Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

Owen DeLong wrote: >> It is merely that you don't understand ICMP at all. > Really, it's not, but I know you like to feel smug and > superior, so enjoy that. Are you saying you are so great that only the greatest can be superior to you, which must be enjoyable? Then, you are wrong. You

Re: worse than IPv6 Pain Experiment

> On Oct 9, 2019, at 14:43 , b...@theworld.com wrote: > > > OK OK OK. > > Can I summarize the current round of objections to my admittedly > off-beat proposal (use basically URLs rather than IP addresses in IP > packet src/dest) as: > > We can't do that! It would require changing

Re: worse than IPv6 Pain Experiment

Can I summarize the current round of objections to my admittedly off-beat proposal (use basically URLs rather than IP addresses in IP packet src/dest) as: We can't do that! It would require changing something! Nope. You can summarize it as "it doesn't scale", which is what has killed

Re: worse than IPv6 Pain Experiment

On Wed, 09 Oct 2019 17:43:00 -0400, b...@theworld.com said: > URLs are an obvious candidate to consider because they're in use, seem > to basically work to identify routing endpoints, and are far from a > random, out of thin air, choice. So explain in detail how a router gets from "URL" to

Re: California public safety power shutdowns

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019, at 22:26, Sean Donelan wrote: > - Will this affect cellphone service? > > Generally no because this is a power shutoff, without other disaster > damage. All major switching offices have backup generators for 24 > to 72 hours and nearly all cell towers and outside plant

Re: worse than IPv6 Pain Experiment

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:28 PM Owen DeLong wrote: > > > URLs are an obvious candidate to consider because they're in use, seem > > to basically work to identify routing endpoints, and are far from a > > random, out of thin air, choice. > > In reality, you’re not really talking about URLs here,

Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

Owen DeLong wrote: As a result, you are properly rewarded to make a fool of yourself in public. If I have, it certainly won’t be the first time. Enjoy it, if you can. PERIOD. Masataka Ohta

Re: worse than IPv6 Pain Experiment

John R. Levine wrote: There's only a few thousand top level domains, so routers should he able to handle this with no problem.  Whaddaya think? Hierarchy inconsistent with network topology is useless for routing. Masataka Ohta

Re: AWS issues with 172.0.0.0/12

I'm just curious, was the ip in the RFC 1918 172.16.0.0/16 range? https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1918 On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 6:01 PM Mehmet Akcin wrote: > To close the loop here (in case if someone has this type of issue in the > future), I have spoken to AT instead of trying to work it out

Re: worse than IPv6 Pain Experiment

b...@theworld.com wrote: URLs are, to a machine, just bit strings though they do incorporate a hierarchical structure which isn't that dissimilar from current network/host parts of IP addresses. Wrong. CIDR hierarchy (available within ASes) has strong correlation to network topology that

Re: California public safety power shutdowns

The National Weather Service forcast changed a little this afternoon, with a later onset of high-winds this evening/early morning hours. But like surfers on Florida coasts before a hurricane hits, some California folks are saying they don't see any wind -now-. Of course, the forcast is about

Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

> On Oct 9, 2019, at 15:10 , Masataka Ohta > wrote: > > Owen DeLong wrote: > > >> It is merely that you don't understand ICMP at all. > > > Really, it's not, but I know you like to feel smug and > > superior, so enjoy that. > > Are you saying you are so great that only the greatest can >

Re: worse than IPv6 Pain Experiment

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 4:30 PM John R. Levine wrote: > > Can I summarize the current round of objections to my admittedly > > off-beat proposal (use basically URLs rather than IP addresses in IP > > packet src/dest) as: > > > > We can't do that! It would require changing something! > > Nope.

Re: worse than IPv6 Pain Experiment

> On Oct 9, 2019, at 18:43 , Matt Harris wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:28 PM Owen DeLong > wrote: > > > URLs are an obvious candidate to consider because they're in use, seem > > to basically work to identify routing endpoints, and are far from a > > random, out

Re: worse than IPv6 Pain Experiment

OK OK OK. Can I summarize the current round of objections to my admittedly off-beat proposal (use basically URLs rather than IP addresses in IP packet src/dest) as: We can't do that! It would require changing something! I've no doubt many here are comfortable with the current architecture.

Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

> On Oct 8, 2019, at 09:48 , Michel Py wrote: > >> Owen DeLong wrote : >> I’m not sure how giving them DNS names makes them less resilient to DNS >> failures. > > How do you resolve the IP address of the PBX ? I hard-code (in the master > config). Usually, i have sufficiently resilient

Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

>> I’m betting that not all of the WWW addresses go to the same ASN. > > Perhaps you have noticed in your vast travels that domain names' > significance is generally read right to left not left to right like IP > addresses? Sure, but I’m betting that trying to aggregate routing around COM. would

Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

> On Oct 8, 2019, at 02:29 , Masataka Ohta > wrote: > > Owen DeLong wrote: > >>> Separation between address and port is vague. >> Explain that to ICMP packets. > > Why do you think ICMP any different? > > Just as usual IP packets, inner IP packets contained in > ICMPv4 error packets

Contact at DALnet?

Hello, We're having an issue with peering to DALnet (AS31800) and have received no further correspondence since the initial contact, and they do not appear to have anything further than email contact. If someone from DALnet or someone with a contact at DALnet, please contact me off-list. Thank

Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

Owen DeLong wrote: Why do you think ICMP any different? Just as usual IP packets, inner IP packets contained in ICMPv4 error packets contain port numbers just after IP headers. Show me the port number in a type 8 or type 0 packet. First 8 bytes of data field can be used as 4 byte source

Re: Update to BCP-38?

On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:03:16AM -0700, William Herrin wrote: > Limiting the server banner so it doesn't tell an adversary the exact > OS-specific binary you're using has a near-zero cost and forces an > adversary to expend more effort searching for a vulnerability. Why would they bother

Re: Update to BCP-38?

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 13:59:58 +, Mark Collins may have written: > Not everyone attacking your systems is going to have the skills or > knowledge to get in though - simple tricks (like hiding what web server > you use) can prevent casual attacks from script kiddies and others who > aren't

Quantum Internet Article - Netherlands

https://www.quantamagazine.org/stephanie-wehner-is-designing-a-quantum-internet-20190925/ [https://d2r55xnwy6nx47.cloudfront.net/uploads/2019/09/WehnerQA_1200x630.jpg] To Invent a Quantum Internet - Quanta

Re: Chicago Equinix IX LAN oddity

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019, at 20:47, JASON BOTHE via NANOG wrote: > I realize this might not be the right list but I have a request to peer > on the Chicago Equinix IX to a 206.223.119 IP but we and many others That block is for Equinix-IX Dallas (at least according to PeeringDB). > are on the

Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

On Wed, 09 Oct 2019 18:51:12 +0900, Masataka Ohta said: > Owen DeLong wrote: > > Yes, thanks for yet another condescending comment proving that > > you completely missed the point of my post. It's always a pleasure. > You should really feel indebted to me because it's not a pleasure > for me to

California public safety power shutdowns

Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison have started Public Safety Power Shut-offs (PSPS) in California wildfire high-risk areas. Shut-offs are taking place in three phases. PG began shutoffs at midnight in Northern California and the North Bay counties, while the rest of the

Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

> On Oct 9, 2019, at 12:08 , b...@theworld.com wrote: > > > On October 8, 2019 at 23:51 o...@delong.com (Owen DeLong) wrote: > (responding to my P.S.) > >>P.S. My prediction? >> >>The world's major telcos et al, having had enough of various problems, >>from address exhaustion to

Re: California public safety power shutdowns

On Oct 9, 2019, at 12:36 PM, Sean Donelan wrote: > Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison have started Public > Safety Power Shut-offs (PSPS) in California wildfire high-risk areas. > > Shut-offs are taking place in three phases. PG began shutoffs at midnight > in Northern

Re: California public safety power shutdowns

Questions & some answers... - Will this affect public water supply? Generally no. Public water supplies have backup generators. Since this is only a power shut-off, and no other damage or disaster to the water system, public water systems will operate as normal. Nevertheless, its always a

Re: worse than IPv6 Pain Experiment

In article <23963.65395.763065.591...@gargle.gargle.howl> you write: >So I proposed we dump numeric addresses entirely and use basically >URLs in IP packets and elsewhere. > >I really meant something like 'IP://www.TheWorld.com' in the >source/dest addr, possibly more specific for multiple

Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

>> You’re selecting a very limited subset of ICMP that happens to >> contain a portion of a packet that happens to contain a port >> number (or two). > > It is merely that you don't understand ICMP at all. Really, it’s not, but I know you like to feel smug and superior, so enjoy that. > See

Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

On October 8, 2019 at 23:51 o...@delong.com (Owen DeLong) wrote: (responding to my P.S.) > P.S. My prediction? > > The world's major telcos et al, having had enough of various problems, > from address exhaustion to non-stop security disasters, and the > chaotic responses,

Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 12:38 PM wrote: > On October 8, 2019 at 12:04 b...@herrin.us (William Herrin) wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 12:01 PM wrote: > > My main point is, as I said, Bits is Bits, whether they're human > > readable (for some value of "human") like URLs or long hex

Re: California public safety power shutdowns

On Wed, 9 Oct 2019, Sean Donelan wrote: - Will this affect cellphone service? [...] Remember, Cable and DSL VOIP and in-home wireless phones need electric power to operate. There are fewer and fewer copper-fed POTS lines with power from the telephone central office. Thanks to the person

Re: California public safety power shutdowns

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 12:37 PM Sean Donelan wrote: > Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison have started Public > Safety Power Shut-offs (PSPS) in California wildfire high-risk areas. > Wasn't California in a similar mess 20 years ago when government regulation at the time also

RE: California public safety power shutdowns

> William Herrin wrote : > Wasn't California in a similar mess 20 years ago when government regulation > at the time also put PG in the position that they couldn't deliver > the electricity their customers wanted? Something to do with hard limits on > what PG could do but few limits on what

Re: California public safety power shutdowns

On Wed, 9 Oct 2019, William Herrin wrote: Wasn't California in a similar mess 20 years ago when government regulation at the time also put PG in the position that they couldn't deliver the electricity their customers wanted? Something to do with hard limits on what PG could do but few limits on

Re: California public safety power shutdowns

Isn't this a topic for an outage list? Or a power grid list? Chuck On Wed, Oct 9, 2019, 5:28 PM Sean Donelan wrote: > On Wed, 9 Oct 2019, William Herrin wrote: > > Wasn't California in a similar mess 20 years ago when government > regulation > > at the time also put PG in the position that