- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Internet vs. Telephone company
by William Allen Simpson 04 Feb '97

04 Feb '97

> From: "Paul J. Zawada" <zawada(a)ncsa.uiuc.edu> > There are lots folks in the phone company who have no clue as to how the > Internet works. This is why none of them saw this Internet access thing > coming. (Not that I'm sure they could have done anything about it...) > They now have a network that is underengineered for the way it's being used > and they have to do something about it quick... The only means they know > of is to raise the price. > It's much worse than that. As some folks know, I'm part owner (I provided the hardware out of my spare equipment) of a very small ISP serving northern Mississippi. I don't live in northern Mississippi. There was no Internet service there from anybody else 3 years ago, and the only way we could afford to bring down a line from Chicago to a client was put up modems to share the cost with other local subscribers. Well, we have hundreds of subscribers now (I had no idea there were so many folks scattered about in such a rural area, we get a hundred more each month), and have been paying many thousand $ a year for the lines. You think that in 3 years Bell South might have noticed the need for more infrastructure? Particularly since they highlighted us in their monthly newsletter a year or so back? And that those $ would have been used for upgrading equipment? Well, no. They are still using a _mechanical_ switch, and have no plans to upgrade. They do not have enough lines into the business district for us to add 8 more modems to the pool (it was taking weeks to get existing lines turned on anyway). They refuse to let us co-locate in the CO (they cannot find an official policy, and thus cannot allow it). Giving them more money will not help the problem. And if any of you know someone to talk to in Atlanta to bypass the locals, I'd sure like to know. Thanks in advance! WSimpson(a)UMich.edu Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32 BSimpson(a)MorningStar.com Key fingerprint = 2E 07 23 03 C5 62 70 D3 59 B1 4F 5E 1D C2 C1 A2

2 1

Great airfare ...
by Noam Freedman 03 Feb '97

03 Feb '97

Just a side note for those procrastinators flying from Chicago (like me). United has a special weekend fare for this weekend. Leave Saturday from Ohare, and return on Monday or Tuesday. Fare is $201 round trip. I believe a 3-day advance is required, but I would suggest running to your favorite travel agent like I did. I believe they have a ~$300 fare from Philadelphia leaving on Friday and returning Monday or Tuesday. - Noam

1 0

RE: Internet vs. Telephone company
by Kent W. England 03 Feb '97

03 Feb '97

At 05:28 PM 31-01-97 -0800, Bharat Ranjan wrote: > >Check out a product called 'Internet Thruway" that routes a call based >on the Called Number. The idea is for telcos to implement this product >as a back-end to their access network so calls being made to a Thruway >provider never reach the voice network. It is instead sent (via IP and >L2F) directly to the ISP's network. SBC is already committed to >deploying this in parts of Texas. > It's a partial solution and expensive to implement. The data calls still have to go through at least the first voice switch. But it would be nice to receive packets rather than switched circuits and avoid the cost of building so many dial POPs, if the price is right. --Kent ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~ Kent W. England Six Sigma Networks 1655 Landquist Drive, Suite 100 Voice/Fax: 619.632.8400 Encinitas, CA 92024 kwe(a)6SigmaNets.com Technical Expertise for PacBell NAP and PacBell Internet Services

4 3

Advice and Directions to Grand Hyatt
by Kent W. England 03 Feb '97

03 Feb '97

At 08:28 PM 02-02-97 -0500, Paul Ferguson wrote: >For those like myself who found the directions to the NANOG >meeting at the San Francisco Grand Hyatt less than satisfactory >(like, take the shuttle) I found satisfactory information by >going to Map Quest [http://www.mapquest.com] > >ObSuggestion: It might also be a good idea to actually make >directions available. > >- paul > > > Let me try. I know I like to cut and paste driving directions from email into my Pilot. [Wish it had a backlight. :-) ] First, if you are flying in, I strongly recommend that you take the shuttle to the hotel and avoid renting a car. If you need to rent a car for a day, there are many car rental locations near the hotel. I often use Budget on Mason St, for example. There are a lot of attractions within walking distance of the hotel. Fisherman's Wharf is a bit of a hike, but you can try to take a cable car. A cab would cost about $6-7 from the hotel to Fisherman's Wharf. Chinatown is within easy walking distance, but I don't recommend the food. Plenty of good food downtown. Second, don't forget Oakland airport. There are shuttles from Oakland airport into the city, so Oakland is a good alternative depending on where you are coming from. Third, driving directions from the Penninsula downtown: Paul, take 101N past the San Francisco International airport. You have the choice of taking 101N to I-80 or you can take 280. If you take 101N to I-80, take the last exit before the Bay Bridge (Fourth St.) You will find yourself heading east toward the Bay on Bryant St. Stay to the left and turn left on Third. Follow Third north across Market St. about six blocks. (Market St is hard to cross, so if you find yourself on Market unable to turn left (north) toward downtown, just follow it down to the bay and go back up California, for example.) If you stayed on Third, you cross Market and find yourself on Kearny St. Go two blocks (north) to Sutter. Turn left on Sutter and go two blocks to Stockton. Turn left on Stockton and the hotel is the first building on your right. The hotel has valet parking, but no self parking lot. There are lots in the area. Grand Hyatt 345 Stockton St at Union Square --Kent ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~ Kent W. England Six Sigma Networks 1655 Landquist Drive, Suite 100 Voice/Fax: 619.632.8400 Encinitas, CA 92024 kwe(a)6SigmaNets.com Technical Expertise for PacBell NAP and PacBell Internet Services

1 0

Re: Alpha test of MAE filtering capability
by Kent W. England 03 Feb '97

03 Feb '97

At 08:14 PM 30-01-97 -0600, Sean Donelan wrote: >>But any reasonable ISP realizes that by using the RADB servers is wonderful, >>but does not come close to preventing an: >>ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 <innocent ISP> > >Nor can the route servers tell when someone/something blocks packets >down at the layer 2 level. Since the route servers are now being paid >by the exchange point operators, maybe there is a chance the two could >be coordinated. Or at least checked for conflicts? > >-- >Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO > Affiliation given for identification not representation > > That is already an issue at the ATM NAPs, since traffic can't flow until PVCs are set-up between consenting peers. And we have had some problems in this area. So I think the answer is "Yes". --Kent ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~ Kent W. England Six Sigma Networks 1655 Landquist Drive, Suite 100 Voice/Fax: 619.632.8400 Encinitas, CA 92024 kwe(a)6SigmaNets.com Technical Expertise for PacBell NAP and PacBell Internet Services

1 0

Directions to Grand Hyatt (?) [administrivia]
by Paul Ferguson 03 Feb '97

03 Feb '97

For those like myself who found the directions to the NANOG meeting at the San Francisco Grand Hyatt less than satisfactory (like, take the shuttle) I found satisfactory information by going to Map Quest [http://www.mapquest.com] ObSuggestion: It might also be a good idea to actually make directions available. - paul

2 1

Mailing list archive
by Eric Germann 02 Feb '97

02 Feb '97

Along the lines of the NANOG Search engine for meeting notes, the NANOG mailing list since the beginning of time, has been converted to HTML and indexed nightly at http://www.cctec.com/maillists/nanog/index.html Enjoy

1 0

Alpha test of MAE filtering capability
by Steve Feldman 02 Feb '97

02 Feb '97

In response to requests from several customers for a filtering solution at MAE EAST and MAE WEST, MFS WorldCom is developing an automated system to enable ISPs to control traffic destined for their own routers and networks. ISPs using this service will be able to specify, by IP address, which MAE-attached routers they wish to accept or block traffic from. On Monday, February 17th, MFS WorldCom will begin live alpha trials of this capability at MAE WEST with a small set of providers who have agreed to help us test this service option. We expect to extend the trial to MAE EAST shortly after and will notify you of the exact date. This means participating ISPs can begin filtering traffic to their routers at their discretion once the alpha period has started. Assuming the trial proceeds as expected, MFS WorldCom plans to introduce filtering as a new service option later in 1997. Please contact mae-info(a)mfst.com if you have any questions or concerns about the MAE filtering service. Steve Feldman

2 1

RE: Internet vs. Telephone company
by Paul J. Zawada 02 Feb '97

02 Feb '97

The Internet Thruway, IMHO, is the first serious attempt at getting to the root problem. I don't know much about Nortel's product, but I do know that using the PSTN seems to be the wrong way to get Internet service. Why on earth do you want to use a circuit-switched network to access a packet switched network? That's nuts, but unfortunately it's the only option Joe Consumer has. Cable modems? They'll be great when your cable company's plant will work birectionally and they get their data act together. I was amused by a letter to the editor in this week's _Fortune_ magazine. The writer proudly proclaimed that Internet access over cable worked wonderfully. He went on about how "..on the appointed day, at the appointed time, two cable installers, three Comcast personnel, and two CompUSA personnel arrived and successfully installed my cable modem in two hours..." Good God, if it takes 14 person-hours to install a cable modem, the cable companies are going to lose their shirts! (I'd like to know if this crew was even able to all show up in the same vehicle! :-) As for ADSL, I have serious doubts as to whether or not the phone campanies understand what to do with the technology. After they get xDSL local loops to everyone's home, will they know what to hook them up to? I've heard a lot about ADSL trials, but what are these loops being connected to? Does the solution scale? There are lots folks in the phone company who have no clue as to how the Internet works. This is why none of them saw this Internet access thing coming. (Not that I'm sure they could have done anything about it...) They now have a network that is underengineered for the way it's being used and they have to do something about it quick... The only means they know of is to raise the price. The Internet Thruway product has potential to help solve their problems, but I'm afraid that it may flop because it'll require too much cooperation between the telcos and the ISPs. After all, the telco nework was just fine until all of these ISPs showed up and screwed it up. You can be damn sure that most of the telco folks don't see it as thier problem to pay to solve this congestion in their network. Many still feel it's the telcos' God-given right to make a profit every quarter, regardless of how poorly they project future customer demand. I'm afraid that they're going to see Internet Thruway as an opportunity to charge ISPs for the privledge of helping to relieve the congestion in the PSTN... It all comes down to paying for more facilities, whether it's Internet Thruway, bigger switches and more trunks, or a parallel (ADSL-based perhaps) packet-switched network. The telcos won't make ubiquitous Internet connectivity happen for free. For that matter, nor would the ISPs if they were in the telcos' position... The fundamental problem is that until now, Internet users have been able to take advantage of "slack" resources in the PSTN at little or no additional cost. Now that these resources are drying up, no one (users, ISPs, telcos) wants to foot the bill for more. --zawada At 05:28 PM 1/31/97 -0800, Bharat Ranjan wrote: > >> My question is: Have other people heard of similar attempts by the >> telephone companies to have "metered Internet access"? >> It seems they would need a hardware level signal analyzer on their >> switching equipment to differentiate between voice/data. >>Does anyone know by what means such a technology could be implemented? > >Check out a product called 'Internet Thruway" that routes a call based >on the Called Number. The idea is for telcos to implement this product >as a back-end to their access network so calls being made to a Thruway >provider never reach the voice network. It is instead sent (via IP and >L2F) directly to the ISP's network. SBC is already committed to >deploying this in parts of Texas. Paul J. Zawada, RCDD | Senior Network Engineer zawada(a)ncsa.uiuc.edu | National Center for Supercomputing Applications +1 217 244 4728 | http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/People/zawada

2 1

Re: Internet vs. Telephone company
by Stephen Sprunk 02 Feb '97

02 Feb '97

>I think we're missing the point. They aren't just going to charge >hourly for data service, but for all service. > >It really wasn't that long ago they were doing this (US West >stopped in the late 70's or early 80's > >All they are going to need to do is notify customers and turn the >old billing procedures back on, they already track hourly usage >anyway. The Public Utility Commissions will have to approve it, which (in many areas at least) will never happen. Even if it did get approved, with local telco competition opening up now, there will undoubtedly always be some provider willing to offer unlimited access, regardless of what the Bells try. >>Tony Torzillo Stephen Sprunk

1 0