Would someone from Sling.com and Netflix contact me off-list
I am running into issues with several of my home internet users being
blocked from your services.
Thanks,
Anthony Leto
Flying Man Studio, LLC
AS393941
anth...@fms.io
Hi, Brandon:
1) "So each RAN has no possibility of redundant connections? ..
": There is difference between "via one IPv4 public address" and
"wide bandwidth or multiple channels". The former is called "numbering
plan". The latter is part of "traffic engineering". The former defines
On Sun, 27 Mar 2022 at 18:31, Jon Lewis wrote:
> Is prepending used for any purpose other than TE? The point I think Joe
> was trying to make was prepending once or even a few times has uses.
> Prepending more than a few times is unlikely to accomplish anything a few
> prepends didn't get done.
Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways...
> On Mar 27, 2022, at 12:18 PM, Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
>
> I am baffled by why does it cause problems on this mailing list.
Are you aware that NANOG is not an IETF list? What would you guess might be the
topic of a list
Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways...
> On Mar 27, 2022, at 12:18 PM, Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
>
> Honestly, I am still trying to figure out what is the "required" etiquette,
> since what I have received were mostly "complaints" not constructive
> "instructions"
Hi, Randy:
1) " ... does not mean it is trivial to get it done on *billions* of
device. ... ": It looks that your mind is focused on upgrading
existing IoTs. They are not to be perturbed according to the initial and
short term EzIP deployment plans, because it basically is following
On Sat, Mar 26, 2022, 21:42 John Gilmore wrote:
>
> Today Google is documenting to its cloud customers that they should use
> 240/4 for internal networks. (Read draft-schoen-intarea-unicast-240 for
> the citation.) We have received inquiries from two other huge Internet
> companies, which are
According to james.cut...@consultant.com :
>> which, in general, requires provider change and renumbering
>> of globally unique addresses, unless you own /24.
>
>Moot since we are not discussing office moves. However, renumbering to global
>IPv6 addressing allows easy coexistence with the global
> On Mar 27, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Masataka Ohta
> wrote:
>
> james.cut...@consultant.com wrote:
>
> > I have yet to find an economical way to manage a business merger
> > involving two large rfc1918 networks where end to end peering is
> > required and which partially or fully overlap.
>
> As
Hi, Justin:
1) " denying that anyone is being stopped from */working on/*
IPv4, I'm referring to users being able to */communicate via /*IPv4.
": The two topics are quite different. It looks that we may have some
language issues here. So, allow me to stop.
Regards,
Abe
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 at 17:32, Joe Provo wrote:
That said, prepending pretty much anything more than your current view
of the Internet's diameter in ASNs is useless in practice.
That is one way of viewing it. But prepending can also be
Abe:
To your first point about denying that anyone is being stopped from working
on IPv4, I'm referring to users being able to communicate via IPv4. I have
seen no evidence of that.
I'm not familiar with the process of submitting ideas to IETF, so I'll
leave that for others who are more
On 27 March 2022 15:53:25 Brandon Butterworth wrote:
On Sun Mar 27, 2022 at 12:31:48AM -0400, Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
EzIP proposes to deploy 240/4
address based RANs, each tethering off the current Internet via one IPv4
public address.
So each RAN has no possibility of redundant
On Sun Mar 27, 2022 at 12:31:48AM -0400, Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
> EzIP proposes to deploy 240/4
> address based RANs, each tethering off the current Internet via one IPv4
> public address.
So each RAN has no possibility of redundant connections? Nobody
of scale would accept such a limitation.
Bjørn Mork wrote on 27/03/2022 10:42:
Yes, for traditional mobile (i.e handsets) the picture is completely
different. Same view shows an average of 85% IPv6 on mobile access:
https://munin.fud.no/vg.no/www.vg.no/vg_ds_telenor_mobil.html
from the point of view of cgnat scaling, a more useful
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG writes:
> It comes from actual measurements in residential networks that already
> offer IPv6.
>
> In typical residential networks, a very high % of the traffic is
> Google/Youtube, Netflix, Facebook, CDNs, etc., which all are IPv6
> enabled.
I wonder about
james.cut...@consultant.com wrote:
> I have yet to find an economical way to manage a business merger
> involving two large rfc1918 networks where end to end peering is
> required and which partially or fully overlap.
As you mention "overlap", you should mean business merger implies
network and
17 matches
Mail list logo
