On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 07:32:48PM -0400, Scott Berkman wrote:
I really wouldn't use the word legacy to describe SONET and OC-3's.
It's around 25 years old (work started in 1985, first standards
published in 1988) and we now have a ratified 100G Ethernet standard.
Much of it is
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 03:23:48PM -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
I remember writing (complaining) about it in a thread back in April,
appreciated.
I still don't know why anyone would complain, although I do
thank Interop for their generosity.
Here's some truth:
1) At
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 01:53:49PM -0700, Christopher McCrory wrote:
Network operations content:
Will We're running MySQL and Postgress servers that do not support
IPv6 be a valid reason for rejecting IPv6 addresses from ISPs or
hosting providers?
First, it's not like the flag day
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:45:45PM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
But how do they multihome without an ASN?
Well, get space from one of your providers, and an LOA
to get the other to announce the deaggregate for you.
Or they've got legacy space, and never had an AS; just
get their
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 12:35:32PM -0500, Jack Carrozzo wrote:
As I understand it, they're trying to get the WAAS sat back online and
working properly after it went on walkabout some time ago. It's currently in
a nonstandard orbit while they work on it. I suppose it's just pure
speculation
On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 10:27:45AM -1000, Paul Graydon wrote:
insignificant changes between v4 and v6. There is nothing on line
that isn't accessible over IPv4 so there has been no critical app
outside the infrastructure to spur such changes yet either.
Paul,
You're speaking
On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 04:51:26PM -0800, Randy Bush wrote:
it is both amusing and horrifying to watch two old dogs argue about
details of written rules as if common sense had died in october 1998.
what is good for the internet? what is simple? what is pragmatic? if
the answer is not simple
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 12:40:41PM -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:
I'll happily join Newnog/NANOG and pay my dues when I can reach the
web site ot do so on IPv6 rather than legacy IPv4.
I noticed that too, but shoot, I'm not even sure their
host supports it.
Besides, you'd still be
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 01:13:49AM -0600, Jimmy Hess wrote:
Perhaps the RIRs should personally and directly ask each /8 legacy
holder to provide
account of their utilization (which portions of the allocation is
used, how many hosts),
and ASK for each unused /22 [or shorter] to be
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 09:27:35AM -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:
Apparently not:
[owen-delongs-macbook-pro:~] owen% host www.skynet.net
www.skynet.net has address 66.165.165.53
[owen-delongs-macbook-pro:~] owen% host -t www.skynet.net
www.skynet.net has no record
Owen,
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 04:00:16PM -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:
Ready or not, IPv6-only (or reasonably IPv6-only) residential
customers are less than 2 years out, so, well within
your 5-year planning horizon, whether those ISPs see that or
not. Denial is an impressive human phenomenon.
On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 12:44:05PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
i am more of a pessimist. i suspect that there will be enough v4-only
destinations out there that multi-homed enterprises fronting onto
dual-stack backbones will announce teenie bits of v4 so they can nat64.
I'll take this
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 06:59:09PM +0100, Darren O'Connor wrote:
I've just set up a vpn tunnel to Amazon's AWS and as part of the config
they required me to configure to /30 tunnels using addressing from the
169.254.0.0/16 space.
Yeah, they do that for Direct Connect.
RFC3927
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 04:53:39PM -0500, Jay Ashworth wrote:
For myself, I usually pick the first three in us.pool.ntp.org, tick and tock,
time.nist.gov, and a couple of regionally appropriate large universities.
I'd advise going through the RR for a while, and pick servers
close to
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 10:41:01AM -0500, Jay Ashworth wrote:
... against multiple [Stratum 1] sources...
Baby, if you've ever wondered... whether it matters whether your sources
are strat 1 or not, now you know -- since there's no real way to get
provenance on down-strat time sources that
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 04:42:46PM +, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Jason,
You've just given 3 weeks notice for a component change in one of the few
critical part of the Internet's infrastructure, at a time when most
networks have entered a configuration freeze (which will usually finish at
the
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 07:09:22PM +, Peter Hicks wrote:
I have a Quick Eagle DL087E here, but Quick Eagle's website has
fallen off the planet:
p...@angel:~$ host -t any www.quickeagle.com
Host www.quickeagle.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
Their phones go to a reorder too. I'm
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 01:08:46PM -0800, Randy Bush wrote:
ok, this is horribly pragmatic, but it's real. yesterday i was in the
westin playing rack and stack for five hours. an horrifyingly large
amount of my time was spent trying to peel apart labels made on my
portable brother label tape
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 03:21:59PM -0500, Wallace Keith wrote:
Have you tried looking under Qwest?
Generally speaking, emailing a Qwest address is useless
these days. You'll get some sort of redirect message, in many
cases to a new address that doesn't work.
Rebranding for the
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 01:54:37PM -0400, Steve Meuse wrote:
FreeBSD, Trimble Thunderbolt and a TAPR FatPPS?
Thing with the Thunderbolts is not all revisions of the
firmware seem to play nice with ntpd. And yes, the PPS is quite
narrow and would have to be conditioned as well.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 04:33:35PM -0400, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
Word around the campfire is that the 18x is jittery compared to the 18.
The 18x is much worse than the 18LVC. Thankfully I still have
2 18LVCs... but that said, given the hockey puck design, and that Randy
already has
On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 11:33:22PM +0100, Tony Finch wrote:
Keith Medcalf kmedc...@dessus.com wrote:
You are assuming facts not in evidence. The rotation is merely
irregular within the capabilities of our scheme of measurement,
calculation, and observation.
There is LOTS of evidence
On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 11:33:35PM -0400, Tyler Haske wrote:
4 years. These things are supposed to be synced to a NTP source
anyway.
Easiest solution is just remove leap second functionality from
mainline code, and make it something you have to special-compile for.
Please reconcile
On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 04:53:32PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
UTC (and the system clock) should not move backwards, but, rather they repeat
second 59. UTC goes 58-59-00 most of the time, but during a leap second, it
should go 58-59-59-00). It's not so much going backwards as dropping a
chime.
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 01:20:23PM -0400, Randy Epstein wrote:
We hope Sprint and Cogent work out their differences, but in the mean time,
we unfortunately will remain partitioned from Cogent.
Randy,
This brings up something I've always wondered. Why do we have
public
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 04:41:39PM -0600, Kevin Day wrote:
I've been told that some of the causes of these problems are fixed on
any reasonably recent ntp distribution, but just in case, you might
wanna keep an eye out if you're seeing any weirdness. The worst damage
I'd heard from
On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 01:30:51AM +0900, Adrian Chadd wrote:
This begs the question - how the heck do timekeepers and politicians get
away with last minute time changes?
Surely there's -some- pushback from technology related interest groups to
try and get more than four weeks warning? :)
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 12:40:42PM -0600, Michienne Dixon wrote:
I'm not entirely certain what is going on but has anyone noticed some
strange announcements for 174.128.31.0/24?
I received a hijack notice that my AS (AS11708) was announcing the above
IP range. I verified that I was not
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 04:31:57PM -0400, Jake Matthews wrote:
Apparently Charter is going to packetsniff its users and use that for
commercial purposes.
I think you'd find they'd run pretty far afoul of 18 USC 2511
for that, without prior consent (18 USC 2511 2) (c)).
I
Greetings,
For NANOG44 in Los Angeles, we will be running the keysigning
sessions during the general session breaks in the Moroccan open seating
area, which is on the Mezzanine level (above the Main Galleria).
If you're planning to attend any of the keysigning sessions,
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 02:01:45PM -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
I am curious. Once we're nearing exhausting all IPv4 space will
there ever come a time to ask/demand/force returning all these
legacy /8 allocations? I think I understand the difficulty in that,
but then running out of IPs is
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 05:19:12PM -0500, Joe Johnson wrote:
Maybe encourage people like Apple, Xerox, HP or Ford to migrate
their operations completely to IPv6 and return their /8?
How are they going to completely migrate to v6 while
there is a demand for v4 space (specifically, THEIR
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 05:48:44PM -0500, John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote:
On the topic of IP4 exhaustion: 1/8, 2/8 and 5/8 have all been assigned in
the last 3 months yet I don't see them being allocated out to customers
(users) yet.
Is this perhaps a bit of hoarding in advance of the
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 04:24:21PM -0700, Leo Bicknell wrote:
How dynamic will dynamic addresses be under IPv6?
With or without privacy extensions enabled?
--msa
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 09:55:10PM -0400, Andrew Kirch wrote:
The US Airforce has sent most of the fighters from the East Coast to
Indiana, what are you doing to prepare for the storm of the next 2 days?
Ready, Set, DISCUSS!
Personally, I was very happy to hear that Equinix had laid
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 10:19:34AM -0500, Jorge Amodio wrote:
As others said you are doing a public service to the rest of the
community and if you give a nice and valuable talk you will get the
recognition of the NANOG community and your colleagues, and we can put
into consideration including
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 06:25:54PM +, Warren Bailey wrote:
We walked up the counter all the time, however that was in Alaska so the
rules may be different down here.
You can walk up with a credit card, terms just make it easier
to place orders in advance for pickup.
Anyway,
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 12:06:50PM -0700, Tim M Edwards wrote:
Needs to be a Corporate CC though.
Nahh, they take my personal card in Phoenix and SF all the time.
--msa
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 07:52:02PM -0400, Ricky Beam wrote:
All of the above plus very poorly managed network / network
security. (sadly a Given(tm) for anything ending dot-e-d-u.) a) why
are *printers* given public IPs? and b) why are internet hosts
allowed to talk to them? I actually
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 01:56:02PM -0600, 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 people, but
the
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 03:50:03PM -0500, John R. Levine wrote:
I believe you, but I don't believe that the set of ntp.org servers
changes so rapidly that it is beyond the ability of network
operators to handle the ones on their own networks as a special
case.
I think you'd be
On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 02:28:22PM -0500, William Herrin wrote:
Verizon Business is willing to do settlement-free peering with you but
you won't agree to a reciprocal penalty if either allows its customers
to forge packets? I call that a weed-out factor. Weed out the bad
actors because anyone
On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 01:14:09PM -0500, Jared Mauch wrote:
If you want something that is cheap as in you for your home, I can
recommend this: ~$350 w/ antenna, etc..
http://www.netburnerstore.com/product_p/pk70ex-ntp.htm
You can get the whole thing going quickly. Majdi has also had
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 02:04:30AM +, John Curran wrote:
Internet routing registries are a fine example; one could argue that
it should be integrated with the number resource registry, but we also
have examples of independent routing registries in active use (and I
can see some potential
On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 06:55:02PM -0400, David Hubbard wrote:
Anyone have recommendations on NTP appliances; i.e. make, model, gps vs
cell, etc.? Roof/outdoor/window access not available. Would ideally
need to be able to handle bursts of up to a few thousand simultaneous
queries. Needs
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 05:33:52PM -0700, Tim Heckman wrote:
I just was alerted to one of the systems I managed having a time skew
greater than 100ms from NTP sources. Upon further investigation it
seemed that the time was off by almost exactly 1 second.
Looking back over our NTP monitoring,
On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 12:20:12PM -0700, Tim Heckman wrote:
Our systems all have loopstats and peerstats logging enabled. I have
those log files available if interested. However, when I searched over
the files I wasn't able to find anything that seemed to indicate this
was the peer who told
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 12:45:07PM -0300, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
sc is Seychelles. Available s* include sf, sp, sq, su and sw. They should
pick .sf, use .scot for in-country domains and sell all .sf domains to San
Francisco residents.
su is not available.
--msa
On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 10:57:29PM -0500, Daniel Seagraves wrote:
It?s not just Marriott doing this; A friend of mine went to a convention
near DC and found the venue was doing something like this. I don?t know if
the method was the same, but he reported that any time he connected to his
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:45:11AM -0600, Mike Hammett wrote:
What about ISPs that aren't world-class dicks?
The punishments will continue until they either fold or sell
to the duopoly which is large enough to buy whatever act of Congress,
court or FCC ruling they require...
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 08:33:14AM +0200, Tore Anderson wrote:
Leap years and DST ladjustments have never caused us any major
issues. It seems these code paths are well tested and work fine.
I've seen quite a few people that for whatever reason insist
on running systems in local time
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 06:29:34PM +, Mel Beckman wrote:
The universal workaround is to simply disable NTP on your devices sometime
on Leap-Second eave. This will let the clocks free-run over the one-second
push, an event of which they will be blissfully ignorant. When you re-enable
NTP
On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 04:32:11AM +, John Curran wrote:
> NANOGers -
>
> If you are providing residential Internet service with IPv6 (or
> are a customer of same), please take a moment to complete
> Jordi’s survey - this will help provide insight into the actual
> technical
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 03:24:43PM +, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> We're all aware this project is underway, right?
>
> https://www.ntpsec.org/
Despite the name, I'm not aware of any significant protocol
changes. It's just a recent fork of the reference implementation
minus the
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:08:16AM +, Mel Beckman wrote:
> NTP has vulnerabilities that make it generally unsuitable for
> provider networks. I strongly recommend getting a GPS-based
> time server. These are as cheap as $300. Here is one I use quite a bit:
So how does this stop from
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 11:21:09AM -0500, Sean Donelan wrote:
> If any network operators still use WWV for time synchronization.
I wouldn't expect this to cause any serious synchonization
problem; anyone using HF for time has to have the ability to hold
over for a miniumum of several
On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 02:08:50PM -0500, Allan Liska wrote:
> In the United States that would the United States Naval Observatory
> (USNO) Master Clock (http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/). You can read more
> about it here:
> http://motherboard.vice.com/read/demetrios-matsakis-and-the-master-clock
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 11:31:08PM -0500, Laurent Dumont wrote:
> 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
On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 01:23:58AM +, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> I haven't personally seen anything about this across my fleet; anyone here
> seeing tracks from it?
-snip-
>
> http://www.ibtimes.com/how-change-ntp-server-microsofts-timewindowscom-causes-computers-display-wrong-time-2519884
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 04:59:53AM -0800, Hal Murray wrote:
> Any suggestions for gear and/or software that works with WWV (or CHU)?
> Or general suggestions for non GPS sources of time?
Hey Hal!
In North America, WWV and CHU are pretty much it for accessible
backups these
On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 05:31:48PM -0800, Mehmet Akcin wrote:
> Next up, let me address the elephant in the room. As many of you know,
> Network Atlas’ Kickstarter for $100K for 2019 funding came up short of
> meeting its goal(we cancelled it before the time because many of you
> reached out
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 01:47:24PM -0600, John Osmon wrote:
> I've got a need to look for some announcements from the mid 1990s.
> The oldest I've found at at the University of Oregon Route Views
> Project, but the earliest I can find there appears to be November of
> 1997.
>
> Anyone have
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 09:29:46AM -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
> There were a lot of NTP threads several weeks ago, but I didn't get an answer
> to my question amongst all of the other chatter.
>
> I'm looking for a device that can receive GPS inside a building without the
> assistance of an
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 09:50:48AM -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
> Isn't a major problem with CDMA-based sources that the networks
> they depend on are getting shut down?
Domestically, yes.
Not only are you dependant on Sprint if you go that route
(Verizon is already pulling the
On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 04:13:55PM -0400, n...@as37662.com n...@as37662.com
wrote:
> Do any orgs here have experience with a good Cogent rep? The rep we got
> via Cogent's website is unresponsive to even basic questions. It feels
> like we are dealing with a bot and copy-pasted replies.
Apparently isn't 44/8 anymore:
NetRange: 44.192.0.0 - 44.255.255.255
CIDR: 44.192.0.0/10
NetName:AT-88-Z
NetHandle: NET-44-192-0-0-1
Parent: NET44 (NET-44-0-0-0-0)
NetType:Direct Allocation
OriginAS:
Organization: Amazon Technologies Inc.
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:02:40PM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> So.. this is/was a legacy allocation, right? with some 'not great'
> contact/etc info...
It's been announced by UCSD as a /8, consistently available,
with tunnel services and rDNS available on a consistent basis, for
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:21:58PM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> who knows? probably? not really my personal concern I guess.
If they're using taxpayer supported networks to provide transit
to a private, for profit entity, we should all care.
> I'm not sure how you're quite going in
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:47:21PM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> Also, who's this 'we'.. I don't live in california... I presume UC is
> getting funding from california, not virginia. (mostly)
> It seems though that 44/8 was being used in some research project at
> UC so... maybe this is just
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 04:41:13PM -0500, b...@theworld.com wrote:
> Thanks everyone for the replies. My conclusion is that no one here
> knows whether HKIX handles 99% of internet traffic for HK or not.
Barry,
While it's absolutely a number we don't have, it's also worth
asking
On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 03:37:25PM -0800, William Herrin wrote:
> Nevertheless, in the protocol's design, the one expressed in the
> RFC's, AS path length = distance.
Bill,
The protocol was also developed at a time when everyone
utilized the same transit provider, and all other
71 matches
Mail list logo
