It appears that [EMAIL PROTECTED] is using a challenge/response system
(see below). This is an extremely bad idea -- so bad that I'm surprised
that NANOG personnel aren't already well aware of it. (It's common
knowledge among most of those working in the anti-spam field.)
See, for example:
BGP Update Report
Interval: 24-Mar-08 -to- 24-Apr-08 (32 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS2.0
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS949898654 1.3% 82.2 -- BBIL-AP BHARTI BT INTERNET LTD.
2 - AS958377229
This report has been generated at Fri Apr 25 21:19:56 2008 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date
I'm looking for someone to swap services with - we need a remote
nameserver/test point, preferrably somewhere other than North America, and we
can offer the same in return.
Ideally we'd just trade small VMWare images (40G disk/512M RAM) but I'm open
to other options as well.
Scott,
Do you want
CWDM - Course Wave Division Multiplexing - 100 nm optical
spacing 1 - 10 x 2.5 - 10 Gbps lambdas
DWDM - Dense Wave Division Multiplexing - =50 nm optical
spacing 20 - 40 x 2.5 - 10 Gbps
UDWDM - Ultra Dense Wave Division
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008, John Lee wrote:
Subscribe to Lightwave (at no charge) and look at the back issues for
networks. Show up at Supercom or OFC or what is replacing them and get the
latest on ROADM, full channel tunable lasers and maintenance costs.
What size of network do you want to
alex,
In your talk, I agree that the CAN with your CWDM is not that expensive but you
also mention that the tighter DWDM with long haul optics is expensive ie
Everybody knows how to do (active) xWDM by giving a lot of money to (insert
vendor of choice]:
When you talk about the tighter itu
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008, John Lee wrote:
In your talk, I agree that the CAN with your CWDM is not that expensive
but you also mention that the tighter DWDM with long haul optics is
expensive ie Everybody knows how to do (active) xWDM by giving a lot of
money to (insert vendor of choice]:
When
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
Daily listings are sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For historical data, please see http://thyme.apnic.net.
If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith [EMAIL
On Apr 25, 2008, at 12:58 PM, Alex Pilosov wrote:
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008, John Lee wrote:
I'd be curious to ask reverse question, did anyone *have* real
problems
deploying duct tape systems, or power jitter chromatic dispersion is
vendor mumbo jumbo designed to make you buy their gear?
On 25 Apr 2008, at 06:34, Greg VILLAIN wrote:
On Apr 23, 2008, at 11:23 PM, Fouant, Stefan wrote:
Wondering if there is a good repository of information somewhere
which
outlines the various major ISPs routing policies such as default
local-pref treatment for customers vs. peers, handling
Anyone from Comcast (or anyone know anyone from Comcast) that can
contact me regarding a routing issue on their network? I'm seeing some
weird routing between a customer of mine and a /32 on our network.
Traceroutes from customer site to two adjacent /32's on our network
Working /32
1 * *
Note that these addresses are advertised aggregated as a /19 from us
to our peers.
GG
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Gary T. Giesen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone from Comcast (or anyone know anyone from Comcast) that can
contact me regarding a routing issue on their network? I'm seeing
Now cogent isn't between my VoIP and my DSL:
1. adsl-63-194-NNN-NNN.dsl.lsan03.p 0.0%82 57.4 22.7 8.3 58.3
16.3
2. dist3-vlan60.irvnca.sbcglobal.ne 1.2%82 21.5 19.4 8.2 133.7
16.3
3. bb1-p6-7.emhril.ameritech.net 0.0%82 41.1 55.0 8.2 242.9
63.7
4.
14 matches
Mail list logo
