- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: OT: DSL equipment of non-american manufacture
by Jim Mercer 19 Apr '01

19 Apr '01

[ apologies for the previous empty reply ] On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:11:34PM -0400, Phillip Vandry wrote: > > can anyone point me at DSL head-end equipment of non-USA manufacture? > > Nortel is Canadian! yes/no. call nortel and tell them you want to ship their equipment to libya, russia or iraq. i don't beleive all of their manufacture is done in canada, and i think they are fairly depended on US branches, or US-based acquired companies. -- [ Jim Mercer jim(a)pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis.ca ] [ Reptilian Research -- Longer Life through Colder Blood ] [ aka jim(a)reptiles.org +1 416 410-5633 ]

1 0

Re: OT: DSL equipment of non-american manufacture
by Jim Mercer 19 Apr '01

19 Apr '01

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:11:34PM -0400, Phillip Vandry wrote: > Jim, > > Nortel is Canadian! > > -Phil > > > i'm looking at a new project, but am having some difficulties with export > > restrictions of the USA. > > > > can anyone point me at DSL head-end equipment of non-USA manufacture? > > > > -- > > [ Jim Mercer jim(a)pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis.ca ] > > [ Reptilian Research -- Longer Life through Colder Blood ] > > [ aka jim(a)reptiles.org +1 416 410-5633 ] > > -- [ Jim Mercer jim(a)pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis.ca ] [ Reptilian Research -- Longer Life through Colder Blood ] [ aka jim(a)reptiles.org +1 416 410-5633 ]

1 0

Governments CERT plans to sell early warnings on Web threats
by Eric Germann 19 Apr '01

19 Apr '01

http://www.msnbc.com/news/561513.asp?0nm=N14O ========================================================================== Eric Germann Inacom Info Systems egermann(a)inacomlima.com Lima, OH 45801 Ph: 419 331 9050 ICQ: 41927048 Fax: 603 825 5893 "It is so easy to miss pretty trivial solutions to problems deemed complicated. The goal of a scientist is to find an interesting problem, and live off it for a while. The goal of an engineer is to evade interesting problems :)" -- Vadim Antonov <avg(a)kotovnik.com> on NANOG

1 0

RE: What does 95th %tile mean?
by Dearborn, Jeffrey S. 19 Apr '01

19 Apr '01

Here's how I explain it on our burstable T1's & T3's (We bill at the 90th percentile BTW): Burstable T1 Explanation I hope that this explanation helps: Consider that your Internet usage is probably similar to 99% of all business users. You will probably use the circuit Monday through Friday between the hours of 8am and 5pm. Utilization in the off hours and on weekends should be close to zero. This means that over an entire month (720 hours), you will have access to the circuit for only 180 hours. Remember, in that 180 hours (8am - 5pm), you will not be constantly uploading and downloading data. It is in fact quite the opposite. Internet traffic is "bursty". For example: If you are viewing a web page and you hit your enter key, data is transmitted and the image and text load. Once it is loaded, the transmission stops and you read the web page. At this point the bandwidth is again sitting idle and utilization is back at zero. This is the cycle that repeats itself during the day so it is a safe bet that your utilization in that 180 hour time frame is 50% at best. This now leaves you with 90 hours of utilization for the month. Since we bill you at the 90th percentile, this means that we will discard the highest 10% of you bandwidth peaks. The 10% equates to 72 hours. This means that we will subtract the HIGHEST 72 hours of utilization from the remaining 90 hours. This now leave you with the lowest 18 hours of utilization for the month. Again, I can't guarantee it, but it is very unlikely that your lowest 18 hours will be greater than 100k. This graph illustrates a typical business customers utilization on a T-1 circuit. http://www.intermedia.com/images/businessinternet/products/lineutil.gif Jeff Dearborn Major Account Manager Intermedia Communications Business Internet 800.993.4439 x2418 toll free 301.847.2418 direct dial 301.419.0288 fax http://www.intermedia.com/ -----Original Message----- From: Alex Rubenstein [mailto:alex@corp.nac.net] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 10:09 AM To: 'nanog(a)merit.edu' Subject: What does 95th %tile mean? I've gotten myself into an argument with a provider about the definition of 'industry-standard 95th percentile method.' To me, this means the following: a) take the number of bytes xfered over a 5 minute period, and determine rate for both the inbound and outbound. Store this in your favorite data-store. b) at billing time, presumably on the first of the month or some other monthly increment, take all the samples, sort them from greatest to least, hacking off the top 5% of samples. Actually, this is done twice, once for inbound, once for outbound. Then, take the higher of those two, and multiply it by your favorite $ multiple (ie, $500 per megabit per second, or $1 per kilobit per second, etc). I think that most people agree with the above; the issue we are running into is one rogue provider who is billing this at in + out, not the greater of in or out. How is everyone else doing it? Specifically, larger folks (UU, Sprint, CW, Exodus/FGC, GX, Qwest, L3) Thanks!

1 0

RE: What does 95th %tile mean?
by Lee Watterworth 19 Apr '01

19 Apr '01

...definately one of those things that need to be asked about during contract negotiations... -----Original Message----- From: Alex Rubenstein [mailto:alex@corp.nac.net] Sent: April 19, 2001 10:09 AM To: 'nanog(a)merit.edu' Subject: What does 95th %tile mean? I've gotten myself into an argument with a provider about the definition of 'industry-standard 95th percentile method.' To me, this means the following: a) take the number of bytes xfered over a 5 minute period, and determine rate for both the inbound and outbound. Store this in your favorite data-store. b) at billing time, presumably on the first of the month or some other monthly increment, take all the samples, sort them from greatest to least, hacking off the top 5% of samples. Actually, this is done twice, once for inbound, once for outbound. Then, take the higher of those two, and multiply it by your favorite $ multiple (ie, $500 per megabit per second, or $1 per kilobit per second, etc). I think that most people agree with the above; the issue we are running into is one rogue provider who is billing this at in + out, not the greater of in or out. How is everyone else doing it? Specifically, larger folks (UU, Sprint, CW, Exodus/FGC, GX, Qwest, L3) Thanks!

2 1

[possibly off-topic] Announcing the Ottawa Internet Exchange
by William F. Maton 19 Apr '01

19 Apr '01

Greetings, FYI, there's a new IX being built in the city of Ottawa in Ontario, Canada. Interested ISP's should check out the following URL: http://www.ottix.net/ Several local ISP's will be connecting to the OttIX switch this week and the next and we hope to get peering up and running within the next couple of weeks. tx., wfms

1 0

Net Management Protocol Folk and Net Operators - Reality Check #2
by Randy Bush 19 Apr '01

19 Apr '01

To: IETF Announce NANOG list From: IETF OPS ADs Date: xx Subject: OPS-NM Interim Meeting All, At the last IETF OPS Area Open meeting we started a good discussion between the OPS NM folk and some Operators. We would like to continue that discussion and so we are planning an OPS-NM Interim, or you could also say Net Management Protocol Folk and Net Operators - Reality Check #2 We consider it an IETF Interim Meeting for the OPS-AREA Network Management people so that we can meet with real operators to try and understand their needs and to explain to them how we think that our NM related work in the IETF can help them to manage their networks. We probably need to have similar sessions in the future to meet with people who operate enterprise networks, because their requirements may be different. We are still working on the agenda, however below you will find a prelimenary agenda proposal. Any suggestions should be sent to Randy and Bert (bwijnen(a)lucent.com) We have limited space for this meeting. Those who plan to attend, pls send a short email to Bert Wijnen, bwijnen(a)lucent.com to let us know. Bert and Randy -------------- OPS-NM Interim Meeting details ------------------ The plan is to have this meeting immediately following the next NANOG meeting, namely NANOG 22. That means: May 20-22 NANOG 22, ends around 5pm on 22nd May 22-23 OPS-NM Interim, starts on 22nd 7pm So we plan to meet 7-10pm on 22nd 9-1pm 23rd possibly 2-4pm 23rd too. NANOG 22 and OPS-NM Interim will be in Scottsdale Arizona, USA, in the Doubltree Paradise Valley. For NANOG and hotel registration, pls visit: www.nanog.org The hotel rate ($119) for NANOG can also be used for OPS-NM, that is if you attend NANOG as well. It may not apply if you only stay for OPS-NM (note OPS-NM is not yet known at the DoubleTree as a meeting identifier), but we have heard even lower rates if NANOG is not mentioned. Prelimenary Agenda ------------------ - Agenda bashing and intro - From SNMP people - How can SNMP and MIBs help manage your network - New developments SNMPCONF and EOS - Operator experience with SNMP - how it has been and is being used - issues with SNMP - area it does not help with - From COPS people - how COPS and PIBs can help manage your network - Operator experience with COPS (if any) - From POLICY people - how policy framework and tools will help manage your network - Operator experience with POLICY (if any) - Operator requirements - what are the real hot issues to be solved this year - what are the constraints within which the tools have to work - Next steps - Wrapup/Summary

1 0

Peering Troubleshooting
by K. Graham 19 Apr '01

19 Apr '01

Just a quick quesiton. I am looking for some information as to "How to troubleshoot Peering". If anyone can point me in the right direction I would appreciate it. I have been able to find alot on what it is, how to set it up, where to set it up but nothing on how to troubleshoot it if it is down, a degraded service, or being overloaded due to a ddos. If you like contact me off list. I can make a summary of the information if it is wanted. Kim

1 0

Nokia
by Andre Fecteau 19 Apr '01

19 Apr '01

Hello, I've heard some good things about a Nokia product called the Nokia P022 Access Controller. Has anyone heard anything about this? I would like to purchase one, but I can't find a contact to purchase from? Can someone please help me out? Thank You, Andre

1 0

Re: "Cisco MPLS-based VPNs" & BGP Stability
by Danny McPherson 18 Apr '01

18 Apr '01

> Not at all. Please provide data which would prove your "clearly" > statement. Second I would say if there is any impact this is only > implementation specific impact. In other words if your bgp > implementation does not separate different address family processing, > trie maintenance, allow for independent timers etc ... you may be right > but I am not aware of any such implementation deployed anywhere so far > :). > > As a matter of fact a lot of today's mpls-vpn deployments use different > set of relflector's hardware for vpnv4 routes plus are using default > route for providing internet access for mpls-vpn customers so I don't > really see how those SPs/ISPs would impact with mpls-vpns any ipv4 bgp > Internet infrastructure or bgp stability. Total AF isolation can be also > easily achived even for inter-as mpls-vpns as well with correctly > architected design. I'm referring more to the PE impact, or any other router that participates in unicast IPv4 peering. There's still a single BGP process, a finite amount of memory and CPU resources, etc.., and impacting any of these can adversely effect IPv4 route stability. Or does the separation you refer to suggest that we have no worries with BGP and route table growth, churn frequency, et al., and that it should be left to the academics? I fully agree that if dedicated infrastructure is employed for this purpose then there will clearly be less impact. However, the whole pitch is that existing network elements can be used to offer the service, the same network elements that provide "Internet" connectivity today -- and lots of folks have drank the kool-aide -- all in hopes of generating more revenue from their existing IP infrastructure, not new dedicated or overlay ones. Then every time someone brings up a scalability or convergence or security issue with BGP/MPLS VPNs a slew of Cisco folks tell them it's targeted at private networks and different infrastructures (hence the requirement for BGP, MPLS, etc.., I guess). Rob, I know how you & your cohorts feel, I was looking for operator feedback. Feedback especially regarding the "Security" document I referenced. As well, I felt that feedback on potential impacts to the global routing stability should be of relevance to the community (versus swept under the rug). -danny (who strives to only listen to the rest of this thread)

4 4