- Test - lists.nanog.org

XO outages?
by David Hubbard 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

Anyone know what's going on with XO? Seem to be having some big outage in the south east for phone and data; traces to equipment in Tampa stop at Virginia. Their customer support lines are as useless as usual with their 'unusually long hold times' which seem to be quite predictable at 60 minutes at a minimum every time I have ever called them. David

2 1

Re: Broadband ISPs taxed for 'generating light energy'
by Frank Coluccio 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

Perhaps five or six years ago, Lucent was experimenting with a fiber to the home application that took the received optical signal and passed it through a splitter on the customer's premises. One half of the received signal went to the optical network element's receive circuitry, and the other half to was channeled to support remote diagnostics, loopbacks and a return path via a MEMS-type mirror assembly. Speculation even existed, at the time, suggesting the use of a separate wavelength for powering purposes, only, thereby solving the lifeline dilemma. More recently I've come across this release from JDSU, below, which tempers what even I thought was a bizarre assertion on the part of the Bangalore government: From: http://www.globalexecutiveforum.net/Photonics.htm --snip: "JDSU claims O-to-E conversion efficiency record "JDSU announced that its Photonic Power Business Unit has achieved a world record in the conversion efficiency of laser light into electrical power. JDSU's 3 volt and 5 volt gallium arsenide (GaAs) Photovoltaic Power Converter (PPC) has achieved optical-to-electrical conversion efficiency greater than 50%. This breakthrough further enables the use of fiber optics to replace copper for power delivery where isolation from the surrounding environment is essential. Photonic Power is especially beneficial for cost-effectively driving electronic devices operating in high-voltage, RF/EMI and magnetic fields where traditional copper options are more complex or impractical. "An efficiency of 50% pushes the boundaries of the maximum theoretical limit for photovoltaic power conversion. This improvement enables more power-hungry electronics such as transducers, transceivers and sensors to be powered over fiber. The higher power efficiency also permits remote electronics to be powered by fiber over longer distances such as tower-mounted installations for cellular and digital TV relay stations. Other applications are numerous including underground exploration and medical applications where the isolated power allows the operation of devices inside strong magnetic fields such as MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging). "With this breakthrough conversion efficiency, JDSU is better positioned to deliver solutions to the medical, industrial sensor, and wireless communications industries," said David Gudmundson, vice president of corporate development for JDSU. "We believe that the delivery of power over fiber can provide strategic and competitive advantages to a variety of applications that require isolated power and are looking for copper wire alternatives." end snip-- Practical? Who knows. Off topic? Youbetcha. I wouldn't have even brought this up except to add some balance to what was already an OT and out of control thread ;) Frank A. Coluccio DTI Consulting Inc. 212-587-8150 Office 347-526-6788 Mobile On Tue Oct 10 13:30 , "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" sent: > >Feh. Any government with real tax mojo will tax both of them on the >gross, not the net. This isn't the milquetoast VAT, you know. > > >On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Roy wrote: > >> >> However, since the customer must beam back light as part of the exchange >> then you must track the number of pulses in both directions and >> determine the difference. Some days the customer gets more energy and >> some days it doesn't. That should affect the tax. >> >> >> > >(OBSerious: I bet it's not true.) > >-- >http://www.icannwatch.org Personal Blog: http://www.discourse.net >A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | froomkin(a)law.tm >U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA >+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm > -->It's warm here.

1 0

Re: that 4byte ASN you were considering...
by Henk Uijterwaal 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

At 10:44 10/10/2006, Michael.Dillon(a)btradianz.com wrote: > > > - 'Canonical representation of 4-byte AS numbers ' > > > >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-michaelson-4byte-as-representatio… > > > > > > and what is good or bad about this representation? seems simple to me. > > and having one notation seems reasonable. what am i missing? > >It breaks any applications which recognize IP address-like >objects by seeing a dot in an otherwise numeric token. Well, it will break an applications that considers everything consisting of numbers and dots to be an IP address/netmask/inverse mask. I don't think many applications do this, as they will then treat the typo "193.0.1." as an IP address. It won't break applications that check if there are exactly 4 numbers in the 0-255 range and 3 dots. The alternative notation (x:y) is much worse in this respect. "x:y" is something (a community string). "x.y" is not. >The real question is what does the notation 1.0 add that the >notation 65536 does not provide? It is (for me, and I guess most other humans) much easier to read and remember, just as 193.0.1.49 is easier to read and remember than 3238002993. It also reflects that on the wire there are two 16 bit numbers, rather than 1 32-bit number. More important: I think it is a mistake to assume that using AS65536 will NOT break things: 1. If you are a 16-bit AS speaker (ASN16), then AS65536 is not just the next one in the line, it is an AS that will have to be treated differently. The code has to recognize it and replace it by the transistion mechanism AS. 2. Just as people having used the regexps that you mentioned, I'm also certain that people have used unsigned short int's or signed long int's in their code. In short, like it or not, you will have to check and update your tools anyway. >If the IETF had really wanted The IETF process is open and you can still comment on the issue. Henk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.amsterdamned.org/~henk P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1160438400 + 381600 = 1160820000.

3 2

Re: Broadband ISPs taxed for "generating light energy"
by Brandon Butterworth 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

Nothing new, we had a form of this long ago http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Window_tax Charging per fibre/mile is much the same brandon

1 0

Re: Broadband ISPs taxed for "generating light energy"
by Fergie 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

Is it April 1st already? :-) - ferg -- Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists(a)gmail.com> wrote: .. because they provide internet over fiber optic cables, which work by sending pulses of light down the cable to push packets .. http://www.hindu.com/2006/10/10/stories/2006101012450400.htm So they get slapped with tax + penalties of INR 241.8 million. [snip] -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

4 3

ARIN to allocate from 2620:0000:/23
by Leslie Nobile 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

Hello- This announcement is being sent to multiple lists. Apologies for any duplicates. ARIN was issued the IPv6 address block 2620:0000:/23 by the IANA on Sept. 12, 2006. ARIN will be making assignments of /48 and shorter from this block immediately in accordance with ARIN's recently implemented IPv6 end user assignment policy. Network operators may wish to adjust any filters in place accordingly. For informational purposes, a list of ARIN's currently administered IP blocks can be found at: http://www.arin.net/reference/ip_blocks.html Regards, Leslie Nobile Director, Registration Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)

1 1

Re: that 4byte ASN you were considering...
by Henk Uijterwaal 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

At 13:34 10/10/2006, Michael.Dillon(a)btradianz.com wrote: >My point is that if we do NOT introduce a special notation >for ASnums greater than 65536, then tools only need to be >checked, not updated. If your tool was written by someone >who left the company 7 years ago then you might want to >do such checking by simply testing it with large as numbers, >not by inspecting the code. The dot notation requires that >somebody goes in and updates/fixes all these old tools. I don't agree with you but this is a valid argument. I suggest you make it to the IESG before they decide. Henk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.amsterdamned.org/~henk P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1160438400 + 381600 = 1160820000.

3 2

Lightning talks for Tuesday
by Steve Feldman 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

These lightning talks will be presented during the Tuesday plenary at NANOG 38, beginning at 11:00 CDT: 4 byte ASNs - Geoff Huston Higher Speed Ethernet - Peter Schoenmaker Internet2 DNSSEC Pilot - A Reverse Tree for the Holidays - Larry Blunk Route Aggregation Recommendations - Philip Smith The two-tier Internet, delivered - Anton Kapela Practical Wave Division Multiplexing, part 2 - Alex Pilosov and Adam Rothschild Steve

1 0

Anyone else seeing latency through SJC2.ALTER.NET?
by William Schultz 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

5 0.so-1-0-0.GW1.SJC2.ALTER.NET (157.130.203.17) 2.173 ms 2.419 ms 2.228 ms 6 127.ATM4-0.XR1.SJC2.ALTER.NET (152.63.56.202) 287.247 ms 287.482 ms 287.548 ms 7 0.so-1-0-0.XL1.SJC2.ALTER.NET (152.63.56.137) 287.316 ms 287.743 ms 288.016 ms 5 0.so-5-1-0.GW6.SJC1.ALTER.NET (152.63.54.169) 1.998 ms 1.918 ms 0.so-1-0-0.GW1.SJC2.ALTER.NET (157.130.203.17) 1.606 ms 6 0.so-0-3-0.XL1.SJC1.ALTER.NET (152.63.56.174) 289.389 ms 293.047 ms 127.ATM4-0.XR2.SJC2.ALTER.NET (152.63.56.206) 294.331 ms 7 0.so-1-0-0.XL2.SJC2.ALTER.NET (152.63.56.141) 294.862 ms 0.so-7-0-0.XL1.SCL2.ALTER.NET (152.63.54.134) 3.410 ms 0.so-1-0-0.XL2.SJC2.ALTER.NET (152.63.56.141) 295.108 ms 4 63.66.208.1 (63.66.208.1) 2.200 ms 2.143 ms 1.299 ms 5 0.so-1-1-0.GW1.SJC2.ALTER.NET (157.130.203.13) 274.324 ms 273.923 ms 273.909 ms 6 127.ATM5-0.XR2.SJC2.ALTER.NET (152.63.56.198) 1.973 ms 2.476 ms 2.431 ms 7 0.so-1-0-0.XL2.SJC2.ALTER.NET (152.63.56.141) 274.125 ms 274.027 ms 274.190 ms -Wil

3 4

Could someone from Mediacom respond ASAP please?
by scheidch＠cfu.net 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

If you're from Mediacom and can help out with this request, I'd very much appreciate your help. We've been added to your DNS blacklist and need to be removed. Thank you, Charles --------------------------------------------------------- Charles Scheidecker phone : +1.319.268.5227 Assistant Network Administrator fax : +1.319.266.8158 Cedar Falls Utilities cell : +1.319.493.0791 support: +1.319.268.5221 url : http://www.cfu.net

1 0