think shared seceret management is dramatically harder than any
other form of of configuration management, modula rekeying requires
coordination with a third party and is therefore hard.
joel
On 1/27/12 14:53 , bas wrote:
While I agree _again_!
It does not explain why TOR boxes have little buffers and chassis box
have many.
you need purportionally more buffer when you need to drain 16 x 10 gig
into 4 x 10Gig then when you're trying to drain 10Gb/s into 2 x 1Gb/s
there's
On 1/27/12 15:01 , George Bonser wrote:
-Original Message- From: bas Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012
2:54 PM To: George Bonser Subject: Re: 10GE TOR port buffers (was
Re: 10G switch recommendaton)
While I agree _again_!
It does not explain why TOR boxes have little buffers
On 1/27/12 15:40 , bas wrote:
Hi All,
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
On 1/27/12 14:53 , bas wrote:
While I agree _again_!
It does not explain why TOR boxes have little buffers and chassis box
have many.
you need purportionally more buffer
vendors that specify a minimum distance for lx typically spec 2 meters.
even EX shouldn't spike the receiver at that distance as long as the max
RX is about +1.
On 1/25/12 11:26 , jon Heise wrote:
we are moving a router between 2 data centers and we only have LX sfp's for
connection, is there
On 1/21/12 11:38 , George Bonser wrote:
Not that I would not be a bit miffed if personal files disappeared,
but that's one of the risks associated with using a cloud service
for file storage. It could have been a fire, a virus erasing file,
bankruptcy, malicious insider damage... Doesn't
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 6:27 AM, Deric Kwok deric.kwok2...@gmail.com wrote:
We are planning to have 3 x 1G bgp connections (full tables) eg: Path A, B, C
Can I say that we have 3G output totally?
Sure.
From my understanding, the bgp chooses the best path to route automatically
It doesn't.
? :)
I wonder when Comcast and Verizon will get into an IPv6 advertising war.
v6... smhee-6! Ditch that cable modem and switch to Fios!
LTE has V6 natively and it gets used today...
joel
jms
By the same token, The mobile broadband network is not some also-ran adjunct to
the residential broadband service.
On Jan 18, 2012, at 16:45, Justin M. Streiner strei...@cluebyfour.org wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012, Joel jaeggli wrote:
On 1/18/12 15:56 , Justin M. Streiner wrote:
On Wed, 18
On 1/15/12 11:30 , Ken King wrote:
I need to choose a wireless solution for a new office.
up to 600 devices will connect. most devices are mac books and mobile phones.
we can see hundreds of access points in close proximity to our new office
space.
what are the thoughts these days on
On 1/15/12 09:56 , Phil Regnauld wrote:
Abdullah Al-Malki (a.almalki1402) writes:
Hi fellows,
I am supporting a big service provider and sometimes I face this problem.
Sometimes I want to access my customer network and want to extract some
verification output show commands from a large number
On 1/13/12 11:19 , -Hammer- wrote:
OK, So I'm doing a lot of reading lately on Nexus as we are about to get
into the 7k/5k game and of course a lot of the marketing revolves around
VPC. Every time I see it referenced, I keep remembering a reasonably
reliable Nortel implementation called Split
stateful translation systems either nat44 or nat64.
If you like a formal slot on the agenda, please reach out to me. If you
simply have an interest in this area let me know and we'll see if we can
fit your topic in the plan.
Thanks
joel
On 1/6/12 12:31 , Bonald wrote:
Hi,
We need to purchase some switch that support 1gbit QinQ.
Any suggestions ? We need to connect 9 schools together in layer2.
All 9 schools have 1gb link from our provider, provider gaves us 5 vlan to
work with.
We have around 35 vlan in-house.
We are low
On 12/28/11 07:30 , Ryan Malayter wrote:
Except nowhere in there is the prefix length for the test indicated,
and the exact halving of forwarding rate for IPv6 leads one to believe
that there are two TCAM lookups for IPv6 (hence 64-bit prefix lookups)
versus one for IPv4.
A cam (assuming
On 12/30/11 08:47 , Kevin Loch wrote:
It is very common to have different routers (routers, firewalls or
load balancers) on the same vlan with different functions in hosting
environments. It is also sometimes necessary to have multiple default
gateways on the same vlan for load balancing or
On Dec 29, 2011, at 7:00 PM, Jeff Kell jeff-k...@utc.edu wrote:
The real-world case for host routing (IMHO) is a server with a public
interface, an administrative interface, and possibly a third path for
data backups (maybe four if it's VMware/VMotion too). Unless the
non-public interfaces
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Livingood, Jason
jason_living...@cable.comcast.com wrote:
If you want to understand the issue in detail, check out the report from
MIT this year, written by Steve Bauer and available at
http://mitas.csail.mit.edu/papers/Bauer_Clark_Lehr_Broadband_Speed_Measurem
On Dec 27, 2011, at 4:28 PM, Glen Kent glen.k...@gmail.com wrote:
I had assumed that nodes derive their link local address from the
Route Advertisements. They derive their least significant 64 bytes
from their MACs and the most significant 64 from the prefix announced
in the RAs.
No, link
On 12/24/11 15:33 , Masataka Ohta wrote:
Karl Auer wrote:
Not necessarily. You can use ARP and DHCPv6 and you don't have
to waste time and power for DAD.
IPv6 does not do ARP, it does ND.
First of all, ND use is optional and, if ND is used, RA
must be used.
It means that, if RA is
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:18 AM, jacob miller mmzi...@yahoo.com wrote:
Am having a debate on the results of speed tests sites.
Am interested in knowing the thoughts of different individuals in regards to
this.
It's one data point of many.
Depending on the speed test site, the protocols it
On 12/23/11 11:16 , Joel Maslak wrote:
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:18 AM, jacob miller mmzi...@yahoo.com wrote:
Am having a debate on the results of speed tests sites.
Am interested in knowing the thoughts of different individuals in regards to
this.
It's one data point of many
On 12/17/11 00:14 , Mark Tinka wrote:
On Friday, December 16, 2011 05:02:33 AM Joe Malcolm wrote:
Once upon a time, UUNET did the opposite by setting
origin to unknown for peer routes, in an attempt to
prefer customer routes over peer routes. We moved to
local preference shortly thereafter
I haven't done wireless in downtown palo alto, only metro-e however.
Given your proximity to 345 hamilton (under 1000 feet most likely) I
would think att would be in a position to offer fairly high-rate dsl,
On 12/16/11 10:24 , Darren Bolding wrote:
Apologies if this is not the most appropriate
On 12/15/11 13:43 , Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 01:36:32PM -0800, David Conrad
wrote:
ARIN's job (well, beyond the world travel, publishing comic books, handing
out raffle prizes, etc.) is to allocate and register addresses according to
On 12/15/11 14:12 , Jeff Wheeler wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
We know rather alot about the original posters' business, it has ~34
million wireless subscribers in north america. I think it's safe to
assume that adequate docuementation could
On 12/14/11 18:46 , Jimmy Hess wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Cameron Byrne cb.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Fyi, I just was rejected from arin for an ipv4 allocation. I demonstrated I
own ~100k ipv4 addresses today.
My customers use over 10 million bogon / squat space ip addresses today,
On 12/12/11 02:05 , Leigh Porter wrote:
-Original Message- From: Vitkovsky, Adam
[mailto:avitkov...@emea.att.com] Sent: 12 December 2011 09:19 To:
Eric Parsonage; valdis.kletni...@vt.edu Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Sad IPv4 story?
and models that doesn't take we may not get
Netflix uses CDNs for content delivery and the platform runs in EC2. What would
peering with them achieve?
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 11, 2011, at 18:06, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappydsl.net wrote:
Which leads to a question to be asked...
Is netflix willing to peer directly with ISP / NSP's
Faisal
On Dec 11, 2011, at 10:21 PM, Joel Jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
Netflix uses CDNs for content delivery and the platform runs in EC2. What
would peering with them achieve?
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 11, 2011, at 18:06, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappydsl.net wrote:
Which leads
On 12/10/11 17:48 , Barry Shein wrote:
I just had a personal email from a brand new ISP in the Asia-Pacific
area desperately looking for enough IPv4 to be able to run their
business the way they would like?
This sniping elicited by the above seems inappropriate and
unprofessional, the
On 12/10/11 21:42 , Joel jaeggli wrote:
On 12/10/11 17:48 , Barry Shein wrote:
I just had a personal email from a brand new ISP in the Asia-Pacific
area desperately looking for enough IPv4 to be able to run their
business the way they would like?
This sniping elicited by the above seems
On 12/9/11 18:22 , Keegan Holley wrote:
assumption that writable SNMP was a bad idea but have never actually
tried
it. I was curious what others were using, netconf or just scripted
logins.
I'm also fighting a losing battle to convince people that netconf isn't
evil. It strikes me as odd
On 12/6/11 00:50 , Florian Weimer wrote:
* Alex Le Heux:
The RIPE NCC is aware that 128.0.0.0/16 is configured as a martian by
default in (some) Juniper OS, even though RFC 5735 and RFC3330 outline
that this /16 should no longer be reserved as specialised address
space.
Would someone
Other than being non-compliant, is an ANY query used by any major
software? Could someone rate limit ANY responses to mitigate this
particular issue?
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Leland Vandervort
lel...@taranta.discpro.org wrote:
Yup.. they're all ANY requests. The varying TTLs indicates
On 11/29/11 09:30 , Owen DeLong wrote:
I believe those have been obsoleted, but, /64 remains the best choice, IMHO.
operational practice has moved on.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6164
Owen
On Nov 29, 2011, at 9:00 AM, McCall, Gabriel wrote:
Note that /127 is strongly discouraged in
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.comwrote:
The trick to deailing with this as a propellorhead[sic] is to include a
*monetized* estimate of the increased manpower OPEX of using the 'dog to
work with' box. And a TCOS figure over the projected lifetime of the
On 11/22/11 08:16 , Jay Ashworth wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Owen DeLong o...@delong.com
As in all cases, additional flexibility results in additional ability
to make mistakes. Simple mechanical lockouts do not scale to the
modern world. The benefits of these additional
On 11/25/11 12:02 , Jay Hennigan wrote:
On 11/25/11 11:34 AM, Joel jaeggli wrote:
Cars generically cause at lot more deaths than faulty traffic
controllers 13.2 per 100,000 population in the US annually.
The cars don't (often) cause them. The drivers do. Yes, there are the
rare
On 11/21/11 14:18 , Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
Look at the number that are refusing to make generous prefix
allocations
to residential end users and limiting them to /56, /60, or even worse,
/64.
Owen,
What does Joe Sixpack do at home with a /48 that he cannot do with a /56 or a
/60?
On Nov 22, 2011, at 8:05 AM, Ray Soucy r...@maine.edu wrote:
As long as a static allocation can be billed as a premium service,
most providers will unfortunately do it.
Exactly. ISPs are in business to make as much money as they can - go figure.
For myself, having a static IP is the least of
On 11/19/11 01:35 , Fearghas McKay wrote:
On 17 Nov 2011, at 12:58, A. Chase Turner wrote:
I am seeking a $100 turnkey micro hardware appliance to plug into a LAN hub
(behind a consumer-level cable modem) whose only purpose in life is to send
heartbeat (and simple quality of service
--
Joel M Snyder, 1404 East Lind Road, Tucson, AZ, 85719
Senior Partner, Opus One Phone: +1 520 324 0494
j...@opus1.comhttp://www.opus1.com/jms
On 11/14/11 10:24 , Joe Greco wrote:
Sure, anytime there's an attack or failure on a SCADA network that
wouldn't have occurred had it been air-gapped, it's easy for people to
knee-jerk a SCADA networks should be airgapped response. But that's
not really intelligent commentary unless you
On 11/7/11 08:37 , Jared Mauch wrote:
On Nov 7, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Richard Golodner wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 11:09 -0500, Todd Snyder wrote:
Can anyone point to any authoritative updates about this?
I think Jared's suggestion was about as close as your going to get for
right
The cellular radios firmware doesn't support ipv6(on your iPhone)...
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 4, 2011, at 4:45 PM, Pete Carah p...@altadena.net wrote:
On 11/04/2011 06:04 PM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
FYI.
T-Mobile USA now has opt-in beta support for an Android phone on IPv6,
more info here
On 10/31/11 03:43 , Jeroen Massar wrote:
On 2011-10-31 08:56 , Dmitry Cherkasov wrote:
Hello,
Please advice what is the best practice to use IPv6 address block
across distributed locations.
You go to multiple RIRs and get multiple prefixes.
Heck, you apparently can even get multiple
On 10/27/11 20:24 , Ryan Finnesey wrote:
If I want to get a block of IP's issued for a network within Mexico who do I
talk with? I have been told arin does not cover Mexico. It was my
understand arin covers North America.
mexico moved to the lacnic region with the formation of the lacnic
Email as facility is a public good whether it constitutes a commons or
not... If wasn't you wouldn't bother putting up a server that would
accept unsolicited incoming connections on behalf of yourself and
others, doing so is generically non-rival and non-excludable although
not perfectly so in
On 10/12/11 07:47 , andrew.wallace wrote:
Guys the outage has moved to U.S and Canada, I think we need to look at this
perhaps being sabotage.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-20119163-266/blackberry-service-issues-spread-to-u.s-and-canada/
North American outages of the blackberry platform
On 10/10/11 17:12 , Randy Carpenter wrote:
Very nice. I wonder if this is an option we could try to use in
future meetings. It makes sense, really, since we already have decent
connectivity for the conference areas, and we wouldn't be destroying
the hotel's outside connection (only their
On 10/10/11 21:25 , Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
I don't think it is. I think that you can negotiate and I will point out
that the hotel
here has wanted our business enough that they have now scrambled to make
life
On 10/10/11 07:00 , Owen DeLong wrote:
It would be wise for NANOG to approach future venues and specifically
discuss these things with the hotel IT departments in question ahead
of time so that they have some remote chance of being prepared.
The hotel IT department is the guy who runs the
On 10/9/11 05:10 , Martin Millnert wrote:
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Florian Weimer f...@deneb.enyo.de wrote:
IPv4 addresses will never run out in a strict sense of the word, it
will just become increasingly more difficult to reassign IPv4 address
space to those who need it.
If you by
On 10/7/11 08:26 , Paul Graydon wrote:
On 10/6/2011 8:02 PM, John Levine wrote:
DISCLAIMER:...
Wow. I was thinking about answering the question, but now I don't dare.
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for
Dummies,
Please consider the environment
On 10/7/11 11:31 , Arturo Servin wrote:
What do you mean with purchasing or renting IPv4.
Last time that I check it was not possible in the RIR world.
If you're not a legitimate business why would you bother with commonly
accepted policy?
If you mean hijacking unused
On 10/5/11 10:05 , Michael Sinatra wrote:
The thread on f-root reminded my of an anecdotal datum regarding DNSSEC
in China. I was in China back in August, staying at the Green Lake
Hotel in Kunming, Yunnan Provence. When connecting to the hotel in-room
network (there was no wireless but a
On 10/2/11 15:25 , Jimmy Hess wrote:
On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 4:53 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 08:38:36 PDT, Michael Thomas said:
I'm not sure why lack of TLS is considered to be problem with Facebook.
The man in the middle is the other side of the connection, tls or
On 10/2/11 15:43 , Joel jaeggli wrote:
On 10/2/11 15:25 , Jimmy Hess wrote:
On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 4:53 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 08:38:36 PDT, Michael Thomas said:
I'm not sure why lack of TLS is considered to be problem with Facebook.
The man in the middle
On 9/30/11 14:59 , Jones, Barry wrote:
I can't tell you the kind of servers, but I can say that I was
recently in Prineville, OR, where FB is building a data center (and a
second data center). I was used to the ol data centers - you know,
where there's raised floors, cabinets, cool air, a
On 9/30/11 15:19 , Steven G. Huter wrote:
I can't tell you the kind of servers, but I can say that I was
recently in Prineville, OR, where FB is building a data center (and a
second data center). I was used to the ol data centers - you know,
where there's raised floors, cabinets, cool air, a
On 9/30/11 15:58 , Seth Mattinen wrote:
On 9/30/11 3:41 PM, Michael Painter wrote:
Steven G. Huter wrote:
this August 2011 article in the Economist outlines some relevant info
about the prineville, oregon FB datacenter.
http://www.economist.com/node/21525237
steve
Informative
On 9/29/11 17:46 , Robert Bonomi wrote:
From: Nathan Eisenberg nat...@atlasnetworks.us
Subject: RE: Synology Disk DS211J
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 21:58:23 +
And this is why the prudent home admin runs a firewall device he or she
can trust, and has a default deny rule in place even for
On Sep 25, 2011, at 3:37 AM, Tom Storey t...@snnap.net wrote:
I found I had to do this many years ago on some Cisco routers to get them to
load balance (per packet) across two links. Adding 0.0.0.0/0 routes across
both links just resulted in traffic routing across one link. Broke it into
two
Protection against learning a bad default route through whatever routing
protocol they are learning, since these two routes would be more specific than
any typical default route. They probably got burned learning a default route.
On Sep 23, 2011, at 7:12 PM, Glen Kent glen.k...@gmail.com
On 9/19/11 18:49 , Richard Barnes wrote:
And if they turn up the voltage on the fence high enough, dinner could be
cooked by the time the crew gets there!
montana experience says:
cows have rather thick skin, sheep come with insulation, and bison will
go through anything that gets in their way
On 9/20/11 10:22 , Hank Nussbacher wrote:
On Tue, 20 Sep 2011, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
Newbie question:
If I do:
route-viewssho ip bgp 4.0.0.0
BGP routing table entry for 4.0.0.0/9, version 821994
why do I see the /9 and not the /8 by default? If I do a specific
lookup for
given that as 729 maxes out at 800cpi there are probably slightly kinky
ways to attack the problem, e.g. someone doing it with disk packs.
http://chrisfenton.com/cray-1-digital-archeology/
there's still plenty of equipment that can wrap 1/2 tape around a spindle.
On 9/19/11 21:14 ,
On 9/14/11 14:24 , Don Gould wrote:
* Did you know that Cisco has a 100Gb solution?
need more L3 1u TORs with 4 x 40 and 48 x 10...
On 9/16/11 13:50 , Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
As an ISP, ARIN will not give you any space if you are new. You
have to already have an equivalent amount of space from another
provider.
does arin *really* still have that amazing barrier to market
entry?
Yes. If you want PI space, you have to
On 9/16/11 11:42 , Steve Bohrer wrote:
My general question is what meaning do I give to lossy traceroutes,
even when pings show no problem.
Can I expect that backbone routers should never give me timeouts on a
traceroute through them, so, lots of asterisks from these systems
indicate a
On 9/10/11 23:30 , Damian Menscher wrote:
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Marcus Reid mar...@blazingdot.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 09:17:10AM -0700, Network IP Dog wrote:
I like this response; instant CA death
On 9/8/11 08:49 , Lyle Giese wrote:
Can we really push an IPv6 agenda for CDN's when IPv6 routing at high
backend levels is still not complete? I certainly don't have the
'clout' to push that, but full routing between Cogent and HE needs to be
fixed.
It's your job to run your network such
On 9/7/11 09:02 , Michael Holstein wrote:
I would love a world where engineering was consulted by marketing :(
Wouldn't be a problem is management invested based on engineering's
recommendations.
There are few problems that money can't solve .. in this case, it's
sure, we can offer
On 9/7/11 09:37 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 09:28:28 PDT, Joel jaeggli said:
The way to achieve a return on invested capital is to attract and retain
customers who pay for a service which they find compelling.
Only true if long-term returns on investment
On 9/3/11 04:20 , Skeeve Stevens wrote:
Hey all,
I've been thinking about the impact that iCloud (by Apple) will have
on the Internet.
My guess is that 99% of consumer internet access is Asymmetrical
(DSL, Cable, wireless, etc) and iCloud when launched will 'upload'
obscene amounts of
On 8/30/11 02:21 , Michael J McCafferty wrote:
All,
Orange innerduct/split-loom tubing for multi-mode, yellow for
single-mode... Where's the aqua for the aqua OM3 fiber?
I feel like the Ethernet fashion police, but it's a horrible color
clash for aqua fiber dressed in yellow or
On Aug 20, 2011, at 10:29 PM, Tammy A. Wisdom wrote:
I completely agree... the real issue here is the system is flawed and
RIPE/ARIN/APNIC etc have zero actual authority over actual routing. Yet
another reason they aren't worth the money we flush down the toilet for them
to do absolutely
On Aug 16, 2011, at 9:40 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:53:24 EDT, Christopher Morrow said:
anyway, they do these donkey things because they can :( people have no
real option (except not to play the game, ala war games).
My brother recently tried to get a
On Aug 16, 2011, at 11:52 PM, Måns Nilsson wrote:
Subject: Re: Verizon Business - LTE? Date: Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:49:38AM
-0400 Quoting chris (tknch...@gmail.com):
Overall, IMO the trends are just seem to be going backwards. We have more
speed but we can use it less? What kind of
On Aug 11, 2011, at 3:19 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
The only reason in my opinion to run IS-IS rather than OSPF today is
due to the fact that IS-IS is decoupled from IP making it less
vulnerable to attacks.
how about simpler and more stable?
not rooted to a particular area.
supports more than
On Aug 10, 2011, at 6:52 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 2011-08-11 12:45, james machado wrote:
what is the life expectancy of IPv6? It won't live forever and we
can't reasonably expect it too. I understand we don't want run out of
addresses in the next 10-40 years but what about 100?
On Aug 8, 2011, at 5:14 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
I'm sure there will be platforms that end up on both sides of this question.
I know of no asic in a switch that claims to support ipv6 that does it this
way... That would tend to place you at a competitive disadvantage to
On Aug 5, 2011, at 9:17 AM, Brian Mengel wrote:
In reviewing IPv6 end user allocation policies, I can find little
agreement on what prefix length is appropriate for residential end
users. /64 and /56 seem to be the favorite candidates, with /56 being
slightly preferred.
I am most curious
This is one of the reasons that I thought a useful output from the opsec or idr
working group would be a documented set of community functions. Not mapped to
values mind you. but I really like to say to providers do you support rfc blah
communities or what's your rfc blah community mapping
On Aug 7, 2011, at 3:09 PM, Jonathon Exley wrote:
This has probably been said before, but it makes me uncomfortable to think of
everybody in the world being given /48 subnets by default.
All of a sudden that wide expanse of 2^128 IP addresses shrinks to 2^48
sites. Sure that's still 65535
On Aug 5, 2011, at 3:56 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
Let's clarify -- /48 is much preferred by Owen,
It's is also supported by RIR policy, and the RFC series. It would unfair to
characterize owen as the only holder of that preference.
but most ISPs seem to be
zeroing in on a /56 for production.
On Aug 2, 2011, at 10:17 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
en1: flags=8863UP,BROADCAST,SMART,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500
ether 60:33:4b:01:75:85
inet6 fe80::6233:4bff:fe01:7585%en1 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x5
inet 192.168.191.223 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.191.255
On Aug 2, 2011, at 2:42 PM, james machado wrote:
Lets look at some issues here.
1) it's unlikely that a normal household with 2.5 kids and a dog/cat
will be able to qualify for their own end user assignment from ARIN.
Interesting...
I have a normal household.
I lack 2.5 kids and
On Aug 2, 2011, at 3:37 PM, james machado wrote:
Yes I am saying a household that mulithomes is abnormal and with
today's and contracted monopolies I expect that to continue. You are
not a normal household in that 1) you multihome 2) you are willing to
pay $1500+ US a year for your own
On Aug 2, 2011, at 9:56 PM, Mark Newton wrote:
On 03/08/2011, at 1:20 PM, Jima wrote:
Alas, I will maintain that any household that multi-homes at this stage is,
indeed, abnormal.
I'll go out on a limb and suggest that most people loathe their telcos with
an undying venomous
On Jul 27, 2011, at 5:05 PM, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:15:04 -0500, David E. Smith wrote:
snip
I think on cheap platforms, they have wirespeed gigabit only on switching
functions, but rest will suck. Their top products can do more, but they are
still cannot
given how often the cellular address changes on my Verizon 4g router not to
mention the external ip address on their LSN I think I can speculate...
joel
On Jul 26, 2011, at 12:11 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
Hi Cameron,
What about routers ? In some locations, users may have only
My measured availability for a automatic reverse ssh tunnel connection made
through a 4g radio in the field was 52%. this was vs 95% on the lab/office
environment with the same equipment. That particular experiment I declared a
failure.
There was never a closer truism than ymmv.
joel
On Jul
On Jul 20, 2011, at 3:37 PM, Walter Keen wrote:
We've recently setup ISC DHCPd with failover for lease information, and
LDAP as a configuration source (mostly because of our need for
dynamically adding dhcp reservations for cable modems, etc) -- we don't
have any performance issues thus
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Larry Stites nc...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
Given what you know now, if you were 21 and just starting into networking /
communications industry which areas of study or specialty would you
prioritize?
Make sure you are always learning. You can't stop learning in
On Jul 12, 2011, at 10:59 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
I didn't claim it would work with existing CPE equipment. Declaring
6to4 historic won't work with existing CPE equipment either.
If the hosts behind it stop using 2002::/16 addresses as a product of a
software update which seems rather
On Jul 12, 2011, at 12:40 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
Leo Bicknell wrote:
In short, make it easy for the operators to participate at the right
time in the process. It will be better for everyone!
Unfortunately, where you want to be inserted into the process is when
everybody has
said
On Jul 12, 2011, at 12:53 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Jul 12, 2011, at 8:43 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Ronald Bonica rbon...@juniper.net wrote:
Leo,
Maybe we can fix this by:
a) bringing together larger groups of clueful operators in the IETF
b)
Public IPs.
At some point you will have to manage something outside your current world or
your organization will need to merge/partner/outsource/contract/etc with
someone else's network and they might not be keen to route to your ULA space
(and might not be more trustworthy than the internet
501 - 600 of 1107 matches
Mail list logo
