You are talking standard SLAs tho right? Guarantee 0.001% packet loss, RTT Xms
between points on your network.. etc.
I was interested in traffic engineering, ATM/Frame PVC style. RSVP, MPLS TE,
diffserv and all that good stuff, of which I had no responses of people using it
and selling them as
Is it just me ?
--
Thanks
Rafi
[rafi@noc ~]$ date
Sun Jul 14 21:30:54 IDT 2002
[rafi@noc ~]$ lynx -dump "http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr-report.html";
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /~tbates/cidr-report.html on this
serve
The problem I had with one of my upstreams' handling of no-export has
been resolved. They were, you'll be happy to hear, full of desire to
do the right thing (and had apparently been doing it until the syntax
for doing so changed out from under them, so clearly you can't turn
your back on those r
> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 21:36:01 +0300 (IDT)
> From: Rafi Sadowsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Is it just me ?
Internet-wide.
I sent a note to Philip Smith re this very item.
The wesite IS down.
> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 08:56:34 +1000
> From: Philip Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Gregory,
>
>
Referring to the no-export community by its numeric value apparently
stopped having the desired effect some number of releases back, while
referring to it as "no-export" currently works (and is the means by
which the problem was resolved).
Stephen
The employees.org server was attacked, and is being rebuilt.
Excerpts from willers.employees.org /etc/motd:
On Friday, June 28, 2002, willers.employees.org was hacked and the root
filesystem was compromised. The system is still under re-construction.
[snip]
We will try to bring up http
In a "safe" place :)
For access we need a signed release form. Can we send you the form?
>
>
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Tue 09 Jul 2002, 23:06 CEST]:
> > The test v6 enabled root servers see ~40-120qps
>
> Where are those hidden?
>
>
> -- Niels.
>
We are using QOS to preferentially drop packets that represent
file-sharing (kazaa, gnutella, etc). This saves us 40Mbps of traffic
across our multiple congested WAN links. The trick is to mark packets
meaningfully. Also, the WFQ introduces some additional latency at our
edge.
On Sun, 14 Jul
On Sun, 14 Jul 2002 21:13:13 -0400 (EDT)
Art Houle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> We are using QOS to preferentially drop packets that represent
> file-sharing (kazaa, gnutella, etc). This saves us 40Mbps of traffic
> across our multiple congested WAN links. The trick is to mark packets
>
On Sun, 14 Jul 2002, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
>
> On Sun, 14 Jul 2002 21:13:13 -0400 (EDT)
> Art Houle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > We are using QOS to preferentially drop packets that represent
> > file-sharing (kazaa, gnutella, etc). This saves us 40Mbps of traffic
> > across our
See now we are back to the catch 22 that is IRR. No one will use it because the data
isnt there, and no one will put the data into it because no one uses it.
I think the way to get IRR into the real world production realm, is to really drive
home the issue w/IPV6.
-Original Message-
--On Friday, July 05, 2002 17:50:24 +0100 Simon Waters
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I
> would guess the "." zone probably isn't that large in absolute
> terms, so large ISPs (NANOG members ?) could arrange for their
> recursive servers to act as private secondaries of ".", thus
> eliminating
12 matches
Mail list logo
