010-11-01 at 15:26 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Karl Auer wrote:
That was with the waivers in force. It will soon cost a one-time US
$1250. We could argue till the cows come home about what proportion of
the population would consider
On Nov 1, 2010, at 4:12 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
It cost me $625 (or possibly less) one-time when I first got it.
one time? truely one time? no other fees or strings?
randy
Yes, one time.
Truly one time.
No other fees. The $100/year I was already paying for my other resources
covers it,
Owen,
On Nov 1, 2010, at 4:59 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Yes, one time.
Truly one time.
No other fees.
Let's say you returned all your IPv4 address space.
What would happen if you then stopped paying?
Regards,
-drc
On Nov 1, 2010, at 4:40 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
In message aanlktinumzyp9qe0i5phyz72al3xyctvaqhjzhutk...@mail.gmail.com,
Mich
el de Nostredame writes:
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Jeroen van Aart jer...@mompl.net wrote:
I battled for a few hours getting IPv6 rDNS to work. The
On Mon, 2010-11-01 at 20:03 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
Interesting... I guess controlling your own internet fate hasn't been a
priority for the companies where you've worked. Not one of my clients
or the companies I have worked for has even given a second thought
to approving the cost of
In message 7e9af5e9-7b3a-4767-a1d3-8eab64031...@delong.com, Owen DeLong write
s:
On Nov 1, 2010, at 4:40 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
=20
In message =
aanlktinumzyp9qe0i5phyz72al3xyctvaqhjzhutk...@mail.gmail.com, Mich
el de Nostredame writes:
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Jeroen van
On Nov 1, 2010, at 5:23 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
It's not a one size fits all situation.
Right. There are folks who are more than happy (in fact demand) to pay the
RIRs for PI space and pay their ISPs to get that space routed. There are
(probably) folks who are perfectly happy with PA and accept
My guess is that the millions of residential users will be less and
less enthused with (pure) PA each time they change service providers...
That claim seems to be unsupported by current experience. Please elaborate.
Nathan
On Nov 1, 2010, at 6:42 PM, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
My guess is that the millions of residential users will be less and
less enthused with (pure) PA each time they change service providers...
That claim seems to be unsupported by current experience. Please elaborate.
Currently, most
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 00:58, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
On Nov 1, 2010, at 6:42 PM, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
My guess is that the millions of residential users will be less and
less enthused with (pure) PA each time they change service providers...
That claim seems to be
43 matches
Mail list logo
