inline...
On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 22:15 -0700, George Bonser wrote:
The problem I have with the concept is that paid prioritization only
really has an impact once there is congestion. If your buffers are
empty, then there is no real benefit to priority because everything is
still being sent
Hi,
Someone please help me understand, in the SONET/SDH virtual tributary
mapping context, K-L-M numbers are used to describe E1 positions.
What do the initials KLM stand for?
Regards,
kweheria
Hi
K describes TUG-3 group (1-3)
L describes a TUG-2 group inside a TUG-3 (1-7)
M describes a TU-12/VC12/E1 inside a TUG-2 (1-3)
I'm not sure if they actually have some meaning.
--
*blap*
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 14:58, Kweheria Erick kwehe...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Someone please help me
On Sep 16, 2010, at 12:15 AM, George Bonser wrote:
I believe a network should be able to sell priotitization at the edge,
but not in the core. I have no problem with Y!, for example, paying a
network to be prioritized ahead of bit torrent on the segment to the end
user but I do have a
On Sep 16, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Danijel theghost...@gmail.com wrote:
K describes TUG-3 group (1-3)
L describes a TUG-2 group inside a TUG-3 (1-7)
M describes a TU-12/VC12/E1 inside a TUG-2 (1-3)
I'm not sure if they actually have some meaning.
They are merely alphabetical indexes.
C
Thanks,
Always wondered what the motivation behind those exact letters was.
-Original Message-
From: Christian Martin christian.mar...@teliris.com
To: Danijel theghost...@gmail.com
Cc: Kweheria Erick kwehe...@gmail.com, nanog@nanog.org
nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: SONET/SDH virtual
On 9/16/2010 8:19 AM, Chris Boyd wrote:
end user
I DO have a problem with a content provider paying to get priority access on
the last mile. I have no particular interest in any of the content that Yahoo
provides, but I do have an interest in downloading my Linux updates via
torrents.
Anyone know the impact on the XO Routing/Peering that is happening right
now? We have had spotty connectivity for the last hour.
Stefan
The internet health report is showing high latency to most of their peers.
Chuck.
On Sep 16, 2010 11:57 AM, Stefan Molnar ste...@csudsu.com wrote:
Anyone know the impact on the XO Routing/Peering that is happening right
now? We have had spotty connectivity for the last hour.
Stefan
I know their own phone systems went down, or perhaps
were overloaded; we lost our office connection to them
but our phones remained online. I called their tech
line by cell, was told thanks for calling XO, we are
experiencing technical difficulties and then it hung
up on me. :-) This seems to
This should probably be on outages@, but XO is definitely having problems to
places like speedtest.com RCN from Boston.
--
TTFN,
patrick
On Sep 16, 2010, at 11:59 AM, Charles Mills wrote:
The internet health report is showing high latency to most of their peers.
Chuck.
On Sep 16,
I get the same hang up message, but did get in queue.
The PSTN side is working fine from what I can see as our phones at a few
locations are fine, but it is a shot in the dark for anything IP.
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010, David Hubbard wrote:
I know their own phone systems went down, or perhaps
XO Engineers are telling us that they are aware of packet loss across their
network and are looking into it. We're experiencing slow/degraded
connectivity out of St. Louis and Nashville but Atlanta and Dallas are
problem free.
William Collier-Byrd
w...@collier-byrd.net
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at
Stefan Molnar wrote:
Anyone know the impact on the XO Routing/Peering that is happening
right now? We have had spotty connectivity for the last hour.
Stefan
I don't know the exact impact but I've had my Covad and ATT customers
ready to hang me because of what's going on.
As of
Does anyone have any information (beyond the wimpy statement that
technical issues were to blame) on the Chase outage?
It seems that when a multibillion dollar company's major web site is
down for more than a day, there must be juicy technical issues that
beg to be told. So, can anyone dish? :-)
Looks like XO has stopped advertising its peer's prefixes. Sessions
coming back up and stable.
-Original Message-
From: Calkins, Mark [mailto:mark.calk...@twtelecom.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 10:18 AM
To: William Byrd
Cc: NANOG list
Subject: RE: XO Routing
XO began
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 12:10 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 08:59:23 CDT, Joe Greco said:
What prevents a service provider from saying We're selling you a
15M/2M circuit, and we guarantee that we've got sufficient capacity
to consistently deliver at least 4M/512K
Hopefully they don't treat this the same way they treat their billing,
otherwise you all will be degraded for months or even years. It is
absolutely amazing that this company is still in business.
Jeff
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 8:48 PM, Calkins, Mark
mark.calk...@twtelecom.com wrote:
XO began
N. Yaakov Ziskind wrote:
Does anyone have any information (beyond the wimpy statement that
technical issues were to blame) on the Chase outage?
It seems that when a multibillion dollar company's major web site is
down for more than a day, there must be juicy technical issues that
beg to be
The unconfirmed chatter I'm hearing is that they were leaking peering routes to
other peers. Can anyone check and confirm this? Renesys?
-C
On Sep 16, 2010, at 9:09 12AM, William Byrd wrote:
XO Engineers are telling us that they are aware of packet loss across their
network and are looking
On 9/16/10 9:35 AM, Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
Hopefully they don't treat this the same way they treat their billing,
otherwise you all will be degraded for months or even years. It is
absolutely amazing that this company is still in business.
The big guys will always remain in business, or be
Zaid Ali wrote (on Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 09:27:40AM -0700):
Isn't that reserved for beer sessions at NANOG?
Bummer. I heard they don't lawyers into the beer sessions. :-)
On 9/16/10 9:13 AM, N. Yaakov Ziskind aw...@ziskind.us wrote:
Does anyone have any information (beyond the wimpy
On Sep 16, 2010, at 12:48 PM, Stefan Molnar wrote:
My sales director said it was their peering.
First problem with a statement talking about technical problems: My sales
director said
Second problem: Peering does not cause internal routing loops. Er, should
not.
Third problem: Was.
--
Your statement misses the point, which is, *who* gets to decide what
traffic is prioritized? And will that prioritization be determined by
who is paying my carrier for that prioritization, potentially against
my own preferences?
I would say that with standard run of the mill consumer
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 2:44 PM, George Bonser gbon...@seven.com wrote:
Your statement misses the point, which is, *who* gets to decide what
traffic is prioritized? And will that prioritization be determined by
who is paying my carrier for that prioritization, potentially against
my own
On Sep 16, 2010, at 10:57 AM, George Bonser wrote:
I DO have a problem with a content provider paying to get priority
access on the last mile. I have no particular interest in any of the
content that Yahoo provides, but I do have an interest in downloading
my Linux updates via torrents.
On Sep 16, 2010, at 11:44 AM, George Bonser wrote:
Your statement misses the point, which is, *who* gets to decide what
traffic is prioritized? And will that prioritization be determined by
who is paying my carrier for that prioritization, potentially against
my own preferences?
I would
Will the provider unbundle the components so that it's feasible for a
niche vendor to sell me custom connection services?
No?
Then the provider doesn't get to decide.
It's about control. As the customer, the guy with the green, I should
have it. A combination of decisions on the
-Original Message-
From: Owen DeLong [mailto:o...@delong.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 2:17 PM
To: George Bonser
Cc: NANOG list
Subject: Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid,Prioritized
Traffic?
SNIP
The point is that if the provider is deciding based on some
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 3:28 PM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
Will the provider unbundle the components so that it's feasible for a
niche vendor to sell me custom connection services?
No?
Then the provider doesn't get to decide.
It's about control. As the customer, the guy with the green, I
On 9/16/2010 2:28 PM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
If you want control: Don't buy the cheapest commodity product.
+1
Next we'll be arguing that akamai nodes are evil because they can have
better service levels than other sites. The p2p guys are also getting
special treatment, as they can grab
Hi all
I don't have two fibr card so that I can't test it
If i have one setting as mode NOT negot, one is using AU To mode
Can they ping each other?
Thank you for your help
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010, Deric Kwok wrote:
I don't have two fibr card so that I can't test it
If i have one setting as mode NOT negot, one is using AU To mode
What kinds of cards are you talking about? Gigabit? 10G? 100baseFX?
I'm also assuming since you mentioned negotiation that you're
33 matches
Mail list logo
