On 2010.04.02. 6:16, Leo Vegoda wrote:
On Mar 31, 2010, at 8:22 PM, Dan White wrote:
[…]
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/
I think it's worth pointing out again that the URLs for IANA registries
have changed and the old URLs, like the one above, will be going away
from
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 11:42:25AM +0200,
Robert Kisteleki rob...@ripe.net wrote
a message of 20 lines which said:
I don't know what good reasons you might have to pull down the current
URLs. Please keep them working.
I strongly agree and, by the way, it seems this was partially
mentioned
This morning I went digging for a book to recommend that someone in
our NOC read in order to understand at a high level how Internet
infrastructure works (bgp, igps, etc) and discovered that the old
standbys (Huitema, Halabi, Perlman) have all not been updated in a
decade or so.
On the one hand,
On Apr 2, 2010, at 7:09 PM, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
So, what are you having your up-and-coming NOC staff read?
http://www.amazon.com/Router-Security-Strategies-Securing-Network/dp/1587053365/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8s=booksqid=1270210783sr=8-2
So, what are you having your up-and-coming NOC staff read?
In an attempt to wean them off of unmanageable PERL scripts
http://www.complete.org/FoundationsOfPythonNetworkProgramming
There are tons of tutorials and articles on the web, often with links
to other useful stuff
So, what are you having your up-and-coming NOC staff read?
While not specifically a NOC book, we find that it lays a great foundation
to build from (if, perhaps, a bit basic in certain areas):
Network Warrior by Gary A. Donahue
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 08:09:29 -0400
Robert E. Seastrom r...@seastrom.com wrote:
This morning I went digging for a book to recommend that someone in
our NOC read in order to understand at a high level how Internet
infrastructure works (bgp, igps, etc) and discovered that the old
standbys
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 13:48:48 BST, Michael Dillon said:
So, what are you having your up-and-coming NOC staff read?
In an attempt to wean them off of unmanageable PERL scripts
There is not, and there never will be, a useful programming language that
makes it the least bit difficult to write
On 4/2/2010 08:39, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 13:48:48 BST, Michael Dillon said:
So, what are you having your up-and-coming NOC staff read?
In an attempt to wean them off of unmanageable PERL scripts
There is not, and there never will be, a useful programming
I just show them this:
http://warriorsofthe.net/
-Scott
-Original Message-
From: Larry Sheldon [mailto:larryshel...@cox.net]
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 9:46 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Books for the NOC guys...
On 4/2/2010 08:39, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On
On Apr 2, 2010, at 7:09 AM, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
This morning I went digging for a book to recommend that someone in
our NOC read in order to understand at a high level how Internet
infrastructure works (bgp, igps, etc) and discovered that the old
standbys (Huitema, Halabi, Perlman) have
On 3/31/10 8:14 PM, Jorge Amodio jmamo...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with the misuse of the term Engineer in IT. I think it should only
be used for the official protected title of civil engineer. Which I
believe is a very respectable job. Sad but true, in IT too many people have
some form of
On Thursday 01 April 2010 02:36:56 pm telmn...@757.org wrote:
Its an april fools joke for them. Dare I say that I have actually seen
DCs with carpeting. My jaw dropped but it does exist.
We had carpeted floor tiles in a data center where I used to work. It was
bound to the raised floor
Robert E. Seastrom r...@seastrom.com writes:
So, what are you having your up-and-coming NOC staff read?
http://www.amazon.com/Illustrated-Network-Modern-Kaufmann-Metworking/dp/0123745411/
I think it's quite good and covers many modern topics. One drawback:
It mentions ethereal and not
On 4/2/10 2:09 PM, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
So, what are you having your up-and-coming NOC staff read?
Practice of System and Network Administration by Limoncelli, Hogan, and
Challup. I may be biased, being married to Hogan.
Eliot
On Friday 02 April 2010 10:29:10 am Lamar Owen wrote:
A large portion of the other 12,000 square feet is, pardon the usage, 'puke
yellow' in color. The 18,000 sq feet is a nice gray color. All have
static draining foil and/or wires woven in the carpet for static control.
A couple of pictures
The Limoncelli etc book is brilliant.
There's phil smith and barry greene's old Cisco ISP Essentials too.
Very good if somewhat outdated
And then there's this if you just want security -
On Apr 1, 2010, at 2:25 PM, George Bonser wrote:
I beg to differ. I know several ISPs that have been quietly putting
quite
a bit of engineering resource behind IPv6. The public announcement
of residential IPv6 trials by Comcast was not the beginning of a
serious
commitment to IPv6 by
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 6:02 AM, Express Web Systems
mailingli...@expresswebsystems.com wrote:
So, what are you having your up-and-coming NOC staff read?
While not specifically a NOC book, we find that it lays a great foundation
to build from (if, perhaps, a bit basic in certain areas):
On Apr 1, 2010, at 11:42 PM, Robert Kisteleki wrote:
I don't know what good reasons you might have to pull down the current URLs.
Because the content has changed from arbitrary ASCII text files into more
easily parseable XML and backporting to those arbitrary ASCII text files has
proven too
-Original Message-
From: Jimi Thompson [mailto:jimi.thomp...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 9:20 AM
To: Jorge Amodio; Jeroen van Aart
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Finding content in your job title
On 3/31/10 8:14 PM, Jorge Amodio jmamo...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with
On 2 Apr 2010, at 2:53, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 11:42:25AM +0200,
Robert Kisteleki rob...@ripe.net wrote
a message of 20 lines which said:
I don't know what good reasons you might have to pull down the current
URLs. Please keep them working.
I strongly agree
On 2010.04.02. 18:16, David Conrad wrote:
On Apr 1, 2010, at 11:42 PM, Robert Kisteleki wrote:
I don't know what good reasons you might have to pull down the current
URLs.
Because the content has changed from arbitrary ASCII text files into more
easily parseable XML and backporting to those
On Friday 02 April 2010 12:25:12 pm Justin Horstman wrote:
[Your title] does
however answer the question of Who is responsible for... which I believe
to be extremely valuable.
Then again, I might be weird.
No, this is exactly how 'business at large' uses the idea of title. In some
On Friday 02 April 2010 11:36:53 am Eliot Lear wrote:
Practice of System and Network Administration by Limoncelli, Hogan, and
Challup. I may be biased, being married to Hogan.
+1 on PSNA. I like it as much for its non-technical content as for its
technical content (a similar book, by
On 02/04/2010 14:39, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 13:48:48 BST, Michael Dillon said:
So, what are you having your up-and-coming NOC staff read?
In an attempt to wean them off of unmanageable PERL scripts
There is not, and there never will be, a useful programming
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Joe Greco jgr...@ns.sol.net wrote:
Someone suggested this be posted more visibly.
Joe,
Been there, done that: http://bill.herrin.us/network/ipxl.html
Maybe the humor was too subtle...
-Bill
--
William D. Herrin her...@dirtside.com
On 04/02/2010 10:43 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
In short: less zealotry, more pragmatism and a realisation that each
language has its own strengths and weaknesses. Bad code is bad code in any
language.
All true, but I'd still say there's a special rung in hell for bad perl.
Mike
Once upon a time, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com said:
All true, but I'd still say there's a special rung in hell for bad perl.
Ehh, bad perl is still more readable than good APL. At least I can
reformat the perl! :-)
--
Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY
Well, speaking as one who wrote an ISP-specific, although not NOC-specific book
about a
decade ago, it doesn't seem as if there is a commercial motivation to update
them. For the
record, it's _Building Service Provider Networks_ (Wiley, 2001), and I'm proud
of it.
Nevertheless, I'm not opposed
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote:
Once upon a time, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com said:
All true, but I'd still say there's a special rung in hell for bad perl.
Ehh, bad perl is still more readable than good APL. At least I can
reformat the perl! :-)
In
It's the same level reserved for child molesters and people who talk at
the theater...
Michael Thomas wrote:
On 04/02/2010 10:43 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
In short: less zealotry, more pragmatism and a realisation that each
language has its own strengths and weaknesses. Bad code is bad code
Aside from the ones already mentioned, troubleshooting books are a
great asset, also. Here are some of my favorites:
http://www.amazon.com/Network-Analysis-Troubleshooting-Scott-Haugdahl/dp/0201433192/
http://www.amazon.com/Troubleshooting-Campus-Networks-Practical-Protocols/dp/0471210137/
While not the stevens book,
the illustrated network isbn 978-0-12-374541-5 was a pretty good
attempt to do a modern version of the same. any book that attempts to
cover all layers of the stack is going to have it's limits, but it has
saved my bacon a couple of times now...
The author is normally
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
In short: less zealotry, more pragmatism and a realisation that each
language has its own strengths and weaknesses. Bad code is bad code in
any
language.
All true, but I'd still say there's a special rung in hell for bad perl.
And it is exacerbated by the huge volume of bad PERL books out
On Apr 2, 2010, at 1:53 44PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com said:
All true, but I'd still say there's a special rung in hell for bad perl.
Ehh, bad perl is still more readable than good APL. At least I can
reformat the perl! :-)
--
Oh, I don't know
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 8:36 AM, Eliot Lear l...@cisco.com wrote:
On 4/2/10 2:09 PM, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
So, what are you having your up-and-coming NOC staff read?
Practice of System and Network Administration by Limoncelli, Hogan, and
Challup. I may be biased, being married to Hogan.
I am curious. Once we're nearing exhausting all IPv4 space will there
ever come a time to ask/demand/force returning all these legacy /8
allocations? I think I understand the difficulty in that, but then
running out of IPs is also a difficult issue. :-)
For some reason I sooner see all IPv4
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 02:01:45PM -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
I am curious. Once we're nearing exhausting all IPv4 space will
there ever come a time to ask/demand/force returning all these
legacy /8 allocations? I think I understand the difficulty in that,
but then running out of IPs is
Hmmm... it is 2pm on a Friday afternoon. I guess it's the appropriate
time for this thread.
*grabs popcorn and sits back to watch the fun*
On Friday 02 April 2010 04:08:03 pm Michael Dillon wrote:
If someone wanted to play the game and trump me, then they would
quote the title of another book, or at least a substantial website
tutorial, that uses another programming language.
I wish I could reply to this yesterday Then, I
Must resist urge to bash v6... must start weekend... must turn off
computer for my own good.
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Charles N Wyble
char...@knownelement.com wrote:
Hmmm... it is 2pm on a Friday afternoon. I guess it's the appropriate time
for this thread.
*grabs popcorn and sits
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 15:01, Jeroen van Aart jer...@mompl.net wrote:
I am curious. Once we're nearing exhausting all IPv4 space will there ever
come a time to ask/demand/force returning all these legacy /8 allocations?
snip
Legacy vs RIR allocated/assigned space is not a proper distinction,
On 4/2/2010 16:08, Charles N Wyble wrote:
Hmmm... it is 2pm on a Friday afternoon. I guess it's the appropriate
time for this thread.
*grabs popcorn and sits back to watch the fun*
While it is true that this is likely to be one of the less productive
windmill jousts.
I used to work for a
BGP Update Report
Interval: 25-Mar-10 -to- 01-Apr-10 (7 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS30890 43018 4.0% 95.6 -- EVOLVA Evolva Telecom s.r.l.
2 - AS845214685
I also just got a fresh box of popcorn. I will sit by and wait for Jeroen to
do a business analysis and tell me the return on investment. (Assuming that he
can find any legal grounds for demanding return of legacy /8 allocations.)
All of the analysis results I have seen mention figuratively
This report has been generated at Fri Apr 2 21:11:30 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
Sigh... Guess you missed the last several go-arounds of
Running out of IPv4 will create some hardships. That cannot be avoided.
Even if we were to reclaim the supposed unused legacy /8s, we'd still
only extend the date of IPv4 runout by a few months.
The amount of effort required to reclaim
On Apr 2, 2010, at 2:16 PM, Chris Grundemann wrote:
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 15:01, Jeroen van Aart jer...@mompl.net wrote:
I am curious. Once we're nearing exhausting all IPv4 space will there ever
come a time to ask/demand/force returning all these legacy /8 allocations?
snip
Legacy vs
Owen DeLong wrote:
The amount of effort required to reclaim those few IPv4 addresses would
vastly exceed the return on that effort. Far better for that effort to be
directed towards the addition of IPv6 capabilities to existing IPv4
deployments so as to minimize the impact of IPv4 exhaustion.
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 05:19:12PM -0500, Joe Johnson wrote:
Maybe encourage people like Apple, Xerox, HP or Ford to migrate
their operations completely to IPv6 and return their /8?
How are they going to completely migrate to v6 while
there is a demand for v4 space (specifically, THEIR
Cutler James R wrote:
I also just got a fresh box of popcorn. I will sit by and wait
I honestly am not trying to be a troll. It's just everytime I glance
over the IANA IPv4 Address Space Registry I feel rather annoyed about
all those /8s that were assigned back in the day without apparently
Jeroen van Aart writes:
Cutler James R wrote:
I also just got a fresh box of popcorn. I will sit by and wait
I honestly am not trying to be a troll. It's just everytime I glance over
the IANA IPv4 Address Space Registry I feel rather annoyed about all those
/8s that were assigned back in
On Friday 02 April 2010 06:14:33 pm Owen DeLong wrote:
This is where Legacy vs. RIR becomes meaningful. Legacy holders have
no contractual obligation to return unused space. RIR recipients, on the
other hand, do.
Some legacy holders might, I imagine, be 'squatting' on that legacy space and
Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Cutler James R wrote:
I also just got a fresh box of popcorn. I will sit by and wait
I honestly am not trying to be a troll. It's just everytime I glance
over the IANA IPv4 Address Space Registry I feel rather annoyed about
all those /8s that were assigned back in
On the topic of IP4 exhaustion: 1/8, 2/8 and 5/8 have all been assigned in the
last 3 months yet I don't see them being allocated out to customers (users) yet.
Is this perhaps a bit of hoarding in advance of the complete depletion of /8's?
- Original Message -
From: Majdi S. Abbas
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 05:48:44PM -0500, John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote:
On the topic of IP4 exhaustion: 1/8, 2/8 and 5/8 have all been assigned in
the last 3 months yet I don't see them being allocated out to customers
(users) yet.
Is this perhaps a bit of hoarding in advance of the
On Apr 2, 2010, at 8:10 AM, Jens Link wrote:
Robert E. Seastrom r...@seastrom.com writes:
So, what are you having your up-and-coming NOC staff read?
http://www.amazon.com/Illustrated-Network-Modern-Kaufmann-Metworking/dp/0123745411/
I think it's quite good and covers many modern
I've gotten multiple emails about this...
Yes, this is a known issue at the moment due to an upgrade put in place
at DeLong. There is an open ticket with Juniper on why the 6in4 tunnels
are not working on the SRX-100 and why traffic coming in through the
alternate path is not being correctly
On Apr 2, 2010, at 3:38 PM, Andrew Gray wrote:
Jeroen van Aart writes:
Cutler James R wrote:
I also just got a fresh box of popcorn. I will sit by and wait
I honestly am not trying to be a troll. It's just everytime I glance over
the IANA IPv4 Address Space Registry I feel rather annoyed
On Apr 2, 2010, at 6:38 26PM, Andrew Gray wrote:
Jeroen van Aart writes:
Cutler James R wrote:
I also just got a fresh box of popcorn. I will sit by and wait
I honestly am not trying to be a troll. It's just everytime I glance over
the IANA IPv4 Address Space Registry I feel rather
You know, I've felt the same irritation before, but one thing I am wondering
and perhaps some folks around here have been around long enough to know -
what was the original thinking behind doing those /8s?
Read your network history. In the beginning all allocations were /8s, in fact
the slash
On 04/02/2010 06:38 PM, Andrew Gray wrote:
I understand that they were A classes and assigned to large
companies, etc. but was it just not believed there would be more than
126(-ish) of these entities at the time? Or was it thought we would
move on to larger address space before we did? Or
- Original Message -
From: Majdi S. Abbas m...@latt.net
To: John Palmer (NANOG Acct) nan...@adns.net
Cc: NANOG list nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: legacy /8
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 05:48:44PM -0500, John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote:
On the topic of
On Apr 2, 2010, at 7:13 AM, Robert Kisteleki wrote:
You're confusing two things: URL and content. According to the announcement,
TXT files will be generated still. Why, again, must the URL change?
As Leo pointed out, a message will be displayed at the historical URL. Does
this address your
On 4/2/10 3:01 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
I am curious. Once we're nearing exhausting all IPv4 space will there
ever come a time to ask/demand/force returning all these legacy /8
allocations? I think I understand the difficulty in that, but then
running out of IPs is also a difficult issue. :-)
On April 2, 2010 at 15:25 jer...@mompl.net (Jeroen van Aart) wrote:
I honestly am not trying to be a troll. It's just everytime I glance
over the IANA IPv4 Address Space Registry I feel rather annoyed about
all those /8s that were assigned back in the day without apparently
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 03:13:16PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
Sigh... Guess you missed the last several go-arounds of
Running out of IPv4 will create some hardships. That cannot be avoided.
we won't run out, we won't exaust, we are -NOT- killing the last tuna.
what we are doing
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 03:25:22PM -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Cutler James R wrote:
I also just got a fresh box of popcorn. I will sit by and wait
I honestly am not trying to be a troll. It's just everytime I glance
over the IANA IPv4 Address Space Registry I feel rather annoyed about
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 03:46:55PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
The expectation was that those /8s would be subnetted into vast arrays of
Class C sized chunks and that subnets within a given /8 all had to be the
same size (this used to be necessary to keep RIP happy and every machine
ipv4 spae is not 'running out.' the rirs are running out of a free
resource which they then rent to us. breaks my little black heart.
even if, and that's an if, ipv6 takes off, ipv4 is gonna be around for a
lng while. when 95% of the world has end-to-end ipv6, do you think
amazon et alia
IPv6 as effectively reindroduced classful addressing.
but it's not gonna be a problem this time, right? after all,
32^h^h128^h^h^h64 bits is more than we will ever need, right?
randy
On Sat, Apr 03, 2010 at 09:25:08AM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
IPv6 as effectively reindroduced classful addressing.
but it's not gonna be a problem this time, right? after all,
32^h^h128^h^h^h64 bits is more than we will ever need, right?
randy
well... looking at a diet analogy,
Just like 640k or memory :)
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote:
IPv6 as effectively reindroduced classful addressing.
but it's not gonna be a problem this time, right? after all,
32^h^h128^h^h^h64 bits is more than we will ever need, right?
randy
On Apr 2, 2010, at 1:40 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote:
Take back all the IP space from China and give them a single /20 and tell
them to make do.
At current consumption rates, that'd buy us another year or so. Then what?
Regards,
-drc
On 4/2/10 6:36 PM, David Conrad wrote:
On Apr 2, 2010, at 1:40 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote:
Take back all the IP space from China and give them a single /20 and tell them
to make do.
At current consumption rates, that'd buy us another year or so. Then what?
Regards,
-drc
To quote:
we get
I've been troubleshooting an issue all day. Traffic leaving our site, on
Verizon public transport, destined for the Spokane area is routing to Qwest
and hitting 400ms rapidly. The offending router seems to be a Verizon router
(number 6 here).
On top of that, we're seeing this via Level3 coming in
On 4/2/2010 17:22, Randy Bush wrote:
ipv4 spae is not 'running out.' the rirs are running out of a free
resource which they then rent to us. breaks my little black heart.
even if, and that's an if, ipv6 takes off, ipv4 is gonna be around for a
lng while. when 95% of the world has
On 4/2/2010 19:25, Randy Bush wrote:
IPv6 as effectively reindroduced classful addressing.
but it's not gonna be a problem this time, right? after all,
32^h^h128^h^h^h64 bits is more than we will ever need, right?
Just like last time.
--
Democracy: Three wolves and a sheep voting on the
Larry Sheldon wrote:
On 4/2/2010 19:25, Randy Bush wrote:
IPv6 as effectively reindroduced classful addressing.
but it's not gonna be a problem this time, right? after all,
32^h^h128^h^h^h64 bits is more than we will ever need, right?
Just like last time.
Oh brother.
On 03/04/10 00:09 +, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 03:13:16PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
Sigh... Guess you missed the last several go-arounds of
Running out of IPv4 will create some hardships. That cannot be avoided.
we won't run out, we won't
The last time I discussed IP Address needs with a company the builds
automobiles, they wanted forty million addresses for robots, sensors, and the
like for manufacturing. A single /8, were it available, would only yield about
20% of that requirement.
On Apr 2, 2010, at 6:46 PM, Owen DeLong
-Original Message-
From: Jim Burwell [mailto:j...@jsbc.cc]
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 6:00 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: legacy /8
So, jump through hoops to kludge up IPv4 so it continues to provide
address space for new allocations through multiple levels of NAT (or
I'm old but maybe not old nuff to know if this was discussed before or
not, but I've been asking people last few months why we don't just do
something like this. don't even need to get rid of BGP, just add some
extension, we see ok to add extensions to BGP to do other things, this
makes at least
Is someone volunteering to work on an RFC? Or, has someone done so for this
already?
- Original Message -
From: jim deleskie deles...@gmail.com
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: legacy /8
I'm old but maybe not old nuff to know if this was
On Fri, 2 Apr 2010, Joe Johnson wrote:
Maybe encourage people like Apple, Xerox, HP or Ford to migrate their
operations completely to IPv6 and return their /8?
Perhaps 45.0.0.0/8 can start, that shouldn't be too hard to migrate out
of? :P
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
-Original Message-
From: jim deleskie
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 7:17 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: legacy /8
I'm old but maybe not old nuff to know if this was discussed before or
not, but I've been asking people last few months why we don't just do
something like
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 15:38:26 -0700
Andrew Gray 3...@blargh.com wrote:
Jeroen van Aart writes:
Cutler James R wrote:
I also just got a fresh box of popcorn. I will sit by and wait
I honestly am not trying to be a troll. It's just everytime I glance over
the IANA IPv4 Address Space
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 18:49:58 MDT, Brielle Bruns said:
we get some IP space back to buy us more time
Didn't say it was a solution, but we're all talking about buying more
time for ipv6 transition. Its no worse then any other suggestion people
have proposed. :)
They've had plenty of time
-Original Message-
From: John Palmer (NANOG Acct) [mailto:nan...@adns.net]
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 7:29 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: legacy /8
Is someone volunteering to work on an RFC? Or, has someone done so
for
this already?
I have never heard of anything along
On Fri, 2 Apr 2010 21:29:20 -0500
John Palmer \(NANOG Acct\) nan...@adns.net wrote:
Is someone volunteering to work on an RFC? Or, has someone done so for this
already?
Probably similar to this (and others that remove end-site knowledge
from the Internet core) -
The Locator Identifier
Anyway, I see it as pretty much moot, since many major players (Comcast,
Google, etc) are in the midst of major IPv6 deployments as we speak.
Eventually you will have to jump on the bandwagon too. :-)
clue0: the isp for which i work deployed ipv6 in the '90s. we were the
world's
-Original Message-
From: George Bonser [mailto:gbon...@seven.com]
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 7:53 PM
To: John Palmer (NANOG Acct); nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: legacy /8
They hard part is getting all the end nodes to use IPIP tunneling as
their primary protocol by default. It
i had a bet w/ some folks when RFC 1918 came into existance. I postulated
that it might be better for the Internet if the RFC 1918 space was used to
address the public Internet and the rest of the space be used inside folks
walled gardens... circa 1996 or so.
--bill
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at
95 matches
Mail list logo
