Re: U.S. test of national alerts on Oct. 4 at 2:20pm EDT (1820 UTC)

It’s been absurd for a while now…Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways...On Oct 6, 2023, at 1:15 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 2:58 PM, Sean Donelan wrote: The Disability Advocacy Community has been extensively involved with CMAS/WEA

Re: Lossy cogent p2p experiences?

It was intended to detect congestion. The obvious response was in some way to pace the sender(s) so that it was alleviated. Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways... > On Sep 7, 2023, at 11:19 PM, Mark Tinka wrote: > >  > >> On 9/7/23 09:51, Saku Ytti wrote: >> >>

Re: Caveat emptor: avoid Inseego 5G products unless you still believe in classful routing

If they think classful IPv4 is the state of the art, I would not assume they have heard of IPv6.Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways...On Mar 28, 2023, at 12:45 PM, Matt Harris wrote:Matt Harris​VP OF INFRASTRUCTUREFollow us on 

Re: Alternative Re: ipv4/25s and above Re: 202211201009.AYC

> What's the group's current thought on emergence or prevalence of > IPv6-only hosts ? They aren’t needed; dual stack hosts will work just fine in a single stack network. When they’re needed, they will be normal but nobody will care.

Re: Jon Postel Re: 202210301538.AYC

Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways... > On Nov 2, 2022, at 5:50 PM, Donald Eastlake wrote: > > In the early years of the > NomCom, I believe there were a small number of cases of a 3 year term > but only for an AD who had already successfully served for 2 years.

Re: IoT - The end of the internet

> On Aug 9, 2022, at 8:06 PM, Mel Beckman wrote: > > Robert Metcalfe, InfoWorld columnist and the inventor of Ethernet, also in > 1995: > “I predict the Internet will soon go spectacularly supernova and in 1996 > catastrophically collapse.” In 1998 I invited Mr Metcalfe to address the

Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers

Sounds like a comment made on the FCC TAC in 1994: “there is no broadband market above 1 MBPS.” Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways... > On May 28, 2022, at 1:46 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > >  >> >> Saying most people don't need more than 25 Mbps is like saying 640k is >>

Re: Let's Focus on Moving Forward Re: V6 still not supported

Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways... > On Apr 2, 2022, at 5:57 AM, Abraham Y. Chen wrote: > > 1)" ... darknet ... ":I am not aware of this terminology. > Nonetheless, I believe that bringing in a not commonly known word into a > discussion like this is

Re: Let's Focus on Moving Forward Re: V6 still not supported Re: 202203261748.AYC

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

Re: Let's Focus on Moving Forward Re: V6 still not supported Re: 202203261748.AYC

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"

Re: "Permanent" DST

> On Mar 15, 2022, at 1:24 PM, Elmar K. Bins wrote: > > 2 - I like how american politics is capable of creating new problems; where > did this bill come from in the first place? And who's lobbying? According to the universal time law, the US is on Standard Time unless a state chooses

Re: "Permanent" DST

> On Mar 15, 2022, at 1:01 PM, Mel Beckman wrote: > > We already have this problem with Arizona, which never changes time for the > summer. Except for the Navajo Nation…

Re: Dropping support for the .ru top level domain

My viewpoint, and the reason I recommended against it, is that it gives Putin something he has wanted for a while, which is a Russia in which he is in control of information flows. We do for him what he has wanted for perhaps 20 years, and come out the bad guys - “the terrible west gut us

Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

On Mar 12, 2022, at 8:15 AM, Abraham Y. Chen wrote: > > 2)On the other hand, there was a recent APNIC blog that specifically > reminded us of a fairly formal request for re-designating the 240/4 netblock > back in 2008 (second grey background box). To me, this means whether to > change

Re: V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4, NetBlock))

> On Mar 11, 2022, at 8:39 AM, Joe Maimon wrote: > > Google's statistics... I'm not sure which of you I'm replying to. The comment was made on NANOG the other day that we should discount Google statistics because they have been promoting IPv6 for a decade. It's true that they have been doing

Re: Russia to disconnect from global Internet

Of course, Ukraine had asked ICANN and the Root Server Operators to disconnect. We declined, but it may be done for us. Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways... > On Mar 6, 2022, at 1:59 PM, Jared Brown wrote: > > Accidentally put the wrong link for the translation. > >

Re: Ukraine request yikes

China has worried that the root server operators would do such a thing to them, and I have argued that it is contrary to our published principles (RaSSAC055) and or practice. “We have never done so; what would that serve?” I have the same question here. Sent using a machine that autocorrects

Re: home router battery backup

> On Jan 12, 2022, at 10:37 AM, Aaron C. de Bruyn via NANOG > wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 10:18 AM Andy Ringsmuth wrote: > Given that most people barely even know what their home router is, I suspect > the percentage would be somewhere south of 1 percent. Outside of my home, I >

Re: IPv6 and CDN's

On Nov 27, 2021, at 7:39 PM, Masataka Ohta wrote: > > Mark Tinka wrote: > >>> On 11/27/21 17:07, Masataka Ohta wrote: >>> Because lengthy IPv6 addresses mean a lot more opex than IPv4. >> I disagree > > Try to type in raw IPv6 addresses. People are likely to use a technology originally

Re: IPv6 and CDN's

> On Oct 26, 2021, at 9:11 AM, David Conrad wrote: > > There has been some effort to create a governance model for the root server > system (see > https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rssac-037-15jun18-en.pdf) but I > believe it has gotten bogged down in the question of “what do you

Re: Redeploying most of 127/8, 0/8, 240/4 and *.0 as unicast

Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways... > On Nov 18, 2021, at 5:15 PM, John Gilmore wrote: > > Keeping the price of IPv4 addresses reasonable means that dual-stack > servers can continue to be deployed at reasonable cost, so that it > doesn't matter whether clients have

Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public

I have read through this thread, and you'll pardon me if it sounds like yet another rehash on yet another list. You might take a look at https://packetlife.net/blog/2010/oct/14/ipv4-exhaustion-what-about-class-e-addresses/, which responds to

Re: . (was IPv6 and CDN's)

> On Oct 26, 2021, at 9:25 AM, Bryan Fields wrote: > > Can you explain how it would work? Say you have a root server operator who > starts messing up, is there any ability to remove them? You might look at https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rssac-037-15jun18-en.pdf. Yes, there is

Re: IPv6 and CDN's

Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways... > On Oct 23, 2021, at 1:55 PM, Christopher Morrow > wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 23, 2021, 15:17 Fred Baker wrote: >> I think you will find that there are some places in which getting IPv6 >> network

Re: IPv6 and CDN's

I think you will find that there are some places in which getting IPv6 network service has been difficult, and as a result even IPv6-capable equipment is not reachable by IPv6. Those are, however, few and far between. Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways... > On Oct 23,

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge

I’m not sure I disagree, but let throw in a point of consideration. Historically, as you note, the caller pays the toll. However, the caller also CHOSE to call, even though the called party might find the call irritating. With a CDN, the network is out there hoping to be called, and the user

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

> On Sep 10, 2021, at 1:33 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: > > The utility let them know that they were going to be doing some maintenance > work in the area. No impact expected, but out of an abundance of caution, > they transfer over to generators. After the utility lets them know that the >

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways... > On Sep 8, 2021, at 1:31 AM, Saku Ytti wrote: > > If the mid size eyeballs knew ipv4 is going away in 10, 15, 20 years > whichever it is, then they'd of course have to start moving too, > because no upstream. And they would

Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

> On Sep 8, 2021, at 1:26 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote: > > > I started wondering if there are areas where we can disable IPv4 today. There are places in which it is disabled today, for at least some services.

Re: Where to get IPv4 block these day

> On Aug 6, 2021, at 8:22 AM, Noah wrote: > > Do majority of smart handsets OS today support v6? > > Majority of people I know (due to economic factors) own lowend android > handsets with no support for v6. This group forms majority of eyeballs that > contribute revenue to local Telecoms

Re: Where to get IPv4 block these day

> On Aug 6, 2021, at 6:48 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: > > v6 isn't a solution today for v4 problems. I don't know that IPv6 was ever intended to be a solution to IPv4 problems per se. It was intended to be an IPv4 replacement to provide connectivity. signature.asc Description: Message signed

Re: Call for academic researchers (Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections)

I would add packet loss rate. Should be zero, and if it isn’t, it points to an underlying problem. Sent from my iPad > On May 31, 2021, at 11:01 AM, Josh Luthman > wrote: > >  > I think the latency and bps is going to be the best way to measure broadband > everyone can agree on. Is there

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

On May 28, 2021, at 11:55 AM, Chris Adams wrote: > I know multiple people that had issues with slow Internet during the > last year as two adults were working from home and 1-3 children were > also schooling from home. Parents had to arrange work calls around > their kids classroom time and

Re: AWS Using Class E IPv4 Address on internal Routing

The "RFC" you're looking for is probably https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilson-class-e-02, which was not agreed to and so has no RFC number. The fundamental issue that was raised during that discussion was that while repurposing class e would provide a few more IPv4 addresses and so delay

Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

True, Sean, but Texas has its own ISO. The counterpart wouldn’t be “Delaware has rolling blackouts”, but “The Eastern ISO has following blackouts”. Sent from my iPad > On Feb 15, 2021, at 8:49 PM, Sean Donelan wrote: > >  > >> On Tue, 16 Feb 2021, Cory Sell via NANOG wrote: >> adoption.

Re: dumb question: are any of the RIR's out of IPv4 addresses?

You may find this article interesting: https://blog.apnic.net/2019/12/13/keep-calm-and-carry-on-the-status-of-ipv4-address-allocation/ Sent from my iPad > On Feb 16, 2021, at 3:07 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: > >  > Basically are there places that you can't get allocations? If so, what is >

Re: DoD IP Space

Streams Transport and PIP. Good grief. V7 was Robert Ullman’s CATNIP. He wanted to sell hardware to everyone, and V7 was the interchange protocol between IPv4, IPX, and CLNS. Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways... > On Feb 15, 2021, at 12:41 PM, Valdis Klētnieks >

Re: DoD IP Space

On Jan 23, 2021, at 11:32 AM, Sabri Berisha wrote: > > Personally, I would > argue that a full implementation of IPv6 means that v4 could be phased out > without > adverse effect on the production network. I like that definition.

Re: DoD IP Space

> On Jan 22, 2021, at 10:28 PM, Valdis Klētnieks > wrote: > > And how would you define "fully implement v6", anyhow? I would define it this way: if something can be done using IPv4, it has an obvious IPv6 counterpart that is usable by the same community to the extent that the community is

Re: DoD IP Space

I recently had a discussion with an Asian ISP that was asking the IETF to PLEASE re-declare DoD space to be private space so that they could use it. This particular ISP uses IPv6 extensively (a lot of their services are in fact IPv6-only) but has trouble with its enterprise customers. Frankly,

Cox contact?

Would an engineer from Cox please contact me privately?

Re: Is there *currently* a shortage of IPv4 addresses?

> On Aug 4, 2020, at 1:01 PM, Tom Beecher wrote: > > The only other option then becomes the secondary transfer markets, where > costs to acquire v4 space are much higher than what direct allocations from > the RIRs used to be. > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 3:35 PM Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. >

Re: [v6ops] Question about "Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers"

your comments to if you wish. > > Thanks, > Fernando > > > > > Forwarded Message > Subject: [v6ops] Question about "Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets > with Extension Headers" > Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 22:55:45 -0700

Re: MAP-T in production

For the record, we are asking similar questions about 464XLAT in v6ops. If you are deploying it, please advise Jordi Palet Martinez. For those unfamiliar with them, MAP-T and 464XLAT are each deployment frameworks for IPv4/IPv6 translation, as described in RFCs 4164, 4166, 4167, and 7915.

RE: RFC6550 (RPL) and RFC6775 (IPv6 Neighbor Discovery for 6LoWPANs)

-Broadcast Multi-Access (NBMA) links), alternative protocols or mechanisms to implement those services will be specified (in the appropriate document covering the operation of IP over a particular link type).” Fred From: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Pascal Thubert

Re: QUIC traffic throttled on AT residential

> On Feb 18, 2020, at 4:00 PM, Ca By wrote: > > I am not a fan of quic or any udp traffic. My suggestion was that Google use > an new L4 instead of UDP, but that was too hard for the Googlers. The argument I have heard is that residential firewalls often block anything that is *not* UDP or

Re: power to the internet

> This time it’s PG all alone, but still fallout from back then. Too much > liability and they’ve not maintained the infrastructure and so they decided > that to reduce the liability costs it’s cheaper to blackout. Same story again > different colors. PG making a mint while people get screwed

Re: Elephant in the room - Akamai

Sent from my iPad > On Dec 5, 2019, at 9:03 PM, Stephen Satchell wrote: > > For SP-grade routers, there isn't "code" that needs to be added to combat > buffer bloat. All an admin has to do is cut back on the number of packet > buffers on each interface -- an interface setting, you see. A

Re: RIPE our of IPv4

> On Dec 3, 2019, at 3:22 PM, Valdis Klētnieks wrote: > > On Tue, 03 Dec 2019 14:58:59 -0800, FREDERICK BAKER said: > >> I think he is saying that companies like Reliance JIO have started with a /22 >> of IPv4 and a /32 (or more) of IPv6, > > As I said - you need IPv4 space to dual-stack.

Re: Russian government’s disconnection test

> On Nov 1, 2019, at 8:15 PM, Constantine A. Murenin wrote: > > If somehow all the transatlantic (and/or transpacific) cables are offline; > will the whole internet outside of the US stop working, too? This has nothing to do with cables, and everything to do with information control and

Re: California public safety power shutdowns

On Oct 9, 2019, at 12:36 PM, Sean Donelan wrote: > Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison have started Public > Safety Power Shut-offs (PSPS) in California wildfire high-risk areas. > > Shut-offs are taking place in three phases. PG began shutoffs at midnight > in Northern

Re: Update to BCP-38?

On Oct 3, 2019, at 3:15 PM, Stephen Satchell wrote: > You still need a IPv6 version of RFC 1812. If we were to start with the current draft, I would probably want to start over, and have people involved from multiple operators. That said, let me give you some background on RFC 1812. The

Re: Update to BCP-38?

On Oct 3, 2019, at 12:30 PM, Stephen Satchell wrote: > > On 10/3/19 8:22 AM, Fred Baker wrote: >> And on lists like this, I am told that there is no deployment - that >> nobody wants it, and anyone that disagrees with that assessment has >> lost his or her mind. That

Re: Update to BCP-38?

Sent from my iPad > On Oct 3, 2019, at 12:14 PM, Stephen Satchell wrote: > > On 10/3/19 8:42 AM, Fred Baker wrote: >> >> >>>> On Oct 3, 2019, at 9:51 AM, Stephen Satchell wrote: >>> >>> Someone else mentioned that "IPv6 has be

Re: Update to BCP-38?

> On Oct 3, 2019, at 9:51 AM, Stephen Satchell wrote: > > Someone else mentioned that "IPv6 has been around for 25 years, and why > is it taking so long for everyone to adopt it?" I present as evidence > the lack of a formally-released requirements RFC for IPv6. It suggests > that the

Re: Update to BCP-38?

On Oct 3, 2019, at 9:51 AM, Stephen Satchell wrote: > It appears that the only parallel paper for IPv6 is > draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs-04, _Requirements for IPv6 Routers_, which > currently carries a copyright of 2018. It's a shame that this document > is still in limbo; witness this quote:

Re: This DNS over HTTP thing

On Sep 30, 2019, at 10:25 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > Is there an official name for it I should be searching for? The IETF calls it "DoH", pronounced like "Dough". https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/doh/about/ There are a number of such services from Google, Amazon, and others. Firefox and

Re: [nanog] Cisco GLBP/HSRP question -- Has it ever been dis

> On Aug 4, 2019, at 5:29 PM, Chriztoffer Hansen > wrote: > > The question was simply about if GLBP/HSRP had ever been up in discussions in > the IETF concerning publishing the protocol specifications as a standard. (As > pointed out. I totally forgot about the RFC concerning HSRP.)

Re: What can ISPs do better? Removing racism out of internet

> On Aug 4, 2019, at 8:41 PM, Mehmet Akcin wrote: > > I am sure there are many sites like this out there, but could network > operators do anything to make these sites “not so easy” to be found, reached, > and used to end innocent lives? I''d suggest reducing their reputation rankings, as

Re: Best ways to ensure redundancy with no terrestrial ISPs

Between overlaid ads and the thing trying to force an account, i’d Describe it as a waste of time. Now, a page that delivered the data advertised... Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways... > On Aug 3, 2019, at 3:36 PM, Mehmet Akcin wrote: > >  > Feel free to open

Re: 44/8

The fundamental reason given, from several sources, was that our experience with IPv4 address trading says that no matter how many IPv4 addresses we create or recover, we won't obviate the need for a replacement protocol. The reasons for that are two: (1) IPv4 isn't forward compatible with

Re: who attacks the weather channel?

According to this, Weather Underground was purchased by the Weather Channel and firmed “The Weather Company”, and that was in turn purchased by IBM last year. https://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/weather-underground-bought-by-ibm.html Sent using a machine that autocorrects in

Re: Gi Firewall for mobile subscribers

> On Apr 11, 2019, at 8:43 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > I’m pretty sure that no matter how good your power management is, any cell > phone’s battery will die long before its /64 can be scanned. And that might be the point of the scan - not to find the addresses in use, but to deplete the

Re: Stupid Question maybe?

On Dec 19, 2018, at 3:50 AM, Brian Kantor wrote: > /24 is certainly cleaner than 255.255.255.0. > > I seem to remember it was Phil Karn who in the early 80's suggested > that expressing subnet masks as the number of bits from the top end > of the address word was efficient, since subnet masks

Re: It's been 20 years today (Oct 16, UTC). Hard to believe.

On Oct 16, 2018, at 4:57 PM, Wayne Bouchard wrote: > Well, simply put, the idea is that you should be able to compensate > for a certain amount of deviation from accepted usage as long as its > still within what the protocol allows (or can be read to allow) but > that you yourself should act with

Re: Oct. 3, 2018 EAS Presidential Alert test

> On Oct 7, 2018, at 12:23 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote: > > That was one advantage of the old air raid siren system, it was difficult to > ignore and required nothing special to receive (hearing > impaired excepted.) Where I grew up, the “Civil Defense Warning” was used for air raids, nuclear

Re: tcp md5 bgp attacks?

Well, think about RST attacks, in which someone bombards a TCP connection with TCP RESET in the hopes of threading a needle and taking it down. It's not the end of the world - BGP restarts - but there is an outage. The simplest way to protect against that (and against having someone with a

Re: Apple Caching Server question

e curious, especially if this could cache the > IOS updates used for all those tablets and other iDevices folks purchase > from Apple. > -- [image: email-signature-logo] <http://www.adelphi.edu/> *Fred Hicks* Director of Network Communications Information Technology hi...@adelphi.edu T 516.877.3338

Re: Brocade Fabric Help

Hello Mike, Running a few larger Brocade VDX fabrics here... In case of that message, there is no other option not to reset that specific new switch and then re-join the device. I had that a few times, too. It happens when you already did some configuration changes on the new switch and

Re: Looking for a Level 3 Routing Registry contact

same... On 23.06.2016 at 18:42 Theodore Baschak wrote: Curious if you had any luck with this task, I've tried via several avenues and had very little luck getting old cruft removed. :-( Theodore On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Delacruz, Anthony B < anthony.delac...@centurylink.com> wrote:

Re: Cogent <=> Google Peering issue

ubject: Re: Cogent <=> Google Peering issue If my telepathy still works fine and I understood your question well - then the answer is "NO, that is not a global well-known issue" ;) On 17.02.16 18:15, Fred Hollis wrote: Anyone else aware of it?

Cogent <=> Google Peering issue

Anyone else aware of it?

Re: Internap route optimization

rt of device filter your prefixes toward your customers/peers/transits... Do not be the next person to leak their internap-box-routes to the world, m'kay? :) On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Fred Hollis <f...@web2objects.com> wrote: Hi, No particular experience with Internaps optimization...

Re: Internap route optimization

Hi, No particular experience with Internaps optimization...however I wouldn't be that sure if I would use it within our networks, because you always have the conflict of this not being their core business as they want to sell their optimized IP transit. However, some time ago we tried

Re: Internap route optimization

Border6 offers such an option based on prependings and bgp communities. But honestly, I didn't test that feature yet. And I'm not that sure how much sense it makes since it probably requires quite a lot global BGP updates... makes routers even more busy than they are currently. On 05.11.2015

Re: IP-Echelon Compliance

At least, we tried contacting you many times, but you ignored all our requests. Still receiving thousands of e-mails not related to our IPs on daily basis. On 13.10.2015 at 00:04 Seth Arnold wrote: Hi All, Please feel free to get in touch with us to request changes. Expedited processing of

Re: IP-Echelon Compliance

Oh, interesting you have the same? We receive thousands of these complains on daily basis that are not related to any of our IPs. Of course we contacted them... but never got a response. On 09.10.2015 at 22:00 Baldur Norddahl wrote: Hi I am sure all of you know of these guys. But what do you

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

> On Oct 2, 2015, at 2:18 PM, William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Fred Baker (fred) <f...@cisco.com> wrote: >> There's no way to change the IPv4 address to be larger > > http://bill.herrin.us/network/ipxl.html >

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

> On Oct 1, 2015, at 3:42 PM, Todd Underwood wrote: > > it's just a new addressing protocol that happens to not work with the rest > of the internet. it's unfortunate that we made that mistake I understand the comment, but I see some issues with it. The problem isn't that

Re: GeoIP information

It is a big pain to do so. We did a couple of times in the past and always took us many months. On 25.09.2015 at 03:48 Ian Clark wrote: Is there anyone here who has successfully changed their GeoIP data for a subset of their ARIN allocation? How do service providers get all the GeoIP companies

Re: GeoIP information

> They could purchase sales records from online retailers. Hey guys, > give us the IP address, city, state and zip code for each sale; we'll > pay you a nickle each. Then correlate that with BGP announcements that > show the range of impacted addresses. After looking more into the geo ip topic,

High latency/packetloss in nyc/nj for cogent/level3/zayo?

Hi, Anyone also experiencing really high lancy and packetloss 80%+ in nyc/nj area for cogent/level3/zayo?

Re: High latency/packetloss in nyc/nj for cogent/level3/zayo?

furt: Feldkirchnerstraße 140, 9020 Klagenfurt Geschäftsführer: Alexander Windbichler Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT U63216601 -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] Im Auftrag von Fred Hollis Gesendet: Freitag, 04. September

Re: How to build an IPv6-only internal network?

On Jul 8, 2015, at 12:53 PM, Cryptographrix cryptograph...@gmail.com wrote: Hypothetically, I want to build an internal network that runs just IPv6 and apply stateless ACLs at redundant external connections. How do users access the current v4 address space? There are two short answers:

Re: Residential VSAT experiences?

On Jun 22, 2015, at 3:11 PM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote: Two-way satellite systems based on SV's in geostationary orbit (like the two you're considering) have high latency. 22,000 miles out, another 22,000 miles back and do it again for the return packet. You'll start around 500ms

Looking for IPv6 /48 from allocation that exists 2-3+ yrs

Hello NANOG, Due to problems with some geo ip databases, we are looking for a /48 from an /32 or /36 allocation that exists for a few years already. East-coast preferred, but open to others in north america as well. Please contact me offlist Thank you, Fred

Re: Fixing Google geolocation screwups

Honestly, I lost patience the system learning the proper location of the IPv6 block. I have a very similar problem to the OP since 4-5 months, submitted this IP correction form multiple times... nothing changed. This is *very* annoying. Yes, my whois/SWIP is perfectly fine, every other geo ip

Re: Fixing Google geolocation screwups

Thanks for sending this to the list: We have the very same issue as well (both IPv4+IPv6). If someone knows the magic button to solve this, please contact me as well. On 08.04.2015 at 00:26 John Levine wrote: A friend of mine lives in Alabama and has business service from att. But Google

Any google network admins out there?

I need contact to a Google network Admin as well. Having some serious issues with our clients reaching Google services. On 03.04.2015 at 23:53 Matt Palmer wrote: Or, to answer your question more simply: No. - Matt On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 11:39:36AM +0100, Pedro Cavaca wrote:

Re: Meeting IRS requirements for encrypted transmission of FTI

and external networks and all types of information system components from which information can be transmitted (e.g., servers, mobile devices, notebook computers, printers, copiers, scanners, fax machines). Sent from my iPad On Apr 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, Hunt, Fred - DCF fred.h

Meeting IRS requirements for encrypted transmission of FTI

such an implementation could share lessons learned, gotchas, etc. Any input is appreciated? Fred

Re: Purpose of spoofed packets ???

Interesting... we had exactly the same an hour ago. That IP was definitely nullrouted for 1 week... Matthew Huff: We recently got an abuse report of an IP address in our net range. However, that IP address isn't in use in our networks and the covering network is null routed, so no return

Re: AOL Postmaster

Having exactly the same issue. Also never received any response from AOL. Quite annoying. John Zettlemoyer: No, started using an IP address that hasn’t been used since we got the range from Arin, and got this - 554- (RTR:BL) Tried to contact AOL through normal channels, and no response in

Re: IPv6 allocation plan, security, and 6-to-4 conversion

On Jan 29, 2015, at 3:28 PM, Eric Louie elo...@techintegrity.com wrote: If I have to do 6-to-4 conversion, is there any way to do that with multiple diverse ISP connections, or am I restricted to using one entry/exit point? (If that's true, do I need to allocate a separate block of

Re: ASN Domain for rDNS

I'd say this is mostly for whitelabelling reason rather than a technical one? Keefe John: I've been seeing more and more carriers(and even small ISPs) using as.net as their domain for rDNS on IP space. What are the pros and cons for doing this versus using your primary business domain

Re: Default routes on BGP routers with full feeds

Long time I had the same opinion, however, if someone operates a network with multiple upstream providers the operator should be able to afford a proper out of band console access which solves this issue completely. I would only accept a default route on Uplinks where I am only receiving a

Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?

On Oct 19, 2014, at 5:05 AM, Matthew Petach mpet...@netflight.com wrote: Wondering if some of the long-time list members can shed some light on the question--why is the .gov top level domain only for use by US government agencies? Where do other world powers put their government agency

Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?

On Oct 20, 2014, at 10:07 AM, John Orthoefer j...@direwolf.com wrote: On Oct 20, 2014, at 12:50 PM, Fred Baker (fred) f...@cisco.com wrote: […] and the older .arpa names quickly fell into disuse. People don’t use in-addr.arpa anymore? ;) johno They do use that, of course

hotmail/msn/outlook mail admin contact

Hello NANOG'ers, Looking for a mail admin contact over at Microsoft who deals with the outgoing mail servers related to hotmail.com/msn.com/outlook.com. Feel free to contact me privately. Thank you. Fred Crandall Sr Systems Admin Whidbey Telecom

Re: Bare TLD resolutions

IMHO, since ICANN has created the situation, the ball is in ICANN’s court to say how this works without disrupting name services. Their ill-informed hipshot is not our emergency. On Sep 17, 2014, at 9:09 AM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote: Pursuant to

  1   2   3   >