On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 6:44 AM, Paul Bennett paul.w.benn...@gmail.com wrote:
Inspired by this thread (and other recent similar ones about how hard
it is to report abuse in the right format to the right people), I've
decided I'm going to start work on [a] Perl module
Well ... preliminary
Hi,
bit weird question, but is it possible to determine
relationship(Internet transit, settlement-free peering, etc) between
the operators based on import and export statements in aut-num object?
Often aut-num objects in RIR database contain the remarks which
describe such relationships. However,
Hello,
We are a small FTTH provider and our main business is selling 1000/1000
internet. Our network is GPON based.
We recently made the mistake of buying a large shipment of Zhone 2301
modems (ONU). We did test this device before purchase, but unfortunately we
failed to notice a severe fault
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 17:36:47 +0200, Martin T said:
bit weird question, but is it possible to determine
relationship(Internet transit, settlement-free peering, etc) between
the operators based on import and export statements in aut-num object?
You can determine who is upstream and downstream
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 17:36:47 +0200, Martin T m4rtn...@gmail.com said:
Last but not least, maybe there is altogether a more reliable
way to understand the relationship between the operators than
aut-num objects(often not updated) in RIR database?
The first thing to do is look and
Baldur Norddahl wrote:
Hello,
We are a small FTTH provider and our main business is selling 1000/1000
internet. Our network is GPON based.
We recently made the mistake of buying a large shipment of Zhone 2301
modems (ONU). We did test this device before purchase, but unfortunately we
failed to
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
If it doesn't deliver to spec, that certainly seems like a warranty claim,
followed by a lawsuit (yes - talk to a lawyer).
Also, define large shipment and total dollars involved. You might be able
to take them to small claims court (much simpler
I know typically peering exchanges are made for peering traffic between
providers, but can you buy IP transit from a provider on an exchange? An
example, buy a 10G port on an exchange, peer 5Gbps of traffic with multiple
providers on the exchange, and buy 5Gbps of IP transit from others on the
On 11/25/14, 1:47 PM, Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com wrote:
I know typically peering exchanges are made for peering traffic between
providers, but can you buy IP transit from a provider on an exchange? An
example, buy a 10G port on an exchange, peer 5Gbps of traffic with
multiple
providers
On 25/11/2014 18:47, Colton Conor wrote:
Is this possible?
it depends. Some transit providers will decline to do this because it can
impact on their margin. Most IXPs don't have a problem with it, but some
do - although it's not clear how they can tell which packets are transit
and which are
On Nov 25, 2014, at 10:47 AM, Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com wrote:
I know typically peering exchanges are made for peering traffic between
providers, but can you buy IP transit from a provider on an exchange? An
example, buy a 10G port on an exchange, peer 5Gbps of traffic with multiple
I know a couple networks that offer to sell transit over exchanges that
permit it, but require that you take a private VLAN on the exchange.
Some exchanges offer private VLANs, others don't.
Regards,
Chris Rogers
+1.302.357.3696 x2110
http://inerail.net/
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Nick
I've found the best method of dealing with vendors like this is to treat
them the same way they treat you. If they won't listen to technical
arguments and act like stubborn children, then I act the same way. Threaten
to take your ball and go home. Or buy everything used or from grey market
I have seen this work well when the exchange allows more than one MAC address
to be presented at layer2. This way you can have two separate sub interfaces
presented, one for peering and one for your private cross connect/transit. That
way the routing all stays clean and manageable. It's still a
The exchange in question is Equinix. Their sales team is leading me
to believe there are multiple exchange products. One where you can peer
with providers (Google, Netflix for example) and then one where you can
create virtual private layer 2 vlans between providers. Then there is also
the
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 7:41 PM, Robert Drake rdr...@direcpath.com wrote:
On 11/18/2014 8:11 PM, Michael Brown wrote:
[snip]
amelioration. So I'm left with a very unsatisfactory feeling of
either shutting down a possibly innocent customer based on a machines
word, or attempting to start a
Hail NANOG!
I am looking for IPv6 security resources to add to:
http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/ipv6/security/
These could be best current practice documents, case-studies,
lessons-learned/issues-found, research/evaluations, RFCs, or anything else
focused on IPv6 security really.
I'm
I agree with Bill...going it on the cheap is risky. DOn't consider it for
primary. It may be good for backup. I have sold small amounts of transit
to non-ISP companies on exchanges (100-200 meg). It's a good extra backup
for ISPs, if you setup your local pref, MED and then prepend your AS an
extra
--- cgrundem...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Chris Grundemann cgrundem...@gmail.com
I am looking for IPv6 security resources to add to:
http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/ipv6/security/
These could be best current practice documents, case-studies,
lessons-learned/issues-found,
Hi Colton,
The primary challenge in buying IP Transit across a Peering Exchange is not so
much of a technical configuration challenge, but rather a 'how do we keep track
of how much IP Transit you are using' ..a billing challenge.
and additionally, one is making the assumption that there is
Hi Conor,
I know this is possible since Hurricane Electric does it for IPv6 transit,
however, I'm not sure if it violates any exchange rules or if it's even a good
idea.
On 25 Nov 2014, at 10:47 pm, Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com wrote:
I know typically peering exchanges are made for
Plus we are planning on getting
a wave to the exchange, and not having any physical routers or switches at
the datacenter where the exchange/wave terminates at. Is this possible?
It's been a while since I've checked the Equinix Customer Agreement and
Policies documents, but I know at one time
On 25/11/14 09:39, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
Before anyone comes back with something like So if I buy an entry level
car, but I expect it to perform like a high-end sports car, does that
mean I can sue the entry-level car maker for false advertising when it
doesn't perform like a high-end
The way our exchange works is 2 different products in regards to this.
1.Peering on the exchange. This is a BGP exchange.
2.Private VLAN. Each side gets a private VLAN between the two.
Either way you buy capacity on the exchange and it¹s up to you how you use
it.
I have some Equinix documents
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Jake Khuon kh...@neebu.net wrote:
Actually, this situation is as if you bought a low-end car that claims
it can go 60MPH just like a high-end sports car which also claims to go
60MPH. But when the low-end car fails to achieve 60MPH and in fact
blows up when
On Nov 25, 2014, at 12:32 PM, Chris Grundemann cgrundem...@gmail.com wrote:
Hail NANOG!
I am looking for IPv6 security resources to add to:
http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/ipv6/security/
These could be best current practice documents, case-studies,
lessons-learned/issues-found,
Be careful joining an IX just to peer with Google (AS15169) and a few
others...especially if your exchange doesn’t have route servers established.
Some companies, such as NetFlix, have a truly open peering policy; establishing
a bilateral BGP session with them is super-straightforward.
On the
At no point does that spec say a single thing about speed. The closest
part I could find was Upstream data rate 1.244Gbps, but I think it's
pretty clear that that is the link speed, not the actual data rate. It's
worth wringing them out over the issue, maybe you can shame them into
taking the
In message
cae7mfijoxo9ybyg4be+f9qm7vnvv1iqfjyjs4h0k0d-jjbw...@mail.gmail.com, Nick B
writes:
At no point does that spec say a single thing about speed. The closest
part I could find was Upstream data rate 1.244Gbps, but I think it's
pretty clear that that is the link speed, not the actual
On 11/25/14 10:06 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
Any router/modem that*crashes* when the input rate exceeds the
output rate is broken. A router/modem shouldn't crash regardless
of the data input rate. It might drop packets but not crash.
Maybe the bit-bucket got full?
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 12:22 AM, Doug Barton do...@dougbarton.us wrote:
Maybe the bit-bucket got full?
Then the new packets should be dropped, but this seems like a
potential vulnerability. What it seems like to me is that the
bit-bucket is not size limited, and proceeds to overwrite other
First please filter the source addr on all egress traffic, please. Please.
Second, please don’t be the network admin whom emails:
“…
To: notourorgabuseem...@tocici.com
From: cluelessad...@example.com
Subject: An attempt of intrusion comes from your ip
.
…”
Just in case you missed the obvious:
A half-day with SQLite, memcached and PHP solved this need for us
(auto-configures Nagios). Tracking a few hundred domains at this point.
Gosh, I really need to cleanup sources, and punt some of these little tools
onto GitHub.
Gregg Berkholtz
On Nov 24, 2014, at 4:52 PM, Mike Hale
33 matches
Mail list logo
