September 1998 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: FR Tidbit [was: 56k modems/frame/ptp revisited (LONG)]
by Dan Jones 02 Sep '98

02 Sep '98

Scott, I'm curious. Is your assertion that "CIR is guaranteed only under "normal" conditions" based on the Frame Relay spec or a paticular vendor(s) implementation? I ask because I have been in that very debate for some time (usually with a FR vendor justifying lousey performance). My tendancy is to take the "Comitted" in CIR literally. It's my understanding that the FR congestion management routines (at least the Stratacom one - Foresight?) will only back off bursty PVC to the point where it's <= CIR. The implication then is that you'll always get at least CIR - which makes sense since that's what you're paying for. Dan At 08:45 AM 9/1/98 -1000, scott w wrote: > > > >On Tue, 1 Sep 1998, Scott, Dan wrote: > >[snip] >> line and port, but the important parameter is the committed information rate >> you purchase from the carrier. Most of Sprint's frame relay business may >[snip] >>from 0-56kbps. Can purchase 56kbps CIR, but it costs extra, would need >[snip] > >CIR is guaranteed only under "normal" conditions. You won't get it under >heavy congestion. Find out the MIR configured for your PVC. I don't know >if they will tell you though... > >scott > > >

3 2

Director Database Marketing (Herndon VA US) (http://www.saic.com/career/jobs/c5
by Alan Sullivan - VoTiV Systems 02 Sep '98

02 Sep '98

FYI... Cheers, Alan

2 1

MAE-EAST / WEST Connection Possibilities
by Jan Czmok 02 Sep '98

02 Sep '98

Hi! Does anybody know if the statement "mfs can offer atm ds3 connection to the mae-west and mae-east ehternet from colo space" issued by a german salesperson is true. According to the www.mfst.com webpage i only see possiblities for 10 Mbit Ethernet, HSSI or FDDI. Any help is appreciated! Jan -- Jan Czmok, IPF.NET Senior Network Engineer email: czmok(a)ipf.de, Phone +49 69 17084-52

3 2

Remote Whois
by Brandon Handeland 02 Sep '98

02 Sep '98

Has anyone seen a Rwhois server for Windows NT available out on the Internet. I have been looking for months and have yet to find one. Any suggestions are appreciated. Brandon Handeland Systems Engineer wyoming.com LLC NOC(a)wyoming.com Network Operations Abuse(a)wyoming.com Email Abuse Complaints (SPAM) Postmaster(a)wyoming.com Mail Administration NOC (307) 856-4220 x 117 FAX (307) 856-1499 ~~ Opinions are mine and do not necessarily represent those of wyoming.com LLC~ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------

1 0

Installation Services ????
by Jan Czmok 02 Sep '98

02 Sep '98

Does anybody of you offer installation services at MAE - EAST and MAE-WEST. Specifically, we would like to install our new B-STDXes there and switch some lines from T1 to DS3 (simply re-wiring and also new-connecting). Ascend is offering that service, but the $$$ is much too high. (Otherwise i have to travel to the states from germany) Timeframe: within next 4 Weeks Please respond via email to: czmok(a)ipf.de Jan -- Jan Czmok, IPF.NET Senior Network Engineer email: czmok(a)ipf.de, Phone +49 69 17084-52

2 1

Re: NSI Bulletin 098-010 | Update on Whois
by bmanning＠vacation.karoshi.com 02 Sep '98

02 Sep '98

> Why not use rwhois and distribute the load like DNS is? Let registerants > decide if they want to provide rwhois support for their own domain(s) or > if they want to delegate the task to the InterNIC to handle it. > > Gee... imagine being able to update data about your DNS domains immediately > instead of having to wait for the InterNIC to process the request. > > Just my $0.02. > > -- > Dan Watts > Vitts Networks > dwatts(a)vitts.com Actually, you could kill two birds w/ one stone by keeping the data in your inverse delegations. There has been some thought on this which could double as a distributed IRR, esp. for those who have trouble getting to/through those centralized databases. A brief note on how this might be done may be found at: http://www.isi.edu/div7/people/bmanning.home/inet98.html if I might toot my own horn here. Note that this is similar to, but does not go quite as far as the presentation given at a recent NANOG mtg. --bill

1 0

Re: NSI Bulletin 098-010 | Update on Whois
by Matthew Silvey 02 Sep '98

02 Sep '98

So what happens when someone like Microsoft implements an 'extended information' feature in their SiteServer package that does whois queries on the domains that hit the webserver, and also implement this in SiteServer Express? Do they build their own whois server? Or do we all end up absorbing the cost? just blabbering really. Matthew Silvey Systems Consultant msilvey(a)thorn.net

1 0

Re: September Effect
by Paul Vixie 02 Sep '98

02 Sep '98

SEAN(a)SDG.DRA.COM (Sean Donelan) writes: > So what is going on? > > Internet growth has slowed. > > Internet growth is being constrained by some factor. [...] The most recent doubling, and most of the one before it, was "the fad thing." CB radio had a similar pair of doublings, but ultimately it got back to the point where only people who had a use for it, used it. The Internet is more useful than CB radio, but on the other hand when you consider that pornography is more than half of the non-interactive traffic (according to the log files I gathered from a worldwide product rollout in the transparent caching space) it's not clear how many more times we'll need to double the bandwidth of the backbone as the fad effect drops off. So perhaps the factor constraining the Internet's growth is "good taste." -- Paul Vixie La Honda, CA "Many NANOG members have been around <paul(a)vix.com> longer than most." --Jim Fleming pacbell!vixie!paul (An H.323 GateKeeper for the IPv8 Network)

2 1

Whois
by max＠inc.net 02 Sep '98

02 Sep '98

Has anyone else noticed a problem with whois? Seems like any domain I do a whois on returns 2 sets of records. 95% of the time it is the correct information for the domain the last 5% though seems to be a totaly unrelated record. Other than my domains here I have checked netscape.com, aol.com,internic.net among others and all seem to return bad info sporadicly. Here is an example of what I get 1 good record followed by a bad one. [max@gecko ~]$ whois webteam.net [rs.internic.net] Registrant: The Cvikota Company, Inc. (WEBTEAM8-DOM) 2031 S 32nd Street La Crosse, WI 54601 Domain Name: WEBTEAM.NET Administrative Contact: Cvikota, Kris (KC4486) kris(a)WEBTEAM.NET 800 937 2845 (FAX) 608 788 6613 Technical Contact, Zone Contact: Administrator, System (AS557-ORG) host(a)WEBTEAM.NET 715/830-7800 Fax- 715/830-7801 Billing Contact: Cvikota, Kris (KC4486) kris(a)WEBTEAM.NET 800 937 2845 (FAX) 608 788 6613 Record last updated on 24-Jul-98. Record created on 24-Jul-98. Database last updated on 2-Sep-98 04:42:00 EDT. Domain servers in listed order: TORGO.WEBTEAM.NET 207.67.50.7 NS1.INC.NET 204.95.160.2 The InterNIC Registration Services database contains ONLY non-military and non-US Government Domains and contacts. Other associated whois servers: American Registry for Internet Numbers - whois.arin.net European IP Address Allocations - whois.ripe.net Asia Pacific IP Address Allocations - whois.apnic.net US Military - whois.nic.mil US Government - whois.nic.gov [max@gecko ~]$ whois webteam.net [rs.internic.net] [No name] (SPG8 ) HOLD-PAY P-U-S-S-Y-C-A-M.COM The InterNIC Registration Services database contains ONLY non-military and non-US Government Domains and contacts. Other associated whois servers: American Registry for Internet Numbers - whois.arin.net European IP Address Allocations - whois.ripe.net Asia Pacific IP Address Allocations - whois.apnic.net US Military - whois.nic.mil US Government - whois.nic.gov [max@gecko ~]$ -Max -- Max Spaulding Internet Connect, INC. max(a)inc.net

4 3

peering analysis
by Jennifer DePalma 02 Sep '98

02 Sep '98

I have recently put together a brief history of peering arrangements, and am now starting on an economic/political analysis of peering. I'm trying to get in touch with people in the industry and sift through answers to the following questions. If you have time to answer them via email or the phone that would be great. Can you think of other questions I should be asking? I suppose my ultimate question is "Is the market fair, open and free"? I say yes, and economically it's probably fairly easy to prove. Politically is another story... How easy is it to enter the market at different levels? What are the largest start-up costs? How political is it? How do you stay competitive? What are the technical dangers involved in peering? What are the excuses used for not peering? Are they valid? What reasons are smaller ISPs giving for wanting free settlements? Are they valid? Is the claim true that the telco-owned networks use their Internet shares to "force" smaller ISPs to lease their lines? If so, is this unfair? How does it affect pricing and the market in general? Does is produce waste? What percentage of traffic both originates and terminates on Sprint's network, Cable & Wireless, UUNet, etc.? What, if anything, is wrong with nondisclosure agreements? How do they affect the market? How should disputes in the industry be resolved? What are the Pros and Cons of peering? How does the global market figure in? (With so much of the international traffic going through California, is this good, bad, or neutral for US companies?) I'd greatly appreciate any useful input. Thanks, Jennifer ***************************** Jennifer A. DePalma 202.789.5226 202.842.3490 (fax) Research Analyst Telecommunications and Technology Studies Cato Institute 1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW Washington, DC 20001

1 0