RE: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s

2003-10-16 Thread Peter E. Fry
lose are the ones you want. Peter E. Fry

Re: Extreme BlackDiamond

2003-10-14 Thread Peter E. Fry
would require creation of an additional internal node.) Good point. I'd made the simple assumption that scanner spikes were due to table churn, as when redistributing connected and/or static routes to unstable interfaces. It happens that most such will be... unnaturally specific. [...] Peter E

Re: CCO/cisco.com issues.

2003-10-06 Thread Peter E. Fry
enough there's a blurb on overclockers.com that follows this somewhat: http://www.overclockers.com/articles843/. Peter E. Fry

Re: Worst design decisions?

2003-09-18 Thread Peter E. Fry
...? Heh. Makes me want to add I hate it when that happens, as in Ever put your head in a vise and crank it down real tight...? Peter E. Fry

Re: BGP issues

2003-09-17 Thread Peter E. Fry
-based filtering. This usually occurs if there's no less-specific route available, but there's 65.112.0.0/12 from Qwest covering both. This leaves only a few very obscure possibilities, so I wouldn't chase this except as a last resort. Peter E. Fry

Re: Cisco Service Provider code - Any good?

2003-09-03 Thread Peter E. Fry
and RBE) is spanky new to the S feature sets -- 12.2-14S range, so a 12.0-S load doesn't sound like it'll do the job for you. Peter E. Fry

Re: Cisco Service Provider code - Any good?

2003-09-03 Thread Peter E. Fry
Peter E. Fry wrote: Looks like bridging (IRB and RBE) is spanky new to the S feature sets -- 12.2-14S range, so a 12.0-S load doesn't sound like it'll do the job for you. Ooops... RBE is available for the 7500 and IRB for the 7200 in the late 12.0-S loads, apparently. Well, that's new

Re: ISPs are asked to block yet another port

2003-06-23 Thread Peter E. Fry
(destination of 137). Heh. Peter E. Fry

Re: IRR/RADB and BGP

2003-06-19 Thread Peter E. Fry
, then. But wouldn't it be nice to support the RADB, and our good friends at Merit? Heck, you could donate a few grand -- I'm sure they'd accept it. Peter E. Fry

Re: Iraqi Internet communications still working 3/21/03

2003-03-22 Thread Peter E. Fry
neighbors, the Holy Land Foundation. Grrr. Offhand I don't know what happened to the remainder of InfoCom. I'll have to poke around if I get the chance. Peter E. Fry

Re: Route Supression Problem

2003-03-12 Thread Peter E. Fry
a few hops in between for that. Ah, but this is the Internet. Jack's two upstreams likely have direct or indirect links between them where they will also receive the route updates in question. Should we change the subject (back) to BGP to doom us all? Peter E. Fry (I believe I said that without

Re: 69/8...this sucks

2003-03-12 Thread Peter E. Fry
the filters a bit. The funny ones are those who've signed up for a partial table or default. Then again, I suppose you can't be too careful. Peter E. Fry

Re: route filtering in large networks

2003-03-12 Thread Peter E. Fry
are nice, but I'd have to rant all over this list to keep y'all from filtering my compelling bogon content. Peter E. Fry

Re: Shuttle Columbia - not necessarily nanog related

2003-02-01 Thread Peter E. Fry
to the shuttle schedule. A pisser on many levels. Peter E. Fry

Re: fast ethernet limits

2003-01-10 Thread Peter E. Fry
Joel Jaeggli wrote: [...] moreover they're signifcantly harder to install since they need to be properly grounded and shielded at both ends. I've actually seen some very impressive ground loops. I'd ground one end. (Actually I'd use fiber, but hey.) Peter E. Fry

RE: frame relay to atm conversion tool?

2003-01-09 Thread Peter E. Fry
tended toward the conservative in some areas. Grrr. Take it easy. Peter E. Fry

Re: Weird networking issue.

2003-01-07 Thread Peter E. Fry
of manufacturing Ethernet equipment capable of autonegotiation. At least until 1999 or so. Yeah, there're a few others, all of which seemed to follow Cisco's lead. Nutty. Peter E. Fry

Re: Weird networking issue.

2003-01-07 Thread Peter E. Fry
Peter E. Fry wrote: [...] the only [...] Yeah, *that* is a nutty statement. I could re-phrase, but I think most here get the intent. Peter E. Fry

Re: ISDN tip wanted

2002-10-31 Thread Peter E. Fry
Ian MacKinnon wrote: Surely it can't be that, as the call has been answered. Not in my experience. Have you tried it? Peter E. Fry

Re: IETF SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org

2002-08-21 Thread Peter E. Fry
a response to a complaint I filed. Interesting idea, though -- you then catch 'em when they attempt to relay through your server. And as far as that goes, I've seen a system that worked quite well... Larry might be familiar with it, as it was his. Peter E. Fry

Re: Max Prefixes Configured on Customer BGP

2002-08-15 Thread Peter E. Fry
were my customer. Peter E. Fry No, I never thought much of emoticons.

Re: OC-768 availability?

2002-07-30 Thread Peter E. Fry
David Charlap wrote: I think an OC-192 network using 56K modems in the core would be a pretty obvious giveaway as well. Yes! Sheesh. Nobody uses K56Flex any more. Peter E. Fry

Re: Bogon list or Dshield.org type list

2002-07-29 Thread Peter E. Fry
more challenging. Peter E. Fry

Re: verio arrogance

2002-07-18 Thread Peter E. Fry
that Verio allocates /24 and larger (all I saw offhand were /24s and /23s) address blocks for customers from the Class C space. Can't fault 'em for consistency. Peter E. Fry

Re: verio arrogance

2002-07-18 Thread Peter E. Fry
, but it's not always provided. Regardless, I want to see an announcement originating from my customer directly to the owner of the block. De facto authorization. [...] Peter E. Fry

Re: RADB mirroring

2002-05-20 Thread Peter E. Fry
level) seems pointless. I've been meaning to try to dig up a contact (from a customer), but haven't had a chance... Peter E. Fry