Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news

On 23/05/2018 04:50, John Levine wrote: >> What about the likely truth that if anyone from Europe mails the list, then >> every mail server operator with subscribers to the list must follow the >> GDPR Article 14 notification requirements, as the few exceptions appear to >> not apply (unless

Re: DirecTV Now contact

In my testing, I see Directv now coming from akamai. We peer with them directly and we're only 4ms away and I sometimes still see buffering. So I'd say there's something more going on. I have no trouble with Netflix, YouTube, real choice demo. On Tue, May 22, 2018, 2:07 PM Mike Hammett

Re: Geolocation issue with a twist

You will probably need to host that attachment elsewhere and post a link to it. Attachments don’t really fly to mailing lists. > On May 22, 2018, at 15:50, Clay Stewart wrote: > > Can someone point me for help with the following issue? > > I purchased a /24 late

Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news

Domain whois is absolutely useful. Try contacting a site to report that their nameservers are hosed without it. People forget that the primary purpose of whois is to report faults. You don’t need to do it very often but when you do it is crucial. Remember that about 50% of zones have not RFC

Re: Segment Routing

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 9:59 AM Saku Ytti wrote: > On 22 May 2018 at 17:43, steve ulrich wrote: > > Hey, > > > sorry, yes. i was referring to SRTE wrt the pop operation. > > Yup RSVP=>SR is more ambiguous and debatable than LDP=>SR which is > unambiguous win.

Geolocation issue with a twist

Can someone point me for help with the following issue? I purchased a /24 late last year on auction which was originally owned by Cox communications in Europe. It had Geolocation in a lot of bad places, and Cox got it 'cleared' up for me. But there is still one issue, an ISP in Spain has it in a

Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news

Maybe I'm going out on a limb here, but was domain whois ever really that useful? I can't remember ever using it for any legitimate sort of activity, and I know it gets scraped quite a bit by spammers. Most of the data is bogus these days on a lot of TLDs which allow "anonymous registrations"

Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news

What is GDPR? My current guess is "Just another thing to learn since whois is now broken because to many of us just abused a once useful tool" On 23 May 2018 1:50:17 PM NZST, John Levine wrote: >>What about the likely truth that if anyone from Europe mails the list, >then

Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news

Perhaps it's time that some would consider new RBLs and Blackhole feeds based on : Domains with deliberately unavailable WHOIS data. Including domains whose registrant has failed to cause their domain registrar and/or registry to list personally identifiable details for registrant and

Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news

>What about the likely truth that if anyone from Europe mails the list, then >every mail server operator with subscribers to the list must follow the >GDPR Article 14 notification requirements, as the few exceptions appear to >not apply (unless you’re just running an archive). Some of us whose

NANOG 73 Agenda is Published

NANOG Community, The NANOG 73 Agenda is published at http://www.cvent.com/d/ttqv1z/16K and available as an iCal feed at https://pc.nanog.org/static/published/meetings/NANOG73/agenda.ics The Program Committee has worked closely with our speakers to develop a first-rate program, and we encourage

[NANOG-announce] NANOG 73 Agenda is Published

This message has been wrapped due to the DMARC policy setting to prevent NANOG subscribers from being unsubscribed due to bounces. --- Begin Message --- NANOG Community, The NANOG 73 Agenda is published at http://www.cvent.com/d/ttqv1z/16K and available as an iCal feed at

[NANOG-announce] NANOG 73 Agenda is Published

This message has been wrapped due to the DMARC policy setting to prevent NANOG subscribers from being unsubscribed due to bounces. --- Begin Message --- NANOG Community, The NANOG 73 Agenda is published at http://www.cvent.com/d/ttqv1z/16K and available as an iCal feed at

Re: Segment Routing

> in the day's of yore, i know a few folks who built tooling to validate > and/or detect failure to sync between the IGP and LDP or detect data plane > black holing behaviors caused by resolution in the RIB w/no complementary > label allocation (or LDP convergence lagging significantly).

Re: Telecommunications Outage Report: Northern California Firestorm 2017

--- s...@donelan.com wrote: From: Sean Donelan :: During the 2017 wildfires, there were no forms of :: communications or technologies that worked better :: than the rest. I don't have time to read all 80+ pages and don't see it in the contents. Do you know what services

RE: earthlink email problems

>host 23.227.197.10 10.197.227.23.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer horsezipsworld.com. >host horsezipsworld.com horsezipsworld.com has address 23.227.197.11 horsezipsworld.com mail is handled by 10 mail.horsezipsworld.com. >host mail.horsezipsworld.com mail.horsezipsworld.com has address

Re: Segment Routing

On 5/22/18 7:04 AM, steve ulrich wrote: fwiw - there's a potentially significant loss of visibility w/SR from a traffic management perspective depending on how it's deployed. though, i doubt the OP is really driving at this point. the data plane behavior on LDP is swap oriented, while the

Re: earthlink email problems

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 2:00 PM, jimmy keffer wrote: > my has problems sending mail to earthlink.net the sever has a ptr abd > reverse dns set but i get this To: ji...@horsezipsworld.com > >Remote server replied: 550 ERROR: No or mismatched reverse DNS (PTR) > entries

Re: DirecTV Now contact

I don't have DirecTV Now. What CDN are they using? Fire up a stream and use Torch to see what IP it's coming from. Torch is a tool in Mikrotik RouterOS. I recognize those three as likely being familiar with RouterOS, so I sent them that way. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing

earthlink email problems

my has problems sending mail to earthlink.net the sever has a ptr abd reverse dns set but i get this To: ji...@horsezipsworld.com Subject: Message undeliverable: MegaBBS Forum horsezip's world : New user alert From: mailer-dae...@horsezipsworld.com Date: Sun, 20 May 2018 23:40:41 -0400 Your

RE: DirecTV Now contact

Similar experience for us as well. Joshua Stump Network Admin Fourway.NET 800-733-0062 -Original Message- From: NANOG On Behalf Of mike.l...@gmail.com Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 2:29 PM To: Michael Crapse Cc: NANOG list

Re: DirecTV Now contact

Yeah, our eyeball network has problems with DirecTV too. Would be nice if they were at the various peering exchanges... -Mike > On May 22, 2018, at 11:08, Michael Crapse wrote: > > Our eyeball network is consistently having some streaming issues(buffering) > with DirecTV

Re: Segment Routing

sorry, yes. i was referring to SRTE wrt the pop operation. in most of the implementations i've poked at, there is the ability to specify a consistent label range, but it's not always the case. SIDs are not labels but they are encoded as labels. i hope operators have the option to configure

Re: Segment Routing

fwiw - there's a potentially significant loss of visibility w/SR from a traffic management perspective depending on how it's deployed. though, i doubt the OP is really driving at this point. the data plane behavior on LDP is swap oriented, while the data plane on SR is pop oriented. depending

DirecTV Now contact

Our eyeball network is consistently having some streaming issues(buffering) with DirecTV now. Our main recourse is to sell them on youtube TV and netflix. fixes the issue, no more complaints from our customers. Issues mainly occur during peak times and even on 300+mbps low latency/jitter

RE: Segment Routing

Nexus supports LDP. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/datacenter/sw/5_x/nx-os/mpls/configuration/guide/mpls_cg/mp_ldp_overview.html Regards, Jakob

Re: Subsea availability

Hello, On Tue, 22 May 2018 06:35:12 +0100 Martin Hepworth wrote: > I'll put this as a starter > > http://submarine-cable-map-2018.telegeography.com/ This one is rather cool too: http://he.net/3d-map/ Paul -- Paul RollandE-Mail :

Re: Segment Routing

Hi Saku gotcha and I see most config examples are RSVP/SR-TE like, where in most of the networks I have come across basic LDP is more than acceptable. On Tue, May 22, 2018, 17:48 Saku Ytti wrote: > Hey Matt, > > > I guess my point is why go through the extra config to program

Re: Segment Routing

Hey Matt, > I guess my point is why go through the extra config to program labels for > each box when LDP does it for you? Why loose potential visibility to network > traffic? Cisco sales and marketing is digging huge into the SR game for > enterprise and SDWAN like backbone networking. They are

Re: Segment Routing

I guess my point is why go through the extra config to program labels for each box when LDP does it for you? Why loose potential visibility to network traffic? Cisco sales and marketing is digging huge into the SR game for enterprise and SDWAN like backbone networking. They are touting about the

Re: Segment Routing

On 22 May 2018 at 17:43, steve ulrich wrote: Hey, > sorry, yes. i was referring to SRTE wrt the pop operation. Yup RSVP=>SR is more ambiguous and debatable than LDP=>SR which is unambiguous win. > not labels but they are encoded as labels. i hope operators have the

Re: Segment Routing

On 22/May/18 16:35, Saku Ytti wrote: > My first google hit shows IPv6 support: > > https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/example/example-configuring-spring-srgb.html I meant as a field deployment in an operator network, and not what documentation says code can do. > I

Re: Segment Routing

On 22 May 2018 at 17:29, Mark Tinka wrote: > This is what I'm struggling to find, as for me, this would be the ideal > use-case for SR. My first google hit shows IPv6 support:

Re: Segment Routing

On 22/May/18 16:21, Saku Ytti wrote: > I have not, but I'm not good source as I don't track this. This is what I'm struggling to find, as for me, this would be the ideal use-case for SR. > I'm just > pointing out that LDP > was/is IPv4 protocol, where as SR IGP extensions are from day1

Re: Segment Routing

On 22 May 2018 at 17:17, Mark Tinka wrote: > Have you seen an actual deployment in the field, forwarding IPv6 traffic > inside MPLS? My use-case would be to remove BGPv6 in the core, the same way > I removed BGPv4 from the core back in 2008. I have not, but I'm not good

Re: Segment Routing

Hey Steve, > the data plane behavior on LDP is swap oriented, while the data plane on SR > is pop oriented. depending on the hardware capabilities in use this may > have (subtle) traffic engineering or diagnostic implications at a minimum. > folks will likely have to build tooling to address

Re: Segment Routing

On 22/May/18 16:14, Saku Ytti wrote: > Yes. In ISIS you'd use Prefix-SID sTLV and attach it to TLV-236 (IPv6) > or TLV-237 (Multitopo IPv6). > > The standard itself has not had any IPv4 bias, IPv6 has had first > class support since first draft. Have you seen an actual deployment in the field,

Re: Segment Routing

Hey Mark, > Can I use that to create MPLS LSP's to carry IPv6 traffic over an IPv6 > next-hop, like LDPv6 has been designed to, i.e., not need for IPv4 in any > way to forward MPLS frames carrying an IPv6 payload? Yes. In ISIS you'd use Prefix-SID sTLV and attach it to TLV-236 (IPv6) or TLV-237

Re: Segment Routing

On 22/May/18 15:38, Saku Ytti wrote: > Why 'alas'? In ISIS you're free to signal Prefix-SID on IPv4 or IPv6, > there isn't anything inherently IPv4 in the standard. Can I use that to create MPLS LSP's to carry IPv6 traffic over an IPv6 next-hop, like LDPv6 has been designed to, i.e., not need

Re: Subsea availability

May be there is something similar, but with the sales contact for each cable system? ;) 22.05.18 08:54, Reid Fishler пише: > Not to mention: > https://www.cablemap.info/ > > Reid > > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 1:46 AM james jones wrote: > >> Not interactive but cool

Re: Segment Routing

On 22 May 2018 at 11:19, Matt Geary wrote: > really seeing the value of SR to replace LDP on my backbone. With some > scripting and lots of software tools I can make it just like LDP, but why? > So break the ease of LDP just to get label switching on my hub core not >

Re: Segment Routing

On 22 May 2018 at 12:36, Mark Tinka wrote: > I was excited about SR because I thought it would finally enable native > MPLSv6 forwarding. But alas... Why 'alas'? In ISIS you're free to signal Prefix-SID on IPv4 or IPv6, there isn't anything inherently IPv4 in the standard.

Re: Curiosity about AS3356 L3/CenturyLink network resiliency (in general)

* David Hubbard [2018-05-16 19:01]: > I’m curious if anyone who’s used 3356 for transit has found > shortcomings in how their peering and redundancy is configured, or >From a recent experience I can tell you that a change request to change a peering from "full

Re: Subsea availability

Not to mention: https://www.cablemap.info/ Reid On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 1:46 AM james jones wrote: > Not interactive but cool animation: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlAJJI-qG2k > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 1:37 AM, Mehmet Akcin wrote: > > >

Re: Segment Routing

SR as a replacement for LDP, but SR-LDP imterop is imteresting too. Do.you have any experience with that? On May 22, 2018 02:59, "dip" wrote: Matt, Just to clarify, Are you asking for SR and LDP interop or SR over LDP? Two different things. Thanks Dip On Fri, May

Re: Segment Routing

Yeah Cisco rep commented that adding LDP to nexus would make ASR obsolete. 48x10g with LDP for $5-7k Yeah no brainer. Although on other point I am not really seeing the value of SR to replace LDP on my backbone. With some scripting and lots of software tools I can make it just like LDP, but why?

Re: Segment Routing

Yes we are considering changing to SR on our backbone because LDP is not supported on the nexus switches. Although, we have no experience with SR and looks plainly simple but we loose some of the LSP path selection. On Tue, May 22, 2018, 10:05 Mark Tinka wrote: > > > On

Re: Segment Routing

On 22/May/18 14:10, Ca By wrote: > > > > Well look at how many authors are on this rfc, that means it is super > good right? More authors, more brains > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-07 > > > Actually it is just an embarasssing marketing technique. Sad!

Re: Segment Routing

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 2:39 AM Mark Tinka wrote: > > > On 22/May/18 10:51, James Bensley wrote: > > > I'm also interested in the uses cases. > > > > As a "typical" service provider (whatever that means) who doesn't have > > any SR specific requirements such as service

Re: Segment Routing

On 22/May/18 10:51, James Bensley wrote: > I'm also interested in the uses cases. > > As a "typical" service provider (whatever that means) who doesn't have > any SR specific requirements such as service chaining, the only > reason/feature SR has which currently makes me want to deploy it is >

Re: Segment Routing

On 22/May/18 10:19, Matt Geary wrote: > Yeah Cisco rep commented that adding LDP to nexus would make ASR > obsolete. 48x10g with LDP for $5-7k Yeah no brainer. Gee, someone at Cisco had their thinking cap on. Let's hope Gert isn't reading this, lest he vent-off about the 6500/7600 debacle (and

Re: Segment Routing

On 22 May 2018 at 09:14, Mark Tinka wrote: > I'm more curious about use-cases for folk considering SR, than SR itself. > > 4 years on, and I still can't find a reason to replace my LDP network > with SR. > > Your use-case makes sense, as it sounds like Cisco deliberately

Re: Curiosity about AS3356 L3/CenturyLink network resiliency (in general)

Yep? -Ben > On May 21, 2018, at 6:37 PM, Aaron Gould wrote: > > 9010 and 7609 Small? > > Aaron > >> On May 19, 2018, at 3:51 PM, Ben Cannon wrote: >> >> Isn’t that the ASR9010? (And before that 7609?) >> >> -Ben >> On May 18, 2018, at 4:20 AM,

Re: Segment Routing

On 22/May/18 10:06, Matt Geary wrote: > Yes we are considering changing to SR on our backbone because LDP is > not supported on the nexus switches. Although, we have no experience > with SR and looks plainly simple but we loose some of the LSP path > selection. Got you. I'm more curious about

Re: Curiosity about AS3356 L3/CenturyLink network resiliency (in general)

On 19/May/18 22:51, Ben Cannon wrote: > Isn’t that the ASR9010? (And before that 7609?) The ASR9901 comes reasonably close - as close as the MX204 could get (although 1Gbps ports might be an issue). Mark.

Re: Segment Routing

On 18/May/18 12:11, Matt Geary wrote: > Hello maillist anyone had any experience with segment routing and its > performance over LDP? We are evaluating the option to move to SR over LDP > so we can label switch across our Nexus L3 switching environment. Is your use-case because you need label

Re: is odd number of links in lag group ok

On 17/May/18 01:32, Ben Cannon wrote: > While it goes without saying that you need the same (can be 5!) number of > links to each router in a multichassis LAG, what isn’t so obvious are things > like port groups etc. I'm not sure the OP was talking about MC-LAG. Just a regular LAG. Mark.

Re: Juniper BGP Convergence Time

On 16/May/18 18:59, Phil Lavin wrote: > Ask if they will configure BFD for you. I’ve not found many transit providers > that will, but it’s worth a shot and it will lower failure detection to circa > 1 second. We've tended to shy away from it, but we have 2 customers we've done it for. Mark.