- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Administrative Bounds
by randy＠psg.com 07 Sep '96

07 Sep '96

> Take a routing dump and look at all of the consecutive /24 with the > eact same AS path. This isn't the registry's fault. The lack of aggregation has been mentioned on NANOG recently, with folk being very quiet. When you take a look at it, it is a mess with some of the classic chest-thumpers being significant offenders. Tony, what happened to the analysis you used to post? We need it again. Badly. randy

2 1

Re: Hey, anyone who wanna help improve the net stability?
by Justin W. Newton 06 Sep '96

06 Sep '96

At 03:01 PM 9/5/96 -0500, Alan Hannan wrote: >] Of the class cs from the swamp how many are now being routed at the >] defaultless core? HOW MANY ADDITIONAL CLASS Cs FROM THE SWAMP ARE THERE >] FOR WHICH THE OWNERS COULD DEMAND ROUTING? > > Lots. Uhm, I dunno that people can really /demand/ routing. Ask for it, expect it or pray for it yes, but there is no reason that ISP X won't come up with a policy tomorrow saying we have a policy saying that we won't route any addresses that come from Justin. Justin Newton Internet Architect Erol's Internet Services

2 1

Re: customers and web servers and level one naps
by dgaudet＠hotwired.com 06 Sep '96

06 Sep '96

In article <hot.mailing-lists.nanog-199609051951.PAA08990(a)netaxs.com>, Avi Freedman <freedman(a)netaxs.com> wrote: >The bigger problem (the one I was thinking about) would be someone putting >a host on 192.41.177.x or 192.157.69.x or 198.32.136.x or ... With something like cisco's Local Director you could quite easily serve a whole web farm out of a single IP. Well, at least when HTTP/1.1 style Host: or full-url GET type requests become more prevalent, otherwise you'd be stuck with a single virtual host. Technically it's a router :) Dean

1 0

Film at eleven
by Paul Ferguson 06 Sep '96

06 Sep '96

An 'interesting' article entitled: Is the Internet doomed? Massive increases in traffic have triggered debates about the 'Net's fate is worth a gander: http://cnnfn.com/digitaljam/9609/05/internet_crash_pkg/index.htm - paul

6 5

Re: Film at eleven
by Paul Ferguson 06 Sep '96

06 Sep '96

At 05:16 PM 9/6/96 -0700, Matthew Petach wrote: > >I guess you've just got to laugh at cases like these, because if >you don't, you'll end up quitting, and taking off for the next >unbesmirched horizon... > Yes, you definately need a sense of humor to be in this business. ;-) - paul

1 0

Re: mae-west fddi saturation
by owen＠DeLong.SJ.CA.US 06 Sep '96

06 Sep '96

> I'd use the mae-west list for this, but several people have said that they're > not getting messages on that list. > > This graph: http://www.mfst.com/MAE/west.mfs.overlay.html > is showing what appears to be hard saturation. But it is at way below > what I thought the saturation speed of FDDI is. Has anyone gotten a > good answer as to what is broken there? > > -matthew kaufman > matthew(a)scruz.net > > I haven't gotten a good answer, but we have tickets: 14237 and Master Ticket 13446 Owen

1 0

Re: Hey, anyone who wanna help improve the net stability?
by Erik-Jan Bos 06 Sep '96

06 Sep '96

Avi, > It's not necessarily unaggregated... > > I'm not sure, it's possible that Sean might have described the swamp as > basically space above the a/b space and < 205/8. At the Los Angeles IETF I tried to define the terms "Swamp" and "Toxic Waste Dump" as follows: * The Swamp is the 192.0.0.0/8 addres space that is routed. * Each and every /24 in the Swamp is part of the Toxic Waste Dump (twd). > > Of the class cs from the swamp how many are now being routed at the > > defaultless core? HOW MANY ADDITIONAL CLASS Cs FROM THE SWAMP ARE THERE > > No clue, but we could find out. You might not like/agree/understand the above definitions, but... given the above definitions the current sizes are: Size(swamp) = 6549 Size(twd) = 5555 This data is taken from a default free router that lives in Amsterdam, The Netherlands which has 40590 prefixes at this moment. FYI. __ Erik-Jan.

4 3

RE: Hey, anyone who wanna help improve the net stability?
by Peter Ford 06 Sep '96

06 Sep '96

It seems the problem is number of flaps, etc. Doesn't it make sense to simply start dropping the routes that flap the most? Of course this will be biased in the /24 space but at least the rationale/solution maps identically to a solid reason. To what extent is this flapping due to basically static information being propogated? One solution would be to nail these routes ... Cheers, peter ----------

3 2

mae-west fddi saturation
by matthew＠scruz.net 05 Sep '96

05 Sep '96

I'd use the mae-west list for this, but several people have said that they're not getting messages on that list. This graph: http://www.mfst.com/MAE/west.mfs.overlay.html is showing what appears to be hard saturation. But it is at way below what I thought the saturation speed of FDDI is. Has anyone gotten a good answer as to what is broken there? -matthew kaufman matthew(a)scruz.net

1 0

Re: customers and web servers and level one naps
by Peter Lothberg 05 Sep '96

05 Sep '96

[...snip] > brought there by the customer. therefor should it really make any > difference to have the web traffic avoid the extra hops of > traversing the local loop? The local loop could be dark fiber running FDDI or OC3 packet-over-sonet, in the latter case the NAP is the bottleneck, not the local_loop. > what am I missing? Hummm.. Tempting... --Peter

1 0