Level3 (3356/3549) changes routing policy

2012-08-02 Thread Fredy Kuenzler
From my observation Level3 has recently changed their routing policy. It seems that 3356 always prefers customer prefixes of 3549, regardless of the AS path length. Example (seen from 3356): 3549_13030_[Customer1]_[Customer2] is preferred over 2914_[Customer1]_[Customer2] Considering that

RE: cost of misconfigurations

2012-08-02 Thread Eric Wieling
I do not think occasional outages cause significant loss of customers. Customers get angry easily, but once an issue is fixed, they get happy quickly. Customers have very short memories and the cost and hassle of changing services is often significant. Outages are never good, but it is

Re: Level3 (3356/3549) changes routing policy

2012-08-02 Thread David Reader
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 10:33:38 +0200 Fredy Kuenzler kuenz...@init7.net wrote: From my observation Level3 has recently changed their routing policy. It seems that 3356 always prefers customer prefixes of 3549, regardless of the AS path length. Example (seen from 3356):

Procera Networks contact

2012-08-02 Thread Jason Lixfeld
If anyone has a contact at Procera Networks who can answer some technical questions about their product, could you please pass it along? The suggested methods at www. have so far gone unanswered. Thanks in advance.

Re: Level3 (3356/3549) changes routing policy

2012-08-02 Thread Justin M. Streiner
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, David Reader wrote: On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 10:33:38 +0200 Level 3 owns both 3356 and 3549. They're simply preferring to have their customers pay them, rather than a 3rd party. I don't think it's suprising at all that they're doing it. If, as you think, it's only happened

RE: Level3 (3356/3549) changes routing policy

2012-08-02 Thread John van Oppen
It probably should be noted that AS3356's local pref heirarchy is as follows: Highest: customers of 3356 Next highest: customers of 3549 Lowest: peers This does not really seem odd at all, and is probably what I would do if I owned two separate networks that were going to take a long time to

RE: Level3 (3356/3549) changes routing policy

2012-08-02 Thread Siegel, David
Thanks David, you hit the nail on the head on both points. Level 3 made the routing policy change last November, roughly 6 weeks after the acquisition of Global Crossing. Dave -Original Message- From: David Reader [mailto:david.rea...@zeninternet.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, August 02,

Re: Level3 (3356/3549) changes routing policy

2012-08-02 Thread Adrian M
Better to use communities instead. On Aug 2, 2012 11:34 AM, Fredy Kuenzler kuenz...@init7.net wrote: From my observation Level3 has recently changed their routing policy. It seems that 3356 always prefers customer prefixes of 3549, regardless of the AS path length. Example (seen from 3356):

RE: cost of misconfigurations

2012-08-02 Thread Brandt, Ralph
The misconfiguration cost is usually not calculable in itself. But I think the more important issue is, How do we prevent it? I would spend more time on prevention than assessing the cost. I can think of several minor provisioning issues that cost us more in customer relations than everything

Re: Is Hotmail in the habit of ignoring MX records?

2012-08-02 Thread Tony Finch
The relevant spec is RFC 5321 section 5. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/ On 31 Jul 2012, at 03:27, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote: Aside from that RFC974 [Page 3] gives mailers significant leeway in deciding how to handle errors:

Re: Is Hotmail in the habit of ignoring MX records?

2012-08-02 Thread William Herrin
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 4:26 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:07:37 -1000, William Herrin said: If you can reference where in the SMTP RFC it offers an authoritative explanation what to do when merging results from various naming systems where one but not all of the

Re: Fwd: Re: DOCSIS 3.0 PPPoE/L2TP compatibility

2012-08-02 Thread Scott Helms
Brian, That's only true if you want to truly implement transparent LAN services over DOCSIS. Separating the CPE data flow works with any DOCSIS 1.0 or better modem since all of the tricky parts are in the CMTS. We took a municipal cable network through 3 different CMTSs (3Com and then

Re: Update from the NANOG Communications Committee regarding recent off-topic posts

2012-08-02 Thread Robert Drake
On 7/30/2012 1:42 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: I'm sorry Panashe is upset by this rule. Interestingly, Your search - Panashe Flack nanog - did not match any documents. So my guess is that a post from that account has not happened before, meaning the post was moderated yet still made it

Re: Update from the NANOG Communications Committee regarding recent off-topic posts

2012-08-02 Thread valdis . kletnieks
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 16:25:56 -0400, Robert Drake said: Percentages: 5804/54166=1% of posts from low contributors. I suspect you fat-fingered something - I get 10.7%, not 1%, for that calculation... pgpGDidhtOsTj.pgp Description: PGP signature

RE: Update from the NANOG Communications Committee regarding recent off-topic posts

2012-08-02 Thread Jamie Bowden
What's an order of magnitude between friends? Very occasionally yours, -- Jamie Bowden(ja...@photon.com) Sr. Sys. Admin. (703) 243-6613 x3848 Photon Research Associates, Inc. 1616 Fort Myer Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, VA 22209 -Original Message- From:

Re: Update from the NANOG Communications Committee regarding recent off-topic posts

2012-08-02 Thread George Herbert
Friends don't let friends binary shift. On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Jamie Bowden ja...@photon.com wrote: What's an order of magnitude between friends? Very occasionally yours, -- Jamie Bowden(ja...@photon.com) Sr. Sys. Admin. (703) 243-6613 x3848 Photon Research

Re: Update from the NANOG Communications Committee regarding recent off-topic posts

2012-08-02 Thread Rhys Rhaven
On 07/30/2012 09:23 PM, Allen McKinley Kitchen (gmail) wrote: On Jul 30, 2012, at 15:04, joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote: On 7/30/12 10:57 AM, Steven Noble wrote: The fix for this issue is trivial. Every new signup ... Most of the subscribers to the mailing list never post. +1 (from an

NFSen plugin - ddd

2012-08-02 Thread Andrew Jones
Hi All, Does anyone have a copy of the DDoS detection plugin for NFSen called ddd that they could send to me? According to a blog article [1] I read, it used to be available at [2]. It's not there, and I haven't had any luck trying to track it down the usual ways. If anyone is able to provide a