- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: wanted: wireless magic tricks
by Mark Allman 16 Aug '01

16 Aug '01

> When we ran a T3 satellite link we installed Mentat boxes on each > end. See: http://www.mentat.com/skyx/skyx-nasa.html for a nice > comparison of TCP vs their SkyX protocol. Bottom line: it works > and no user had to change a thing in their TCP stack. Their > product goes up to T3 speeds, though. If you have access to the > end devices and want to "tune the stack" to achieve full thruput > via high delay links see: > http://www.psc.edu/networking/perf_tune.html Right. Lots of these boxes exist. I would encourage folks to consider the implications of these boxes before putting them in general purpose use, though. They are sometimes OK, and sometimes they may not be. See RFC 3135 for a discussion. allman --- Mark Allman -- BBN/NASA GRC -- http://roland.grc.nasa.gov/~mallman/

1 0

Re: wanted: wireless magic tricks
by Mark Allman 16 Aug '01

16 Aug '01

> Well, that is quite wonderful, but when I approached this problem > with a collegue of mine over a sat link for a client that wasn't > our experience and after considerable tweaking we ended up having > to settle for less. > > PS: got pointers to documents detailing the 500mbps over OC-12 sat link? > email addr will do, as well, I'd love to find out what they did. Yep, sorry -- I should have included a pointer. Try: David E. Brooks, Craig Buffinton, Dave R. Beering, Arun Welch, William D. Ivancic, Mike Zernic, Douglas J. Hoder. ACTS 118x Final Report High Speed TCP Interoperability Testing, July 1999. http://ctd.grc.nasa.gov/5610/publications/TM-1999-209272.pdf In the first couple of pages they show a results of 473 Mbps over an OC-12 circuit (a little less than line rate, but still quite good) using Solaris. Results with other operating systems varied. I seem to remember a presentation at the TCP Over Satellite IETF WG where over 500 Mbps was reported. My main point was that there is nothing wrong with the TCP *protocol* that makes it under-perform at large delay*bandwidth products. The implementations are not necessarily up to the job in some cases, but the protocol is sound. (Further reference might be the TCPSAT WG's two RFCs: 2488 and 2760). allman --- Mark Allman -- BBN/NASA GRC -- http://roland.grc.nasa.gov/~mallman/

4 3

ScanMail Message: To Sender, sensitive content found and action t aken. (fwd)
by John Fraizer 16 Aug '01

16 Aug '01

>Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 23:07:49 -0400 >From: System Attendant <MAIL-SA(a)syndesis.com> >To: 'John Fraizer' <nanog(a)Overkill.EnterZone.Net> >Subject: ScanMail Message: To Sender, sensitive content found and action >taken. > >Trend SMEX Content Filter has detected sensitive content. > >Place = measl(a)mfn.org; Steven J. Sobol; Johnny Eriksson; nanog(a)merit.edu; >postmaster(a)mfn.org; >Sender = John Fraizer >Subject = Re: Affects of the balkanization of mail blacklisting >Delivery Time = August 15, 2001 (Wednesday) 23:07:49 >Policy = Sexual Discrimination >Action on this mail = Quarantine message > >Warning message from administrator: >Sender, Content filter has detected a sensitive e-mail. God! What on earth in my email was sexually discriminatory? I don't like SPAMMERS. I don't care if they're male, female or hermaphrodite. No discrimination. They should all be shot on site! --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc

3 2

RE: wanted: wireless magic tricks
by Young, Jason 16 Aug '01

16 Aug '01

cheap/fast/good. Pick two. I don't know that you can get that kind of speed from satellite. If you could get that kind of range from point-to-point wireless at that speed, you'd certainly need a good line of sight. Do you have that? You should see if this data is reasonably compressible. Maybe your bandwidth needs aren't as bad as you think. Jason Young CNS - Network Design, Anheuser-Busch (314)577-4597 > -----Original Message----- > From: Cerqua, Toby [mailto:toby@platinumsystems.net] > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 11:02 AM > To: 'nanog(a)merit.edu' > Subject: wanted: wireless magic tricks > > > > hey all, > > we've got a client that wants some crazy stuff, and i need either > suggestions or confirmation that this is impossible/too expensive. > > client needs 45Mbps pushed over 20 miles... and he wants it > wireless. the > kicker is that they don't want a T3 because it is "too > expensive" and it > would take too long to get installed. it doesn't need to be > constant, but he > wants to move of 2.5GB within 45 minutes. this is in the > chicago area, if > that helps any. so, i don't know, satellite? > > - toby > ----------------------------------------------- > t(a)platinumsystems.net > http://www.platinumsystems.net >

5 4

RE: wanted: wireless magic tricks
by Irwin Lazar 16 Aug '01

16 Aug '01

If you've got line of site you can look at the FSO-based solutions from companies such as Terabeam - www.terabeam.com Irwin ------ Irwin Lazar, Senior Consultant The Burton Group - www.tbg.com ilazar(a)tbg.com 703-742-9659 (office) 703-402-4119 (cell) "Driving Network Evolution" > -----Original Message----- > From: Cerqua, Toby [mailto:toby@platinumsystems.net] > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 12:02 PM > To: 'nanog(a)merit.edu' > Subject: wanted: wireless magic tricks > > > > hey all, > > we've got a client that wants some crazy stuff, and i need either > suggestions or confirmation that this is impossible/too expensive. > > client needs 45Mbps pushed over 20 miles... and he wants it > wireless. the > kicker is that they don't want a T3 because it is "too > expensive" and it > would take too long to get installed. it doesn't need to be > constant, but he > wants to move of 2.5GB within 45 minutes. this is in the > chicago area, if > that helps any. so, i don't know, satellite? > > - toby > ----------------------------------------------- > t(a)platinumsystems.net > http://www.platinumsystems.net >

1 0

RE: wanted: wireless magic tricks (fwd)
by Robert Mathews-ICICX 16 Aug '01

16 Aug '01

Toby: This was sent to me just a moment ago.. I am posting it for the sender -- to your benefit. Best. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 07:03:37 -1000 From: "LeBlanc, Jason" <Jml(a)ebay.com> To: 'Robert Mathews-ICICX' <mathews(a)CSATI.EDU> Subject: RE: wanted: wireless magic tricks (fwd) I can't post, but can you send this in: http://www.wmux.com/products/leasing.html Might be a good option.

1 0

Re: wanted: wireless magic tricks (fwd)
by Robert Mathews-ICICX 16 Aug '01

16 Aug '01

On Thu, 16 Aug 2001, Cerqua, Toby wrote: > hey all, > > we've got a client that wants some crazy stuff, and i need either > suggestions or confirmation that this is impossible/too expensive. > > client needs 45Mbps pushed over 20 miles... and he wants it wireless. the > kicker is that they don't want a T3 because it is "too expensive" and it > would take too long to get installed. it doesn't need to be constant, but he > wants to move of 2.5GB within 45 minutes. this is in the chicago area, if > that helps any. so, i don't know, satellite? > > - toby Toby: Quick and dirty answer... if they cannot stand the cost of a DS3, it is worth considering that satellite costs might not be 'that much' cheaper... of course, price point, serivce vendor investigations permitting. But, something to think about is line of sight Microwave.. you could potentially push the requisite sum of bits across such a link if you use a good Tx-Rx frequency and is weather (rain etc.) is not a large consideration. Here too you have to consider: is TERM/length of service need with the overall COST... frequency spectrum allocation and management issues in the area etc. But, as you suggest -- if your intent is to convince the client that this is not doable (impossible/too expensive as you put it), I am sure you can find enough reasons! :) Best.

1 0

RE: wanted: wireless magic tricks
by Roeland Meyer 16 Aug '01

16 Aug '01

|> From: Cerqua, Toby [mailto:toby@platinumsystems.net] |> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 9:02 AM |> |> hey all, |> |> we've got a client that wants some crazy stuff, and i need either |> suggestions or confirmation that this is impossible/too expensive. |> |> client needs 45Mbps pushed over 20 miles... and he wants it |> wireless. the |> kicker is that they don't want a T3 because it is "too |> expensive" and it |> would take too long to get installed. it doesn't need to be |> constant, but he |> wants to move of 2.5GB within 45 minutes. this is in the |> chicago area, if |> that helps any. so, i don't know, satellite? The expense part is arguable, but they may be correct about the lead-time. I'm seeing more than 6 months for provisioning here, for T3s. I hear similar numbers everywhere else. However, microwave towers take almost as long, and are even MORE expensive (the permits alone, might take that long and *then* you have to acquire the rights-of-way and build the towers<sigh>). Depending on frequency of occurance, it might be far cheaper to burn a DAT tape, or DVD-R, and drive it the 20 miles. You might want to consider doing this until the T3 gets installed. It all depends on what the transfer is worth (it looks like a data synchronization run). If is is a data-sync run then they might want to consider a lower-speed line and sync RDBMSs, such as with Oracle Replication Services (Assuming that it *is* RDBMS data and they *are* using Oracle [Sybase works too]). The bottom-line is that, they look like they have a systems architecture problem that they are trying to fix with a claw-hammer. Everything is possible. It is just that certain versions of "possible" cost more than others.

1 0

Re: wanted: wireless magic tricks
by BRA-SAO-Pucci,Persio 16 Aug '01

16 Aug '01

ps: it's not a U-Haul delay, but certainly 400ms + ;) Persio Pucci Analista Internetworking - Sao Paulo Impsat Comunicacoes Ltda. Tel: (55-11) 3444-6205 Fax: (55-11) 3444-6351 email: ppucci(a)impsat.net.br ----- Original Message ----- From: "BRA-SAO-Pucci,Persio" <ppucci(a)impsat.net.br> To: <nanog(a)merit.edu> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 1:21 PM Subject: Re: wanted: wireless magic tricks > Sattelite would do it. We had a 45Mb on a HSSI interface here and uesd to > work great, using a 9m diameter antenna. Now, the only thing would be the > cost for that... > > Persio Pucci > Analista Internetworking - Sao Paulo > > Impsat Comunicacoes Ltda. > Tel: (55-11) 3444-6205 > Fax: (55-11) 3444-6351 > email: ppucci(a)impsat.net.br > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Young, Jason" <Jason.Young(a)anheuser-busch.com> > To: "'Cerqua, Toby'" <toby(a)platinumsystems.net>; <nanog(a)merit.edu> > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 1:13 PM > Subject: RE: wanted: wireless magic tricks > > > > > > > > cheap/fast/good. Pick two. > > > > I don't know that you can get that kind of speed from satellite. If you > could > > get that kind of range from point-to-point wireless at that speed, you'd > > certainly need a good line of sight. Do you have that? > > > > You should see if this data is reasonably compressible. Maybe your > bandwidth > > needs aren't as bad as you think. > > > > Jason Young > > CNS - Network Design, Anheuser-Busch > > (314)577-4597 > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Cerqua, Toby [mailto:toby@platinumsystems.net] > > > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 11:02 AM > > > To: 'nanog(a)merit.edu' > > > Subject: wanted: wireless magic tricks > > > > > > > > > > > > hey all, > > > > > > we've got a client that wants some crazy stuff, and i need either > > > suggestions or confirmation that this is impossible/too expensive. > > > > > > client needs 45Mbps pushed over 20 miles... and he wants it > > > wireless. the > > > kicker is that they don't want a T3 because it is "too > > > expensive" and it > > > would take too long to get installed. it doesn't need to be > > > constant, but he > > > wants to move of 2.5GB within 45 minutes. this is in the > > > chicago area, if > > > that helps any. so, i don't know, satellite? > > > > > > - toby > > > ----------------------------------------------- > > > t(a)platinumsystems.net > > > http://www.platinumsystems.net > > > > > >

1 0

www.icann.org changed IP address to a reserved block?
by Dani Roisman 16 Aug '01

16 Aug '01

I just recently noticed that we cannot get to www.icann.org. Granted, it's been a few weeks since I last tried. I'm seeing: www.icann.org has address 192.0.34.65, but have been filtering 192.0.0.0/16 le 32 from BGP updates for the longest time. ARIN shows: (RESERVED-2) RESERVED-192 192.0.0.0 - 192.0.255.255 ICANN c/o Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (NET-ICANN) ICANN 192.0.32.0 - 192.0.47.255 I thought RESERVED meant not in use on the public Internet? I guess in the mean time, I'm gonna drop the 192.0.0.0/16 le 32 filter. - Dani

3 3