James Hess wrote:
> Auto MDI/MDI-X is an optional feature in the 1000BaseT standard.
Can someone please explain how can the whole MDI vs. MDI-X distinction
be meaningful at all for 1000BaseT? I thought they run 250 Mbps on each
of the 4 pairs in both directions using some form of echo-cancelli
Along with bpduguard, Cisco switches also continue to look for loops
with loopguard. They continuously look for the Keepalive packets that
they send out each port. So as long as you have not turned off STP all
together on the port, you will be fine.
On 3/26/10 6:21 PM, Matthew Huff wrote:
> Bpdugu
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> So basically, the problem is the core switches implement a proprietary
> loop-prevention protocol that sends "beacon" frames out every 500ms,
> and if a certain number of these special frames come back (exceeds
--> loop first, but I'm beginn
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 08:29:52PM -0500, James Hess wrote:
> Most all switch manufacturers provide some type of port security
> feature that allows an end-user connection port to automatically be
> disabled and require admin intervention to re-activate, if the number
> of MAC addresses exceed a
Thanks to those who replied to offer experience and input on working with ARIN.
You've given me some helpful information to pass along to our legal team when
considering the RSA.
Cheers!
-JC
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Matthew Huff wrote:
> Bpduguard if running cisco. set all the switch ports to bpduguard or enable
> it globally
Bpduguarding a cool idea, and not a bad protective measure, if running
that vendor's equipment, but it still allows a possibly large
disruption for
or reboot is problematic in many cases. Many systems drop link-state during
reboot for a long-enough period that the bridge-port restarts its spanning tree
process, making results across reboots consistently bad.
Interesting; Windows tends to bring link up well-prior to the login
dialogue an
Hello Jeremy -
So let's see if I can clarify some of your questions:
- ARIN doesn't generally modify the terms of the RSA agreement
(this is a fairness issue so that all address holders are
under similar terms to the extent possible)
- We've actually revised the RSA on several
On Mar 26, 2010, at 4:33 PM, Mark Foster wrote:
>
>> "Desktop" switches. You know, those 4 or 5 port Gigabit Ethernet
>> switches. Apparently, many of them don't do any kind of STP at all.
>> Recommendations on ones that do STP?
>
> If the network fabric you're on is important enough to cause
On Mar 26, 2010, at 7:48 PM, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> If you have 2 network jacks next to each other in a conference room,
> do they each get configured as a separate "user"?
Indeed, most of the buildings have a 'community room' like that -- but all the
deployed ports (unless ordered differentl
Registration is now open for the 49th NANOG meeting, to be held in San
Francisco on June 13-16, 2010 and hosted by Netflix.
The early registration price is $450, so register now to get the best
value!
Hotel reservations are also available. The group rate expires on May
24, 2010, or when th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Greetings Owen,
The only problem is that there will be a number of devices that the
eyeballs like that won't ever see an IPv6 packet (specifically thinking about
the CE devices in the home). As such, it won't be IPv6 only, it will be
dual-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
yes; no; without reservation; really, why would a competent lawyer have any
problems accepting that contract :) ?
On 27 Mar 2010, at 08.45 , Jeremy Charles wrote:
> Has anyone here had their legal department balk at the legal agreement that
> ARIN w
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 06:56:15PM -0400, Anton Kapela wrote:
> In general, I avoid the potential for layer2 loops to any
> user-accesible layer2 ports in a manner that many edge network and
> broadband providers may find familiar -- vlan per user, tail, port,
> etc. -- aggregated in a hierarchi
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 14:24:21 +0100
Jeroen Massar wrote:
> InterNetX - Lutz Muehlig wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > has someone experience in anycast ipv4 networks (to support DNS)?
>
> "Never been done" "Dangerous" "TCP does not work" etc etc etc.
>
> I assume quite a number of people know how to do
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 03:33:56PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Switches that support STP?
Yes, "soho" or "desktop" switches I mean. Apparently Netgear GS105's
do not do STP at all, at least they don't claim to.
> There are switches that have STP protection such that they are
> portfast until th
"Desktop" switches. You know, those 4 or 5 port Gigabit Ethernet
switches. Apparently, many of them don't do any kind of STP at all.
Recommendations on ones that do STP?
If the network fabric you're on is important enough to cause you grief in
the event of a STP event, you shouldn't be fiel
Hi Chuck,
> Anyone have suggestions on Ethernet LAN loop-prevention? With the
In general, I avoid the potential for layer2 loops to any user-accesible layer2
ports in a manner that many edge network and broadband providers may find
familiar -- vlan per user, tail, port, etc. -- aggregated in
Switches that support STP?
There are switches that have STP protection such that they are
portfast until they see an inbound BPDU and then revert to
spanning tree on that port (it blocks, listens, learns, then
forwards if appropriate).
The only draw-back to such a configuration I am aware of is
t
Bpduguard if running cisco.
set all the switch ports to bpduguard or enable it globally
-Original Message-
From: Chuck Anderson [mailto:c...@wpi.edu]
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 6:09 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Auto MDI/MDI-X + conference rooms + bored == loop
Anyone have suggest
Disable the jacks all together and go wireless? Have them put in a trouble
ticket if they absolutely need a port activated in a conference room for a
one-time meeting.
-Mike
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> Anyone have suggestions on Ethernet LAN loop-prevention? Wit
Anyone have suggestions on Ethernet LAN loop-prevention? With the
advent of Auto MDI/MDI-X ports on switches, it seems way too easy to
accidentally or maliciously create loops between network jacks. We
have bored or inattentive people plugging in patch cords between
adjacent network jacks. S
This report has been generated at Fri Mar 26 21:11:54 2010 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date
BGP Update Report
Interval: 18-Mar-10 -to- 25-Mar-10 (7 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS30890 50203 3.6% 113.6 -- EVOLVA Evolva Telecom s.r.l.
2 - AS845230728 2.
I am aware of a general case where the RSA has been modified. As presented, the
RSA is
targeted toward US-based commercial & not-for-profit entities. If you are a
soveriegn
in the ARIN region or are a state government in the US, I beleive there is some
wiggle-room
for changing liability and ve
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Jeremy Charles wrote:
> Has anyone here had their legal department balk at the legal
> agreement that ARIN wants you to sign when you get things
> like an AS number or an IP block?
Yes.
> Any luck in negotiating with ARIN?
No.
> The agreement has language at th
Don't know for sure but I doubt it. The whole point is that everyone plays
by the same set of rules and opening up the RSA for "negotiation" would
defeat that purpose.
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Charles [mailto:jchar...@epic.com]
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 4:46 PM
To: nanog@nano
doesn't hurt to ask arin's legal folks, they work for you (kinda).
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Jeremy Charles wrote:
> Has anyone here had their legal department balk at the legal agreement that
> ARIN wants you to sign when you get things like an AS number or an IP block?
> Any luck in n
Dave,
It's clear we disagree about what will happen in an obviously
unpredictable future. I think that eyeball networks will deploy IPv6
rapidly due to the high costs of attempting to continue to hack IPv4.
You believe that something else will happen. In time, we will see
which of us turns
Has anyone here had their legal department balk at the legal agreement that
ARIN wants you to sign when you get things like an AS number or an IP block?
Any luck in negotiating with ARIN?
The agreement has language at the top saying that ARIN doesn't accept
modifications, but our legal team is
On Friday 26 March 2010 02:10:45 pm Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <201003261157.23601.lo...@pari.edu>, Lamar Owen writes:
> > "Hey, great presentation. Compelling arguments. But I have one
> > question: will our existing gear that's not yet fully depreciated handle
> > it? No?
> What percen
On Friday 26 March 2010 01:31:33 pm Owen DeLong wrote:
> The other key point to take away... If your engineer is telling you that
> your ISP isn't ready yet, it's time for you to give your engineer your
> backing at telling the ISP that IPv6 is a requirement for contract
> renewal.
At least right
On 3/25/2010 7:03 AM, Dave Hart wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 12:51 UTC, Kyle Bader wrote:
>> Can anyone recommend a solid clock souce (stratum 0) that's not overly
>> expensive?
>
> All the options I'm aware of have no prices posted, sadly. For me,
> that means "forget it, you don't want to
On 3/26/2010 1:31 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> On Mar 26, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
>
> You should ask your server guy how he plans to talk to your core
> stakeholders when they can't get IPv4 any more.
Then, at that time, both he and his key stakeholders will experience
pain while they
And a followup I've got someone in their mail group and we're working on
clearing up the issue.
Thank you everyone for the replies and help.
__
Eric Esslinger
Information Services Manager - Fayetteville Public Utilities
http://www.fpu-tn.com/
(931)433-1522 ext 165
> --
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net
For historical data, please see http://thyme.apnic.net.
If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith .
Routing
Good afternoon, I'm looking for some cluefull help from someone at Charter.
I've got a static IP customer unable to deliver mail to charter.net customers
and I can get no help trying to get in through the 'front door' of tech
support. I've been forwarded to the residential spanish technicians 3
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 11:35:37 EDT, "Justin M. Streiner" said:
I don't see TDM going away entirely any time soon because it still comes
in handy for things like out-of-band management, etc, plus nowadays there
is lots of TDM gear on the seconda
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 11:35:37 EDT, "Justin M. Streiner" said:
> I don't see TDM going away entirely any time soon because it still comes
> in handy for things like out-of-band management, etc, plus nowadays there
> is lots of TDM gear on the secondary market that can be picked up
> dirt-cheap.
In message <201003261157.23601.lo...@pari.edu>, Lamar Owen writes:
> On Wednesday 10 March 2010 09:46:19 pm Jim Burwell wrote:
> > On 3/10/2010 16:57, Owen DeLong wrote:
> > > The target really needs to be the CxOs and the management,
> > > especially in places where there is content facing the ge
> Same is true of MIPS and PowerPC, though. There are far more MIPS chips in
> routers than ever saw desktop use in SGI workstations; and while it might take
> a little while for Cisco's PowerPC driven routers' CPU's to outnumber all the
> PowerMacs our there, one day it will happen.
MIPS are now
On Mar 26, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
On Wednesday 10 March 2010 09:46:19 pm Jim Burwell wrote:
On 3/10/2010 16:57, Owen DeLong wrote:
The target really needs to be the CxOs and the management,
especially in places where there is content facing the general
public. Fortunately, Googl
On 03/26/2010 10:16 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> On Mar 26, 2010, at 8:45 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday 24 March 2010 05:24:39 pm Michael Dillon wrote:
>>> For comparison look at the z-80 CPU which powered the early desktop
>>> computers. When the IBM PC came out, people thought that th
On Mar 26, 2010, at 8:45 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 05:24:39 pm Michael Dillon wrote:
For comparison look at the z-80 CPU which powered the early desktop
computers. When the IBM PC came out, people thought that the Intel
8086
would make the Z-80 obsolete. But it didn't.
On 2010-03-26, at 10:04, Owen DeLong wrote:
> It doesn't require an unstable routing table. There is a small set of
> locations that could hit routers with multipath that may "balance"
> the anycast packets down divergent paths.
>
> Essentially, these are the topological midpoints between any t
On Mar 26, 2010, at 6:55 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Max Larson Henry wrote:
has someone experience in anycast ipv4 networks (to support DNS)?
"Never been done" "Dangerous" "TCP does not work" etc etc etc.
- Yes but as for DNS, anycast is essentially used for user requests
(UDP) not to p
On 2010-03-26, at 06:40, Max Larson Henry wrote:
>>> has someone experience in anycast ipv4 networks (to support DNS)?
>>
>> "Never been done" "Dangerous" "TCP does not work" etc etc etc.
>
> - Yes but as for DNS, anycast is essentially used for user requests (UDP)
> not to perform zone transfe
On Mar 26, 2010, at 6:40 AM, Max Larson Henry wrote:
has someone experience in anycast ipv4 networks (to support DNS)?
"Never been done" "Dangerous" "TCP does not work" etc etc etc.
- Yes but as for DNS, anycast is essentially used for user requests
(UDP)
not to perform zone transfer(TC
On 2010-03-26, at 06:21, InterNetX - Lutz Muehlig wrote:
> has someone experience in anycast ipv4 networks (to support DNS)?
This is a general reference that tries hard not to be DNS-specific:
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4786.txt
These are two papers written whilst at ISC describing many aspe
Rick Ernst wrote:
> I've noticed over the last 3 years or so that TDM, specifically T-1, access
> and transport has been in a steady decline. Customers are moving to FTTH
> and cable, or going WiMAX and Metro-Ethernet. Ethernet seems to have taken
> an even bigger bite out of DS-3. The bigger
In message <4828.1269611...@localhost>, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu writes:
> --==_Exmh_1269611568_4209P
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 09:40:39 EDT, Max Larson Henry said:
>
> > - Yes but as for DNS, anycast is essentially used for user requests (UDP)
> > not t
Apologies for the gibberish of my previous message.
Here's The URL that never made it to the list that contains the article
I referenced and my footer note:
[1]http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=26408512
--- fr...@fttx.org wrote:
From: "Frank A. Coluccio"
To:
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 09:03, J.D. Falk wrote:
> Why is this fake conference still posting to NANOG?
Maybe a motivational speaker at one of his past "conferences" told him
never to give up?
-Bill
re: "what is the state of voip-over-cellular as essentially the last
holdout
of TDM? Will the new 4G stuff be able to support latencies, etc? Has
the
work on handovers-over-IP matured enough that it's viable?"
One of the biggest hurdles in bringing Ethernet to mobile/cellular apps
On Mar 26, 2010, at 11:44 AM, Olsen, Jason wrote:
>> From: Rick Ernst [mailto:na...@shreddedmail.com]
>
>
>> an even bigger bite out of DS-3. The bigger pipes seem to favor
>> ethernet. A recent upgrade from OC-3 to GigE transport actually saved
> us a large
>> chunk of money.
>
> We recently
On Mar 26, 2010, at 6:38 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> This is the same fake conference spammer who's been hitting a lot
> of mailing lists and Usenet newsgroups -- best to blacklist the
> sender address and the domain.
Why is this fake conference still posting to NANOG?
--
J.D. Falk
Return Path I
On Wednesday 10 March 2010 09:46:19 pm Jim Burwell wrote:
> On 3/10/2010 16:57, Owen DeLong wrote:
> > The target really needs to be the CxOs and the management,
> > especially in places where there is content facing the general
> > public. Fortunately, Google, Yahoo, Netflix, etc. get it and have
Dylan Ebner expunged (dylan.eb...@crlmed.com):
> Funny thing about this is we have been steadily getting rid of all of our t1
> and ds3 circuits and replacing them with metro-e or cable based services at
> much better price/Mbs. However, when we went to VOIP and wanted to do sip
> trunking with
> From: Rick Ernst [mailto:na...@shreddedmail.com]
> an even bigger bite out of DS-3. The bigger pipes seem to favor
> ethernet. A recent upgrade from OC-3 to GigE transport actually saved
us a large
> chunk of money.
We recently had exactly the opposite experience, unfortunately. During
reloc
On Wednesday 24 March 2010 05:24:39 pm Michael Dillon wrote:
> For comparison look at the z-80 CPU which powered the early desktop
> computers. When the IBM PC came out, people thought that the Intel 8086
> would make the Z-80 obsolete. But it didn't. The Z-80 just disappeared
> into all sorts of e
Funny thing about this is we have been steadily getting rid of all of our t1
and ds3 circuits and replacing them with metro-e or cable based services at
much better price/Mbs. However, when we went to VOIP and wanted to do sip
trunking with qwest, they needed to deliver this over t1, otherwise i
On 3/26/2010 8:15 AM, Rick Ernst wrote:
I've noticed over the last 3 years or so that TDM, specifically T-1, access
and transport has been in a steady decline. Customers are moving to FTTH
and cable, or going WiMAX and Metro-Ethernet. Ethernet seems to have taken
an even bigger bite out of DS-3
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010, Rick Ernst wrote:
I've noticed over the last 3 years or so that TDM, specifically T-1, access
and transport has been in a steady decline. Customers are moving to FTTH
and cable, or going WiMAX and Metro-Ethernet. Ethernet seems to have taken
an even bigger bite out of DS-3
Steve Meuse wrote:
I'm wondering if others are seeing the same behavior, if it's
market-dependant, or if I'm just imagining things. I'm working on building
new infrastructure and my current thoughts are to minimize my TDM
footprint. It would be useful to get a better feel if this is an overal
On 03/26/2010 08:26 AM, Steve Meuse wrote:
Rick Ernst expunged (na...@shreddedmail.com):
I'm wondering if others are seeing the same behavior, if it's
market-dependant, or if I'm just imagining things. I'm working on building
new infrastructure and my current thoughts are to minimize my TDM
fo
On 03/26/2010 08:26 AM, Steve Meuse wrote:
Rick Ernst expunged (na...@shreddedmail.com):
I'm wondering if others are seeing the same behavior, if it's
market-dependant, or if I'm just imagining things. I'm working on building
new infrastructure and my current thoughts are to minimize my TDM
fo
Rick Ernst expunged (na...@shreddedmail.com):
> I'm wondering if others are seeing the same behavior, if it's
> market-dependant, or if I'm just imagining things. I'm working on building
> new infrastructure and my current thoughts are to minimize my TDM
> footprint. It would be useful to get a
I've noticed over the last 3 years or so that TDM, specifically T-1, access
and transport has been in a steady decline. Customers are moving to FTTH
and cable, or going WiMAX and Metro-Ethernet. Ethernet seems to have taken
an even bigger bite out of DS-3. The bigger pipes seem to favor ethernet
On Tuesday 23 March 2010 10:59:31 pm Mark Newton wrote:
> How many 10 year old pieces of kit do you have on your network?
90% of the network equipment here is over ten years old, and still trucking.
No plans to replace what is still working, as long as we have spares in stock,
and until we get
* Jeroen Massar:
> Simple recipe:
> - Box with:
>- Your favourite OS
>- Quagga or OpenBGPd
>- Your favourite DNS server
> - Announce the IP of the anycast node in BGP
> - Monitor the DNS server, when it does not work kill your local BGPd
>and notify the admins that it broke
Thi
Max Larson Henry wrote:
>
> > has someone experience in anycast ipv4 networks (to support DNS)?
>
> "Never been done" "Dangerous" "TCP does not work" etc etc etc.
>
>
> - Yes but as for DNS, anycast is essentially used for user requests
> (UDP) not to perform zone transfer(TCP).
Also t
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 09:40:39 EDT, Max Larson Henry said:
> - Yes but as for DNS, anycast is essentially used for user requests (UDP)
> not to perform zone transfer(TCP).
DNS uses TCP for more than just XFR. For instance, if you're running a
resolver that doesn't do EDNS0, and you hit an (increas
> > > has someone experience in anycast ipv4 networks (to support DNS)?
> >
> > "Never been done" "Dangerous" "TCP does not work" etc etc etc.
>
> - Yes but as for DNS, anycast is essentially used for user requests (UDP)
> not to perform zone transfer(TCP).
How-to with working configurations for
On Mar 26, 2010, at 9:24 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> InterNetX - Lutz Muehlig wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> has someone experience in anycast ipv4 networks (to support DNS)?
>
> "Never been done" "Dangerous" "TCP does not work" etc etc etc.
Can't really tell if you're being serious here due to caffein
On Thursday 25 March 2010 12:46:23 pm Marty Anstey wrote:
> If you are of the DIY persuasion, check out the following project:
> http://www.febo.com/pages/soekris/
And if the OP (or any one else on list) is of that persuasion, and really
wants to get into serious timing discussions, joining the
> > has someone experience in anycast ipv4 networks (to support DNS)?
>
> "Never been done" "Dangerous" "TCP does not work" etc etc etc.
>
- Yes but as for DNS, anycast is essentially used for user requests (UDP)
not to perform zone transfer(TCP).
-M
This is the same fake conference spammer who's been hitting a lot
of mailing lists and Usenet newsgroups -- best to blacklist the
sender address and the domain.
---Rsk
InterNetX - Lutz Muehlig wrote:
> Hello,
>
> has someone experience in anycast ipv4 networks (to support DNS)?
"Never been done" "Dangerous" "TCP does not work" etc etc etc.
I assume quite a number of people know how to do it, especially as
several root DNS servers abuse it.
Simple recipe:
- B
Hello,
has someone experience in anycast ipv4 networks (to support DNS)?
Regards
Lutz
79 matches
Mail list logo
