Apologies to all - but I could condense this into a simple sentence: "Why can't the biggest ISP and backbone in the UK provide technical leadership at every level"?
Why aren't YOU as a company doing this up front? Why do I, as a lowly grunt, have to work out what the oracle is saying? I know 10x less than you do - why can't you disseminate this information, when you're trying to sell me a connection? I complain about the home stuff - but this extends to the work stuff where I earn my money - and again, I work in places where they spend hundreds of thousands each month on private circuits from you. Why should I trust you when your technical people know nothing about fibre, and this lack of knowledge or interest extends to endpoints? Andrews and Arnold are expensive - but crikey, look at them on Twitter - I even used their help to sort out my BT problems. Why can't BT do that? A couple of blogs are cheap. BT have a structural problem, you're not a part of it, but the hatred of the way your company operates is only going to accelerate having the two halves of BT separated. On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 11:59 PM Sean Keeney <ad...@serverangels.co.uk> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 11:28 PM Neil J. McRae <n...@domino.org> wrote: > > I’m not sure where to start on this! > > I’m not clear on what community you mean and engagement in a community is > typically a personal thing, or at least always has been for me. > > We have presented at a lot of UKNOF meetings, we have been a patron > sponsor and hosted a meeting too. > A quick grep on the RFC ftp site shows us contributing to over 100 RFCs > and we participate in half a dozen working groups and chair a couple also > and I think we have about half a dozen drafts in progress. > We engage at ETSI in at least six different forums including setting up > the NFV forum and a few other related forums. > One of our staff members currently chairs the broadband forum. > We engage at ITU, EBU and IEEE on standards for loads of technology most > recently G.FAST > We have submitted several papers at OFC to make sure fibre can carry the > traffic we need it to carry in the future: > http://www.comsoc.org/ctn/strengthening-backbone-5g-and-beyond > And a ton of other stuff (including working with Google on a few things) > We co-hosted the IETF (that’s the Internet Engineering Task Force!) a > couple of years ago and are set to co-host in 2018 (if it comes to the UK) > > With regards to working with other service providers, we participate in > lots of forums with service providers, in fact we are running a G.FAST > pilot now where several large service providers are engaged. > > So no, we don’t tell you how to config your router we’d much rather do the > work so you have something to configure on your router in the first place! > > From: uknof <uknof-boun...@lists.uknof.org.uk> on behalf of Sean Keeney < > ad...@serverangels.co.uk> > Date: Monday, 7 November 2016 at 20:54 > To: "uknof@lists.uknof.org.uk" <uknof@lists.uknof.org.uk> > Subject: [uknof] Fwd: IPv6 adoption approaching 16% in UK > > Apologies - I didn't reply all on this earlier. > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Sean Keeney <ad...@serverangels.co.uk> > Date: Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 8:22 PM > Subject: Re: [uknof] IPv6 adoption approaching 16% in UK > To: Neil J. McRae <n...@domino.org> > > Nothing mighty about the admin bit, and not having a go at you personally. > It's just the default for this domain I use. > But - for the largest ISP in the UK, it is hilarious for BT to have a go > at other ISPs. Unlike AAISP and others I don't see any technical direction > from BT apart from the occasional SIN document and no engagement in the > community. > Again, it's not a go at you personally - but for BT to throw stones, even > at a company for whom security is a tangential issue, when they act like > the monopoly they grew out of is ridiculous. > BT don't act like part of the internet like Facebook and Google do. That's > my issue. > > On 7 Nov 2016 8:16 pm, "Neil J. McRae" <n...@domino.org> wrote: > > On 7 Nov 2016, at 20:13, Sean Keeney <ad...@serverangels.co.uk> wrote: > Good point Neil. It's a bit like the largest incumbent government > sponsored ISP in the UK not engaging with the community isn't it? > Ok Sean (oh mighty admin!) I'm biting (again) - what nonsense are you > going on about now dood? > > Regards, > Neil > > > Thank you, Neil. > > As I said you aren't the problem - BT are.They provide my internet, but > they don't engage. > > So. > > Where's the documentation on how to provide ipv6 (or even ipv4) in my > network without using that awful HH? How can I learn to do it properly > myself before providing it to a customer? Your contract with me (afaik) > extends to the box at the wall - so, where is the github or wherever that > gives me the technical details I need to provide this? Where's the nice > Ubuntu package? > > What if my requirements extend to doing something that your HH doesn't do > - like a local DNS domain? > > I reverse engineered your stack for getting IPTV (Sky Sports etc) over > your multicast network. Why should I need to do this, 4 days of work, why > isn't the information loud and clear? My Linux box connects to the OR modem > - who knew i'd have to give the bare connection a fake IP address to be > able to route multicast from it? Why can't you put this up in advance, so I > don't need to second guess the largest supplier of internet in the country? > What are you trying to hide? > > Why is your ipv6 allocation non-static? Is there a reason? If so, i'm all > ears - if it's a good technical reason then fine. If not, then i'll have a > go. You had an excuse for a non static allocation with ipv4, why can't you > give me a static allocation with ipv6? If it's difficult then fine but > PLEASE TELL ME THIS. > > Seriously BT act like a black box. You're not, I can always move to Sky, > which is why I feel bad complaining at you. But the company you work for > *do not realise* they provide access to the internet and that is all. They > are not gatekeepers, like they were in the days when we all had to use > trimphones and had party lines. > > Why are BT not leading the way by giving us information we need to get > people to use BT services?! > > As an aside - in my last role at a secure establishment - BT (OR) sent an > engineer that didn't understand the difference between single and > multi-mode fibre. This is a company that spend hundreds of thousands a > month. Don't under estimate the power of word of mouth. This cost us 3 days. > > Finally: > > 1. Where is your github? > 2. Where is your best practice? > 3. Where are your instructions on helping people get the best from the > connections you provide? > 4. Where are your clear instructions on DNS servers, NTP, etc? Do I need > to talk to India again? > > Seriously. > > /Sean >
