>> make ipv6 easier to deploy, especially in enterprise. repeat the
>> previous sentence 42 times.
>
> I'm still waiting for the IETF to come around
> to allowing feature parity between IPv4 and IPv6
> when it comes to DHCP. The stance of not
> allowing the DHCP server to assign a default
> gate
Sure your VPN tunnel wasn't 'stuck' flowing through a less than optimal or
saturated ISP upstream transit peer? Sometimes, just restarting your VPN may
force the traffic through a different path in your ISP's network and clear up
an issue. We manage many customer IPsec tunnels, hit similar situa
Hello list,
I have a site-to-site ipsec vpn with strongswan. It was working well
for 5-6 months then a day ago I have noticed something strange, that
from Site-A to Site-B (tunnel mode) only the upload bandwidth is
capped
down to 20-30kbit/s inside the VPN.
I have tried various apps like f
We have customers asking to lease IP space for BGP transit with us and other
peers. But they are struggling to get at a minimum even a Class C, even though
they have their own ASN. We don't have large amounts of free IPv4 space to
lease out to a single customer in most cases anymore. Hope to at
In message <01de01d13900$fe364dd0$faa2e970$@gmail.com>, "Chuck Church" writes:
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Petach
> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 1:59 PM
> Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
> Subject: Re: Nat
>
> >
You could tunnel to a data center.
Or NAT out their service.
Tunneling via EoIP would allow you to stay within their ToS.
> On Dec 17, 2015, at 16:01, b...@theworld.com wrote:
>
>
> I'm looking at some sort of 50-100mbps failover link in case my
> primary is down.
>
> My options seem limit
I'm looking at some sort of 50-100mbps failover link in case my
primary is down.
My options seem limited particularly since I'm cheap.
I see Comcast has unlimited data business links in this range but I'm
not sure I'd want to deal with the management issue of BGP or swapping
ip blocks etc with t
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Petach
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 1:59 PM
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
Subject: Re: Nat
>I'm still waiting for the IETF to come around to allowing feature parity
>between IPv4 and I
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 5:22 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> We need to put some pain onto everyone that is IPv4 only.
>
> this is the oppress the workers so they will revolt theory.
Ah, yes, the workers are quite revolting!
> load of crap.
>
> make ipv6 easier to deploy, especially in enterprise. rep
At $dayjob$ (which is a university) we spoke to several vendors and eventually
gave A10 Networks Thunder 3030 a test drive.
It satisfied our requirements and fit our budget. Most of our NAT traffic
originates from our undergraduate student population. Peak workload during
2015 fall term was
On 17/12/2015 17:36, Ahmed Munaf wrote:
> we are using ESP 20
You haven't said what you mean by "better". This could mean "faster" or
"copes with more sessions" or "cheaper". If your ISP is large, then it
might be "cost per user is lower" or "able to cope with the number of users".
Nick
we are using ESP 20
> On Dec 16, 2015, at 10:46 PM, Tony Wicks wrote:
>
> We have the ASR1006 ESP40's handling 25,000+home broadband users running NAT
> and barely breaking a sweat. What ESP are you using ?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behal
> On Dec 16, 2015, at 7:52 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
>
> On 16/Dec/15 18:36, Ahmed Munaf wrote:
>
>> In addition to the limited concurrent sessions for ASR1000, we are
>> facing some issue with many users how are playing online games! Nat
>> problems!
>
> This could be a function of the s
As network/server techies (UK and EU/USA) lets raise even more money donations
next year for Action for Children.
Colin
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Colin Johnston
> Subject: Fwd: ByteNight 2015 North West movie
> Date: 17 December 2015 at 16:25:12 GMT
> To: "" ,
> stephen , "ASPINA
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:55:46 -0800
Tim Howe wrote:
> [...]
> Could someone contact me privately and clue me in as to who can
> be contacted to clear an old blacklist entry?
>
> --TimH
FYI, I got resolution off-list. Thanks!
--TimH
Dear NANOG readers,
thank you very much for your participation in this survey. We already
received more than 60 replies from ISPs all over the world.
If you work for an ISP and didn't answer yet, we would greatly
appreciate your response.
Link to the survey: http://natsurvey.icsi.berkeley.edu/
Thanks for the info
I have contacted my sales rep to she if she can get it turned on for my
fiber connection.
Roy
On 12/17/2015 7:32 AM, Rampley Jr, Jim F wrote:
Hi Roy,
Charter has launched IPv6 for our commercial Fiber Internet customers. We
are also in EFT with IPv6 for Cable Modem Manag
Hi Roy,
Charter has launched IPv6 for our commercial Fiber Internet customers. We
are also in EFT with IPv6 for Cable Modem Management and Dual Stack for
Resi HSI is in our PoC lab. Both of these are expected to launch mid-2016.
Hope this is helpful. Let me know if you have any questions.
Jim
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:27:01PM -0500,
Jean-Francois Mezei wrote
a message of 66 lines which said:
> The Québec government is wanting to pass a law that will force ISPs
> to block and/or redirect certain sites it doesn't like. (namely
> sites that offer on-line gambling that compete agains
Here's our page on IPv6 support:
http://www.charter.net/support/internet/ipv6/
TL;DR: Subscribers can only get ipv6 today via a 6rd tunnel.
Andrew White
Desk: 314.394-9594 | Cell: 314.452-4386
Systems Engineer III, DAS DNS group
Charter Communications
12405 Powerscourt Drive, St. Louis, MO
20 matches
Mail list logo
