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. D

Re: CDN node locations

On Nov 16, 2013, at 19:36 , Jay Ashworth wrote: >> Second, a list of CDN nodes is likely impossible to gather & maintain >> without the help of the CDNs themselves. There are literally thousands >> of them, most do not serve the entire Internet, and they change >> frequently. And before you ask,

Re: List of CDNs?

> On Nov 16, 2013, at 5:28 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > >> First, the location of CDN nodes is not relevant to passive DNS monitoring. >> If Andrew would like a list of domains with CDN hostnames in them, that >> might be findable. >> >> Second,

Re: List of CDNs?

ful for redacting those hosts. >> >> Andy >> >> >> Andrew Fried >> andrew.fr...@gmail.com >> >> On 11/14/13, 5:11 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >>> List of CDNs would be difficult, but not impossible. Although they do >>> different

Re: List of CDNs?

twork, your decision, I'm just making suggestions. -- TTFN, patrick > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:11:59PM +, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> List of CDNs would be difficult, but not impossible. Although they do >> different things, so a simple list is unlikely to be as useful as i

Re: List of CDNs?

List of CDNs would be difficult, but not impossible. Although they do different things, so a simple list is unlikely to be as useful as it looks. A lost of CDN "DC nodes" is not possible. Why do you care about such a thing anyway? -- TTFN, patrick Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgi

Re: Sudan disconnected from the Internet

It's not a fiber cut. It did come back for a while at least. -- TTFN, patrick On Sep 25, 2013, at 21:03 , Jean-Francois Mezei wrote: > On 13-09-25 20:43, Warren Bailey wrote: >> We make Ku-band backpacks for this ty

Re: iOS 7 update traffic

Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. On Sep 19, 2013, at 14:11, Warren Bailey wrote: > I don't see how operators could tolerate this, honestly. I can't think of a > single provider who does not oversubscribe their access platform... Which > leads me to this question : > > W

Re: iOS 7 update traffic

Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. On Sep 19, 2013, at 13:58, Paul Ferguson wrote: > Can someone please explain to a non-Apple person what the hell happened > that started generating so much traffic? Perhaps I missed it in this > thread, but I would be curious to know what iO

Re: common method to count traffic volume on IX

n-standard sampling method, they have refused to change when confronted or even say what their traffic would be with a 300 second timer. -- TTFN, patrick > On 9/17/13, Nick Hilliard wrote: >> On 17/09/2013 14:43, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >>> And yes, DE-CIX is more than well

Re: common method to count traffic volume on IX

On Sep 17, 2013, at 11:04 , Nick Hilliard wrote: > On 17/09/2013 14:43, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> And yes, DE-CIX is more than well aware everyone thinks this is .. uh .. >> let's just call it "silly" for now, although most would use far more >> dispara

Re: common method to count traffic volume on IX

On Sep 17, 2013, at 07:02 , Nick Hilliard wrote: > On 17/09/2013 11:52, Martin T wrote: >> Is there a common method to count this traffic on a switch-fabric? >> Just read all the switch interface "packets input" counters with an >> interval to get the aggregated input traffic and read all the swi

Re: Akamai Edgekey issues ?

On Sep 03, 2013, at 02:41 , Scott Hulbert wrote: > Matthew Petach wrote: >> Why not just use the TWC nameservers, >> if thiings work when you use them instead >> of the Google nameservers? >> > > One reason would be that TWC used to hijack failed DNS requests and show > advertisements ( > htt

Re: Akamai Edgekey issues ?

On Sep 03, 2013, at 09:58 , Jay Ashworth wrote: >> From: "Matthew Petach" >> On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Jorge Amodio wrote: >> >>> Here is another bit of data... www.apple.com not reachable from a >>> machine >>> using Google's NS, reachable from an iPad using TWC NS >>> >>> IP addresses

Re: Trivium

On Aug 19, 2013, at 10:42 , Blake Dunlap wrote: > Without Google, how do you know where anything even *is*? Pretending that wasn't a troll, I wonder how much of the traffic these days is things like AppleTV, Roku, OS updates, iThing/Android 'Apps', etc. that do not require a user to type "www.

Re: How big is the Internet?

On Aug 16, 2013, at 00:37 , Sean Donelan wrote: > On Thu, 15 Aug 2013, Seth Mattinen wrote: >> We'll also need this data in units of number of Libraries of Congress. > > The researchers at the Library of Congress are more than happy to explain why > you are wrong to attempt to use the Library o

Re: How big is the Internet?

On Aug 15, 2013, at 20:02 , Jay Ashworth wrote: >> From: "Warren Bailey" > >> I neglected to say one additional thing which I think may be worth reading >> before replying. I have always held the opinion that internet traffic >> isn't internet traffic until it hits the Internet, which I defined

Re: How big is the Internet?

On Aug 15, 2013, at 10:05 , Leo Bicknell wrote: > On Aug 14, 2013, at 3:27 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> Once you define what you mean by "how bit is the Internet", I'll be happy to >> spout off about how big it is. :) > > Arbitrary definition time: A In

Re: How big is the Internet?

On Aug 15, 2013, at 00:19 , Sean Donelan wrote: > On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> It is actually even harder than the above illustrates. Most people define >> "Mbps on the Internet" as inter-AS bits. But then what about Akamai AANP >> nodes,

Re: How big is the Internet?

On Aug 14, 2013, at 15:00 , Sean Donelan wrote: > I should have remembered, NANOG prefers to correct things. So here are > several estimates about how much IP/Internet traffic is downloaded > in a month. Does anyone have better numbers, or better souces of > numbers that can be shared? I think

Re: ddos attacks

On Aug 02, 2013, at 09:37 , sgr...@airstreamcomm.net wrote: > I’m curious to know what other service providers are doing to > alleviate/prevent ddos attacks from happening in your network. Are you > completely reactive and block as many addresses as possible or null0 traffic > to the effected

Re: nLayer IP transit

On Jul 31, 2013, at 20:00 , Mark Tees wrote: > I remember reading a while back that customers of nLayer IP transit > services could send in Flowspec rules to nLayer. Anyone know if that is > true/current? Not any more. -- TTFN, patrick signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: ARIN WHOIS for leads

On Jul 26, 2013, at 12:54 , Alex Rubenstein wrote: >> Case in point.. And I'm going to name drop, but do not consider this a shame. >> I have been looking at various filtering technologies, and was looking at >> Barracudas site. I went on with my day, but noticed that filtering vendors >> start s

Re: ARIN WHOIS for leads

ternet companies. -- TTFN, patrick On Jul 26, 2013, at 11:59 , "Otis L. Surratt, Jr." wrote: > -Original Message- > From: Patrick W. Gilmore [mailto:patr...@ianai.net] > Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 9:47 AM > To: NANOG list > Subject: Re:

Re: ARIN WHOIS for leads

On Jul 26, 2013, at 11:05 , David Conrad wrote: > On Jul 26, 2013, at 7:58 AM, "Patrick W. Gilmore" wrote: >> You can change anything you want. ARIN & ICANN are both member >> organizations. Propose a change, get the votes, and POOF!, things are >> changed.

Re: ARIN WHOIS for leads

On Jul 26, 2013, at 09:32 , Ryan Pavely wrote: > What about the 2am phone calls from the guy, who did a nslookup on a website, > and then whois on the ip, who is calling to say his porn site is partially > not working and he's pissed. > > imho. The days of having public records like whois/rwh

Re: ARIN WHOIS for leads

On Jul 25, 2013, at 19:29 , "Otis L. Surratt, Jr." wrote: > From: Warren Bailey [mailto:wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com] >> Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of maintaining the whois? > > Yep! > >> We registered a few domains and get the same thing, I think it's > something that people a

Re: Friday Hosing

On Jul 12, 2013, at 19:22 , Nick Khamis wrote: > Set up your own email server, host your own web pages, maintain your own > cloud, breath your own oxygen FTW. That's simply not realistic for many companies and essentially all people (to a first approximation). -- TTFN, patrick

Re: Friday Hosing

On Jul 12, 2013, at 13:44 , Bryan Fields wrote: > On 7/12/13 1:39 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> Put another way, whether it was stupid or evil, the results are the same. >> Turning off a customer in good standing is actionable in court, and should >> be avoided by leg

Re: Friday Hosing

Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. On Jul 12, 2013, at 13:25, na...@namor.ca wrote: > On Fri, 12 Jul 2013, Alain Hebert wrote: > >> Is it me or the bigger a corporation gets the more vindictive (a b-word >> intended) they are to customers leaving them? > > "Never attribute t

Re: /25's prefixes announced into global routing table?

On Jun 24, 2013, at 13:29 , Paul Rolland (ポール・ロラン) wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 13:56:02 -0600 Michael McConnell > wrote: >> As the IPv4 space get smaller and smaller, does anyone think we'll see a >> time when /25's will be accepted for global BGP prefix announcement. The >> current smallest s

Re: /25's prefixes announced into global routing table?

On Jun 22, 2013, at 16:16 , Grzegorz Janoszka wrote: > On 22-06-13 17:30, Owen DeLong wrote: >> Looking at the number of autonomous systems in the IPv6 routing table and >> the total number of routes, it looks like it will shake out somewhere in the >> neighborhood of 3-5 prefixes/ASN. Since th

Re: Need help in flushing DNS

On Jun 20, 2013, at 01:30 , Grant Ridder wrote: > Yelp is evidently also affected Not from here. If the NS or www points to 204.11.56.0/24 for a production domain/hostname, that's "bad". Yelp seems to be resolving normally for me. -- TTFN, patrick > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:19 PM, John L

Re: Multihop eBGP peering or VPN based eBGP peering

On Jun 17, 2013, at 00:36 , "Otis L. Surratt, Jr." wrote: >> Any idea why more companies don't offer eBGP peering / multi hop >> peering? Its very common for providers to offer single or double hop >> peering, so why not 5 or 10 hops? In many cases people find it logical >> to perform single or d

Re: huawei

based on source/dest IP address or something that is magically messaged from the mother ship, but I am dubious. It should be trivial to prove to yourself the box is, or is not, doing something evil if you actually try. -- TTFN, patrick > --Original Message-- > From: Patrick

Re: huawei

On Jun 13, 2013, at 12:18 , Nick Khamis wrote: > A local clec here in Canada just teamed up with this company to > provide cell service to the north: > > http://cwta.ca/blog/2012/09/24/ice-wireless-iristel-and-huawei-partner-for-3g-wireless-network-in-northern-canada/ > > Scary Why? Do yo

Re: Single AS multiple Dirverse Providers

On Jun 10, 2013, at 15:23 , Job Snijders wrote: >> The alternative is to expect "networks" with 100s or 1000s of locations to >> burn 100s or 1000s of ASNs. Which I think is a bit silly. Hence my question >> about possibly changing the rules. > > I see no issue with that, we have an ASN pool o

Re: Single AS multiple Dirverse Providers

On Jun 10, 2013, at 14:14 , Joe Provo wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 01:18:04PM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:54 , Joe Provo wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:36:44AM -0500, Dennis Burgess wrote: >>>> I have a network that has th

Re: Single AS multiple Dirverse Providers

On Jun 10, 2013, at 14:07 , Bruce Pinsky wrote: > Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > > On Jun 10, 2013, at 13:36 , Bruce Pinsky wrote: > >> Or maintain "standard" behavior by running a GRE tunnel between the two > >> discontinuous sites and run iBGP over the t

Re: Single AS multiple Dirverse Providers

On Jun 10, 2013, at 13:36 , Bruce Pinsky wrote: > Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > >> however, providers a/b at site1 do not send us the two /24s from > >> site b.. > > > > This is probably incorrect. > > > > The providers are almost certainly send

Re: Single AS multiple Dirverse Providers

On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:54 , Joe Provo wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:36:44AM -0500, Dennis Burgess wrote: >> I have a network that has three peers, two are at one site and the third >> is geographically diverse, and there is NO connection between the two >> separate networks. > > So, you h

Re: Single AS multiple Dirverse Providers

> however, providers a/b at site1 do not send us the two /24s from > site b.. This is probably incorrect. The providers are almost certainly sending you the prefixes, but your router is dropping them due to loop detection. To answer your later question, this is the definition of 'standard' as i

whoami.akamai.net

As the whoami.akamai.net hostname came up on the list, I thought I'd mention it here. The hostname 'whoami.akamai.com' is a CNAME for whoami.akamai.net. That CNAME is, frankly, a mistake. It will be removed "soon". If you are using the .com name, please move to the .net name. -- TTFN, patrick

Re: Variety, On The Media, don't understand the Internet

On May 14, 2013, at 21:14 , Jean-Francois Mezei wrote: > On 13-05-14 20:55, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> Since when is peering not part of the Internet? > > Yes, one car argue that an device with an IP address routable from the > internet is part of the internet. Can ar

Re: Variety, On The Media, don't understand the Internet

On May 14, 2013, at 15:53 , Jean-Francois Mezei wrote: > On 13-05-14 13:06, Jay Ashworth wrote: > >> >> http://variety.com/2013/digital/news/netflix-puts-even-more-strain-on-the-internet-1200480561/ >> >> they suggest that Akamai and other ISP-side caching is either not >> affecting these nu

Re: Variety, On The Media, don't understand the Internet

On May 14, 2013, at 13:06 , Jay Ashworth wrote: > Or I don't. Which is not completely impossible. > > In this piece: > > > http://variety.com/2013/digital/news/netflix-puts-even-more-strain-on-the-internet-1200480561/ > > they suggest that Akamai and other ISP-side caching is either not > a

Re: whoami.akamai.net [was: Google Public DNS Problems?]

On May 02, 2013, at 14:42 , "Constantine A. Murenin" wrote: > On 2 May 2013 11:12, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> For clarity: Looking up the hostname "whoami.akamai.net" will return the IP >> address in the source field of the packet (DNS query) which reache

whoami.akamai.net [was: Google Public DNS Problems?]

On May 02, 2013, at 12:12 , Joe Abley wrote: > On 2013-05-02, at 12:10, Joe Abley wrote: >> On 2013-05-02, at 11:59, Charles Gucker wrote: >>> That's not entirely true.You can easily do lookup for >>> whoami.akamai.net and it will return the unicast address for the node >>> in question (p

Re: Tier1 blackholing policy?

Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. On Apr 30, 2013, at 12:32, Thomas Schmid wrote: > Am 30.04.2013 17:53, schrieb Patrick W. Gilmore: >> "Core"? Seriously? Which of these statements are true: A) Is it impossible >> for an end user or busines

Re: Tier1 blackholing policy?

On Apr 30, 2013, at 11:23 , Thomas Schmid wrote: > On 30.04.2013 17:07, Chris Boyd wrote: >> On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 10:59 -0400, ML wrote: >>> 1) Do nothing - They're supposed deliver any and all bits >>> (Disregarding >>> a DoS or similiar situation which impedes said network) >>> 2) Prefix filte

Re: Tier1 blackholing policy?

On Apr 30, 2013, at 11:07 , Chris Boyd wrote: > On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 10:59 -0400, ML wrote: >> 1) Do nothing - They're supposed deliver any and all bits >> (Disregarding >> a DoS or similiar situation which impedes said network) >> 2) Prefix filter - Don't be a party (at least in one direction)

Re: IPv6 and HTTPS

On Apr 26, 2013, at 00:19 , joel jaeggli wrote: > On 4/25/13 6:24 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote: >> Ok, here's a stupid question[1], which I'd know the answer to if I ran bigger >> networks: >> >> Does anyone know how much IPv4 space is allocated *specifically* to cater >> to the fact that HTTPS requir

Re: Open Resolver Problems

On Apr 01, 2013, at 12:09 , "Dobbins, Roland" wrote: > On Apr 1, 2013, at 11:03 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > >> You can always make an exception if the user is extremely loud. > > It might be a good idea to make pinholes for the Google and OpenDNS > recur

Re: Open Resolver Problems

On Apr 01, 2013, at 11:55 , "Milt Aitken" wrote: > Most of our DSL customers have modem/routers that resolve DNS > externally. > And most of those have no configuration option to stop it. > So, we took the unfortunate step of ACL blocking DNS requests to & from > the DSL network unless the reques

Re: Open Resolver Problems

On Mar 26, 2013, at 10:38 , Jay Ashworth wrote: >> From: "Jared Mauch" > >> b) locking down your recursive servers to networks you control > > Sure. But OpenDNS, Google, and the other providers of recursive servers > for edge cases can't do that anymore? I wish people would stop bring that up

Re: Open Resolver Problems

On Mar 26, 2013, at 08:01 , "Dobbins, Roland" wrote: > On Mar 26, 2013, at 6:50 PM, Jamie Bowden wrote: > >> let's suppose I just happen to have, or have access to, a botnet comprised >> of (tens of) millions of random hosts all over the internet, and I feel like >> destroying your DNS servers

Re: Open Resolver Problems

Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. On Mar 26, 2013, at 18:27, "Dobbins, Roland" wrote: > On Mar 26, 2013, at 3:13 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote: > >> The whole point of this thread is that dns amplification hurts other people, >> not the resolver which is being abused. > > Actual

Re: Is multihoming hard? [was: DNS amplification]

On Mar 20, 2013, at 16:20 , Owen DeLong wrote: > On Mar 20, 2013, at 10:18 AM, "Patrick W. Gilmore" wrote: >> On Mar 20, 2013, at 09:25 , Owen DeLong wrote: >>> Not one of them will run BGP with a residential subscriber. >> >> Who cares? [See below.] &

Re: Is multihoming hard? [was: DNS amplification]

On Mar 20, 2013, at 09:25 , Owen DeLong wrote: >> I don't know a single ISP that wants to throttle growth by not accepting >> additional customers, BGP speaking or not. (I do know several that want to >> throttle growth through not upgrading their links because they have a >> captive audience

Is multihoming hard? [was: DNS amplification]

Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. On Mar 20, 2013, at 8:07, Aled Morris wrote: > On 20 March 2013 11:44, Arturo Servin wrote: > >>The last presentations that I saw about it said that we are going >> to be >> fine: >> >> http://www.iepg.org/2011-11-ietf82/2011-11-13

Re: routing table go boom (was: Re: [c-nsp] DNS amplification)

[Thanx for changing subject - should have done it myself a couple posts ago.] Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. On Mar 19, 2013, at 14:26, Jared Mauch wrote: > On Mar 19, 2013, at 2:12 PM, Joe Abley wrote: > >> We've been saying "unconstrained growth bad" for BGP for years

Re: [c-nsp] DNS amplification

Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. On Mar 19, 2013, at 13:57, Jared Mauch wrote: > > On Mar 19, 2013, at 1:50 PM, Christopher Morrow > wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 1:45 PM, David Conrad wrote: >>> On Mar 19, 2013, at 10:12 AM, Christopher Morrow >>> wrote:

Re: [c-nsp] DNS amplification

Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. On Mar 19, 2013, at 13:45, David Conrad wrote: > On Mar 19, 2013, at 10:12 AM, Christopher Morrow > wrote: >> There's nothing inherent in BGP that would not work with an >> unconstrained growth of the routing table, right? You just need en

Re: What Should an Engineer Address when 'Selling' IPv6 to Executives?

On Mar 05, 2013, at 13:41 , Cameron Byrne wrote: > In-line Isn't every reply? (Well, every reply worth reading.) > On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Mukom Akong T. wrote: >> Dear experts, >> >> I've found myself thinking about what ground an engineer needs to cover in >> order to convince the

Re: Cloudflare is down

On Mar 04, 2013, at 09:51 , Leo Bicknell wrote: > Any competent network admin would have stopped and questioned a > 90,000+ byte packet and done more investigation. Competent programmers > writing their internal tools would have flagged that data as out > of rage. The last couple words are the

Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network

On Feb 12, 2013, at 01:06 , Doug Barton wrote: > On 02/11/2013 03:52 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> One of us has a different dictionary than everyone else. > > I'm not sure it's different dictionaries, I think you're talking past each > other. No, it&#x

Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network

On Feb 11, 2013, at 18:52 , "Patrick W. Gilmore" wrote: > On Feb 11, 2013, at 14:11 , Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> Multicast _is_ useful for filling the millions of DVRs out there with >> broadcast programs and for live events (eg. sports). A smart VOD system >>

Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network

On Feb 11, 2013, at 14:11 , Stephen Sprunk wrote: > On 11-Feb-13 12:25, Mark Radabaugh wrote: >> On 2/11/13 9:32 AM, ML wrote: >>> Any eyeball network that wants to support multicast should peer with >>> the content players(s) that support it. Simple! >>> >>> Just another reason to make the trans

Re: Global caches

On Feb 04, 2013, at 09:03 , Kyle Camilleri wrote: > Some CDN providers such as Akamai and Google (often called Global Google > Cache) are offering caches to ISPs. It is very convenient for small ISPs to > alleviate bandwidth towards the provider, but also the CDN provider benefits > by putting

Re: Ddos mitigation service

On Feb 01, 2013, at 10:02 , "Paul Stewart" wrote: > Akamai (CDN) does scrubbing??? I'm sure there are other things Akamai does in the security sector as well. -- TTFN, patrick > -Original Message- > From: Pierre Lamy [mailto

Re: Netflix transit preference?

-- TTFN, patrick On Dec 27, 2012, at 13:54 , Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > On Dec 27, 2012, at 13:46 , randal k wrote: > >> Thanks for your prompt response. Yes, we are trying to determine where/how >> we receive it ... not necessarily influence it, as there isn't so mu

Re: Netflix transit preference?

hive mind for some info > in the meantime. > > Cheers, > Randal > > > On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore > wrote: > On Dec 27, 2012, at 13:19 , randal k wrote: > > > I work at a datacenter in southern Colorado that is the upstream bandwi

Re: Netflix transit preference?

On Dec 27, 2012, at 13:19 , randal k wrote: > I work at a datacenter in southern Colorado that is the upstream bandwidth > provider for several regional ISPs. We have been investigating our > ever-growing bandwidth usage and have found that out of transits > (Level3,Cogent,HE) that Netflix always

Re: Why do some providers require IPv6 /64 PA space to have public whois?

On Dec 08, 2012, at 21:14 , Darius Jahandarie wrote: > On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Dan Luedtke wrote: >> Off-topic but somehow important to me: >>> HE has an open-peering policy (AFAIK); >>> which basically means that tunnelbroker.net traffic is free for >>> hetzner.de >> >> Is that true? >

Legal Crap [was: William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please help if you can.]

On Nov 30, 2012, at 20:25 , Randy Bush wrote: >> Not a lawyer. > > than stfu with the legal crap It amazes me how people feel free to opine on things like networking without a certification, but if you don't have a law degree, suddenly they believe you are incapable of understanding anything

Re: William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please help if you can.

On Nov 29, 2012, at 13:57 , William Herrin wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore > wrote: >> Do you think if the police found out child pr0n was >> being served from a starbux they wouldn't >> confiscate the equipment from that store? >

Re: William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please help if you can.

On Nov 29, 2012, at 12:58 , Barry Shein wrote: > On November 29, 2012 at 11:45 patr...@ianai.net (Patrick W. Gilmore) wrote: >> On Nov 29, 2012, at 11:17 , Barry Shein wrote: >> >>> It's funny, it's all illusion like show business. It's not hard to set &g

Re: William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please help if you can.

On Nov 29, 2012, at 11:17 , Barry Shein wrote: > Back in the early days of the public internet we didn't require any id > to create an account, just that you found a way to pay us. We had > anonymous accts some of whom dropped by personally to pay their bill, > some said hello but I usually didn

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On Nov 20, 2012, at 14:44 , "Tony Hain" wrote: > If you assume that Youtube/Facebook/Netflix are 50% of the overall traffic, > why wouldn't a dual stacked end point have half of its traffic as IPv6 after > June??? "If you assume...". Kinda says it all right there. But more importantly, those

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On Nov 20, 2012, at 11:42 , Mike Jones wrote: > On 20 November 2012 16:05, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> On Nov 20, 2012, at 08:45 , Owen DeLong wrote: >> >>> It is entirely possible that Google's numbers are artificially low for a >>> number >>>

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On Nov 20, 2012, at 08:45 , Owen DeLong wrote: > It is entirely possible that Google's numbers are artificially low for a > number > of reasons. AMS-IX publishes stats too: This is probably a better view of overall percentage on the Internet than a sp

Re: Plages d'adresses IP Orange

On Nov 19, 2012, at 12:16 , Jamie Bowden wrote: > Actually, this is kind of an interesting aside. Last time I checked, Canada > counts as North America and large parts of Quebec are inhabited by folks who > don't speak much, if any, English. Having said that, I can't recall having > seen any

Re: Google/Youtube problems

On Nov 19, 2012, at 03:05 , Saku Ytti wrote: > On (2012-11-18 23:47 +0100), Daniel Suchy wrote: > >> Is anyone else seeing similar problems with Google/Youtube? > > My advice is, host the content locally. Sound advice, IMHO. > I'm bit curious about market position youtube has. GOOG claims you

Re: Indonesian ISP Moratel announces Google's prefixes

t;> time I have seen the victim being blamed. Interesting concept. >> >> -Hank >> >> I don't know what Google and Moratel's peering agreement, but "leak"? >>> educate me, Google is announcing /24 for all of their 4 NS prefix and >>>

Re: Indonesian ISP Moratel announces Google's prefixes

in the path. Shame on them! (Does that have any effect any more? :) Oh, and we are still waiting for an answer: Which attribute do you think Google could have used to stop this? -- TTFN, patrick > On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > >> On Nov 07, 2012,

Re: Indonesian ISP Moratel announces Google's prefixes

o stop this? Hint: Don't say No-Advertise, unless you want peers to only talk to the adjacent AS, not their customers or their customers' customers, etc. Looking forward to your answer. -- TTFN, patrick > On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 9:02 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >

Re: Indonesian ISP Moratel announces Google's prefixes

On Nov 06, 2012, at 23:48 , Jian Gu wrote: > What do you mean hijack? Google is peering with Moratel, if Google does not > want Moratel to advertise its routes to Moratel's peers/upstreams, then > Google should've set the correct BGP attributes in the first place. That doesn't make the slightest

[NANOG-announce] Elections open tomorrow

Everyone: NANOG elections open tomorrow. Please consider standing for one of the committees, or nominating someone for the committees. Remember, committee members get free registration to every NANOG meeting! The only requirement is a willingness to contribute to the community, and being a N

Re: really nasty attacks

On Sep 27, 2012, at 11:34 , Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 08:55:58AM -0600, Miguel Mata > wrote > a message of 30 lines which said: > >> Guys, > > No gals on NANOG? Many. Although in fairness, some people use "guys" in a gender-neutral manner. >> The attacks comes f

Re: Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs...

On Sep 11, 2012, at 17:04 , ryanL wrote: > when patrick is referring to "taking their word for it", he's referring to a > post on outages@ by godaddy's network engineering manager that stated "bgp, > and more details to follow". Well, mostly I'm taking GoDaddy at their word that this was not a

Re: Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs...

On Sep 11, 2012, at 16:04 , Christopher Morrow wrote: > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Damian Menscher wrote: >> >> Summary: 30 minutes late on the start time, and off by well over an hour on >> the stop time. > > even a broken clock is right 2x/day? > nostrodamus was eventually right a few t

Re: Sprint Outage - Chicago

On Aug 27, 2012, at 12:58, virendra rode wrote: > On 08/25/2012 11:36 AM, Jason Baugher wrote: >> On 8/24/2012 11:39 PM, Randy Bush wrote: You mean outages@... >>> chris, this is not productive. outages are a very apt subject >>> for nanog. I'm actually not certain posting outages to NANOG-

Re: Comcast 1, Verizon 0 [was: Comcast vs. Verizon for repair methodologies]

Just as a follow up, leaving my driveway this morning, the tech was installing a new pedestal. Said everything should be fixed today. Comcast++ -- TTFN, patrick On Aug 20, 2012, at 17:22 , Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > Comcast has already contacted me to fix this up. > > -

Comcast 1, Verizon 0 [was: Comcast vs. Verizon for repair methodologies]

Comcast has already contacted me to fix this up. -- TTFN, patrick On Aug 20, 2012, at 16:12 , Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > Given the recent VZ thread, I thought I'd show why my new house has crap > Internet. > > The story: A piece of underground cable went bad. The tech

Re: Comcast vs. Verizon for repair methodologies

On Aug 20, 2012, at 16:25 , Leo Bicknell wrote: > In a message written on Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 04:12:22PM -0400, Patrick W. > Gilmore wrote: >> The story: A piece of underground cable went bad. The techs didn't pull new >> underground cable. They decided it was bett

Comcast vs. Verizon for repair methodologies

Given the recent VZ thread, I thought I'd show why my new house has crap Internet. The story: A piece of underground cable went bad. The techs didn't pull new underground cable. They decided it was better to do it "arial" (if you can call 2 feet "arial"). They took apart the two pedestals on

Re: Return two locations or low TTL [was: DNS caches that support partitioning ?]

On Aug 20, 2012, at 10:07 , "Dobbins, Roland" wrote: > On Aug 20, 2012, at 5:56 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > >> My question above is asking Mark how you guarantee the user/application >> selects the A record closest to them and only use the other A recor

Re: Return two locations or low TTL [was: DNS caches that support partitioning ?]

On Aug 20, 2012, at 08:47 , Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Patrick W. Gilmore said: >> * How many applications are even aware multiple addresses were returned? > > Most anything that supports IPv6 should handle this correctly, since > getaddrinfo() will return a li

Re: Return two locations or low TTL [was: DNS caches that support partitioning ?]

On Aug 20, 2012, at 08:25 , Tony Finch wrote: > Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> On Aug 19, 2012, at 17:37 , Mark Andrews wrote: >> >>> Which is why the DNS supports multiple address records. Clients >>> don't have to wait a minutes to fallover to a second a

Re: Return two locations or low TTL [was: DNS caches that support partitioning ?]

On Aug 20, 2012, at 06:49 , "Dobbins, Roland" wrote: > On Aug 20, 2012, at 5:24 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > >> But I do not think returning multiple A records for multiple datacenters is >> as useful as lowering the TTL. > > Some folks do this via various

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >