Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

Good thing there are no windows at this “hypothetical” location :) > On Jan 16, 2024, at 1:51 AM, b...@theworld.com wrote: > >  > Something worth a thought is that as much as devices don't like being > too hot they also don't like to have their temperature change too > quickly. Parts can

Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block

On Mon, Jan 15, 2024, 3:08 PM Abraham Y. Chen wrote: > 1)Re: Ur. Pt. 1):The initial deployment of EzIP overlay is only > applying 240/4 to existing (IPv4 based) CG-NAT facility to become the > overlaying RAN, plus upgrading RG-NATs (Routing / Residential NATs) to > OpenWrt. So that none

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 at 08:51, wrote: > A rule of thumb is a few degrees per hour change but YMMV, depends on > the equipment. Sometimes manufacturer's specs include this. Is this common sense, or do you have reference to this, like paper showing at what temperature change at what rate occurs

Re: IPv6 Traffic Re: IPv6? Re: Where to Use 240/4 Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 at 21:08, Michael Thomas wrote: > An ipv4 free network would be nice, but is hardly needed. There will > always be a long tail of ipv4 and so what? You deal with it at your I mean Internet free DFZ, so that everyone is not forced to maintain two stacks at extra cost,

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

Something worth a thought is that as much as devices don't like being too hot they also don't like to have their temperature change too quickly. Parts can expand/shrink variably depending on their composition. A rule of thumb is a few degrees per hour change but YMMV, depends on the equipment.

Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block

On Mon, Jan 15, 2024, 1:21 PM Abraham Y. Chen wrote: > If I subscribe to IPv6, can I contact another similar subscriber to > communicate (voice and data) directly between two homes in private like the > dial-up modem operations in the PSTN? If so, is it available anywhere right > now? >

Re: [External] Re: Diversity in threading, Diversity of MUAs (was Re: How threading works

On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 12:37 AM Andy Smith wrote: > Over on a technical support list there are actually some prolific > old time posters asking for subject changes in sprawling threads > (and citing the list's FAQ…) but also gmail users asking for people > to *not* do that as it spawns new

Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block

It was always about using 240/4 as shared service provider space, just a roundabout way of doing it. You can call a horse a horse, or you can call it "an animal that pulls a wagon which carries people and items from A to B". At the end of the day, it's still a horse. Regards, Christopher Hawker

Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block

If I remember correctly, quite a few years ago, "EzIP" was something else entirely. I vaguely remember them talking about having some kind of extended IPv4 address or to use an extension header or something like that. It was something that would essentially require the entire Internet to be

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

Someone I talked to while on scene today said their area got to 130 and cooked two core routers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" To: "NANOG" Sent: Monday, January 15,

Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block

>From what I gather, "EzIP" is just a fancy name for repurposing the 240/4 address space as RFC6598 shared address space for service providers and adding another gateway into a network to make it look like a new technology, nothing more. It does absolutely nothing more than what is already

Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block

The reality is your whole concept for EzIP is so impractical and so unlikely to be implemented by any service provider with half a clue, that I’m not sure why I would even try to explain to you why a Radio Access Network is relevant to the Internet.  You obviously have decided you are smarter than

Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block

Hi, Sronan: 1) “Radio Access Network”:     Thanks for bringing this up. Being an RF engineer by training, I am aware of this terminology. However, how specific is its claimed applicable domain? 2)    I went to search on an acronym site and found a long list of expressions that

Re: Stealthy Overlay Network Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

If "EzIP" is about using 240/4 as CGNAT space, let's call it what it is, not rename something that already exists and attempt to claim it as a new idea. It is completely unnecessary to use 240/4 as CGNAT space. Here are a few reasons why: 1. There are 4,194,304 IPv4 addresses in a /10 prefix.

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

On Mon, 2024-01-15 at 08:08 -0600, Mike Hammett wrote: > Let's say that hypothetically, a datacenter you're in had a cooling > failure and escalated to an average of 120 degrees Major double-take there for this non-US reader, until I realised you just had to mean Fahrenheit. Regards, K. --

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 7:14 AM wrote: >> I’m more interested in how you lose six chillers all at once. >Extreme cold. If the transfer temperature is too low, they can reach a >state where the refrigerant liquifies too soon, damaging the compressor. >Regards, >Bill Herrin Our 70-ton Tranes here

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 7:14 AM wrote: > I’m more interested in how you lose six chillers all at once. Extreme cold. If the transfer temperature is too low, they can reach a state where the refrigerant liquifies too soon, damaging the compressor. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin

Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block

You most certainly can, it's called a VPN. One side initiates a connection to the other. ;) Regards, Christopher Hawker On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 at 07:21, Abraham Y. Chen wrote: > Hi, Forrest: > > 1)I have a question: > > If I subscribe to IPv6, can I contact another similar subscriber to

Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block

Please don’t use the term RAN, this acronym already has a very specific definition in the telecom/network space as “Radio Access Network.”ShaneOn Jan 15, 2024, at 5:12 PM, Abraham Y. Chen wrote: Hi, Forrest: 1)    Re: Ur. Pt. 1):    The initial

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 4:10 PM Jay Hennigan wrote: > On 1/15/24 10:37, Pennington, Scott wrote: > > yes but it has been -8 in Chicago plenty of times before this. > > Very interested in root cause... > > Absolutely. My point was that claiming "Global warming" isn't going to > fly as an

Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block

Hi, Forrest: 1)    Re: Ur. Pt. 1): The initial deployment of EzIP overlay is only applying 240/4 to existing (IPv4 based) CG-NAT facility to become the overlaying RAN, plus upgrading RG-NATs (Routing / Residential NATs) to OpenWrt. So that none of the on-premises IoTs will sense any changes.

Re: Vint Cerf Re: Backward Compatibility Re: IPv4 address block

Hi, Warren: 1)    "  not intended to be endorsement…":     Fully agreed. 2)    "Implying that it is is disingenuous…   ":     Again, I fully agree. 3)    Note that I only stated "It opened our eyes about what were the implications of EzIP ...   ". It was an education moment that was more

Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block

Hi, Forrest: 1)    I have a question:     If I subscribe to IPv6, can I contact another similar subscriber to communicate (voice and data) directly between two homes in private like the dial-up modem operations in the PSTN? If so, is it available anywhere right now? Regards, Abe

Re: Searching for technical contact at Aptum AS13768

I have good success with nsc.global@ The last email I’ve received from them was Dec 12, 2023, and they typically respond in two days or less. Tom > On Jan 15, 2024, at 11:49 AM, Eric Dugas via NANOG wrote: > > Hello, > > I'm searching for a technical contact, either Ops or Eng at

Searching for technical contact at Aptum AS13768

Hello, I'm searching for a technical contact, either Ops or Eng at Aptum AS13768 to remove stale route objects created by their NOC from IRR(s). Contacting their nsc.global@ group yielded no response at all. Thanks Eric

Re: Backward Compatibility Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

On 1/15/24 09:37, Abraham Y. Chen wrote: 2)    Allow me to share with you an almost parallel event in the PSTN, to illustrate how tough is to achieve the replacement of a working service, even under an environment with very strict backward compatibility disicpline:     A.    The Decadic

Re: IPv6 Traffic Re: IPv6? Re: Where to Use 240/4 Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

On 1/15/24 12:26 AM, Saku Ytti wrote: On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 at 10:05, jordi.palet--- via NANOG wrote: In actual customer deployments I see the same levels, even up to 85% of IPv6 traffic. It basically depends on the usage of the caches and the % of residential vs corporate customers. You

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

My sarcasm generator is clearly set incorrectly :) -mel > On Jan 15, 2024, at 10:33 AM, Jay Hennigan wrote: > > On 1/15/24 07:21, Mel Beckman wrote: >> Easy. Climate change. Lol! > > It was -8°F in Chicago yesterday. > On Jan 15, 2024, at 7:17 AM, sro...@ronan-online.com wrote: >>>

Re: IPv6 Traffic Re: IPv6? Re: Where to Use 240/4 Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

On 1/15/24 12:56 AM, jordi.palet--- via NANOG wrote: No, I’m not saying that. I’m saying "in actual deployments", which doesn’t mean that everyone is deploying, we are missing many ISPs, we are missing many enterprises. I don't think what's going on internally with enterprise needs to

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

On 1/15/24 10:37, Pennington, Scott wrote: yes but it has been -8 in Chicago plenty of times before this.  Very interested in root cause... Absolutely. My point was that claiming "Global warming" isn't going to fly as an excuse.

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

On 1/15/24 07:21, Mel Beckman wrote: Easy. Climate change. Lol! It was -8°F in Chicago yesterday. On Jan 15, 2024, at 7:17 AM, sro...@ronan-online.com wrote:  I’m more interested in how you lose six chillers all at once. -- Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net Network Engineering - CCIE #7880

Re: Backward Compatibility Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

Hi, Christopher" 1)    "  IPv6 is designed to replace IPv4.  ":     Correct. But, this is not like Ten Commandments that God gave to his children. Even such had not worked out in most cases. In real life, technical backward compatibility is the only known approach to achieve graceful

Re: Contact at GoDaddy domains

Sending a letter to their legal department has always worked to get any issue solved for us, that’s pretty much the only success we’ve ever had with escalations before we promptly move the domain as far away from them as possible.Sent from my iPhoneOn Jan 15, 2024, at 11:08, Greg Joosse -

Re: Stealthy Overlay Network Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

Hi, Christopher: 1)    " Hang on... So EzIP is now about using 240/4 as CGNAT space? Wait, I'm lost...   ":     Correct. This is one way to visualize the EzIP deployment. This configuration is so far the most concise manner to describe the the EzIP building block, RAN (Regional Area

Re: One Can't Have It Both Ways Re: Streamline the CG-NAT Re: EzIP Re: IPv4 address block

On 2024-01-13 04:03, Brett O'Hara wrote: They have no interest in trying new things or making new technology work without a solid financial reason and there is none for them implementing ipv6. When I left $DAYJOB-1 almost 2 years ago, they had just finished increasing fees on IPv4 blocks

Contact at GoDaddy domains

Hoping someone has a contact at GoDaddy (Domains) as I have a big client with a clientHold 30 day suspension and their support doesn't seem to know what this means. Have spend 7hrs and have got nowhere. Failing this, is it possible to transfer a domain with this status? Cheers, Greg --

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

Exactly. Perhaps they weren’t all online to begin with…On Jan 15, 2024, at 10:18 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:and none in the other two facilities you operate in that same building had any failures.-Mike HammettIntelligent Computing SolutionsMidwest Internet ExchangeThe Brothers WISPFrom:

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

Easy. Climate change. Lol! -mel On Jan 15, 2024, at 7:17 AM, sro...@ronan-online.com wrote:  I’m more interested in how you lose six chillers all at once. Shane On Jan 15, 2024, at 9:11 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:  Let's say that hypothetically, a datacenter you're in had a cooling failure

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

and none in the other two facilities you operate in that same building had any failures. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP - Original Message - From: sro...@ronan-online.com To: "Mike Hammett" Cc: "NANOG"

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

I’m more interested in how you lose six chillers all at once.ShaneOn Jan 15, 2024, at 9:11 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:Let's say that hypothetically, a datacenter you're in had a cooling failure and escalated to an average of 120 degrees before mitigations started having an effect. What are normal QA

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

Our Zayo circuit just came up 30 minutes ago and it routes through 350 E Cermak.  Chillers were all messed up.  No hypothetical there.  :-) It was down for over 16 hours! On 1/15/24 10:04 AM, Bryan Holloway wrote: I think we're beyond "hypothetical" at this point, Mike ... ;) On 1/15/24

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

I think we're beyond "hypothetical" at this point, Mike ... ;) On 1/15/24 15:49, Mike Hammett wrote: Coincidence indeed   ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 6:08 AM Mike Hammett wrote: > Let's say that hypothetically, a datacenter you're in had a cooling failure > and escalated to an average of 120 degrees before mitigations started > having an effect. What should be expected in the aftermath? Hi Mike, A decade or so ago I

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

Coincidence indeed ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP - Original Message - From: "Clayton Zekelman" To: "Mike Hammett" , "NANOG" Sent: Monday, January 15, 2024 8:23:37 AM Subject: Re: "Hypothetical"

Re: "Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

At 09:08 AM 2024-01-15, Mike Hammett wrote: Let's say that hypothetically, a datacenter you're in had a cooling failure and escalated to an average of 120 degrees before mitigations started having an effect. What are normal QA procedures on your behalf? What is the facility likely to be

"Hypothetical" Datacenter Overheating

Let's say that hypothetically, a datacenter you're in had a cooling failure and escalated to an average of 120 degrees before mitigations started having an effect. What are normal QA procedures on your behalf? What is the facility likely to be doing? What should be expected in the aftermath?

Re: Vint Cerf Re: Backward Compatibility Re: IPv4 address block

Hi, Tom: 1)    "  Vint told you the same thing other people have been telling you for years. You don't seem to name drop anyone else. Weird.   ":     As far as we are aware of, Vint was the first and only person who branded EzIP as an "overlay" network. Please identify who else said the

Re: IPv6 Traffic Re: IPv6? Re: Where to Use 240/4 Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

I strongly disagree that IPv6 is very much an afterthought. A perfect example is that in Australia, our largest mobile network provider Telstra, has completely moved to IPv6 single-stack on their mobile network for pre-paid and post-paid customers. Russell Langton made the announcement in

Re: IPv6 Traffic Re: IPv6? Re: Where to Use 240/4 Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 at 10:59, jordi.palet--- via NANOG wrote: > No, I’m not saying that. I’m saying "in actual deployments", which doesn’t > mean that everyone is deploying, we are missing many ISPs, we are missing > many enterprises. Because of low entropy of A-B pairs in bps volume, seeing

Re: IPv6 Traffic Re: IPv6? Re: Where to Use 240/4 Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

No, I’m not saying that. I’m saying "in actual deployments", which doesn’t mean that everyone is deploying, we are missing many ISPs, we are missing many enterprises. Saludos, Jordi @jordipalet > El 15 ene 2024, a las 9:26, Saku Ytti escribió: > > On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 at 10:05,

Re: IPv6 Traffic Re: IPv6? Re: Where to Use 240/4 Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 at 10:05, jordi.palet--- via NANOG wrote: > In actual customer deployments I see the same levels, even up to 85% of IPv6 > traffic. It basically depends on the usage of the caches and the % of > residential vs corporate customers. You think you are contributing to the IPv6

Re: IPv6 Traffic Re: IPv6? Re: Where to Use 240/4 Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

All those measurements are missing the amount of traffic in the caches located at the ISPs. For each download passing thru AMSIX, there are thousands of multiples of that download (videos, music, documents, static contents, OS updates, etc.) flowing to thousands of customers. In some cases is