Subject: Re: Yahoo and IPv6 Date: Tue, May 17, 2011 at 04:22:54AM + Quoting
Paul Vixie (vi...@isc.org):
From: Owen DeLong o...@delong.com
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 16:12:27 -0700
... It's not like you can even reach anything at home now, let alone
reach it by name.
that must and
On May 17, 2011, at 2:07 AM, Mans Nilsson wrote:
Subject: Re: Yahoo and IPv6 Date: Tue, May 17, 2011 at 04:22:54AM +
Quoting Paul Vixie (vi...@isc.org):
From: Owen DeLong o...@delong.com
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 16:12:27 -0700
... It's not like you can even reach anything at home now,
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 11:07:17 +0200
From: Mans Nilsson mansa...@besserwisser.org
... It's not like you can even reach anything at home now, let alone
reach it by name.
that must and will change. let's be the generation who makes it possible.
I'd like to respond to this by
On 05/17/2011 08:56 AM, Paul Vixie wrote:
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 11:07:17 +0200
From: Mans Nilssonmansa...@besserwisser.org
... It's not like you can even reach anything at home now, let alone
reach it by name.
that must and will change. let's be the generation who makes it possible.
I'd
On 5/17/2011 5:25 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
My point was that at least in IPv6, you can reach your boxes whereas with
IPv4, you couldn't reach them at all (unless you used a rendezvous service
and preconfigured stuff).
Actually almost everyone will *still* need a rendezvous service as even
if
On May 17, 2011, at 8:49 AM, Steve Clark wrote:
On 05/17/2011 08:56 AM, Paul Vixie wrote:
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 11:07:17 +0200
From: Mans Nilssonmansa...@besserwisser.org
... It's not like you can even reach anything at home now, let alone
reach it by name.
that must and will change.
On 17 mei 2011, at 17:55, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
firewall traversal
Smells like job security: first install a firewall, then traverse it anyway.
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 11:49:47 -0400
From: Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com
This is all very confusing to me. How are meaningful names going to assigned
automatically?
It'll probably be a lot like Apple's and Xerox's various multicast naming
systems if we want it to work in non-globally
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Welch, Bryan bryan.we...@arrisi.com wrote:
Greetings all.
I've been tasked with comparing the use of open source load balancing
software against commercially available off the shelf hardware such as F5,
which is what we currently use. We use the load
Paul Vixie vi...@isc.org wrote:
This is all very confusing to me. How are meaningful names going to assigned
automatically?
It'll probably be a lot like Apple's and Xerox's various multicast naming
systems if we want it to work in non-globally connected networks.
Or perhaps user-relative
We've use Linux LVS for many many years with success.
http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Welch, Bryan bryan.we...@arrisi.comwrote:
Greetings all.
I've been tasked with comparing the use of open source load balancing
software against commercially available
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 11:03 -0600, Michael Loftis wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Welch, Bryan bryan.we...@arrisi.com wrote:
Greetings all.
I've been tasked with comparing the use of open source load balancing
software against commercially available off the shelf hardware such as
On 05/17/2011 08:23 AM, Tom Hill wrote:
I've worked with open source and commercial solutions, and while the
open source systems were almost always far more flexible, and cheaper
up front, they certainly required more work to get going.. Once setup
and running though both types of solutions had
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 04:15:45PM -0700, Welch, Bryan wrote:
Greetings all.
I've been tasked with comparing the use of open source load balancing
software against commercially available off the shelf hardware such as F5,
which is what we currently use. We use the load balancers for
http://e.businessinsider.com/public/184962
Subject: Re: Yahoo and IPv6 Date: Tue, May 17, 2011 at 12:56:37PM + Quoting
Paul Vixie (vi...@isc.org):
:-).
to be clear, the old pre-web T1 era internet did not have much content
but what content there was, was not lopsided. other than slip and ppp
there weren't a lot of networks one
--- d...@dotat.at wrote:
Or perhaps user-relative names.
http://www.brynosaurus.com/pub/net/uia-osdi.pdf
--
What about privacy concerns; stopping your every move being tracked through the
personal name attached to all of your devices? Did I
On Tue, 17 May 2011 15:04:19 PDT, Scott Weeks said:
What about privacy concerns
Privacy is dead. Get used to it. -- Scott McNeely
pgpsQx7TWOx0s.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--- valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: -
From: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
On Tue, 17 May 2011 15:04:19 PDT, Scott Weeks said:
What about privacy concerns
Privacy is dead. Get used to it. -- Scott McNeely
--
It doesn't have to be that
In message BANLkTimxkNx5=__jxd9056fao19v1zo...@mail.gmail.com, Michael Loftis
writes:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Welch, Bryan bryan.we...@arrisi.com wrot=
e:
Greetings all.
I've been tasked with comparing the use of open source load balancing sof=
tware against commercially
On May 17, 2011 6:26 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 17 May 2011 15:04:19 PDT, Scott Weeks said:
What about privacy concerns
Privacy is dead. Get used to it. -- Scott McNeely
Forget that attitude, Valdis. Just because privacy is blown at one level
doesn't mean you give it away
On May 17, 2011, at 4:30 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
On May 17, 2011 6:26 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 17 May 2011 15:04:19 PDT, Scott Weeks said:
What about privacy concerns
Privacy is dead. Get used to it. -- Scott McNeely
Forget that attitude, Valdis. Just because
(And I get flamed by multiple people because I put in the quote and managed to
hit send before adding the commentary. Maybe one of these days I'll learn not
to try to mix replying to e-mail and dealing with vendor engineers doing a tape
library expansion at the same time. :) Oh well, equivalent
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
[snip]
Better still would be for them to return records but until one
is ready to do that the negative responses need to be correct.
Hm... better would be for load balancers operate transparently at Layer 3 and
not tamper
--- joe...@bogus.com wrote:
From: Joel Jaeggli joe...@bogus.com
On May 17, 2011, at 4:30 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
On May 17, 2011 6:26 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 17 May 2011 15:04:19 PDT, Scott Weeks said:
What about privacy concerns
Privacy is dead. Get used to it. -- Scott
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 11:57 AM, LaDerrick H. na...@lacutt.com wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 04:15:45PM -0700, Welch, Bryan wrote:
Greetings all.
I've been tasked with comparing the use of open source load balancing
software against commercially available off the shelf hardware such as F5,
In response to your query on dnssec in the browser, I use this.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/dnssec-validator/
--Original Message--
From: Jimmy Hess
To: Mark Andrews
Cc: Welch, Bryan
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Experience with Open Source load balancers?
Sent: May
--- valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
From: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
Why give the corpment (corporate/government contraction) an easy time at it?
Just like the early days, security and privacy do not seem to be in folk's
mind
when things are being designed.
But more importantly, who has
Yes indeed. http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/79/slides/intarea-3.pdf
-- sent from a tiny screen
On May 17, 2011, at 6:09 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
--- joe...@bogus.com wrote:
From: Joel Jaeggli joe...@bogus.com
On May 17, 2011, at 4:30 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
On May 17, 2011 6:26 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 17 May 2011 15:04:19 PDT, Scott Weeks said:
What about privacy
On Mon, 16 May 2011, Todd Lyons wrote:
Double check the kernel version you have. IIRC kernels before 2.6.20
didn't have the ability to do RELATED,ESTABLISHED in ipv6. This hit
me on a CentOS box that I was using as a gateway. I am unaware if
there is a version of their 2.6.18 that has the
--- scott.b...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Scott Brim scott.b...@gmail.com
Yes indeed. http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/79/slides/intarea-3.pdf
-
Hm, that's a funny correlation to what I have been thinking and talking about
lately. I'll have to read
--- joe...@bogus.com wrote:
From: Joel Jaeggli joe...@bogus.com
if you put something in the dns you do so because you want to discovered.
scoping the nameservers such that they only express certain certain resource
records to queriers in a particular scope is fairly straight forward.
On May 17, 2011, at 7:51 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
--- joe...@bogus.com wrote:
From: Joel Jaeggli joe...@bogus.com
if you put something in the dns you do so because you want to discovered.
scoping the nameservers such that they only express certain certain resource
records to queriers
On Tue, 17 May 2011 20:22:23 PDT, Joel Jaeggli said:
On May 17, 2011, at 7:51 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
Only if you design your network that way. EUI-64 isn't required.
don't much matter, if you move around you're going get them a lot.
Of course, if you're moving around and getting EUI-64
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 9:37 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
Unless you end up behind a fascist firewall that actually checks that the
EUI-64 half of the SLAAC address actually matches your MAC address - but we
all
know that firewalls are weak at IPv6 support, so probably nobody's
Hello,
I have installed IRRd and I am trying to set it up, just for study
purposes. I have successfully mirrored some DBs but I cant handle to
make my very first maintainer creation. irrd-user.pdf seems to be the
only documentation around and it says nothing about How the admin
creates a
I'll pile on here too - there's very little of Mozilla's web infrastructure
that isn't behind Zeus.
+1 for Zeus. Use it in our production network with great success.
Magnitudes cheaper than a solution from F5, and doesn't hide the inner
workings of the product if you want to do some things
38 matches
Mail list logo
