On Feb 20, Saku Ytti wrote:
> Is deaggregation inherently undesirable? In some RIR LIR will not get new
No. Excessive deaggregation is undesirable, but we lack a method to teach
routers to enforce this subtlety and maybe also a wide agreement on what
is excessive.
> allocation, just because LIR
You forgot to use the word “Shibboleet” when you called care. Contacted
Peter off-list
- Kevin
On 2/23/15, 1:25 AM, "Peter Loron" wrote:
>Apologies for a bit off topic, but I’m trying to get an issue resolved
>and am having trouble reaching anybody who seems clue positive.
>
>From hom
Currently engaged on a project where they’re building out a VPC infrastructure
for hosted applications.
Users access apps in the VPC, not the other direction.
The issue I'm trying to get around is the customers who need to connect have
multiple overlapping RFC1918 space (including overlapping w
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Eric Germann wrote:
> Currently engaged on a project where they’re building out a VPC
> infrastructure for hosted applications.
>
> Users access apps in the VPC, not the other direction.
>
> The issue I'm trying to get around is the customers who need to connect
>
FWIW, if you phone support you generally end up with a tier-1 person. In cases
where people have more technical background, you may want to try things that
land in more senior levels of Care (or even get checked by engineering
directly) such as:
- Customer support forums: http://forums.comcast.
Thank you, everyone, for all of the responses, both on and offlist!
Anne
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
CEO/President
ISIPP SuretyMail Email Reputation, Accreditation & Certification
Your mail system + SuretyMail accreditation = delivered to their inbox!
http://www.SuretyMail.com/
http://www.SuretyMail.
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Eric Germann wrote:
> In spitballing, the boat hasn't sailed too far to say "Why not
> use 100.64/10 in the VPC?"
>
> The only one I can see is if the customer has a service provider
> with their external interface in 100.64 space. However, this
> approach would
I put lots of these to good use
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserved_IP_addresses
Regarding public cloud with ipv6 support, contact me off-list i might even
get you a special discount
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Ca By wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Eric Germann wrote:
>
> >
Hi, Eric -
Bill already described the salient points. The "transition" space is
meant to be used for cases where there are multiple stacked NATs, such
as CGN with CPE-based NAT. In theory, if the NAT implementations support
it, one could use it repeatedly by stacking NAT on top of NAT ad
naus
Could someone from AOL who deals with the email systems please contact me
off-list.
Thank you.
John Zettlemoyer
WCiT LLC
856.310.1375 x221
j...@wcit.net
Subject: Wisdom of using 100.64/10 (RFC6598) space in an Amazon VPC deployment
Date: Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 10:02:44AM -0500 Quoting Eric Germann
(ekgerm...@cctec.com):
> Currently engaged on a project where they’re building out a VPC
> infrastructure for hosted applications.
> Thoughts and tha
Did you suddenly start getting "AOL will not accept delivery of this
message" bounce backs?
On Feb 23, 2015 3:30 PM, "John Zettlemoyer" wrote:
> Could someone from AOL who deals with the email systems please contact me
> off-list.
> Thank you.
>
> John Zettlemoyer
> WCiT LLC
> 856.310.1375 x221
>
No, started using an IP address that hasn’t been used since we got the range
from Arin, and got this - 554- (RTR:BL)
Tried to contact AOL through normal channels, and no response in over a week.
Feedback loop has been in place for years, and we check it every day (its
clean).
John Zettlemoyer
Ok, it took 21 days from the time I opened a ticket with them last month
for them to respond to me. I ended up having to have our ISP update our
rDNS. Not sure if it's something similar for you but I felt the same way
after a week of waiting for a response from them.
On Feb 23, 2015 3:56 PM, "John
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
> you might find http://www.route-aggregation.net/ interesting
Hi Randy,
I found it very interesting. Wish I'd noticed when it was fresh.
I don't fully understand the math yet but the algorithm doesn't smell
right. As near as I can figure it ma
Might be ill-advised since AWS uses it themselves for their internal
networking. Just traceroute to any API endpoint from an EC2/VPC resource
or instance. :)
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Måns Nilsson
wrote:
> Subject: Wisdom of using 100.64/10 (RFC6598) space in an Amazon VPC
> deployment
Having exactly the same issue. Also never received any response from
AOL. Quite annoying.
John Zettlemoyer:
No, started using an IP address that hasn’t been used since we got the range
from Arin, and got this - 554- (RTR:BL)
Tried to contact AOL through normal channels, and no response in over
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Eric Germann wrote:
> In spitballing, the boat hasn’t sailed too far to say “Why not use 100.64/10
> in the VPC?”
Read RFC6598.
If you can assure the conditions are met that are listed in 4.
Use of Shared CGN Space..
Then usage of the 100.64/10 shared spac
Mulling over the implications of this.
[root@ip-100-64-0-55 ~]# traceroute s3.amazonaws.com
traceroute to s3.amazonaws.com (54.231.0.64), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 ec2-79-125-0-202.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com (79.125.0.202) 1.068 ms
0.824 ms 0.787 ms
2 178.236.1.18 (178.236.1.18)
> Then usage of the 100.64/10 shared space may be applicable, under
> other conditions it may be risky
about as risky as the rest of private address space.
randy
20 matches
Mail list logo
