There are other stealth companies the space. I still see activity on
Twitter (favorites, etc) so I he is still active. We will see good things
in the space.
On Mar 13, 2015 11:31 AM, Adrian Beaudin adrian.beau...@nominum.com
wrote:
it looks like (according to linkedin) that Jeremy has moved to
The index scheme has worked very well with RFCs, and has the added advantage of
their index numbers becoming handy memes. I strongly urge Nanog to take
advantage of the RFC system's success. There is no shortage of monotonically
ascending integers :)
-mel beckman
On Mar 13, 2015, at 11:19
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,
CaribNOG and the RIPE Routing Working Group.
Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net
For
That's news to me, and quite a bummer. Trying to confirm on twitter now -
but it looks like other folks have also asked about it in the past week,
but haven't gotten an answer. So I'm assuming it is dead.
Guess it's Ansible + homegrown solutions for now.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 8:09 AM, Scott
it looks like (according to linkedin) that Jeremy has moved to a stealth
startup.
-a
Adrian Beaudin
Principal Architect, Special Projects
Nominum, Inc.
o: +1.650.587.1513
adrian.beau...@nominum.com
From: NANOG [nanog-boun...@nanog.org] on behalf of
Top Quality ?
Are they aged longer in special barrels? Polished extra nicely?
(Ouch, I think I injured my eyes from the rolling)
thanks,
-Randy
- On Mar 13, 2015, at 2:46 PM, Alec Muffett alec.muff...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps I'm odd, but I find the novelty of this to be amusing:
Perhaps I'm odd, but I find the novelty of this to be amusing:
IPv4 Market Group Announces the Availability of a Significant Portfolio of
IPv4 Addresses for Purchase in the RIPE Region:
IPv4 Market Group, a global leader in IPv4 sales, has just announced the
availability of up to 2.6
unrouted addresses I expect
What with their CTO declaring no need for IPv6 last June I do wonder if
the Government is in the driving seat of its network policy.
It'll be a'rolling in the aisles when HMG wakes up to find they've
flogged their v4 and can't deploy v6 and are to be stuck behind
You'll get more comments about the numbering scheme than any actual BCOP...
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Yardiel D. Fuentes yard...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello NANOGers,
The NANOG BCOP committee is currently considering strategies on how to
best create a numbering scheme for the BCOP
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:30 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 18:46:31 -, Alec Muffett said:
IPv4 Market Group, a global leader in IPv4 sales, has just announced
the
availability of up to 2.6 million top quality IPv4 addresses for
purchase
top quality?
This report has been generated at Fri Mar 13 21:14:30 2015 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
Agreed. A new document should be a complete replacement and represent the full
text recommendation.
Owen
On Mar 13, 2015, at 07:37, George, Wes wesley.geo...@twcable.com wrote:
On 3/12/15, 7:48 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
Then, just like the RFCs, maintain the BCOP
On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 18:46:31 -, Alec Muffett said:
IPv4 Market Group, a global leader in IPv4 sales, has just announced the
availability of up to 2.6 million top quality IPv4 addresses for purchase
top quality?
Well... Yeah. They've probably had no chance to end up in any reputation
I think the RFC numbering system is a terrible scheme. As Wes described,
you have a document purporting to describe something, with no indicator
that parts of it have been rendered obsolete by parts of other documents.
I pity implementors who have to figure it all out.
I also agree with Joel,
Colour me surprised that so many people are talking about the marketing
schtick (or: woe betide the seller for unspecified reasons) - and not the
opportunity... but so be it.
Digging around on the web I've found:
http://blog.jgc.org/2012/09/the-uk-has-entire-unused-ipv4-8-that-is.html
...which
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:30 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 18:46:31 -, Alec Muffett said:
IPv4 Market Group, a global leader in IPv4 sales, has just announced the
availability of up to 2.6 million top quality IPv4 addresses for purchase
top quality?
Graded by
BGP Update Report
Interval: 05-Mar-15 -to- 12-Mar-15 (7 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS61894 227643 5.2% 56910.8 -- FreeBSD Brasil LTDA,BR
2 - AS23752 220856 5.0%
The RFC index is updated when a new RFC updates or obsoletes one or more
existing RFCs. The old entry has pointers to the new RFCs and vice-versa. Now
which parts are updated is usually left as an exercise but it's usually not
too hard to figure out. There is also an errata system in place.
I have great hopes for Schprokits. The idea behind it is outstanding - an
Ansible for networking. It must be tough though, integrating all major
vendor APIs seamlessly into a product. I have faith in Jeremy and his
team...hopefully they are close to shipping code =)
*Pablo Lucena*
On Fri, Mar 13,
On 03/12/2015 11:52 PM, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 05:31:54PM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
Jon Postel. I'm told that it is out of favor these days in protocol-land,
from a security standpoint if nothing else.
The principle has nothing to do with security: it doesn't mean
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 10:37:10AM -0400, George, Wes wrote:
Please don't exactly replicate the RFC series's model where the existing
document can only be updated by new documents but is not always completely
replaced/obsoleted such that the reader is left following the trail of
breadcrumbs
On 3/12/15, 7:48 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
Then, just like the RFCs, maintain the BCOP appeal numbering as a
sequential monotonically increasing number and make the BCOP editor
responsible for updating the index with the publishing of each new or
revised BCOP.
Note, IMHO, a revised
On 03/12/2015 10:25 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
Robustness is desirable from a security perspective. Failure to be
liberal in what you accept and not being prepared to deal with
malformed input leads to such wonders as the Microsoft bug that led
to unexpected/malformed IP datagrams mishandled as
Schprokits was mentioned at NANOG63 but http://www.schprokits.com/
doesn't look too good.
What happened?
24 matches
Mail list logo
