On 3/4/14, 3:16 AM, ku po wrote:
> One of my client has peering with nlayer and a provider from Asia. It seems
> from one major ISP in US, the best path is through this Asia provider,
> instead of through nlayer which we want it to be.
>
> It seems this major ISP does not have a direct peering wi
Have them look at radware linkproof which is designed for small shops that
don't want to do bgp and getting their own ASN and pi address space. Been
around since 1999.
http://www.radware.com/Products/LinkProof/
Hank
On Mar 4, 2014 3:11 AM, Eric A Louie wrote:
>
> This may sound like dumb que
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
If they're not technically competent enough to handle BGP, they won't be
technically competent enough to deal with solutions that play the short DNS
TTL game.
As someone else mentioned in this thread - would colocating the servers be a
workable s
On 03/03/2014 10:16 PM, ku po wrote:
> One of my client has peering with nlayer and a provider from Asia. It seems
> from one major ISP in US, the best path is through this Asia provider,
> instead of through nlayer which we want it to be.
>
> It seems this major ISP does not have a direct peerin
On 3/3/14, 7:20 PM, Randy Carpenter wrote:
> Is there some technical reason that BGP is not an option? You could allow
> them to announce their AT&T space via you as a secondary.
With the risk of starting holy war on how BGP works on dialup and that
providers should permit such, the OP has not s
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Eric A Louie wrote:
Honestly? Because the end-customers are not technically competent
enough to run dual-homed BGP, and we don't want to be their managed
service providers on the IT side. And announcing the AT&T space is fine
until something goes wrong, and I have to trou
There are other elaborate solutions to accomplish this, however all of them
would require a competent IT/Network Person to manage the network.
If we were the ISP, we would look at such a case an an opportunity, and become
the managed service provider, for a fee (typically a premium), and provide
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Eric A Louie wrote:
Are there any other solutions, short of using BGP multihoming and
having them try to get their own ASN and IPv4 /24 block?
For what it sounds like the customer wants to do, this really is the right
solution. Most everything else has some level of 'ugly
Honestly? Because the end-customers are not technically competent enough to
run dual-homed BGP, and we don't want to be their managed service providers on
the IT side. And announcing the AT&T space is fine until something goes wrong,
and I have to troubleshoot the problem (Customer - "How come
> Depending on their business=2C using dynamic DNS providers could be a reall=
> y bad idea. If they deal only with home users who won't even know=2C it'll =
> probably work. If their customers are security-aware businesses=2C they pro=
> bably block all sites hosted with dynamic DNS systems.
Whe
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Randy Carpenter wrote:
> Is there some technical reason that BGP is not an option? You could allow
> them to announce their AT&T space via you as a secondary.
unless it is a /26, /25 or something shorter.
Even with a /24 things may get messy.
IPv4 is coming to a
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Eric A Louie wrote:
> One thought I had was having them use Dynamic DNS service.
>
> Are there any other solutions, short of using BGP multihoming
> and having them try to get their own ASN and IPv4 /24 block?
Hi Eric,
I went through this a couple years ago with c
That's a good point Ray - thank you.
>
> From: Ray
>To: Matthew Crocker ; Eric A Louie
>
>Cc: NANOG
>Sent: Monday, March 3, 2014 6:31 PM
>Subject: RE: ISP inbound failover without BGP
>
>
>
>
>Depending on their business, using dynamic DNS providers could
Is there some technical reason that BGP is not an option? You could allow them
to announce their AT&T space via you as a secondary.
-Randy
- Original Message -
> This may sound like dumb question, but... I'm used to asking those.
>
> Here's the scenario
>
> Another ISP, say AT&T, is t
One of my client has peering with nlayer and a provider from Asia. It seems
from one major ISP in US, the best path is through this Asia provider,
instead of through nlayer which we want it to be.
It seems this major ISP does not have a direct peering with nlayer AS 4436
is the cause of this prob
Depending on their business, using dynamic DNS providers could be a really bad
idea. If they deal only with home users who won't even know, it'll probably
work. If their customers are security-aware businesses, they probably block all
sites hosted with dynamic DNS systems.
Ray
> Subject: Re: I
I can do it.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 3, 2014, at 12:40 PM, "Nick Olsen" wrote:
>
> Hey Guys, I need a 24 port ADSL (2, +, It's all the same in my book) DSLAM.
> And I need it by tomorrow.
>
> Normal channels seem to be impacted by weather. Not to mention we've been
> pretty unhappy wit
Depends on the application,
SIP, VPN, SMTP, etc just setup both IPs and let the end-user application figure
it out (SIP-UA register to both IPs for example)
HTTP/HTTPS setup a proxy server in a colo that is multi-homed to frontend the
requests. Then it can load balance traffic over both IPs
> This may sound like dumb question, but... I'm used to asking those.=0A=0AHe=
> re's the scenario=0A=0AAnother ISP, say AT&T, is the primary ISP for a cust=
> omer.=0A=0ACustomer has publicly accessible servers in their office, using =
> the AT&T address space.=0A=0AI am the customer's secondary I
This may sound like dumb question, but... I'm used to asking those.
Here's the scenario
Another ISP, say AT&T, is the primary ISP for a customer.
Customer has publicly accessible servers in their office, using the AT&T
address space.
I am the customer's secondary ISP.
Now, if AT&T link fails,
Thanks to all that replied. Specially Eric @ Luma Optics.
We've reached the cut off date for day. We're working on fixing the DSLAM
we have on hand for use.
I appreciate all the replies.
Nick Olsen
Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106
F
Cocoa, Florida. Sorry.
Nick Olsen
Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106
From: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 4:05 PM
To: n...@flhsi.com
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: DSLAM
On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 15:40:35 -0500, "Nick Olse
On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 15:40:35 -0500, "Nick Olsen" said:
> Hey Guys, I need a 24 port ADSL (2, +, It's all the same in my book) DSLAM.
> And I need it by tomorrow.
Bonus points if you tell us what continent/timezone you need this in. Getting
said device to 60 Hudson and to Nowhere Island, Tahiti ar
Hey Guys, I need a 24 port ADSL (2, +, It's all the same in my book) DSLAM.
And I need it by tomorrow.
Normal channels seem to be impacted by weather. Not to mention we've been
pretty unhappy with our current models (Versa, And Planet).
Any options? Unicast is acceptable.
Nick Olsen
N
Dear Colleagues,
The RIPE NCC has received the following AS Number Blocks from the IANA
in February 2014.
200192-201215
201216-202239
You may want to update your records accordingly.
Best regards,
Andrea Cima
Registration Services Manager
RIPE NCC
> - the IXP participants keep their IRRDB information fully up-to-date
Geez anything else but the fully up-to-date IRRDB please. That just won't fly.
That's why I said that an up to date IRRDB would have been a nice side effect
of IXP filtering.
> - the IXP operators put in mechanisms to stop b
26 matches
Mail list logo
