Please remove me from all mailing lists !!!

Marshall Eubanks tme at americafree.tv
Fri Jul 2 07:20:06 CDT 2010


At the very bottom of each message, you will see

https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

If you go there, you can unsubscribe.

Regards
Marshall


On Jul 2, 2010, at 7:24 AM, Scott Amyoony wrote:

>
>
> _____________________________________________
> From: <nanog-bounces at nanog.org> [mailto:nanog-bounces at nanog.org]
> Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 8:23 AM
> To: <scott.amyoony at conyersdill.com>
> Subject: The results of your email commands
>
>
> The results of your email command are provided below. Attached is your
> original message.
>
>
> - Unprocessed:
>    move me.
>    Thanks!
>    _____________________________________________
>    From: <nanog-request at nanog.org> [mailto:nanog-request at nanog.org]=20
>    Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 12:19 AM
>    To: <nanog at nanog.org>
>    Subject: NANOG Digest, Vol 30, Issue 4
>    Send NANOG mailing list submissions to
>    =09nanog at nanog.org
>    To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>    =09https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
>    or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>    =09nanog-request at nanog.org
>    You can reach the person managing the list at
>    =09nanog-owner at nanog.org
>    When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>    than "Re: Contents of NANOG digest..."
>
> - Ignored:
>
>
>    Today's Topics:
>
>       1. Re: The Economist, cyber war issue (andrew.wallace)
>       2. Re: The Economist, cyber war issue (Randy Bush)
>       3. Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right (Stefan Sp? 
> hler)
>       4. Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right (William  
> Herrin)
>       5. Re: XO feedback (Stefan Molnar)
>       6. Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right (Matthew  
> Walster)
>       7. Re: SPANS Vs Taps (Darren Bolding)
>       8. Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right (Larry  
> Sheldon)
>       9. Re: SPANS Vs Taps (Ricky Beam)
>      10. Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right (Matthew  
> Palmer)
>      11. Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
>          (Marshall Eubanks)
>      12. Re: Type of network operators? (Martin Hannigan)
>
>
>     
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    Message: 1
>    Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 14:51:20 -0700 (PDT)
>    From: "andrew.wallace" <andrew.wallace at rocketmail.com>
>    Subject: Re: The Economist, cyber war issue
>    To: Jeroen van Aart <jeroen at mompl.net>
>    Cc: nanog at nanog.org
>    Message-ID: <862176.46872.qm at web59616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
>    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8
>
>    There is a part 2 as well http://www.economist.com/node/16478792?story_id=
>    =3D16478792
>
>    Andrew
>
>
>
>    ----- Original Message ----
>    From: Jeroen van Aart <jeroen at mompl.net>
>    To: NANOG list <nanog at nanog.org>
>    Sent: Thu, 1 July, 2010 19:57:08
>    Subject: Re: The Economist, cyber war issue
>
>    andrew.wallace wrote:
>> Article: http://www.economist.com/node/16481504?story_id=3D16481504
>
>    I know it's shortsighted, but any article with the word cyber in  
> it, used i=
>    n such a way as being about "cyber this-or-that", already lost  
> its credibil=
>    ity by virtue of using the word. It must be a of rather high  
> quality to win=
>     back its credibility. This economist article sadly does the  
> opposite.
>
>    Regards,
>    Jeroen
>
>    -- http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
>
>
>         =20
>
>
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
>    Message: 2
>    Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 07:01:02 +0900
>    From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
>    Subject: Re: The Economist, cyber war issue
>    To: "andrew.wallace" <andrew.wallace at rocketmail.com>
>    Cc: nanog at nanog.org
>    Message-ID: <m28w5uzwtd.wl%randy at psg.com>
>    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DUS-ASCII
>
>> There is a part 2 as well
>
>    and this is a bug or a feature?
>
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
>    Message: 3
>    Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 00:05:36 +0200
>    From: Stefan Sp?hler <lists at stefan-spuehler.org>
>    Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
>    To: nanog at nanog.org
>    Message-ID: <4C2D1130.9030704 at stefan-spuehler.org>
>    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
>
>    On 07/01/2010 02:04 PM, Gadi Evron wrote:
>> http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/01/finland.broadband/index.html?h=
>    pt=3DT2
>> =20
>> =20
>> Interesting...
>>
>    Finland isn't first.
>
>    http://www.comcom.admin.ch/aktuell/00429/00457/00560/index.html?lang=3Den&m=
>    sg-id=3D13239
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
>    Message: 4
>    Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 18:17:43 -0400
>    From: William Herrin <bill at herrin.us>
>    Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
>    To: Gadi Evron <ge at linuxbox.org>
>    Cc: nanog at nanog.org
>    Message-ID:
>    =09<AANLkTilh2hagwUvCoxQKCkbFhYpvd3c3HZrCwqfqseXi at mail.gmail.com>
>    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
>
>    On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Gadi Evron <ge at linuxbox.org> wrote:
>> http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/01/finland.broadband/index.html?h=
>    pt=3DT2
>
>    In the US, the Communications Act of 1934 brought about the  
> creation
>    of the "Universal Service Fund." The idea, more or less, was that
>    every phone line customer contributed to the fund (you'll find it
>    itemized on your phone bill) and the phone companies had to  
> charge the
>    same for every phone line regardless of where delivered in their
>    territory but when initially installing an unusually difficult
>    (expensive) phone line the phone company was entitled to  
> reimburse its
>    cost from the fund.
>
>    In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the  
> universal
>    service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate"
>    program) instead of improving rural communications...
>
>
>
>    --=20
>    William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
>    3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
>    Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
>
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
>    Message: 5
>    Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 15:21:25 -0700 (PDT)
>    From: Stefan Molnar <stefan at csudsu.com>
>    Subject: Re: XO feedback
>    To: Net <funkyfun at gmail.com>
>    Cc: nanog at nanog.org
>    Message-ID: <20100701150758.T81245 at clockwork>
>    Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=3DUS-ASCII; format=3Dflowed
>
>
>    XO has many downs than ups.   I am a current XO customer mainly  
> due to the=
>    =20
>    costs, having voice, PtP, Transit, and Co-Location.
>
>    Here is my rundown.
>
>    Internet Transit:  Yes it works, and when their routing goes ape,  
> no one=20
>    knows what is going on.  They have a tendency not to do a "wr  
> mem" on=20
>    their ciscos.
>
>    Point to Point:  Yes it works, but when they have to take an OC12  
> or some=
>    =20
>    large circuit down you might be notified the day of.  Also if you  
> have=20
>    more than one circuit with them, finding what circuit will be hit  
> takes=20
>    ages on their side.
>
>    Co-Location:  One crap shoot close to death.  A "change control"  
> group has=
>    =20
>    to approve changes, adds, and you as a customer has zero say.
>
>    Call Center:  I feel like Mr. Bean is running the call center.   
> Depending=
>    =20
>    on who you call, and when they last did trainning you will get a  
> wild=20
>    range of responces.  Even for the simplest of things takes about  
> 20 min to=
>    =20
>    make a ticket, and some have taken past 40min.
>
>    Voice:  Random failures of not being able to reach cell phone  
> carriers.=20
>    Random issues where some trunk lines just go offline.  But to XO  
> it is=20
>    always the customer hardware.  Another great feature if you have  
> a trouble=
>    =20
>    ticket and in part of correcting the issue if some other change  
> was=20
>    introduced an automated system will back out any changes weeks  
> later.
>
>    It is one of those things in life you deal with because the  
> tradeoff is=20
>    something execs see as the monthly OPEX costs.
>
>    Stefan
>
>
>    On Thu, 1 Jul 2010, Net wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We're currently looking to buy transit from XO for one of our DCs.
>> Their pricing is very competative compared to some of the other
>> providers we've considered to date.
>>
>> I'm hoping to get some feedback on their services, support, peering
>> arrangements and the overall stability of their core backbone network
>> from folks who've had experience or currently using them.
>>
>> Any info would be greatly appreciated.
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>> --=20
>> Sent from my mobile device
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
>    Message: 6
>    Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 00:14:42 +0100
>    From: Matthew Walster <matthew at walster.org>
>    Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
>    To: nanog list <nanog at nanog.org>
>    Message-ID:
>    =09<AANLkTikywKRBHfsT88M4rDLc_52W4Atwj47elKBjsyzI at mail.gmail.com>
>    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DUTF-8
>
>    On 1 July 2010 23:17, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>> In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the universal
>> service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate"
>> program) instead of improving rural communications...
>
>    As someone who's always been in the "tech" field, the amount  
> spent on
>    ICT in schools has always shocked and appalled me.
>
>    Bring back the Acorn Archimedes and ECONET!
>
>    M
>
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
>    Message: 7
>    Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 16:24:38 -0700
>    From: Darren Bolding <darren at bolding.org>
>    Subject: Re: SPANS Vs Taps
>    To: "Bein, Matthew" <mbein at iso-ne.com>
>    Cc: nanog at nanog.org
>    Message-ID:
>    =09<AANLkTilK1925X0LPw319-PmhMpBzqZQ0parHx2jeCT0J at mail.gmail.com>
>    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
>
>    Tap manufactures will be sure to tell you of many issues.
>
>    The main concern I would have is that it is possible for a switch  
> to drop
>    frames of a SPAN.  Your decision might be influenced based on your
>    application and the impact of such errors (billing, lawful  
> intercept,
>    forensics).
>
>    A tap vendors take: http://www.networkcritical.com/What-are-Network-Taps
>
>    On a somewhat related note, I will mention that TNAPI from ntop  
> is quite
>    handy.   http://www.ntop.org/TNAPI.html
>
>    <http://www.networkcritical.com/What-are-Network-Taps>--D
>
>    On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Bein, Matthew <mbein at iso-ne.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> As I was doing a design today. I found that I had a bunch of 100 MB
>> connections that I was going to bring into a aggregation tap. Then  
>> I was
>> thinking, why don't I use a switch like a Cisco 3560 to gain more
>> density. Anyone run into this? Any down falls with using a switch to
>> aggregate instead of a true port aggregator??
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>>
>
>
>    --=20
>    --  Darren Bolding                  --
>    --  darren at bolding.org           --
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
>    Message: 8
>    Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 18:25:52 -0500
>    From: Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon at cox.net>
>    Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
>    To: nanog at nanog.org
>    Message-ID: <4C2D2400.3050308 at cox.net>
>    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
>
>    On 7/1/2010 18:14, Matthew Walster wrote:
>> On 1 July 2010 23:17, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>>> In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the  
>>> universal
>>> service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate"
>>> program) instead of improving rural communications...
>> =20
>> As someone who's always been in the "tech" field, the amount spent on
>> ICT in schools has always shocked and appalled me.
>> =20
>> Bring back the Acorn Archimedes and ECONET!
>
>    Does anybody know how much the Big Sky Telegraph cost, and who  
> paid for it?
>
>    --=20
>    Somebody should have said:
>    A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for  
> dinner.
>
>    Freedom under a constitutional republic is a well armed lamb  
> contesting
>    the vote.
>
>    Requiescas in pace o email
>    Ex turpi causa non oritur actio
>    Eppure si rinfresca
>
>    ICBM Targeting Information:  http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
>    http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml
>
>    =09
>
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
>    Message: 9
>    Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 20:50:40 -0400
>    From: "Ricky Beam" <jfbeam at gmail.com>
>    Subject: Re: SPANS Vs Taps
>    To: "Darren Bolding" <darren at bolding.org>, "Bein, Matthew"
>    =09<mbein at iso-ne.com>
>    Cc: nanog at nanog.org
>    Message-ID: <op.ve6xyqngtfhldh at rbeam.xactional.com>
>    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii; format=3Dflowed;  
> delsp=3Dyes
>
>    On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 19:24:38 -0400, Darren Bolding <darren at bolding.org 
> > =20
>    wrote:
>> Tap manufactures will be sure to tell you of many issues.
>
>    Well, there are issues on both sides...
>
>    A true tap is an electronic mirror.  It doesn't much care what  
> the signal =
>    =20
>    is; whatever it senses, it replicates.  As the OP is talking  
> about an =20
>    aggrigating tap, he's already using a switch.  I've used  
> NetworkCritical, =
>    =20
>    NetOptics, and several other "cheap" taps.  None of them are even  
> remotely =
>    =20
>    cheap.  That said, use an ethernet switch...
>
>> The main concern I would have is that it is possible for a switch  
>> to drop
>> frames of a SPAN.  Your decision might be influenced based on your
>> application and the impact of such errors (billing, lawful intercept,
>> forensics).
>
>    Yes, a switch can drop traffic (inbound and out.)  But so can a  
> tap.  And =
>    =20
>    so can the thing listening to the tap.
>
>    At work I'm configuring an integrate Broadcom 10G switch (SoC) as  
> a pure =
>    =20
>    mirror.  The ports wired to the system form a trunk group which  
> is the =20
>    destination for the mirror of the external ports.  This is  
> exactly what =20
>    you'll find inside $$$$$ commercial multiport aggrigating "taps".  
> (and =20
>    btw, we've thrown over 1Mpps at it without issue; ~50% 64byte  
> packets, the =
>    =20
>    bane of any switch.  (recorded) real world traffic, not some  
> Spirent =20
>    simulation.)
>
>    --Ricky
>
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
>    Message: 10
>    Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 11:54:52 +1000
>    From: Matthew Palmer <mpalmer at hezmatt.org>
>    Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
>    To: nanog at nanog.org
>    Message-ID: <20100702015452.GB7566 at hezmatt.org>
>    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii
>
>    On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 12:14:42AM +0100, Matthew Walster wrote:
>> On 1 July 2010 23:17, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>>> In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the  
>>> universal
>>> service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate"
>>> program) instead of improving rural communications...
>> =20
>> As someone who's always been in the "tech" field, the amount spent on
>> ICT in schools has always shocked and appalled me.
>
>    Don't get me started on ICT in schools.  Please.
>
>    - Matt
>
>    --=20
>    <Igloo> I remember going to my first tutorial in room 404. I was  
> most upset
>    when I found it.
>
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
>    Message: 11
>    Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 22:33:57 -0400
>    From: Marshall Eubanks <tme at americafree.tv>
>    Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
>    To: William Herrin <bill at herrin.us>
>    Cc: nanog at nanog.org
>    Message-ID: <00173191-2CCE-43A6-A928-139979306E08 at americafree.tv>
>    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DUS-ASCII; format=3Dflowed
>
>
>    On Jul 1, 2010, at 6:17 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Gadi Evron <ge at linuxbox.org> wrote:
>>> http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/01/finland.broadband/index.html?=
>    hpt=3DT2
>>
>> In the US, the Communications Act of 1934 brought about the creation
>> of the "Universal Service Fund." The idea, more or less, was that
>> every phone line customer contributed to the fund (you'll find it
>> itemized on your phone bill) and the phone companies had to charge  
>> the
>> same for every phone line regardless of where delivered in their
>> territory but when initially installing an unusually difficult
>> (expensive) phone line the phone company was entitled to reimburse  
>> its
>> cost from the fund.
>>
>> In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the universal
>> service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate"
>> program) instead of improving rural communications...
>>
>>
>
>    Sen. Larry Pressler (R-S.D.) invented the Internet ?
>
>    Regards
>    Marshall
>
>
>
>>
>> --=20
>> William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com   
>> bill at herrin.us
>> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
>> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
>    Message: 12
>    Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 23:18:45 -0400
>    From: Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com>
>    Subject: Re: Type of network operators?
>    To: Butch Evans <nanog at butchevans.com>, nanog at nanog.org
>    Message-ID:
>    =09<AANLkTimRAHmAUg2UC3_YuJuKxBfyoBTxng4PX3pydqm9 at mail.gmail.com>
>    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
>
>    Thanks. Your observations are good related to active posters. The
>    overall list is very diverse. Aside from the active posters, the  
> list
>    is about 10K strong. Everything from AOL to people from Zoos,  law
>    enforcement, banks, and any industry you can think of.  NANOG is  
> not
>    just a list, but an interesting hodge podge of builders and  
> occupants
>    of the Internet that sometimes make sense. :-)
>
>    As Paul Wall might say, Drive Slow.
>
>    Best,
>
>    Marty
>
>
>
>    On 7/1/10, Butch Evans <nanog at butchevans.com> wrote:
>> I have been on this list for about 2 weeks, just observing the
>>        discussions.  I have primarily worked with wireless service
>>        providers in
>>        the past who are fairly low budget operators.  Some of the
>>        things I've
>>        observed about this group are:
>>
>>        * This list seems to be populated by better funded operations
>>        (whether
>>        that means larger or just better at getting funding may remain
>>        to be
>>        seen)
>>
>>        * Most of the operators on this list seem to be pretty good at
>>        their
>>        work and the questions seem to revolve around more complex
>>        issues
>>
>>        * There seems to be a number of corporate network operators on
>>        this list
>>        as opposed to access network operators (such as ISPs and such)
>>
>>        I hope you all don't take this as an affront and get offended,
>>        as that's
>>        not my intent.  I am just making some simple observations.
>>
>>        Having said this, I wanted to introduce myself and see if this
>>        is a list
>>        that I need to participate in actively.  I am a network  
>> engineer
>>        and
>>        consultant.  I have worked in the past with Cisco, Juniper and
>>        other
>>        similar "higher end" type devices, but it's been a while  
>> since I
>>        had
>>        customers who use that gear.  Most of my current customer base
>>        are
>>        smaller operators who can pinch a penny in half.  :-)
>>
>>        I do a lot of work with MikroTik RouterOS, ImageStream and  
>> other
>>        Linux
>>        based devices.  I do engineering, training, hardware sales and
>>        such for
>>        networks all over the world.  I am likely to continue to  
>> monitor
>>        the
>>        list for questions that are in my area of expertise, but
>>        wondered if
>>        these devices I mention are "common" to operators on this  
>> list.
>>        I know
>>        that I have not caught a discussion that involved any of  
>> them so
>>        far
>>        (other than one reference to an OpenBSD solution a day or two
>>        ago).
>>
>>        Anyway, hello to the list and I look forward to finding a home
>>        among
>>        this group.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
>    _______________________________________________
>    NANOG mailing list
>    NANOG at nanog.org
>    https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
>
>    End of NANOG Digest, Vol 30, Issue 4
>    ************************************
>
>
>
>
> - Done.
>
> From: "Scott Amyoony" <Scott.Amyoony at conyersdill.com>
> Date: July 2, 2010 7:22:21 AM EDT
> To: <nanog-request at nanog.org>
> Subject: PLEEEEASE REMOVE ME FROM MAILING LISTS !
>
>
> I have tried the mailman link, could not get password reset. PLEASE  
> just remove me.
>
> Thanks!
>
> _____________________________________________
> From: <nanog-request at nanog.org> [mailto:nanog-request at nanog.org]
> Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 12:19 AM
> To: <nanog at nanog.org>
> Subject: NANOG Digest, Vol 30, Issue 4
>
>
> Send NANOG mailing list submissions to
> 	nanog at nanog.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	nanog-request at nanog.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	nanog-owner at nanog.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of NANOG digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: The Economist, cyber war issue (andrew.wallace)
>   2. Re: The Economist, cyber war issue (Randy Bush)
>   3. Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right (Stefan Sp?hler)
>   4. Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right (William Herrin)
>   5. Re: XO feedback (Stefan Molnar)
>   6. Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right (Matthew  
> Walster)
>   7. Re: SPANS Vs Taps (Darren Bolding)
>   8. Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right (Larry Sheldon)
>   9. Re: SPANS Vs Taps (Ricky Beam)
>  10. Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right (Matthew Palmer)
>  11. Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
>      (Marshall Eubanks)
>  12. Re: Type of network operators? (Martin Hannigan)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 14:51:20 -0700 (PDT)
> From: "andrew.wallace" <andrew.wallace at rocketmail.com>
> Subject: Re: The Economist, cyber war issue
> To: Jeroen van Aart <jeroen at mompl.net>
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
> Message-ID: <862176.46872.qm at web59616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> There is a part 2 as well http://www.economist.com/node/16478792?story_id=16478792
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jeroen van Aart <jeroen at mompl.net>
> To: NANOG list <nanog at nanog.org>
> Sent: Thu, 1 July, 2010 19:57:08
> Subject: Re: The Economist, cyber war issue
>
> andrew.wallace wrote:
>> Article: http://www.economist.com/node/16481504?story_id=16481504
>
> I know it's shortsighted, but any article with the word cyber in it,  
> used in such a way as being about "cyber this-or-that", already lost  
> its credibility by virtue of using the word. It must be a of rather  
> high quality to win back its credibility. This economist article  
> sadly does the opposite.
>
> Regards,
> Jeroen
>
> -- http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 07:01:02 +0900
> From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
> Subject: Re: The Economist, cyber war issue
> To: "andrew.wallace" <andrew.wallace at rocketmail.com>
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
> Message-ID: <m28w5uzwtd.wl%randy at psg.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
>> There is a part 2 as well
>
> and this is a bug or a feature?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 00:05:36 +0200
> From: Stefan Sp?hler <lists at stefan-spuehler.org>
> Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
> To: nanog at nanog.org
> Message-ID: <4C2D1130.9030704 at stefan-spuehler.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 07/01/2010 02:04 PM, Gadi Evron wrote:
>> http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/01/finland.broadband/index.html?hpt=T2
>>
>>
>> Interesting...
>>
> Finland isn't first.
>
> http://www.comcom.admin.ch/aktuell/00429/00457/00560/index.html?lang=en&msg-id=13239
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 18:17:43 -0400
> From: William Herrin <bill at herrin.us>
> Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
> To: Gadi Evron <ge at linuxbox.org>
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
> Message-ID:
> 	<AANLkTilh2hagwUvCoxQKCkbFhYpvd3c3HZrCwqfqseXi at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Gadi Evron <ge at linuxbox.org> wrote:
>> http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/01/finland.broadband/index.html?hpt=T2
>
> In the US, the Communications Act of 1934 brought about the creation
> of the "Universal Service Fund." The idea, more or less, was that
> every phone line customer contributed to the fund (you'll find it
> itemized on your phone bill) and the phone companies had to charge the
> same for every phone line regardless of where delivered in their
> territory but when initially installing an unusually difficult
> (expensive) phone line the phone company was entitled to reimburse its
> cost from the fund.
>
> In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the universal
> service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate"
> program) instead of improving rural communications...
>
>
>
> -- 
> William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 15:21:25 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Stefan Molnar <stefan at csudsu.com>
> Subject: Re: XO feedback
> To: Net <funkyfun at gmail.com>
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
> Message-ID: <20100701150758.T81245 at clockwork>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
>
> XO has many downs than ups.   I am a current XO customer mainly due  
> to the
> costs, having voice, PtP, Transit, and Co-Location.
>
> Here is my rundown.
>
> Internet Transit:  Yes it works, and when their routing goes ape, no  
> one
> knows what is going on.  They have a tendency not to do a "wr mem" on
> their ciscos.
>
> Point to Point:  Yes it works, but when they have to take an OC12 or  
> some
> large circuit down you might be notified the day of.  Also if you have
> more than one circuit with them, finding what circuit will be hit  
> takes
> ages on their side.
>
> Co-Location:  One crap shoot close to death.  A "change control"  
> group has
> to approve changes, adds, and you as a customer has zero say.
>
> Call Center:  I feel like Mr. Bean is running the call center.   
> Depending
> on who you call, and when they last did trainning you will get a wild
> range of responces.  Even for the simplest of things takes about 20  
> min to
> make a ticket, and some have taken past 40min.
>
> Voice:  Random failures of not being able to reach cell phone  
> carriers.
> Random issues where some trunk lines just go offline.  But to XO it is
> always the customer hardware.  Another great feature if you have a  
> trouble
> ticket and in part of correcting the issue if some other change was
> introduced an automated system will back out any changes weeks later.
>
> It is one of those things in life you deal with because the tradeoff  
> is
> something execs see as the monthly OPEX costs.
>
> Stefan
>
>
> On Thu, 1 Jul 2010, Net wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We're currently looking to buy transit from XO for one of our DCs.
>> Their pricing is very competative compared to some of the other
>> providers we've considered to date.
>>
>> I'm hoping to get some feedback on their services, support, peering
>> arrangements and the overall stability of their core backbone network
>> from folks who've had experience or currently using them.
>>
>> Any info would be greatly appreciated.
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>> -- 
>> Sent from my mobile device
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 00:14:42 +0100
> From: Matthew Walster <matthew at walster.org>
> Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
> To: nanog list <nanog at nanog.org>
> Message-ID:
> 	<AANLkTikywKRBHfsT88M4rDLc_52W4Atwj47elKBjsyzI at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On 1 July 2010 23:17, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>> In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the universal
>> service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate"
>> program) instead of improving rural communications...
>
> As someone who's always been in the "tech" field, the amount spent on
> ICT in schools has always shocked and appalled me.
>
> Bring back the Acorn Archimedes and ECONET!
>
> M
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 16:24:38 -0700
> From: Darren Bolding <darren at bolding.org>
> Subject: Re: SPANS Vs Taps
> To: "Bein, Matthew" <mbein at iso-ne.com>
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
> Message-ID:
> 	<AANLkTilK1925X0LPw319-PmhMpBzqZQ0parHx2jeCT0J at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Tap manufactures will be sure to tell you of many issues.
>
> The main concern I would have is that it is possible for a switch to  
> drop
> frames of a SPAN.  Your decision might be influenced based on your
> application and the impact of such errors (billing, lawful intercept,
> forensics).
>
> A tap vendors take: http://www.networkcritical.com/What-are-Network-Taps
>
> On a somewhat related note, I will mention that TNAPI from ntop is  
> quite
> handy.   http://www.ntop.org/TNAPI.html
>
> <http://www.networkcritical.com/What-are-Network-Taps>--D
>
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Bein, Matthew <mbein at iso-ne.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> As I was doing a design today. I found that I had a bunch of 100 MB
>> connections that I was going to bring into a aggregation tap. Then  
>> I was
>> thinking, why don't I use a switch like a Cisco 3560 to gain more
>> density. Anyone run into this? Any down falls with using a switch to
>> aggregate instead of a true port aggregator??
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> --  Darren Bolding                  --
> --  darren at bolding.org           --
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 18:25:52 -0500
> From: Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon at cox.net>
> Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
> To: nanog at nanog.org
> Message-ID: <4C2D2400.3050308 at cox.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 7/1/2010 18:14, Matthew Walster wrote:
>> On 1 July 2010 23:17, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>>> In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the  
>>> universal
>>> service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate"
>>> program) instead of improving rural communications...
>>
>> As someone who's always been in the "tech" field, the amount spent on
>> ICT in schools has always shocked and appalled me.
>>
>> Bring back the Acorn Archimedes and ECONET!
>
> Does anybody know how much the Big Sky Telegraph cost, and who paid  
> for it?
>
> -- 
> Somebody should have said:
> A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for  
> dinner.
>
> Freedom under a constitutional republic is a well armed lamb  
> contesting
> the vote.
>
> Requiescas in pace o email
> Ex turpi causa non oritur actio
> Eppure si rinfresca
>
> ICBM Targeting Information:  http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
> http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml
>
> 	
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 20:50:40 -0400
> From: "Ricky Beam" <jfbeam at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: SPANS Vs Taps
> To: "Darren Bolding" <darren at bolding.org>, "Bein, Matthew"
> 	<mbein at iso-ne.com>
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
> Message-ID: <op.ve6xyqngtfhldh at rbeam.xactional.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 19:24:38 -0400, Darren Bolding  
> <darren at bolding.org>
> wrote:
>> Tap manufactures will be sure to tell you of many issues.
>
> Well, there are issues on both sides...
>
> A true tap is an electronic mirror.  It doesn't much care what the  
> signal
> is; whatever it senses, it replicates.  As the OP is talking about an
> aggrigating tap, he's already using a switch.  I've used  
> NetworkCritical,
> NetOptics, and several other "cheap" taps.  None of them are even  
> remotely
> cheap.  That said, use an ethernet switch...
>
>> The main concern I would have is that it is possible for a switch  
>> to drop
>> frames of a SPAN.  Your decision might be influenced based on your
>> application and the impact of such errors (billing, lawful intercept,
>> forensics).
>
> Yes, a switch can drop traffic (inbound and out.)  But so can a  
> tap.  And
> so can the thing listening to the tap.
>
> At work I'm configuring an integrate Broadcom 10G switch (SoC) as a  
> pure
> mirror.  The ports wired to the system form a trunk group which is the
> destination for the mirror of the external ports.  This is exactly  
> what
> you'll find inside $$$$$ commercial multiport aggrigating "taps". (and
> btw, we've thrown over 1Mpps at it without issue; ~50% 64byte  
> packets, the
> bane of any switch.  (recorded) real world traffic, not some Spirent
> simulation.)
>
> --Ricky
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 11:54:52 +1000
> From: Matthew Palmer <mpalmer at hezmatt.org>
> Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
> To: nanog at nanog.org
> Message-ID: <20100702015452.GB7566 at hezmatt.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 12:14:42AM +0100, Matthew Walster wrote:
>> On 1 July 2010 23:17, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>>> In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the  
>>> universal
>>> service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate"
>>> program) instead of improving rural communications...
>>
>> As someone who's always been in the "tech" field, the amount spent on
>> ICT in schools has always shocked and appalled me.
>
> Don't get me started on ICT in schools.  Please.
>
> - Matt
>
> -- 
> <Igloo> I remember going to my first tutorial in room 404. I was  
> most upset
> when I found it.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 22:33:57 -0400
> From: Marshall Eubanks <tme at americafree.tv>
> Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
> To: William Herrin <bill at herrin.us>
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
> Message-ID: <00173191-2CCE-43A6-A928-139979306E08 at americafree.tv>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
>
> On Jul 1, 2010, at 6:17 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Gadi Evron <ge at linuxbox.org> wrote:
>>> http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/01/finland.broadband/index.html?hpt=T2
>>
>> In the US, the Communications Act of 1934 brought about the creation
>> of the "Universal Service Fund." The idea, more or less, was that
>> every phone line customer contributed to the fund (you'll find it
>> itemized on your phone bill) and the phone companies had to charge  
>> the
>> same for every phone line regardless of where delivered in their
>> territory but when initially installing an unusually difficult
>> (expensive) phone line the phone company was entitled to reimburse  
>> its
>> cost from the fund.
>>
>> In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the universal
>> service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate"
>> program) instead of improving rural communications...
>>
>>
>
> Sen. Larry Pressler (R-S.D.) invented the Internet ?
>
> Regards
> Marshall
>
>
>
>>
>> -- 
>> William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com   
>> bill at herrin.us
>> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
>> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 23:18:45 -0400
> From: Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Type of network operators?
> To: Butch Evans <nanog at butchevans.com>, nanog at nanog.org
> Message-ID:
> 	<AANLkTimRAHmAUg2UC3_YuJuKxBfyoBTxng4PX3pydqm9 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Thanks. Your observations are good related to active posters. The
> overall list is very diverse. Aside from the active posters, the list
> is about 10K strong. Everything from AOL to people from Zoos,  law
> enforcement, banks, and any industry you can think of.  NANOG is not
> just a list, but an interesting hodge podge of builders and occupants
> of the Internet that sometimes make sense. :-)
>
> As Paul Wall might say, Drive Slow.
>
> Best,
>
> Marty
>
>
>
> On 7/1/10, Butch Evans <nanog at butchevans.com> wrote:
>> I have been on this list for about 2 weeks, just observing the
>>        discussions.  I have primarily worked with wireless service
>>        providers in
>>        the past who are fairly low budget operators.  Some of the
>>        things I've
>>        observed about this group are:
>>
>>        * This list seems to be populated by better funded operations
>>        (whether
>>        that means larger or just better at getting funding may remain
>>        to be
>>        seen)
>>
>>        * Most of the operators on this list seem to be pretty good at
>>        their
>>        work and the questions seem to revolve around more complex
>>        issues
>>
>>        * There seems to be a number of corporate network operators on
>>        this list
>>        as opposed to access network operators (such as ISPs and such)
>>
>>        I hope you all don't take this as an affront and get offended,
>>        as that's
>>        not my intent.  I am just making some simple observations.
>>
>>        Having said this, I wanted to introduce myself and see if this
>>        is a list
>>        that I need to participate in actively.  I am a network  
>> engineer
>>        and
>>        consultant.  I have worked in the past with Cisco, Juniper and
>>        other
>>        similar "higher end" type devices, but it's been a while  
>> since I
>>        had
>>        customers who use that gear.  Most of my current customer base
>>        are
>>        smaller operators who can pinch a penny in half.  :-)
>>
>>        I do a lot of work with MikroTik RouterOS, ImageStream and  
>> other
>>        Linux
>>        based devices.  I do engineering, training, hardware sales and
>>        such for
>>        networks all over the world.  I am likely to continue to  
>> monitor
>>        the
>>        list for questions that are in my area of expertise, but
>>        wondered if
>>        these devices I mention are "common" to operators on this  
>> list.
>>        I know
>>        that I have not caught a discussion that involved any of  
>> them so
>>        far
>>        (other than one reference to an OpenBSD solution a day or two
>>        ago).
>>
>>        Anyway, hello to the list and I look forward to finding a home
>>        among
>>        this group.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list
> NANOG at nanog.org
> https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
>
> End of NANOG Digest, Vol 30, Issue 4
> ************************************
>
>
>
>
>





More information about the NANOG mailing list