Re: Remote email access

[Dave Crocker]

JC,

Monday, February 3, 2003, 9:43:01 PM, you wrote:
JD> Dave Crocker wrote:
>> Recently I had protracted discussions with a number of Ops folks about
>> this issue and have chosen to drop that debate. I do not agree with
>> blocking port 25, either, but am far more concerned about having a
...
JD> Why does a single solution need to be "broadly supported"?

interoperability. when there are choices for solving the same problem, a
service can make one choice -- or, in this case, each of at least two
different services can make different choices -- and a software vendor
can make yet another another. then there is no interoperability.

that is exactly the problem that I have repeatedly experienced.


JD> IMHO, all
JD> that is needed is for each individual to find a solution that works for
JD> them, given their preferred email client, email host, and provider options.

hmmm.  sounds like I have not described the problem clearly enough.  So
here is the short form:

My email service provider permits me to post new email from anywhere on
the net, as long as I go through proper authentication.  (The details of
how this is done do not matter; the method is reasonable and
sufficient.)

The provider happens to support this posting via port 25.

When I am traveling, my access often is through a provider that kindly
block outbound port 25, so I cannot post email.

Each provider has behaved as you suggest, and the result is that I
cannot post email.


JD> My present solution is to ssh into a server where I have an account,

Once again: I have no doubt that individuals are able to solve their
individual problems, individually, especially when they are technically
savvy.

That approach does not make for a viable, large-scale (as in
mass-market) industry.

d/
-- 
 Dave 
 Brandenburg InternetWorking 
 t +1.408.246.8253; f +1.408.850.1850

Re: Network Operations "Metrics"

[Bill Woodcock]

  On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Pete Kruckenberg wrote:
> What systems/processes do you use to track all of this
> information, and associate it to overall business success?

I assume this was a rhetorical question, since you know as well as I do
that all major telcos fly by the seat of their pants.

-Bill

Network Operations "Metrics"

[Pete Kruckenberg]

CEO's are judged by their company's profitability, long-term
growth, efficiency, etc. Students are judged based on
quizes, reports, mid-terms and finals. The economy is
tracked by tracking individual sectors, quarter-to-quarter
and year-over-year performance, unemployment, interest
rates, etc.

What metrics are used to measure networks and network
operators?

What "micro" measurements (the equivalent of tracking travel
expenses or cost-of-sales to ensure overall profitability)  
are used to ensure good macro-level (up-time, network 
reliability, application performance, happy customers)?

What systems/processes do you use to track all of this 
information, and associate it to overall business success?

Thanks.
Pete.

Re: RIRs getting new /8s from IANA

[bmanning]

> 
> 
> Hello,
>   Could someone please answer the following question?
> 
>   Under exactly what conditions does an RIR qualify for a new /8 from
> IANA?
> 
> Harsha.

RFC 2050 is the baseline.

--bill

RIRs getting new /8s from IANA

[Harsha Narayan]

Hello,
  Could someone please answer the following question?

  Under exactly what conditions does an RIR qualify for a new /8 from
IANA?

Harsha.

Re: EuroNOG

[bmanning]

 how/why is this proposed group distinct from the European Operator Forum?
 

> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I forward this on behalf of my colleague.
> 
> (When my colleague send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], his message is not
> published on the list. He don't get errors and he subscribed to nanog
> and nanog-post.)
> 
> -Forwarded Message-
> 
> From: Mike CHENEY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: EuroNOG (European Network Operators Group)
> Date: 04 Feb 2003 00:18:41 +0100
> 
> Hi folks,
> 
> For european people, there is now a group called EuroNOG with about the
> same goals as Nanog.
> 
> For more information: http://www.euronog.org/
> 
> For subscribe to EuroNOG mailing-list, send a mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Mike
> 
> Note: message resent because not received by the list.
> 
> -Forwarded Message-
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> -- 
> Nicolas DEFFAYET, NDSoftware
> 

EuroNOG

[Nicolas DEFFAYET]

Hello,

I forward this on behalf of my colleague.

(When my colleague send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], his message is not
published on the list. He don't get errors and he subscribed to nanog
and nanog-post.)

-Forwarded Message-

From: Mike CHENEY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: EuroNOG (European Network Operators Group)
Date: 04 Feb 2003 00:18:41 +0100

Hi folks,

For european people, there is now a group called EuroNOG with about the
same goals as Nanog.

For more information: http://www.euronog.org/

For subscribe to EuroNOG mailing-list, send a mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Regards,

Mike

Note: message resent because not received by the list.

-Forwarded Message-

Best Regards,

-- 
Nicolas DEFFAYET, NDSoftware

Information about NASA web site performance

[Sean Donelan]

The New York Times (free registration required) is running a story about
the performance of NASA's web site over the weekend, and some of the
changes they made to handle the load.  NASA introducted their new web site
at Midnight, the morning of the loss of Columbia, it experienced a 25-fold
increase in traffic.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/03/technology/03WEB.html

As several folks have pointed out, NASA is working on a lot of other stuff
right now.  So network stats are probably low on the priority list.  But
appears to be making an effort to release whatever information they can.

RE: IP QoS case-studies

[Mike Bernico]

Pete,

Our network is currently offering DiffServ QoS to customers.  It's a new
service, but so far it is working well and has been very well received
by our customers.  

I'd be happy to answer any questions about what we do or why offline but
here are some "talking points" of our policy.

1.  We established a network wide delay budget and then put together
some software that monitors network latency.  

2.  We control the classification feature.  We classify all our customer
traffic for them with Cisco class based policing at the CPE router.  

3.  We use Cisco's LLQ or MDRR queuing only on our links from
distribution to the network edge.   On our high speed links (622Mb and
above) we don't queue.  There are two schools of thought on this, but we
currently subscribe to the theory that just letting FIFO happen is
faster than applying custom queues in the core.  YMMV with very fast
routers, ASICs, and all that.


Hope that helps!

Mike


-Original Message-
From: Pete Kruckenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 1:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: IP QoS case-studies


I've found there's no shortage of advice and theory about
the viability of IP QoS (DiffServ) in a large wide-area
(converged) network.

I have not had much luck with finding documentation about
experiences implementing and operating such a beast.  
Presumably that's yet another (silent) confirmation that It
Doesn't Work or There's a Better/Easier Way.

Nevertheless, I'd still like to find anyone who has tried
(successfully or not) to converge (ie VoIP/H.323/data) a
high-speed (~ 1Gb/s) IP network and use IP QoS for what it
is sold to do. White paper/presentation references or
off-line conversation would be appreciated.

Pete.

Re: IP QoS case-studies

[K. Scott Bethke]

Pete,

There was an article in the last network world about Worldcom using DiffServ
in its VPN offering, and I found this article as well:

http://www.netcentrex.net/news_and_events/2002_3_22_CommNews_VPN-Outsourcing
Options.shtml

-Scotty


- Original Message -
From: "Pete Kruckenberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 4:04 PM
Subject: IP QoS case-studies


>
> I've found there's no shortage of advice and theory about
> the viability of IP QoS (DiffServ) in a large wide-area
> (converged) network.
>
> I have not had much luck with finding documentation about
> experiences implementing and operating such a beast.
> Presumably that's yet another (silent) confirmation that It
> Doesn't Work or There's a Better/Easier Way.
>
> Nevertheless, I'd still like to find anyone who has tried
> (successfully or not) to converge (ie VoIP/H.323/data) a
> high-speed (~ 1Gb/s) IP network and use IP QoS for what it
> is sold to do. White paper/presentation references or
> off-line conversation would be appreciated.
>
> Pete.
>
>
>

IP QoS case-studies

[Pete Kruckenberg]

I've found there's no shortage of advice and theory about
the viability of IP QoS (DiffServ) in a large wide-area
(converged) network.

I have not had much luck with finding documentation about
experiences implementing and operating such a beast.  
Presumably that's yet another (silent) confirmation that It
Doesn't Work or There's a Better/Easier Way.

Nevertheless, I'd still like to find anyone who has tried
(successfully or not) to converge (ie VoIP/H.323/data) a
high-speed (~ 1Gb/s) IP network and use IP QoS for what it
is sold to do. White paper/presentation references or
off-line conversation would be appreciated.

Pete.

Re: OT: Re: WANAL (Re: What could have been done differently?)

[Måns Nilsson]

--On Tuesday, January 28, 2003 18:06:47 -0800 Scott Francis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I'm sure
> they'll move to a newer version when somebody on the team gets a chance
> to give it a thorough code audit, and run it through sufficient testing
> prior to release.

The -current tree now is at BIND 9.2.2rc-whatever, and has been so for
roughly a month. Thank Jakob Schlyter. 

-- 
Måns NilssonSystems Specialist
+46 70 681 7204 KTHNOC  MN1334-RIPE

We're sysadmins. To us, data is a protocol-overhead.