we used to have that problem here. a big customer from us does
many gre tunnels. the problem seemed to be that they were blocking
icmp, thus every mtu variation on the way from any point could not be
known by the routers making the point unavailable (we actually saw
the packets just before ent
(Taking NANOG out, as this is moving a little towards personal conversation)
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 16:44:26 -0800 "todd glassey"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Vadim - the instant someone sues a Provider for sexual harassment from
> their spam epidemic you will start to see things change. The reas
Sounds similar to my problem with the Linksys cable/DSL router.
My problem was that it would work perfectly with NAT enabled, but
the minute I turned NAT off, I couldn't get to a lot of sites.
I tried a number of firmwares. I even tried to get support from
Linksys. But, after a week without any r
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 11:11:19 -0500 Damian Gerow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> (Taking NANOG out, as this is moving a little towards personal
> conversation)
Apparently, I didn't read my own Cc: line. Sorry, folks.
I have been looking at some stats on a router and I am seeing high
utilization between 2 routers, I am seeing utilization on one interface
of about 60megs up and down, when the aggregate of all other interfaces
is about 13megs up and down. The routers that I am using are a
Riverstone 8600 and a
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, todd glassey wrote:
>
> Vadim - the newest form of SPAM uses the Messenger facility to place a
> pop-up in the middle of your screen without any email, pop, smtp or other
> service being involved. I apologize for the tone of the first posting, but I
> still stand by it. When
Not to mention that fact that 99.99% of current consumer connections are
not up to the task. Standard full-screen video digital stream is ~6Mbps,
HDTV requires 19.4Mbps. Don't know many consumers with T3s. ;)
As always, it gets down to doing the math, something may dot bombers
weren't (aren't) ve
Al Rowland wrote:
Not to mention that fact that 99.99% of current consumer connections are
not up to the task. Standard full-screen video digital stream is ~6Mbps,
HDTV requires 19.4Mbps. Don't know many consumers with T3s. ;)
VDSL or ADSL2+ would cut it, until fiber to the curb gets the nor
On Wednesday, 2003-01-22 at 12:04 EST, "Dale Levesque"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been looking at some stats on a router and I am seeing high
> utilization between 2 routers, I am seeing utilization on one interface
> of about 60megs up and down, when the aggregate of all other interface
At 09:28 AM 1/22/2003 -0800, Al Rowland wrote:
Not to mention that fact that 99.99% of current consumer connections are
not up to the task. Standard full-screen video digital stream is ~6Mbps,
HDTV requires 19.4Mbps. Don't know many consumers with T3s. ;)
Drifting off-topic, but those are 'raw
speaking of HDSL over copper, does anyone know anything about a company
called Rose Tekephone that reportedly has an HDTV over T1 service?
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Parker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 1:02 PM
Subject: RE: FW: Re: I
1. I also remember when web page standards required you to design
everything to fit in a 640x400 screen. DTV/HDTV will significantly
change your 'not much in the way of image quality loss' yardstick. My
viewing habits have changed significantly in the year plus I've been
DTV/HDTV. Among other thin
"Al Rowland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> mention the effect everyone on AOL going to broadband and downloading
> Disney clips all the time would have on their settlement plans with
> backbone providers.
Of course, because you are definitely being kept in the loop regarding
the AOL settlement p
At 10:58 AM 1/22/2003 -0800, Al Rowland wrote:
1. I also remember when web page standards required you to design
everything to fit in a 640x400 screen. DTV/HDTV will significantly
change your 'not much in the way of image quality loss' yardstick. My
viewing habits have changed significantly in th
Its actually funny you mention this. I'd been working on a way to deliver
television via atm for years just never had much interest. But basically
by attaching to the cloud and then being able to draw pvc's over to dsl
lines it should be quite possible. Don't forget also many of us in given
are
Fellow Networkers,
I have a question regarding current filtering
rules/practices on the Internet and prefix length
requirements for Class B space. I know that the ARIN
space (64/8, 66/8 etc.) must be accepted at /19 or
smaller but what about old class Bs? I have a global
organization that ha
Speaking of early networks: I see where Epoch was broken up and sold
recently.
On 1/21/03 1:48 PM, "Avi Freedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> : So did you aquire those "assets" from clearblue or where the appliedtheory's
> : ass
Figured it out, it was a stupid mistake on my end. I forgot I shut down
a customer (For Spamming) in the colo, but did not null black hole his
route so it was sending it to my router that normal handles my customer
termination for our Wireless net. And because his spam was successful he
was getti
Anyone clueful at Charter around? Can you contact me off list, thanks!
Stones and glass houses. Not to throw stones, but to learn how to build
better glass houses. California's SB 1386 doesn't become effective until
July 1, 2003.
http://www.betanews.com/article.php3?sid=1043252353
Security Flaw Exposes 35 Million AOL Accounts
By Nate Mook and Craig Newell, Beta
> Drifting off-topic, but those are 'raw' data rates. Compression algorithms
> along with motion-estimation allow you to get full-screen video down to
> ~1.5 Mbps with not much in the way of image quality loss.
>
Raw HDTV is about 1.2Gbps. RAW NTSC SDI bitstream is a few hundred.
The 6 and 19.8
Hello;
On Wednesday, January 22, 2003, at 06:04 PM, Petri Helenius wrote:
Drifting off-topic, but those are 'raw' data rates. Compression
algorithms
along with motion-estimation allow you to get full-screen video down to
~1.5 Mbps with not much in the way of image quality loss.
Raw HDTV i
Anyone hear of aol not allowing in 69.0.0.0/8 addresses. It was just
claimed to me but I thought that seemed highly unlikely.
From: "Scott Granados" <>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 7:18 PM
>
> Anyone hear of aol not allowing in 69.0.0.0/8 addresses. It was just
> claimed to me but I thought that seemed highly unlikely.
>
>
69.8.0.1>telnet www.aol.com 80
Translating "www.aol.com"...domain server (69.8.2.15) [OK]
T
Andy -
- Original Message -
From: "Andy Dills" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "todd glassey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Vadim Antonov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: FW: Re: Is there a line of defense against Distributed
Reflective at
Interestingly enough, its also devided between hosting & access.
And I remember well another early ISP, where the same happened - Digex
I wonder if there is a pattern here for the future ...
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, joe mcguckin wrote:
>
>
> Speaking of early networks: I see where Epoch was broke
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/23/technology/circuits/23sher.html
If you remember my comments about the remarkable sherpa i met in
kathmandu relative to the SANOG conference which opens there today,
the above URL takes you to a very good story in todays new york
times1400 words with 3 pict
The link wants you to log in with a New York Times login...
-Mike
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Gordon Cook wrote:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/23/technology/circuits/23sher.html
>
> If you remember my comments about the remarkable sherpa i met in
> kathmandu relative to the SANOG conference w
Something I'm surprised no one has commented on considering the
direction of this thread has been should ISPs be responsible for
customer actions if they are not allowed to refuse service to customers?
I'm surprised this hasn't come up since the latter half of the question
also represented a fairl
29 matches
Mail list logo
