Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention

On 10/Jun/16 16:47, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > > ​so I can't be a customer of you and a network you peer with? You can, but we won't learn your paths via the peering session we would have with your other ISP. Mark.

Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention

On Fri 2016-Jun-10 13:08:48 -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote: On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Mark Tinka wrote: On 10/Jun/16 16:47, Christopher Morrow wrote: so I can't be a customer of you and a network you peer with? You can, but we

Local Loop Provider

Hi, I am looking for on-net tail providers between the sites below. Need both 100 and 1000 meg Layer 2 Ethernet point-to-point quotes. Two year terms. A point: 12101 Tukwila International Blvd, Seattle, WA 98168. Z point: 2001 6th Avenue, Westin Bld. A point: 4300 Brighton Blvd, Denver, CO

Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > On 10/Jun/16 16:47, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > > > ​so I can't be a customer of you and a network you peer with? > > > You can, but we won't learn your paths via the peering session we would > have with your other

Re: Equinix IX Port Moves

The second option. Well, there is the first under process too, but the second is the priority at the moment. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: "Christopher Morrow"

Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > On 10/Jun/16 19:08, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > > > ​oh, so I didn't misunderstand.. that makes 'backup isp' less useful, no?​ > > > > With regard to reaching our network, not true. You would still be able to >

Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention

On 10/Jun/16 19:08, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > > ​oh, so I didn't misunderstand.. that makes 'backup isp' less useful, no?​ > With regard to reaching our network, not true. You would still be able to reach our network if your primary service with us failed, but not via a local peer.

Re: Equinix IX Port Moves

On 10.06.2016 16:00, Mike Hammett wrote: > Who has moved an Equinix IX port? We're told that it's a full > cancellation, re-order, re IPs, re-peering, etc. > > Can anyone lend any input either way on that? Same issue here. Super complicated. I'm tempted to stop the process after the first step.

Re: Equinix IX Port Moves

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: > The second option. > > Well, there is the first under process too, but the second is the priority > at the moment. > > > ​it's a little mystifying that they can't arrange a 'hot cut' of the link then between the 2

Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention

On 10/Jun/16 10:50, Job Snijders wrote: > I second this. One of NTT's design principles is to be very strict in > what we accept (e.g. "postel was wrong") at the ingress point. At the > ingress point the route announcement is weighted, judged, categorized & > tagged. This decides 99% of what

Re: Equinix IX Port Moves

I believe this isn't the actual process, however recent reorganization has brought with it a new tier of "entry level" order/service management that's not fully up to speed on things. You'll want to ask your account team for a dedicated project manager to help with the process. HTH, -a On Fri,

Re: Equinix IX Port Moves

Same issue here. Super complicated. I'm tempted to stop the process after the first step. I think most things involving equinix are complicated and frustrating, at least once the contract is signed.

Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention

On 10/Jun/16 19:19, Hugo Slabbert wrote: > > > Unless it's mitigated by you accepting customer A's prefixes from any > transits you have, This. Mark. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

RE: Webmail / IMAPS software for end-user clients in 2016

Zimbra Jason Bertoch -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Eric Kuhnke Sent: Wednesday, June 8, 2016 9:06 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Webmail / IMAPS software for end-user clients in 2016 If you had to put up a public facing webmail interface

Re: Netflix banning HE tunnels

> Also, the Randy who closed the ngtrans working group "declar[ing] victory" > yet having produced nothing. in the ietf, that is a victory indeed! :) from slide 9, "430 transition mechanisms." the problem is they were and are a mess. so the iesg decided to stop the farce. of course, folk

Re: Netflix banning HE tunnels

(alternate solution: rename IPv6 to something media-friendlyish and request ISPs to enable support for it, advertising that most of their hardware "*already supports it*") On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 2:58 PM Cryptographrix wrote: > Just to clarify - there's no transition

Re: Netflix banning HE tunnels [really: IPv6 adoption]

This is sort of whacky. IPv4 was so successful, let's say post 1990, because it got people from nothing to internet or as some say Internet. IPv6 cannot duplicate that. So continuing to rely on this idea that "hey a coupla billion people went for IPv4, and even that was slow at first, so it's

Re: Netflix banning HE tunnels

On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 23:57:08 -0400, Randy Bush wrote: zero interoperability, and no viable migration paths, it's a Forklift Upgrade(tm). You say that with such confidence! Doesn't make it true. https://archive.psg.com/120206.nanog-v4-life-extension.pdf randy, who works for

Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention

On 10/Jun/16 19:34, Leo Bicknell wrote: > It does mean the provider creating the leak has already lost, but > that doesn't mean it still isn't vital to protecting the larger > internet. A good example of this is fire code. Most fire codes > do not do much to prevent you from starting a fire

Akamai GeoIP

Can somebody from Akamai contact me offlist about a GeoIP location change for a block please? Thank you.

Re: Netflix banning HE tunnels

Just to clarify - there's no transition involved - IPv4 to IPv6 is like going from the VINES protocol to IPv6: IPv6 may as well have been called "PROTOCOL 493" - it bares very little relation to the original protocol that brought us the internet as-it-is-today. The deployment of IPv4 had nothing

Maybe Telia issues?

Not quite sure whether this should go to outages, or here. I'm not confident that there actually *is* an outage of any sort...having a tough time characterizing it. I have an IPSec tunnel between 64.6.220.219 (upstreams Sprint, AT, and LeveL3/legacy TWTelecom) and 64.199.98.162 (upstream

Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention

In a message written on Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:50:17AM +0200, Job Snijders wrote: > You say 'often', but I don't recognise that design pattern from my own > experience. A weakness with the egress point (in context of route leak > prevention) is that if you are filtering there, its already too

RE: Enough about Netflix banning HE tunnels [really: IPv6 adoption]

Just as an example in the K-12 education space; we have added 5000 Chromebooks in the last 12 months. This was an end point add, not a replacement for desktops or other devices. And each Chromebook has to be filtered for Internet content to meet CIPA requirements (and the Chromebook content

Re: Enough about Netflix banning HE tunnels [really: IPv6 adoption]

On Fri, 10 Jun 2016 20:12:43 -, "STARNES, CURTIS" said: > and the Chromebook content filtering is not IPv6 compatible either So what are you using for content filtering? A quick google search indicates that there do exist filtering solutions that are IPv6 capable? And what *non* Chromebook

Re: Netflix banning HE tunnels

On Sat, 11 Jun 2016 00:21:52 +0900, Masataka Ohta said: > As such, the fish passages can be constructed, if translation > behavior of the NAT boxes are known to end systems so that > the end systems have sufficient knowledge to reverse the > translation. This requires each end system to restrict

Re: Akamai GeoIP

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > Can somebody from Akamai contact me offlist about a GeoIP location > change for a block please? > > Thank you. You can always mail n...@akamai.com or peer...@akamai.com for this type of request and we'll help get it

Re: Enough about Netflix banning HE tunnels [really: IPv6 adoption]

On Fri, 10 Jun 2016 19:39:38 -, "STARNES, CURTIS" said: > - Unix such as System V/BSD/Open Systems/AIX/SCO/HP-UX/Sun Solaris would each > rule the world. Compare the number of Android devices (basically every single smartphone on the planet that doesn't say iPhone) to the number of laptops

Enough about Netflix banning HE tunnels [really: IPv6 adoption]

NANOG members; First things first - PLEASE NOTE: This is just an opinion from one old IT guy who used to have to use a dial-up connection from a small town in central Texas to connect to my "ISP" (term used loosely for the very early 1990's) in Dallas, Oklahoma City, and sometimes Shreveport,

Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention

>> One thing we do to reduce opportunistically hazardous vectors is to not >> learn customer paths via peers. > ​so I can't be a customer of you and a network you peer with? > (I'm sure I got your meaning wrong)​ sure you can. just don't expect packets from job's cone when your link to him is

Re: Netflix banning HE tunnels

valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: This requires each end system to restrict its use of ephemeral ports to a specified *different* subrange per system, because the number of end systems times their ephemeral port range can't exceed the number of front-end systems times their ephemeral port range.

Re: Netflix banning HE tunnels

In message , Randy Bush writes: > > Also, the Randy who closed the ngtrans working group "declar[ing] victory" > > > yet having produced nothing. > > in the ietf, that is a victory indeed! :) from slide 9, "430 transition > mechanisms." the problem is they were

Re: Sunday night social?

Hi Matt - The registration questions built into Cvent are a standard set which is created prior to confirmation of sponsored events. The questions are there as a means to allow potential sponsors to plan accordingly. There is not a Sunday Social taking place in Chicago. Apologies if the

Fwd: Sunday night social?

> I just finished registering for NANOG 67, and answered Yes to "Will you be attending the sunday evening social" and booked my flight accordingly...but now i can't seem to find any details on what time it starts on the website. Does anyone know what time it starts? > > Thanks! > > Matt > >

RE: Netflix banning HE tunnels

--- chuckchu...@gmail.com wrote: From: "Chuck Church" The true jerks who used HE to bypass geo-lockout probably changed to something else the next day. But we suffer still. The FCC or some other federal entity probably needs to step in.

Re: Netflix banning HE tunnels

> Well, they have to power to push out net neutrality. This intentional > blocking of tunneling customers because their crap method of > geo-location can't be used and thus hinders advancement of the > internet (IPv6) is something that should disallowed. you omitted the "in my opinion." the

RE: Netflix banning HE tunnels

Well, they have to power to push out net neutrality. This intentional blocking of tunneling customers because their crap method of geo-location can't be used and thus hinders advancement of the internet (IPv6) is something that should disallowed. Or a good candidate for class action suit.

Re: Netflix banning HE tunnels

On Friday, 10 June, 2016 05:48, "Mark Foster" said: > Router-jockeys and purists often cite this. I've done it myself. > But there are a lot more moving parts in most service providers than > simply the ones and zeros. > Bandwidth Accounting, Billing, Provisioning systems

Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention

Hi All, On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 08:48:11AM -0400, Joe Provo wrote: > On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 11:48:36AM +, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) wrote: > > Thanks for the inputs about the inter-AS messaging and route-leak > > prevention techniques between neighboring ASes. Certainly helpful > >

Re: Netflix banning HE tunnels

On Fri, 10 Jun 2016 07:19:22 +0100, "t...@pelican.org" said: > All the business systems that sit around it? Not so much. $DAYJOB has > plenty of code, database structures etc that are built around "an IP address > is > no more than 15 characters long and matches >

Re: Equinix IX Port Moves

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: > Who has moved an Equinix IX port? We're told that it's a full > cancellation, re-order, re IPs, re-peering, etc. > > Can anyone lend any input either way on that? > > ​there are 2 meanings (at least) to 'move', did you

Re: intra-AS messaging for route leak prevention

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 2:35 AM, Mark Tinka wrote: > One thing we do to reduce opportunistically hazardous vectors is to not > learn customer paths via peers. > ​so I can't be a customer of you and a network you peer with? (I'm sure I got your meaning wrong)​

Equinix IX Port Moves

Who has moved an Equinix IX port? We're told that it's a full cancellation, re-order, re IPs, re-peering, etc. Can anyone lend any input either way on that? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com

Re: Netflix banning HE tunnels

Randy Bush wrote: https://archive.psg.com/120206.nanog-v4-life-extension.pdf randy, who works for the first isp to deploy ipv6 to customers To be a salmon, all we need is fish passages around dams of NAT boxes. As such, static binding on port/IP at NAT boxes is fine, as long as the binding