Re: Trying to Make Sense of the Comcast/Level 3 Dispute

On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Paul Ferguson wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Interesting article: > > http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/sjs/trying-make-sense-comcast-level-3 > - -dispute > > Considering the fact that I received an e-mail survey request today from

RE: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions

Makes we wonder if Level3's contract with Netflix has certain performance requirements that would preclude Level3 sending Netflix traffic to Comcast the long way around. http://seekingalpha.com/article/235645-akamai-to-lose-netflix-as-a-customer- level-3-and-limelight-pick-up-the-business I

Trying to Make Sense of the Comcast/Level 3 Dispute

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Interesting article: http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/sjs/trying-make-sense-comcast-level-3 - -dispute Considering the fact that I received an e-mail survey request today from Netflix (I am a subscriber) which, among other questions, asked if I

Re: Blocking International DNS

> Can you cite specific examples of USG interfering with ccTLDs? >>> For several decades the USG has made it crystal clear that they do >>> not mess with ccTLDs, not even ones for countries they don't like >>> such as .CU and .IR. >> possibly clear to you.  the factual experience is that this state

Re: Blocking International DNS

Randy, Can you cite specific examples of USG interfering with ccTLDs? Jeff On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 11:53 PM, Randy Bush wrote: >> For several decades the USG has made it crystal clear that they do >> not mess with ccTLDs, not even ones for countries they don't like >> such as .CU and .IR. > > po

Re: Blocking International DNS

> For several decades the USG has made it crystal clear that they do > not mess with ccTLDs, not even ones for countries they don't like > such as .CU and .IR. possibly clear to you. the factual experience is that this statement is patently false to those dealing with those particular cctlds. ra

Re: Blocking International DNS

>the more i think about this, the more i am inclined to consider a second >trusted root not (easily) attackable by the usg, who owns the root now, This particular domain grab had nothing to do with the root or ICANN. If you look at the name servers and WHOIS of the domains that were seized, you ca

Re: Blocking International DNS

Steve, On Dec 1, 2010, at 3:35 PM, Steven Bellovin wrote: >> Wouldn't this simply change the focus of who can attack from the USG (which, >> as far as I am aware, has not attacked the root) to some other government >> (or worse, the UN)? Given a handle, folks are going to want to grab it when

Re: Blocking International DNS

In message , "Lyndon Neren berg (VE6BBM/VE7TFX)" writes: > > Also, who you will really trust to run it ? > > The UUCP network chugged along quite nicely for many years without any > central authority. (Pathalias and the maps weren't an authority, just > a hint.) And there would have been total

Re: Blocking International DNS

*wonders where his fidonet archives are. dusty. Any system needs to be designed to be open to anyone at any level of the economic chart and a minimum of technical knowledge to implement. This does not necessarily need to encompass the identification requirements for commerce, that may well be

Re: Blocking International DNS

> http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000787.html I see no drafts, no white or any color papers, no research, no background, good intentions and a napkin list of specs/requirements, no substance. -J

Re: Blocking International DNS

> Also, who you will really trust to run it ? The UUCP network chugged along quite nicely for many years without any central authority. (Pathalias and the maps weren't an authority, just a hint.) --lyndon

Re: Blocking International DNS

> And I have too many bad memories of Alternic > to feel comfortable about Peter Sunde's P2P ideas. IMHO, there is a basic and fundamental flaw on many of the "alternate" schemes. The current "DNS ecosystem" has been feeding the pockets of many for many years and became what a ~$7B? industry ? man

Re: Blocking International DNS

On Dec 2, 2010, at 10:10 AM, Randy Bush wrote: > we have a significant failure by the security community in that they keep > giving us hierarchic models, pgp being a notable exception. --- R

Re: Blocking International DNS

> but playing with the current dns is a short term solution. > > in the long run, centralization/rootification of control is equivalent > to monopoly. and we have seen time and again that this leads to > despotism, often cloaked in false protectionism and false "we represent > the community.".

Re: Blocking International DNS

> internationalizing ICANN may be the best solution. for sure! if it is truly removed from the states and not put in genf. gedanken experiment: who would i trust more to not interfere with **other people's** data, the usg, icann, the itu, or the pirate bay party? my conclusion makes me very sad

Re: Blocking International DNS

> Wasn't this exactly why people suggested ICANN should just move to > Switzerland and become an independent international organization ? Would > this still be possibility ? You can move ICANN to Mars but unless you move the "root", IANA is and will still be under USG control as it is today. Also

Re: Blocking International DNS

On Dec 1, 2010, at 4:41 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > the more i think about this, the more i am inclined to consider a second > trusted root not (easily) attackable by the usg, who owns the root now, > or the acta vigilantes. as dissent becomes less tolerated, let alone > supported, we may want to at

Re: Blocking International DNS

>> the more i think about this, the more i am inclined to consider a >> second trusted root not (easily) attackable by the usg, who owns the >> root now, or the acta vigilantes. as dissent becomes less tolerated, >> let alone supported, we may want to attempt to ensure it in our >> deployments. >

Re: wikileaks unreachable

http://asert.arbornetworks.com/2010/11/wikileaks-cablegate-attack/ and http://asert.arbornetworks.com/2010/11/round2-ddos-versus-wikileaks/ - Craig On Dec 1, 2010, at 4:38 PM, Mike wrote: > Just on an operational front, does anyone know the nature of the DDoS against > wikileaks? eg: spoofed s

Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast'sActions

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Derek J. Balling wrote: > On Nov 29, 2010, at 10:25 PM, William Herrin wrote: >> There are a couple forms of shared billing. > > There's a third kind you failed to mention that doesn't require equal footing > of the parties. The broker. > > I might pay an apartment

Re: Blocking International DNS

On Dec 1, 2010, at 8:18 42PM, David Conrad wrote: > On Dec 1, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Randy Bush wrote: >> the more i think about this, the more i am inclined to consider a second >> trusted root not (easily) attackable by the usg, who owns the root now, >> or the acta vigilantes. as dissent becomes

Re: Blocking International DNS

On Dec 1, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Randy Bush wrote: > the more i think about this, the more i am inclined to consider a second > trusted root not (easily) attackable by the usg, who owns the root now, > or the acta vigilantes. as dissent becomes less tolerated, let alone > supported, we may want to att

Re: Blocking International DNS

Randy Bush wrote: the more i think about this, the more i am inclined to consider a second trusted root not (easily) attackable by the usg, who owns the root now, or the acta vigilantes. as dissent becomes less tolerated, let alone supported, we may want to attempt to ensure it in our deployment

Re: Blocking International DNS

On 12/01/2010 10:41 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > the more i think about this, the more i am inclined to consider a second > trusted root not (easily) attackable by the usg, who owns the root now, > or the acta vigilantes. as dissent becomes less tolerated, let alone > supported, we may want to attempt

Re: FUD: 15% of world's internet traffic hijacked

On Dec 1, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote: > sometimes I love to pull your chain... :) I agree though that folks > won't publish this data (in general) directly, for whatever reason. > Also, right '15% of traffic' really should have been '15% of routes*' Agreed, I should have been mor

Re: FUD: 15% of world's internet traffic hijacked

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Randy Bush wrote: >> also, you won't get the traffic stats from the >> offending parties > > and how much traffic data does google publish? > > or iij or ntt?  oops!  cho, fukuda, esaki, & kato [0] did show real > traffic data from japan's largest isps. > > no accu

Re: regional ASN's

On Dec 1, 2010, at 5:05 PM, Jack Bates wrote: > On 12/1/2010 3:56 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> Having islands which point default is not ugly. They are probably pointing >> default anyway. > > If all sites strictly do default, fine. However, one could say static routing > would work fine th

Re: Cage nuts/rack hw near SAVVIS DC3 (Sterling VA)

On 12/01/2010 12:47 PM, Jameel Akari wrote: > >> Or, you could do what our co-loc does, have a large coffee can with >> screws, nuts, etc and a few shared screwdrivers in another. On your >> way in, grab the nuts/screws and a screwdriver, on your way out put >> unused and extras back in the can. >

Re: regional ASN's

On 12/1/2010 3:56 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: Having islands which point default is not ugly. They are probably pointing default anyway. If all sites strictly do default, fine. However, one could say static routing would work fine there too; and then you don't need an ASN. If each site i

Re: regional ASN's

On Dec 1, 2010, at 4:43 PM, Jack Bates wrote: > On 12/1/2010 3:37 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> >> Or just have disparate networks using the same ASN. Works fine. >> >> Why waste ASNs and try to explain to others how asX,Y,Z, etc., are all the >> same company? > > I dislike the problem of r

Re: regional ASN's

On 12/1/2010 3:37 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: Or just have disparate networks using the same ASN. Works fine. Why waste ASNs and try to explain to others how asX,Y,Z, etc., are all the same company? I dislike the problem of routes not being accepted with my ASN in it. There's workaround

Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast'sActions

On Wed, 01 Dec 2010 16:32:47 EST, Jared Mauch said: > Ultimately I managed to work something out and get service, but for > those on the "edge" areas, its much harder than you would think to gain > access. I suspect there will be ongoing property devaluation as a > consequence of lack of these ut

Re: Blocking International DNS

the more i think about this, the more i am inclined to consider a second trusted root not (easily) attackable by the usg, who owns the root now, or the acta vigilantes. as dissent becomes less tolerated, let alone supported, we may want to attempt to ensure it in our deployments. randy

Re: wikileaks unreachable

Just on an operational front, does anyone know the nature of the DDoS against wikileaks? eg: spoofed source garbage, http get, synfloods, or ? Mike-

Re: regional ASN's

On Dec 1, 2010, at 4:30 PM, Michael Hallgren wrote: > Le mercredi 01 décembre 2010 à 17:31 +, deles...@gmail.com a écrit : >> You can use one AS and communities to seperate your traffic/policies. > > Or other iBGP means of internal separation, like BGP confederations (in > order to avoid iBGP

Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast'sActions

On Dec 1, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Derek J. Balling wrote: > On Nov 29, 2010, at 11:20 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote: >> Broadband in the US is not in that boat. Too many consumers have >> a "choice" of a single provider. The vast majority of the rest >> have the "choice" of two providers. > > I dunno. I'v

Re: regional ASN's

Le mercredi 01 décembre 2010 à 17:31 +, deles...@gmail.com a écrit : > You can use one AS and communities to seperate your traffic/policies. Or other iBGP means of internal separation, like BGP confederations (in order to avoid iBGP session hacks). mh > > -jim > --Original Message--

Re: wikileaks unreachable

On Nov 30, 2010, at 11:07 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > > On Nov 28, 2010, at 4:34 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > >> anyone know why https://www.wikileaks.org/ is not reachable? nations >> state level censors trying to close the barn door after the horse has >> left? >> >> randy >> >> > > That wa

Re: FUD: 15% of world's internet traffic hijacked

> it's fairly clear though that you won't get traffic information > without looking at the interconnects between the offending parties yep > also, you won't get the traffic stats from the > offending parties and how much traffic data does google publish? or iij or ntt? oops! cho, fukuda, es

Re: FUD: 15% of world's internet traffic hijacked

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > as usual i see no traffic measurements in the renesys note.  i see > inference of traffic based on some control plane measurements.  and, has > been shown, such inferences are highly suspect. it's fairly clear though that you won't get traffic i

Re: FUD: 15% of world's internet traffic hijacked

Dear Randy; On Dec 1, 2010, at 3:28 PM, Randy Bush wrote: >> At the very least you might want to review: >> http://www.renesys.com/blog/2010/11/chinas-18-minute-mystery.shtml >> Renesys provides one data point but there are others that clearly show >> traffic routed *through* China (meaning they

Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast'sActions

On Nov 29, 2010, at 10:25 PM, William Herrin wrote: > There are a couple forms of shared billing. There's a third kind you failed to mention that doesn't require equal footing of the parties. The broker. I might pay an apartment broker $X to help find me an apartment. In turn the apartment bro

Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast'sActions

Sprint also offers unlimited 3G/4G data, and they were *really* specific in a mailing to their customers a couple days ago actually that "unlimited means unlimited, not like some of our competitors are doing to their customers". D On Nov 30, 2010, at 11:29 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: > MetroPCS als

Re: FUD: 15% of world's internet traffic hijacked

> At the very least you might want to review: > http://www.renesys.com/blog/2010/11/chinas-18-minute-mystery.shtml > Renesys provides one data point but there are others that clearly show > traffic routed *through* China (meaning they did indeed > originate/hijack, and then pass data on to the orig

Re: TWT - Comcast congestion

I've collected my fav links (inc. nanog posts) on this topic on http://www.isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=1504. If there are issues with my brief explanation please let me know. j On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote: > > Comcast has released additional details publically. Of course, this

Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast'sActions

On 2010-11-30 @ 1122, William Herrin wrote: > I checked it out when I updated my credit card number online recently. > The billing page has a place to describe a cap and overage charges. > It's listed as unlimited. Not saying you're wrong. Just saying that > the billing documentation disagrees. A

Re: Cage nuts/rack hw near SAVVIS DC3 (Sterling VA)

Or, you could do what our co-loc does, have a large coffee can with screws, nuts, etc and a few shared screwdrivers in another. On your way in, grab the nuts/screws and a screwdriver, on your way out put unused and extras back in the can. I like this idea better - which is what one of our D

Re: TWT - Comcast congestion

Comcast has released additional details publically. Of course, this is their side of the story, so I wouldn't believe it hook line and sinker but it helps fill in the gaps. http://blog.comcast.com/2010/11/comcasts-letter-to-fcc-on-level-3.html -- Leo Bicknell - bickn...@ufp.org - CCIE 3

Re: regional ASN's

You can use one AS and communities to seperate your traffic/policies. -jim --Original Message-- From: Ryan Finnesey To: NANOG list Subject: regional ASN's Sent: Dec 1, 2010 1:13 PM I see various people are recommending networks setup regional ASN's. I am in the process of setting up a ne

Re: TWT - Comcast congestion

On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 06:31:39AM -0800, Leo Bicknell wrote: > In a message written on Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:59:25PM -0600, Richard A > Steenbergen wrote: > > I believe that's what I said. To be perfectly clear, what I'm saying is: > > > > * Comcast acted first by demanding fees > > * Level 3

regional ASN's

I see various people are recommending networks setup regional ASN's. I am in the process of setting up a new network which will serve as a transit network for all our operating units. I was planning on using one ASN for North America, Asia and Europe. Is this not recommended? Cheers Ryan

Re: Cage nuts/rack hw near SAVVIS DC3 (Sterling VA)

On 12/1/10 9:43 AM, Chris Adams wrote: A plain (non-drink) machine draws a few watts. I don't think rack screws and patch cables need to be refrigerated; if they can't spare a few watts for a vending machine, then you probably can't install anything new there anyway. Its def not a bad idea, a

COMSNETS 2011 (Call for Participation)

COMSNETS 2011 The THIRD International Conference on COMmunication Systems and NETworks January 4-8, 2011, Bangalore, India http://www.comsnets.org Email: comsnets2...@ece.iisc.ernet.in (In Co-operation with ACM SIGMO

Re: Cage nuts/rack hw near SAVVIS DC3 (Sterling VA)

On Dec 1, 2010, at 8:43 AM, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Christopher Morrow said: >> the colo provider may not want to 'waste' electricity/cooling on a >> vending machine... > > A plain (non-drink) machine draws a few watts. I don't think rack > screws and patch cables need to be ref

Re: Cage nuts/rack hw near SAVVIS DC3 (Sterling VA)

Once upon a time, Christopher Morrow said: > the colo provider may not want to 'waste' electricity/cooling on a > vending machine... A plain (non-drink) machine draws a few watts. I don't think rack screws and patch cables need to be refrigerated; if they can't spare a few watts for a vending ma

Re: Cage nuts/rack hw near SAVVIS DC3 (Sterling VA)

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Cat Okita wrote: > On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Leo Bicknell wrote: >> >> Every meeting I have with a colo provider I suggest this exact idea. >> Patch cables (cat5, single mode, multi-mode), fiber couplers, maybe >> even SFP's, velcro ties, a 10-in-1 screwdriver, etc. > >

Re: Cage nuts/rack hw near SAVVIS DC3 (Sterling VA)

On 2010-12-01, at 09:48, Leo Bicknell wrote: > In a message written on Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 06:43:25AM -0800, JC Dill wrote: >> I really don't understand why someone hasn't put vending machines in >> every major colo around the world. We have vending machines that sell >> ipods at the maul, we

Re: Cage nuts/rack hw near SAVVIS DC3 (Sterling VA)

On Dec 1, 2010, at 9:43 AM, JC Dill wrote: > On 30/11/10 5:32 AM, Christopher J. Pilkington wrote: >> Anyone know where I can buy cage nuts and rack screws locally >> near SAVVIS DC3 in Sterling, VA? They don't seem to have a >> local supply here, and somehow the racks we bought came with >> a 2

Re: Cage nuts/rack hw near SAVVIS DC3 (Sterling VA)

On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Leo Bicknell wrote: Every meeting I have with a colo provider I suggest this exact idea. Patch cables (cat5, single mode, multi-mode), fiber couplers, maybe even SFP's, velcro ties, a 10-in-1 screwdriver, etc. I'd say skip the colo provider, and look for vending machine comp

Re: [NANOG-announce] Reminder: Today is the last day to register for NANOG 51 at the early bird rate

Jon, Sorry about that; not sure what's up. I'll look into it. Thanks, Dave On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 7:57 PM, Jon Lewis wrote: > On Tue, 30 Nov 2010, David Meyer wrote: > > Register today to get the early bird rate. >> >> Looking forward to seeing you in Miami. >> > > I just tried (to take ad

Re: Cage nuts/rack hw near SAVVIS DC3 (Sterling VA)

In a message written on Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 06:43:25AM -0800, JC Dill wrote: > I really don't understand why someone hasn't put vending machines in > every major colo around the world. We have vending machines that sell > ipods at the maul, we can certainly have a vending machine that sells >

Re: Cage nuts/rack hw near SAVVIS DC3 (Sterling VA)

On 30/11/10 5:32 AM, Christopher J. Pilkington wrote: Anyone know where I can buy cage nuts and rack screws locally near SAVVIS DC3 in Sterling, VA? They don't seem to have a local supply here, and somehow the racks we bought came with a 2:1 screw:nuts ratio. I really don't understand why som

Re: TWT - Comcast congestion

In a message written on Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:59:25PM -0600, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > I believe that's what I said. To be perfectly clear, what I'm saying is: > > * Comcast acted first by demanding fees > * Level 3 went public first by whining about it after they agreed to pay > * Comcast

Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions

Well, I don't work for the NBN, but I do live here and follow the politics with interest. So far the 'experiment' is on track. The political parties who support the NBN are the majority by a slim margin (2 or 3 seats) and the project seems to be going forward. Most recently legislation passed

New IPv4 blocks allocated to RIPE NCC

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [Apologies for duplicate mails] Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC received the IPv4 address ranges 5/8 and 37/8 from the IANA in November 2010. We will begin allocating from these ranges in the near future. The minimum allocation size for these two /8s

TWT - Comcast congestion

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > uncongested access. This is the kind of action that virtually BEGS for > government involvement, which will probably end badly for all networks. This depends on the eventual regulatory mechanism and the goals it intends to promote.

Re: Level3 issues from Denver to San Jose?

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:22:41PM -0700, Khurram Khan wrote: > I'm seeing some packet loss out of one of my routers in San Diego, we peer > with L3. > > ping 4.69.132.57 so gi3/8 repeat 1000 size 5000 > > Type escape sequence to abort. > Sending 1000, 5000-byte ICMP Echos to 4.69.132.57, timeout