Re: [uknof] tail aggregator

On 19/04/2024 15:27, uknof-requ...@lists.uknof.org.uk wrote: So lots of P2P links from customer sites to Telehouse, but backhauled via a single fat pipe (hope that makes sense). Guess local tails would be provided by another provider to local node. Does this exist? Do OR etc have such a

Re: [uknof] CGNAT Solutions

On 07/07/2023 17:14, Paul Mansfield wrote: I think the key part is educating consumers to stop buying that hasn't got a "IPv6 Compatible" label on it. I disagree. I don't think you can blame consumers for: - Many ISPs not providing IPv6 - Almost all content providers not serving over

Re: [uknof] CGNAT Solutions

On 07/07/2023 12:00, uknof-requ...@lists.uknof.org.uk wrote: --- this is what I wrote --- Here's a thought. Industry leading bodies* should announce that from 2026 all internet connections sold in the UK will be IPv6 only, and thus all CPEs must support IPv6 on the WAN and the LAN side, with no

Re: [uknof] Eurostar and tools

On 11/04/2023 12:00, Tom Storey wrote: they dont seem to have a concept of checked baggage which I would otherwise happily pay for. They advertise that they do, for "selected trains between London and Paris", which has to be "booked via our Travel Services team" :

Re: [uknof] OOB connectivity in Pulsant Trafford Park (was M247, Ball Green)

On 21/03/2023 12:00, uknof-requ...@lists.uknof.org.uk wrote: Looking for a /30 or /31 of IPv4 that is accessible globally, statically routed and with ~10Mbps CIR. Why IPv4?  IPv6 is the global out-of-band management network :-)

Re: [uknof] MIkrotik RoS7 BGP Woes

On 02/11/2022 07:35, uknof-requ...@lists.uknof.org.uk wrote: I am probably not the only one with a love/hate relationship with Mikrotik, sometimes it amazes me what you can do, but has anyone else been unfortunate enough to deploy a Mikrotik RoS7 BGP Route Reflector network? I have had an

Re: [uknof] Bandwidth Shaping?

On 06/07/2016 22:20, Iain Grant wrote: Modifying the window size is not new, shorewall can do it - anything that can use the ifb driver in linux can! Can you point me to some documentation to back up that assertion? As I understand it, etinc and packeteer work by modulating the TCP receive

[uknof] IPv6 and flat /48's

I have now dealt with two UK providers who, when asked to add IPv6 to a business connection, have insisted on configuring a flat /48 on the CPE LAN port. I was expecting them to configure a /64 interconnect on the LAN port, plus a /48 static route pointing to the customer's own router or

Re: [uknof] IPv6 usage explosion

On 24/05/2016 11:12, Brandon Butterworth wrote: That is one of the fundamental problems: deploying IPv6 does*not* in >the slightest reduce your need for IPv4 addresses! I would have expected more v6 = less pressure on CGNAT box so can get away with higher user to real IP ratio Sure - if

Re: [uknof] IPv6 usage explosion

> I've had internal discussions about pushing out IPv6 internally everywhere to save on v4 That is one of the fundamental problems: deploying IPv6 does *not* in the slightest reduce your need for IPv4 addresses! You're still going to need as much IPv4 space as you ever did: - for outbound

Re: [uknof] Fwd: internet connection record

On 20/01/2016 16:40, uknof-requ...@lists.uknof.org.uk wrote: A slightly more detailed description can be found in some of the Home Office written evidence to the joint committee: http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidence

Re: [uknof] Trimming the Routing Table

> As a side note, does anybody have practical experience with taking two > tables and how this affects FIB and memory? Here I take two full feeds on two separate 2901's (IOS 15.2, each with 2.5GB RAM) which iBGP with each other. rtr1#sh bgp ipv4 unicast summary ... NeighborV

[uknof] uknof list archive?

At http://lists.uknof.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uknof/ it says " To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit theuknof Archives ." However that link points to http://lists.uknof.org.uk/pipermail/uknof/ which gives a 404. Is there

Re: [uknof] 10gb switch

On 17/09/2015 21:12, Brian Candler wrote: I have good experience with Netgear XSM7224S (only used for layer 2), but that's considerably more expensive. I remembered there is a cheaper model: http://netgear.co.uk/business/products/switches/smart/XS712T.aspx#tab-techspecs This is not a proper

Re: [uknof] Openreach withdrawal of FTTC CPEs

On 17/09/2015 10:19:46, James Bensley wrote: A common deployment is that we are using static IPs between CPE and exchange device, then the customer is running DHCP relay (it's configured on our CPE LAN interface) back to a central DHCP server somewhere else in their WAN.

Re: [uknof] 10gb switch

On 17/09/2015 18:50, Joseph Waite wrote: Looking for recommendations/suggestions for 10gig switch. Requirements are minimum 4 x 10gig fibre ports. Plus minimum 8 x 10gig, not fussed fiber or copper, rj45 or cx4 Only requirements on switch is lag group support & jumbo

Re: [uknof] Notice of Claimed Infringement

On 14/09/2015 12:00, uknof-requ...@lists.uknof.org.uk wrote: I don't disagree with some of the points others have raised, however I am not going to potentially accuse my customer of breaking the law without someone giving me something a bit more realiable to go on :) I don't think there is any

Re: [uknof] TCP Trainee

If my laptop was filling it's RWIN then sending back the ACKs it would be like one in 10 That would be a great way to kill your TCP throughput. Once an RWIN of data had been sent, the transmitter would be forced to stop sending. There would then be an RTT pause until it was able to start

Re: [uknof] TCP Trainee

Alternatively you can just use the underlying tool directly, which for packet loss is owamp. By default it sends 10 packets per second, and it measures the packet loss and latency separately in each direction. (Latency measurements require good NTP sync at both ends). Yes, configuring owamp is a

Re: [uknof] TCP Trainee

I have downloaded a 100MB test file on my colo box from another box in the US which climbed to just over 100Mbps before the end of the file was reached. What's the problem - what speed were you expecting from the spreadsheet? There are a whole bunch of things which can affect the total

[uknof] ntp1.linx.net jitter

to report this, but maybe someone here will pick it up? Regards, Brian Candler. $ sudo traceroute -I ntp1.linx.net traceroute to ntp1.linx.net (195.66.241.3), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets ... 3 ae-125-3511.edge5.london1.Level3.net (4.69.166.41) 4.415 ms 4.425 ms 4.424 ms 4 ae-125-3511.edge5

[uknof] BT mail

Anyone here know anything about the btinternet.com (Yahoo) mail service? I'm trying to help someone who has one of these accounts. The username/password works fine logging into the BT/Yahoo desktop site. But if you try to login at m.yahoo.com, it says: Your account needs updating. Please

Re: [uknof] Vodafone UK/AS25135, 1.2.3.50 O RLY?

On 17/09/2014 11:00, Greg Choules greg.chou...@three.co.uk wrote: My*guess* is that there are insufficient RFC1918 (v4) addresses to go around both 3G and 4G mobile terminals and since everything that needs to go externally will be NATed to a public IP anyway it doesn't matter what is used

Re: [uknof] Belfast

On 11/09/2014 09:34, Charlie Boisseau char...@fluency.net.uk wrote: Erm.. I hate to break it to you, but Belfast is in Britain. We might not be able to say the same about Scotland soon:-(, but Northern Ireland is still part of Britain Technically I believe we are the United Kingdom of Great

[uknof] Small L3 switch with unnumbered ethernet

I'm looking for a small layer 3 switch with 2 x 10G interfaces and which supports unnumbered point-to-point ethernet subinterfaces. Application is a native ethernet access network, with customers presented on different tagged VLANs. No PPPoE/BRAS. Using /31 point-to-point subnets would be

Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce

On 05/09/2014 17:15, Richard Patterson deton...@helix.net.nz wrote: there's plenty of things that content providers may care about that'll be broken under NAT44 and can be resolved by adopting IPv6. ... Geolocation tracking and/or CDN steering. Access restrictions (Betting sites blocking

Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce

On 05/09/2014 09:43, Andy Davidson a...@nosignal.org wrote: giving users native v6 and NAT44 gives content companies an opportunity to sidestep the brokenness by simply adopting V6 I'd say that giving users native V6 and NAT44 gives the content companies *no reason whatsoever* to adopt V6,

Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce

I sometimes wonder if the larger, established ISPs, sitting on their old allocations of IPv4 addresses, have a vested interest in preserving the status quo since without a functioning IPv6, the lack of IPv4 space is a barrier to new competitors entering the market. I don't see a need to invoke

Re: [uknof] Reverse DNS by 3rd Party

I have good experience with GoDaddy Premium DNS. It's astonishingly cheap, for an unlimited number of zones, and provides two anycast servers. I use them in conjunction with an off-site secondary VM for more resilience. You can either use their web interface to manage the zones (and permit

[uknof] Easynet performance issue

for that, please could you contact me via private E-mail. Thanks, Brian Candler.