Once upon a time, Chris Adams said:
> Anybody here from Linode and/or Google Fiber that can help out with
> packet loss between these networks at NYIIX peering? It's been going on
> for almost a week... opened a Linode case and they looked at the VM
> host, also opened a Googl
Anybody here from Linode and/or Google Fiber that can help out with
packet loss between these networks at NYIIX peering? It's been going on
for almost a week... opened a Linode case and they looked at the VM
host, also opened a Google Fiber case and got zero response (don't think
front-line
> On Feb 18, 2021, at 5:19 PM, Louie Lee wrote:
>
> Hey Chris,
>
> Thanks for reporting this. We had an issue that caused emails to addresses in
> that domain to not be recognized.
>
> The email is no longer bouncing back, and emails to other googlefiber.net
> addresses are confirmed
Can someone at ARIN tell them they need to fix this?
>
> From whois 136.32.164.64:
> OrgAbuseHandle: GFA32-ARIN
> OrgAbuseName: Google Fiber Abuse
> OrgAbusePhone: +1-650-253- <(650)%20253->
> OrgAbuseEmail: ab...@googlefiber.net
> OrgAbuseRef:https://rdap.
Whoops.
Thank you for reporting this, it’s being looked into.
W
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 5:01 PM Chris Boyd wrote:
> Can someone at ARIN tell them they need to fix this?
>
> From whois 136.32.164.64:
> OrgAbuseHandle: GFA32-ARIN
> OrgAbuseName: Google Fiber Abuse
> OrgA
b 18, 2021 at 2:00 PM Chris Boyd <mailto:cb...@gizmopartners.com>> wrote:
> Can someone at ARIN tell them they need to fix this?
>
> From whois 136.32.164.64 <http://136.32.164.64/>:
> OrgAbuseHandle: GFA32-ARIN
> OrgAbuseName: Google Fiber Abuse
> OrgAb
Did you try opening a ticket with arin?
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 2:00 PM Chris Boyd wrote:
> Can someone at ARIN tell them they need to fix this?
>
> From whois 136.32.164.64:
> OrgAbuseHandle: GFA32-ARIN
> OrgAbuseName: Google Fiber Abuse
> OrgAbusePhone: +1-650-253-
&g
Can someone at ARIN tell them they need to fix this?
From whois 136.32.164.64:
OrgAbuseHandle: GFA32-ARIN
OrgAbuseName: Google Fiber Abuse
OrgAbusePhone: +1-650-253-
OrgAbuseEmail: ab...@googlefiber.net
OrgAbuseRef:https://rdap.arin.net/registry/entity/GFA32-ARIN
Email response
er
IP Numbers Administrator
Google Fiber
lou...@google.com
(650) 253-2847
*There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary,
and those who don't.*
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 7:51 AM Blake Hudson wrote:
> Does someone from Google Fiber hang out on this list? I've contact
Does someone from Google Fiber hang out on this list? I've contacted
arin-cont...@google.com (the WHOIS tech and admin contact), but not
gotten any response and I suspect contacting a frontline callcenter
would be fruitless. It appears that some portion of customers in KC are
being provided
95% sure that Google Fiber only sells access, not point to point or wave
services.
On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 9:30 AM Robert DeVita wrote:
> Does anyone have a sales contact at Google Fiber, looking for Dark fiber
> in Pflugerville, TX back to Datafoundry TX1
>
>
>
>
Does anyone have a sales contact at Google Fiber, looking for Dark fiber in
Pflugerville, TX back to Datafoundry TX1
Thanks
Rob
[photo]
[https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/symbols/frames/frame_bubble_left_top_part.png]
Robert DeVita
Managing Director, Mejeticks
[https
I designed the original numbering plan, but handed it off a while back.
Taking a look into this, thanks for the heads up.
--Heather
On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 11:58 PM Chris Adams wrote:
> Anybody here from Google Fiber? When I first got it last year, my IPv6
> setup got a /56 prefix del
Hi,
> Anybody here from Google Fiber? When I first got it last year, my IPv6
> setup got a /56 prefix delegated. I now see that no matter what size I
> request, I only get a /64. Is this intentional?
Sounds broken, especially considering how people like Lorenzo have always
fought f
Anybody here from Google Fiber? When I first got it last year, my IPv6
setup got a /56 prefix delegated. I now see that no matter what size I
request, I only get a /64. Is this intentional?
--
Chris Adams
Can someone from Google Fiber contact me off list? Thanks.
Mark
Comcast T Core Network Services
- Original Message -
From: Scott Helms khe...@zcorum.com
Here is the architecture document:
http://static.googleusercontent.com/external_content/untrusted_dlcp/research.google.com/en/us/pubs/archive/36936.pdf
Nice get; that will make very interesting reading today. Thanks.
-- jra
--
Scott Helms wrote:
Here is the architecture document:
http://static.googleusercontent.com/external_content/untrusted_dlcp/research.google.com/en/us/pubs/archive/36936.pdf
The document, seemingly, does not address drop cable cost
difference.
It does not address L1 unbundling with WDM-PON,
In a message written on Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 09:53:50PM -0600, Frank Bulk wrote:
Sure, Verizon has been able to get their cost per home passed down to $700
To be fair, Verizon has chosen to build their FIOS network in many
expensive to build locations, because that's where they believe
there to
- Original Message -
From: Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org
Remember that Google cherry-picked which city it would serve, so it was able
to identify location that is likely less challenging and expensive to serve
than the average. A lot of Google's Kansas City build will not be buried
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org wrote:
True, but I think it means we've bound the problem. It appears to
take $1400-$4500 to deploy fiber to the home in urban and suburban
areas, depending on all the fun local factors that effect costs.
*sigh*
I'd gladly pay
- Original Message -
From: Matthew Petach mpet...@netflight.com
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org wrote:
True, but I think it means we've bound the problem. It appears to
take $1400-$4500 to deploy fiber to the home in urban and suburban
areas,
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Matthew Petach mpet...@netflight.com
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org wrote:
True, but I think it means we've bound the problem. It appears to
take
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Masataka Ohta
mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp wrote:
Scott Helms wrote:
Here is the architecture document:
http://static.**googleusercontent.com/**external_content/untrusted_**
Rural deployments present an entirely different problem of geography. I
suspect the dark fiber model I advocate for is appropriate for 80% of
the population from large cities to small towns; but for the 20% in
truely rural areas it doesn't work and there is no cheap option as far
as I can
Scott Helms wrote:
The document, seemingly, does not address drop cable cost
difference.
It does not address L1 unbundling with WDM-PON, which
requires fiber patch panel identical to that required
for SS, either.
They're not doing WDM-PON or any flavor of PON at all. Its entirely an
of more info about the Google Fiber deployment?
--
Leo Bicknell - bickn...@ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
pgp4GxILKmy7y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
on a cost recovery
bases to all takers for $10-$12 a month (no Internet or other services
included).
Anyone know of more info about the Google Fiber deployment?
The biggest factor that Google has going for them is they are their own
gear manufacturer, both the in home stuff and the access
- Original Message -
From: Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org
Here's an article with some economics from several different
deployments:
http://fastnetnews.com/fiber-news/175-d/4835-fiber-economics-quick-and-dirty
Looks like $500-$700 in capex per residence is the current gold
standard.
In a message written on Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 05:03:52PM -0500, Jay Ashworth
wrote:
From: Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org
Looks like $500-$700 in capex per residence is the current gold
standard. Note that the major factor is the take rate; if there are
two providers doing FTTH they are both
selective
deployment approach.
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Leo Bicknell [mailto:bickn...@ufp.org]
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2013 4:40 PM
To: NANOG
Subject: Re: Is Google Fiber a model for Municipal Networks?
In a message written on Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 05:03:52PM -0500, Jay Ashworth
When comparing costs of building (per home passed/connected), it is also
important to see if those quoted costs include the regulatory costs of
dealing with cities.
If a municipal project won't suffer costs of negotiating for
diggging/building permits, already has the land to build the CO, and
Ramasubramanian [mailto:ops.li...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 5:36 PM
To: Otis L. Surratt, Jr.
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Google Fiber - keeps you regular
All jokes about crappy Internet service aside, that is?
On Friday, December 7, 2012, Otis L. Surratt, Jr. wrote:
Why does
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=re0VRK6ouwIfeature=share
you'll probably laugh so hard you won't even need the fiber
Why does the youtube video link lead back to their Fiber Internet/TV
offering?
Maybe I'm lost but the video is about a Google Fiber Bar right?
Otis
-Original Message-
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:ops.li...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 5:31 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
All jokes about crappy Internet service aside, that is?
On Friday, December 7, 2012, Otis L. Surratt, Jr. wrote:
Why does the youtube video link lead back to their Fiber Internet/TV
offering?
Maybe I'm lost but the video is about a Google Fiber Bar right?
Otis
-Original Message
Fiber - keeps you regular
All jokes about crappy Internet service aside, that is?
On Friday, December 7, 2012, Otis L. Surratt, Jr. wrote:
Why does the youtube video link lead back to their Fiber Internet/TV
offering?
Maybe I'm lost but the video is about a Google Fiber Bar right?
Otis
-Original
[mailto:ops.li...@gmail.com javascript:;]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 5:36 PM
To: Otis L. Surratt, Jr.
Cc: nanog@nanog.org javascript:;
Subject: Re: Google Fiber - keeps you regular
All jokes about crappy Internet service aside, that is?
On Friday, December 7, 2012, Otis L. Surratt, Jr
38 matches
Mail list logo
