Thanks Ben, but that doesn't extend to technical standards that OR specify - multicast is a good example.
Why can't BT actually telegraph what they are doing? Or do I have to guess the SIN document, again? On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 12:21 AM Sean Keeney <[email protected]> wrote: > Apologies to all - but I could condense this into a simple sentence: > > "Why can't the biggest ISP and backbone in the UK provide technical > leadership at every level"? > > Why aren't YOU as a company doing this up front? Why do I, as a lowly > grunt, have to work out what the oracle is saying? I know 10x less than you > do - why can't you disseminate this information, when you're trying to sell > me a connection? > > I complain about the home stuff - but this extends to the work stuff where > I earn my money - and again, I work in places where they spend hundreds of > thousands each month on private circuits from you. Why should I trust you > when your technical people know nothing about fibre, and this lack of > knowledge or interest extends to endpoints? > > Andrews and Arnold are expensive - but crikey, look at them on Twitter - I > even used their help to sort out my BT problems. Why can't BT do that? A > couple of blogs are cheap. > > BT have a structural problem, you're not a part of it, but the hatred of > the way your company operates is only going to accelerate having the two > halves of BT separated. > > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 11:59 PM Sean Keeney <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 11:28 PM Neil J. McRae <[email protected]> wrote: > > I’m not sure where to start on this! > > I’m not clear on what community you mean and engagement in a community is > typically a personal thing, or at least always has been for me. > > We have presented at a lot of UKNOF meetings, we have been a patron > sponsor and hosted a meeting too. > A quick grep on the RFC ftp site shows us contributing to over 100 RFCs > and we participate in half a dozen working groups and chair a couple also > and I think we have about half a dozen drafts in progress. > We engage at ETSI in at least six different forums including setting up > the NFV forum and a few other related forums. > One of our staff members currently chairs the broadband forum. > We engage at ITU, EBU and IEEE on standards for loads of technology most > recently G.FAST > We have submitted several papers at OFC to make sure fibre can carry the > traffic we need it to carry in the future: > http://www.comsoc.org/ctn/strengthening-backbone-5g-and-beyond > And a ton of other stuff (including working with Google on a few things) > We co-hosted the IETF (that’s the Internet Engineering Task Force!) a > couple of years ago and are set to co-host in 2018 (if it comes to the UK) > > With regards to working with other service providers, we participate in > lots of forums with service providers, in fact we are running a G.FAST > pilot now where several large service providers are engaged. > > So no, we don’t tell you how to config your router we’d much rather do the > work so you have something to configure on your router in the first place! > > From: uknof <[email protected]> on behalf of Sean Keeney < > [email protected]> > Date: Monday, 7 November 2016 at 20:54 > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: [uknof] Fwd: IPv6 adoption approaching 16% in UK > > Apologies - I didn't reply all on this earlier. > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Sean Keeney <[email protected]> > Date: Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 8:22 PM > Subject: Re: [uknof] IPv6 adoption approaching 16% in UK > To: Neil J. McRae <[email protected]> > > Nothing mighty about the admin bit, and not having a go at you personally. > It's just the default for this domain I use. > But - for the largest ISP in the UK, it is hilarious for BT to have a go > at other ISPs. Unlike AAISP and others I don't see any technical direction > from BT apart from the occasional SIN document and no engagement in the > community. > Again, it's not a go at you personally - but for BT to throw stones, even > at a company for whom security is a tangential issue, when they act like > the monopoly they grew out of is ridiculous. > BT don't act like part of the internet like Facebook and Google do. That's > my issue. > > On 7 Nov 2016 8:16 pm, "Neil J. McRae" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 7 Nov 2016, at 20:13, Sean Keeney <[email protected]> wrote: > Good point Neil. It's a bit like the largest incumbent government > sponsored ISP in the UK not engaging with the community isn't it? > Ok Sean (oh mighty admin!) I'm biting (again) - what nonsense are you > going on about now dood? > > Regards, > Neil > > > Thank you, Neil. > > As I said you aren't the problem - BT are.They provide my internet, but > they don't engage. > > So. > > Where's the documentation on how to provide ipv6 (or even ipv4) in my > network without using that awful HH? How can I learn to do it properly > myself before providing it to a customer? Your contract with me (afaik) > extends to the box at the wall - so, where is the github or wherever that > gives me the technical details I need to provide this? Where's the nice > Ubuntu package? > > What if my requirements extend to doing something that your HH doesn't do > - like a local DNS domain? > > I reverse engineered your stack for getting IPTV (Sky Sports etc) over > your multicast network. Why should I need to do this, 4 days of work, why > isn't the information loud and clear? My Linux box connects to the OR modem > - who knew i'd have to give the bare connection a fake IP address to be > able to route multicast from it? Why can't you put this up in advance, so I > don't need to second guess the largest supplier of internet in the country? > What are you trying to hide? > > Why is your ipv6 allocation non-static? Is there a reason? If so, i'm all > ears - if it's a good technical reason then fine. If not, then i'll have a > go. You had an excuse for a non static allocation with ipv4, why can't you > give me a static allocation with ipv6? If it's difficult then fine but > PLEASE TELL ME THIS. > > Seriously BT act like a black box. You're not, I can always move to Sky, > which is why I feel bad complaining at you. But the company you work for > *do not realise* they provide access to the internet and that is all. They > are not gatekeepers, like they were in the days when we all had to use > trimphones and had party lines. > > Why are BT not leading the way by giving us information we need to get > people to use BT services?! > > As an aside - in my last role at a secure establishment - BT (OR) sent an > engineer that didn't understand the difference between single and > multi-mode fibre. This is a company that spend hundreds of thousands a > month. Don't under estimate the power of word of mouth. This cost us 3 days. > > Finally: > > 1. Where is your github? > 2. Where is your best practice? > 3. Where are your instructions on helping people get the best from the > connections you provide? > 4. Where are your clear instructions on DNS servers, NTP, etc? Do I need > to talk to India again? > > Seriously. > > /Sean > >
