> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 1:37 PM
> To: George Bonser
> Cc: bmanning
> Subject: Re: IPv4 sunset date revised : 2009-02-05
>
> anyone still not paying attention? (read the CERNET2 reports
> on the costs of dual-stack...) Native may be your best long
> term bet.
>
> --bil
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Oct 22, 2010, at 5:25 AM, William Herrin wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 1:20 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>>> On 10/21/10 6:38 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Oct 21, 2010, at 3:42 PM, Jack Bates wrote:
> On 10/21/2010 5:27 PM, Joel Jaegg
One of our guys navigated a Sprint phone tree and hit a deposit of clue.
Issue is fixed, it was indeed on the Sprint side.
Thanks to Sprint for responding and fixing this, especially when we aren't
even your customer (yet).
--
Brandon Applegate - CCIE 10273
PGP Key fingerprint:
7407 DC86 AA7B
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 08:55:49AM -0500, Jack Bates wrote:
>> I suppose you could run DHCPv6 on a subnet to give hosts addresses
>> but never give them a default gateway, but that would be a little
>> useless no?
>
> Works great when you don't need routing.
Or the default route should point out a
You know, if my tax dollars paid for that I'd probably sit back with a video
camera and laugh.
Q
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:32:38AM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Steven Bellovin
> wrote:
> >
> > >
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:32:38AM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Steven Bellovin
> wrote:
>
> > In the words of a former Justice Department official involved with
> > critical infrastructure protection, ?I have seen too many situations where
> > go
If you have visibility and can fix things - I would greatly appreciate an
off-list contact. We have a reachability issue through Level3, but it's
on the Sprint side of a specific peer and the Level3 support person can't
fit the pieces together mentally.
We are still pursuing our ticket and tr
>>>
>> Actually, it's not pointless at all. The RA system assumes that all routers
>> capable of announcing RAs are default routers and that virtually all routers
>> are created equal (yes, you have high/medium/low, but, really, since you
>> have to use high for everything in any reasonable deploy
On Sat, 2010-10-23 at 03:48 +1030, Mark Smith wrote:
> An RA is single, periodic, in the order of 100s of seconds, multicast
> packet. If you're arguing against the cost of that, then I think you're
> being a bit too precious with your packets.
Just to be clear on this: I was taking issue solely w
This report has been generated at Fri Oct 22 21:11:51 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: 14-Oct-10 -to- 21-Oct-10 (7 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS947626169 3.5%6542.2 -- INTRAPOWER-AS-AP IntraPower
Pty. Ltd.
2 - AS7315
> > I am looking for some vendors that make PtP optical wireless (laser)
> > gear.
>
Any reason you want an optical wavelength link, rather than a 23, 38, 60 or
80Ghz Microwave link?
Best Regards,
Nathan Eisenberg
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:20:45PM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
>
>
> > From: bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com
> >
> >
> > ah... but the trick is to only need enough IPv4 in the pool
> > to dynamically talk to the Internet. Native v6 to Native v6
> > never has to drop back to the Intern
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Scott Reed wrote:
> Public or not, if someone wants to run IPv6 only, they shouldn't have to
> have the v4 stack just for the database. Databases must work on the v6
> stack.
amen. so isn't that a dba issue and not a netop issue? I subscribe to
postgresql-* list
Canon. Canobeam laser systems. Very nice, very fast. I've heard of
installations going around a mile and stayed up in a snow storm.
Cheers,
Curtis
On 10/22/2010 3:15 PM, james edwards wrote:
I am looking for some vendors that make PtP optical wireless (laser) gear. I
have a project where
http://www.lightpointe.com/downloads/datasheets/FlightStrata155E_G.pdf
-Original Message-
From: james edwards [mailto:lists.james.edwa...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 15:15
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Optical Wireless
I am looking for some vendors that make PtP optical wi
I am looking for some vendors that make PtP optical wireless (laser)
gear. I
have a project where I have to link 2 buildings separated by a 5 lane
road.
Buildings are at least 10 stories high. Multiple reasons why RF (WiFi)
or
fiber under the street will not work, plus some layer 8 issues.
I need 1
RF in general or you don't want to use wi-fi which is understandable?
For our telcom back-haul needs which needs to meet carrier class grade
we have found Ceregon, Redline, and Dragonwave to work flawlessly.
Redline and Dragon are PoE, Ceregon use coax. Unfortunately we don't use
laser because
> From: bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com
>
>
> ah... but the trick is to only need enough IPv4 in the pool
> to dynamically talk to the Internet. Native v6 to Native v6
> never has to drop back to the Internet, It uses native v6
> paths. So the larger the v6 uptake, the fe
I am looking for some vendors that make PtP optical wireless (laser) gear. I
have a project where I have to link 2 buildings separated by a 5 lane road.
Buildings are at least 10 stories high. Multiple reasons why RF (WiFi) or
fiber under the street will not work, plus some layer 8 issues.
I need 1
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, AusNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, LacNOG,
CaribNOG and the RIPE Routing Working Group.
Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:21:36AM -0700, Cameron Byrne wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 10:54 AM, wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 09:42:50AM -0700, Cameron Byrne wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 10:20 PM, George Bonser wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> -Original Message-
> >> >> From:
Howdy,
So I'm fighting a VPN issue, trying to establish a Client to
Firewall VPN for remote access with 3 of my customers. Customer is using a
Sonicwall firewall (TZ210 or NSA240 with similar issues). We have ruled out
the firewall being the issue by terminating the internet co
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 10:54 AM, wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 09:42:50AM -0700, Cameron Byrne wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 10:20 PM, George Bonser wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> -Original Message-
>> >> From: Christopher Morrow > Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 9:49 PM
>> >> To: bmann
On 10/22/2010 8:04 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 1:46 AM, George Bonser wrote:
>> An agreement signed this month with the Department of Homeland Security
>> and an earlier initiative to protect companies in the defense industrial
>> base make it likely that the military w
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 01:28:24PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote:
>
> It occurs to me that there is some pressing need to investigate this
> all-IPv6 internet -- motivated by the cost of (not) maintaining IPv4
> forever.
>
> Right now we can observe essentially an all-IPv4 internet (99%,
> whatever.)
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 09:42:50AM -0700, Cameron Byrne wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 10:20 PM, George Bonser wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Christopher Morrow > Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 9:49 PM
> >> To: bmanning
> >> Cc: NANOG
> >> Subject: Re: IPv4 sunset da
It occurs to me that there is some pressing need to investigate this
all-IPv6 internet -- motivated by the cost of (not) maintaining IPv4
forever.
Right now we can observe essentially an all-IPv4 internet (99%,
whatever.)
In a very few years, possibly as few as two, the picture might become
much
All,
We are receiving reports that customers using Wild Blue ISP are having
trouble reaching our network. We have asked customers to provide us with
packet captures and are still waiting on them.
Our troubleshooting has not revealed any reason why customers can not access
us from that ISP. The sa
On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 01:10:08 -0700
Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> On Oct 22, 2010, at 12:55 AM, Mark Smith wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 15:52:08 +1100
> > Karl Auer wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 21:05 -0500, Jack Bates wrote:
> >>> On 10/21/2010 8:39 PM, Ray Soucy wrote:
>
> Ho
On October 22, 2010 at 08:48 d...@dcrocker.net (Dave CROCKER) wrote:
>
> On 10/21/2010 1:56 PM, Barry Shein wrote:
> > Well, if the DNS root servers ceased IPv4 service it'd be pretty much
> > a fait accompli as far as the public internet is concerned.
>
>
> Given the reality of fragment
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 10:20 PM, George Bonser wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Christopher Morrow > Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 9:49 PM
>> To: bmanning
>> Cc: NANOG
>> Subject: Re: IPv4 sunset date revised : 2009-02-05
>
>
>>
>> (now I'm teasing.. .Bill where's your docs on
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 7:06 AM, Jack Bates wrote:
> On 10/22/2010 8:38 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately the folks in the IETF don't even want to listen, to the
>> point a working group chair when I tried to explain why I wanted such a
>> feater told the rest of the group "He's an opera
Public or not, if someone wants to run IPv6 only, they shouldn't have to
have the v4 stack just for the database. Databases must work on the v6
stack.
On 10/22/2010 10:02 AM, Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo wrote:
IMHO you should never, ever make your MySQL accesible over the public
Internet, which
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:50 AM, George Bonser wrote:
>
>
>
>> From: christopher.mor...@gmail.com
>> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 8:05 AM
>> To: George Bonser
>> Cc: NANOG
>> Subject: Re: DHS and NSA getting married?
>>
>> are any of the civilian agencies really prepared/capable of dealing
>> w
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Butler [mailto:ben.but...@c2internet.net]
> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 8:40 AM
> To: NANOG
> Subject: RE: Only 5x IPv4 /8 remaining at IANA
>
> " see a potential result of huge swathes of v4 resources reusable by
> these companies, probably dwarfing t
It's amazing how much of a problem you think leaking of prefixes is...
I don't know about you, but I'm pretty strict about what prefixes I
allow to be advertised up to me from people we service.
I'm not sure having a random private prefix will make much of a
difference, since it sounds like fat-f
Dave CROCKER wrote:
On 10/21/2010 1:56 PM, Barry Shein wrote:
Well, if the DNS root servers ceased IPv4 service it'd be pretty much
a fait accompli as far as the public internet is concerned.
Given the reality of fragmenting the DNS -- including its root -- that's
an action that well might
Ben Butler wrote:
If we, as a community of operators are going to get on and deploy IPv6 and we
agree it's a migration the lets get doing and set some targets dates / BCP for
when it is reasonably expected that net/sys admins will have completed the
rollout and by whatever contractual or c
> From: christopher.mor...@gmail.com
> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 8:05 AM
> To: George Bonser
> Cc: NANOG
> Subject: Re: DHS and NSA getting married?
>
> are any of the civilian agencies really prepared/capable of dealing
> with 'cyber attack'? it seems fairly natural that a 'cyber attack'
On 10/21/2010 1:56 PM, Barry Shein wrote:
Well, if the DNS root servers ceased IPv4 service it'd be pretty much
a fait accompli as far as the public internet is concerned.
Given the reality of fragmenting the DNS -- including its root -- that's an
action that well might backfire. Current fr
On Oct 22, 2010, at 5:25 AM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 1:20 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>> On 10/21/10 6:38 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>> On Oct 21, 2010, at 3:42 PM, Jack Bates wrote:
On 10/21/2010 5:27 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>
> Announce your gua and then blackhol
On Oct 22, 2010, at 11:32 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Steven Bellovin
> wrote:
>
>>In the words of a former Justice Department official involved with
>> critical infrastructure protection, “I have seen too many situations where
>> government offi
" see a potential result of huge swathes of v4 resources reusable by these
companies, probably dwarfing the reclaimable resources most any other provider
without a similar customer profile will have."
See this is at the hub of it as well, is it a reusable resource, or is it an
obsolete one? Sh
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Steven Bellovin wrote:
> In the words of a former Justice Department official involved with
> critical infrastructure protection, “I have seen too many situations where
> government officials claimed a high degree of confidence as to the source,
> inten
On 10/21/2010 10:46 PM, George Bonser wrote:
Among other things, a senior DHS cyber official and other DHS employees
will move to the NSA to be closer to the heart of the military's cyber
defense capability. Closer collaboration provides "an opportunity to
look at new ways that we can do nationa
On Oct 22, 2010, at 11:04 37AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 1:46 AM, George Bonser wrote:
>> An agreement signed this month with the Department of Homeland Security
>> and an earlier initiative to protect companies in the defense industrial
>> base make it likely that the
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 1:46 AM, George Bonser wrote:
> An agreement signed this month with the Department of Homeland Security
> and an earlier initiative to protect companies in the defense industrial
> base make it likely that the military will be a key part of any response
> to a cyber attack.
On 10/22/2010 8:38 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
Unfortunately the folks in the IETF don't even want to listen, to the
point a working group chair when I tried to explain why I wanted such a
feater told the rest of the group "He's an operator and thus doesn't
understand how any of this works, ignore hi
IMHO you should never, ever make your MySQL accesible over the public
Internet, which renders the issue of MySQL not supporting IPv6 correctly
mostly irrelevant. You could even run your MySQL behind your web backend
using RFC1918 space (something I do recommend).
Moreover, if you need direct acces
On 10/22/2010 7:12 AM, Ray Soucy wrote:
The design of IPv6 is that DHCPv6 and RA work together. This is why
there is no method to express the default gateway using DHCPv6, that
task is handled by the RA. I suppose you could run DHCPv6 on a subnet
to give hosts addresses but never give them a de
In a message written on Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 06:25:18PM +1030, Mark Smith wrote:
> There isn't a method to specify a default gateway in DHCPv6. Some
> people want it, however it seems a bit pointless to me if you're going
> to have RAs announcing M/O bits anyway - you may as well use those RAs
> to
Hi Jorge,
What if the move to IPv6 was not too hard?
What if the move to IPv6 did have some positive results?
What if the move to IPv6 meant the reliance on IPv4 was significantly
diminished?
Would that be OK with you?
Thanks,
Mick
-Original Message-
From: nanog-requ...@nanog.org [mail
Matthew Petach wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 6:34 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Oct 21, 2010, at 3:29 PM, Joe Maimon wrote:
Matthew Petach wrote:
So...uh...who's going to be first to step up and tell their customers
"look, you get a v6 /56 for free with your account, but if you want
v4 addres
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 1:20 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> On 10/21/10 6:38 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> On Oct 21, 2010, at 3:42 PM, Jack Bates wrote:
>>> On 10/21/2010 5:27 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Announce your gua and then blackhole it and monitor your prefix.
you can tell if you're lea
The design of IPv6 is that DHCPv6 and RA work together. This is why
there is no method to express the default gateway using DHCPv6, that
task is handled by the RA. I suppose you could run DHCPv6 on a subnet
to give hosts addresses but never give them a default gateway, but
that would be a little
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 6:34 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Oct 21, 2010, at 3:29 PM, Joe Maimon wrote:
>> Matthew Petach wrote:
>>
>>> So...uh...who's going to be first to step up and tell their customers
>>> "look, you get a v6 /56 for free with your account, but if you want
>>> v4 addresses, it's
>> The end of IPv4 is near, but that doesn't mean the end of the Internet is
>> here. The next chapter gets a new page turned. Maybe we will determine
>> that IPv6 needs to go the way of IPX/Decnet/AppleTalk and some new system
>> (non-IP even) will take over the world.
IMHO, there is no such
On Oct 22, 2010, at 12:55 AM, Mark Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 15:52:08 +1100
> Karl Auer wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 21:05 -0500, Jack Bates wrote:
>>> On 10/21/2010 8:39 PM, Ray Soucy wrote:
How so? We still have RA (with a high priority) that's the only way
DHCPv
On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 15:52:08 +1100
Karl Auer wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 21:05 -0500, Jack Bates wrote:
> > On 10/21/2010 8:39 PM, Ray Soucy wrote:
> > >
> > > How so? We still have RA (with a high priority) that's the only way
> > > DHCPv6 works. I guess there is a lot of misunderstanding ab
On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 22:09:39 -0400
Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:51 PM, Barry Shein wrote:
>
> > Anyhow, it might be an interesting topic to discuss in the appropriate
> > venues, IETF, "What is the cost of maintaining IPv4 forever?" but it's
> > getting a little ahead of ourselv
61 matches
Mail list logo
