Hi Clayton,
Putting on my TorIX hat, I'll address what you've brought up:
1. We implemented port security because MAC ACL's were not effectively
blocking certain types of bad traffic, which was a problem with the
hardware in place at the time. As you are certainly aware, getting
vendors to w
On 11/24/14 8:58 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 11/23/2014 11:20 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
>> Their grasp of load-balancing seems a
>> bit shallow also.
>
>
> Are there discussion/guidance papers that one can point to, to improve
> the depth of understanding, or at least get better configuration
> ch
We peer at TorIX and Equinix. I have to say that despite the fact that
Equnix charges us more for our port, we're getting far more value from it
than TorIX. Around double the traffic, and they don't have silly punative
measures like locking your port if you leak a MAC address other than the
one
Having run an exchange, I can speak to a couple of points.
1.An exchange is only as good as any other provider. If they don¹t have a
redundant design then you have more room for failure. Same can be said
about good staff behind it. If they know what they are doing and keep it
simple, then it ca
When we first lit our wavelength to Chicago, we had them terminate it in a
cabinet at Equnix. We then had our transit provider terminate in the
cabinet and we threw a patch cable in. No power ordered initially.
It served its purpose for the interim, but we eventually put a switch in
once we co
> - Original Message -
>>> Do these people never check what exactly they end up originating
>>> outbound due to a config change, if that's really the case?
>>
>> Of course not because their neighbors are allowing it to
>> pass; so as with all hijacks, deaggregation, and other
>> unfiltere
I’m not new here but the thread caught my eye, as I am one of the lower ASs
being mentioned. I guess there isn’t really anything one can do to prevent
these things other than listening to route servers, etc. I guess it’s all on
what the upstream decides to allow-in and re-advertise.
Jason
Ja
- Original Message -
> From: "Joe Provo"
> On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 12:53:07AM +0900, Paul S. wrote:
> > Do these people never check what exactly they end up originating
> > outbound due to a config change, if that's really the case?
>
> Of course not because their neighbors are allowing
Yes, we could of course pay for some space and power with a shared hosting
provider, but buying a full rack and power for a single router seems silly.
The ideal person to buy the small amount of space and power from would be
the transport provider that is transporting us to Equinix, but in most
cas
.-- My secret spy satellite informs me that at 2014-11-30 6:24 AM
Pierfrancesco Caci wrote:
>> "Simon" == Simon Leinen writes:
>
> Simon> Some suspicious paths I'm seeing right now:
>
> Simon> 133439 5
> Simon> 197945 4
>
> my bet is on someone using the syntax "prepend asnX
On 11/30/2014 11:26 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Dec 2014 00:53:07 +0900, "Paul S." said:
>> Do these people never check what exactly they end up originating
>> outbound due to a config change, if that's really the case?
>
> You're new here, aren't you? :)
Thank you, I needed t
On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 12:53:07AM +0900, Paul S. wrote:
> Do these people never check what exactly they end up originating
> outbound due to a config change, if that's really the case?
Of course not because their neighbors are allowing it to
pass; so as with all hijacks, deaggregation, and othe
On Mon, 01 Dec 2014 00:53:07 +0900, "Paul S." said:
> Do these people never check what exactly they end up originating
> outbound due to a config change, if that's really the case?
You're new here, aren't you? :)
pgpeSOBr2fqm8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
I'm currently looking into AS3 in an attempt to figure out what's going on.
Always interested to hear what others have found out.
Cheers,
Harry
On Nov 30, 2014 8:57 AM, Simon Leinen wrote:
>
> cidr-report writes:
> > BGP Update Report
> > Interval: 20-Nov-14 -to- 27-Nov-14 (7 days)
> > Obse
Do these people never check what exactly they end up originating
outbound due to a config change, if that's really the case?
On 11/30/2014 午後 11:24, Pierfrancesco Caci wrote:
"Simon" == Simon Leinen writes:
Simon> Some suspicious paths I'm seeing right now:
Simon> 133439 5
S
> "Simon" == Simon Leinen writes:
Simon> Some suspicious paths I'm seeing right now:
Simon> 133439 5
Simon> 197945 4
my bet is on someone using the syntax "prepend asnX timesY" on a router
that instead wants "prepend asnX asnX"
--
Pierfrancesco Caci, ik5pvx
cidr-report writes:
> BGP Update Report
> Interval: 20-Nov-14 -to- 27-Nov-14 (7 days)
> Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
> TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
> Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
[...]
> 11 - AS5 38861 0.6% 7.0 -- SYMBOLICS - Symbolics,
Subject: Phasing out of telco TDM Backbones (was: Phasing out of copper) Date:
Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 12:09:40AM -0500 Quoting Jay Ashworth (j...@baylink.com):
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Måns Nilsson"
>
> > Maintaining copper plant is expensive. It will be retired as soon as
> > buy
n Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 10:27 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> The phenomena I reported was observed on a consumer cable service (not
> my own). it is now no-longer in evidence with that same source ip. In
> answer an intermediate observation, the cpe and the devices on it are
> sufficiently well underst
19 matches
Mail list logo
