> On Oct 10, 2022, at 6:37 PM, Matthew Petach wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 8:44 AM Mark Tinka wrote:
> On 10/10/22 16:58, Edvinas Kairys wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > We're considering to buy some Cisco boxes - NCS-55A1-24H. That box has
> > 24x100G, but only 2.2mln route (FIB)
> On Feb 16, 2022, at 4:46 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
>
>
> On 2/16/22 1:36 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>> What is the embarrassment?
> That in the tech center of the world that we're so embarrassingly behind the
> times with broadband. I'm going to get fiber in the rural Sierra Nevada
> before
> On Jun 5, 2020, at 2:11 PM, Ryan Rawdon wrote:
>
>
>> On Jun 4, 2020, at 11:00 PM, James Breeden wrote:
>>
>> I have been doing a lot of research recently on operating networks with
>> partial tables and a default to the rest of the world. Seems
> On Jun 4, 2020, at 11:00 PM, James Breeden wrote:
>
> I have been doing a lot of research recently on operating networks with
> partial tables and a default to the rest of the world. Seems like an easy
> enough approach for regional networks where you have maybe only 1 upstream
> transit
> On Dec 1, 2015, at 1:23 PM, Max Tulyev wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> we got an issue today that announces from Cogent don't reach Hurricane
> Electric. HE support said that's a feature, not a bug.
>
> So we have splitted Internet again?
>
> I have to change at least one of my
On May 22, 2014, at 9:18 PM, Matthew Petach mpet...@netflight.com wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Lee Howard l...@asgard.org wrote:
On 5/22/14 8:04 AM, Livingood, Jason jason_living...@cable.comcast.com
wrote:
[snip]
In his really useful listing of content providers' IPv6
On Jan 21, 2013, at 1:27 PM, Michael Vallaly wrote:
Anyone have any good recommendations for an equipment cart to shuffle
IT/Telco equipment around between an office/colo ?
Id like something able to carry ~6 1U Dell servers at once, and maybe make it
over an elevator gap without a
On Oct 15, 2012, at 1:08 PM, chris wrote:
I am having a issue delivering mail to a specific domain hosted
@netsol for a significant amount of time now (several days) only and
getting a vague error from the remote side:
Note that mail delivery issues to NetSol have been discussed over the
On Aug 20, 2012, at 2:09 PM, Eric Wieling wrote:
For a while we have had a customer with some lines which go down every time
it rains. We put in the trouble ticket, a couple of days later Verizon says
the issue is resolved...until the next time it rains.
The customer sent us some
On Oct 9, 2012, at 9:34 AM, Christopher J. Pilkington wrote:
I want to make an informed response to a comment made by our
CenturyLink rep regarding IPv6, in the context of SAVVIS not
being able to provide IPv6 at their DC3 facility:
There is only a handful of carriers that can provide that
On Sep 27, 2012, at 11:00 AM, chris wrote:
I tested today just for giggles, test-ipv6.com shows I have working ipv4
and ipv6 10/10 on both tests. Interestingly enough I was only seeing 3G on
the device at the time.
So I guess its not just on LTE or is it LTE devices ?
I'm running galaxy
On Sep 7, 2012, at 7:44 PM, Basil Baby wrote:
Hmm... Even though similar issue was identified in 2003, looks like still
there are devices in market with those old firmwares or similar
behavior. sheesh !! :(
-Basil
While NETGEAR does have a history of issues like this, the UofW issue is
On Jul 26, 2012, at 2:14 AM, Lou Katz wrote:
One of my users has reported incoming mail failures, which I finally
tracked down. It turned out that Hotmail has seen fit to send the mail
to his domain's A record machine, despite the fact that he has valid MX
records.
The A record points to
On Jul 26, 2012, at 2:21 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
If the MX records are not responsive / timing out, they might be falling
back to the A record.
Per RFC2821 (and later RFC5321):
If one or more MX RRs are found for a given name, SMTP systems MUST
NOT utilize any address RRs
On Jun 27, 2012, at 9:26 AM, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
What would be nice is the to see the contents of the htaccess file
(obviously with sensitive information excluded)
I cleaned up compromises similar to this in a customer site fairly recently.
In our case it was the same exact behavior
On Jun 27, 2012, at 10:10 AM, Ryan Rawdon wrote:
On Jun 27, 2012, at 9:26 AM, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
What would be nice is the to see the contents of the htaccess file
(obviously with sensitive information excluded)
I cleaned up compromises similar to this in a customer site
Assuming it is not a futile/wasted effort, where is the current best
place/resource to report an active botnet CC to?
On Feb 3, 2012, at 3:10 PM, -Hammer- wrote:
So, we are preparing to add IPv6 to our multi-homed (separate routers and
carriers with IBGP) multi-site business. Starting off with a lab of course.
Circuits and hardware are a few months away. I'm doing the initial designs
and having some
On Feb 3, 2012, at 3:25 PM, Philip Dorr wrote:
You should accept the full v6 table, because some IPs may not,
currently, be reachable via one of the carriers.
Definitely agreed here, and this is why we take full v6 tables. Especially
since one of our upstreams does not peer with at least
On Jan 25, 2012, at 6:51 PM, Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Hi,
from my location / austria, mysql.org seems to be down:
traceroute to 213.136.52.82 (213.136.52.82), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
7 at-vie-xion-pe01-vl-2061.upc.at (84.116.229.21) 39.009 ms 38.957 ms
39.001 ms
8
On Jan 4, 2012, at 3:46 PM, Mark Kamichoff wrote:
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 09:39:39PM +0100, Seth Mos wrote:
And a similar mistake I see others respond too as well, this is
another domain with just a IPv4 record. That was not really what I was
complaining about but I was not specific enough
On Dec 12, 2011, at 2:10 PM, Eric J Esslinger wrote:
I'm not looking to monitor a massive infrastructure: 3 web sites, 2 mail
servers (pop,imap,submission port, https webmail), 4 dns servers (including
lookups to ensure they're not listening but not talking), and one inbound mx.
A few
On Nov 30, 2011, at 3:12 PM, Drew Weaver wrote:
-Original Message-
From: rob.vercoute...@kpn.com [mailto:rob.vercoute...@kpn.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 3:05 PM
To: matlo...@exempla.org; richard.bar...@gmail.com;
andrew.wall...@rocketmail.com
Cc: nanog@nanog.org;
On Nov 7, 2011, at 10:06 PM, clay...@haydel.org wrote:
transit provider. Is XO the end-access provider for either you or the
destination site? Or are both of those on some other connection, and XO
is a bystander along the way?
We're a direct customer. The IP's that I've seen them
On Oct 20, 2011, at 4:48 PM, bas wrote:
Recently I was contacted by an Internap sales person.
The third line of the email read:
As you know well, BGP makes all routing decisions simply based on HOP COUNT
I blinked my eyes a couple of times.. Yes it really said hop count.
Then I replied
On Sep 22, 2011, at 9:32 PM, Ryan Pugatch wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 8:55 PM, Ryan Pugatch r...@linux.com wrote:
Hi,
Anyone noticing anything weird with the Verizon / FiOS network?
Seems like many people on their network are having trouble getting to us
(on Sidera / RCN) but not
We (AS22578) are unable to reach anything in 2620:0101:8001::/48 from
2620:4b::/48 (ICMP, 80/tcp, 443/tcp etc) and previous attempts to contact
Mozilla via more normal channels about this have not resulted in a resolution.
ryan@ashburn-netops:~$ mtr --report www.mozilla.com
HOST: ashburn-netops
I've heard some mixed reports of XO's IPv6 availability - some that they have
full deployment/availability, but others like the answer back from our XO
reseller that XO does not offer IPv6 on circuits under 45mbit/s.
What is the experience of NANOG on this matter, particularly with XO
On Mar 28, 2011, at 9:50 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 03:18:30PM -0700, Wil Schultz
wrote:
I'm attempting to find out information on the SEO implications of testing
ipv6 out.
I don't run a web site where SEO is a top priority, so I don't track
Doesn't the LogMeIn Hamachi VPN service use 5.0.0.0/8? Perhaps the spikes to
5.5.5.0/24 or the space in general are from fluctuations or waves of
disconnects of Hamachi users, so when they are disconnected their Hamachi
traffic heads out in to the DFZ? This service is particularly popular
Hello NANOGers -
What considerations should be made with respect to implementing egress
filtering based on source IPv6 addresses? Things like allowing traffic
sourced from fe80::/10 in said filters for on-link communication (for the
interface that the filter is applied to). Is there anything
I believe Verizon's specs for 4G devices required v6 support from the start:
http://www.personal.psu.edu/dvm105/blogs/ipv6/2009/06/verizon-mandates-ipv6-support.html
I seem to recall IPv6 support being a requirement for smartphones on their 3G
network as well, but I can't find a reference for
On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 11:45:14 -0500, Bob Poortinga
bobp+na...@webster.tsc.com wrote:
This is starting to be picked up by mainstream media, but was was first
reported here (I believe):
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=249
Cyber Experts Have Proof That
33 matches
Mail list logo