November 2008 - Test - lists.nanog.org

L2tp for DSL
by adrian kok 04 Nov '08

04 Nov '08

Hi Do you know any free open source L2tp for NAS? I know this software was developed so many years before but stopped any information Thank you Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

3 2

trans-oceanic dns secondary exchange
by Randy Bush 03 Nov '08

03 Nov '08

hank kilmer and i exchange secondary dns for a small lot of small zones for other old flea scratchers and friends of the family. this last weekend, we had a double failure, where both our servers went down at the same time, i lost a power supply, and hank fried a mobo. so we are seeking a third to jinx, preferably in europe, the middle east, asia, ... old dogs much preferred. and it is probably time to automate a bit, so consistency does not rely on mops. thanks for listening. randy

1 0

Why do some companies get depeered and some don't?
by Nelson Lai 03 Nov '08

03 Nov '08

Why do some companies like Cogent get depeered relatively often and companies like Teleglobe don't even get talked about and operate in silence free from depeering? -- Hyundai to launch the i20 in India. Catch the exclusive preview on ZigWheels.com http://www.zigwheels.com/b2cam/newsDetails.action?name=Emb11_20080731&path=…

20 27

Peering - Benefits?
by Paul Stewart 03 Nov '08

03 Nov '08

Hi there... I'm in a meeting next week to discuss settlement-free peering etc..... always an interesting time. A push is on (by myself) to get into other physical locations and participate on the peering exchanges. Besides costs, what other factors are benefits to peering? I can think of some but looking to develop a concrete list of appealing reasons etc. such as: -control over routing between networks -security aspect (being able to filter/verify routes to some degree) -latency/performance Just looking for other positive ideas etc...;) Cheers! Paul ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and contains confidential and/or privileged material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender immediately and then destroy this transmission, including all attachments, without copying, distributing or disclosing same. Thank you."

20 39

cold.net contact
by Josh Smith 03 Nov '08

03 Nov '08

Could someone who has insight into DNS for it.colt.net please contact me off list. I am having sporadic difficulty resolving a domain you are providing DNS for. Thanks -- Josh Smith KD8HRX email/jabber: juicewvu(a)gmail.com phone: 304.237.9369(c) () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments

1 0

Another driver for v6?
by Steven M. Bellovin 02 Nov '08

02 Nov '08

According to http://www.nytimes.com/external/idg/2008/10/28/28idg-10-best-feature.html Windows 7 will have a cool feature called DirectAccess that "requires deploying IPv6 and IPsec". I know nothing more of this feature than is in the article, but if accurate it may create a client-centric demand for v6, i.e., desirable new functionality that isn't available on v4. Of course, Windows 7 will have to ship first, and then get deployed in the enterprise... --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb

21 33

Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage
by Eric Jensen 02 Nov '08

02 Nov '08

>Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 14:09:43 -0500 >From: Adam Rothschild <asr+nanog(a)latency.net> > >On 2008-11-02-10:14:14, Matthew Kaufman <matthew(a)eeph.com> wrote: > > But seriously, it shouldn't be necessary to have two connections at > > work [...] >... >If anything, these recent de-peerings underscore the lack of wisdom in >end users connecting to (or purchasing CDN services from) members >of the tier 1 club directly. This is the take-away message for me. Buying transit from Tier 1 (and especially almost-Tier 1) providers is a risky idea for single-homed customers. Tier 1 connectivity could be cheaper, and could be better-performing, but has this potential for severe connectivity issues. Single-homed end users would be well-advised to buy transit from a multi-homed tier 2/3 ISP. Single-homed SPs (such as Sprint Wireless, for example) should become multi-homed or buy transit from such a multi-homed tier 2/3 ISP as well. - Eric

2 1

RE: Sprint Depeering Timeframe
by Lorell Hathcock 02 Nov '08

02 Nov '08

All: I am trying to help a small ISP/cable operator in south Texas with VOIP customers. They are having VOIP problems and have been for about three to four weeks. A traceroute from the end users location reveals that their ATAs traverse Sprint's network on their way to the hosted VOIP provider. Working with providers at both ends provides reveals a willingness to point fingers at the IXC providers (Sprint and Level 3) Sprint and Level 3 have examined traceroutes and they have are satisfied that their networks aren't to blame. I'm looking for a smoking gun and the Sprint depeering could fit the crime if the timeline works out. When did Sprint depeer? If this is at the root cause of the problem and I think it could be if the time lines match when the VOIP problems started, then it would fall under the category of why a routine roll out of hosted PBX / VOIP is a bad idea. It would help me point the customer towards a more secure solution of a SIP Trunk with transit specifically purchased from the VOIP provider to the cable head end where the CMTS resides. Thanks! Sincerely, Lorell Hathcock OfficeConnect.net | 832-665-3400 (o) | 713-992-2343 (f) | lorell(a)OfficeConnect.net ocbannerjoomla

2 1

RE: Sprint / Cogent
by Nick Hilliard 01 Nov '08

01 Nov '08

>>The most interesting part of the press release to me is: > >>In the over 1300 on-net locations worldwide where Cogent provides service, >>Cogent is offering every Sprint-Nextel wireline customer that is unable to >>connect to Cogent's customers a free 100 megabit per second connection to >>the Internet for as long as Sprint continues to keep this partitioning of >>the Internet in place. Unfortunately, there is no way that Cogent can do >>the same for the wireless customers of Sprint-Nextel. > > This wasn't the first time Cogent offered something similar. They did the > same thing when Level3 depeered them. And they'll do it to others in future peering spats. It's just a bullying tactic - entertaining if you're on the sideline; irritating if you're Sprint. Cogent reminds me of Ethan Coen's poem, which starts: The loudest has the final say, The wanton win, the rash hold sway, The realist's rules of order say The drunken driver has the right of way. Nick

17 21