It is likely not to change when people don't have the available upload to
begin with. This is compounded by the queue problems on end devices.
How many more people would stream to twitch or youtube or skype if they didn't
have to hear this, Are you uploading? You're slowing down the download!
::AWG:: Strawman Alert!
Nobody's talking about taking poor Erlang behind the barn and shooting him.
We're talking about being able to send upstream at a reasonable/comparable
rate as downstream.
Mike
Exactly, now you see the dilemma. What is reasonable/comparable? Is it
Don't know who this is but the legalities are pretty clear I think. The DC is
not required to know what data is stored but if the cops can prove that someone
DID know what was stored, that person can be criminally charged. IANAL but I
have worked with LE on a similar case and that is how it
Here is what is going to hurt or help the cops case.
The volume of information is so expansive that in order to store and analyze
the data safely and securely, police had to purchase storage hardware similar
to what was used by Canadian military forces in Afghanistan. To access the
files, many
The backend is still symmetric. It's still something like 1.25 gigs up and 2.5
gigs down. You can only beat that going to AE.
Truth is, once the user is achieving what they consider to be acceptable
performance they don't care if it is symmetric or not.
Not a very informative discussion.
Unless there is significant stupidly-done bufferbloat, where the
insignificant amount of control traffic in the opposite direction is delayed
because the big blocks of the upload are causing a traffic jam in the upstream
pipe.
Which has nothing at all to do with the asymmetry of the circuit
That's simply wrong - at least for folks who do any work related stuff at home.
Consider: I've just edited a large sales presentation - say a PPT deck with
some embedded video, totaling maybe 250MB (2gbit) - and I want to upload that
to the company server. And let's say I want to do that 5
That statement completely confuses me. Why is asymmetry evil? Does that not
reflect what Joe Average User actually needs and wants? The statement that
the average users *MUST* have the same pipes going UP as he does going DOWN
does not reflect reality at all. Do a lot of your users want to
Actually most users would perceive a download increase as a speed upgrade
because they are not hitting the performance limits of the upstream. In the
DSL world, there is a maximum reliable speed attainable due to the physics
involved in high speed transmission over copper. More speed in one
These standards are for the interoperability of the equipment between vendors.
There is no technical reason that you could not have one particular speed in
one direction and any other speed in the opposite direction as long as you do
not exceed the total bandwidth potential of the loop. In
How about this? Show me 10 users in the average neighborhood creating content
at 5 mbpsPeriod. Only realistic app I see is home surveillance but I don't
think you want everyone accessing that anyway. The truth is that the average
user does not create content that anyone needs to see.
I think you may see more than average numbers of creative types at a university
environment. Once you have a full time job you tend to have less time for
creative endeavors. I can say that having thousands of customers, the
content producers are definitely a minority. I would even guess that
That's my point. NANOG users are not the average user. For every one of you
there are at least a thousand people who just want good Netflix connections and
even if they might be backing up stuff remotely they are sending a few selfies
and a couple Word docs.
Steven Naslund
Chicago IL
Sorry, no frequencies to play with on Ethernet. Ethernet is a baseband
technology (i.e. DC voltage, not AC frequencies) One pair is
transmitting, one pair is receiving in gigE. If you want to use both
pairs in the same direction to double up the bandwidth, that could be
done but it
Build it and they will come is a good way to go out of business in this
industry.
Steven Naslund
Chicago IL
It is likely not to change when people don't have the available upload to
begin with. This is compounded by the queue problems on end devices.
How many more people would stream to
Completely wrong. Sorry, but most network traffic is not symmetric. In
corporate environments traffic flows much more heavily from server to client.
Home networks are very highly asymmetric because upstream you see URL requests
and downstream you have media streams. PON networks were
William Waites wrote:
This is a self-fulling prophecy. As long as the edge networks have asymmetry
built into them popular programs and services will be developed that are
structured to account for this. As long as the popular programs and services
are made like this, the average user
will not
I'll disagree on the home part. I doubt that most homes are symmetric.
I agree, most homes are not symmetric, the two biggest services are cable modem
and DSL which are usually asymmetric.
Of course, what needs to happen is for standards bodies to start thinking more
dynamic when they build
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Scott Helms khe...@zcorum.com wrote:
My point is that the option should be there, at the consumer level.
Why? What's magical about symmetry? Is a customer better served by
having a 5mbps/5mbps over a 25mbps/5mbps?
If the option sells, it will be offered.
When I was involved with private-loop provision, what I noticed here in
northern Nevada is that the provisioning of T1 circuits moved from baseband
signalling to SDSL. From the standpoint of cable management, the splatter
from SDSL was MUCH lower than the splattering of baseband T1, so
What is that statement based on? I have not seen any outcry for more symmetric
speeds. Asymmetry in our networks causes a lot of engineering issues and if it
were up to the carriers, we would much rather have more symmetric traffic
patterns because it would make life easier for us. Remember
I would try to recommend finding a microwave guy that knows IP. Quite a lot of
them do now since most of their installs are IP traffic backhaul.
Steven Naslund
Chicago IL
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Scott Weeks
Sent: Thursday, February
We run Dragonwave systems and have no issues at all. MPLS in itself doesn't
make a difference since the gear is a straight Ethernet link. Just make sure
your gear handles your frame sizes and tagging and you should be good.
As long as your radio link is engineered right you should have high
The times I have seen this type of language they are usually aimed at
residential type service where they are trying to prevent you from hosting
content. This is not necessarily unfair depending on the pricing because most
residential cost models include a lot of assumptions that the circuit
They want the ability to buy off the shelf components when they manufacture.
They just don't want you to have the same privilege when you purchase. Your
switches and routers are made of a bunch of OEM components with some custom
programmed ASICS and some secret sauce. If they used non
Let talk about the 800 pound gorilla in the room and the #1 reason to hate
vendor locked optics. Some vendors (yes, Cisco I'm looking at you) want to
charge ridiculously high prices for optic that are identical to generic optics
other than the vendor lock. Maybe a better tactic would be to
That is their most popular argument. However this is no different from putting
a NIC card. RAM, or hard drives in a server platform. For that matter, do you
blame the network vendor if you have a faulty optical cable? In your example,
can you be sure that the SFP was the issue? You can't be
Our experience using that command has been mixed enough to be unreliable for
production. Problems include error disabled interfaces refusing to come back
online and the command not surviving a power cycle. Use with caution.
Steven Naslund
Chicago IL
On Nov 17, 2014, at 2:11 PM, ryanL
I can tell you that I do not do that. Typically if my BGP connectivity to a
carrier fails I would prefer we don't route anything their way until we get
that resolved because it might indicate a circuit that is up but unable to pass
traffic (very common with carrier Ethernet especially). It
at all.
Steven Naslund
Chicago IL
On Oct 9, 2014, at 7:42 PM, Chris Marget
ch...@marget.commailto:ch...@marget.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Naslund, Steve
snasl...@medline.commailto:snasl...@medline.com wrote:
If you set up an AP and try to plug it into my wired infrastructure
:03:48 -, Naslund, Steve said:
the AP can bug light your clients.
Only if your clients are configured to allow it.
I don't read it that way at all. It is illegal to intentionally interfere
(meaning intending to prevent others from effectively using the resource) with
any licensed or unlicensed frequency. That is long standing law.
It says in (b) that you must accept interference caused by operation of
Yes, the BART case is different because we are talking about a public safety
functionality. It really does not even matter who owns the repeaters. Let's
say one of the carriers suddenly shuts down their very own cell sites to
purposely deny public service.You can almost guarantee that an
I understand the concerns but it seems to me that there are already plenty of
ways for any large government to black hole whatever they want and they do not
need UTRS to do so. The only thing stopping (most) governments from doing this
regularly are fears of turning the Internet into another
Not a weird issue. It's called packet loss. You might want to try some traces
to see where that loss is happening. Basic troubleshooting.
Steve Naslund
Chicago IL
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Khurram Khan
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014
We have seen the same issue with Lenovo devices. They all seem to have a
variety of Intel chipsets. We have not found a good solution other than
updating drivers and/or shutting down ipv6 which we really don’t want to do but
it is easier to automate that than to automate the driver update. I
Something sounds really unlikely about that. Lack of DHCP would not cause
reachability problems except for the clients. The trace below looks like a
transit connection that should be unaffected by DHCP. Looks more like a
routing issue. Also sounds unlikely that one DHCP server would be
IL
From: Chris Lane [mailto:clane1...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 8:51 AM
To: Warren Bailey
Cc: Chris Garrett; Naslund, Steve; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Time Warner outage?
Agreed on DHCP, just passing along something i had heard about. With that
said, why wouldn't the TW
In common ISP language, peering is a connection between equals that is mutually
beneficial so no money usually changes hands, peering connections are usually
AS to AS without the ability to transit through to other AS (or at least some
kind of policy that prevents you from using your peer for
If you are a multi-homed end user and you feel that a BGP configuration for
that is a big management nightmare then you probably should not be running BGP.
It would take me somewhere less than 15 minutes to set this up with two
carriers and unless the carrier's are at drastically different
I am just guessing but you probably have not been in the service provider
space. Peering in my experience has always required an ASN and BGP as a
pre-requisite. That is because all service providers use BGP communities and
various other mechanisms to control these connections. Sure you could
Sorry to be cold about this but as high speed connectivity becomes more
necessity than luxury, the market will still react. For example, I could move
to the top of a mountain with no electric however most of us would not. If I
was buying a home and I could not get decent high speed Internet,
I can't believe that you actually believe that Brett. The reason the cost goes
down as the number of IPs goes up is because these blocks are not managed
address by address, they are managed as a single entity. ARIN has almost the
same amount of labor and management involved whether it is a
Chevy, sure they
would like for you to have bought from them but they will take what they can
get.
Steven Naslund
Steve, the key piece you're missing here is that the major broadband
providers are both
- near-monopolies in their access areas
- content providers
Not a situation where market
Which is their perfect right as a business. If their service starts sucking
because of it, they will not be in business long. The end user will quickly
figure out the Netflix sucks no matter who your Internet provider is and poof,
they will be gone. Market forces at work.
Steve
The name of
Net Neutrality is really something that has me worried. I know there have to
be some ground rules, but I believe that government regulation of internet
interconnection and peering is a sure way to stagnate things. I have been in
the business a long time and remember how peering kind of
Here we go down the rabbit hole again. This is not difficult. An Internet
Service Provider is an entity that provides Internet connectivity to its
customers for some consideration.
If you are looking for a legal definition of an ISP you are not going to find
(a satisfactory) one. The FCC
If you can figure out how to store an address and a mask you can have any size
entry you want. Just like a routing table. This is not insurmountable.
Steven Naslund
Chicago IL
OTOH, a spammer with a single /64, pretty much the absolute minimum
IPv6 block, has more than 18 quintillion
Would it make it more unique; if I suggested creation of a new distributed
Cryptocurrency something like 'MAILCoin' to track the memberships in the
club and handle voting out of abusive mail servers: in a distributed
manner, to ensure that no court could ever mandate that a certain IP
Look at it this way. If I see an attack coming from behind your NAT,
I'm gonna deny all traffic coming from your NAT block until you assure
me you have it fixed because I have no way of knowing which host it is
coming from. Now your whole network is unreachable. If you have a
I think it would be just as easy to claim that breaking the end-to-end model is
more of a security concern that lack of NAT. Having the NAT is essentially
condoning a permanent man-in-the-middle. A lot of customers do believe that
NAT adds to their security. I would advise them however that
If they have a stateful IPv6 firewall (which they should and which most
firewall vendors support), they already have what they need to prevent their
internal systems from being accessible from the outside. If you are an
enterprise and you don't have a stateful firewall, you are in trouble from
, March 24, 2014 12:34 PM
To: Naslund, Steve
Subject: Re: misunderstanding scale
On 3/24/2014 12:53 PM, Naslund, Steve wrote:
If they have a stateful IPv6 firewall (which they should and which most
firewall vendors support), they already have what they need to prevent their
internal systems from
That number will change depending on distance, terrain, and a lot of other
factors. I have personally installed a lot of outside plant fiber and $700 can
turn into $2400 the first time you find a rock or need to add a manhole
somewhere. It also depends on distance between customers and their
I doubt that many residential customers will be readdressing their networks
except for us geeks. Most of them are going to be using CPE that grabs an
address via DHCP for the WAN interface and then does an IPv6 DHCP PD with the
/64 it gets from the service provider. The customer sees nothing
Thinking about this again, let's take Jay at his word that he can make a
passing for $700-800. Unfortunately, the ISP or service provider does not
pay for a passing, they pay for an entry. After all we can't let them make
their own entry or we will have everyone and their brother in our
I can easily answer that one as a holder of v4 space at a commercial entity.
The end user does not feel any compelling reason to move to ipv6 if they have
enough v4 space.
I can't give my employer a solid business case of why they need to make the
IPv6 transition. They already hold enough v4
That is correct as long as that direct allocation came from ARIN. A really
large chunk of address space was allocated (especially to the government
entities) way before ARIN was controlling the space. I think the large
percentage of space held by non-ARIN members come from those really large
Exactly right. In fact that is generous because the v6 host having a stateful
firewall has a real protocol aware firewall (and often bundled IDS/IPS
capability) not just a NAT to protect him.
The NAT provides almost no security once a single host behind the NAT is
compromised and makes an
Randy,
I am not sure I understand the argument here. If you think that ARIN is not
representing the address space holders in proper fashion, how would we suggest
correcting that? If an address holder does not become a member (which is
fairly easy to do if you care enough) how would we even
A question came to mind with all the discussion of ipv6 vulnerabilities. I am
wondering for those with a lot of real world pure IPv6 connectivity, how robust
have been the V6 to V4 gateways necessary for intercommunication between native
IPv6 hosts and the IPv4 world? I was thinking that
You are right but that is usually how it works with fiber because that last
drop to the home is a pretty expensive piece that you don't usually want
installed until it is needed. The LECS usually don't even light a building
unless there is a service that requires it. I was trying to make the
We don't know because the service provider rolls that cost up along
with th= e services they sell. That is my point. They are able to
spread the costs= out based on the profitable services they sell.
Okay.
If they were not able to =
sell us services I am not sure they could afford to
... In fact, having been a service provider I can tell you that I
paid the LEC about $4 a month for a copper pair to your house to sell
DSL service at around ten times that cost. I am sure the LEC was not
making money at the $4 a month and I know I could not fund a build out for
that
There may not need to be competition in the capitalist sense of the word but
there needs to be some feedback loop for the consumer of a service to provide
feedback on their satisfaction with it. In the case of a government provided
service people vote at the polls. With a commercially
I am not sure I agree with the basic premise here. NAT or Private addressing
does not equal security.
A globally routable address does not necessarily mean globally accessible.
Any enterprise that cares a wit about network security is going to have a
firewall. If you are relying on NAT to
[mailto:frnk...@iname.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 10:08 PM
To: Naslund, Steve
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica
Not sure which rural LECs are exempt from competition. Some areas are
effectively exempt from facilities-based (i.e. wireline
Here is the legal definition of an RLEC.
http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/rural-telephone-company/
Steven Naslund
Chicago IL
-Original Message-
From: Naslund, Steve [mailto:snasl...@medline.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 10:16 PM
To: Frank Bulk
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE
infrastructure without services,
it might work in a major metro area but not in these areas.
Steven Naslund
-Original Message-
From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnk...@iname.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 10:21 PM
To: Naslund, Steve
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns
Exactly right John. I think the term owned is a problem here.
It seems to me that the terms would correctly be holder or who the address
space was issued to or user being the end user using that space.
Wouldn't all of the holders be ARIN members unless grandfathered in?
Steven Naslund
Chicago
to make a political statement.
I apologize if I gave you the impression that I disapproved of your question.
Steve
-Original Message-
From: Randy Bush [mailto:ra...@psg.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 10:52 PM
To: Naslund, Steve
Cc: John Curran; North American Network Operators' Group
-Original Message-
From: Randy Bush [mailto:ra...@psg.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 11:10 PM
To: Naslund, Steve
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
Subject: Re: arin representation
sorry steve.
was not chasing down the tree. not clear what a useful measurement would be.
randy
He is definitely in the authoritative hands :)
Steve
-Original Message-
From: John Curran [mailto:jcur...@arin.net]
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 11:16 PM
To: Naslund, Steve
Cc: Randy Bush; North American Network Operators' Group
Subject: Re: arin representation
Steve -
Thanks
How do you get around the problem of natural monopolies, then? Or should
we be moving to a world where, say, a dozen or more separate companies are
all running fiber or coax on the poles on my street in an effort to get to my
house?
We already did it. The Telecommunications Act allows
-Original Message-
From: Jim Popovitch [mailto:jim...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 10:15 AM
To: Naslund, Steve
Cc: Sholes, Joshua; Larry Sheldon; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Naslund, Steve snasl
that right).
Steven Naslund
-Original Message-
From: Mark Tinka [mailto:mark.ti...@seacom.mu]
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 10:01 AM
To: Naslund, Steve
Subject: Re: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica
On Friday, March 21, 2014 04:46:13 PM Naslund, Steve wrote:
First question to ask
for that price.
Steven Naslund
-Original Message-
From: Jim Popovitch [mailto:jim...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 11:07 AM
To: Naslund, Steve
Cc: Sholes, Joshua; Larry Sheldon; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on Technica
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 11:48 AM
The error in this whole conversation is that you cannot take it back as an
engineer. You do not own it. You are like an architect or carpenter and are
no more responsible for how it is used than the architect is responsible that
the building he designed is being used as a crack house. Do
I am unclear on what you mean by technical choice. Are you talking about a
technical solution to keep the government from seeing your traffic? That will
not work for two main reasons.
1. The government has a lot more resources and motivation than the average
company when it comes to
-Original Message-
From: Ricky Beam [mailto:jfb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 2:45 PM
To: NANOG list; Mike
Subject: Re: Service provider T1/PPP question
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 00:07:45 -0400, Mike mike-na...@tiedyenetworks.com
wrote:
I am wanting to offer a broadband over T1
I can't help but wonder what would happen if US Corporations simply
blocked all inbound Chinese traffic. Sure it would hurt their
business, but imagine what the Chinese people would do in response
First thing is the Chinese government would rejoice since they don't
want their citizens on our
Kind of seems to me that if I am deep enough in your mobile device to get your
accelerometer data, I probably can get access to your stored data in the
device. The only reason I think I would want your passcode would be to
physically steal your device and then try to use it.
This is one of
Ashworth [mailto:j...@baylink.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:22 AM
To: Naslund, Steve
Subject: Re: Endpoint Security and Smartphones
- Original Message -
From: Steve Naslund snasl...@medline.com
Kind of seems to me that if I am deep enough in your mobile device to
get your
with your phone. Problem with that is that the accuracy would
have to be much better for that purpose.
Steven Naslund
-Original Message-
From: George Herbert [mailto:george.herb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:47 AM
To: Naslund, Steve
Cc: NANOG; George Herbert
Subject: Re
of these sensors on your person
is a security threat.
Steve
-Original Message-
From: Jay Ashworth [mailto:j...@baylink.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:41 AM
To: Naslund, Steve
Subject: Re: Endpoint Security and Smartphones
- Original Message -
From: Steve Naslund snasl
I would think your $ value would be calculated by a few factors.
1. How much would it cost to train and hire NOC guys that do what you
do today vs. using outsourced support for those issues or going to a
higher level team.
2. How much longer would SLA affecting problems take to solve without
Please, no connectors that do not lock into place. Is plugging in the
RJ-45 that much of a task? Most portable devices are going wireless in
any case so they are not an issue. The RJ-45 has worked OK for me. The
AUI connectors have a special place in networking hell. What an
incredibly
It takes a lot of voltage to cause an arcing spark. I would suspect
static buildup along the way and bad grounding. Even a big facility
with a good ground should not have enough voltage differential between
grounding points to cause sparks. Having the right size rack grounding
should give you a
HDMI is also extremely distance limited. At those kinds of distances
you probably would have no problem running 8 gbps over a Cat 6 with
RJ-45s as well. I don't know how many people remember it but 1G used to
be real expensive as well. In a few years you will see the 10 gbps
D-Link switches at
Distance, data rate required, bandwidth (like RF signals), analog
signals and timing that Ethernet does not provide. I suppose that you
cable box could encode everything as Ethernet/IP to send it to your TV
but it would take lots of processing horsepower to encode/decode. Your
stereo could take
Naslund
-Original Message-
From: Eric Wieling [mailto:ewiel...@nyigc.com]
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 11:30 AM
To: Naslund, Steve; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
The only thing I would change about RJ-45 is a longer tab (but make it
optional
Make sure you check this out in detail. My export / import people found
out that if the device is going to be in control of and used by a US
company doing business in China, there are a lot less encryption
restrictions. The ruling was that it was not an export if the device
remains the property
Agreed. I have run IPsec over MPLS with no problem in China on several
carriers. Internet connectivity also worked but performance was spotty
due to overloaded firewall or circuits in and out of the country.
Steven Naslund
-Original Message-
From: Tom Paseka
There are lots of carriers but unfortunately they all seem to use China
Telecom infrastructure for transport so there is not really a way to get
better Internet service there. In our experience MPLS performs better
because China Telecom seems to hand off service to the international
MPLS carriers
You can get DID numbers from a carrier when you buy a service from them. There
is usually a ratio of how many DIDs you can get for a certain service. I know
you will need state utilities commission licenses at least if you want to
become a telephone carrier. IP only voice service I am not
If you are a facilities based broadband provider in the US you have to
comply with CALEA. There is no coming to some agreement, you have a
legal obligation to comply. No more, and no less. You don't have to
comply with requests from agencies other than law enforcement under
CALEA but you may
[mailto:william.allen.simp...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 9:20 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] William was raided for running a Tor exit node.
Please help if you can.
On 11/30/12 5:15 PM, Naslund, Steve wrote:
Well, in that case I am really worried that the cops might
-Original Message-
From: Rich Kulawiec [mailto:r...@gsp.org]
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 6:59 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please
help if you can.
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 08:04:02AM -0500, Chris quoted (William):
Yes, it
WAIT A SECOND HERE!?!?
I just read below that this guy runs a large ISP in Austria. I thought
his Tor node was hosted with an external provider. If he runs the ISP,
why would he not host his own server in house? I suppose there are
reasons but I can't think of one, especially if you feel so
or legal sharing and
distribution and some not so nice media.
Steven Naslund
-Original Message-
From: Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law
[mailto:froom...@law.miami.edu]
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 6:30 PM
To: Naslund, Steve
Cc: NANOG
Subject: RE: William was raided for running
201 - 300 of 339 matches
Mail list logo
