Re: PCH Peering Paper

On Feb 16, 2016, at 9:49 AM, Livingood, Jason wrote: > On 2/12/16, 8:56 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Niels Bakker" > wrote: >> * bedard.p...@gmail.com (Phil Bedard) [Sat 13 Feb 2016, 01:40 CET]: >>> I was going

PCH Peering Paper

I quoted a PCH peering paper at the Peering Track. (Not violating rules, talking about myself.) The paper is: https://www.pch.net/resources/Papers/peering-survey/PCH-Peering-Survey-2011.pdf I said “99.97%” of all peering sessions have nothing behind them more than a “handshake” or an

Re: New peerings between Hurricane Electric and Level3?

Make the AS path longer, losing traffic, and therefore revenue? Why would they do that? The twtelecom customers cannot multi-home (most of them anyway). Most of 3549’s traffic has other paths to the Internet. -- TTFN, patrick > On Jan 21, 2016, at 2:22 PM, Matthew D. Hardeman

Re: de-peering for security sake

On Jan 16, 2016, at 9:53 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote: > On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 05:43:56AM -0800, Ca By wrote: >> I see a great deal of folks on nanog clamoring to buy ddos gear. Packets >> are starting to become like spam email, where 90% are pure rubbish, and >> us good guys have

Re: CDN

PeeringDB will tell you where they connect. I do not think anyone puts stuff into PeeringDB when they have on-net nodes. In general, only the big three (Akamai, Netflix, Google) have significant deployments inside eyeball networks. Exceptions to every rule and all that, but if you pick random

Re: CDN

cin <meh...@akcin.net> wrote: > > I don’t think anyone really would tell where their critical network assets > are but obviously you can guesstimate by looking where they have connection > points available. > >> On Dec 19, 2015, at 8:13 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patr

Re: Netflow parameters and data that comes from CDNs

The answer is: It depends. :) In the case of Akamai, for a standard streaming or HTTP service, the IP address is not dedicated to a single customer. Also, Akamai is not going to give you a list of IP addresses serving your content. This is specific to Akamai, and for a general Akamai

Re: improved NANOG filtering

> If you really are a NANOG admin, I suggest adding some kind of URI filtering > for blocking the message based on the the domains/IPs found in the clickable > links in the body of the message. And the first person who says “who has seen $URL” or similar in a message gets bounced, then bitches

Re: spam smackdown?

On Oct 26, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Jim Popovitch wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 10:39 PM, Scott Weeks wrote: >> It looks like someone's trying to make a point. > > The takeaway is: > > 1) NANOG doesn't seem to do simple inbound spam filtering :-) In

Re: Is anyone tracking the "Fw: New Message" joe-job spammer?

I have 521 messages that match: To: nanog* Subject:new message In the last week. Obviously that includes things like Jay’s message below, but still a lot more than 100. It also hit outages@, and probably other places. Of course, I’m very upset about that.

Re: Why is NANOG not being blacklisted like any other provider that sent 500 spam messages in 3 days?

Myth: Andrew’s post has utility to the 10K+ people reading it. (Not watching Twitter makes me braindead? really? Yeah, it’s 2015. Get up-to-date, should have sent a snapchat. Duh.) Fact: Andrew should probably just un-sub since he finds NANOG useless. That would actually provide utility to the

Re: RFP for Internet Transit for ARIN ASN 10745 (at Ashburn, Virginia, USA)

Do you pay in v4 address space? :-) -- TTFN, patrick > On Oct 26, 2015, at 2:35 PM, John Curran wrote: > > NANOGers - > > If you are interested in providing transit for ARIN, please see the > attached RFP announcement. > > Thanks! > /John > > John Curran >

Re: Google's peering, GGC, and congestion management

On Oct 14, 2015, at 1:07 PM, Baptiste Jonglez wrote: > In its peering documentation > [https://peering.google.com/about/traffic_management.html], > Google claims that it can drive peering links at 100% utilisation: > >> Congestion management >> >> Peering ports

Re: Google's peering, GGC, and congestion management

On Oct 15, 2015, at 5:13 PM, Baldur Norddahl <baldur.nordd...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 15 October 2015 at 22:00, Patrick W. Gilmore <patr...@ianai.net> wrote: > >> The reason routers do not do that is what you suggest would not work. >> >> > Of course

Re: Google's peering, GGC, and congestion management

On Oct 15, 2015, at 3:50 PM, Baldur Norddahl <baldur.nordd...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 15 October 2015 at 16:35, Patrick W. Gilmore <patr...@ianai.net> wrote: >> The 100% number is silly. My guess? They’re at 98%. >> >> That is easily do-able because al

Re: Akamai Geolocation Secret Sauce?

Akamai’s DB is frequently updated, not dependent upon SWIP, and has been measured as the most accurate of all the providers for something over a decade. How they do it is proprietary. And sure, it can be wrong. Very wrong. But those times are rare, and they are good at updating when you tell

Re: Peering + Transit Circuits

On Aug 18, 2015, at 1:24 PM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote: On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:29 AM, Tim Durack tdur...@gmail.com wrote: Question: What is the preferred practice for separating peering and transit circuits? 1. Terminate peering and transit on separate routers. 2. Terminate

Re: Peering + Transit Circuits

Assume you and I are at an IX and peer. Suppose I send you traffic for Comcast. I can do this, even if you do not send me prefixes for Comcast. It requires me to manually configure things, but I can do it. Put another way, you said We will trust everything coming in”. I am saying that perhaps

Re: Peering + Transit Circuits

, patrick - Original Message - From: Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net To: nanog list nanog@nanog.org Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 7:12:23 PM Subject: Re: Peering + Transit Circuits Assume you and I are at an IX and peer. Suppose I send you traffic for Comcast. I can do

Re: Drops in Core

On Aug 16, 2015, at 8:44 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote: On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote: On Aug 15, 2015, at 1:41 PM, Job Snijders j...@instituut.net wrote: On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 11:01:56PM +0530, Glen Kent wrote: Is there a paper

Re: Drops in Core

. Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net --- http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman Internet Exchange - Peering - Distributed Fabric On Aug 16, 2015, at 8:00 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote

Re: Drops in Core

On Aug 15, 2015, at 1:41 PM, Job Snijders j...@instituut.net wrote: On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 11:01:56PM +0530, Glen Kent wrote: Is there a paper or a presentation that discusses the drops in the core? If i were to break the total path into three legs -- the first, middle and the last, then

Re: Drops in Core

On Aug 16, 2015, at 8:15 AM, Job Snijders j...@instituut.net wrote: On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 08:00:55AM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: On Aug 15, 2015, at 1:41 PM, Job Snijders j...@instituut.net wrote: On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 11:01:56PM +0530, Glen Kent wrote: Is there a paper

Re: United Airlines is Down (!) due to network connectivity problems

Lifted as of 0920 EDT. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/08/united-airlines-flights-in-us-grounded-due-to-computer-issues/?intcmp=latestnews -- TTFN, patrick On Jul 08, 2015, at 10:06 , Marshall Eubanks marshall.euba...@gmail.com wrote:

Re: United Airlines is Down (!) due to network connectivity problems

I’m with Ferg-dog. I can’t tell you the number of times someone (yes, including me) has designed, purchased, and installed a system with multiple backups, failovers, redundancies, etc., and some vital piece fails in a weird way which sends the whole thing into a tailspin. Taking UA as an

Re: CDNs for carriers

Netflix: https://openconnect.netflix.com/ Frankly, those three are roughly the same size, and the only ones anywhere near that size. -- TTFN, patrick On Jun 29, 2015, at 08:53 , Ramy Hashish ramy.ihash...@gmail.com wrote: Hello there, Does anybody recommend a CDN to work beside

Re: DC Circuit denies stay on Neutrality

Hundreds of people / companies on both sides. The point of the article is not Verizon lost, but that the FCC was not crazy power-usurping unlawful (direct quote from article). I.e. The FFC has at least a moderate chance of prevailing. Whether they should or not is actually not the point and

Re: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial?

On Jun 01, 2015, at 17:46 , William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote: On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Baldur Norddahl baldur.nordd...@gmail.com wrote: This is only a problem if you use so called tier 1 transit providers. The smaller fish in the pond have multiple transits themselves and will

Re: Akamai minimum prefix length issue

Akamai does not follow BGP perfectly, for many reasons, including BGP preferring crappy paths much of the time. ISPs should email netsupport-...@akamai.com to get help with traffic engineering, performance, and other questions. (Or at least that used to be the case a year ago.) -- TTFN,

Re: Akamai minimum prefix length issue

Akamai does not do this. -- TTFN, patrick On May 13, 2015, at 15:42 , Jake Mertel j...@nobistech.net wrote: Chuck, Just throwing this out there as a possibility, I've seen similar issues with other ISPs wherein the root cause was their BGP speaking routers using a filter set published

Re: SFP Programmers

Flexbox rox. But I think you do have to buy their optics, not certain. However, I've never seen a piece of equipment I couldn't use a Flexoptix SFP[+] in. -- TTFN, patrick Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. On Mar 22, 2015, at 15:12, chris ch...@nifry.com wrote:

Re: Searching for a quote

On Mar 12, 2015, at 20:44 , Larry Sheldon larryshel...@cox.net wrote: On 3/12/2015 19:20, Jason Iannone wrote: There was once a fairly common saying attributed to an early networking pioneer that went something like, be generous in what you accept, and send only the stuff that should be sent.

Re: What is lawful content? [was VZ...]

I am not a lawyer (in fact, I Am Not An Isp), but my understanding is this is pretty well settled. And it is not even weird or esoteric. If the content on the site is against the law in the jurisdiction in question, it is not legal (duh). Otherwise, yes it is, and no ISP gets to decide whether

Re: What is lawful content? [was VZ...]

On Feb 27, 2015, at 18:12 , Jim Richardson weaselkee...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote: I am not a lawyer (in fact, I Am Not An Isp), but my understanding is this is pretty well settled. And it is not even weird or esoteric

Re: Wisdom of using 100.64/10 (RFC6598) space in an Amazon VPC deployment

I personally find it amusing that companies try to have it both ways. We are huge, you should use us instead of $LITTLE_GUY because our resources scale make us better able to handle things. Oh, what, you want IPv6? We're too big to do that quickly But hey, I would try the same thing in

Re: Input Regarding Cogent and NTT

By that logic, and giving you the benefit of the doubt that you follow your own advice, you have 15-20 upstreams? I've never tried that on a standard network with BGP as the only tool. See any interesting operational stuff with that many upstreams? Also, while many people knock Cogent, I would

Peering Track: Peering Personals - any new peers out there?

Everyone: As the NANOG 63 Peering Track moderator, I would like to make a call for Peering Personals. This time around, I would like to limit the Personals to new - networks new to peering, existing networks with new locations, changes to peering policies, turning up v6 peering, etc. If you

Peering Track for NANOG 63

Everyone: I have been asked to moderate the Peering Track for NANOG 63. Time is short, and I need to fill a couple hours. If you have interesting ideas on how to do it, or better yet, would like to present something yourself, please ping me off-list. See you San Antonio! -- TTFN, patrick

Re: DDOS solution recommendation

I agree with lots said here. But I've said for years (despite some people saying I am confused) that BCP38 is the single most important thing we can do to cut DDoS. No spoofed source means no amplification. It also stops things like Kaminsky DNS attacks. There is no silver bullet. Security is

Re: DDOS solution recommendation

I do love solutions which open larger attack surfaces than they are supposed to close. In the US, we call that a cure worse than the disease. Send packet from random bot with source of Google, Comcast, Akamai, etc. to Mr. Hammett's not-DNS / honeypot / whatever, and watch him close himself off

Re: DDOS solution recommendation

packet to a non-DNS server is .. let's call it counterproductive. Good hygiene is necessary both on outgoing packets and on blocking. Checking ARIN/RIPE (not APNIC, LACNIC, AFRINIC?) is not even the bare minimum you should be doing. -- TTFN, patrick On 11 Jan 2015, at 19:42, Patrick W

Re: DDOS solution recommendation

- Original Message - From: Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net To: NANOG list nanog@nanog.org Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2015 1:42:13 PM Subject: Re: DDOS solution recommendation I do love solutions which open larger attack surfaces than they are supposed to close

Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules

This is an interesting thread, but the actual winning strategy was only tangentially mentioned. Q: How do you get a vendor to change? A: Everyone stop buying that vendor's gear. It's a simple business decision. If the profit dollars of the people who stick around with locked

Re: Shipping bulk hardware via freight

Holy crap. I've actually used Death Wish. Small world. They were awesome. Of course, I moved something far less interesting - a piano. But I called them on a Tuesday and said I need a piano moved by 1 PM tomorrow. They did it, no fuss, no muss, very professional, and reasonably priced. Highly

Cogent admits to QoSing down streaming

http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2014/11/cogent-now-admits-slowed-netflixs-traffic-creating-fast-lane-slow-lane.html This is interesting. And it will be detrimental to network neutrality supporters. Cogent admits that while they were publicly complaining about other networks congesting links,

FCC delays Comcast / TWC merger 180 days

http://www.forbes.com/sites/amadoudiallo/2014/10/04/comcast-merger-review-put-on-hold-by-fcc/ Seems to be both on-topic, and timely, given the start of NANOG62 is tomorrow (or today for some). As I mentioned elsewhere, if the FCC asked both companies to provide info and both companies did not

Re: So Philip Smith / Geoff Huston's CIDR report becomes worth a good hard look today

On Aug 14, 2014, at 02:36 , Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote: It was kindly pointed out to me in private that my phrasing could be misleading here. When ACL112 came into being, there were old equipment that were being protected by the /19 filters. However, the filters were in place long

Re: So Philip Smith / Geoff Huston's CIDR report becomes worth a good hard look today

When ACL112 came into being, there were old equipment that were being protected by the /19 filters. However, the filters were in place long after those equipment were replaced. This was done for commercial reasons, not to protect the Internet. You know it, I know it, and I'm pretty sure the

Re: So Philip Smith / Geoff Huston's CIDR report becomes worth a good hard look today

On Aug 13, 2014, at 16:42 , Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote: half the routing table is deagg crap. filter it. We disagree. Just because you don't like all more specifics doesn't mean they are useless. Not everything is about minimizing FIB size. (And RIB size hasn't been relevant for

Re: So Philip Smith / Geoff Huston's CIDR report becomes worth a good hard look today

has lots of bad side effects, such as less revenue when they don't pick you because you don't have the route. -- TTFN, patrick On Thursday, August 14, 2014, Brett Frankenberger rbf+na...@panix.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 07:53:45PM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: you mean your

Re: Akamai contact/ Infrastructure,CDN

I would email their Network Support group, netsupport-...@akamai.com. -- TTFN, patrick On Jul 23, 2014, at 11:33 , Payam Poursaied m...@payam124.com wrote: Hi Everyone, Can someone from Akamai contact me offlist. Specially those who deal with infrastructure. Regards

Re: The Cidr Report

Does the CIDR report have a 510K prefix limit and crashed or something? :) -- TTFN, patrick On Jul 11, 2014, at 18:00 , cidr-rep...@potaroo.net wrote: This report has been generated at Fri Jul 11 21:10:32 2014 AEST. The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router and generates a

Re: Listing or google map of peering exchange

On Jul 09, 2014, at 15:36 , Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote: On Jul 9, 2014, at 11:35 AM, Zaid A. Kahn z...@zaidali.com wrote: PeeringDB www.peeringdb.com is the defacto source of truth. That’s user-submitted data. The PCH directory is twenty years old, and is independently verified by

Re: Listing or google map of peering exchange

On Jul 09, 2014, at 16:03 , Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote: On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:46 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote: Taking just Seattle IX (since I have a personal interest there :), it says 177 under “participants Interesting. We pull automatically from the standard

Re: Owning a name

On Jun 27, 2014, at 00:07 , Larry Sheldon larryshel...@cox.net wrote: http://joshuapundit.blogspot.com/2014/06/court-ruling-israeli-and-us-terrorism.html Have not seen much discussion about this. That would be a horrifically bad precedent to set. I hope this insanity stops before it get

Re: rich...@bennett.com has shared Cable companies astroturfing support against FCC Title II regulation | Electronista

Any particular reason you wouldn't send such a thing? It is interesting, operationally relevant, and timely. -- TTFN, patrick On Jun 06, 2014, at 18:48 , Richard Bennett rich...@bennett.com wrote: Dear NANOG, I didn't send this. Sorry to disappoint the speculators. Richard On

Re: rich...@bennett.com has shared Cable companies astroturfing support against FCC Title II regulation | Electronista

(although I don't know if mailman will respect that). -- TTFN, patrick On Jun 06, 2014, at 20:03 , Richard Bennett rich...@bennett.com wrote: Is there any reason you would? On 6/6/14, 4:39 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: Any particular reason you wouldn't send such a thing? It is interesting

Re: rich...@bennett.com has shared Cable companies astroturfing support against FCC Title II regulation | Electronista

too much time on his hands. RB On 6/6/14, 5:06 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: I believe I listed 3. And there are multiple times I have posted similar items in the past. Just curious about the speculators thing. But I think we're off-topic, so apologies to the audience for extra email

Re: The Cidr Report

Dammit people. Get back to work. Pull us back down under 500K! -- TTFN, patrick On May 16, 2014, at 18:00 , cidr-rep...@potaroo.net wrote: This report has been generated at Fri May 16 21:13:53 2014 AEST. The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router and generates a report on

Re: New Zealand Spy Agency To Vet Network Builds, Provider Staff

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of this. But at least they did it in the open, unlike the NSA (where you live). -- TTFN, patrick On May 13, 2014, at 12:12 , Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote: Yep… If I had infrastructure in NZ, that would be enough to cause me to remove it. Owen On

Re: New Zealand Spy Agency To Vet Network Builds, Provider Staff

advance approval rights on our maintenance procedures. Owen On May 13, 2014, at 9:34 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote: Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of this. But at least they did it in the open, unlike the NSA (where you live). -- TTFN, patrick On May 13

Re: New Zealand Spy Agency To Vet Network Builds, Provider Staff

On May 13, 2014, at 17:47 , Tony Wicks t...@wicks.co.nz wrote: Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: New Zealand Spy Agency To Vet Network Builds, Provider Staff I didn't see the NSA telling us what we had to buy are demanding advance approval rights on our maintenance procedures. Owen Try to

Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Network Neutrality (was: Wow its been quiet here...

Nice discussion about history motivations. Not completely correct, but it's always fun to argue over history, and over motivations, since both are open to intepretation. Personally, I am interested in the future, and specifically in market-driven solutions to our problems. Call me a

Re: The Cidr Report

w00 h00! We did it!! Is this excellent or what? We dipped below half a million again! I am impressed. Keep up the good work, everyone. Party in Bellevue if we can keep it below 500K until then! -- TTFN, patrick On May 9, 2014, at 18:00, cidr-rep...@potaroo.net wrote: This report has

Re: We hit half-million: The Cidr Report

On Apr 30, 2014, at 09:15 , Jérôme Nicolle jer...@ceriz.fr wrote: Le 29/04/2014 04:39, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu a écrit : Do we have a handle on what percent of the de-aggrs are legitimate attempts at TE, and what percent are just whoopsies that should be re-aggregated? Deaggs can

Re: We hit half-million: The Cidr Report

...@apnic.net wrote: On 29 Apr 2014, at 12:39 pm, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 21:59:43 -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore said: On Apr 28, 2014, at 19:41, Chris Boyd cb...@gizmopartners.com wrote: I'm in the middle of a physical move. I promise I'll take the 3 deagg'd /24s out as soon

Re: We hit half-million: The Cidr Report

Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. On Apr 28, 2014, at 19:41, Chris Boyd cb...@gizmopartners.com wrote: On Apr 28, 2014, at 2:27 AM, Andy Davidson wrote: now aggregate it back down again, please. :-) I'm in the middle of a physical move. I promise I'll take

Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post

On Apr 25, 2014, at 00:57 , Larry Sheldon larryshel...@cox.net wrote: I just posted a completely empty message for which I apologize. Larry is confused. He can claim he is not, but posting to NANOG does not change the facts. Then again, just because I posted to NANOG doesn't prove I'm right

Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post

all be better off without? -- TTFN, patrick On Apr 25, 2014, at 18:47 , Larry Sheldon larryshel...@cox.net wrote: On 4/25/2014 8:23 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: On Apr 25, 2014, at 00:57 , Larry Sheldon larryshel...@cox.net wrote: I just posted a completely empty message for which I

We hit half-million: The Cidr Report

: Patrick W Gilmore | 5 Nov 14:39 2004 On Nov 5, 2004, at 6:00 AM, cidr-report at potaroo.net wrote: Recent Table History Date PrefixesCIDR Agg [...] 05-11-04156315 103781 Well, we broke 150K prefixes - and without

The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post

Anyone afraid what will happen when companies which have monopolies can charge content providers or guarantee packet loss? In a normal free market, if two companies with a mutual consumer have a tiff, the consumer decides which to support. Where I live, I have one broadband provider. If they

Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post

I think you and I disagree on the definition of anti-competitive. But that's fine. There is more than one problem to solve. I just figured the FCC thing was timely and operational. -- TTFN, patrick On Apr 24, 2014, at 10:53 , Bob Evans b...@fiberinternetcenter.com wrote: Gee whiz, why

Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post

* I'll have to see how these changes are implemented and how things are interpreted before we know what this is going to do to competitveness. -Wayne On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 04:42:42PM -0500, Jack Bates wrote: On 4/24/2014 9:59 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: I think you and I disagree

Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post

On Apr 24, 2014, at 23:38 , Larry Sheldon larryshel...@cox.net wrote: On 4/24/2014 10:23 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: The invisible hand of the market cannot fix problems when there is a monopoly. Put in economic terms, a player with Market Power is extracting Rents. (Capitalization

Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post

On Apr 25, 2014, at 00:01 , Everton Marques everton.marq...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.netwrote: On Apr 24, 2014, at 23:38 , Larry Sheldon larryshel...@cox.net wrote: Regulating monopolies protects monopolies from competition

Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post

. - The Washington Post On 4/24/2014 10:44 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: On Apr 24, 2014, at 23:38 , Larry Sheldon larryshel...@cox.net wrote: On 4/24/2014 10:23 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: The invisible hand of the market cannot fix problems when there is a monopoly. Put in economic

Re: ARIN Enters Phase Four of the IPv4 Countdown Plan

If you didn't like it, you could have participated in the rule making where things like this were discussed at length, and voted on by the community (which turned out to be a very few people who gave a shit). -- TTFN, patrick On Apr 23, 2014, at 10:35, Paul S. cont...@winterei.se wrote:

Re: [[Infowarrior] - NSA Said to Have Used Heartbleed Bug for Years]

On Apr 14, 2014, at 15:47 , Scott Howard sc...@doc.net.au wrote: On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Niels Bakker niels=na...@bakker.netwrote: At least one vendor, Akamai is helping out now: http://marc.info/?l=openssl-usersm=139723710923076w=2 I hope other vendors will follow suit.

Re: Serious bug in ubiquitous OpenSSL library: Heartbleed

On Apr 09, 2014, at 11:26 , Me jsch...@flowtools.net wrote: On 04/08/2014 09:46 PM, Rob Seastrom wrote: If that's true, you might want to consider immediately disconnecting your systems from the Internet and never re-connecting them. After all, theres a lot of online unseen code testing your

Re: Serious bug in ubiquitous OpenSSL library: Heartbleed

Lots of tools available. I'm with ferg, surprised more haven't been mentioned here. Tools to check for the bug: • on your own box: https://github.com/musalbas/heartbleed-masstest/blob/master/ssltest.py • online: http://filippo.io/Heartbleed/ (use carefully as they might log

Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition

On Mar 30, 2014, at 16:40 , Måns Nilsson mansa...@besserwisser.org wrote: Subject: Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Date: Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 11:06:11AM -0400 Quoting Patrick W. Gilmore (patr...@ianai.net): On Mar 29, 2014, at 3:15, Måns Nilsson mansa...@besserwisser.org

Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition

Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. On Mar 29, 2014, at 3:15, Måns Nilsson mansa...@besserwisser.org wrote: Quoting John R. Levine (jo...@iecc.com): Ergo, ad hominem. Please quit doing that. As a side note I happen to run my own mail server without spam filters -- it works

Re: misunderstanding scale

On Mar 24, 2014, at 12:21, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote: On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.com wrote: I am not sure I agree with the basic premise here. NAT or Private addressing does not equal security. Many of the folks you would have deploy IPv6

Re: misunderstanding scale

On Mar 24, 2014, at 13:17 , William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote: On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote: On Mar 24, 2014, at 12:21, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote: Some folks WANT to segregate their networks from the Internet via a general-protocol

Re: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on ISPs’ refusal to upgrade networks | Ars Technica

On Mar 20, 2014, at 08:39 , Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote: On Wednesday, March 19, 2014 09:06:47 PM Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: The angle on my right shoulder wants to congratulate a tier one (whatever the F that means) provider for finally admitting, in writing, in public, from

US to relinquish control of Internet

(As if the US has control anyway) It's all over the popular press, strange I haven't seen it here. http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/200889-us-to-relinquish-internet-control

Re: Filter on IXP

On Feb 28, 2014, at 11:52 , Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote: On 28/02/2014 15:42, Jérôme Nicolle wrote: Instead, IXPs _could_ enforce BCP38 too. Mapping the route-server's received routes to ingress _and_ egress ACLs on IXP ports would mitigate the role of BCP38 offenders within member

Re: Everyone should be deploying BCP 38! Wait, they are ....

Barry is a well respected security researcher. I'm surprised he posted this. In his defense, he did it over a year ago (June 11, 2012). Maybe we should ask him about it. I'll do that now -- TTFN, patrick On Feb 18, 2014, at 13:31 , Dave Bell m...@geordish.org wrote: That article is

Re: internet peering conferences in Asia Pacific

On Feb 14, 2014, at 00:44 , Antonio Querubin t...@lavanauts.org wrote: On Thu, 13 Feb 2014, Warren Bailey wrote: There is a group called PTC.. Pacific Telecommunications Council.. That¹s pretty much the biggest I can think of (lot¹s of MSO¹s.. Operators, etc.) and it¹s in Hawaii every year.

Re: carrier comparison

On Feb 6, 2014, at 11:22, Joshua Goldbard j...@2600hz.com wrote: Cogent always has the cheapest rates Objectively, provably false. -- TTFN, patrick but they also have the most peering disputes of any operator. I've seen intra-data center hops between cogent and Verizon take over 150ms.

Re: Will a single /27 get fully routed these days?

[...] particularly of policies defined by a handful of folks who bother to participate in the ARIN public policy processes I love this part. I was told a billion times where and how to participate in the policy debate - to the point where many people complain they are being told too many

Re: Neighborhood mesh statistical multiplexing

On Jan 26, 2014, at 16:04 , Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote: I wonder if they'll break BCP 38... or vice-versa... http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/01/bewifi-lets-you-steal-your-neighbors-bandwidth-when-theyre-not-using-it/ As long as Telefonica customers only use other Telefonica

Re: Neighborhood mesh statistical multiplexing

On Jan 27, 2014, at 11:58 , Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote: From: Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net On Jan 26, 2014, at 16:04 , Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote: I wonder if they'll break BCP 38... or vice-versa... http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/01/bewifi-lets-you-steal

Re: China ISPs DNS problems on Jan 22nd - any idea what happened?

On Jan 26, 2014, at 22:50 , Geoffrey Keating geo...@geoffk.org wrote: Patrick van Staveren pvanstave...@mintel.com writes: This past Tuesday the 22nd I was witness to a widespread DNS poisoning problem in China, whereby a lot of DNS queries were all returning the same IP address, 65.49.2.178.

Re: NetSol opts domain customers into $1800 Security program?

On Jan 22, 2014, at 14:20 , Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote: They also will change your domains to auto renew magically and punch a credit card 90 days in advance of expiry so for example if a domain expires in April expect a charge in January at the latest. Why? I dunno, better to have

Re: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes

On Jan 15, 2014, at 10:44 , William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote: On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote: NEVER EVER EVER put an IX prefix into BGP, IGP, or even static route. An IXP LAN should not be reachable from any device not directly attached

Re: Proxy ARP detection

Excellent. So all everyone has to do is not buy cisco _or_ juniper. Wait a minute -- TTFN, patrick On Jan 15, 2014, at 19:54 , Eric Rosen ero...@redhat.com wrote: Cisco PIX's used to do this if the firewall had a route and saw a ARP request in that IP range it would proxy arp.

Re: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes

Pardon the top post, but I really don't have anything to comment below other than to agree with Chris and say rfc5963 is broken. NEVER EVER EVER put an IX prefix into BGP, IGP, or even static route. An IXP LAN should not be reachable from any device not directly attached to that LAN. Period.

Re: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes

On Jan 14, 2014, at 22:20 , Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org wrote: On Jan 14, 2014, at 7:55 PM, Eric A Louie elo...@yahoo.com wrote: I have a connection to a peering fabric and I'm not distributing the peering fabric routes into my network. There's a two part problem lurking. Problem #1

Re: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes

On Jan 14, 2014, at 23:03 , Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org wrote: On Jan 14, 2014, at 9:35 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote: So Just Don't Do It. Setting next-hop-self is not just for big guys, the crappiest, tiniest router that can do peering at an IXP has the same ability

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >