www.bl.uk?
Matt.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Stephane Bortzmeyer
Sent: 14 December 2004 09:52
To: Gadi Evron
Cc: nanog list
Subject: Re: [Fwd: zone transfers, a spammer's dream?]
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 03:52:38AM +0200,
Gadi Evron
id Diaz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 20 September 2002 18:35
To: Matt Ryan; William B. Norton; Ralph Doncaster; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Cogent service
I dont believe that number at all. Not to disagree with you at all
Matt. But real world, it would depend on the desi
Whatever the relative technical merits of MPLS/BGP VPNs over other layer
3 VPNs (GRE, IPsec, L2TP etc) there are many service providers around the world
selling these services. There is clearly a business need for them, and obviously
customers how will buy them (well, we have managed to sell
Something like http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps5888/index.html?
Matt.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Bill Stewart
Sent: 01 October 2004 08:23
To: Eric Germann; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Blackhole Routes
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 10
Cachelogic put appliances into the network that both monitor traffic
(semi-deep packet inspection) and also cache P2P content to take the load of
your network. While I don't think they made the figures up it's worth
bearing in mind they are selling a 'solution' to the problem they highlight.
For t
MPLS (on its own) gives you jack-squat in terms of delay and jitter. All the
clever queuing can do it for you - but then it can for IP (because its the
same thing!).
Matt.
-Original Message-
From: Petri Helenius [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 March 2003 15:10
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED];
lol - I promise in future to read to the bottom of messages. In fact if I
didn't top post I would have noticed, but that's a different can of worms
8-)
Matt.
-Original Message-
From: Petri Helenius [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 March 2003 17:52
To: Matt Ryan; [EMAIL
Do you get commission from Juniper?
Matt.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 January 2004 16:51
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: CIsco 7206VXR w/NPE-G1 Question
Keep in mind, 72xx is still flow-based, so you need to count *both* shared
fa
It's not the Cisco bashing I was referring to, but the all singing all
dancing Juniper performance claim.
Matt.
-Original Message-
From: Petri Helenius [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 January 2004 17:43
To: Matt Ryan
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CIsco 7206VXR w/NPE-G1 Que
me balance when unrealistic
claims are made.
Matt.
-Original Message-
From: Alex Yuriev [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 January 2004 14:45
To: Matt Ryan
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: CIsco 7206VXR w/NPE-G1 Question
> It's not the Cisco bashing I was referring to, but the al
Depending on your chosen vendor the ACL cost is unlikely to be $0 - if you
steal CPU cycles from packet forwarding then you incur earlier router
upgrade costs and that has a NPV cost increase associated with it. It's just
not as obvious as a invoice for a firewall.
Matt.
-Original Message--
11 matches
Mail list logo
