On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 4:18 PM Lancheng via NANOG wrote:
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> >Hurricane Electric now uses ASPA to do hop by hop checking of AS paths
> >when deciding which routes to accept when building prefix filters.
>
> >Here is an example of a route failing the ASPA check.
>
> >44.31.69.0/24,rej
On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 11:38 AM Laura Smith
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Monday, 12 August 2024 at 16:11, Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
>
> >
> > you MIGHT try just using the 'clear the google-public-dns cache' page:
> > https://developers.google.com/speed/
On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 10:15 AM Matt Corallo wrote:
> On 8/10/24 10:16 AM, Laura Smith via NANOG wrote:
> > In typical "Google knows best" style they appear to be ignoring SOA and TTL
> > and doing their own thing.
you MIGHT try just using the 'clear the google-public-dns cache' page:
https:
On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 12:52 PM Saku Ytti wrote:
>
> budget, the actual hardware becomes very important, so i think lack of
> specificity there implies it's not about latency.
I'd bet the real answer is that someone wants to connect a commodity
server to an IX and pretend to be
some network/asn a
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 1:40 PM Matt Erculiani wrote:
>
> It's important to note though that if you quietly (or even publicly) patch
> 600k devices to fix a bug, nobody cares. Plus, doing so is still a crime:
> it's 600k instances of accessing a computer system without permission. It's
> also fa
“We checked the website you are trying to access for malicious and
spear-phishing content and found it likely to be unsafe.”
perhaps charter thinks there's a reason to not permit folks to access
a possibly dangerous site?
(it's also possible it just got cough up amongst some other stuff in
the hos
On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 12:03 PM 𝑀𝒶𝓇𝒸𝑜 𝒟𝒶𝓋𝒾𝒹𝓈 via NANOG
wrote:
>
> Op 27-02-24 om 16:22 schreef Brotman, Alex:
>
> > We are seeing the same,
>
> Thanks.
>
> > You may also want to ask the mailop list.
>
>
> I was about to do that, when I noticed that the problem seems solved.
sorry about the nois
On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 1:27 PM Owen DeLong wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jan 21, 2024, at 16:10, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2024, 5:39 PM Owen DeLong wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 21, 2024, at 12:07, Christopher Morrow
>> w
On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 7:39 AM kubanowy wrote:
> On Jan 19, 2024, at 02:39, kubanowy wrote:
>
> Hi,
> We have our own prefix assignment from ARIN. We have our infrastructure in
> GCP (Google Cloud Platform) where we started using BYOIP functionality
> (Google advertises our IPs). We followed t
On Sun, Jan 21, 2024, 5:39 PM Owen DeLong wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 21, 2024, at 12:07, Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2024, 4:55 PM Owen DeLong via NANOG
> wrote:
>
>> Sounds like you’ve got a weird mix of route origination. Why woul
On Fri, Jan 19, 2024, 4:55 PM Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote:
> Sounds like you’ve got a weird mix of route origination. Why wouldn’t you
> advertise to Google via BGP and have your prefix originate from your own
> ASN?
>
I think in this case the customer has their own disconnected deployment,
and
Why is this conversation even still going on?
It's been established ~100 messages ago that the plan here is nonsense.
it's been established ~80 messages ago that the 'lemme swap subjects to
confuse the issue' is nonsense.
stop feeding the troll.
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 11:20 PM Christopher Hawker
(I have not looked at our config in a bit to be sure)
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 1:29 PM Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 11:06 AM Tom Beecher wrote:
>> >
>> > From my observations, all us-east-5 IPs are announced via transit and
>&g
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 10:17 AM Ray Bellis wrote:
>
>
>
> On 05/12/2023 12:29, Michael Hare via NANOG wrote:
>
> > At quick glance following the ISC link I didn’t see the compute
> > infrastructure [core count] needed to get 1Mpps. There is an obvious
> > difference between 99% load of ~500rps an
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 11:06 AM Tom Beecher wrote:
>
> From my observations, all us-east-5 IPs are announced via transit and peering
> at all of my locations Chicago and east.
>
i would expect that google announces the /16 at least from 'everywhere', yes.
> On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 9:11 AM Drew W
note an entirely helpful answer, but google does publish:
https://www.gstatic.com/ipranges/cloud.json - where isp live in
'google cloud' (mostly where they live)
https://www.gstatic.com/ipranges/goog.json - prefixes announced
maybe 'where' was not 'location' but 'origination by as15169 and it'
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 9:31 PM Tom Samplonius wrote:
>> The most surprising thing in the DE-DIX flow chart, was that they check
>> that the origin AS exists in the IRR as-set, before doing RPKI, and if the
>> set existence fails, they reject the route. I don’t see a problem with
>> this,
On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 10:22 AM Tom Beecher wrote:
>>
>> In the service provider industry, its primary use is for advertising address
>> resources (IPv4/v6 and ASN)
>
>
> Not really.
I would think there are a few uses of LOA in the telco/SP world, at least:
1) 'can I make this cross-connec
On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at 4:51 PM Dave Taht wrote:
>
> Anyone have an update as to where this effort, announcing qute a bit
> of usa government space, stands?
>
they stopped their internet telescope project?
> https://www.kentik.com/blog/the-mystery-of-as8003/
> --
> Oct 30: https://netdevconf.info
Hank, all exact match for prefix length? Or longer subnets covering the
whole?
(Is this leakage of a optimizer or possibly censorship leakage?)
On Sun, Oct 22, 2023, 1:03 PM Olivier Benghozi
wrote:
> Same stuff (with our ASN and our prefixes) detected here, coming
> from AS2027 (Milkywan), for a
On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 12:54 PM wrote:
>
> * morrowc.li...@gmail.com (Christopher Morrow) [Tue 03 Oct 2023, 18:29 CEST]:
> >this sort of thing (provider X scrapes Y and mails Z for sales leads)
> >every ~18 months.
> >the same outrage and conversation happens every time
this sort of thing (provider X scrapes Y and mails Z for sales leads)
every ~18 months.
the same outrage and conversation happens every time.
the same protection mechanisms are noted every time.
Is there a reason that: "killfileand move on" is not the answer
everytime for this?
(why do we need to
On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 6:56 AM Jim wrote:
...
> My understanding is a good number of password manager products exists which
> will handle that,
> and then the only AAA which network devices need to be concerned about for
> Authentication and
> Authorization is Basic password auth, which all
On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 5:40 AM Simon Leinen wrote:
>
> Christopher Morrow writes:
> > On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 1:22 PM Jim wrote:
> >>
> >> Router operating systems still typically use only passwords with
> >> SSH, then those devices send the passwords ov
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 1:22 PM Jim wrote:
>
> Router operating systems still typically use only passwords with
> SSH, then those devices send the passwords over that insecure channel. I
> have yet to
> see much in terms of routers capable to Tacacs+ Authorize users based on
> users'
> openSS
On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 11:45 AM Warren Kumari wrote:
>> from: me
>> this is a common problem (or is common when I look at things, perhaps I'm
>> looking wrongly, but...)
>> I'd love to have something that parsed all of my device type configs and
>> output the results into a
>> 'database' that i
On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 11:10 AM Justin H. wrote:
>
> Christopher Morrow wrote:
> >
> > In looking around there are examples of some of this, in a way, the
> > most common thing
> > I end up looking at, and getting sad about, is some java monstrosity
> > (who&#
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 11:39 PM Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote:
>
> On 8/21/23 7:09 PM, Diogo Montagner wrote:
> > I would first try to understand what you are trying to achieve. JUNOS is
> > very flexible on this front and I am wondering why you think yacc is the
> > right way to achieve what you
On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 5:36 PM Delong.com wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jun 23, 2023, at 12:19, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 9:16 AM Mike Hammett wrote:
>
>
> I view throwing everything into NOVA as being lazy. Throwing so many at one
> p
On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 3:57 PM William Herrin wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 12:19 PM Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
> > The discussions in local news (in nova) seem to center around:
> > "but the noise!"
> >
> > i'm sure it'll work out in
On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 9:16 AM Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> I view throwing everything into NOVA as being lazy. Throwing so many at one
> place isn't good for resiliency.
there's nyc and chicago and california :) (and dallas)
but.. :)
The discussions in local news (in nova) seem to center around:
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 4:59 PM William Herrin wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 1:38 PM Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 2:35 PM William Herrin wrote:
> > > Ping is used by some versions of traceroute which can help the
> >
> >
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 2:35 PM William Herrin wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 11:00 AM Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 4:37 AM wrote:
> > > Cutting PING means you are hurting your basic troubleshooting.
> > > Is that thin
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 4:37 AM wrote:
>
> So, DoD does NOT have capacity to answer those little ICMP echo
> request packets? Heh.. Anyway, this is IMO terrible practice.
why?
> Cutting PING means you are hurting your basic troubleshooting.
> Is that thing even plugged in? Maybe Firewall misconf
On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 8:48 AM richey goldberg
wrote:
> In 25 years of working for ISPs I don’t think I’ve ever worked for one that
> SWIPed IP space of any size to an end user and I don’t think I’ve ever seen a
> request. Mostly because no one wants to put a list of customers out in the
> pu
On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 5:41 PM Ca By wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>> **ROA Auto-renewal**
>>
>> After the May software release, any ROA created via ARIN Online or the new
>> RESTful provisioning endpoint will be automatically renewed, meaning all
>> newly created ROAs will persist indefinitely until they ar
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 7:08 PM Brandon Zhi wrote:
>
> Our person in charge has consulted with their previous person in charge, and
> their response is this.
you are talking up the discussion with the wrong folks, really.
Please go see the spamhaus folk directly.
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 9:51 AM Brandon Zhi wrote:
> I don't think any ISP would reject an IP that is on the Spamhaus list.
you, clearly, have been living under several rocks for a very long time.
On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 4:19 PM Christopher Munz-Michielin
wrote:
>
> Not this exact scenario, but what we see a lot of in my VPS company is
> people sending spam by using our VPS' source addresses, but routing
> outbound via some kind of tunnel to a VPN provider or similar in order
> to bypass our
On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 6:12 PM Sean Donelan wrote:
>
> Verizon network maintenance will impact access to the “National Driver
> Register,” a system that motor vehicle offices around the country need to
> check before handing out a license.
Wait, what year is it?
how is a network maintenance on w
Didn't ethan's project:
https://www.measurementlab.net/publications/reverse-traceroute.pdf
end with usable code/etc?
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 8:09 AM Rolf Winter wrote:
>
> Dear NANOG folks,
>
> As you know, traceroute is unable to enumerate routers on the reverse
> path. Given that paths throu
On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 11:18 AM Mike Hammett wrote:
> Initially, my thought was to use community filtering to push just IXes,
> customers, and defaults throughout the network, but that's obviously still
> sub-optimal.
>
> I'd be surprised if a last mile network had a ton of traffic going to any
>
On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 8:37 AM Tom Beecher wrote:
> Disagree that it’s a line in the sand. It’s use the right tool for the
> job.
>
> If a device is low FIB, it’s that way for a reason. There are plenty of
> ways to massage that with policy and software, depending on capabilities ,
> but at the e
idays!
>
you as well!
> /John
>
> On Jan 3, 2023, at 11:01 AM, Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 10:53 AM John Curran wrote:
>
>> Mike -
>>
>> A friendlier RPKI system would allow you to delegate/authorize the
>
On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 10:53 AM John Curran wrote:
> Mike -
>
> A friendlier RPKI system would allow you to delegate/authorize the
> automatic action of refreshing your RPKI ROA’s when they are close to
> expiration.
>
> ARIN’s current RPKI system does not provide this (we literally cannot
> unde
On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 9:58 AM Mike Hammett wrote:
> ROAs expire. Creating new ones doesn't seem to be terribly difficult, but
> why do they expire in the first place?
>
>
I think this is covered in the overview rpki document (design decisions):
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8374/
maybe
On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 12:50 PM Lukas Tribus wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 28 Dec 2022 at 17:41, Mike Hammett wrote:
> >
> > Does AS15169 have a speed test?
>
> Stadia speedtest is still up today:
>
> https://stadia.google.com/speedtest
"Google partners with Measurement Lab (M-Lab) to run this
cific conflicts.
>
> It does look like 3356 pulled the announcement, which is good.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 4:48 AM Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 11:25 PM Ryan Hamel wrote:
>> >
>> > AS3356 has been announcing 2000
On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 11:25 PM Ryan Hamel wrote:
>
> AS3356 has been announcing 2000::/12 for about 3 hours now, an aggregate
> covering over 23K prefixes (just over 25%) of the IPv6 DFZ.
>
>
interesting that this is leaking outside supposed RPKI OV boundaries as well.
For example:
6762 3356
On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 8:49 AM Lukas Tribus wrote:
>
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 at 14:00, Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
> > Also, also, possibly the output path on the session(s) here is not
> > filtering in an OV fashion.
>
> ROV belongs on the input path, let'
There are 2 sides to the bgp conversation for any ASN, and then really 4 sides.
customer -> RAS -> peer (settlement-free)
peer(sfp) -> RAS -> customer
customer -> ras -> transit
transit -> ras -> customer
Depending on the RAS's capabilities or status in their journey to
'fully RAS', it's
On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 8:36 PM wrote:
>
> The FCC hasn’t enforced it because the burden on large carriers to collect
> that data would be insane. And it would be reduce the flexibility of large
> carriers to take on new traffic in disaster situations, which is one of the
> strongest points of t
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 12:00 PM Sean Donelan wrote:
>
> On Sat, 27 Aug 2022, Michael Thomas wrote:
> >> In some situations where a client machine is connected via some specific
> >> Optical Network Terminals (ONTs), and data is appended after the packet
> >> checksum, the network adapter can drop
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 5:49 AM Bjoern Franke via NANOG wrote:
>
> Hi,
> while investigating an issue I was wondering a german IP was only 1-2
> hops away from some RIPE Atlas Probes connected via AS701.
>
> It seems at least probe #50235 and #54508 see any IP directly as next
> hop, as an example
On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 11:44 AM holow29 wrote:
> I would expect Verizon to be able to contact CT and figure out why they
> aren't passing the correct routes just as I might expect Baidu to do the
> same thing, I suppose. Ultimately,
>
You seem to be misunderstanding the relationship here...
B
mac addresses can be lies... and they can repeat... joy!
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 12:22 PM JoeSox wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have something I have never seen before and was wondering if anyone in
> the community has seen something like this?
>
> So some active directory accounts are getting locked int
07:f8b0:4004:c09::6a: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=24.0 ms
>>> 64 bytes from 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=17.6 ms
>>> 64 bytes from 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=20.4 ms
>>> 64 bytes from 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=23.4 ms
>>>
One problem, I have at least, is that all of the 'service I can pay
for/signup for' have odd scaling problems on pricing :( and on top of that
are extra noisy :( and don't tell me how they make any particular judgement
:(
So, they are all, effectively, a loud blackbox that's very expensive :(
Hav
Curious to know if the 'saved the day' was really 'fell into a different
rate-limit bucket' for UDP by address family :)
On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 10:53 AM Jared Mauch wrote:
>
>
> > On Jun 13, 2022, at 10:25 AM, Brielle wrote:
> >
> > I quickly reconfigured the Cys WireGuard node to connect to t
th',
because everytime I have tried at my house I've just taken it out behind
the woodshed with a maul... and replaced it with
something I CAN configure successfully. (plus.. don't want that TR 069 in
my home...)
-chris
> -Darrel
>
> On Jun 11, 2022, at 7:05 PM, Christopher M
Looks like FIOS customers may be getting ipv6 deployed toward them, finally:
ifconfig snippet from local machine:
inet6 2600:4040:2001:2200:73d2:6bcc:1e6b:43a1 prefixlen 64
scopeid 0x0
inet6 2600:4040:2001:2200:e87:bf36:b6cb:6ce1 prefixlen 64 scopeid
0x0
ping attempt:
64 byt
Are we discussing direct connectivity between 15169/174?
or via a third party(ies)? I ask, because i looks like RouteViews has, in:
http://archive.routeviews.org/bgpdata/2020.07/UPDATES/updates.20200715.0345.bz2
at last this bit of clues:
BGP4MP_ET|1594784883.404691|A|91.218.184.60|49788|35.213.0
On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 4:37 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> On 6/6/22 12:00 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> > is gatekeeping what users MIGHT do, and/or deciding based on corner
> > cases helpful to this discussion?
> > (this isn't meant as a note directly to dorn, j
is gatekeeping what users MIGHT do, and/or deciding based on corner cases
helpful to this discussion?
(this isn't meant as a note directly to dorn, just a convenient place to
interject)
Aside from planning based on a formula like Jason Livingood's plan... OR
based on build/deploy/upgrade costs int
On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 12:55 PM Christopher Morrow
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 12:22 PM John Von Essen wrote:
>
>> Feel free to contact me off-list if your associated with Google Fi.
>>
>> I’m trying to narrow down some IP abuse that I believe is coming fr
On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 12:22 PM John Von Essen wrote:
> Feel free to contact me off-list if your associated with Google Fi.
>
> I’m trying to narrow down some IP abuse that I believe is coming from
> Google Fi mobile devices. The IPs are all coming up as generic Google LLC
> in whois, and they do
On Wed, Jun 1, 2022 at 1:10 PM Seth Mattinen wrote:
> On 5/23/22 12:00 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
> >
> > On 5/23/22 11:49 AM, Aaron Wendel wrote:
> >> The Fiber Broadband Association estimates that the average US
> >> household will need more than a gig within 5 years. Why not just jump
> >> it
On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 2:29 PM Tomas Jonsson wrote:
> Since yesterday, I've started to see an increase in latency between my
> self in NJ on Verizon FIOS and Hetzner in DE. Even using Verizon:s
> looking glass is giving me 250ms. This is an increase of about 150ms
> (Seems to be true for most
On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 10:32 AM Sean Donelan wrote:
>
> AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, Others Commit to Low-Income Broadband Program
> Providers will help offer high-speed internet to millions of households
> under the infrastructure law
>
>
> https://www.wsj.com/articles/internet-providers-commit-to-lo
This reads a lot like dsl wars between ilecs and clecs in the late 90s and
early 2ks.
Great times? Or Greatest times?
On Fri, Apr 29, 2022, 15:44 scott via NANOG wrote:
>
>
> I thought I'd put a smile on your faces for Friday. This is how
> networking happens in Hawaii...
>
>
> https://www.civ
On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 3:12 PM Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> If there's a bug in an ISP's implementation of RFC2549 carrier
> 'equipment', is that considered a software bug, hardware, or subject of
> ornithological research?
>
>
Certainly that would depend on what part of the pipeline was involved, no?
On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 1:21 PM John Kristoff wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 18:36:24 +0200
> Jared Brown wrote:
>
> > IPv4 address blocks have a fixed one-time cost, not an ongoing
> > $X/month cost.
>
> From an RIR perhaps, but when demand changes for your available pool,
> what happens downst
On Sat, Mar 26, 2022, 21:42 John Gilmore wrote:
>
> Today Google is documenting to its cloud customers that they should use
> 240/4 for internal networks. (Read draft-schoen-intarea-unicast-240 for
> the citation.) We have received inquiries from two other huge Internet
> companies, which are i
1) please join the list properly and stop replying to the digests.
(note there have been many folks asking you to do this, disconnected
message/new-threads
are super super super annoying and remove the parts of the discussion from
a coherent thread)
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:25 PM Abraham Y. Chen
View of traffic into the ISP with Netflow/etc is very different than all on
my lan traffic.
Tr-069 is bad news.
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022, 15:53 Tom Beecher wrote:
> You don't even have to use their equipment. My provider at home is Charter
> / Spectrum. I own my own cable modem / router ,they have
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 10:04 AM Giovane C. M. Moura via NANOG <
nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
>
> > Who cares about the SSID???
>
> I don't remember the data model, but I remember that they retrieved data
> very often, multiple times a minute.
>
>
Please keep in mind that TR-069 (which in all likelihoo
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 5:36 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> On 3/22/22 5:45 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> right would have had any better chance of being adopted? My experience
> with Cisco product managers at the time is that they couldn't give a
> shit about the technical aspects of an ipng. If the
John's probably seen this but I think it addresses power on cables and
branching nodes (which are just optical /roadm devices)
https://youtu.be/H9R4tznCNB0
On Thu, Mar 17, 2022, 22:40 John Levine wrote:
> It appears that Jerry Cloe said:
> >-=-=-=-=-=-
> >
> >it look like it was completely a
https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2022-March/217815.html
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 11:29 AM Patrick Bryant wrote:
> I don't like the idea of disrupting any Internet service. But the current
> situation is unprecedented.
>
> The Achilles Heel of general public use of Internet services has a
On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 7:55 PM William Herrin wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 12:29 PM Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
> > What's the actual proposal for 240/4?
> > Is it: "Make this usable by me on my /intranet/?"
> > Is it: "Make this usable a
On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 10:39 AM William Herrin wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 1:22 AM Joe Maimon wrote:
> > The true dilemma is that any amelioration of IPv4 scarcity may indeed
> > contribute to further delaying mass global IPv6 adoption, regardless of
> > whose effort and time is involved.
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 4:16 PM Josh Luthman
wrote:
> Verizon Wireless does have v6. I see a 100.64/24 on my phone all the time.
>
>
wireless != wired/internet/fios/dsl
Verizon, as I noted elsewhere, in the wired network (as701 / 702 / 703,
mostly these days) supported v6 in ~2005 across the en
not to echo cameron's comment too much, but...
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 3:44 PM Josh Luthman
wrote:
> >but nowadays, some are going all v6.
>
> Where is there v6 only services/content?
>
>>
>>
I don't think any of this matters, really.
Is deploying v6 doable? yes
Is deploying it going to cost som
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 11:09 AM Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
wrote:
>
> https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-19-72A1.docx
>
> It says nothing about this. And certainly the FCC would not issue
> something with such a short date fuse; that letter appears to be a scam
> using scare and pressure
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 5:26 PM Ryan Hamel wrote:
> If it's before committing the changes just run "top" to get back to the
> root of the configuration tree, then "rollback 0" to go back to the version
> before any changes were made, then just "exit" out.
>
> Ryan
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022, 2:20
On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 2:10 PM Lady Benjamin Cannon of Glencoe
wrote:
> ok that’s amazing.
>
> RFC1149 amazing.
>
>
> Side note, am I missing something obvious where I can’t just have hardware
> routers strip ICMP, pipe it separately, put 500 VMs behind 4 vLBs and let
> the world ping the brains
On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 4:05 PM Mike Hammett wrote:
> Some people need a clue by four and I'm looking to build my collection of
> them.
>
>
> Someone on Outages was nice enough to send this about someone else's
> thread:
> https://peering.google.com/#/learn-more/faq
>
> "Google services, including
On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 10:54 AM Bjørn Mork wrote:
>
> I assume you know which names you are going to serve?
>
>
how would they be able to serve:
footgun.slack.com
bjornbjorn.slack.com
ilovecorn.slack.com
so immediately without that wildcard though?
:)
>
>
> sounds like no one a taker on the survey then...
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 2:37 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> I think for the vast majority of cloud users they'd do a way worse job at
> uptime than the providers. Whether that applies to some telcos, I'm not
> sure.
>
>
It seems like some of the situation is:
"5g/mobile builds include a bunch mor
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 10:53 AM David Bass wrote:
> Wondering what others in the small to medium sized networks out there are
> using these days for netflow data collection, and your opinion on the tool?
a question not asked, and answer not provided here, is:
"What are you actually trying to
Looking at your 1 repeat ORD example:
On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 12:17 AM PAUL R BARFORD wrote:
> 6 64.125.15.65 1.895 ms [x] (zayo.telia.ter1.ord7.us.zip.zayo.com.,
> CAIDA-GEOLOC -> Chicago, IL, US)
>
> 7 62.115.118.59 99.242 ms[x] (prs-b3-link.ip.twelve99.net.,
> CAIDA-GEOLOC -> Par
On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 5:31 PM PAUL R BARFORD wrote:
> Dear Pengxiong,
>
> Thanks for your questions:
>
>
>1. We are using CAIDA’s Internet Topology Data Kit (ITDK) that uses
>the MIDAR alias resolution method to infer IP addresses assigned to the
>same router.
>2. We understand
On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 12:07 PM Mike Hale wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone have a cloudflare abuse contact? The email address in the
> whois doesn't actually go to their abuse team, and their abuse form
>
RAbuseHandle: ABUSE2916-ARIN
RAbuseName: Abuse
RAbusePhone: +1-650-319-8930
RAbuseEmail
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 3:20 AM Ben Maddison wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> On 11/29, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 8:14 AM Job Snijders via NANOG
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Anurag,
> > >
> > > Circular dependencies definitel
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 8:14 AM Job Snijders via NANOG
wrote:
> Hi Anurag,
>
> Circular dependencies definitely are a thing to keep in mind when
> designing IRR and RPKI pipelines!
>
> In the case of IRR: It is quite rare to query the RIR IRR services
> directly. Instead, the common practise is t
On Sat, Nov 27, 2021, 17:36 Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote:
> Well, 1.4x faster is a bit of an odd metric. I presume that means that
> connection set up times measured were on average
> 1/1.4 times as long for IPv6 as they were for IPv4, but there are other
> possible interpretations.
>
> So really,
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 5:12 PM Geoff Huston wrote:
>
>
> > On 25 Nov 2021, at 7:57 am, Christopher Morrow
> wrote:
> >
> > Are you proposing SCTP? There is sadly not much more hope for widespread
> adoption of that as of IPv6.
> >
> > or perh
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 9:12 AM Baldur Norddahl
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 08:16, Masataka Ohta <
> mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
>
>> So, as modifying end systems is inevitable, there is
>> no reason not to support full end to end multihoming
>> including modifications to sup
On Sat, Oct 23, 2021, 15:17 Fred Baker wrote:
> I think you will find that there are some places in which getting IPv6
> network service has been difficult, and as a result even IPv6-
Fred, do you mean places like, all of Verizon FiOS?
capable equipment is not reachable by IPv6. Those are, ho
1 - 100 of 1986 matches
Mail list logo
