- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Parler
by sronan＠ronan-online.com 14 Jan '21

14 Jan '21

This is a list for Network Operators, AWS certainly operates networks. Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 10, 2021, at 4:27 PM, K. Scott Helms <kscott.helms(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > No, > > It really does not. Section 230 only applies to publishers, and not to network providers. If this were a cloud hosting provider list then you'd be correct, but as a network provider's list it does not belong here. > > > Scott Helms > > > >> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 3:21 PM Lady Benjamin PD Cannon <ben(a)6by7.net> wrote: >> As network operations and compute/cloud/hosting operations continue to coalesce, I very much disagree with you. Section 230 is absolutely relevant, this discussion is timely and relevant, and it directly affects me as both a telecom and cloud compute/services provider. >> >> >> —L.B. >> >> Lady Benjamin PD Cannon, ASCE >> 6x7 Networks & 6x7 Telecom, LLC >> CEO >> ben(a)6by7.net >> "The only fully end-to-end encrypted global telecommunications company in the world.” >> FCC License KJ6FJJ >> >> <Speedtest9118.png> >> <Ben LIC.png> >> >>> On Jan 10, 2021, at 12:13 PM, K. Scott Helms <kscott.helms(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> It's not, and frankly it's disappointing to see people pushing an agenda here. >>> >>> >>> Scott Helms >>> >>> >>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 9:37 AM <sronan(a)ronan-online.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> NANOG is a group of Operators, discussion does not have to be about networking. I have already explained how this represents a significant issue for Network Operators. >>>> >>>> On Jan 10, 2021, at 9:09 AM, Mike Bolitho <mikebolitho(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> It has nothing to do with networking. Their decision was necessarily political. If you can specifically bring up an issue, beyond speculative, on how their new chosen CDN is somehow now causing congestion or routing issues on the public internet, then great. But as of now, that isn't even a thing. It's just best to leave it alone because it will devolve into chaos. >>>> >>>> - Mike Bolitho >>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021, 6:54 AM <sronan(a)ronan-online.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Why? This is extremely relevant to network operators and is not political at all. >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 10, 2021, at 8:51 AM, Mike Bolitho <mikebolitho(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Can we please not go down this rabbit hole on here? List admins? >>>>> >>>>> - Mike Bolitho >>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021, 1:26 AM William Herrin <bill(a)herrin.us> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Anybody looking for a new customer opportunity? It seems Parler is in >>>>>> search of a new service provider. Vendors need only provide all the >>>>>> proprietary AWS APIs that Parler depends upon to function. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/09/amazon-parler-suspensi… >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Bill HErrin >>

12 14

DoNotPay Spam?
by Robert Webb 14 Jan '21

14 Jan '21

Anyone else getting spam from DoNotPay everytime they send an email to the list? I have not sent anything in a while until my ATT email and now I am getting this on every new email I send to the list. [image: Alternate text] *You’re almost there! Sign up once to unlock lifetime protection (and even compensation) on all spam emails. *

10 13

Nashville
by Andy Ringsmuth 14 Jan '21

14 Jan '21

Certainly thankful no serious injuries or fatalities in this clusterblank. It seems the AT&T building at 185 2nd Ave N may have been a target, which would explain the timing (holiday morning when no one is out, as opposed to a holiday evening when there would be mass casualties). A little curious what that building has. Is it just a big co-lo place? Regional CLEC/ILEC? No earth-shattering revelations here. Admittedly just bored on a slow Christmas Day when my wife is at work (nurse) and kid is playing with a new tablet and I’m just watching the news trying to understand/figure out a little what and why. ---- Andy Ringsmuth 5609 Harding Drive Lincoln, NE 68521-5831 (402) 304-0083 andy(a)andyring.com “Better even die free, than to live slaves.” - Frederick Douglas, 1863

13 22

NDAA passed: Internet and Online Streaming Services Emergency Alert Study
by Sean Donelan 14 Jan '21

14 Jan '21

The House on Monday and the Senate on Friday have overriden the President's veto of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 passing it into law. Among the NDAA's various sections, it includes the Reliable Emergency Alert Distribution Improvement (READI) Act. The READI Act includes a study and report for Emergency Alerts via the internet and streaming services. SEC. 9201. RELIABLE EMERGENCY ALERT DISTRIBUTION IMPROVEMENT. [...] (e) INTERNET AND ONLINE STREAMING SERVICES EMERGENCY ALERT EXAMINATION.— (1) STUDY.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, and after providing public notice and opportunity for comment, the Commission shall complete an inquiry to examine the feasibility of updating the Emergency Alert System to enable or improve alerts to consumers provided through the internet, including through streaming services.

35 101

Looking for alternate providers
by james jones 14 Jan '21

14 Jan '21

Greetings, Looking for upstream alternatives in Ayer, MA (01432). Need a gigabit link. Can be async but needs to be at least 35Mb up. Comcast need not apply. -James

1 0

ATT Outage in South Florida?
by Robert Webb 13 Jan '21

13 Jan '21

Getting complaints from internet and wireless users of no data or voice access. Anyone down that way having the same experience?

3 3

Re: DMVPN via Internet or Private APN
by Joel M Snyder 13 Jan '21

13 Jan '21

> I offer a question to help me settle an internal debate. As a network > engineer for a large enterprise, do you choose ISP flexibility or ISP > security when you build an OOB network? Flexibility. (will not joke about immense problem of including the words "ISP" and "security" in same sentence, unless accompanied by the phrase "complete and total absence of" as well) My particular area of concentration the last decade or so has been large multi-national WANs. I've been fortunate enough to see entire waves of deployment and redeployment, which has added a thick layer of scarring. One of the lessons that I take away from these deployments is that anything which is not pure "Internet" IP must be avoided, because if it doesn't bite you in the *ss on day 1, it will on day 1,000 or 10,000. Providers love to deliver a customized service, and in small deployments (such as connecting offices within a metropolitan area) I can see the value. But whether the provider is creating lock-in (sinister conspiracy theory) or just wants to give you a better service (optimistic world view theory), it *always* ends up being a problem sooner or later. I can pull a dozen anecdotes out where this happened and cost between $ and $$$$ to deal with, but my long-term experience is that the more vanilla the pipe, the better off you will be in the long run especially as the clock ticks past years and years. There are certainly issues with having multiple contracts, and the overhead of handling hundreds of semi-overlapping and slightly different bills and contact points is not to be dismissed lightly; it is a BIG deal especially for larger organizations with high internal costs for administrative overhead. Providers also claim better pricing on big contracts, but rarely is this true, because of the sharp and continuous drop in costs for Internet worldwide. Go with vanilla. It's easier to pour syrup and nuts on top than it is to dig out those disgusting frozen marshmallow chunks from the rocky road someone committed to. jms -- Joel M Snyder, 1404 East Lind Road, Tucson, AZ, 85719 Senior Partner, Opus One Phone: +1 520 324 0494 jms(a)Opus1.COM http://www.opus1.com/jms

1 0

Loss from USA to Singapore
by nanoguser99 13 Jan '21

13 Jan '21

Reporting packet loss getting from US to Singapore. Our prefix is being announced by AS 7473. The problem appears to be with transport to the US through STIX. Anyone else experiencing these issues? Are there other transit providers that do not use STIX? Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.

1 0

DMVPN via Internet or Private APN
by Sean Kelly 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

Hello Nanog's I offer a question to help me settle an internal debate. As a network engineer for a large enterprise, do you choose ISP flexibility or ISP security when you build an OOB network? I was tasked to create an OOB network for my company. Realistically it would only be deployed to 25% of the companies sites as they are considered important enough to justify the cost. The design is simple enough. Hub and spoke using cellular routers. DMVPN will carry data from the spoke to the hub. The real debate arrives when it's time to choose a carrier to host the router. I choose to go with a major cell carrier using a "private" APN. It allows me to connect my cell routers to a private layer 2 network and my private IP addresses will be used to provide layer 3 connectivity. I know that there will be outliers that can't use this carrier or cellular at all. These outliers, in my opinion, shouldn't have a majority stake in the overall design. The APN overall cost is low and so is the data plan for the hosted routers. The private APN also eliminates the router as an internet attack vector. I don't believe routers are appropriate security appliances to defend and monitor against network threats. Some of my colleagues believe that the flexibility of public cellular access outweighs the security risks. The cellular internet will provide us with a solution for more of the outliers than a private APN. I don't agree with this philosophy even though it's not "technically" wrong. I am interested in a broader range of opinion and technical reasoning. Nanog member KELLYSP

5 4

RE: Parler
by Keith Medcalf 12 Jan '21

12 Jan '21

That would make me wonder how many cases there have been of someone "shouting fire in a crowded theatre" where there was no fire and at least one person died as a result; and the charge laid against the shouter was "reckless disregard for human life resulting in culpable homocide" and the elements of that offence being proved, was dismissed on the basis that the "speech" was protected by the first amendment? -- Be decisive. Make a decision, right or wrong. The road of life is paved with flat squirrels who could not make a decision. >-----Original Message----- >From: Rod Beck <rod.beck(a)unitedcablecompany.com> >Sent: Monday, 11 January, 2021 05:13 >To: Keith Medcalf <kmedcalf(a)dessus.com> >Subject: Re: Parler > >Hi, > > >Your distinction sounds specious. The Courts have consistently that the >1st amendment protects free speech from government retaliation in many >instances. It is not just prior restraint. > > >Best, > > >Roderick. > > >________________________________ > >From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+rod.beck=unitedcablecompany.com(a)nanog.org> on >behalf of Keith Medcalf <kmedcalf(a)dessus.com> >Sent: Monday, January 11, 2021 3:11 AM >To: nanog(a)nanog.org <nanog(a)nanog.org> >Subject: RE: Parler > >>The first amendment deals with the government passing laws restricting >>freedom of speech. It has nothing to do with to whom AWS chooses to sell >>their services. It is also not absolute (fire, crowded theater, etc.) > >You are correct and incorrect. The First Amendment prohibits the >Government from passing laws which constitute "prior restraint". It does >nothing with respect to anyone other then the "Government" and its >agents. > >You are also incorrect. Freedom of Speech is Absolute. There is no >prior restraint which precludes you from "(fire, crowded theatre, etc.)" >whatever that means. That does not mean that speech does not have >"consequences". The first amendment only protects against prior >restraint, it does not protect against the suffering of consequences. >And of course "consequences" come AFTER the speech, not BEFORE the >speech. > >Furthermore your "(fire, crowded theater, etc.)" (whatever the hell that >means) cannot, as a matter of fact, possibly justify any action taken >prior to the so-called speech having been made as that would be an >assumption of fact not in evidence (also known as a hypothetical >question) and the courts do not rule on hypotheticals. If you do not >understand the difference then perhaps you should be sentenced to death >since you have a hand, and having a hand it could hold a gun, and since >it could hold a gun, you could also murder someone. So therefore you >should be put to death now as "prior restraint" to prevent you from >committing murder. > >I am neither a lawyer nor a yankee doodle and I know these facts to be >self-evident. > >-- >Be decisive. Make a decision, right or wrong. The road of life is paved >with flat squirrels who could not make a decision. > > >

10 10