On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 05:16:08PM -0700, Crist Clark wrote:
It seems to me is what hurts the ISPs is the accompanying upload
streams, not the download (or at least the ISP feels the same
download pain no matter what technology their end user uses to get
the data[0]). Throwing more bandwidth
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 06:20:31PM -0500, Neal R wrote:
I have a customer with IP transport from Sprint and McLeod and fiber
connectivity to Sprint in the Chicago area. The person making the
decisions is not a routing guy but is very sharp overall. He is
currently examining the latency on
We will be running the keysigning sessions in Toronto during the
general session breaks (the breaks start sometime between 1000 and 1030
each day) in Hall F.
You may add your key to the keyring at:
http://www.biglumber.com/x/web?keyring=9342
Additional details
On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 10:55:53AM -0800, Bill Woodcock wrote:
...of how this whole ATT rebranding thing works, Stephen Colbert summs it
up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bj1Mtv9cD0Ieurl=
Much along the lines of seeing how fast you can name the
states, or their capitals
The key signings will be during the Monday and Tuesday morning breaks
in Director's Row 46. Please try to get those keys into me by 9pm CDT on
Sunday, however any late submissions will be accomodated as best I can.
--msa
-snip-
Stickers for Your Name Badge
When you stop by
The key signing will be on Monday at 3pm in the State room. If you
can't make it, feel free to submit keys as there will be a follow-up session
during the Wednesday morning break.
So get those keys in and I'll see you in Dallas!
--msa
-snip-
Stickers
On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 02:05:36PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
and telcos usually do. but they almost always tell you it's protected.
force them to test, or pull one side yourself. and repeat the test every
quarter.
Actually Randy, I would say 85% of the APS problems I've
had were not
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 02:26:37PM -0700, Jared B. Reimer wrote:
This is a pretty serious flaw IMHO, if it is (in fact) true. qmail isn't
the only mailer that behaves this way. It looks like they may have tried
to kludge their way around this with LDAP in the case of MS Exchange, which
When you stop by the registration desk at NANOG30, there will
be colored stickers available for your nametag that indicate if you
have an interest in signing PGP keys. If people keep trying to peer with
you, you've picked up the wrong color sticker and should go back.
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 08:07:05PM -0600, Adam Selene wrote:
IMHO, all consumer network access should be behind NAT.
-snip-
As for plug-in workgroup networking (the main reason why
everything is open by default), when you create a Workgroup,
it should require a key for that workgroup and
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 02:22:19PM -0400, Todd Vierling wrote:
Sucks to be anyone trying to use the service whose routers pick those nodes
as the only ones available. That's the fault of the implementor, not the
client.
I have a sneaking suspicion that if UltraDNS's tld cluster that
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 04:10:19PM +0100, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
Hi, can we get any reverse DNS for the meeting LAN?
Email to nanog-support is usually a good way to bring attention
to this sort of problem during the conference, however, I note that it's
working okay for me:
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 12:04:28PM -0800, Scott Granados wrote:
There has been a lot of latency on several 7018 peers including 3561 and
3549 for the last week or so.
Also wierd asimetric routing like one direction will have 7018 6461 and
the other wil have 6461 3561 7018 with the 3561
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 02:57:22PM -0500, Eric Germann wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/03/07/speed.record/index.html
Comments folks?
Given enough thrust, pigs fly just fine...demonstrated by
a professional driver on a closed track, please do not try
On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 01:01:33AM +0530, alok wrote:
there was a comment from chris saying...never possible to knw what networks
an bgp customer uplinks via you which is very true.. ..so i assume u mean
non-bgp customers? loose or strict, rpf will not work for aasymterically
connected bgp
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 11:40:11PM -0400, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
Manually configuring a static route in router A would achieve the result:
ip route 172.16.16.0 255.255.255.0 fa0/0
However, I'm surprised that there's no dynamic routing protocol that
allows you to do everything you can with
On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 11:24:15AM -0700, Christopher J. Wolff wrote:
The cable companies do this quite well; however, it's not
immediately clear to me how I would multiplex the IP traffic and
the existing video and deliver it to a home.
Well, the traditional solutions involve some
On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 12:45:01PM -0700, Al Rowland wrote:
Steganography looked great in that hollywood movie Along Came a Spider
with Morgan Freeman (or at least the 'screen friendly' version they
portrayed) but a recent study of millions of graphics across USENET
found zero steganographic
On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 09:55:21AM -0400, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
No.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=enselm=3C32924F.994E1D01%40udel.edu
Every critical organization should run at least four
low-stratum servers configured as above, so dependant servers and
clients can do the
On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 11:57:39PM -0400, John Todd wrote:
Hmm... $2400 is still in the pricey range to be throwing out
bunches of these across a network in wide distribution. (Pardon me
if some of you on the list snicker at my reluctance at the $2400
price - for some of us the new, new
On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 03:08:22PM -0400, N. Richard Solis wrote:
I think that getting caught is a good indication that they take the security
of the facility seriously.
Which is clearly exhibited by them leaving a side door propped
open, or not checking or securing this door
On Sat, Aug 17, 2002 at 05:04:05PM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:
--The service provider must not determine the recipients of the material.
One could argue (in theory) that a routing-table lookup
may satisfy this.
I'm not so sure. Generally speaking, a destination network is a
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 05:24:57PM -0700, Herb Leong wrote:
All my sessions at the PAIX are active--anybody else seeing this?
I saw a fairly large traffic hit on the public fabric
less than an hour ago. I'm currently seeing 87.5% of my
sessions down. I suspect that the sessions that
On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 09:46:07AM +0300, Huopio Kauto wrote:
Interesting how quietly one of the powerhouses in Europe has been shut
down yesterday evening. Any notes on increased latency / routing issues
wrt AS286 shutdown?
On a much quieter note, how many people noticed that AS1673
On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 01:58:44AM -0400, Frank Scalzo wrote:
See now we are back to the catch 22 that is IRR. No one will use it because
the data isnt there, and no one will put the data into it because no one
uses it.
[CC: list trimmed]
Actually, I think you'll find that
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 11:00:58AM -0400, Pawlukiewicz Jane wrote:
Anybody have a noc phone number for these guys?
I can't seem to find anything on them publicly, except the usual hype.
Jane, had you actually read many of the postings on this
list before jumping right in and posting
On Wed, Jun 26, 2002 at 12:39:11PM -0400, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
While many other tier-1's have publicly listed their peering policies,
I've never seen anything for 1239. Not that I'd stand a chance, but does
anyone know what their peering requirements are?
sprintlink.net# grep peering
On Wed, Jun 26, 2002 at 02:34:42PM -0400, Mitchell, Dan wrote:
a strong management team (after all, they *did* build MFS)
^
`- I think you have mistaken this for an endorsement.
And in the age of cooked books, stated revenue can be
misleading, particularly when it
On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 05:30:50PM -0400, blitz wrote:
Adelphia announced price increases today 90 cents a month for cable TV,
bringing the package to about $39. a month in Buffalo, and $41. outside.
Also they increased the powerlink cablemodem $2.00 a month. (this is the
second
On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 01:24:04PM -0700, Clayton Fiske wrote:
How does the absence of an IXP route affect traceroutes -through- it?
The IXP device has a route back to the source of the trace, so it can
reply. The traceroute packets are addressed to the ultimate destination,
so they don't
On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 11:46:16AM +0200, Erik-Jan Bos wrote:
But the Internet, build on resilient technology, will survive...
Is it?
--msa
On Sat, May 18, 2002 at 04:51:27PM -0400, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
One BGP session instead of dozens is more convenient. Maybe not more
useful for engineering, but certainly less work than negotiating and
configuring a bunch of sessions for bilateral peering.
For smaller ISPs like mine,
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 04:04:42PM -0400, Bradley Corner wrote:
I tried to notify UUNET at their 800-900-0241 number that there was a
loop in their network. They told me that if I didnt have an account
with them they were not interested in any information that I may have
had for them. I
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 10:37:37AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone have current contact info for VERIO NOC or Engineering?
puck data is completely out of date, as is my internal lists.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is out of date?
--msa
34 matches
Mail list logo
