US
9 - 185.11.121.0/24 14957 0.5% AS202105 -- DSP-AS , SA
Everyone of these prefixes have managed to average one update per 40
seconds during a week, or worse. How is that even possible? Yes, I know we
don't generally have dampening anymore, but geez, that's a lot of updates.
--
Mikael Abraham
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
If you are, I'm very interested in hearing your motivation for doing
that.
I realised I probably used the wrong english word here. The correct
english word(s) would probably be "rationale/reason/facts", not
"motivation".
-
eems to me that
you do.
If you are, I'm very interested in hearing your motivation for doing that.
If you're not, please do share what you actually meant.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
over to another new switch chassis?
What about buffer requirements? If you want a buffered switch, it
increases capex and lowers number of switch-models that can be used.
Microbuffered switches may lose packets in microbursts when ports are
being run (near) full.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail
we want to go?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
to communicate directly with other phone (customer) ?
No. Your phone has a tunnel to a node in the mobile network and that's the
only one you can send packets to. It's a GTP tunnel, but it's very similar
to GRE or IPIP or whatever.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
cussion. I don't see it as "vendor
bashing" but instead as someone who has an opinion on how things are done
today.
Question is, how can it be had in a constructive manner?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
refix came with a cost.
So I also think that is part of the reason we don't have a charging system
for DFZ slots, because getting that charging infrastructure to work isn't
worth it, the benefit of this complication isn't enough.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
happening NOW, and everything is ready to go.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
users.
Still, Netflix is blocking my HE IPv6 tunnel, it seems mostly just
lazy-blocking all HE prefixes instead of actually writing some intelligent
code to try to find the people that are trying to circumvent the
geographical limitations imposed by content owners.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail
because
when I deconfigured IPv6 on my Apple Airport Extreme and moved my IPv6 to
an UBNT ER5, the Airport didn't send zero lifetime RAs so now everything
is chaos for a while.
Family acceptance factor is helped by Happy Eyeballs I guess though...
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
so it would correlate the following:
My billing address is in Sweden.
My IPv4 GEOIP says I am in Sweden.
My IPv6 GEOIP says I am in Sweden.
Ok, so fine, I am not trying to circumvent anything so just let me watch
the bloody content ok to show to people in Sweden.
BLOODY HELL!
--
Mikael
sing a source address for the ICMP error message from something
with the same RFC6724 label as the ICMP error message is being sent to?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
service and getting 315ms RTT means
the NAT64 isn't very local to me... :P
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
sent a message to the TeamNANOG youtube account with
the same request.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
that everyone has that ?
Typically you'll see one ACK per 2 packets, so you need approximately 1:50
bytes up/down ratio for the ACKs.
It's possible to have middle boxes suppress some ACKs, please see thread
here:
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/aqm/current/msg01482.html
--
Mikael Abrahamsson
n this /36 is a /48. Do you
pick this up automatically and hint your abuse system about this? Does it
send automatically generated abuse reports to the abuse contact as well?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
100 entries (IPv4), 10 entries (IPv6)"
I don't know if there is a typo somewhere, but it shows the difference
between RIB and FIB.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
the world and were providing a sizable
chunk of the world total traffic, you would probably reason differently.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
On Thu, 10 Mar 2016, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote:
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote on 10/3/16 18:21:
However, I stand by my earlier statement that we need to include MTU/MRU in ND
messages, so that this can be negotiated on a LAN where not all devices support
large MTU.
Isn't this already
On Thu, 10 Mar 2016, Saku Ytti wrote:
On 10 March 2016 at 02:44, Niels Bakker
d on a LAN where not all
devices support large MTU.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
fairly
easy for the IXP to offer this service.
The IXPs who offer "private lans" between two parties, do they generally
limit these as well to 1500 L3 MTU?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
I've configured and connected to an IXP, they would all
be configured by setting max L2 MTU on the main interface, and then you
configure whatever needed IPv4 and IPv6 L3 MTU on the subinterface.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
ly benefit in being able to slap
an L3 tunnel header on that packet, send it as ~1550 bytes to the other
ISP, and then they take off the header again, without having to handle
tunnel packet fragments (which tend to be quite resource intensive).
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016, Nick Hilliard wrote:
interface MTU configured to be 9000 bytes, the packet will be
blackholed, not rejected with a PTB.
That is only true if the router/host sets MRU=MTU. That is definitely not
always the case.
in networks.
With IPv6 we have the chance to make PMTUD work properly and also have
PMTU blackhole detection implemented in all hosts. IPv4 is lost cause in
my opinion (although it's strange how many hosts that seem to get away
with 1492 (or is it 1496) MTU because they're using PPPoE).
--
Mikael
customers
misconfiguraiton by blocking port 25 and the MS ports, why not 53 as well?
This is a slippery slope of course, and judgement calls are not easy to
make.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
no customer complaints.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
ght of any IPv6 anything in the setup menus, it only
displays IPv4 information etc. It's smart enough to support Skype, Youtube
and so on, but not smart enough to support IPv6.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
ix as well. Haven't had any problems since.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
used
than what TCP could indicate to the application is available.
It's of course better if the application do these choices than for the ISP
to have an middle-box that tries to affect applications by means of TCP
rate-adaptation trickery.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
net access, not something the customer has to actively choose.
If the customer buys their own CPE and it doesn't support IPv6, well, then
that customer will have to fix that themselves, but the ISP needs to make
sure that whatever equipment/access they deliver, they need to support
IPv6 on it.
--
Mikael A
support this mode once for
their devices, than it is for every mobile provider to have to support
IPv4v6 with all the drawbacks, and then migrate people again to IPv6+AFTR
solution in a few years.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
), and the only way to find out is to probe (=run
faster than customer access speed).
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
eone would put the effort into creating such a
list.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
at all yet.
IPv6 only operation for mobile is going to become fairly easy in the next
few years due to the entire ecosystem maturing in this aspect, so my guess
is that we'll start to see a lot more IPv6 over the next few years in
mobile.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
long-time support, automatic updates,
software quality etc, and not just testing wifi speed as a factor of
distance, we might get somewhere.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
ISPs do
not respond to abuse reports.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
devices range by now...
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
ms,
it's time to start running the link quality estimation algorithm. Facing
bufferbloat so that link is over 1ms RTT, you probably want to
link-estimate it anyway...
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
ad, plenty of equipment that doesn't.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
that P2 will silently
drop due to 1500 MRU.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Mark Tinka wrote:
I'm not really sure what the hold-up is, but I know Mikael, together
with the good folks at netDEF (Martin and Alistair) are working hard on
fixing these issues. While I have not had much time to provide them with
feedback on their progress, it is high
stuck.
There is no right or wrong IGP to run, both protocols have their quirks
and pro:s and con:s.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
(if I remember correctly), 4500 computers that participants brought with
them.
Usually these events nowadays tend to use 5-20 gigabit/s for that amount
of people, so 2x1GE is just not enough. Already in 2001 that GigE was
fully loaded after 1-2 days.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm
think to recall interest in work on bleaching
by others too.
Then I'm happy to meet you in Prague.
Regards,
Ruediger
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:swm...@swm.pp.se]
Gesendet: Montag, 29. Juni 2015 09:38
An: Geib, Rüdiger
Cc: ts...@ietf.org
Betreff: Re: AW
minutes of uptime. That way you'll run into
any bugs quickly. Either we should abolish the leap second or we should
make leap second adjustments (back and forth) on a monthly basis to
exercise the code.
This is a hard sell though...
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
that from your mobile device, IPv4 will most
likely work worse than IPv6. Then it's downhill from there.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
to
customers. Since you use 464XLAT and NAT64, you still offer IPv4 access
even though it's done over IPv6 to the customer.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
to peoples homes have been around for years in other places.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
the user, yes, data amount
increases, but when you go from 100 to 250 megabit/s towards the user, not
so much.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
decent is available.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
On Fri, 12 Jun 2015, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
Can someone explain to me how Android uses SLAAC to implement tethering?
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7278
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
.
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2015 18:07:57 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se
To: bl...@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Apple ECN, Bufferbloat, CoDel
I highly encourage people to take a look at:
https://developer.apple.com/videos/wwdc/2015/?id=719 (you might have
off-list if you want more information.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
at the relayed messages and install static routes
without any OOO-communication.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
entries?
If you did PD the way it's normally done, you would need 1 entry, not 2.
I do agree that you do not want your equipment sitting in the same
broadcast domain as all the customers devices, but do use PD. I'm just
baffled by the way you have implemented PD.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm
on my Google device anyhow.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
, so let's get that happening then?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
need
SAVI (https://tools.ietf.org/wg/savi/) and 802.1x (or similar mechanism)
in order to actually gain the control these people are looking for. My
question, do they implement this on IPv4?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
problem (albeit with added code).
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
, but not the Internet.
My Nexus4 with Android 5.1.1 works just fine with IPv6 on wifi.
So talk to your handset manufacturer, they must have broke something.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
,
and use that instead of AAA.
So instead of doing everything in the BNG, you have to do it at the access
port using SNMP to poll counters and change port policy there.
If this is not your liking, then you have to keep the BNG.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
and complication.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
-lothbergs-terastream-presentation-at-ripe-67/
if you want to know more about the project.
Next time you purchase 100G DWDM equipment, make sure you buy equipment
that follows this standard to be certain that it interoperates to combat
vendor secret sauce.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm
fine until there were a lot of nearby
players in the game, then things started working very badly. Also nice
corner case :P
So yes, setting all external Internet traffic to DSCP=BE (0) is something
one wants to do.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
should have DCM.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
optics (they might be
cheaper), add DCM as well if the manufacturer rates them as not being able
to electronically compensate for dispersion more than 40km.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
? 500k? 1M?
From a technical point of view, I have little interest in my router
handling the fact that an office at the other side of the planet shut down
their router, and learning this via DFZ.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
/certified-products/
http://secureenduserconnection.se/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/SEC-Secure-End-user-Connection-2014-05-30.pdf
is a good document to make sure your network follows as well.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
be accurate enough. SNMP isn't sampled, if you poll the
IfOctet counter, it just counts upwards and if you're not worried about
the switch rebooting, you could poll it once per month and be accurate.
I'd say polling it once or a few times a day protects enough against that.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail
they request, stop
differentiating between different kinds of devices, and just charge where
the costs are, ie on packets moved.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
the networks to them. This is true for all types of
customers.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
worked as expected, great job!
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
on others. So how do we work this? It obviously
hasn't worked so far, what do we change to make this work?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
the initial
install, or something like this.
Why isn't this being done? Why are we complaining about 300 gigabit/s DDOS
attacks, asking people to fix their open resolvers, NTP servers etc, when
the actual culprit is that some networks in the world don't implement
BCP38?
--
Mikael Abrahamsson
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
these tests are anonymous checkbox during the initial install, or
something like this.
After posting this, I was pointed to http://spoofer.cmand.org . This seems
like the exact thing I would like to test.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm
installed back in 3.x days or so, probably around 2005 or thereabouts. My
root shell uses bash and /bin/sh points to bash. I probably received a
question about this sometime long ago when upgrading but I guess I
answered no.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
allow two ethertypes, ARP and IPv4?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
to all the state that needs to be kept.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
.
They're attractively priced, buy one and try it out!
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
comes along without port numbers then you give them a
list of subscribers behind that IP at the time. Use port block allocation
and keep track of the blocks to reduce logging load.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
. Also, after putting it in, you own the infrastructure,
so it might actually be a good investment and raise your property value.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Scott Helms wrote:
They are also running into serious problems trying to scale and while
getting 400 homes wired up is laudable, having it take more than two years
is not impressive at all.
I am impressed by it. 200km of fiber is not easy to do.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson
? The above percentage points, do
they include the cost of labor for fusion splicing of the fiber?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
municipal fiber (L1 only) has been operating fiber network since
1994, they're doing ~20MUSD profit on ~100MUSD turnover per year.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
now the local network needs to support it.
It's cleaner just to do L1 and aggregate thousands or tens of thousands of
residential properties in the same place.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
from basement up to the
apartments which is a major cost, and also it's currently not known
exactly how fault finding should be done. I would be more comfortable if
STOKAB took responsibility all the way into the handoff in the apartment.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
?
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
you handle layer 2
yourself.
This has been done on a fairly wide scale in Sweden for 10-12 years. We're
now seeing the L2 muni networks being major hinderance for IPv6
deployment because of their L2.5+ functions (see my earlier email).
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
as well,
so by your reasoning the provider wants to do L3 access where they handle
everything and the ISP only routes a /20 IPv4 block and /43 IPv6 to the
muni network, and all their customers needs in form of DHCPv4/v6(-PD) etc
is handled by the fiber operator.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail
(this works even in sparsely populated areas
I'd say) and you're going to have less competition, but you still have the
possibility to get competition. In these cases I though agree that L2
backhaul by the fiber operator might make sense.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
much of it, and
you can easily check this with a fiber light meter. Running L2 network,
perhaps even with some L3 functions to make multicast etc more efficient,
is not as easy to do as it might sound considering all factors.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
and the infrastructure is likely to be as viable in
30 years as it is day 1 after installation.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
. You need to make sure your reveue model matches your
expenditure model.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
101 - 200 of 604 matches
Mail list logo
