Re: Colo in Africa

Then you are "doing it wrong(tm). Good luck. On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 5:40 PM Ken Gilmour wrote: > These are actual real problems we face. thousands of customers load and > reload TBs of data every few seconds on their dashboards. We have busy > servers. We tried cloud. I passionately hate it.

Re: Colo in Africa

Go look at the actual specifications for one of the metal boxes - you are not going to come close to maxing anything out with the workload you describe. FSB hasn't been a thing in over a decade. If you really wanted to go crazy you could do some build a custom solution in FPGA on the F1s. It's a

Re: Colo in Africa

0 PM Bryan Fields wrote: > On 7/16/19 10:55 AM, Akshay Kumar via NANOG wrote: > > The 2nd requirement seems artificial. The new hypervisors have come a > long > > way and the overhead is minimal. Also you can run bare metal instances in > > AWS if you really need them wi

Re: Colo in Africa

My bad. They announced that Oct 2018 so I figured they'd be close to it now. Yeah turns out it's mid 2020 :-( https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/in-the-works-aws-region-in-south-africa/ On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 4:02 PM Chris Knipe wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 4:57 PM Akshay

Re: Colo in Africa

The 2nd requirement seems artificial. The new hypervisors have come a long way and the overhead is minimal. Also you can run bare metal instances in AWS if you really need them with 100Gbps. Just just use the South Africa AWS region. On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 3:35 PM Ken Gilmour wrote: > Hi

Re: RFC 1918 network range choices

https://superuser.com/questions/784978/why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip-address-class/785641 On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > Does anyone have a pointer to an *authoritative* source on why > > 10/8 > 172.16/12 and >