Re: PAIX

> I'm putting the number closer to 40 (the "NFL cities") right now, and > 150 by the end of the decade, and ultimately any "metro" with population > greater than 50K in a 100 sq Km area will need a neutral exchange point > (even if it's 1500 sqft in the bottom of a bank building.) What applicatio

Re: PAIX

PV> Date: 14 Nov 2002 05:14:30 + PV> From: Paul Vixie [ re number of US exchange points ] DD> Right now seems domestically 6 may be all we need. PV> I'm putting the number closer to 40 (the "NFL cities") right PV> now, and 150 by the end of the decade, and ultimately any PV> "metro" with p

Re: [South Florida Network Operators Group]

"Dale Levesque" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > - > Attachment: > MIME Type: multipart/alternative > - > Does anyone in here now of a South Florida Network Operators Group, or > something similar,

Re: PAIX

> > I'm putting the number closer to 40 (the "NFL cities") right now, and > > 150 by the end of the decade, and ultimately any "metro" with population > > greater than 50K in a 100 sq Km area will need a neutral exchange point > > (even if it's 1500 sqft in the bottom of a bank building.) > > Wha

Re: PAIX

Well thanks for the agreement Ed. Philosophically, I agree with Paul. I think 40 exchange points would be a benefit. At this time though, there is no model that would support it. 1) Long haul circuits are dirt cheap. Meaning distance peering becomes more attractive. L3 also has an MPLS pr

Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

Good Morning, I am interested in how everyone who is affected by the recent Spanish Judicial order to block specific "terrorist affiliated" sites from access to Spanish nationals? Without re-starting the endless debate over how impossible this is in fact, since that is obvious -

compuserve proxy ips

Does anyone know where I can get a list of compuserve's proxy ip's? Thanks, Jason -- Jason Beltrame INetU, Inc.(tm)- http://www.INetU.net Electronic commerce - Web development - Web hostin

Re: compuserve proxy ips

not meaning to sound facetious but have you asked compuserve? On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Jason Beltrame wrote: > > > Does anyone know where I can get a list of compuserve's proxy ip's? > > Thanks, > > Jason > > -- >

Re: PAIX

On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 10:22:09 -0500 David Diaz wrote: > 2) There is a lack of a killer app requiring peering every 100 sq Km. David; I recommend some quality time with journals covering South Korea, broadband, online gaming and video rental. regards, fletcher

Re: PAIX

Thus spake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 10:22:09 -0500 David Diaz wrote: > > 2) There is a lack of a killer app requiring peering every 100 sq Km. > > David; > > I recommend some quality time with journals covering South > Korea, broadband, online gaming and video rental. Current pe

Re: compuserve proxy ips

Yes, but they didn't know. Their website also didn't list them. -- Jason Beltrame INetU, Inc.(tm)- http://www.INetU.net Electronic commerce - Web development - Web hosting [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Phone:

Re: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

Hi, In Spain Some provideers are blocking the resolv of this domains in their dns servers. Others block in the edge the ip actually associated with this domains. Others don't block ;) Is very interesting know what happening if this domains move to Akamai or Digital Island. Deny this traffi

RE: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

Its my understanding that since Akamai is based on DNS resolves if you where to use the method of blocking it within the DNS system it would make no difference. Although I'm no Akamai expert. -Jim -Original Message- From: Daniel Concepcion [mailto:dani@;intelideas.com] Sent: Thursday,

Re: PAIX

Wired covered several of these topics in their August issue. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.08/korea.html The article points out several subtle, yet fundamental, changes that happen socially and psychologically once the broadband network is available everywhere, to virtually everyone, all

RE: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

-- On Thursday, November 14, 2002 12:11 PM -0500 -- Jim Deleskie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> supposedly wrote: Its my understanding that since Akamai is based on DNS resolves if you where to use the method of blocking it within the DNS system it would make no difference. Although I'm no Akamai expert.

Re: PAIX

Still seems that none of these "requires" peering every 100 km. Latency is still not a factor in this case. People seem to prefer cost of quality at this time. Good Fast Cheap Pick any two. As far as digital libraries and content and such... proxies and caches would fill the roll here. Akam

Re: PAIX

Used to be when it first came out, Wired was a mag the best quality printing on no substance I had ever seen, really seemed like a borderline artist mag. The colors were amazing. I see now, upon looking at a recent issue, their content seems to have improved dramatically. Brian - Origin

Re: PAIX

DD> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 10:22:09 -0500 DD> From: David Diaz DD> 1) Long haul circuits are dirt cheap. Meaning distance DD> peering becomes more attractive. L3 also has an MPLS product DD> so you pay by the meg. I am surprised a great many peers are DD> using this. But apparently CFOs love

Re: PAIX

At 18:31 + 11/14/02, E.B. Dreger wrote: DD> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 10:22:09 -0500 DD> From: David Diaz DD> 1) Long haul circuits are dirt cheap. Meaning distance DD> peering becomes more attractive. L3 also has an MPLS product DD> so you pay by the meg. I am surprised a great many peers

Re: PAIX

Thus spake "E.B. Dreger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > DD> 1) Long haul circuits are dirt cheap. Meaning distance > DD> peering becomes more attractive. L3 also has an MPLS product > DD> so you pay by the meg. I am surprised a great many peers are > DD> using this. But apparently CFOs love it > > Uebe

RE: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

This all strikes me as incorrect. The function of the domain name system is primarily to translate an IP number into a domain name, vice versa. If a user wishes to browse to   he/she will arrive also at . The domain name is propagated and subsequently refreshed t

DNS Subdomains

Helo, Might be a simple question But... I've got no idea what the answer could be... In the early days, one only had a .com address space (amongst the most popular ones). These days, there is .com(this) and .com(that) and any kind of .(whatever) you can think of. My question... How does on

Re: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 12:11:14 EST, Jim Deleskie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > Its my understanding that since Akamai is based on DNS resolves if you where > to use the method of blocking it within the DNS system it would make no > difference. Although I'm no Akamai expert. The Akamai gotcha is th

Re: DNS Subdomains

well current practice seems to be to declare yourself the legitimate root authority and go out and set them up however for the rest of us who either like the internet to continue to function in a predictable manner or are mere mortals not worthy of declaring ourselves root the answer is you cant

Re: PAIX

SS> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 13:32:55 -0600 SS> From: Stephen Sprunk SS> Incorrect. Cheap longhaul favors a few centralized SS> exchanges. If there is no economic value in keeping traffic SS> local, it is in carriers' interests to minimize the number of SS> peering points. True. However, cheap

Re: DNS Subdomains

Gawie Marais (Home) wrote: Might be a simple question But... I've got no idea what the answer could be... In the early days, one only had a .com address space (amongst the most popular ones). These days, there is .com(this) and .com(that) and any kind of .(whatever) you can think of. My qu

DNS Subdomains

Helo, Might be a simple question But... I've got no idea what the answer could be... In the early days, one only had a .com address space (amongst the most popular ones). These days, there is .com(this) and .com(that) and any kind of .(whatever) you can think of. My question... How does o

Re: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

-- On Thursday, November 14, 2002 4:52 PM -0500 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] supposedly wrote: On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 12:11:14 EST, Jim Deleskie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: Its my understanding that since Akamai is based on DNS resolves if you where to use the method of blocking it within the DNS system it

RE: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

-- On Thursday, November 14, 2002 8:52 PM +0100 -- hostmaster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> supposedly wrote: This all strikes me as incorrect. The function of the domain name system is primarily to translate an IP number into a domain name, vice versa. If a user wishes to browse to

RE: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

> This all strikes me as incorrect. The function of the domain name system is > primarily to translate an IP number into a domain name, vice versa. If a > user wishes to browse to he/she will arrive also at > . Remember some servers won't work with IP address, typically if

Re: PAIX

On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, David Diaz wrote: > 2) There is a lack of a killer app requiring peering every 100 sq Km. Peering every 100 sq km is absolutely infeasible. Just think of the number of alternative paths routing algorithms wil lhave to consider. Anything like that would require serious r

Re: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 17:26:21 EST, "Patrick W. Gilmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Not if you block the domain name terrorist.com from resolving at the > caching name server, only if you block the IP address to which is resolves > on your routers. (Which in many cases will be an Akamai server

DirecPC Protocols

I've been looking for some technical descriptions on how DirecPC works from a TCP/IP point of view. Does anyone out there have some references? I have not been able to find anything too detailed, and from what I have been told, they are not too forthcoming when contacted directly. I know the roug

Re: PAIX

Its possible/likely that what Paul is saying may happen, but it requires a lot of locality-specific high-bandwidth applications (none exist now or in demand now) and technologies that make it possible (cost-effective) to manage such complex peering network for a very large network Maybe 10 ye

Re: DirecPC Protocols

On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 02:53:59PM -0800, Crist J. Clark wrote: > > I've been looking for some technical descriptions on how DirecPC works > from a TCP/IP point of view. Does anyone out there have some > references? I have not been able to find anything too detailed, and > from what I have been t

Re: DirecPC Protocols

Well there are some two way dish solutions for consumers now that don't need a dial-uplink. I think dishnetwork has such a thing as does direct tv. Doesn't help much but does help people in remote areas. On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Crist J. Clark wrote: > > I've been looking for some technical descr

Re: PAIX

## On 2002-11-14 14:44 -0800 Vadim Antonov typed: VA> VA> VA> On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, David Diaz wrote: VA> VA> > 2) There is a lack of a killer app requiring peering every 100 sq Km. VA> VA> Peering every 100 sq km is absolutely infeasible. Just think of the VA> number of alternative paths

Re: DirecPC Protocols

If you don't get an answer here, you might want to try the isp-satellites list. http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-satellites/ Also, there are a -few- knowledgable folks on alt.satellite.direcpc. Good luck...I'd be interested in hearing the description myself. --Michael - Original Messa

RE: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

At 05:28 PM 11/14/2002, Patrick W. Gilmore most definitely admitted: -- On Thursday, November 14, 2002 8:52 PM +0100 -- hostmaster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> supposedly wrote: This all strikes me as incorrect. The function of the domain name system is primarily to translate an IP number into a domain nam

Re: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

Once upon a time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 17:26:21 EST, "Patrick W. Gilmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > Not if you block the domain name terrorist.com from resolving at the > > caching name server, only if you block the IP address to which is resolves

Re: DirecPC Protocols

Scott, Just an f.y.i., Charlie Ergan (DishNetwork) said he couldn't see how the business plan could succeed and pulled out of StarBand. They are currently in Chap. 11. http://65.186.192.177/liarband/ch11.html --Michael - Original Message - From: "Scott Granados" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To

Re: DirecPC Protocols

Ah didn't know that. Seems like it has some possibilities but I agree I think it would be hard to make money in the consumer space. Direct-tv is doing it according to some other posts I read here but again I think direct-tv's installed base is 3 or 4 times that of dish. To bad they didn't merge

Re: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

-- On Thursday, November 14, 2002 6:01 PM -0500 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] supposedly wrote: On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 17:26:21 EST, "Patrick W. Gilmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: Not if you block the domain name terrorist.com from resolving at the caching name server, only if you block the IP address to

RE: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

-- On Friday, November 15, 2002 12:45 AM +0100 -- hostmaster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> supposedly wrote: At 05:28 PM 11/14/2002, Patrick W. Gilmore most definitely admitted: Suppose they just make it a law that each ISP has to block "domain.com" in their caching name servers? Who is 'they', Patri

Re: PAIX

Voice of reason... The only possible reason I can think of is if these data networks replace the present voice infrastructure. Think about it, if we really all do replace our phones with some video screen like in the movies, then yes, most of those calls stay local within the cities. Mom cal

Re: PAIX

At 1:20 +0200 11/15/02, Rafi Sadowsky wrote: ## On 2002-11-14 14:44 -0800 Vadim Antonov typed: VA> VA> VA> On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, David Diaz wrote: VA> VA> > 2) There is a lack of a killer app requiring peering every 100 sq Km. VA> VA> Peering every 100 sq km is absolutely infeasible. Just think

Re: PAIX

On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Rafi Sadowsky wrote: > VA> > 2) There is a lack of a killer app requiring peering every 100 sq Km. > VA> > VA> Peering every 100 sq km is absolutely infeasible. Just think of the > VA> number of alternative paths routing algorithms wil lhave to consider. > VA> > VA> Anyt

Re: Blocking specific sites within certain countries.

On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 17:59:59 CST, Chris Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > You don't. If you configure your name server to block resolution of > terrorist.com, you'll never find out that it goes to an Akamai server. Unfortunately, the politicians would actually believe that. msg06710/pgp000