On (2013-08-27 00:01 +), Christopher Palmer wrote:
If anyone has any data or anecdotes, please feel free to send an off-list
email or whatever.
[y...@ytti.fi ~]% ssh ring ring-all -t90 ping -s 1473 -c2 -w3 ip.fi|pastebinit
http://p.ip.fi/KA7N
[ytti@sci ~]% curl -s
On Aug 26, 2013, at 22:02 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 00:01:45 -, Christopher Palmer said:
What is the probability that a random path between two Internet hosts will
traverse a middlebox that drops or otherwise barfs on fragmented IPv4
packets?
THe fact
On 27/08/2013 08:55, Saku Ytti wrote:
On (2013-08-27 00:01 +), Christopher Palmer wrote:
If anyone has any data or anecdotes, please feel free to send an off-list
email or whatever.
[y...@ytti.fi ~]% ssh ring ring-all -t90 ping -s 1473 -c2 -w3 ip.fi|pastebinit
http://p.ip.fi/KA7N
Christopher Palmer christopher.pal...@microsoft.com wrote:
What is the probability that a random path between two Internet hosts
will traverse a middlebox that drops or otherwise barfs on fragmented
IPv4 packets?
This question is important for large EDNS packets so you'll find some
recent
Christopher Palmer christopher.pal...@microsoft.com wrote:
What is the probability that a random path between two Internet hosts
will traverse a middlebox that drops or otherwise barfs on fragmented
IPv4 packets?
This question is important for large EDNS packets
On (2013-08-27 10:45 +0200), Emile Aben wrote:
224 vantage points, 10 failed.
48 byte ping:42 out of 3406 vantage points fail (1.0%)
1473 byte ping: 180 out of 3540 vantage points fail (5.1%)
Nice, it's starting to almost sound like data rather than anecdote, both
tests implicate 45%
Drew,
Optimum's Hotspot locator will show partner hotspots that they have access
through. Check out their wifi locator page below to see you will have
wifi coverage.
http://m.optimumwifi.com/results.php?s=quickt=washington+dclocal=1lat=38
.9072309lon=-77.0364641#pageTop
They may also have an
Greetings all, I've got an issue I was hoping to put a few more eyes on.
Here's the scenario. Downloading a file at our Border is multiple orders
of magnitude faster then a few hops out. Using the same 128MB test file, I
tested at two different locations. As well as between them. Using
I've had good luck emailing them at abuse_...@abuse-att.net. Takes a
couple days to hear back from them, but they do generally reply.
On 08/26/2013 01:21 PM, Drew Weaver wrote:
Howdy,
Does anyone know of a good/working ATT.net postmaster contact? We
have been trying for several weeks to get
On Aug 27, 2013, at 6:24 AM, Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi wrote:
On (2013-08-27 10:45 +0200), Emile Aben wrote:
224 vantage points, 10 failed.
48 byte ping:42 out of 3406 vantage points fail (1.0%)
1473 byte ping: 180 out of 3540 vantage points fail (5.1%)
Nice, it's starting to almost
You didn't indicate this, but do you understand how TCP windowing works?
This conversation can go two very different ways depending on the answer.
To me, it looks like this is what you'd expect, and you need to fix your
packet loss issues, which possibly might be QoS settings related (but it's
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 00:34:57 -0700, Owen DeLong said:
That's a lot of questions he didn't ask.
This isn't your first rodeo. You should know by now that the question
actually asked, the question *meant* to be asked, and the question that
actually needed answering are often 3 different things.
And then you have other issues like networks that arbitrarily set DF on all
packets passing through them. That burnt a good three days of my life back
in the day.
-Blake
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 9:33 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 00:34:57 -0700, Owen DeLong said:
Duplex mismatch has been checked across the board. On every device.
Nick Olsen
Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106
From: Chad Dailey na...@thedaileyplanet.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 10:48 AM
To: n...@flhsi.com
Subject: Re: TCP Performance
I have done a decent amount of reading on both TCP windowing and Flow
Control. But I've seen a lot of conflicting data. Some say flow control
breaks more then it fixes. Where some say it's completely required.
Currently we do not have Flow control enabled. Our routers do not support
flow
This really sounds like you aren't testing the correct flow type in
i/jperf, or you have some QoS queues for http traffic but not the perf
traffic that are filled.
Regardless, your problem looks like either tail drops or packet loss, which
you showed originally. The task is to find out where this
Hello,
Can someone from Bluehost please contact me?
Email blacklist issue. We have gone through the normal support
channels, but have come up with the support staff @ Bluehost not
understanding the nature of our request.
Thanks,
-Bobby
Regardless, your problem looks like either tail drops or packet loss, which
you showed originally. The task is to find out where this is occurring, and
which of the two it is. If you want to confirm what is going on, there are
some great bandwidth calculators on the internet which will show
On 8/27/2013 10:04 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
On Aug 27, 2013, at 6:24 AM, Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi wrote:
On (2013-08-27 10:45 +0200), Emile Aben wrote:
224 vantage points, 10 failed.
48 byte ping:42 out of 3406 vantage points fail (1.0%)
1473 byte ping: 180 out of 3540 vantage points
If you have a router, you can turn on shaping to the bandwidth the link
will support.
-Blake
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Nick Olsen n...@flhsi.com wrote:
I do indeed have stats for TX Pause Frames And they do increment.
However, Our router is ignoring them since it doesn't support flow
No QoS is in use anywhere..
To the best of my ability I've eliminated Packet loss. However, I've not
found a way any better than ICMP/MTR/Ping -f..etc.
The reason flow control has been mentioned is to correct buffer overflow at
the Microwave links. Where they physically link at GigFDX. But the
I do indeed have stats for TX Pause Frames And they do increment.
However, Our router is ignoring them since it doesn't support flow
control.
I guess my next question would be. In the scenario where we insert a switch
between the radio and the router that does support flow control. Are we not
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Christopher Palmer
christopher.pal...@microsoft.com wrote:
What is the probability that a random path between two Internet
hosts will traverse a middlebox that drops or otherwise barfs on
fragmented IPv4 packets?
Hi Christopher,
I think there might be three
I have indeed tried that. And it didn't make any difference. Functionally
limiting each router port to is connected microwave links capacity. And
queuing the overflow. However the queue never really fills as the traffic
rate never goes higher then the allocated bandwidth.
Nick Olsen
Network
On Aug 27, 2013, at 07:33 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 00:34:57 -0700, Owen DeLong said:
That's a lot of questions he didn't ask.
This isn't your first rodeo. You should know by now that the question
actually asked, the question *meant* to be asked, and the
Based on various conversation threads on Nanog I've come up with a few
criteria for evaluating Tier 1 providers. I'm open to add other criteria -
what would you add to this list? And how would I get a quantitative or
qualitative measure of it?
routing stability
BGP community offerings
On 2013-08-27, at 15:02, Eric Louie elo...@yahoo.com wrote:
Based on various conversation threads on Nanog I've come up with a few
criteria for evaluating Tier 1 providers. I'm open to add other criteria -
what would you add to this list? And how would I get a quantitative or
qualitative
We are currently working on an algorithm that automatically detects
geographic hints inside of hostnames. At this point we are seeking
operators who can validate some of our inferences. Please contact me
if you can valid one of the inferences below or can provide us with one
we have missed.
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013, Eric Louie wrote:
Based on various conversation threads on Nanog I've come up with a few
criteria for evaluating Tier 1 providers. I'm open to add other criteria -
what would you add to this list? And how would I get a quantitative or
qualitative measure of it?
Define
On Aug 27, 2013, at 12:02 PM, Eric Louie elo...@yahoo.com wrote:
Based on various conversation threads on Nanog I've come up with a few
criteria for evaluating Tier 1 providers.
It's easy. Tier 1 is yourself. Tier 2 is your customers and your competitors.
Tier 3 is your customers'
Clued-in support is a good criteria. (I've been using a broker for some of
my connections and there was virtually no value-add there, especially in the
prefix-list modifications, and a liability in other MACs)
That's a good point with the Tier 2 providers. So that begs the question,
why
Good stuff Justin - Any other criteria that you would use?
much appreciated,
Eric Louie
-Original Message-
From: Justin M. Streiner [mailto:strei...@cluebyfour.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 9:17 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Evaluating Tier 1 Internet providers
On Tue, 27
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013, Eric Louie wrote:
Good stuff Justin - Any other criteria that you would use?
Joe covered a lot of good stuff in his response.
A few providers call themselves Tier 1, though the accuracy of those
assertions is often suspect. The truth can be somewhat more
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 13:45:34 -0700, Eric Louie said:
That's a good point with the Tier 2 providers. So that begs the question,
why wouldn't I just get my upstream from a Tier 2? (Because my management
is under the perception that we're better off with Tier 1 providers, but
that doesn't mean
http://www.renesys.com/products/ provide some guidance, but probably not the
kind of detailed tech you want.
Judging from my own experience, we have mostly been hit by limited path
diversity everything seems fine support in the past.
--
Tassos
Eric Louie wrote on 27/8/2013 22:02:
Based on
Tier 1 = Internet backbone providers (United States - ATT, UUNET, Sprint,
AboveNet/Zayo, Cogent, Qwest/CenturyLink, L3/GBLX). However, I might be
better served with a Tier 2 for reachability as pointed out in another
response.
When you say level of service, what are you referring to? Customer
I'm thinking that same thing, although after researching, the de-peering
King is probably not a contender as one of our primary upstream connection.
(And I don't have secondary or tertiary connections)
much appreciated,
Eric Louie
-Original Message-
From: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
If you don't have secondary connectivity, then I don't suggest going with a
Teir 1. Using a peer-only as a transit link is not something I would
recommend in general unless you know what you are doing in that regard, and
have designed around the inevitable peering issues related to that decision.
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013, Eric Louie wrote:
Tier 1 = Internet backbone providers (United States - ATT, UUNET, Sprint,
AboveNet/Zayo, Cogent, Qwest/CenturyLink, L3/GBLX). However, I might be
better served with a Tier 2 for reachability as pointed out in another
response.
Some of those providers
I appreciate that warning. The bigger truth is, No secondary/tertiary on
that router/in that location. I do have iBGP with alternate providers
through my core.
much appreciated,
Eric Louie
-Original Message-
From: Blake Dunlap [mailto:iki...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013
To add some more from recent experiences.. Most of these are in colocation
datacenters.
- speed to handle your emergency support call. (recent experience, some
tier1 can take a couple hours)
- if support requires a portal opened ticket, is the staff to reset a
password also 24/7.
- Latency
-Original Message-
From: Justin M. Streiner [mailto:strei...@cluebyfour.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 10:36 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Evaluating Tier 1 Internet providers
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013, Eric Louie wrote:
I would also look at which providers are on-net in
From: Bryan Socha [mailto:br...@serverstack.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 2:45 PM
To: Eric Louie; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Evaluating Tier 1 Internet providers
To add some more from recent experiences.. Most of these are in colocation
datacenters.
[EL] I'm colocated too.
-
If this was previously mentioned, my apologies.
The time they can respond to a PNI upgrade. If you have an existing 10G and
wish to add another. Can this be provisioned off the same device to form a
LAG or can they only provide ECMP. May not be something you can evaluate at
contract signing, but
- speed to handle your emergency support call. (recent experience,
some tier1 can take a couple hours)
*[EL] * time to respond / time to resolve are good ones (hard to get
them to provide the true values, though)
Call and pretend your a customer with an emergency.You might be
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Eric Louie elo...@yahoo.com wrote:
Based on various conversation threads on Nanog I've come up with a few
criteria for evaluating Tier 1 providers. I'm open to add other criteria -
what would you add to this list?
Billing issues such as:
attitude during a
You should also consider who exactly your customers (or you alone) want to
reach. Are you mostly looking to connect to eyeball networks? Enterprise
networks? Government networks? If you have some target networks you should
do some due diligence to find out how well connected your various
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Eric Louie elo...@yahoo.com wrote:
Based on various conversation threads on Nanog I've come up with a few
criteria for evaluating Tier 1 providers. I'm open to add other criteria -
what would you add to this list?
BGP Peering relationships
Peering policy. A
- time taken to turn around BGP import filter changes
So much This... You don't realize how important this is until your
nationwide provider takes 8 WEEKS to add one network to your (already set
up and working for 20 other networks) peering. Then decides to charge you
a fee for the change.
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013, Ben Hatton wrote:
- time taken to turn around BGP import filter changes
So much This... You don't realize how important this is until your
nationwide provider takes 8 WEEKS to add one network to your (already set
up and working for 20 other networks) peering. Then
From the NY tech meetup list. Any one here care to comment, off or on list?
j
-- Forwarded message --
From: Dean Collins
Anyone know more about Barclay Wifi -
http://www.fastcompany.com/3007452/innovation-agents/brooklyn-nets-barclays-center-slam-cam-puts-every-dunk-your-face
Any idea of the data rate required per stream?
Sent from my Mobile Device.
Original message
From: Joly MacFie j...@punkcast.com
Date: 08/27/2013 8:14 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: North American Network Operators Group nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Fwd: [newtech-1] Barclays wifi
From the
52 matches
Mail list logo
