From: Geert Bosch [mailto:bo...@adacore.com]
Basically, it should not have to cost anything extra to set up
new users for IPv6. The same hardware that handles IPv4 today
can be programmed to do IPv6.
That is not the case for a significant number of home gateways
and other consumer
Michael Loftis mlof...@wgops.com wrote:
I could just set the attn_string to say ^A and then I could just hit that
and it would work, but it doesn't seem to.
Remember if you're using minicom it will escape ^A for it's own menu use.
Wolfe.net had a score of those with Multi-tech modems way back
On 13/02/2011 15:30, Joe Hamelin wrote:
day. I remember days spent hunting down ring-no-answers in a 400 POTS
line hunt group.
It was much easier to detect those by looking for strange port connectivity
patterns in the logs.
re: annexes, it was a happy day when we upgraded from annex 3 to
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:
On 13/02/2011 15:30, Joe Hamelin wrote:
day. I remember days spent hunting down ring-no-answers in a 400 POTS
line hunt group.
It was much easier to detect those by looking for strange port connectivity
patterns in
On 2/3/11 12:59 PM, David Conrad wrote:
On Feb 3, 2011, at 5:35 AM, Jack Bates wrote:
You missed my pointed. Root servers are hard coded, but they aren't
using a well known anycast address.
Actually, most of the IP addresses used for root servers are anycast
addresses and given they're in
On Feb 13, 2011, at 7:56 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Of course, one might ask why those well known anycast addresses are
owned by 12 different organizations instead of being golden
addresses specified in an RFC or somesuch, but that gets into root
server operator politics...
there are perfectly
- Original Message -
From: David Conrad d...@virtualized.org
On Feb 13, 2011, at 7:56 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Of course, one might ask why those well known anycast addresses are
owned by 12 different organizations instead of being golden
addresses specified in an RFC or somesuch,
Hello,
I'm wondering what are people's experience is with boxes, like those
from Gigamon, to aggregate 10g span ports? Any recommendations?
As background, we currently have a sensor network where we provide
our InfoSec team with taps from various points in our network. In
cases where we have
* Ryan Finnesey:
This is one of the reasons we are starting to look at Juniper for a
new network build. It is my understanding we set software updates
for life for free.
My understanding is that it's free for customers who have a service
contract in place. Most downloads are not
Will an ATT op comment on what looks like an outage (or the beginning
of a connectivity tiff) regarding LLNW content (Netflix among others)
delivered via GBLX and TiNet to AS7132 customers in Southern
California?
Here's the full path:
AS22822 AS3257 AS7018 AS7132
Thanks.
-RR
How does Juniper feel about used hardware?
~Seth
I love Juniper's hardware and software, and support. However, the way they deal
with used or second hand hardware is terrible. It is not possible to transfer
ownership at all. You can not resell anything, and hope to get any software
updates
* Ryan Finnesey:
This is one of the reasons we are starting to look at Juniper for a
new network build. It is my understanding we set software updates
for life for free.
My understanding is that it's free for customers who have a service
contract in place. Most downloads are not
In message 000901cbcb22$3cf978a0$b6ec69e0$@org, Lee Howard writes:
-Original Message-
From: Geert Bosch [mailto:bo...@adacore.com]
Honestly, I can't quite see the big deal for home users. I'm using
an Apple Airport Extreme, and setting it up with a IPv6 tunnel from
$150?
It's bad that home gateways need replacing
It's not neccessarily bad. There are a lot of older devices out there
and technology has progressed a couple of generations since then. That
spells market opportunity for manufacturers of IPv6 gateways,
particularly at the higher end of the market where
In message 8b082d10-a0ea-4012-8656-e60dd7ec7...@adacore.com, Geert Bosch write
s:
On Feb 12, 2011, at 21:03, Lee Howard wrote:
Honestly, I can't quite see the big deal for home users. I'm using
an Apple Airport Extreme, and setting it up with a IPv6 tunnel from
=20
$150? That's a
Fine approach as long as the DSLAMs and CPE allow ether type 0x86DD to pass.
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Jack Bates [mailto:jba...@brightok.net]
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 4:01 PM
To: Ricky Beam
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: IPv6 mistakes, was: Re: Looking for an IPv6
It looks like one of nanog's outbound servers doesn't have a PTR record.
Mark
Received:from s0.nanog.org (207.75.116.162) by edge.atlasbiz.com (192.168.198.21
) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.2.255.0; Sun, 13 Feb 2011 21:34:17 +
; DiG 9.6.0-APPLE-P2 -x 207.75.116.162
;; global options:
PoS failure detection happens in under 50ms, but what about the failback? Same
deal? I ask because I've got two routers connected to opposite ends of a spare
PoS link that I've been playing with and I'm noticing that the failback on the
far side seems to be about 15 seconds (assuming the near
- Original Message -
It looks like one of nanog's outbound servers doesn't have a PTR
record.
Mark
Received:from s0.nanog.org (207.75.116.162) by edge.atlasbiz.com
(192.168.198.21
) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.2.255.0; Sun, 13 Feb 2011 21:34:17
+
; DiG
On 2/13/11 10:31 AM, David Conrad wrote:
On Feb 13, 2011, at 7:56 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Of course, one might ask why those well known anycast addresses
are owned by 12 different organizations instead of being
golden addresses specified in an RFC or somesuch, but that gets
into root server
In message 121334192.111427.1297644483313.JavaMail.root@int-mailstore01, Larr
y J. Blunk writes:
- Original Message -
It looks like one of nanog's outbound servers doesn't have a PTR
record.
Mark
Received:from s0.nanog.org (207.75.116.162) by edge.atlasbiz.com
fwiw we have v6 transit from internap in metro atlanta. setup was
drama-free. up until about 6 months ago it was offered on a
non-production basis and only as a tunnel, now it's dual stacked to our
customer edge.
joel
On 2/4/11 7:05 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
We have been working diligently for
On Feb 13, 2011, at 1:33 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
In message 000901cbcb22$3cf978a0$b6ec69e0$@org, Lee Howard writes:
-Original Message-
From: Geert Bosch [mailto:bo...@adacore.com]
Honestly, I can't quite see the big deal for home users. I'm using
an Apple Airport Extreme,
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 04:49:57PM -0800, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
On 2/13/11 10:31 AM, David Conrad wrote:
On Feb 13, 2011, at 7:56 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Of course, one might ask why those well known anycast addresses
are owned by 12 different organizations instead of being
golden addresses
On Feb 13, 2011, at 2:49 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Ignoring historical mistakes, what would they be?
gosh, I can't imagine why anyone would want to renumber of out
198.32.64.0/24...
I guess you missed the part where I said Ignoring historical mistakes.
making them immutable pretty much
Ditto.
-Original Message-
From: Jack Bates [mailto:jba...@brightok.net]
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 11:02 PM
To: NANOG list
Subject: Re: quietly
snip
I have also now seen 2 different vendor DSL modems which when not using
PPPoE require a manually entered default router (ie,
Sounds like PI space is a solution for those 5000 desktops.
Frank
-Original Message-
From: david raistrick [mailto:dr...@icantclick.org]
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 11:05 AM
To: Cameron Byrne; Owen DeLong
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: quietly
On Tue, 1 Feb 2011, Cameron
Requiring them to be on certain well known addresses is restrictive and
creates an unnecessary digression from IPv4 practice. It's comments like
this that raise the hair on admins' necks. At least mine.
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum [mailto:iljit...@muada.com]
28 matches
Mail list logo
