On 14-05-15 16:17, Keenan Tims wrote:
As primarily an eyeball network with a token (8000 quoted) number of transit
customers it does not seem reasonable for them to expect balanced ratios on
peering links.
Pardon my ignorance here, but isn't there a massive difference between
On Thursday, May 15, 2014 07:11:20 PM Jean-Francois Mezei
wrote:
Can anyone confirm whether ONTs generally have routing
(aka: home router that does the PPPoE or DHCP and then
NAT for home) capabilities?
I know of a well-known vendor coming out with a new OLT that
supports both typical GPON
On Thursday, May 15, 2014 07:24:33 PM Aled Morris wrote:
I notice Cisco's new ME4600 ONT's come in two flavors,
one (the Residential GateWay) with all the bells and
whistles that you'd expect in an all-in-one home router
(voice ports, small ethernet switch, wifi access point)
and another
On Thursday, May 15, 2014 09:05:57 PM Joe Greco wrote:
Hi I'm an Internet company. I don't actually know what
the next big thing next year will be but I promise that
I won't host it on my network and cause our traffic to
become lopsided.
You mean like almost every other mobile carrier the
What you're missing is that the transit provider is
selling full routes. The access network is selling
paid peering, which is a tiny fraction of the routes.
Considering they charge on a $per/mb basis I don't think its just routes
they are selling. It looks a lot like they are selling bits. From
Thanks, Eddie. Yes, I also have been experiencing intermittency this week.
But yesterday/today things went worse: I simply can not reach neither some
sites hosted there, neither GD's admin area. Neither their call centre...
:-(
Takashi Tome
network dummy
2014-05-16 0:00 GMT-03:00 Eddie Aquino
On 5/15/14, 12:49 PM, arvindersi...@mail2tor.com
arvindersi...@mail2tor.com wrote:
I have two issues with the comments:
2. You mention that all packets treated equally - no games. Why does
AS7922 assign the speed test different DSCP from regular internet
connection?
I have no idea what you
On , Livingood, Jason wrote:
On 5/15/14, 12:49 PM, arvindersi...@mail2tor.com
arvindersi...@mail2tor.com wrote:
I have two issues with the comments:
2. You mention that all packets treated equally - no games. Why does
AS7922 assign the speed test different DSCP from regular internet
All the talk about ratios is a red herring… The real issue boils down to this:
1. The access (eyeball) networks don’t want to bear the cost of delivering
what they promised to their customers.
2. This is because when they built their business models, they didn’t
expect their customers
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 7:56 AM, Vinny Abello vi...@abellohome.net wrote:
I think he's questioning why packets from speedtest.comcast.net have CS1 if
everything is supposedly equal, and what that is used for. A quick Wireshark
shows that to be true right now running to your Plainfield, NJ
On May 16, 2014, at 3:25 AM, Rick Astley jna...@gmail.com wrote:
Broadband is too expensive in the US compared to other places
I have seen this repeated so many times that I assume it's true but I have
never seen anything objective as to why. I can tell you if you look at
population
On 5/16/14, 7:56 AM, Vinny Abello vi...@abellohome.net wrote:
I think he's questioning why packets from speedtest.comcast.net have CS1
if everything is supposedly equal, and what that is used for. A quick
Wireshark shows that to be true right now running to your Plainfield, NJ
speedtest site, and
On Friday, May 16, 2014 03:54:33 PM Owen DeLong wrote:
customers. 2. This is because when they built their
business models, they didn’t expect their customers to
use nearly as much of their promised bandwidth as they
are now using. Most of the models were constructed
around the idea that a
Social media is not a big driver of symmetrical traffic here in the US or
internationally. Broadband suffers here for a number of reasons, mainly
topological and population density, in comparison to places like Japan,
parts (but certainly not all) of Europe, and South Korea.
Scott Helms
Vice
- Original Message -
From: Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu
On Thursday, May 15, 2014 07:24:33 PM Aled Morris wrote:
I notice Cisco's new ME4600 ONT's come in two flavors,
one (the Residential GateWay) with all the bells and
whistles that you'd expect in an all-in-one home router
On Friday, May 16, 2014 05:08:33 PM Scott Helms wrote:
Social media is not a big driver of symmetrical traffic
here in the US or internationally. Broadband suffers
here for a number of reasons, mainly topological and
population density, in comparison to places like Japan,
parts (but
- Original Message -
From: Matthew Petach mpet...@netflight.com
You want to stream a movie? No problem;
the video player opens up a second data
port back to a server next to the streaming
box; its only purpose is to accept a socket,
and send all bits received on it to /dev/null.
- Original Message -
From: Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu
While that is true a lot of the time (especially for eyeball
networks), it is less so now due to social media. Social
media forces the use of symmetric bandwidth (like FTTH),
putting even more demand on the network,
Oh yes;
Mark,
Bandwidth use trends are actually increasingly asymmetical because of the
popularity of OTT video.
Social media, even with video uploading, simply doesn't generate that much
traffic per session.
During peak period, Real-Time Entertainment traffic is by far the most
dominant traffic
Jay Ashworth wrote the following on 5/16/2014 10:35 AM:
- Original Message -
From: Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu
While that is true a lot of the time (especially for eyeball
networks), it is less so now due to social media. Social
media forces the use of symmetric bandwidth (like
Blake,
None of those applications come close to causing symmetrical traffic
patterns and for many/most networks the upstream connectivity has greatly
improved. Anything related to voice is no more than 80 kbps per line, even
if the SIP traffic isn't trunked (less if it is because the signaling
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 10:26:02PM -0700, Matthew Petach wrote:
You want to stream a movie? No problem;
the video player opens up a second data
port back to a server next to the streaming
box; its only purpose is to accept a socket,
and send all bits received on it to /dev/null.
You can
I agree symmetry alone is a bad metric and efforts to build a service, or
artifically game traffic in order to create symmetry will likely have
negative consequences all around.
I can¹t speak for all situations, but I believe relative ³balance was
designed to be one of several criteria which
Certainly video is one of the most bandwidth intensive applications. I
don't deny that a 1 Mbps video call is both less common and consumes
less bandwidth than an 8Mbps HD stream. However, if Americans had access
to symmetric connections capable of reliably making HD video calls (they
don't,
NANOGers:
We are aware of stress regarding the Hyatt Hotel Room Block, therefore, 2
alternate NANOG Room blocks at nearby
hotelshttps://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog61/hotelinformation have
been established. We are confident, all who wish to attend NANOG 61 should
find a reasonable hotel rate and
Blake,
I might agree with your premise if weren't for a couple of items.
1) Very few consumers are walking around with a HD or 4K camera today.
2) Most consumers who want to share video wouldn't know how to host it
themselves, which isn't an insurmountable issue but is a big barrier to
entry
Scott Helms wrote:
Mark,
Bandwidth use trends are actually increasingly asymmetical because of the
popularity of OTT video.
Until my other half decides to upload a video.
Is it too much to ask for a bucket of bits that I can use in whichever
direction happens
to be needed at the moment?
Thanks for the insight Scott. I appreciate the experience and point of
view you're adding to this discussion (not just the responses to me).
While I might be playing the devil's advocate here a bit, I think one
could argue each of the points you've made below.
I do feel that general usage
On May 16, 2014, at 9:28 AM, McElearney, Kevin
kevin_mcelear...@cable.comcast.com wrote:
will likely have
negative consequences all around.
Actually, pretty focusedly more negative for the middlemen trying to charge for
those packets' transit of their networks.
-george william herbert
Michael,
No, its not too much to ask and any end user who has that kind of
requirement can order a business service to get symmetrical service but the
reality is that symmetrical service costs more and the vast majority of
customers don't use the upstream capacity they have today. I have
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote:
Scott Helms wrote:
Mark,
Bandwidth use trends are actually increasingly asymmetical because of the
popularity of OTT video.
Until my other half decides to upload a video.
Is it too much to ask for a bucket of bits
Blake,
You're absolutely correct. The world adapts to the reality that we find
ourselves in via normal market mechanics. The problem with proposing that
connectivity for residential customers should be more symmetrical is that
its expensive, which is why we as operators didn't roll it out that
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, AusNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, LacNOG,
TRNOG, CaribNOG and the RIPE Routing Working Group.
Daily listings are sent to
I'd just like to point out that a lot of people are in fact using their
upstream capability, and the operators always throw a fit and try to cut off
specific applications to force it back into the idle state. For example P2P
things like torrents and most recently the open NTP and DNS servers.
Oh, I'm not proposing symmetrical connectivity at all. I'm just
supporting the argument that in the context of this discussion I think
it's silly for a residential ISP to purport themselves to be a neutral
carrier of traffic and expect peering ratios to be symmetric when the
overwhelming
Lazlo,
You're correct that some applications are being restricted, but AFAIK in
North America they are all being restricted for quite valid network
management reasons. While back in the day I ran Sendmail and sometimes
qmail on my home connection I was also responsible with my mail server and
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
in the context of this discussion I think it's silly for a residential ISP
to purport themselves to be a neutral carrier of traffic and expect peering
ratios to be symmetric
is 'symmetric traffic ratios' even relevant though?
Blake,
I'm not sure what the relationship between what an access network sells has
to do with how their peering is done. I realize that everyone's favorite
target is Comcast right now, but would anyone bat an eye over ATT making
the same requirement since they have much more in the way of
Christopher Morrow wrote the following on 5/16/2014 1:52 PM:
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
in the context of this discussion I think it's silly for a residential ISP
to purport themselves to be a neutral carrier of traffic and expect peering
ratios to be
All this talk about symmetry and asymmetry is interesting.
Has anyone actually quantified how much congestion is due to buffer bloat which
is, in turn, exacerbated by asymmetric connections?
James R. Cutler
james.cut...@consultant.com
PGP keys at http://pgp.mit.edu
signature.asc
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Christopher Morrow
morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
in the context of this discussion I think it's silly for a residential
ISP
to purport themselves to be a neutral carrier of traffic and
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:14 PM, James R Cutler
james.cut...@consultant.com wrote:
All this talk about symmetry and asymmetry is interesting.
Has anyone actually quantified how much congestion is due to buffer bloat
which is, in turn, exacerbated by asymmetric connections?
James R.
Matthew,
There is a difference between what should be philosophically and what
happened with Level 3 which is a contractual issue.
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
On
On Friday, May 16, 2014 05:35:39 PM Jay Ashworth wrote:
Could you expand a bit, Mark on Social media forces the
use of symmetric bandwidth? Which social media
platform is it that you think has a) symmetrical flows
that b) are big enough to figure into transit symmetry?
What we saw with FTTH
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Matthew Petach mpet...@netflight.com wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Christopher Morrow
morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
in the context of this discussion I think it's silly for a
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
Christopher Morrow wrote the following on 5/16/2014 1:52 PM:
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
in the context of this discussion I think it's silly for a residential
ISP
to purport
On Friday, May 16, 2014 05:45:06 PM Scott Helms wrote:
Bandwidth use trends are actually increasingly
asymmetical because of the popularity of OTT video.
Social media, even with video uploading, simply doesn't
generate that much traffic per session.
Our experience showed that there is a
Mark,
I don't think that anyone disputes that when you improve the upstream you
do get an uptick in usage in that direction. What I take issue with is the
notion that the upstream is anything like downstream even when the capacity
is there. Upstream on ADSL is horribad, especially the first
Scott Helms wrote:
Michael,
No, its not too much to ask and any end user who has that kind of
requirement can order a business service to get symmetrical service but
the reality is that symmetrical service costs more and the vast majority
of customers don't use the upstream capacity they
Mark Tinka wrote:
One of the use-cases we thought about when deploying an FTTH
backbone was having remote PVR's. So rather than record and
save linear Tv programming on the STB, record and save it in
the network. This could only be done with symmetric
bandwidth.
Isn't this already the
Mike,
In my experience you're not alone, just in a really tiny group. As I said
I have direct eyeballs on ~500k devices and the ability to see another 10
million anytime I want and the percentage of people who cap their upstream
in both of those sample groups for more than 15 minutes (over the
Scott Helms wrote:
Mike,
In my experience you're not alone, just in a really tiny group. As I
said I have direct eyeballs on ~500k devices and the ability to see
another 10 million anytime I want and the percentage of people who cap
their upstream in both of those sample groups for more
I think you will, all of those things have been around for a long time
(well, except for pervasive video calls, which I think is vapor) and none
generate the kind of traffic it takes to congest a decent link. Most of
the DOCSIS systems I've worked with are running at least 6 mbps upstreams
and
Scott Helms wrote:
I think you will, all of those things have been around for a long time
(well, except for pervasive video calls, which I think is vapor) and
none generate the kind of traffic it takes to congest a decent link.
Most of the DOCSIS systems I've worked with are running at least
Michael,
I didn't claim Webrtc is vapor, I claim that pervasive video calling is
vapor. Further, even if that prediction is wrong pervasive video calling
isn't enough even if 100% of users adopt it to swing the need for
symmetrical bandwidth. An average Skype/Google Hangout/Apple is less than
On May 16, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote:
In the US, we just surpassed 1/2 of the population who have that capability,
iirc. They
call them phones nowadays.
Many of them have native IPv6 as well, this also hasn't gotten significant
number of legacy/incumbents to
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 01:47:53PM -0500, Blake Hudson wrote:
Mr. Rick Astley (I assume a pseudonym)
Why would you assume that? Mr. Astley has long been a champion of solid
network engineering, and even net neutrality... he's long said that he's
Never gonna drop a route, never gonna fill a
Duh.
On 5/16/14, 1:54 PM, Matt Palmer mpal...@hezmatt.org wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 01:47:53PM -0500, Blake Hudson wrote:
Mr. Rick Astley (I assume a pseudonym)
Why would you assume that? Mr. Astley has long been a champion of solid
network engineering, and even net neutrality... he's
Matt Palmer wrote the following on 5/16/2014 3:54 PM:
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 01:47:53PM -0500, Blake Hudson wrote:
Mr. Rick Astley (I assume a pseudonym)
Why would you assume that? Mr. Astley has long been a champion of solid
network engineering, and even net neutrality... he's long said
This report has been generated at Fri May 16 21:13:53 2014 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/2.0 for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
BGP Update Report
Interval: 08-May-14 -to- 15-May-14 (7 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS9829 108543 2.6% 65.8 -- BSNL-NIB National Internet
Backbone,IN
2 - AS4775
Hi all,
We are looking at doing a small FTTP deployment in a community of about 30
homes and I'm searching for options regarding access layer hardware.
Initially we thought of a simple point-to-point ethernet setup with
1000Base-BX to each premises and a 48-port access switch. However, finding
You mean consume electricity in cpu cycles on the end devices and all the
network middleboxes in between all over the world/Internet for dud data?
For what? Just to stop a debate instead of resolving it thought
intellectual brainstorming? For one thing it will slow down the TCP
connections as
There are many ONTs out there with various abilities. I can only
comment on what I deploy, and what various telcos deploy that I am
familiar with.
A few years ago, all of our AE and GPON ONTs were deployed as bridges.
Port 1 was generally an Internet VLAN, and port 2,3,4 were IPTV VLANs.
Dammit people. Get back to work. Pull us back down under 500K!
--
TTFN,
patrick
On May 16, 2014, at 18:00 , cidr-rep...@potaroo.net wrote:
This report has been generated at Fri May 16 21:13:53 2014 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router
and generates a report on
Chris hs.citi...@gmail.com writes:
I'm interested to see what other people are doing for these types of small
setups. Does anyone know of any other reasonably priced access switches,
32+ SFP ports, and able to withstand 60degC or higher operating temperature?
An alternative you might consider
On May 16, 2014 12:21 PM, Matthew Petach mpet...@netflight.com wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Christopher Morrow
morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
in the context of this discussion I think it's silly for a
I agree with Rahul, seems like pointless cycles along the entire path.
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:35 PM, Rahul Sawarkar srahul...@gmail.comwrote:
You mean consume electricity in cpu cycles on the end devices and all the
network middleboxes in between all over the world/Internet for dud
Wow nanog, dissecting the architecture of a sarcastic proposal.
Maybe the joke would have been clearer if Matt had used the phrase a
modest proposal ..
On Saturday, May 17, 2014, Phil Fagan philfa...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with Rahul, seems like pointless cycles along the entire path.
On
You shouldn't of stopped them I was eagerly waiting to find out how rtt was
going to be increased :)
-jim
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Rogers network.
Original Message
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 11:26 PM
To: Phil Fagan
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:26 AM, Matthew Petach mpet...@netflight.com wrote:
You want to stream a movie? No problem;
the video player opens up a second data
port back to a server next to the streaming
box; its only purpose is to accept a socket,
and send all bits received on it to
TL:DR? “Thanks, Comcast!” and “Who’s Next?”
The test-ipv6.com site started out 4 years ago, at a table in Seattle,
after an IPv6 round table meeting hosted by Internet Society. John
Brzozowski and myself were each trying to come up with a way to help
end users figure out that their IPv6 internet
72 matches
Mail list logo
