ABQNOG -- May 4, 2023

For folks that might be in the southwest US (and any that want to visit!), we're going to hold an operators group meeting on May 4, 2023 in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Come to the land of green chile chessburgers, and meet some of the local operators. This inaugural meeting is free. We hope to

Re: SDN Internet Router (sir)

On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 01:04:28PM -0600, Mike Hammett wrote: > I don't even know where this conversation has gone anymore. You have reached a terminal point in the NANOG mailing list state machine: NOP-ARGUE Many paths lead to this state, and it isn't unique to NANOG. The sub-state is:

Re: "Permanent" DST

On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 12:22:14PM -0700, Jay Hennigan wrote: > On 3/15/22 12:19, Dave wrote: > >Ending DST is a really good idea. > > > >Moving 15 degrees East not so much but let’s face it, the environmental > >impact statement will take forever to write > > Moving 15 degrees east would put

Re: Muni broadband sucks (was: New minimum speed for US broadband connections)

On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 04:02:02PM -0500, Mike Hammett wrote: [...] > Getting the incumbents on-board certainly isn't a requirement. The > post I was replying to favored a future where all providers converged > on one infrastructure. I was saying that wasn't likely to happen. If there's any

Re: mail admins?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 08:05:39AM +0300, Töma Gavrichenkov wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020, 12:45 AM Randy Bush wrote: > > > sad. http://nanog.org used to be the brilliant example of a fully > > featured web site sans javascript, flash, ... > > > > That was long ago now. It was using Cvent for

historical BGP announcements? (pre-1997)

I've got a need to look for some announcements from the mid 1990s. The oldest I've found at at the University of Oregon Route Views Project, but the earliest I can find there appears to be November of 1997. Anyone have pointers to date from earlier?

Re: [outages] facebook slow

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 04:12:27PM -0500, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: [...] > There's the additional factor that security is always about trade-offs - for > many sites, the dangers of using social media logins are *far* outweighed > by being able to just have a big shiny "Log in using Facebook"

Re: (perhaps off topic, but) Microwave Towers

On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 08:54:25AM -0600, Miles Fidelman wrote: [...] > I find myself driving down Route 66.  On our way through Arizona, I > was surprised by what look like a lot of old-style microwave links.  > They pretty much follow the East-West rail line - where I'd expect > there's a lot of

Re: SIP fax sending software?

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:54:05AM -0400, John R. Levine wrote: > >You *can* get a fax across a G.711 connection if your throughput, > > My SIP provider supports T.38. How much difference does that make? It can make a great deal of difference. You change the dynamics from:

Re: SIP fax sending software?

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 11:14:12PM -0400, John Levine wrote: [...FAX over IP...] > I don't really care if it's flaky. For one fax a month a few retries > are not a big deal. But hellofax's free 5 pages a month will probably > do the job. For folks that have made it this far, you might be

Re: IPv6 Unique Local Addresses

On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 12:38:58AM -0600, Matt Harris wrote: > I'm not sure where you're getting the $100 figure from, ARIN's minimum fee > for an allocation is $250/year [...] End Users have a different fee structure: Annual maintenance fees are $100 for each IPv4 address block, $100 for

Re: Free access to measurement network

> My point was that consumers voted out thousands of independents by > taking service from incumbents instead of independents. Thousands have > closed up shop. Where independents are available, it's still tough > getting customers if the incumbents have a service that mostly works > (over say 5 to

Re: Vendors spamming NANOG attendees

> > From: "Chuck Anderson" > > To: nanog@nanog.org > > Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 12:47:17 PM > > Subject: Re: Vendors spamming NANOG attendees > > > > I've started keeping a list of companies who make unsolicited > > calls/emails. I tell them that I put them on my list of

Re: Voip faxing

On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 04:52:46AM +, Carlos Alcantar wrote: > Hey Samual, > > > you might want to check out the voice ops mailing list, might be a bit more > relevant over there. > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops Aside from voiceops, here's decade (or more?) old

Re: Peering + Transit Circuits

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:27:53PM +, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: Thanks for the explanation, I am still trying to figure out the realistic business case where doing something like this would make sense to any party. (unless purely malicious or in error). I'm sure others will reply as well,

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

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:32:23PM -, John Levine 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. Yeah... I've had a recurring nightmare for a while

Re: Muni Fiber and Politics

On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 10:23:55AM -0500, Leo Bicknell wrote: [...] By drawing an (admittedly somewhat arbitrary) boundary between L1/L2 and L3-L7, I think a situation can be created where there is maximum flexibility on both sides of that boundary, and the least chance of stupidity from

Re: Muni Fiber and Politics

Anyone know how to summarize this end game well enough for state/federal legislators? Or raise enough money and direction to provide sufficient lobbying? Wasn't KC asking for a dept of the Internet at the NANOG 20 in DC? On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 09:44:28AM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote: On Friday,

Re: Muni Fiber and Politics

On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 09:55:39AM -0500, Steven Saner wrote: [...] Now, it is tempting to suggest that the electric cooperative should take on the project. I've seen that exact scenario happen in rural New Mexico. The Co-op members wanted dial-up access, and couldn't get it. They asked the

Re: Muni Fiber and Politics

On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 01:34:58PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote: On Jul 21, 2014, at 11:38 , William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote: On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote: The only exception I see to this would be if localities were constrained to providing

Re: Muni Fiber and Politics

On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 05:36:13PM -0400, Jay Ashworth wrote: As I noted in a long thread last year, I think that providing noncompetitive L2 aggregation as well -- on the same type of terms -- is productive in reducing barriers to entry. Qwest had a great DSL product that did just this. They

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 03:54:52PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote: [...] And then the bandwidth catches up and it's no big deal anymore. I think I want this on a T-shirt.

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 09:50:22AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote: [...] I'm always surprised that folks at smaller exchanges don't form consortiums to build a mutually beneficial transit AS that connects to a larger remote exchange. In my experience, the price of buying transit from established

Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss.

On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 10:48:03AM -0700, Octavio Alvarez wrote: On 10/11/2013 10:27 AM, William Waites wrote: I'm having a discussion with a small network in a part of the world where bandwidth is scarce and multiple DSL lines are often used for upstream links. The topic is policy-based

Re: Vancouver IXP - VanTX - BCNet

it was a successful bandwidth co-op with several local ISPs buying from it and benefiting from the local connectivity. Perhaps others can make a go at it? --- IXNM Opening e-mail - Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:45:27 -0700 From: John M. Brown j...@chagres.net To: 'John

Re: How big is the Internet?

On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 06:04:19PM -0400, Tony Tauber wrote: All this goes to the point that the original question was poorly worded and I daresay ill-conceived. Are you saying there *are* dumb questions? :-)

Re: bgp for ipv6 question

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 07:58:10AM +1100, Karl Auer wrote: On Thu, 2013-02-14 at 08:08 -0500, Jared Mauch wrote: I recommend keeping your network as congruent between IPv4 and IPv6 as possible, with dual-stack. Why? I asked a similar question a few years ago:

muni L1 example (WAS: Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?)

On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 09:04:43AM -0800, Leo Bicknell wrote: [...] People are doing this, and it does work, it's just being done in locations the big telcos and cablecos have written off... To re-iterate this point, and get a note into the archives -- Muni networks *can* work. Idaho Falls, ID

Re: muni L1 example (WAS: Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?)

the rules for the city at the last minute. On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 12:44 PM, John Osmon [1]jos...@rigozsaurus.com wrote: On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 09:04:43AM -0800, Leo Bicknell wrote: [...] People are doing this, and it does work, it's just being done in locations

Re: muni L1 example (WAS: Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?)

Thanks Scott. Even if you can't name names, having those points stored somewhere searchable is going to help someone build a useful case when deciding to deploy or not. On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 04:55:41PM -0500, Scott Helms wrote: On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 4:38 PM, John Osmon [1]jos

ONT diagnostics (WAS: Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?)

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 07:53:34PM -0800, Owen DeLong wrote: [...] It really isn't. You'd be surprised how many uncompensated truck rolls are eliminated every day by being able to talk to the ONT from the help desk and tell the subscriber Well, I can manage your ONT and it's pretty clear the

Re: Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications....

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:22:43PM -0500, Jay Ashworth wrote: VZF's ONTs can't even do *ARP* right, or at least they couldn't as of last March. We expect them to do v6? Perfect! We don't *need* ARP for v6!

Re: ARIN lead time

On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 07:54:15PM +, Warren Bailey wrote: Does anyone know the lead time for ARIN to issue OrgID and subsequently an AS? Generally a day or so after getting them the proper information.

Re: The Department of Work and Pensions, UK has an entire /8

On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 12:07:33AM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote: Assume you have a public IPv4 assignment, and someone else starts routing your assignment... legitimately or not, RIR allocation transferred to them, or not. There might be a record created in a database, and/or internet routing

Re: Any Idea About Spectrum-DMR-104-1 ?!

On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 01:10:42PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote: [...] +1 for ubiquity. I've had excellent results with their products though I have not used the Air Fiber product specifically and haven't tested any of the long-haul 1Gbps products. I've many friends that are happy with ubiquity

Re: WW: Colo Vending Machine

On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 10:16:28PM -0800, Chaim Rieger wrote: Apple stickers I've got half a sheet of NeXT stickers left. Is that a reasonable substitute?

Re: WW: Colo Vending Machine

On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 07:12:01PM +1100, Julien Goodwin wrote: The old colo at $JOB[-1] used to have an old Wyse 50 kicking around which I was happy enough to use (yes they can still be made to snarf credentials, but it's less likely) once or twice when I forgot my USB-Serial. At my $JOB[-1]

Re: Hi speed trading - hi speed monitoring

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 10:30:33AM -0500, Jay Ashworth wrote: - Original Message - From: Paul Graydon p...@paulgraydon.co.uk Anecdotally, I had an interview years ago for a small-ish futures trading company based in London. The interviewer had to pause the interview part way

Re: Common operational misconceptions

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 10:18:57AM -0500, Steve Clark wrote: I agree with this 100%. Having worked with many people over the last 40 years, the good trouble shooters understood how things were suppose to work. This helps immeasurably in determining where to start looking. Don't forget

Re: ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs

On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:44:07AM -1000, Paul Graydon wrote: [...] I don't mind new TLDs, but company ones are crazy and going to lead to a confusing and messy internet. Maybe we could demote the commercial ones to live under a single TLD to make things simpler/neater... :-)

NOT Buckaroo (WAS: Re: Netflix Is Eating Up More Of North America's Bandwidth Than Any Other Company)

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 07:45:44AM +1000, Jeffrey S. Young wrote: No matter where you go, there you are. [--anon?] Oliver's Law of Location Kinda usurped by Buckaroo Banzai in the movie by the same name. It always annoys me when attributed to that character. Go back to your regular

Re: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style

On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:17:46AM -0800, Joel Jaeggli wrote: [...] The fact that I can get a wavelength to county dump in Eugene OR the composting facility in Palo Alto doesn't really do anything for the residential access market. Why not? You have to start with connectivity *somewhere*. If

Re: [Nanog-futures] an alternate proposal for NewNOG'smembership structure

On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 03:15:19PM -0800, David Barak wrote: I completely agree with Joe: let#39;s start with no extra complexity, and only add it if we absolutely need it later on. +1 We're having this discussion because most felt we'd tried the complex route and failed.

Re: [Nanog-futures] an alternate proposal for NewNOG?s membership structure

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 05:31:18PM -0800, Steve Feldman wrote: In order to jump-start the process of defining a membership structure for NewNOG, I wrote an alternative proposal. My goals were to keep it as simple and short as possible, and address the concerns which came up during the

Re: DNS Fake Authority for hidden forwarders?

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 08:22:00PM +0100, Leland Vandervort wrote: Hi All, Apologies if off topic, but hoping that one of you gurus out there might have some tips on this. I have a rather unusual application for DNS which I need to figure out a way to make it work, but running into

Re: AS path question.

[... learning about path prepending ...] On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 03:39:31PM -0500, Greg Whynott wrote: thanks all, this makes sense now.and i just showed the internet how ignorant I am? Ignorance can be cured with knowledge -- as you've just proven. Keep showing people how ignorant you

Re: [Nanog-futures] Draft Policy re individual sites

On Sat, May 02, 2009 at 08:17:10PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote: [...] I'd prefer the MLC to treat each case on its merits, and to work with a light touch to keep the list useful. Do the MLC volunteers feel that this isn't working? It's not clear to me exactly what problem this proposed

Re: Network diagram software

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 04:11:38PM +0100, Mathias Wolkert wrote: [...] I like the idea of having one physical version showing cables and devices (CDP/EDP/LLDP view pretty much) and one logical view showing IP subnets. Many times I found *documented* networks where this is all combined making

Re: v6 DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 02:16:10PM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote: In message 00df01c98b27$3181b7e0$948527...@com, TJ writes: [...SOX auditor stuff...] When the compliance explicitly requires something they are required to check for it, they don't have the option of ignoring or waving

Re: v6 DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)]

On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 04:44:58PM -0500, Ricky Beam wrote: [...] I've lived quite productively behind a single IPv4 address for nearly 15 years. I've run 1000 user networks that only used one IPv4 address for all of them. I have 2 private /24's using a single public IPv4 address right

Re: v6 DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)]

This is falling outside of the IPv6/RFC-1918 discussion, so I'll only answer questions with questions... If there's need for a real discussion, I'll let someone change the subject, and continue on... On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 01:11:13AM +0100, Sven-Haegar Koch wrote: [...] The flip side shows up

Re: v6 DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)]

On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 11:36:25AM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote: [...] WII's should be able to be directly connected to the network without any firewall. If they can't be then they are broken. Amen brother Mark! Can I get a hallelujah from the chorus? (Meanwhile, I'll continue to

Re: IPv4 source routing options and IPv6 Type 0 Routing Header

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 06:35:12PM +0100, Sam Stickland wrote: Can someone give an example of how to use source routing to check a peers routing policy? Channelling from a similar private conversation I had many years ago: Seeing if packets directed to prefixes that you're not announcing

A pipe dream? [WAS: Re: P2P agents for software distribution - saving the WAN from meltdown?!?]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:42:22PM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: [...] random type=idea from tonight If only there was a way for a SP to run a BitTorrent type service for their clients, subscribing the BT server(s) to known-good (ie, not warez-y) torrents pre-seeded from trusted sources and then

Re: [NANOG] Comcast latency

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 09:46:38AM -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote: Looks can sometimes be deceiving. ;-) I've seen Comcast drop packets left and right, but show 8Mbs/2Mbs on speed test sites. Other times I've seen the opposite, zero PL but extremely high latency (seconds, double digits!)... all