On Monday, August 04, 2014 04:38:39 PM Jay Ashworth wrote:
So that implies he really did mean 44x GigE to end-prem,
from 4 $5500 10G ports -- or, $500/home in MRC *cost* to
the provider.
I'm confused.
With an edge router chassis filled with 10Gbps ports for
various things, they quickly
you mean your vendor won't give you the knobs to do it smartly ([j]tac
tickets open for five years)? wonder why.
Might be useful if you mentioned what you considered a smart way to
trim the fib. But then you couldn't bitch and moan about people not
understanding you, which is the real
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 01:47:20AM -0400, Dorian Kim wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 12:15:36AM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos.
On Aug 13, 2014, at 22:59, Suresh Ramasubramanian ops.li...@gmail.com
wrote:
Swisscom or some
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
after those equipment were replaced.
but by then it had driven
Subject: Re: So Philip Smith / Geoff Huston's CIDR report becomes worth a good
hard look today Date: Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:27:46AM -0700 Quoting Merike Kaeo
(mer...@doubleshotsecurity.com):
B: they *did* know about the issue, but convincing management to spend
the cash to buy hardware
Hi Suresh,
Op 13 aug. 2014, om 03:16 heeft Suresh Ramasubramanian ops.li...@gmail.com
het volgende geschreven:
Needs an Anthill Inside sticker like Hex at the Unseen University.
I should have bought one at the Discworld Convention last weekend :)
http://www.pjsmprints.com/stickers/index.html
I believe at one point, SPRINT had in the RADB (and actively advertised)
0.0.0.0/2, 64.0.0.0/2, 128.0.0.0/2, and 192.0.0.0/2 under something called
“Quarter Default Route, see Rational Default Project” or words to that effect.
I could be wrong. It was a long time ago and I barely remember
Hello
Thanks for the responses, I think it clarified a lot and I already started
reading this CM-SP-L2VPN-I13-140403.pdf documentation.
What I need here is that existing clients are sent through ISP1 currently and I
would like to add ISP2 for future clients without interfering anything with
Toney,
Depending on which DHCP server software you're using, its probably easier
to do this kind of move with it rather than trying to build layer 2
tunnels.
Since each modem MAC is added (usually) to the DHCP server you can simply
run two different server instances and with the original server
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
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
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Chris Woodfield rek...@semihuman.com wrote:
Hence the “when programming the TCAM” part of my original statement :)
Hi Chris,
My point was that Randy's BGP RIB pruning knobs are missing for a
different reason than your router FIB pruning knobs. Neither the
- Original Message -
From: Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu
On Monday, August 04, 2014 04:38:39 PM Jay Ashworth wrote:
So that implies he really did mean 44x GigE to end-prem,
from 4 $5500 10G ports -- or, $500/home in MRC *cost* to
the provider.
I'm confused.
With an edge
Did cisco bother to open any DDTSes on the issues you saw? I’ve found that
they care very little about these “automation” issues because they have zero
automation in their lab testing that reflects how someone truly uses a device.
I’ve been through many iterations with Cisco on this front
Hello list,
most /24 subnets from 85.25.0.0/16 network (PlusServer AG/intergenia AG)
seem to be blocked on mxlogic.net inbound email servers (208.65.144.2
208.65.144.3 208.65.145.2 208.65.145.3).
Could someone from both parties please check it?
I tried to contact MX Logic by whois contacts
Nice little article
http://www.bgpmon.net/what-caused-todays-internet-hiccup/
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Randy Bush
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 4:43 PM
To: Suresh Ramasubramanian
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
Thanks for the info Pete, Geoffrey Hugo!
LU
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Pete Lumbis alum...@gmail.com wrote:
Yep. Most of the time I've seen this it's two data centers, both go TCAM
exception. You reboot DC1, when it comes back up you reboot DC2. This means
no iBGP learned routes so
My point was that Randy's BGP RIB pruning knobs are missing for a
different reason than your router FIB pruning knobs. Neither the
science nor the technology exists to create Randy's BGP pruning knobs.
ahhh, you dug out the [j]tac tickets, or are you just conjecturbating?
if the former, ticket
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote:
My point was that Randy's BGP RIB pruning knobs are missing for a
different reason than your router FIB pruning knobs. Neither the
science nor the technology exists to create Randy's BGP pruning knobs.
ahhh, you dug out the
ahhh, you dug out the [j]tac tickets, or are you just conjecturbating?
Neither.
ROFL. so just ad hominem. smart.
plonk
randy
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote:
ahhh, you dug out the [j]tac tickets, or are you just conjecturbating?
Neither. I'm reporting the state of the science.
ROFL. so just ad hominem. smart.
That phrase ad hominem, I don't think it means what you think it means.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4GLTE sm
- Reply message -
From: William Herrin b...@herrin.us
To: Randy Bush ra...@psg.com
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group nanog@nanog.org
Subject: So Philip Smith / Geoff Huston's CIDR report becomes worth a good hard
look today
Date: Thu,
I think you mean what is best described here:
http://www.swinog.ch/meetings/swinog7/BGP_filtering-swinog.ppt
--Aris
Suresh Ramasubramanian mailto:ops.li...@gmail.com
Thursday, August 14, 2014 04:59
Swisscom or some other European SP has / used to have a limit where they
would not accept more
23 matches
Mail list logo
