On 30/Dec/19 21:37, Paul Nash wrote:
> This was (not quite) how bits of sub-saharan Africa got netnews in the early
> days. Store-and-forward, UUCP links over dial-ups, and the occasional mag
> tape couriered over.
There are some on this list who can corroborate the mag tape shipping...
Karl Auer writes:
> I think the point about email is that it is inherently store-and-
> forward, so it can relatively easily be moved off a network, stored,
> moved by other means, and put back on a (possibly different) network.
It's trivial to set up a mail transport between physically
Maybe one day we'll see Ham-SD-Radio P2P News and Files Sharing economy.
:)
On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 6:14 AM Rich Kulawiec wrote:
>
> And this is why, despite all the disdainful remarks labeling such
> things as "antiquated", mailing lists and Usenet newsgroups are vastly
> superior to web
This was (not quite) how bits of sub-saharan Africa got netnews in the early
days. Store-and-forward, UUCP links over dial-ups, and the occasional mag tape
couriered over.
paul
> On Dec 29, 2019, at 9:11 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
>
>
> And this is why, despite all the disdainful
Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a
> lot about anticipated traffic volume.
>
> >-Original Message-
> >From: NANOG On Behalf Of Scott Weeks
> >Sent: Sunday, 29 December, 2019 15:38
> >To: nanog@nanog.org
> >Subject: Re: Iran cuts 95% of Internet traf
t;From: NANOG On Behalf Of Scott Weeks
>Sent: Sunday, 29 December, 2019 15:38
>To: nanog@nanog.org
>Subject: Re: Iran cuts 95% of Internet traffic
>
>
>
>--- jhellent...@dataix.net wrote:
>From: "J. Hellenthal"
>
>Yeah sorry to say any email
On Sun, 2019-12-29 at 16:16 -0600, J. Hellenthal via NANOG wrote:
> Personally, email would be the easiest to block behind riuting.
"Give me ssh and an open port and I shall tell the world"
- Archimedes, circa 250 BC
Of course, he'd still need a network.
I think the point about email is that
> --- r...@gsp.org wrote:
>
> From: Rich Kulawiec
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Iran cuts 95% of Internet traffic
> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2019 09:11:23 -0500
>
>
> And this is why, despite all the disdainful remarks labeling such
> things as "antiquated&
then you need methods
> :: that don't rely on a network and aren't realtime.
>
>
> This is a great idea, but 99.9% of folks use GUI
> email. :-(
>
> scott
>
>
>
>
> --- r...@gsp.org wrote:
>
> From: Rich Kulawiec
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Iran
wrote:
From: Rich Kulawiec
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Iran cuts 95% of Internet traffic
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2019 09:11:23 -0500
And this is why, despite all the disdainful remarks labeling such
things as "antiquated", mailing lists and Usenet newsgroups are vastly
superior to web sit
And this is why, despite all the disdainful remarks labeling such
things as "antiquated", mailing lists and Usenet newsgroups are vastly
superior to web sites/message boards/et.al. when it comes to facilitating
many-to-many communications between people. Why? Well, there are many
reasons, but
I'm curious to see if there will be a Telecomix grass roots type
resurgence to POTS.
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 7:11 AM Sean Donelan wrote:
>
>
> Its very practical for a country to cut 95%+ of its Internet connectivity.
> Its not a complete cut-off, there is some limited connectivity. But for
>
>"Internet penetration and complexity has vastly grown in Iran
>over the past decade, but the country’s users still connect
>to the global network through just two gateways. Both are
>controlled by the regime, and can be blocked when it chooses."
>
>"Access to the internet is gradually being
--- eric.kuh...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Eric Kuhnke
The vast majority of Iranian ISPs' international transit
connectivity is through AS12880 DCI , which is a government
run telecom authority. Google "AS12880 DCI Iran" for more
info. DCI is also responsible for layer 2 transport and
DWDM
The vast majority of Iranian ISPs' international transit connectivity is
through AS12880 DCI , which is a government run telecom authority. Google
"AS12880 DCI Iran" for more info. DCI is also responsible for layer 2
transport and DWDM services for smaller downstream ISPs, on other
international
Digging a little deeper, it looks like Iran's blocking is more complex
than I've seen before.
Consumer/mobile networks appear nearly completely blocked.
However, many important business/financial networks and B2B traffic appear
operating normally.
I don't yet have good data about of the
Do we have any ideas which prefixes are still accessible?
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 3:01 PM Scott Fisher wrote:
> One would hope so, but I am I sure they will just threaten their
> population on using it. Tyrannical regimes know no bounds.
>
> Thanks,
> Scott Fisher
> Team Cymru
>
> On 11/18/19
One would hope so, but I am I sure they will just threaten their
population on using it. Tyrannical regimes know no bounds.
Thanks,
Scott Fisher
Team Cymru
On 11/18/19 2:26 PM, Tony Wicks wrote:
>>Implementation specifics vary. Most rely on state control of consumer
> ISPs and implement a
--- t...@wicks.co.nz wrote:
From: "Tony Wicks"
I guess all these governments who like to control...
The wierd thing to me is the one thing governments are afraid
of is people talking to each other without restriction. Not
this or that, rather just people
>Implementation specifics vary. Most rely on state control of consumer ISPs and
>implement a variety of systems at that layer. Many also have chokepoints for
>>international connectivity as well.
I guess all these governments who like to control access so tightly are going
to be in a total
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 11:29 AM Scott Weeks wrote:
>
>
> --- s...@donelan.com wrote:
> From: Sean Donelan
>
> Its very practical for a country to cut 95%+ of its Internet connectivity.
> Its not a complete cut-off, there is some limited connectivity. But for
> most ordinary individuals, their
--- s...@donelan.com wrote:
From: Sean Donelan
Its very practical for a country to cut 95%+ of its Internet connectivity.
Its not a complete cut-off, there is some limited connectivity. But for
most ordinary individuals, their communication channels are cut-off.
Though Iran's situation is hardly a new advent, it reminds me that
more and more countries seem to be going for the centralized
filter/control/kill option and what a sad development that is. It sure
seems like this is going to vastly change how inter-nation traffic (or
at least inter-continental)
Its very practical for a country to cut 95%+ of its Internet connectivity.
Its not a complete cut-off, there is some limited connectivity. But for
most ordinary individuals, their communication channels are cut-off.
https://twitter.com/netblocks/status/1196366347938271232
24 matches
Mail list logo