Hi,
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:44:56 -0800
Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 04:36:28PM -0500,
> Christopher Morrow wrote:
> > leaking the IX prefix to customers, to me, seems like a recipe for
> > much wider/unintended leakage :(
>
> Oh, it is. I remember when MAE
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> The customers cloging up your help desk with this sort of stuff are
> idiots. Unfortunately that's where the majority of your helpdesk time
> goes...
i admit to missing it :( but yes, now with the explanation, I get your point :)
In a message written on Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 04:37:05PM -0500, Christopher
Morrow wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Michael K. Smith - Adhost
> > I was thinking about what Leo said about tools that test each hop through a
> > path. At least my downstream customers will be able to test th
In a message written on Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 04:36:28PM -0500, Christopher
Morrow wrote:
> leaking the IX prefix to customers, to me, seems like a recipe for
> much wider/unintended leakage :(
Oh, it is. I remember when MAE-EAST was injected by at least 50 people
into the DFZ because back then p
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Michael K. Smith - Adhost
wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: christopher.mor...@gmail.com
>> why is it a good idea to send this to your customers? the next-hop
>> info is surely only useful to your local network? done right it's even
>> only relevant to
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 02:34:21PM -0500, Christopher
> Morrow wrote:
>> why is it a good idea to send this to your customers? the next-hop
>> info is surely only useful to your local network? done right it's even
>> only
In a message written on Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 02:34:21PM -0500, Christopher
Morrow wrote:
> why is it a good idea to send this to your customers? the next-hop
> info is surely only useful to your local network? done right it's even
> only relevant to the IX connected router, right? it seems wholely
On 2011-02-18, at 14:34, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Michael K. Smith - Adhost
> wrote:
>
>> Sorry for the misfire on my last email. The 206.81.80.0/23 network is
>> assigned to the SIX from ARIN. In general, we don't want
>> people to announce that space to
> -Original Message-
> From: christopher.mor...@gmail.com
> [mailto:christopher.mor...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Morrow
> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 11:34 AM
> To: Michael K. Smith - Adhost
> Cc: Yaoqing(Joey) Liu; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Intern
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Michael K. Smith - Adhost
wrote:
> Sorry for the misfire on my last email. The 206.81.80.0/23 network is
> assigned to the SIX from ARIN. In general, we don't want
> people to announce that space to the DFZ, so the three providers listed above
> are not filte
17, 2011 7:04 PM
To: Michael K. Smith - Adhost
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Internet Exchange Point(IXP) questions
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Michael K. Smith - Adhost
wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Yaoqing(Joey) Liu [mailto:joey.li...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday,
From: Yaoqing(Joey) Liu [mailto:joey.li...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 7:04 PM
To: Michael K. Smith - Adhost
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Internet Exchange Point(IXP) questions
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Michael K. Smith - Adhost
mailto:mksm...@adhost.com>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 17, 2011, at 7:24 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
> this from the guy who pushed "layer three exchange points" for years?
> rofl!
I was one of the people who built one in 1994, and used it quite happily for a
few years, until it had outlasted its need
>> type 1: use exchange routers, which works in layer 3
> This is not an IXP. This is a router. That router would be owned by
> someone, who would have some sort of policy in the router, which would
> make it an Internet service provider, not an Internet exchange point.
this from the guy who pus
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 17, 2011, at 6:03 PM, Yaoqing(Joey) Liu wrote:
> As I know, generally there are two types of IXPs
This is incorrect.
> type 1: use exchange routers, which works in layer 3
This is not an IXP. This is a router. That router would be owned by
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Michael K. Smith - Adhost <
mksm...@adhost.com> wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Yaoqing(Joey) Liu [mailto:joey.li...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 6:03 PM
> > To: nanog@nanog.org
> >
>> On the Seattle Internet Exchange (SIX) we have ARIN-assigned
>> addresses that we use on the Layer 2 fabric (your type 2 above).
>> Hopefully the addresses aren't being announced at all, although we
>> sometimes have to chase down people that announce it.
>
> I've had to deal with exchanges lik
In a message written on Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 02:17:48AM +, Michael K. Smith
- Adhost wrote:
> On the Seattle Internet Exchange (SIX) we have ARIN-assigned addresses that
> we use on the Layer 2 fabric (your type 2 above). Hopefully the addresses
> aren't being announced at all, although we
> -Original Message-
> From: Yaoqing(Joey) Liu [mailto:joey.li...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 6:03 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Internet Exchange Point(IXP) questions
>
> I'm doing some research on multiple origin AS problems of IXPs. As
I'm doing some research on multiple origin AS problems of IXPs. As I know,
generally there are two types of IXPs
type 1: use exchange routers, which works in layer 3
type 2: use switches and Ethernet topology, which works in layer 2.
So I have a couple of qustions:
1. For type 1, the exchange route
20 matches
Mail list logo
