Hi
We search a colocation at Equinix Singapore:
1/4 Rack with in option 1/2 Rack.
anyone know of a company that offers this service ?
Cordialy
Olivier
You'll still probably carry the /128 loopbacks in your IGP to deal with your
iBGP mesh.
Owen
On Dec 14, 2011, at 9:54 PM, Glen Kent wrote:
Hi,
In the service provider networks, would we usually see a large number
of /128 prefixs in the v6 FIB tables?
In an IP/MPLS world, core routers
Some idiot jumpered runs that existed between 3 different buildings. That
person did not know about the 550m limit that we also follow.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 14, 2011, at 22:38, Keegan Holley keegan.hol...@sungard.com wrote:
2011/12/14 oliver rothschild orothsch...@gmail.com
This is why I wish they would release it as open source or sell it to someone
else, the product really did work well, the kernel in the underlying Linux is
the biggest hurdle.
Thanks,
-Drew
-Original Message-
From: Rampley Jr, Jim F [mailto:jim.ramp...@chartercom.com]
Sent: Wednesday,
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011, Keegan Holley wrote:
2011/12/14 oliver rothschild orothsch...@gmail.com
How did you end up with a MM run this long? SX optics are only rated at
500 meters at best. Even with mode conditioning jumpers more the 1km is a
risk. I'm glad it held up during testing though.
I think you will learn a lot of /128s from IGP, but not from eBGP. I consider
the wild to be the DFZ or similar type of network and in that case, you
should not see advertisements for anything longer than a /48. This is not hard
and fast, but please correct me if I'm wrong.
- Brian J.
Is a good knowledge of either origin-AS, or next-AS with respect to flows
valuable in establishing, monitoring, or re-enforcing a security posture?
In what ways?
TIA,
Joe
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011, David Conrad wrote:
I'm confused. When justifying 'need' in an address allocation request,
what difference does it make whether an address in use was allocated by
an RIR or was squatted upon? Last I heard, renumbering out of (say) RFC
1918 space into public space was
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011, Glen Kent wrote:
In the service provider networks, would we usually see a large number
of /128 prefixs in the v6 FIB tables?
If you have /128s on the loopbacks of your routers, your other routers
could learn the /128s for the loopbacks of your other routers
through your
In a message written on Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 11:24:56AM +0530, Glen Kent wrote:
What are the scenarios when IPv6 routers would learn a large number of
/128 prefixes?
In addition to the loopback interfaces already mentioned, you may
also see virtual addresses of several kinds. For instance an
In a message written on Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 02:24:13AM -0500, Keegan Holley
wrote:
I always assumed that taking in more traffic was a bad thing. I've heard
about one sided peering agreements where one side is sending more traffic
than the other needs them to transport. Am I missing
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011, Joe Loiacono wrote:
Is a good knowledge of either origin-AS, or next-AS with respect to flows
valuable in establishing, monitoring, or re-enforcing a security posture?
In what ways?
If I'm understanding your question correctly, I think it can be helpful,
to a degree.
On 12/15/2011 09:07, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
I tend to think of squatting in the sense of using a resource (could be an
IP address block, could be an empty house, could be just about anything)
that the person who is using it does not have permission to do so. I
would think that
On 12/14/2011 11:14 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:47 PM, David Conradd...@virtualized.org wrote:
[snip]
I'm confused. When justifying 'need' in an address allocation request, what difference
does it makewhether an address in use was allocated by an RIR or was squatted upon?
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:42:40 PST, Matthew Kaufman said:
Here's a simple one involving squat space: You have a network that
internally is using *all* of 10.0.0.0/8 *and* 5.0.0.0/8 (because you
have enough customers to fill two /8s).
Now that 5.0.0.0/8 is being allocated, you need to move out
On Thursday, December 15, 2011 09:56:04 PM Brian Johnson
wrote:
I think you will learn a lot of /128s from IGP, but not
from eBGP. I consider the wild to be the DFZ or
similar type of network and in that case, you should not
see advertisements for anything longer than a /48. This
is not
On Thursday, December 15, 2011 10:42:37 PM Leo Bicknell
wrote:
However, there may be a simpler explanation. If you bill
by the bit as a transit provider it's in your best
interest to make sure your customer gets as many bits
through you as possible. Plus if you can fill their
pipe, they
Jimmy,
On Dec 14, 2011, at 11:14 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
A RFC1918 network is not a normal network; and this is not a
renumbering in the same manner as a renumbering from public IP space
to new public IP space.
I'll admit I haven't been following ARIN policy making for some time. Can you
On Dec 15, 2011, at 6:07 AM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011, David Conrad wrote:
I'm confused. When justifying 'need' in an address allocation request, what
difference does it make whether an address in use was allocated by an RIR or
was squatted upon? Last I heard,
2011/12/15 Mark Tinka mti...@globaltransit.net
On Thursday, December 15, 2011 10:42:37 PM Leo Bicknell
wrote:
However, there may be a simpler explanation. If you bill
by the bit as a transit provider it's in your best
interest to make sure your customer gets as many bits
through you
-Original Message-
From: Justin M. Streiner [mailto:strei...@cluebyfour.org]
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 9:45 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Is AS information useful for security?
origin-AS could be another story. If you know of an AS that is being used by
the bad guys for
On Friday, December 16, 2011 12:27:48 AM Keegan Holley
wrote:
Forgive my ignorance, but are connections between ISP's
normally billed by the bit? I'm a transit AS but not an
ISP in the traditional sense, so I just have the normal
monthly billing.
Per-bit billing, for us, is not a
In a message written on Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 01:15:48PM -0800, Cameron Byrne
wrote:
But all I can qualify for is a /18, and then in 3 months maybe a /17. This
is called slow start ? For an established business?
https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four216
You should be able to get a /16
On 12/15/2011 8:05 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:42:40 PST, Matthew Kaufman said:
Here's a simple one involving squat space: You have a network that
internally is using *all* of 10.0.0.0/8 *and* 5.0.0.0/8 (because you
have enough customers to fill two /8s).
Now
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 11:28:48AM -0500, Drew Weaver wrote:
I could be wrong here but I believe origin-AS uses a lookup from the routing
table to figure out what the originAS for the source IP should be (and not
what it explicitly IS) which means the information is unreliable.
Using a bit
--- br...@bryanfields.net wrote:
From: Bryan Fields br...@bryanfields.net
Now this gets a lot more fun as we get closer to true IPv4 exhaustion. If
there is a business case between two or more providers to side step a RIR
process and recognize IP allocations that the RIR does not, who really
The max limit for 100 base FX (100 Mbps Ethernet) is around 6600 feet. Many
campus ductbank systems built in the 1990s when 10 and 100 Mbps Ethernet were
the commodity speeds (before GiGE) used 62.5/125 MM fiber to connect buildings.
It is not unusual to see long MM runs on campus facilities
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote:
On 12/15/2011 8:05 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:42:40 PST, Matthew Kaufman said:
Here's a simple one involving squat space: You have a network that
internally is using *all* of 10.0.0.0/8
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:42:40 -0500, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at
wrote:
Now that 5.0.0.0/8 is being allocated, you need to move out of it (so
that your users can reach the real 5.0.0.0/8 sites).
Why wouldn't this be sufficient justification for a new /8 from ARIN?
Because it's not
Jeff Wheeler writes:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:07 AM, Keegan Holley
keegan.hol...@sungard.com wrote:
Had in interesting conversation with a transit AS on behalf of a customer
where I found out they are using communities to raise the local preference
That sounds like a disreputable practice.
On Dec 15, 2011, at 12:41 PM, Ricky Beam wrote:
Because it's not ARIN's job to clean up someone else's stupid.
ARIN's job (well, beyond the world travel, publishing comic books, handing out
raffle prizes, etc.) is to allocate and register addresses according to
community-defined documented
In a message written on Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 01:36:32PM -0800, David Conrad
wrote:
ARIN's job (well, beyond the world travel, publishing comic books, handing
out raffle prizes, etc.) is to allocate and register addresses according to
community-defined documented policies. I had thought new
On 12/15/11 13:43 , Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 01:36:32PM -0800, David Conrad
wrote:
ARIN's job (well, beyond the world travel, publishing comic books, handing
out raffle prizes, etc.) is to allocate and register addresses according to
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
We know rather alot about the original posters' business, it has ~34
million wireless subscribers in north america. I think it's safe to
assume that adequate docuementation could be provided.
I missed the post where he
On 15-Dec-11 15:54, Joel jaeggli wrote:
On 12/15/11 13:43 , Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 01:36:32PM -0800, David Conrad
wrote:
ARIN's job (well, beyond the world travel, publishing comic books, handing
out raffle prizes, etc.) is to allocate and register
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:36:32 -0500, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org
wrote:
... I had thought new allocations are based on demonstrated need. The
fact that addresses are in use would seem to suggest they're needed.
That depends on how you see their demontrated need. The way I look at
it,
In a message written on Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 01:54:28PM -0800, Joel jaeggli
wrote:
We know rather alot about the original posters' business, it has ~34
million wireless subscribers in north america. I think it's safe to
assume that adequate docuementation could be provided.
As I suspect there
On 12/15/2011 2:32 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
It would only take a couple of these sorts of requests and the free
pool is gone.
Personally, I can't wait.
Matthew Kaufman
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:32:17 PST, Leo Bicknell said:
80% effiency that would require ~2.5 /8's worth of space. It would only
take a couple of these sorts of requests and the free pool is gone.
/me makes some popcorn. This could be fun.
pgpCZOCgqbO2T.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On 12/15/11 14:12 , Jeff Wheeler wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
We know rather alot about the original posters' business, it has ~34
million wireless subscribers in north america. I think it's safe to
assume that adequate docuementation could be
On 15-Dec-11 16:31, Ricky Beam wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:36:32 -0500, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org
wrote:
... I had thought new allocations are based on demonstrated need. The
fact that addresses are in use would seem to suggest they're needed.
That depends on how you see their
On Dec 15, 2011 6:43 PM, Stephen Sprunk step...@sprunk.org wrote:
On 15-Dec-11 16:31, Ricky Beam wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:36:32 -0500, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org
wrote:
... I had thought new allocations are based on demonstrated need. The
fact that addresses are in use would
In a message written on Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 04:59:15PM -0800, Cameron Byrne
wrote:
Regarding this thread in general, I asked a question about slow start and
got a good answer about immediate need. Thanks !
Note that the slow-start is not based on size (as far as I can
remember) but on
It's useful in terms of remediation as it can help identify through which
door packets entered your network. Though, as others will undoubtedly point
out, it's trustworthiness will depend upon how you derive the AS mapping and
upon other security features (e.g. uRPF)
-- Eric :)
On Thu,
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 18:43:05 -0500, Stephen Sprunk step...@sprunk.org
wrote:
However, if they actually have the number of hosts claimed, that
justifies the space they're asking for. What addresses they're using
today is irrelevant. ARIN policy only /suggests/ that they use RFC 1918
space;
On 12/15/11 3:31 PM, Ricky Beam wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:36:32 -0500, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org
wrote:
... I had thought new allocations are based on demonstrated need. The
fact that addresses are in use would seem to suggest they're needed.
That depends on how you see their
I wonder how this will go in the USA and what trickle effect it might have
on us if Senator Conroy gets wind of it.
An Open Letter From Internet Engineers to the U.S. Congress.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/12/internet-inventors-warn-against-sopa-a
nd-pipa
Ephesians 4:32 Cheers!!!
47 matches
Mail list logo
