Erm, WAN-PHY did not extend into 40G because there was not much
of those STM-256 deployment? (or customers didnt wanted to pay for those).
WAN-PHY was designed so people could encapsulate Ethernet frames
right into STM-64. Once world moved out of SDH/SONET stuff, there was
no more need for
Yeah, thats cool. It reminds me good old internet from 90's and early 2000.
Anyway, if that list is so importand, maybe its time to run
it with redundancy of 1+N (master-slave topology)? Its all MTAs
so its pretty easy, all you need to sync data from master to slaves
via push (best, because its
Well, for some basic overview you can use CAIDA AS rank.
You can use it directly, or you may try my (more user friendly)
frontend for it: http://as-rank.uu3.net/?as=14593
-- Original message --
From: Dave Taht
To: NANOG
Subject: starlink ixp peering progress
Date: Tue, 27 Feb
I could NOT agree more. Even tho, I am IPv6 phobic, let IPv4 go away.
At least, make it go away from mainstream commercial Internet.
90% users do NOT care about it. They want to browse web, watch movies
or play games. They can do it using IPv6.
I cant wait :) more IPv4 address space for people
I use my own console/terminal based stuff.
Its composed of 2 main scripts called blgrep for searching
and bldiff to display differences between revision/files.
Backend is SVN to keep stuff in sync and allow multiple people
to work on data.
Works pretty well for small/medium DC/NOC. I guess it
Yeah. I wonder why this cannot be reversed really?
First domain registration should cost more.. 50 USD maybe? Dunno.
And then, when you want to extend the domain, price should be
around 5 times lower?
Those who want to use it for legal activity will chew that little CAPEX.
-- Original
Well, I think the sane solution would be to push customers/clients
into IPv6 and keep services IPv4. Then start moving services to dualstack.
Most of todays customers/clients are consumers. They just connect to server
to get data, watch movies, listen to music. Gaming is similar. That way,
ISPs
This is not the outcome of internet ecosystem, this is outcome
of commercialization, where money is what is all cared, not good
product, ethical behavior, etc.
This is also because good guys do NOT fight back strong enough.
Cogent start to give you hard time? Start to filter they whole
prefixes?
Haha :) you are right.
I just checked Caida AS ranking:
http://as-rank.uu3.net/?as=2
A lot of "providers" for UDEL-DCN. Yeah right..
They all indeed probably try to prepend their AS 2 times
ending up having ASN 2 in path.
-- Original message --
From: Mike Davis
To:
Thats not it.. But I finally found it:
https://blog.apnic.net/2018/07/12/shutting-down-the-bgp-hijack-factory/
-- Original message --
From: Niels Bakker
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: malware warning
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2023 19:42:58 +0200
* b...@uu3.net (b...@uu3.net) [Sat 22
Oh, just dont bother. The battle is over and we lost it, because
good people are too soft.
The only interesting action I ever saw was:
"Shutting down email spam factory"; where some network was depeered
from internet completly. Well done.
(Somehow I cannot find post about that anymore).
The only
Heh, its kinda sad that noone mentions space environment impact at all.
How that 40k sats will pollute already decently pulluted orbit.
I wonder if decommision process will be clean (burn in atmosphere).
If there will be failure rate, we will end up w/ dead sats at orbit.
I really wonder if
So, DoD does NOT have capacity to answer those little ICMP echo
request packets? Heh.. Anyway, this is IMO terrible practice.
Many many times I have to deal w/ "products" that do exacly the same
because its so much "secure" to not respond to ping.
Any basic network security researcher know that
Yeah, ARDC sold part of it to Amazon. I doubt they even had right to do
so due to 44/8 was an legacy IP range.. ARIN allowed it.. All too shady.
Anyway, according to AMPRnet that range was unallocated, so no active
radio ham networks were at that range, so I doubt it was someone
from AMPRnet.
You were close... I think you mean this one?
https://as2914.net/
-- Original message --
From: Brian Johnson
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: BGP Javascript Map/Visualization
Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 20:07:51 +
Hey all,
Sorry for the noise. Years ago someone here built and
I know its the same, but from UX standpoints looks different.
Anyway, that was just one example.
As for IPv6 -> IPv4 (note the arrow) its pretty much easy.
IPv6 have much bigger address space, so it can embed IPv4 addresses
in special interop subnets that are routed to special NAT GW
that handle
While Im dont like IPv6, I see it as a bad idea.
>From my knowledge I dont see a way of extending IPv4 without making it
a new protocol. It was not designed that way.
What I would LOVE to see that someone will pop in with new IP protocol
that is much more similar to IPv4, just extends address
Yes, you are right. And gradually IPv4 was improved and fixed.
We learned how to defend L2. CIDR was added (with should be thing
from the begining instead of netmasks, but who could forsee...)
And in case of IPv6 it seems that all that experience was throwed out
of window. Design was much
Ohh sorry if I misunderstood orginal message a bit.
I am all on your side about it indeed.
I am el-cheapo dual-homed at home, and this setup is impossible
to do without NAT. I can add/del ISP connections at any time with
minimal reconf. Have static IPs in LAN and overlay network.
Life is good.
Yes, IPv6.. but for example 64bit address space but with a much
closer ties to IPv4 imo. So network people would be much more
confortable with it.
I already said how my ideal IPv6 should look like. Many people
disagree with that ok. Its very hard to please everyone indeed, hence
KISS concept
It seems team developing IPv6 had ONE way of doing things,
with is actually recipe for disaster. Why? Because they were building an IP
protocol. Something that will be using globally by ALL networks around.
Not some local IOT (useless) shit used here and there.
Thats why such IP protocol should
No, you are not alone. This just gets kinda pathetic.
It also shows how an IPv6 is a failure.
(No please, leave me alone all you IPv6 zealots).
I think its time to go back to design board and start
working on IPv8 ;) so we finnaly get rid of IPv4...
-- Original message --
From:
Oh well.. Then how you gonna solve the el-cheapo SOHO multihoming?
Im currently dual homed, having 2 uplinks, RFC1918 LAN, doing policy
routing and NATing however I want..
-- Original message --
From: Mark Andrews
To: b...@uu3.net
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: IPv6 woes -
Heh, NAT is not that evil after all. Do you expect that all the home
people will get routable public IPs for all they toys inside house?
And if they change ISP they will get new range?
Doesnt sounds nice to me.. But I guess I its just me
Yeah I am aware of putting additional aliases on loopback.
Because IPv4 loopback is 127.0.0.1/8 and its usefull?
0:0:1-:0/32 means you generate addreses from
that range and not necessary using /32 prefix..
It just range thats reserved for LL.
Same about RFC1918 aka space.. its a range reserved for local addreses.
The whole rationale is:
- shorter
Well, I think we should not compare IPX to IPv4 because those protocols
were made to handle completly different networks?
Yeah, IPv6 is new, but its more like revolution instead of evolution.
Well, Industry seems to addapt things quickly when they are good enough.
Better things replace worse. Of
Well, I see IPv6 as double failure really. First, IPv6 itself is too
different from IPv4. What Internet wanted is IPv4+ (aka IPv4 with
bigger address space, likely 64bit). Of course we could not extend IPv4,
so having new protocol is fine. It should just fix problem (do we have other
problems I am
Oh yeah, it would be very funny if this will really happen (new protocol).
Im not happy with IPv6, and it seems many others too.
This is short list how my ideal IPv6 proto looks like:
- 64bit address space
more is not always better
- loopback 0:0:0:1/48
- soft LL 0:0:1-:0/32 (Link Local)
-
So, I assume you have PI IPv6 space and doing BGP with HE?
In other case, if anything will happen to HE (they close they
tunnelbroker service) you will have to renumber.
-- Original message --
From: Javier J
To: b...@uu3.net
Cc: nanog
Subject: Re: 10 years from now... (was:
Oh, sorry to disappoint you, but they are not missing anything..
Internet become a consumer product where data is provided by
large corporations similary to TV now. Your avarage Joe consumer
does NOT care about NAT and that he cant run services or he does NOT
have full e2e communication.
Yes, you
Hmm right... Somehow I tought that having that special Null MX
will silently discard message... I dont know why...
So, RFC 7505 is pretty much even pointless in my opinion.
You have to do more.. to pretty much achieve the same..
Its just easier to not having MX on subdomains that does not serve
Well, I bet my legacy system will bounce it for example...
Postfix 3.0: RFC 7505 ("Null MX" No Service Resource Record), Earlier
Postfix versions will bounce mail because of a "Malformed DNS server reply".
I cant speak about Sendmail, qmail, Exim.. when they started supporting it.
So, In my
Thats cute, but remember that there are gazylion of legacy systems
on Internet as well. They might have no clue what do do with it..
Also remember that MTA is supposed to accept email to [ip] too.
On my opinion, its best to just have no MX record at all.
While MTA can fallback and try to do
Hold on.. Math doesnt add-up here.
Are you telling me that a gallon propane tank (3.8l) can last
24 hours for about 1000W power generation. Are you sure?
I could belive for 6 hours... maybe 8.. not 24 hours.
So either you are using up 200-300W.. or you have superior power
generator. Can you share
Oh, no worries.. It will never happen ;)
There is reason why everyone stick to IPv4...
Also, there was also nice space that could be used safely on private
networks [14.0.0.0/8]. Unfortunately money needs to flow, so it was
converted to normal space. Shame.
Same with recent shady action w/
There's also for example
http://www.silicom-usa.com/Intelligent_Bypass_Switches/IBS10G-Intelligent_10G_Bypass_Switch_33
//jb
2014-01-27 Keyser, Philip pkey...@fibertech.com:
Does anyone have any recommendations for a fiber bypass switch? I am looking
for something capable of 10G that when
36 matches
Mail list logo
