Re: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-21 Thread Bruce Pinsky
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Darrell Hyde wrote: That might have something to do with the fact InterNAP bought both of them (and the third company in that space). I believe RouteScience was acquired by Avaya in 2004. Did Internap acquire the IP after the fact? Correct

Re: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-21 Thread Matt Buford
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:08 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: Yes, it's possibly foolish to allocate x.y.z.0 or .255. But saying that that x.y.z.0 is *not* *capable* of representing an interface is demonstrating a dangerous lack of knowledge. There's several totally legal .0 and .255

Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread bas
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 to the guy that if he tries to sell a technical

Re: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread Paul Graydon
On 10/20/2011 10:48 AM, 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 to the guy

Re: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread Jay Nakamura
Well, it didn't say router hops... They could mean AS hops I guess. I never trust marketing garbage anyway. It makes my head hurt. On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 4:48 PM, bas kilo...@gmail.com wrote: Recently I was contacted by an Internap sales person. The third line of the email read: As you

RE: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread Holmes,David A
: nanog Subject: Re: Did Internap lose all clue? Well, it didn't say router hops... They could mean AS hops I guess. I never trust marketing garbage anyway. It makes my head hurt. On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 4:48 PM, bas kilo...@gmail.com wrote: Recently I was contacted by an Internap sales person

Re: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread Ryan Rawdon
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

Re: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread bas
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Jay Nakamura zeusda...@gmail.com wrote: Well, it didn't say router hops...  They could mean AS hops I guess. Well actually the url I included earlier contains an explanation Understanding the “Hop” Data transmitted across a network passes through numerous

Re: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread Richard Irving
1:54 PM To: bas Cc: nanog Subject: Re: Did Internap lose all clue? Well, it didn't say router hops... They could mean AS hops I guess. I never trust marketing garbage anyway. It makes my head hurt. On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 4:48 PM, baskilo...@gmail.com wrote: Recently I was contacted

Re: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread manny
On 10/20/11 5:11 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: On Oct 20, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Holmes,David A wrote: Looking at the link referenced below, the route optimization method mentioned appears to be very similar to the old Routescience or Sockeye BGP optimization products. That might have something

RE: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread Darrell Hyde
That might have something to do with the fact InterNAP bought both of them (and the third company in that space). I believe RouteScience was acquired by Avaya in 2004. Did Internap acquire the IP after the fact? - Darrell

Re: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread Jack Bates
On 10/20/2011 4:03 PM, Ryan Rawdon wrote: You should expectour prefix.1 to respond to ping and such, but not 2our prefix.0 as that is only capable of representing a subnet and not a network interface of any kind, or any machine, at all Honestly, though. Can you blame them in this case? Given

Re: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 19:39:51 CDT, Jack Bates said: On 10/20/2011 4:03 PM, Ryan Rawdon wrote: You should expectour prefix.1 to respond to ping and such, but not 2our prefix.0 as that is only capable of representing a subnet and not a network interface of any kind, or any machine, at all

Re: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread Jack Bates
On 10/20/2011 8:08 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: Yes, it's possibly foolish to allocate x.y.z.0 or .255. But saying that that x.y.z.0 is *not* *capable* of representing an interface is demonstrating a dangerous lack of knowledge. There's several totally legal .0 and .255 addresses in each

Re: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread Brant I. Stevens
On 10/20/11 5:22 PM, manny mherna...@comcast.net wrote: On 10/20/11 5:11 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: On Oct 20, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Holmes,David A wrote: Looking at the link referenced below, the route optimization method mentioned appears to be very similar to the old Routescience or

Re: Did Internap lose all clue?

2011-10-20 Thread Richard A Steenbergen
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:48:34PM +0200, 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