- Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: CCO goes down the tubes
by Howard C. Berkowitz 29 Mar '04

29 Mar '04

At 6:58 AM -0800 3/29/04, Michel Py wrote: > > Maybe I'm the only one left who sees a need to be >> able to check on things from a vt100 at a remote site. > >You are not. A telnet version without all the fluffy bullshit would be >more than welcome. > I suppose it's trivial in the grand scheme of things, but on a fairly small screen, I can'tget full access to the search without scrolling to the right. We wouldn't want to reduce the priority of advertising information display to the user who probably has already bought equipment and has a question about it, would we? Perhaps a nastier effect is that the more eye candy, the harder it is to use disability access features. One of the incredibly positive social effects of the Internet is that it is inclusionary, not exclusionary. The regrettable tendency of many enterprises to equate the Internet with the latest and greatest in Web technology leads to both economic and sensory exclusion. Personally, I resent having to buy new hardware to run the new operating system that runs the new browser that runs the latest plugin, in order to see straightforward reference material [1]. In addition, the more visually intensive an interface metaphor, the more difficult it is to adapt it to magnified images, text-to-speech, or other things needed for people with visual disabilities. The more mouse/trackball/pointing device intensive, the more difficult it is to adapt to people with motor disabilities -- including the all-too-common repetitive stress injuries to hands.

2 1

Telus Vancouver/Burnaby contact?
by Eric Kuhnke 29 Mar '04

29 Mar '04

Could somebody from Telus (preferably the Vancouver/Burnaby office) please contact me off-list? This is in regards to CRTC decisions 1995-15, 1996-1484, 2000-13 and most importantly 2003-54.

1 0

RE: CCO goes down the tubes
by Michel Py 29 Mar '04

29 Mar '04

> Maybe I'm the only one left who sees a need to be > able to check on things from a vt100 at a remote site. You are not. A telnet version without all the fluffy bullshit would be more than welcome. Michel.

1 0

Re: Publish or (gulp) Perish
by Michael.Dillon＠radianz.com 29 Mar '04

29 Mar '04

>well, a copy of "the bell technical journal" with the first >paper describing unix is on my shelf. On my bookshelf too. I believe this was more of a "technical reports" series than a referreed journal since it contained only work being done by the one organization. A lot of universities and research labs also publish a "technical reports" series that describes work whichj may or may not make its way into journals and conference proceedings. Would it be better to think of a way that NANOG could publish a series of NANOG Technical Reports rather than a journal? This seems to be the ideal way to formalize work that is supposed to focus on the here and now by describing stuff that is operationally useful no more than 6 months into the future. Then we would have an archive of NANOG presentations, associated NANOG Technical Reports and the occasional pointer to a journal paper when the author takes their work to that stage. --Michael Dillon

2 1

disabling SMTP
by Eric A. Hall 29 Mar '04

29 Mar '04

I'm wondering if the installed base of legitimate messaging systems has migrated to ESMTP so as to get away with disabling plain-old SMTP except for internal devices. Anybody got any data or observations on this? -- Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/ Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/

6 12

RE: Protected message
by steve＠opaltelecom.co.uk 29 Mar '04

29 Mar '04

1 0

Overflow circuit
by Mailing List Subscriptions 29 Mar '04

29 Mar '04

I am looking for advice on technique or products that can solve the following challenge ... Two private line T1's between A and B - one terrestial T1 with >200 ms RTT, the other T1 is over satellite with ~500 ms RTT. The circuits are being used for mixed VoIP (70%) and data (30%) applications. To achieve optimal voice quality, we want to route all VoIP calls over the terrestial T1 until it is "full", then divert all subsequent VoIP calls over the satellite T1 (** while existing VoIP calls continue to be routed over the terrestial T1). So it looks like I need per-flow (based on protocol, src IP, dst IP, src port, dst port) routing. It looks like MPLS Traffic Engineering can do the job. Is there anything else that can it with less complexity? Ideas or recommendations? Regards, Joe

7 10

CCO goes down the tubes
by bdragon＠gweep.net 29 Mar '04

29 Mar '04

Anyone else notice that you now need javascript in order to even view TAC Cases? Anyone else annoyed by this crippling of something Cisco actually did reasonably well? Anyone not care what cisco does to CCO because you're still mourning the loss of CIO? What's next, requirement for flash to view vendor documentation? (Equinix already has this inane requirement.) Maybe I'm the only one left who sees a need to be able to check on things from a vt100 at a remote site. Welcome to the web, the technology that was supposed to remove technological incompatibilities and vendor-specific software requirements.

3 2

Multiple Cisco AS5800 controlled by 1 Cisco 7206VXR
by D. Scott Smith 28 Mar '04

28 Mar '04

I have been tasked by management to determine if there is a way to connect more than 1 AS5814 to a Cisco7206VXR for the purpose of Providing Dialup Modems. Currently we have a 1 to 1 ratio of Cisco 7206VXR Router-Shelf connected to a Cisco 5814 Dial-Shelf and it works without any problems. We are trying to see if anyone has had any luck with connecting more than 1 dial-shelf to a single Router-Shelf. Any recommendations are welcome. D. Scott Smith Operations Manager Core Communications, Inc. scott(a)coretel.net

1 0

RE: Overflow circuit
by Michel Py 28 Mar '04

28 Mar '04

> Alexei Roudnev wrote: > VoIP over satellite? I am very sceptical about it. > Better, forget such idea. It works fine if the pipe is good enough (T1 class or better, what Joe's talking about). Latency although not nice is not the worst problem (which is jitter). In my experience aggressive QOS (priority queing) is required if you share the pipe with data. One day for the fun of it I even tried with DirectWay (el-cheapo consumer-grade satlink); for one line in the wee hours of the night it worked fine. Forget about it day-time though. But as long as you understand that your're not going to get VOIP over sat for 50 bucks a month and it's correctly configured you're fine. Michel.

5 7