Re: Speedtest.net not accessible in Chrome due to deceptive ads

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Antonio Querubin wrote: > Feedback: needs IPv6 connectivity and support. > Point well taken. The vast majority of M-Lab sites have IPv6 connectivity, and we have enabled it for NDT at times, but I believe there was a concern at one point

Re: Speedtest.net not accessible in Chrome due to deceptive ads

Thanks for the mention – for what it's worth, we are testing a more accessible interface for the web-based NDT test. Link: https://speed.measurementlab.net/#/ Definitely interested in feedback from the NANOG community. On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Ishmael Rufus wrote:

Re: Measuring the quality of Internet access

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Max Tulyev wrote: > But I can't figure out what SamKnows uses as the destination for tests? > As I understand the destination differs per measurement partnership, but in at least the United States a substantial portion of the infrastructure

Re: Softlayer / Blocking Cuba IP's ?

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: > So, out of the blue, after years and years of everything working, suddenly > emails flowing thru spam filtering service hosted on Softlayer Cloud, > totally blocked any / all emails from Cuba from coming thru...

Re: Softlayer / Blocking Cuba IP's ?

Being as Softlayer is owned by IBM and headquartered in Virginia, they are pretty bound by U.S. sanctions policy, although this is obviously overcompliance. Essentially if there was to be a prohibited customer and a threat of enforcement, they want to be able to say they took extreme steps to

Re: Binge On! - And So This is Net Neutrality?

This thread seems to have run its course, but it was an interesting conversation, so I wanted to flag that the Open Technology Institute is running what seems to be a fairly balanced panel on the issue in D.C. next week. Might be worth asking if there's remote participation.

Re: content regulation, was Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality

On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 8:32 AM, John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote: With the legal content rule, I expect some bottom feeding bulk mailers to sue claiming that their CAN SPAM compliant spam is legal, therefore the providers can't block it. How would this legal environment be any different

Re: Owning a name

://www.securityweek.com/country-specific-web-domains-cant-be-seized-icann Court Documents: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/icann-various-2014-07-30-en On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Mark Rudholm m...@rudholm.com wrote: On 06/26/2014 10:14 PM, Collin Anderson wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:00 PM, John

Re: Net Neutrality...

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 6:57 PM, Doug Barton do...@dougbarton.us wrote: Errr, I didn't see anything about any LTG candidates in that piece, what did I miss? I'm also curious about what it is that you think is misstated or overblown in that piece that would lead you to believe that it's a hit

Re: Owning a name

On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 7:50 AM, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote: Yes. ccTLDs are treated as national sovereign resources. By whom and where? Regardless, there are 'State Sponsors of Terrorism'-related amendments to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act that come into play here. --

Re: Owning a name

As best as I and others have been able to discern, the order in question is a subpoena to ICANN pertaining to contracts, financial information and communications with the Iranian government over their names and addresses. The claims of granted control appear to be inaccurate -- all of the

Re: Owning a name

It might also interest the list that every couple of years ICANN actually has to apply to the Department of Treasury's OFAC in order to obtain a license to do business with Iranian parties. On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Collin Anderson col...@averysmallbird.com wrote: As best as I

Re: Owning a name

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:00 PM, John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote: I've been looking for the case in PACER, and don't see anything filed this year against ICANN so the case doesn't even exist. Seth Charles Ben HAIM, et al., Plaintiffs, v. The ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN, et al., Defendants.

Re: Sudan disconnected from the Internet

My recollection is that Renesys classified Sudan as a country vulnerable to disconnection due to low diversification of international transit; the old authoritarian preference on monopolizing the gateways has its advantages. I have been monitoring responsive hosts using ZMap every 15 minutes or so