On 3/13/14, 11:09 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 12:46:06 -0400, William Herrin said:
> (Contemplate for a bit why Kirk
> wasn't bounced out on his butt from the Academy)
Apparently the thinking about hacking was a little more permissive in 1966.
>
>
signature.asc
On 3/6/14, 1:00 PM, Jiri Prochazka wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> we're deploying a new rack/technology in Atlanta,GA and we are out of
> reserves of optical patchcords.
>
> We need to get another few pieces (combinations of most used connectors
> like LC/SC/E2000 and lenghts).
>
>
> Could you please
On 3/4/14, 3:16 AM, ku po wrote:
> One of my client has peering with nlayer and a provider from Asia. It seems
> from one major ISP in US, the best path is through this Asia provider,
> instead of through nlayer which we want it to be.
>
> It seems this major ISP does not have a direct peering wi
On 2/21/14, 12:27 PM, Randy Carpenter wrote:
>
> OpenGear's newer stuff is Gigabit (SFP even).
>
> I've not seen any real switch made in the last decade that has a problem with
> 100Mb/s connections. Ancient cisco, maybe had issues.
>
there are a substantial number of 10Gb/s switch that cannot
On 2/23/14, 12:11 PM, Royce Williams wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Royce Williams
> wrote:
>> Newb question ... other than retrofitting, what stands in the way of
>> making BCP38 a condition of peering?
Peering is frequently but harldy exclusively on a best effort basis,
e.g. you ag
On 2/14/14, 3:00 PM, Hal Murray wrote:
>
>> I was being a bit extreme, I don't expect UDP to be blocked and there are
>> valid uses for NTP and it needs to pass. Can you imagine the trading
>> servers not having access to NTP?
>
> Sure.
>
> They could setup internal NTP servers listening to GP
he
> traffic through the 7206).
so those pps numbers are worst case (small packet) but the acl count
/distribution and so on are going to impact what you actually get in the
downward direction.
>
> On 2/10/2014 10:41 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
>> On 2/10/14, 7:17 AM, Vlade Ristevski
On 2/10/14, 7:43 AM, Vlade Ristevski wrote:
> We're still on the 12.4 train. I do use an ACL with less than 100
> entries which handle BCP38 and block a few bad actors and private IPs on
> the Internet. I will be moving the BCP38 ACL closer to the hosts before
> the upgrade so the ACL will be a bit
On 2/10/14, 7:17 AM, Vlade Ristevski wrote:
> We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from
> 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1
> card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on
> this list have them deployed. If you or
On 2/5/14, 1:46 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "joel jaeggli"
>
>>> As I've noted, I'm not sure I believe that's true of current generation
>>> gear, and if it *is*, then it should cost manufacturers busin
On 2/5/14, 1:24 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Octavio Alvarez"
>
>> Maybe I'm oversimplifying things but I'm really curious to know why
>> can't the nearest-to-end-user ACL-enabled router simply have an ACL to
>> only allows packets from end-users that has a val
On 2/2/14, 7:30 AM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
> On 2/1/2014 10:40 PM, Jima wrote:
>> +1. Cisco calls them Twinax, HP calls them DACs. I don't know what
>> anyone else calls them as it hasn't come up in conversation for me.
>
> I thought "Twinax" was an IBMish MILSPEC term.
twinax could refer to a
On 2/1/14, 1:18 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> On Feb 1, 2014, at 4:05 PM, Phil Bedard wrote:
>
>> As for 10GBase-T in a transceiver, I haven't seen that on anyone's
>> roadmap. It will probably come eventually but not for awhile.
>
> It must exist, as there is this:
Nah that's a 10G-base-t pci e
On 1/30/14, 5:26 PM, james jones wrote:
> I would like to know if anyone has seen one of these? If so where? Also if
> they don't exist why? It would seem to me that it would make it a lot
> easier to play mix and match with fiber in the DC if they did. Would be so
> hard to make the 1G SFPs faster
On 1/28/14, 5:29 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> So essentially, you are looking for a 'direct' x-connect to AWS ?
> and not wanting to go thru a peering fabric or any other network ?
just as an aside amazon peer routes are in my experience regional so if
the goal is to offload traffic in miami bound f
On 1/19/14, 9:05 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On (2014-01-19 16:11 +), Nick Hilliard wrote:
>
>> attacks for hardware-forwarded routers, so generally the only sensible
>> option is to drop packets with long EH chains.
>
> I think sensible is to handle HW when possible and punt rate-limited when
> m
On 1/18/14, 10:30 AM, John van Oppen wrote:
> This is exactly what pushed us into 6PE... it was the only way to make
> performance similar to v4 from a routing standpoint.
This statement is a bit facile... What platform are you referring to?
> John @ AS11404
>
>
signature.asc
Description
I think you'll find that windows update heavily leverages 3rd party CDN
providers as well as their own...
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc627316.aspx
On 1/16/14, 11:04 PM, shawn wilson wrote:
> Does anyone have a list of all of the ranges Microsoft uses for
> Windows Update? I've fou
On 1/8/14, 11:45 AM, excel...@gmx.com wrote:
> That´s actually a topic, I was thinking ago some time ago. Why not take
> a current TOR switch with 1. BGP support and 2. high buffer. Like
> mentioned above we have Trident 2 bases switches. HP (no recommendation)
> has its HP 5930 series but tells "R
On 1/8/14, 10:02 AM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
>
> On Jan 9, 2014, at 12:52 AM, Nick Olsen wrote:
>
>> But this is needed to integrate into an existing network.
>
> Route redistribution?
I've done mixed eigrp ospf environments in places where I wasn't
responsible for legacy decisions... it worke
On 12/11/13, 7:45 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> To be clear, I wasn't accusing you of whining. And thanks for documenting
>> it for the next guy.
>
> it just works for gals, they have all the luck and the brains
>
>> Stock netgear does PD and works out of the box? Didn't realize that.
>
> so says my
On 12/11/13, 11:46 AM, Kinkaid, Kyle wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
>> It doesn’t. You can get IPv6 working with off-the-shelf equipment if you
>> choose to.
>>
>> Randy chose to use that particular hardware and software combination.
>
>
> I'm curious, do you kn
On 12/11/13, 7:11 AM, Eric Oosting wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>
>> Randy Bush wrote:
>>> http://comcast6.net/ tells me that the local cmts is v6 enabled. my
>>> modem, a cisco dpc3008, is in the supported products list. so how do
>>> i turn the sucker on?
>>>
>>
On 12/4/13, 12:58 PM, Brian Dickson wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Brian Dickson
>> wrote:
>>> Except that we have a hard limit of 1M total, which after a few 100K from
>>
>> where does the 1M come from?
>>
>
> FIB table
On 12/1/13, 9:23 AM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
>
> On Dec 2, 2013, at 12:19 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
>
>> Given a measurement target on the customer side and smokeping instance on
>> your side you can actively measure the availability/latency/loss
>> rates between them.
On 12/1/13, 8:56 AM, Notify Me wrote:
> Hi Everyone
>
> Please I have a very problematic radio link which goes out and back on
> again every few hours.
> The only way I know this is happening is from my gateway device: a Sophos
> UTM that sends email anytime there's been an outage.
>
> The ISP ref
On 11/25/13, 8:26 PM, Jawaid Desktop wrote:
> Hello NANOGers,
>
> We're a regional CLEC and I've had a BGP filter change request in to
> CenturyLink for 3 days. I've had no luck trying to get this processed.
>
> I tried calling in tonight because, you know, my expectation these days
> is that eve
On 11/22/13, 12:01 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:18:27 -0800, "Tony Hain" said:
>
>> The top 100 websites: records and IPv6 connectivity
>>count with A: 98 ( 98.000%)
>> count with : 30 ( 30.000%)
>> Of the 30 hosts with AA
On 11/20/13, 11:53 AM, Eric A Louie wrote:
> Scenario: a regional ISP preparing to cutover to a new upstream BGP provider
> at one of my POPs. Want minimal or no network disruption, and want to ensure
> everything is ready to go prior to the cutover.
>
> I'm planning to use the following order
On Nov 12, 2013, at 9:16 PM, Brandon Galbraith
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:03 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>>> Now it would be trivial to setup syslog and sshd to give only the sessions
>>> that complete the handshake, however I'm also not sure how responsive some
>>> of the abuse contact
On Nov 1, 2013, at 7:06 PM, Harry Hoffman wrote:
> That's with a recommendation of using RC4.
it’s also with 1024 bit keys in the key exchange.
> Head on over to the Wikipedia page for SSL/TLS and then decide if you want
> rc4 to be your preference when trying to defend against a adversary wi
It's a pretty normal situation. even with a 1-2m jumper I see light levels
that are well below the maximum rx levels for 10km optics. e.g. the max might
be .5 and the actual readings are -1.4 - -2.7. our WDM terminals sit in the the
adjacent racks to the pop routers so they're all like that.
On Oct 11, 2013, at 10:27 AM, William Waites wrote:
> I'm having a discussion with a small network in a part of the world
> where bandwidth is scarce and multiple DSL lines are often used for
> upstream links. The topic is policy-based routing, which is being
> described as "load balancing" wher
On Oct 5, 2013, at 11:43 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 2:08 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 5, 2013, at 9:45 AM, Christopher Morrow
>> wrote:
>>
>>> you really don't want to do policy routing :(
>>>
>>
On Oct 5, 2013, at 9:45 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> you really don't want to do policy routing :(
>
PBR has this tendency to be brittle in the face of topology changes.
There are much better way to outbound load-balance between providers offering
same or similar quality routes to the sam
On Sep 27, 2013, at 10:04 AM, Randy Carpenter wrote:
>
>> There is no bit length which allocations of /20's and larger won't
>> quickly exhaust. It's not about the number of bits, it's about how we
>> choose to use them.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bill Herrin
>
> True, but how many orgs do we expect t
On Sep 26, 2013, at 1:18 PM, Darren Pilgrim wrote:
> On 9/26/2013 1:07 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 26, 2013, at 12:29 PM, Darren Pilgrim
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/26/2013 1:52 AM, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
>>>> so
On Sep 26, 2013, at 12:29 PM, Darren Pilgrim wrote:
> On 9/26/2013 1:52 AM, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
>> sounds just like folks in 1985, talking about IPv4...
>
> The foundation of that, though, was ignorance of address space exhaustion.
> IPv4's address space was too small for su
On 9/25/13 5:25 PM, Tammy Firefly wrote:
> On 9/25/13 18:18:04, Glen Kent wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The report from renesys states that
>>
>> "We initially stated that Sudan’s outage began at 12:47 UTC because that
>> was when virtually all Sudanese routed networks were withdrawn from the
>> global routi
On 9/24/13 8:10 PM, Nathanael C. Cariaga wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I raised actually this concern during our IP resource application.
>
> On a personal note, I think /48 IPv6 allocation is more than enough for
> our organization to use for at least the next 5-10 years assuming that
> this can be farmed ou
On 9/24/13 6:47 AM, Otis L. Surratt, Jr. wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Nathanael C. Cariaga [mailto:nccari...@stluke.com.ph]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 8:50 AM
> To: NANOG Mailing List
> Subject: minimum IPv6 announcement size
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just wondering if anyone could s
On 9/19/13 5:54 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
>
> Why do you sell services to customers using iThings if you are
> incapable of supporting them? Are you sure that it is not you
> yourself who have used to much "bait and switch" selling a service
> you are unable to provide? What actions do you take t
this, they could have been pushing
unreleased software blobs for a couple weeks for example, as some steam
game launches do for example. But, if you support near instantanious
gratification then, when somebody asks for something, then you start
fulfilling it.
> Only in a perfect world thoug
On 9/19/13 3:29 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
> Your software updates (you meaning a user of the Internet) should not affect
> my experience. I'm not advocating we go back to 5.25 floppies and never look
> back. I'm asking..
>
> Is there a way for a COMPUTER and PHONE manufacturer to distribute their
On 9/9/13 7:43 AM, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
> That notwithstanding, it's stupid to send traffic to/from one of the
> large $your_region/country incumbents via $not_your_region/country.
> It's just not good Internet.
yyz-yvr is faster via the united states. physics doesn't respect
poltical boundries.
On 9/9/13 12:43 PM, Michael Hallgren wrote:
> Le 09/09/2013 21:16, Joe Abley a écrit :
>> On 2013-09-09, at 14:29, joel jaeggli wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/9/13 7:43 AM, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
>>>> That notwithstanding, it's stupid to send traffic to/from o
WOL uses 100Mb/s, the phy draws less that way.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 31, 2013, at 10:13, Charles N Wyble
wrote:
> On hp proliant gen8 servers with management and ilo on same port, with the
> server off the ports show up as 100mbps.
>
> Jimmy Hess wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 6:4
On 8/29/13 6:08 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> How do people deal with situation where you need <=48 SFP/SFP+ ports, but
> you occasionally need one or two cu 10/100 ports?
arista 7050s support 100 Mb/s on their copper sfp I have leveraged that,
if you can break out the 40Gb/s ports you have as many as 64
On 8/21/13 6:56 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> but how do you represent seattle colonolizing bc?
"keep your potatoes out of my pig."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_War
>
> randy
>
On 7/14/13 7:22 AM, John Levine wrote:
I suspect the problem is the (offsite) hotel that Mark and I are at was not
really prepared for a full house of folks interested in viewing streams,
downloading documents, etc. (despite attempts to inform the hotel of the
impending tsunami). I imagine folks
On 6/28/13 2:15 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
On 06/28/2013 02:07 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Thomas"
My first reaction to this was why not SCTP, but apparently they think
Simple Computer Telephony Protocol? Did anyone ever actually
implement that?
No:
On 6/24/13 1:19 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
joe...@bogus.com wrote:
From: joel jaeggli
That's why I'm trying to follow up on the original question. Is
there something similar the global public can use to secure their
connections that is not government designed
On 6/24/13 12:55 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
- william.allen.simpson wrote: -
And at $189,950 MSRP, obviously every ISP is dashing out the door
for a pair for each and every long haul fiber link. ;-)
It's the same as buying, say, .nanog... >;-)
-
On 6/21/13 2:15 PM, Grzegorz Janoszka wrote:
On 21-06-13 21:56, Michael McConnell wrote:
As the IPv4 space get smaller and smaller, does anyone think we'll see a time
when /25's will be accepted for global BGP prefix announcement. The current
smallest size is a /24 and generally ok for most pe
On 6/15/13 5:35 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
i wonder if and how many governments are worried about when the nsa
tells cisco to send the kill switch signal to their routers.
Having worked for an Israel-based security vendor I'd opine:
A. That many sovereign states are concerned about sourcing for reas
On 6/10/13 6:48 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
On 6/10/13 6:36 PM, Dennis Burgess wrote:
I have a network that has three peers, two are at one site and the third
is geographically diverse, and there is NO connection between the two
separate networks.
Currently we are announcing several /24s out one
On 6/10/13 6:36 PM, Dennis Burgess wrote:
I have a network that has three peers, two are at one site and the third
is geographically diverse, and there is NO connection between the two
separate networks.
Currently we are announcing several /24s out one network and other /24s
out the second
On 5/20/13 2:45 PM, Matt Palmer wrote:
On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 04:42:23PM -0700, Seth Mattinen wrote:
On 5/19/13 4:27 PM, Ben wrote:
Do you actually need stateful filtering? A lot of people seem to think
that it's important, when really they're accomplishing little from it,
you can block ports
On 5/2/13 3:54 PM, Paul Ferguson wrote:
Hang on -- University of New Orleans's AS is 23666?
http://bgp.he.net/AS26333
Looks like "SISTELINDO-AS-ID PT Sistelindo Mitralintas":
http://www.cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/as-report?as=as23666
?
- ferg
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Paul Ferguson wrot
On 4/30/13 8:23 AM, Thomas Schmid wrote:
On 30.04.2013 17:07, Chris Boyd wrote:
On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 10:59 -0400, ML wrote:
1) Do nothing - They're supposed deliver any and all bits
(Disregarding
a DoS or similiar situation which impedes said network)
2) Prefix filter - Don't be a party (at le
On 4/28/13 3:46 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
-- for example: large Cable providers getting together and agreeing to
implement a 100ms RTT latency penalty for IPv4
we do not see intentionally damaging our customers as a big sales
feature. but we think all our competitors should do so.
This business
On 4/26/13 1:49 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:
On Apr 23, 2013, at 5:36 PM, shawn wilson wrote:
I'm looking at an IP-KVM. I don't need anything high res as I only
need to see Linux consoles, BIOS, and RAID. What I am looking for:
Non-Java client that runs on Linux (or a WebUI that will deploy a
dece
On 4/24/13 1:55 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013, Geoff Huston wrote:
However, personally I find it a little hard to place a high
probability on Tony's projected exhaustion date of August this year.
I also have to qualify that by noting that while I think that a
runout of the
On 4/25/13 10:16 PM, Matt Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 07:49:03PM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
On 04/25/2013 07:27 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
AWS stands out as a complete laggard in this area.
Heh... that's why I put all kinds of question marks and hedges :)
That's disappointing about aws
On 4/25/13 9:27 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Apr 26, 2013, at 00:19 , joel jaeggli wrote:
On 4/25/13 6:24 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Ok, here's a stupid question[1], which I'd know the answer to if I ran bigger
networks:
Does anyone know how much IPv4 space is allocated *specif
On 4/25/13 6:24 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
Ok, here's a stupid question[1], which I'd know the answer to if I ran bigger
networks:
Does anyone know how much IPv4 space is allocated *specifically* to cater
to the fact that HTTPS requires a dedicated IP per DNS name?
It doesn't, or doesn't if if you
On 4/12/13 3:41 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
On 4/11/13, Oliver Garraux wrote:
Agreed; but it would seem that unstoppable forces have been set into
motion by ICANN, to cause it to happen, regardless of whether it is
beneficial to the community, and regardless of any objections from the
public...
Yes
On 4/8/13 7:23 AM, Jack Bates wrote:
On 4/8/2013 7:20 AM, Tore Anderson wrote:
BTW. It is AIUI quite possible with MAP to provision a "whole" IPv4
address or even a prefix to the subscriber, thus also taking away the
need for [srcport-restricted] NAPT44 in the CPE.
The problem is NAPT44 in the
On 4/3/13 3:20 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
Try it with upwards of 900ms of variable latency.
on linux
tc qdisc add dev eth0 root netem delay 900ms 150msdistribution normal
and then you can slowly test the internet to your hearts content.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
Original
On 4/3/13 6:25 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
I'm shocked Ookla hasn't been eaten by some major ISP. Speed tests are the root
of most complaints. Your link is congested (oversubed) and you then attempt to
completely saturate your bandwidth to tell your provider what a suck job they
are doing. I can'
On 4/1/13 11:59 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 19:40:03 +0100, Tony Finch said:
You should be able to get a reasonable sample of IPv6 resolvers from the query
logs of a popular authoritative server.
Hopefully, said logs are not easily accessible to the miscreants.
Misc
On 3/28/13 1:50 PM, Andrew Latham wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Christopher Morrow
wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
nyt reports capture of scuba divers attempting to cut telecom egypt
undersea fiber.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2013/03/27/world/mi
On 3/26/13 7:04 PM, Matthew Petach wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 6:06 PM, John Levine wrote:
As a white-hat attempting to find problems to address through legitimate means,
how
do you …
You make friends with people with busy authoritative servers and see
who's querying them.
I'm confused.
On 3/26/13 10:10 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Mar 26, 2013, at 9:39 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
On 03/26/2013 09:28 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Mar 26, 2013, at 5:59 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu said:
Now explain how you find a recursive nameserver that isn't li
On 3/23/13 11:20 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
1M sq ft datacenter in former VZN CO at 375 Pearl:
http://www.wallstreetandtech.com/it-infrastructure/worlds-largest-high-rise-data-center-ope/240151399
From the story:
"""
Intergate.Manhattan is not only one of the largest facilities [at 32 stories,
On 3/23/13 9:13 PM, Matt Palmer wrote:
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 07:47:12PM -0700, Kyle Creyts wrote:
You do realize that there are quite a few people (home broadband
subscribers?) who just "go do something else" when their internet goes
down, right?
[...]
Will they really demand ubiquitous, un
On 3/21/13 11:09 AM, Buz Dale wrote:
Is anyone else seeing a lot of Class E address space (240.0.0.0/4) at their
borders?
I'd put those is in the martian category.
Has this space been reinstated in some as yet unknown to me RFC?
No it hasn't.
Thanks,
Buz
On 3/21/13 9:27 AM, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
On 21 March 2013 04:36, Masataka Ohta wrote:
Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
Are you suggesting that geolocation is inaccurate enough to misplace
Europe with Asia?
Yes, of course.
Think mobile.
Why are you insisting that mobile will have wron
On 3/12/13 10:18 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Joe Abley wrote:
On 2013-03-12, at 09:30, "Dobbins, Roland" wrote:
On Mar 12, 2013, at 8:25 PM, Joe Abley wrote:
What are better approaches?
Flow telemetry.
Can you use cflow/jflow/ipfix exports with 1:1 samp
that the three cellular devices aren't right on top of each other
*From:* joel jaeggli
*To:* Philip Lavine ; NANOG list
*Sent:* Friday, March 8, 2013 11:40 AM
*Subject:* Re: internet in the box
cradlepoint, verizon lte wireless usb dongle and a commercial plan
with the appropiate bandw
cradlepoint, verizon lte wireless usb dongle and a commercial plan with
the appropiate bandwidth cap.
I would then put a somewhat more powerful wireless-ap/router/nat-box
behind it.
I have stood up a datacenter behind such a thing while waiting for
circuits to arrive.
the cradlepoint can
On 2/27/13 6:26 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
The reason is Hilton outsources it to AT&T. They don't build the networks for
performance in my experience. I have started to avoid some hotels that moved from
level3 to AT&T for their Internet providers as they are very slow at peak times.
Sad as we all
On 2/25/13 8:42 AM, Warren Bailey wrote:
I should probably know this, but doesn't N just spread better and have the
ability to send receive on multiple polarizations?
That would be a rather extreme over-simplifcation of
spatial-division-multiplexing and space-time-coding.
As an RF engineer I
how you subnet a network operator is is fairly complex topic even if the
principles are rather simple.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5375.html
includes among other things some case studies.
there's quite a lot of source material from the various nog(s) where
people have presented on their own
On 2/18/13 1:42 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Feb 17, 2013, at 21:12 , Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2013, Owen DeLong wrote:
Greater attenuation is an oversimplification.
Along some dimensions sure, e.g. we have quite a lot of parameters we
can fiddle with.
With respect to an is
On 2/17/13 12:18 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Owen DeLong"
I think by A you actually mean 5Ghz N. A doesn't do much better than G, though
you still have the advantage of wider channels and less frequency congestion
with other uses.
No, my ThinkPad doesn't *do* N,
On 2/17/13 8:33 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Scott Howard"
A VPN or SSH session (which is what most hotel guests traveling for
work will do) won't cache at all well, so this is a very bad idea.
Might improve some things, but not the really important ones.
The ch
On 2/9/13 7:55 PM, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
Dear NANOG@,
In light of the recent discussion titled, "The 100 Gbit/s problem in
your network", I'd like to point out that smaller operators and
end-sites are currently very busy having and ignoring the 10 Mbit/s
problem in their networks.
Hotel
On 2/8/13 9:46 AM, fredrik danerklint wrote:
About 40 - 50 Mbit/s. Not bad at all.
Downloading software does not have to be in real-time, like watching
a movie, does.
In both cases it's actually rather convenient if it's as fast as
possible,
Yes. What I would like to have is to allow the acce
On 2/8/13 9:02 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
On (2013-02-08 14:15 +), Aled Morris wrote:
"Multicast"
I don't see multicast working in Internet scale.
Essentially multicast means core is flow-routing. So we'd need some way to
decide who gets to send their content as multicast and who are forced to
On 2/8/13 8:23 AM, fredrik danerklint wrote:
The media market has fragmented, so unless we're talking about the first
week in February in the US it's not all from one source or 3 or 5.
Explain further. I did not get that.
The superbowl is the first sunday in feb, it pulls a 75 share of the tv
On 2/8/13 5:23 AM, fredrik danerklint wrote:
- Well, as it turns out, we don't have that kind of a problem.
- You don't?
- No, we do not have that kind of a problem in our network.
We have plenty of bandwidth available to our customers,
thank-you-every-much.
- Do you have, just to make an
On 2/6/13 4:41 PM, Brandt, Ralph wrote:
David. I am on an evening shift and am just now reading this thread.
I was almost tempted to write an explanation that would have had
identical content with yours based simply on Level3 doing something and
keeping the information close.
Responsible Vendor
On 2/6/13 8:34 AM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
On Wed, 6 Feb 2013, Ray Wong wrote:
My impression is mostly that people are left feeling uncomfortable by
a massive upgrade of this sort with so little communication about why
and so on. "Emergency work for five hours and 30 minutes
disconnection" t
On 2/6/13 7:43 AM, Ray Wong wrote:
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 07:39:14AM -0500, Jared Mauch wrote:
So, I'm wondering what is shocking that someone may have to push out some sort
of upgrade either urgently or periodically that is so impacting
On 2/5/13 10:02 AM, Jason Biel wrote:
Agree as well.
Bad assumption on my part that Level3 would doing the items listed in the
workaround already.
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Jonathan Lassoff wrote:
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Jason Biel wrote:
Workaround is proper filtering and o
On 1/30/13 5:01 PM, Jake Khuon wrote:
On Wed 30 Jan 2013 16:58:28 PST, John Osmon wrote:
Does anyone make an ONT with a blinky light that you can toggle on/off
remotely? It'd be great to say:
Go look at the "it works" light.
If the remote tech can control the light, the end user would have
On 11/28/12 4:17 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:04 AM, Tony Hain wrote:
Getting the cpe vendors to ship in quantity requires the ISP engineering organizations to
say in unison "we are deploying IPv6 and will only recommend products that pass
testing".
Do you see any evidenc
On 1/30/13 8:05 AM, Jason Baugher wrote:
Oh, so all the fault belongs to the financial institutions, and there is no
corruption within the government agencies themselves. Right.
More like it's turtles all the way down.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 9:58 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
On 1/30/13
On 1/30/13 6:33 AM, Jason Baugher wrote:
There is much talk of how many fibers can fit in a duct, can be brought
into a colo space, etc... I haven't seen much mention of how much space the
termination in the colo would take, such as splice trays, bulkheads, etc...
Someone earlier mentioned being
201 - 300 of 975 matches
Mail list logo
