systemd is insanity. one would have hoped that deb and others would
know better. sigh.
vmlinux.el here we come!
randy
> On Oct 20, 2014, at 9:30 PM, Bill Woodcock wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
>> Breaking tons of things is an interesting opinion of "why not”.
>
> Eh. Off the top of my head, I see two categories of breakage:
>
> 1) things that hard-code a list of “real” T
On Oct 20, 2014 11:54 PM, "Doug Barton" wrote:
>
> On 10/20/14 4:07 PM, shawn wilson wrote:
>>
>>
>> Do we really have any prior examples that are even .1 the size of the
>> usgov public system? Again, I'm not just referring to BIND and Windows
>> DNS (and probably some Netware 4 etc stuff) - thi
Not that anyone is looking for a solution but I suppose one possible
solution would be to use the two-letter cctld then gov like
parliament.uk.gov or parliament.ca.gov etc.
No doubt there would be some collisions but probably not too serious.
--
-Barry Shein
The World | b
Hi Guys,
Not sure if this got posted before as I didn't see it come in my Inbox.
Have you heard of Saisei (www.saisei.com)?
They have a very good product that allows you to do this and much more in a
virtualised environment.
The software solution allows for very small to very large scale deplo
The platforms I¹ve seen used for large scale dpi is procera I¹ve heard
rave reviews, but also comes with the price tag.
http://www.proceranetworks.com
Carlos Alcantar
Race Communications / Race Team Member
1325 Howard Ave. #604, Burlingame, CA. 94010
Phone: +1 415 376 3314 / car...@race.com /
i won't comment on your experience, having no direct knowledge. why you
comment on mine is uninteresting.
-e
On 10/20/14 9:03 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
On 10/20/14 7:47 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
having written the technical portion of winning proposal to ntia for the
.us zone, i differ.
Hi
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Мурат Каипов wrote:
> Hello Guys.
> What about DPI solutions? We use Cisco SCE8000 for traffic policing and
> billing purposes. Also, as we in MNO market we use PCRF tools too.
>
>
Cisco SCE8000 or even smaller boxes are pretty expensive and then require
coup
Hello,
I never used it. I always get a fresh install of FreeBSD and configure it
from scratch so that it doesn't have all of the overhead from pfSense...
Downside is that you have to configure it all by hand, but when all you
need is one or two features, I prefer to do that instead. I usually go w
Hello Guys.
What about DPI solutions? We use Cisco SCE8000 for traffic policing and
billing purposes. Also, as we in MNO market we use PCRF tools too.
Regards.
21 Окт 2014 г. 6:41 пользователь "Alex Nderitu"
написал:
> Not sure if Allot has GA on the virtual appliances but they did a demo
> earli
Hi Skeeve,
Have you heard of Saisei (www.saisei.com)?
They have a very good product that allows you to do this and much more in a
virtualised environment.
The software solution allows for very small to very large scale deployments and
has a RESTful API for easy integration with your applicatio
On 10/20/14 7:47 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
having written the technical portion of winning proposal to ntia for the
.us zone, i differ.
The plan I outlined was discussed about 2 years after Neustar took over
management, and TMK was never actually discussed with Neustar.
as i recall,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 10/20/14 6:30 PM, Bill Woodcock wrote:
|
| On Oct 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Jared Mauch
| wrote:
|
|> Breaking tons of things is an interesting opinion of "why not”.
|
| Eh. Off the top of my head, I see two categories of breakage:
|
| 1) things th
On 10/20/14 4:07 PM, shawn wilson wrote:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
3. Set a target date for the removal of those TLDs for 10 years in the
future
Because this worked for IPv6?
Actually it worked really well for IPv6 in USG-space. It also mostly
worked for DNSSEC.
Em segunda-feira, 20 de outubro de 2014, Rafael Possamai
escreveu:
> Yes, pfSense can be virtualized. I did it once with VMWare to create a
> site2site tunnel, although I used Workstation 10 on Windows7 rather than
> the bare metal ESXi, but I wouldn't expect any changes.
>
>
What you think about
having written the technical portion of winning proposal to ntia for the
.us zone, i differ.
as i recall, having done the research, in the year prior to the ntia's
tender some six people held some 40% of the major metro area subordinate
namespaces. to my chagrin, relieved by a notice of termin
Not sure if Allot has GA on the virtual appliances but they did a demo
earlier this month
http://www.allot.com/index.aspx?id=3797&itemID=158923
On 21 Oct 2014 00:37, "Skeeve Stevens"
wrote:
What I'd really love is a vAppliance. Some of these hardware solutions are
VERY expensive for offering o
at ietf-9 jon and i discussed the problem solved (scaling of the zone
editor function as the price of network interfaces dropped by orders of
magnitude) by reliance upon iso3166-1, and the problems created by
reliance upon iso3166-1. the economic success of .cat (unique among the
icann 1st and
In message
, shawn wilson writes:
> On Oct 20, 2014 9:33 PM, "Bill Woodcock" wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Oct 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> >
> > > Breaking tons of things is an interesting opinion of "why notâ.
> >
> > Eh. Off the top of my head, I see two categories of breakage:
> >
On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 22:09:11 -0400, shawn wilson said:
> There's probably also a legal issue 1here. You can't make it so that
> someone can't communicate with their elected official.
You might want to actually surf over to house.gov and start looking at
how many totally broken pages are there. E
Jared,
On Oct 20, 2014, at 6:23 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> Breaking tons of things is an interesting opinion of "why not".
Beyond challenges caused by
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/name-collision-2013-12-06-en, is there
something new TLDs is breaking? (Serious question)
Thanks,
-drc
On Oct 20, 2014 9:33 PM, "Bill Woodcock" wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> > Breaking tons of things is an interesting opinion of "why not”.
>
> Eh. Off the top of my head, I see two categories of breakage:
>
>1) things that hard-code a list of “real” TLDs, and
On Oct 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> Breaking tons of things is an interesting opinion of "why not”.
Eh. Off the top of my head, I see two categories of breakage:
1) things that hard-code a list of “real” TLDs, and break when their
expectations aren’t met, and
2) things
Breaking tons of things is an interesting opinion of "why not".
Jared Mauch
> On Oct 20, 2014, at 6:10 PM, Bill Woodcock wrote:
>
> Equally, no reason not to.
On Monday, October 20, 2014, Israel G. Lugo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Not intending to start a flame war here. I have been referred to the
> website below, and believe they certainly raise some valid concerns.
>
> http://www.debianfork.org/
>
> If you have the time, please take a moment to read over the t
On Oct 21, 2014, at 6:09 AM, manning bill wrote:
> there was/is near zero reason to technically extend/expand the number of TLDs.
Equally, no reason not to.
> On 20October2014Monday, at 12:19, Sandra Murphy wrote:
>
>> By the time of RFC1591, March 1994, authored by Jon Postel, said:
>>
>> G
Hi,
Not intending to start a flame war here. I have been referred to the
website below, and believe they certainly raise some valid concerns.
http://www.debianfork.org/
If you have the time, please take a moment to read over the text, and
follow a few links. I am quoting the first few paragraphs
Spanish speaking countries .gob.$2lettercodecountry. No problem so far.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:05 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> In message
>
> , shawn wilson writes:
>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>>
>> > 3. Set a target date for the removal of those TLDs for 10 years
In message
, shawn wilson writes:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>
> > 3. Set a target date for the removal of those TLDs for 10 years in the
> > future
>
> Because this worked for IPv6?
Well there wasn't a target date set for the change to IPv6 and it
is starting to ha
I remember asking this same question when I first started managing DNS records
in the early 1990s. Being young and unencumbered by "it's always been done
this way" thinking I believed that it would only be a few years of transition
and .mil/.gov would be pushed to the history books. Now I'm ol
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> 3. Set a target date for the removal of those TLDs for 10 years in the
> future
>
Because this worked for IPv6?
> Obviously there are various implementation details for effecting the move,
> but application-layer stuff will be as obvious to
Provided without commentary, in case this impacts some operations:
https://www.facebook.com/Tinetworkers/
https://twitter.com/TinetStrike/with_replies
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:44 AM, wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 10:45:44 -0400, shawn wilson said:
>
>> 3. I don't want to see the report on how many Allaire ColdFusion with
>> NT 3.5 .gov sites are out there
>>
>> any other reasons not to do this? Maybe, but here's the real
>> question - why
On 10/20/2014 17:09, manning bill wrote:
FNC “reserved” .gov and .mil for the US.
And Postel was right… there was/is near zero reason to technically
extend/expand the number of TLDs.
It appears to this outsider that Postel and others never understood at
all that the sole purpose and destiny o
On 10/19/14 5:05 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:
Wondering if some of the long-time list members
can shed some light on the question--why is the
.gov top level domain only for use by US
government agencies? Where do other world
powers put their government agency domains?
... I think these questions
FNC “reserved” .gov and .mil for the US.
And Postel was right… there was/is near zero reason to technically
extend/expand the number of TLDs.
/bill
PO Box 12317
Marina del Rey, CA 90295
310.322.8102
On 20October2014Monday, at 12:19, Sandra Murphy wrote:
> By the time of RFC1591, March 1994, a
Yes, pfSense can be virtualized. I did it once with VMWare to create a
site2site tunnel, although I used Workstation 10 on Windows7 rather than
the bare metal ESXi, but I wouldn't expect any changes.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Skeeve Stevens <
skeeve+na...@eintellegonetworks.com> wrote:
>
What I'd really love is a vAppliance. Some of these hardware solutions are
VERY expensive for offering only an average solution. I'd also rather not
rely on their hardware, but servers with VMware (or whatever) that we can
design our own redundancy.
Does anyone know if Allot does a Virtual Appli
>Hey all,
>
>Just wondering what/if people are using any shaping hardware/appliances
>these days, and if so, what.
>
>I have a client which has thousands of customers on Satellite and needs to
>restrict some users who are doing a lot.
>
>So I wanted to see what the current popular equipment out th
Eric,
You may want to be a little more specific. I know from personal experience
that the divisions inside of Netgear (corporate/enterprise, direct to
consumer, and service provider) don't work together nor have common
infrastructure in many cases.
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ZCoru
Is there anyone from Netgear on this list? If you could contact me off-list, it
was be appreciated.
Thanks!
Eric Miller, CCNP
Network Engineering Consultant
(407) 257-5115
On 05/10/14 18:44, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 10:54 AM, wrote:
>> The *real* problem isn't the testing.
>> It's the assumption that you can actually *do* anything useful with this
>> data.
>> Name-n-shame probably won't get us far - and the way the US works, if
>> there's a
>
>
By the time of RFC1591, March 1994, authored by Jon Postel, said:
GOV - This domain was originally intended for any kind of government
office or agency. More recently a decision was taken to
register only agencies of the US Federal government in this
domain.
No referen
Can someone from softlayer/networklayer contact me off list please.
thks,
Humberto Galiza
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 01:07:13PM -0400, John Orthoefer wrote:
> People don’t use in-addr.arpa anymore? ;)
Hadn't you noticed how bad the reverse mapping maintenance is?
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
Dyn, Inc.
asulli...@dyn.com
v: +1 603 663 0448
On 10/9/14 6:46 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
For me and any others here in the "F" row, a question about the use and
meaning and implication of the use of the word "rogered".
"F" row indeed :)
On Oct 20, 2014, at 10:07 AM, John Orthoefer wrote:
>
>> On Oct 20, 2014, at 12:50 PM, Fred Baker (fred) wrote:
>>
>> […] and the older .arpa names quickly fell into disuse.
>
>
> People don’t use in-addr.arpa anymore? ;)
>
> johno
They do use that, of course. But for example they don’t
> On Oct 20, 2014, at 12:50 PM, Fred Baker (fred) wrote:
>
> […] and the older .arpa names quickly fell into disuse.
People don’t use in-addr.arpa anymore? ;)
johno
I wish marriages worked like that.. ;)
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
Original message
From: Bryan Fields
Date: 10/20/2014 8:13 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: NANOG list
Subject: Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On 10/19/14, 8:05 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:
> Wonde
On Oct 19, 2014, at 5:05 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:
> Wondering if some of the long-time list members
> can shed some light on the question--why is the
> .gov top level domain only for use by US
> government agencies? Where do other world
> powers put their government agency domains?
>
> With t
On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 10:45:44 -0400, shawn wilson said:
> 3. I don't want to see the report on how many Allaire ColdFusion with
> NT 3.5 .gov sites are out there
>
> any other reasons not to do this? Maybe, but here's the real
> question - why in the hell would we want to do this?
See your po
On 10/19/14, 8:05 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:
> Wondering if some of the long-time list members
> can shed some light on the question--why is the
> .gov top level domain only for use by US
> government agencies? Where do other world
> powers put their government agency domains?
>
> With the excepti
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Stephen Satchell wrote:
> On 10/20/2014 07:20 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 05:58:01 -0400, shawn wilson said:
>>
>>> Bad idea. I'm betting we'd find half of gov web sites down due to not being
>>> able to reboot and issues in old coldf
On 10/20/2014 07:20 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 05:58:01 -0400, shawn wilson said:
>
>> Bad idea. I'm betting we'd find half of gov web sites down due to not being
>> able to reboot and issues in old coldfusion and IIS and the like (and
>> needing to fix static links a
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:20 AM, wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 05:58:01 -0400, shawn wilson said:
>
>> Bad idea. I'm betting we'd find half of gov web sites down due to not being
>> able to reboot and issues in old coldfusion and IIS and the like (and
>> needing to fix static links and testing et
On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 05:58:01 -0400, shawn wilson said:
> Bad idea. I'm betting we'd find half of gov web sites down due to not being
> able to reboot and issues in old coldfusion and IIS and the like (and
> needing to fix static links and testing etc).
You say that like it's a bad thing
pgp
Nick Hilliard writes:
> On 19/10/2014 13:05, Matthew Petach wrote:
>> Would love to get any info about the history
>> of the decision to make it US-only.
>
> incidentally, why does the .gov SOA list usadotgov.net in its SOA? The web
> site for the domain looks like it's copied from drjanicepost
The name of the game is you create it, you set your own rules. The United
States Gov't was involved w/ the Internet before people thought about it
being more than just a US gov't system.
As far as the SOA, someone probably copied and pasted another SOA not
really knowing what they were doing (or
I know and feel the same way Roland. Just trying to figure out the best
way to get these users with a scare resource under control.
...Skeeve
*Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd
ske...@eintellegonetworks.com ; www.eintellegonetworks.com
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ;
For GPON and Ethernet it's just SNMP counters.
Frank
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Colton Conor
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 5:35 PM
To: Livingood, Jason
Cc: NANOG
Subject: Re: Keeping Track of Data Usage in GB Per Port
So it looks like DO
Used following two product to shape traffic on packet level (L3). Had no
issue with several thousand customer.
Allot
http://www.allot.com/netenforcer.html
ET
http://www.etinc.com/
Found "Allot" is very popular for satellite based Internet specially in
south pacific island countries.
-R
On
On 20/10/2014 11:12, Roland Dobbins wrote:
> Is QoS in the network infrastructure coupled with strictly-enforced quotas
> insufficient to needs?
for satellite, no.
> These permanently-inline boxes and blades that dork around with general
> Internet traffic to/from eyeball networks can be a suppor
On 19/10/2014 13:05, Matthew Petach wrote:
> Would love to get any info about the history
> of the decision to make it US-only.
incidentally, why does the .gov SOA list usadotgov.net in its SOA? The web
site for the domain looks like it's copied from drjanicepostal.com. Has
USGOV decided to open
On Oct 20, 2014, at 11:56 AM, Skeeve Stevens <
skeeve+na...@eintellegonetworks.com> wrote:
I have a client which has thousands of customers on Satellite and needs to
restrict some users who are doing a lot.
Is QoS in the network infrastructure coupled with strictly-enforced quotas
insufficient t
On Oct 19, 2014 9:53 AM, "Mike." wrote:
>
>
> I'd rather see .gov (and by implication, .edu) usage phased out and
> replaced by country-specific domain names (e.g. fed.us).
>
> imo, the better way to fix an anachronism is not to bend the rules so
> the offenders are not so offensive, but to bring
65 matches
Mail list logo
