Hello colleagues,
I'm trying to optimize the latency packet loss between CHINANET (AS4134) and
our network.
The outgoing traffic to china is fine now but I have no idea how they are
routing towards us.
This is why I'm looking for some sort of looking glass, route server or
webtracerouter
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
On Jan 13, 2008 9:55 PM, Tony Finch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
One operationally better way to go seems to be Mark Delany's mx0dot
proposal, which started out as an internet draft, but
Pardon me if I am using the wrong term, I am using the term
Asymmetrical routing to describe a scenario in which a request packet enters a
network via one path and the response packet exits the network via a different
path.
For example an ICMP ping request enters a network via ISP A
I'm not sure I understand. If a routing protocol such as BGP is being used,
this is considered normal behavior, and the routing determination is made
usually wrt either best route or best bandwidth. In the first case, a return
packet would usually follow on the same interface. In the
Routing in general is based of the premise of my decision, my control and
therefore you have some (albeit limited) controls about how YOU can
influence someone else's routing decision.
So any time you have more than one connection to the collective ('Net) then
you simply run the risk of you make
On Jan 14, 2008 10:30 AM, Drew Weaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't noticed too many instances of this causing huge performance
problems,
but I have noticed some, has anyone noticed any instances in the real world
where this
has actually caused performance gains over symmetrical
Geo:
That's an over-simplification. Some access technologies have different
modulations for downstream and upstream.
i.e. if a:b and a=b, and c:d and cd, a+bc+d.
In other words, you're denying the reality that people download a 3 to 4
times more than they upload and penalizing every in trying
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Frank Bulk wrote:
In other words, you're denying the reality that people download a 3 to 4
times more than they upload and penalizing every in trying to attain a
1:1 ratio.
That might be your reality.
My reality is that people with 8/1 ADSL download twice as much as
Interesting, because we have a whole college attached of 10/100/1000 users,
and they still have a 3:1 ratio of downloading to uploading. Of course,
that might be because the school is rate-limiting P2P traffic. That further
confirms that P2P, generally illegal in content, is the source of what
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David E. Smith
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 12:03 PM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: ISPs slowing P2P traffic...
The wireless ISP business is a bit of a special case in this regard, where
P2P traffic is
From my experience, the Internet IP Transit Bandwidth costs ISP's a lot
more than the margins made on Broadband lines.
So users who rarely use their connection are more profitable to the ISP.
We used the Cisco Service Control Engine (SCE) to throttle P2P
bandwidth.
Stephen Bailey
IS Network
Subject: RE: ISPs slowing P2P traffic...
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:19:58 -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[[.. munch ..]]
From a technical point of view, if your Bittorrent protocol seeder
does not have a copy of the file on its harddrive, but pulls it
in from the customer's computer, you
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Frank Bulk wrote:
In other words, you're denying the reality that people download a 3 to
4 times more than they upload and penalizing every in trying to attain
a 1:1 ratio.
That might be your reality.
My reality is that people with 8/1 ADSL
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Frank Bulk wrote:
Interesting, because we have a whole college attached of 10/100/1000 users,
and they still have a 3:1 ratio of downloading to uploading. Of course,
that might be because the school is rate-limiting P2P traffic. That further
confirms that P2P, generally
We're delivering full IP connectivity, it's the school that's deciding to
rate-limit based on application type.
Frank
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Mikael Abrahamsson
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 1:28 PM
To: nanog list
Subject: RE:
Geo:
That's an over-simplification. Some access technologies have different
modulations for downstream and upstream.
i.e. if a:b and a=b, and c:d and cd, a+bc+d.
In other words, you're denying the reality that people download a 3 to 4
times more than they upload and penalizing every in
You're right, I shouldn't let the access technologies define the services I
offer, but I have to deal with the equipment I have today. Although that
equipment doesn't easily support a 1:1 product offering, I can tell you that
all the decisions we're making in regards to upgrades and replacements
From my experience, the Internet IP Transit Bandwidth costs ISP's a lot
more than the margins made on Broadband lines.
So users who rarely use their connection are more profitable to the ISP.
The fat man isn't a welcome sight to the owner of the AYCE buffet.
What exactly does this imply,
On Jan 14, 2008 5:25 PM, Joe Greco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So users who rarely use their connection are more profitable to the ISP.
The fat man isn't a welcome sight to the owner of the AYCE buffet.
Joe,
The fat man is quite welcome at the buffet, especially if he brings
friends and tips
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 06:43:12PM -0500, William Herrin wrote:
On Jan 14, 2008 5:25 PM, Joe Greco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So users who rarely use their connection are more profitable to the ISP.
The fat man isn't a welcome sight to the owner of the AYCE buffet.
The fat man is quite
There's the somewhat trivial efficiency that if you're willing to
accept asymmetric routing, you spend a lot less time tweaking your
networks than if you insist on symmetry, and the more significant
issue that the network will usually be more resilient and reliable
(though slightly less
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -- Bill Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Essentially, if you don't control all the parts of the network that
your packet uses, you're not able to directly set optimization
parameters, so what you're doing to get symmetry is throwing lots of
hints
On Jan 14, 2008 5:08 PM, Tony Finch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the . convention then it will look up the root's and A records,
which is stupid but should cause the message to bounce as desired. However
if it does implement the convention (just like the usage rules for a SRV
record target
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008, Paul Ferguson wrote:
I wish I could remember who to attribute this quote (maybe Geoff
Huston?), but paraphrasing:
Asymmetric end-to-end traffic paths in The Internet is a fact of
life. Get over it.
I wish people wouldn't base their bloody netflow accounting systems
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
On Jan 14, 2008 5:08 PM, Tony Finch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the . convention then it will look up the root's and A records,
which is stupid but should cause the message to bounce as desired. However
if it does implement the convention (just like
Fallback to A should be removed sure sounds like a plan.
great idea. it will only break mail to 42% of the internet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_astonishment
randy
On Jan 15, 2008 8:53 AM, Mark Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are lots of places in the DNS where . makes sense
as a null indicator. RP uses it today, as does SRV. MX
should use it and fallback to A should be removed. It
Fallback to A should be removed sure
Fallback to A should be removed sure sounds like a plan.
great idea. it will only break mail to 42% of the internet.
Since there is no fallback to , in a few years it will
break very little as most of the internet will have IPv6
MTA's (and hence MX's) for their
Anyone have any detail on the apparent GBLX fiber cut between Seattle
and northern California? The outage has been ongoing since
mid-morning.
Thanks,
John van Oppen
Spectrum Networks LLC
206.973.8302 (Direct)
206.973.8300 (main office)
John van Oppen wrote:
Anyone have any detail on the apparent GBLX fiber cut between Seattle
and northern California? The outage has been ongoing since mid-morning.
We're sitting on about 12 hours of downtime for an affected circuit
here; I've been told that techs were on-scene doing splices
30 matches
Mail list logo
