Peribit "sequence reducers" -- do they worth the investment?
Dear sirs, My bosses are fascinated with the so-called "sequence reducers" from Peribit Networks (www.peribit.com). Are their equipments a good investment? Any opinion will be welcome. Regards, Marlon Borba, CISSP.
RE: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > Owen DeLong > Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 7:08 PM > To: David Barak; nanog@merit.edu > Subject: Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance > > [ SNIP ] > Email. Why should > it apply to VOIP? Just because it's a voice service? 911 > service is not > a standard feature of many voice appliances availble today. It has nothing to do with the appliance. > Various two-way > radios, for example. VOIP is VOIP. It is _NOT_ the PSTN. It's not VoIP either, it's a protocol that is transmitting a voice call in a non-traditional manner and making them any-to-any connections. That doesn't mean that it shouldn't have traditional services. Many State PUC's agree, but they were pre-empted by the FCC Pulver Order. > It may be that > the PSTN loses many of it's customers to VOIP. It may be > that the best > services available are those that integrate the capabilities > of VOIP and > the PSTN, but, in the end, it still remains that they are > different services > and should be subject to different requirements and regulations. 911 is a hot competitive issue. It'll get worked out. -M<
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
USB is better because almost every computer today has USB ports. Not all of them have headset/mic jacks. My personal favorite is the Telex H551 implemented as a USB adapter which provides standard headset/mic jacks. Owen --On Friday, April 1, 2005 2:00 PM -0800 Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> (speaking of amazon, i found that usb headsets are down to ~$34.94 >> now. yay!) > > if you mean the logitech 980130-0403, $32 at newegg > > why is usb better than the headset/mic jacks? > > randy > -- If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me. pgpjfW8pCsQAe.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
> That may be the rule in Florida, but in DC, MD, and UT > (the states in which I've lived in the past 2 > decades), you can be be ticketed if you are driving a > car and not wearing a seatbelt. > This is true in CA, too. However, the law in CA specifically provides that if you are driving a car first registered before XXX (I don't remember the exact year in which seatbelts became mandatory), you are exempt as the car is not required to have seat belts. There are many other lesser known exceptions to the seatbelt law. These are likely true in those other states as well, but, I confess I haven't done detailed legal research outside of my own state. > To make this a little bit more relevant to our > VoIP/911 discussion, would we allow a startup car > company to sell something which looked like a > seatbelt, but was not crash rated above 5 mph? No, of > course we wouldn't. Would that be anticompetitive? > No, it just means that to be a startup car company, > you have to meet the same safety standards as the > existing car companies. > Yes... It is indeed unfortunate that the VOIP providers are choosing to look like telcos, and, more unfortunate that they are providing a service that looks like telephony instead of some of the real possibilities of VOIP. > Why would these arguments not apply to VoIP? > VOIP without 911 is not creating toxic emissions that are harmful to the people around them. VOIP without 911 is simply another form of communication. I haven't heard anyone demanding 911 service for IRC or Email. Why should it apply to VOIP? Just because it's a voice service? 911 service is not a standard feature of many voice appliances availble today. Various two-way radios, for example. VOIP is VOIP. It is _NOT_ the PSTN. It may be that the PSTN loses many of it's customers to VOIP. It may be that the best services available are those that integrate the capabilities of VOIP and the PSTN, but, in the end, it still remains that they are different services and should be subject to different requirements and regulations. Owen -- If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me. pgpJljFmfhNSm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
Thus spake "Adi Linden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Frankly, I'm fine with 911 not working on VoIP lines; I have a cell phone > > for that when needed. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure I've ever > > actually dialed 911 from a land line. > > You're lying on the floor incapacitated and in agony, suffering from some > acute and life threatening medical condition. Your neighbour finds you. > He picks up your landline phone, dials 911 and hears "911 service is not > available from this phone please use another phone...". He goes looking > for another phone while you die and rest in peace. Hopefully he'll pull a cell phone out of his (or my) pocket and not leave my side in such a dire emergency. Or he might run across the hall to the cop that lives there. After noting there's no phones anywhere in the living areas, he'll probably get the hint I don't have a phone line, which is becoming common at least within my social group. I certainly hope he doesn't dig around in my office; there's half a dozen VoIP phones in here, most of which don't work at any given time since I'm constantly futzing with them for work. However, in case someone might chance upon a working one before giving up, I'll go figure out how to make the PBX to route 911 and 9911 to my PSAP instead of one in Canada. Or maybe I'll just put it in an on-screen speed dial. Hmm. S Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do." K5SSS --Isaac Asimov
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
Thus spake "David Barak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > --- Paul Vixie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > most american PBX's don't have 911 as a dialplan. > > you have to dial 9-911. > > We work on different PBXes. The ones on which I work > are specifically configured to respond to 911 OR 9-911 > to avoid a problem. Would YOU want to have been the > person who didn't enable one of those options, and > thus delayed response time? Flagging 9,11 as the same as 9,911 is problematic since 11 is part of the standard NANP dialing plan. You probably won't run into it unless you have rotary phones (* is 11 and # is 112, IIRC), but it's still valid even for touchtone users. You also have problems with someone who intended to dial 9,011 but has a bad 0 key. Lately I've been running into PBXes that don't require 9 for outside lines; if they get a dial timeout (or #) after collecting 4 or 5 digits, they consider it an extension, otherwise they consider it an outside number. What are they supposed to do when someone starts dialing extension 91125? S Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do." K5SSS --Isaac Asimov
RE: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
Also, as a former medical professional who has some actual experience with these scenarios, I'd like to point out that the percentage of times that people are _NOT_ screwed, even if the location pops up and EMS gets there as absolutely fast as possible is less than 1%. That's right... If you are having a serious heart attack, and, are to the point where you are unconscious before EMS arrives, your survival probability is less than 1% with BLS capable EMS. If you are fortunate enough to live in an area where ACLS is provided on the EMS rig, that probability rises to something on the order of 3-5%. So, let's look at this somewhat in perspective. Owen Apologies... I've resisted the desire to post to the off-topic parts of this as long as I can. pgpIku9keXKIW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
> (speaking of amazon, i found that usb headsets are down to ~$34.94 > now. yay!) if you mean the logitech 980130-0403, $32 at newegg why is usb better than the headset/mic jacks? randy
Re: Positioning technology
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Joel Jaeggli wrote: > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Christopher L. Morrow wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Joel Jaeggli wrote: > > > >> > >> On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Roy wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> GPS type technology that works indoors > >>> > >>> http://www.rosum.com/rosum_tv-gps_indoor_location_technology.html > >> > >> the massive uhf antenna on your voip phone will be impressive. > > > > its integreated into the 'handsfree' set... > > Um... This is a whole sip phone... > I was referring to the antenna, and joking that just about the gigantic antenna atop your handsfree headset... > http://twin.uoregon.edu/~joelja/pictures-2005/20022005-japan/dsc02306.jpg > > no base-station, roams between wireless networks, 10 day standby time... >
Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
Oops! Very sorry. (Man, this is embarrassing!) -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: +1 510 486-8634 > Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 14:09:08 -0800 > From: "Kevin Oberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > David, > > While it's true that you must wear seatbelts in most states *IF THE CAR > HAS SEATBELTS WHEN MANUFACTURED*. As far as I know, no state requires the > installation of belts in a 1929 Ford Roadster or any other car that > predates the use of seat belts. > > NOTE: This is NOT going to NANOG. > -- > R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer > Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) > Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: +1 510 486-8634 >
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Randy Bush wrote: > > (speaking of amazon, i found that usb headsets are down to ~$34.94 > > now. yay!) > if you mean the logitech 980130-0403, $32 at newegg > why is usb better than the headset/mic jacks? because integrated or pci audio are often plagued by internal electrical noise. USB largely avoids this by doing all the conversion externally and largely isolated. -Dan
Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
David, While it's true that you must wear seatbelts in most states *IF THE CAR HAS SEATBELTS WHEN MANUFACTURED*. As far as I know, no state requires the installation of belts in a 1929 Ford Roadster or any other car that predates the use of seat belts. NOTE: This is NOT going to NANOG. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: +1 510 486-8634
cable management systems
I've been tasked with evaluating cable management software systems for my employer. I work for a large university with 30-35,000 phones and roughly as many computers spread across 100+ buildings in 5 campuses, with substantial copper, coax, and fiber plants. That said, I'm much more interested in peoples' real-world experiences using CMS software packages in large multi-building environments than I am in vendor marketing materials. Feel free to respond to me off-list if you like. If you use some type of CMS package, did you buy it or built it in-house? Does it integrate with your existing workflow/trouble ticketing systems? Does it integrate with your existing network management/monitoring tools? What processes do you have in place to make sure moves/adds/changes (MACs) are processed through the CMS all the time, every time? There could be both technical and procedural/policy components to this. A CMS with stale data is often worse than having no CMS at all. If you are a CMS software vendor, you may contact me off-list. jms
Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
--- "Jay R. Ashworth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually, and I think the distinction is pertinent > to this discussion, > if the car has no seatbelts, you can drive it just > fine -- as long as > it came that way. You can't *sell* a car without > seatbelts, anymore. That may be the rule in Florida, but in DC, MD, and UT (the states in which I've lived in the past 2 decades), you can be be ticketed if you are driving a car and not wearing a seatbelt. To make this a little bit more relevant to our VoIP/911 discussion, would we allow a startup car company to sell something which looked like a seatbelt, but was not crash rated above 5 mph? No, of course we wouldn't. Would that be anticompetitive? No, it just means that to be a startup car company, you have to meet the same safety standards as the existing car companies. If we want to take the analogy away from something which is a direct safety issue, the exact same argument applies to emissions standards. They're "standard" for a reason: they apply to everyone, and every car maker must comply. (SUVs are classified as trucks, and comply with the truck rules). Why would these arguments not apply to VoIP? David Barak Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise: http://www.listentothefranchise.com __ Yahoo! Messenger Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun. http://www.advision.webevents.yahoo.com/emoticontest
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Jay R. Ashworth") writes:
> There are, as I implied in another post, many unobvious end-to-end
> systemic characteristics that make the PSTN the PSTN that Internet
> Telephony isn't going to be able to fulfill for some time, if ever, due
> to the differing fundamental engineering assumptions that underly it.
i, as a user, only use the PSTN for its reach, not any of its differing
fundamental engineering assumptions, most of which i'd challenge if i
cared, but i don't care. internet-as-disintermediator means clearchannel
can't prevent podcasting, newspapers can't prevent online auctions and
online news websites, politicians can't prevent bloggers, and sears can't
prevent amazon... but as long as we have the FCC and NANP and an
investment-protection policy, PSTN *can* prevent voip, and they'll use
selective enforcement of 911 as one of the tools to do so.
which is why i predict that we'll see more computers doing voice, using
domain names rather than "phone numbers" for rendezvous.
(speaking of amazon, i found that usb headsets are down to ~$34.94 now. yay!)
--
Paul Vixie
Re: Positioning technology
The "A" in A-GPS does not come from 12,500 miles away, as their web site asserts. The "A" is ephemeris and other over-head info, and in this context is transmitted by the mobile phone network. GlobalLocate Corp and SIRF both tout receiver designs that incorporate massively parallel correlator technology. This extends GPS receiver sensitivity down to -159dBmW. Galileo has been approved. It is compatible Navstar and will more than double the GPS constellation. This will provide greater likelihood of favorable signal reception conditions. At 09:45 AM 4/1/2005, Roy wrote: >GPS type technology that works indoors > >http://www.rosum.com/rosum_tv-gps_indoor_location_technology.html > >Roy Engehausen > > >Robert Bonomi wrote: > >>>To: nanog@merit.edu >>>Subject: Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors ) >>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 13:58:39 +0100 >>> >>> >>> >>> >Why can't we have VoIP phones with built-in GPS receivers and a > Because GPS doesn't work indoors. >
Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 10:09:12AM -0800, Bill Nash wrote: > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Church, Chuck wrote: > > > > >Incorrectly chosen switching path can now result in lost packets AND > >indigestion. > > > > Is this mitigated by activating Nabisco Express Forwarding? . o O ( aka diarrhea? ) --- Wayne Bouchard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Dude http://www.typo.org/~web/
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 06:48:08PM +, Paul Vixie wrote: > but go ahead and visit a few large companies and tell me how many such warning > labels you see. as an added boon, note that campuses with blocks of 1000 DIDs > end up using the corporate headquarters or the address of the PBX as the 911 > locator for all 1000 (or 1 or whatever) extensions, making the fire dept > have to select from among 20 different buildings by looking for smoke plumes. > > geez, where's the FCC when you need 'em, huh? They're there, actually. http://www.qwest.com/pcat/large_business/product/1,1016,989_4_25,00.html http://www.xo.com/products/smallgrowing/voice/local/psali/ et al. > i think the selective enforcement here is sickening, and that if old money > telcos can't compete without asset protection, they should file for chapter > 11 rather than muscling newcomer costs up by calling these things "phone" and > then circling their wagons around the NANP. but that's not going to happen, > so i predict that the internet will do what it always does-- work around the > problem. so, domain names and personal computers rather than "phone numbers" > and things-that-look-like-phones. > > i've got nothing against 911, and i love my local fire dept. Glad to hear it. But it's not as easy as all that. There are, as I implied in another post, many unobvious end-to-end systemic characteristics that make the PSTN the PSTN that Internet Telephony isn't going to be able to fulfill for some time, if ever, due to the differing fundamental engineering assumptions that underly it. > if there are people out there who want cell-quality voice, are willing to > live without 911, but want to make multiple calls at once with flat rate > billing, they should be able to choose VoIP (or VoPI, i guess). however, > the FCC seems to have decided that this would be $bad, which i guess from > the point of view of old money telcos and capital inertia, it indeed is. I'm not sure that one assumption supports the other, but... Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me
Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
Does this mean our routers will be edible? :-) On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 04:45:17PM +, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote: > > > Priceless. ;-) > > The Register: > Published Friday 1st April 2005 15:22 GMT > > "Cisco Systems and Kraft Foods shocked investors today > with an unlikely mega-acquisition that will see Cisco > buy Kraft's Nabisco unit for $15bn. Perhaps even more > surprising, former RJR Nabisco and IBM CEO Lou Gerstner > has come out of retirement to head the new firm > tentatively called NaCisco." > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/01/cisco_buys_nabisco/ > > - ferg > > -- > "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson > Engineering Architecture for the Internet > [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Wayne Bouchard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Dude http://www.typo.org/~web/
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 09:30:19AM -0800, Bill Nash wrote: > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Adi Linden wrote: > > If VoIP companies are regulated into providing 911 service, minimum > > availability standards, etc is one thing. Forcing anyone that might be > > transporting VoIP into becoming a Telco is quite another... > > At this point, I think it's simply an argument over the interpretation of > 'signalling technology'. Nope, it's an argument over the *implementation* of 'signallaling technology'. Do *you* want to build your network to 5-nines? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 11:25:27AM -0800, David Barak wrote: > > most american PBX's don't have 911 as a dialplan. > > you have to dial 9-911. > > We work on different PBXes. The ones on which I work > are specifically configured to respond to 911 OR 9-911 > to avoid a problem. Would YOU want to have been the > person who didn't enable one of those options, and > thus delayed response time? Would *you* want to be the person who got a dressing down from the local fire chief because several of your phones had skip-py 1 keys, people trying to dial 9-1-800-555-1212 kept dialling 911 instead? There are *many* possible failure modes involving 911: http://www.911dispatch.com/911_file/911_misdials.html And for background: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9-1-1 It's not as simple as it looks, off topic though it probably is. Cheers, -- jr 'learning opportunity' a -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 09:45:42AM -0800, David Barak wrote:
> >we're going to have to integrate it into our computers. ("dammit, i
> >need a decent quality USB headset for less than USD $300!") because
> >as long as something looks-like-a-phone, the POTS empire can use the
> >NANP (or local equivilent) and 911 regulations (or local equivilent)
> >to prevent newer more efficient carriers from making money from
> >"voice".
>
> Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but your implication seems to be
> "damn the 911, full steam ahead." That's great for optional voice
> (calls to Panama) but not so good for non-optional voice (to the fire
> dept).
An excellent distinction, and one that the government had to deal with
many years ago... when they discovered that AT&T had *many* facets, and
that breaking up the functions they used to use Ma Bell for required
*figuring out what those functions were*. Many of them had cropped up
by accretion, along the way.
To a first approximation, for example, Bell Labs was America's national
research laboratory, and I'm sure the country hasn't entirely
benefitted from what *they've* had to go through.
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Designer Baylink RFC 2100
Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274
If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me
Re: Yes, I realize it's April Fools Day, but... (was: Cisco to merge with Nabisco)
> and nanog-linkexchange :-) Sometimes I think people post links so > they can incite flame wars without actually looking like a flame war > participant. and i think they do it because they don't know how to set up their own blog so they can tell the grandkids what they read today. randy
Re: Yes, I realize it's April Fools Day, but... (was: Cisco to merge with Nabisco)
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 15:02:06 -0500 Joe Provo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have as much humour as the next guy, but [insert renewed call for > nanog-chat or nanog-social or whatever would keep the chitchat in a > different blasted bucket]. Heck, if this is the general bucket than and nanog-linkexchange :-) Sometimes I think people post links so they can incite flame wars without actually looking like a flame war participant. John
Re: Positioning technology
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Christopher L. Morrow wrote: On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Joel Jaeggli wrote: On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Roy wrote: GPS type technology that works indoors http://www.rosum.com/rosum_tv-gps_indoor_location_technology.html the massive uhf antenna on your voip phone will be impressive. its integreated into the 'handsfree' set... Um... This is a whole sip phone... http://twin.uoregon.edu/~joelja/pictures-2005/20022005-japan/dsc02306.jpg no base-station, roams between wireless networks, 10 day standby time... joelja -- -- Joel Jaeggli Unix Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG Key Fingerprint: 5C6E 0104 BAF0 40B0 5BD3 C38B F000 35AB B67F 56B2
Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 04:56:27PM +1000, Jamie Norwood wrote: > On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:33:49 -0800, Alexei Roudnev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Heard of a little thing called 'spam'? > > > > So what? You can use your car as a weapon; should we prohibit you from car > > driving? > > No, but if your car doesn't have seat belts, we don't let you drive > it. Actually, and I think the distinction is pertinent to this discussion, if the car has no seatbelts, you can drive it just fine -- as long as it came that way. You can't *sell* a car without seatbelts, anymore. Cheers, - jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me
Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 11:58:50PM +, Christopher L. Morrow wrote: > Given that, certainly some networks might choose to NOT transport VOIP or > HTTP or BitTorennt across their networks. There are market reasons why > this will, or could, eventually force them to re-evaluate their practices > or face the consequences. > > I don't find it shocking at all that ISP-Y decides to block VOIP, > especially if they have their own VOIP service offering. It might not be > the BEST plan in the long run for them, but certainly it makes some sense > to them... Just don't use their network(s), and complain to their support > organization(s) about the failures on their networks. I think the underlying issue here is the same one that it is when Walmart sells a "sanitized" version of a song with Bad Words in it: They don't *tell you* about it. Disclosure is the real issue. People tend to make assumptions about what "an Internet connection" can do... some of which are compatible with the engineering and business models of various carriers, and some of which aren't. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
Actually, that's an interesting point... What if SIP based phones could "know" do the following: 1. If they know where they are, include: X-Lat: N/S dd:mm:ss.sss X-Lon: E/W ddd:mm:ss.sss In the SIP headers. 2. If they don't know where they are, include: X-Location: unknown 3. 911 is automatically mapped to: SIP://e911.emergency.int E911.emergency.int, would be resolved by ANYCAST DNS servers operated by 911 centers. Ideally, each VOIP capable 911 call center would operate one of these. It would return the IP address of that 911 call center's SIP proxy. Sure, it's not perfect, but, your topologically closest 911 call center is not unlikely to be at least somewhat geographically closest as well. This provides at least as good a service as cell phones without GPSs, and, where possible, as good as cell phones with GPSs. Just random thoughts on the subject. Owen -- If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me. pgpDExKi1dv32.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Yes, I realize it's April Fools Day, but... (was: Cisco to merge with Nabisco)
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 03:02:06PM -0500, Joe Provo wrote: > On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 11:45:16AM -0800, Bill Woodcock wrote: > > ...the "reformed" NANOG list moderation committee seems to suffer > > foolishness somewhat more gladly than the old regime. Could we have a > > little more backbone in the moderation, please? I don't want to be > > reading about crackers until this time next year. > > I have as much humour as the next guy, but [insert renewed call for > nanog-chat or nanog-social or whatever would keep the chitchat in a > different blasted bucket]. Heck, if this is the general bucket than > can we please have an actual -tech where the non-gibberish belongs? > > If randy can tell me how to preemptively configure filter recognition > for 'chitchat', then I'll send him some cookies. No points for > reactive, since that is the present mode. You don't have a 'Kill Thread' button? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me
Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 09:33:16AM -0800, Bill Nash wrote: > 'Network devices are rated by total packet volume, not chassis weight. > Packets may settle during shipping.' No, Bill, that's the VoIP thread. Pay attention. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me
RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Bill Nash wrote: > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Church, Chuck wrote: > > > > Incorrectly chosen switching path can now result in lost packets AND > > indigestion. > > Is this mitigated by activating Nabisco Express Forwarding? Yes, but this is only available with the Gastric Bypass feature set that requires a rather bloated image. Traffic shaping is required to avoid denial of service attacks as the input buffers are easily overloaded when implementing this fix. -- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Administration - [EMAIL PROTECTED] WestNet: Connecting you to the planet. 805 884-6323 WB6RDV NetLojix Communications, Inc. - http://www.netlojix.com/
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why can't we have VoIP phones with built-in GPS receivers and a built-in 911 dialplan that makes the phone transmit your coordinates along with the emergency call? are you serious? if you are, why don't you ask for a pony while you're at it. [EMAIL PROTECTED]< The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
Re: Yes, I realize it's April Fools Day, but... (was: Cisco to merge with Nabisco)
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 11:45:16AM -0800, Bill Woodcock wrote: > > ...the "reformed" NANOG list moderation committee seems to suffer > foolishness somewhat more gladly than the old regime. Could we have a > little more backbone in the moderation, please? I don't want to be > reading about crackers until this time next year. I have as much humour as the next guy, but [insert renewed call for nanog-chat or nanog-social or whatever would keep the chitchat in a different blasted bucket]. Heck, if this is the general bucket than can we please have an actual -tech where the non-gibberish belongs? If randy can tell me how to preemptively configure filter recognition for 'chitchat', then I'll send him some cookies. No points for reactive, since that is the present mode. Joe -- RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE
RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
They don't already? -ejay > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Church, Chuck > Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 11:54 AM > To: nanog@merit.edu > Subject: RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco > > > Incorrectly chosen switching path can now result in lost packets AND > indigestion. > > > Chuck
Re: Yes, I realize it's April Fools Day, but... (was: Cisco to merge with Nabisco)
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Bill Woodcock wrote: ...the "reformed" NANOG list moderation committee seems to suffer foolishness somewhat more gladly than the old regime. Could we have a little more backbone in the moderation, please? I don't want to be reading about crackers until this time next year. "In a stunning response to Cisco's purchase of Nabisco, Juniper Networks has rapidly countered this foray into cross-marketing by quickly snapping up food conglomerate General Mills. In a statement released by early this afternoon, Juniper Networks founder Pradeep Sindhu points out, 'It's no surprise Cisco bought a company renowned for snack foods, look at their entire product lineup. Garbage in, garbage out. Keep an eye out for our seriously robust line of Cheerio routers. All the fiber you can handle!'" - billn
Re: Yes, I realize it's April Fools Day, but... (was: Cisco to merge with Nabisco)
> ...the "reformed" NANOG list moderation committee seems to suffer > foolishness somewhat more gladly than the old regime. Could we have a > little more backbone in the moderation, please? I don't want to be > reading about crackers until this time next year. fix your mail reader's filters, don't call john ascroft. personally, i find the thread about as useful as many here. ymmv. randy
Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Apr 1 13:19:44 2005 > Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 20:18:38 +0100 > From: Richard Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: nanog@merit.edu > Subject: Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco > > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:15:55 -0800 > "Dave Hilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Must we now redefine "nibbles" & "bytes". > > Well, I guess remote configs will have to be disabled - from now on the > only permitted access will be via the cereal port ... Which is, I'm told, on the new models, just _barley_ workable. Something about going against the grain, or so it seems. Rumor mill also says the next kernel will load _really_ fast. Just a few millet-seconds. caveat: I'm not sure if this is really rye humor, or just corny.
RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
You mean SNACK engineers, right? - Andy > Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 13:35:11 -0600 > From: "Church, Chuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Bill Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: nanog@merit.edu > Subject: RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco > > > Yes. According to the Keebler elves, who now are 3rd level TAC > engineers... --- Andy Grosser, CCNP, CCDA andy at meniscus dot org ---
Yes, I realize it's April Fools Day, but... (was: Cisco to merge with Nabisco)
...the "reformed" NANOG list moderation committee seems to suffer foolishness somewhat more gladly than the old regime. Could we have a little more backbone in the moderation, please? I don't want to be reading about crackers until this time next year. -Bill
RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
Yes. According to the Keebler elves, who now are 3rd level TAC engineers... Chuck Church Lead Design Engineer CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE Netco Government Services - Design & Implementation Team 1210 N. Parker Rd. Greenville, SC 29609 Home office: 864-335-9473 Cell: 703-819-3495 [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x4371A48D -Original Message- From: Bill Nash [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 1:09 PM To: Church, Chuck Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Church, Chuck wrote: > > Incorrectly chosen switching path can now result in lost packets AND > indigestion. > Is this mitigated by activating Nabisco Express Forwarding?
qwest packet drops?
hello anyone seeing issues with qwest dropping packets today? wyatt Wyatt Smiarli, Esq. Web Network Administrator RESIST.COM White Point Publishing, LLC. + 1 (760) 728-9817 _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Steve Sobol wrote: > > "Church, Chuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Incorrectly chosen switching path can now result in lost packets AND > > indigestion. > > I wonder how they're going to integrate Chips Ahoy into the existing Cisco > lineup. Nabisco always used to advertise that Chips Ahoy has far more chips > than any of the competing products. > With new process techology, the entire box of cookies can be integrated into a single chip. This will improve eating performance to over 3 million cookies per second (CPS). Unfortunatly, there are still thermal issues that must be resolved so each package will contain a heat sink and fan that can be strapped to your head. Both chips and cookies will now be available in 6" wafers, with or without chocolate coating. To ensure quality, all cookies will be factory tested for opens or shorts in the chocolate layer. The new lineup of cookies will also incorporate BIST (built in self taste) to insure consistant flavor. CAD/EDA vendors are now rushing to update their software to incorporate constraint based routing for multi-layer chocolate and vanilla wafers. New firewall software will be able to convert web site cookies into real cookies so you can snack while you browse. > > -- > JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638) > Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED > > "The wisdom of a fool won't set you free" > --New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle" > > > > +--+ | Michael MoscovitchCiteNet Telecom Inc. | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: (514) 861-5050 | +--+
Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:15:55 -0800 "Dave Hilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Must we now redefine "nibbles" & "bytes". Well, I guess remote configs will have to be disabled - from now on the only permitted access will be via the cereal port ... Richard
Community Experiences with the InterNIC Whois Data Problem Reports Sys tem
While I was poking around on the ICANN and GNSO web sites, I ran across this report which might be of interest: Community Experiences with the InterNIC Whois Data Problem Reports System 31 March 2005 http://www.icann.org/whois/wdprs-report-final-31mar05.htm "This Report summarizes ICANN's experience with the operation of the Whois Data Problem Report system (WDPRS) during a 12-month reporting period that ended 28 February 2005. ICANN developed this system to receive and track complaints about inaccurate or incomplete Whois data entries. Individuals who encounter such entries may notify ICANN by completing an online form, which is then forwarded to the registrar of record for appropriate action. The WDPRS is one of the tools that ICANN uses to improve the accuracy of Whois data. Last year ICANN streamlined the system to provide for both greater automation and expanded functionality. The new system includes all gTLDs; the replaced system addressed .com, .net and .org only." - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
"Church, Chuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Incorrectly chosen switching path can now result in lost packets AND > indigestion. I wonder how they're going to integrate Chips Ahoy into the existing Cisco lineup. Nabisco always used to advertise that Chips Ahoy has far more chips than any of the competing products. -- JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638) Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED "The wisdom of a fool won't set you free" --New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle"
Re: Positioning technology
Joel Jaeggli wrote: On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Roy wrote: GPS type technology that works indoors http://www.rosum.com/rosum_tv-gps_indoor_location_technology.html the massive uhf antenna on your voip phone will be impressive. Its a great excuse to build TV and video into your VOIP phone. OR build VOIP into your TV set. Roy Engehausen
Re: Positioning technology
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Joel Jaeggli wrote: > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Roy wrote: > > > > > GPS type technology that works indoors > > > > http://www.rosum.com/rosum_tv-gps_indoor_location_technology.html > > the massive uhf antenna on your voip phone will be impressive. its integreated into the 'handsfree' set...
Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 10:15:55 PST, Dave Hilton said: > > Must we now redefine "nibbles" & "bytes". > Read RFC4042 - they've just been increased 12.5%. Supersize-me! :) pgpQxtmI8nUVh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
Resellers beware- New distribution channels will be opened up, Girl Scouts will soon be seen offering byte-able cookies in blue-green boxes, door to door and in unlikely places! Stale inventory is not expected to become a problem even with the increased distribution.
Re: Disappointment at DENIC over Poor Rating in .net Procedure
> For what it's worth, a highly scientific measurement from my house in > Berkeley, the authoritative location for all quantitative evaluation of > the Internet, using secret proprietary round-trip latency-measurement > tools... > > a.nic.de, 100 packets, 7% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max = 163.454/199.368/494.708 ms > > c.de.net, 100 packets, 2% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max = 15.071/46.131/724.957 ms > > z.nic.de, 100 packets, 3% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max = 180.9/222.723/578.468 ms > > s.de.net, 100 packets, 0% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max = 184.26/219.786/501.547 ms > > l.de.net, 100 packets, 1% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max = 170.435/211.573/568.7 ms > > f.nic.de, 100 packets, 5% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max = 171.717/206.826/489.947 ms > > Overall for DENIC: 3% loss and 15ms / 166ms / 725ms min/avg/max latency. > c.de.net is the one I'd be using, and it gives 2% loss and 46ms latency. c.de.net is the one you WISH your resolver would use. sometimes it might, others it might not. randy
RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
Must we now redefine "nibbles" & "bytes".
RE: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
--On 01 April 2005 10:05 -0800 Alexander Kiwerski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: And for the record, the GPS locators currently in cell phones tend *not* to work indoors, so even if you are lucky enough to live in an area where E911 is plugged into your cell phone carrier's locator service, you still have a high probability of being screwed. No idea why this is relevant to NANOG, but cell phone location works by cell triangulation, not by GPS. So if the cell phone is working indoors, the locator service should work. Alex
RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
At 01:09 PM 4/1/2005, you wrote: On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Church, Chuck wrote: Incorrectly chosen switching path can now result in lost packets AND indigestion. Is this mitigated by activating Nabisco Express Forwarding? That would be really bad! You would almost immediately gain 300lbs if you enabled NEF! The path goes from process switched to almost 100% efficient switching path for the energy from the cookies, crackers, and other goodies directly to your fat cells. You have been warned. COS (Cookie Operating System) 14.5(T)XB7 should resolve that bug though and allow full pleasure with no path to the fat cells. DO NOT try to eat any cookies from anyone other than NaCisco at the same time though. There may be compatibility problems... -R Tellurian Networks - The Ultimate Internet Connection http://www.tellurian.com | 888-TELLURIAN | 973-300-9211 "Well done is better than well said." - Benjamin Franklin
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
--- Adi Linden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If VoIP companies are regulated into providing 911 > service, minimum > availability standards, etc is one thing. Forcing > anyone that might be > transporting VoIP into becoming a Telco is quite > another... I agree - the former is exactly the direction I think we should go. David Barak Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise: http://www.listentothefranchise.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates. http://personals.yahoo.com
Weekly Routing Table Report
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. Daily listings are sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 02 Apr, 2005 Analysis Summary BGP routing table entries examined: 158858 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 92606 Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 76314 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 19277 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 16774 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix:7827 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:2503 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 68 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 4.5 Max AS path length visible: 23 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table:31 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table:0 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 13 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 1394234240 Equivalent to 83 /8s, 26 /16s and 83 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 37.6 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 59.1 Percentage of available address space allocated: 63.7 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 74106 APNIC Region Analysis Summary - Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes:32310 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 15324 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 30240 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:15312 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:2239 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:653 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:338 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:4.4 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 16 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 180060544 Equivalent to 10 /8s, 187 /16s and 129 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 66.8 APNIC AS Blocks4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 23552-24575 APNIC Address Blocks 58/7, 60/7, 124/7, 126/8, 202/7, 210/7, 218/7, 220/7 and 222/8 ARIN Region Analysis Summary Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes: 86512 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation:52745 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks:67502 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 24656 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 9794 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:3550 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 926 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 4.3 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 21 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 243382272 Equivalent to 14 /8s, 129 /16s and 184 /24s Percentage of available ARIN address space announced: 69.1 ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106 2138-2584, 2615-2772, 2823-2829, 2880-3153 3354-4607, 4865-5119, 5632-6655, 6912-7466 7723-8191, 10240-12287, 13312-15359, 16384-17407 18432-20479, 21504-23551, 25600-26591, 26624-27647, 29696-30719, 31744-33791 ARIN Address Blocks24/8, 63/8, 64/6, 68/7, 70/6, 198/7, 204/6, 208/7 and 216/8 RIPE Region Analysis Summary Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 30109 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation:20838 Prefixes being announced from the RIPE address blocks:27161 Unique aggregates announced from the RIPE address blocks: 18075 RIPE Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 6476 RIPE Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:3412 RIPE Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:1083 Average RIPE Region AS path length visible: 5.1 Max RIPE Region AS path length visible: 23 Number of RIPE addresses announced to Internet: 199895488 Equivalent to 11 /8s, 23
RE: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
>> Frankly, I'm fine with 911 not working on VoIP lines; I have a cell phone >> for that when needed. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure I've ever >> actually dialed 911 from a land line. > >You're lying on the floor incapacitated and in agony, suffering from some >acute and life threatening medical condition. Your neighbour finds you. >He picks up your landline phone, dials 911 and hears "911 service is not >available from this phone please use another phone...". He goes looking >for another phone while you die and rest in peace. And let's not forget the: You collapse from a heart attack at 1:00 AM, dial 911 on your cell phone and go unconscious before the operator answers. You die because the operator doesn't have your location auto-magically popping up on his/her screen. And for the record, the GPS locators currently in cell phones tend *not* to work indoors, so even if you are lucky enough to live in an area where E911 is plugged into your cell phone carrier's locator service, you still have a high probability of being screwed. /Alex K.
RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Church, Chuck wrote: Incorrectly chosen switching path can now result in lost packets AND indigestion. Is this mitigated by activating Nabisco Express Forwarding?
Re: Telcordia report on ICANN .net RFP Evaluation
> But my recent post was not "against" (or "for", for that matter) > Verisign. I am just disappointed that ICANN did not have the integrity > to select a company that is _truly_ independent to judge the > applicants. In the prior round ICANN picked a company doing non-trivial business with the LNP/NANPA side of applicant NeuStar. > Would someone from ICANN care to explain their decision process? I > cannot believe they did not know the apparent conflict of interest. Your turn. You can just make the last flight to Argintina. Eric
.net report slammed again
Not an April 1st lark, from The Register: "The report that decided ownership of the .net registry has come under heavy criticism for a second time this week." http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/01/net_report_spat/ - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
Incorrectly chosen switching path can now result in lost packets AND indigestion. Chuck -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Hilton Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 12:44 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco Runts are hereinafter referred to as crumbs. Hilton
Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Apr 1 11:30:15 2005 > Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 09:33:16 -0800 (PST) > From: Bill Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Robert Boyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: nanog@merit.edu > Subject: Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco > > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Robert Boyle wrote: > > > Brilliant move Cisco! This should give Cisco a keen and unprecedented > > insight > > into the inner workings of the cracker culture which will enable better > > network security. > > > > 'Network devices are rated by total packet volume, not chassis weight. > Packets may settle during shipping.' > Can't wait to see the new model router, with all the Nabisco chips inside. A whole new meaning to 'debugging'."Quick, Ma, the Flit!"
RE: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
Runts are hereinafter referred to as crumbs. Hilton
Re: Telcordia report on ICANN .net RFP Evaluation
> >ICANN Opens Public Comment Forum on .NET Evaluators' Report > >29 March 2005 /dev/null.
RE: RFC 4041
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Fergie (Paul Ferguson) > Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 9:22 AM > To: nanog@merit.edu > Subject: RFC 4041 > > > > > Requirements for Morality Sections in Routing Area Drafts > ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc4041.txt I realize comments would better be directed to the appropriate IETF work area, but this seems like a natural extension to RFC3514 ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3514.txt Lee > > Cheers, > > - ferg > > -- > "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson > Engineering Architecture for the Internet > [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Re: Disappointment at DENIC over Poor Rating in .net Procedure
> a.nic.de is with RIPE in Amsterdam > f.nic.de and z.nic.de are in Frankfurt > c.de.net. is with Savvis in Santa Clara > s.de.net is with Deutsche Telekom in Germany > l.de.net I see over Mediaways/Telefonica DE in London (what a poor choice, scary) For what it's worth, a highly scientific measurement from my house in Berkeley, the authoritative location for all quantitative evaluation of the Internet, using secret proprietary round-trip latency-measurement tools... a.nic.de, 100 packets, 7% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 163.454/199.368/494.708 ms c.de.net, 100 packets, 2% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 15.071/46.131/724.957 ms z.nic.de, 100 packets, 3% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 180.9/222.723/578.468 ms s.de.net, 100 packets, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 184.26/219.786/501.547 ms l.de.net, 100 packets, 1% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 170.435/211.573/568.7 ms f.nic.de, 100 packets, 5% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 171.717/206.826/489.947 ms Overall for DENIC: 3% loss and 15ms / 166ms / 725ms min/avg/max latency. c.de.net is the one I'd be using, and it gives 2% loss and 46ms latency. a.gtld.biz, 100 packets, 1% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 91.234/122.828/504.932 ms b.gtld.biz, 100 packets, 2% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 84.284/113.632/391.781 ms c.gtld.biz, 100 packets, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 11.425/34.311/351.397 ms d.gtld.biz, 100 packets, 3% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 151.251/189.494/592.378 ms e.gtld.biz, 100 packets, 8% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 183.608/222.593/571.288 ms f.gtld.biz, 100 packets, 4% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 191.292/220.594/501.575 ms g.gtld.biz, 100 packets, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 73.427/98.744/272.382 ms h.gtld.biz, 100 packets, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 11.389/17.377/62.261 ms Overall for Sentan: 2% loss and 11ms / 127ms / 592ms min/avg/max latency. h.gtld.biz is the one I'd be using, and it gives 0% loss and 17ms latency. a2.nstld.com, 100 packets, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 75.234/105.418/428.176 ms c2.nstld.com, 100 packets, 9% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 74.604/99.534/355.924 ms d2.nstld.com, 100 packets, 1% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 106.717/144.679/459.303 ms e2.nstld.com, 100 packets, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 24.709/63.391/602.586 ms f2.nstld.com, 100 packets, 34% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 30.717/65.595/365.876 ms g2.nstld.com, 100 packets, 1% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 14.06/61.24/380.896 ms l2.nstld.com, 100 packets, 1% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 72.493/112.227/852.949 ms Overall for Verisign: 7% loss and 14ms / 93ms / 852ms min/avg/max latency. g2.nstld.com is the one I'd be using, and it gives 1% loss and 61ms latency. This was just a test of the root DNS measurement system. Had this been a real measurement of the root DNS system, it would have been conducted by Nevil Brownlee, from his house in Auckland. -Bill
Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
> Frankly, I'm fine with 911 not working on VoIP lines; I have a cell phone > for that when needed. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure I've ever > actually dialed 911 from a land line. You're lying on the floor incapacitated and in agony, suffering from some acute and life threatening medical condition. Your neighbour finds you. He picks up your landline phone, dials 911 and hears "911 service is not available from this phone please use another phone...". He goes looking for another phone while you die and rest in peace. Adi
Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Robert Boyle wrote: Brilliant move Cisco! This should give Cisco a keen and unprecedented insight into the inner workings of the cracker culture which will enable better network security. 'Network devices are rated by total packet volume, not chassis weight. Packets may settle during shipping.' - billn
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Adi Linden wrote: If VoIP companies are regulated into providing 911 service, minimum availability standards, etc is one thing. Forcing anyone that might be transporting VoIP into becoming a Telco is quite another... At this point, I think it's simply an argument over the interpretation of 'signalling technology'. - billn
Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Stephen Sprunk wrote: I understand the woes of mixing 911 and VoIP myself, although I'm not a Vonage user. The VoIP phone on my desk connects 911 calls to the Vancouver, BC, PSAP (since it's off a PBX at work), but I also know the direct-dial number for the local Dallas, TX, PSAP -- the emergency line, not the "administrative" line that Vonage uses -- and if I bothered, I could easily set the PBX to reroute 911 there instead. Location information is tougher, but I have to tell the operator my location on a cell phone too, so it's not a deal-killer. It kinda makes you wonder how people contacted the police in the early 80s, completely discounting that people had even conceived of the notion of 'emergency' before the 70s. When I was a kid, I was made to memorize my home address, my phone number, an emergency contact number, and the local police number. 911, while a great idea, is a classic example of the desire to let technology replace basic common sense. I don't mean to get off on a rant here.. - billn
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
> Personally, I'm quite glad for government regulations > regarding food safety, home inspection, and lots of > other things which are safety related. There are > other restrictions which I'm not thrilled about, but I > have yet to hear a compelling reason (which does not > inherently boil down to a libertarian argument) to > stop requiring that anything which defines itself as a > phone-based voice service should have a working 911 > connection. The VoIP companies currently call > themselves "phone" companies, and by doing so, IMO, > they open themselves to this level of regulation. If VoIP companies are regulated into providing 911 service, minimum availability standards, etc is one thing. Forcing anyone that might be transporting VoIP into becoming a Telco is quite another... Adi
Re: Positioning technology
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Roy wrote: GPS type technology that works indoors http://www.rosum.com/rosum_tv-gps_indoor_location_technology.html the massive uhf antenna on your voip phone will be impressive. Roy Engehausen Robert Bonomi wrote: To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors ) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 13:58:39 +0100 Why can't we have VoIP phones with built-in GPS receivers and a Because GPS doesn't work indoors. -- -- Joel Jaeggli Unix Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG Key Fingerprint: 5C6E 0104 BAF0 40B0 5BD3 C38B F000 35AB B67F 56B2
Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
Thus spake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > VoIP is great. VoPI (Voice over Public Internet) is great when > > it works, but I wouldn't bet my life or my business on it. > > Who says that you have to disconnect your home phone > just because you use VoIP? In fact, one of the advantages > of DSL over cable, is that the phone line is still there. > Buy a bright red "hot-line" phone, put a sticker on it > that says "For Emergencies Only!" and another one with > "911". Place it in the front hall so that any visitors > to your home see it when they enter. Disconnect the > ringer on the hot-line phone so that you aren't > disturbed by wrong numbers and telemarketers. > > Then use VoIP for all your regular calls. So you're saying everyone should continue paying $30/mo for a POTS line just for 911 calls? A typical Vonage customer buys the service to replace, not supplement, their POTS line. Frankly, I'm fine with 911 not working on VoIP lines; I have a cell phone for that when needed. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure I've ever actually dialed 911 from a land line. I understand the woes of mixing 911 and VoIP myself, although I'm not a Vonage user. The VoIP phone on my desk connects 911 calls to the Vancouver, BC, PSAP (since it's off a PBX at work), but I also know the direct-dial number for the local Dallas, TX, PSAP -- the emergency line, not the "administrative" line that Vonage uses -- and if I bothered, I could easily set the PBX to reroute 911 there instead. Location information is tougher, but I have to tell the operator my location on a cell phone too, so it's not a deal-killer. S Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do." K5SSS --Isaac Asimov
Re: Cisco to merge with Nabisco
At 11:45 AM 4/1/2005, you wrote: Priceless. ;-) The Register: Published Friday 1st April 2005 15:22 GMT "Cisco Systems and Kraft Foods shocked investors today with an unlikely mega-acquisition that will see Cisco buy Kraft's Nabisco unit for $15bn. Perhaps even more surprising, former RJR Nabisco and IBM CEO Lou Gerstner has come out of retirement to head the new firm tentatively called NaCisco." http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/01/cisco_buys_nabisco/ Brilliant move Cisco! This should give Cisco a keen and unprecedented insight into the inner workings of the cracker culture which will enable better network security. -Robert I know it's terrible, but I just couldn't help myself! ;) Tellurian Networks - The Ultimate Internet Connection http://www.tellurian.com | 888-TELLURIAN | 973-300-9211 "Well done is better than well said." - Benjamin Franklin
Cisco to merge with Nabisco
Priceless. ;-) The Register: Published Friday 1st April 2005 15:22 GMT "Cisco Systems and Kraft Foods shocked investors today with an unlikely mega-acquisition that will see Cisco buy Kraft's Nabisco unit for $15bn. Perhaps even more surprising, former RJR Nabisco and IBM CEO Lou Gerstner has come out of retirement to head the new firm tentatively called NaCisco." http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/01/cisco_buys_nabisco/ - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 05:06:00PM -0800, Bill Nash wrote: > I find this to be entertaining, since as a VOIP consumer, I'm reimbursing > my ISP for the cost of the traffic as part of my monthly tithe. Why > exactly are networks taking this stance to QoS VOIP traffic, generated by > their customers, into uselessness? Oh, c'mon, Bill; you *know* why. :-) This goes back to when I ran a Teeny Tiny ISP in '95 on a 256K DSL link and 40 modems, and got massacred by iPhone: The carriers based their provisioning, and thus pricing, on a traffic engineering model that was reasonable *until the Big New Application became a runaway hit*. You're not paying (at least at the lower levels of the food chain) for what you *could* utilize, you're paying for what you're likely to utilize, *given what the people who set the pricing knew at the time*. Pricing depends on oversubscription; safe oversubscription depends on having a pretty decent handle on the traffic patterns, at the macro level. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me
Re: outage/maintenance window opinion
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 04:28:01PM -0500, Howard, W. Lee wrote: > Luke Parrish: > > In this situation we were expecting to be done for the majority of > > the maintenance window, but yes I see your point. However I block > > out a 3 hour window for maintenance because the activities I am > > performing on the network could easily cause a longer service outage > > than planned as we all know. So if I plan for a 4 hour window but > > only expect 20 minutes of downtime that actually turns into 3 hours, > > as long as it is inside the maintenance window specified then it > > should not go against outage minutes. It was done in the window for > > a reason... > > I'd agree that as long as it's back up before the end of the window, > you're covered. However, if the outage extends beyond the end of the > window, I would take the the position that made me look worst. That > shows how seriously you take your maintenance window, and I think this > kind of integrity gives you credibility later. You're both right. :-) Yeah, Luke; that *is* why outage windows get defined, and, fundamentally, what matters is how your SLA contract is written, and clearly it should explicitly define this situation so no one has to guess. But, from a business, rather than legal, standpoint, Lee's right: the choice *which* you should explicitly enshrine in that language probably ought to be the one that helps your clients more than it helps you: hey; you can write it off in Marketing's budget. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth[EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & AssociatesThe Things I Think'87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me
Re: Telcordia report on ICANN .net RFP Evaluation
At 8:48 +0530 3/30/05, someone wrote: Telcordia ranking VRSN way ahead does seem to be raising some hackles here Telcordia did not rank VRSN "way ahead" of the rest. Being that I work for one of the bidding teams (Sentan), I merely want to point out that the above statement is untrue. Below are two quotes from the report that contradict "way ahead." From the report's section 1.2 (Executive Summary of the Findings): "The evaluators find that all of the vendors have the capability to run the .NET registry." and later in the section, "VeriSign has a small numerical edge over Sentan that is not statistically significant given the methodology used to rate the RFP responses." I encourage concerned folks to draw opinions from reading the report itself, at least the executive summary. Here is the link to the ICANN page announcing the report: http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-28mar05.htm And the report itself: http://www.icann.org/tlds/dotnet-reassignment/net-rfp-finalreport-28mar05.pdf FYI, For discussions on the evaluation report, ICANN's web page says: ICANN Opens Public Comment Forum on .NET Evaluators' Report 29 March 2005 -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis+1-571-434-5468 NeuStar Achieving total enlightenment has taught me that ignorance is bliss.
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Barak) writes: > > sure as hell, we'll see laws requiring every home to have a telephone, > > to have that telephone in the kitchen or other main room of the home, > > and to be clearly marked. then the POTS tithe comes back, it'll be > > with vengeance. > > So given that you see this as likely, and by your tone, I'm guessing that > you're not in favor of this outcome, what do you propose? i propose that if a gov't is going to mandate something, that they be required to ensure competition for the revenue thus enabled, or they be required to provide it in a not-for-profit manner (like water and sewage). again-- i like 911 and i love my local fire department. what i do not love is protectionism for capital inertia, in the form of selectively enforced regulations (like 911). one of the reasons i like open source so much is that people will only run BIND9 (et al) if they think it's the best way to solve their problem, and one of the alternatives that's always available is "code fork!". this tends to make for responsiveness on the part of vendors. and while i've been heard to quibble about some of the restrictive aspects of GPL (vs BSD), the same is true of emacs, gcc, linux, freebsd, and everything else i use. i want that kind of alternative available for my voice communications or indeed anything i spend money on. 911 is to POTS as MSIE is to Windows-- it helps put the "lock" in "lock-in". -- Paul Vixie
Positioning technology
GPS type technology that works indoors http://www.rosum.com/rosum_tv-gps_indoor_location_technology.html Roy Engehausen Robert Bonomi wrote: To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors ) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 13:58:39 +0100 Why can't we have VoIP phones with built-in GPS receivers and a Because GPS doesn't work indoors.
Re: RFC 4041
You need more brain power to understand that draft, so I recommend you quickly get new Google Gulp: http://www.google.com/googlegulp/ On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote: Requirements for Morality Sections in Routing Area Drafts ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc4041.txt Cheers, - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFC 4041
Requirements for Morality Sections in Routing Area Drafts ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc4041.txt Cheers, - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Telcordia report on ICANN .net RFP Evaluation
On Apr 1, 2005, at 1:07 AM, Dave Crocker wrote: I do believe that study is open to peer review? Telcordia ranking VRSN way ahead does seem to be raising some hackles here it is oddly interesting to see the persistent -- one might even say tenacious -- clearly bi-modal clustering of assessments about Verisign. From what I can tell, one cluster is primarily composed of people with serious (and probably larger-scale) network services operation experience and the other cluster has pretty much no one of that ilk... Interesting assessment! I had not noticed that the only outspoken supporters of Verisign were not truly operational. But my recent post was not "against" (or "for", for that matter) Verisign. I am just disappointed that ICANN did not have the integrity to select a company that is _truly_ independent to judge the applicants. Would someone from ICANN care to explain their decision process? I cannot believe they did not know the apparent conflict of interest. -- TTFN, patrick
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
> To: nanog@merit.edu > Subject: Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors ) > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 13:58:39 +0100 > > > > > Why can't we have VoIP phones with built-in GPS receivers and a > > > > Because GPS doesn't work indoors. > > GPS works anywhere where the satellite signals can be detected. > http://www.u-blox.com/technology/supersense.html > Obviously, signals get weaker when they have to pass through > solid materials like building walls. But people are already > working on more sensitive receivers. > > But, leaving that aside, if the IP phone has a battery > inside it and if it can record previous GPS locations > and if you move the phone outside to a new location, then > it could remember the last GPS detectable location and > use that when it connects to the net again. > There's a reason these kinds of capabilities aren't in VoIP "phones". That reason is *money*. GPS capability in the handset would raise the cost of low-end VoIP handsets by an order of magnitude, at least. Using battery-power for the GPS while not plugged into the line is a laugh. Think about what happens when the batteries run down, *before* the phone reaches it's final destination. Suppose it's in an airplane at the time. The 911 call shows a "location" of 37,000 ft _above_ the middle of Lake Michigan. Care to imagine the lawsuit when somebody *dies*, when 'emergency responce' didn't get there in time, _because_ the phone lied about where it was at? Note: this is all getting _fair_ afield from the chartered NANOG subject matter. I'll shut up.
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Fri 01 Apr 2005, 14:57 CEST]: >>> Why can't we have VoIP phones with built-in GPS receivers and a >> Because GPS doesn't work indoors. > > GPS works anywhere where the satellite signals can be detected. > http://www.u-blox.com/technology/supersense.html > Obviously, signals get weaker when they have to pass through > solid materials like building walls. But people are already > working on more sensitive receivers. > > But, leaving that aside, if the IP phone has a battery > inside it and if it can record previous GPS locations > and if you move the phone outside to a new location, then > it could remember the last GPS detectable location and > use that when it connects to the net again. Sure, why not put in a GSM receiver as well? You don't even need a subscription or even a SIM card to make emergency calls. Or what about a boiler plate, so your phone can make you a nice cup of tea? That'd be useful, not having to get up in the middle of a conversation anymore to get fresh tea. -- Niels. -- The idle mind is the devil's playground
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
> > Why can't we have VoIP phones with built-in GPS receivers and a > > Because GPS doesn't work indoors. GPS works anywhere where the satellite signals can be detected. http://www.u-blox.com/technology/supersense.html Obviously, signals get weaker when they have to pass through solid materials like building walls. But people are already working on more sensitive receivers. But, leaving that aside, if the IP phone has a battery inside it and if it can record previous GPS locations and if you move the phone outside to a new location, then it could remember the last GPS detectable location and use that when it connects to the net again. --Michael Dillon P.S. assuming that phones like this come on the market, we might see the following exchange on a web forum somewhere... Q. Hi. My ACME VoIP Phone is complaining that it can't provide E-911 service. I reset it, pulled the plug, but nothing helps. A. Do you live in an apartment building? Q. Yeah, why? What difference does that make? A. Trust me. Unplug the phone, take it outside and walk to the nearest major intersection. Cross all 4 streets at the intersection, walking around until you get back to where you first arrived at the intersection. Then go home, plug in your ACME VoIP Phone and try again. Q. WOW! It worked! I can't believe it. Now I have a new problem. I told my friends how I fixed the phone and now they all think I'm smoking strange substances. A. Well, you win some, and you lose some. :-)
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
--- Owen DeLong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I can't speak for Paul, but, I propose that the > government stop telling > me what I do or don't need, and what risks are or > are not acceptable for > my family and allow me to make those choices for > myself. This belief == libertarianism, no? I take it you'd rather inspect your own food processing plants, and not have a licensing system in place for elctrical work (et. al.)? Personally, I'm quite glad for government regulations regarding food safety, home inspection, and lots of other things which are safety related. There are other restrictions which I'm not thrilled about, but I have yet to hear a compelling reason (which does not inherently boil down to a libertarian argument) to stop requiring that anything which defines itself as a phone-based voice service should have a working 911 connection. The VoIP companies currently call themselves "phone" companies, and by doing so, IMO, they open themselves to this level of regulation. >If I want 911 > service, then, I should subscribe to at least one > telephony service which > provides it, and, which charges me for it. If I am > willing to risk life > without reliable 911 service, then, that should be > my choice, and, I should > be able to choose voice carriers which do not > provide 911 service and I > should not have to pay for it. Should you be able to subscribe to the fire department? How about the police? That's how it used to be, but that model didn't work nearly as well as universal coverage paid by taxes does. David Barak Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise: http://www.listentothefranchise.com __ Yahoo! Messenger Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun. http://www.advision.webevents.yahoo.com/emoticontest
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Fri 01 Apr 2005, 13:33 CEST]: > Why can't we have VoIP phones with built-in GPS receivers and a Because GPS doesn't work indoors. -- Niels. -- The idle mind is the devil's playground
The Cidr Report
This report has been generated at Fri Apr 1 21:44:47 2005 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of an AS4637 (Reach) router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org/as4637 for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date PrefixesCIDR Agg
26-03-05154810 106377
27-03-05155148 106497
27-03-05155155 106485
28-03-05155145 106544
29-03-05155203 106651
30-03-05155573 106553
31-03-05155520 106583
01-04-05155627 106572
AS Summary
19174 Number of ASes in routing system
7831 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix
1470 Largest number of prefixes announced by an AS
AS7018 : ATT-INTERNET4 - AT&T WorldNet Services
90490368 Largest address span announced by an AS (/32s)
AS721 : DLA-ASNBLOCK-AS - DoD Network Information Center
Aggregation Summary
The algorithm used in this report proposes aggregation only
when there is a precise match using the AS path, so as
to preserve traffic transit policies. Aggregation is also
proposed across non-advertised address space ('holes').
--- 01Apr05 ---
ASnumNetsNow NetsAggr NetGain % Gain Description
Table 10 1066154893531.5% All ASes
AS4323 1086 225 86179.3% TWTC - Time Warner Telecom
AS18566 7807 77399.1% COVAD - Covad Communications
AS4134 882 212 67076.0% CHINANET-BACKBONE
No.31,Jin-rong Street
AS721 1121 566 55549.5% DLA-ASNBLOCK-AS - DoD Network
Information Center
AS22773 475 23 45295.2% CCINET-2 - Cox Communications
Inc.
AS27364 465 22 44395.3% ACS-INTERNET - Armstrong Cable
Services
AS6197 880 467 41346.9% BATI-ATL - BellSouth Network
Solutions, Inc
AS7018 1470 1084 38626.3% ATT-INTERNET4 - AT&T WorldNet
Services
AS3602 507 144 36371.6% SPRINT-CA-AS - Sprint Canada
Inc.
AS17676 427 77 35082.0% JPNIC-JP-ASN-BLOCK Japan
Network Information Center
AS6478 515 167 34867.6% ATT-INTERNET3 - AT&T WorldNet
Services
AS9929 347 45 30287.0% CNCNET-CN China Netcom Corp.
AS4766 572 277 29551.6% KIXS-AS-KR Korea Telecom
AS14654 2626 25697.7% WAYPORT - Wayport
AS9443 374 123 25167.1% INTERNETPRIMUS-AS-AP Primus
Telecommunications
AS1239 904 656 24827.4% SPRINTLINK - Sprint
AS6140 383 137 24664.2% IMPSAT-USA - ImpSat
AS7545 466 226 24051.5% TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Internet
Pty Ltd
AS9583 663 428 23535.4% SIFY-AS-IN Sify Limited
AS4355 289 60 22979.2% ERMS-EARTHLNK - EARTHLINK, INC
AS15270 262 34 22887.0% AS-PAETEC-NET - PaeTec.net -a
division of
PaeTecCommunications, Inc.
AS6198 459 232 22749.5% BATI-MIA - BellSouth Network
Solutions, Inc
AS5668 477 265 21244.4% AS-5668 - CenturyTel Internet
Holdings, Inc.
AS11456 311 106 20565.9% NUVOX - NuVox Communications,
Inc.
AS9498 263 60 20377.2% BBIL-AP BHARTI BT INTERNET
LTD.
AS2386 835 633 20224.2% INS-AS - AT&T Data
Communications Services
AS6167 274 78 19671.5% CELLCO-PART - Cellco
Partnership
AS6517 311 124 18760.1% YIPESCOM - Yipes
Communications, Inc.
AS6147 205 20 18590.2% Telefonica del Peru S.A.A.
AS16852 239 66 17372.4% FOCAL-CHICAGO - Focal Data
Communications of Illinois
Total 16504 6570 993460.2% Top 30 total
Possible Bogus Routes
24.138.80.0/20
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
> most american PBX's don't have 911 as a dialplan. you have to dial 9-911. > this isn't a violation of the law as long as there's a warning labelabout it. > but go ahead and visit a few large companies and tell me how many such warning > labels you see. as an added boon, note that campuses with blocks of1000 DIDs > end up using the corporate headquarters or the address of the PBX as the 911 > locator for all 1000 (or 1 or whatever) extensions, making the fire dept > have to select from among 20 different buildings by looking for smoke plumes. Why can't we have VoIP phones with built-in GPS receivers and a built-in 911 dialplan that makes the phone transmit your coordinates along with the emergency call? That solves the campus problem. And since VoIP phones are nearly as portable as cellphones, this makes good sense. If you take your VoIP phone to grandma's house at Thanksgiving, plug into her broadband router and need to call for assistance, it would just work. Of course there is the little matter of a national E-911 center to accept the calls, decode the GPS info, and dispatch the call correctly... --Michael Dillon
P2P Usage Increases was: (Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance)
> > > My guess would be that PtP is a much bigger bandwidth hog than gaming, > > > especially for the people who have high upstream capacity (10meg+). > > > > the seven biggest isps in japan recently cooperated on a really > > good paper measuring a lot about broadband use in japan. it is > > in the most recent ccr, v35n1 jan 05. sorry, siteseer seems not > > to have it yet. > I haven't seen that issue of SIGCOMM CCR, however I suspect that > the slides at this URL are related to the paper since they > give thanks to seven organizations on the last slide and the > graphs show recent data > http://www.iijlab.net/~kjc/papers/srccs-rbb-traffic-2up.pdf The paper itself is also available at that site, at http://www.iijlab.net/~kjc/papers/ivs-rbb-traffic.pdf Andrew Odlyzko
Re: Disappointment at DENIC over Poor Rating in .net Procedure
* Bill Woodcock: > On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Florian Weimer wrote: > > Yes, the selection of criteria could be biased. Or Telcordia compared > > apples and oranges when it compared Verisign's 100 ms to DENIC's > > 200 ms (or what the actual numbers where). > > Yeah, I was a little curious about the composition of the latency > number as well... [...] But I'd certainly be curious as to their > actual methodology. It's described in the report. Basically, their comparison is based on the submitted proposals. Telcordia did conduct site visits, but did not perform any network measurements. The latter would have been impossible anyway because some of the proposed infrastructure does not exist yet.
P2P Usage Increases was: (Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance)
> > My guess would be that PtP is a much bigger bandwidth hog than gaming, > > especially for the people who have high upstream capacity (10meg+). > > the seven biggest isps in japan recently cooperated on a really > good paper measuring a lot about broadband use in japan. it is > in the most recent ccr, v35n1 jan 05. sorry, siteseer seems not > to have it yet. I haven't seen that issue of SIGCOMM CCR, however I suspect that the slides at this URL are related to the paper since they give thanks to seven organizations on the last slide and the graphs show recent data http://www.iijlab.net/~kjc/papers/srccs-rbb-traffic-2up.pdf --Michael Dillon
Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
> VoIP is great. VoPI (Voice over Public Internet) is great when it works, > but I wouldn't bet my life or my business on it. Who says that you have to disconnect your home phone just because you use VoIP? In fact, one of the advantages of DSL over cable, is that the phone line is still there. Buy a bright red "hot-line" phone, put a sticker on it that says "For Emergencies Only!" and another one with "911". Place it in the front hall so that any visitors to your home see it when they enter. Disconnect the ringer on the hot-line phone so that you aren't disturbed by wrong numbers and telemarketers. Then use VoIP for all your regular calls. Why can't the parasitic phone companies like Vonage tell their customers stuff like this. If they can't provide real E-911 service then they should make it clear to subscribers that they need to keep a real phone line in place. It would help if telephone set manufacturers would start supplying hot-line emergency phones with a ringer-off switch and the warning notice embedded in the plastic. They could be sold in a set with a new-fangled SIP phone. --Michael Dillon
Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )
On 4/1/2005 12:34 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > on the other hand I disagree with your example that the US is inventing > everything, Nope, didn't say that either. > Also, look at where implementation of high-speed local access is being > done, it's not in the US anyway. Also a reflection of culture. We aren't high-density as in Korea, and we don't have massive natural resource and taxation revenues to afford fiber drops into every isolated corner of a single state as in Norway, and so forth. More to the point, we're not going to move into single-room dwellings or invert our economy (both of which are suggested from time to time--"the koreans/norwegians can do it, so can we..."). Instead some fool will develop (and deploy) unproven technologies that may or may not eventually solve our problem, at great pain and expense to us all. Even more to the point, of course, we're glad that others are successfully using (and will be using) the technologies that work out in spite of our apparent foolishness in pursuing them. But really, all I'm saying here is that nationalizing and/or mandating technology may work great elsewhere (and even in some areas here) but generally speaking its not in our culture and the suggestion falls flat. I'm not bragging, I'm explaining why. > If the PTTs can sit on their access networks without regulation, there > will be no competition in the access, and then the market comes to a > standstill because building new access networks costs an arm and a leg, > especially if right-of-way is hard to come by and you have to negotiate > with every land-owner on the way. It's in everybody's interest to reduce capitalization requirements and increase access. See voluntary tower-sharing agreements, for example. http://wethersfieldct.com/B+C/PZC_05-18-2004.html and start reading at 'tower sharing'; I'd prefer to see this made easier, certainly. -- Eric A. Hallhttp://www.ehsco.com/ Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/
Re: Disappointment at DENIC over Poor Rating in .net Procedure
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Florian Weimer) wrote: > > As always: Never trust a statistic you have not faked yourself ... > > I doubt that DENIC will ever publish the technical part of its bid, so > this isn't convincing. Like you already admitted on the DENIC list, this has of course been made public, since the largest parts of all proposals can be found on the ICANN web site. DENIC's proposal can be found here: http://www.icann.org/tlds/net-rfp/applications/denic.htm Elmar.
