- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

WiFi courses/vendors recommendation
by Abdullah Medhat 03 Jun '15

03 Jun '15

Good day all, We are looking forward to establish MetroWifi network as a new business line in our company, in addition to small/medium events Wifi coverage. I have two questions: 1. What are the required resources/material/training curriculum to let our engineers start educating in this? We are looking for the vendor-agnostic materials that will give our engineers the WiFi essentials/fundamentals to start building a good foundation before evolving to the professional level. 2. What vendors do you recommend? We need to find a cost-effective yet competent option with good pre/post sales service. Thanks, -- Abdullah Medhat

14 15

Re: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial?
by Scott Weeks 03 Jun '15

03 Jun '15

but I don't do email like that why is it hard to read? it's really hard to read email this way. because it's out of order umm, ok. I fixed it for you ----------------------------------------- You've obviously never been hounded by sales folks scraping this list that believe they should never give up. It's painful to say the least. If every "Product Evangelist" were allowed to do this, NANOG would be a nightmare. <snip> To others out there thinking of doing the same, again I say Please read #5 https://www.nanog.org/list ------------------------------------------ --------- nanog(a)ics-il.net wrote: ---------- From: Mike Hammett <nanog(a)ics-il.net> Probably not NANOG, but I have way more traffic on many other lists over the last 12+ years. I'm no stranger to over-zealous sales guys. I've started blocking the ones that call my support line and talking to the call center, despite the warning that support is only for my customers. ------------------------------------------ So, why-oh-why encourage them here? I'm done with this non-thread and fixing out of order postings. Way too much work for me, but I'm sure it's easier for you. No matter what either of us thinks NANOG's AUP specifically states "Product marketing is prohibited." and "Using list as source for private marketing initiatives is prohibited." [FIN, ACK, Seq=2many, Len=0] scott

2 1

Password Decryption Methods?
by Lorell Hathcock 02 Jun '15

02 Jun '15

All: I have a video camera that I need to recover the password. I have a password hash that is stored in a database, but any online decryption sites are not working. Can someone push me in the right direction on where I go from here? Thanks, Lorell

3 2

MaxMind contact
by Alejandro Acosta 02 Jun '15

02 Jun '15

Hi there, Sorry for the noise. Is there anyone from MaxMind on here? I would appreciate it if anyone on, or off-list can provide any contact details Thanks in advance, Alejandro Acosta,

1 0

Any routing issues with TWT in Seattle today?
by Arlington Albertson 02 Jun '15

02 Jun '15

Hey folks, Just wondering if anyone is seeing any issues with TWT routing this morning around Seattle. We've seen a few routing problems and connection issues which appear to be related to this. -AA

1 0

Re: BGP in the Washngton Post
by Scott Weeks 02 Jun '15

02 Jun '15

--- bill(a)herrin.us wrote: From: William Herrin <bill(a)herrin.us> Interesting story about BGP and security in the Washington Post today: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/business/2015/05/31/net-of-insecurity-part… ------------------------------------------------ Great article for the WP and they asked good questions from the correct people, but I have to take issue with the lack of network operator's participation comments: : But getting network operators to participate is proving : difficult. : Many network operators also are cool to taking the further : step of adopting a secure new routing protocol called BGPSEC : to replace BGP. : “Unless [network] operators can see that the benefits will : generally outweigh the costs, they just won’t deploy it.” It's more that the managers who have no idea what is going on are forcing operators to focus their attention elsewhere, rather than the important things until everyone's behind the 8-ball. Then, all of the sudden, the mostly clueless managers are all about it. But, by then it's too late. Farting in a hurricane and hoping it makes a difference... ;-) scott

1 0

Re: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial?
by Scott Weeks 02 Jun '15

02 Jun '15

----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Weeks" <surfer(a)mauigateway.com> --- nogs(a)border6.com wrote: From: Pawel Rybczyk <nogs(a)border6.com> platform where we included new feature called That might be interesting for you. ------------------------------------------- This might be interesting for you. https://www.nanog.org/list Please read #5 before going further. Product Evangelist -------------------------------------- BLECH! I need a shower. ----------------------------------- --- nanog(a)ics-il.net wrote: From: Mike Hammett <nanog(a)ics-il.net> Seems like a perfectly good post to me. Someone made an inquiry as to how to solve a particular problem There were multiple solutions presented. Pawel posted relevant, on-topic information regarding how his product could solve the problem in a unique way. No harm, no foul. ------------------------------ You've obviously never been hounded by sales folks scraping this list that believe they should never give up. It's painful to say the least. If every "Product Evangelist" were allowed to do this, NANOG would be a nightmare. The only answer many times is to be sure you don't buy from "Product Evanglists" that post their crap on NANOG. Hit them where it hurts (no sales because they did that) and they stop. Quickly. To others out there thinking of doing the same, again I say Please read #5 https://www.nanog.org/list scott

2 1

Capacity/transit costs vs growth
by Jean-Francois Mezei 02 Jun '15

02 Jun '15

I am looking for some rough estimates of the ratio of capacity (equipment) pricing declines versus average increase in end user capacity. For instance, say end user average capcity usage increases 50% over 3 years, would the ISP's costs also increase by 50% ? Or would increased efficency of equipment result in a 50% decrease in capacity costs yielding roughly the same total cost to the service provider ? So I am looking are some sort of ratio of gross costs increases/decreases relative to end user usage increase in usage over time. Context: Wholesale services in Canada are priced linearly and there is a process trying to convince the CRTC to review them ASAP. So if average use grows from 1mbps during peak to 1.2mbps, we are looking at 20% increase in costs in a linear pricing scheme. But if this happens over a period where there have been improvements in equipment/efficiency, then one would think the increase in costs would be less than 20%. So I am looking for any and all information that can help convince the regulator that current linear increase is not right and needs a review. any help appreciated.

7 10

PeeringDB Admin
by Jason Bothe 01 Jun '15

01 Jun '15

Could I please have a PeeringDB admin contact me off-list ? Thanks! Jason Bothe, Manager of Networking Rice University o +1 713 348 5500 m +1 713 703 3552 jason(a)rice.edu

3 3

BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial?
by Maqbool Hashim 01 Jun '15

01 Jun '15

Hi, We are an enterprise that are eBGP multihoming to two ISPs. We wish to load balance in inbound and outbound traffic thereby using our capacity as efficiently as possible. My current feeling is that it would be crazy for us to take a full Internet routing table from either ISP. I have read this document from NANOG presentations: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uac… The above document reenforces my opinion that we do not need full routing tables. However I was seeking some clarity as there are other documents which suggest taking a full routing table would be optimal. I "guess" it depends on our criteria and requirements for load balancing: - Just care about roughly balancing link utilisation - Be nice to make some cost savings We have PI space and two Internet routers one for each ISP. Either of our links is sufficient to carry all our traffic, but we want to try and balance utilisation to remain within our commits if possible. I am thinking a "rough" approach for us would be: - Take partial (customer) routes from both providers - Take defaults from both and pref one Maybe we can refine the above a bit more, any suggestions would be most welcome! Many Thanks

11 23