April 2008 - Test - lists.nanog.org

[NANOG] support.microsoft.com?
by Colin Alston 24 Apr '08

24 Apr '08

Has anyone else noticed strange things with support.microsoft.com? If I wget it ('http://support.microsoft.com/') from anywhere, I get an index.html fine. If I use lynx, I get gibberish (gzipped content, without a correct header) If I use Firefox or IE behind some Squid proxies in certain places, it doesn't understand the content either. Looks like either they are not correctly encoding the content based on browser capabilities. _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG(a)nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

8 8

[Nanog] Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics [Was: Re: ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010]
by Paul Ferguson 23 Apr '08

23 Apr '08

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - -- William Warren <hescominsoon(a)emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com> wrote: >Here in comcast land hdtv is actually averaging around 12 megabits a second. Still adds up to staggering numbers..:) > Another disturbing fact inside this entire mess is that, by compressing HD content, consumers are noticing the degradation in quality: http://cbs5.com/local/hdtv.cable.compression.2.705405.html So, we have a "Tragedy of The Commons" situation that is completely created by the telcos themselves trying to force consumer decisions, and then failing to deliver, but bemoaning the fact that infrastructure is being over-utilized by file-sharers (or "Exafloods" or whatever the apocalyptic issue of the day is for telcos). A real Charlie Foxtrot. - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.6.3 (Build 3017) wj8DBQFIDX5Rq1pz9mNUZTMRAovKAJ0SXpK/XrW73mkCGZhtLCO5ZGsspQCfbUY3 0DPluYrtq0Et/RbvJguq3WM= =furJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG(a)nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

9 19

Re: [Nanog] Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics [Was: Re: ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010]
by Laird Popkin 23 Apr '08

23 Apr '08

This raises an interesting issue - should optimization of p2p traffic (P4P) be based on "static" network information, or "dynamic" network information. It's certainly easier for ISP's to provide a simple network map that real-time network condition data, but the real-time data might be much more effective. Or even if it's not real-time, perhaps there could be "static" network maps reflecting conditions at different times of day? Since P4P came up, I'd like to mention that the P4P Working Group is putting together another field test, where we can quantify issues like the tradeoff between static and dynamic network data, and we would love to hear from any ISP's that would be interested in participating in that test. If you'd like the details of what it would take to participate, and what data you would get out of it, please email me. Of course, independently of the test, if you're interested in participating in the P4P Working Group, we'd love to hear from you! - Laird Popkin, CTO, Pando Networks email: laird(a)pando.com mobile: 646/465-0570 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Harrowell" <a.harrowell(a)gmail.com> To: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer(a)nic.fr> Cc: nanog(a)nanog.org Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 10:10:28 AM (GMT-0500) America/New_York Subject: Re: [Nanog] Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics [Was: Re: ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010] Personally I consider P4P a big step forward; it's good to see Big Verizon engaging with these issues in a non-coercive fashion. Just to braindump a moment, it strikes me that it would be very useful to be able to announce preference metrics by netblock (for example, to deal with networks with varied internal cost metrics or to pref-in the CDN servers) but also risky. If that was done, client developers would be well advised to implement a check that the announcing network actually owns the netblock they are either preffing in (to send traffic via a suboptimal route/through a spook box of some kind/onto someone else's pain-point) or out (to restrict traffic from reaching somewhere); you wouldn't want a hijack, whether malicious or clue-deficient. There is every reason to encourage the use of dynamic preference. On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer(a)nic.fr> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 02:02:21PM +0100, > michael.dillon(a)bt.com <michael.dillon(a)bt.com> wrote > a message of 46 lines which said: > > > This is where all the algorithmic tinkering of the P2P software > > cannot solve the problem. You need a way to insert non-technical > > information about the network into the decision-making process. > > It's strange that noone in this thread mentioned P4P yet. Isn't there > someone involved in P4P at Nanog? > > http://www.dcia.info/activities/p4pwg/ > > IMHO, the biggest issue with P4P is the one mentioned by Alexander > Harrowell. After that users have been s.....d up so many times by some > ISPs, will they trust this service? > > > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > NANOG(a)nanog.org > http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog > _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG(a)nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG(a)nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

6 7

[Nanog] Outlook Junk Email After Migration?
by Matthew Evans 23 Apr '08

23 Apr '08

Hello all, Is anyone else have a problem with the NANOG messages ending up in their Outlook Junk Email folder since the migration to nanog.org? It only seems to happen when someone replies to another post and CC's nanog(a)nanog.org rather than replying to nanog(a)nanog.org directly. If anyone else has run into this, what have you done to resolve it? Matthew Evans, MCSA Alpha Theory | "the right decision, every time." 2201 Coronation Blvd., Suite 140 Charlotte, NC 28227 www.alphatheory.com _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG(a)nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

3 3

[Nanog] Fwd: IANA Update: Project to convert registries to XML
by Martin Hannigan 23 Apr '08

23 Apr '08

Knowing that some here use this data for ops purposes.....FYI ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michelle Cotton <michelle.cotton(a)icann.org> Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:49:44 -0700 Subject: IANA Update: Project to convert registries to XML To: "ietf(a)ietf.org" <ietf(a)ietf.org> IETF Community: IANA is currently engaged in a project to convert the IETF related registries to XML to provide the community with multiple ways of viewing registry information. When conversion to XML is done, XML will become the source format for the registries and the current formats of html and plain text will be generated from the XML source. Stylesheets and schemas will also be made available together with XML. Users will be able to access the registries in new and useful ways, while still having the ability to see the registries in the original style. Part of the conversion requires IANA to "clean-up" the registries in order to fit with the XML schemas. IANA is not changing the data in the registries. IANA is cleaning up the formatting including regularizing spacing and providing consistent display of titles, references and registration procedures. For those registries that need extensive format changes, IANA will be working with the appropriate working groups and area directors to make sure that the format changes do not affect the content of the registry. Those registries that are required to be in specific formats, for example the MIBs and language subtags registries, will still be produced in the existing formats. IANA has consulted with the IETF XML directorate to make sure that the XML schemas are properly formulated. Certain decisions on schemas reflect the needs of IANA in maintaining the registries moving forward. In the coming months, cleaned-up versions of the registries will begin appearing on the IANA website. If you notice any content issues with the updated versions, or if they are not accessible, please notify IANA staff immediately and we will work with the appropriate parties to correct any inconsistencies. We look forward to providing the XML versions of the registries to better serve the community's needs. IANA will announce in advance when the registry conversion will be completed. After the conversion is complete, we intend to introduce new services such as the ability to subscribe to be notified when specific registries are updated Thank you, Michelle Cotton IANA IETF Liaison Email: michelle.cotton(a)icann.org _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG(a)nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

1 0

[Nanog] [NANOG-announce] Program Committee vacancy: call for volunteers
by Todd Underwood 23 Apr '08

23 Apr '08

Ted Seely has decided to step down from the NANOG Program Committee. On behalf of the Program Committee, and the NANOG community as a whole, I'd like to thank Ted for his many years of service to NANOG, not just in his capacity as a member of the Program Committee, but as a presenter and active participant. The Steering Committee has directed me to solicit candidates to fill the remainder of his term, which ends with the fall 2008 meeting. As some of you know, the Program Committee is responsible for the content of the NANOG conference. It is important work and we really need a diversity of backgrounds and perspectives to make the conference relevant for conference attendees. If you ever thought that the content of a conference wasn't as good as it should be, this is your chance to step up and work to make it better. ** Procedure ** To nominate yourself or someone else, please send mail to nominate(a)nanogpc.org with the following, no later than Monday, May 5, 2008 - Your name - Nominee's name (if not you) - Nominee's email address - Nominee's phone number - Reasons why you believe the nominee is qualified to serve on the Program Committee. A committee member will contact each of the nominees to verify interest and possibly request additional information. The Steering Committee, with input from the current Program Committee, will then select the person to fill the position. ** Eligibility ** The charter states: "To be eligible to be appointed as a member of the Program Committee, an individual must have attended one NANOG meeting within the prior calendar year (12 months). " ** Duties ** Again quoting the charter: "The Program Committee is responsible for motivating/soliciting people to submit interesting talks, selecting the submissions which seem most appropriate (with some attention to presentation skills), and following up with speakers after acceptances to ensure that presentations are completed in time, with ample warning of potential problems with the presentation." "Each member of the Program Committee must review all presentations submitted for each meeting. The Chair may excuse a member from one meeting's review cycle due to extenuating circumstances, but if a member misses two meetings in a row, he or she may be removed from the committee." ** Length of term ** This position is for the remainder of a two year term, which began after the Fall 2006 meeting, and ends with the Fall 2008 meeting. So, yes, this term is only for a single NANOG meeting. But this will not impact the successful candidate's ability to serve two full terms. If you have any further questions, please post to the nanog-futures list, or contact the Steering Committee at steering(a)nanog.org. Todd Underwood, Chair Program Committee [1] The full charter is available at http://www.nanog.org/charter.html -- _____________________________________________________________________ todd underwood +1 603 643 9300 x101 renesys corporation general manager babbledog todd(a)renesys.com http://www.renesys.com/blog _______________________________________________ NANOG-announce mailing list NANOG-announce(a)nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG(a)nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

1 0

[Nanog] Crypto export restricted prefix list
by Kevin Blackham 23 Apr '08

23 Apr '08

Is there a prefix list available listing the IP space of cryptographic export restricted countries? My google skills are failing me. I'm required to apply a ban on North Korea, Iran, Syria, Sudan and Cuba. _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG(a)nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

1 1

Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010
by Paul Ferguson 23 Apr '08

23 Apr '08

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - -- "Scott Weeks" <surfer(a)mauigateway.com> wrote: >I looked around for text or video from Mr. Cicconi at the "Westminster >eForum" but can't find anything. > >www.westminsterforumprojects.co.uk/eforum/default.aspx > For what it's worth, I agree with Ryan Paul's summary of the issues here: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080420-analysis-att-fear-mongering-o n-net-capacity-mostly-fud.html ...but take it at face value. $.02, - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.6.3 (Build 3017) wj8DBQFIDBkpq1pz9mNUZTMRAlZ1AKCehJ0/xwgXXA9RBRwuIWfcLGp+9ACfbcJw lsmtPaDeGkV5/PllhBqBV88= =z8LR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG(a)nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

22 37

Re: [Nanog] Crypto export restricted prefix list
by Kevin Blackham 22 Apr '08

22 Apr '08

Thanks for the reply. I'm aware of the limitations of this approach. For the same reasons you stated (proxy etc), I don't expect this to be foolproof or accurate. I'm only intending to satisfy a demand to "do something". We already dictate export requirements in the EULA, but we need to also attempt to block the embargoed countries. On 4/22/08, Buhrmaster, Gary <gtb(a)slac.stanford.edu> wrote: > > > Is there a prefix list available listing the IP space of cryptographic > > export restricted countries? My google skills are failing me. I'm > > required to apply a ban on North Korea, Iran, Syria, Sudan and Cuba. > > I am pretty sure that while you can get a list of IP addresses > "currently" being used, you know (as well as I do) that those > can/will change, and NAT/Proxies make it nearly impossible > to really enforce this. So while it can be something to > do, it is not going to be complete. > > I am pretty sure you need something like a "click-through" > for people to say they agree they are not citizens of those > countries, and agree not to export to them (same as Cisco > and others do). > > In any case, check with your lawyers are to the actual > acceptable practices. They are the ones who will need > to defend your company if/when the software gets to > the "evil-doers" (and it will, if they want it, and > we all know it), and someone decides you should have > done more and decides to sue. > > (The ITAR (and equivalent) restriction laws are complex, > and you want to make sure you get it right, since you > do not want to be the "designated felon" as our lawyers > likes to call the guy who is responsible for compliance > and will be the one the feds go after if the software > or information gets to the "wrong" groups. So, make > sure someone else is the "designated felon".) > > Gary > _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG(a)nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

1 0

[Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010
by Scott Francis 22 Apr '08

22 Apr '08

http://www.news.com/2100-1034_3-6237715.html I find claims that "soon everything will be HD" somewhat dubious (working for a company that produces video for online distribution) - although certainly not as eyebrow-raising as "in 3 years' time, 20 typical households will generate more traffic than the entire Internet today". Is there some secret plan to put 40Gb ethernet to "typical households" in the next 3 years that I haven't heard about? I don't have accurate figures on how much traffic "the entire Internet" generates, but I'm fairly certain that 5% of it could not be generated by any single household regardless of equipment installed, torrents traded or videos downloaded. Even given a liberal application of Moore's Law, I doubt that would be the case in 2010 either. Does anybody know what the basis for Mr. Cicconi's claims were (if they even had a basis at all)? Internal reports from ATT engineering? Perusal of industry news sources? IRC? A lot of scary numbers were tossed into the air without any mention of how they were derived. A cynical person might be tempted to think it was all a scare tactic to soften up legislators for the next wave of "reasonable network management" practices that just happen to have significant revenue streams attached to them ... -- darkuncle(a){gmail.com,darkuncle.net} || 0x5537F527 http://darkuncle.net/pubkey.asc for public key _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG(a)nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

14 14