The Bogon Reference Page
Hi, NANOGers. [ Apologies to those of you who have seen this post in other fora. ] Many of you have requested a variety of methods for obtaining a list of the bogon prefixes. I have added several additional methods of tracking the bogon prefixes, and I'm also happy to add that two folks have volunteered to be part of the effort. Thanks to Dave Deitrich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and Steve Gill ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) for the assistance! You can now track the bogons through HTTP, e-mail (here and elsewhere), DNS, RADb, and BGP. Feel free to use some or all of these options. They are all detailed in the Bogon Reference Page found here: http://www.cymru.com/Bogons/ Thanks to John Payne, Jared Mauch, Boyan Krosnov, Eddy Dreger, Hank Nussbacher, and Rafi Sadowsky for the feedback and ideas! Comments and feedback are always welcome. Help stamp out bogons and bogus ASNs! :) Thanks, Rob. -- Rob Thomas http://www.cymru.com ASSERT(coffee != empty);
NANOG registration
We've now opened registration for NANOG 27, to be held February 9-11 in Phoenix, Arizona: https://www.merit.edu/nanog/registration.form.html General meeting info and the Call for Presentations are here: http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0302/ Hotel information (special NANOG rate expires Jan. 18): http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0302/hotel.html See you soon, and many thanks to Rodney Joffe and UltraDNS for hosting the meeting!
RE: AOL Cogent
Been on vacation so sorry for the late response but we're talking fiber here, not ICs. How about this for an analogy: When I upgraded from ISDN to Cable, my Internet habits changed considerably. Large downloads were no longer something to be avoided and that 250Kbps audio/video stream could run in the background 24/7 without interfering with my other traffic. While you may visit the same old web pages after upgrading your computer, upgrading your connectivity typically results in significant changes in traffic patterns. Computers have been capable of broadband connectivity for decades. No need to upgrade to use more bandwidth. :) So let's change your analogy to the day after you upgraded from dialup to broadband... Just my 2ยข. Best regards, __ Al Rowland -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Leber Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 11:08 PM To: Paul Vixie Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: AOL Cogent [SNIP] To illustrate how moores law and the hypothetical end user bandwidth demand law are different, for anybody that has upgraded their personal workstation to twice the processor speed or greater, to do the exact same end user task (i.e. visit a website) the day after you upgraded did you generate twice as much bandwidth? probably not. Mike. +- H U R R I C A N E - E L E C T R I C +-+ | Mike Leber Direct Internet Connections Voice 510 580 4100 | | Hurricane Electric Web Hosting Colocation Fax 510 580 4151 | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.he.net | +- --+
Re: Nanog broken?
Hi all. I haven't seen any posts this morning, is the list broken or did everyone take a day off? enjoy the silence.
Re: Nanog broken?
--- Ejay Hire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all. I haven't seen any posts this morning, is the list broken or did everyone take a day off?
Re: DC power versus AC power
Also, some AC circuit breakers are of a design that counts on the magnetic properties of AC, and, therefore, won't trip due to ANY DC load. I think these are mostly not available any more, but I remember encountering them some time ago and realizing that it would be _REALLY_ bad if someone put them in a DC plant accidentally. Owen --On Monday, December 30, 2002 9:18 -0500 Robert E. Seastrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Barton F Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Typical 120/208V small branch circuit breakers in small buildings and homes have an interrupting capacity rated at 10,000 amps, and should not be deployed where that can be exceeded. It will be on the label. It's worth noting that the interrupting capacity of the aforementioned breakers is 10,000 amps *AC*, and that said circuit breakers should not be used in *DC* applications despite the fact that the voltage is less than half as much and the fact that they're downstream from a 600A fuse (and have smaller wire in the circuit that will naturally limit how many amps can go into a short anyway). I'm hazy on the theory (perhaps someone more knowledgeable can post it), but my understanding is that with AC the arc has a chance to quench 120 times per second (ie, every time there's a zero crossing), and with DC that opportunity (obviously) does not exist. Bottom line is that one should buy breakers and fuses that are designed for use in DC powerplants, rather than trying to cheap out with something you picked up at Home Depot or Pep Boys. I'm sure I'm wasting my breath since _nobody_ who reads NANOG would ever try to cut corners to save a few bucks... :) ---Rob
US-Asia Peering
Hi all - I understand that there is a real glut of AP transoceanic capacity, particularly on the Japan-US cable where twice as much capacity is idle as is in use. This has sent the price point down to historic levels, O($28K/mo for STM-1) or less than $200/Mbps for transport! This is approaching an attractive price point for long distance peering so, just for grins,... Are there transport providers that can provide a price point around $100/Mbps for transport capacity from Tokyo to the U.S. (LAX/SJO) ? What are the technical issue with extreme long distance (transoceanic) peering? In particular, what are the issues interconnecting layer 2 switches across the ocean for the purposes of providing a global peering cloud using: 0) vanilla circuit transport to interconnect the switches 1) MPLS framed ethernet service to interconnect the switches 2) tunnelled transport over transit to interconnect the switches Thanks in advance. Bill
