October 2001 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: No more MMDS fixed wireless networks?
by rs＠seastrom.com 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

<vijay>it does not scale</vijay> Curtis Maurand <curtis(a)lamere.net> writes: > There are an awful lot of small ISP's out there doing fixed wireless and > making a bit of money at it. They're not doing MMDS, they're doing 802.11 > and just getting it done. Better yet, they have no recurring loop costs > to contend with. That Nokia rooftop system looks pretty cool from where I > sit. > > Curtis Maurand > System Administrator > lamere.net powered by Prexar > > *** My opinions are not those of my employer. *** > > > On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Bora Akyol wrote: > > > > > If they actually did this, it is about time they finally woke up and > > smelled the coffee. > > > > There is pretty much no way any wireless (or free space optical) > > technology is going to compete with wireline (including FTH) in an area > > where there is abundant infrastructure. The capacity in fixed wireless > > technologies even with the latest advances in technology including MIMO > > antenna arrays, CDMA etc is just not there. When you start talking > > mobile wireless data delivery, the price/performance ratio changes > > making wireless delivery of information profitable provided that you > > don't pay XXX billion dollars for bandwidth. Another alternative is > > using fixed wireless in areas without infrastructure including > > continents other than North America. > > > > I once participated in a similar analysis for another broadband fixed > > wireless delivery network and the capacity to support enough subscribers > > such that the scheme broke even was simply unsupportable in the spectrum > > that was allocated for the system given the power and antenna size > > restrictions. > > > > Bora Akyol > > > > On Wednesday, October 3, 2001, at 04:36 , Christopher J. Wolff wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello folks, > > > > > > I heard today that Sprint is ready to capitulate to the FCC and > > > reassign the > > > radio spectrum it occupies in most major markets (MMDS) to mobile > > > use. I > > > guess they will be shutting off the Sprint Broadband Internet product > > > in 30 > > > days. Can anyone corroborate this? > > > > > > Regards, > > > Christopher J. Wolff, VP, CIO > > > Broadband Laboratories, Inc. > > > http://www.bblabs.com > > > email:chris@bblabs.com > > > phone:520.622.4338 x234 > > > > > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Curtis Maurand System Administrator > lamere.net Powered by Prexar http://www.lamere.net > mailto:curtis@lamere.net Linux, OS/2, Windows (any flavor) > http://www.prexar.com Cisco, OpenRoute, Lucent > MySQL, SQL Server, PHP, Perl > ------------------------------------------------------------

2 2

netsol: not processing requests?
by Eric S. Hvozda 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

Anyone out there notice a slow down or lack of processing requests at netsol (ie verisign, whatever their name is now)? We did some maintenance yesterday and only received 2 of the "do you agree with this change" emails. Yet we received all the "we have received your request" emails for all changes. Changes that we approved we never got the "your change has been completed" emails and yet we did the maintenace around 1-3pm EDT yesterday. Anyone will similar experience out there?

12 12

No more MMDS fixed wireless networks?
by Christopher J. Wolff 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

Hello folks, I heard today that Sprint is ready to capitulate to the FCC and reassign the radio spectrum it occupies in most major markets (MMDS) to mobile use. I guess they will be shutting off the Sprint Broadband Internet product in 30 days. Can anyone corroborate this? Regards, Christopher J. Wolff, VP, CIO Broadband Laboratories, Inc. http://www.bblabs.com email:chris@bblabs.com phone:520.622.4338 x234

3 2

Carnivore alternative
by Hank Nussbacher 04 Oct '01

04 Oct '01

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/21992.html Hank

1 0

800-number outage?
by Los, Ralph 03 Oct '01

03 Oct '01

Does anyone know about this outage? Seems like every 800-type number in the country is out right now...is it a network problem somewhere? Ralph M. Los Asst. Vice-President, Internet Systems and Security EnvestnetPMC rlos(a)envestnet.com (312) 827-3945 (direct) (312) 296-9003 (wireless w/voicemail) * If you haven't been hacked, you don't know where your vulnerabilities lie*

10 11

Even the FCC isn't safe from backhoes
by Sean Donelan 03 Oct '01

03 Oct '01

A backhoe attempted to attack the FCC today. A backhoe digging near the FCC Portals building today, and managed to strike a large water main next to the building. Apparently it was quite a site with a Worldcom people, backhoe operator, and general public watching the river flow past the FCC front door.

2 1

FW: Proposed Legislation Significantly Affecting Computer Profession (46637)
by Gregory Hicks 03 Oct '01

03 Oct '01

Thought you might be interested in this and might want to express your opinion to your elected representative. Gregory Hicks ------------- Begin Forwarded Message ------------- From: board-enotify(a)usenix.org [mailto:board-enotify@usenix.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 1:38 PM The USENIX Board of Directors has decided to alert our membership that bills pending before the U.S. Congress or in committee appear to have a detrimental impact on computer professionals. We are most concerned about aspects of two proposed bills, the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) and the Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), and how they interact with existing legislation such as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The ATA redefines virtually all computer crime as terrorism, enlarges the maximum penalty to life in prison without parole, allows broad pre-conviction seizures, and, furthermore, does this retroactively, removing the existing statute of limitations. The SSSCA essentially mandates copyright protection in all digital consumer devices and makes disabling or avoidance of copyright mechanisms a felony offense. More information about these and related issues can be found at: http://www.usenix.org/whatsnew/legislation.html Similar legislation is being considered in other jurisdictions including Canada and some states. If you believe that provisions of these or similar acts are inappropriate, we strongly encourage you to contact your elected representatives as soon as possible and register your opinions. Sincerely, The USENIX Board of Directors http://www.usenix.org/directory/board.html ------------- End Forwarded Message ------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Gregory Hicks | Principal Systems Engineer Cadence Design Systems | Direct: 408.576.3609 555 River Oaks Pkwy M/S 6B1 | Fax: 408.894.3479 San Jose, CA 95134 | Internet: ghicks(a)cadence.com "To do great, important tasks, two things are necessary: a plan and not quite enough time." -- Anonymous

1 0

well, another route-views failure
by David Meyer 03 Oct '01

03 Oct '01

Folks, I tried again to get a zebra bgpd going to replace the current (Cisco) route-views box. What I have to conclude at this point that zebra bgpd really isn't yet up to handling this kind of scale (not only was it incredibly slow in receiving a single rib (> 35 minutes), the vty management thread was too slow to be useful. Add to that that it would crash before it could get all the RIBs, and well....). I'm not sure what I'm going to do now. I wanted to run a zebra bgpd to get the updates and ribs in MRT format (like the RIPE folks are) as well as the 'sh ip bgp' that we're archiving now, but that doesn't look possible with current generation zebra. In any event, I'll leave the Cisco there until I can verify whatever I do next works (if not forever), and continue see if we can't debug the zebra bgpd on a different box (I'll need a few duplicate bgp sessions to do this). Sorry for all of this inconvenience. Dave

1 0

Re: Verio Peering Question
by smd＠clock.org 03 Oct '01

03 Oct '01

| Multihoming costs a lot of money I have had a couple friends -- gamers, rather than network techs -- ask me how they could take advantage of their various household broadband connections (cable, DSL and ethernet-from-bredbandsbolaget.se) to increase their download speeds, handle upstream outages, and improve RTTs to selected targets. Admittedly their providers are unlikely to offer them "true multihoming" in the BGP + PI prefix sense, however I think it is an indication of demand in need of some supply. The supply is not horrifically expensive for at least one of the broadband providers, and the others could in principle constrain their _local_ costs enough that passing them down to my friends would not result in an unaffordable option. Is this a trend, or do I simply collect friends who are completely unreflective of reality? Is my estimation that for at least some broadband providers, per-household/per-customer BGP is a operational expense rather than one requring the capital purchase of new equipment, completely out-to-lunch (in advance of an interesting new product launch in the next few days)? Sean.

4 4

Re: netsol: not processing requests?
by Tom Glover 03 Oct '01

03 Oct '01

On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, *Hobbit* wrote: > okay, since you appear to be successful at getting NSI to jump when you say, > how 'bout sending in some more details to nanog about HOW you manage to do > it? Even down to how you format your mail to them, which is apparently > important since their auto-parsers are so broken, and down to what magic > words you say to humans over the phone, and how you escalate out of the > worldwide-scattered call-centers up to someone with an actual CLUE ... > I think if you provided this information, you would do the NANOG community > a great service. Too many of us have wasted too much time dealing with > NSI, and I'm sure that swapping registrars isn't an immediate option for > many of them... > > _H* > I used their Web site to request a list of all zones using my nameservers. I got it within 3 days. I then called them and asked how they wanted me to handle a global change request. At that time they gave me what they call a "Service request number" and told me to send an e-mail using that number. Specifically they told me to send an e-mail to hostmaster(a)networksolutions.com with a subject of "Global Change Request" and quoting the "Service request number" as the first line of the e-mail body. I did this and all zones were changed as requested within a few days. -- Tom Glover

1 0