On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Dennis Bohn wrote:
> So if someone (say an eyeball network) was putting out a RFQ for a gig say
> of upstream cxn and wanted to spec full reachability to the full V6 net,
> what would the wording for that spec look like?
> Would that get $provider's attention?
"We
Confirmed in Northern California, on all 3 primary NS servers. A little Friday
night maintenance window, maybe?
Looks like it’s just the www record...
> On Mar 18, 2016, at 10:38 PM, Dmitry Sherman wrote:
>
> dig www.cisco.com @8.8.8.8
>
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.8.3-P1 <<>> www.cisco.com @8.8.8.8
>
> On Mar 18, 2016, at 18:42 , Jay Hennigan wrote:
>
> On 3/12/16 12:15 PM, Joe Hamelin wrote:
>> I know at Clearwire data centers we used gray for network, blue for
>> management and orange for RS-232 console. At least for the initial build.
>> Later re-work or additions were whatever the tech
dig www.cisco.com @8.8.8.8
; <<>> DiG 9.8.3-P1 <<>> www.cisco.com @8.8.8.8
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 60416
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;www.cisco.com.
What's driving the desire for larger packets?
A single bit error will drop a whole packet.
Larger packets will cause more loss. Cables will need to be
shorter or bitrates lower to compensate.
Byte overhead of packet headers?
Are we seeing degradation of packets per second in forwarding
due to th
On 16/Mar/16 17:41, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> my guess is the same as Owen's ... 'your rfq don't mean squat'.
> honestly it's not like people don't ask their cogent sales folk for
> this sort of thing, it's just not cogent's (clearly, given how long
> the HE/Cogent thing along has persisted) w
Kevin,
That's largely true, but keep in mind that it's normal for people who have
had to fulfill a request to be disallowed from talking about it which makes
them seem even more rare than they actually are. I'm also not familiar
with any laws that prevent state or local agencies from leveraging C
I think that’s the problem in a nutshell…until every vendor agrees on the size
of a “jumbo” packet/frame (and as such, allows that size to be set with a
non-numerical configuration flag). As is, every vendor has a default that
results in 1500-byte IP MTU, but changing that requires entering a va
We are very excited to be holding the next NOTR event in Raleigh/Durham
Research Triangle on April 12, 2016, and we invite you to join us!
Are you interested in Internet networking/peering? Do you work at a colocation,
hosting or data center facility? Are you a provider of hardware/software
sol
So...
Before I go on, I have not been in Todd's shoes, either serving nor directly
supporting an org like that.
However, I have indirectly supported orgs like that and consulted at or
supported literally hundreds of commercial and a few educational and nonprofit
orgs over the last 30 years.
On 16 March 2016 at 14:56, Dennis Bohn wrote:
> So if someone (say an eyeball network) was putting out a RFQ for a gig say
> of upstream cxn and wanted to spec full reachability to the full V6 net,
> what would the wording for that spec look like?
> Would that get $provider's attention?
>
But is
Hi Paul
I will email you privately to address your concerns.
Regards
Marla Azinger
Supervisor Network ENG
IP Address Management
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Paul B. Henson
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 5:27 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subjec
I know someone (not ops but ha can forward internally); forwarding to him.
George William Herbert
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 16, 2016, at 2:18 PM, Christopher Tyler
> wrote:
>
> Does anyone have a contact at Craigslist?
> Some of our IP addresses got blocked and we are getting no response
>
>> I know someone (not ops but ha can forward internally); forwarding to
>> him.
>
> If George's contact doesn't pan out, I have a name that I can forward your
> concern to.
> Ping me at work (address in the Cc:) with details if there's no response?
/facepalm
Let's try that again, once more w
I believe Scott, just hit the nail on the head...
"but keep in mind that it's normal for people who have
had to fulfill a request *to be disallowed from talking about it* which
makes
them seem even more rare than they actually are."
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Scott Helms wrote:
> Kevin,
>
Be aware that collectd itself is a collection agent. It doesn't include
(last I checked) a grapher. There are however a number of graphers out
there to work with those RRD files, if you use that to store the data.
I personally have been using collectd across hundreds of Linux systems,
using rrdcac
Would anyone care to share their experience using collectd as an
alternative to rtg for high-resolution polling of interface traffic and
long term storage?
I am investigating the various options for large data set size, lossless
long term traffic charting (not RRAs which lose precision over time).
On 16/Mar/16 21:23, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Please confirm that you in fact are receiving 174 * 6939 IPv6 paths from them?
>
> Seems unlikely to me.
Nope (neither IPv4 nor IPv6) - they are about 1,500 IPv6 routes short
from what we see from the others.
You're welcome to poke if you want to test m
You would hardly notice it.
Helium is 4 times as heavy as hydrogen, but only marginally less buoyant.
Header overhead:
Ethernet=38
IPv4=20
TCP=20
Total=78
Protocol efficiency:
1500: 1500/1578 = 95%
9000: 9000/9078 = 99%
That's 4% better for a TCP packet, not 600%.
Thanks,
Jakob.
> On Mar 18, 2
Thus spake Jakob Heitz (jheitz) (jhe...@cisco.com) on Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at
09:29:44PM +:
> What's driving the desire for larger packets?
In our little corner of the internet, it is to increase the performance
of a low number of high-bdp flows which are typically dataset transfers.
All of our
I was trying to resist the urge to chime in on this one, but this discussion
has continued for much longer than I had anticipated... So here it goes
I spent 5 years in the Marines (out now) in which one of my MANY duties was to
manage these "data centers" (a part of me just died as I used that w
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Dennis Bohn wrote:
>
> On Mar 16, 2016 10:06 AM, "Christopher Morrow"
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Dennis Bohn wrote:
>> > So if someone (say an eyeball network) was putting out a RFQ for a gig
>> > say
>> > of upstream cxn and wanted to spec
So if someone (say an eyeball network) was putting out a RFQ for a gig say
of upstream cxn and wanted to spec full reachability to the full V6 net,
what would the wording for that spec look like?
Would that get $provider's attention?
On Mar 15, 2016 12:50 AM, "Todd Crane" wrote:
>
> > This is onl
Ignore it until you get the paperwork. The local law enforcement can not get a
warrant for the real time, full data capture. Only FBI or other national
agencies can get those subpeona's. We went through this with our local police
department. They wanted to make sure we were prepared and want
On 3/12/16 12:15 PM, Joe Hamelin wrote:
I know at Clearwire data centers we used gray for network, blue for
management and orange for RS-232 console. At least for the initial build.
Later re-work or additions were whatever the tech had on hand ;) They also
had labels on each end of each wire sh
On 3/11/16 7:18 AM, Robert Jacobs wrote:
Till we have exclusive content on IPV6 or it is a shorter, faster, bigger,
better path then we are still fighting this uphill battle to get more adoption
of IPV6 and it will not matter to the majority of Cogent customers that they
can't get full IPV6 r
On 3/11/16 9:03 AM, Sean Donelan wrote:
https://datacenters.cio.gov/optimization/
"For the purposes of this memorandum, rooms with at least one server,
providing services (whether in a production, test, stage, development,
or any other environment), are considered data centers. However, rooms
c
On 2016-03-17 00:41, Randy Bush wrote:
i have just finished $subject. arin and ripe host and admin folk were
cooperative and helpful to the point of being embarrassing; dealing with
me when the moon is in klutz has to be a major pita. but inter-rir
transfer works, works well, and works for lega
Then it's mainly TCP slowstart that you're trying to improve?
Thanks,
Jakob.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dale W. Carder [mailto:dwcar...@wisc.edu]
> Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 3:03 PM
> To: Jakob Heitz (jheitz)
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Internet Exchanges supporting jumbo f
29 matches
Mail list logo