Op 8 sep 2011, om 07:26 heeft Geoff Huston het volgende geschreven:
>
> On 08/09/2011, at 2:41 AM, Leigh Porter wrote:
>
> It may not be what Randy was referring to above, but as part of that program
> at APNIC32 I reported on the failure rate I am measuring for Teredo. I'm not
> sure its all
On 08/09/2011, at 2:41 AM, Leigh Porter wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Daniel Roesen [mailto:d...@cluenet.de]
>> Sent: 07 September 2011 17:38
>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>> Subject: Re: NAT444 or ?
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 12:16:28PM +0200, Randy Bush wrote:
I'm going
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 08:03:24PM -0500, Jimmy Hess said:
>On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Brandon Kim
wrote:
>> I would love to be a part of this list if there is one!!!
>>
>> Cooling is not as easy as just pumping cold air into a room.
>>
>?
>Indeed... it's even easier than t
It affected outside Tampa even. Even went as far south as Bradenton so I
am guessing it was systemwide. For awhile their call center was so
overloaded you received a fast busy when you called.
Justin
--
Justin Wilson
Aol & Yahoo IM: j2sw
http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP News
http://www.t
LOL too funny guys..
I agree it has to do with air flowplus temps have to be just right. You
don't want it too cold and
equipment start freezingor ice forming
> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 18:32:01 -0700
> From: sur...@mauigateway.com
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Mailing li
- From: Jimmy Hess -
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Brandon Kim wrote:
> Cooling is not as easy as just pumping cold air into a room.
: There are many ways of accomplishing that. One of the best ways
: is to put your room in an already cold environment, in contact
: with an exc
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Brandon Kim wrote:
> I would love to be a part of this list if there is one!!!
>
> Cooling is not as easy as just pumping cold air into a room.
>
?
Indeed... it's even easier than that. Cooling is as easy as making
an entire room emit heat
to the outside envir
+1
--
Pardon the typos - sent from a silly keyboard
On Sep 7, 2011, at 12:09, Matt Ryanczak wrote:
> On 09/07/2011 03:06 PM, Brandon Kim wrote:
>> I would love to be a part of this list if there is one!!!
>
> +1
>
On Sep 7, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Leigh Porter wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Seth Mos [mailto:seth@dds.nl]
>> Sent: 07 September 2011 20:26
>> To: NANOG
>> Subject: Re: NAT444 or ?
>>
>> I think you have the numbers off, he started with 1000 users sharing
>> the same IP, sinc
Does anyone know what the "software bug" that hit Brighthouse in Tampa?
Eric Miller
So I think my shortlist is Esol, Equinix, Qwest, and DirectColo, if they're
not already a tenant of one of the other 3.
Anyone got any info on how those three/four are about native IPv6?
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com
Designer
> -Original Message-
> From: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu [mailto:valdis.kletni...@vt.edu]
> Sent: 07 September 2011 23:14
> To: Dorn Hetzel
> Cc: Leigh Porter; NANOG
> Subject: Re: NAT444 or ?
>
> On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 16:13:26 EDT, Dorn Hetzel said:
>
> > Perhaps it can be made ever so sligh
On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 16:13:26 EDT, Dorn Hetzel said:
> Perhaps it can be made ever so slightly less ugly if endpoints get an
> "address" that consists of a 32 bit IP address + (n) upper bits of port
> number.
>
> This might be 4 significant bits to share an IP 16 ways, or 8 significant
> bits to s
Have found http://www.linkedin.com/groups?about=&gid=94108 to have some
gems in it.
I mention only because it's otherwise a case of YAML (that is, Yet
Another Mailing List, not the logging format...)
Of course, not everyone uses or likes LinkedIn.
Mark.
On Wed, 2011-09-07 at 16:09 -0400, Drew
David Israel wrote, on 09/07/2011 04:21 PM:
> In theory, this
> particular performance problem should only arise when the NAT gear insists on
> a
> unique port per session (which is common, but unnecessary)
What you're describing is known as "endpoint-independent mapping" behaviour. It
is good fo
> -Original Message-
> From: David Israel [mailto:da...@otd.com]
> Sent: 07 September 2011 21:23
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: NAT444 or ?
>
> On 9/7/2011 3:24 PM, Seth Mos wrote:
> > I think you have the numbers off, he started with 1000 users sharing
> the same IP, since you can
On Sep 7, 2011, at 3:09 PM, Drew Weaver wrote:
> dc-...@puck.nether.net thanks Jared =)
+1, beat me to it. Thanks!
--Chris
On 9/7/2011 3:24 PM, Seth Mos wrote:
I think you have the numbers off, he started with 1000 users sharing the same IP, since
you can only do 62k sessions or so and with a "normal" timeout on those
sessions you ran into issues quickly.
Remember that a TCP session is defined not just by the po
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Leigh Porter
wrote:
>
> I was thinking of an average of around 100 sessions per user for working
> out how things scale to start with. It would also be handy to be able to
> apply sensible limits to new sessions, say limit the number of sessions to a
> single destin
>> However these are with a very high address-sharing ratio (several
>> thousands users per address). Using a sparser density (<= 64 users per
>> address) is likely to show much less dramatic user impacts.
>
> I think you have the numbers off, he started with 1000 users sharing
> the same IP,
dc-...@puck.nether.net thanks Jared =)
http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/dc-ops
-Drew
-Original Message-
From: Drew Weaver [mailto:drew.wea...@thenap.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:28 PM
To: 'nanog@nanog.org'
Subject: Mailing list/group for datacenter facilities folks
> -Original Message-
> From: Seth Mos [mailto:seth@dds.nl]
> Sent: 07 September 2011 20:26
> To: NANOG
> Subject: Re: NAT444 or ?
>
> I think you have the numbers off, he started with 1000 users sharing
> the same IP, since you can only do 62k sessions or so and with a
> "normal" tim
I'd like to have discussions on air flow, CRAC units, A/B power
circuitsbest practices etc etc.
> From: a...@corp.nac.net
> To: brandon@brandontek.com; drew.wea...@thenap.com; nanog@nanog.org
> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 15:20:56 -0400
> Subject: RE: Mailing list/group for datacenter f
On Sep 7, 2011, at 1:28 PM, Drew Weaver wrote:
> Just wondering,
>
> Is anyone aware whether there is already an active mailing list/group for
> datacenter facilities folks to discuss power, cooling, physical
> infrastructure, etc, etc...?
>
There was one at shorty.com, but that's now a pain
Op 7 sep 2011, om 19:06 heeft jean-francois.tremblay...@videotron.com het
volgende geschreven:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 12:16:28PM +0200, Randy Bush wrote:
>>> I'm going to have to deploy NAT444 with dual-stack real soon now.
>> you may want to review the presentations from last week's apnic me
Perhaps there should be a DC track at NANOG?
One of the reasons I have not gone in years.
I have much knowledge and experience to share, but no one to share it with.
>
> I would love to be a part of this list if there is one!!!
>
> Cooling is not as easy as just pumping cold air into a room...
On 09/07/2011 03:06 PM, Brandon Kim wrote:
> I would love to be a part of this list if there is one!!!
+1
I would love to be a part of this list if there is one!!!
Cooling is not as easy as just pumping cold air into a room.
> From: drew.wea...@thenap.com
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 14:28:05 -0400
> Subject: Mailing list/group for datacenter facilities folks
>
> Just wonder
The United States Department of Defense (DoD) has authorized the DoD Network
Information Center (NIC) to sign the .mil zone using DNSSEC. The DoD NIC
will sign the .mil zone using a phased implementation plan that will span a
three (3) month period.
The first phase will consist of signing the .m
Just wondering,
Is anyone aware whether there is already an active mailing list/group for
datacenter facilities folks to discuss power, cooling, physical infrastructure,
etc, etc...?
thanks,
-Drew
Most networks have been trying to avoid that, building out a quarterly pop
thing,... problem is now its an ongoing cumulative quarterly pop across many
years, With pent up frustrated consumer demand for more and more
videoincluding face time on these apple devices!
Iridescent iPhone
Friends of mine recently bought a large traditionally-designed house.
The former "servant's quarters" are now the server room.
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 01:06:11PM -0400,
jean-francois.tremblay...@videotron.com wrote:
> I had the same question. I found Miyakawa-san's presentation has some
> dramatic examples of CGN NAT444 effects using Google Maps:
> http://meetings.apnic.net/__data/assets/file/0011/38297/Miyakawa-APNIC-K
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 12:16:28PM +0200, Randy Bush wrote:
> > I'm going to have to deploy NAT444 with dual-stack real soon now.
> you may want to review the presentations from last week's apnic meeting
> in busan. real mesurements. sufficiently scary that people who were
> heavily pushing nat44
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Joel jaeggli wrote:
> On 9/7/11 09:02 , Michael Holstein wrote:
>>
>>> I would love a world where engineering was consulted by marketing :(
>>>
>>
>> Wouldn't be a problem is management invested based on engineering's
>> recommendations.
>>
>> There are few problems
On 9/7/11 09:37 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 09:28:28 PDT, Joel jaeggli said:
>
>> The way to achieve a return on invested capital is to attract and retain
>> customers who pay for a service which they find compelling.
>
> Only true if long-term returns on investment are
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Roesen [mailto:d...@cluenet.de]
> Sent: 07 September 2011 17:38
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: NAT444 or ?
>
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 12:16:28PM +0200, Randy Bush wrote:
> > > I'm going to have to deploy NAT444 with dual-stack real soon now.
> >
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 12:16:28PM +0200, Randy Bush wrote:
> > I'm going to have to deploy NAT444 with dual-stack real soon now.
>
> you may want to review the presentations from last week's apnic meeting
> in busan. real mesurements. sufficiently scary that people who were
> heavily pushing na
On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 09:28:28 PDT, Joel jaeggli said:
> The way to achieve a return on invested capital is to attract and retain
> customers who pay for a service which they find compelling.
Only true if long-term returns on investment are suitable for consideration
instead of short-term returns.
On Wednesday 07 Sep 2011 17:17:10 Network IP Dog wrote:
> FYI!!!
>
>
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/microsoftpri0/2016132391_microsoft_dee
> ms_all_diginotar_certificates_untrust.html
>
> Google and Mozilla have also updated their browsers to block all
DigiNotar
> certificates, while App
On 9/7/11 09:02 , Michael Holstein wrote:
>
>> I would love a world where engineering was consulted by marketing :(
>>
>
> Wouldn't be a problem is management invested based on engineering's
> recommendations.
>
> There are few problems that money can't solve .. in this case, it's
> "sure, we
FYI!!!
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/microsoftpri0/2016132391_microsoft_dee
ms_all_diginotar_certificates_untrust.html
Google and Mozilla have also updated their browsers to block all DigiNotar
certificates, while Apple has been silent on the issue, a emblematic zombie
response!
Cheers.
> I would love a world where engineering was consulted by marketing :(
>
Wouldn't be a problem is management invested based on engineering's
recommendations.
There are few problems that money can't solve .. in this case, it's
"sure, we can offer unlimited bandwidth, we just need to build (x)
On 9/6/2011 6:02 AM, BH wrote:
Looking around, I believe the issue is that the IP has ended up on a
master game list, so we are now getting the queries directed at US.
Having written multiple versions of a Quake III master server (again,
much self-hate) I pulled one of my old master query scri
> -Original Message-
> From: Randy Bush [mailto:ra...@psg.com]
> Sent: 07 September 2011 11:18
> To: Leigh Porter
> Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
> Subject: Re: NAT444 or ?
>
> > I'm going to have to deploy NAT444 with dual-stack real soon now.
>
> you may want to review t
> I'm going to have to deploy NAT444 with dual-stack real soon now.
you may want to review the presentations from last week's apnic meeting
in busan. real mesurements. sufficiently scary that people who were
heavily pushing nat444 for the last two years suddenly started to say
"it was not me who
> -Original Message-
> From: Arturo Servin [mailto:arturo.ser...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 07 September 2011 01:37
> To: Serge Vautour
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: NAT444 or ?
>
>
> NAT444 alone is not enough.
>
> You will need to deploy it along with 6rd or DS-lite.
>
>
> In a typical DS-Lite deployment you won't be using NAT444. One of the
> key advantages of DS-Lite (and A+P, I believe) is that there's only one
> level of NAT between the end user and the public internet.
yep. and in ds-lite that nat is in the core, so you talk to comcast's
lawyers when you nee
* Arturo Servin
> NAT444 alone is not enough.
>
> You will need to deploy it along with 6rd or DS-lite.
In a typical DS-Lite deployment you won't be using NAT444. One of the
key advantages of DS-Lite (and A+P, I believe) is that there's only one
level of NAT between the end user and
49 matches
Mail list logo