On 2/25/10 10:12 PM, deles...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe I'm wrong on this, and I'm not a mailadmin anywhere nor have I been or
pretended to have been in the past. But I'm pretty sure FB only sends you
mail based on the prefrences you choose, and I know this is the answer you
where given so
On Mar 4, 2010, at 8:13 AM, Sean Donelan wrote:
On Wed, 3 Mar 2010, Antonio Querubin wrote:
On Wed, 3 Mar 2010, Sean Donelan wrote:
Are there any common locations in Alaska where multiple local ISPs exchange
traffic, either transit or peering? Or is Seattle the closest exchange
point
pfsense or Vyatta on Intel dual core hardware with decent network cards
will save you a ton of $$$ and run thousands of tunnels.
On 3/3/2010 7:01 PM, Paul Wall wrote:
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Leslieles...@craigslist.org wrote:
We're currently looking for a small lt2p/pptp
On Mar 4, 2010, at 8:13 AM, Sean Donelan wrote:
On Wed, 3 Mar 2010, Antonio Querubin wrote:
On Wed, 3 Mar 2010, Sean Donelan wrote:
Are there any common locations in Alaska where multiple local ISPs
exchange traffic, either transit or peering? Or is Seattle the closest
exchange point for
On 3/4/10 8:57 AM, Jay Hanke jha...@myclearwave.net wrote:
snip
We've seen the same issues in Minnesota. Locally referred to as the Chicago
Problem. Adding on to point 3, there is also a lack of neutral facilities
with a sufficient amount of traffic to justify the next carrier connecting.
In
On 2010-03-03, at 18:51, Bill Woodcock wrote:
On Mar 3, 2010, at 3:13 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
Are there any common locations in Alaska where multiple local ISPs exchange
traffic, either transit or peering? Or is Seattle the closest exchange
point for Alaska ISPs?
PCH doesn't know of
On 3/4/10 8:57 AM, Jay Hanke jha...@myclearwave.net wrote:
snip
We've seen the same issues in Minnesota. Locally referred to as the
Chicago
. Problem. Adding on to point 3, there is also a lack of neutral
facilities
with a sufficient amount of traffic to justify the next carrier
connecting.
We have very similar issues in Kansas City. A couple years ago we set up a
local exchange point but it's had issues gaining traction due to a lack of
understanding more than anything else. In these smaller markets people have
a hard time understanding how connecting to a competitor benefits
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Jorge Amodio jmamo...@gmail.com wrote:
By the virtue of CCITT X.666 Hyperspace Transport Protocol your
messages have been transported within different space-time
coordinates, best guess check your PC Real Time Clock.
When working with timezones I always find
On Mar 4, 2010, at 10:33 AM, Jay Hanke wrote:
From the looks of the link it looks like there is a bit of traction at the
MadIX. One of the other interested carriers has talked to the University of
MN and they showed some interest in participating. The trick is getting the
first couple of
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 10:41:38 CST, Aaron Wendel said:
We have very similar issues in Kansas City. A couple years ago we set up a
local exchange point but it's had issues gaining traction due to a lack of
understanding more than anything else. In these smaller markets people have
a hard time
Let me preface this by saying that I'm not a full time network admin,
but we're a small company and I'm the only one handling this. Our
budget is also not huge, but we're at the point where extended downtime
would cost us enough money that we can spend some money to fix the problem.
Here's
On Mar 4, 2010, at 12:13 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 10:41:38 CST, Aaron Wendel said:
We have very similar issues in Kansas City. A couple years ago we set up a
local exchange point but it's had issues gaining traction due to a lack of
understanding more than
If you want to keep it cheap, roll out another Quagga edge - one to each
peer. Drop default into OSPF from both edges, iBGP over a GE between them.
If one toasts you'll only lose half your routes for 1s-ish, or however long
you set your OSPF keepalives.
While you're at it, add extra fans and run
[snip]
Does anybody have some numbers they're able to share? In the two small
ISPs
in the boonies scenario, *is* there enough cross traffic to make an
interconnect worth it? (I'd expect that gaming/IM/email across town to a
friend
on The Other ISP would dominate here?) Or are both
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
Or at the cogent website ($4/meg) do the cost justify peering anymore?
Personally I'd rather pay $10 for something that works, than $4 for
something that doesn't
sc...@zaphod:~$ telnet www.cogentco.com 80
Trying
Joe Abley wrote:
On 2010-03-03, at 18:51, Bill Woodcock wrote:
On Mar 3, 2010, at 3:13 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
Are there any common locations in Alaska where multiple local ISPs exchange
traffic, either transit or peering? Or is Seattle the closest exchange
point for Alaska
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Alex Thurlow wrote:
2. Buy a Cisco/Juniper/whatever and then have the Quagga box as backup.
3. I have a 6500 behind the router that's just doing switching. Could I have
something switch that to static route all traffic to one of my providers if
something happened to the
Anyone have any real-world experience with Ubiquti's MIMO PTP equipment?
We're looking to shoot data at distances of a few hundred feet up to 2-3
miles. Reliability? Latency? Other issues? Any feedback is appreciated.
http://www.ubnt.com/nanobridge
Thanks!
Todd
There is a wealth of information in Ubiquti's forums:
http://ubnt.com/forum/
Jon
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:44 PM, Todd Mueller t...@velocitytelephone.com wrote:
Anyone have any real-world experience with Ubiquti's MIMO PTP equipment?
We're looking to shoot data at distances of a few hundred
On Mar 4, 2010, at 1:44 PM, Todd Mueller wrote:
Anyone have any real-world experience with Ubiquti's MIMO PTP equipment?
We're looking to shoot data at distances of a few hundred feet up to 2-3
miles. Reliability? Latency? Other issues? Any feedback is appreciated.
So to start off, I'm new to following this list so if these points have
already been beaten into the ground, feel free to tell me to shut up.
So two things I wonder about the preservation of current IP4 space and
delaying IP6 are:
1.Why don't providers use /31 addresses for P2P
On Mar 4, 2010, at 1:52 PM, Thomas Magill wrote:
1.Why don't providers use /31 addresses for P2P links? This
works fine per rfc 3021 but nobody seems to believe it or use it. Are
there any major manufacturers out there that do not support it?
Some vendors inconsistently support
On 3/4/10 10:52 AM, Thomas Magill wrote:
So to start off, I'm new to following this list so if these points have
already been beaten into the ground, feel free to tell me to shut up.
So two things I wonder about the preservation of current IP4 space and
delaying IP6 are:
1.
1.Why don't providers use /31 addresses for P2P links? This
works fine per rfc 3021 but nobody seems to believe it or use it. Are
there any major manufacturers out there that do not support it?
99.999% of my customers are on /32 anyway. I could probably get a handfull of
addresses
On 03/04/2010 10:52 AM, Thomas Magill wrote:
2. Longer than /24 prefixes in global BGP table. The most obvious
answer is that some hardware may not handle it... How is that hardware
going to handle an IP6 table then? I have had several occasions where
functionally I needed to
If I leave all boxes checked to send mail/notices/app requests to
everyone in my list, or if I give FB my gmail password to pull all my
contacts and send them an invite, its pure @ my request, sure FB is
happy I do it, but it is no way spam. Its like calling 5 ICMP packets
a DDoS.
-jim
On Thu,
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Thomas Magill
tmag...@providecommerce.com wrote:
1. Why don't providers use /31 addresses for P2P links? This
works fine per rfc 3021 but nobody seems to believe it or use it. Are
there any major manufacturers out there that do not support it?
Because
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 03:16:25PM -0400, jim deleskie wrote:
If I leave all boxes checked to send mail/notices/app requests to
everyone in my list, or if I give FB my gmail password to pull all my
contacts and send them an invite, its pure @ my request, sure FB is
happy I do it, but it is no
I'm not going to both on this thread anymore.. waste of time. Sorry
for the bulk mail/spam generated by my replies to nanog.
I'll stop feeding the trolls now.
-jim
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Rich Kulawiec r...@gsp.org wrote:
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 03:16:25PM -0400, jim deleskie wrote:
On 3/4/2010 1:16 PM, jim deleskie wrote:
If I leave all boxes checked to send mail/notices/app requests to
everyone in my list, or if I give FB my gmail password to pull all my
contacts and send them an invite, its pure @ my request, sure FB is
happy I do it, but it is no way spam. Its like
On 3/4/2010 1:37 PM, jim deleskie wrote:
I'm not going to both on this thread anymore.. waste of time. Sorry
for the bulk mail/spam generated by my replies to nanog.
I'll stop feeding the trolls now.
Nice recovery attempt for a lost cause.
--
Government big enough to supply everything you
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Thomas Magill wrote:
1.Why don't providers use /31 addresses for P2P links? This
works fine per rfc 3021 but nobody seems to believe it or use it. Are
there any major manufacturers out there that do not support it?
2. Longer than /24 prefixes in global BGP
On Thu, March 4, 2010 3:19 am, Jay Hennigan wrote:
Facebook, like many similar sites, rather aggressively requests that its
users supply their email credentials so that the site can invite their
contacts. All of them. Every stinkin' email address they can mine.
Also, Facebook sends mail
Hello,
I apologize if this is an unusual topic but I would like to know what this
expert community thinks about this issue:
We have noticed that a number of Cisco appliances we have recently purchased
and paid (AS NEW), are being shipped as if they have been already
used/refurbished. In
Its like calling 5 ICMP packets a DDoS.
Okay .. here's a fun exercise (granted, as a .edu, the FB stats are
statistically over-represented) .. this is yesterday.
total email : 1,594,435
from @*facebook* : 17,274 (1.1%)
Taken as a total of *legitimate* email that got through the spam
If you are getting Cisco hardware with configs on it or crashfiles, etc. Then
no it is NOT new equipment. Who are you buying from? Are they a Gold partner
on Cisco's partner locator? If not, then I have seen some seedy things, and of
course i have seen seedy things with Gold partners too, I
Todd Mueller t...@velocitytelephone.com wrote on 03/04/2010 10:44:01
AM:
From: Todd Mueller t...@velocitytelephone.com
To:
Date: 03/04/2010 10:44 AM
Subject: Ubiquti NanobridgeM
Anyone have any real-world experience with Ubiquti's MIMO PTP equipment?
We're looking to shoot data at
Don't deploy the equipment, demand a refund, and report the reseller to Cisco.
I agree completely with Brian - find a good Cisco partner and stick with them.
Also, you can't legally buy used Cisco equipment and use the operating system.
You can buy the equipment but the OS is absolutely
On Mar 4, 2010, at 1:30 PM, William Herrin wrote:
Because we expect far fewer end users to multihome tomorrow than do today?
Regards,
Bill Herrin
I would suggest that the ratio of folks that will multihome under IPv6 versus
those that won't will get smaller. I base that on an assumption
If you are getting Cisco hardware with configs on ... Then no it is NOT new
equipment.
That is not entirely true. Many Cisco models arrive with a default
configuration - private IP addresses and all. All the new Cisco ASA's I've seen
were this way.
--
Tim Sanderson
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Stan Barber s...@academ.com wrote:
On Mar 4, 2010, at 1:30 PM, William Herrin wrote:
Because we expect far fewer end users to multihome tomorrow than do today?
I would suggest that the ratio of folks that will multihome under IPv6
versus those that won't will
Tim Sanderson wrote:
That is not entirely true. Many Cisco models arrive with a default
configuration - private IP addresses and all. All the new Cisco ASA's I've
seen were this way.
Ditto on that. Of about 12 ASA 5505s and 5510s I've deployed in the last year,
only one didn't come with a
So if one were to purchase equipment, which is explicitly sold as
Refurbished from, say www.impulsetech.us and they were to offer Smartnet
on it, there is no guarantee that even if you paid for it, that Cisco would
fulfil their support contract?
Regards,
Ken
On 4 March 2010 15:22, Adcock, Matt
The 7750 and 7450 are really good products. We were a pure Cisco shop
about three years ago and then started using the 7750. We are very
happy with the product.
If you have any questions you can contact me off list.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 4, 2010, at 5:07 PM, Chris Wallace
--- li...@iamchriswallace.com wrote:
I am hoping to get some peoples opinions on Alcatel-Lucent routers. We are
looking at the 7750 SR line and the 7450 ESS line. We are currently a Cisco
shop but these would be deployed in a completely new network delivering mostly
MPLS based services and
According to previous conversations with my Cisco rep the answer is no - Cisco
won't support it. I'm blind copying him on this and will pass on his response.
Thanks,
Matt
From: Ken Gilmour [mailto:ken.gilm...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thu 3/4/2010 4:17 PM
To: Adcock,
--- li...@iamchriswallace.com wrote:
I am hoping to get some peoples opinions on Alcatel-Lucent routers. We are
looking at the 7750 SR line and the 7450 ESS line. We are currently a Cisco
shop but these would be deployed in a completely new network delivering mostly
MPLS based services and
Would anyone here know of any 24x7 contact at APNIC? The TXT records
indicate they just signed the reverse zone for 203.in-addr.arpa today, and
the delegations for our IP blocks disappeared when they did; and the helpdesk is
currently not answering the phones:
On Fri, March 5, 2010 11:37 am, Matthew Petach wrote:
Would anyone here know of any 24x7 contact at APNIC? The TXT records
indicate they just signed the reverse zone for 203.in-addr.arpa today, and
the delegations for our IP blocks disappeared when they did; and the
helpdesk is
currently not
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Matthew Petach wrote:
Would anyone here know of any 24x7 contact at APNIC? The TXT records
indicate they just signed the reverse zone for 203.in-addr.arpa today, and
the delegations for our IP blocks disappeared when they did; and the
helpdesk is
In message 63ac96a51003041437o3fe7ddc7i78acae067263a...@mail.gmail.com, Matth
ew Petach writes:
Would anyone here know of any 24x7 contact at APNIC? The TXT records
indicate they just signed the reverse zone for 203.in-addr.arpa today, and
the delegations for our IP blocks disappeared when
Very good routers. We have been using them for several years now. Very
solid product, and very easy to setup services: ie vprn/ vpls/ epipe,
etc.
The qos on the box is very scalable. I could talk more about them off
line with you or discuss more over phone.
On Mar 4, 2010, at 5:22
I'll have to second everything everyone is saying. Absolutely pleased
with everything about them. Just wish I had more 7750s instead of
7450s.
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Craig cvulja...@gmail.com wrote:
Very good routers. We have been using them for several years now. Very solid
product,
Thanks for the feedback. Let me clarify a few things regarding issues that this
thread has addressed so far:
A) Pre-existing configs: What Tim and Joe mentioned is apparently correct. I
was on phone with a few Cisco tech-reps earlier today and they told me that
since version 8.2, they have
Step #2.
Retain legal counsel or talk to general counsel.
On Mar 4, 2010, at 4:22 PM, Adcock, Matt [HISNA] wrote:
Don't deploy the equipment, demand a refund, and report the reseller to
Cisco. I agree completely with Brian - find a good Cisco partner and stick
with them. Also, you
On Mar 4, 2010, at 6:16 PM, Kaveh . wrote:
Thanks for the feedback. Let me clarify a few things regarding issues that
this thread has addressed so far:
A) Pre-existing configs: What Tim and Joe mentioned is apparently correct. I
was on phone with a few Cisco tech-reps earlier today and
On 3/4/2010 2:35 PM, Dean Anderson wrote:
When there are 100 million facebook organizations, perhaps your
comparison will be appropriate. But even then, only if your friends
participate in all 100 million. Getting the occasional facebook,
linkedin, and plaxo invitation from your friends is
Ben,
Here is the output of # dir command - It includes all the files on disk0:/
ciscoasa# dir
Directory of disk0:/
134-rwx 1627545608:43:56 Jul 15 2009 asa821-k8.bin
135-rwx 1134830010:46:44 Jul 15 2009 asdm-621.bin
136-rwx 20480 00:00:00 Jan 01 1980
On 3/4/10 4:23 PM, Ben Carleton wrote:
Kaveh:
I can confirm with absolute certainty that fcsk is a Unix utility for
determining if a hard disk is failing and optionally attempting a
recovery. I have never heard of such output files, though. How big
are they? If they are tiny, they could just
On 3/4/2010 3:14 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:35:47 EST, Dean Anderson said:
lots of whining about it's not a DDoS/spam elided.
My To: list:
To: jim deleskie deles...@gmail.com Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Your To: list:
To: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu, Shon Elliott
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 16:46 -0700, Brielle Bruns wrote:
fsck is not just for failing hard drives. fsck is used any time you
want to check a disk (may it be ssd, optical, magnetic) for any kind of
errors or inconsistencies. It's a standard part of any UNIX toolkit.
On Linux systems with
--- mirot...@gmail.com wrote:
I'll have to second everything everyone is saying. Absolutely pleased
with everything about them. Just wish I had more 7750s instead of
7450s.
--
That reminds me of one thing that adds more complexity. We carry our
--- af...@hotmail.com wrote:
B) What Cisco reps could NOT explain was the existence of a number of
FSCK000#.REC files on these appliances. To be more specific each of ASAs in
question contains 4 extra files: FSCK.REC, FSCK0001.REC, FSCK0002.REC,
FSCK0003.REC). I said 'extra' because I
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 18:16:01 -0500, Kaveh . af...@hotmail.com wrote:
A) Pre-existing configs: What Tim and Joe mentioned is apparently
correct. I was on phone with a few Cisco tech-reps earlier today and
they told me that since version 8.2, they have been shipping ASAs with a
default
On 3/4/2010 16:16, Ricky Beam wrote:
Not necessarily. I've seen a lot of boxes that appear to have come
direct from Cisco, however, I know they came from a wholesaler's
warehouse. (only one came direct from Cisco. from the factory in Malaysia.)
A lot of counterfeits come direct from the
The evesdroppring reported below on csuohio.edu end-users Email is a
prima facie violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.
I'm not sure why this got under your skin so badly, but aggregate
statistics != eavesdropping. The SPAM appliance vendor software gathers
these
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 19:16 -0500, Ricky Beam wrote:
It's a DOS FAT
filesystem.
h. hmm. FAT. Ah well, there must be a reason I guess.
Not exactly what I'd choose for a high security snort box ;)
But, horses for courses I suppose.
Yes, as others say, good idea to check the s/n's
That's very true. They ship some out one door for Cisco and some out another
door for gray/black market.
One other thing to note - the discounts shown on the Web site previously
mentioned here are not that greater than the ones I know Cisco gives many
companies. Is it really worth taking a
On Mar 4, 2010, at 6:16 PM, Kaveh . wrote:
Thanks for the feedback. Let me clarify a few things regarding issues that
this thread has addressed so far:
A) Pre-existing configs: What Tim and Joe mentioned is apparently correct. I
was on phone with a few Cisco tech-reps earlier today and
On most transactions, good reputable cisco partners are making about 3% on the
front end. Most good partners make their money off services, and they hire
highly trained engineers to deliver projects. Cisco hardware is like any other
retail business, there is not deep margins. So trying to
Folks, I know that IPv4 is down to bread crumbs.
That's why I'm ready for IPv6 and hopefully the rest of you are or will be soon.
However, let's consider how much address space is saved by going from /30 to /31
on every point-to-point link in the internet...
Let's assume that there are ~1
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 19:42:39 EST, Michael Holstein said:
The evesdroppring reported below on csuohio.edu end-users Email is a
prima facie violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.
I'm not sure why this got under your skin so badly, but aggregate
statistics !=
On 05/03/2010, at 12:25 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
The most we could achieve would be to extend IPv4 freepool lifespan
by roughly 26 days. Given the amount of effort sqeezing useful
addresses out of such a conversion would require, I proffer that
such effort is better spent moving towards IPv6
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 09:55:26 +0800, Owen DeLong said:
So, assuming:
1. There are actually 8 million point to point links in the
internet
2. All of them are currently /30s
3. Absolutely optimum use of addresses for all those links
4. All of them
The most we could achieve would be to extend IPv4 freepool lifespan
by roughly 26 days. Given the amount of effort sqeezing useful
addresses out of such a conversion would require, I proffer that
such effort is better spent moving towards IPv6 dual stack on your
networks.
A /8 sounded like a
On 2010.03.04 20:55, Owen DeLong wrote:
Folks, I know that IPv4 is down to bread crumbs.
That's why I'm ready for IPv6 and hopefully the rest of you are or will be
soon.
However, let's consider how much address space is saved by going from /30 to
/31
on every point-to-point link in the
We have noticed that a number of Cisco appliances we have recently purchased
and paid (AS NEW), are being shipped as if they have been already
used/refurbished. In other words, several times we have seen brand new Cisco
hardware, out of the box, that has pre-existing configuration
On 2010.03.04 16:53, William Herrin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Stan Barber s...@academ.com wrote:
On Mar 4, 2010, at 1:30 PM, William Herrin wrote:
Because we expect far fewer end users to multihome tomorrow than do today?
I would suggest that the ratio of folks that will
On 2010.03.04 22:26, Steve Bertrand wrote:
On 2010.03.04 16:53, William Herrin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Stan Barber s...@academ.com wrote:
On Mar 4, 2010, at 1:30 PM, William Herrin wrote:
Because we expect far fewer end users to multihome tomorrow than do today?
I would
On Mar 4, 2010, at 2:30 PM, William Herrin wrote:
Because we expect far fewer end users to multihome tomorrow than do today?
We do?
Why do we expect this?
Regards,
-drc
On Mar 4, 2010, at 9:41 PM, Thomas Magill wrote:
The most we could achieve would be to extend IPv4 freepool lifespan
by roughly 26 days. Given the amount of effort sqeezing useful
addresses out of such a conversion would require, I proffer that
such effort is better spent moving towards IPv6
On 05/03/2010, at 2:50 PM, David Conrad wrote:
When the IPv4 free pool is exhausted, I have a sneaking suspicion you'll
quickly find that reclaiming pretty much any IPv4 space will quickly become
worth the effort.
Only to the extent that the cost of IPv6 migration exceeds the cost
of
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 11:15 PM, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
On Mar 4, 2010, at 2:30 PM, William Herrin wrote:
Because we expect far fewer end users to multihome tomorrow than do today?
We do?
yea, it doesn't seem to follow based on what I'd seen at a large
network provider, more
Hi. it's been handled, so sorry for a bit of delay, which is due to the
APNIC/Apricot meeting going on in KL.
This problem was caused by missing WHOIS domain objects.
APNIC staff are helping Matthew to resolve the problem.
-George
On 05/03/2010, at 6:37 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:
Would
On 03/04/2010 06:41 PM, Thomas Magill wrote:
I've been on board with rolling out IP6 but the SPs I've talked to are
all '...about to start trying to possibly think about extending a beta
to a small portion of some customers' or something along those lines.
This led me to believe that SPs are
On Mar 5, 2010, at 1:57 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
On 03/04/2010 06:41 PM, Thomas Magill wrote:
I've been on board with rolling out IP6 but the SPs I've talked to are
all '...about to start trying to possibly think about extending a beta
to a small portion of some customers' or something
Dean,
I started the thread with the original question, and after not hearing a
suitable response from either Spamcop or someone from the networking side of
Facebook, I gave up on this thread when people like Michelle started chiming in
their opinion. This thread wasn't meant to be an
88 matches
Mail list logo
