If you run a multi-homed network calling them back can't hurt. Apparently they
provide route optimization like Internap but is available for smaller networks.
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 02:30:52PM -0700, Ray Wong wrote:
> gotten a few cold calls from Noction. All I see is some PR about BGP
> hap
I try to write to you but I receive this error:
Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
cc...@b2b2c.com
Technical details of permanent failure:
Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the server for
the recipient domain b2b2c.com bysmtp.cidc.net. [66.158
We are using the product. It works fairly well although the code is
still slightly immature at the moment.
Started using it about a year ago in beta and it has greatly improved
over time (due to a lot of input from us beta testing it in the process :> )
On 4/10/2013 5:56 PM, Aaron Wendel wrote
It's like the Internap FCP. I think it's been on the market about a year.
They're a nice group of guys and the product does what they say it does.
Aaron
On 4/10/2013 4:30 PM, Ray Wong wrote:
gotten a few cold calls from Noction. All I see is some PR about BGP
happiness and good feelings wit
I think you answered your own question
--Original Message--
From: Ray Wong
To: nanog list
Subject: Noction?
Sent: Apr 10, 2013 5:30 PM
gotten a few cold calls from Noction. All I see is some PR about BGP
happiness and good feelings with no technical hints about what they
actually have to
gotten a few cold calls from Noction. All I see is some PR about BGP
happiness and good feelings with no technical hints about what they
actually have to offer. They haven't even hit me directly, rather seem
to be chasing us down via corporate listings, so are giving me
not-confident feelings I sho
Hello,
Any single-homed or more IPv6 AS174 customers willing to take a 5
minute test for me? Please contact me off-list. We are not single
homed to them but we have a particular destination that is having
issues, and the funky part is that any outbound traffic over the Cogent
transit is ju
In time of response order:
There is Leo's reference to the not yet concluded RAA process, in
which a para contains possibly relevant "registrar shall" terms.
This is forward looking (the proposed RAA is not yet required by the
Corporation) and may apply only to parties contracting with the
Corpor
* Carlos M. martinez
> the partner insists that Junos 12.3 / 13.1 supports RPKI on the SRX
> line.
JUNOS 12.3 and 13.1 aren't supported on SRX at all.
>From e.g. http://www.juniper.net/support/downloads/?p=srx5600 :
«High: Junos OS Release 12.2, 12.3 and 13.1 are not supported On SRX
Series, J
Hello all,
I'm working with a Juniper partner in Colombia on a possible RPKI
deployment.
As far as I understand Juniper's website, only the T, M and MX lines
support RPKI, yet the partner insists that Junos 12.3 / 13.1 supports
RPKI on the SRX line.
I cannot find any document or reference confir
to be fair: cloudmark did its best to contact me and it seems that we've been
able to resolve the issue. thanks!
as a side note: it might be a good idea to have some sort of lookup-tool on the
website or an email notification to the netblock owner.
thanks again (and also to the people off-list
I sent you a private reply, but also posting publicly…
On Apr 9, 2013, at 4:55 PM, "A. Pishdadi" wrote:
> In the last 2 weeks we have seen double the amount of ddos attacks, and way
> bigger then normal. All of them being amplification attacks. I think the
> media whoring done during the spam
On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 08:13:49PM -0700, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
> On 4/9/13 5:47 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> > Can you point is at the right address or form to submit regarding this?
> > Seems like its time for both on and DS.
>
> Jared,
>
> Joe is an employee of the corporation, a rat
13 matches
Mail list logo
