[swinog] PCH survey on peering

this, -Bill Woodcock Research Director Packet Clearing House -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAk2UqpYACgkQGvQy4xTRsBGvowCgzXIkFOEfqj9BCgGkqhiv8AgF

Re: [swinog] (secret) ITU conference in Dubai: Swiss Delegation?

On Nov 27, 2012, at 3:37 PM, Fredy Kuenzler kuenz...@init7.net wrote: Mr Frédéric RIEHL, Chef des Affaires Internationales, OFCOM Mr Hassane MAKKI, Affaires Internationales, OFCOM Mr Raphael SCHERRER, Conseiller Economiste, OFCOM Mr Dirk-Olivier VON DER EMDEN, Conseiller juridique, OFCOM Mr

[swinog] PCH peering survey 2016

ts asked us to include it this time. Please respond by replying to this email, before the end of September. Thank you for considering participating. We very much appreciate it, and we look forward to returning the results to the community.

Re: [swinog] DDOS >1Tbps - Swiss-wide (regional) BGP propagation?!

Speaking for PCH, which operates the largest DNS CDN, what you’re discussing is similar to our practice, in effect. We have server clusters in 145 IXPs, including Switzerland. 90% of those advertise services only through peering, so, only to our peers at each specific exchange and their

Re: [swinog] SmokePing 3.0 Project

> On Nov 21, 2016, at 12:23 PM, Fredy Kuenzler wrote: > > Tobi, > > Sounds like a plan! I suggest do make a project on any international accepted > crowdfunding plattform for the 50k (plus some reserve), we spread the link > via all *NOG lists and social media and I'm

[swinog] GCSC critical infrastructure protection questions: your input needed.

One of PCH’s long-term efforts has been to encourage governments to restrict their use of offensive cyber attacks against civilian networks. We've successfully gotten that effort out of the U.N., where it was floundering, and into a well-supported stand-alone commission. It’s being taken

Re: [swinog] GCSC critical infrastructure protection questions: your input needed.

> On Nov 29, 2017, at 6:19 AM, Hendrik Jaeger wrote: > Since I have hardly thought about this topic (attacks against civilian > infrastructure), my thoughts are still rather unstructured, but I feel > it important to give you feedback, especially as I see no other >

Re: [swinog] Google DNS on Salt Mobile

> On Oct 29, 2018, at 1:16 AM, Gregor Riepl wrote: > It seems like Salt is no longer supplying their own DNS servers when > establishing an LTE connection. Instead, the network responds with Google DNS > servers (8.8.8.8 8.8.4.4). > I'd rather not send all my DNS requests to Google. > Perhaps

Re: [swinog] Google DNS on Salt Mobile

> On Nov 1, 2018, at 12:45 AM, Gregor Riepl wrote: > >> Quad9 collects: >> >> - Aggregate count of IPv4 queries per site > . >> - Aggregate count of queries matching each blocked domain per site, for >> queries which are directed to the malware-filtering addresses. >> >> In the future,

Re: [swinog] Google DNS on Salt Mobile

> On Oct 29, 2018, at 11:38 PM, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > On 2018-10-30 00:25, Bill Woodcock wrote: >>> On Oct 29, 2018, at 1:16 AM, Gregor Riepl wrote: >>> It seems like Salt is no longer supplying their own DNS servers when >>> establishing an LTE conne

[swinog] Re: Service Provider Network Topologies

Sure, happy to. Have them email me. -Bill > On Jan 18, 2023, at 4:23 PM, Urs Baumann via swinog > wrote: > > Good day, > > We want to analyse different network graphs from service providers in a > Bachelor Thesis. Would anyone be willing to share the