Re: My first ARIN Experience but probably not the last, unfortunately..

[Darin Steffl]

This screams of entitlement. If you can't afford $250 a year for ARIN, you
probably shouldn't be starting a new business. Sorry

On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 4:00 PM Grant Taylor via NANOG 
wrote:

> On 7/14/23 12:04 PM, Robert Webb wrote:
> > For all of you who have historical knowledge of how ARIN has/does
> > operate, throw that out the window and look at it from a newcomer
> > point of view and the wording being taken at face value.
> Drive by comment:
>
> I can see how someone not in the know -- like myself -- could mistake
> this the way that Robert did.  I can also see how it might be taken
> differently by those in the know.
>
> "There is a temporary IPv6 fee waiver for organizations in the 3X-Small
> service category."
>
> I can see that as both "(new) organizations (that aren't currently
> registered) that are the size of a 3X-Small..." and "(existing 3X-Small)
> organizations that are (already registered and) the size of a 3X-Small..."
>
> It seems somewhat unclear to me if it applies to new registrants or if
> it's a perk for existing registrants to grow.
>
> Just my $0.02 worth as I drive by.
>
>
>
> Grant. . . .
>


-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Re: Verizon/Qwest single end-user difficulty vs Xfinity

[Darin Steffl]

Verizon does weird stuff with traffic in their cell network. Like wireguard
only running 1-2 Mbps over Verizon but faster on fixed like providers. I'm
assuming they rate limit certain protocols to avoid bypassing their
streaming video rate limits. I can see 200/30 Mbps on a 4G speedtest but
VPN runs very slow still.

Xfinity is better than cellular so I'd switch back. Any fixed cable, fiber,
wisp, or fast dsl provider should be better and more stable.

On Sat, Mar 18, 2023, 2:51 PM Jeff Woolsey  wrote:

> Verizon 5G Internet Support is not at a high-enough pay grade to assess
> this problem...  So I'm turning to y'all.
>
> I'm trying to save $$$ and increase speed, using Verizon 5G Home
> Internet to replace XFinity, even though they gave me a faster modem a
> few weeks ago.  I run both of the modems in Bridge/Passthrough mode.
>
> A friend of mine is nice enough to offer some offsite backup space, and
> I use rsync over ssh to get there.  He's 1500 miles away.  He uses a
> non-standard ssh port (keeps the doorknob twisters away).   This sort of
> thing has been working without difficulty over Xfinity (my end) for
> years.  He also changed his connection almost a month ago now, to Qwest,
> I believe.
>
> I try the same thing over Verizon [1] and ssh always times out, no
> response.  We are also NTP peers, and that doesn't work well over
> Verizon either. ICMP traceroutes and pings succeed.  UDP traceroutes do
> not get any further than 207.109.3.78 (last hop before destination) .
> Not every traceroute offers TCP, but MacOS does, and nothing responds to
> any of that, even at the usual ssh port.  UDP traceroutes to either port
> behave like an ordinary one, which it is.
>
> Since I can get there via xfinity, I can traceroute, ping, but not ssh
> back through Verizon.
>
> I also set up an incoming (xfinity) port from the same non-standard ssh
> port forwarding to regular ssh on a different system on my LAN, and when
> I ssh -p   that from Verizon (even cellphone data),  I get that
> other system, and that works fine.  The 207... router is not in that path.
>
> I can also ping the Verizon connection from Xfinity (and vice versa).
>
> Go figure.
>
> [1] This same difficulty occurs in Verizon's Looking Glass, from several
> different places, and other Looking Glasses (e.g. Cogent, Equinix).  It
> also occurs on my Verizon phone data connection (not WiFi).  If he were
> serving more stuff out of his home, this would be a bigger problem.
>
>
> --
> Jeff Woolsey {woolsey,jlw}@{jlw,jxh}.com first.last@{gmail,jlw}.com
> Spum bad keming.
> Nature abhors a straight antenna, a clean lens, and empty storage.
> "Delete! Delete! OK!" -Dr. Bronner on disk space management
> "Card sorting, Joel." -me, re Solitaire
>
>

Re: 10g residential CPE

[Darin Steffl]

Oh they'll get plenty of support calls still, almost all about wifi issues.
They'll be connected to 2.4ghz on an old device, run a speedtest and only
get 30 mbps and complain they're not getting 950 mbps on their free
connection.

WiFi issues will always cause support calls no matter what isp. The denser
the area, the more wifi interference that exists and will drive more calls.

I understand wanting to offer free internet to a small number of entities
and residential areas, particularly hotspots. What I don't agree with is
free service for every residential home or apartment. It absolutely hurts
your business to do this. It's a charity, not a business then. You say it
doesn't take any additional resources to support but it absolutely does.
You have way more than $300 into an install. You'll also have to hire
additional staff sooner because of additional tech support calls from the
res side.

Again, it seems nice to be able to do this but most companies don't have
idle resources sitting around to give away things for free. We have zero
extra time to work for free.

On Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 1:28 AM Mark Tinka  wrote:

>
>
> On 12/29/20 04:41, Keith Medcalf wrote:
>
> > Are you sure that is not related to "residential services" being of a
> generally lower quality than business services?  It has been my experience
> that shoddy service generates higher need for "support" than does
> "non-shoddy" service.  In this regard, the price for "business" services
> should be less than "residential service" by a couple of orders of
> magnitude since it costs orders of magnitude more money to "support" shoddy
> services than non-shoddy services.
>
> Considering that Aaron said 98% of their residential customers are on
> the free plan, and that they use Active-E with every 1Gbps customer
> getting a proper switch port, I'd hazard the bulk of their support
> queries to be non-techie customers needing software support (grandma, et
> al), or fibres being cut.
>
> It wouldn't seem like they'd be getting calls about "speed" issues,
> which are most annoying ones :-).
>
> Mark.
>

Re: 10g residential CPE

[Darin Steffl]

Aaron,

The "Free" service doesn't cover your cost of support which is much higher
for residential than any business customer. Our residential customers call
at least 15x more often compared to business customers compared on a 1:1
ratio.

I honestly can't fathom providing free residential service because we make
enough money on the business side of things. You should be charging
something, at least $20-30 per month.

On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 11:15 AM Aaron Wendel 
wrote:

> The $300 covers the equipment and the time to send someone out to a
> house to install it.  If $300 is too much you can pay in 12 installments
> of $25.
>
> The TIK alone costs us about $250.
>
> Aaron
>
>
> On 12/27/2020 5:04 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 12/26/20 20:48, Darin Steffl wrote:
> >
> >> Aaron,
> >>
> >> One simple question. Why on earth would you offer free internet
> >> service? How and why? Your site show 1 Gig symmetrical for free when
> >> you should be a minimum of $65 per month to be competitive.
> >
> > They also ask for no monthly fee after a single payment of US$300.
> >
> > Considering the 2Gbps package costs US$49.95, you'd guess they'd value
> > the 1Gbps service at, say US$27/month, give or take.
> >
> > So that US$300 provides a bit of coverage, perhaps 1 year, in which
> > time they'd have likely upgraded the customer.
> >
> > Mark.
>
> --
> 
> Aaron Wendel
> Chief Technical Officer
> Wholesale Internet, Inc. (AS 32097)
> (816)550-9030
> http://www.wholesaleinternet.com
> 
>
>

-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Re: 10g residential CPE

[Darin Steffl]

Aaron,

One simple question. Why on earth would you offer free internet service?
How and why? Your site show 1 Gig symmetrical for free when you should be a
minimum of $65 per month to be competitive.

On Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 12:31 PM Aaron Wendel 
wrote:

> We run MikroTik RB4011s for residential speeds between 1G and 10G or just
> supply a media converter.  For residential 40G and 100G we just drop in
> Arista or Extreme switches.  SMBs are normally just a media converter or
> direct fiber handoff.
>
> https://mikrotik.com/product/rb4011igs_5hacq2hnd_in
>
> There are not a lot of options for good, off the shelf 10G CPE equipment.
> The handful of 10G residential customers we have seem to be happy with the
> tik.  The couple that don’t use it have rolled their own solution.
>
> Like anything, I’m sure once the major home broadband providers start to
> catch up with us smaller guys the vendors will catch up as well.
>
> https://www.kcfiber.com/residential
>
> Aaron
>
>
> On Dec 26, 2020, at 11:53 AM, Mel Beckman  wrote:
>
> 
>
> i really don't get what the problem is. it's like they're being
> deliberately obtuse.
>
>
> Michael,
>
> If vendors saw a 10GbE CPE market, they would serve it. Obviously they
> don’t see a market. Why don’t people insisting vendors build their hobby
> horse see that? It’s like they’re being deliberately obtuse :)
>
> -mel via cell
>
> On Dec 26, 2020, at 9:16 AM, Michael Thomas  wrote:
>
>
> 
>
> On 12/26/20 8:00 AM, Valdis Klētnieks wrote:
>
>
> Anybody got a feel for what percent of the third-party gear currently sold
> to
>
> consumers has sane bufferbloat support in 2020, when we've *known* that
>
> de-bufferbloated gear is a viable differentiatior if marketed right
> (consider the
>
> percent of families that have at least one gamer who cares)?
>
>
> I don't know percentages, but just trying to find cpe that support it in
> their specs is depressingly small. considering that they're all using linux
> and queuing discipline software is ages old, i really don't get what the
> problem is. it's like they're being deliberately obtuse. given all of the
> zoom'ing happening now you think that somebody would hit them with the
> clue-bat that this is a marketing opportunity.
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>

Re: Hulu Proxy Blocking our IP's

[Darin Steffl]

They emailed back now and said there was a problem on their end yesterday
which has now been resolved.

They also said that none of our IP's fell under their block/proxy list.

On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 10:34 AM Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> It might be a blanket error for VPN/proxy/geolocation.  Keep in mind that
> error is consumer facing.
>
> Josh Luthman
> 24/7 Help Desk: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 11:33 AM Darin Steffl 
> wrote:
>
>> It shouldn't be a geolocation issue. It gives a proxy error on IP's that
>> worked fine for years.
>>
>> I'll try that too though.
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020, 9:46 AM Josh Luthman 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> >Hulu: ipad...@hulu.com, also see Digital Envoy above
>>>
>>> Digital Envoy  - https://www.digitalelement.com/contact-us/
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> 24/7 Help Desk: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 10:42 AM Darin Steffl 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Josh,
>>>>
>>>> I emailed the correct email address already and got it off that site
>>>> yesterday morning as stated. No response yet.
>>>>
>>>> ipad...@hulu.com
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 9:27 AM Josh Luthman <
>>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hulu is already on this list:
>>>>> http://thebrotherswisp.com/index.php/geo-and-vpn/
>>>>>
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> 24/7 Help Desk: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 10:11 AM Pennington, Scott <
>>>>> scott.penning...@cinbell.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Darin - If you are able to make progress on this, please share back
>>>>>> to the list.   We've recently been getting sporadic complaints of same.  
>>>>>>  I
>>>>>> did speak to a support agent at hulu who advised they utilize google's 
>>>>>> geo
>>>>>> database, but haven't been able to get beyond that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Scott
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> *From:* NANOG 
>>>>>> on behalf of Darin Steffl 
>>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, December 3, 2020 9:37 AM
>>>>>> *To:* North American Network Operators' Group 
>>>>>> *Subject:* Hulu Proxy Blocking our IP's
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hey all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We are a residential and business ISP. We don't host any servers or
>>>>>> lease our IP space to anyone but ourselves.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yesterday we had customers report Hulu was blocking their streaming
>>>>>> with a proxy error. Customer contacted Hulu who blamed us. I emailed the
>>>>>> hulu email yesterday morning and haven't heard a thing back.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can someone help get this resolved for us?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ipad...@hulu.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Darin Steffl
>>>>>> Minnesota WiFi
>>>>>> www.mnwifi.com
>>>>>> 507-634-WiFi
>>>>>> Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Darin Steffl
>>>> Minnesota WiFi
>>>> www.mnwifi.com
>>>> 507-634-WiFi
>>>> Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
>>>>
>>>

-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Re: Hulu Proxy Blocking our IP's

[Darin Steffl]

It shouldn't be a geolocation issue. It gives a proxy error on IP's that
worked fine for years.

I'll try that too though.

On Thu, Dec 3, 2020, 9:46 AM Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> >Hulu: ipad...@hulu.com, also see Digital Envoy above
>
> Digital Envoy  - https://www.digitalelement.com/contact-us/
>
> Josh Luthman
> 24/7 Help Desk: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 10:42 AM Darin Steffl 
> wrote:
>
>> Josh,
>>
>> I emailed the correct email address already and got it off that site
>> yesterday morning as stated. No response yet.
>>
>> ipad...@hulu.com
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 9:27 AM Josh Luthman 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hulu is already on this list:
>>> http://thebrotherswisp.com/index.php/geo-and-vpn/
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> 24/7 Help Desk: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 10:11 AM Pennington, Scott <
>>> scott.penning...@cinbell.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Darin - If you are able to make progress on this, please share back to
>>>> the list.   We've recently been getting sporadic complaints of same.   I
>>>> did speak to a support agent at hulu who advised they utilize google's geo
>>>> database, but haven't been able to get beyond that.
>>>>
>>>> -Scott
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *From:* NANOG 
>>>> on behalf of Darin Steffl 
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, December 3, 2020 9:37 AM
>>>> *To:* North American Network Operators' Group 
>>>> *Subject:* Hulu Proxy Blocking our IP's
>>>>
>>>> Hey all,
>>>>
>>>> We are a residential and business ISP. We don't host any servers or
>>>> lease our IP space to anyone but ourselves.
>>>>
>>>> Yesterday we had customers report Hulu was blocking their streaming
>>>> with a proxy error. Customer contacted Hulu who blamed us. I emailed the
>>>> hulu email yesterday morning and haven't heard a thing back.
>>>>
>>>> Can someone help get this resolved for us?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you
>>>>
>>>> ipad...@hulu.com
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Darin Steffl
>>>> Minnesota WiFi
>>>> www.mnwifi.com
>>>> 507-634-WiFi
>>>> Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Darin Steffl
>> Minnesota WiFi
>> www.mnwifi.com
>> 507-634-WiFi
>> Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
>>
>

Re: Hulu Proxy Blocking our IP's

[Darin Steffl]

Josh,

I emailed the correct email address already and got it off that site
yesterday morning as stated. No response yet.

ipad...@hulu.com

On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 9:27 AM Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> Hulu is already on this list:
> http://thebrotherswisp.com/index.php/geo-and-vpn/
>
> Josh Luthman
> 24/7 Help Desk: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 10:11 AM Pennington, Scott <
> scott.penning...@cinbell.com> wrote:
>
>> Darin - If you are able to make progress on this, please share back to
>> the list.   We've recently been getting sporadic complaints of same.   I
>> did speak to a support agent at hulu who advised they utilize google's geo
>> database, but haven't been able to get beyond that.
>>
>> -Scott
>>
>> --
>> *From:* NANOG  on
>> behalf of Darin Steffl 
>> *Sent:* Thursday, December 3, 2020 9:37 AM
>> *To:* North American Network Operators' Group 
>> *Subject:* Hulu Proxy Blocking our IP's
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> We are a residential and business ISP. We don't host any servers or lease
>> our IP space to anyone but ourselves.
>>
>> Yesterday we had customers report Hulu was blocking their streaming with
>> a proxy error. Customer contacted Hulu who blamed us. I emailed the hulu
>> email yesterday morning and haven't heard a thing back.
>>
>> Can someone help get this resolved for us?
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>> ipad...@hulu.com
>>
>> --
>> Darin Steffl
>> Minnesota WiFi
>> www.mnwifi.com
>> 507-634-WiFi
>> Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
>>
>

-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Hulu Proxy Blocking our IP's

[Darin Steffl]

Hey all,

We are a residential and business ISP. We don't host any servers or lease
our IP space to anyone but ourselves.

Yesterday we had customers report Hulu was blocking their streaming with a
proxy error. Customer contacted Hulu who blamed us. I emailed the hulu
email yesterday morning and haven't heard a thing back.

Can someone help get this resolved for us?

Thank you

ipad...@hulu.com

-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Re: Hurricane Electric AS6939

[Darin Steffl]

Yes but they're $$$ to have protection. Generally ethernet will be cheaper
than waves with the added protection.

I'm not arguing for one or the other. Waves will often be cheaper when
looking at 10G or 100G compared to ethernet. For 1G or less, ethernet might
be cheaper with some protection already built-in.

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 3:31 PM Mike Hammett  wrote:

> *nods* There are protected wave services generally available if you wish
> to protect about such things.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>
> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>
> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange>
> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>
> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> --
> *From: *"Darin Steffl" 
> *To: *"Mike Hammett" 
> *Cc: *"Eric Kuhnke" , "nanog list"  >
> *Sent: *Wednesday, October 14, 2020 3:08:19 PM
> *Subject: *Re: Hurricane Electric AS6939
>
> The downside to waves are that they're typically not protected. So a cut
> will take you down. If you have 10G Layer 2 ethernet, they often will have
> redundant paths so the only single path that can fail is between you and
> their first POP where they hopefully have redundancy. It can make a big
> difference when you're transporting data hundreds or thousands of miles.
> The longer the path, the less reliable the wave will be as each route mile
> opens you up to more risk.
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 2:25 PM Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>> I suppose it depends on your carrier and their capabilities.
>>
>> I much prefer waves to any kind of service that you can aggregate. Being
>> able to aggregate just means they're going to oversubscribe you and at some
>> point, you'll not get what you're paying for. Can't do that on a wave.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>
>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>
>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix>
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange>
>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
>> --
>> *From: *"Eric Kuhnke" 
>> *To: *"Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
>> *Cc: *"nanog list" 
>> *Sent: *Wednesday, October 14, 2020 2:25:46 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: Hurricane Electric AS6939
>>
>> For small ISPs looking at setting up their first ever presence at an IX
>> point, you almost certainly would not be ordering an actual 'wave' (eg: a
>> specific DWDM channel on a legacy 10G DWDM platform, handed off to you with
>> 1310/LX interfaces at both ends), but lit layer 2 transport service between
>> the carrier hotel and your service location.
>>
>> Pricing for the two types of service can be quite different when you
>> request an actual 'wave' from a carrier sales person, vs just lit L2
>> transport capable of large MTUs, QinQ, etc.
>>
>> The ISP carrying it might take it between those two places as simply a
>> vlan trunked through a larger 100G link, as a MPLS circuit, lots of
>> possible things.
>>
>> Unless you happened to be in a happy conjunction of the right place at
>> the right time, and an older DWDM system on exactly the same path you
>> wanted happened to have an empty channel and ready to go interface cards at
>> both ends.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 11:12 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) <
>> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Generally one would order a circuit (aka wave) between your location and
>>> the IX fabric at the interchange if you

Re: Hurricane Electric AS6939

[Darin Steffl]

gt;> *To:* Aaron Gould 
>>> *Cc:* nanog@nanog.org
>>> *Subject:* Re: Hurricane Electric AS6939
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> https://bgp.he.net/AS16527
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You don't appear to be on any IXes. Definitely join some IXes before
>>> buying another 100G of transit.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> DFW has a couple and there are some more that are starting up.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>
>>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>
>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>
>>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
>>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
>>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix>
>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange>
>>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
>>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
>>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>
>>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *From: *"Aaron Gould" 
>>> *To: *nanog@nanog.org
>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, October 13, 2020 6:29:55 PM
>>> *Subject: *Hurricane Electric AS6939
>>>
>>> Do y’all like HE for Internet uplink?  I’m thinking about using them for
>>> 100gig in Texas.  It would be for my eyeballs ISP.  We currently have
>>> Spectrum, Telia and Cogent.
>>>
>>> -Aaron
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - Forrest
>>
>
>

-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Re: Hurricane Electric AS6939

[Darin Steffl]

Depending on transport costs, it may be cheaper to just use HE at a
datacenter he's already in vs going to a datacenter he's not in currently.

HE has 10G of transit for as low as $900 right now. If 10G of transport
from him to an IX is more than that, there's no financial incentive to peer
instead of buy more transit. Since HE peers with everyone on most IX's, he
is essentially paying HE for full routes plus peering to the same IX he
would go to anyway. It's lower cost and you kill two birds with one stone.
I understand the desire to have your own connection to an IX but having HE
in the mix is basically like peering direct since they're everywhere in
nearly every IX. The other upside is you don't need to waste time trying to
establish bilateral peering sessions with providers who don't peer with the
route servers.

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, 8:09 AM Michael Spears  wrote:

> Yep. Get on some IXes first. You’d be able to offload a ton of traffic to
> free peering, vs sending everything via the transit you pay for.
>
>
>
> *From:* NANOG  *On Behalf Of *Mike
> Hammett
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 13, 2020 8:20 PM
> *To:* Aaron Gould 
> *Cc:* nanog@nanog.org
> *Subject:* Re: Hurricane Electric AS6939
>
>
>
> https://bgp.he.net/AS16527
>
>
>
> You don't appear to be on any IXes. Definitely join some IXes before
> buying another 100G of transit.
>
>
>
> DFW has a couple and there are some more that are starting up.
>
>
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
> 
> --
>
> *From: *"Aaron Gould" 
> *To: *nanog@nanog.org
> *Sent: *Tuesday, October 13, 2020 6:29:55 PM
> *Subject: *Hurricane Electric AS6939
>
> Do y’all like HE for Internet uplink?  I’m thinking about using them for
> 100gig in Texas.  It would be for my eyeballs ISP.  We currently have
> Spectrum, Telia and Cogent.
>
> -Aaron
>
>
>

Re: Hurricane Electric AS6939

[Darin Steffl]

In Minnesota, hurricane has the lowest latency and most routes out of our
state. I can reach most destinations with lower latency than any other
carrier I've tested.

Their NOC is great and easy to reach. Billing is perfect and predictable
with no hidden fees or surcharges in the fine print. And their pricing is
some of the best out there.

They peer with anyone who wants to peer and they're on more IX's than any
other provider.

You would do well to add them to your mix and remove one of the other ones.
I'd probably remove spectrum and replace with HE. We've only had 30 minutes
of downtime total in 5 years so they've been very reliable for us.

On Tue, Oct 13, 2020, 7:01 PM Brandon Martin 
wrote:

> On 10/13/20 7:29 PM, Aaron Gould wrote:
> > Do y’all like HE for Internet uplink?  I’m thinking about using them for
> 100gig in Texas.  It would be for my eyeballs ISP.  We currently have
> Spectrum, Telia and Cogent.
>
> They're a good bulk/budget option in a blend.  A decent number of
> content hosts are keen to source traffic into them.  I would be loathe
> to be single-homed to them, but even then they're not the worst option
> in that department.
>
> If you've already got Telia, Spectrum, and Cogent, 6939 is probably a
> great addition to your blend.
>
> They'll probably want a 5yr contract out of you to get their best (and
> headline per-Mbps) rate.  Evaluate carefully what position that puts you
> in based on the continually dropping cost of wholesale transit and bulk
> interconnect opportunities.  You may prefer a shorter contract term at
> slightly higher rates.
>
> As others said, if you don't need full routes from them, they have a
> VERY open peering policy, and that 100G port might be better suited to a
> local IX where you can pick them up along with a bunch of other content
> networks.
> --
> Brandon Martin
>

Re: Gaming Consoles and IPv4

[Darin Steffl]

This isn't rocket science.

Give each customer their own ipv4 IP address and turn on upnp, then they
will have open NAT to play their game and host.

On Sun, Sep 27, 2020, 12:50 PM Matt Hoppes <
mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net> wrote:

> I know the solution is always “IPv6”, but I’m curious if anyone here knows
> why gaming consoles are so stupid when it comes to IPv4?
>
> We have VoIP and video systems that work fine through multiple layers of
> PAT and NAT. Why do we still have gaming consoles, in 2020, that can’t find
> their way through a PAT system with STUN or other methods?
>
> It seems like this should be a simple solution, why are we still opening
> ports or having systems that don’t work?

Re: Europe IP Transit Provider Ideas ?

[Darin Steffl]

Why isn't Hurricane in your mix yet? They have great routes, some of the
lowest pricing available, and they are always easy to reach at the NOC.
They also peer at nearly every IX possible. They're #1 in number of BGP
adjacencies.

It looks like they have 3 or 4 paths in/out of Africa. I'd use their
looking glass tool to check latency and peering.



On Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 6:29 AM Mark Tinka  wrote:

>
>
> On 30/Jun/20 13:14, James Braunegg wrote:
>
> Dear Nanog
>
>
>
> For those running a AS with multiply POP locations around the world who
> would you recommend as a strong tier 1 transit provider in Europe (good
> routes to Africa would be a bonus)
>
>
>
> We currently take full table feeds from Telia, GTT, Cogent, Retn,
> tisparkle (Seabone) we are also looking at adding NTT in the USA and maybe
> also in Europe but any other recommendations ?
>
>
>
> Happy to be contacted by transit providers off list, thanks in advance
>
>
> For Europe, even though it's 10% of our overall traffic, we have been
> happy with the top 7 global carriers.
>
> For routing into Africa, I'll unicast you.
>
> Mark.
>

Re: Netflix Open Connect

[Darin Steffl]

Do you have 5 Gbps of traffic coming from Netflix yet? If not, you're not
at the size required to receive an OCA.

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 3:13 PM John Alcock  wrote:

> I figure Netflix is busy just like every other company during the pandemic.
>
> I sent a request several weeks ago for Netflix OCA.  I have not heard
> anything.  Anyone from Netflix contact me off list?
>
> I am in charge of AS395437
>
> John
>


-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Re: COVID-19 vs. our Networks

[Darin Steffl]

Playing games doesn't take much bandwidth. Downloading games does. So as
long as everyone already has their games and there's no updates, playing
the game is typically under 100 kbps which is negligible compared to
streaming video which takes 1 to 25 mbps.

On Fri, Mar 13, 2020, 8:52 PM Sabri Berisha  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I don't know where y'all live, but here in the SF Bay Area, pretty much
> all public and private schools have closed down. My school district (in
> Santa Clara County) will be closed until Spring Break.
>
> The impact of all these bored school kids on the networks due to gaming
> might cause some issues. I know that if I'm working from home and my
> videoconferencing slows down because of someones gaming, I'm taking the
> necessary action (read, change some rules on my firewall).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sabri
>
>
> - On Mar 13, 2020, at 4:12 PM, Hugo Slabbert  wrote:
>
> I think under circumstances like this, I could definitely see some of the
>> online based games shutting services down.
>
>
> How so?
>
> Signed,
>
> Someone who works for an online gaming company and has heard nothing of
> this.
>
> --
> Hugo Slabbert   | email, xmpp/jabber: h...@slabnet.com
> pgp key: B178313E   | also on Signal
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 2:52 PM Mike Bolitho 
> wrote:
>
>> I think under circumstances like this, I could definitely see some of the
>> online based games shutting services down.
>>
>> - Mike Bolitho
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 2:41 PM Ahmed Borno  wrote:
>>
>>> Its already happening in Italy, and now that schools are shutting down
>>> here as well, its going to get interesting:
>>>
>>> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-12/housebound-italian-kids-strain-network-with-fortnite-marathon
>>>
>>> The ultimate traffic test is coming, looking forward to hearing about it
>>> on this thread.
>>>
>>> Maybe its a good time to start a communication channel between content
>>> providers/gaming companies and ISPs/CDNs.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 11:22 AM Rubens Kuhl  wrote:
>>>


 On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 3:46 PM g...@1337.io  wrote:

> With talk of there being an involuntary statewide (WA) and then
> national quarantines (house arrest) for multiple weeks, has anyone put
> thought into the impacts of this on your networks if/when this comes to
> fruition?
>
> We're already pushing the limits with telecommuters / those that are
> WFH, but I can only imagine what things will look like with everyone stuck
> at home for any duration of time.
>


 People will turn to you and every other ISP hoping you keep them
 online. So besides demand issues, keeping your network up will be important
 to a whole lot of people.


 Rubens


>>>
>

Re: ATT Microcell in Austin, TX

[Darin Steffl]

Matt,

You're correct that if most of these small cells goes offline during a
power outage, the remaining macro cells would not be able to handle the
load well.

Data would be nearly useless and phone/texts may be sporadic.

I believe that when this happens, they should proactively block or limit
video and file download/upload traffic as much as possible to make sure
communications like calls and texts can go through with the highest success
rate possible. Netflix and YouTube should never hinder more important
communications in my opinion. Maybe it's as simple as putting a rate limit
for each cellphone connected to these now overloaded sectors so no one can
hog the cell capacity.

It would be pretty sweet though if small cells all had a linked power
source following the same fiber paths that all hook back into a large
battery backup or generator somewhere. Maybe 30-40 small cells can have
backup power from one macro cell generator. I'm not sure if they're
installed that way or not but it would ideal. Otherwise, you're losing 10
to 100x of the capacity of a cell network during power outages if the small
cells go down.

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020, 9:46 AM Matt Erculiani  wrote:

> It will be interesting to see how this plays out as reliance on these
> small cells for capacity grows. I'd imagine demand for cellular bandwidth
> goes up during a power outage and not down.
>
> Is it reasonable to think that there could be a situation where cell
> capacity is not available during a time of need because these sites will
> simply go down and significantly reduce coverage/quality in dense
> metropolitan areas?
>
> -Matt
>
> On Sun, Feb 16, 2020, 19:15 Shane Ronan  wrote:
>
>> This is a small cell. They are very common across all of the carriers.
>>
>> It is NOT intended to provide primary coverage for the area.
>>
>> It IS intended to provide additional capacity to the immediate area.
>>
>> Think of the large cell towers as providing blanket coverage, while small
>> cells provide hot spots of increased capacity.
>>
>> Most small cells have no battery backup or generator at all, as it's not
>> feasible given the real estate available.
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 16, 2020, 5:58 PM Chris Boyd  wrote:
>>
>>> Since people on here like to talk about the generatorn run time on cell
>>> towers, I thought y’all might like to see an ATT microcell in downtown
>>> Austin, TX.  No apparent generator or battery on it.
>>>
>>> https://imgur.com/a/RY9Tg7h
>>>
>>> —Chris
>>
>>

Re: FYI - Suspension of Cogent access to ARIN Whois

[Darin Steffl]

Cogent is still violating this whois suspension.

A couple wisp's I know were contacted by cogent in the last week after
receiving their ASN.

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, 12:57 PM Justin Wilson  wrote:

> This shall be my answer from now on.
>
> > On Jan 27, 2020, at 1:22 PM, Dovid Bender  wrote:
> >
> > I find it interesting that they say their clients didn't see it as an
> issue. Whenever they called and asked if I want transit my answer always
> was when they had v6 peering to He and Gooogle we could talk.
> >
>
>

Re: akamai yesterday - what in the world was that

[Darin Steffl]

Shouldn't game patches like this be released overnight during off-peak
hours? Fortnite releases their updates around 3 or 4am when most ISP's
networks are at their lowest utilization. It seems somewhat reckless to
release such a large patch during awake hours.

On Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 12:08 PM Brandon Jackson via NANOG 
wrote:

> "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare fragged our business VOIP: US ISP blames
> outage on smash-hit video game rush
> This is Windstream, going dark..."
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/01/23/windstream_fvoip_outage/
>
> Apparently not everyone came out unscathed.
>
> --
> Brandon Jackson
> bjack...@napshome.net
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 10:14 AM Aaron Gould  wrote:
>
>> My gosh, what in the word was that coming out of my local Akamai aanp
>> servers yesterday !?  starting at about 12:00 noon central time lasting
>> several hours ?
>>
>>
>>
>> -Aaron
>>
>

Re: Requesting /24 from ARIN

[Darin Steffl]

I feel it's the same now as it was 5 years ago. Same spreadsheet and
justification as years ago. I just got a /22 yesterday and it was no
different from an ARIN allocation to a purchase and transfer.

On Sat, Dec 28, 2019, 12:37 PM Kaiser, Erich  wrote:

> Yes been doing it for years but seems to be more in depth now from latest
> documentation I received, it has never been an easy process IMO.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 12:22 PM Pennington, Scott <
> scott.penning...@cinbell.com> wrote:
>
>> This is not a change. You've always had to justify in order to
>> legitimately transfer even from an auction.
>>
>> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36>
>>
>> --
>> *From:* NANOG  on behalf of Kaiser, Erich <
>> er...@gotfusion.net>
>> *Sent:* Saturday, December 28, 2019 1:13:53 PM
>> *To:* Darin Steffl 
>> *Cc:* North American Network Operators' Group 
>> *Subject:* Re: Requesting /24 from ARIN
>>
>> They have changed their policies from what I can tell.  It was easier to
>> get IPs when there were none and you were buying from an auction but now
>> that they have them they want you to fill out a bunch of info and recertify
>> everything.
>>
>>
>> Erich Kaiser
>> The Fusion Network
>> er...@gotfusion.net
>> Office: 815-570-3101
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 11:23 AM Darin Steffl 
>> wrote:
>>
>> In the most polite manner possible, RTFM.
>>
>> ARIN has all the info on their website on how to request resources. It is
>> not difficult. I've never had to call them before.
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 28, 2019, 9:53 AM Seth Mattinen  wrote:
>>
>> On 12/28/19 7:12 AM, Terrance Devor wrote:
>> > Thank You Jorge! What is important for us is not to overpay That's
>> > why auctions are really a last resort. Can someone please walk me
>> > through this with a few links? This is my first time going through this
>> > process.
>>
>>
>> Ask ARIN. They will help you.
>>
>>

Re: Requesting /24 from ARIN

[Darin Steffl]

In the most polite manner possible, RTFM.

ARIN has all the info on their website on how to request resources. It is
not difficult. I've never had to call them before.

On Sat, Dec 28, 2019, 9:53 AM Seth Mattinen  wrote:

> On 12/28/19 7:12 AM, Terrance Devor wrote:
> > Thank You Jorge! What is important for us is not to overpay That's
> > why auctions are really a last resort. Can someone please walk me
> > through this with a few links? This is my first time going through this
> > process.
>
>
> Ask ARIN. They will help you.
>

Re: Questions about satellite phones + satellite Internet

[Darin Steffl]

I can't speak much to phone service but between Viasat and hughesnet,
you'll have a way better experience with Viasat. Don't expect it to be full
speed once you hit the caps. It will run slow during peak times once you
hit the caps in the fine print. Off peak hours should be fairly fast.
Latency also is above 700ms so don't expect twitch gaming to work. VPN is
also bad.

I also doubt Comcast is throttling your entire community. Have you
escalated your issue with them? Maybe they have a congested node that needs
to be split. Or their peering points could be running hot so certain
services feel slow to you.

On Fri, Dec 6, 2019, 3:55 PM Yosem Companys  wrote:

> Hey All,
>
> I'm new to the world of satellite phones + satellite Internet. I can't
> find an informative guide that will help me figure out the best options.
>
> Anyone know where I could find such information?
>
> Based on my exhaustive search, it seems the best generally speaking are
> Iridium and ViaSat, respectively. (For Iridium, that assumes one has line
> of sight.) But would it be best to do both or get Iridium Go only and use
> one's cell phone via a satellite link or have a dedicated satellite phone?
> More important, how can one assess whether one's geographic location is
> ideally suited for one service vis-a-vis the other?
>
> For perspective, I live on the Silicon Valley Coastside (i.e., Half Moon
> Bay). Comcast and AT&T rely on PG&E's transmission cables for Internet
> access. As such, whenever a power shutdown occurs, many of us on the
> Coastside are left without cable or Internet access. I shudder to think
> what would happen during the Big One. Even when there are no power
> shutoffs, however, Comcast appears to throttle our community on a regular
> basis.
>
> As such, I'm thinking about getting a combo of satellite phone
> and/or satellite Internet both to improve my Internet service and to
> maintain communication during an anthropogenic or natural disaster.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Thanks,
> Yosem
>

Re: Puerto Rico IX (operational)

[Darin Steffl]

My guess is Aeronet already has a Netflix OCA but Netflix may still be
interested adding some gear on the IX for other ISP's that don't qualify
for their own appliance.

Also, cloudflare would likely want to add a POP here as well. They're
trying to be within 10ms of every ISP in the world or something like that.

On Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 4:56 PM Mehmet Akcin  wrote:

> Hey there,
>
> Puerto Rico IX , famously known as PRIX , is now operational.
>
> You can visit www.puertoricoix.net to see sites you can connect to PRIX,
> members and join Ix mailing list.
>
> There are no fees to join the IX. We hope to keep this, this way until
> there is enough interest to form a non profit org.
>
> I would like to thank once again Aeronet, Arista and Cloudsmash for their
> donations of equipment , time and energy!
>
> Now, we are looking for those who want to deploy 1-2RU caching boxes
> anything from DNS to Content.
>
> We are working on more stats/looking glass, etc soon!
>
> Mehmet
> --
> Mehmet
> +1-424-298-1903
>

Re: Cogent sales reps who actually respond

[Darin Steffl]

Tim,

The reps themselves have not been unethical. They've not lied or been
dishonest to me in the sales process at all. Comparing them to a shady used
car salesman is not a fair comparison.

They are likely given a list of leads and need to make so many cold calls
to show they're trying to make sales.

That's not to say some reps will do unethical things vs other reps like
ours who were nothing but honest, good people.

I think it's juvenile to avoid a company solely on reps reaching out to
sell to you. That's their job. If their network and support is good and
their cost is attractive, get over your petty reasons for avoiding them.
You're stuck on one point and hold a grudge because "their sales process is
shady".

I've seen shady companies and cogent isn't one of them. Take CenturyLink
where they quote a small business $100 for internet and phone but the bill
is actually $197 after all the hidden fees and tax. That's shady. Cogent
has never done that. They bill you exactly what's in the contract and not a
penny more.

Zayo adds hidden fees and BS reasons for why they collect them and there's
no way out of it. Again, not a problem with cogent or Hurricane.


On Sun, Sep 22, 2019, 9:53 AM Dmitry Sherman  wrote:

> They are not that cheap...
>
> Best regards,
> Dmitry Sherman
> Interhost Networks
> www.interhost.co.il
> dmi...@interhost.net
> Mob: 054-3181182
> Sent from Steve's creature
>
> On 22 Sep 2019, at 16:49, Tim Burke  wrote:
>
> Ethical business practices are quite important to me... I don't care how
> their pricing is, if every one of their sales reps is on-par with a used
> car salesman, I want nothing to do with them. No other carrier I deal with
> acts in this fashion.
>
> If you're OK with cheap bandwidth sold by car sales rejects, that's
> fine... but I am most certainly not interested.
>
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019, at 8:02 AM, Darin Steffl wrote:
>
> It may be unethical to pull emails from ARIN listings but their sales guys
> have a job to do and quotas to meet.
>
> Don't get mad at the sales reps, maybe think a little higher up the food
> chain. Each rep I've had has been very fair and respectful. If I don't need
> anything new, I tell them to followup with me in 6 months and they do. At
> most they send me a 2 sentence email to see if I need anything. That's
> something a good rep should do to make sure they're always in the back of
> your mind and easy to reach.
>
> Also, just because you don't like their sales process doesn't mean their
> network is bad. We've had them for 3 years and never had a single outage.
> The very few times we did call them for routing questions, they picked up
> the phone immediately and knew what to do.
>
> That already makes them better than some companies that cost 5 times as
> much. At cogent pricing, you should receive the worst support but it's damn
> good right along with HE support. Both are the most affordable transit
> providers but offer the best support. The more expensive guys should get
> their crap together.
>
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019, 7:54 AM Tim Burke  wrote:
>
>
> That is just The Cogent Way™, unfortunately. I just had (yet another)
> Cogent rep spam me using an email address that is _only_ used as an ARIN
> contact, trying to sell me bandwidth. When I called him out on it, with
> complia...@arin.net CCed, he backpedaled and claimed to obtain my
> information from Google.
>
> Gotta love these awful bottom feeding companies.
>
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019, at 10:05 AM, Dmitry Sherman wrote:
>
> Cogent are spamming seriously, they call me from different phone number in
> Frankfurt and USA in holidays or at night.
>
> --
> Dmitry Sherman
> Interhost Networks Ltd
> dmi...@interhost.net
> Mobile: +972-54-3181182
> Office: +972-74-7029881
> Web: www.interhost.co.il
>
> On 17/09/2019, 3:25, "NANOG on behalf of Michel Py" <
> nanog-boun...@nanog.org on behalf of michel...@tsisemi.com> wrote:
>
> > If you don’t like Cogent - explain.
>
> Besides the peering issues, they can't stop spamming. If after 20
> attempts on the phone you have not picked up, they start to send email.
> They abuse whois. They are one of the primary reasons few people put
> their real phone number in whois.
>
> And I have never talked to that level of incompetence. Tell their
> sales droids that you want a link over RFC 1149, or that you need BGT
> (instead of BGP), they will tell you no problem.
> Don't even try to ask anything about communities or RPKI; they can't
> tell the difference between a router and a connected coffee pot. If you
> must deal with them, re

Re: Cogent sales reps who actually respond

[Darin Steffl]

It may be unethical to pull emails from ARIN listings but their sales guys
have a job to do and quotas to meet.

Don't get mad at the sales reps, maybe think a little higher up the food
chain. Each rep I've had has been very fair and respectful. If I don't need
anything new, I tell them to followup with me in 6 months and they do. At
most they send me a 2 sentence email to see if I need anything. That's
something a good rep should do to make sure they're always in the back of
your mind and easy to reach.

Also, just because you don't like their sales process doesn't mean their
network is bad. We've had them for 3 years and never had a single outage.
The very few times we did call them for routing questions, they picked up
the phone immediately and knew what to do.

That already makes them better than some companies that cost 5 times as
much. At cogent pricing, you should receive the worst support but it's damn
good right along with HE support. Both are the most affordable transit
providers but offer the best support. The more expensive guys should get
their crap together.

On Sun, Sep 22, 2019, 7:54 AM Tim Burke  wrote:

> That is just The Cogent Way™, unfortunately. I just had (yet another)
> Cogent rep spam me using an email address that is _only_ used as an ARIN
> contact, trying to sell me bandwidth. When I called him out on it, with
> complia...@arin.net CCed, he backpedaled and claimed to obtain my
> information from Google.
>
> Gotta love these awful bottom feeding companies.
>
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019, at 10:05 AM, Dmitry Sherman wrote:
>
> Cogent are spamming seriously, they call me from different phone number in
> Frankfurt and USA in holidays or at night.
>
> --
> Dmitry Sherman
> Interhost Networks Ltd
> dmi...@interhost.net
> Mobile: +972-54-3181182
> Office: +972-74-7029881
> Web: www.interhost.co.il
>
> On 17/09/2019, 3:25, "NANOG on behalf of Michel Py" <
> nanog-boun...@nanog.org on behalf of michel...@tsisemi.com> wrote:
>
> > If you don’t like Cogent - explain.
>
> Besides the peering issues, they can't stop spamming. If after 20
> attempts on the phone you have not picked up, they start to send email.
> They abuse whois. They are one of the primary reasons few people put
> their real phone number in whois.
>
> And I have never talked to that level of incompetence. Tell their
> sales droids that you want a link over RFC 1149, or that you need BGT
> (instead of BGP), they will tell you no problem.
> Don't even try to ask anything about communities or RPKI; they can't
> tell the difference between a router and a connected coffee pot. If you
> must deal with them, record everything.
>
> If someone has a cheap Asterisk trick so when the caller ID says
> COGENT it goes directly to Lenny I'll take it.
>
> Michel
>
> TSI Disclaimer:  This message and any files or text attached to it are
> intended only for the recipients named above and contain information that
> may be confidential or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,
> you must not forward, copy, use or otherwise disclose this communication or
> the information contained herein. In the event you have received this
> message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this
> message, and then delete all copies of it from your system. Thank you!...
>
>
>
>
>

Re: AS16509 (Amazon) peering contact

[Darin Steffl]

It took us over a year before peering was established. Just keep trying
until they reply.

On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:13 AM Francois Lecavalier <
francois.lecaval...@mindgeek.com> wrote:

> Hi nanog,
>
>
>
> We just joined a IXP (QiX – Montreal) in the hope to offload >4Gbps of
> traffic to AWS, however it’s been 2 weeks we sent a request to
> peer...@amazon.com without any reply.
>
>
>
> Are they usually taking long to reply?  Anyone have a direct contact?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> *-Frank*
> This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not
> waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying
> of this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended
> recipient is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in error, please
> advise me (by return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Ce courrier
> électronique est confidentiel et protégé. L'expéditeur ne renonce pas aux
> droits et obligations qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou
> copie de ce message ou des renseignements qu'il contient par une personne
> autre que le (les) destinataire(s) désigné(s) est interdite. Si vous
> recevez ce courrier électronique par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser
> immédiatement, par retour de courrier électronique ou par un autre moyen.
>


-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Re: CenturyLink/Level 3 combined AS

[Darin Steffl]

Ok just so simplify things.

Is Cogent or CenturyLink/L3 better for transit?

On Fri, Jun 7, 2019, 3:00 PM Brielle Bruns  wrote:

> On 6/7/2019 11:03 AM, Romeo Czumbil wrote:
> > All new CL Internet get's provisioned on AS3356
> > You would need a strong case for them to put you on AS209
>
>
> Got provisioned last year on AS209 when they turned up my ent Fiber with
> BGP.
>
> Could depend heavily on what services and where.
>
> --
> Brielle Bruns
> The Summit Open Source Development Group
> http://www.sosdg.org/ http://www.ahbl.org
>

CenturyLink/Level 3 combined AS

[Darin Steffl]

Hey all,

Are there plans for CL and Level3 to combine AS's into one network?

If not, do they actively peer and route traffic through each other's
networks at least?

Basically we're looking at picking up 1G of CL and wondering if it's near
the same quality as Level3 in terms of latency and packet loss.

Thanks

-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Re: modeling residential subscriber bandwidth demand

[Darin Steffl]

Paul,

I have hard time seeing how you aren't maxing out that circuit. We see
about 2.3 mbps average per customer at peak with a primarily residential
user base. That would about 575 mbps average at peak for 250 users on our
network so how do we use 575 but you say your users don't even top 100 mbps
at peak? It doesn't make sense that our customers use 6 times as much
bandwidth at peak than yours do.

We're a rural and small town mix in Minnesota, no urban areas in our
coverage. 90% of our customers are on a plan 22 mbps or less and the other
10% are on a 100 mbps plan but their average usage isn't really much higher.


Enterprise environments can easily handle many more users on a 100 meg
circuit because they aren't typically streaming video like they would be at
home. Residential will always be much higher usage per person than most
enterprise users.

On Wed, Apr 3, 2019, 2:46 AM Valdis Klētnieks 
wrote:

> On Tue, 02 Apr 2019 23:53:06 -0700, Ben Cannon said:
> > A 100/100 enterprise connection can easily support hundreds of desktop
> users
> > if not more.  It’s a lot of bandwidth even today.
>
> And what happens when a significant fraction of those users fire up
> Netflix with
> an HD stream?
>
> We're discussing residential not corporate connections, I thought
>
>

Re: Amazon Peering

[Darin Steffl]

We've been waiting since December 2017 with multiple followup. Their most
recent response said that February would probably be when they turn us up,
15 months after our first request.

On Thu, Jan 24, 2019, 1:46 PM Mike Hammett  Let us know your success as well. I'll hold off following up on my
> requests until I see that other people are successful. I don't want to
> contribute to flooding them with requests.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Tom Beecher" 
> *To: *"Jason Lixfeld" 
> *Cc: *"North American Network Operators' Group" 
> *Sent: *Thursday, January 24, 2019 1:38:51 PM
> *Subject: *Re: Amazon Peering
>
> Thanks Jason. I'll have my peering team take another crack at reaching out
> and see what happens. Appreciate it!
>
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 2:21 PM Jason Lixfeld 
> wrote:
>
>> We circled back with them yesterday on a request we made in late November
>> where at the time they said they wouldn’t be turned up until 2019 due to
>> holiday network change freeze.
>>
>> They responded within about 4 hours, thanked us for our patience and
>> understanding and said we should expect them to be turned up in about 6
>> weeks, which is apparently their typical timing.
>>
>> On Jan 24, 2019, at 2:13 PM, Tom Beecher  wrote:
>>
>> I hate to necro-thread , but has anyone seen any movement from Amazon on
>> this? I just got a Strongly Worded Message about it, and according to my
>> peering team , it's been radio silence for months.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 12:32 PM JASON BOTHE via NANOG 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> This is a note I received on Oct18 when checking on a peering request
>>> submitted on Aug7..
>>>
>>> “Apologies for the delays here. We have temporarily frozen IX peering as
>>> we revise some of our automation processes. I’m hopeful this will be
>>> unblocked by early November. Thank you for your continued patience.”
>>>
>>> On Nov 24, 2018, at 10:59, Darin Steffl  wrote:
>>>
>>> It seems wasteful for Amazon to connect to an IX but then ignore peering
>>> requests for a year.
>>>
>>> They have 40G of connectivity but are unresponsive. I'll try emailing
>>> all the other contacts listed in peeringdb.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018, 10:38 AM Mike Hammett >>
>>>> I've e-mailed my contacts there a couple times on people's behalf. No
>>>> response yet.
>>>>
>>>> It seems like a lot of organizations need 1 more person in their
>>>> peering departments.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>
>>>> Midwest-IX
>>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *From: *"Darin Steffl" 
>>>> *To: *"North American Network Operators' Group" 
>>>> *Sent: *Friday, November 23, 2018 10:21:51 PM
>>>> *Subject: *Amazon Peering
>>>>
>>>> Hey all,
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone have a direct contact to get a peering session established
>>>> with Amazon at an IX? I sent a peering request Dec 2017 and two more times
>>>> this Sept and Nov with no response.
>>>>
>>>> I sent to peer...@amazon.com and received one automated response back
>>>> so I know they received my email but nothing since.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Darin Steffl
>>>> Minnesota WiFi
>>>> www.mnwifi.com
>>>> 507-634-WiFi
>>>> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
>>>> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>

Re: Non-profit IX vs. neutral for-profit IX

[Darin Steffl]

is a larger value because
>> there's no bump.  Whether that's true or not, who knows but that's the
>> perception I've heard.
>> >
>> > Depending on the size of the non-profit, I'd almost compare it to how
>> the hospitals are here in Boise.
>> >
>> > The non-profits are oversized, monopolistic, price gouging, etc.  Their
>> care can be pretty meh, esp since they bought up all the little independent
>> clinics (yay, ER pricing for a basic family clinic visit).
>> >
>> > The for-profit smaller clinics and hospitals run a pretty tight ship,
>> better value for their money, service is very good, and compete with one
>> another for who has the best service.
>> >
>> > People think they are getting 'better' because they are going to a
>> place that is supposed to be run to benefit people over profit, but alas,
>> you'd be very very wrong.
>> > --
>> > Brielle Bruns
>> > The Summit Open Source Development Group
>> > http://www.sosdg.org / http://www.ahbl.org
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Clayton Zekelman
>> Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
>> 3363 Tecumseh Rd. E
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=3363+Tecumseh+Rd.+E+%0D%0AWindsor,+Ontario+%0D%0AN8W+1H4&entry=gmail&source=g>
>> Windsor, Ontario
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=3363+Tecumseh+Rd.+E+%0D%0AWindsor,+Ontario+%0D%0AN8W+1H4&entry=gmail&source=g>
>> N8W 1H4
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=3363+Tecumseh+Rd.+E+%0D%0AWindsor,+Ontario+%0D%0AN8W+1H4&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>
>> tel. 519-985-8410
>> fax. 519-985-8409
>>
> --
> Mehmet
> +1-424-298-1903
>
>

-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Re: Amazon Peering

[Darin Steffl]

It seems wasteful for Amazon to connect to an IX but then ignore peering
requests for a year.

They have 40G of connectivity but are unresponsive. I'll try emailing all
the other contacts listed in peeringdb.

Thanks

On Sat, Nov 24, 2018, 10:38 AM Mike Hammett  I've e-mailed my contacts there a couple times on people's behalf. No
> response yet.
>
> It seems like a lot of organizations need 1 more person in their peering
> departments.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Darin Steffl" 
> *To: *"North American Network Operators' Group" 
> *Sent: *Friday, November 23, 2018 10:21:51 PM
> *Subject: *Amazon Peering
>
> Hey all,
>
> Does anyone have a direct contact to get a peering session established
> with Amazon at an IX? I sent a peering request Dec 2017 and two more times
> this Sept and Nov with no response.
>
> I sent to peer...@amazon.com and received one automated response back so
> I know they received my email but nothing since.
>
>
>
> --
> Darin Steffl
> Minnesota WiFi
> www.mnwifi.com
> 507-634-WiFi
> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
>
>

Amazon Peering

[Darin Steffl]

Hey all,

Does anyone have a direct contact to get a peering session established with
Amazon at an IX? I sent a peering request Dec 2017 and two more times this
Sept and Nov with no response.

I sent to peer...@amazon.com and received one automated response back so I
know they received my email but nothing since.



-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Re: Whats going on at Cogent

[Darin Steffl]

oo, and I’ve also seen an
>>>> increase in salespeople calling, for example when an AS is registered etc.
>>>> in addition to the normal calls..
>>>>
>>>> On 16 Oct 2018, at 16:54, Dovid Bender  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> They call me every few months. the last time they emailed me I said I
>>>> wasn't interested because of the HE issue. I have yet to get another
>>>> email...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 9:29 AM, Ca By  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 5:16 AM David Hubbard <
>>>> dhubb...@dino.hostasaurus.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Have had the same sales rep for several years now; unfortunately he has
>>>> no ability to fix their IPv6 peering issue so we’re slowly removing
>>>> circuits, but otherwise for a handful of 10gig DIA circuits it’s been
>>>> stable.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yep, this.  Whenever Cogent calls, this is what i tell them.
>>>> Black-holing HE and Google ipv6 traffic, which is what they do if i use a
>>>> default route from them, is dead on arrival.  Shows they make bad decisions
>>>> and dont put the customer first, or even create such an illusion.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From: *NANOG  on behalf of Ryan Gelobter <
>>>> rya...@atwgpc.net>
>>>> *Date: *Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 6:04 AM
>>>> *To: *NANOG 
>>>> *Subject: *Whats going on at Cogent
>>>>
>>>> Anyone else seen terrible support and high turnover of sales/account
>>>> people at Cogent the last few months? Is there something going on over
>>>> there internally? I'm sure some people will say Cogent has always been crap
>>>> but in the past their account reps and support were pretty good. It seems
>>>> to have gone downhill the last 12 months really bad.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Ryan
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>

-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Re: Puerto Rico Internet Exchange

[Darin Steffl]

What is the average latency from the mainland to PR? If it's under 10ms,
there's probably not a huge push for a local IX.

But to compare to our IX in Minnesota, we are within 8ms of Chicago and we
certainly didn't need one here but a group of guys got together some
donations and donated rack space, power, etc. And now we have a very busy
IX with most of the big players on it. I think we push almost 211 gbps at
peak.

So our model was a "build it and they will come" and it worked great. It's
very popular and many content providers and ISP's are peered here including
us.

Our exchange has since started charging port fees but it was free to join
for the longest time.

http://micemn.net

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 8:57 AM Mel Beckman  wrote:

> Mike,
>
> But why would you want, as a content provider, to have your content hosted
> on the island? Backhauling it over fiber is no big deal across the short
> distances involved. As far as I can tell, PR has a glut of ocean floor
> fiber capacity, just installed a couple years ago. We're not talking stock
> market trades here, where milliseconds matter. We're talking Netflix movie
> reruns, which could be easily delivered with seconds of latency.
>
> Those who hold to the "if you build it they will come" business model
> forget that that model was a fantasy in a movie.
>
> A movie currently being streamed to PR without difficulty :-)
>
> -mel via cell
>
> On Sep 14, 2018, at 6:14 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
> Agreed. Very chicken or the egg. Any recently formed IX is largely a
> conduit for big content to connect to local eyeballs. As some critical mass
> of eyeballs is achieved, local content is interested as are large networks
> like Hurricane Electric.
>
> In the case of PR, if there are no local content providers, an IX provides
> an avenue for one to form to connect to other operators on the island,
> avoiding underwater cables to the mainland. If I were a company in PR, I'd
> want my web site and other services hosted in PR, not Miami or Virginia.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
> 
> --
> *From: *"Sander Steffann" 
> *To: *"Mel Beckman" 
> *Cc: *"nanog" 
> *Sent: *Friday, September 14, 2018 8:08:58 AM
> *Subject: *Re: Puerto Rico Internet Exchange
>
> Hi,
>
> > In general an IX only makes sense when there are local resources to
> exchange. It doesn’t seem like PR has a lot of, if any, content providers
> of its own, so most consumer content is coming from offshore anyway.
>
> This can also work the other way: once there is a local IXP, it can open
> opportunities for local content providers.
>
> Cheers,
> Sander
>
>
>

Re: OpenDNS CGNAT Issues

[Darin Steffl]

Guys, I'm not asking about IPv6. I'm simply asking for a contact at OpenDNS.

And we are purchasing enough IPv4 space to provide an IP to every customer
but it's not ready yet.

Thank you

On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 8:39 AM, Ca By  wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 6:31 AM Matt Hoppes  rivervalleyinternet.net> wrote:
>
>> So don't CGNat?  Buy IPv4 addresses at auction?
>>
>
> As long as you don’t deploy ipv6, you should be good.
>
> Seriously. Not sure why this is so hard. IPv4 does not scale.  Your
> customers, like my customers, probably mostly go to Youtube, google, fb,
> netflix,  all which have ipv6. Giving your existing customers ipv6
> moves this traffic off your cgn. And gives them a path to dns services.
>
> But you do you. if you ask NANOG, how to solve this problem, and missed
> the 3 NANOG meeting presos at every meeting about how ipv6 is good  not
> sure what you expect here. Definately not a shoulder to cry on, but i wm
> sure some v4 brokers and cgn box pushers see your customers blood in the
> water.
>
> CB
>
>>
>> On 9/11/18 9:28 AM, Ca By wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 6:04 AM Matt Hoppes
>> > > > <mailto:mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net>> wrote:
>> >
>> > That isn’t a solution. He still will need to dual stack and CGNat
>> that.
>> >
>> >
>> > But the flows that can support ipv6, will go ipv6 and not be subject to
>> > these abuse triggers.
>> >
>> > Look, this list has monthly reports from some small network operator
>> > hurting their customers with CGN NAT. Meanwhile, the big guys like
>> > Comcast / Charter / ATT / Cox have moved onto ipv6.
>> >
>> > Where does that leave the little guy with CGN?
>> >
>> > Right here. Screaming into the avoid begging for help. Some special
>> > exception.
>> >
>> > And, me, saying you had 10+ years of not deploying ipv6.  Here’s to the
>> > next 10 years of you email this list about your own failure to keep up
>> > with the times.
>> >
>> > We will have this discussion again and again.  Not sure your customers
>> > will stick around, all they know is your CGN space got black listed
>> from
>> > yet another service
>> >
>> > #realtalk
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sep 11, 2018, at 08:54, Ca By > > <mailto:cb.li...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 9:12 PM Darin Steffl
>> >> mailto:darin.ste...@mnwifi.com>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> I have a ticket open with OpenDNS about filtering happening on
>> >> some of our CGNAT IP space where a customer has "claimed" the
>> >> IP as theirs so other customers using that same IP and OpenDNS
>> >> are being filtered and not able to access sites that fall
>> >> under their chosen filter.
>> >>
>> >> I have a ticket open from 6 days ago but it's not going
>> >> anywhere fast.
>> >>
>> >> Can someone from OpenDNS contact me or point me to a contact
>> >> there to help get this resolved? I believe we need to claim
>> >> our CGNAT IP space so residential users can't claim IP's of
>> >> their own.
>> >>
>> >>     Thank you!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> You should provide your users ipv6, opendns supports ipv6 and
>> >> likely will not have this issue you see
>> >>
>> >> https://www.opendns.com/about/innovations/ipv6/
>> >>
>> >> I am sure it may cost you time / money / effort. But this old
>> >> thing we call ipv4 is in a death spiral, and it will just get
>> >> worse and worse for you without ipv6.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Darin Steffl
>> >> Minnesota WiFi
>> >> www.mnwifi.com <http://www.mnwifi.com/>
>> >> 507-634-WiFi
>> >> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
>> >> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
>> >>
>>
>


-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

OpenDNS CGNAT Issues

[Darin Steffl]

Hello,

I have a ticket open with OpenDNS about filtering happening on some of our
CGNAT IP space where a customer has "claimed" the IP as theirs so other
customers using that same IP and OpenDNS are being filtered and not able to
access sites that fall under their chosen filter.

I have a ticket open from 6 days ago but it's not going anywhere fast.

Can someone from OpenDNS contact me or point me to a contact there to help
get this resolved? I believe we need to claim our CGNAT IP space so
residential users can't claim IP's of their own.

Thank you!

-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Re: DirecTV Now Geolocation Contact

[Darin Steffl]

We heard from a customer that it was working great then their locals
stopped working because Directv said they were out of market. Of course we
didn't change anything and it was normal on our end.

Since it's not our service and everything except their locals was working,
we told them to escalate to Directv and we haven't heard back. Not sure if
it's fixed or not.

On Tue, Aug 21, 2018, 10:42 AM Blake Hudson  wrote:

> Hey Dan, just an FYI we had a client indicate issues with previously
> working DirecTV service suddenly stop working last month because DirecTV
> was geolocating their customer to the wrong state. There was some errant
> whois information likely to blame for this, but the WHOIS information
> had been unchanged for years. Seems like DirecTV may have changed their
> geolocation provider or their granularity (locating to city or state
> level rather than country/region).
>
> --Blake
>
> Dan White wrote on 8/21/2018 9:13 AM:
> > Are there any DirecTV Now contacts on-list? We are having geolocation
> > trouble with a well established ip range.
> >
>
>

Re: DirecTV Now contact

[Darin Steffl]

In my testing, I see Directv now coming from akamai. We peer with them
directly and we're only 4ms away and I sometimes still see buffering.

So I'd say there's something more going on. I have no trouble with Netflix,
YouTube, real choice demo.

On Tue, May 22, 2018, 2:07 PM Mike Hammett  wrote:

> I don't have DirecTV Now. What CDN are they using? Fire up a stream and
> use Torch to see what IP it's coming from.
>
> Torch is a tool in Mikrotik RouterOS. I recognize those three as likely
> being familiar with RouterOS, so I sent them that way.
>
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Joshua Stump" 
> To: "mike lyon" , "Michael Crapse" <
> mich...@wi-fiber.io>
> Cc: "NANOG list" 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 1:59:27 PM
> Subject: RE: DirecTV Now contact
>
> Similar experience for us as well.
>
> Joshua Stump
> Network Admin
> Fourway.NET
> 800-733-0062
>
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG  On Behalf Of mike.l...@gmail.com
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 2:29 PM
> To: Michael Crapse 
> Cc: NANOG list 
> Subject: Re: DirecTV Now contact
>
> Yeah, our eyeball network has problems with DirecTV too.
>
> Would be nice if they were at the various peering exchanges...
>
> -Mike
>
> > On May 22, 2018, at 11:08, Michael Crapse  wrote:
> >
> > Our eyeball network is consistently having some streaming
> > issues(buffering) with DirecTV now. Our main recourse is to sell them
> > on youtube TV and netflix. fixes the issue, no more complaints from
> > our customers. Issues mainly occur during peak times and even on
> > 300+mbps low latency/jitter customers.
> > However, if someone from DirecTV could contact me off list and we can
> > debug this issue so that we don't have to keep pulling people to other
> > services that would be great.
> > Alternatively, if anyone could suggest with whom to peer to reduce the
> > impact of this issue, that would be great.
> > A solution that would be even better is if someone from Youtube TV
> > would contact us off list and we can set up something commissioned
> > based for all the good things we say about your service, and of course
> > give our tech support people a reason to not be frustrated with the
> > calls we receive for this issue.
>
>
>

Re: Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 public DNS broken w/ AT&T CPE

[Darin Steffl]

I am behind a Calix router at home for my ISP and 1.1.1.1 goes to my router
and not any further. When I enter the IP into my browser, it opens the
login page for my router. So it appears 1.1.1.1 is used as a loopback in my
Calix router.

1.0.0.1 goes to the proper place fine.

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 3:59 PM, Jeremy L. Gaddis 
wrote:

> Greetings,
>
> If anyone at 7018 wants to pass a message along to the correct folks,
> please let them know that Cloudflare's new public DNS service (1.1.1.1)
> is completely unusable for at least some of AT&T's customers.
>
> There is apparently a bug with some CPE (including the 5268AC). From
> behind such CPE, the services at 1.1.1.1 are completely unreachable,
> whether via (ICMP) ping, DNS, or HTTPS.
>
> Using the 5268AC's web-based diagnostic tools, pinging 1.1.1.1 returns
> the following results:
>
>   ping successful: icmp seq:0, time=2.364 ms
>   ping successful: icmp seq:1, time=1.085 ms
>   ping successful: icmp seq:2, time=1.160 ms
>   ping successful: icmp seq:3, time=1.245 ms
>   ping successful: icmp seq:4, time=0.739 ms
>
> RTTs to the CPE's default gateway are, at minimum, ~20 ms.
>
> A traceroute (using the same web-based diagnostic tool built-in to the
> CPE) reports, simply:
>
>   traceroute 1.1.1.1 with: 64 bytes of data
>
>   1: 1.1.1.1(1dot1dot1dot1.cloudflare-dns.com), time=0 ms
>
> I haven't bothered to report this to AT&T through the standard customer
> support channels (for reasons that should be obvious to anyone who has
> ever called AT&T's consumer/residential technical support) but if anyone
> at AT&T wants to pass the info along to the appropriate group, it would
> certainly be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> -Jeremy
>
> --
> Jeremy L. Gaddis
>
>
> "The total budget at all receivers for solving senders' problems is
> $0. If you want them to accept your mail and manage it the way you
> want, send it the way the spec says to."  --John Levine
>
>


-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Re: craigslist.com admin

[Darin Steffl]

Have been getting reports of the same thing. Went to the craigslist help
forums where some people there decided to call us a fake ISP because we
don't hand out publics to every customer. They were VERY rude and hopefully
none of them were employees. They said our customers can't use craigslist
if we don't hand publics to everyone. It didn't matter to them that we
don't have enough IP's for every customer.

I sent an email to some admin account someone recommended but haven't heard
anything back yet.



On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Dennis Burgess 
wrote:

> Looking for a craigslist.com admin to connect with offlist about a block
> :)
>
> [DennisBurgessSignature]
> www.linktechs.net<http://www.linktechs.net/> - 314-735-0270 x103 -
> dmburg...@linktechs.net<mailto:dmburg...@linktechs.net>
>
>


-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Apple blocking downloads to certain IP address

[Darin Steffl]

Hello all,

We seem to keep having problems with Apple blocking app downloads and
software updates to one of our IP addresses we use to NAT some customers to.

To fix it in the past, we've switched customers to a different IP and it
works awhile then it stops again.

Anyone have a contact for Apple so we can get our entire subnet whitelisted
to not be blocked?

Thanks

-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>