Re: Canada joins the 21st century !

[Mike Hammett]

Fake competition. Lack of innovation competition. Lack of diversity. 

As I said, there are plenty of ways to utilize independents to accomplish 
reasonable goals. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "Rod Beck"  
To: "Mike Hammett"  
Cc: Nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2016 5:20:18 PM 
Subject: Re: Canada joins the 21st century ! 



Thousands of ISPs that collectively add up to a pimple on a horse's ass. In 
practice you have two dominant landline providers in each market, the ILEC and 
the cable company. A duopoly with a competitive fringe. Whereas other countries 
like South Korea and France have achieved much higher broadband penetration 
rates using other approaches. 





From: NANOG  on behalf of Mike Hammett 
 
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2016 10:58 PM 
Cc: Nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: Re: Canada joins the 21st century ! 

In the US there are thousands of independent ISPs. I assume Canada at least has 
hundreds of them. There are plenty of ways of utilize independents to improve 
access versus throwing cash into a fan. 

Not to mention the ridiculousness of a 50/10 requirement. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message - 

From: "John Sage"  
To: Nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2016 8:23:26 AM 
Subject: Re: Canada joins the 21st century ! 

On 12/23/2016 05:18 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: 
> The government getting involved with the Internet rarely goes well. The FCC 
> is a shining example of how to usually do it wrong. 
> 

I agree. To hell with 'government'. What has it done for you lately, anyway? 

Canada should just have Comcast (or is it "Xfinity"?) provided 
nation-wide Internet service as a for-profit monopoly. 

Problem solved! 


- John 
-- 

Re: Canada joins the 21st century !

[Rod Beck]

Thousands of ISPs that collectively add up to a pimple on a horse's ass. In 
practice you have two dominant landline providers in each market, the ILEC and 
the cable company. A duopoly with a competitive fringe. Whereas other countries 
like South Korea and France have achieved much higher broadband penetration 
rates using other approaches.



From: NANOG  on behalf of Mike Hammett 

Sent: Friday, December 23, 2016 10:58 PM
Cc: Nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Canada joins the 21st century !

In the US there are thousands of independent ISPs. I assume Canada at least has 
hundreds of them. There are plenty of ways of utilize independents to improve 
access versus throwing cash into a fan.

Not to mention the ridiculousness of a 50/10 requirement.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP

- Original Message -

From: "John Sage" 
To: Nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2016 8:23:26 AM
Subject: Re: Canada joins the 21st century !

On 12/23/2016 05:18 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
> The government getting involved with the Internet rarely goes well. The FCC 
> is a shining example of how to usually do it wrong.
>

I agree. To hell with 'government'. What has it done for you lately, anyway?

Canada should just have Comcast (or is it "Xfinity"?) provided
nation-wide Internet service as a for-profit monopoly.

Problem solved!


- John
--

Re: Canada joins the 21st century !

[Lyndon Nerenberg]

Canada should just have Comcast (or is it "Xfinity"?) provided nation-wide 
Internet service as a for-profit monopoly.


Just as long as we have *someone* to Telus whom to chose.

Re: Wanted: volunteers with bandwidth/storage to help save climate data

[Doug Barton]

On 12/21/2016 06:15 PM, Royce Williams wrote:

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Ken Chase  wrote:

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 04:41:29PM -0800, Doug Barton said:
 [..]
  >>Everyone has a line at which "I don't care what's in the pipes, I just
  >>work here" changes into something more actionable.
  >
  >Stretched far beyond any credibility. Your argument boils down to, "If it's
  >a political thing that *I* like, it's on topic."


I can see why you've concluded that. My final phrasing was indeed
ambiguous. I would have hoped that the rest of my carefully
non-partisan post would have offset that ambiguity.


There was no ambiguity, your argument was clear. I simply think you were 
wrong. :)



"If it's a politically-generated thing I'll have to deal with at an
operational level, it's on topic."

That work?


That is indeed what I was trying to say - thanks, Ken.


Again, hard to see how the OP asking for assistance with his pet project 
fits any definition of "have to deal with at an operational level."


But now I'm repeating myself, so I'll leave it at that.

Doug

Re: Canada joins the 21st century !

[Mike Hammett]

In the US there are thousands of independent ISPs. I assume Canada at least has 
hundreds of them. There are plenty of ways of utilize independents to improve 
access versus throwing cash into a fan. 

Not to mention the ridiculousness of a 50/10 requirement. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "John Sage"  
To: Nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2016 8:23:26 AM 
Subject: Re: Canada joins the 21st century ! 

On 12/23/2016 05:18 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: 
> The government getting involved with the Internet rarely goes well. The FCC 
> is a shining example of how to usually do it wrong. 
> 

I agree. To hell with 'government'. What has it done for you lately, anyway? 

Canada should just have Comcast (or is it "Xfinity"?) provided 
nation-wide Internet service as a for-profit monopoly. 

Problem solved! 


- John 
-- 

Re: Recent NTP pool traffic increase

[Philip Homburg]

>What I mostly meant is that there should be a regulated, industry-wide 
>effort in order to provide a stable and active pool program. With the 
>current models, a protocol that is widely used by commercial devices is 
>being supported by the time and effort of volunteers around the world. 

My employer has a budget 'for the good of the Internet' So I'd suggest that
people involved in NTP (certainly pool) submit proposals.

Likewise, there are country code DNS registries that are non-profits
and have budgets for research, etc. Given that time is important for
DNSSEC, it maybe worth contacting them.

Re: Canada joins the 21st century !

[John Sage]

On 12/23/2016 05:18 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

The government getting involved with the Internet rarely goes well. The FCC is 
a shining example of how to usually do it wrong.



I agree. To hell with 'government'. What has it done for you lately, anyway?

Canada should just have Comcast (or is it "Xfinity"?) provided 
nation-wide Internet service as a for-profit monopoly.


Problem solved!


- John
--

Benefits (and Detriments) of Standardizing Network Equipment in a Global Organization

[Chris Grundemann]

Hail NANOGers!

A global hospitality organization with 100+ locations recently asked us how
to weigh the importance of standardizing infrastructure across all their
locations versus allowing each international location to select on their
own kit.

My first instinct was to jump on my favorite search engine and look for an
authoritative document covering the topic. To my surprise I have not been
able to find such a thing. So I've begun to write one myself, and as I
start I've realized that:
 a) This is likely to be a document that will be helpful to the wider
community, and
 b) This is likely a topic that many of you have a great deal of knowledge
and personal experience.

If you have pointers to an existing doc, please share.

If you have a case study, lesson learned, data point, or even just a strong
opinion; I'd love to hear it!

My intention is to put this together BCOP style, but with more of a focus
on why rather than how this time around. Feel free to reply on or off list.

Thanks in advance for your input!

Cheers,
~Chris

PS - I won't use any direct quotes without advance permission and I'll
provide attribution to all that contribute meaningfully.

-- 
@ChrisGrundemann
http://chrisgrundemann.com

Weekly Routing Table Report

[Routing Analysis Role Account]

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,
SAFNOG, SdNOG, BJNOG, CaribNOG and the RIPE Routing WG.

Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net

For historical data, please see http://thyme.rand.apnic.net.

If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith .

Routing Table Report   04:00 +10GMT Sat 24 Dec, 2016

Report Website: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net
Detailed Analysis:  http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/

Analysis Summary


BGP routing table entries examined:  626295
Prefixes after maximum aggregation (per Origin AS):  221402
Deaggregation factor:  2.83
Unique aggregates announced (without unneeded subnets):  303816
Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 55496
Prefixes per ASN: 11.29
Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:   36274
Origin ASes announcing only one prefix:   15209
Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:6547
Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:170
Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table:   4.4
Max AS path length visible:  38
Max AS path prepend of ASN ( 55644)  36
Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table:58
Unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table:  19
Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs:  16676
Number of 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:   12675
Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table:   51879
Number of bogon 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:   627
Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table:0
Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space:385
Number of addresses announced to Internet:   2833553892
Equivalent to 168 /8s, 228 /16s and 153 /24s
Percentage of available address space announced:   76.5
Percentage of allocated address space announced:   76.5
Percentage of available address space allocated:  100.0
Percentage of address space in use by end-sites:   98.4
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  207587

APNIC Region Analysis Summary
-

Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes:   156526
Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation:   43103
APNIC Deaggregation factor:3.63
Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks:  170977
Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:70544
APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:5182
APNIC Prefixes per ASN:   32.99
APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:   1131
APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:937
Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:4.4
Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 38
Number of APNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:   2568
Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet:  761387652
Equivalent to 45 /8s, 97 /16s and 218 /24s
APNIC AS Blocks4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431
(pre-ERX allocations)  23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079, 55296-56319,
   58368-59391, 63488-64098, 64297-64395, 131072-137529
APNIC Address Blocks 1/8,  14/8,  27/8,  36/8,  39/8,  42/8,  43/8,
49/8,  58/8,  59/8,  60/8,  61/8, 101/8, 103/8,
   106/8, 110/8, 111/8, 112/8, 113/8, 114/8, 115/8,
   116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8, 120/8, 121/8, 122/8,
   123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8, 133/8, 150/8, 153/8,
   163/8, 171/8, 175/8, 180/8, 182/8, 183/8, 202/8,
   203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8, 219/8, 220/8, 221/8,
   222/8, 223/8,

ARIN Region Analysis Summary


Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes:188266
Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation:89328
ARIN Deaggregation factor: 2.11
Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks:   195158
Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 89565
ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:16087
ARIN Prefixes per ASN:12.13

Re: Canada joins the 21st century !

[Jean-Francois Mezei]

On 2016-12-23 10:37, Seth Mattinen wrote:

> It would certainly suck to be an ISP in Canada and be forced to fund 
> your competitors. Or does Canada not have any small privately run ISPs 
> like we do in the US?

We not only have smaller ISPs, but also a wholesale framework where ISPs
can purchase access to last mile from the incumbents (telco and cable).

The current plan (which will be defined in a subsequent proceeding)
calls for any ISPs with more than 10 million in revenues to contribute
to the fund, the amount being a percentage of their revenues.


The percentage will be adjusted annually to cause contributions to the
fund to total the desired amount  ($100 million on year 1, increasing by
$25m until iut reaches $200).

And yeah, this means ISPs contribute money which will be used by a
competitor to deploy in rural areas.

Of course, since we're talking about billions to get all Canadians
connected, this is peanuts.

Re: Canada joins the 21st century !

[Seth Mattinen]

On 12/22/16 6:59 AM, Jean-Francois Mezei wrote:


Nothing happens for now because a "follow up" process is needed to
decide how the funding mechanism will work (what portions of a companies
revenues are counted to calculated its mandated contribution to fund)
and how the process of bidding for subsidies will work. That could take
1 to 2 years.



It would certainly suck to be an ISP in Canada and be forced to fund 
your competitors. Or does Canada not have any small privately run ISPs 
like we do in the US?


~Seth

Re: Canada joins the 21st century !

[Oliver O'Boyle]

Awesome, some maybe in 5 years we'll see the speeds we should have seen 20
years earlier! Can't wait!

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> The government getting involved with the Internet rarely goes well. The
> FCC is a shining example of how to usually do it wrong.
>
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
>
> The Brothers WISP
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Jean-Francois Mezei" 
> To: Nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2016 8:59:22 AM
> Subject: Canada joins the 21st century !
>
> This is more of an FYI.
>
> Yesterday, the CRTC released a big decision on broadband. In 2011, the
> same process resulted in CRTC to not declare the Internet as "basic
> service" and to set speed goals to 1990s 5/1.
>
> Yesterday, the CRTC declared the Internet to be a basic service (which
> enables additional regulatory powers) and set speed goals to 50/10.
>
> Note that this is not a definition of broadband as the FCC had done, it
> one of many criteria that will be weighted when proposal to get funding
> is received. But hopefully, it means the end of deployment of DSL.
>
>
> Also, as a result of declaring it a basic service, the CRTC enables
> powers to force ISPs to contrtibute to a fund that will be used to
> subsidize deplooyment in rural areas.
>
> It plans to collect $100 million/year, increasing by $25m each year to
> top at $200m which will then be distributed to companies who deploy
> internet to unserved areas.
>
> By setting the speed standard to 50/10, it basically marks any territory
> not served by cableco as underserved since telco's copper can't reliably
> deliver those speeds.
>
>
> Nothing happens for now because a "follow up" process is needed to
> decide how the funding mechanism will work (what portions of a companies
> revenues are counted to calculated its mandated contribution to fund)
> and how the process of bidding for subsidies will work. That could take
> 1 to 2 years.
>
> Also in the decision is the phasing out of the equivalent programme for
> POTS which saw telephone deployed everywhere. The difference is that the
> POTS program had an "obligation to serve" whereas the internet doesn't.
>
>


-- 
:o@>

Re: Canada joins the 21st century !

[Mike Hammett]

The government getting involved with the Internet rarely goes well. The FCC is 
a shining example of how to usually do it wrong. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "Jean-Francois Mezei"  
To: Nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2016 8:59:22 AM 
Subject: Canada joins the 21st century ! 

This is more of an FYI. 

Yesterday, the CRTC released a big decision on broadband. In 2011, the 
same process resulted in CRTC to not declare the Internet as "basic 
service" and to set speed goals to 1990s 5/1. 

Yesterday, the CRTC declared the Internet to be a basic service (which 
enables additional regulatory powers) and set speed goals to 50/10. 

Note that this is not a definition of broadband as the FCC had done, it 
one of many criteria that will be weighted when proposal to get funding 
is received. But hopefully, it means the end of deployment of DSL. 


Also, as a result of declaring it a basic service, the CRTC enables 
powers to force ISPs to contrtibute to a fund that will be used to 
subsidize deplooyment in rural areas. 

It plans to collect $100 million/year, increasing by $25m each year to 
top at $200m which will then be distributed to companies who deploy 
internet to unserved areas. 

By setting the speed standard to 50/10, it basically marks any territory 
not served by cableco as underserved since telco's copper can't reliably 
deliver those speeds. 


Nothing happens for now because a "follow up" process is needed to 
decide how the funding mechanism will work (what portions of a companies 
revenues are counted to calculated its mandated contribution to fund) 
and how the process of bidding for subsidies will work. That could take 
1 to 2 years. 

Also in the decision is the phasing out of the equivalent programme for 
POTS which saw telephone deployed everywhere. The difference is that the 
POTS program had an "obligation to serve" whereas the internet doesn't.