July 2005 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Is there a "alternative" way of doing kvm-over-IP
by Drew Weaver 21 Jul '05

21 Jul '05

Buying the hardware boxes sounds pretty attractive, but I wondered if any industrious open sourcers have come up with anything that any NANOG-ers have come across that would do something similar to what the Dell 2161DS box would do. I realize we would need a server with some cards in it to terminate the connections and then some cards to go in the boxes, we just need a bit more density than 16 ports. Tia -Drew

6 5

Re: Vonage Selects TCS For VoIP E911 Service
by Brad Knowles 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

At 10:32 AM +0100 2005-07-20, Michael.Dillon(a)btradianz.com wrote: >> While I agree that GPS is the likely answer, I wasn't expecting the >> ability to work inside computer rooms and basements. > > It doesn't need to work in basements, etc. It only needs to keep > a record of the last location it was at when the signal faded > away. The emergency service vehicles probably can't get any closer > than that anyway. I've been doing some reading on this subject. It seems that both GPS and tower triangulation methods suck. For GPS, the problems are signal acquisition and penetration in urban environments, especially with non-dedicated handheld devices. For tower triangulation, the problem appears to be areas with poor signal coverage where you might only be able to barely see one tower, and where TDoA, AoA, and EOTD aren't going to do you any good. In either case, simply keeping the last known signal lock may very well be one of the worst things you could do. It seems to me that we need to use both technologies in order to get any real hope of reasonably sustainable accuracy, either for E911 or any other location-aware technology. And I'm not convinced even that's enough. So, anyone want to place any bets on what's really going to happen? -- Brad Knowles, <brad(a)stop.mail-abuse.org> "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755 SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.

5 5

OT: RIP, James Doohan...
by Fergie (Paul Ferguson) 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

I know this is off-topic, but the "engineer's engineer" died early today, ironically, on the 36th anniversaty of the Apollo 11 lunar landing (20 July, 1969). http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/TV/07/20/obit.doohan.ap/index.html So long, Mr. Scott. You'll be missed. - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

2 1

Bob Metcalf not taking his meds again....
by Fergie (Paul Ferguson) 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

I was delighted this afternoon to see post on on /. entitled "Bob Metcalfe on Open Source, IPv6, IETF": [snip] "The inventor of Ethernet Bob Metcalfe is interviewed by AlwaysOn on current issues. Metcalfe is known for challenging commonly accepted wisdom and this time he's quite confrontational. On open source and operating systems: "If you look at Windows and Linux, both are based on 25-year- old technology. Windows is sort of a GUI version of the Mac's operating system, and Linux is of course Unix, which stems from 1968. These are both old clunkers. So the question is, Where are the new operating systems likely to come from?" On IPv6 adoption and IETF: "Back when you attended the IETF, you all looked down your noses at the ITU (or I guess it was called CCITT at the time)--the entrenched, corporately manipulated, corrupt, competent standards being embodied in IT. We were the IETF--the swashbuckling, institution- oriented, open people, the rebels. That's changed now. The Internet has arrived, and all of those people are now just like ITU: IETF has become the ITU."" [snip] http://it.slashdot.org/it/05/07/20/1529242.shtml?tid=218 One of my favorite exchanges between Metcalf and AlwaysOn, from this article, is this one: [snip] AlwaysOn: Where to you think this ideology stems from? Metcalfe: The IETF, or maybe the IAB. They have beards and wear T-shirts with tie-dye on them, and they live in universities. AlwaysOn: And they know how slide-rules work. Metcalfe: Yes. Plus, they hate my guts; I used to flame them with my columns. They're sweet people underneath, but their ideology gets in the way. [snip] http://www.alwayson-network.com/comments.php?id=9712_0_3_0_C Right, Bob. Whatever. ;-) - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

1 0

Re: Vonage Selects TCS For VoIP E911 Service
by Brad Knowles 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

At 11:21 AM +0100 2005-07-20, Michael.Dillon(a)btradianz.com wrote: > On the other hand, maybe all you want to do is to route the > call to the right E911 center. In that case, as long as you > are in the right county you are probably OK. If all you use the "last known position" information for is routing to the correct E911 system, that might be okay. However, one thing I believe you need to also transmit along with the position information is "time since last fix", so that you can get some sort of idea how long it's been since that position information was reasonably accurate. If the time since last fix is several hours, then the person might now be on a plane using a picocell or broadband wireless network connection that is not position-enhanced, and using the position information for routing to the presumed correct E911 system may be inappropriate. So long as we give additional information which gives the system an idea of the expected level of age and error in the information, I think the risks should be able to be reasonably minimized. > In any case, no solution to E911 and VoIP is likely to meet > 100% of its requirements, but if you can improve the situation > significantly, then it is still worth doing. I guess it also depends on what you mean by "significantly". Is a 10% solution significant? Do you need 90% before you're significant? And what's the cost of false positives, as well as false negatives? I think all these factors need to be considered, when looking at potential solutions. -- Brad Knowles, <brad(a)stop.mail-abuse.org> "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755 SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.

6 6

RE: Vonage Selects TCS For VoIP E911 Service
by Kuhtz, Christian 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

> On the other hand, maybe all you want to do is to route the > call to the right E911 center. In that case, as long as you > are in the right county you are probably OK. And if by chance you end up in the wrong county, as it happens from mobile phones on occasions, they will immediately transfer you to the right center. The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers. 163

2 1

RE: Vonage Selects TCS For VoIP E911 Service
by David Lesher 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

> > > I think this can work. Put a battery backup in the ATA, to power the > GPS and real time clock. The ATA will maintain the internet-routable > address it's using (not necessarily it's own IP address) indefinitely. > If the ATA determines it's routable address (or /23 or whatever subnet) > has changed since being disconnected, it prompts (via voice menu on > connected phones) that it needs to be taken outside and re-GPS'ed. > Flashing light on the box confirms when GPS has synced it's location. > Take it back inside, plug it in, and all is ok again. Or something > along those lines.... So will you block all useage until you do so? Any voluntary compliance solution will fail the CALEA aspect. And I recall reading somewhere in the trade press that the reason some cellular carriers went to GPS-based solutions was they could not meet the FBI specs for accuracy with tower-timing solutions. And needless to say, I can think of many places both cellular and VOIP cam be used where GPS will be worthless. One other point: both the FBI and EMS want to know which office on which floor of the Empire State Building you are in when you call, not just a 2-D circle of X radius. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz(a)nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

1 0

RE: Vonage Selects TCS For VoIP E911 Service
by Church, Chuck 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

I think this can work. Put a battery backup in the ATA, to power the GPS and real time clock. The ATA will maintain the internet-routable address it's using (not necessarily it's own IP address) indefinitely. If the ATA determines it's routable address (or /23 or whatever subnet) has changed since being disconnected, it prompts (via voice menu on connected phones) that it needs to be taken outside and re-GPS'ed. Flashing light on the box confirms when GPS has synced it's location. Take it back inside, plug it in, and all is ok again. Or something along those lines.... Chuck Church Lead Design Engineer CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE Netco Government Services - Design & Implementation Team 1210 N. Parker Rd. Greenville, SC 29609 Home office: 864-335-9473 Cell: 703-819-3495 cchurch(a)netcogov.com PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x4371A48D -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Michael.Dillon(a)btradianz.com Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 5:32 AM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: Vonage Selects TCS For VoIP E911 Service > >I see no other way of doing this reliably than to put some kind of > >GPS device into the VoIP unit. > > While I agree that GPS is the likely answer, I wasn't expecting the > ability to work inside computer rooms and basements. It doesn't need to work in basements, etc. It only needs to keep a record of the last location it was at when the signal faded away. The emergency service vehicles probably can't get any closer than that anyway. --Michael Dillon

1 0

Re: Paul Vixie on the wgig report
by Fergie (Paul Ferguson) 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

I would highly recommend reading Paul's comments, as he brings up some very key issues. He also mentioend one of my pet peeves, which is the WGIG's posture on peering arrangements: Vixie says: [snip] "WGIG seems to be concerned about the general lack of interconnection and the anticompetitive cost of entry for new ISPs. One can see the ITU influence here (ITU more or less regulates international telephone service today), but when I think of the way national sovereignty has been abused to turn telecommunications access fees into [ major GDP sources ], I already don't think I'm going to like the endgame if "regulation" occurs in the area of international Internet peering and interconnection." [snip] Seeing as how the Internet isn't a science project anymore, it's a little difficult to reconcile taking something which are now _business_ decisions for many organizations and turing the entire peering issue into regulatory hell. $.02, - ferg -- Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists(a)gmail.com> wrote: http://fm.vix.com/internet/governance/wgig-report-july05.html I like the ending - > I think a lot of hard work went into this report, and considering the > number and strength and diversity of views expressed during the WGIG > process, the result has to be called herculean. I'm a bit concerned that > it amounts to a generally agreed upon statement that "somebody ought to > put a bell on that cat". Turning hegemony into democracy by peaceful means > has been done only a few times in human history, and the outlook for this > time isn't good. > > Paul Vixie -- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists(a)gmail.com) -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

1 0

clec vs ilec, how do you know who's lying?
by David Hubbard 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

Hello everyone, not sure if this is off topic or not since it is will be operational in nature if I can ever get the service set up. :-) I'm having the pleasure, or lack thereof, of ordering some data connectivity via a very large clec which requires the ilec to provide the local loops. Well we're about two months past the estimated install completion and all I get from the clec is continuous blame pointed at the ilec who has now missed three install dates and in turn has wasted staff time sitting there from 8 to 5 each of the days; assuming they were really scheduled in the first place. I know the two types of entities don't particularly like each other but at this point how do I tell who's lying to me? I have supposed work order numbers for the ilec but I don't have any direct contact with them to see if they are real numbers and if the disposition of the previous work orders are what the clec has told me or if they are messing things up themselves and trying to cover it up. Thanks, David

2 1