Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap?
On Wed, 4 Aug 2004, Jeff Wheeler wrote: Anybody know a good source for near-T1 low-latency bandwidth at around $100/month? I'm in the northern VA area btw. How much is low latency? I have 6ms RTT over my 8M/800k ADSL, it's usually 6-8ms over an equivalent 2M g.shdsl line. -- Mikael Abrahamssonemail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap?
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Aug 5 01:51:20 2004 Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 08:47:43 +0200 (CEST) From: Mikael Abrahamsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jeff Wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap? On Wed, 4 Aug 2004, Jeff Wheeler wrote: Anybody know a good source for near-T1 low-latency bandwidth at around $100/month? I'm in the northern VA area btw. How much is low latency? I have 6ms RTT over my 8M/800k ADSL, it's usually 6-8ms over an equivalent 2M g.shdsl line. another datapoint: 768k SDSL. 10-11 msec RTT to my ISPs peering connections with other networks. end-to-end RTT of 14 ms, over twice the physical distance (a whopping 22 miles) compared to circa 9ms times to the same location(over 12 mi end-to-end) from a real T-1 local loop. Wire distance on the DSL is about 6k ft. The T-1 loop is less than 900 ft. Everything past that 'last mile' is T-3 or better. I can live with an added 5ms.
Re: XO Mail engineers?
Drew, Here's the straight scoop: The New XO SMTP servers are new in the sense that they go back to a 1997 platform rather than a 1993 platform that smtp.concentric.net derives from. They're both from the Concentric* part of XO, and both come out of my team, for what it's worth. What we've been doing is consolidating some of the extremely old systems onto the newer platforms, where we've been focusing our development cycles for some time. 'smtp.concentric.net' isn't ceasing to exist, but it's now (or rather, extremely soon) will be on the up-to-date systems. That said, we're not forcing people to host mail with us in order to use us for outbound relay. The one restriction that will be imposed by the new smtp.concentric.net that the old one didn't do was to require the sender domain to exist on-platform rather than to allow completely unchecked relay by domain. Domain hosting is bundled with all our DSL and other network access products, so for the vast majority of people, this is no problem, because we don't need to be authoritative, or have MX pointed to us, for this to work. The one situation where people are impaired is if they want to send mail via a domain name of some other ISP (e.g. aol.com), in which case they should use the relays provided by their other ISP (we don't block outbound port 25 across the board), or if a customer is running a mail server/mailing list/etc of their own, where said server might send out mail from any domain, in which case that server should be doing its own MX routing and not relying on a relay. Most of our DSL and other access customers that use an XO-provided relay are already on the newer platform and have been for a long time, and only a few remain with configurations still pointing at the older legacy systems. So the actual impact here is quite small. You may now all commence flaming this, and me :) --David Schairer VP/Chief Systems Architect XO Communications, Inc. * We have recently relaunched the Concentric brand for our email and hosting products -- www.concentric.com -- for those of you who remember it from the 'before time' :) I have a few discount codes left for email/hosting accounts -- send me an email if interested. On Aug 4, 2004, at 9:41 AM, Drew Weaver wrote: It has come to my attention that XO has done away with some of concentric's email systems and have replaced them with new XO SMTP servers these new XO SMTP servers aren't allowing people who don't have their mail hosted at XO to relay mail through them even though they are XO DSL customers, you guys may want to rethink your policy on this. It is generally the responsibility of the ISP to provide the outgoing mail transport for your connected users. -Drew
Re: Convention networks and viruses
See section 2, above. Neither is what Sean was getting at, I believe. What he seemed to be saying is that a few infected folks can cause temp networks at conventions to suffer major problems. Doesn't matter if it's at a news org conference or a NANOG conference. To be sure, though, you don't have to take the whole network down to find them. Of course you don't, but if you notice they shut down a segment of the network only. Probably some arse running a DHCP server that conflicted with the real one. Chances are the bigwigs shut it off while some lackey had to find the geeks at whatever booth they were snagging swag at :) Rob Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
searching for high bandwidth
Thank you to everyone that responded to my low-latency bandwidth question, and please if anyone else has a suggestion along that line please do respond to my last email! I'll compile the responses I get and post to the list in a few days. Anyway, I'm emailing now to request any information on sources that would help in searching for high bandwidth (meaning T3 or similar) providers. I already know about bandwidth.com (a broadbandreports.com affiliate) and through Google found nationwidebandwidth.com, but what else is there? How do you all figure out who to contact when shopping around for additional bandwidth? I'm searching for a provider in the Washington, D.C. area by the way, and currently our fractional T3 is provided by UUNet. I will of course be contacting them, also I've already contact Cogent based on someone's suggestion yesterday or the day before. -- Jeff Wheeler Postmaster, Network Admin US Institute of Peace
Re: Quick question.
On Aug 4, 2004, at 10:53 PM, Paul Jakma wrote: On Wed, 4 Aug 2004, Alexei Roudnev wrote: I am sorry, but I do not make a theory - I just repors practical results. 2 CPU systems are much more stable than 1 CPU system, in my experience. You are free to find an explanatiion, if you want -:). The theory suggests your experience is unusual, Practice suggests that there may well be good reason for this. Mainboards that are set up for 2 CPUs are likely to be engineered to a much higher standard than your normal chop-shop cheapie special. An interesting experiment would be to run a 1 CPU system based on the exact same 2 CPU mainboard and if it the level of reliability would be significantly different. Tony
BGP Redistribution question
While looking into a routing issue, I found that one of my routers wasn't passing one of my static routes, being redist into ospf into bgp, and not sure as to why. It has been a while since I have worked with BGP, so I am a little rusty. The solution was for me to add the following BGP network statement... network 10.86.8.0 mask 255.255.248.0. If statics are being redist info ospf, and ospf is basically being redist into bgp, why did I have to have the network statement. Why didn't it put it into BGP and pass it along? Here is the scenario: Router A: ip route 10.86.8.0 255.255.248.0 10.86.138.14 ATL--CR6513A#ping 10.86.138.14 success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/1/4 ms ATL -CR6513A#sh ip route 10.86.8.0 Routing entry for 10.86.8.0/21 Known via static, distance 1, metric 0 Redistributing via ospf 1 Advertised by ospf 1 subnets bgp 2 Routing Descriptor Blocks: * 10.86.138.14 Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1 ATL-CR6513A#sh ip ospf data ext 10.86.8.0 OSPF Router with ID (10.86.194.5) (Process ID 1) Type-5 AS External Link States Routing Bit Set on this LSA LS age: 898 Options: (No TOS-capability, DC) LS Type: AS External Link Link State ID: 10.86.8.0 (External Network Number ) Advertising Router: 10.86.194.2 LS Seq Number: 8D87 Checksum: 0x3D49 Length: 36 Network Mask: /21 Metric Type: 2 (Larger than any link state path) TOS: 0 Metric: 20 Forward Address: 0.0.0.0 External Route Tag: 0 LS age: 554 Options: (No TOS-capability, DC) LS Type: AS External Link Link State ID: 10.86.8.0 (External Network Number ) Advertising Router: 10.86.194.5 LS Seq Number: 8D87 Checksum: 0x2B58 Length: 36 Network Mask: /21 Metric Type: 2 (Larger than any link state path) TOS: 0 Metric: 20 Forward Address: 0.0.0.0 External Route Tag: 0 ATL-CR6513A#sh ip bgp 10.86.8.0 BGP routing table entry for 10.86.0.0/16, version 1078065 Paths: (2 available, best #2, table Default-IP-Routing-Table) Multipath: eBGP Advertised to non peer-group peers: 10.1.2.9 1, (aggregated by 1 10.1.254.253) 10.1.2.9 from 10.1.2.9 (10.1.254.253) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external, atomic-aggregate, multipath 1, (aggregated by 1 10.1.254.252) 10.1.2.1 from 10.1.2.1 (10.1.254.252) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external, atomic-aggregate, multipath, best router ospf 1 redistribute static subnets router bgp 2 no synchronization network x.x.x.x network y.y.y.y network 10.86.8.0 mask 255.255.248.0 ***had to be added for this to work, but wasn't present before hand*** redistribute connected route-map OSPF-Links redistribute ospf 1 route-map WW-OSPF-Routes neighbor 10.1.2.1 remote-as 1 neighbor 10.1.2.1 advertisement-interval 1 neighbor 10.1.2.9 remote-as 1 neighbor 10.1.2.9 advertisement-interval 1 maximum-paths 2 no auto-summary route-map WW-OSPF-Routes permit 10 set metric-type internal This is I was seeing on my Upstream Core router: ATL -CR12406A#sh ip route 10.86.8.0 Routing entry for 10.86.0.0/16 Known via bgp 1, distance 200, metric 0, type locally generated Routing Descriptor Blocks: * directly connected, via Null0 Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1 AS Hops 0, BGP network version This is what I was seeing after I add the network statement: GAATL-WW1-CR12406A#sh ip bgp 10.86.8.0 BGP routing table entry for 10.86.8.0/21, version 2210556 Paths: (2 available, best #2, Advertisements suppressed by an aggregate.) Multipath: eBGP iBGP Not advertised to any peer 2 10.1.2.2 from 10.1.2.2 (10.86.194.5) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external, multipath 2 10.1.2.6 from 10.1.2.6 (10.86.194.2) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external, multipath, best __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
RE: BGP Redistribution question
Hi there The redistribution information you have set in BGP only redistributes routes *learnt* via OSPF into BGP. An alternative solution to using the network command in BGP would have been to use the redistribute static command from within the BGP process context. This would be similar to the redistribute static command you had set up within the OSPF context. The network command tells BGP to originate a route for that network whether or not such a route exists in the router's IP route table, which means it has no connection with the static IP route you defined. Hope that helps. Mike Dell Networking Protocols Group Data Connection Ltd Tel: +44 20 8366 1177 Fax: +44 20 8367 8501 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.dataconnection.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of D Train Sent: 05 August 2004 16:09 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: BGP Redistribution question While looking into a routing issue, I found that one of my routers wasn't passing one of my static routes, being redist into ospf into bgp, and not sure as to why. It has been a while since I have worked with BGP, so I am a little rusty. The solution was for me to add the following BGP network statement... network 10.86.8.0 mask 255.255.248.0. If statics are being redist info ospf, and ospf is basically being redist into bgp, why did I have to have the network statement. Why didn't it put it into BGP and pass it along? Here is the scenario: Router A: ip route 10.86.8.0 255.255.248.0 10.86.138.14 ATL--CR6513A#ping 10.86.138.14 success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/1/4 ms ATL -CR6513A#sh ip route 10.86.8.0 Routing entry for 10.86.8.0/21 Known via static, distance 1, metric 0 Redistributing via ospf 1 Advertised by ospf 1 subnets bgp 2 Routing Descriptor Blocks: * 10.86.138.14 Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1 ATL-CR6513A#sh ip ospf data ext 10.86.8.0 OSPF Router with ID (10.86.194.5) (Process ID 1) Type-5 AS External Link States Routing Bit Set on this LSA LS age: 898 Options: (No TOS-capability, DC) LS Type: AS External Link Link State ID: 10.86.8.0 (External Network Number ) Advertising Router: 10.86.194.2 LS Seq Number: 8D87 Checksum: 0x3D49 Length: 36 Network Mask: /21 Metric Type: 2 (Larger than any link state path) TOS: 0 Metric: 20 Forward Address: 0.0.0.0 External Route Tag: 0 LS age: 554 Options: (No TOS-capability, DC) LS Type: AS External Link Link State ID: 10.86.8.0 (External Network Number ) Advertising Router: 10.86.194.5 LS Seq Number: 8D87 Checksum: 0x2B58 Length: 36 Network Mask: /21 Metric Type: 2 (Larger than any link state path) TOS: 0 Metric: 20 Forward Address: 0.0.0.0 External Route Tag: 0 ATL-CR6513A#sh ip bgp 10.86.8.0 BGP routing table entry for 10.86.0.0/16, version 1078065 Paths: (2 available, best #2, table Default-IP-Routing-Table) Multipath: eBGP Advertised to non peer-group peers: 10.1.2.9 1, (aggregated by 1 10.1.254.253) 10.1.2.9 from 10.1.2.9 (10.1.254.253) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external, atomic-aggregate, multipath 1, (aggregated by 1 10.1.254.252) 10.1.2.1 from 10.1.2.1 (10.1.254.252) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external, atomic-aggregate, multipath, best router ospf 1 redistribute static subnets router bgp 2 no synchronization network x.x.x.x network y.y.y.y network 10.86.8.0 mask 255.255.248.0 ***had to be added for this to work, but wasn't present before hand*** redistribute connected route-map OSPF-Links redistribute ospf 1 route-map WW-OSPF-Routes neighbor 10.1.2.1 remote-as 1 neighbor 10.1.2.1 advertisement-interval 1 neighbor 10.1.2.9 remote-as 1 neighbor 10.1.2.9 advertisement-interval 1 maximum-paths 2 no auto-summary route-map WW-OSPF-Routes permit 10 set metric-type internal This is I was seeing on my Upstream Core router: ATL -CR12406A#sh ip route 10.86.8.0 Routing entry for 10.86.0.0/16 Known via bgp 1, distance 200, metric 0, type locally generated Routing Descriptor Blocks: * directly connected, via Null0 Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1 AS Hops 0, BGP network version This is what I was seeing after I add the network statement: GAATL-WW1-CR12406A#sh ip bgp 10.86.8.0 BGP routing table entry for 10.86.8.0/21, version 2210556 Paths: (2 available, best #2, Advertisements suppressed by an aggregate.) Multipath: eBGP iBGP Not advertised to any peer 2 10.1.2.2 from 10.1.2.2 (10.86.194.5) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external, multipath 2 10.1.2.6 from 10.1.2.6 (10.86.194.2) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external, multipath, best __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Re: Reporting the state of an apparatus to a remote computer patented
Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine wrote: so ... mark lottor's your-machine-room-is-melting thermo+modem circa 1990 is what? prior art? Or the first project that I was senior systems analyst, back in 1979, all published and everything -- remote sensing in farmers' fields via satellite and X.25. (Messages contained type=value tuples, not XML.) Although I wanted to upgrade the PE 7/32s to Unix when that operating system became more stable ;-) This newfangled TCP/IP was starting to look more interesting about then, too Merit staff mailed me the paper, as they weren't accessible to us on-line yet. Seems to me like a company of undergraduates without any real-time systems experience. And a patent office of ignorant monkeys. -- William Allen Simpson Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32
Re: Reporting the state of an apparatus to a remote computer patented
I believe it is time to file the patent on a process for the induction of Oxygen for the purpose of converting molecular structure to energy resulting in the expulsion of CO2. -- -1-2-3-4-5-6-7 Eric Kimminau Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Sales Engineer Office:248.766.9921 Rainfinity Fax: 248.393.8037 www.rainfinity.com EXPERIENCE DATthe induction of A MOVEMENT WITHOUT DISRUPTION
Re: Reporting the state of an apparatus to a remote computer patented
SW Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 16:18:29 -0700 SW From: Scott Whyte [snip] I think I'll patent SNMP traps as low-bandwidth extensible DRM technology. Redirected cron output, EDI, RSS, too, while I'm at it. Looking at archive.org, it seems adventnet.com had XML-based notification before Axeda even existed. Also interesting is http://www.xml.com/pub/a/1999/08/bluestone/ and search for notification. Some additional quick Google searching turns up tidbits such as http://www.voiceshot.com/public/casestudyid57702.asp http://devresource.hp.com/drc/specifications/wsrf/ http://www.opensec.org/articles/01.html Then we have various registrars and payment gateways and their XML-based interfaces, which include notifications and state. So why are Axeda and USPTO oblivious to all this? Eddy -- EverQuick Internet - http://www.everquick.net/ A division of Brotsman Dreger, Inc. - http://www.brotsman.com/ Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building Phone: +1 785 865 5885 Lawrence and [inter]national Phone: +1 316 794 8922 Wichita _ DO NOT send mail to the following addresses: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -*- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -*- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sending mail to spambait addresses is a great way to get blocked.
hotmail admins?
Does anyone know if MSN Hotmail [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a manned box? We just replied there regarding an automated notification that they've blocked one of our hubs. If not, anyone know a hotmail admin contact? -mark -- Mark Jeftovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] Co-founder, easyDNS Technologies Inc. ph. +1-(416)-535-8672 ext 225 fx. +1-(416)-535-0237
Re: Reporting the state of an apparatus to a remote computer patented
Speaking on Deep Background, the Press Secretary whispered: so ... mark lottor's your-machine-room-is-melting thermo+modem circa 1990 is what? prior art? Or the first project that I was senior systems analyst, back in 1979, all published and everything -- remote sensing in farmers' fields via satellite and X.25. (Messages contained type=value tuples, not XML.) I used to work on North Electric Paracode on a pipeline control system. It sent six bits, with 2 of the 5 spaces as longer to count decimal: 1 12 2 13 3 14 4 15 9 35 0 45 It generated the longer pauses with copper-cored -48v telco relays that hung in a little longer. There were relay-based A-D converters to read meter pressures. And shift registers to samplehold meter counts. The acceptance test was in Galion OH on the day President Kennedy said: Good evening my fellow citizens: This Government, as promised, has maintained the closest surveillance of the Soviet Military buildup on the island of Cuba. Within the past week, unmistakable evidence has established the fact that a series of offensive missile sites is now in preparation on that imprisoned island. The purpose of these bases can be none other than to provide a nuclear strike capability against the Western Hemisphere. Does that count as prior art? -- A host is a host from coast to [EMAIL PROTECTED] no one will talk to a host that's close[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead20915-1433
Re: Reporting the state of an apparatus to a remote computer patented
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Edward B. Dreger) [Thu 05 Aug 2004, 19:28 CEST]: [prior art] So why are Axeda and USPTO oblivious to all this? The USPTO doesn't do due diligence research. This is only a small part of the reasons for the current patent mess, however. Axeda has no interest in finding prior art, they have an interest in people paying them money, preferably without having to go to court and possibly face defeat when their emperor turns out to have not been in full dress uniform after all. That won't get the defending party back the money they were forced to spend on the process of pointing that out, however. http://kwiki.ffii.org/SwpatcninoEn -- Niels. -- Today's subliminal thought is:
Re: sms messaging without a net?
Use TAP (telocator access protocol) your monitoring application dials a modem pool logs on and sends a text message to the subscriber. Verizon, Cingular, Nextel all offer this service as does Skytel and most of the paging vendors. Scott C. McGrath On Tue, 3 Aug 2004, Adrian Chadd wrote: On Tue, Aug 03, 2004, Dan Hollis wrote: Does anyone know of a way to send SMS messages without an internet connection? Having a network monitoring system send sms pages via email very quickly runs into chicken-egg scenario. How do you email a page to let the admins know their net has gone down. :-P GNOKII and a suitable nokia phone. http://www.gnokii.org/ Adrian -- Adrian Chadd I'm only a fanboy if [EMAIL PROTECTED] I emailed Wesley Crusher.
Re: hotmail admins?
On 08/05/04, Mark Jeftovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know if MSN Hotmail [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a manned box? No, but there's contact info inside the message body. -- J.D. Falk...one of the worst signs of our danger [EMAIL PROTECTED] is we can't imagine the route from here to utopia. -- Kim Stanley Robinson
Re: XO Mail engineers?
David A.Ulevitch wrote: 1: SRS may just be a boondoggle, we'll see. Considering MARID seems to be sender id first and the rest nowhere .. http://www.internetnews.com/xSP/article.php/3390221 This article has the state of these drafts stated incorrectly. See: http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/mail-archive/msg03062.html There is a last call coming but there is no assurance Sender-ID will escape this process. Judging by remaining flaws, I doubt that it will. CSV will go to last call in October. I think its prospects are better. There are also work ongoing in MASS such as BATV. See: http://www.ietf.org/ietf/04aug/mass.txt This agenda has been amended to include BATV. http://www.brandenburg.com/specifications/draft-crocker-marid-batv-00-06dc.html It will be a draft written by Dave Crocker, John Levine, Sam Silberman, and Tony Finch. This will stop the bounces and virus notices without any help from the far end. I would also expect the Submitter draft in Sender-ID to be dropped. -Doug
Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap?
How much is low latency? I have 6ms RTT over my 8M/800k ADSL, it's usually 6-8ms over an equivalent 2M g.shdsl line. interesting question. i have two adsl lines. pinging the first hop router verizon / lavanet (hawi to honolulu, 25 mins air time by plane) 64 bytes from 64.65.95.73: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=20.637 ms 64 bytes from 64.65.95.73: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=22.186 ms 64 bytes from 64.65.95.73: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=21.965 ms 64 bytes from 64.65.95.73: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=21.723 ms 64 bytes from 64.65.95.73: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=21.538 ms qwest / iinet (30 miles from bainbridge to hellview wa us) 64 bytes from 209.20.186.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=63 time=67.008 ms 64 bytes from 209.20.186.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=63 time=67.700 ms 64 bytes from 209.20.186.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=63 time=56.696 ms 64 bytes from 209.20.186.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=63 time=60.249 ms i do not know why and can get no useful info on provisioning. i know iinet is redback. randy
Re: low-latency bandwidth for cheap?
On Wed, 4 Aug 2004, Randy Bush wrote: How much is low latency? I have 6ms RTT over my 8M/800k ADSL, it's usually 6-8ms over an equivalent 2M g.shdsl line. interesting question. i have two adsl lines. pinging the first hop router Perhaps I should point out that in both my cases the IP router is in the CO and the ATM connection is only the actual physical DSL connection. -- Mikael Abrahamssonemail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
