Hello folks,
Does anyone have any experiences or insights to share on how more (or
less) efficient routing is with IPv6? Any specific thoughts with respect to
how the following characteristics help or not with routing efficiency?
- fixed header size
- Extension header chain
- flow labels in heade
BGP Update Report
Interval: 09-Jan-14 -to- 16-Jan-14 (7 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS14420 64462 2.7% 131.6 -- CORPORACION NACIONAL DE
TELECOMUNICACIONES - CNT EP
2 - AS3
This report has been generated at Fri Jan 17 21:13:37 2014 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org/2.0 for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014, John Kristoff wrote:
>
> UNISOG no longer exists. The REN-ISAC community has, mostly, replaced
> it.
>
> Have you just tried contacting their security folks directly? Chances
> are usually high if an .edu has a dedicated security staff and web
> site, that is probably the
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 13:25:42 -0600
"J. Oquendo" wrote:
> Yes I know there is UNISOG, not on it anymore. Can someone
> on that list either forward, or put me in touch with one
> in the know there (AS5078) concerning things malware related
> appreciated.
UNISOG no longer exists. The REN-ISAC comm
Yes I know there is UNISOG, not on it anymore. Can someone
on that list either forward, or put me in touch with one
in the know there (AS5078) concerning things malware related
appreciated.
--
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
J. Oquendo
SGFA, SGFE, C|EH, CNDA, CHFI,
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, AusNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, LacNOG,
TRNOG, CaribNOG and the RIPE Routing Working Group.
Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.ap
On 2014-01-16, at 18:21, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> On 2014-01-16 23:11, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>> On 16/01/2014 21:22, Jon Lewis wrote:
>>> Also, at least of the ones I've dealt with, there is no verification of
>>> records as they're entered.
>>
>> on the RIPE IRRDB, there is validation, so you can
Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> I can point anyone interested to the place in the
> bind source to force it to reply to all UDP queries with TC=1
> to force TCP. should be safe on any authority servers, as a recursive
> server should be able to do outbound TCP.
However see http://www.potaroo.net/is
9 matches
Mail list logo
