On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Kevin Graham wrote:
Indeed. Capacity upgrades are best gauged by drop rates; bit-rates
without this context are largely useless.
If you're dropping packets, you're already over the cliff. Our job as ISP
is to forward the packets our customers send to us, how is that compat
> So, in summary: Your dropped packet counters are the ones to be looking at
> as a measure of goodput, more than your utilization counters.
Indeed. Capacity upgrades are best gauged by drop rates; bit-rates without
this context are largely useless.
When you're only aware of the RX side though,
Sean,
We had a clipped conversation years ago. I'm no longer with the DIA or the
NSA or the ASA (an old '70's agency)
I've worked at Columbia University in the 80's, the NSA in the 70's, and a
lot of other places in the 90's and beyond. Because of my past, I have to
"lurk"...
However, and you mus
Mehmet Akcin wrote:
If you were to compare brands such as Dell, IBM, HP, Supermicro (or any
other vendor?) which one you would recommend for this kind of approach?
loadbalancer.org picked supermicro and dell. Their Dell option has
better US support. They partnered with local companies in the U
Hey,
Let's say you want to pick a server vendor and you don't necessarily
want to buy from one country and ship it to 50 different locations but
instead buy them locally in each country, and also have local parties
provide support.
If you were to compare brands such as Dell, IBM, HP, Supe
Holmes,David A wrote:
runs with good values on all 3 measures (low RTT, little or no packet
loss, low jitter with small inter-packet arrival variation) can be
deemed not a candidate for bandwidth upgrades. The key to active
Sounds great, unless you don't own the router on the other side of the
All,
I am forwarding this on for Susan Estrada with FirstMile.US, a fellow ISOC'er:
FirstMile.US has formulated a survey for the tech community. The responses
will be complied and sent to the FCC as a formal comment in the reply round
to the FCC's "Comment Sought on Defining Broadband, NBP Public
> do any router vendors provide something akin to hardware latches to
> keep
> track of highest buffer fill levels? poll as frequently/infrequently
> as
> you like...
Without getting into each permutation of a device's architecture, aren't buffer
fills really just buffer drops? There are means t
Back up .. Nairobi Kenya.
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
> On 2009-09-01, at 4:34 PM, James Downs wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 1, 2009, at 1:11 PM, Dominic J. Eidson wrote:
>>
>> It appears to be much more a problem with gmail (the MUA) than gmail
>>> (the MDA).
>>>
>>> Gmail/im
Another approach to collecting buffer utilization is to infer such
utilization from other variables. Active measurement of round trip times
(RTT), packet loss, and jitter on a link-by-link basis is a reliable way
of inferring interface queuing which leads to packet loss. A link that
runs with good
On 2009-09-01, at 4:34 PM, James Downs wrote:
On Sep 1, 2009, at 1:11 PM, Dominic J. Eidson wrote:
It appears to be much more a problem with gmail (the MUA) than
gmail (the MDA).
Gmail/imap appears to be working fine, at least from AUS.
Same thing here in the US. Pop/Imap access remain
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
u...@3.am wrote:
>
> pop.gmail.com is answering on port 995 (pop3 ssl) as well, so I think
> it's safe to assume this is probably a httpd-side problem.
>
> On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Jeff Kell wrote:
>
Google says they have issues with gmail:
http://gm
As a government-employed computer security guy who has never owned or
worn a suit OR tie, I feel entitled to ask... WTF?
Nick Hilliard wrote:
On 01/09/2009 21:01, Jim Wininger wrote:
Anyone else seeing issues with gmail?
Down, definitely down. Call the White House!
It should be clear t
pop.gmail.com is answering on port 995 (pop3 ssl) as well, so I think it's
safe to assume this is probably a httpd-side problem.
On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Jeff Kell wrote:
m...@sabbota.com wrote:
I think it just may be front end services that are impacted. I'm able to
send/receive mail through
access via igoogle via a web client works as well ...
On Sep 1, 2009 4:25pm, Glenn Johnson wrote:
FWIW:
http://gmail.com doesn't work for me either right now, but I've read the
whole "Issues with Gmail" thread and posted this email via GMail POP and
GMail SMTP
glenn.s.john...@g
On Sep 1, 2009, at 1:11 PM, Dominic J. Eidson wrote:
It appears to be much more a problem with gmail (the MUA) than
gmail (the MDA).
Gmail/imap appears to be working fine, at least from AUS.
Same thing here in the US. Pop/Imap access remains solid. I never
use the web interface.
-j
Working on my BB here. Acct with rogers in canada but right now on ATT in Vegas
--Original Message--
From: Jeff Kell
To: m...@sabbota.com
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Issues with Gmail
Sent: Sep 1, 2009 4:25 PM
m...@sabbota.com wrote:
> I think it just may be front end services that ar
On 01/09/2009 21:01, Jim Wininger wrote:
Anyone else seeing issues with gmail?
Down, definitely down. Call the White House!
It should be clear that the root cause here is a lack of regulation, so
could someone phone Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) _urgently_ and advise him
that the only way to
Hummm. Looking through some of my data I found that the domain
NORTHROANOKE.COM resolves to 98.190.204.2 (the first attack vector).
That box is running Microsoft Business Server 2003. NORTHROANOKE.COM
appears to be some kind of assisted living facility in Roanoke, Virginia
(based on whois).
Doe
Seems to work with IMAP/SMTP, but no luck on the web UI in boston.
On Sep 1, 2009, at 4:14 PM, m...@sabbota.com wrote:
I think it just may be front end services that are impacted. I'm
able to send/receive mail through my BB BIS gmail account.
--Original Message--
From: Nathan And
Dominic J. Eidson wrote:
It appears to be much more a problem with gmail (the MUA) than gmail
(the MDA).
Gmail/imap appears to be working fine, at least from AUS.
- d.
On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Kameron Gasso wrote:
Jim Wininger wrote:
Anyone else seeing issues with gmail?
Yep, it's been th
Kameron Gasso wrote:
> Yep, it's been throwing 502 HTTP errors for about 25 minutes now.
> We've been getting a handful of calls from frantic Gmail users
> wondering why we broke their interwebs. ;)
Somehow it's always our fault, isn't it? :P
(Sorry about the earlier top-posting...have been for
FWIW:
http://gmail.com doesn't work for me either right now, but I've read
the whole "Issues with Gmail" thread and posted this email via GMail
POP and GMail SMTP
glenn.s.john...@gmail.com
On Sep 1, 2009, at 1:06 PM, Scott Brown/Clack/ESD wrote:
Gmail and Google Apps are down in our
m...@sabbota.com wrote:
> I think it just may be front end services that are impacted. I'm able to
> send/receive mail through my BB BIS gmail account.
IMAP seems to still be up.
Jeff
From Spint EVD0 I get
Unable to reach Gmail. Please check your internet connection. Trying
to reconnect now…
Marshall
On Sep 1, 2009, at 4:07 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
Jim Wininger wrote:
Anyone else seeing issues with gmail?
More specifically?
--
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Sys
Jim Wininger wrote:
> Anyone else seeing issues with gmail?
http://mail.google.com/support/?hl=en
--
Kevin Stange
Chief Technology Officer
Steadfast Networks
http://steadfast.net
Phone: 312-602-2689 ext. 203 | Fax: 312-602-2688 | Cell: 312-320-5867
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital s
Same here. Complete outage
Nathan Anderson wrote:
> The minute I saw your question, I tabbed over to an open session, and sure
> enough...
>
I think it just may be front end services that are impacted. I'm able to
send/receive mail through my BB BIS gmail account.
--Original Message--
From: Nathan Anderson
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Issues with Gmail
Sent: Sep 1, 2009 2:05 PM
The minute I saw your question, I tabbed o
Yup, it's down.
http://thenextweb.com/2009/09/01/google-experiencing-downtime-world/#
http://www.google.com/appsstatus#hl=en
Been down for the past twenty minutes or so for me in Chapel Hill, NC.
Other Google services seem to be working fine.
Shaddi
On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:01:46 -0400, Jim Wini
It appears to be much more a problem with gmail (the MUA) than gmail (the
MDA).
Gmail/imap appears to be working fine, at least from AUS.
- d.
On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Kameron Gasso wrote:
Jim Wininger wrote:
Anyone else seeing issues with gmail?
Yep, it's been throwing 502 HTTP errors for
Gmail and Google Apps are down in our neck of the woods.
--
Scott
From: Jim Wininger
Jim Wininger wrote:
Anyone else seeing issues with gmail?
More specifically?
--
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems
Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/
Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670
Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
The minute I saw your question, I tabbed over to an open session, and sure
enough...
--
Nathan Anderson
First Step Internet, LLC
nath...@fsr.com
-Original Message-
From: Jim Wininger [mailto:jwinin...@indianafiber.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 1:02 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subje
Jim Wininger wrote:
> Anyone else seeing issues with gmail?
Yep, it's been throwing 502 HTTP errors for about 25 minutes now. We've
been getting a handful of calls from frantic Gmail users wondering why
we broke their interwebs. ;)
--
Kameron Gasso | Senior Systems Administrator | visp.net
Dire
Yes, I'm seeing errors like:
Google
Error
Server Error
The server encountered a temporary error and could not complete your
request.
Please try again in 30 seconds.
r
Jim Wininger wrote:
Anyone else seeing issues with gmail?
Full gmail outage as per the status page
EOM
--Original Message--
From: Jim Wininger
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Issues with Gmail
Sent: Sep 1, 2009 13:01
Anyone else seeing issues with gmail?
--
Jim Wininger
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Anyone else seeing issues with gmail?
--
Jim Wininger
Issues with gmail.com
here in DC
Winn Johnston
From: u...@3.am [...@3.am]
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 3:28 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: POP3 DoS attacks and mailanyone.net?
For the first time since I can remember, my POP3 server was effectively
For the first time since I can remember, my POP3 server was effectively
shut down by too many simultaneous connections today. The first fix I
tried was to raise the number of connections from the default 40 to 100,
but the problem soon returned.
I finally ipfw'd off the offending IP (98.190
On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 11:55:45AM +0100, Paul Jakma wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Aug 2009, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> >In order to get a really good idea of what's going on at a microburst
> >level, you would need to poll as often as it takes to fill the buffer
> >of the port in question. This is not feasible
If anyone from Qwest with site access to 1500 Eckington is around please reply
to me privately. Have an urgent issue.
-Vin
On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:12:33 +1000
Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> In message <4a9c45d2.1000...@brightok.net>, Jack Bates writes:
> > na...@wbsconnect.com wrote:
> > > Any and all nefarious activity alleged in this lawsuit was
> > > conducted by a c
> > ustomer, of a customer, of a customer yet the host
On Sun, 30 Aug 2009, Nick Hilliard wrote:
In order to get a really good idea of what's going on at a
microburst level, you would need to poll as often as it takes to
fill the buffer of the port in question. This is not feasible in
the general case, which is why we resort to hacks like QoS to
43 matches
Mail list logo
