On Mar 10, 2011, at 11:22 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
>
> On Mar 11, 2011, at 2:02 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
>> If you want to be truly anal about it, you can also block packets to
>> non-existent
>> addresses on the PtoP links.
>
> Sure, I advocate iACLs to block traffic to p2p links and loopb
> How big? I see reports of Tokyo, was Kyoto affected?
it's up north at sendia which is taking the brunt
Jeroen van Aart wrote:
It started a few days earlier, I was keeping an eye on it:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/usb0001r57.php
For a complete list so far:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Maps/10/145_40_eqs.php
Did you feel it?
http://earthquake.usg
> USGS now says magnitude 8.9. And there seem to have been three
> aftershocks so far, two in the 7.x range...
shaking pretty continuous still
Randy Bush wrote:
manichi daily still says 7.7. but english language news is not very
current.
maz-san reports at least one fiber break
randy, cleaning up a lot of spilled coffee
It started a few days earlier, I was keeping an eye on it:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Qu
According to the Japan Meteorological Agency
-05:46 UTC M7.9 in Miyagi Pref. not M8.8
-06:15 UTC M7.4 in Ibaragi Pref.
still aftershocks often...
We see 20% - 30% traffic change in JPNAP Tokyo I
http://www.jpnap.net/english/jpnap-tokyo-i/traffic.html
JPIX also
http://www.jpix.ad.jp/en/technical
Upgraded to 8.8 a little while ago.
Owen
On Mar 10, 2011, at 10:25 PM, Paul Ferguson wrote:
> 7.9 magnitude:
>
> http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5iOJwLEwcIwB93yjCubUJpuu4UZKA?docId=6212195
>
> I received word a few minutes ago from a colleague in out Tokyo
> (Shinji
According to the Japan Meteorological Agency, it's 8.4
-05:46 UTC M8.4 in Miyagi Pref. not M8.8
-06:15 UTC M7.4 in Ibaragi Pref.
tomoya
On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 00:13:42 -0700
Khurram Khan wrote:
|bbc reports 8.8 magnitude with a tsunami.
|
|http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-1270
On Mar 11, 2011, at 2:02 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> If you want to be truly anal about it, you can also block packets to
> non-existent
> addresses on the PtoP links.
Sure, I advocate iACLs to block traffic to p2p links and loopbacks. Still,
it's best not to turn routers into sinkholes in the f
I think it's probably more useful for people to follow this instead
of media reports:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_big.php
-dorian
USGS now says magnitude 8.9. And there seem to have been three
aftershocks so far, two in the 7.x range...
Thanks,
Donald
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 2:13 AM, Khurram Khan wrote:
> bbc reports 8.8 magnitude with a tsunami.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12709598
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar
bbc reports 8.8 magnitude with a tsunami.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12709598
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Bryan Irvine wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Tomoya Yoshida wrote:
>> Japan had so big terrible earthquake
>
> How big? I see reports of Tokyo, was Kyo
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Tomoya Yoshida wrote:
> Japan had so big terrible earthquake
How big? I see reports of Tokyo, was Kyoto affected?
> http://www.veetle.com/index.php/channel/view#4d713653b2e98
bad report. murdoch style exaggeration.
BBC Feed;
http://www.veetle.com/index.php/channel/view#4d713653b2e98
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Yuki Nakae wrote:
> Kayabacho has also shaken heavily twice.
>
> The epicenter is off shore Miyagi pref.
>
> 2011/3/11 Randy Bush
>
> > manichi daily still says 7.7. but english language n
On Mar 10, 2011, at 8:00 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
>
> On Mar 11, 2011, at 10:51 AM, George Bonser wrote:
>
>> If you are a content provider, it doesn't make any difference if they take
>> down the links between your routers or if they take down the link that your
>> content farm is on.
>
>
Kayabacho has also shaken heavily twice.
The epicenter is off shore Miyagi pref.
2011/3/11 Randy Bush
> manichi daily still says 7.7. but english language news is not very
> current.
>
> maz-san reports at least one fiber break
>
> randy, cleaning up a lot of spilled coffee
>
>
manichi daily still says 7.7. but english language news is not very
current.
maz-san reports at least one fiber break
randy, cleaning up a lot of spilled coffee
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:39:31PM -0800, George Bonser wrote:
> Upgraded to M8.8 24km deep. This is a big one.
M8.8 at 05:46:23 UTC and M6.4 at 06:06:11 UTC so far according to USGS.
-dorian
Upgraded to M8.8 24km deep. This is a big one.
> -Original Message-
> From: Randy Bush [mailto:ra...@psg.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 10:37 PM
> To: Tomoya Yoshida
> Cc: pac...@pacnog.org; nanog@nanog.org; routing...@ripe.net;
> ap...@apops.net; af...@afnog.org; sa...@sanog.org
> Japan had so big terrible earthquake
still shaking in jimbocho
On Thu, 10 Mar 2011, Joseph Prasad wrote:
here is the Live Video feed.
a Tsunami has hit also.
http://www.livestation.com/channels/3-al-jazeera-english-english
USGS is saying 8.8 magnitude now:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/usc0001xgp.php
--
Mikael Abrahamsson
here is the Live Video feed.
a Tsunami has hit also.
http://www.livestation.com/channels/3-al-jazeera-english-english
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:23 PM, Seiichi Kawamura wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> (2011/03/11 15:19), Tomoya Yoshida wrote:
> > Japan had so big ter
7.9 magnitude:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5iOJwLEwcIwB93yjCubUJpuu4UZKA?docId=6212195
I received word a few minutes ago from a colleague in out Tokyo
(Shinjiku) office -- they could see the smoke of building fires in the
distance.
- ferg
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
(2011/03/11 15:19), Tomoya Yoshida wrote:
> Japan had so big terrible earthquake
Still shaking here in Tokyo.
We're seeing major traffic loss.
Seiichi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (MingW32)
iEYEARECAAYFAk15v9cACgkQcrhTYfxyMkI
Japan had so big terrible earthquake
--
Tomoya Yoshida
On Mar 11, 2011, at 11:34 AM, George Bonser wrote:
> And I say taking down 10 such farms is no bigger problem than taking down 10
> /64 backbone links.
Yes, but the difference is in routine attacker behavior.
And of course, iACLs should be protecting p2p links and loopbacks, irrespective
of
=
> Of course, it does - you may have many content farms/instances, and
> taking down point-to-point links can DoS your entire set of
> farms/instances, whereas an attack against a given endpoint access
> network doesn't necessarily mean that your other
> properties/networks/services are being atta
On Mar 11, 2011, at 10:51 AM, George Bonser wrote:
> If you are a content provider, it doesn't make any difference if they take
> down the links between your routers or if they take down the link that your
> content farm is on.
Of course, it does - you may have many content farms/instances,
>
> As Richard points out, there is *no* reason to configure /64s on
> point-to-point links, and there are obvious disadvantages. The "RFC
> wavers" are downright stupid to suggest otherwise.
>
> As for IXP LANs, I predict that one of two things will happen: either
> one or more major IXPs will
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:52 PM, George Bonser wrote:
> What I have done on point to points and small subnets between routers is
> to simply make static neighbor entries. That eliminates any neighbor
> table exhaustion causing the desired neighbors to become unreachable. I
> also do the same wit
I'm looking for an AT&T IP Transit sales contact. Email links on the website
don't seem to work and I was on hold for 30 minutes with an auto-attendant when
I tried to call.
I'm looking for transit on a 1Gbps access out of TelX @ 60 Hudson.
Thanks in advance.
On Mar 10, 2011, at 1:01 PM, Blake Hudson wrote:
>
>> My concern is trying to find a router (within our budget) that has room for
>> growth in the IPv6 routing space. When compared to the live table sizes
>> that the CIDR report and routeviews show, some can't handle current routing
>> table
>
> Man. It must be annoying to change all those static neighbor entries
> when the interfaces fail, links must be migrated to another line cards
> or you replace routers.
>
> --
Yeah, that happens about once every five years or so and in my
particular case there aren't a lot of these point to
On Thu, 10 Mar 2011, George Bonser wrote:
And this is better than just not trying to implement IPv6 stateless
auto-configuration on ptp links in the first place how exactly?
I don't use autoconfiguration. Static configured IPs, static neighbor
entries for these types of links.
Man. It must
> And this is better than just not trying to implement IPv6 stateless
> auto-configuration on ptp links in the first place how exactly?
I don't use autoconfiguration. Static configured IPs, static neighbor
entries for these types of links.
> My concern is trying to find a router (within our budget) that has room for
> growth in the IPv6 routing space. When compared to the live table sizes that
> the CIDR report and routeviews show, some can't handle current routing
> tables, let alone years of growth. BGP tweaks may keep us goi
Problem solved. NANOG is awesome! Thanks much to all who assisted.
It is actually quite easy to load the MIB definitions to you Ubuntu machine.
I just downloaded the complete Cisco MIB tree to make life easier "
ftp://ftp.cisco.com/pub/mibs/v2";. Downloaded the "v2.tar.gz file".
Unpacked the
Is anyone staying away from certain address ranges in /127s? I have seen where
they say not to use the all zeros or end addresses from 1 - 127. Thoughts on
this?
-Mike
-Original Message-
From: Justin M. Streiner [mailto:strei...@cluebyfour.org]
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 10:36
I suggest grabbing the whole lot from
ftp://ftp.cisco.com/pub/mibs/v2/v2.tar.gz ... I generally extract that
to a directory and move files to my MIB directory individually. This
has the benefit of preventing Net-SNMP from ripping through megabytes of
garbage related to x.25 and the like. Your iss
On Mar 10, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:52:37AM -0800, George Bonser wrote:
>>
>> What I have done on point to points and small subnets between routers
>> is to simply make static neighbor entries. That eliminates any
>> neighbor table exhaustio
On Thu, 10 Mar 2011, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:52:37AM -0800, George Bonser wrote:
What I have done on point to points and small subnets between routers
is to simply make static neighbor entries. That eliminates any
neighbor table exhaustion causing the desired n
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:52:37AM -0800, George Bonser wrote:
>
> What I have done on point to points and small subnets between routers
> is to simply make static neighbor entries. That eliminates any
> neighbor table exhaustion causing the desired neighbors to become
> unreachable. I also d
> If you configure a /64, you are much more likely to have guaranteed
> forwarding speed to that destination, and guaranteed number of routes
> in FIB. What you don't have is a guarantee that ARP/NDP will work
> correctly on the access router. If you choose to configure a /120,
> you may lose one
Hello All,
Apologize for my lameness in advance. I have spent some serious time
researching this topic and have decided to reach out to the forums as the
two of the smartest people I know have hit the same wall in the past.
Bottom line is I do not understand how to add (?compile?) MIB(s) into my
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Chris Woodfield wrote:
> I think this is the point where I get a shovel, a bullwhip and head over to
> the horse graveyard that is CAM optimization...
The classic problem with any sort of FIB optimization is that you
can't optimize every figure on the spec sheet a
mine is redirecting to google.com.hk too :)
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Gavin Pearce wrote:
> Sure you all know this already:
> http://google.com/ncr
>
> Temp fix for getting the .com version.
>
> G
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Keymer [mailto:m...@viviotech.net]
> Sent: 04 Marc
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 08:30:17AM +0100, sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
> > > Or how they do vlan configurations.
> >
> > I have complained about that, too. With Cisco you add vlans to ports,
> > with Brocade you add ports to vlans. Subtle difference. You can't look
> > at the config and very easily
On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 08:52:54PM -0800, George Bonser wrote:
> > No SNMP stats for virtual vlan interfaces and when asking Brocade
> > about it, you get told "it is too hard to program". You gotta be
> > kiddin me
>
> Yeah, that is something that has been bugging me. No stats on ve
> inter
49 matches
Mail list logo
