Re: Comcast Customer Owned Modem Firmware : WAS : Xfi Advances Security (comcast)

On 9/16/21 08:13, Tom Beecher wrote: Does Comcast actually allow customers who own their own modems full management of the modem firmware? As far as I have been aware since my time at Adelphia 20-odd years ago, that has never been allowed by provider; all users of a given model had the same

Re: Fastly Peering Contact?

Hi Bryan, On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 at 19:53, Bryan Holloway wrote: > Hey all ... looking for a Fastly (54113) peering contact that might be > able to get me in touch with the right folks to do stuff. I’ll follow up with you off-list. Kind regards, Job

Fastly Peering Contact?

Hey all ... looking for a Fastly (54113) peering contact that might be able to get me in touch with the right folks to do stuff. E-mails to the 'policy' peeringdb contact don't seem to be getting through. Thanks! - bryan

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

John Curran wrote: If by "design choices" you mean the tradeoffs accepted in selecting a particular candidate protocol and declaring victory, then I’d strongly disagree. What actually happened is that SIP was chosen but modified by IPng directorates to pretend, for political purposes, IPng

Webinar TODAY + VIDEO - Ep.1 "Internet Innovators" + more

*️ Webinar TODAYJoin us for a Fireside Chat w/ CENIC Nick Plunkett * *Date + Time:* September 16, 11am - 1pm PST / 2pm - 4pm EST *Agenda: *Join us for a fireside chat discussion. We will talk about several topics including: - The path taken to a tech career - What is CENIC -

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

Baldur Norddahl wrote: >> But in fact with local number portability, you cannot rely >>> >>> You are confusing number portability and call forwarding > I am not confusing anything. Nobody said anything about number > portability in the above

Comcast Customer Owned Modem Firmware : WAS : Xfi Advances Security (comcast)

Jason- I have a sidebar question here. I came across the AQM paper you and others recently published. ( https://arxiv.org/pdf/2107.13968.pdf ) In that paper, the following is stated : When a customer purchases their own cable modem, they are responsible for > administering it, updating the

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

On 16 Sep 2021, at 8:58 AM, Eliot Lear wrote: > > John you were not the "sole network operator" on the directorate.[1] > https://www.sobco.com/ipng/directorate.minutes/bigten.5.19.94 > Eliot - You are referencing the minutes of

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

Owen DeLong wrote: You mean anywhere in the world. Calls to my number reach my cell phone no matter where I go. You are confusing number portability and call forwarding. Not exactly… He is confusing number portability and roaming. Wrong. Mobility including, but not limited to, roaming

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

> On Sep 16, 2021, at 06:35 , Jared Mauch wrote: > > > >> On Sep 16, 2021, at 9:23 AM, Ca By wrote: >> >> >> >> >> This has nothing to do with IPv6, of course, other than that modern phones >> use >> VoLTE so within a mobile carrier's network your voice call is probably >> handled >>

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

> On Sep 16, 2021, at 9:23 AM, Ca By wrote: > > > > > This has nothing to do with IPv6, of course, other than that modern phones use > VoLTE so within a mobile carrier's network your voice call is probably handled > using IPv6 transport. > > Good point John. > > A lot of folks missed

Re: Never push the Big Red Button

We had a new fire suppression guy testing our system for our computer room, and unbeknownst to him, one of the tests that he did triggered the EPO. One of my co-workers was in the room, which had about 20 racks of equipment, and he told me afterwards that for a quick second he thought he died. He

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

> > > > > This has nothing to do with IPv6, of course, other than that modern phones > use > VoLTE so within a mobile carrier's network your voice call is probably > handled > using IPv6 transport. > > Good point John. A lot of folks missed that ipv6 absorbed the scale growth in mobile, and

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

John you were not the "sole network operator" on the directorate.[1]  And I'm not saying that there weren't arguments, but I am saying that nobody said, “wait for something better.” Rather, everyone was arguing for their preferred approach out of the ones I mentioned. Eliot [1]

Re: Never push the Big Red Button (New York City subway failure)

I once worked for a provider who had a company next door that ran a small datacenter of about a dozen or so racks.They had been sold and all of their infrastructure had been virtualized and moved to the new owner’s network. The last task of the local admin was to just get rid of

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

On 16 Sep 2021, at 5:46 AM, Eliot Lear wrote: > It's hard to argue that there was no transition plan. There were in fact at > least three transition plans for the selected approach (dual stack, 6to4, and > tunneling) some of which have been discarded along the way; while others came > to be

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

It's hard to argue that there was no transition plan.  There were in fact at least three transition plans for the selected approach (dual stack, 6to4, and tunneling) some of which have been discarded along the way; while others came to be based on operational experience.  Moreover, the only

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

On 2021-09-16, at 01:20, Michael Thomas wrote: > > So I'm beginning to think that the reason ipv6 didn't take off is one simple > thing: time. Well, actually, the reason was: Microsoft :-) (And time.) We entered into the current trajectory when we missed the window to get IPv6 into Windows

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

> On 20210916, at 11:15, John Curran wrote: > > On 14 Sep 2021, at 3:46 AM, Eliot Lear wrote: >> …. >> There is no evidence that any other design choices on the table at the time >> would have gotten us transitioned any faster, and a lot of evidence and >>

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

On 14 Sep 2021, at 3:46 AM, Eliot Lear wrote: > …. > There is no evidence that any other design choices on the table at the time > would have gotten us transitioned any faster, and a lot of evidence and > analysis that the exact opposite is more likely. Elliot - If by “design choices” you