* Forrest Christian (List Account) [2020-10-08 11:39]:
> I've done a bit of googling and am either finding stuff that is largely
> Cisco-specific or which is generic - all of which I'm rather familiar with
> based on my past history. Is there anything I should worry about which is
> Juniper-spec
* David Hubbard [2018-05-16 19:01]:
> I’m curious if anyone who’s used 3356 for transit has found
> shortcomings in how their peering and redundancy is configured, or
>From a recent experience I can tell you that a change request to
change a peering from "full table" to "default route only" has
r
* Ronald F. Guilmette [2017-08-02 09:37]:
>
> The annotations in the RIPE WHOIS record for AS202746 seem pretty clear to me.
> This thing is B-O-G-U-S!
You know, people might be more willing to listen to you when you
express your points in a less emotional and aggressive tone.
Regards
Sebasti
* Job Snijders [2015-06-12 13:30]:
> Yes, I suspect tons of 3356 / 3549 customers shut down their BGP
> sessions waiting for the storm to blow over. I expect more churn then
> usual the next 6 ~ 12 hours, due to customers slowly turning session
> back on.
Yes. It's nice and stable now.
http://ww
* Roland Dobbins [2015-06-12 12:57]:
>
> On 12 Jun 2015, at 17:46, Job Snijders wrote:
>
> > OK, as of now (~ 10:40) UTC things look normalised.
>
> Just got off the phone, I think things may be in hand, now.
Still seeing a lot more updates than usual:
http://www.karotte.org/pics/bgp-stabilit
* Tore Anderson [2015-06-12 11:12]:
> I see tons of bogus routes show up with AS4788 in the path, and at
> least AS3549 is acceping them.
>
> E.g. for the RIPE NCC (193.0.0.0/21):
>
> [BGP/170] 00:20:29, MED 1000, localpref 150
> AS path: 3549 4788 12859
Hello,
my resolver running on a dedicated server is warning about DNSSEC
validation failure for these two .gov domains 7 minutes after every
full hour:
Sep 26 13:07:04 alita unbound: [28931:0] info: validation failure
: no keys have a DS with algorithm
RSASHA1-NSEC3-SHA1 from 199.169.196.64 for k
* Brielle Bruns [2010-11-17 04:34]:
> Hey All,
>
> Sorry to bother the list, but I'm noticing that I've got no connectivity
> to Hurricane Electric through GBLX from my Qwest DSL.
>
> In this case, I'm trying to get to tunnelbroker.net:
>
> ...
> 3 184-99-65-41.boid.qwest.net (184.99.65.41) 3
Hello Nanog,
I'm looking into a weird request which more and more customers have.
They want "different Class C addresses", by which they mean IPs in
different /24 subnets.
The apparent reason for this is that Google will rank links from
different /24 higher then links from the same /24. So it's a
9 matches
Mail list logo
