Having a bit of diffculty with a Google matter. Was hoping to get pointed in
the right direction by someone from Google.
--Patrick Darden
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks everyone! Several people from Google responded very quickly, and the
issue was resolved faster than I can believe.
--Patrick Darden
--ARMC
-with-quickpage-a-sms-tap-gateway/
This is important not only to avoid the inconsistency of the vtext
email-sms gateway but to get an alert out in case of a major network
disruption that breaks email functionality.
Patrick Shoemaker
President, Vector Data Systems LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
office: (301) 358-1690
.
But - and please don't take this the wrong way - but I liked the
original agenda posted a week or two ago better
:)
--
TTFN,
patrick
the top story here, especially the last sentence:
http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/WN08/wn040408.html
--
TTFN,
patrick
within their
sales organization or at an executive level, to whom I may address my
grievances? I would be most grateful.
Thank you in advance.
Kind Regards,
Patrick Torney
Trion World Network
out how to monitor/cut off/contain
any leaks. Advantage is that cooling would continue up to the limit of
the BTUs stored in the chilled water tank, even in the absence of power.
Cordially
Patrick Giagnocavo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
be mitigated, but you can't really
do anything about it other than contacting your upstream provider. Until your
provider does something, the bottleneck here is your uplink.
--Patrick Darden
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Mike Lyon
Sent
distribution systems that are customizable at the rack level allows for
a wide variety of densities and configurations throughout the room.
Check out the tour at this link:
http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/environment/green/datacenter.jsp
--
Patrick Shoemaker
President, Vector Data Systems LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED
, read FAQs, and looked over the docs at whitehouse.gov without
much luck. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
--Patrick Darden
I understand you have no budget for a comercial load balancer; however, you
should consider setting up two inexpensive servers or PCs as load balancers.
You could do it with one, but that would itself be a single point of failure.
The OS and software are all free. Two old PCs would be next
FERNANDO ST STE 1010
SAN JOSE, CA 95113-2414
US
408-367-6673 fax: 408-367-6688
If that does not help, then you can solicit for better contact information
(from NANOG.) I am betting above.net knows about this and is already working
on it.
Good luck!
--Patrick Darden
, and when it reaches the total the OS
can handle it lets you know the time passed. Take that and divide by total
number of connections and you get the average It won't be very accurate,
but it will give you some kind of idea.
Please forgive the humor
--Patrick Darden
-Original
and other locations.
--
TTFN,
patrick
, but the effectiveness is disputable...
No, the effectiveness is not disputable. It is guaranteed to be sub-
optimal. This is not in doubt or question.
See, as has been quoted many times, as7007.
--
TTFN,
patrick
. :)
--
TTFN,
patrick
with the easy stuff. Walk before run and all that.
--
TTFN,
patrick
attach to a host
outside the USofA?
3: Considered highly competent technically.
Here we agree.
4: With state of the art security and operations.
I think we agree, but I wouldn't have said it like that.
--
TTFN,
patrick
OTOH: I would say that, until today, those who advocate not engaging
this, since now all the world's script kiddies have
seen what can be done.
I would argue the answer to your question is not yet, as we haven't
done anything yet.
We can argue whether that is the right answer, but it is still THE
answer.
--
TTFN,
patrick
not. Where does the word assumption
come in?
That doesn't mean they are not also additional vectors. But Item #1
does not conflict with Item #2.
--
TTFN,
patrick
) an IXP.
--
TTFN,
patrick
a
substantial portion of it's communication channels with the outside world...
-Patrick
- Original Message -
From: Mark Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Martin Hannigan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Sean Donelan [EMAIL PROTECTED], nanog@merit.edu
Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2008 11:12:46 PM (GMT
everything about MY network.
Anyone who thinks differently is either confused or has an agenda they
are pushing. Or, possibly, trying to sell you a bigger box.
PLEASE, let the thread die.
--
TTFN,
patrick
remotely to
that effect.
If one side has, they are being quite silly.
Oh, and where do I plug my 10GE port in for $39.99/month?
And, as an aside, the Network Neutrality issue affects the globe and
is only being debated in one country.
Perhaps you should change that? :)
--
TTFN,
patrick
feeds. :)
--
TTFN,
patrick
/month for voice only)
compared to $40 one-time?
Hell yes I expect more minutes per dollar on my long-term contract.
Hrmm, wonder if someone will offer pay-as-you-go broadband @ $XXX (or
$0.XXX) per gigabyte?
--
TTFN,
patrick
On Jan 20, 2008, at 6:06 AM, William Herrin wrote:
On Jan 19, 2008 11:43 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Jan 19, 2008, at 12:55 PM, William Herrin wrote:
There was some related work on ARIN PPML last year. The rough
numbers
suggested that the attributable economic cost
thinking that only the largest providers
should be allowed to add a prefix to the table. At least if we are
going to continue making money on the Internet.
--
TTFN,
patrick
On Jan 20, 2008, at 7:08 AM, Ben Butler wrote:
Hi,
Out of curiosity was the reasoning also to charge the PA who
Good thing neither pizzahut.com or any other single-homed att
customer injected an extra prefix into the table and raised everyone's
cost by multi-homing! :)
--
TTFN,
patrick
On Jan 20, 2008, at 2:53 AM, Paul Ferguson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The oddball
) is clearly in error.
--
TTFN,
patrick
Cost delta (attributable to the DFZ prefix count): $30,000
Expected lifespan in the DFZ of an entry-level router: 3 years
Prefixes in the table: 245,000
Calculation: The LOWER BOUND for the cost per prefix per router can be
calculated as:
( [entry level
,
patrick
a 7600 is the # of prefixes it can take, I'm not sure why I am
still reading your posts.
On Jan 20, 2008 5:10 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 20, 2008, at 3:34 PM, William Herrin wrote:
( [entry level router's cost attributable to prefixes]/[expected
lifespan] ) / [DFZ
On Jan 18, 2008, at 4:01 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Jan 18, 2008, at 3:11 PM, Michael Holstein wrote:
My guess is the market will work this out. As soon as it's
implemented, you'll see ATT commercials in that town slamming
cable and saying how DSL is really unlimited.
P.S. Perhaps
and saying how DSL is really unlimited.
I do not doubt that. But do you honestly expect the att DSL line to
provide faster / more reliable access?
Hint: Whatever your answer, it will be right or wrong for a given time
in the near future.
--
TTFN,
patrick
I know? If you think things
are out of whack, sounds like a business opportunity to me! You
should be able to take your superior knowledge and make a killing
implementing a proper network.
--
TTFN,
patrick
- except the kids. But since
they don't pay cable bills, no one cares.
--
TTFN,
patrick
.
--
TTFN,
patrick
on the Internet. Although not what I
would do personally.
2) He said he killed the Sprint line. He also said ARIN (correctly)
denied him an ASN because he was not multi-homed.
--
TTFN,
patrick
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
Mike
), guess which node anycast will pick?
--
TTFN,
patrick
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
users, especially over time
as the Internet changes. This is not in question either.
--
TTFN,
patrick
Anycast by itself probably isn't entirely desirable in any case, and
could
ideally be paired up with other technologies to fix problems like
this.
I haven't seen many easy ways to roll
, and then to exit on the preferred interface (if no preference is
made clear via routing, then the default outbound interface is the one with the
lower IP address--e.g. 201.x.y.z would be preferred over 202.x.y.z).
Does that help?
--Patrick Darden
--ARMC
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
will not send packets to them, so they are protected from
most (but not all!) botnets.
--
TTFN,
patrick
or an updateable site, but it's bound to be abused
and thus ignored, the same reason people arn't sending to abuse@ and
postmaster@ in the first place.
-Patrick
- Original Message -
From: Martin Hannigan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: nanog@merit.edu
Cc: nanog-admin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January
an element with a general identifier of
(CFQUERY), occupying document position (54:2) to (54:49). -Patrick
- Original Message -
From: mack [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: nanog@merit.edu
Sent: Wednesday, January 2, 2008 7:14:24 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: rtcomm.ru
If anyone
I know, I apologize. This was supposed to be sent directly to the party
involved and not cc'd to the list.
-Patrick
- Original Message -
From: Christopher Morrow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Patrick Clochesy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: mack [EMAIL PROTECTED], nanog@merit.edu
Sent: Wednesday
to be educated.
--
TTFN,
patrick
limited to [public IP addresses]
Make sense?
--Patrick Darden
--Internetworking Manager
--ARMC
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Drew Weaver
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 10:09 AM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: General question on rfc1918
From my experience, a fast P4 linux box with 2 good NICs can NAT 45Mbps
easily. I am NAT/PATing 4,000 desktops with extensive access control lists
and no speed issues. This isn't over a 45Mb T3--this is over 100 Mb Ethernet.
--Patrick Darden
--ARMC, Internetworking Manager
-Original
of the roots
will override the hints file.
--
TTFN,
patrick
On Nov 6, 2007, at 3:24 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Nov 6, 2007, at 3:06 PM, J. Oquendo wrote:
Nice to get news third string...
//
Last week, ICANN setup a new IP address for one of the thirteen root
name servers that oversee DNS queries across the net, and it plans
on
retiring
to be tempered by
the greater good, or we end up with an unworkable system, and then
everyone makes less money in the long run.
IMHO, of course.
--
TTFN,
patrick
On Nov 5, 2007, at 10:54 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 08:32:25AM -0500, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
A single provider doing this is not equivalent to the root servers
doing it. You can change providers, you can't change . in DNS.
This is true, but Verisign wasn't doing
.
Lastly, it's trivial to get around, unless your provider is
transparently intercepting / redirecting port 53.
--
TTFN,
patrick
On Oct 9, 2007, at 8:15 AM, Jamie Bowden wrote:
On Oct 8, 2007, at 6:45 PM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
If you do you have permission from the owner of the block, you
Should Not Announce it.
Agreed.
I stated above that you should
the number of inconsistently originated prefixes has been
non-trivial for at least a decade, I have trouble believing this is a
huge threat to the internet. Or even those 1500 NOC monkeys. (And
wouldn't it be 3K - at least 2 ASNs per prefix? :)
--
TTFN,
patrick
mean you can't or shouldn't do it.
Of course, you can probably still find documentation against it.
(You can find documentation for or against just about anything.)
--
TTFN,
patrick
if the customers gets their own ASN and
announces a sub-block from one of the providers?
Or are you suggesting they should get PI space?
--
TTFN,
patrick
, but when things break,
troubleshooting the source of the customer's reachabilit woes will
get very interesting.
You have made an assumption that the original upstream would not
originate a prefix equivalent to the one you are originating.
--
TTFN,
patrick
On Oct 8, 2007, at 6:45 PM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
It's not 'law' per se, but having the customer originate their
own announcements is definitely the Right Way to go.
That is not at all guaranteed.
I never said it was. My experience, both
On Oct 8, 2007, at 9:46 PM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
If you went ahead and did this, the more specific route being
announced by you on behalf of your customer would be more likely
to attract traffic back to you. Prefix length is checked
of the Internet operations
community whom I respect have argued strongly that this is going to
happen. I thought I'd ask around to see what other folk think...
I'd bet against the first part happening, so the second part is moot.
--
TTFN,
patrick
we (as the local telco) had to go out there cause they
where certain it was a problem with the Ts, When in fact someone had
either tripped over the power cord or unplugged it somehow.
-Patrick
--
Patrick Muldoon
Network/Software Engineer
INOC (http://www.inoc.net)
PGPKEY (http://www.inoc.net
is nice in case all of
your upstreams decided to die @ the exact same time.
-Patrick
--
Patrick Muldoon
Network/Software Engineer
INOC (http://www.inoc.net)
PGPKEY (http://www.inoc.net/~doon)
Key ID: 0x370D752C
Life's disappointments are harder to take when you don't know any
swear words
.
--
TTFN,
patrick
? Or are you suggesting that any capacity should
be available to anyone who needs it, whether they pay or not?
BGP cannot find a path that the business rules forbid.
--
TTFN,
patrick
2. What is the actions a network operator will take when such
failures occures? Is it the case like that, 1
enablers.
Actually, I think the fact Zombies do not honor TTLs is a feature. :)
--
TTFN,
patrick
as well as UDP.
The anti-ddos box sends back a UDP reply with the TCP bit sent and no
data. Which, I believe, violates the RFC. (But it is too hard to look
up on my iPhone. :)
If so, guess that makes those boxes 'stupid'.
--
TTFN,
patrick
best, and we all know that is not even close to the truth.
--
TTFN,
patrick
seconds. That's more than fast enough for most applications these days.
--
TTFN,
patrick
to you about things I b0rk'ed by myself as
hurting you. Which isn't a stretch, support costs money, and
costing me money because you screwed up is definitely hurtful.
--
TTFN,
patrick
P.S. To be clear, no, your pr0n site not resolving because I don't
support TCP does not qualify as hurting
?
Plus, as you mention above, there's file size. How about streaming
vs. HTTP? Optimize for latency or throughput?
Did I mention cost?
Etc., etc.
If someone asked what are the major challenges in making scalable
backbones?, how would you answer?
--
TTFN,
patrick
metric. BGP makes ICMP
look like the gold standard.
--
TTFN,
patrick
forgot the default Single Point of Failure in anything..
HUMANS.
The earth is a SPoF. Let's put DCs on the moon.
Besides, safety always overrides convenience. And I don't think that
is a bad trade off.
--
TTFN,
patrick
port 25.
--
TTFN,
patrick
not
configure.
How exactly is DNSSEC going to stop them from doing this?
--
TTFN,
patrick
well either. Nor
am I trying to say which is at fault. In fact, not even sure I care
who is at fault, if fault can even be apportioned.
--
TTFN,
patrick
P.S. Don't suppose people could change the subject when, well, the
subject changes?
that these
sites
multihome with? If not, how large is it in general?
Difficult to say, and lots of people have tried. Route-Views @
Oregaon, CAIDA, RIPE RIS, and many others has some data you might be
able to morph into that.
--
TTFN,
patrick
change the flow.In that regard, we've
been upgrading our older NPE's to newer ones in order to support
SII, All the while I keep having something a co-worker said stuck in
my head. CALEA - Consultant And Lawyer Enrichment Act :)
-Patrick
--
Patrick Muldoon
Network/Software Engineer
INOC
under surviellance?
Good question. In our case, we are owned by LECS, so we are
facilities based, and the trade off is doing the intercept at the OC-
X level or at the router.
-Patrick
--
Patrick Muldoon
Network/Software Engineer
INOC (http://www.inoc.net)
PGPKEY (http://www.inoc.net
they receive has
filters in
place to prevent their hearing it?
And even if they didn't, what important IP space in that /2 is not
covered by more specifics?
--
TTFN,
patrick
is silly - sillier than the USG
thinking it can actually do so. They're politicians, they're
ignorant of reality and therefore can be excused for not
understanding how stupid they sound. All of you should know better.
--
TTFN,
patrick
On Apr 23, 2007, at 5:04 PM, Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 04:52 PM 4/23/2007, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
I do not want any particular gov't (US or otherwise) to be in
charge of the Internet any more than the next person. And good
thing too, because it simply cannot happen, political pipe-dreams
must have a long rap-sheet.
--
TTFN,
patrick
sessions between two ASes is quite common if both are large ISPs.
So yes, I'd say that between 5-10 is quite common.
At least 5, and more than 10 for many prefixes, inside very, very
large networks.
--
TTFN,
patrick
? Perhaps there are some
simplifying assumptions we can make, depending upon your application?
--
TTFN,
patrick
On Apr 17, 2007, at 8:02 PM, Ricardo V. Oliveira wrote:
Telnet to any of these route servers:
http://www.bgp4.net/wiki/doku.php?id=tools:ipv4_route_servers
and do show ip bgp
changing their
configuration. Therefore, it probably won't have an impact on v6
adoption. (That ghod.)
--
TTFN,
patrick
On Apr 10, 2007, at 1:24 PM, Joseph S D Yao wrote:
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 12:10:59PM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
...
Second, who said v6 was the heights? ...
My, aren't we serious? Too serious to realize that satellites are a
little higher than I, at least, can reach.
Guess I
On Apr 2, 2007, at 10:27 PM, Douglas Otis wrote:
The suggestion was to preview the addition of domains 24 hours in
advance of being published. This can identify look-alike and cousin
domain exploits, and establish a watch list when necessary. A preview
provides valuable information for
to kill this thread.
If the list feels otherwise, and that it is of interest and within
nanog guidelines, then I acquiesce, respecting the greater wisdom of
the list.
--Patrick
to discuss this issue; nor the
methods that you suggest as a remedy, regardless of merit.
Again if the rest of the list wants to continue, then so be it.
--Patrick
off ?
Entirely possible.
--
TTFN,
patrick
On Mar 6, 2007, at 6:00 PM, Jason Arnaute wrote:
--- Patrick Giagnocavo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jason Arnaute wrote:
I am currently hosted in a small, independent
datacenter that has 4 or 5 public peers (L3,
Sprint,
UUnet, ATT and ... ?)
They are a very nice facility, very technical
anything wrong with having the North American Network
Operators Group meeting there.
IMHO, YMMV, etc.
--
TTFN,
patrick
tournament? :)
--
TTFN,
patrick
. :)
Back on topic, I've already said I don't believe the DR will be a
problem vis-a-vis travel policies, and I would like to go to the DR
for NANOG. Anyone else wanna answer the questions which were asked?
--
TTFN,
patrick
.
--
TTFN,
patrick
purpose box with special (easy to forget
about and
screw up) box?
Or even a special purpose box that intentionally gives an unfiltered
view?
I don't think a spurious prefix directly injected into route-views is
proof a network is broken.
--
TTFN,
patrick
to mention that private
channels had been exhausted in one's public notification.
Anyway, this one is sorry if that one thought one was being
curmudgeonly. :)
--
TTFN,
patrick
with stable throughput are much better for
streaming than low latency links with any packet loss, even without
buffering.
IOW: Latency is irrelevant.
--
TTFN,
patrick
1 - 100 of 503 matches
Mail list logo
