On 12/14/2012 11:11 PM, eric-l...@truenet.com wrote:
It's been about 2 years in since I've heard about the concept, and honestly
I'm about ready to jump into test environments at my house. My questions
are pretty basic, what distro would you recommend for a controller, and
should I start by
On 1/5/2012 11:29 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 11:09:59AM -0500, Jay Ashworth
wrote:
Didn't *say* broadband. Didn't even say Internet service. Said Internet
*access*, in the non-techspeak meaning of those words.
For the purposes of my e-mail and this
On 1/4/2012 10:46 AM, Mike Tancsa wrote:
I suspect the higher inbound values might be due to tech mailling
lists which tend to come from IPv6 enabled hosts ?
Yeah, all of my (non-internal) ipv6 mail is from such mailing lists.
-Dave
On 2/2/2011 10:52 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
No, the point is that DNS resolvers in different places all use the same
addresses. So at the cyber cafe 3003::3003 is the cyber cafe DNS but at the
airport 3003::3003 is the airport DNS. (Or in both cases, if they don't run a
DNS server, one
On 2/2/2011 5:42 PM, Brian Johnson wrote:
I must have missed something. Why would u do NAT in IPv6?
1) To allow yourself to change or maintain multiple upstreams without
renumbering.
2) To allow your IPv6-only hosts to reach IPv4 addresses, or vice versa.
3) To give all your outbound
On 2/1/2011 2:57 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 1 feb 2011, at 16:21, Jack Bates wrote:
I still know a LOT of people who have no desire to switch. They are holding out
until vendors implement the features they want. NAPTv6, default router in
DHCPv6, etc, etc.
What's the point of
On 2/1/2011 3:10 PM, Randy Carpenter wrote:
- Original Message -
On 2/1/2011 2:57 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 1 feb 2011, at 16:21, Jack Bates wrote:
I still know a LOT of people who have no desire to switch. They are
holding out until vendors implement the features they want.
On 2/1/2011 3:32 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 1 feb 2011, at 21:03, Dave Israel wrote:
People want to engineer their networks they way they want to. Let them. If
their way is stupid, then they'll have the stupidly engineered network they
wanted.
The problem is that their stupidity
On 2/1/2011 9:33 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Feb 1, 2011, at 6:24 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Owen DeLongo...@delong.com said:
On Feb 1, 2011, at 3:41 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
Devil's advocate hat on: NAT (in its most common form) also permits
internal addressing to be independent of
On 8/27/2010 3:22 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
When you are processing something, it's sometimes hard to tell if something
just was mis-parsed (as I think the case is here with the missing-2-bytes)
vs just getting garbage. Perhaps there should be some way to re-sync when
you are having this
On 4/27/2010 1:36 PM, Andy Davidson wrote:
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 11:29:59AM -0400, John R. Levine wrote:
Did you use Yahoo IM, AIM, or Skype?
Yes, yes, and yes. Works fine.
What about every other service/protocol that users use today,
and might be invented tomorrow ? Do
On 4/9/2010 12:30 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Put differently, you work in this arena too... you've presumably
talked to stakeholders. Can you list some of the reasons people have
provided for not adopting v6, and are any of them related to the v6
policies regarding address space?
On 3/26/2010 1:31 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Mar 26, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
You should ask your server guy how he plans to talk to your core
stakeholders when they can't get IPv4 any more.
Then, at that time, both he and his key stakeholders will experience
pain while they both
Joe Abley wrote:
On 2010-01-13, at 11:31, Anthony Uk wrote:
The ability to automatically discern users' political positions from their
inbox is not one that any email provider reasonably needs.
It's arguably something that gmail users consent to when they give Google
rights to
I _do_ create action plans and _do_ quarterback each step and _do_
slap down any attempt to deviate.
imagine a network engineering culture where the concept of 'attempt to
deviate' just does not occur.
Are you trying to suggest that this is something horrible, or that it's the
Clue Store wrote:
Well you and the rest of these so called dreamers can help with the
purchase of my new routers that don't exist yet to support you wanting to
multi-home a /29 and have the rest of the Internet world hold all of these
said /29's in their tables. Most folks who get a /29's
Clue Store wrote:
I think you're missing my point and did not read my post completely.
First off, BGP was never mentioned in my post.
Oops, you are correct. Somebody else said BGP. You spoke of the
existing table, and so I had BGP in my mind, and I muddled the two
together. Mea culpa.
Paul Vixie wrote:
digital security is getting a lot of investor attention right now. i wonder
if this will ever consolidate or if pandora's box is just broken for all time.
It'll consolidate to the point where probabilities and probably costs
can be accurately assessed, at which point it
Tony Hain wrote:
Merike Kaeo wrote:
...
ESP-Null came about when folks
realized AH could not traverse NATs.
Thus the absolute reason why people should promote AH to kill off the 66nat
nonsense. Just because you can't use it for IPv4 is no reason to avoid using
it for IPv6 now
Nathan Ward wrote:
On 26/02/2009, at 2:48 AM, David Barak wrote:
If two hosts are exchanging 1Gbps flows, the traffic across the bus
will be 2Gbps, right?
You don't get to add transmit and receive together to get 48Gbps.
Packets don't go across the backplane once to receive, and then once
We're seeing them from AS 48438, coming across to us as an Optional
Transitive Attribute which our force-10s are not parsing (but cheerfully
passing along to our clients, who are then flapping their peers because
of it.) Sample route; 91.210.248.0/23
Ozar wrote:
I am starting to see random
Rod Beck wrote:
And a 'Tier One' nework is a transit-free network that can reach all end
points (end user IP addresses)
A Tier One is best defined as the ISP the salesman represents. It
originally referred to transit-free, settlement-free ISPs, but over
time, bigger ISPs began to play with
Paul Wall wrote:
Please realize that the above is list vs. list. Cisco 6500 series
hardware is extremely popular in the secondary market, with discounts
of 80% or greater on linecards, etc common, furthering the argument
that Cisco is the cheaper of the two solutions.
Secondary market
Normally, I don't participate in this sort of thing, but I'm a sucker
for a there's more than one way to do it challenge.
Shadow wrote:
Robert D. Scott wrote:
The harder way:
Decimal: 1089055123
Hex (dashes inserted at octals): 40-E9-A9-93
Decimal (of each octet): 64-233-169-147
IP
24 matches
Mail list logo
