Fw: new message

[Randy Epstein]

Hey!

 

New message, please read <http://muskokasupyogamermaid.com/condition.php?541>

 

Randy Epstein

Fw: new message

[Randy Epstein]

Hey!

 

New message, please read <http://www.chobbiklobbik.com/eat.php?kf5g>

 

Randy Epstein

Fw: new message

[Randy Epstein]

Hey!

 

New message, please read <http://t4tdeutsch.org/thrown.php?wth8>

 

Randy Epstein

Re: Buying IP Bandwidth Across a Peering Exchange

[Randy Epstein]

On 11/25/14, 1:47 PM, "Colton Conor"  wrote:

>I know typically peering exchanges are made for peering traffic between
>providers, but can you buy IP transit from a provider on an exchange? An
>example, buy a 10G port on an exchange, peer 5Gbps of traffic with
>multiple
>providers on the exchange, and buy 5Gbps of IP transit from others on the
>exchange?
>
>Some might ask why not get a cross connect to the provider. It is cheaper
>to buy an port on the exchange (which includes the cross connect to the
>exchange) than buy multiple cross connects. Plus we are planning on
>getting
>a wave to the exchange, and not having any physical routers or switches at
>the datacenter where the exchange/wave terminates at. Is this possible?

Depends on the exchange.  Some allow it, some don’t.  Some don’t have a
policy.

Some providers offer it, some don’t.

Randy

Re: Craigslist hacked?

[Randy Epstein]

On 11/24/14, 7:51 PM, "Mark Andrews"  wrote:

>
>In message , Randy Epstein writes:
>> On 11/24/14, 7:16 PM, "George Herbert"  wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >He didn't hack the registry, he hijacked its records.  And this is far
>> >from the first time a registry account was hacked.  But, yeah, *still*
>> >not secure enough.
>>
>> Actually, he didnâ•˙t hack its records either.  He exploited a bug in
>>BIND.
>
>And your evidence for that is what?  Feel free to send to
>security-offi...@isc.org.
>
>Mark

I could be wrong.  This is what was reported by a few back in 1997.  If
not true, so be it.  I have no further details from something that
occurred 17 years ago.


> 
>> >George William Herbert
>> >Sent from my iPhone
>> >
>> >> On Nov 24, 2014, at 2:17 PM, Randy Epstein 
>> >>wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 11/24/14, 5:08 PM, "Michael T. Voity"  wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I hate to say this, But I think that Network Operators have not see
>> the
>> >>> last of of this DNS Hijacking. Craigslist might have been a test to
>> see
>> >>> how far they could get and how long it would take for it to be
>> >>> discovered.   I hope the FBI and the other Federal agencies out
>>there
>> >>> are involved with Craigslist to determine how this happened and put
>>in
>> >>> safeguards in place to help prevent this from happening again.
>> >>>
>> >>> -Mike
>> >>>
>> >>> Michael T. Voity
>> >>> Network Engineer
>> >>> University of Vermont
>> >>
>> >> Anyone heard from Eugene Kashpureff lately?
>> >>
>> >> Hello 1996.  :)
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>
>-- 
>Mark Andrews, ISC
>1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
>PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org

Re: Craigslist hacked?

[Randy Epstein]

On 11/24/14, 7:18 PM, "George Herbert"  wrote:

>And that was July 1997 not 96, though that does nothing to make me feel
>younger ...

http://archive.wired.com/politics/law/news/1997/07/5325

Yep.  He did it to one of my domains (besides internic.net).

>George William Herbert
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Nov 24, 2014, at 4:16 PM, George Herbert 
>>wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> He didn't hack the registry, he hijacked its records.  And this is far
>>from the first time a registry account was hacked.  But, yeah, *still*
>>not secure enough.
>> 
>> 
>> George William Herbert
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>>> On Nov 24, 2014, at 2:17 PM, Randy Epstein 
>>>>wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On 11/24/14, 5:08 PM, "Michael T. Voity"  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I hate to say this, But I think that Network Operators have not see
>>>>the
>>>> last of of this DNS Hijacking. Craigslist might have been a test to
>>>>see
>>>> how far they could get and how long it would take for it to be
>>>> discovered.   I hope the FBI and the other Federal agencies out there
>>>> are involved with Craigslist to determine how this happened and put in
>>>> safeguards in place to help prevent this from happening again.
>>>> 
>>>> -Mike
>>>> 
>>>> Michael T. Voity
>>>> Network Engineer
>>>> University of Vermont
>>> 
>>> Anyone heard from Eugene Kashpureff lately?
>>> 
>>> Hello 1996.  :)
>>> 
>>> 

Re: Craigslist hacked?

[Randy Epstein]

On 11/24/14, 7:16 PM, "George Herbert"  wrote:

>
>He didn't hack the registry, he hijacked its records.  And this is far
>from the first time a registry account was hacked.  But, yeah, *still*
>not secure enough.

Actually, he didn’t hack its records either.  He exploited a bug in BIND.

>George William Herbert
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Nov 24, 2014, at 2:17 PM, Randy Epstein 
>>wrote:
>> 
>>> On 11/24/14, 5:08 PM, "Michael T. Voity"  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I hate to say this, But I think that Network Operators have not see the
>>> last of of this DNS Hijacking. Craigslist might have been a test to see
>>> how far they could get and how long it would take for it to be
>>> discovered.   I hope the FBI and the other Federal agencies out there
>>> are involved with Craigslist to determine how this happened and put in
>>> safeguards in place to help prevent this from happening again.
>>> 
>>> -Mike
>>> 
>>> Michael T. Voity
>>> Network Engineer
>>> University of Vermont
>> 
>> Anyone heard from Eugene Kashpureff lately?
>> 
>> Hello 1996.  :)
>> 
>> 

Re: Craigslist hacked?

[Randy Epstein]

On 11/24/14, 5:08 PM, "Michael T. Voity"  wrote:

>I hate to say this, But I think that Network Operators have not see the
>last of of this DNS Hijacking. Craigslist might have been a test to see
>how far they could get and how long it would take for it to be
>discovered.   I hope the FBI and the other Federal agencies out there
>are involved with Craigslist to determine how this happened and put in
>safeguards in place to help prevent this from happening again.
>
>-Mike
>
>Michael T. Voity
>Network Engineer
>University of Vermont

Anyone heard from Eugene Kashpureff lately?

Hello 1996.  :)

Re: Facebook down?

[Randy Epstein]

Back up now.

On 9/3/14, 3:48 PM, "Randy Epstein"  wrote:

>Yes.
>
>On 9/3/14, 3:45 PM, "Marshall Eubanks"  wrote:
>
>>http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/facebook.com
>>
>>It's not just you! *http://facebook.com* <http://facebook.com/> looks
>>down
>>from here.
>>
>>Relevant because of the likely increase in productiviity
>>
>>
>>Regards
>>
>>Marshall Eubanks
>
>

Re: Facebook down?

[Randy Epstein]

Yes.

On 9/3/14, 3:45 PM, "Marshall Eubanks"  wrote:

>http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/facebook.com
>
>It's not just you! *http://facebook.com*  looks down
>from here.
>
>Relevant because of the likely increase in productiviity
>
>
>Regards
>
>Marshall Eubanks

Re: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for 6500/7600routers.

[Randy Epstein]

Ah.  I had to ³no mls cef max ip² and ³no mls def max mpls² for it to
share.  They were previously adjusted separately.

:)

Thanks.

On 6/10/14, 3:12 AM, "John van Oppen"  wrote:

>On the sup 720 they become unshared if you carve v4 away from the default
>separately, that is why I carve the other two instead.

Re: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for 6500/7600routers.

[Randy Epstein]

On the RSP720-10GE at least, it seems that IPv4 and MPLS are not shared.
Am I correct or am I missing something?

FIB TCAM maximum routes :
===
Current :-
---
 IPv4- 768k
 MPLS- 64k
 IPv6 + IP Multicast - 96k (default)

Randy


On 6/9/14, 3:27 PM, "John van Oppen"  wrote:

>It is generally much better to do the following:
>
>mls cef maximum-routes ipv6 90
>mls cef maximum-routes ip-multicast 1
>
>This will leave v4 and mpls in one big pool, puts v6 to something useful
>for quite a while and steals all of the multicast space which is not
>really used on most deployments.
>
>
>This gives us the following (which is pretty great for IP backbone
>purposes in dual stack):
>
>#show mls cef maximum-routes
>FIB TCAM maximum routes :
>===
>Current :-
>---
> IPv4 + MPLS - 832k (default)
> IPv6- 90k
> IP multicast- 1k
>
>
>John
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Jon Lewis
>Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 12:10 PM
>To: Pete Lumbis
>Cc: nanog@nanog.org
>Subject: Re: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for
>6500/7600routers.
>
>Why, in your example, do you bias the split so heavily toward IPv4 that
>the router won't be able to handle a current full v6 table?  I've been
>using
>
>mls cef maximum-routes ip 768
>
>which is probably still a little too liberal for IPv6
>
>FIB TCAM maximum routes :
>===
>Current :-
>---
>  IPv4- 768k
>  MPLS- 16k (default)
>  IPv6 + IP Multicast - 120k (default)
>
>given that a full v6 table is around 17k routes today.
>
>A more important question though is how many 6500/7600 routers will fully
>survive the reload required to affect this change?  I've lost a blade
>(presumably to the bad memory issue) each time I've rebooted a 6500 to
>apply this.
>
>On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Pete Lumbis wrote:
>
>> The doc on how to adjust the 6500/7600 TCAM space was just published.
>>
>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/switches/catalyst-6500-serie
>> s-switches/117712-problemsolution-cat6500-00.html
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Pete Lumbis  wrote:
>>
>>> There is currently a doc for the ASR9k. We're working on getting on
>>> for
>>> 6500 as well.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/routers/asr-9000-series-agg
>>> regation-services-routers/116999-problem-line-card-00.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 1:34 PM,  wrote:
>>>
 I would like to see Cisco send something out...

 -Original Message-
 From: "Drew Weaver" 
 Sent: ÿÿ5/ÿÿ6/ÿÿ2014 11:42 AM
 To: "'nanog@nanog.org'" 
 Subject: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for
 6500/7600routers.

 Hi all,

 I am wondering if maybe we should make some kind of concerted effort
 to remind folks about the IPv4 routing table inching closer and
 closer to the 512K route mark.

 We are at about 94/95% right now of 512K.

 For most of us, the 512K route mark is arbitrary but for a lot of
 folks who may still be running 6500/7600 or other routers which are
 by default configured to crash and burn after 512K routes; it may be
 a valuable public service.

 Even if you don't have this scenario in your network today; chances
 are you connect to someone who connects to someone who connects to
 someone
 (etc...) that does.

 In case anyone wants to check on a 6500, you can run:  show platform
 hardware capacity pfc and then look under L3 Forwarding Resources.

 Just something to think about before it becomes a story the
 community talks about for the next decade.

 -Drew


>>>
>>
>
>--
>  Jon Lewis, MCP :)   |  I route
>  |  therefore you are _
>http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_

Re: Does anyone know Jared's birthday?

[Randy Epstein]

Jared Mauch?  July 23rd.

Randy

On 6/4/14, 6:30 PM, "manning bill"  wrote:

>well then.  you could just use that date then and it should be alrightŠ
>
>/bill
>Neca eos omnes.  Deus suos agnoscet.
>
>On 4June2014Wednesday, at 12:24, Warren Kumari  wrote:
>
>> 
>> 
>> On Wednesday, June 4, 2014, manning bill  wrote:
>> did you ask Jared?
>> 
>> 
>> Yup.
>> 
>> And he updated it on Facebook to throw us off the scent...
>> 
>> W
>> 
>>  
>> /bill
>> Neca eos omnes.  Deus suos agnoscet.
>> 
>> On 4June2014Wednesday, at 12:15, Warren Kumari 
>>wrote:
>> 
>> > Yup, I did think it was worth asking the entire list.
>> >
>> > W
>> 
>

[NANOG-announce] New NANOG website launching tomorrow evening - Maintenance Notice

[Randy Epstein]

Greetings NANOG community,

We have great news to report!  The redeveloped NANOG website is now ready to
go live.

Thanks to the input from the community, as well as all the volunteers that
assisted from concept to completion and every step in between.

One of the primary goals of the redesign was to present a clean, yet
functional and up to date website, improving delivery of information to
NANOG members and sponsors, as
well as providing attraction to potential new members and sponsors.  We feel
we have more than achieved this goal and hope the community feels the same.

The plan is to launch the new website on Tuesday, April 30th at 10 PM
PDT/Wednesday, May 1st at 1 AM EDT.  During this time you may experience a
brief disruption of service.

If you have any questions regarding this maintenance, please feel free to
contact me.  If you experience any issues once the new website is launched,
you may always email webmas...@nanog.org.

Thank you,

Randy Epstein
On behalf of the Website Redesign Team



___
NANOG-announce mailing list
nanog-annou...@mailman.nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

Re: AS30424

[Randy Epstein]

On 2/1/13 7:56 AM, "Teun Vink"  wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>While examining some routing table entries one of my coworkers stubled
>upon a number of prefixes which is are somewhat strange (or maybe even
>suspicious). The ASN originating these prefixes is AS30424, which is
>part of a block of ASN's assigned to ARIN. However, there's no entry in
>the ARIN database (or peeringdb, radb, etc) for AS30424.

AS30424 was assigned to "Super Networks" of Columbia, MD on March 18,
2008.  It's possible they didn't pay their ARIN invoice, and they also
didn't renew their domain "supernetworks.net", as that has lapsed as well.

Have you tried contacting Megatechie?

Randy

Re: Roy Bates, "Prince Roy" of Sealand, dies at 90.

[Randy Epstein]

As a Lord of Sealand, I can assure you Sealand is not defunct.  :)

Randy

On 10/11/12 11:12 AM, "chris"  wrote:

>Last I heard sealand was defunct I remember the hosting havenco went dark
>I
>thought sealand shutdown too
>On Oct 11, 2012 10:59 AM, "jamie rishaw"  wrote:
>
>> +++
>> ATH0
>>
>> http://goo.gl/EdN3C  [SealandGov.org]
>> also,
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/10/prince-sealand-dies
>>
>> -j
>> --
>> "sharp, dry wit and brash in his dealings with contestants." - Forbes
>> /* - teh jamie. ; uri -> http://about.me/jgr */
>>
>> California Voter?  Vote YES on Prop 34.   http://YesOn34.org/
>>

[NANOG-announce] Seeking NANOG Communications Committee candidates for upcoming elections and my farewell

[Randy Epstein]

Greetings NANOG friends and colleagues!

This month, elections will take place at NANOG 56 in Dallas, TX.  There are
currently two open positions available on the NANOG Communications Committee
for the upcoming 
term.

Some brief information about the Committee and what we are seeking:

The Communications Committee will consist of at least three members selected
by the Board of Directors. Members of the Communications Committee may not
serve concurrently 
on the Board of Directors. The chairperson of the Communications Committee
will serve ex officio in a non-voting role on the Board of Directors, in
order to facilitate
communication between the two groups. One of the primary functions of
Communications Committee is the maintenance of a community mailing list (the
NANOG operators list).
The Communications Committee will be responsible for the administration and
minimal moderation of the list.

The Board of Directors will select the new Communications Committee members
after the election in October. Two positions are to be filled.

The main NANOG mailing list serves an important role in the community by
providing a day-to-day forum for network operators. Participating as a
member of the 
Communications Committee gives you the opportunity to make a noticeable
contribution.

All candidates will be asked to complete a questionnaire about their
qualifications, and to submit a Declaration of Candidacy (DoC), which is
available at 
https://www.nanog.org/governance/elections/2012elections/2012_Declaration_of
_Candidacy.docx.

Communications Committee Member Responsibilities may be viewed at
http://www.nanog.org/governance/CC_Member.pdf.

If you have any further questions, please feel free to reach out to me
directly as well.

Personally, I will not be able to run again as I have now served two terms
(four years) on the Committee and will be termed out.  It has been a
pleasure serving the
members of NANOG and the Board of Directors during these last four years,
from when I first started on the Mailing List Committee and watched over the
transformation into
what is now the Communications Committee.

I'd like to thank the NANOG community for giving me this opportunity as it
has certainly been an enjoyable experience.  I hope to serve the community
again in the future.

Regards,

Randy Epstein
Chair, NANOG Communications Committee



___
NANOG-announce mailing list
nanog-annou...@mailman.nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

[NANOG-announce] List ID changed for NANOG mail list

[Randy Epstein]

Greetings,

A quick email to let folks know that we've changed the list ID to
mailman.nanog.org.  It was previously nanog.nanog.org.  This notification is
to alert you in case you need to modify your procmail filters.

Regards,

Randy Epstein
NANOG CC Chair

On behalf of the NANOG Communications Committee



___
NANOG-announce mailing list
nanog-annou...@mailman.nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

[NANOG-announce] Maintenance Notification for Wednesday, October 3rd, 2012 at 11am Eastern

[Randy Epstein]

Dear Colleagues,

On Wednesday, October 3rd, 2012 at 11am Eastern Time, access to NANOG
Meeting Registration, submissions to PC.NANOG.ORG, and access to the
membership portal will be
unavailable for 30-60 minutes.

Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact the NANOG
Communications Committee for more details, adm...@nanog.org.

Randy Epstein
NANOG CC Chair

On behalf of the NANOG Communications Committee



___
NANOG-announce mailing list
nanog-annou...@nanog.org
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

[NANOG-announce] NANOG mail list maintenance completed

[Randy Epstein]

NANOG Community:

The mail list upgrade went well.  NANOG mail lists are now operating on
NANOG owned machines and under the management of the Communications
Committee.

Regards,

Randy Epstein
NANOG CC Chair

On behalf of the NANOG Communications Committee



___
NANOG-announce mailing list
nanog-annou...@nanog.org
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

[NANOG-announce] REMINDER: Upcoming NANOG mail list maintenance notification - 18-Sept-2012

[Randy Epstein]

Reminder of the upcoming Mail List service scheduled for Tuesday, September
18, 2012 beginning at 6 am Eastern, expected to last no more than 30
minutes.

Regards,

Randy Epstein
NANOG CC Chair

On behalf of the NANOG Communications Committee



___
NANOG-announce mailing list
nanog-annou...@nanog.org
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

[NANOG-announce] RESCHEDULE NOTIFICATION for NANOG mail list maintenance - Tuesday, September 18th, 2012

[Randy Epstein]

Colleagues:

The NANOG mailman list upgrade and transition was not completed this
morning.  The maintenance has been rescheduled for Tuesday, September 18,
2012 at 6 am Eastern time.

Regards,

Randy Epstein
NANOG CC Chair

On behalf of the NANOG Communications Committee



___
NANOG-announce mailing list
nanog-annou...@nanog.org
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

[NANOG-announce] REMINDER: Upcoming NANOG mail list maintenance notification - 13-Sept-2012

[Randy Epstein]

Reminder of the upcoming Mail List service scheduled for Thursday, September
13, 2012 beginning at 6 am Eastern, expected to last no more than 30
minutes.

Regards,

Randy Epstein
NANOG CC Chair

On behalf of the NANOG Communications Committee



___
NANOG-announce mailing list
nanog-annou...@nanog.org
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

[NANOG-announce] Upcoming NANOG mail list maintenance notification - 13-Sept-2012

[Randy Epstein]

On Thursday, September 13, 2012 beginning at 6 AM Eastern, the NANOG mail
list service will be unavailable. Mailman will be upgraded and moved to a
new location, and all lists will be synced, thus ensuring that no messages
or archives are lost in the transition.  We expect the outage to last no
longer than 30 minutes.

Regards,

Randy Epstein
NANOG CC Chair

On behalf of the NANOG Communications Committee



___
NANOG-announce mailing list
nanog-annou...@nanog.org
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

NANOG Website Redesign Project

[Randy Epstein]

Greetings NANOG community,

NANOG is in the process of completely redeveloping its website
(http://www.nanog.org) and is looking for feedback from the community and
NANOG members.

One of the primary goals of the redesign is to present a clean, yet
functional and up to date website, improving delivery of information to
NANOG members and sponsors, as
well as providing attraction to potential new members and sponsors.
Additionally, a mobile-compatible version of the website with access to the
same up to date
information that the full website offers is another goal of ours.

We have a long list of features that have been discussed within the various
Committee and Board meetings.  We however, want to make sure we hear more
from the community,
as our goal is to serve your needs.  If you have a wish list item (or
items)?, or thoughts about what works well on current site and what we need
to make sure to improve,
please send your opinions to us.  We've set up a special email address where
you can directly contact the folks working on the website re-design project.
The address is
communityfeedb...@nanog.org.

We're hoping to launch the website prior to the new year, so the sooner you
get those great ideas to us, the sooner we can move the project forward.

Thank you,

Randy Epstein
Chairman, NANOG Communications Committee
On behalf of the Website Redesign Team

Re: very confusing.

[Randy Epstein]

Folks,

This content is great .. for another list.  I know you're not happy with
receiving unsolicited mail, and yes, it's likely your addresses were
scraped from either the mailing list itself or various archives that are
kept, but this list is not the best place to discuss this.

Please refrain from these types of discussions on the NANOG mailing list.
We are doing everything in our power to keep the list on-topic and stop
abuse when we see it.  We don't take situations like this lightly.

Thank you all in advance and if you have any issue with this, please
contact me or the Communications Committee directly.

Regards,

Randy Epstein
Acting Chair, NANOG CC

Re: UCE: Re: Fiber outage in Miami

[Randy Epstein]

On 1/30/12 11:53 AM, "Joe Marr"  wrote:

>I've yet to hear back from them on the reason for the outage and
>explanation on why our "redundant" darkfiber pairs both were down.

They cut ALL THE FIBER going into MI1 .. At the same time.

Randy

Re: Fiber outage in Miami

[Randy Epstein]

>
>Anyone has seen on gotten a  RFA  or a deeper explanation of what
>happened from them ?
>
>
>Faisal Imtiaz
>Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>7266 SW 48 Street
>Miami, Fl 33155
>Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
>Helpdesk: 305 663 5518 option 2 Email: supp...@snappydsl.net

Yes.  They blamed/burned the local crew and suggested that they fired
them.  Yes, they put this in the RFO.  I have it, but I'm having legal
determine if it can be made public record.

Randy

Re: Fiber outage in Miami

[Randy Epstein]

>
>
>
>On 1/28/12 1:07 PM, "Faisal Imtiaz"  wrote:
>
>>hmm... an what exactly does this accomplish ?
>>
>>Faisal Imtiaz
>>Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>
>It forces Fiberlight to follow a procedure that was outlined in the TRO
>filing.  Yes, a maintenance procedure.

Oh, maybe you weren't aware.  The maintenance was never completed.  It was
reverted back.  Everyone is still feeding via Eqx-MI1.

They wanted to perform the same maintenance again this weekend.

Randy

Re: Fiber outage in Miami

[Randy Epstein]

On 1/28/12 1:07 PM, "Faisal Imtiaz"  wrote:

>hmm... an what exactly does this accomplish ?
>
>Faisal Imtiaz
>Snappy Internet&  Telecom

It forces Fiberlight to follow a procedure that was outlined in the TRO
filing.  Yes, a maintenance procedure.

Re: Fiber outage in Miami

[Randy Epstein]

On 1/23/12 3:57 PM, "Jason LeBlanc"  wrote:

>We are still impacted from what I understand.
>
>On 01/23/2012 10:02 AM, Jimmy Changa wrote:
>> Was anyone impacted by a botched fiber move in Miami this weekend? I
>>lost 2 pieces of dark fiber for over almost 24 hours due to a fiber move
>>being performed by FiberLight. I'm curious if anyone else was impacted.
>>
>> Sent from mobile device
>

This is what happens when you don't follow proper procedure:
http://web.hostleasing.net/~repstein/FiberlightOrder.pdf

Yes, we had to file a TRO against them.

Randy

Re: US DOJ victim letter

[Randy Epstein]

On 1/27/12 1:23 PM, "valdis.kletni...@vt.edu" 
wrote:

>On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:16:27 EST, Bryan Horstmann-Allen said:
>
>> Bit odd, if it's a phish. Even more odd if it's actually from the Fed.
>
>What if it's a phish from a compromised Fed box? :)

We've spoken to folks at various FBI field offices and at 26 Plaza in New
York which is handling this case.  Further, John Curran (ARIN CEO) has
confirmed it's real via their own liaison and Paul Vixie is actually
working with them on this.

Randy

Re: US DOJ victim letter

[Randy Epstein]

>
>Bit odd, if it's a phish. Even more odd if it's actually from the Fed.
>
>Cheers.
>-- 
>bdha
>cyberpunk is dead. long live cyberpunk.

It's for real.  Yes, it's really odd and wasteful.

Randy

Re: Equinix Miami 1 condemnation

[Randy Epstein]

>
>. o O ( and I don't know where equinix's building was in south florida,
>either.  but I know they never showed up on our radar when we were
>hunting 
>for space with dark fiber back to the NAP to feed our southern customers
>their dose of WCQ...)
>
>...david

This was the Metro Mall facility, operated by Switch and Data until
Equinix's acquisition of S&D a few years ago.  It is now known as
Equinix-Miami 1.  1 NE 1st Street.

The issue here has nothing to do with any hurricanes in the past.  My
opinion is that they lacked proper documentation and planning.  Having a
bit of insider knowledge here and knowing where this fiber came from
originally (ACSI) and how FiberLight came to acquire it, I'm fairly sure
I'm on the money.

Randy

Re: [Nanog] Ballot Confirmation

[Randy Epstein]

On 10/15/11 11:21 PM, "Randy Epstein"  wrote:

>Betty,
>
>I believe there was a problem with the voting system this past election.
>Proposed amendment 1, which I voted NO on, did not register.  It does not
>show a vote in the ballot confirmation email (well, it just doesn't say
>what I did), but I know I voted NO.  Further, what makes this even more
>suspicious is that 0 people voted no on this one, yet 8 voted no on the
>2nd.  Yet, the yes votes on both were 79 and 78 respectively.
>
>Results:
>
>Member structure ratification
>79 yes
> 
>0 no
> 
>
>Committee Structure Simplification Rationale
>78 yes
> 
>8 no
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
>
>Can anyone investigate this?  I'm just concerned that there might be a
>problem in the future, and I'd like to find out what happened here.
>
>Regards,
>
>Randy
>
>On 10/9/11 11:15 PM, "Nanog"  wrote:
>
>>Ballot Cast: Bylaw Changes
>>Cast by: Randy Epstein
>>
>>1. Membership structure ratification
>>Rationale:
>>The membership structure as specified in the original bylaws made a lot
>>of people unhappy, so the board used its power to temporarily amend the
>>bylaws to institute the now-current membership structure, under which
>>all 
>>current NANOG voters have become members.  That amendment now needs to
>>be 
>>ratified by the membership, to avoid the membership structure reverting
>>to its previous state.
>>
>>Proposal:
>>That the membership ratify the bylaw amendment enacted by the Board on
>>January 4, 2011, establishing the now-current NANOG membership
>>structure. 
>> 
>>
>>The amendment is as follows:
>>- Replace the current section 5 in its entirety with:
>>
>>5. Membership
>>
>>5.1 Membership Qualifications - Membership in NewNOG is open to any
>>individual with an interest in Internet operations, engineering, or
>>research and who wishes to further education and knowledge sharing
>>within 
>>the Internet operations community. Any individual may become a member of
>>NewNOG by completing an application and payment of dues.
>>
>>5.2 Membership Classes - There shall be only one class of membership,
>>with all the rights and privileges specified in these Bylaws.
>>
>>5.3 Membership Dues - The Board of Directors shall specify the cost of
>>annual membership dues.  The Board may establish discounts for members
>>meeting certain criteria, or for members wishing to pay for more than
>>one 
>>year in advance.
>>
>>5.4 Rights and Benefits of Members - Members in good standing shall be
>>entitled to these privileges:
>>
>>* Vote in all NewNOG elections.  * Run as a candidate for the Board
>>of Directors * Serve on an administrative committee, as defined in
>>section 9 * Other privileges as specified by the Board of Directors
>>
>>5.5 Policies and Procedures - The Board of Directors shall establish and
>>publish policies and procedures for implementation of the membership
>>program.
>>
>>
>> 2. Committee Structure Simplification
>>Rationale:
>>Substantial portions of the roles of the Event Logistics committee and
>>the Budget and Finance committee are now being carried out by the
>>Executive Director and staff, with oversight by the Treasurer and other
>>board members.  This amendment eliminates the permanent status of those
>>committees, and allows the board discretion to create new ad hoc
>>committees as needs change.
>>
>>The amendment would:
>>
>>- Eliminate the finance and event committees as standing committees
>>- Allow the board to create other ad-hoc committees as needed to perform
>>specific tasks
>>- Clarify that all committee chairs are given non-voting ex-officio
>>seats 
>>on the board, which are not counted towards a quorum
>>- Fix a few other minor language issues and typos
>>
>>Proposal:
>>- In section 8.6, replace the text "at least four members" with "at
>>least 
>>four voting members".
>>
>>- Replace section 9 introductory text with:
>>The Board of Directors will create three standing committees to fulfill
>>the NewNOG mission.  Those committees will be the Program Committee, the
>>Communication Committee, and the Membership and Development Committee.
>>The Board may also at its discretion create ad hoc committees to carry
>>out other functions as needed.  All members of committees must be
>>Members 
>>in Good Standing of NewNOG.
>>The chairperson of each committee will serve 

RE: AltDB?

[Randy Epstein]

>So has anyone had any contact from ALTDB as to what's going on?

>Thanks!
>--J

I just got off the phone with Steve Rubin.  He restarted it 45 minutes ago
and it's back up.

Regards,

Randy

FCC petition filed by some members of NANOG in regards to Comcast and ratios as a peering criteria

[Randy Epstein]

As previously mentioned, the following FCC petition has been filed in
regards to
Comcast's peering practices (one issue being ratios as a peering criteria)
by a group of NANOG members:
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7021024373


Regards,

Randy

RE: IPv6 BGP table size comparisons

[Randy Epstein]

> HE routes missing on Cogents side?

I would guess HE routes missing at Cogent and Cogent routes missing at HE.
Remember the cake?

http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Hurricane-Cake
.jpg

Or was that rectified?  Mahtan?

Randy

RE: Help with GC/Level3 route issue

[Randy Epstein]

Carlos,

>Hi,
>I'm facing a problem that is becoming a nightmare.
>Some of our prefixes (ASN 10277) are being redistributed by Level 3 as
>being learned from/originated by Global Crossing.

Care to provide some of the prefixes?

RE: Comcast vs Level 3 - This time with video

[Randy Epstein]

> A simplified explanation of the situation between Level 3 and Comcast,
from the perspective of a Comcast customer who is asking for the same thing
Comcast is asking for. :)

> http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/8124137/

I have to question Richard on this interaction though. There is no way in
hell a Comcast customer service rep would respond like that. Not at least
without putting you on hold 5 times and then still, wouldn't know what in
the hell you're talking about. In the end, the service rep would tell you
they need to dispatch someone to your house.

Randy

RE: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style

[Randy Epstein]

>> Earlier this morning a Comcast peering manager had the following things
to say about the recent NANOG thread, in a public IRC channel with many
witnesses:
(snip)

>With all due respect, logs or GTFO. I can find no mention of this outside
of your email.
>I would expect there to be quite a few mentions of such a statement made in
"a public IRC channel with many witnesses".

I was in the IRC channel at the time and saw it.  It's real.

I don't support the posting of IRC logs, but can't control that either.

Randy

RE: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style

[Randy Epstein]

> How well did the lawsuits against Microsoft's monopoly work to reduce 
> their ability to use their monopoly to manipulate the market?
> 
> jc

Why don't you ask the folks over at The Technical Committee
(http://www.thetc.org), since they monitor Microsoft compliancy for the DOJ.

Randy

FCC filings against Comcast

[Randy Epstein]

FCC petitions are piling in against Comcast:

 

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment/view?id=6016064165

 

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7020923751

 

Full disclose: I've signed one as well that should be filed tomorrow.

 

Also: WASHINGTON, Dec. 14 -- The office of Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.,
issued the following news release: Warning that a huge media monopoly would
drive up cable television prices and stifle the free flow of information,
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) today urged the Department of Justice to block
Comcast's planned takeover of NBC Universal.

 

Regards,

 

Randy

RE: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style

[Randy Epstein]

Jon,



>Ratios only make sense between peers.  When you're buying transit, you 
>don't get to enforce ratios and tell your transit providers you're not 
>going to pay (or they're going to pay you) because they're sending you too 
>much traffic.  Back when I ran a dialup network, and our traffic profile 
>was maybe 5:1 input vs output, UUnet would have laughed at me and shut us 
>off if I told them "you're sending us traffic at a 5:1 ratio...because 
>you're sending us so much more traffic than we send you, you're going to 
>have to pay us to deliver that traffic."  Comcast can only get away with 
>that because of their monopoly (captive userbase) and size.

I agree with most of your reply.  In regards to ratios, I firmly believe
they don't make sense between peers as well.  When you operate an eyeball
network, you need
to expect that your users are pulling the data from the content providers.
Your ratios will always be unbalanced with most of your peers.

If ratios are really a concern and you really need to maximize your port
capacity, there are ways to balance this; balance your customer base.  Start
hosting content.  Now, this might not help on private peering interconnects,
but if you peer publicly, this will help you balance (and take advantage of)
your public peering capacity.

Either way, ratios are very 1990s.  As has been mentioned before, it was
more of an excuse not to peer by the monopolistic entities that made up a
big portion of the Internet in the 90s and isn't very relevant today.

Randy

RE: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style

[Randy Epstein]

Laurent,

>If a 10G port for transit is paid by comcast $30/Mbit/s monthly
>that's 0.19 cent/internet customer/month for a new 10G port
>to properly desaturate this particular link.

>Did I compute something wrong?

>Laurent

Yes, now you need to multiply that by the numerous other ports that have the
same conditions and need upgrades.

Randy

RE: IPv6 internet broken, cogent/telia/hurricane not peering

[Randy Epstein]

No need for me to repeat what Mike has posted.  I agree 100% with him on all
fronts.  Mike and his team have gone out of their way to promote and support
IPv6 from the very beginning and I think everyone knows this.  In the past,
I had some differences with Mike over legacy policies that Hurricane adopted
initially, but after spending time with him and explaining those issues, he
did everything in his power to correct them.  I'd even say he went above and
beyond everyone's expectations.

I hope this issue gets resolved quickly.  I've seen first hand the political
issues in v4 and I really hope we don't have a repeat of this in v6.  There
are a handful of providers that have turned to a restrictive IPv6 policy (or
"must be existing peer in v4 to peer in v6 with us") and I find it
outrageous at this point in time.

Cogent, get with the program.

Regards,

Randy

RE: 32-bit AS numbers

[Randy Epstein]

> While it's good to see support _finally_ in 2.2SX, I still don't see it
> in 12.2SR (for rsp720).  It's almost like Cisco has no idea how
> many of these things are actually used on the Internet.

This is actually our issue as well.  Our backbone runs primarily RSP720's
(with some Sup720's for good measure).  

Support in 12.2SRx would be much appreciated if anyone from Cisco product is
listening.

Regards,

Randy

RE: APAC to US crawling

[Randy Epstein]

>Is anyone seeing a huge latency jump from Asia Pac to US again? 



>The above was taken from a user in China tracing to New York about 30 mins ago 

There was another earthquake today in Asia, this one between Japan and Taiwan.  
Is this possibly related?

Randy

RE: World famous cabling disasters?

[Randy Epstein]

Joe,

>I'm looking for a couple of pictures of the worst cabling  
>infrastructure ever seem. One Wilshire meet me room comes to mind.
>Anyone got any links to their photo albums, etc?

The One Wilshire pictures you are referring to were within this Wired
article:
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/multimedia/2008/03/gallery_one_wilshire?slid
e=3&slideView=2

Also there are some great photos at
http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2007/03/really-bad-wiring-jobs_20.html


>Joe McGuckin
>ViaNet Communications

Regards,

Randy

RE: Sprint / Cogent dispute over?

[Randy Epstein]

Patrick,

>Aren't you in one of the "1300 on-net locations" with Cogent?  Doesn't  
>that give you a free FE?
> :-)

Clearly you are joking here, but no, wasn't even offered the free FastE!  :)

Randy

RE: routing around Sprint's depeering damage

[Randy Epstein]

>It would be better to regulate some type of communication to customers
>*before* depeering occurs, much in the same way that the SEC requires
>publicly traded companies to communicate certain things a certain times to
>its shareholders.  

Wait.  Cogent's known about this risk factor for some time.  Have they not
included this in their 10-Q/K filings?

Randy

RE: Sprint / Cogent dispute over?

[Randy Epstein]

> https://www.sprint.net/cogent.php

Yes, I've read it.  They need to fix their .

So while Cogent was depeered by Sprint, we contacted the CEO of Cogent on
Friday to try and arrange at least a temporary peering arrangement so that
bits flowed between our networks while they battled this situation out with
Sprint.  Cogent's response?  Buy transit from them.

I presume one of Sprint's dissatisfactions during the trial with Cogent were
ratios.  My network happens to have a very high ratio of eyeballs (inbound
traffic) vs outbound traffic.  One would believe that Cogent would like to
offload their outbound traffic to networks other than their Tier-1 peers, to
at least give them an upper hand when negotiating peering arrangements with
these networks.

It's funny how Cogent depeers networks whenever they want, but the second
another network depeers them, they cry foul.

Randy

Sprint / Cogent dispute over?

[Randy Epstein]

Real time look at the situation:

*>i4.23.112.0/2466.216.0.20  0100  0 1239 174 21889
i
* i 66.216.0.1   0100  0 1239 174 21889
i
* i 66.186.193.160100  0 1239 174 21889
i
* i 66.186.193.170100  0 1239 174 21889
i
*>i4.23.113.0/2466.216.0.20  0100  0 1239 174 21889
i
* i 66.216.0.1   0100  0 1239 174 21889
i
* i 66.186.193.160100  0 1239 174 21889
i
* i 66.186.193.170100  0 1239 174 21889
i

Etc.

Problem resolved?

Randy

RE: Sprint / Cogent

[Randy Epstein]

If you haven't already seen it, the great Todd Underwood of Renesys
published an article today on his blog regarding this subject:

http://www.renesys.com/blog/2008/10/wrestling-with-the-zombie-spri.shtml

An aside, WV Fiber (AS19151) is currently partitioned from Cogent since
AS19151 only contracts with Sprint for transit and is settlement-free with
the rest of its peers.  As previously reported, late last year, Cogent
depeered AS19151 for unknown reasons.  Up until yesterday, this wasn't much
of a problem.  Now unfortunately, the two networks (AS19151 and AS174) are
partitioned.  Any single homed WV Fiber customer and any single homed Cogent
customer can not reach each other.  WV Fiber hosts over 7 million eyeballs
and many networks under its AS.

We hope Sprint and Cogent work out their differences, but in the mean time,
we unfortunately will remain partitioned from Cogent.

Regards,

Randy Epstein
President
WV Fiber

RE: Sprint / Cogent

[Randy Epstein]

>The most interesting part of the press release to me is:

>In the over 1300 on-net locations worldwide where Cogent provides service,
>Cogent is offering every Sprint-Nextel wireline customer that is unable to
>connect to Cogent's customers a free 100 megabit per second connection to
>the Internet for as long as Sprint continues to keep this partitioning of
>the Internet in place.  Unfortunately, there is no way that Cogent can do
>the same for the wireless customers of Sprint-Nextel.

This wasn't the first time Cogent offered something similar.  They did the
same thing when Level3 depeered them.

Randy

RE: once again, network hardware vendors spamming...

[Randy Epstein]

All,

I just crushed John's foot accidently with my chair, so he wants to know if
we're even?

Randy

-Original Message-
From: Marshall Eubanks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 7:48 AM
To: Robert E. Seastrom
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: once again, network hardware vendors spamming...

Dear Robert;

I feel that this is not appropriate for this list.

Anyone on this list might have valid or nefarious reasons to wish to  
DOS someone else. This
list is not an appropriate means of organizing that.

I have not received such mail.

I have no way of verifying whether or not you have.

I don't know J.L. and don't even see him as a contributor to this list.

Now, I know you, but there are way too many people on this list to  
know them all, or for them to
all know you (or me, or anyone else). And, email addresses can be  
spoofed. And, not everyone reads NANOG
faithfully all the time, so a spoof might not be detected for some time.

I think you can see the potential for mischief here.

Regards
Marshall


On Sep 25, 2008, at 3:28 PM, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:

>
> Anyone else gotten mail from John Lucania at atlantixglobal.com today?
>
> He lists his phone numbers as:
>
> 770.582.7248 Direct
> and
> 404.287.2603 Cell
>
> Why not give him a ring (preferably on his cell phone, maybe tonight?)
> and tell him what you think of spammers?  :-)
>
> -r
>
>

RE: LoA (Letter of Authorization) for Prefix Filter Modification?

[Randy Epstein]

>Is this a common practice?  Our past experience indicates that a simple
>request to a NOC or update of a routing registry usually is sufficient.
>
>Regards,
>Mauricio Rodriguez
>FPL Fibernet, LLC

Cogent AFAIK have been doing this for years.  Not many others require this
unless there is a serious question over the request.

Randy

RE: InterCage, Inc. (NOT Atrivo)

[Randy Epstein]

>amidst all this high flyin' political theory discussion of rights, there
>is an elephant in the room.  as conditions to merger/purchase, there
>were legal restrictions placed on one or more significant operators
>regarding [de-]peering (i.e. your statement above is significantly
>incorrect).  my altzheimer's device tells me that those restrictions end
>2008.12.31.  expect change.
>
>randy

SBC end-date is 2009-Dec-31.

Randy

RE: InterCage, Inc. (NOT Atrivo)

[Randy Epstein]

>Obviously host lost some money now after buying a provider with a big 
>client that was just depeered, so it is now a financial concern.

>   Gadi.

On the floor ..  dying here.

RE: Coop Peering Fabric??

[Randy Epstein]

> That's one of the reasons many of them incorporate as non-profits...  
> Under the tax laws of most countries, the U.S. and Canada included, 
> non-profits are legaly protected against acquisition by for-profits.
>-Bill

Yes, but it's somewhat easy to convert from non-profit to for-profit anyhow.
Hospitals do it all the time.

Randy

RE: Arbitrary de-peering

[Randy Epstein]

> Which is as it should be. Then somebody (not clear who) apparently  
> took explicit steps to stop the traffic from taking these other paths.

> Surprising.  Severing a peering relationship is one thing, purposely
> filtering large swathes of the Internet over other all links is quite
> another.
> As I said, this is surprising behaviour, but not simple de-peering.  
> And I'm sure that any Tier 1 has enough peering relationships with enough
> other Tier 1 networks that they can always buy temporary transit
> privileges over an existing link.

This is not surprising at all.  One of the networks making arrangements to
purchase transit immediately may help the customers of both networks in the
short term, but the reality is that peering problem still exists and it
immediately shows a weakness on one side.  If they're willing to pay, they
may agree to peering with settlements as well or just continue to buy
transit.  No transit free network is going to allow this to happen.  It is
in their best interest to make the de-peering as painful as possible to get
a quicker resolution that satisfies both parties.

Maybe not the greatest analogy, but think labor strikes and scabs (temporary
workers willing to cross the picket line).  If there were no repercussions
to allowing scab workers to cross a picket line (lack of training leading to
mistakes/accidents, pressure placed by the unions, negative publicity
causing customers to boycott the company, etc), then unions wouldn't exist,
or at least wouldn't have the strength needed to put the issue to rest as
quickly as possible.

When your customers (and the other networks customers) are complaining, the
issue gets resolved much quicker.  The Telia/Cogent depeering went longer
than most, but it usually gets the job done.

>-w

Randy

Re: [NANOG] Need Hananet Contact

[Randy Epstein]

Hello Giuseppe,

noc {at} hanaro.com should work.  The company is called Hanaro Telecom and
their NOC phone number is +82 2 6266-6767.

Randy

-Original Message-
From: Giuseppe Ravasio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 5:48 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: [NANOG] Need Hananet Contact

Hi,

I'm having troubles accessing Hananet DNS (AS9318) from AS44567.
Probably because our IP Address space (93.92 etc etc) was listed in a
very old version of Bogon Networks Block List

( http://www.team-cymru.org/?sec=8&opt=25 )

I tried some Hananet Whois Contacts but I haven't had any feedback.

Do someone has a hananet working contact?

Best regards
Giuseppe Ravasio

___
NANOG mailing list
NANOG@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog


___
NANOG mailing list
NANOG@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

Re: [NANOG] Level3 not honoring Broadwing contracts?

[Randy Epstein]

James,

There should be a clause in the contract that allows you to cancel services
if they change the terms and conditions of the agreement.

I know that doesn't help you much, but at least it gives you an out.

Randy

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 7:37 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: [NANOG] Level3 not honoring Broadwing contracts?


In 2006, I signed a 3 year contract with Broadwing for a 1 cabinet 
colocation with 6Mbs dedicated for under $1,000/mo.  A few weeks ago, 
about halfway through this contract, I get a letter from Level 3's 
"Director of Colocation" that they are going to raise my price by several 
hundred dollars a month.

I spoke with my new Level 3 rep, and he just notified me that their legal 
deparment confirms that all they have to do is give me 30 days notice to 
increase their price.

This does not make sense to me.  I am bound to a 3 year contract, where I 
have to pay them the rest of the term if I were to leave early, but they 
can jack up the price by 40-50% during that time, arbitrarily?  I do not 
see that provision in my contract, and would rather avoid legal expenses 
if possible.  Has anyone else had to deal with this sort of thing from 
Level 3?

TIA,

James Smallacombe PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   
http://3.am
=

___
NANOG mailing list
NANOG@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog


___
NANOG mailing list
NANOG@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

Re: [NANOG] Purpose of Internap's PNET AS22212

[Randy Epstein]

Thurber,

PNET (AS22212) is looked upon by InterNAP's PNAPs (its various ASes) as just
another transit provider in the mix.

So yes, InterNAP technically peers (under AS22212), but there is no
guarantee its various PNAPs would choose that path, depending upon a number
of factors.

(Disclaimer: This is what I've gathered from public information, not from
information obtained under non-disclosure.)

Regards,

Randy

-Original Message-
From: Thurber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 12:01 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: [NANOG] Purpose of Internap's PNET AS22212

Can anybody shed some light on Internap's PNET AS22212? Specifaly how it
relates to their PNAP architecture?  Is Internap now doing peering? I was
under the impression that their entire business model was based around
isolated PNAPs and being a backboneless provider. Attempts at getting an
explanation from Internap have been fruitless.

CT



___
NANOG mailing list
NANOG@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog


___
NANOG mailing list
NANOG@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

[NANOG] AS3300-BT Infonet sends full table to AS1239-Sprint

[Randy Epstein]

All,

At ~19:00 UTC today, AS3300-BT/Infonet announced their full routing table to
AS1239-Sprint, and Sprint accepted it and re-announced it to all of their
peers and transit customers.

Example:

*> 3.0.0.0  144.228.191.169   100  0 1239 3300 21484
6661 3257 701 703 80 i

As a peer of AS3300, our max-prefix filters knocked down the session
immediately at multiple peering points in the US and Europe.

After ~20 minutes, we started noticing AS3300 announcements via some of our
other peers, that we wouldn't normally see.

Anyone from AS3300 on the list to explain?

Regards,

Randy Epstein



___
NANOG mailing list
NANOG@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

RE: San Francisco Power Outage

[Randy Epstein]

>It appears that 365 is using the Hytec Continuous Power System [

http://hitec.pageprocessor.nl/p3.php?RubriekID=2016], which is a motor,
generator, flywheel, clutch, and Diesel engine all on the same shaft. They
don't use batteries.
>If the flywheels spent their energy before the generators came online, they
don't have the ability to start the generators up without utility power
(unless they purchased the Dark Start option, which is simply extra
batteries). 
>-brandon

 

They claim in the video tour that they do not have any battery systems on
the site.  They rely solely on the flywheels.

 

 

Randy