On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Frank Bulk wrote:
Except that upstreams are not at 27 Mbps
(http://i.cmpnet.com/commsdesign/csd/2002/jun02/imedia-fig1.gif show that
you would be using 32 QAM at 6.4 MHz). The majority of MSOs are at 16-QAM
at 3.2 MHz, which is about 10 Mbps. We just took over two systems
Hi,
That is where I got to last night with my cogitations before I feel
asleep.
Ben
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Robert Bonomi
Sent: 16 January 2008 01:26
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: BGP Filtering
> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:1
- Original Message -
From: "Joe Greco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[snip]
As long as you fairly disclose to your end-users what limitations and
restrictions exist on your network, I don't see the problem.
You've set out a qualification that generally doesn't exist. For example,
this discu
Joe Greco wrote:
As long as you fairly disclose to your end-users what limitations and
restrictions exist on your network, I don't see the problem.
You've set out a qualification that generally doesn't exist. For example,
this discussion included someone from a WISP, Amplex, I believe, t
> Unless you define "topologically nearest" as "what BGP picks", that is
> incorrect. And even if you do define topology to be equivalent to
> BGP, that is not what is of the greatest interest.
> "Goodput" (latency, packet loss, throughput) is far more important.
> IMHO.
Certainly, but
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Patrick W.Gilmore")]
> And even if you do define topology to be equivalent to BGP, that is not
> what is of the greatest interest. "Goodput" (latency, packet loss,
> throughput) is far more important. IMHO.
in my less humble justified true belief, this is 100% truth.
> This
On Jan 15, 2008, at 3:03 PM, Joe Greco wrote:
Except Hank is asking for true topological distance (latency /
throughput / packetloss).
Anycast gives you BGP distance, not topological distance.
Say I'm in Ashburn and peer directly with someone in Korea where he
has a node (1 AS hop), but I get
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Rod Beck wrote:
> At the risk of incurring Mr. Pilosoft's wrath (the Putin of NANOG?),
You meant the "srh of nanog". And I'm not ;)
> I'll looking for NANOG style ISP meetings to attend in Europe this year
> (France, Germany, UK, Belgium, and Netherlands). Any suggestions wo
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Christopher Morrow wrote:
Jon, didn't you start:
http://www.wibble.co.uk/archives/nanog/2007/msg05265.html
Yep.
and Ben, is this sort of what you are looking for? Or would it
accomplish the same thing for you?
I don't think it's at all what Ben "wants", but I think i
On Jan 13, 2008 6:56 PM, Paul Ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Interesting, given that TTNet sits atop this ranking:
>
> https://nssg.trendmicro.com/nrs/reports/rank.php?page=1
>
> I wonder if this is somehow related? ;-)
>
probably not..
On Jan 15, 2008 2:02 PM, Jon Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Ben Butler wrote:
>
> > I want a filter that will automatically match the shorter prefixes that
> > match any longer prefix, once I can match them I can drop them.
> > I don't want to manually configure a static
On Jan 15, 2008 2:42 PM, Rod Beck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> At the risk of incurring Mr. Pilosoft's wrath (the Putin of NANOG?), I'll
he's not a bad guy actually :) it's a rough job corralling all the
-admin folks I'm certain. Also this isn't really that off topic is it?
> looking for NANOG
On 15-Jan-2008, at 12:50, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
Anycast gives you BGP distance, not topological distance.
Yeah, it's topology modulated by economics :-)
Joe
> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:16:04 -0500
> From: "William Herrin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: BGP Filtering
>
>
> On Jan 15, 2008 12:51 PM, Dave Israel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I think I understand what you want, and you don't want it. If you
> > receive a route for, say, 204.91.0.
Except that upstreams are not at 27 Mbps
(http://i.cmpnet.com/commsdesign/csd/2002/jun02/imedia-fig1.gif show that
you would be using 32 QAM at 6.4 MHz). The majority of MSOs are at 16-QAM
at 3.2 MHz, which is about 10 Mbps. We just took over two systems that were
at QPSK at 3.2 Mbps, which is a
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Frank Bulk wrote:
I'm not aware of MSOs configuring their upstreams to attain rates for 9 and
27 Mbps for version 1 and 2, respectively. The numbers you quote are the
theoretical max, not the deployed values.
But with 1000 users on a segment, don't these share the 27 meg
I'm not aware of MSOs configuring their upstreams to attain rates for 9 and
27 Mbps for version 1 and 2, respectively. The numbers you quote are the
theoretical max, not the deployed values.
Frank
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Mikael A
Hi,
It is late and am just checking email. But...
The /24 is more specific than the /19 therefore the /24 take priority.
In my opinion AS path length became somewhat redundant with the rise of
confederations and BGP doesn't understand bandwidth, latency and
congestion. But I didn't write it,
But if I can see the /19 in the table, do I care about a load of /24s
because the whole of the /19 should be reachable as the origin AS is
announcing it somewhere in their network and it is being received my a
transit so should be reachable.
The "presumption" in cases like this is that the /24
I have reached the conclusion that some of these threads are good indicators of
the degree of underemployment among our esteemed members. But don't worry, I am
not a snitch.
Roderick S. Beck
Director of European Sales
Hibernia Atlantic
1, Passage du Chantier, 75012 Paris
http://www.hiberniaatla
On Jan 15, 2008 3:52 PM, Joe Greco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Joe Greco wrote:
> > > I have no idea what the networking equivalent of thirty-seven half-eaten
> > > bags of Cheetos is, can't even begin to imagine what the virtual
> > > equivalent
> > > of my couch is, etc. Your metaphor doe
> Joe Greco wrote:
> > I have no idea what the networking equivalent of thirty-seven half-eaten
> > bags of Cheetos is, can't even begin to imagine what the virtual equivalent
> > of my couch is, etc. Your metaphor doesn't really make any sense to me,
> > sorry.
>
> There isn't one. The "fat man
William Herrin wrote:
On Jan 15, 2008 12:51 PM, Dave Israel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think I understand what you want, and you don't want it. If you
receive a route for, say, 204.91.0.0/16, 204.91.0.0/17, and
204.91.128.0/17, you want to drop the /17s and just care about the /16.
This is amazing. People are discovering oversubscription.
When we put the very first six 2400bps modems for the public on the
internet in 1989 and someone shortly thereafter got a busy signal and
called support the issue was oversubscription. What? You mean you
don't have one modem and phone lin
On Jan 15, 2008 12:51 PM, Dave Israel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I think I understand what you want, and you don't want it. If you
> receive a route for, say, 204.91.0.0/16, 204.91.0.0/17, and
> 204.91.128.0/17, you want to drop the /17s and just care about the /16. But
> a change in topol
> Except Hank is asking for true topological distance (latency /
> throughput / packetloss).
>
> Anycast gives you BGP distance, not topological distance.
>
> Say I'm in Ashburn and peer directly with someone in Korea where he
> has a node (1 AS hop), but I get to his node in Ashburn through
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> > Fallback to A should be removed sure sounds like a plan.
>
> great idea. it will only break mail to 42% of the internet.
Randy's right, though it's email *from* 42% of the Internet that's the
biggest problem. [rant about email from shitty php web form
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> Since there is no [MX] fallback to
Wrong. http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg49841.html
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/
FISHER GERMAN BIGHT: SOUTHERLY BECOMING CYCLONIC THEN WESTERLY 7 TO SEVE
At the risk of incurring Mr. Pilosoft's wrath (the Putin of NANOG?), I'll
looking for NANOG style ISP meetings to attend in Europe this year (France,
Germany, UK, Belgium, and Netherlands). Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Please bypass the list and send them directly to me.
Roderick S. B
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Ben Butler wrote:
I want a filter that will automatically match the shorter prefixes that
match any longer prefix, once I can match them I can drop them.
I don't want to manually configure a static prefix list for lots and
lots and lots of reasons.
If the longer prefix disa
The /17 isn't sitting there still being filtered; it was never there to
begin with. Your router heard the /17, saw that it didn't want it
because of your filter settings, and promptly forgot it. You can tell
your router to remember routes it doesn't install; it's called soft
reconfiguration
I see roadrunner listens.
frodo:~ dig +short houston.rr.com mx
0 .
frodo:~ dig +short houston.rr.com txt
"v=spf1 -all"
--srs
On Jan 13, 2008 8:55 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A bunch of roadrunner subdomains migrated over to comcast and those are dud.
>
> One operati
Joe Greco wrote:
I have no idea what the networking equivalent of thirty-seven half-eaten
bags of Cheetos is, can't even begin to imagine what the virtual equivalent
of my couch is, etc. Your metaphor doesn't really make any sense to me,
sorry.
There isn't one. The "fat man" metaphor was get
Hi Dave,
Yes that is what I was thinking I want to do - so I am guessing here - I
think what we are saying is the /17s never get re-added when the /16 is
withdrawn because this does not - for very good reasons when I think
about it- cause the filter to be evaluated upon the withdrawal of a
prefix
I see the site, not the error.
--Patrick Darden
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Daniele Arena
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 12:48 PM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: NANOG website unreachable?
Hi,
Am I the only one to get a 403 on http://
I know of Level 3 issues in the Tampa area. Where are you?
-Scott
- Original Message -
From: "David Hubbard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 11:44:31 AM (GMT-0500) America/New_York
Subject: Level 3 (3356) issues?
Just curious if anyone is seein
> Joe Greco wrote:
> > Time to stop selling the "always on" connections, then, I guess, because
> > it is "always on" - not P2P - which is the fat man never leaving. P2P
> > is merely the fat man eating a lot while he's there.
>
> As long as we're keeping up this metaphor, P2P is the fat man who
Ben,
I think I understand what you want, and you don't want it. If you
receive a route for, say, 204.91.0.0/16, 204.91.0.0/17, and
204.91.128.0/17, you want to drop the /17s and just care about the /16.
But a change in topology does not generally result in a complete update
of the BGP ta
On Jan 15, 2008, at 12:00 PM, Bill Woodcock wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
The Ultradns (now Neustar) Directional DNS service is based on
statically defined IP responses at each of their 14 sites so there
is no proximity checking done.
Yes, and that's how anycast work
Looks like this was localized to Tampa. I've received
emails from two other people connected through Tampa, like us,
who were having the same issues. I finally got TCAM on the
phone after about an hour. They have a master ticket for a
failure of "three DLM modules" lasting 47 minutes but it is
Hi,
Agreed that is why I have lots of RAM - doesn't mean I should carry on
upgrading my tower of babble though to make it ever higher and higher if
there is a better way of doing things.
I still don't see how a default route to a portioned pop is going to
help in the slightest - you are saved by
> As long as we're keeping up this metaphor, P2P is the fat man who says
Guys, according to wikipedia over 70 million people fileshare
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_file_sharing
That's not the fat man, that's a significant portion of the market.
Demand is changing, meet the new needs o
Hi,
I might be being slow, or you might not understand my question - I am
not sure it has been a long day.
I want a filter that will automatically match the shorter prefixes that
match any longer prefix, once I can match them I can drop them.
I don't want to manually configure a static prefix li
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> The Ultradns (now Neustar) Directional DNS service is based on
> statically defined IP responses at each of their 14 sites so there
> is no proximity checking done.
Yes, and that's how anycast works: it directs traffic to the
_top
On 15-Jan-2008, at 11:40, Ben Butler wrote:
Defaults wont work because a routing decision has to be made, my
transit
originating a default or me pointing a default at them does not
guarantee the reachability of all prefixes..
Taking a table that won't fit in RAM similarly won't guarantee
Our DS3 here in Cupertino, Ca seems to be working flawless
-Mike
On Jan 15, 2008 8:44 AM, David Hubbard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Just curious if anyone is seeing issues with Level 3
> right now? Our session is still up but we can't
> see any outside routes through them currently. I'
No issues here full feed coming in and no issues getting out (that
have been noticed so far)
2 so-8-0.hsa1.Detroit1.Level3.net (166.90.248.1) [AS 3356] 12 msec 8
msec 12 msec
3 so-4-3-0.mp1.Detroit1.Level3.net (4.68.115.1) [AS 3356] 12 msec 12
msec 8 msec
4 as-4-0.bbr2.NewYork1.Level3.n
Ben,
Look here. They show an example of prefix filtering on the 128.0.0.0/8
network. I would assume you could extrapolate and come up with your own
rule.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0/np1/configuration/guide/1cbgp.h
tml#wp7487
Mike Walter, MCP
Systems Administrator
3z.net a PCD Co
Just curious if anyone is seeing issues with Level 3
right now? Our session is still up but we can't
see any outside routes through them currently. I'm
guessing by the fact that I've been on hold for 25
minutes that I'm not the only one having an issue with
them but wanted to double check.
Tha
Hi Jason,
Fantastic news, it is possible. We are using Cisco - would you be so
kind as to give me a clue into which bit of Cisco's website you would
like me to read as I have already read the bits I suspected might tell
me how to do this but have guessed wrong / the documentation hasn't
helped -
Hi,
Default wont work - I do care about my transit providers network
becoming partitioned or IXPs having problems or fiber cuts etc etc
So I need my router to see all the reachability of a prefix in BGP so
that my router knows which transit to send it to.
Defaults wont work because a routing de
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 04:11:36PM -, Ben Butler wrote:
> As a transit consumer - why would I want to carry all this cr*p in my
> routing table, I would still be getting a BGP route to the larger prefix
> anyway - let my transit feeds sort out which route they use & traffic
> engineering.
Hi,
Considering:
http://thyme.apnic.net
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 113220
!
/20:17046 /21:16106 /22:20178 /23:21229 /24:126450
That is saying to me that a significant number of these smaller prefixes
are due to de-aggregation of PA and not PI
Joe Greco wrote:
Time to stop selling the "always on" connections, then, I guess, because
it is "always on" - not P2P - which is the fat man never leaving. P2P
is merely the fat man eating a lot while he's there.
As long as we're keeping up this metaphor, P2P is the fat man who says
he's go
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:43:12 -0500
> "William Herrin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 AY
At 12:14 AM 16-01-08 +1300, jamie baddeley wrote:
Yes, but that would require them to run a DNS server at each of their 4
locations. They do not want to run their own DNS. They want it outsourced.
Thanks,
-Hank
Thought about anycasting? Broad as a barn door, but if you add health
checking
I am looking for a commercial DNS service that provides
geo-directionality. Suppose I have 4 data centers scattered thruout the
world and want users to hit the closest data center based on proximity
checks (pings, TTLs, latency, load, etc.). I know one can "roll their
own", using various ge
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:56:30 +0900
Adrian Chadd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008, Mark Smith wrote:
>
> > But the fat man isn't allowed to take up residence in the restaurant
> > and continously eat - he's only allowed to be there in bursts, like we
> > used to be able to ass
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Brandon Galbraith wrote:
I think no matter what happens, it's going to be very interesting as Comcast
rolls out DOCSIS 3.0 (with speeds around 100-150Mbps possible), Verizon FIOS
Well, according to wikipedia DOCSIS 3.0 gives 108 megabit/s upstream as
opposed to 27 and 9
On 1/15/08, Adrian Chadd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> ffs, stop with the crappy analogies.
>
> The internet is like a badly designed commodity network. Built
> increasingly
> cheaper to deal with market pressures and unable to shift quickly to
> shifting
> technologies.
>
> Just like the telcos
Hi,
thanks for all your answers it helped a lot, we will do a test with nProbe.
Best Stefan
--
Stefan Hegger
Internet System Engineer
Lycos Europe GmbH
Carl-Bertelsmann Str. 29
Postfach 315
33312 Gütersloh
Phone:
Tel: +49 5241 8071 334
Fax: +49 5241 80671 334
Mobile: +49 170 1892720
Sitz d
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008, Mark Smith wrote:
> But the fat man isn't allowed to take up residence in the restaurant
> and continously eat - he's only allowed to be there in bursts, like we
> used to be able to assume people would use networks they're connected
> to. "Left running" P2P is the fat man n
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:43:12 -0500
"William Herrin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 buffe
63 matches
Mail list logo
