Time Service is more complicated than just having a single NTP server. But it
can be useful and is not really a luxury.
Two primary reasons for local time service are to reliably serve a network that
is relatively or completely isolated from the general internet, and, to provide
a local time
Regarding leap seconds:
A modern OS kernel using the NTP daemon to control time will always experience
monotonic time. Negative leap seconds should result in the local clock slowing
slightly until the local time matches the NTP-derived time.
This is in strong contrast to what can happen when
Routers are not a good choice for time servers as it complicates configuration
and, to some extent, constrains deployment methodology for routers to be
effective with time service. We don't run DNS on routers, it is a service. Time
service via NTP is a service as well. The NTP daemon in a
I have a quibble with this discussion. When I defined a byte as a mouthful
of bits to my boss back in 1977, he nearly fired me on the spot. He did not
care about PDP-10 , much less PDP-11, data constructs.
By now, octet has become essentially synonymous with byte and nibble with
4-bits.
That seems to be Off Topic.
The operational implications for most of us is, most likely, much more
technical bookkeeping and data storage.
On Dec 16, 2010, at 2:24 PM, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
What is in the best interests of the customer?
Nathan
James R. Cutler
On Jan 21, 2011, at 4:23 PM, Michael Holstein wrote:
I'd be curious to see what effects (if any) those who use
GPS-disciplined NTP references in Southeastern Georgia see from this
experiment.
Aren't CDMA BTS clocked off GPS?
NTP isn't going to be the only ripple.
Regards,
On Jan 21, 2011, at 4:45 PM, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
NTP isn't going to be the only ripple.
Most of the brand name GPS NTP solutions have a clock
with is more than stable enough to survive without GPS
lock for 45 minutes(*). Some of the more expensive units with
temperature controlled
On Jan 25, 2011, at 3:50 PM, Nick Olsen wrote:
Whats the rule of thumb for naming gear these days
(routers,switches...etc). Or is there one?
Pick a scheme which:
1. Uses simple memorable names.
2. Makes business sense to you.
3. You know how to manage (database, publication, updates, etc.
If
- http://support.sharedband.com
-Original Message-
From: Cutler James R [mailto:james.cut...@consultant.com]
Sent: 25 January 2011 22:41
To: nanog group
Subject: Re: Network Naming
On Jan 25, 2011, at 3:50 PM, Nick Olsen wrote:
Whats the rule of thumb for naming gear these days
On Feb 2, 2011, at 10:23 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
Who ever puts NTP addresses in DHCP? That doesn't make any sense. I'd rather
use a known NTP server that keeps correct time.
Been there. Done that. Made perfect business sense. The NTP servers were ours
and kept excellent time.
Oh, we
All this talk about CPE is wasted until folks like ATT have someone on the
retail interface (store, phone, or, web) who even knows what is this IPv6
thing. Exploring this issue with DSL providers and Uverse is like that old
exercise with combat boots. It feels much better when I stop.
James
On Feb 10, 2011, at 12:15 AM, Ricky Beam wrote:
On Wed, 09 Feb 2011 16:42:14 -0500, Nathan Eisenberg
nat...@atlasnetworks.us wrote:
What do you mean, lit up? You mean they're not in the routing tables that
you get from your carriers? I'd argue that's no indication of whether
they're in
On Feb 28, 2011, at 1:29 PM, Bret Clark wrote:
On 02/28/2011 01:17 PM, Leigh Porter wrote:
VoIP at the last mile is just too niche at the moment. It's for people on
this list, not my mother.
--
Leigh
Baloney...if that was the case, then all these ILEC's wouldn't be whining
about
On Oct 6, 2012, at 2:35 PM, Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote, in part:
We can map from host names to ip addresses to routing actions, right?
So clearly they're not unrelated or independent variables. There's a
smooth function from hostname-ipaddr-routing.
I would suggest that this is a
On Oct 7, 2012, at 4:56 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
Ancedotally, for users of an e-gadget company's website, cellphone
company's outbound web proxies, internet games company, and
image-intensive home furnishings website, the CGNs delivered content
faster than the main
On 11/26/2012 03:18 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
Apple and Microsoft are application developers as well as OS vendors. How
much of a priority do you think IPv6 capabilities are to their application
development organizations? How much of a priority do you think IPv6
capabilities are to
On Nov 26, 2012, at 7:47 PM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Nov 27, 2012, at 7:27 AM, Cutler James R wrote:
Have you looked at the current Apple software? It pretty much just works
on IPv6.
Yes, but it doesn't do or enable anything via IPv6 that it doesn't do or
enable
On Jan 30, 2013, at 12:43 PM, joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
As a product of having a motorola sb6121 and a netgear wndr3700 both of which
I bought at frys I have ipv6 in my house with dhcp pd curtesy of commcast. If
it was any simpler somebody else would have had to install it.
A domain name without a terminal dot is a relative domain name.
-- An application requesting name to address translation gets to decide if a
search list is to be used, including the default of dot.
A domain name with a terminal dot is a Fully Qualified Domain Name.
-- An application
On Nov 17, 2011, at 3:47 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Richard Golodner rgolod...@infratection.com
1. Why was such a list created?
2. Why was I automatically subscribed to it?
3. Why was this done without notice to the community?
This has a lot of us
On Dec 23, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Paul Stewart wrote:
In my opinion they are only somewhat reliable if they are on your network
or very close to your network -we operate one of the speedtest.net sites and
for our own eyeball traffic find it to be a reasonable indicator of what
kind of speeds the
On Feb 17, 2012, at 1:35 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Feb 17, 2012, at 6:52 AM, -Hammer- wrote:
Let me simplify that. If you are over 35 you know how to troubleshoot.
Is this a statement or something to be added to the list of misconceptions
that are commonplace out there?
Not trying to
On Jun 5, 2012, at 5:23 PM, William Herrin wrote:
On 6/5/12, David Hubbard dhubb...@dino.hostasaurus.com wrote:
Does anyone have suggestions on good books to really get
a thorough understanding of v6, subnetting, security practices,
etc. Or a few books. Just turned up dual stack with our
On Jun 6, 2012, at 9:53 AM, Anton Smith wrote:
snip
Hi all,
Potentially silly question but, as Bill points out a LAN always occupies a
/64.
Does this imply that we would have large L2 segments with a large
number of hosts on them? What about the age old discussion about
keeping
Examination of the raw messages confirms phishing messages. Visible URLS do
not match effective URLs.
On Jun 11, 2012, at 2:07 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
I think it's a troll, trying to shock you into clicking on something.
James R. Cutler
james.cut...@consultant.com
-top posted by OS X Mail
On Aug 3, 2012, at 3:22 PM, Otis L. Surratt, Jr. o...@ocosa.com wrote:
Anyone charging end users for IPv6 space yet? :p
snip/
Otis
I can't imagine that this would be anything but counterproductive. End users
are not interested in IPv6 - most would not recognize IPv6 if it fell out of
is typical
then you would lose that revenue if they converted to IPv6. If you didn't
charge for IPv4 then you have nothing to to lose.
Otis
From: Cutler James R [mailto:james.cut...@consultant.com]
Sent: Fri 8/3/2012 3:48 PM
To: Otis L. Surratt, Jr.
Cc: NANOG list
Subject: Re: IPv6 End User
On Sep 5, 2012, at 5:12 PM, Izaac iz...@setec.org wrote:
Since tcp25 filtering has been so successful, we should deploy
filters for everything except tcp80 and tcp443 and maaaybe tcp21 --
but NAT already does so much to enhance the user experience there
already. And what with ISP
On Sep 18, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Jason Baugher ja...@thebaughers.com wrote:
What about network-based objects outside of our orbit? If we're talking about
IPv6 in the long-term, I think we have to assume we'll have networked devices
on the moon or at other locations in space.
Jason
On Sep 18, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Jason Baugher ja...@thebaughers.com wrote:
On 9/18/2012 11:47 AM, Cutler James R wrote:
On Sep 18, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Jason Baugher ja...@thebaughers.com wrote:
What about network-based objects outside of our orbit? If we're talking
about IPv6 in the long-term, I
On Sep 18, 2012, at 1:55 PM, Joe Hamelin j...@nethead.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Cutler James R wrote:
...waste of NANOG list bandwidth.
I sure get a chuckle when I read this on a list for people that swing around
10Gb/s pipes all day.
That's why I included a word you
On Sep 19, 2012, at 9:24 AM, John Osmon jos...@rigozsaurus.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 12:07:33AM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote:
Assume you have a public IPv4 assignment, and someone else
starts routing your assignment... legitimately or not, RIR allocation
transferred to them, or not.
On Sep 19, 2012, at 1:42 PM, Jo Rhett jrh...@netconsonance.com wrote:
And second, have you ever worked on a private intranet that wasn't connected
to the internet through a firewall? Skipping oob networks for equipment
management, neither have I.
Yes, for many years. External connections
On Sep 20, 2012, at 10:56 AM, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.com wrote:
Wouldn't you say that there is a very real expectation that
when you request address space through ARIN or RIPE that it would be
routable?
I certainly would not say that.
I would say that I get addresses from the
On Sep 27, 2012, at 12:12 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote:
On Sep 27, 2012, at 11:34 , Stephane Bortzmeyer bortzme...@nic.fr wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 08:55:58AM -0600, Miguel Mata
mm...@intercom.com.sv wrote
a message of 30 lines which said:
Guys,
No gals on
On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:41 PM, Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com wrote:
SNIP/
The proper approach is to ask the vendor for RFC 1149 trasport for the BGP
session, and whether it terminates in a shared cage, or if a fully private
one is required. Including an 'envionmental impact
On Oct 3, 2012, at 4:17 PM, Dave Crocker d...@dcrocker.net wrote:
Is anyone aware of any historical documentation relating to the
choice of 32
bits for an IPv4 address?
...
Actually that was preceded by RFC 760, which in turn was a derivative
of IEN 123. I believe the answer to the original
On Oct 3, 2012, at 6:49 PM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/3/12, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
So the address space for IPv8 will be...
/troll
In 100 years, when we start to run out of IPv6 addresses, possibly we
will have learned our lesson and done two things:
(1)
On Oct 4, 2012, at 4:00 PM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Cutler James R
james.cut...@consultant.com wrote:
On Oct 3, 2012, at 6:49 PM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote:
In 100 years, when we start to run out of IPv6 addresses, possibly we
will have
I also just got a fresh box of popcorn. I will sit by and wait for Jeroen to
do a business analysis and tell me the return on investment. (Assuming that he
can find any legal grounds for demanding return of legacy /8 allocations.)
All of the analysis results I have seen mention figuratively
The last time I discussed IP Address needs with a company the builds
automobiles, they wanted forty million addresses for robots, sensors, and the
like for manufacturing. A single /8, were it available, would only yield about
20% of that requirement.
On Apr 2, 2010, at 6:46 PM, Owen DeLong
No. You get a different set of problems, mostly administrative.
On Apr 21, 2010, at 1:53 PM, Dave Sparro wrote:
On 4/21/2010 8:46 AM, Jim Burwell wrote:
Despite it doing the job it was intended to do, I've always seen NAT
as a bit of an ugly hack, with potential to get even uglier with
On Apr 29, 2010, at 4:11 PM, Olsen, Jason wrote:
I'm a bit surprised that after the furor here on NANOG when the story
first broke (in 2008) that there's been no discussion about the recent
outcome of his trial (convicted, one count of felony network tampering).
===
I'm not surprised. It has
On Apr 1, 2011, at 1:28 PM, Dorn Hetzel wrote:
I'm thinking both TCP and UDP, and for ICMP don't NAT's use the sequence
number field to keep them separate ?
SNIP/
In my experience, the Avian Carriers usually eat the NATs.
James R. Cutler
james.cut...@consultant.com
On Jun 10, 2011, at 10:21 PM, George Herbert wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
And like I said before, we have more pressing things to do than tinker some
more with DHCPv6.
Meh... We can achieve a big win for relatively low cost very quickly and
James R. Cutler james.cutler at consultant.com
Fri Feb 6 18:00:52 UTC 2009
DHCP items are end system considerations, not routing network
considerations.
The network operations staff and router configuration engineers do not
generally concern themselves with end systems.
End
On Jul 12, 2011, at 11:02 AM, Thomas Donnelly wrote:
I received no spam, and had I received 2 pieces, it may have been slightly
irritating.
What is irritating is the sheer number of people complaining about it. Can we
stop please? I think they get it.
-=Tom
Tom, you are one of the
On Aug 4, 2011, at 7:08 PM, Dan Armstrong wrote:
On 2011-08-04, at 6:43 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Aug 4, 2011, at 2:55 PM, Dan White wrote:
On 04/08/11 14:32 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Aug 4, 2011, at 2:08 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
- Original Message -
I have not found a fiber-to-Ethernet adapter for sufficiently low cost. If I
ever do, backyard Gigabit, here I come.
On Aug 12, 2011, at 9:57 PM, Chaim Rieger wrote:
What nobody wired their abode with fiber ?
Am i the only one here
James R. Cutler
james.cut...@consultant.com
On Jun 26, 2013, at 1:52 PM, Adam Greene maill...@webjogger.net wrote:
Hi,
We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
mid-90's and who has continued to announce the blocks, even though their
relationship with Paetec ended a long time ago.
Is this a
On Sep 19, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Warren Bailey
wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com wrote:
Why does apple feel it is okay to send every mobile device an update on a
single day?
Apple does not send updates. The user device must request an update.
--As a side note, IOS 7 fixes/improves
On Sep 19, 2013, at 3:10 PM, Fred Reimer frei...@freimer.org wrote:
I was making the wrong assumption that people understood how
the Internet works.
Absolutely!
Most people understand that the internet works by use of a browser and are
content with that knowledge. Much like most motor
On Sep 26, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Mark Lancaster markl...@gmail.com wrote:
I have heard a lot of questions and debate about whether the iOS updates
download automatically:
“Available updates download automatically if your device is connected to
Wi-Fi and a power source.”
I try not to think about sinners too much when planning networks. Subnets are
more interesting.
Maybe many of you like spending time maintaining NAT configurations and
creatively masking as determined by today's end system count on each subnet.
This all, of course, in the interest of maximum
On Oct 9, 2013, at 12:35 PM, Blair Trosper blair.tros...@gmail.com wrote:
Does anyone know why (or can someone from Comcast explain why) there is no
PTR on their residential/business IPv6 addresses?
Which IPv6 addresses:
1 delegated WAN address?
2 end systems on delegated LAN prefix or
On Nov 6, 2013, at 9:02 AM, Livingood, Jason
jason_living...@cable.comcast.com wrote:
Reverse DNS for (typical) residential customer IPv6 addresses is dead,
people just haven¹t come to grips with it just yetŠ ;-)
When publicly-reachable services in home networks are created that may be
a
On Dec 2, 2013, at 5:14 PM, Tony Hain alh-i...@tndh.net wrote:
Ricky Beam wrote:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 08:39:59 -0500, Rob Seastrom r...@seastrom.com
wrote:
So there really is no excuse on ATT's part for the /60s on uverse
6rd...
Except for a) greed (we can *sell* larger slices) and b)
On Dec 3, 2013, at 12:04 AM, Eric Oosting eric.oost...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 11:11 PM, Rob Seastrom r...@seastrom.com wrote:
Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 08:39:59 -0500, Rob Seastrom r...@seastrom.com
wrote:
So there really is no excuse on
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote:
http://comcast6.net/ tells me that the local cmts is v6 enabled. my
modem, a cisco dpc3008, is in the supported products list. so how do
i turn the sucker on?
According to Comcast’s DOCSIS Devices page,
On Dec 9, 2013, at 12:32 PM, Gary Buhrmaster gary.buhrmas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Cutler James R
james.cut...@consultant.com wrote:
According to Comcast’s DOCSIS Devices page,
http://mydeviceinfo.comcast.net/?s=iso=1e=0d3=1tier=-1sc=84, the Cisco
DPC3008
On Dec 9, 2013, at 12:32 PM, Gary Buhrmaster gary.buhrmas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Cutler James R
james.cut...@consultant.com wrote:
I opted for my minimal-effort solution. I installed a Motorola SB6121 and a
5th gen Airport Extreme and turned them
On Dec 9, 2013, at 3:37 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, Cutler James R wrote:
My conclusion is that Apple does not yet support IPv6 in any fashion for
Wireless Guest networks.
Works for me on 7.7.2 on the latest hardware (802.1ac version with time
On Dec 9, 2013, at 4:06 PM, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
On Dec 9, 2013, at 3:51 PM, Cutler James R james.cut...@consultant.com
wrote:
This is disappointing to me as a user but good for me as an Apple stockholder
I stopped using their [network] hardware and shifted
Wow, what a lot of NANOG traffic about IPv6 readiness for SMTP!
Please explain my misunderstanding on the following:
1. IPv6 is a Routing Layer Protocol (with some associated helpers, like RA,
ND, DHCP-PD, and the like).
2. SMTP is an Application Layer Protocol, supposedly independent of
64 matches
Mail list logo
