Re: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
> > How about INOC-DBA, which is supposed to have a clue threshold you > > obtained an ASN by some means in order to have a dial-by-asn phone. > > Obtaining an ASN isn't much of a clue threshold. However, obtaining an ASN is a volume threshold which is far more important to the people on the receiving end of the communications. --Michael Dillon
RE: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
> > I believe SBC was one of the pilot users in 1993. > using what protocol set? Sorry, 2003. -Bill
RE: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
> I believe SBC was one of the pilot users in 1993. using what protocol set? randy
RE: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Henry Linneweh wrote: > The only reference I see to this, is this non profit > research org > www.pch.net/inoc-dba/ > and a Nanog reference page to the same thing > http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0505/upadhaya.html Yes, those are correct URLs. Quite a few SBC folks use the system, and I believe SBC was one of the pilot users in 1993. You might check with Ren or Sean Donelan if you want details on SBC's participation. -Bill
Re: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Jeroen Massar wrote: > Maybe the RIR's should keep a "Free VoIP phone with each ASN" special? NIC.BR, the Brazilian NIR, does exactly that... they've given out about 200 INOC-DBA phones with ASNs in the last three years. NetNod does the same in Sweden, and the WAIA does the same in Australia... All told I think about 500 of the INOC-DBA phones out there were given out in that manner, though not by RIRs per se. > (Though they would have to raise their membership fees then I guess) Probably not, actually... To the best of my knowledge, the RIRs pretty much all run budget surpluses that they can't get membership agreement as to what to do with. -Bill
Re: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
Something I (unless skipped) didn't see being mentioned in the former threads was: http://www.peeringdb.com, although meant for peerings it does contain quite a large number of direct links/phones to various NOC's and a lot of other very useful information. On Fri, 2006-02-03 at 15:59 -0500, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: [..] > With all due respect to the INOC-DBA project, which is actually somewhat > interesting (from a "I want to play with free IP phones too" perspective > if nothing else), it isn't a workable solution to operational contacts > yet. The only real issue I see is that it would require a major part of the NOC's to be present to be really effective. Currently for the NOC's that are there this seems to work perfectly well. Maybe the RIR's should keep a "Free VoIP phone with each ASN" special? (Though they would have to raise their membership fees then I guess) > Among other reasons, it seems that the vast majority of the users are just > people playing around with it at their desk in the office, never expecting > it to ring for anything serious. I've been at a couple of places where the INOC-DBA phones are at least in grabbing distance, usually literaly next to the normal phone, unless the POTS system was integrated with some VoIP system and the POTS came in over the VoIP phone. > It might be more interesting if people > actually set up 1234*NOC extensions, but puck.nether.net seems like a far > more effective choice. The INOC-DBA system so far doesn't seem to > integrate particularly will with existing NOC phones or systems that are > not IP based, and you really have to go out of your way to get it to > forward to multiple people like say an engineer on duty. Just install an asterisk, add one of the POTS cards et tada you have your POTS and VoIP system integrated as one solution. For INOC-DBA you need a VoIP gateway, but the endpoint doesn't need to be VoIP ;) Call forwarding is one of the really nice features of any phone system. Personally I think that VoIP systems are really nice especially from the perspective where one can roam around with the endpoint and/or login using multiple methods and just pick it up wherever one wants Greets, Jeroen (hats off for the PCH folks!) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
RE: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
The only reference I see to this, is this non profit research org www.pch.net/inoc-dba/ and a Nanog reference page to the same thing http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0505/upadhaya.html -Henry --- "Wayne Gustavus (nanog)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > To chime with my own experiences, the few times I > have used the INOC-DBA > system for an Inter-provider issue have been quite > successful. The > results were much faster and much less frustrating > that calling through > the 'front door' of the provider's NOC. > > And it is fair to say that the system only gains > usefulness with wider > implementation among network providers and > appropriate deployment of the > phones within the organization. Within Verizon, I > deployed the phones > with our IP-NOC (yes, we have *many* NOCs, but only > 1 handles IP > issues), with our IP escalation team (TAC), and on > my desk (footnote: my > desk recently moved and haven't gotten the inoc-dba > phone back up on the > new net infrastructure). > > In light of recent purchases by VZ, if none of the > above methods work, > just call Chris Morrow. Just kidding Chris! :-) > > - Wayne > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Christopher L. Morrow > > Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 4:31 PM > > To: Richard A Steenbergen > > Cc: Sean Donelan; nanog@merit.edu > > Subject: Re: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA? > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > > > > > And then of course there is that whole "using > the IP > > network to contact > > > someone about an IP network issue" thing that > doesn't seem > > terribly well > > > thought out... Admittedly I haven't looked at > the INOC-DBA > > stuff in a > > > while, there could have been some massive > advancement that > > I'm not aware > > > of, but I suspect that the situation is still > "more work > > needed". Existing > > > phone systems, call centers, and engineers with > cellphones, > > seems to be a > > > much safer bet right now. > > > > there is no one solution... to anything except > 'life' > > (solution == death). > > So, how about looking at it as a tool to use. You > might have your > > provider's $Person_for_Problem in your cell phone, > use that > > if you can. > > Use their Customer Service number or use their > INOC number putting > > down a project that does work because it's not the > holy grail isn't > > productive. > > > > > >
RE: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Henry Linneweh wrote: > > The only reference I see to this, is this non profit > research org > www.pch.net/inoc-dba/ > and a Nanog reference page to the same thing > http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0505/upadhaya.html > that would be it... I'm sure that, aside from the presentation and emails on-list about it, if you have other questions Woody can probably answer them, or other users could...
RE: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
To chime with my own experiences, the few times I have used the INOC-DBA system for an Inter-provider issue have been quite successful. The results were much faster and much less frustrating that calling through the 'front door' of the provider's NOC. And it is fair to say that the system only gains usefulness with wider implementation among network providers and appropriate deployment of the phones within the organization. Within Verizon, I deployed the phones with our IP-NOC (yes, we have *many* NOCs, but only 1 handles IP issues), with our IP escalation team (TAC), and on my desk (footnote: my desk recently moved and haven't gotten the inoc-dba phone back up on the new net infrastructure). In light of recent purchases by VZ, if none of the above methods work, just call Chris Morrow. Just kidding Chris! :-) - Wayne > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Christopher L. Morrow > Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 4:31 PM > To: Richard A Steenbergen > Cc: Sean Donelan; nanog@merit.edu > Subject: Re: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA? > > > > > On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > > > And then of course there is that whole "using the IP > network to contact > > someone about an IP network issue" thing that doesn't seem > terribly well > > thought out... Admittedly I haven't looked at the INOC-DBA > stuff in a > > while, there could have been some massive advancement that > I'm not aware > > of, but I suspect that the situation is still "more work > needed". Existing > > phone systems, call centers, and engineers with cellphones, > seems to be a > > much safer bet right now. > > there is no one solution... to anything except 'life' > (solution == death). > So, how about looking at it as a tool to use. You might have your > provider's $Person_for_Problem in your cell phone, use that > if you can. > Use their Customer Service number or use their INOC number putting > down a project that does work because it's not the holy grail isn't > productive. > >
Re: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > And then of course there is that whole "using the IP network to contact > someone about an IP network issue" thing that doesn't seem terribly well > thought out... Admittedly I haven't looked at the INOC-DBA stuff in a > while, there could have been some massive advancement that I'm not aware > of, but I suspect that the situation is still "more work needed". Existing > phone systems, call centers, and engineers with cellphones, seems to be a > much safer bet right now. there is no one solution... to anything except 'life' (solution == death). So, how about looking at it as a tool to use. You might have your provider's $Person_for_Problem in your cell phone, use that if you can. Use their Customer Service number or use their INOC number putting down a project that does work because it's not the holy grail isn't productive.
Re: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
On 3-Feb-2006, at 15:59, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: With all due respect to the INOC-DBA project, which is actually somewhat interesting (from a "I want to play with free IP phones too" perspective if nothing else), it isn't a workable solution to operational contacts yet. I think you are understating its usefulness, somewhat. Whilst it's an uncontested fact that you can't hope to reach The Right Person by dialling their ASN in all cases, I find it useful for probably around one in five people that I need to call. That's a pretty good strike rate, especially since if you *can* reach someone through INOC-DBA, it's almost always the Right Person, and it almost never involves an IVR. And then of course there is that whole "using the IP network to contact someone about an IP network issue" thing that doesn't seem terribly well thought out... You could also argue that trying to contact someone about a major fibre cut using the PSTN is also doomed to failure, at least for some fibre cuts. That's no reason to never try using the PSTN. Not all problems with remote AS Y involve a complete inability to exchange packets with AS Y. Admittedly I haven't looked at the INOC-DBA stuff in a while, there could have been some massive advancement that I'm not aware of, but I suspect that the situation is still "more work needed". Existing phone systems, call centers, and engineers with cellphones, seems to be a much safer bet right now. Although the provisioning system seems to be under active development, and sometimes exhibits hiccups, the system as a whole is fine. More people should try it. Joe
Re: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Aaron Glenn wrote: On 2/3/06, Sean Donelan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: How about INOC-DBA, which is supposed to have a clue threshold you obtained an ASN by some means in order to have a dial-by-asn phone. Obtaining an ASN isn't much of a clue threshold. No...and sometimes its done on some customer's behalf...but there's still some clue threshold involved in getting setup with INOC-DBA. -- Jon Lewis | I route Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are Atlantic Net| _ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_
Re: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 02:34:16PM -0500, Sean Donelan wrote: > > On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > > Until someone invents a universally recognized system where you can call > > and say "Hi I'm CCIE #12345, I'm certified to know what I'm talking about > > and I have an actual network issue, please transfer me to someone with > > clue", we're going to continue to see the problem of letting the legit > > calls through while seperating out the calls from J. Random Crackmonkey > > How about INOC-DBA, which is supposed to have a clue threshold you > obtained an ASN by some means in order to have a dial-by-asn phone. With all due respect to the INOC-DBA project, which is actually somewhat interesting (from a "I want to play with free IP phones too" perspective if nothing else), it isn't a workable solution to operational contacts yet. Among other reasons, it seems that the vast majority of the users are just people playing around with it at their desk in the office, never expecting it to ring for anything serious. It might be more interesting if people actually set up 1234*NOC extensions, but puck.nether.net seems like a far more effective choice. The INOC-DBA system so far doesn't seem to integrate particularly will with existing NOC phones or systems that are not IP based, and you really have to go out of your way to get it to forward to multiple people like say an engineer on duty. And then of course there is that whole "using the IP network to contact someone about an IP network issue" thing that doesn't seem terribly well thought out... Admittedly I haven't looked at the INOC-DBA stuff in a while, there could have been some massive advancement that I'm not aware of, but I suspect that the situation is still "more work needed". Existing phone systems, call centers, and engineers with cellphones, seems to be a much safer bet right now. -- Richard A Steenbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)
Re: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
On Feb 3, 2006, at 2:57 PM, Aaron Glenn wrote: On 2/3/06, Sean Donelan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: How about INOC-DBA, which is supposed to have a clue threshold you obtained an ASN by some means in order to have a dial-by-asn phone. Obtaining an ASN isn't much of a clue threshold. If that's actually true, then it's unlikely that any amount of communication is going to save us. For those who are slightly less cynical: http://www.pch.net/inoc-dba/ Tom Vest Research Program Manager Packet Clearing House http://www.pch.net (703) 598-6831
Re: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 03:08:27PM -0500, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > > On Feb 3, 2006, at 2:57 PM, Aaron Glenn wrote: > > >On 2/3/06, Sean Donelan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>How about INOC-DBA, which is supposed to have a clue threshold you > >>obtained an ASN by some means in order to have a dial-by-asn phone. > > > >Obtaining an ASN isn't much of a clue threshold. > > Knowing what an ASN is would be a bar too high for 90+% of the people > who call / e-mail abuse desks. > > Getting an INOC-DBA phone is a bar far, far, far too high for 99.99% > of these people. > > -- > TTFN, > patrick Which, as I always saw it, was kind of the point... A way to make sure that the clues can talk to each other when needed but that the noise level remains very low. --- Wayne Bouchard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Dude http://www.typo.org/~web/
Re: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
On Feb 3, 2006, at 2:57 PM, Aaron Glenn wrote: On 2/3/06, Sean Donelan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: How about INOC-DBA, which is supposed to have a clue threshold you obtained an ASN by some means in order to have a dial-by-asn phone. Obtaining an ASN isn't much of a clue threshold. Knowing what an ASN is would be a bar too high for 90+% of the people who call / e-mail abuse desks. Getting an INOC-DBA phone is a bar far, far, far too high for 99.99% of these people. -- TTFN, patrick
Re: Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
On 2/3/06, Sean Donelan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How about INOC-DBA, which is supposed to have a clue threshold you > obtained an ASN by some means in order to have a dial-by-asn phone. Obtaining an ASN isn't much of a clue threshold.
Anyone heard of INOC-DBA?
On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > Until someone invents a universally recognized system where you can call > and say "Hi I'm CCIE #12345, I'm certified to know what I'm talking about > and I have an actual network issue, please transfer me to someone with > clue", we're going to continue to see the problem of letting the legit > calls through while seperating out the calls from J. Random Crackmonkey How about INOC-DBA, which is supposed to have a clue threshold you obtained an ASN by some means in order to have a dial-by-asn phone.
