Texas doesn't generally experience this type of extreme cold. The power grids
are being overload due to people using their electric heat or electric portable
heaters.
From: NANOG on behalf of
Rod Beck
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 7:09 AM
To: Robert Jacobs
Not an official club, but the unofficial club is full of members including
myself unfortunately...little you can do except consider DDoS mitigation
service if it continues.
It is a criminal activity, so you can report the attack to the FBI...they can't
do much to be honest, but at the very
They are advertising one of /22 right now as well,
Bret
On 04/02/2014 04:21 PM, Bryan Tong wrote:
They have advertised all of ours now.
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Bob Evans b...@fiberinternetcenter.comwrote:
Yes, I too have alerts for some of our prefixes from the same offending
On 12/27/2013 05:59 AM, Martin Hotze wrote:
On 27/12/2013, at 10:13 pm, Martin Hotze m.ho...@hotze.com wrote:
Thanks,
estimated traffic levels are at about half a gig, but at least 50 megs
of UDP (VoIP) in both directions.
one thing is that I haven't found a solution for redundant power
Sort of like saying why haven't we changed from RJ-48's for phones...old
habits die hard I guess! For the most part the RJ-45 connector is pretty
sturdy...remember those silly dongle cables that were used for pc-card
Ethernet adapters in laptops...those things would last about a month
before
Anyone seeing their customers having problems with IPSec tunnels? Its a
strange problem where the customer can ping the other end, but are
having trouble keeping the IPSec tunnels active. I was able to
preference some of our customer routes out of another BGP edge router
which solved their
On 07/10/2012 03:32 AM, goe...@anime.net wrote:
On Mon, 9 Jul 2012, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
William Herrin wrote:
This is, incidentally, is a detail I'd love for one of the candidates
to offer in response to that question. Bonus points if you discuss MSS
clamping and RFC 4821.
The less precise
On 04/10/2012 12:31 AM, Steven King wrote:
Hello All,
I am tasked with replacing an old linux router setup with Juniper gear
in the near future. Though I am a Cisco guy myself.
Does anyone know of any older cheap Juniper gear I might find on Ebay so
that I may build a home lab without going
On 01/11/2012 04:38 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
And for the record, I've been quite happy with E-Sol; as long as Knology
plays no games with the staff, I don't expect any problems.
Cheers,
-- jra
It's extremely important you let the right people in Knology know that.
Bret
On 01/10/2012 12:31 PM, Patrick Giagnocavo wrote:
Expect all the local guys you dealt with to be gone in 6 months.
--Patrick
It's unfortunate just how true this will be.
Bret
Couldn't agree more, it's unfortunate that so many users take them as
gospel!
On 12/23/2011 04:23 AM, Leigh Porter wrote:
They are completely unreliable and not to be trusted except for an occasional
general indication of speed.
Is http://cyclops.cs.ucla.edu/ still working? I don't seem to received
emails from them anymore when we stop announcing to one of our upstream
providers. On the other hand http://bgpmon.net/ does send me emails when
an announcement disappears from an upstream, although it's usually a day
On 11/01/2011 05:03 AM, Mike Reed wrote:
Is there a common policy on rendering vendor-supplied CPEs unusable?
Yes if they are old.
As a network operator to residential users, would you notify any
potentially affected users before making such a change?
Any responsible provider would make sure
Every cell tower is different, every region is different, good
performance in one region on one carrier, maybe the exact opposite in
another region on that same carrier. That's quite a bit of data
(assuming 1-2mbps...not sure what digit megs are) you're trying push
through a cell network
On 09/14/2011 07:58 AM, Brian Raaen wrote:
Nice, I didn't see that. Then I guess whoever set up this site was a shill for
Cisco, I just love how instead of focusing on developing better products, that
they are more about marketing now.
---
Brian Raaen
Network Architect
Cisco has always
On 06/20/2011 08:13 AM, Steve Richardson wrote:
What I'd like to know is whether there is a
legitimate use for so many addresses in discontiguous networks besides
spam? I am trying my best to give them the benefit of the doubt here,
because they do work directly with Spamhaus to not be listed
Why would Microsoft need this many IP's? I could see the benefiting
service providers much more.
On 03/24/2011 09:27 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
Jay Nakamurazeusda...@gmail.com wrote:
666,624 is kind of odd number, isn't it? That comes out to a
/13,/15,/19,/21 and a /22.
From the court
On 02/28/2011 01:17 PM, Leigh Porter wrote:
VoIP at the last mile is just too niche at the moment. It's for people on this
list, not my mother.
--
Leigh
Baloney...if that was the case, then all these ILEC's wouldn't be
whining about POT's lines decreasing exponentially year over year!
On 02/22/2011 12:23 PM, Hammer wrote:
As Max stated, you can set triggers based on thresholds that are monitered
via multiple methods in Cisco IOS. That way you could force the route down
dynamically. There's always a risk when letting the machines do the thinking
but this would help in
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Dylan Ebnerdylan.eb...@crlmed.com wrote:
My company has about 2 dozen Comcast business cable accounts at satellite offices around
the Midwest. We are looking at adding an additional ISP to the mix and we are thinking of
purchasing an Ethernet circuit from
On 12/20/2010 06:55 AM, Jeff Wheeler wrote:
What no one has mentioned thus far is that CLECs really are able to
install their own facilities to homes and businesses if they decide
that is a good way to invest their finite resources.
Yes and no, we tried that way back when but found out that
On 12/16/2010 06:07 PM, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 13:34:38 -0800 (PST)
andrew.wallaceandrew.wall...@rocketmail.com wrote:
Anyone having issue with Facebook?
Always have but that's just me.
Comcast must have planned this so that we would flood the list with
On 12/10/2010 10:01 AM, Dylan Ebner wrote:
3. You cannot trust the second isp to advertise the SWIP block correctly if
they are not a tier 1. Even though they may advertise it for you to their
upstream, they don't always have the appropriate procedures in place to get the
LOAs to the upstream
On 12/04/2010 06:03 PM, Ken Gilmour wrote:
Now Sarah Palin is suggesting Wikileaks are terrorists and should be taken
offline with technical capabilities
http://www.golem.de/1012/79848.html
or for anyone who can't speak German:
On 11/30/2010 07:59 AM, Sean Donelan wrote:
Or why don't you build a network to places that Comcast peers at; and
bypass L3 completely and negotiate a peering relationship directly
with Comcast?
We tried Comcast wouldn't peer with us because they considered us a
compeititor.
Seriously
On 11/29/2010 07:55 PM, Ren Provo wrote:
http://blog.comcast.com/2010/11/comcast-comments-on-level-3.html
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Dave CROCKERd...@dcrocker.net wrote:
Okay's let's say L3 gives in to Comcast and pays them. L3 then turns
around and charges us (providers) more to
Iperf can be used to measure jitter and delay as well as simulate a
quasi VoIP call. You can also use mtr under Linux which provides jitter
and delay measurements from one point to another point. A g.729 call
(lower quality) takes about ~40kbps and a g.711 (high quality) used
about ~100Kbps of
Most VoIP solutions are RTP whether internal or via SIP solution from a
service provider.
On 11/22/2010 10:04 AM, Kasper Adel wrote:
Sorry i forgot to add more detail.
We are not looking for IP Telephony type of voice but RTP from Media
Gateways.
Cheers,
Kim
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 4:59 PM,
if measuring what they have or generating traffic and
measuring it is the same thing. what do u think?
thanks,
Kim
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Bret Clark bcl...@spectraaccess.com
mailto:bcl...@spectraaccess.com wrote:
Iperf can be used to measure jitter and delay as well as simulate
On 10/24/2010 12:29 PM, Brandon Kim wrote:
I guess what I'm trying to understand is, is having your own NTP server just a
luxury?
I personally would like to have my own, I just need to pitch its advantages to
my company. Unless everyone here on the NANOG group
clearly spells it out to me that
RF in general or you don't want to use wi-fi which is understandable?
For our telcom back-haul needs which needs to meet carrier class grade
we have found Ceregon, Redline, and Dragonwave to work flawlessly.
Redline and Dragon are PoE, Ceregon use coax. Unfortunately we don't use
laser because
On 10/12/2010 12:46 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
I kinda-sortta feel like many others who have posted here. This is a mail
thing, not netops. Grow a pair and post under your own name. Is it even
on-topic for NANOG? Etc.
I even started typing a message to the effect of: even though I
I have to agree on this as well. I can understand when a service
provider is having problems and people questioning it since that can
affect many of us who depend on backbone connections, but sites like
facebook and twitter being down should not be posted here but on the
On 10/06/2010 06:08 PM, Tammy A. Wisdom wrote:
This thread proves too me yet again that nanog is the internets equivalent of a
giant panty raid. This isn't the outages list I am rather annoyed that we
must discuss junk social media sites such as facebook. Just because you are
panicing does
I was told every 48 hours when I recently dealt with Level3 on a similar
thing about a month ago.
On 10/05/2010 12:50 PM, Paul Stewart wrote:
Normally it's done every night (overnight)... that's been our experience...
Paul
-Original Message-
From: Florin Veres
We just had to get another new block, took about 5 days.
On 10/02/2010 03:17 AM, Imran Moin wrote:
Hello All,
I was wondering how long it is taking ARIN these days to assign new IP block
and AS Number. We are a new startup and looking to build our network over
the next few months.
Thanks,
If the buildings are a 100ft apart, can't you just go with a wireless
connection? Speeds would probably be better and no monthly fee!
On 09/30/2010 06:08 PM, Robert Johnson wrote:
If your sales contact don't know what an alarm circuit is, go find
ATT's tariff filed with your state's PUC. It
We use a mix of software and hardware based routers, have found little
difference between the two platforms in terms of performance and
stability. Our software base routers are serving a couple 100Mbps
upstream links running on some HP Proliants with dual PS and dual HD's
that we picked up on
Whoa...there is clairvoyance for you...that article is from
yesterday...wonder if the author provides stock tips???
Facebook down...where is the Like button?
On 9/23/2010 3:46 PM, Steven Bellovin wrote:
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/09/22/facebook-goes-down-for-some-users/
We've been noticing high latency for some time with Verizon (UUNET)
connections at least through the NY area.
On 09/08/2010 10:34 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
Anyone notice any issues with Cogent?
Internet Health Report showing some high latency to Verizon and a couple of
other carriers.
That host is not working for us either, but looks more like a host
problem rather then BGP problem. I have no problem getting to other
IP's in that range like 216.113.132.21 which is probably it's default
gateway.
On 08/30/2010 05:22 AM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
We have problems reaching
Agree...when you rate limit verse shaping you can actually cause more
traffic because the packets need to be retransmitted to deal with those
that got dropped.
On 07/08/2010 06:43 PM, Murphy, Jay, DOH wrote:
traffic-shape rate 7500 9000 9000 1000 for example. Your rate limit
On 07/02/2010 08:28 AM, William Hamilton wrote:
On 02/07/2010 13:20, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
At the very bottom of each message, you will see
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
If you go there, you can unsubscribe.
Regards
Marshall
Was it really necessary to quote
google (or any search engine) is your friend.
http://www.google.com/search?aq=fsourceid=chromeie=UTF-8q=mtu+1492+dsl
http://www.google.com/search?aq=fsourceid=chromeie=UTF-8q=mtu+1492+dsl
On 06/17/2010 08:19 AM, Deric Kwok wrote:
Hi
My DSL company asks me to set the modem 146 2 and my old
On 06/17/2010 09:46 AM, Dennis Burgess wrote:
Lots of my clients (Wireless ISPs) have looked into deploying it,
however the costs are well over 20 times the cost of a unlicensed system
per access point.
Yeah...that is really the crux of the problem. Every WISP I know would
switch over in a
Not any different then when Bob Metcalf predicted the Internet would
melt down in the late 1990's and looked like a fool when it never
happened! Even though I don't disagree IP4 address are rapidly getting
used up, most of us on this list have the know how and tenacity to
work through current
On 05/21/2010 08:23 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
I will refrain from making any smart-ass comments about Mikrotik and BGP,
but no: there is no reason whatever that you can't take your internet feeds
from different locations, so long as you have a good quality interior
network link between those two
Uhmokay...but why does anyone prepend their ASN that much? Are you
saying the Mikrotik did that on purpose?
Adrian M wrote:
MikroTik strikes again ?
%BGP-6-ASPATH: Long AS path ... 39412 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625
39625 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625
39625
Tim Warnock wrote:
Adrian M wrote:
MikroTik strikes again ?
%BGP-6-ASPATH: Long AS path ... 39412 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625
39625 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625 39625
From: Bret Clark [mailto:bcl...@spectraaccess.com]
Sent: Monday, 3 May 2010 8:26 PM
All the new OS's (IE Windows7) automatically adjust TCP window size.
Personally I've never found those website speed test to be that accurate
on fast connections (over 15Mbps full duplex). The only way to really
confirm bandwidth is by running IPERF.
Robert Glover wrote:
Adjust your TCP
Peter Boone wrote:
I purchased 2x Ubiquity Bullet2's (2.4 GHz) and utilized our existing
antennas. It has been working extremely well, pushing a stable 54 Mbps over
the link without issue. Signal strength is consistently -40 dBm +/- 2 dBm,
from about -80 dBm before! Total cost included 2x
Steve Meuse wrote:
I'm wondering if others are seeing the same behavior, if it's
market-dependant, or if I'm just imagining things. I'm working on building
new infrastructure and my current thoughts are to minimize my TDM
footprint. It would be useful to get a better feel if this is an
Joe Greco wrote:
I've gotten strange stuff each time I've tried their tests. I
particularly like the factor of 10 difference in upload speeds.
... JG
Yeah...these test are algorithm based and rarely accurate! On our
100Mbps Internet connection (which I know handles 100Mbps) best I could
OPSF (in this scenario) is easier to set up then BGP...but check out
http://www.openmaniak.com/quagga.php.
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 10:46 -0600, Alex Thurlow wrote:
I have to say that this looks like a nice solution to me, and I've
definitely had many people point me to OSPF. One problem is
Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 02:41:51PM -0600, Lorell Hathcock wrote:
1 - AP network (need suggestion for cost effective gig-e switch)
2 to 4 - back haul ports
1 - internet port (on one out of every 4 towers or so) (and most likely
fiber instead of copper)
Does anyone
Good point...so if the cut is in the middle of nowhere without easy
access...then how the hell did it get cut? Malicious?
Matt Simmons wrote:
And in an open desert, back hoes can smell fiber from miles away.
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Bill Stewart [1]nonobvi...@gmail.com wrote:
On
denyhost is one of my favorite apps. http://denyhosts.sourceforge.net/
James Hess wrote:
When you really want to be safe -- even one illicit access attempt may
be enough to gain access.fail2ban or ssh rate limiting do not
stop distributed brute force attacks.
The best action depends on a
Won't say I'm an expert with TC, but anytime I see packet loss on an
interface I always check the interface itself...10% packet loss is
pretty much what you would get if there was a duplex problem. I always
try to hard set my interfaces on both the Linux machines and Switches.
Bret
Chris
If the customer insist on using their domain, then you would have to
have the customer setup an SPF record within their domain that points to
your email server IP blocks. I would just tell your customer that if
they insist of using their FROM domain, to help get past someone's
spamming system
For sure...everyone remembers the Bill Gates Borg picture, but at this
rate, Google will soon become the new poster child for that picture (or
something comparable).
Bret
On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 10:48 -0800, Seth Mattinen wrote:
No kiddng. I must be the only one who is getting tired of
Brielle Bruns wrote:
Why is it that people start cracking out at the thought of Google
offering a free service that people might have an actual use for and
that is completely optional and used by choice?
It's a free service people! No different then Hotmail, or Yahoo Mail,
or Gmail, AOL
Long time ago I assited on consultation for this device. Probably
provide what you are looking for:
http://www.zhone.com/products/ETHX-2200-DS3/
On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 07:31 -0500, Jason Rowley wrote:
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Brad Fleming bdflem...@kanren.net
wrote:
Hello all,
My
Doesn't really say much, but blacklisted would certainly cause those
problems rather then just having server problems
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Earthlink-Suffers-From-Major-Email-Outage-105607
On Mon, 2009-11-23 at 18:29 +, chaim.rie...@gmail.com wrote:
Same here
Many bounces,
Don't recall if it was mention but we use a nice little app called MyPMS
http://lvoware.com/. Put it on an internal system and then people have
to access via a VPN connection to browse into it. That way if a person
is no longer with the company, then their VPN has been turned off and
they don't
Yeah...because when the economy is sucking wind why not raise fees to
the consumer?!?!
Want to get broadband out to people, then deal with duopolies that many
of the regions in the country have...such as Verizon Comcast! They are
the main barriers that cause grief in deployment, giving a chance
Cogent has been brought up several times over the last year. I suggest
searching http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/nanog/users/
Otherwise you've just reopened a can of worms again.
On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 15:04 +, a...@baklawasecrets.com wrote:
Contemplating using Cogent
True, we usually find Linux based machines work better running IPerf
then Windows (at least out of the box) because of the TCP window
sizewell Windows XP at least, don't know about Vista or 7.
Jason Biel wrote:
Please take note with using iperf that you'll want to make sure the
We use [1]http://www.troubleticketexpress.com/ to do just that. While
it leans more towards being a customer support system, we've had no
problem using it as our internal provisioning/network maintenance
system too.
Basic, simple and ties into a SQL db.
Bret
Paul Stewart
BS to say the least...first the US Chamber of Commerce is not a
government organization. And even if there were what right does anyone
have to tread on Freedom of Speech?!? Was there a court order?
I'd really be interested in know what strong arm tactic they used with HE.
William Allen
On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 09:40 +1100, Mark Andrews wrote:
Verizon's policy has been related to me that they will not accept
or
propogate any IPv6 route advertisements with prefix lengths longer
than
/32. Full stop. So that even includes those of us that have /48
PI
space from ARIN
How does this stuff ever make it to court??? Why is it an ISP is
responsible for policing it's customers? I'm constantly getting called
up from scammers trying to offering me bogus warranty insurance for cars
I don't own...does that mean I can sue Verizon because they are letting
scammers use
Cancel the circuit...I know most of the providers I've worked with have
a 90 satisfaction guarantee. Chances are if you cancel the circuit they
will mysteriously find a way to work with you.
Warren Bailey wrote:
Threaten to twitter about it. Worked for the guy on myth busters.. ;)
-
Justin Sharp wrote:
I didn't read through all of the replies to see if this was suggested,
apologies if it was.
http://www.solectek.com/products.php?prod=sw7kpage=feat
I implemented a PTP link at about 3 miles using these Solectek radios.
I get 40Mbps consistently with TCP traffic and
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 09:34 -0700, John van Oppen wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Tim Huffman [mailto:t...@bobbroadband.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 9:27 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Wireless bridge
The line of sight is all clear, no trees. Only one building along
John Levine wrote:
Not that I've ever seen. Nobody else has the breadth of data that
Spamhaus does.
I've been using it for ages and based on zero complaints, it's never
blocked anything that any of my users wanted.
R's,
John
I have to agree with this...I'm somewhat surprised to see some
I'm skeptical as to where this info came from since this seems nothing
more then nay-say? if people are going to make grandiose statements then
they should justify them with reputable evidence. I would be extremely
surprised if Cogent engineering isn't working on a IPv6 plan or doesn't
have one
While BGP can become a rather complex protocol to implement as a network
grows, basic BGP peering between two providers isn't really that
complex...probably talking 10 config lines at most (excluding
bogon/filtering). The first thing you want to make sure is that you're
upstream providers are
77 matches
Mail list logo
