Re: internet visualization

2015-09-09 Thread Aaron C. de Bruyn
On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 7:14 PM, Eric Tykwinski wrote: > Anyone else have some input beside grammar nazis? Yeah. Add a few Klingon ships and give me phaser control and I will never leave that site. -A

Re: IPv6 Subscriber Access Deployments

2015-09-09 Thread Mark Tinka
On 8/Sep/15 21:31, Owen DeLong wrote: > > If the ISPs equipment supports IPv6 on shared VLANs with DHCP snooping and > other security, you can implement it with a single /64 giving each router a > unique address within that segment, but it’s not really ideal. This was > mainly done in IPv4

Re: internet visualization

2015-09-09 Thread Jared Mauch
Please reply off list to me or Job, is this a useful tool that should be updated with data weekly or monthly? Jared Mauch > On Sep 8, 2015, at 7:16 PM, Jeff Shultz wrote: > > Weirdest thing I've found yet - AS7224, Amazon AS - Amazon, has 1 > indegree - AS724 -

Re: IPv6 Subscriber Access Deployments

2015-09-09 Thread Mark Tinka
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 8/Sep/15 22:41, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: > > > Oh, it doesn't *need* that many. You can go ahead and run your IPv6 subnets > with a /96 or /112. Just remember that will piss off any hardware that tries > to do SLAAC. or a few other

Re: IPv6 Subscriber Access Deployments

2015-09-09 Thread Mark Tinka
On 8/Sep/15 21:04, Josh Moore wrote: > I'm reading that the recommended method for assigning IPv6 addresses to > end-users is to do this via a dedicated VLAN and /64. Some broadband access > methods utilize a shared VLAN model with additional security mechanisms in > place such as DHCP

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Dovid Bender
I am trying to understand why the legal babble bothers anyone. Does it give you a nervous twitch? Remind you why you hate legal? It's just text at the bottom of your email. Regards, Dovid -Original Message- From: Larry Sheldon Sender: "NANOG"

RE: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Tony Hain
Dovid Bender wrote: > I would. Once I see legal stuff I know to stop reading. It does not hurt > anyone. Not sure why this hurts so much. Some things will remain a > mystery. > No mystery ... It wastes bits that could otherwise be used to watch cat videos. ;) Tony

Re: internet visualization

2015-09-09 Thread Joly MacFie
Crow for lunch today. On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, Larry Sheldon wrote: > On 9/8/2015 21:05, Joly MacFie wrote: > >> ​3/10 for spelling >> >> adjancencies​ >>> >> >> or is that a thing? >> > > http://www.thefreedictionary.com/adjacencies > > > -- > sed quis custodiet

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread John Levine
In article <1515735780-1441805800-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1712088326-@b13.c3.bise6.blackberry> you write: >I am trying to understand why the legal babble bothers anyone. Does it give >you a nervous twitch? Remind you why you hate legal? >It's just text at the bottom of your

Re: internet visualization

2015-09-09 Thread Oliver O'Boyle
A bit of salt on that will help... On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Joly MacFie wrote: > Crow for lunch today. > > On Wednesday, September 9, 2015, Larry Sheldon > wrote: > > > On 9/8/2015 21:05, Joly MacFie wrote: > > > >> ​3/10 for spelling > >> > >>

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Wed, 09 Sep 2015 13:36:39 -, "Dovid Bender" said: > I am trying to understand why the legal babble bothers anyone. Does it give > you a nervous twitch? Remind you why you hate legal? It's just text at the > bottom of your email. Disclaimers like those are like brown M's backstage at a Van

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Dovid Bender
I would. Once I see legal stuff I know to stop reading. It does not hurt anyone. Not sure why this hurts so much. Some things will remain a mystery. Regards, Dovid -Original Message- From: Alan Buxey Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 16:23:01 To: ;

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Alan Buxey
>It's just text at the bottom of your email. 1 often a very large amount of text - in this case the legalese was something like 10x longer than the comment! 2 its pointless. Its not enforceable and doesn't mean anything. Shall i put a chapter of war and peace at the end of my emails? You

Re: Capital Internet http://www.capitalinternet.com/ down?

2015-09-09 Thread Don Gould
Thanks William, Fibre cut then and they couldn't reannounce our ip ranges because of a lack of LOA. Learning here... more jobs on the ToDo list. As for our providers dns, phones, etc... yes. D On 10/09/2015 9:43 AM, William Waites wrote: Near as I can tell, the network that your

Re: Capital Internet http://www.capitalinternet.com/ down?

2015-09-09 Thread William Herrin
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Don Gould wrote: > Fibre cut then and they couldn't reannounce our ip ranges because of a lack > of LOA. Which upstream gave them grief about an LOA during an emergency for a route they'd been announcing to another service provide and that

WiFI on utility poles

2015-09-09 Thread Michael T. Voity
Hello, Today another colleague and I discovered the famous 'xfinitywifi' ,'CableWIFi', 'CoxWiFi' and a new one 'XFINITY' on our University campus. After doing some poking around on campus we found these gems (attached picture) on 2 utility poles that pass by our east campus.Standing

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread John Levine
>If your employer insists on attaching a legalistic signature to your >email which warns the recipient that the message is for their eyes >only... it's because you are not authorized to make public statements >as an employee of the company. No, that's not it. A disclaimer "I don't speak for

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Larry Sheldon
On 9/9/2015 08:36, Dovid Bender wrote: I am trying to understand why the legal babble bothers anyone. Does it give you a nervous twitch? Your disrespectful query is not really worthy of a answer because it is obviously not asked in good faith, but I am going to try to answer it it because

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Dovid Bender
So far what I have learned 1) It causes issues reading bottom up (which I never do, I always go top down to review the convo) but I can how it bothers others. 2) You don't want lawyers saying "we had a warning, you violated it now we sue". Understandable. Thanks for the explanation. Regards,

Re: WiFI on utility poles

2015-09-09 Thread Michael T. Voity
Sorry folks, attachment didn't work. Here is the link - https://www.uvm.edu/~mvoity/pole.JPG -Mike Michael Voity University of Vermont On 9/9/15 9:24 PM, Michael T. Voity wrote: Hello, Today another colleague and I discovered the famous 'xfinitywifi' ,'CableWIFi', 'CoxWiFi' and a new

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Larry Sheldon
On 9/9/2015 20:22, Larry Sheldon wrote: I can not believe (except as, perhaps, an irrefutable sign of my advancing years) that I did not mention the very personal objection to the apparently content-free Wile E. Coyote legalese pollution: The irrefutable fact that in years (and

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Larry Sheldon
On 9/9/2015 10:23, Alan Buxey wrote: It's just text at the bottom of your email. 1 often a very large amount of text - in this case the legalese was something like 10x longer than the comment! 2 its pointless. Its not enforceable and doesn't mean anything. Shall i put a chapter of war and

Re: WiFI on utility poles

2015-09-09 Thread Philip Dorr
On Sep 9, 2015 11:15 PM, "John Levine" wrote: > > The placement may be suboptimal, but free wifi away from home is nice. > CableWifi really is a consortium, T-W customers can use Comcast's > hotspots and vice versa. > Suboptimal is an understatement. How they are placed around

Re: WiFI on utility poles

2015-09-09 Thread Mike Lyon
And they are as annoying as f*! and litter the already noisy 5 Ghz unlicensed band, Hopefully, the sun will fry them dead over time. -Mike On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:19 PM, Phil Bedard wrote: > There are Comcast people on the list who may have more info, but it’s just >

Re: WiFI on utility poles

2015-09-09 Thread John Levine
In article

Re: WiFI on utility poles

2015-09-09 Thread Phil Bedard
There are Comcast people on the list who may have more info, but it’s just expansion of their WiFi hotspot network and part of the CableWifi consortium. http://www.cablewifi.com, or you can go to http://wifi.xfinity.com to see Comcast’s specific deployment. Cable companies have thousands of

Re: WiFI on utility poles

2015-09-09 Thread Mike Hammett
Usually terribly placed, like a shotgun blast instead of strategic locations. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: "Mike Lyon" To:

Re: outlook.com outgoing blacklists?

2015-09-09 Thread Steve Atkins
> > Anybody have some recommendations on how I resolve this The most likely explanation is a configuration error at your end, so the first step is to share what the domain is. Cheers, Steve

Re: IPv6 Subscriber Access Deployments

2015-09-09 Thread Clinton Work
Granted that having the CPE request both a IA_NA and IA_PD is a more common configuration. Some of the CPEs using only DHCPv6 PD can allocate a /64 out of the delegated /48 for WAN address & management. The IPV6 traceroute is not broken with the DHCPv6 PD only configuration. On Wed, Sep 9,

RE: outlook.com outgoing blacklists?

2015-09-09 Thread eric-list
The only example I could come up with is an IDN, which Todd already said wasn't the case. At least I know Unicode domains didn't work on Exchange 2013 OWA, but worked when changed to ASCII. It may have changed by now though. Sincerely, Eric Tykwinski TrueNet, Inc. P: 610-429-8300 F: 610-429-3222

Re: outlook.com outgoing blacklists?

2015-09-09 Thread Todd K Grand
Almost seems like something corrupt at Outlook/Hotmail or a blacklist of some type. -Original Message- From: eric-l...@truenet.com Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 2:00 PM To: 'nanog list' Subject: RE: outlook.com outgoing blacklists? The only example I could come up with is an

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Stephen Satchell
On 09/09/2015 06:36 AM, Dovid Bender wrote: I am trying to understand why the legal babble bothers anyone. Does it give you a nervous twitch? Remind you why you hate legal? It's just text at the bottom of your email. It's all about best practices. In an e-mail thread, where the thread grows

Re: IPv6 Subscriber Access Deployments

2015-09-09 Thread Owen DeLong
The ACLs/Security policy can actually be fairly generic or automated, so I don’t see that as an issue. The DHCP forwarder configuration is usually global, so the helper address statement demonstrates your lack of IPv6 understanding. The /64 is pretty much nothing, but yeah, so what? Owen >

RE: internet visualization

2015-09-09 Thread Gustav Ulander
Agreed. Everyone at the office have been flying some. :) //Gustav -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+gustav.ulander=telecomputing...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Chris Knipe Sent: den 8 september 2015 16:50 To: nanog list Subject: Re: internet visualization Indeed! One

Contact for AS701/Verizon

2015-09-09 Thread Fabien V.
Dear List, If someone reads my email from Verizon/AS701, we are looking for an internal contact in order to check opportunities/facilities regarding transit/PNI. Thanks in advance for any help ;) Regards, -- - Fabien VINCENT

Cisco ASR9K G.8032 ERP configuration and experiences

2015-09-09 Thread Florian Figula
Maybe someone having some experiences with Cisco ASR9K and ERP (G.8032)? I have configured a pair of two ASR9K for a customer. The other side is a pair of Huawei Switch. The Ring seems to work fine. We have simulated link fault and protection switch occurred but on traffic test we were not

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Octavio Alvarez
On 09/09/15 06:36, Dovid Bender wrote: > I am trying to understand why the legal babble bothers anyone. Does > it give you a nervous twitch? Remind you why you hate legal? It's > just text at the bottom of your email. I've seen it in multiple languages (not necessarily on this list). Furthermore,

Re: outlook.com outgoing blacklists?

2015-09-09 Thread Steve Atkins
> On Sep 9, 2015, at 11:43 AM, Steve Atkins wrote: > > >> >> Anybody have some recommendations on how I resolve this > > The most likely explanation is a configuration error at your end, so the > first step is to share what the domain is. Todd shared the domain with me

Re: IPv6 Subscriber Access Deployments

2015-09-09 Thread Owen DeLong
Sure, but this is a useless savings that comes at the cost of awkward traceroute output that will initially confuse your new employees and consistently confuse your customers. Owen > On Sep 8, 2015, at 12:46 , Clinton Work wrote: > > If you use separate VLANs for each

Re: IPv6 Subscriber Access Deployments

2015-09-09 Thread Josh Moore
It's not just the tag though... You have the /64 that has to be provisioned, the helper addresses for DHCP, ACLs/security policy, etc. Thanks, Joshua Moore Network Engineer ATC Broadband 912.632.3161 > On Sep 9, 2015, at 1:14 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > VLAN tags aren’t

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Owen DeLong
In my case, I resent the idea that some lawyer somewhere thought I could somehow be bound to an agreement I never agreed to which does not appear to me until I have reached the end of an email on which he/she feels I should be bound. It’s an absurd construct. It’s a waste of bits that could be

outlook.com outgoing blacklists?

2015-09-09 Thread Todd K Grand
I have an email server which hosts 3 domains. I have reason to believe that microsoft maintains an outgoing blacklist and would like confirmation on this. I have had many a report that people on domains hosted on hotmail/outlook are getting messages bounced back stating that our server was

Re: IPv6 Subscriber Access Deployments

2015-09-09 Thread Owen DeLong
VLAN tags aren’t global and 4096 is only a limitation on ethernet. VPI/VCI is many more. Yes, if you need more than 4096 customers on a single switch, you’ve got an issue, but there are many potential issues in that scenario beyond VLAN tagging (like customers choosing not to use routers and

Contact for AS701/Verizon

2015-09-09 Thread Fabien VINCENT
Dear List, If someone reads my email from Verizon/AS701, we are looking for an internal contact in order to check opportunities/facilities regarding transit/PNI. Thanks in advance for any help ;) Regards, Fabien VINCENT

Re: outlook.com outgoing blacklists?

2015-09-09 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Wed, 09 Sep 2015 11:49:30 -0500, "Todd K Grand" said: > This happens without ever sending a packet to our servers. > The affected domain can send emails to hotmail/outlook accounts just fine. Step 0: Verify that the DNS has the appropriate MX, A, and other records for the failing domain.

Re: outlook.com outgoing blacklists?

2015-09-09 Thread Todd K Grand
DNS has been confirmed to be valid. -Original Message- From: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 1:22 PM To: Todd K Grand Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: outlook.com outgoing blacklists? On Wed, 09 Sep 2015 11:49:30 -0500, "Todd K Grand" said: This happens

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Oliver O'Boyle
I love cat videos. On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Tony Hain wrote: > Dovid Bender wrote: > > I would. Once I see legal stuff I know to stop reading. It does not hurt > > anyone. Not sure why this hurts so much. Some things will remain a > > mystery. > > > > No mystery ...

Re: IPv6 Subscriber Access Deployments

2015-09-09 Thread Owen DeLong
Because the designers of IPv6 didn’t want to bake the hardware constraints of equipment available 10+ years ago (20?) into the addressing plan for the future. Hanging 4k customers off a switch is a current hardware limitation which has almost nothing to do with IPv6 other than not being

Re: Extraneous "legal" babble--and my reaction to it.

2015-09-09 Thread Justin M. Streiner
On Wed, 9 Sep 2015, Dovid Bender wrote: I am trying to understand why the legal babble bothers anyone. Does it give you a nervous twitch? Remind you why you hate legal? It's just text at the bottom of your email. I can see both sides of this: 1. People who post to this list from a work email

Re: outlook.com outgoing blacklists?

2015-09-09 Thread Michael J Wise
>> Anybody have some recommendations on how I resolve this > > The most likely explanation is a configuration error at your end, so the > first step is to share what the domain is. That's the 0th Step, actually. If people are going to ask for help, *PLEASE* provide us enough details to be able

Re: outlook.com outgoing blacklists?

2015-09-09 Thread Todd K Grand
Content-Type: message/delivery-status Reporting-MTA: dns;COL004-OMC2S2.hotmail.com Received-From-MTA: dns;COL129-W41 Arrival-Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 02:13:28 -0700 Final-Recipient: rfc822;supp...@qkstream.com Action: failed Status: 5.5.0 Diagnostic-Code: smtp;554 The mail could not be delivered

Re: outlook.com outgoing blacklists?

2015-09-09 Thread Todd K Grand
another email domain hosted on the same server is tgr...@tgrand.com. Hotmail/Outlook can send fine to this domain. -Original Message- From: Todd K Grand Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 2:19 PM To: Steve Atkins ; nanog list Subject: Re: outlook.com outgoing blacklists? Content-Type:

Re: Software Defined Networking

2015-09-09 Thread Tom Hill
On 09/09/15 11:51, Bevan Slattery wrote: > Yes. Usually Automation/Orchestration and allowing the customer to manage > their own network requirements in real-time through a portal/iPhone etc? "But, where does this OpenFlow stuff fit into that?" Ad infinitum. -- Tom

Re: outlook.com outgoing blacklists?

2015-09-09 Thread Todd K Grand
When I send from outlook.com to qkstream.com packets never arrive from microsofts outbound ip addresses. Yet I can see the packets fine if I send from outlook.com to tgrand.com -Original Message- From: Nate Itkin Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 2:38 PM To: Todd K Grand Subject: Re:

Capital Internet http://www.capitalinternet.com/ down?

2015-09-09 Thread Don Gould
One of my providers seems to be off line currently. Phones and DNS has vanished too. Does anyone know anything? D Capital Internet http://www.capitalinternet.com/ 200 Sandy Springs Place Northeast Atlanta, GA 30328 Company phone: +1.404.531.0080 Company fax: +1.404.303.1945 -- Don Gould 31

Re: Capital Internet http://www.capitalinternet.com/ down?

2015-09-09 Thread Christopher Morrow
looks like their internet is broken, perhaps time for them to turn it off and on again? (ripe stat shows it's been down since 1600 UTC 9/9/2015, Sept 9th 2015 for my european friends) On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Don Gould wrote: > One of my providers seems to be off

Re: Capital Internet http://www.capitalinternet.com/ down?

2015-09-09 Thread Robert Webb
downforeveryoneorjustme.com says it is down for them too On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 09:24:56 +1200 Don Gould wrote: One of my providers seems to be off line currently. Phones and DNS has vanished too. Does anyone know anything? D Capital Internet

Re: Capital Internet http://www.capitalinternet.com/ down?

2015-09-09 Thread William Waites
Near as I can tell, the network that your nameservers are in, 68.168.144.0/20 is being correctly announced by AS21560 which is "Netstream Communications". I see this announcement here. A traceroute goes as far as, 13 te0-3-1-7.agr22.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.47.190) 97.933 ms