Hi Job,
I think this is important work.
As you indicated in your mail you have spent quite some time compiling
the constraints files in the appendix. Keeping them up to date requires
tracking allocations and policy developments in all RIRs. It reminds me
of bogon filters for unallocated IP
https://www.facebook.com/groups/maintnote/
On 17/06/19 15:14, Andrew Dampf wrote:
> Hello nanog,
>
> I've heard second-hand there is an existing standard for provider
> maintenance emails that should be followed in the form of a calendar
> attachment, but I can't seem to find any information on
individually. Something like
draft-van-beijnum-multi-mtu-03, which was mentioned before in this
thread. With this in place individual sets of peers could safely use
different MTUs on the same VLAN, and IXPs would have a migration path
towards supporting larger framesizes.
--
Kind regards,
Jeffrey,
On Tue, 4 Feb 2014 22:53:40 -0500
Jeffrey Haas jh...@pfrc.org wrote:
Sent from my iPad
On Jan 25, 2014, at 1:37 PM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:
On 25/01/2014 15:48, Sebastian Spies wrote:
To make things worse: even if the IXPs ASN is 2-byte, I would assume,
Hello Leo,
On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 08:18:13 -0600
Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org wrote:
This whole problem smacks to me of exchange points that are too big to
fail. Since some of these exchanges are so big, everyone else must bend to
their needs. I think the world would be a better place if
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 10:07:49 +0300
Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi wrote:
On (2013-10-24 23:05 -0400), Erik Muller wrote:
Rancid certainly has its warts, but other than needing to test, pull
hair, and patch things for new OS/platform deployments, it still
generally Just Works once you have it
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:44:56 -0800
Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org wrote:
In a message written on Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 04:36:28PM -0500,
Christopher Morrow wrote:
leaking the IX prefix to customers, to me, seems like a recipe for
much wider/unintended leakage :(
Oh, it is. I remember
7 matches
Mail list logo
