On Tue, Jul 20, 2021, at 22:44, Saku Ytti wrote:
> I'm going to hazard a guess that the exhaustive list is empty.
Actually, it's not empty. I know 2 operators in my part of the world that do it
in some way or another.
> Allowing 3rd parties to launch alien waves to your system puts your
On Fri, Jan 1, 2021, at 23:12, Matt Hoppes wrote:
> How would that even work? Force a pop up into web traffic? What if
> the end users is using an app on a phone?
Like any other "commission-based study".
Remember, the action is :
"after providing public notice and opportunity for comment,
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, at 22:40, Darin Steffl wrote:
> For 1G or less, ethernet
> might be cheaper with some protection already
Not to mention that 1G waves are becoming less and less comon those days. In
this part of the world waves tend to start at 10G.
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, at 20:38, Rod Beck wrote:
> You are correct that if you have
> to carve it up into a lots of VLANs, it would be a nightmare. But
> Hibernia was a true wholesale carrier providing backbone to clients,
> not links distributing traffic to lots of user end points.
On Thu, Sep 10, 2020, at 08:08, aar...@gvtc.com wrote:
> Interesting... I've never heard of SPRINGv4
Neither did I until a few days ago.
> I wonder if SPRINGv4 is like SRv6, meaning, SPRING(SR) over IPv4 dataplane?
> Or, am I reading way too much into that SPRINGv4 acronym?
Like SR-VXLAN ?
On Sun, Sep 6, 2020, at 10:14, Jeff Tantsura via NANOG wrote:
> Out of curiosity - if you are interested in SR, where are you getting
> your information from if not IETF (SPRING)?
Much beloved vendor claims support for "SPRINGv4" feature for a certain family
of products (I personally expect
On Sat, Aug 15, 2020, at 11:35, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
> No plan survives contact with the enemy. Your careful made growth
> projection was fine until the brass made a deal with some major
> customer, which caused a traffic spike.
Capacity planning also includes keeping an eye on what is being
On Sat, Aug 15, 2020, at 02:39, Louie Lee wrote:
> get an understanding of your traffic growth and try to project when you
> will reach that number. You have to decide whether you care about the
> occasional peak, or the consistent peak, or somewhere in between, like
> weekday vs weekends,
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020, at 12:31, Mark Tinka wrote:
> I'm confident everyone (even the cheapest CFO) knows the consequences of
> congesting a link and choosing not to upgrade it.
I think you're over-confident.
> It's great to monitor packet loss, latency, pps, e.t.c. But packet loss
> at 10% link
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020, at 09:31, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> At what point do commercial ISPs upgrade links in their backbone as
> well as peering and transit links that are congested? At 80% capacity?
> 90%? 95%?
Some reflections about link capacity:
At 90% and over, you should panic.
On Wed, Jul 8, 2020, at 00:09, Adam Thompson wrote:
> Good luck with tunnelling LACP, no matter what boxes you have - LACP
> has (de facto) hard jitter requirements of under 1msec, or you'll be
> getting TCP resets coming out your ears due to mis-ordered packets.
Errr sorry, but at the
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020, at 04:01, Jon Lewis wrote:
> Just like I said, if you create an ROA for an aggregate, forgetting that
> you have customers using subnets of that aggregate (or didn't create ROAs
> for customer subnets with the right origin ASNs), you're literally telling
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020, at 10:11, Mark Tinka wrote:
> On 19/Jun/20 09:20, Radu-Adrian Feurdean wrote:
> > A whole ocean of "datacenter" hardware, from pretty much evey vendor.
> You mean the ones deliberately castrated so that we can creat
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020, at 20:40, Dave Bell wrote:
> I don't understand the point of SRv6. What equipment can support IPv6
> routing, but can't support MPLS label switching?
A whole ocean of "datacenter" hardware, from pretty much evey vendor. Because
many of them automatically link MPLS to
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020, at 20:51, Mark Tinka wrote:
> Well, according to them, SRv6 is winning customers over, and nobody
> wants LDPv6. Then again, they have LDPv6 in IOS XR; figures.
Well, given their (Cisco's) braindead policy regarding non-implementation of
LDPv6 on XE, no wonder people are
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020, at 10:58, Mark Tinka wrote:
> Within our core, we run 9,178 bytes (which translates to 9,192 bytes on
> Junos and IOS XR), to support the transport of Jumbo frames for
Beware of bad dog^H^H^H NCS model. On NCS5000 (don't know about 5500 - those
arrived months after me
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020, at 07:51, Saku Ytti wrote:
> I'm not sure what 'globally our IS-IS domain runs 8000 bytes' means.
> Your LSP MTU is like 1492B, there isn't a mechanism to fragment and
> reassemble LSP in-transit. ISIS network doesn't support different MTU
> sizes and I've not heard anyone
On Fri, Mar 20, 2020, at 20:31, Matthew Petach wrote:
> Netflix, Amazon Prime, Youtube, Hulu, and other video
> streaming services cut their bit rates down?
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020, at 18:56, William Herrin wrote:
> With so much work shut down, I'm curious how backhoe season is shaping
> up this year? How do the circuit and fiber outage numbers look?
It seems that in France there are alternatives to backhoes (fr: pelleteuse,
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020, at 19:52, Mike Hammett wrote:
Did you read the part about *IPv6* traffic ?
Your link points to some IPv*4* relationship. Over IPv6, you get this :
On Sat, Mar 21, 2020, at 08:37, Bill Woodcock wrote:
> And a giant thumbs up to Free, who are keeping my 10G broadband flying
Are you talking about the same Free.fr that depeered HE a few days ago and
expects all IPv6(*) traffic from HE to arrive via their only transit - Cogent ?
(*) close to
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 19:59, Mike Hammett wrote:
> Join an IX your provider is on?
As someone that works for an IXP these days, I would prefer *NOT* having to
deal with people that do not understand the Internet ecosystem. Which
hospitals, and most businesses are.
An IXP is not an ISP
On Sat, Mar 14, 2020, at 04:31, Darin Steffl wrote:
> Playing games doesn't take much bandwidth. Downloading games does. So
> as long as everyone already has their games and there's no updates,
> playing the game is typically under 100 kbps which is negligible
> compared to streaming video
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020, at 06:15, Hugo Slabbert wrote:
Actually that one DOES contain some information.
- check the "subscriber" or "broadband" functionality of your gear if it has
something like that - check if the DHCPv6
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020, at 00:05, Keith Medcalf wrote:
> On Wednesday, 8 January, 2020 14:35. Octolus Development
> Stop doing business with Criminal Organizations (SONY). Problem solved.
You (as a provider) may not do any business with them, but your customers may,
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020, at 20:09, Randy Bush wrote:
> i am not a fiber/sfp/... geek, so clue bat please
> on my left, i have a delta 9020SL running arcos, female 40g qsfp
> on my right, i have incoming 10g 1310nm single mode from the seattle
> internet exchange. it is currently into a redstone
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020, at 19:35, Keith Medcalf wrote:
> How absolutely awful that must be, to always be relegated to slow and
> insecure childrens band. I turn off childrens band (WiFi) on my phone
> with extreme prejudice and it stays that way. I have yet to meet a
> childrens band
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020, at 16:38, Paul Nash wrote:
> > And more interestingly, if that city's residents and visitors had the
> > option of connecting to active 5G or wi-fi, what do we think they'd choose?
> They’d probably choose whichever popped un onto the device first.
Don't know how things
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019, at 17:10, Martijn Schmidt via NANOG wrote:
> Hi Drew,
> You're probably best off ordering those crossconnects through the
> Equinix portal, then you can choose the exact positions for the order
> that goes to the facility rather than relying on a human to transcribe
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019, at 15:49, Matthew Huff wrote:
> It’s not about optimization, it’s about the contract with the content
For Disney, isn't it the same "house" ?
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019, at 17:30, Keith Medcalf wrote:
> Why do you need to do anything? TLS is Transport Layer Security and
> it's sole purpose is to protect communications from eavesdropping or
> modification by wiretappers on/in the line between points A and B. MD5
> in BGP is used for
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019, at 16:42, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> Executive summary: it's SDN for BGP. Centralizing Internet routing,
> what could go wrong? (As the authors say, "One reason is there is no
> single entity that has a big picture of what is going on, no
> manager". I wonder who will be
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019, at 08:02, Mel Beckman wrote:
> The fire risk is from electrical transmission lines, not from end users
> of electrical power. The underlying problem is that the State’s rules
> for line separation were ill-considered, making it possible for
> high-enough winds to cause
On Wed, Oct 9, 2019, at 22:26, Sean Donelan wrote:
> - Will this affect cellphone service?
> Generally no because this is a power shutoff, without other disaster
> damage. All major switching offices have backup generators for 24
> to 72 hours and nearly all cell towers and outside plant
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019, at 20:47, JASON BOTHE via NANOG wrote:
> I realize this might not be the right list but I have a request to peer
> on the Chicago Equinix IX to a 206.223.119 IP but we and many others
That block is for Equinix-IX Dallas (at least according to PeeringDB).
> are on the
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019, at 08:13, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Aug 2019 at 09:09, Radu-Adrian Feurdean
> > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019, at 16:51, Tom Hill wrote:
> > > No-one has mentioned it yet, so for completeness big C have the ASR 9901
> > Weren
On Thu, Aug 8, 2019, at 16:51, Tom Hill wrote:
> No-one has mentioned it yet, so for completeness big C have the ASR 9901
Weren't we talking about "decently priced" ?
> (not 9001) with traditional router bits in it.
9001, while approaching EoL, can be a good solution if your needs are limited :
SR1 (without s) is 2u high, bit it doesn't have 1G ports. It doesn't even have
"native" 10G ports. Only 40/100G, with 4x10G optics for 10G. For 1G you would
need a 7210 in sattelite mode, which is one extra U + $$$.
Otherwise very nice box...
On Thu, Aug 8, 2019, at 05:30, Mehmet Akcin
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019, at 02:55, Randy Bush wrote:
> do folk use `netstat -s` to help diagnose on routers/switches?
Before today, I've never heard on anyone using it on routers/switches.
Only on servers. `netstat -s` not very often. `netstat` (all options included)
- less ans less
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019, at 18:15, Joe Yabuki wrote:
> Hi all,
> How do you deal with QoS for Office365, since the IPs are subject to changes ?
For "Classic QoS" : you don't. At best you tell the customer it's done without
actually doing anything (it very often works). If it doesn't, see
On Thu, May 30, 2019, at 09:41, Jérôme Nicolle wrote:
> Yup. Should it hard-drop ? Buffer ? Both are unthinkable in OTN terms
> (is that a cultural thing ?). It's what packet networks are made for.
> And that's why an alien device, with support for Ethernet, OTN and
> programmable pipelines,
On Sat, May 18, 2019, at 09:52, Brandon Martin wrote:
> What it does is hook into the DHCPv6 lightweight relay functionality.
> Basically, it just snoops the DHCPv6 replies for a PD assignment and
> inserts a quasi-static route into its table for anything that it sees
> with next-hop
On Wed, May 15, 2019, at 04:28, Brandon Martin wrote:
> Is there a standard that defines/recommends behavior for route injection
> of snooped DHCPv6-PD (or IA, I guess) assignments on routers running
> relay agents? That is, snooping or otherwise examining a relayed DHCPv6
> response for a
On Fri, May 17, 2019, at 15:28, Blake Hudson wrote:
> From my perspective one's ability to intelligently route IP traffic is
> directly correlated to the data they have available (their routing
> protocol and table). For example, with static default routes one can
For me, routing table and
On Thu, May 16, 2019, at 16:38, Blake Hudson wrote:
> offloading that responsibility onto the transit provider. IMHO, what's
> the point of being multi-homed if you can't make intelligent routing
> decisions and provide routing redundancy in the case of a transit
> provider outage?
On Wed, May 15, 2019, at 13:44, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
> Or maybe we have a list of worst offenders? I am looking for ASN that
> announces a lot of unnecessary /24 prefixes and which happens to be far
> away from us? I would filter those to something like /20 and then just
> have a default
On Wed, May 8, 2019, at 14:21, Lars Prehn wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> do you NTP sync your AS boundary routers? If so, what are incentives for
> doing so? Are there incentives, e.g. security considerations, not to do it?
We (and I suppose a lot of others) do sync the border routers like any
On Thu, Apr 4, 2019, at 22:42, na...@jack.fr.eu.org wrote:
> I highly recommends https://www.alturnanetworks.com/
> They sell solid optics, all are tested
> Quick shipping, competitive price
> I have never been even remotely disappointed with those guys
They ship from the Netherlands,
On Sun, Mar 3, 2019, at 22:05, Mark Andrews wrote:
> admins who don’t know how IP is supposed to work.
You do realise that in "corporate world" that's more than 80% of network admins
? Some of them even make it to "audit" companies, so they can screw a company
with clueful admins with their
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019, at 03:24, Mark Andrews wrote:
> You do realise that when the day was chosen it was just the date after
> which new versions of name servers by the original group of Open Source
> DNS developers would not have the work arounds incorporated?
I think it's pretty safe to
On Thu, Dec 6, 2018, at 11:52, Radu-Adrian Feurdean wrote:
> Router: gin-pv0-thar1
> Site: FR, Paris, PV0
Very similar results (going to NTT in very few hops) from their 2 NYC routers.
On Thu, Dec 6, 2018, at 00:19, Randy Bush wrote:
> if anyone here is 'behind' 6453 en route 188.8.131.52, can you send
> a trace, please?
They have a looking-glass : http://lg.as6453.net/lg/
which says :
Site: FR, Paris, PV0
Command: traceroute inet4 184.108.40.206
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018, at 12:37, Nikolay Shopik wrote:
> Are you sure about ATV4 netflix app? Support is there and I've seen
> traffic from it when recently did tcpdump from ATV4.
Or there is some braindead wifi in-between that does not allow IPv6 to function
(or makes it unreliable). Already
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, at 21:53, William Herrin wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 3:10 PM Brandon Applegate wrote:
> > - Traceroutes are miserable.
> Also breaks PMTUD which can break TCP for everybody whose packets
> transit your router. So don't do this.
... unless you happen to provide a
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018, at 17:30, Daniel Corbe wrote:
> $300 MRC for a once-off cross connect isn’t unreasonable. There’s costs
300$ would be (at the limit of) reasonable *M*RC for a 12 FO cable (= 6 duplex
XCOs). Or the one-off (*N*RC) for one XCO. That's actually close to the rates
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018, at 17:48, Jared Mauch wrote:
> I also strongly suggest you look at how to get native IPv6 from your
> clients behind the CG-NAT rolled out. I know many folks have had issues
Getting IPv6 to your customers is good, but they still have to use it.
If I look at my stats, I
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018, at 13:24, Aftab Siddiqui wrote:
> Q - Generally, Private or Reserved ASNs are considered as Bogon ASN but
> what about unallocated ASNs?
If you don't have an automated update process running at decent time intervals
(one week or more often, under no circumstance less than
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018, at 16:34, Aaron Gould wrote:
> I don't know if it's fixed on the endpoints, or in the cgnat config or what.
Not specific to Juniper, but it's NOT fixed.
You'll either start spending time on work-arounds or you start selling a new
service with dedicated public IPv4 - more
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018, at 15:45, Mike Hammett wrote:
> Fast.com will pull from multiple nodes at the same time. I think there
Here in Europe, fast.com consistently proven to be 100% UNreliable, especially
on high-speed FTTH. OOKla and nPerf gave better results for high-speed
connections 100% of
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018, at 18:12, Andy Ringsmuth wrote:
> I suppose in reality it’s no different than any other utility. My home
> has 200 amp electrical service. Will I ever use 200 amps at one time?
No, because at 201 Amps instantaneous the breaker will cut everything.
> Highly highly
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018, at 16:42, Mike Hammett wrote:
> Build your own last mile or order that 10% more?
Do you realize what you are saying ? Let me offer a few translations:
1. "Don't spend N00 Currency/month for X Mbps from your customer to your
aggregation DC on an existing NNI, but pay
On Sat, Jul 14, 2018, at 17:07, Keith Stokes wrote:
> There’s a lot less backhoe fade with microwave. ;-)
> Kidding aside, I’m sure there are plenty of scenarios where microwave
> makes better sense than fiber especially since it’s a lot easier to
HFT or any low-latency app is such a
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018, at 20:23, Job Snijders wrote:
> I'm very happy FranceIX apply filters - however Bitcanal is known to
> submit fabricated/falsified IRR information to databases like RADB and
> RIPE. I've reported this multiple times over the years to IRR database
On Sat, Jun 16, 2018, at 22:07, Keith Medcalf wrote:
> People stream HD Video in the Water Closet? I don't think my 80" HDTV
> would fit in there!
I don't think they do that, but they are more and more to receive regular TV
via OTT STBs. And sport events, which attract viewers, are better
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018, at 12:23, Ong Beng Hui wrote:
> With every operators looking at high quality HD video stream, anyone
> feeling the impact for WC 2018 yet ?
It's too early. For now only minor changes (e.g. 2 hours ago, when local team
had their first match we saw levels of traffic
On Mon, Apr 9, 2018, at 17:03, DurgaPrasad - DatasoftComnet wrote:
> Thanks all. Understood.
> Anyone know if AS-STATS understands AS4?
It does, if the flow source sends the information needed.
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018, at 01:14, Jared Mauch wrote:
> If you’re then doing DSL + PPPoE and your customers really see a MTU
> of 1492 or less, then another device has to fragment 5x again.
In this part of the world we have even worse stuff around: PPP over L2TP over
over IP with 1500 MTU
On Fri, Jan 5, 2018, at 00:34, Stephen Satchell wrote:
> On 01/04/2018 01:02 PM, Dan Hollis wrote:
> > when the first tier incompetence stops, the direct contacts will stop too.
> But, but, but...when the first tier support person gets the training to
> not be incompetent, he is promoted to
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018, at 06:46, Tim Burke wrote:
> AS12876 is online.net... home of the €2.99 physical server, perfect for
> all of your favorite illegitimate activity. I’m curious how much traffic
> originates from that ASN that is actually legitimate... probably close
> to none.
For you, in
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017, at 21:02, Job Snijders wrote:
> Nothing wrong with using xxx.0 or xxx::0 in the context of a host route
> (/32 or /128).
For a host route, no problem. For the
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017, at 07:47, Mel Beckman wrote:
> As far as I know, you can't buy an existing ASN for any amount of money.
You can in RIPE region, but you must first find an "owner" ready to
tranfer it (for money or for free). ASN transfers do happen here, and
there are indications
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017, at 22:15, Filip Hruska wrote:
> * OVH is also a home ISP - just in France though; but not sure if/how
> APNIC separated OVH as an ISP and OVH as a server provider.
> I think it's all under the same ASN (might be wrong though)
OVH ISP uses a slightly weird set-up:
On Sat, Jul 8, 2017, at 19:13, Mel Beckman wrote:
> Are you assuming that a goal of IPv6 is to efficiently fill subsets? I
No, but I assume IPv6 is still subject to common-sense.
> among them easy mapping of MAC addresses for transition purposes and the
> security that discourages
On Sat, Jul 8, 2017, at 03:06, Owen DeLong wrote:
> consider a /48 per guest room as well as a /48 per hotel for the hotel
I think the classfull madness of "/48 everywhere" should stop at some
point; the "every subnet is a /64" is enough already.
A /48 is 65536 *subnets*, with each
On Thu, Jun 22, 2017, at 08:18, Mukom Akong T. wrote:
> On 18 June 2017 at 17:36, Radu-Adrian Feurdean <nanog@radu-
> adrian.feurdean.net> wrote:>> so for the record, business customers are much
> more active in
>> *rejecting* IPv6, either explictely (they
On Mon, Jun 19, 2017, at 14:17, f...@fhrnet.eu wrote:
> I assume it means 60% of all their IPv6 traffic is reaching Google
> services, ie GMail or YouTube.
Or otherwise said, more than 60% of the IPv6 bytes (NOT flow entries)
accounted via Sflow (residential) or sampled Netflow (whole
On Mon, Jun 5, 2017, at 14:51, Bajpai, Vaibhav wrote:
> The v6 numbers from ^ NANOG post are now more than 1 year old. Thought
> to re-bump this thread. Would it be possible to share updated numbers
> of v6 traffic share within your network and % contribution by top apps.
We didn't test any of those features. My understandig was that they all
require extra licenses that would bring them "out of scope"
($$$-wise) and our need was for pure "P-routers"... actually being
technically unable to perform as PE was kind of hidden requirement :)
On Sat, May 27,
On Thu, May 18, 2017, at 15:21, Erik Sundberg wrote:
> We're at the growing point where we need a dedicated P router for a core
> device. We are taking a serious look at the NCS5501. Is there anyone else
> using a NCS5501 as P Router or just general feedback on the NCS5501 if
> you are using it?
On Fri, May 5, 2017, at 18:55, LF OD wrote:
> of our existing ASNs and peerings. As it turns out, there are many
> routers that can do VRFs but you cannot put a unique ASN on each VRF so
> replicating the old environment isn't quite that straightforward. The BGP
> remote-as looks to be a possible
On Fri, Apr 7, 2017, at 20:03, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, Max Tulyev wrote:
> > BTW, does somebody check how implementing a native IPv6 decrease actual
> > load of CGNAT?
> Reports are that 30-50% of traffic will be IPv6 when you enable dual
> stack. This would be
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017, at 12:25, Mike Hammett wrote:
> Are your DNS resolvers on your network? No DNS forwarding?
Yes, DNS resolvers on our network. Forwarding only for facebook.com and
fbcdn.com, in order to eliminate bad performance associated with "direct
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017, at 20:38, Jürgen Jaritsch wrote:
> I understand that FB is using some type of DNS geo-loadbalancing and other
> mechanism to redirect users to (possibly) nearer mirrors. The used DNS is
> directly requesting the root DNS and not any other public DNS (e.g. not
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016, at 01:01, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message
> "Radu-Adrian Feurdean" writes:
> > I know, but for the "server guys" turning on IPv6 it's pretty lo
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016, at 23:27, Mark Andrews wrote:
> But it shows that if you turn on IPv6 on the servers you will get
> IPv6 traffic. We are no longer is a world where turning on IPv6
> got you a handful of connections. There are billions of devices
> that can talk IPv6 to you today the
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016, at 19:40, Seth Mattinen wrote:
> ARIN's last /8 was run to zero last year.
> Anything since then has been randomness from the waiting list such as:
and a slightly more restricted "really last" /10 :
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016, at 12:43, Saku Ytti wrote:
> Last I checked you can't commit/replace configuration in VRP. Has this
> changed? Can you give it full new config and expect it to figure out
> how to apply the new config without breaking existing?
> Yeah it's best I've seen. 8-10k
On Sun, Jun 5, 2016, at 23:55, jim deleskie wrote:
> Damian, I HIGHLY doubt regular folks are running into issues with this, I
> suspect its not even geeks in general having issues, I suspect 80% plus of
> those having issues spend most of their time complaining about something
> related to v6 and
Mail list logo