On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:07 PM, Michael Hallgren wrote:
> Am I missing something? What's the trigger for doing tunneling here?
>
With "IP address leasing" you aren't connected to the network which holds
the address registration.
For leasing less than a /24, they need a plan
On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 17:40:27 -0500, Justin Wilson said:
> I know of dozens, if not hundreds of small ISPs that canât participate in
> BGP
> because they donât have big enough blocks.
What's the business model, if you have less than 120 customers? Selling
value-add services on top of moving
Startups, people serving areas where there aren't a ton of people, etc.
I'm sure they'd love to have /24s, but ARIN is out of them and the market is
too pricey for most of these guys.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
And this is exactly what other companies are doing. The traditional way of
doing a startup ISP is:
1.You get provider assigned IP space
2.You grow big enough to get your own IP space, historically from ARIN.
Nowadays you have to buy it on the open market.
3.You re-adddress your network for
On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 12:58:48 -0800, Dan Hollis said:
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2018, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> > Been there, done that. Been out of the country and offline for 36 hours,
> > reconnect and there's a user with a problem that would have been dealt
> > with 36 hours earlier if they had
Thanks Bill. Kinda ugly, but OK I see... Prefer v6 ;-)
mh
Le 4 janv. 2018 à 23:17, à 23:17, William Herrin a écrit:
>On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:07 PM, Michael Hallgren wrote:
>
>> Am I missing something? What's the trigger for doing tunneling here?
>>
>
>With "IP
By the way, RIPE still seems to provide fresh /22s to new LIRs. Same in the
ARIN region?
mh
Le 4 janv. 2018 à 23:50, à 23:50, William Herrin a écrit:
>On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Justin Wilson wrote:
>
>> I know of dozens, if not hundreds of small ISPs that
I can tell you that when we started (and there were IP's still available)
we first leased from another company to get our feet when and run tests
before we requested our own resources.
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 6:21 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 6:06 PM, Mike
Most of the ones I know personally are doing CGN and have no real need for IP
addresses. I know of Wireless ISPs with 2000 customers and only about 50 IPv4
addresses in use for nat and the occasional Public IP customer.
Justin Wilson
j...@mtin.net
www.mtin.net
www.midwest-ix.com
> On Jan 4,
In article <20180102170409.ga5...@gsp.org> you write:
>On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 04:46:02PM +, Mel Beckman quoted:
>> "rbl.iprange.net will mark every ip address as listed to force removal of
>> this server."
>
>Apparently they didn't read section 3.4 of RFC 6471:
I agree that listing the
On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 19:20:26 -0500, Justin Wilson said:
> How is this a good use of resources when they have to justify 80% of a /24 in
> which they only need half of? I have 5 ISPs I work with that have 300-500
> customer and are using a /26 or smaller of IP space. They canât have true
>
Le 2018-01-04 20:16, Job Snijders a écrit :
On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 at 20:13, Filip Hruska wrote:
I have stumbled upon this site [1] which seems to offer /27 IPv4
leasing.
They also claim "All of our IPv4 address space can be used on any
network
in any location."
I thought that
There are hundreds of ISPs with under 500 customers. More start up every week.
No need to marginalize them.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
- Original Message -
From: "William Herrin"
To:
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Dan Hollis wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2018, William Herrin wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Michael Crapse
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I've never dealt with a support queue that resolved the issue faster than
>>> a
Yes, we do this for several clients. We route them a smaller than 24 block
over a tunnel.
Which bring up an interesting question. Will there be a time where the
smallest block size recognized will be something smaller than a /24? /25, /26 ?
Most modern routers have the horsepower to deal
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Justin Wilson wrote:
> I know of dozens, if not hundreds of small ISPs that can’t participate in
> BGP because they don’t have big enough blocks.
Hi Justin,
Not much of an ISP if they can't get a /24. We're talking about a one-time
market
No. ARIN is out of IPv4 other than IXes, critical infrastructure and IPv6
transition.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Hallgren"
To: "William Herrin"
On 01/04/2018 01:02 PM, Dan Hollis wrote:
when the first tier incompetence stops, the direct contacts will stop too.
But, but, but...when the first tier support person gets the training to
not be incompetent, he is promoted to the second tier and the vacuum is
filled with another incompetent
In article
you write:
>If you're going to run a DNSBL to advertise your mail software,
>perhaps do so in a way that doesn't flip the bird at everyone using it.
On the other hand if you're going to use DNSBLs, you really should
Alas, these RBLs are often hard-coded into firewalls. Non-sophisticated users
just think they have a check box saying "block spam". Fixing those IS hard.
-mel
> On Jan 4, 2018, at 4:45 PM, John Levine wrote:
>
> In article
>
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 6:06 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
> There are hundreds of ISPs with under 500 customers. More start up every
> week. No need to marginalize them.
>
Hi Mike,
No disrespect, but anyone who can't afford to spend $5000 on resources
critical to their activity is
Le 2018-01-04 20:27, Harald Koch a écrit :
"IPv6 available upon request. "
LOL.
+1 :-)
mh
"IPv6 available upon request. "
LOL.
--
Harald
Notice that the LOA is only checked off on /24 or larger.
Luke Guillory
Vice President – Technology and Innovation
Tel:985.536.1212
Fax:985.536.0300
Email: lguill...@reservetele.com
Reserve Telecommunications
100 RTC Dr
Reserve, LA 70084
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Michael Crapse wrote:
> I've never dealt with a support queue that resolved the issue faster than
> a direct contact.
>
I've never dealt with a support queue that's more competent than the last
direct contact I talked with. Navigating the
On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 at 20:13, Filip Hruska wrote:
> I have stumbled upon this site [1] which seems to offer /27 IPv4 leasing.
> They also claim "All of our IPv4 address space can be used on any network
> in any location."
>
> I thought that the smallest prefix size one could get
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 2:16 PM, Job Snijders wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 at 20:13, Filip Hruska wrote:
> > I thought that the smallest prefix size one could get routed globally is
> > /24? So how does this work?
> >
> Probably with GRE, IPIP or OpenVPN
Hi,
I have stumbled upon this site [1] which seems to offer /27 IPv4 leasing.
They also claim "All of our IPv4 address space can be used on any
network in any location."
I thought that the smallest prefix size one could get routed globally is
/24?
So how does this work?
[1]
On Thu, 4 Jan 2018, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 09:33:51 -0500, William Herrin said:
Why anyone thinks it's acceptable for the form submission to vanish in to
the faceless support queue is more of a quandary. The form submission
should provide a case number, the
On Thu, 4 Jan 2018, William Herrin wrote:
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Michael Crapse wrote:
I've never dealt with a support queue that resolved the issue faster than
a direct contact.
I've never dealt with a support queue that's more competent than the last
direct
Thanks for all the responses!
Seems like I was right about doubting this.
Regards
--
Filip Hruska
Linux System Administrator
Dne 1/4/18 v 20:20 Matt Harris napsal(a):
They're probably using GRE or other sorts of tunnels, I'd imagine? It
would likely involve increased latency, as any
Alas, these RBLs are often hard-coded into firewalls. Non-sophisticated
users just think they have a check box saying "block spam". Fixing those
IS hard.
I believe there are cases where people have made it hard, but there are
limits on how much I believe in protecting people from the
$5k aint nothing. I started with less than that (but
hung off the colo's in house bw through NAC.net til I
could wean off it). I imagine tiny communities (and say on
remote native reserves for eg) that $5k additional expense
could be limiting.
And soon to become even harder to setup an isp?
Depends on what "legitimate" means.
We have a decent amount of traffic to the network (like 2Gbps sustained in any afternoon). Its typically a mix of
bittorrent, tor-relay traffic, ftp-transfers and of course the expected scanners, malware-hosts, ddos-bots and such.
For me
On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 09:33:51 -0500, William Herrin said:
> Why anyone thinks it's acceptable for the form submission to vanish in to
> the faceless support queue is more of a quandary. The form submission
> should provide a case number, the individual to whom it is assigned, direct
> contact
I've never dealt with a support queue that resolved the issue faster than a
direct contact.
On 4 January 2018 at 09:12, wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 09:33:51 -0500, William Herrin said:
>
> > Why anyone thinks it's acceptable for the form submission to vanish in to
> >
On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 09:48:24 -0700, Michael Crapse said:
> I've never dealt with a support queue that resolved the issue faster than a
> direct contact.
Which would the user prefer - a guaranteed 15 minute response time from the
queue,
or 10 minute from a direct contact, unless it's an hour
On 1/4/2018 12:36 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 09:48:24 -0700, Michael Crapse said:
I've never dealt with a support queue that resolved the issue faster than a
direct contact.
Which would the user prefer - a guaranteed 15 minute response time from the
queue,
or 10
On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 10:57 PM, Dan Hollis wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2018, Dovid Bender wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 2:47 AM, Mickael Marchand
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dovid,
>>>
>>> Just fill in our abuse form at https://abuse.
On 01/03/2018 09:46 PM, Tim Burke wrote:
AS12876 is online.net... home of the €2.99 physical server, perfect
for all of your favorite illegitimate activity. I’m curious how much
traffic originates from that ASN that is actually legitimate...
probably close to none.
SETI at home?
Bitcoin
In their defense I was pleasantly surprised that I got a response back from
them telling me the account was banned. Though it makes me wonder if this
is just them trying to save face. I have spoken with the guys that run DO's
network and they have an extensive amount of automation to weed out
On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 09:33:51AM -0500, William Herrin wrote:
> Because the number of people who successfully provide actionable
> information without being prompted is vanishingly small and the number of
> people who fire off automated complaints to the best guess abuse address
> (also without
42 matches
Mail list logo