Can someone from Gmail security contact me off list.
Pardon the interruption
EKG
> On Jun 19, 2018, at 11:55 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
>
> On 6/19/18 8:48 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>> MikroTik is getting there but most people are just not enabling it either.
>
>
> RouterOS still has "will not fix" IPv6 bugs, so that doesn't help shops
> dependent on Mikrotik want to move
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 7:56 PM Seth Mattinen wrote:
>
> On 6/19/18 8:48 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> > MikroTik is getting there but most people are just not enabling it either.
>
>
> RouterOS still has "will not fix" IPv6 bugs, so that doesn't help shops
> dependent on Mikrotik want to move forward
On 6/19/18 8:48 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
MikroTik is getting there but most people are just not enabling it either.
RouterOS still has "will not fix" IPv6 bugs, so that doesn't help shops
dependent on Mikrotik want to move forward with deploying it.
> On Jun 11, 2018, at 8:07 PM, Job Snijders wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 05:01:24PM -0700, Ca By wrote:
>>> I posit that the more miles a packet has to travel, the more likely
>>> it is to be an IPv4 packet.
>>
>> Related. The more miles the traffic travels the more likely it is the
>>
> On Jun 19, 2018, at 8:03 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
>>
>> On 20 Jun 2018, at 4:16 am, Wes George wrote:
>>
>> On 6/18/18 7:34 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>>
>>> If a ASN is announcing 2002::/16 then they are are happy to get the
>>> traffic. It
>>> they don’t want it all they have to do is
I've always said that the fiber middle mile price themselves out of more
money. I want a fiber connection that will service a subdivision(20-50
households) with speeds up to 1gbps, oh that's $2k/mo. The problem is that
we want a fiber connection for 10 or 20 subdivisions, oh, that's 2k per,
but
Although the FB link is vague but argument itself is true. We just became
more intelligent in deploying IPV6. The same measurement if was done in less
than a decade for example would show that ipv4 is faster. The dual stack
implementation and the slowness introduced by Teredo Tunneling
There are solutions like that out there, but some people refuse to play in that
sandbox.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com
- Original Message -
From: "William Herrin"
To: "Lee Howard"
Cc:
I encourage you to look at operating a network outside of a datacenter or
corporate campus.
The wireless last hop is *NOT* the problem. A modern deployment in a small
village could put dozens of megabit/s to every house for $10k. The transit or
transport connections *ARE* the fiscal problem.
> On 20 Jun 2018, at 4:16 am, Wes George wrote:
>
> On 6/18/18 7:34 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
>> If a ASN is announcing 2002::/16 then they are are happy to get the traffic.
>> It
>> they don’t want it all they have to do is withdraw the prefix. It is not up
>> to
>> the rest of us to
> On 20 Jun 2018, at 6:59 am, Bryan Fields wrote:
>
> On 6/15/18 6:23 AM, Ong Beng Hui wrote:
>> With every operators looking at high quality HD video stream, anyone
>> feeling the impact for WC 2018 yet ?
>
> I took and uber today, the driver was streaming a match on his phone in the
>
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 12:09 PM, wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:33:50 -0400, William Herrin said:
>
>> The innovation I'd like to see is a multi-level streaming cache.
>> Here's the basic idea:
>>
>> Define a network protocol such as "mlcache"
>>
>>
On 6/15/18 6:23 AM, Ong Beng Hui wrote:
> With every operators looking at high quality HD video stream, anyone
> feeling the impact for WC 2018 yet ?
I took and uber today, the driver was streaming a match on his phone in the
suction cup mount.
Hands free, so it's technically legal...
--
Bryan
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 3:16 PM Luke Guillory
wrote:
> Seeing that it seems I’m misunderstanding things, so I went grab a meter
> and checked what was leaving. Both of the 100g SFPs were only outputting on
> 1310, while the 40g showed each of the 4 lanes.
>
> Thanks much for checking - I didn't
On 06/19/2018 04:16 PM, Luke Guillory wrote:
> Seeing that it seems I’m misunderstanding things, so I went grab a meter and
> checked what was leaving. Both of the 100g SFPs were only outputting on 1310,
> while the 40g showed each of the 4 lanes.
IIRC, the lambda spacing for 100GBASE-LR4 is
Seeing that it seems I’m misunderstanding things, so I went grab a meter and
checked what was leaving. Both of the 100g SFPs were only outputting on 1310,
while the 40g showed each of the 4 lanes.
100GBASE-LR4 QSFP28 Transceiver Module (SMF, 1310nm, 10km, LC, DOM)
Optical Components DML
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 11:53 AM Luke Guillory
wrote:
> They still leave the transceiver as a single 1310, the lanes color isn't
> ever expose since the mux takes place within the transceiver. When I looked
> into this for 40g and 100g I found no way to passively do it.
>
Luke,
Can you link a
On 6/18/18 7:34 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> If a ASN is announcing 2002::/16 then they are are happy to get the traffic.
> It
> they don’t want it all they have to do is withdraw the prefix. It is not up
> to
> the rest of us to second guess their decision to keep providing support.
WG] I don't
On 06/19/2018 12:41 PM, Lewis,Mitchell T. wrote:
Let me clarify a bit-I understand that 40GBase-LR4 uses 4 10g
wavelengths(lanes) which typically are:
1264.5- 1277.5 nm
1284.5–1297.5 nm
1304.5–1317.5 nm
1324.5–1337.5 nm
My question is are there any vendors that make optics which 4
It is a bummer, if 40/100g optics existed that used 1550 or some other color
than those could be muxed onto same fiber pair as 1310 optic (The method for
passively doing that extraneous to this conversation.
Regards,
Mitchell T. Lewis
[ mailto:mle...@techcompute.net |
No, though the lane colors are irrelevant since we only care about the final
output color. Why the lanes can’t be muxed into another output color I’m not
sure, I can only find specs listed for the lanes but nothing for the final mux
leaving the transceiver.
Luke Guillory
Vice President –
So you weren't able to find anyone that uses different lane colors?(As an
example 1550). I am not looking to mux alongside 10g waves, I am just looking
to put 3 or 4 on a single fiber pair.
Regards,
Mitchell T. Lewis
[ mailto:mle...@techcompute.net | mle...@techcompute.net ]
[
They still leave the transceiver as a single 1310, the lanes color isn't ever
expose since the mux takes place within the transceiver. When I looked into
this for 40g and 100g I found no way to passively do it.
Luke Guillory
Vice President – Technology and Innovation
Tel:985.536.1212
Job Snijders wrote on 18/06/2018 22:08:
Is there still really any legit reason left to accept, or propagate,
2002::/16 on EBGP sessions in the DFZ?
Out of curiosity, I ran a some atlas probe ping tests earlier today to
both a 6to4 test host and a separate control host with good quality v6
Let me clarify a bit-I understand that 40GBase-LR4 uses 4 10g
wavelengths(lanes) which typically are:
1264.5- 1277.5 nm
1284.5–1297.5 nm
1304.5–1317.5 nm
1324.5–1337.5 nm
My question is are there any vendors that make optics which 4
wavelengths(lanes) are something other than those
I believe the 40g and 100g optics are already muxing 4 channels within the
transceiver before outputting it to 1310.
https://community.fs.com/blog/40gbase-lr4-qsfp-transceiver-links-cwdm-and-psm.html
Luke Guillory
Vice President – Technology and Innovation
Tel:985.536.1212
Fax:
> Does anyone know if any Single Mode QSFPs exist on the market that use
> wavelengths other than 1310nm (either self tunable or factory tuned)?
> I am looking to put more than one 40gb link on a fiber pair similar to using
> DWDM OADMs for 1g & 10g but can't seem to find any qsfp optics that
QSFPs generally output 4 lanes of traffic. Either 4 channels at 10G or 4
channels at 25G. So unless you find an optic that can do single-channel
OTN at 100G, you’re probably going to have a hard time plugging them into a
DWDM shelf.
at 12:27 PM, Lewis,Mitchell T. wrote:
Does anyone
You're gonna need to do something like:
https://www.packetlight.com/innovations/40g-connectivity
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Lewis,Mitchell T. <
ml-na...@techcompute.net> wrote:
> Does anyone know if any Single Mode QSFPs exist on the market that use
> wavelengths other than 1310nm
Does anyone know if any Single Mode QSFPs exist on the market that use
wavelengths other than 1310nm (either self tunable or factory tuned)? I am
looking to put more than one 40gb link on a fiber pair similar to using DWDM
OADMs for 1g & 10g but can't seem to find any qsfp optics that don't use
On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:33:50 -0400, William Herrin said:
> The innovation I'd like to see is a multi-level streaming cache.
> Here's the basic idea:
>
> Define a network protocol such as "mlcache"
>
> mlcache://data.netflix.com/starwars/chunk12345 is a chunk of some
> video that netflix has. It's
Netflix is not supposed to be cacheable by third parties for legal reasons
that have absolutely nothing to do with routing.
Similar with most streaming services including stupid geolocation usage.
If you have sufficient eyeballs, Netflix will work with you to get a local cache
set up using their
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Lee Howard wrote:
> On 06/17/2018 02:53 PM, Brad wrote:
>> While I agree there are unintended consequences every time advancements
>> are made in relation to the security and stability of the Internet- I
>> disagree we should be rejecting their implementations.
I’m confused.
People are using last hop (wireless) arguments against HTTPS Everywhere; that’s
the part that requires full bandwidth either way (as your non-HTTPS cache is
upstream somewhere). The fiber links that are physically fixed and can handle
in many cases better lasers, are the ongoing
On 06/17/2018 02:53 PM, Brad wrote:
While I agree there are unintended consequences every time advancements are
made in relation to the security and stability of the Internet- I disagree we
should be rejecting their implementations. Instead, we should innovate further.
I look forward to
On Sat, Jun 16, 2018, at 22:07, Keith Medcalf wrote:
>
> People stream HD Video in the Water Closet? I don't think my 80" HDTV
> would fit in there!
I don't think they do that, but they are more and more to receive regular TV
via OTT STBs. And sport events, which attract viewers, are better
Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> There is also the problem noted by Wes George with 6to4 being used in
> DNS amplification, which may be interesting..
>
> http://iepg.org/2018-03-18-ietf101/wes.pdf
I configure my DNS servers with a long-ish list of bogon addresses. For
v6, the list includes Teredo and
* ma...@isc.org (Mark Andrews) [Tue 19 Jun 2018, 01:35 CEST]:
If you filter 2002::/16 then you are performing a denial-of-service
attack on the few sites that are still using it DELIBERATELY.
Find me one site with a competent admin that deliberately publishes
2002::/16 in DNS.
None of the
On 6/18/18 6:18 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> I don’t believe most providers are intending to offer 6to4 as a global
> service. Even the large providers (eg: Comcast) seem to have disabled it ~4+
> years ago. While I know there’s people on the internet that like to hang on
> to legacy things,
40 matches
Mail list logo
