- Test - lists.nanog.org

Film at eleven
by Paul Ferguson 07 Sep '96

07 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 07 Sep '96

07 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 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

1 0

Re: customers and web servers and level one naps
by Peter Lothberg 06 Sep '96

06 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

Re: customers and web servers and level one naps
by Peter Lothberg 06 Sep '96

06 Sep '96

> Is PAIX a "major" exchange Gordon? What is the PAIX? (I have hosts behind a router at the exchange in my bathroom) --Peter

5 5

Re: customers and web servers and level one naps
by Peter Lothberg 06 Sep '96

06 Sep '96

> Second: allowing such a customer, or an NSP, to attach web services > directly to the FDDI ring at the NAP. This is a security problem, if there is no switch in the middle and each host are induvidually attached to the switch. Next problem is that a host needs to knew what router to send a packet to for a particular destination, so either it points default at one of the NAP routers, and packets traverse the NAP twice, or the host impleements BGP and has a full set of routes. So host at a the NAP media should be 'strongly not recomended'. An interesting scenario is, a router with two FDDI interfaces, one to the host and one to the NAP. It now comes down to if it's worth the real_estate to have the host there. --Peter

2 1

RE: Hey, anyone who wanna help improve the net stability?
by Jim Fleming 05 Sep '96

05 Sep '96

On Thursday, September 05, 1996 9:52 AM, bmanning(a)isi.edu 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? @ > @ > In other words are these 5,000 new class c's just the beginning? Or are @ > they, hopefully the end? @ @ Lets see, what the BOE math tell us... @ @ 24,000 entries now, @ 192.0.0.0/8 is ~2million. @ @ ~2mil - 24,000 = current router death. @ @ -- @ --bill @ @ Is now when we say..."we told you so..."....??? You are seeing the great allocation policies and procedures at work... fortunately, there will be other address spaces and the IPv4 space can be wrapped up as one TWD... -- Jim Fleming UNETY Systems, Inc. Naperville, IL e-mail: JimFleming(a)unety.net

2 1