geek whois

anyone else having problems wiht geek whois today? randy

Re: Packetfront/Waystream gear

Their products seem to be named 'MPC' or 'ASR,' reminds me of J and C respectively. Very unique way of naming things, I must say. On 10/15/2015 06:08 AM, rdrake wrote: Does anyone have experience running Packetfront hardware in a production network? We've looked at a few and they seem to be

Re: Microsoft / Outlook.com contact???

On 2015-10-15 01:58, Robert Glover wrote: On 10/13/2015 10:49 PM, Michael J Wise wrote: Unfortunately, that's not going to work if the refusal reason was FBLW15 (or TBLW15). You're not dealing with an issue on the Outlook/Hotmail side of the house. If you had provided the last two octets,

Re: Android and DHCPv6 again

Android does not have a complete IPv6 implementation and should not be IPv6 enabled. Please do your part and complain to Google that Android does not support DHCPv6 for address assignment. On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Baldur Norddahl wrote: > Hi > > I noticed that

Re: IPv6 and Android auto conf

On the nexus 5, if you are running android 6, you should enable older style dhcp. It can be found in the dev section.

Re: IPv6 and Android auto conf

Hello all Thankyou for your responses. A quick update on this: It must have been an Android bug. I got Android updated to 6.0 (Marshmallow) on Nexus 5 few days back and right after update IPv6 issue has been completely resolved. Device stays with usual two IPv6 addresses all the time and

Re: IP-Echelon Compliance

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:19:00AM -0700, George Herbert wrote: > These guys are in violation of CAN-SPAM. They're also in violation of the DMCA itself. 17 USC 512 includes this requirement for those filing DMCA notifications: (vi) A statement that the information in the notification is

Re: Microsoft blocking mail

On 18 September 2015 at 10:45, Marcin Cieslak wrote: > On Fri, 18 Sep 2015, Tei wrote: > >> On 18 September 2015 at 04:48, Keith Medcalf wrote: >> > >> > Being blocked is probably a good thing ... >> >> >> CGI forms that do the validation in the serverside

RE: Android and DHCPv6 again

Excuse my ignorance, but can DHCPv6 and SLAAC be run in parallel? Thank you, - Nich > -Original Message- > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Dave Bell > Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 9:52 AM > To: Ray Soucy > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: Android and

RE: Android and DHCPv6 again

Yes but Android refuses to do IPv6 if there is any DHCPv6 on the network. It is a bug. Regards Baldur Den 15. okt. 2015 17.22 skrev "Nicholas Warren" : > Excuse my ignorance, but can DHCPv6 and SLAAC be run in parallel? > > Thank you, > - Nich > > > -Original

Re: Packetfront/Waystream gear

Their products seem to be named 'MPC' or 'ASR,' reminds me of J and C respectively. PacketFront/Waystream actually owns the ASR trademark. We got quite surprised when Cisco released their ASR routers (Yes, I did work there from 2004-2011) /Anders

Re: Android and DHCPv6 again

Hi, > SLAAC by default provides the address and default gateway (RA) > If SLAAC managed flag is set, then DHCPv6 is used get the address and other > configs (DNS, etc..) > If SLAAC other flag is set, then SLAAC provides the address, and uses DHCPv6 > to get the other configs (DNS, etc..)

RE: Android and DHCPv6 again

Yes, SLAAC by default provides the address and default gateway (RA) If SLAAC managed flag is set, then DHCPv6 is used get the address and other configs (DNS, etc..) If SLAAC other flag is set, then SLAAC provides the address, and uses DHCPv6 to get the other configs (DNS, etc..) With SLAAC

Re: Google's peering, GGC, and congestion management

On Oct 14, 2015, at 1:07 PM, Baptiste Jonglez wrote: > In its peering documentation > [https://peering.google.com/about/traffic_management.html], > Google claims that it can drive peering links at 100% utilisation: > >> Congestion management >> >> Peering ports

Re: geek whois

> anyone else having problems wiht geek whois today? not geek whois at all. geek faulty memory. alias whois='whois -h whois-servers.net' randy

Re: Android and DHCPv6 again

On 15 October 2015 at 13:22, Ray Soucy wrote: > Android does not have a complete IPv6 implementation and should not be IPv6 > enabled. Please do your part and complain to Google that Android does not > support DHCPv6 for address assignment. I use android devices on my network

Google's peering, GGC, and congestion management

Hi, In its peering documentation [https://peering.google.com/about/traffic_management.html], Google claims that it can drive peering links at 100% utilisation: > Congestion management > > Peering ports with Google can be run at 100% capacity in the short term, > with low (<1-2%) packet loss.

Re: Android and DHCPv6 again

Hi, > Android does not have a complete IPv6 implementation and should not be IPv6 > enabled. Please do your part and complain to Google that Android does not > support DHCPv6 for address assignment. no different to other devices historically it can get IPv6 connectivity via SLAAC and then

Re: Google's peering, GGC, and congestion management

On 15 October 2015 at 22:00, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > The reason routers do not do that is what you suggest would not work. > > Of course it will work and it is in fact exactly the same as your own suggestion, just implemented in the network. Besides it _is already_ a

Re: sfp "computer"?

Hi, The problem with that is the lack of power options. I got -48V DC. And no USB port to power any devices. Regards, Baldur On 16 October 2015 at 04:47, Jameson, Daniel wrote: > Mk802 might get you close. Sub $50 plus a couple adapters. > >

Re: Android and DHCPv6 again

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:46 AM, Baldur Norddahl wrote: > Yes but Android refuses to do IPv6 if there is any DHCPv6 on the network. > It is a bug. > That would indeed be a bug, but I'm not aware of such a bug. As long as the network provides SLAAC as well as DHCPv6,

Re: Cogent BGP Woes

I am trying to turn up BGP on a circuit that ha never had it. In the past, you went to the support portal, filled out the questionnaire and in a day or so you would have you bgp info. When I did that this time I received a prompt response back from support saying this is now handled by sales

the fcc vs wifi lockdown issue

I had hoped to have seen some discussion of what vint cerf, myself, linus torvalds, jim gettys, dave farber, and 260 others just cooked up as to solve the edge device, wifi, and iot security problems we face. Press release here:

Re: Cogent BGP Woes

I am trying to turn up BGP on a circuit that ha never had it. In the past, you went to the support portal, filled out the questionnaire and in a day or so you would have you bgp info. When I did that this time I received a prompt response back from support saying this is now handled by sales

sfp "computer"?

Hi Does anyone make a SFP with a system on chip "computer" that you can run a small embedded linux on? I am sure it can be done because I have a "GPON stick" which is basically a ONU with a small embedded Linux all on a SFP module. Does get fairly hot however. My application is to run some

RE: sfp "computer"?

Mk802 might get you close. Sub $50 plus a couple adapters. From: NANOG on behalf of Baldur Norddahl Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 9:24:21 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: sfp "computer"? Hi Does anyone make a SFP with a system on chip "computer" that you can

ultradns / neustar outage?

hi, we are hosting some domains at ultradns, and they all seem to be dead. anyone else seeing issues? --jim -- Jim Mercer Reptilian Research j...@reptiles.org+1 416 410-5633 Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well

Re: ultradns / neustar outage?

On Thu 2015-Oct-15 17:46:19 -0400, Curtis Generous wrote: Our DNS is hosted by UltraDNS, and are unreachable. Anyone else impacted? Lots of people; primarily East Coast. This is being discussed on outages as well. https://twitter.com/search?q=ultradns From an

Re: Google's peering, GGC, and congestion management

On Oct 15, 2015, at 5:13 PM, Baldur Norddahl wrote: > On 15 October 2015 at 22:00, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > >> The reason routers do not do that is what you suggest would not work. >> >> > Of course it will work and it is in fact exactly the

Re: Google's peering, GGC, and congestion management

On 15 October 2015 at 16:35, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > The 100% number is silly. My guess? They’re at 98%. > > That is easily do-able because all the traffic is coming from them. > Coordinate the HTTPd on each of the servers to serve traffic at X bytes per > second, ensure

Re: Google's peering, GGC, and congestion management

On Oct 15, 2015, at 3:50 PM, Baldur Norddahl wrote: > On 15 October 2015 at 16:35, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> The 100% number is silly. My guess? They’re at 98%. >> >> That is easily do-able because all the traffic is coming from them. >>

Re: ultradns / neustar outage?

Neustar ultradns dashboard shows the service is unavailable On Oct 15, 2015 3:47 PM, "Jim Mercer" wrote: > hi, > > we are hosting some domains at ultradns, and they all seem to be dead. > > anyone else seeing issues? > > --jim > > -- > Jim Mercer Reptilian Research

Re: ultradns / neustar outage?

Our DNS is hosted by UltraDNS, and are unreachable. Anyone else impacted? On 10/15/15, 4:49 PM, "NANOG on behalf of N M" wrote: >*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(r) Pro* >Neustar ultradns dashboard

Re: Cogent BGP Woes

Sales now handled it because they bill now for having a bgp session. ​ Carlos Alcantar Race Communications / Race Team Member 1325 Howard Ave. #604, Burlingame, CA. 94010 Phone: +1 415 376 3314 / car...@race.com / http://www.race.com From: NANOG

Re: Spamhaus contact needed

On 10/15/2015 00:27, Jason Baugher wrote: Sorry to clutter up this list with an email issue, but hopefully someone is here from Spamhaus that can contact me off-list. I have a customer whose IP keeps getting listed in the CBL, and even after doing packet captures of everything in and out of

Re: Spamhaus contact needed

On 10/15/2015 12:32, Larry Sheldon wrote: On 10/15/2015 00:27, Jason Baugher wrote: Sorry to clutter up this list with an email issue, but hopefully someone is here from Spamhaus that can contact me off-list. I have a customer whose IP keeps getting listed in the CBL, and even after doing

Re: Spamhaus contact needed

On 10/15/2015 13:27, Larry Sheldon wrote: On 10/15/2015 12:32, Larry Sheldon wrote: On 10/15/2015 00:27, Jason Baugher wrote: Sorry to clutter up this list with an email issue, but hopefully someone is here from Spamhaus that can contact me off-list. I have a customer whose IP keeps getting

Cogent BGP Woes

Have the rest of you been having as hard a time I am having in turning up BgP sessions with Cogent? They have made it a sales order nowadays instead of support. I filled out the questionnaire on the support site over 3 weeks ago and was directed to sales. I am going on 3 weeks waiting on a

Re: Cogent BGP Woes

TWC is this way. They ignore it. I had to find someone responsible and it took a day or two. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Oct 15, 2015 11:40 AM, "Justin Wilson - MTIN" wrote: > Have the rest of you been

AW: Cogent BGP Woes

Hi Justin, no issues in the past 6 months ... neither in Kiev nor in Dublin ... most of the time solved within 2-3 days. best regards Jürgen Jaritsch Head of Network & Infrastructure ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs GmbH Telefon: +43-5-0556-300 Telefax: +43-5-0556-500 E-Mail:

Re: Cogent BGP Woes

Justin, What are you trying to do? I had a similar situation as my rep got the wrong product for BGP. I actually cleaned it up by talking to support and I had to fill out a second BGP questionnaire but it was resolved and turned up in a couple of days. James On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:38 AM,

RE: Cogent BGP Woes

I have not had a problem. Reach out to your account manager and have them put a rush on it. I just did this last week and had no problem getting it setup. If you don’t know your account manager reach out to: Smith, Christopher (csm...@cogentco.com) -Original Message- From: NANOG

Re: IPv6 Irony.

Getting IPv6 to the masses without giving them the ability to get their IPv6 problems resolved seems not like a long-tail issue so much as a really poor choice of deployment plans. Just my $0.02. Owen > On Oct 12, 2015, at 20:17 , Ca By wrote: > > On Monday, October 12,

Re: Spamhaus contact needed

When all it says is, "spam-sending trojan, malicious link, or some type of botnet", it's not a lot to go on. I've seen examples where their lookup tool provides more details, but in this case, the response is generic. In fact, usually when this happens to a customer, they're able to figure out