Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 09:43:35AM -0800, Mike Lyon wrote: > Could someone who reads (or is suppose to read...) empty the mailbox > over at [EMAIL PROTECTED] It would appear that little has changed: > The following addresses had delivery problems: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Permanent Failure: > 522_mailbox_full;_sz=629145594/629145600_ct=70494/10 > Delivery last attempted at Sat, 25 Oct 2003 12:52:40 - Remember, though -- per Comcast's official position -- they "take the spam problem seriously". --Rsk
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lovely... Could someone who reads (or is suppose to read...) empty the mailbox over at [EMAIL PROTECTED] < sccrmxc20.comcast.net #5.0.0522_mailbox_full;_sz=629145600/629145600_ct=2746/10 smtp; Permanent Failure: Other undefined Status> Thanks, Mike
Peering [EMAIL PROTECTED] BOF XV at NANOG 40 in Bellevue
[ If you are NOT ATTENDING this NANOG in Bellevue, please disregard
]
We have some time at this Peering BOF XV for some Peering Coordinator
introductions. This is
a chance for Peering Coordinators to introduce themselves to the group
before we break for beers.
How does this work? We solicit Peering Coordinators (with this note), asking
them to characterize
their networks and peering policies in general ways ("content heavy" or
"access (eyeball) -heavy,"
"Open" vs. "Selective" vs. "Restrictive" policies etc.).
From the answers we will select a set of ISP Peering Coordinators to share a
short (2-3 minute)
description of their network, what they look for in a peer, etc., allowing
the audience to put a face
with the name of the ISP. At the end of the Peering BOF, Peering
Coordinators will have time to
speak with Peering Coordinators of ISPs they seek to interconnect with. The
expectation is
that these interactions will lead to the Peering Negotiations stage, the
first step towards a more
fully meshed and therefore resilient Internet.
If you are a Peering Coordinator and wish to participate in the Peering
Personals section of the Peering BOF,
please reply to me (privately) with the answers the following 8 questions:
--
1) Name:
2) Title: ___
3) Company: _
4) AS#: _
5) Check which one best applies:
___ We are an ISP (sell access to the Internet)
--OR--
___ We are a Non-ISP (content company, etc.)
___ We are Content-Heavy
--OR--
___ We are Access-Heavy
6) Check whichever ones apply:
___ We are an "Open" peer (The answer to peering requests is YES)
___ We are a "Selective" peer (The answer to peering requests is YES
but we may have a few 'objective and meetable' pre-requisites such as
"three geographically diverse locations with 10Mbps on each coast")
___ We are a "Restrictive" peer (The answer to peering requests is generally NO)
___ We have huge volumes of traffic (lots of users and/or lots of content)
(huge: > 1 Gbps total outbound traffic to peers and transit providers)
___ We have a global network
___ We require Contracts for Peering
7) Current Peering Locations: ___
8) Planned (3-6 mos) Peering Locations: ___
Bill
--
//
// William B. Norton
// Co-Founder and Chief Technical Liaison, Equinix
// GSM Mobile: 650-315-8635
// Skype, Y!IM: williambnorton
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: [arin-announce] ARIN Board Advises Internet Community on Migration to IPv6]
this might be of interest to the operator community. --bill - forwarded --- ARIN and the other Regional Internet Registries have distributed Internet Protocol version 6, IPv6, alongside IPv4 since 1999. To date, ARIN has issued both protocol versions in tandem and has not advocated one over the other. ARIN has closely monitored trends in demand and distribution for both protocol versions with the understanding that the IPv4 available resource pool would continue to diminish. The available IPv4 resource pool has now been reduced to the point that ARIN is compelled to advise the Internet community that migration to IPv6 is necessary for any applications that require ongoing availability from ARIN of contiguous IP number resources. On 7 May 2007, the ARIN Board of Trustees passed the following resolution: RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF ARIN ON INTERNET PROTOCOL NUMBERING RESOURCE AVAILABILITY WHEREAS, community access to Internet Protocol (IP) numbering Resources has proved essential to the successful growth of the Internet; and, WHEREAS, ongoing community access to Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) numbering resources can not be assured indefinitely; and, WHEREAS, Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) numbering resources are available and suitable for many Internet applications, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board of Trustees hereby advises the Internet community that migration to IPv6 numbering resources is necessary for any applications which require ongoing availability from ARIN of contiguous IP numbering resources; and, BE IT ORDERED, that this Board of Trustees hereby directs ARIN staff to take any and all measures necessary to assure veracity of applications to ARIN for IPv4 numbering resources; and, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board of Trustees hereby requests the ARIN Advisory Council to consider Internet Numbering Resource Policy changes advisable to encourage migration to IPv6 numbering resources where possible. Implementation of this resolution will include both internal and external components. Internally, ARIN will review its resource request procedures and continue to provide policy experience reports to the Advisory Council. Externally, ARIN will send progress announcements to the ARIN community as well as the wider technical audience, government agencies, and media outlets. ARIN will produce new documentation, from basic introductory fact sheets to FAQs on how this resolution will affect users in the region. ARIN will focus on IPv6 in many of its general outreach activities, such as speaking engagements, trade shows, and technical community meetings. For more information visit the IPv6 Information Center at: http://www.arin.net/v6/v6-info.html. Regards, Raymond A. Plzak President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) - End forwarded message -
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: Two Tiered Internet]
somhow, this esacped into a private thread. i'm pretty
sure that there is a fairly high thermal component to this
thread and not too many photons... so this is it for me
on this thread...
- Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
> > > You start with a flawed assumption, you end up with wrong conclusions.
> > > Who said this had anything to do with "the Internet"?
> >
> > well... the press? the telco marketing droids??
>
> It seems to be the press and the Google lobbyist droids trying to stir
> things up that use the "Internet" word the most. A problem is some
> reporters think anything that uses IP (Internet Protocol) means the
> same thing as "the Internet."
that is common... in part 'cause you can't ever tell if its
-not- part of the Internet. (I note the subject line of this
thread talks about a two-tier Internet... which we are both
actively responding to... :) If its not Internet, then lets
call it what you claim it is, private virtual pipes, some of
which touch the commodity Internet and some which run a private,
IP-based network for Telcos use only. Right there next to the
dedicated copper, lambdas, and glass that they lease to others.
> Most, but not all, of the telco droids have tried to stay on message,
> that this is about bringing more competition to video. It is not the
> Internet, it is not cable TV, it is IPTV. But when people expand the
> acronym IPTV, it seems to come out as Internet video. Much like VOIP
> seems to turn into Voice over the Internet, even though a lot of VOIP
> uses private networks.
-IF- we can be assured that the telco/ folks -REALLY- will keep
(or cable co)
parts of thier network fabric isolated and disconnected from
the Internet, and have the ability for random, third-party
inspection that these closed, private networks that use IP
-STAY- that way, then sure.
> > they should not call it "the Internet" then should they? :)
> Maybe it would have helped if the technologists had chosen less similar
> names for the network ("Internet") and the networking protocal ("IP").
> There are lots of networks using IP which are not the Internet.
again, its nearly impossible to tell when/if an IP network is
or is not part of what might be part of the Internet. Mobil
nodes are common and mobil networks are becoming so. Virtually
every (save two) IP based network that I have touched in the
last 25 years has at one point or another touched other IP based
networks... thus becoming part of the Internet... as seen by others.
That said, there are many IPbased networks which rarely touch
what most think of as the Internet. I've come to the conclusion
that the commodity or commercial services Internet is a small subset
of the larger Internet. as usual, YMMV.
--bill
- End forwarded message -
FW: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [afnog] New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to RIPE NCC
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of leo vegoda Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 8:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: afnog@afnog.org Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [afnog] New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to RIPE NCC Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC received the IPv6 address range 2001:4C00::/23 from the IANA in December 2004. You may wish to adjust any filters you have in place accordingly. More information on the IP space administered by the RIPE NCC can be found on our web site at: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/smallest-alloc-sizes.html> Regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC ___ afnog mailing list afnog@afnog.org http://listserv2.cfi.co.ug/mailman/listinfo/afnog
