Greetings,
* Javier J (jav...@advancedmachines.us) wrote:
> Since FiOS still doesn't do ipv6 (I don't bother checking anymore) I've
> used tunnelbroker since I was stuck on Comcast.
Called last week and, no, FiOS *still* doesn't do ipv6. Seriously
ridiculous.
> I'm not running BGP since that's
nelbroker service) you will have to renumber.
>
>
> -- Original message --
>
> From: Javier J
> To: b...@uu3.net
> Cc: nanog
> Subject: Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures)
> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 13:57:20 -0400
>
> I've had an IPV6 tunn
n I be el-cheappo
> dual-homed then?
>
>
> -- Original message --
>
> From: Mark Andrews
> To: Andy Ringsmuth
> Cc: Grant Taylor via NANOG
> Subject: Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures)
> Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2021 08:00:38 +1100
>
> Th
I am doing this right now. A starlink CPE is a fairly ordinary DIA link
that exists in cgnat space from the perspective of whatever router you plug
into it. The starlink indoor 'router' is optional.
Whatever you plug into the high power PoE injector will be given a DHCP
lease and a default route
It’s not like Starlink is anything brand new. Iridium and Globalstar both
do Internet from LEO. It wasn’t their primary service, voice was/is, but
they could do it in a half-a** manner.
Starlink isn’t going to become big in China without bowing to the GFW
‘cause how do you bill for it if you
I mix Starlink and Comcast over two openvpn tunnels to my datacenter in
Ashburn.
><>
nathan stratton
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 3:38 PM Matt Erculiani wrote:
> I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if anyone out there was trying to
> mix their StarLink kit and existing broadband service to
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if anyone out there was trying to mix
their StarLink kit and existing broadband service to optimize performance
and/or add redundancy though.
The underlying technologies will change, but what people try to do with
them will remain relatively unchanged.
Back
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 11:39 AM Matt Erculiani
wrote:
> I think the best way to think about what 10 years from now will look like
> is to compare 10 years ago to the present:
> https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2011-April/thread.html
>
Multi-homing your DSL connection?
I can't wait to
On 3/29/21 11:36 AM, Matt Erculiani wrote:
We might be talking a lot more about PRKI as it becomes compulsory,
maybe 400G transit links will start being standard across the
industry. If we're lucky (or unlucky, depending on how you look at it)
maybe a whole new routing protocol will be
I think the best way to think about what 10 years from now will look like
is to compare 10 years ago to the present:
https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2011-April/thread.html
- BGP issues/hijacks: for sure, despite everyone's best efforts
- Jokes and fun stories: I sure hope so!
- Current
>
>
> -- Original message --
>
> From: Mark Andrews
> To: Andy Ringsmuth
> Cc: Grant Taylor via NANOG
> Subject: Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures)
> Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2021 08:00:38 +1100
>
> There are more smart phones in use in the world today t
On 3/29/21 07:21, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
The US State Department is already a large customer for dedicated
transponder capacity, in C-band hemispheric and Ku beams in some weird
places in the world.
As a randomly chosen example if you take a look at the roof of the UK
embassy in Kabul,
The US State Department is already a large customer for dedicated
transponder capacity, in C-band hemispheric and Ku beams in some weird
places in the world.
As a randomly chosen example if you take a look at the roof of the UK
embassy in Kabul, there's a nice 4 meter size Andrew/Commscope
of life is paved
> with flat squirrels who could not make a decision.
>
> >-Original Message-
> >From: NANOG On Behalf Of
> >Eric Kuhnke
> >Sent: Sunday, 28 March, 2021 18:24
> >To: na...@jima.us
> >Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> >Subject: Re: 10 years
On 3/29/21 02:23, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
I am not saying it is an impossible problem to solve, but any system
intended for that sort of purpose would have to be designed for
circumvention, and not a consumer/COTS adaptation of an off the shelf
starlink terminal.
Behind the walls of an
8:31 PM na...@jima.us <mailto:na...@jima.us>
>mailto:na...@jima.us> > wrote:
>
>
> Please don't forget that RF sources can be tracked down by even
>minimally-well-equipped adversaries.
>
> - Jima
>
> -Original Message-
>
.us wrote:
> Please don't forget that RF sources can be tracked down by even
> minimally-well-equipped adversaries.
>
> - Jima
>
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG On Behalf Of scott
> Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2021 19:36
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject:
On 3/26/2021 9:42 AM, Michael Thomas wrote:
LEO internet providers will be coming online which might make a
difference in the corners of the world where it's hard to get access,
but will it allow internet access to parachute in behind the Great
Firewall?
How do the Chinas of the
Please don't forget that RF sources can be tracked down by even
minimally-well-equipped adversaries.
- Jima
-Original Message-
From: NANOG On Behalf Of scott
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2021 19:36
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures)
On 3/26
On 3/26/2021 9:42 AM, Michael Thomas wrote:
LEO internet providers will be coming online which might make a
difference in the corners of the world where it's hard to get access,
but will it allow internet access to parachute in behind the Great
Firewall?
How do the Chinas of
On 3/27/21 2:50 AM, Valdis Klētnieks wrote:
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 12:42:20 -0700, Michael Thomas said:
dishwasher will probably be common, but that's hardly exciting. LEO
internet providers will be coming online which might make a difference
in the corners of the world where it's hard to get
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 12:42:20 -0700, Michael Thomas said:
> dishwasher will probably be common, but that's hardly exciting. LEO
> internet providers will be coming online which might make a difference
> in the corners of the world where it's hard to get access, but will it
> allow internet access
On 3/26/21 3:31 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:
On 3/26/21 23:30, b...@uu3.net wrote:
Oh, sorry to disappoint you, but they are not missing anything..
Internet become a consumer product where data is provided by
large corporations similary to TV now. Your avarage Joe consumer
does NOT care about NAT
On 3/26/21 2:00 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
There are more smart phones in use in the world today the world than can be
addressed by IPv4. Complaining about lack of IPv6 deployment has been
legitimate for a long time. Telcos shouldn’t have to deploy NATs. Homes
shouldn’t have to deploy NATs.
On 3/26/21 23:30, b...@uu3.net wrote:
Oh, sorry to disappoint you, but they are not missing anything..
Internet become a consumer product where data is provided by
large corporations similary to TV now. Your avarage Joe consumer
does NOT care about NAT and that he cant run services or he
On 3/26/21 23:00, Mark Andrews wrote:
There are more smart phones in use in the world today the world than can be
addressed by IPv4. Complaining about lack of IPv6 deployment has been
legitimate for a long time. Telcos shouldn’t have to deploy NATs. Homes
shouldn’t have to deploy NATs.
On 3/26/21 22:12, Andy Ringsmuth wrote:
Ten years from now? Easy. We’ll still be talking about the continued shortage
of IPv4 address space and (legitimately) complaining about why IPv6 still isn’t
the default addressing/routing methodology for the Internet worldwide.
Thankfully, the
On 3/26/21 21:42, Michael Thomas wrote:
So the obvious question is what will happen to the internet 10 years
from now. The last 10 years were all about phones and apps, but that's
pretty well played out by now. Gratuitously networked devices like my
dishwasher will probably be common, but
On 3/26/21 2:00 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> Telcos shouldn’t have to deploy NATs. Homes shouldn’t have to
>deploy NATs. Businesses shouldn’t have to deploy NATs.
But NATs are good: https://youtu.be/v26BAlfWBm8
(Since we're speaking of things from ~10 years ago...!)
--
Robert L Mathews, Tiger
--
From: Mark Andrews
To: Andy Ringsmuth
Cc: Grant Taylor via NANOG
Subject: Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures)
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2021 08:00:38 +1100
There are more smart phones in use in the world today the world than can be
addressed by IPv4. Complaining about lack of IPv6
There are more smart phones in use in the world today the world than can be
addressed by IPv4. Complaining about lack of IPv6 deployment has been
legitimate for a long time. Telcos shouldn’t have to deploy NATs. Homes
shouldn’t have to deploy NATs. Businesses shouldn’t have to deploy NATs.
> On 3/26/21 12:26 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:
>> If the last decade is anything to go by, I'm keen to see what the next one
>> brings.
>> Mark.
>>
>
>
> So the obvious question is what will happen to the internet 10 years from
> now. The last 10 years were all about phones and apps, but that's
32 matches
Mail list logo
