I've noticed over the last 3 years or so that TDM, specifically T-1, access
and transport has been in a steady decline. Customers are moving to FTTH
and cable, or going WiMAX and Metro-Ethernet. Ethernet seems to have taken
an even bigger bite out of DS-3. The bigger pipes seem to favor
(widely
deployed) IPv6 prefix filter size will be?
Thanks,
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Rick Ernst na...@shreddedmail.com wrote:
A couple of different incantations searching the archive didn't enlighten
me, and I find it hard to believe this hasn't been discussed. Apologies
A couple of different incantations searching the archive didn't enlighten
me, and I find it hard to believe this hasn't been discussed. Apologies and
a request for pointers if I'm rehashing an old question.
As a small/regional ISP, we got our /32 assigned and it's time to start
moving forward
I thought I had mentioned outsourcing earlier, but I don't see it in the
thread...
The two mechanisms I've seen for outsources D/DoS are DNS manipulation, or
essentially remote BGP peering with an tunnel back to the local presence.
Even if we are purely hosting, DNS manipulation doesn't do
Right. Some providers allow you to BGP community trigger RTBH. There was a
separate mention of D/DoS-mitigation-providers using DNS and BGP tunneling.
Rick
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Stefan Fouant
sfou...@shortestpathfirst.net wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Rick Ernst
wrong, I want my own, local, big-red button.
Rick
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Martin Hannigan mar...@theicelandguy.comwrote:
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Rick Ernst na...@shreddedmail.com wrote:
Looking for D/DoS mitigation solutions. I've seen Arbor Networks
mentioned
several times
Looking for D/DoS mitigation solutions. I've seen Arbor Networks mentioned
several times but they haven't been responsive to literature requests (hint,
if anybody from Arbor is looking...). Our current upstream is 3x GigE from
3 different providers, each landing on their own BGP endpoint feeding
Several responses already, and Arbor has poked their head up.
I'm going to start there and keep the other suggestions at-hand.
Thanks,
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Rick Ernst na...@shreddedmail.com wrote:
Looking for D/DoS mitigation solutions. I've seen Arbor Networks mentioned
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Jan 5, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Rick Ernst wrote:
A solution preferably that integrates with NetFlow and RTBH. An in-line
solution obviously requires an appliance, or at least special/additional
hardware.
The key
an extension of RTBH; a scrubber
destination rather than Null0) is an understandable state.
Rick
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Stefan Fouant sfou...@shortestpathfirst.net
wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Rick Ernst [mailto:na...@shreddedmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 12:19
Lots of good info, and a nice mind-dump that gives me a whole host of other
things that need to be looked at... Umm. thanks :)
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:10 PM, Perry Lorier pe...@coders.net wrote:
Rick Ernst wrote:
Resent, since I responded from the wrong address:
---
The basic operation
Although the implementation is Cisco-specific, this feels more appropriate
for NANOG.
We've started rolling out a state-wide monitoring system based on Cisco's
IP SLA feature set. Out of 5 sites deployed so far (different locations,
different providers), we are consistently seeing one-way
trying to walk/correct the time.
Thanks for the input!
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Rick Ernst er...@shreddedmail.com wrote:
Resent, since I responded from the wrong address:
---
The basic operation of IP SLA is as surmised; payload with timestamps
and other telemetry data is sent
Starting about a week ago, I've had sporadic reports of slow uploads
(hundreds of kbs, has been 10s of mbs) born out by multiple speed test sites
and application results and also duplicated internally. Downloads are
50Mbs as expected (OC-3 and GigE uplinks to ATT/UUNET/Level3/Sprint/Qwest,
etc).
Pedantry is not necessarily a bad thing, especially when the student doesn't
know the right questions to ask. :)
6in4 is what I was looking for.
Thanks,
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Nathan Ward na...@daork.net wrote:
On 14/07/2009, at 4:23 AM, Rick Ernst wrote:
Either they don't
Either they don't exist, or my Google-fu is particularly bad this morning.
I'm trying to get my toes wet with IPv6. I've established an internal
6to4/4to6 tunnel. I'd also like to have a testbed for access to public v6
sites. I'm also trying to find some clue at my upstreams, but figured I'd
Multiple responses of tunnelbroker.net. Couldn't have been any easier to
setup and get going.
Thanks!
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Chad Burnham cburn...@du.edu wrote:
Rick,
I use this one:
http://www.tunnelbroker.net/
Free!
Chad
-Original Message-
From: Rick Ernst
Thanks to multiple private/public responses.
I was able to get an iperf test and also a close mirror for a DVD iso.
Time to put live traffic on it and see what happens.
On Wed, March 25, 2009 11:05, Rick Ernst wrote:
Resent from my subscribed address. Hopefully this isn't a dupe
Resent from my subscribed address. Hopefully this isn't a dupe to anybody.
---
I'm working on turning up our first GigE connection (400mbs CIR) and the
various online speedtests I'm aware of choke after about 100Mbs or so.
Does anybody know of testing sites
://www.measurementlab.net/measurement-lab-tools#ndt
-Azher
Rick Ernst wrote:
Resent from my subscribed address. Hopefully this isn't a dupe to
anybody.
---
I'm working on turning up our first GigE connection (400mbs CIR) and the
various online speedtests I'm aware
as the hosts they're hosted on and
the path by which you reach them.
I use iperf on each end of a link that I'm turning up. I put Linux hosts
at both endpoints, but I believe iperf comes in a windows flavor too.
-b
From: Rick Ernst [er...@easystreet.com
We've had an increasing rate of DoS attacks that spew tens-of-thousands of
small UDP packets to a destination on our network. We are getting roughly
2x our entire normal pps across all providers through one interface, or
about 4x normal through the individual interface. The Cisco
7206VXR/NPE-G1
, although I'd
be concerned that Hey, can somebody block traffic {from} or {to}? would
be an interesting experiment in a socially-engineered DoS.
Finally, there were some suggestions S/RTBH. RTBH I get, but my
Google-fu is weak on S/RTBH. Details?
Thanks,
Rick
On Fri, December 12, 2008 10:15, Rick
23 matches
Mail list logo
