Re: [Nanog-futures] [NANOG] [NANOG-announce] Mail List Committee announcement

2008-05-14 Thread Martin Hannigan
Haha. I can't believe I'm going to respond to the ASR alias, but ok, I will. On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 1:11 AM, Paul Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 3:07 AM, Philip Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear all, The Steering Committee has unanimously agreed to start afresh with

Re: [Nanog-futures] MLC post-mortem

2008-05-14 Thread Paul Ferguson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 - -- Alex Pilosov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By now it's no news to anyone on -futures or the main list that the SC unanimously decided to dissolve the current Mailing List Committee (to be blunt, fire all existing MLC members) and start anew. I guess

Re: [NANOG] Alcatel-Lucent

2008-05-14 Thread michael.dillon
vendor ears == ON Hopefully... ;-) Not likely! This is a motley crew of people who like to jabber, not a forum for your favorite vendor's customer support. I want to be able to carry IPv6 in a VPRN without having to pay an order of magnitude more for an IOM. May I suggest that you will

[NANOG] [NANOG-announce] Call for Volunteers for the NANOG Mailing List Committee

2008-05-14 Thread Philip Smith
Hello everyone, The NANOG Mailing List Committee is a group of individuals from the NANOG community who collectively are responsible for ensuring the functioning of the NANOG mailing list as an effective resource for the operations community. The Steering Committee would like to hear from

Re: [NANOG] Alcatel

2008-05-14 Thread Paul Wall
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Dan Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What about Alcatel's MPLS edge routers like the 7x50 products that came from Timetra...anyone have any experience with them? Are they a good product? Garbage, the 7750/7450 are complete junk boxes. Here is why... - For

Re: [NANOG] Alcatel

2008-05-14 Thread Tim Sanderson
Why be neutral? If something is better, then it is better. Whenever I have tried a vendor other than Cisco for a routing or switching solution, I regretted it. Now I use Cisco equipment exclusively except where they do not make that product I need [such as FatPipe MPVPN]. Tim -Original

Re: [NANOG] Alcatel

2008-05-14 Thread Nicolas Antoniello
Ok, I agree with you, may be I didn't explain myself clear: I meant neutral in the sense of relation with each other (i.e. Not being hostile). Nic. Tim Sanderson wrote: Why be neutral? If something is better, then it is better. Whenever I have tried a vendor other than Cisco for a routing

[NANOG] NANOG 43 PGP signing party.

2008-05-14 Thread Joel Jaeggli
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Just a quick note, The thrice annual nanog pgp key signing party will be making an appearance at NANOG 43. The keysigning sessions are going to be during the morning breaks during the general session, and will be location TDB. Monday June

[NANOG] Charter Communications going to sniff traffic for advertising?

2008-05-14 Thread Jake Matthews
Apparently Charter is going to packetsniff its users and use that for commercial purposes. Looks like the only way to somewhat opt out is by getting a cookie set at the below link - which is not only a dumb idea, but still - not even https.

Re: [NANOG] Charter Communications going to sniff traffic for advertising?

2008-05-14 Thread Majdi S. Abbas
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 04:31:57PM -0400, Jake Matthews wrote: Apparently Charter is going to packetsniff its users and use that for commercial purposes. I think you'd find they'd run pretty far afoul of 18 USC 2511 for that, without prior consent (18 USC 2511 2) (c)). I

Re: [NANOG] Charter Communications going to sniff traffic for advertising?

2008-05-14 Thread Jake Matthews
Majdi S. Abbas wrote: On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 04:31:57PM -0400, Jake Matthews wrote: Apparently Charter is going to packetsniff its users and use that for commercial purposes. I think you'd find they'd run pretty far afoul of 18 USC 2511 for that, without prior consent (18

Re: [NANOG] Alcatel

2008-05-14 Thread Aaron Glenn
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 11:11 AM, Nicolas Antoniello [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, I agree with you, may be I didn't explain myself clear: I meant neutral in the sense of relation with each other (i.e. Not being hostile). hopefully we're all big boys and girls and can identify a strong opinion

Re: [NANOG] Alcatel

2008-05-14 Thread John Menerick
I have been using the 7750/7450 in a couple of my production environments. I have to say this: AMAZING. I have had very little problems with these machines. Their support has been amazing. I would recommend these machines to anyone. Beware of the price though. You def. get what you pay for

Re: [NANOG] Charter Communications going to sniff traffic for advertising?

2008-05-14 Thread Patrick Clochesy
I think that a TV station cannot just digitally insert an ad into copyrighted material, as it would be considered a derivative work. .. they have approval and pay to do that. I wonder what the legal implications for a web page would be, I would almost assume they would be the same. -Patrick

Re: [NANOG] Charter Communications going to sniff traffic for advertising?

2008-05-14 Thread Tony Patti
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Regulation could address this, a differentiated service could address this, but this smacks of paying for a service to then get additional ads sent to you. (like everytime you dialed a number into your Skype for Pizza Delivery, they sent you to their paid-Pizza

Re: [NANOG] Alcatel

2008-05-14 Thread Scott Weeks
Top posting due to lengthy email... In my experience from the last year on Alcatel (several years on E and M Juniper before that) you couldn't be more wrong. As far as looking at the config, I back them up to a UNIX box nightly. :1,$ s/exit// Not one of the support guys has ever mentioned