YouTube Video Streaming
I would like to get some input for the following problem we face with YouTube video streaming. We are an ISP in Singapore and peer with Google at Equinix and SOX (Singapore Open Exchange), For about 2 weeks we have been facing choppy streaming or continuous buffering on various YouTube videos. These problem videos are streamed at HD or original quality. Our troubleshooting narrow down to those bad videos being streamed to us from outside Singapore. We contacted Google support, they are confused too, as why we are served from a cache server in Poland on one of the videos. The case has been escalated within Google, unfortunately no update from them since. Not all YouTube videos are bad through us, some 45 minutes videos can fully buffered within seconds on HD or original quality, of course the IP we streamed for these videos are through our local peering with Google. -Thames
RE: Commerical Backup Solutions
First, I work for a managed service provider. We support a large number of traditional and over the wire backup solutions. We have used Symantec Backup Exec, eVault, Acronis, Intronis, Asigra, Heroware (newer solution more DR focused) and many more I've purged from my memory. I have been using BE since it was Veritas starting in about 2003. Backup Exec is GREAT if you have a premise Disk server with Tape archive, or even a remote over fast WAN. Acronis is nice, but not easy to manage historically. Intronis get not only a no, but a "hell no please die now". Asigra is probably one of my favorites. You spend the cash for it, but it works right, it integrates with everything, depending on if you get it from a reseller or run your own vault, you get good reporting options and BMR is easy as pie. Heroware has great DR and versioning options but its still growing. Small datacenter platform, I like it a lot. Aiming at Asigra a little more there are many vendors that offer over the wire backup using this. Most of them price by the gig, but based on what you are doing you could probably do a peer replication where you run your own "vault" locally to back up to, and then integrate that to one of many providers to get your off site. Asigra offers decent compression and integration into Windows and nix tools for open file and such. We have used Asigra to backup up anything from nt4 to 2008r2, nix, bsd, as400, esx and esxi. All the backup stuff is included. You get the base software you get the ability to back up everything it can, with the exception of Message Level backup and restore in Exchange, and file level within SharePoint which require another service to be enabled. The UI has its moments of clunky, but it has gotten WAY better over the past few years. Reporting options are great, as is file growth trending. Restores are tricky the first time, but its just a learning curve like any other app. As far as BMR restores on above products I've pretty much done them all. We do a lot of SMB work so many times single server, often SBS. I have done single DC, Exchange servers, mysql servers, file and print servers and many more. By far the trickiest ones are the Windows Small Business Servers based solely on the fact they can be complicated to work with as they have Windows, AD, Exchange, SQL, RWW and SharePoint on 1 box. If you have ever done a BMR of an SBS server 2000/2003/2008/2011 if everything isn't perfect you might as well rebuild. All of these assume you have a well managed backup solution which is getting all the data needed for a full restore of course. Backup Exec its possible and its not that hard. EVault in theory, but the process can be difficult. Acronis does a very nice job of it. Intronis don't bother, spend the time working on a resume because a BMR from this is probably a career changing event. I had to attempt it for one customer, I got the data I needed gave it the proverbial finger and built a new server to move it onto. Asigra makes it really easy. I have done about 5 (about 18 in our company total) SBS full restores. You have to jump through a few hoops, but we fully restored a failed SBS 2003 server onto a VM while replacement hardware came in in 12 hours, including line of business SQL app, Exchange, AD and about 200gb of data. Heroware is very similar in theory. It works off a replication technology (DoubleTake backend) which does snapshots within the replication. Heroware is designed to have an "appliance" per 10-50 servers depending on size and load so it might not scale to the size you are looking. Dollars to doughnuts if I had the option, I would do Asigra every time if I had the budget from the customer for the offsite. Why? Many of the resellers out there even guarantee they can do a 24 or 48 hour RTO of a full environment assuming they have the correct backed up date. It just works that well. I have done 2 5+ server environments restore the whole thing from backups with no problems in 24 hours or less onto mismatched hardware as well. Keep in mind we are working with customers with user counts between 10 and 150 in most cases and usually about $1 per gig because they are lower size. I've heard rumors of people getting as low as 25 cents a gig, but I cant speak to that. Yes, I resell many of these products at my day job, however I also implement and support them and work with the various support teams from each vendor. I favor Asigra because of personal preference and ease of use. --Blake -Original Message- From: Josh Baird [mailto:joshba...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 6:01 PM To: Thomas York Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Commerical Backup Solutions We have used Symantec's BackupExec (Veritas) in several locations but have standardized on IBM's Tivoli Storage Manager (TSM). Not a fan of IBM, but it works, and it works well. Be prepared to drop some seri
Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth
In message , Darius Jahandarie writes: > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Robert Bonomi > wrote: > > > > Marshall Eubanks wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:46 AM, PC wrote: > >> > While there may be other grounds for telling them not to call you, the > >> > do not call list is not one of them as it does not apply to business > >> > to business solicitations. > >> > > >> > "The national Do-Not-Call list protects home voice or personal > >> > wireless phone numbers only. While you may be able to register a > >> > business number, your registration will not make telephone > >> > solicitations to that number unlawful." > >> > http://www.fcc.gov/guides/unwanted-telephone-marketing-calls > >> > > >> > >> Also, (from http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/do-not-call-list ) > >> > >> The Do-Not-Call registry does not prevent all unwanted calls. It does > >> not cover the following: > >> > >> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0calls from organizations with which you have establi= > shed a > >> business relationship; > >> > >> And, in this case, there is a previously established =C2=A0business rela= > tionship. > > > > a) The "previously established business relationship" exemption expires 6 > > =C2=A0 months after the 'business relationship' ends. (This is in the 'fi= > ne > > =C2=A0 print' of the actual rules0 =C2=A0As the relationship in question = > ended > > =C2=A0 several years ago, according to the prior poster, this exemption w= > ould > > =C2=A0 not apply. > > > > b) Nothing in the Do-not-call rules applies to calls to business numbers. > > =C2=A0 Callers to business numbers are not even required to respect a 'pu= > t me > > =C2=A0 on your "do-not-call" list', or 'do not call me again' request und= > er > > =C2=A0 the DNC rules. > > So the moral of the story is to make sure you always make your Cogent > calls from your home phone? :-) > > --=20 > Darius Jahandarie > I suspect you could just sue them for harassment if they fail to honour a request to stop calling you. do-not-call lists cover home phones, in part, as governments, world wide, recognise that individuals are not in the position to sue every company that fails to honour requests to cease and desist. Company to company battles are more even and many companies have a existing relationship with lawyers as it is needed for other reasons. There are laws in most countries that will stop this harassment. You just need to pick the right one for the circumstances. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
Re: Commerical Backup Solutions
We have used Symantec's BackupExec (Veritas) in several locations but have standardized on IBM's Tivoli Storage Manager (TSM). Not a fan of IBM, but it works, and it works well. Be prepared to drop some serious coin, though. We currently use it to do tape backups for over 800+ servers (Linux, AIX, Windows). Josh On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Thomas York wrote: > We use Barracuda Yosemite backup with about 10 locations all over the > world, using disk to disk (single disks via esata and to SANs) and disk to > tape (both libraries and single drives). Very rarely do we have issues. > Barracuda support isn't as good as Yosemite's (Barracuda bought them) but > still not bad. Also, the site wide license is a steal! Get a demo, it might > fit the bill. > > --Thomas York > On May 17, 2012 6:59 PM, "Mike Lyon" wrote: > >> We used Acronis and it was a nightmare as was their off-shored support >> model. Never again... Wouldn't touch them with a 10 foot pole. >> >> Switched to Iron Mountain LiveVault which backs everything up over the >> wire. It has basic reporting functions but not extremely granular. >> http://ironmountain.com/services/democenter/livevault/player.html >> >> Barracuda also seems to have a nice product. Though, i've never used it: >> http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/products/backup_overview.php >> >> -Mike >> >> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Paul Stewart >> wrote: >> >> > Hey folks. >> > >> > >> > >> > I'm hoping for some input from operational folks on backup solutions for >> > servers. We are looking for a commercial backup solution with a nice >> > reporting dashboard etc. >> > >> > >> > >> > It must support full/incremental backups on Windows and various flavors >> of >> > Linux. We would also be looking for bare metal image/recovery abilities. >> > >> > >> > >> > To date, we've been fond of Acronis until we got the quote for it .. >> > Initially we would be looking at 50-80 servers and growing it up from >> there >> > to probably 150-200 boxes. Some of these servers are geographically >> > dispersed. >> > >> > >> > >> > At the moment we have been using Bacula but it lacks bare metal options >> and >> > doesn't have any nice reporting options (Executive Dashboard etc) >> > >> > >> > >> > Thanks for any input, >> > >> > >> > >> > Paul >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> Mike Lyon >> 408-621-4826 >> mike.l...@gmail.com >> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon >>
Re: Commerical Backup Solutions
We use Barracuda Yosemite backup with about 10 locations all over the world, using disk to disk (single disks via esata and to SANs) and disk to tape (both libraries and single drives). Very rarely do we have issues. Barracuda support isn't as good as Yosemite's (Barracuda bought them) but still not bad. Also, the site wide license is a steal! Get a demo, it might fit the bill. --Thomas York On May 17, 2012 6:59 PM, "Mike Lyon" wrote: > We used Acronis and it was a nightmare as was their off-shored support > model. Never again... Wouldn't touch them with a 10 foot pole. > > Switched to Iron Mountain LiveVault which backs everything up over the > wire. It has basic reporting functions but not extremely granular. > http://ironmountain.com/services/democenter/livevault/player.html > > Barracuda also seems to have a nice product. Though, i've never used it: > http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/products/backup_overview.php > > -Mike > > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Paul Stewart > wrote: > > > Hey folks. > > > > > > > > I'm hoping for some input from operational folks on backup solutions for > > servers. We are looking for a commercial backup solution with a nice > > reporting dashboard etc. > > > > > > > > It must support full/incremental backups on Windows and various flavors > of > > Linux. We would also be looking for bare metal image/recovery abilities. > > > > > > > > To date, we've been fond of Acronis until we got the quote for it .. > > Initially we would be looking at 50-80 servers and growing it up from > there > > to probably 150-200 boxes. Some of these servers are geographically > > dispersed. > > > > > > > > At the moment we have been using Bacula but it lacks bare metal options > and > > doesn't have any nice reporting options (Executive Dashboard etc) > > > > > > > > Thanks for any input, > > > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Mike Lyon > 408-621-4826 > mike.l...@gmail.com > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon >
Re: Commerical Backup Solutions
We were considering Acronis for backing up our internal infrastructure, we use R1Soft for our customers. What were the issues with Acronis? I'd be interested in getting some real-world feedback. You can hit me off list if you like. -Gary On 5/18/2012 8:59 AM, Mike Lyon wrote: > We used Acronis and it was a nightmare as was their off-shored support > model. Never again... Wouldn't touch them with a 10 foot pole. > > Switched to Iron Mountain LiveVault which backs everything up over the > wire. It has basic reporting functions but not extremely granular. > http://ironmountain.com/services/democenter/livevault/player.html > > Barracuda also seems to have a nice product. Though, i've never used it: > http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/products/backup_overview.php > > -Mike > > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Paul Stewart wrote: > >> Hey folks. >> >> >> >> I'm hoping for some input from operational folks on backup solutions for >> servers. We are looking for a commercial backup solution with a nice >> reporting dashboard etc. >> >> >> >> It must support full/incremental backups on Windows and various flavors of >> Linux. We would also be looking for bare metal image/recovery abilities. >> >> >> >> To date, we've been fond of Acronis until we got the quote for it .. >> Initially we would be looking at 50-80 servers and growing it up from there >> to probably 150-200 boxes. Some of these servers are geographically >> dispersed. >> >> >> >> At the moment we have been using Bacula but it lacks bare metal options and >> doesn't have any nice reporting options (Executive Dashboard etc) >> >> >> >> Thanks for any input, >> >> >> >> Paul >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >
Re: Commerical Backup Solutions
Recently finished developing a product around Commvault Simpana. Fairly happy with their API and reporting capabilities. Application specific plugins (MySQL, mssql, exchange, etc) are pretty solid so far as well. On May 17, 2012, at 4:59 PM, "Mike Lyon" wrote: > We used Acronis and it was a nightmare as was their off-shored support > model. Never again... Wouldn't touch them with a 10 foot pole. > > Switched to Iron Mountain LiveVault which backs everything up over the > wire. It has basic reporting functions but not extremely granular. > http://ironmountain.com/services/democenter/livevault/player.html > > Barracuda also seems to have a nice product. Though, i've never used it: > http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/products/backup_overview.php > > -Mike > > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Paul Stewart wrote: > >> Hey folks. >> >> >> >> I'm hoping for some input from operational folks on backup solutions for >> servers. We are looking for a commercial backup solution with a nice >> reporting dashboard etc. >> >> >> >> It must support full/incremental backups on Windows and various flavors of >> Linux. We would also be looking for bare metal image/recovery abilities. >> >> >> >> To date, we've been fond of Acronis until we got the quote for it .. >> Initially we would be looking at 50-80 servers and growing it up from there >> to probably 150-200 boxes. Some of these servers are geographically >> dispersed. >> >> >> >> At the moment we have been using Bacula but it lacks bare metal options and >> doesn't have any nice reporting options (Executive Dashboard etc) >> >> >> >> Thanks for any input, >> >> >> >> Paul >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Mike Lyon > 408-621-4826 > mike.l...@gmail.com > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon
Re: Commerical Backup Solutions
We used Acronis and it was a nightmare as was their off-shored support model. Never again... Wouldn't touch them with a 10 foot pole. Switched to Iron Mountain LiveVault which backs everything up over the wire. It has basic reporting functions but not extremely granular. http://ironmountain.com/services/democenter/livevault/player.html Barracuda also seems to have a nice product. Though, i've never used it: http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/products/backup_overview.php -Mike On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Paul Stewart wrote: > Hey folks. > > > > I'm hoping for some input from operational folks on backup solutions for > servers. We are looking for a commercial backup solution with a nice > reporting dashboard etc. > > > > It must support full/incremental backups on Windows and various flavors of > Linux. We would also be looking for bare metal image/recovery abilities. > > > > To date, we've been fond of Acronis until we got the quote for it .. > Initially we would be looking at 50-80 servers and growing it up from there > to probably 150-200 boxes. Some of these servers are geographically > dispersed. > > > > At the moment we have been using Bacula but it lacks bare metal options and > doesn't have any nice reporting options (Executive Dashboard etc) > > > > Thanks for any input, > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > -- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.l...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon
Commerical Backup Solutions
Hey folks. I'm hoping for some input from operational folks on backup solutions for servers. We are looking for a commercial backup solution with a nice reporting dashboard etc. It must support full/incremental backups on Windows and various flavors of Linux. We would also be looking for bare metal image/recovery abilities. To date, we've been fond of Acronis until we got the quote for it .. Initially we would be looking at 50-80 servers and growing it up from there to probably 150-200 boxes. Some of these servers are geographically dispersed. At the moment we have been using Bacula but it lacks bare metal options and doesn't have any nice reporting options (Executive Dashboard etc) Thanks for any input, Paul
Re: [routing-wg] RPKI performance metrics; your help requested
Kudos to the RIPE NCC for graciously offering to collect and analyze repository performance data. And I'm sure that if we ask nicely they will provide data dumps we can analyze ourselves, just like they do with RIS and other projects. Cheers! Carlos On 5/17/12 3:31 PM, Arturo Servin wrote: > On 17 May 2012, at 00:47, Randy Bush wrote: > >>> Could someone make: >>> 2) put the graphs at 'not rpki.net' on rpki.net (too) >> no. that is the exact point. the graph to which i pointed is on rob's >> site. these are data each relying party can collect and see for >> themselves and their point of view in the universe, > Which I think it is a very valuable thing as a RP operator. I haven't > used the lastest versions of RIPE NCC validator for myself but that would be > a nice feature to have there as well. I will update my rcynic installation, I > liked the graphs. > >> not some central >> authority. >> ripe/ncc thinks it is the center of the universe. we do >> not. we know it is in freemont [0], a neighborhood of seattle. > I do not think that is the intention from RIPE NCC. > > The intention as I understood is to get the data that each RP is > getting and to send it to central repository for further analysis. Which it > is a centralized approach but for simplicity, not for thinking that they are > the center of the universe. > > In my view there are 2 problems. One is to see as an RP operator how > healthy are the repositories where you retrieve data (which for the url that > you sent is done very nicely with rcynic), and two it is that as repository > operator and protocol designers you'd like to see how good or bad your > repository/protocols are doing to provide data to RPs in different locations > of the world (which I think it is the aim of RIPE NCC effort). > > >> so that url is very intentionally rob's relying party instance. i have >> one at >> http://rgnet.rpki.net/ >> but it has not been running as long as you can see. >> >> and sorry that our certs did not pay godzilla or gobble for the >> privilege of being in their bowsers. refund below [1] >> >> randy >> >> [0] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fremont,_Seattle >> >> http://www.stonerforums.com/lounge/members/guiness-albums-stuff-picture19971-center-known-universe-freemont.jpg >> >> http://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=e712e7f5-0a55-4cc0-a40c-88deedce8d72&gid=3 > > If anybody else is willing to share its data and URLs about their RP > performance, I would be nice. I have an old rsync installation that I will > try to update this weekend. Now it is here but does not show too much: > > http://www.labs.lacnic.net/~rpki/rpki-monitor/rpki-ta-status.xml > > > Regards, > as > > >
Re: [routing-wg] RPKI performance metrics; your help requested
On 17 May 2012, at 00:47, Randy Bush wrote: >> Could someone make: >> 2) put the graphs at 'not rpki.net' on rpki.net (too) > > no. that is the exact point. the graph to which i pointed is on rob's > site. these are data each relying party can collect and see for > themselves and their point of view in the universe, Which I think it is a very valuable thing as a RP operator. I haven't used the lastest versions of RIPE NCC validator for myself but that would be a nice feature to have there as well. I will update my rcynic installation, I liked the graphs. > not some central > authority. > ripe/ncc thinks it is the center of the universe. we do > not. we know it is in freemont [0], a neighborhood of seattle. I do not think that is the intention from RIPE NCC. The intention as I understood is to get the data that each RP is getting and to send it to central repository for further analysis. Which it is a centralized approach but for simplicity, not for thinking that they are the center of the universe. In my view there are 2 problems. One is to see as an RP operator how healthy are the repositories where you retrieve data (which for the url that you sent is done very nicely with rcynic), and two it is that as repository operator and protocol designers you'd like to see how good or bad your repository/protocols are doing to provide data to RPs in different locations of the world (which I think it is the aim of RIPE NCC effort). > > so that url is very intentionally rob's relying party instance. i have > one at > http://rgnet.rpki.net/ > but it has not been running as long as you can see. > > and sorry that our certs did not pay godzilla or gobble for the > privilege of being in their bowsers. refund below [1] > > randy > > [0] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fremont,_Seattle > > http://www.stonerforums.com/lounge/members/guiness-albums-stuff-picture19971-center-known-universe-freemont.jpg > > http://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=e712e7f5-0a55-4cc0-a40c-88deedce8d72&gid=3 If anybody else is willing to share its data and URLs about their RP performance, I would be nice. I have an old rsync installation that I will try to update this weekend. Now it is here but does not show too much: http://www.labs.lacnic.net/~rpki/rpki-monitor/rpki-ta-status.xml Regards, as
Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Robert Bonomi wrote: > > Marshall Eubanks wrote: >> >> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:46 AM, PC wrote: >> > While there may be other grounds for telling them not to call you, the >> > do not call list is not one of them as it does not apply to business >> > to business solicitations. >> > >> > "The national Do-Not-Call list protects home voice or personal >> > wireless phone numbers only. While you may be able to register a >> > business number, your registration will not make telephone >> > solicitations to that number unlawful." >> > http://www.fcc.gov/guides/unwanted-telephone-marketing-calls >> > >> >> Also, (from http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/do-not-call-list ) >> >> The Do-Not-Call registry does not prevent all unwanted calls. It does >> not cover the following: >> >> calls from organizations with which you have established a >> business relationship; >> >> And, in this case, there is a previously established business relationship. > > a) The "previously established business relationship" exemption expires 6 > months after the 'business relationship' ends. (This is in the 'fine > print' of the actual rules0 As the relationship in question ended > several years ago, according to the prior poster, this exemption would > not apply. > > b) Nothing in the Do-not-call rules applies to calls to business numbers. > Callers to business numbers are not even required to respect a 'put me > on your "do-not-call" list', or 'do not call me again' request under > the DNC rules. So the moral of the story is to make sure you always make your Cogent calls from your home phone? :-) -- Darius Jahandarie
Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth
Marshall Eubanks wrote: > > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:46 AM, PC wrote: > > While there may be other grounds for telling them not to call you, the > > do not call list is not one of them as it does not apply to business > > to business solicitations. > > > > "The national Do-Not-Call list protects home voice or personal > > wireless phone numbers only. While you may be able to register a > > business number, your registration will not make telephone > > solicitations to that number unlawful." > > http://www.fcc.gov/guides/unwanted-telephone-marketing-calls > > > > Also, (from http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/do-not-call-list ) > > The Do-Not-Call registry does not prevent all unwanted calls. It does > not cover the following: > > calls from organizations with which you have established a > business relationship; > > And, in this case, there is a previously established business relationship. a) The "previously established business relationship" exemption expires 6 months after the 'business relationship' ends. (This is in the 'fine print' of the actual rules0 As the relationship in question ended several years ago, according to the prior poster, this exemption would not apply. b) Nothing in the Do-not-call rules applies to calls to business numbers. Callers to business numbers are not even required to respect a 'put me on your "do-not-call" list', or 'do not call me again' request under the DNC rules.
Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:46 AM, PC wrote: >> While there may be other grounds for telling them not to call you, the >> do not call list is not one of them as it does not apply to business >> to business solicitations. >> >> "The national Do-Not-Call list protects home voice or personal >> wireless phone numbers only. While you may be able to register a >> business number, your registration will not make telephone >> solicitations to that number unlawful." >> http://www.fcc.gov/guides/unwanted-telephone-marketing-calls >> > > Also, (from http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/do-not-call-list ) > > The Do-Not-Call registry does not prevent all unwanted calls. It does > not cover the following: > > calls from organizations with which you have established a > business relationship; > > And, in this case, there is a previously established business relationship. "Because of limitations in the jurisdiction of the FTC and FCC, calls from or on behalf of political organizations, charities, and telephone surveyors would still be permitted, as would calls from companies with which you have an existing business relationship, or those to whom you’ve provided express agreement in writing to receive their calls. However, if you ask a company with which you have an existing business relationship to place your number on its own do-not-call list, it must honor your request." [1] Which seems to suggest to me, if you tell them to not call you again, they need to stop. However, I was not aware of the complications of using a business number instead of a personal number. [1] http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/alerts/alt107.shtm -- Darius Jahandarie
Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:46 AM, PC wrote: > While there may be other grounds for telling them not to call you, the > do not call list is not one of them as it does not apply to business > to business solicitations. > > "The national Do-Not-Call list protects home voice or personal > wireless phone numbers only. While you may be able to register a > business number, your registration will not make telephone > solicitations to that number unlawful." > http://www.fcc.gov/guides/unwanted-telephone-marketing-calls > Also, (from http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/do-not-call-list ) The Do-Not-Call registry does not prevent all unwanted calls. It does not cover the following: calls from organizations with which you have established a business relationship; And, in this case, there is a previously established business relationship. Regards Marshall > > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Darius Jahandarie > wrote: >> >> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Paul Stewart wrote: >> > I liked Cogent when we had them years ago but due to routing instability >> > (off the charts) and unplanned down time every single month we dropped >> > them. they call me every 3-6 months (different person each time) and I >> > tell them to go away >> >> You know, if you're in the U.S., on the No Call list, and you tell >> them specifically not to call you again, they're doing something >> illegal and can be fined up to $16,000 dollars for it. Though I hear >> that the FTC doesn't actually enforce it too well. May want to try >> waving the stick at them at least. >> >> -- >> Darius Jahandarie >> >