- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: Next NANOG
by Aviva Garrett 26 Feb '01

26 Feb '01

No. In message <Pine.LNX.4.30.0102261033550.8406-100000(a)localhost.localdomain>you w rite: > > Was the date/place of the next NANOG announced in Atlanta? > > Pete. > > >

1 0

Circuit Database
by Berger, Gary 26 Feb '01

26 Feb '01

Can anyone point me to a good tool that manages circuit information Thanks Gary Berger Internal Consultant, Principal Dow Jones & Company Enterprise Network Services

1 0

RE: IXs
by Akio Sugeno 26 Feb '01

26 Feb '01

At PM 12:31 02/25/01, Daniel Golding wrote: >MAE-LA has never been very hot. Same with NYIIX. Currently we have about 40 members and the peak traffic is approx. 320Mbps. Entering 2001, our growth rate jumped to 3-5 member/mo. We've got 5 members in January and 3-5 member are currently under contract including fairy large ISPs. --akio ----------------------------------- Akio Sugeno Chairman of NYIIX/LAIIX/6IIX Voice: 718-355-2509, Fax: 718-355-2517

1 0

Re: IXs
by Akio Sugeno 26 Feb '01

26 Feb '01

> >Via Telehouse's LAIIX <URL:http://www.laiix.net/> it is possible to gain >access to MAE-LA connected peers still. Or, at least, that is the claim. You are absolutely correct. The configuration is: LAIIX ---- LAAP ---- MAE-LA LAIIX members can peer with anyone at LAAP and MAE-LA. --akio ----------------------------------- Akio Sugeno Chairman of NYIIX/LAIIX/6IIX Voice: 718-355-2509, Fax: 718-355-2517

1 0

Re: IXs
by Josh Richards 26 Feb '01

26 Feb '01

* Troy Davis <troy(a)nack.net> [20010225 00:48]: > > Per www.mae.net, MFS isn't accepting new peers at MAE-LA or MAE-Houston. Via Telehouse's LAIIX <URL:http://www.laiix.net/> it is possible to gain access to MAE-LA connected peers still. Or, at least, that is the claim. Though, that is a good point against worrying about going into MAE-LA I suppose, since more potential peers will be discouraged and unlikely to join. Is the significance of MAE-LA so small that someone with a presence at all of the other major NAPs (MAE-West, MAE-East, AADS, PacBell-NAP, Sprint-NAP, PAIX) can safely ignore it? -jr ---- Josh Richards [JTR38/JR539-ARIN] <jrichard(a)geekresearch.com/cubicle.net/fix.net/freedom.gen.ca.us> Geek Research LLC - <URL:http://www.geekresearch.com/> IP Network Engineering and Consulting

3 2

Outage: South Dakota - Qwest/USwest
by Sean Donelan 26 Feb '01

26 Feb '01

CBS news reports much of South Dakota lost telephone and Internet service due to a power failure at a USWEST/Qwest central office from 8pm Friday until 3am Saturday. I didn't see any Internet problems. Did anyone see any impact due to this power failure?

1 0

OOPS...
by John Fraizer 25 Feb '01

25 Feb '01

7 65.64/27.183.34.216.in-addr.arpa (216.34.183.65) 16 msec 20 msec 20 msec --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc

5 5

Re: rfc 1918?
by SMcGrath＠dhhs.state.nh.us 25 Feb '01

25 Feb '01

Bill, You get the 10 point bonus. Are we leaking RFC1918 SMTP headers ? Scott bill manning <bmanning(a)localhost.localdomain>@merit.edu on 02/23/2001 02:49:32 PM Please respond to bmanning(a)karoshi.com Sent by: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu To: nanog(a)merit.edu cc: Valdis.Kletnieks(a)vt.edu Subject: Re: rfc 1918? SMcGrath(a)dhhs.state.nh.us wrote: > > Agreed Valdis, > > Our upstream's use 1918 addresses internally so that 1918 addresses are > constantly bouncing off our filters > we have an aggressive egress filter which makes sure no 1918's leak and > pollute the internet ;-} and filtering on core routers is a suboptimal > solution RFC 1819 addresses (10 points to the person who knows the > predecessor) NEED to be filtered at the border IMHO. > > Scott > AS long as you are filtering, could you -PLEASE- add the SMTP filter to prevent email w/ RFC 1918 addresses in the headers from leaking out of your networks? RFC 1597. --bill

2 1

Network for Sale
by Curt Rask 25 Feb '01

25 Feb '01

________________________________________________________________________ Please excuse this if you feel you are receiving a hugely off-topic post. I have been given the onerous task of selling a small tier1 network. This network would be ideal for anyone wishing to get into the world of peering by advancing their efforts through several years already completed work. Please reply to me directly, off list, if you are interested, serious, and would like more information. No further posts will be made regarding this. Again, forgive the intrusion to the forum, and thank you. Curt Rask ________________________________________________________________________

13 15

DS3 Ordering Experiences
by Joe Budion 25 Feb '01

25 Feb '01

How's Level3? Anyone else have any good/bad experiences with them? Best, joe > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Martin Hannigan" <hannigan(a)fugawi.net> > To: <nanog(a)merit.edu> > Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 3:21 PM > Subject: Re: DS3 Ordering Experiences > > > > > > At 02:59 PM 2/22/2001 -0500, Andy Dills wrote: > > > > > > >This might help some people ordering DS3s from UUnet in the future, so > > >I'll post it here for the archives. > > > > > >We ordered a DS3 to UUnet last July, and after several blown FOC dates, > we > > >finally started passing packets last night. (And man, nothing like 2 ms > > >latency and being able to measure downloads in MB/s.) Thank god the > > >circuit is quality, or this would be an entirely different post. > > > > > >UUnet was amazingly slow: 7+ months to terminate a DS3 to Frederick, MD, > > >50 miles north of their world headquarters. > > > > > > [ snip ] > > > > > > Remember that post I made a bit back that was supposed to be a personal > > note regarding > > an OC12? > > > > I have my OC12 with an FOC of March 15, 10 days ahead of my six weeks. I > > also have a lot of confidence in the ability to deliver it on time. > > > > It took me awhile, but the part about being the squeaky wheel is very true > and > > accurate. Sucks, but that's the way it is. > > > > Sorry for posting so much today. Ahem. Last One. > > > > > > -M > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > -- > > Martin Hannigan hannigan(a)fugawi.net > > Fugawi Networks Engineering > > Boston, MA http://www.fugawi.net > > Ph: 617.742.2693 Fax: 617.742.2300 > > > > > > > >

3 2