Please remove me from all mailing lists !!!
Marshall Eubanks
tme at americafree.tv
Fri Jul 2 12:20:06 UTC 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