- Test - lists.nanog.org

Weekly Routing Table Report
by Routing Analysis Role Account 28 Aug '09

28 Aug '09

This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. Daily listings are sent to bgp-stats(a)lists.apnic.net For historical data, please see http://thyme.apnic.net. If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith <pfs(a)cisco.com>. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 29 Aug, 2009 Report Website: http://thyme.apnic.net Detailed Analysis: http://thyme.apnic.net/current/ Analysis Summary ---------------- BGP routing table entries examined: 294090 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 139250 Deaggregation factor: 2.11 Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 146854 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 32061 Prefixes per ASN: 9.17 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 27872 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 13619 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 4189 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 101 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 3.6 Max AS path length visible: 24 Max AS path prepend of ASN (12026) 22 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 396 Unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 114 Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs: 251 Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table: 97 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table: 0 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 327 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 2101238976 Equivalent to 125 /8s, 62 /16s and 92 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 56.7 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 64.9 Percentage of available address space allocated: 87.3 Percentage of address space in use by end-sites: 78.7 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 140768 APNIC Region Analysis Summary ----------------------------- Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes: 70329 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 24979 APNIC Deaggregation factor: 2.82 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 69774 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks: 31721 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 3759 APNIC Prefixes per ASN: 18.56 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 1032 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 575 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible: 3.6 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 16 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 492656320 Equivalent to 29 /8s, 93 /16s and 86 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 83.9 APNIC AS Blocks 4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079 APNIC Address Blocks 43/8, 58/8, 59/8, 60/8, 61/8, 110/8, 111/8, 112/8, 113/8, 114/8, 115/8, 116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8, 120/8, 121/8, 122/8, 123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8, 175/8, 180/8, 182/8, 183/8, 202/8, 203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8, 219/8, 220/8, 221/8, 222/8, ARIN Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes: 124611 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation: 66436 ARIN Deaggregation factor: 1.88 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 125177 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 52596 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 13189 ARIN Prefixes per ASN: 9.49 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 5096 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1301 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 3.3 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 24 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 1013478976 Equivalent to 60 /8s, 104 /16s and 118 /24s Percentage of available ARIN address space announced: 88.8 ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106 (pre-ERX allocations) 2138-2584, 2615-2772, 2823-2829, 2880-3153 3354-4607, 4865-5119, 5632-6655, 6912-7466 7723-8191, 10240-12287, 13312-15359, 16384-17407 18432-20479, 21504-23551, 25600-26591, 26624-27647, 29696-30719, 31744-33791 35840-36863, 39936-40959, 46080-47103 53248-55295 ARIN Address Blocks 3/8, 4/8, 6/8, 7/8, 8/8, 9/8, 11/8, 12/8, 13/8, 15/8, 16/8, 17/8, 18/8, 19/8, 20/8, 21/8, 22/8, 24/8, 26/8, 28/8, 29/8, 30/8, 32/8, 33/8, 34/8, 35/8, 38/8, 40/8, 44/8, 45/8, 47/8, 48/8, 52/8, 54/8, 55/8, 56/8, 63/8, 64/8, 65/8, 66/8, 67/8, 68/8, 69/8, 70/8, 71/8, 72/8, 73/8, 74/8, 75/8, 76/8, 96/8, 97/8, 98/8, 99/8, 108/8, 173/8, 174/8, 184/8, 199/8, 204/8, 205/8, 206/8, 207/8, 208/8, 209/8, 214/8, 215/8, 216/8, RIPE Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 67574 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation: 39857 RIPE Deaggregation factor: 1.70 Prefixes being announced from the RIPE address blocks: 67192 Unique aggregates announced from the RIPE address blocks: 45585 RIPE Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 13438 RIPE Prefixes per ASN: 5.00 RIPE Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 7031 RIPE Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 2013 Average RIPE Region AS path length visible: 4.0 Max RIPE Region AS path length visible: 21 Number of RIPE addresses announced to Internet: 499997888 Equivalent to 29 /8s, 205 /16s and 92 /24s Percentage of available RIPE address space announced: 99.3 RIPE AS Blocks 1877-1901, 2043, 2047, 2107-2136, 2585-2614 (pre-ERX allocations) 2773-2822, 2830-2879, 3154-3353, 5377-5631 6656-6911, 8192-9215, 12288-13311, 15360-16383 20480-21503, 24576-25599, 28672-29695 30720-31743, 33792-35839, 38912-39935 40960-45055, 47104-52223 RIPE Address Blocks 25/8, 51/8, 62/8, 77/8, 78/8, 79/8, 80/8, 81/8, 82/8, 83/8, 84/8, 85/8, 86/8, 87/8, 88/8, 89/8, 90/8, 91/8, 92/8, 93/8, 94/8, 95/8, 109/8, 178/8, 193/8, 194/8, 195/8, 212/8, 213/8, 217/8, LACNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------ Prefixes being announced by LACNIC Region ASes: 25032 Total LACNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 6186 LACNIC Deaggregation factor: 4.05 Prefixes being announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 25006 Unique aggregates announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 14048 LACNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1170 LACNIC Prefixes per ASN: 21.37 LACNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 375 LACNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 190 Average LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.1 Max LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 22 Number of LACNIC addresses announced to Internet: 73430272 Equivalent to 4 /8s, 96 /16s and 117 /24s Percentage of available LACNIC address space announced: 72.9 LACNIC AS Blocks 26592-26623, 27648-28671, 52224-53247 plus ERX transfers LACNIC Address Blocks 186/8, 187/8, 189/8, 190/8, 200/8, 201/8, AfriNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------- Prefixes being announced by AfriNIC Region ASes: 6214 Total AfriNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 1551 AfriNIC Deaggregation factor: 4.01 Prefixes being announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 6614 Unique aggregates announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 2643 AfriNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 310 AfriNIC Prefixes per ASN: 21.34 AfriNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 85 AfriNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 66 Average AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 3.8 Max AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 14 Number of AfriNIC addresses announced to Internet: 20196096 Equivalent to 1 /8s, 52 /16s and 43 /24s Percentage of available AfriNIC address space announced: 60.2 AfriNIC AS Blocks 36864-37887 & ERX transfers AfriNIC Address Blocks 41/8, 197/8, APNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 4766 1718 6981 425 Korea Telecom (KIX) 17488 1548 139 102 Hathway IP Over Cable Interne 4755 1228 292 140 TATA Communications formerly 9583 1092 86 531 Sify Limited 4134 999 18167 389 CHINANET-BACKBONE 18101 949 202 32 Reliance Infocom Ltd Internet 7545 821 198 99 TPG Internet Pty Ltd 9829 807 620 16 BSNL National Internet Backbo 23577 784 34 665 Korea Telecom (ATM-MPLS) 4808 762 1530 180 CNCGROUP IP network: China169 Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-APNIC ARIN Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 6389 4181 3610 313 bellsouth.net, inc. 4323 1919 1049 390 Time Warner Telecom 1785 1733 714 138 PaeTec Communications, Inc. 7018 1488 5875 1049 AT&T WorldNet Services 20115 1474 1475 675 Charter Communications 6478 1385 280 271 AT&T Worldnet Services 2386 1296 657 941 AT&T Data Communications Serv 3356 1216 10980 441 Level 3 Communications, LLC 11492 1112 208 12 Cable One 22773 1090 2604 66 Cox Communications, Inc. Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-ARIN RIPE Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 30890 485 92 195 Evolva Telecom 12479 476 578 6 Uni2 Autonomous System 3292 457 1905 394 TDC Tele Danmark 702 427 1837 344 UUNET - Commercial IP service 35805 381 40 5 United Telecom of Georgia 9198 367 138 12 Kazakhtelecom Data Network Ad 3320 352 7067 303 Deutsche Telekom AG 3301 345 1412 309 TeliaNet Sweden 3215 344 3081 109 France Telecom Transpac 8866 340 109 20 Bulgarian Telecommunication C Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-RIPE LACNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ----------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 8151 1474 2898 241 UniNet S.A. de C.V. 10620 990 223 101 TVCABLE BOGOTA 28573 669 603 60 NET Servicos de Comunicao S.A 7303 632 334 97 Telecom Argentina Stet-France 22047 542 302 14 VTR PUNTO NET S.A. 11830 475 310 65 Instituto Costarricense de El 11172 443 99 70 Servicios Alestra S.A de C.V 6471 421 96 31 ENTEL CHILE S.A. 7738 416 858 29 Telecomunicacoes da Bahia S.A 3816 395 191 78 Empresa Nacional de Telecomun Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-LACNIC AfriNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ------------------------------------------ ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 8452 1002 188 7 TEDATA 24863 920 92 52 LINKdotNET AS number 20858 320 34 6 EgyNet 3741 274 856 235 The Internet Solution 2018 201 180 142 Tertiary Education Network 6713 175 166 16 Itissalat Al-MAGHRIB 29571 143 14 6 Ci Telecom Autonomous system 33783 131 10 17 EEPAD TISP TELECOM & INTERNET 24835 130 46 9 RAYA Telecom - Egypt 5536 122 8 13 Internet Egypt Network Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-AFRINIC Global Per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 6389 4181 3610 313 bellsouth.net, inc. 4323 1919 1049 390 Time Warner Telecom 1785 1733 714 138 PaeTec Communications, Inc. 4766 1718 6981 425 Korea Telecom (KIX) 17488 1548 139 102 Hathway IP Over Cable Interne 7018 1488 5875 1049 AT&T WorldNet Services 8151 1474 2898 241 UniNet S.A. de C.V. 20115 1474 1475 675 Charter Communications 6478 1385 280 271 AT&T Worldnet Services 2386 1296 657 941 AT&T Data Communications Serv Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet Global Per AS Maximum Aggr summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets Net Savings Description 1785 1733 1595 PaeTec Communications, Inc. 4323 1919 1529 Time Warner Telecom 17488 1548 1446 Hathway IP Over Cable Interne 4766 1718 1293 Korea Telecom (KIX) 8151 1474 1233 UniNet S.A. de C.V. 6478 1385 1114 AT&T Worldnet Services 11492 1112 1100 Cable One 4755 1228 1088 TATA Communications formerly 18566 1062 1052 Covad Communications 22773 1090 1024 Cox Communications, Inc. Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-CIDRnet List of Unregistered Origin ASNs (Global) ----------------------------------------- Bad AS Designation Network Transit AS Description 16927 UNALLOCATED 12.0.252.0/23 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 15132 UNALLOCATED 12.9.150.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 32567 UNALLOCATED 12.14.170.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 13746 UNALLOCATED 12.24.56.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 32567 UNALLOCATED 12.25.107.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 26973 UNALLOCATED 12.39.152.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 26973 UNALLOCATED 12.39.154.0/23 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 26973 UNALLOCATED 12.39.159.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 32326 UNALLOCATED 12.40.49.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 25639 UNALLOCATED 12.41.169.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-badAS Advertised Unallocated Addresses -------------------------------- Network Origin AS Description 24.225.128.0/17 36377 PATRIOT MEDIA AND COMMUNICATI 41.223.92.0/22 36936 >>UNKNOWN<< 41.223.176.0/22 36981 >>UNKNOWN<< 41.223.189.0/24 26452 Local Communications Networks 43.245.0.0/16 7502 Internetwork Kyoto 43.245.96.0/20 7502 Internetwork Kyoto 43.245.112.0/20 7502 Internetwork Kyoto 43.245.192.0/20 7502 Internetwork Kyoto 43.245.208.0/20 7502 Internetwork Kyoto 43.245.224.0/20 7502 Internetwork Kyoto Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-add-IANA Number of prefixes announced per prefix length (Global) ------------------------------------------------------- /1:0 /2:0 /3:0 /4:0 /5:0 /6:0 /7:0 /8:19 /9:10 /10:25 /11:62 /12:168 /13:351 /14:624 /15:1178 /16:10639 /17:4812 /18:8366 /19:17327 /20:20674 /21:20700 /22:26669 /23:26392 /24:153358 /25:921 /26:1041 /27:580 /28:150 /29:8 /30:7 /31:1 /32:8 Advertised prefixes smaller than registry allocations ----------------------------------------------------- ASN No of nets Total ann. Description 6389 2709 4181 bellsouth.net, inc. 4766 1405 1718 Korea Telecom (KIX) 17488 1294 1548 Hathway IP Over Cable Interne 1785 1204 1733 PaeTec Communications, Inc. 18566 1043 1062 Covad Communications 11492 1039 1112 Cable One 4323 965 1919 Time Warner Telecom 9583 944 1092 Sify Limited 8452 926 1002 TEDATA 10620 897 990 TVCABLE BOGOTA Complete listing at http://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-sXXas-nos Number of /24s announced per /8 block (Global) ---------------------------------------------- 4:14 8:214 12:2132 13:7 15:21 16:3 17:5 20:35 24:1124 32:52 34:2 38:595 40:97 41:1754 43:1 44:2 47:8 52:6 55:2 56:2 57:25 58:624 59:610 60:460 61:972 62:1102 63:2012 64:3658 65:2400 66:3425 67:1742 68:882 69:2763 70:556 71:162 72:1664 73:2 74:1733 75:179 76:317 77:858 78:559 79:375 80:923 81:833 82:602 83:427 84:630 85:1065 86:377 87:670 88:371 89:1463 90:49 91:2504 92:399 93:1118 94:1183 95:1082 96:166 97:267 98:276 99:30 110:180 111:386 112:124 113:149 114:240 115:301 116:1132 117:566 118:342 119:768 120:121 121:650 122:1248 123:755 124:1059 125:1345 128:223 129:219 130:129 131:417 132:75 133:9 134:174 135:42 136:225 137:160 138:169 139:85 140:445 141:124 142:385 143:341 144:389 145:49 146:387 147:156 148:530 149:220 150:207 151:192 152:208 153:152 154:2 155:274 156:167 157:301 158:113 159:350 160:291 161:164 162:270 163:164 164:276 165:524 166:471 167:362 168:701 169:162 170:479 171:41 172:2 173:393 174:322 175:1 178:1 180:8 182:1 186:127 187:152 188:590 189:588 190:2877 192:5783 193:4248 194:3275 195:2706 196:1125 198:3551 199:3360 200:5130 201:1302 202:7764 203:8273 204:3903 205:2191 206:2384 207:2743 208:3939 209:3409 210:2518 211:1106 212:1606 213:1654 214:131 215:29 216:4310 217:1352 218:408 219:422 220:1107 221:463 222:323 End of report

1 0

RE: FCCs RFC for the Definition of Broadband
by Carlos Alcantar 28 Aug '09

28 Aug '09

That's why I believe all the major lecs are refusing to submit for funds due to all the red tape that comes with that money. Eg. (Nondiscrimination and interconnection obligation) they are really pushing network openness something I don't think the lecs want to do with their fiber plant. Carlos Alcantar Race Telecommunications, Inc. 101 Haskins Way South San Francisco, CA 94080 P: 650.649.3550 x143 F: 650.649.3551 -----Original Message----- From: JC Dill [mailto:jcdill.lists@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 9:51 PM To: NANOG list Subject: Re: FCCs RFC for the Definition of Broadband Leo Bicknell wrote: > What Telecom companies have done is confused infrastructure and > equipment. It would be stupid to plan on making a profit on your > GSR over 30 years, after 10 it will be functionally obsolete. When > it comes to equipment the idea of 1-3 year ROI's makes sense. > However, when it comes to fiber or copper in the ground or on a > pole it has a 20, 30, 40, or even 50 year life span. To require > those assets to have a 1-3 year ROI is absurd. What happens if we have improvements in data transmission systems such that whatever we put in now is obsolete in 15 years? What happens if we put in billions of dollars of fiber, only to have fiber (and copper) obsolete as we roll out faster and faster wireless solutions? IMHO the biggest obstacle to defining broadband is figuring out how to describe how it is used in a way that prevents an ILEC from installing it so that only the ILEC can use it. If the customer doesn't have at least 3 broadband choices, there's no real choice, and pricing will be artificially high and service options will be stagnant and few. Look at what happened to long distance rates and telephone services once Ma Bell was broken up and businesses started competing for customers. I remember when we paid more than $35 a month for long distance fees alone (and about that much more for our basic service, including phone "rental") when I was a teenager in the 1970s. Without competition, with inflation, that same long distance bill would easily be over $100/month today. Yest today, more than 30 years later you can get a cell phone with unlimited minutes, unlimited domestic long distance, for $35/month (e.g Metro PCS). Let's not make this mistake again and let the ILECs use TARP funds to build "broadband" to the curb/home that only they get to use to provide internet services to the customers. jc

1 0

Avaya (or other folks) who work with the CNA/APC (route reflector)
by Drew Weaver 27 Aug '09

27 Aug '09

Hi, All of my contacts within Avaya who work with the CNA/APC system have seemingly vanished, does anyone on the list have any contacts in Avaya which still know about the existence of this product? Also, does anyone have any contact information for someone at Internap who has sales information about the FCP product? thanks, -Drew

2 1

Qwest IPv6
by Kevin Brown 27 Aug '09

27 Aug '09

Does anyone have a contact at Qwest who can help us get the ball rolling to implement an exchange of IPv6 traffic? Their NOC referred us back to our account manager, who said "We don't do IPv6". A quick Google search would seem to indicate otherwise... Thanks! -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Kevin W. Brown | 2975B Manchester Rd. | E-Mail: kevin(a)qis.net Quantum Internet Services | Manchester, MD 21102 | Voice: 410-239-6920 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ My current spamtrap: qstkb74027451(a)qis.net

3 2

MTAs used
by Sharef Mustafa 27 Aug '09

27 Aug '09

Hi, Can anyone please point me to a list of the most used MTAs (mail servers) and their market share? BR

10 9

MRLG
by Carlos Alcantar 27 Aug '09

27 Aug '09

Anyone seem to have the src code to Multi-Router Looking Glass version 5.4.1 Beta (the perl version) seem like the original site that has the src is down. -carlos

1 0

Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509.
by Peter George 26 Aug '09

26 Aug '09

Hello, I have several Catalyst 6500 (Supervisor 32) aggregation switches with WS-X6148A-GE-TX and WS-X6148-GE-TX line cards. These line cards do not support storm-control/broadcast suppression. This impacted us badly during a recent spanning tree event. As it stands, we are at risk of overwhelming control planes with excess broadcast or multicast traffic, and I need to find alternative ways to protect these switches. I have been researching STP enhancements, and control-plane policing in the following documents, and would appreciate advice from engineers who may have had to implement similar workarounds for storm-control in a service provider setting. * Configuring Denial of Service Protection http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst6500/ios/12.2SX/config… * Configuring Control Plane Policing http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst4500/12.2/31sga/config… * Configuring Optional STP Features http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst4500/12.2/31sga/config… So, if we can't mitigate against STP events using storm-control or broadcast suppression, what might be the best combination of STP enhancements and control-plane policing? For example, is it possible to rate-limit broadcast/multicast, STP and ARP on a per VLAN basis? If so, how? Many thanks, P -- Peter George Lumison t: 0845 1199 900 d: 0131 514 4022 P.S. Lumison have changed the way businesses communicate forever http://www.unified-communications.net/ ________________________________ -- This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. Any offers or quotation of service are subject to formal specification. Errors and omissions excepted. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Lumison. Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. Lumison accept no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.

10 15

FCCs RFC for the Definition of Broadband
by Dorn Hetzel 26 Aug '09

26 Aug '09

not to mention all the lightning-blasted-routers that will be prevented by FTTH :) even with several layers of protection I still accumulate about one dead interface of some sort each year on my very rural T-1... On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:57 PM, jim deleskie <deleskie(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I agree we should all be telling the FCC that broadband is fiber to > the home. If we spend all kinds of $$ to build a 1.5M/s connection to > homes, it's outdated before we even finish. > > > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Fred Baker<fred(a)cisco.com> wrote: > > If it's about stimulus money, I'm in favor of saying that broadband > implies > > fiber to the home. That would provide all sorts of stimuli to the economy > - > > infrastructure, equipment sales, jobs digging ditches, and so on. I could > > pretty quickly argue myself into suggesting special favors for deployment > of > > DNSSEC, multicast, and IPv6. As in, use the stimulus money to propel a > leap > > forward, not just waste it. > > > > On Aug 26, 2009, at 9:44 AM, Carlos Alcantar wrote: > > > >> I think the big push to get the fcc to define broadband is highly based > >> on the rus/ntia setting definitions of what broadband is. If any anyone > >> has been fallowing the rus/ntia they are the one handing out all the > >> stimulus infrastructure grant loan money. So there are a lot of > >> political reasons to make the definition of broadband a bit slower than > >> one would think. I guess it doesn't hurt that the larger lec's with the > >> older infrastructure are shelling out the money to lobby to make sure > >> the definition stays as low as can be. They don't want to see the gov > >> funding there competition. Just my 2 cents. > >> > >> -carlos > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Ted Fischer [mailto:ted@fred.net] > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:50 AM > >> To: nanog(a)nanog.org > >> Subject: Re: FCCs RFC for the Definition of Broadband > >> > >> > >> > >> Paul Timmins wrote: > >>> > >>> Fred Baker wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On Aug 24, 2009, at 9:17 AM, Luke Marrott wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> What are your thoughts on what the definition of Broadband should be > >> > >>>>> going > >>>>> forward? I would assume this will be the standard definition for a > >>>>> number of > >>>>> years to come. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Historically, narrowband was circuit switched (ISDN etc) and > >> > >> broadband > >>>> > >>>> was packet switched. Narrowband was therefore tied to the digital > >>>> signaling hierarchy and was in some way a multiple of 64 KBPS. As the > >> > >>>> term was used then, broadband delivery options of course included > >>>> virtual circuits bearing packets, like Frame Relay and ATM. > >>> > >>> of or relating to or being a communications network in which the > >>> bandwidth can be divided and shared by multiple simultaneous signals > >> > >> (as > >>> > >>> for voice or data or video) > >>> > >>> That's my humble opinion. Let them use a new term, like "High Speed > >>> Internet". > >>> > >>> > >> Seconded > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >

2 1

Data Center testing
by Dan Snyder 26 Aug '09

26 Aug '09

Does any one know of any data centers that do failure testing of their networking equipment regularly? I mean to verify that everything fails over properly after changes have been made over time. Is there any best practice guides for doing this? Thanks, Dan

14 18

RE: FCCs RFC for the Definition of Broadband
by Carlos Alcantar 26 Aug '09

26 Aug '09

I believe a lot of people are thinking the same way that fiber to the home is broadband. Looking at some poll results from a calix webinar it looks like most people submitting for stimulus money are going down that path of fiber to the home as gpon and active Ethernet seem to be the front runners. If anyone cares to look at the poll http://www.calix.com/bbs/ bottom right. -carlos -----Original Message----- From: jim deleskie [mailto:deleskie@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 10:57 AM To: Fred Baker Cc: Carlos Alcantar; nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: Re: FCCs RFC for the Definition of Broadband I agree we should all be telling the FCC that broadband is fiber to the home. If we spend all kinds of $$ to build a 1.5M/s connection to homes, it's outdated before we even finish. On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Fred Baker<fred(a)cisco.com> wrote: > If it's about stimulus money, I'm in favor of saying that broadband implies > fiber to the home. That would provide all sorts of stimuli to the economy - > infrastructure, equipment sales, jobs digging ditches, and so on. I could > pretty quickly argue myself into suggesting special favors for deployment of > DNSSEC, multicast, and IPv6. As in, use the stimulus money to propel a leap > forward, not just waste it. > > On Aug 26, 2009, at 9:44 AM, Carlos Alcantar wrote: > >> I think the big push to get the fcc to define broadband is highly based >> on the rus/ntia setting definitions of what broadband is. If any anyone >> has been fallowing the rus/ntia they are the one handing out all the >> stimulus infrastructure grant loan money. So there are a lot of >> political reasons to make the definition of broadband a bit slower than >> one would think. I guess it doesn't hurt that the larger lec's with the >> older infrastructure are shelling out the money to lobby to make sure >> the definition stays as low as can be. They don't want to see the gov >> funding there competition. Just my 2 cents. >> >> -carlos >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ted Fischer [mailto:ted@fred.net] >> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:50 AM >> To: nanog(a)nanog.org >> Subject: Re: FCCs RFC for the Definition of Broadband >> >> >> >> Paul Timmins wrote: >>> >>> Fred Baker wrote: >>>> >>>> On Aug 24, 2009, at 9:17 AM, Luke Marrott wrote: >>>> >>>>> What are your thoughts on what the definition of Broadband should be >> >>>>> going >>>>> forward? I would assume this will be the standard definition for a >>>>> number of >>>>> years to come. >>>> >>>> >>>> Historically, narrowband was circuit switched (ISDN etc) and >> >> broadband >>>> >>>> was packet switched. Narrowband was therefore tied to the digital >>>> signaling hierarchy and was in some way a multiple of 64 KBPS. As the >> >>>> term was used then, broadband delivery options of course included >>>> virtual circuits bearing packets, like Frame Relay and ATM. >>> >>> of or relating to or being a communications network in which the >>> bandwidth can be divided and shared by multiple simultaneous signals >> >> (as >>> >>> for voice or data or video) >>> >>> That's my humble opinion. Let them use a new term, like "High Speed >>> Internet". >>> >>> >> Seconded >> >> >> > > >

1 0