Fwd: APRICOT 2005 Fellowship and CFP Announcement
>From Philip Smith. Begin forwarded message: Subject: APRICOT 2005 Fellowship and CFP Announcement Hi everyone, Please find below the call for presentations and tutorials for the APRICOT 2005 conference in Kyoto, Japan. philip -- CALL FOR APRICOT 2005 CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS AND TUTORIALS (Asia Pacific Regional Internet Conference on Operational Technologies) 16-25 February 2005 Kyoto International Conference Hall (KICH) Kyoto, Japan The APRICOT 2005 Program Committee is seeking contributors to the program. We are looking for people who would like to: * Offer a technical tutorial on an appropriate topic; and/or * Participate in the technical conference sessions as a speaker. * Convene and chair a Birds of a Feather (BOF) session. You can make a proposal by completing the online form at http://www.2005.apricot.net/cfp.html SCHEDULE 3 September 2004: Call for Papers Announcement 27 September 2004: All Proposed Session Presentations and Tutorials Submitted 12 October 2004: Presentations and Tutorials Selected and Announced 25 October 2004: Presentation Titles and Abstracts Submitted 4 February 2005: All Speaker Presentation Materials Submitted for Review 21 February to 22 February 2005: Tutorials 23 February to 24 February 2005: Conference PROGRAM TOPICS Tutorial and Technical Conference Session topics which have been designated for this year, include: Tutorial: Wireless Infrastructure Broadcast and Contents Delivery Internet Backbone Operations MPLS and Traffic Engineering Enterprise Security Broadband Network Design InterConnections and Peering Intranet Operations Enterprise Network IPv6 Transition DNS Operations Internet Telephony Conference: Internet Telephony (organized by APEET) IPv6 - Transition/Network Services/Applications (organized by APIPv6TF) Asia Pacific Peering Security Incident Handling (organized by APCERT) Anti-Spam and Net Abuse (organized by APCAUCE) Internet Routing and Backbone Operations The program committee will consider proposals in any of these areas, and also in new areas. If you have an idea for a tutorial or session subject that is not listed, please feel free to submit it to us. When considering a subject, remember that the APRICOT audience is mainly comprised of technical network operators and engineers with a wide range of experience levels from beginners to multi-year experience. IMPORTANT NOTE APRICOT is a TECHNICAL conference. The program committee is charged with maintaining the technical standard of APRICOT, and will therefore not accept inappropriate materials. It is the expectation of both the selection committee and the audience that the presenter be a technical professional not a marketing or sales person. TUTORIALS Tutorials are full-day workshops (4 sessions of 90 min. in length) which focus on a particular subject in-depth. They may be presented by a single Instructor, or a team of instructors working together. You can propose a tutorial by completing the online form at http://www.2005.apricot.net/cfp.html TECHNICAL CONFERENCE SESSIONS The APRICOT Technical Conference Schedule is made up of 1.5 hour conference sessions, each including up to 3 speakers (therefore allowing 20-30 minutes per speaker). Sessions are chaired by persons of appropriate expertise in the subject matter of the session, and will include ample time for questions from the audience. If you would like to propose a presentation, complete the online form at http://www.2005.apricot.net/cfp.html FUNDING AND SUPPORT Only in exceptional circumstances of hardship will APRICOT be able to consider assisting with travel expenses of conference speakers or tutorial instructors. Registration fees will be waived for presenters to attend the portion of the program they are speaking in. MAKING A PROPOSAL AS A SPEAKER, INSTRUCTOR If you would like to be considered as a tutorial instructor or conference session speaker, please complete the online form at http://www.2005.apricot.net/cfp.html BEFORE 27 September 2004. The following information will be requested on the online form. -- 1. SPEAKER PERSONAL INFORMATION First (Given) Name: Middle Name: Last (Family) Name: Title: Company / School / Affiliation: Organization URL: Country: email: Personal URL: Short Bio (please include enough information that we can determine that you are a qualified speaker on this subject): 2. PROPOSAL CONTENT Tutorial or Technical Conference Session Presentation (choose one for each submission): Subject (Choose one from): Tutorial: Wireless Infrastructure Broadcast and Contents Delivery Internet Backbone Operations MPLS and Traffic Engineering Enterprise Security Broadband Network Design InterConnections and Peering Intranet Operations Enterprise Network IPv6 Transition DNS Operations Internet Telephony Conference: Internet Telephony (organized by APEET) IPv6 - Transition/Network Services/Applications (organized by APIPv6TF) Asia Pacific
Re: RIPE Golden Networks Document ID - 229/210/178
well RIPE is the RIR for Europe. RIPE-229 is, from my viewpoint, arbitrary and capricious. the root servers are -ONE- set of interesting servers. what about the web sites that point to these important documents? or the time servers, or my NOC monitoring machines? The idea of an Internet Registry stepping into giving routing advice is a leap of faith. An RIR can tell you what was delegated - but presuming to give advice on what is important for everyone that uses IP protocols is over the top. so no, i don't use this document as a guideline for golden networks. the advice on dampening is important tho and it worthwhile. On Sep 3, 2004, at 3:44, Rodney Joffe wrote: Hello folks, This is actually NANOG applicable, despite referring to RIPE... ;-) How many of you who manage BGP speaking networks implement the RIPE best practices regarding dampening parameters for so-called golden networks? See: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/routeflap-damping.html and http://www.qorbit.net/documents/golden-networks (thanks, Steve!) If you do, what parameters do you use, or do you not dampen the golden networks at all? If you don't implement ripe-229, why not? If there is enough interest/response (i.e if anyone besides me feels this is a real operational issue currently and wants to deal with it), I'll work on compiling the responses and producing a report. Note: A *significant* number of networks appear to *not* follow ripe-229 guidelines at all. Thanks, Rodney Joffe CenterGate Research Group, LLC http://www.centergate.com Technology so advanced, even WE don't understand it(R)
Re: [6bone] Reserved ASN 64702, 6to4, 2 ghosts, other oddities and still no working contacts...
[Internal error while calling pgp, raw data follows] % -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- % % Bill Manning [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: % % % Another funny one: % % 3ffe:3::/32 Subnet of 3ffe::/24 Mismatching origin ASN, % % should be 4555 (now: 29216) % % welcome to more root server testing w/ IPv6. % % I don't mind that at all, I'd rather see them sticking 's % into the glue :), but I do wonder why they are not using the % RIPE space they got assigned and which is being announced. they are, for the production service. this is for experimental activities. % % 2001:7fe::/32 is for I-rootserver-net-20030916 got assigned on % 2003-09-16 and was to be seen since 2003-09-17 02:51:14. % This new 6bone can be seen since yesterday, thus there is to % wonder for what purpose. There is no difference between 6bone % and RIR space, unless they want to make a sign that the % '6bone is not production'... bing! the 3ffe:: entries are for experimental services -only- while the 2001:: will eventually be production services. and the test are -not- primarly about connectivity. % % Also these are the current paths: % % 3ffe:3::/32 8447 1853 786 109 109 4555 29216 IGP % 3ffe:3::/32 1213 3549 6939 109 4555 29216 IGP % 3ffe:3::/32 12779 3549 6939 109 4555 29216 IGP % 3ffe:3::/32 6939 109 4555 29216 IGP % % 2001:7fe::/32 has the same issue: % 2001:7fe::/32 8954 4555 29216 % 2001:7fe::/32 12779 6175 4555 29216 % 2001:7fe::/32 15516 3257 2497 6939 109 4555 29216 % % As Cisco (109) and EP.Net are US based I wonder if % Stockholm suddenly moved to the US :) % That last one as from Stockholm - US - Japan - Denmark... % If they really want to test then use some native european % connectivity, there is a *lot* of that over here. % And if they can't get native, please tunnel to a *local* % ISP and not to something in the US, see Minimal IPv6 Peering: % http://ip6.de.easynet.net/ipv6-minimum-peering.txt % % K has a RIPE delegation too, but that has not been seen (yet :) % But I heared good stories about work being done on that. % % Greets, % Jeroen % % -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- % Version: Unfix PGP for Outlook Alpha 13 Int. % Comment: Jeroen Massar / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://unfix.org/~jeroen/ % % iQA/AwUBP4fgXimqKFIzPnwjEQJl1ACcD2aK8TGQU/YD04sZsFuMQoMSex8AoLcH % 7aO9jplhb76T11d5hALTf6BD % =gyub % -END PGP SIGNATURE- % [End of raw data] -- --bill Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).
Re: [6bone] Reserved ASN 64702, 6to4, 2 ghosts, other oddities and still no working contacts...
% Another funny one: % 3ffe:3::/32 Subnet of 3ffe::/24 Mismatching origin ASN, % should be 4555 (now: 29216) welcome to more root server testing w/ IPv6. --bill Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).
