On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Aaron Glenn wrote:
On 8/17/05, Joe Shen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
Using netflow based monitor tool, I noticed there is a
lot of traffic on 8094/UDP and 4662/TCP( both exceed
1Gbps, and exist all the time)
What application use that port? Is there any P2P
applicati
On Sun, 7 Aug 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agreed. However, in this case it matches a fature I've wanted for
years. Being able to mirror packets to a different port is pretty
common for managed switches, and is rather useful sometimes in
tracking abuse and similar. I *want* the same capability
On Wed, 25 May 2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
Again, you are under no obligation to do anything with QoS flags from
non-paying customers, and I'm not advocating for anybody to get a free
ride here. Ignore the markings, but leave them alone too.
Yes please. HOW? That is what I have been asking sinc
On Wed, 25 May 2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
On 5/25/2005 3:42 PM, Lars Erik Gullerud wrote:
I.e. my customer with two offices who run their own IPSec tunnel between,
should in other words no longer be able to pay me for improved delivery
without buying a full VPN offering from me (which they
On Wed, 25 May 2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
On 5/25/2005 2:50 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
Beatiful idea, how in practice do you suggest this is done, how will
my router know if it should just ignore the TOS bytes or do expedited
forwarding as configured for given value of TOS byte?
VLANs? Different
On Fri, 2004-11-19 at 16:36, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> /127 prefixes are assumed for point-to-point links, and presumably an
> organization will divide up a single /64 for all ptp links -- unless they
> have more than 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 of them.
While that would seem logical for most engi
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Simon Lyall wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Mark Borchers wrote:
> > Everybody's entitled to their opinion, but this excerpt from
> > http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR//VRRP-CISCO does not seem to me
> > to portend predatory pricing:
>
> However it does make an open source (and cert
On Wed, 4 Feb 2004, Erik-Jan Bos wrote:
> Looks OK from SURFnet (AS1103) through Level3:
>
> [...]
Hm - both through 3561 (CW) and 3549 (GBLX) in Europe (tracing from
source-IP's on our border routers from the respective providers'
netblocks, and our own IP's), we have no connectivity. Both path
On Tue, 2003-09-16 at 18:50, William Allen Simpson wrote:
> > Please note that the people running the root nameservsers are a different
> > set from the people who run the .com and .net nameservers.
> >
> True, these days, at least in part.
>
> Since the latest zone for .net (and maybe .com acc
On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 17:37, Steve Carter wrote:
> I speak for Global Crossing when I say that ICMP rate limiting has existed
> on the Global Crossing network, inbound from peers, for a long time ... we
> learned our lesson from the Yahoo DDoS attack (when they were one of our
> customers) back i
On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 18:31, Robert Boyle wrote:
> I had a little 2000VA rackmount Liebert UPS catch fire in 1997 and another
> new and improved Liebert model almost catch fire about a year later. Both
> were operating well within specified input, load, and temperature
> parameters. I haven't
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 02:24, David Schwartz wrote:
> The laws require an "intent to" "conceal" the "origin or
> destination". NAT would not count, as the intent is to share a scarce
> resource, not to conceal the origin or destination -- the origin is
> only concealed to the extent neces
On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 04:47, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> Personally I don't think it's "too" hard to setup some scripts scripts
> which can apply updated bogon and other important prefix-list updates
> globally. Rancid and about 15 lines of shell script should do you just
> fine. If you're luc
Just a small thank you-note to all the 27(!) people who responded to me
privately with the information I needed. The issue has now been
resolved, so my compliments to the very helpful guys at Qwest who got
this quickly sorted out as well.
/leg
On Fri, 2003-01-24 at 11:36, Lars Erik Gullerud
Does anyone have a working NOC contact for SuperNet Inc., AS3908? Or if
they are now perhaps owned by some other entity (All traces seems to end
up in Qwest.net), who might that be, and how can we get in touch with
them?
The issue is that 3908 is incorrectly announcing five /24's and a /22
with
On Wed, 2002-10-30 at 16:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Therefore, would it be a reasonable suggestion to ask router vendors to
> source address filtering in as an option[1] on the interface and then move
> it to being the default setting[2] after a period of time? This appeared
> to have some s
Uhm it seems to me people are trying to make this whole AS112-thing sound more
complex than it really is...
We use the BGP anycast-method in our backbone, and have been doing so for a
long time. Basically, we have multiple caching DNS-servers scattered around
our network, but all of them use
Yes, I realize this is NANOG and a lot of people here doesn't seem very
interested about events over in Europe, but for those who might be
interested and have not already seen this:
http://nocpeople.org/ebone/broadcast2.html
>From what I can see personally, all BGP sessions with Ebone at major
18 matches
Mail list logo
