Earlier today I had an issue where a circuit to one of my two BGP
connected upstreams went away for an hour or so.
During this period, I expected BGP to act as expected and migrate the
traffic to the second circuit with a second provider. This did not
occur. Initially I figured this had t
Randy Epstein wrote:
I don't have an answer to the root cause of your problem, and I'm not
looking for a discussion on route dampening (there are enough debates
onthis issue to make your head spin), but may I suggest you raise your
hold timers to prevent your BGP sessions from going down on sh
Two somewhat intertwined questions. I'll ask the second part first.
I buy transit from Global Crossing and another carrier on HDLC
encapsulated DS3's.
Recently my BGP session has started flapping on the GX circuit... It
looks something like this:
Jul 21 21:17:43.731 UTC: %BGP-3-NOTIFICATI
After a routing issue between us and an instance of the RFC1918 anycast
servers blackhole-[12].iana.org which caused all sorts of bizzare failures
within customer networks, I'm trying to figure out if there is a really
good reason why I shouldn't keep a copy of the 1918 zones on my local
recursiv
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Bob Martin wrote:
> I didn't know this was possible. I thought there was a 1 to 1
> relationship with nameserver names/addresses. I'm trying to figure out
> if this is or will be a problem.
Paul Vixie can probably better address this than myself, but I will
mention that with
On Wed, 4 Aug 2004, Drew Weaver wrote:
> It is generally the responsibility of the ISP to provide the outgoing
> mail transport for your connected users.
This BCP seems to be changing. The new BCP which seems to be evolving
requires customers to authenticate to their home mail server on the MSA
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004, Christopher Woodfield wrote:
> OK, from my reading in Newton's Telecom Dictionary, it appears that NIU
> is a generic term for "whatever the customer plugs their cable into",
> be it a powered or a dumb device. Mea culpa.
...
> "...installed on the premises as a semi-intellig
data at 70mb/s
towards the internet. Considering we're only attached to our (multiple)
upstreams at a combined bandwidth of quite a bit less than that, it
basically buried our router and upstream connectivity.
- Forrest W. Christian ([EMAI
things, you probably want at least 256MB.
If you are using something else, YMMV - it all depends on how efficient
the software is at storing it in memory.
- Forrest W. Christian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) AC7DE
--
The I
do name-based
(non SSL) virtual hosting so I need an IP for each domain I host" or
"I think it would be cool to have a real publically visible address on
each of my 100 computers in my Beowulf cluster of 486's" are the types of
things we don't waive the fees f
quot; to "a block of addresses aligned on a
/24 boundary".
My guess of the real underlying reason is that saying "I need a full class
C" or "I need a block of [4,8,16,32,64] addresses" seems to be a lot
easier to say in a clear fashion over the phone or in person than
end to tell. Regardless, it seems to fix the
broken sites. YMMV
- Forrest W. Christian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) AC7DE
--
The Innovation Machine Ltd. P.O. Box 5749
http://www.imach.com/
ll. In fact, it works well enough that
we're starting to buy circuits at each of our POPs as it is cheaper to buy
circuits from sprint or similar to their internet PoPs than it is to buy
circuits around the state. In most cases we will still be maintaining
internal connectivity for
oftware.libertine.org/tmda/
- Forrest W. Christian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) AC7DE
--
The Innovation Machine Ltd. P.O. Box 5749
http://www.imach.com/Helena, MT 59604
Home of
ren't on the best of terms with them.
- Forrest W. Christian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) AC7DE
--
The Innovation Machine Ltd. P.O. Box 5749
http://www.imach.com/Helena, MT
l sending with proving you have spent about 15 seconds worth of CPU
cycles. In fact, I'm thinking this is probably a better solution than the
pay-per-message solution, as we don't have to worry about settlement, etc.
etc. which was the real problem with the pa
cycles. This might be an easier thing to
swallow.
Passing laws and putting on filters don't work. Depending on each mail
server admin to do the right thing doesn't work. We need to find
something else that will.
- Forrest W. Christian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) AC7DE
-
On Sat, 4 May 2002, Johannes B. Ullrich wrote:
> sounds a bit like www.vanqish.com . But other than that, how
> would it work for mailing lists like this one?
My solution to this would be for people to be able to select certain
senders as not being charged.
- Forrest W. Christian (
I want to clarify this a bit, before I get flamed (not that I'm not going
to anyways).
On Sat, 4 May 2002, Forrest W. Christian wrote:
>
> The people in the middle would get *nothing* beyond what they are getting
> today.
>
> Grandma would get 2c for each mail she received
ase the cost of sending the spam, then we will lessen the
profitability of sending it, and the problem will diminish substantially.
Remember almost 100% of the spam is driven by greed, and if we can't
satisfy the greed of the spammers, they will go elsewhere.
- Forrest W
On Sat, 4 May 2002, Forrest W. Christian wrote:
> What I envision is some sort of micropayment protocol extension to SNMP.
-
Make that SMTP :) I guess I've been working on network monitoring too
much
he sender "That will be x cents please", at
which point the server sends some sort of cert-signed digital cash.
I'm not sure how you would bootstrap this or if it will ever be possible.
I just think that if we could get even $0.02 per email from the spammers a
lot of them would st
mail server (I've seen 40 streams open at once to my
mail server from the same class C - all injecting mail as fast as
possible). And on and on and on.
- Forrest W. Christian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) AC7DE
--
The Inn
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002, Lionel wrote:
> >telnet bofh.engr.wisc.edu 666
>
> Folks, please don't try to connect to that service.
> Posting it here seems to have Slashdotted it.
Works fine here
Are you sure you haven't got uunet between you and it? ;-)
- Forrest W. Ch
is.
I also know that bind9 has added functionality similar to what you are
looking for. I'm a bind fan myself.
- Forrest W. Christian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) AC7DE
--
The Innovation Machine Ltd. P.O. Bo
west.
Ride the Light... Right into the darkness.
- Forrest W. Christian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) AC7DE
--
The Innovation Machine Ltd. P.O. Box 5749
http://www.imach.com/Helena
broken with Qwest is
kinda like someone who doesn't even know how to turn on a computer trying
to fix a router.
As a final insult, Qwest is trying to convince the FCC to give them LATA
relief (which would be a mixed blessing for us), because "they are getting
beat up by the competition"
est W. Christian wrote:
> Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 12:10:18 + (GMT)
> From: Forrest W. Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: batz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Stephen J. Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Mark E. Mallett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
&g
27;t tell which of my upstreams is having the problem in
order to call them without a BGP or traceroute from the provider we're
having problems reaching.
- Forrest W. Christian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) AC7DE
x27;t have a direct relationship with UUnet. But trying to
get my upstream to talk to their upstream to talk to UUnet just to get
someone at uunet to do a traceroute or tell me what is showing up in their
(uunet's) BGP tables is just plain rediculous.
Does anyone have better contact informati
30 matches
Mail list logo
