Re: Dragonfly network changes - U-Verse almost a complete failure

2011-03-17 Thread Francois Tigeot
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 01:02:00PM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote: > Hahaha... ok, well, I spoke too soon. U-Verse is a piece of crap. [...] > Sigh. You'd think AT&T would be smart enough to do this properly, but > after 5 years of trying they are still clueless about IP networks. Maybe

Dragonfly network changes - U-Verse almost a complete failure

2011-02-20 Thread Matthew Dillon
Hahaha... ok, well, I spoke too soon. U-Verse is a piece of crap. That's my conclusion. Here's some detail: * The physical infrastructure is fine, as long as you make sure there's no packet loss. To make sure you have to upload and download continuously at th

Re: Dragonfly network changes

2011-02-18 Thread Chris Turner
On 02/18/11 11:09, Ulrich Spörlein wrote: FTFY " Within each index entry, the title of the writeup to which it refers is followed by the appropriate section number in parentheses. " http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=V1/man/manintro.txt UNIX PROGRAMMER'S MANUAL K. Thompson D. M. Ri

Re: Dragonfly network changes

2011-02-18 Thread Ulrich Spörlein
On Fri, 18.02.2011 at 08:33:34 -0600, Chris Turner wrote: > On 02/18/11 03:59, Sergey V. Dyatko wrote: > > > So please, next time wrote your jokes correctly. > > man 7 mdoc FTFY

Re: Dragonfly network changes

2011-02-18 Thread Chris Turner
On 02/18/11 03:59, Sergey V. Dyatko wrote: So please, next time wrote your jokes correctly. man mdoc(7)

Re: Dragonfly network changes

2011-02-18 Thread Sergey V. Dyatko
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 11:59:52 +0200 "Sergey V. Dyatko" wrote: SVD>On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 10:47:07 +0100 SVD>Francois Tigeot wrote: SVD> SVD>> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 02:29:05AM -0600, Chris Turner wrote: SVD>> > On 02/18/11 00:53, Francois Tigeot wrote: SVD>> > >Do they offer IPv6 ? SVD>> > man gif(

Re: Dragonfly network changes

2011-02-18 Thread Sergey V. Dyatko
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 10:47:07 +0100 Francois Tigeot wrote: > On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 02:29:05AM -0600, Chris Turner wrote: > > On 02/18/11 00:53, Francois Tigeot wrote: > > >Do they offer IPv6 ? > > man gif(4) > > > > MUHUAHAHAHAA > > I don't know about the US, but I've add native v6 connectivit

Re: Dragonfly network changes

2011-02-18 Thread Francois Tigeot
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 02:29:05AM -0600, Chris Turner wrote: > On 02/18/11 00:53, Francois Tigeot wrote: > >Do they offer IPv6 ? > man gif(4) > > MUHUAHAHAHAA I don't know about the US, but I've add native v6 connectivity for about 8 years (forgot exactly when), so there's really no excuse these

Re: Dragonfly network changes

2011-02-18 Thread Matthias Rampke
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 09:29, Chris Turner wrote: > On 02/18/11 00:53, Francois Tigeot wrote: > >> Do they offer IPv6 ? > > man gif(4) I think whether an ISP offers native IPv6 a very valid question and everybody should ask it to theirs once in a while … in the meantime I'm very happy with the

Re: Dragonfly network changes

2011-02-18 Thread Chris Turner
On 02/18/11 00:53, Francois Tigeot wrote: Do they offer IPv6 ? man gif(4) MUHUAHAHAHAA - C

Re: Dragonfly network changes

2011-02-17 Thread Francois Tigeot
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 07:18:18PM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote: > Various DragonFly machines are now running on a much faster network > thanks to AT&T u-verse, Great :-) > For those interested this is AT&T Business U-Verse. Downlink speed is > around 16 MBits and uplink speed is

Dragonfly network changes

2011-02-17 Thread Matthew Dillon
Various DragonFly machines are now running on a much faster network thanks to AT&T u-verse, and despite utterly horrid disaster that at&t's little router box is I am slowly managing to thrash it into shape. Our main web site is now on the new network (www, gitweb, wiki, and