Owen DeLong o...@delong.com writes:
On Sep 27, 2010, at 9:30 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
On 10-09-27 7:20 AM, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
Cannot establish SSL with SMTP server 67.202.37.63:465 does not
sound like a 587 problem to me.
netalyzr folks? comment?
Sorry, I hit send too soon
Vyatta has support contracts. If you want hardware, they've got that,
too.
On 9/27/2010 6:48 PM, Heath Jones wrote:
Oh, support contract!!?
Differences:
- Hardware forwarding
- Interface options
- Port density
- Redundancy
- Power consumption
- Service Provider stuff - MPLS TE? VPLS?
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010, Venkatesh Sriram wrote:
While I have used MD5 with OSPFv2, I never used authentication with
OSPFv3 since IPsec is (a) not available on all platforms (or/and
requires a special license) and (b) requires too much of coordination
with other folks to bring it up. I know
I would suggest getting on the GRX network. As an enterprise you
should be able to get IPX service from any number of providers.
Belgacom, Syniverse, and Sybase365 all offer IP data service onto the
GRX. Then you aren't limited to just the US carriers, you'll be able
to reach most all carriers
On 9/27/2010 7:35 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
Can someone name an ISP that encourages P2P traffic?? ;)
A proper ISP doesn't encourage any type of traffic. We're indifferent.
Of course, we'll be happy to mention the benefits and draw backs of
using various protocols on the Internet. Demand
On 27 Sep 2010, at 8:29, Owen DeLong wrote:
[...]
465 is not an odd-ball port, it's the standard well-known port for STMPS.
It is? That's not what's recorded at:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers
urd 465/tcpURL Rendesvous Directory for SSM
igmpv3lite 465/udp
On 9/28/10 7:49 AM, Leo Vegoda wrote:
On 27 Sep 2010, at 8:29, Owen DeLong wrote:
[...]
465 is not an odd-ball port, it's the standard well-known port for STMPS.
It is? That's not what's recorded at:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers
urd 465/tcpURL
Vyatta has hardware forwarding? Real hardware forwarding? Where?
Best Regards,
Nathan Eisenberg
-Original Message-
From: Curtis Maurand [mailto:cmaur...@xyonet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 5:55 AM
To: Heath Jones
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Software-based Border
He must have meant the actual chassis/box/case...
Vyatta has hardware forwarding? Real hardware forwarding? Where?
-Original Message-
From: Curtis Maurand [mailto:cmaur...@xyonet.com]
Vyatta has support contracts. If you want hardware, they've got that, too.
Doh. Serves me right for posting BEFORE having my coffee.
Though, on reflection was anyone claiming Vyatta didn't have hardware to sell
you?
Best Regards,
Nathan Eisenberg
-Original Message-
From: Heath Jones [mailto:hj1...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 10:11
465 is not an odd-ball port, it's the standard well-known port for STMPS.
It is? That's not what's recorded at:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers
urd 465/tcpURL Rendesvous Directory for SSM
igmpv3lite 465/udpIGMP over UDP for SSM
Microsoft
BitTorrent have been active contributors to the IETF LEDBAT working
group, which is looking at transport protocols that back off much more
aggressively than TCP, with exactly the idea of making P2P have a
lower impact on other things at the customer edge.
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ledbat/
On
Jack,
Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but looking at your website - do you only offer
dial up services? This could be the background for a statement like a proper
ISP doesn't encourage any type of traffic. We have a couple of OC-192 running
to Seattle, so certain types of traffic can make a good
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 17:39:33 +
Nathan Eisenberg nat...@atlasnetworks.us wrote:
465 is not an odd-ball port, it's the standard well-known port
for STMPS.
It is? That's not what's recorded at:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers
urd 465/tcpURL
Hi Jared
Is this different then the service at Equinix?
Leo
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Jared Geiger ja...@compuwizz.net wrote:
I would suggest getting on the GRX network. As an enterprise you
should be able to get IPX service from any number of providers.
Belgacom, Syniverse, and
On 9/28/2010 1:00 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
Jack,
Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but looking at your website - do you only offer dial up services? This could be
the background for a statement like a proper ISP doesn't encourage any type of traffic. We have a
couple of OC-192 running to Seattle,
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:57 AM, Jared Geiger ja...@compuwizz.net wrote:
I would suggest getting on the GRX network. As an enterprise you
should be able to get IPX service from any number of providers.
Belgacom, Syniverse, and Sybase365 all offer IP data service onto the
GRX. Then you aren't
Jack,
Apologies, I did not realize that you guys were doing so much. Please don't
take my last email as anything which was intended to question or insult you
guys. Up here (Alaska) we have about 100,000 cable subscribers along with mixed
Fiber/DSL/POTS access and nearly 50,000 cellular
Evidence strongly suggests that AS11296 together with all of the IPv4
space it is currently announcing routes for, i.e.:
63.247.160.0/19
199.241.64.0/19
206.226.64.0/24
206.226.65.0/24
206.226.66.0/24
206.226.67.0/24
206.226.68.0/24
206.226.69.0/24
206.226.70.0/24
206.226.71.0/24
206.226.72.0/24
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 9/28/10 3:01 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
Jack,
Apologies, I did not realize that you guys were doing so much. Please don't
take my last email as anything which was intended to question or insult you
guys. Up here (Alaska) we have about 100,000
Out of curiosity, what led you to this conclusion?
Evidence strongly suggests that AS11296 together with all of the IPv4
space it is currently announcing routes for, i.e.:
have all been hijacked. I will be reporting this formally to ARIN today,
via their helpful fraud reporting web form.
In my experience users aren't willing to pay for dedicated bandwidth.
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 1:22 PM, manolo hernandez mherna...@comcast.net wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 9/28/10 3:01 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
Jack,
Apologies, I did not realize that you guys were
-Original Message-
From: Jason Iannone [mailto:jason.iann...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 12:50 PM
To: manolo hernandez
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Online games stealing your bandwidth
In my experience users aren't willing to pay for dedicated bandwidth.
He blocked google mail? WTF?
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem mailer-dae...@googlemail.com
Date: 28 September 2010 20:49
Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
To: hj1...@gmail.com
Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
Whether recorded with IANA or not, it certainly is what you will find if you
google:
smtp ssl port
It's also what just about every MUA and MTA I've seen expects for that purpose.
Owen
On Sep 28, 2010, at 7:49 AM, Leo Vegoda wrote:
On 27 Sep 2010, at 8:29, Owen DeLong wrote:
[...]
465
I realize that this is somewhat OT, but I'm sure that others on the list
encounter the same issues and that at least some folks might have useful
comments.
An increasingly large number of our customers are using Gmail or Google Apps
and almost all of our OSS/BSS mail is getting spam filtered
Now that's some paranoia ;)
-Original Message-
From: Heath Jones hj1...@gmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 4:05pm
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: AS11296 -- Hijacked?
He blocked google mail? WTF?
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem
On 9/28/2010 2:22 PM, manolo hernandez wrote:
What is keeping your company from buying more bandwidth? I find the
excuse of over subscription to be a fail. If that's your companies
business model then it should not be whining when people are using what
you sell them. Provision bandwidth
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 4:15 PM, Erik L erik_l...@caneris.com wrote:
An increasingly large number of our customers are using
Gmail or Google Apps and almost all of our OSS/BSS mail
is getting spam filtered by Google. Among others, these
e-mails include invoices, order confirmations, payment
Hi,
Have you checked the IronPort reputation scores for your mailserver IPs?
Google uses this data as part of it's spam detection method.
William
On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 16:15 -0400, Erik L wrote:
I realize that this is somewhat OT, but I'm sure that others on the list
encounter the same
Hi Cameron,
On 24 sep 2010, at 02:56, Cameron Byrne wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Scott Weeks sur...@mauigateway.com wrote:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 5:50 PM, Scott Weeks sur...@mauigateway.com wrote:
--- ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
It's working over LISP:
Our excuse? We have purchased every available transponder on every spacecraft
suitable for transmission out of Alaska. Granted, there are additional
spacecraft out there with Alaska footprints. We however, being a service
provider, are interested in space segment which gives us quality over
Bill,
Thanks for the response and excellent ideas.
The OSS/BSS box is in our internal network with a RFC1918 address and it relays
to outside via another box which sits in the DMZ and which is in SPF records
for the domain that appears in From/Return-Path, etc.
That DMZ machine does not
Hi William,
I do so for our entire IP space on a regular basis. The edge MTA I mentioned in
the reply to Bill shows up as Neutral there.
Thanks
Erik
- Original Message -
From: William Pitcock neno...@systeminplace.net
To: Erik L erik_l...@caneris.com
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Tuesday,
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Matthew Walster matt...@walster.org wrote:
Plenty of people sell p2p caches but they all work using magic, smoke and
mirrors.
Somehow that seems appropriate for gaming networks; maybe add some
swords or old Gandalf boxes.
In general distributing gaming software
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Job W. J. Snijders j...@instituut.net wrote:
Hi Cameron,
On 24 sep 2010, at 02:56, Cameron Byrne wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Scott Weeks sur...@mauigateway.com wrote:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 5:50 PM, Scott Weeks sur...@mauigateway.com wrote:
---
In a SP environment, you need to hand off two VLANs to a customer, is
there any advantage or disadvantage in doing the following two setups?
- One untagged and one tagged VLAN
- Two tagged VLAN and no untagged VLAN
I can't think of anything other than some equipment may not let you
have no
As for online experience, any action game with players 200ms away from each
others, is not really playable.
By the time you aim, shoot, and the info register on the server and other user
player PC, it has moved far away from the shot...
I'd think that going with two tagged VLAN's is the better route. You will then
be forcing the customer
to adhere to the VLAN's that you have specified and reserved for them.
It's also a security advantage because if you go with untagged, who knows if
someone might be able
to vlan hop/double
We're trying to help a downstream customer with an issue and require
assistance from a clued Telia netop. The customer is running a GRE
tunnel from Los Angeles to Brazil for international transit and needs
to avoid carrying local traffic over the tunnel. He is requesting a
pref of 150 for Level3
On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 16:56:21 -0400 (EDT)
Jon Lewis jle...@lewis.org wrote:
On Sat, 25 Sep 2010, Rodrick Brown wrote:
If you follow the links in the article people are complaining that the LotR
process has served 70gb in a week, others are complaining that the service
is resulting in
-Original Message-
From: Jay Nakamura [mailto:zeusda...@gmail.com]
Sent: den 29 september 2010 03:28
To: NANOG
Subject: tagged vs. untagged VLAN
In a SP environment, you need to hand off two VLANs to a customer, is
there any advantage or disadvantage in doing the following two setups?
42 matches
Mail list logo
