Re: Major California Faults Ready To Rupture | IFLScience
Loma Prieta, very little; the UCSC line was a non-redundant T1 from San Jose BARRNET, and the other leaf nodes off that were down. As I recall the San Jose / SF to LA links were all golden. Phone service to Santa Cruz was down, then spotty, then up over the course of a day, but every line was jammed with people checking in so connect rates sucked. The UCSC point to point T1 had to be manually repaired I think. The telco lines had alternate routes for calls and made it work, in a bit. Northridge a few years later more or less flattened a CW center just about at ground zero. CRL's pager-happy 24x7 MUD customer in Atlanta woke me up a minute later, and our lines through LA (and many others' lines) were down for a while. Dynamic routing was a little less dynamic then; I don't know what others did in great detail. CIX lists buzzed etc. I think that predates nanog as a list by a few months, but memory is fuzzy. George William Herbert Sent from my iPhone On Oct 18, 2014, at 3:42 PM, Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote: Nothing that I recall. Sean might know better. -Bill On Oct 19, 2014, at 6:19, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote: How widespread were the effects on backbone communication circuits from those quakes? On October 18, 2014 3:22:58 PM EDT, Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote: On Oct 19, 2014, at 2:20 AM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: You should restate the predates; I was on console on earthquake.berkeley.edu at the time Loma Prieta let go, using among other things (then) Forumnet (now) ICB in a chat, and one of the immediate damage indications was that everyone at UC Santa Cruz dropped offline. …and I was one of those people at UCSC, who had an interesting little adventure driving home to Berkeley the next day. Also, there are probably people in Northridge and Napa who might dispute your definition of “major,” but yes,a I take your point. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Northridge_earthquake http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Baja_California_earthquake http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_South_Napa_earthquake -Bill -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Major California Faults Ready To Rupture | IFLScience
On 10/19/14, 9:45 AM, George Herbert wrote: Loma Prieta, very little; the UCSC line was a non-redundant T1 from San Jose BARRNET, and the other leaf nodes off that were down. As I recall the San Jose / SF to LA links were all golden. Phone service to Santa Cruz was down, then spotty, then up over the course of a day, but every line was jammed with people checking in so connect rates sucked. The UCSC point to point T1 had to be manually repaired I think. The telco lines had alternate routes for calls and made it work, in a bit. This was my recollection as well. Many corporate PBXes failed, and as it happened, for some reason, the mobile towers functioned with excess capacity, to the point where I had a line coming out of my car. Best form of communication into and out of the region during the crisis was the Internet. No surprise. That's what it was designed for. Eliot signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Major California Faults Ready To Rupture | IFLScience
On 10/19/2014 02:45 AM, George Herbert wrote: Loma Prieta, very little; the UCSC line was a non-redundant T1 from San Jose BARRNET, and the other leaf nodes off that were down. As I recall the San Jose / SF to LA links were all golden. Phone service to Santa Cruz was down, then spotty, then up over the course of a day, but every line was jammed with people checking in so connect rates sucked. The UCSC point to point T1 had to be manually repaired I think. The telco lines had alternate routes for calls and made it work, in a bit. Northridge a few years later more or less flattened a CW center just about at ground zero. CRL's pager-happy 24x7 MUD customer in Atlanta woke me up a minute later, and our lines through LA (and many others' lines) were down for a while. Dynamic routing was a little less dynamic then; I don't know what others did in great detail. CIX lists buzzed etc. I think that predates nanog as a list by a few months, but memory is fuzzy. George William Herbert Sent from my iPhone Northridge cut a section out of the Santa Monica freeway, which took out a bunch of cable (I think by then it was mostly fiber) between USC and points west; that got Cerfnet's connections to several west LA customers (I worked for one of them in Culver City at the time). I kind of remember that they restored it by routing through Los Nettos. At home I was using the Cerfnet Caltech pop at the time, and had an outage for an hour or two (and lost power for about that long). The windstorm a few years later cut lots of above-ground fiber, though; lots more outages than any earthquake. I recall that CSUN was pretty well cut off (both net and roads) for a while. I don't recall if the Hector Mine quake cut any fiber but there is a repeater building near the railroad just east of the fault-line crossing. There wasn't a ground break that far north so the cables probably weathered it OK but the building might not have. (amazing to have a 7.4 or so quake that almost didn't injure anyone; almost all the damage was from the derail of the southwest chief westbound.)
Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
Wondering if some of the long-time list members can shed some light on the question--why is the .gov top level domain only for use by US government agencies? Where do other world powers put their government agency domains? With the exception of the cctlds, shouldn't the top-level gtlds be generically open to anyone regardless of borders? Would love to get any info about the history of the decision to make it US-only. Thanks! Matt
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
Wondering if some of the long-time list members can shed some light on the question--why is the .gov top level domain only for use by US government agencies? Where do other world powers put their government agency domains? With the exception of the cctlds, shouldn't the top-level gtlds be generically open to anyone regardless of borders? Do you have reason to believe that governments of other countries would *want* to use the .gov TLD? Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sth...@nethelp.no
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
Wondering if some of the long-time list members can shed some light on the question--why is the .gov top level domain only for use by US government agencies? Where do other world powers put their government agency domains? With the exception of the cctlds, shouldn't the top-level gtlds be generically open to anyone regardless of borders? Would love to get any info about the history of the decision to make it US-only. In part due to RFC1480. At one point, everything here in the US was set to transition away from the US- and TLD-centric models. It is now only a fuzzy memory, but at one point commercial entities could not just register a random .NET or .ORG domain name ... which would have resulted in a nicer-looking Internet domain system today. But to make a long story short, and my memory's perhaps a bit rusty now, but my recollection is that shorter URL's looked nicer and there was significant money to be had running the registry, so there was some heavy lobbying against retiring .GOV in favor of .FED.US (and other .US locality domains). ... JG -- Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I won't contact you again. - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN) With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
Why is the Greek flag always flow at the Olympics as well as the Olympic and host nation flags? Why is Britain the only country allowed, under Universal Postal Union regulations to have no national identification on its stamps used in international mail? Basically, if you are first, you tend to get extra privileges. Same with .gov for the US government. Thanks, Donald = Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA d3e...@gmail.com On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:05 AM, Matthew Petach mpet...@netflight.com wrote: Wondering if some of the long-time list members can shed some light on the question--why is the .gov top level domain only for use by US government agencies? Where do other world powers put their government agency domains? With the exception of the cctlds, shouldn't the top-level gtlds be generically open to anyone regardless of borders? Would love to get any info about the history of the decision to make it US-only. Thanks! Matt
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 7:12 AM, Joe Greco jgr...@ns.sol.net wrote: But to make a long story short, and my memory's perhaps a bit rusty now, but my recollection is that shorter URL's looked nicer and there was significant money to be had running the registry, so there was some heavy lobbying against retiring .GOV in favor of .FED.US (and other .US locality domains). [snip] The same problem exists with .EDU capriciously adopting new criteria that excludes any non-US-based institutions from being eligible. I believe the major issue is that if a TLD is in the global namespace, then it should NOT be allowed to restrict registrations based on country; the internet is global and .GOV and .EDU are in Global Namespace. So then, why aren't .EDU and .GOV just allowed to continue to exist but a community decision made to require whichever registry will be contracted to manage .GOV to accept registrations from _all_ government entities regardless of nationality ? In otherwords, rejection of the idea that a registry operating GTLD namespace can be allowed to impose overly exclusive eligibility criteria ... JG -- -JH
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On 10/19/14 12:42, Donald Eastlake wrote: Why is the Greek flag always flow at the Olympics as well as the Olympic and host nation flags? Why is Britain the only country allowed, under Universal Postal Union regulations to have no national identification on its stamps used in international mail? Basically, if you are first, you tend to get extra privileges. Same with .gov for the US government. Thanks, Donald = Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA d3e...@gmail.com On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:05 AM, Matthew Petach mpet...@netflight.com wrote: Wondering if some of the long-time list members can shed some light on the question--why is the .gov top level domain only for use by US government agencies? Where do other world powers put their government agency domains? With the exception of the cctlds, shouldn't the top-level gtlds be generically open to anyone regardless of borders? Would love to get any info about the history of the decision to make it US-only. Thanks! Matt Do as we say, not as we do
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 7:12 AM, Joe Greco jgr...@ns.sol.net wrote: But to make a long story short, and my memory's perhaps a bit rusty now, but my recollection is that shorter URL's looked nicer and there was significant money to be had running the registry, so there was some heavy lobbying against retiring .GOV in favor of .FED.US (and other .US locality domains). [snip] The same problem exists with .EDU capriciously adopting new criteria that excludes any non-US-based institutions from being eligible. I believe the major issue is that if a TLD is in the global namespace, then it should NOT be allowed to restrict registrations based on country; the internet is global and .GOV and .EDU are in Global Namespace. So then, why aren't .EDU and .GOV just allowed to continue to exist but a community decision made to require whichever registry will be contracted to manage .GOV to accept registrations from _all_ government entities regardless of nationality ? Because the US has historically held control over the whole process. Regardless of what it may seem like, it's not a community process. In otherwords, rejection of the idea that a registry operating GTLD namespace can be allowed to impose overly exclusive eligibility criteria In the specific case of .gov, I'd say that there's some danger to having multiple nations operating in that single 2LD space; .gov should probably be retired and federal institutions migrated to .fed.us. There's also namespace available for localities. But given the choice between rationality and insanity, usually the process seems to prefer insanity. ... JG -- Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I won't contact you again. - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN) With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On 10/19/2014 at 8:13 AM Jimmy Hess wrote: |[snip] |So then, why aren't .EDU and .GOV just allowed to continue to exist |but a community decision made to require whichever registry will be |contracted to manage .GOV to accept registrations from _all_ |government entities regardless of nationality ? | |In otherwords, rejection of the idea that a registry operating GTLD |namespace can be allowed to impose overly exclusive eligibility |criteria = I'd rather see .gov (and by implication, .edu) usage phased out and replaced by country-specific domain names (e.g. fed.us). imo, the better way to fix an anachronism is not to bend the rules so the offenders are not so offensive, but to bring the offenders into compliance with the current rules.
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
you can register .edu if you are a non-us institution as long as you are accredited by a US recognized organization Mehmet On Oct 19, 2014, at 6:13 AM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 7:12 AM, Joe Greco jgr...@ns.sol.net wrote: But to make a long story short, and my memory's perhaps a bit rusty now, but my recollection is that shorter URL's looked nicer and there was significant money to be had running the registry, so there was some heavy lobbying against retiring .GOV in favor of .FED.US (and other .US locality domains). [snip] The same problem exists with .EDU capriciously adopting new criteria that excludes any non-US-based institutions from being eligible. I believe the major issue is that if a TLD is in the global namespace, then it should NOT be allowed to restrict registrations based on country; the internet is global and .GOV and .EDU are in Global Namespace. So then, why aren't .EDU and .GOV just allowed to continue to exist but a community decision made to require whichever registry will be contracted to manage .GOV to accept registrations from _all_ government entities regardless of nationality ? In otherwords, rejection of the idea that a registry operating GTLD namespace can be allowed to impose overly exclusive eligibility criteria ... JG -- -JH
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
The same problem exists with .EDU capriciously adopting new criteria that excludes any non-US-based institutions from being eligible. I believe the major issue is that if a TLD is in the global namespace, then it should NOT be allowed to restrict registrations based on country; the internet is global and .GOV and .EDU are in Global Namespace. Gee, someone should alert NANOG management that the list has fallen through a wormhole into 1996. To answer the original question, many governments use a subdomain of their ccTLD such as gc.ca or gov.uk. Or they just use a name directly in the ccTLD such as bundesregierung.de. R's, John
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On 10/19/2014 06:20 AM, Joe Greco wrote: But given the choice between rationality and insanity, usually the process seems to prefer insanity. Or, alternatively, inertia. I would be like renumbering, only worse, because so many links would need to be found and updated.
Re: Major California Faults Ready To Rupture | IFLScience
On 10/19/14 2:03 AM, Eliot Lear wrote: This was my recollection as well. Many corporate PBXes failed, and as it happened, for some reason, the mobile towers functioned with excess capacity, to the point where I had a line coming out of my car. Best form of communication into and out of the region during the crisis was the Internet. No surprise. That's what it was designed for. So I guess heartbeat.belkin.com stayed up? Jim
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On Oct 19, 2014, at 9:13 AM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 7:12 AM, Joe Greco jgr...@ns.sol.net wrote: But to make a long story short, and my memory's perhaps a bit rusty now, but my recollection is that shorter URL's looked nicer and there was significant money to be had running the registry, so there was some heavy lobbying against retiring .GOV in favor of .FED.US (and other .US locality domains). [snip] The same problem exists with .EDU capriciously adopting new criteria that excludes any non-US-based institutions from being eligible. I believe the major issue is that if a TLD is in the global namespace, then it should NOT be allowed to restrict registrations based on country; the internet is global and .GOV and .EDU are in Global Namespace. So then, why aren't .EDU and .GOV just allowed to continue to exist but a community decision made to require whichever registry will be contracted to manage .GOV to accept registrations from _all_ government entities regardless of nationality ? You forgot .MIL , this one will be even more fun to change... signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Matthew Petach mpet...@netflight.com wrote: Wondering if some of the long-time list members can shed some light on the question--why is the .gov top level domain only for use by US government agencies? Where do other world powers put their government agency domains? Note that .mil is also restricted to US DoD, and that although .com is not restricted to US citizens and companies, it is under contract with US DoC. The only legacy gTLDs that are not in US control of some sort are .net and .org. Rubens
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On Oct 19, 2014, at 9:35 AM, Rubens Kuhl rube...@gmail.com wrote: Wondering if some of the long-time list members can shed some light on the question--why is the .gov top level domain only for use by US government agencies? RFC 1591. Where do other world powers put their government agency domains? Under their ccTLDs. Note that .mil is also restricted to US DoD, Yes. See RFC 1591. and that although .com is not restricted to US citizens and companies, it is under contract with US DoC. The only legacy gTLDs that are not in US control of some sort are .net and .org. No. NET is under essentially the same contractual agreement as .COM (specifically, Cooperative Agreement NCR-9218742). By the terms of Amendment 24 of that CA, ORG was removed from the CA when that registry moved to PIR (in 2002 I believe). Regards, -drc signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 12:51 PM, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote: RFC 1591. It is extremely unlikely that any other TLDs will be created. My how times have changed. -Jim P.
Re: Keeping Track of Data Usage in GB Per Port
So it looks like DOCSIS cable has a great solution with IPDR, but what about DSL, GPON, and regular Ethernet networks? It was mentioned that DSL uses radius, but most new DSL systems no longer use PPPoE, so I don't believe radius is a viable option. What about Wifi Access Points? What would be the best way to track usage across these devices? On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Livingood, Jason jason_living...@cable.comcast.com wrote: There are lots of ways to do it. Cable uses IPDR, which is baked into DOCSIS standards. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Protocol_Detail_Record On 10/15/14, 1:38 PM, Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com wrote: So based on the response I have received so far it seems cable was a complicated example with service flows involved. What if we are talking about something simpler like keeping track of how much data flows in and out of a port on a switch in a given month? I know you can use SNMP, but I believe that polls in intervals and takes samples which isn't really accurate right? On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 1:40 PM, na...@jack.fr.eu.org wrote: Folks, use sflow with rrdtool! Quite awesome handy On 15/10/2014 20:14, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:06:56 -0500, Colton Conor said: on a cisco switch vs a DSL port on a DSLAM for example? I would think these access switches would have some sort of stat you can count similar to a utility meter reader on a house. See what it was at last month, see what is is at this month, subtract last months from this months, and the difference is the total amount used for that month. Assume a 20mbit connection. How many times can this roll over a 32 bit counter in a month if it's going full blast?
Re: Keeping Track of Data Usage in GB Per Port
There's no correlation between PPPoE and RADIUS. Many (if not all) BRAS/BNG platforms will support RADIUS based accounting for IPoE sessions. The majority of accounting is done that way; with outliers using some other mechanism (Diameter; proprietary vendor billing solutions; flow based platforms; or counters elsewhere on the network). WiFi in my experience also typically uses a RADIUS based approach, although it can depend on the deployment context. AJ Original Message From: Colton Conor Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 3:35 PM To: Livingood, Jason Cc: NANOG Subject: Re: Keeping Track of Data Usage in GB Per Port So it looks like DOCSIS cable has a great solution with IPDR, but what about DSL, GPON, and regular Ethernet networks? It was mentioned that DSL uses radius, but most new DSL systems no longer use PPPoE, so I don't believe radius is a viable option. What about Wifi Access Points? What would be the best way to track usage across these devices? On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Livingood, Jason jason_living...@cable.comcast.com wrote: There are lots of ways to do it. Cable uses IPDR, which is baked into DOCSIS standards. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Protocol_Detail_Record On 10/15/14, 1:38 PM, Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com wrote: So based on the response I have received so far it seems cable was a complicated example with service flows involved. What if we are talking about something simpler like keeping track of how much data flows in and out of a port on a switch in a given month? I know you can use SNMP, but I believe that polls in intervals and takes samples which isn't really accurate right? On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 1:40 PM, na...@jack.fr.eu.org wrote: Folks, use sflow with rrdtool! Quite awesome handy On 15/10/2014 20:14, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:06:56 -0500, Colton Conor said: on a cisco switch vs a DSL port on a DSLAM for example? I would think these access switches would have some sort of stat you can count similar to a utility meter reader on a house. See what it was at last month, see what is is at this month, subtract last months from this months, and the difference is the total amount used for that month. Assume a 20mbit connection. How many times can this roll over a 32 bit counter in a month if it's going full blast?
Re: Major California Faults Ready To Rupture | IFLScience
- Original Message - From: Jim Shankland na...@shankland.org On 10/19/14 2:03 AM, Eliot Lear wrote: This was my recollection as well. Many corporate PBXes failed, and as it happened, for some reason, the mobile towers functioned with excess capacity, to the point where I had a line coming out of my car. Best form of communication into and out of the region during the crisis was the Internet. No surprise. That's what it was designed for. So I guess heartbeat.belkin.com stayed up? And Jim wins the Internet for this weekend. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
ISP Shaping Hardware
Hey all, Just wondering what/if people are using any shaping hardware/appliances these days, and if so, what. I have a client which has thousands of customers on Satellite and needs to restrict some users who are doing a lot. So I wanted to see what the current popular equipment out there is. ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd ske...@eintellegonetworks.com ; www.eintellegonetworks.com Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; http://twitter.com/networkceoau linkedin.com/in/skeeve experts360: https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9 twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering
Re: Keeping Track of Data Usage in GB Per Port
On Wed, 15 Oct 2014, Colton Conor wrote: So based on the response I have received so far it seems cable was a complicated example with service flows involved. What if we are talking about something simpler like keeping track of how much data flows in and out of a port on a switch in a given month? I know you can use SNMP, but I believe that polls in intervals and takes samples which isn't really accurate right? If you're measuring per month, there is no reason you can't use SNMP, poll that 64bit counter once per day or something, and then add the values up each month. It'll be accurate enough. SNMP isn't sampled, if you poll the IfOctet counter, it just counts upwards and if you're not worried about the switch rebooting, you could poll it once per month and be accurate. I'd say polling it once or a few times a day protects enough against that. -- Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
