Folks,
T-Mobile USA has launched an IPv6 beta service and we are interested
in recruiting some friendly users as part of this trial service.
Right now, the service is only for T-Mobile USA subscribers in
T-Mobile USA coverage (no roaming) and only Nokia phones are
supported.
For more info and
to WiFi as a first step,
but they need to keep going.
Here is a short thread on the Android IPv6 issue, it is really
Qualcomm's issue at this point http://tinyurl.com/28nttno
Cameron
On 1/08/2010 9:46 a.m., Cameron Byrne wrote:
Folks,
T-Mobile USA has launched an IPv6 beta service and we
http://condor.depaul.edu/~jkristof/tdc375/
John,
I could not help but take a peak at the class topics. I nearly jumped
out of my seat with joy in seeing the e2e principle
http://web.mit.edu/Saltzer/www/publications/endtoend/endtoend.pdf
But, then went sad and jaded again when poking around
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Jack Bates jba...@brightok.net wrote:
John Jason Brzozowski wrote:
Hey Bill,
No plans for Teredo at this time.
I'm sure, like us, you looked at what was involved and said, eh, easier to
just provide native v6 than deal with that mess. 6to4 is definitely a
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Scott Weeks sur...@mauigateway.com wrote:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 5:50 PM, Scott Weeks sur...@mauigateway.com wrote:
--- ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
It's working over LISP:
http://www.lisp4.facebook.com/
-
LISP as in
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:57 AM, Jared Geiger ja...@compuwizz.net wrote:
I would suggest getting on the GRX network. As an enterprise you
should be able to get IPX service from any number of providers.
Belgacom, Syniverse, and Sybase365 all offer IP data service onto the
GRX. Then you aren't
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Job W. J. Snijders j...@instituut.net wrote:
Hi Cameron,
On 24 sep 2010, at 02:56, Cameron Byrne wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Scott Weeks sur...@mauigateway.com wrote:
On Sep 23, 2010, at 5:50 PM, Scott Weeks sur...@mauigateway.com wrote:
--- ja
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Joel Jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
On 10/9/10 5:08 PM, Ryan Finnesey wrote:
I have been working on a similar project and I am finding it very hard
to get the mobile operators to understand why we want as little latency
as possible and they are not very open
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Ryan Finnesey
ryan.finne...@harrierinvestments.com wrote:
Can someone on the list from T-Mobile USA please contact me. I have
tried sending a message to ad...@tmodns.net but the message bounces back
and the mailbox for arintechcont...@t-mobile.com is full. I
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Mark Smith
na...@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 16:25:12 -0700
Zaid Ali z...@zaidali.com wrote:
On 10/19/10 3:58 PM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
Adding is seperate IPv6 server is a work around and runs
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Nick Olsen n...@flhsi.com wrote:
Curious as to who is running IPv6 with TW Telecom or Cogent.
I'm wanting to turn up native IPv6 with them, And wanted to hear
thoughts/experiences.
I assume it should be a non-event. We've already got a prefix from arin
that we
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Mike Tancsa m...@sentex.net wrote:
On 11/18/2010 5:14 PM, Lee Riemer wrote:
Try tracerouting to 2001:500:4:13::81 (www.arin.net) or
2001:470:0:76::2 (www.he.net) via Cogent.
Interesting. I noticed a similar issue with ipv6.cnn.com today. I dont
see it via
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 3:17 PM, Cameron Byrne cb.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Mike Tancsa m...@sentex.net wrote:
On 11/18/2010 5:14 PM, Lee Riemer wrote:
Try tracerouting to 2001:500:4:13::81 (www.arin.net) or
2001:470:0:76::2 (www.he.net) via Cogent.
Interesting
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Grzegorz Janoszka grzeg...@janoszka.pl wrote:
On 21-11-10 22:31, Cameron Byrne wrote:
Yahoo just dropped in on the IPv6 content party
http://ipv6.weather.yahoo.com/
I just bookmarked it. Well done Yahoos.
Well,
ipv6.ycpi.ops.yahoo.net has IPv6 address
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 2:05 PM, George Bonser gbon...@seven.com wrote:
Well,
ipv6.ycpi.ops.yahoo.net has IPv6 address 2a00:1288:f006:1fe::1000
ipv6.ycpi.ops.yahoo.net has IPv6 address 2001:4998:f00b:1fe::1000
ipv6.ycpi.ops.yahoo.net has IPv6 address 2001:4998:f011:1fe::1000
In my bgp I
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Nov 29, 2010, at 9:09 PM, Andrew Koch wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 22:17, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
So you're saying: treat it like electrical service. I have a 200 amp
electrical service at my house. But I
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 11:07 AM, George Bonser gbon...@seven.com wrote:
Just move to v6, already. v4 is done. trying to keep it on life
support
is going to cost everyone time, money, and reduced life span due to
increased stress.
Exactly. People need to adopt the v4 is done mindset and
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Dec 9, 2010, at 2:10 AM, Mohacsi Janos wrote:
Do you think adopting LISP or similar architectures to reduce the problems
mentioned above?
Yes.
No. I still fail to see the value of LISP in a mature and sane
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Seth Mattinen se...@rollernet.us wrote:
On 12/8/2010 11:23, Cameron Byrne wrote:
At the edge, with the down economy, i bet there are plenty of folks
that are only accept /21s and shorter from their upstream ISP so they
can get some more mileage out
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Dec 9, 2010, at 2:38 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
I still fail to see the value of LISP in a mature and sane IPv6 world.
Abstraction of the global routing table away from direct dependence upon the
underlying
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 10:15 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 12:49:37 EST, Christopher Morrow said:
on this, I HOPE vzw does the right thing and launches with v4/v6
dualstack on the devices in all regions where deployment happens. I
don't have much hope that this will
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Jan 6, 2011, at 9:38 AM, ML wrote:
At least not without some painful rebuilds of criticals systems which have
these IPs deeply embedded in their configs.
They shouldn't be using IP addresses in configs, they
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
In message aanlktimkgpyky_aka5px4-ca-3=oufhgbnenrkpmp...@mail.gmail.com,
Came
ron Byrne writes:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Jan 6, 2011, at 9:38 AM, ML wrote:
At least
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote:
On 1/5/2011 8:47 PM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
And, you will notice that the list at
http://groups.google.com/group/ipv4literals shows only a few web site,
because there are only a few that have this design flaws
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:55 PM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
In message aanlktiks_enacm2bfyx=b=m=khejaqjkvdbwx2hwm...@mail.gmail.com,
Came
ron Byrne writes:
As long as dual-stack is around, the app vendors don't have to move
and network guys have to dream up hacks to support these
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote:
On 1/5/2011 9:39 PM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
I understand my users pretty well, they only go to a few web pages ...
its the nature of the net. I assure you, i am not taking any undue
risk with regards to web. Try our
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote:
On 1/8/2011 3:22 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
Relay nodes are always protecting themselves by rate-limiting, aren't
they?
Yes.
And isn't most media traffic relayed?
No, not at all. Almost all media traffic goes directly
On Jan 12, 2011 7:50 PM, Richard Barnes richard.bar...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
What IPv6 prefix lengths are people accepting in BGP from
peers/customers? My employer just got a /48 allocation from ARIN, and
we're trying to figure out how to support multiple end sites out of
this (probably
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 1:18 AM, jarod smith jarod.smo...@gmail.com wrote:
Although it would seem that double-stack is still the preferred method of
linux
distribution, I want my next deployed in IPv6 only.
For linux there is NAT-PT tomicki and NAT64 Viagenie.
I don't have Cisco equipment
On Jan 21, 2011 6:49 PM, Pete Carah p...@altadena.net wrote:
On 01/21/2011 04:29 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
On Friday, January 21, 2011 04:23:52 pm Michael Holstein wrote:
Aren't CDMA BTS clocked off GPS?
Yep; and many of the aftermarket GPS receivers commonly used for the
disciplined clock for
On Jan 30, 2011 9:03 AM, Glen Kent glen.k...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I would like to understand why there is a preference for L3 VPNs over
L2 VPNs for the EPC backhaul networks? We can use both layer 2 and
layer 3 VPNs for communication between the eNodeB and the MME or S-GW,
so why is it that
On Jan 30, 2011 10:11 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Cameron Byrne wrote:
/
There are just more companies offering L2 metroE than L3 in the backhaul
space. I have pushed for L3 but very few offer the speeds and reach
required
Could you please elaborate
On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Cameron Byrne wrote:
The only way to reach 2000 cell sites in Chicago with 100megs of Ethernet
handoff is with L2 metroE. There is not a feasible L3 service offered
today.
Ah.
We either rent
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
Discussed, Disgusted, and Dismissed.
The E space would take more software upgrades to existing systems than just
deploying IPv6.
It's true. It was only after discovering how much work it would take
to make 240/4 like RFC
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Chuck Anderson c...@wpi.edu wrote:
On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 03:14:57PM -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Feb 1, 2011, at 2:58 PM, Jack Bates wrote:
There are many cases where ULA is a perfect fit, and to work
around it seems silly and reduces the full capabilities
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote:
Once upon a time, Owen DeLong o...@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 external
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 5:03 PM, david raistrick dr...@icantclick.org wrote:
On Wed, 2 Feb 2011, Chris Owen wrote:
On Feb 2, 2011, at 3:09 PM, david raistrick wrote:
At least in ARIN territory, if you're multihomed, and you can show
in-1-year use of 50% of a (v4) /24, you qualify for a PI v6
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Marshall Eubanks t...@americafree.tv wrote:
On Feb 3, 2011, at 10:00 AM, Max Larson Henry wrote:
News conference starts now
The exhaustion has made CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web/02/03/internet.addresses.gone/
You mean
I have used both softlayer and arpnetworks. Both have v6 by default, but
only softlayer can be considered a big boy... multiple sites. Cloud and
dedicated servers ... softlayer is a class act with v6 added for free
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Joel Jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
On 2/6/11 7:08 PM, Adam Rothschild wrote:
We (voxel.net, AS 29791) offer dual-stack on all server and cloud
products. As others have pointed out, SoftLayer is an excellent
example of a hosting provider that Gets It on a
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Feb 11, 2011, at 6:38 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
ISPs know it takes years to move a customer base. They should have
been ready years ago. They still arn't ready. I was asking for
what features to look for in a new CPE so
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Feb 11, 2011, at 7:00 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
I don't know about that. Yes, v4 will be around for a long time but
considering the oligopolies we have in both eyeball and content
networks, ones a dozen or so very large
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
I think you'll be in for a surprise here, too. The 4G transition is already
underway. For the vendors where 4G means LTE, IPv6 is the native protocol
and IPv4 requires a certain amount of hackery to operate.
In the WiMax
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2011, Thomas Habets wrote:
Really.
Exactly. Can we PLEASE kill the myth that Android and iPhone has IPv6
support for mobile side. PLEASE. None do, and there are no publically
available roadmaps when
Too bad the article pushes my mobile device to their mobile site
mobile.nytimes.com and that references an ipv4 literal for the picture to
load so not only is nytimes not ipv6 it is also broken for ipv6 only
users behind nat64
On Feb 14, 2011 1:52 PM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
In message 4d597216.1030...@brightok.net, Jack Bates writes:
On 2/14/2011 12:12 PM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
Too bad the article pushes my mobile device to their mobile site
mobile.nytimes.com and that references an ipv4 literal
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 5:08 AM, John Curran jcur...@istaff.org wrote:
On Feb 17, 2011, at 7:39 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
Not that it matters because it's too late now and it would only give us a
few more months, but:
Does the US government really need more than 150 million addresses,
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:46 AM, George Bonser gbon...@seven.com wrote:
If you want to go on a wild goose chase, start chasing down 240/4 and
you might make some progress.
As i have mentioned before, it was only after i gave up on 240/4 for
private network numbering that i really earnestly
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:51 AM, John Curran jcur...@istaff.org wrote:
On Feb 17, 2011, at 12:48 PM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
240/4 has been enabled in Linux since 2.6.25 (applied on January 21,
2008 by David Miller) so that's like three years already.
Yep, and that's great. Let me know when
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:52 AM, George Bonser gbon...@seven.com wrote:
240/4 has been enabled in Linux since 2.6.25 (applied on January 21,
2008 by David Miller) so that's like three years already.
Yep, and that's great. Let me know when a Cisco 7600 will route a
packet like this.
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:42 AM, George Bonser gbon...@seven.com wrote:
You never been told something like We don't do (or stock) that
because
there's no demand for it! You know, you're the Nth person to ask about
it
today. I have, and many more times than merely once.
--
Mike Andrews,
On Feb 28, 2011 8:45 AM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Feb 28, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Joe Abley wrote:
On 2011-02-28, at 10:27, Nick Hilliard wrote:
On 28/02/2011 14:59, Joe Abley wrote:
I'm not sure why people keep
fixating on that as an end goal. The future we ought to be
On Feb 28, 2011 12:28 PM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote:
It's hard to see v6-only networks as a viable, general-purpose
solution to anything in the foreseeable future. I'm not sure why
people keep fixating on that as an end goal. The future we ought to be
working towards is a consistent,
On Oct 7, 2012 1:48 PM, Tom Limoncelli t...@whatexit.org wrote:
Have there been studies on how much latency CGN adds to a typical
internet user? I'd also be interested in anecdotes.
Anecdote. Sub-millasecond, with full load. (gigs and gigs) . CGN does not
meaningfully add latency. CGN is
On Oct 24, 2012 12:40 AM, Daniël W. Crompton daniel.cromp...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 24 October 2012 08:35, Masataka Ohta mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp
wrote:
(2012/10/24 12:29), Rodrick Brown wrote:
With coded TCP, blocks of packets are clumped together and then
transformed into
Sent from ipv6-only Android
On Nov 26, 2012 5:54 AM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Nov 26, 2012, at 8:33 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
Why is that a significant question?
It is significant because it provides some rough measure of the relative
*importance* of IPv6
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Nov 26, 2012, at 10:36 PM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
Ipv6 is not important for users, it is important for network operators who
want to sustain their business.
I agree with the first part; not sure I agree
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
In message alpine.deb.2.00.1211270558340.27...@uplift.swm.pp.se, Mikael
Abrah
amsson writes:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2012, Michael Thomas wrote:
I don't see either Apple or Microsoft as being the hindrance. In fact,
both of them
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:28 AM, mike m...@mtcc.com wrote:
On 11/26/12 8:59 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2012, Michael Thomas wrote:
I don't see either Apple or Microsoft as being the hindrance. In fact,
both of them seem pretty ready, fsvo ready. Unlike ISP's by and large.
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote:
On 11/27/2012 11:58 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:28 AM, mike m...@mtcc.com wrote:
Is this the app's fault? What are they doing wrong?
Yes, it is the app's fault.
They are either doing IPv4
Sent from ipv6-only Android
On Nov 27, 2012 8:39 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, mike wrote:
You're saying there are no cellular v6 deployments? I'm about 99%
certain that you're wrong. I see v6 addresses in my apache logs all the
time and they're almost
Sent from ipv6-only Android
On Nov 27, 2012 10:57 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Cameron Byrne wrote:
Verizon in the USA does have iOS on ipv6. Afaik, the network must ask for
it the same way all Android Samsung devices on t-mobile now have ipv6 as
a
user
Got some bad data here. Let me help.
Sent from ipv6-only Android
On Nov 29, 2012 8:22 AM, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote:
Phone apps, by and large, are designed by people in homes or
small companies. They do not have v6 connectivity. Full stop.
They don't care about v6. Full stop. It's
Everything you need to know except for how to actually accomplish this
task in the real world.
In order to accomplish this in the real world using present-day software
development methodologies you would need to do a few more things:
- Generate some user stories that explain why the
Constantine,
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Constantine A. Murenin
muren...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 January 2013 08:12, fredrik danerklint fredan-na...@fredan.se wrote:
From the article:
Faced with the shortage of IPv4 addresses and the failure of IPv6 to take
off, British ISP PlusNet is
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 9:13 AM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Warren Bailey wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com
We as Americans have plenty of things we have done halfass.. I hope an
Internet kill switch doesn't end up being one of them. Build
Hi,
In-line
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Mukom Akong T. mukom.ta...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear experts,
I've found myself thinking about what ground an engineer needs to cover in
order to convince the executives to approve and commit to an IPv6
Deployment project.
I think such a
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Mukom Akong T. mukom.ta...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Mike. the.li...@mgm51.com wrote:
I would lean towards
f) Cost/benefit of deploying IPv6.
I certainly agree, which is why I propose understanding you organisation's
business model
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:29 PM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote:
On 3/5/2013 8:20 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Mar 5, 2013, at 7:55 PM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote:
On 3/5/2013 7:15 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Mar 5, 2013, at 6:46 PM, Mukom Akong T. mukom.ta...@gmail.com
On Sep 26, 2011 1:29 AM, Florian Weimer fwei...@bfk.de wrote:
* Cameron Byrne:
It is very important to ask the redirect partners about yields...
meaning,
you may find that less than 5% of nxdomain redirects can be actually
served
an ad page because 95%+ of nxd are printer lookups
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Seth Mattinen se...@rollernet.us wrote:
On 9/26/11 8:36 AM, Drew Weaver wrote:
Has anyone been able to pull any magic off that allows PPTP connectivity
over sprint's 3G/4G wireless network?
I assume they're just filtering it flat out, but before I contact
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net wrote:
On Oct 13, 2011, at 7:26 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
On 10/13/11 3:30 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
In fact, Skype, just as a for instance, is worse on hotel wifi as launching
the app on a laptop makes you a middle
On Oct 31, 2011 9:13 PM, Jack Bates jba...@brightok.net wrote:
On 10/31/2011 11:00 PM, Scott Whyte wrote:
But seriously, if you can help her ascertain real middlebox use cases
she wants to help improve that segment of networking via useful research,
nothing more or less.
Would love to see
FYI.
T-Mobile USA now has opt-in beta support for an Android phone on IPv6,
more info here https://sites.google.com/site/tmoipv6/lg-mytouch
As far as i know, this is the first Android phone that support IPv6 on
the GSM/UMTS mobile interface. Previous version of Android phones
supported IPv6 on
On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Tom Hill t...@ninjabadger.net wrote:
On Fri, 2011-11-04 at 15:04 -0700, Cameron Byrne wrote:
FYI.
T-Mobile USA now has opt-in beta support for an Android phone on IPv6,
more info here https://sites.google.com/site/tmoipv6/lg-mytouch
Very, very good. I hope T
On Nov 6, 2011 10:15 PM, David Hubbard dhubb...@dino.hostasaurus.com
wrote:
Hi all, I am looking at cellular-based devices as a higher
speed alternative to dial-up backup access methods for
out of band management during emergencies. I was
wondering if anyone had experiences with such devices
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Jeroen Massar jer...@unfix.org wrote:
On 2011-11-09 17:32 , Brzozowski, John wrote:
Update from http://www.comcast6.net
IPv6 Pilot Market Deployment Begins
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Comcast has started our first pilot market deployment of IPv6...
Congrats!
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 12:13 PM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Robert Bonomi
bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 10:36:43 -0500, Jason Lewis jle...@packetnexus.com
wrote;
On Nov 14, 2011 9:22 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 19:06:13 EST, William Herrin said:
Using two firewalls in serial from two different vendors doubles the
complexity. Yet it almost always improves security: fat fingers on one
firewall rarely repeat the same way on
On Nov 15, 2011 7:09 AM, -Hammer- bhmc...@gmail.com wrote:
Guys,
Everyone is complaining about whether a FW serves its purpose or not.
Take a step back. Security is about layers. Router ACLs to filter
whitenoise. FW ACLs to filter more. L7 (application) FWs to inspect HTTP
payload. Patch
On Dec 7, 2011 7:49 PM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Dec 8, 2011, at 1:36 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
I don't think you're looking at defense in depth in the right way,
Actually, it sometimes seems as if nobody in the industry understands
what 'defense in depth' really means,
Fyi, I just was rejected from arin for an ipv4 allocation. I demonstrated I
own ~100k ipv4 addresses today.
My customers use over 10 million bogon / squat space ip addresses today,
and I have good attested data on that.
But all I can qualify for is a /18, and then in 3 months maybe a /17. This
On Dec 15, 2011 6:43 PM, Stephen Sprunk step...@sprunk.org wrote:
On 15-Dec-11 16:31, Ricky Beam wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:36:32 -0500, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org
wrote:
... I had thought new allocations are based on demonstrated need. The
fact that addresses are in use would
On Dec 15, 2011 10:35 PM, Brielle Bruns br...@2mbit.com wrote:
On 12/15/11 3:31 PM, Ricky Beam wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:36:32 -0500, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org
wrote:
... I had thought new allocations are based on demonstrated need. The
fact that addresses are in use would seem
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 7:28 AM, TJ trej...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/12/28 Masataka Ohta mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
SNIP
In this case, the following statement in RFC1883:
If the minimum time for rebooting the node is known (often more than
6
On Dec 29, 2011 6:38 AM, Ray Soucy r...@maine.edu wrote:
Sounds like we have one group saying that IPv6 is too complicated and
that all the overhead of IPv6 had resulted in slow adoption.
Meanwhile we have others saying it doesn't have enough functionality,
and should also include IGP.
On Dec 30, 2011 9:16 AM, Alexander Harrowell a.harrow...@gmail.com
wrote:
In the DHCP v6 thread, there was some discussion of
mobility and its IP layer consequences. As various people
pointed out, cellular networks basically handle this in the
RAN (Radio Access Network) and therefore at layer
On Jan 4, 2012 4:52 AM, Måns Nilsson mansa...@besserwisser.org wrote:
Subject: anycast load balancing issue Date: Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at
01:02:55PM +0100 Quoting Måns Nilsson (mansa...@besserwisser.org):
Trouble is, we find that (untweaked) cost and metric are such that all
nodes are equal.
On Jan 10, 2012 5:11 PM, Peter Kristolaitis alte...@alter3d.ca wrote:
Wow! Congrats to the Comcast crew, that's absolutely awesome!
+1
Between dnssec and ipv6 Comcast has shown true internet evolution
leadership in their *actions*, which really stands out in an industry full
of talk.
Cb
On Jan 15, 2012 1:40 PM, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
On Jan 15, 2012, at 2:56 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
Unfortunately that does exactly nothing to help with Internet scale.
Now scaling for your local environment embedded RP might be beneficial,
but
actual practical applications
On Jan 18, 2012 8:43 AM, Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Steven Bellovin s...@cs.columbia.edu
wrote:
On Jan 18, 2012, at 10:41 30AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org
wrote:
On
On Jan 25, 2012 7:52 AM, Justin M. Streiner strei...@cluebyfour.org
wrote:
Is anyone using ULA (RFC 4193) address space for v6 infrastructure that
does not need to be exposed to the outside world? I understand the concept
of having fc00::/8 being doled out by the RIRs never went anywhere, and
On Jan 26, 2012 5:49 AM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Jan 26, 2012, at 2:00 AM, George Bonser wrote:
Use different GUA ranges for internal and external. It's easy enough to
get an additional prefix.
As others have mentioned, things like management interfaces on access
On Jan 26, 2012 8:44 AM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Jan 26, 2012, at 6:39 AM, Jima wrote:
On 2012-01-26, Owen DeLong wrote:
If you can't point to some specific advantage of ULA over secondary
non-routed GUA prefixes, then, ULA doesn't have a reason to live.
My biggest
On Jan 26, 2012 8:49 AM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Jan 26, 2012, at 7:35 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
On Jan 26, 2012 5:49 AM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
On Jan 26, 2012, at 2:00 AM, George Bonser wrote:
Use different GUA ranges for internal and external. It's easy
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:10 PM, -Hammer- bhmc...@gmail.com 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
Not sure on the usefulness of these threads, but i have been getting
testy about lightreading.com not working
wget -6 www.lightreading.com
--2012-03-20 04:48:25-- http://www.lightreading.com/
Resolving www.lightreading.com (www.lightreading.com)... 2001:470:1f06:1274::2
Connecting to
On Mar 28, 2012 2:25 PM, Arturo Servin arturo.servinarturo.ser...@gmail.com
@ arturo.ser...@gmail.comgmail.com arturo.ser...@gmail.com wrote:
Another reason to not use them.
Seriusly, if they cannot expend some thousands of dollars (because
it shouldn't be more than that) in
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:21 AM, james jones ja...@freedomnet.co.nz wrote:
Not to sound like I am trolling here, but how hard is it get VPS servers or
some EC2 servers and setup your own DNS servers. Are there use cases where
that is not practical?
If your goal is , i assume you care
On Mar 30, 2012 3:13 PM, Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Henry Yen he...@aegisinfosys.com wrote:
uunet/vzb will terminate its United States Newsreader and Newsfeed
services on March 31, 2012, with no plans to offer a replacement, and
any
1 - 100 of 206 matches
Mail list logo
