Hey all
A friend just told me that Cybernet told him there is a Switzerlandwide Internet Problem.
Does anybody know something?
Cheers
Michele
--------
Online Consulting AG, Michele Capobianco, System Administrator, Weststrasse 38, CH-9500 Wil
Phone +41 (0)71 913 31 31, Fax +41 (0)71 913 31 32
http://www.online.ch, michele.capobianco(a)online.ch<mailto:michele.capobianco@online.ch>
--------
Heya Swinog
We have business customers with an own mailservers asking us to provide a
backup MX for their mailserver.
Usualy we deny such request, because such a backup MX would bounce all spam
which cannot be relayed, and anyway, the sending server usualy queues the
email usualy about the same amount of time a backup mx would queue it. So we
see not advantage, but a big disatvantage.
Now some of our customers complain that 'all other ISP' offers such services.
So I wanted to know your opinions:
- Why would business customers _need_ their ISP to operate a backup MX for
them?
- Why can you avoid the disatvantage to generate a shitload of bounces when
operating ab backup MX?
- Is it true, that most ISP offer this kind of service?
Mit freundlichen Grüssen
Benoit Panizzon
--
I m p r o W a r e A G -
______________________________________________________
Zurlindenstrasse 29 Tel +41 61 826 93 07
CH-4133 Pratteln Fax +41 61 826 93 02
Schweiz Web http://www.imp.ch
______________________________________________________
hi everybody
i'm pleased to announce together with Nicole the SwiNOG-BE111 @ the
Angelsfood lounge - we will put the fire on and create a wonderful
barbequeue for you!
the deal is: CHF 40.- is fixed for all the food and drinks are paid
separately. Nicole will heat up her wonderful smokers BBQ gril :)
here's the announcement for the next beer event:
the facts for the next event:
-----------------------------
Date: 2nd of July 2012
Time: starting around 18.30 o'clock
Location: @ the "angelfood: creative cuisine"
(Forchstrasse 424, 8702 Zollikon; Tram 11 or Forchbahn until
Rehalp)
http://www.angelsfood.ch
Registration deadline: 01.07.2012 00:00:00
Registration URL: http://swinog.mrmouse.ch/
-----------------------------
since we have to make reservations, i need to know who's coming and who not.
If you cannot attend and you're registered please inform me asap (+41 79 277
92 35).
greetings
-steven & nicole
FYI. May be of interest to some of the operators in Switzerland.
Regards,
Thomas
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [MBONED] PIM survey for operators
Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 10:39:58 -1000 (HST)
Resent-From: Antonio Querubin <tony(a)lavanauts.org>
Resent-To: nanog(a)nanog.org
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:21:41 -0700
From: Stig Venaas <stig(a)venaas.com>
To: MBONED WG <mboned(a)ietf.org>
The IETF pim working group is conducting a survey in order to advance
the PIM Sparse Mode spec on the IETF Standards Track, and would like
input from operators. The survey ends July 20th. Please see below for
more information.
thank you,
pim chairs Mike & Stig
Introduction:
PIM-SM was first published as RFC 2117 in 1997 and then again as
RFC 2362 in 1998. The protocol was classified as Experimental in
both of these documents. The PIM-SM protocol specification was
then rewritten in whole and advanced to Proposed Standard as
RFC 4601 in 2006. Considering the multiple independent
implementations developed and the successful operational
experience gained, the IETF has decided to advance the PIM-SM
routing protocol to Draft Standard. This survey intends to
provide supporting documentation to advance the Protocol
Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM) routing protocol
from IETF Proposed Standard to Draft Standard. (Due to RFC 6410,
now the intention is to progress it to Internet Standard. Draft Standard
is no longer used.)
This survey is issued on behalf of the IETF PIM Working Group.
The responses will be collected by a neutral third-party and kept
strictly confidential; only the final combined results will be
published. Marshall Eubanks has agreed to anonymize the response
to this Questionnaire. Marshall has a long experience with
Multicast but has no direct financial interest in this matter,
nor ties to any of the vendors involved. He is also a member of
the IAOC, Chair of the IETF Trust and co-chair of the IETF
Layer 3 VPN Working Group. Please send Questionnaire responses
to his email address, marshall.eubanks(a)gmail.com. He requests
that such responses include the string "RFC 4601 bis Questionnaire" in
the subject field.
Before answering the questions, please comple the following background
information.
Name of the Respondent:
Affliation/Organization:
Contact Email:
Provide description of PIM deployment:
Do you wish to keep the information provided confidential:
Questions:
1 Have you deployed PIM-SM in your network?
2 How long have you had PIM-SM deployed in your network?
Do you know if your deployment is based on the most recent
RFC4601?
3 Have you deployed PIM-SM for IPv6 in your network?
4 Are you using equipment with different (multi-vendor) PIM-SM
implementations for your deployment?
5 Have you encountered any inter-operability or backward-
compatibility issues amongst differing implementations?
If yes, what are your concerns about these issues?
6 Have you deployed both dense mode and sparse mode in your
network?
If yes, do you route between these modes using features such
as *,*,RP or PMBR?
7 To what extent have you deployed PIM functionality, like BSR,
SSM, and Explicit Tracking?
8 Which RP mapping mechanism do you use: Static, AutoRP, or BSR?
9 How many RPs have you deployed in your network?
10 If you use Anycast-RP, is it Anycast-RP using MSDP (RFC 3446)
or Anycast-RP using PIM (RFC 4610)?
11 Do you have any other comments on PIM-SM deployment in your
network?
_______________________________________________
MBONED mailing list
MBONED(a)ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned
hi,
I'm organizing an open, English-spoken, workshop on the topics of VoIP service redundancy:
htto://trrtrr.net
If you're interested to join, please vote in Doodle:
http://doodle.com/gvmswcx5nridzidf
cheers,
stan
Sehr geehrte Swinog-Community
Wir bieten folgende Hardware zum Kauf an:
HP Blade:
- 2x Cisco GESM HP Blade System
- 3x HP BL20p G3
- 2x HP BL25p
- 2x HP BL20p G
48V power supply
- SP-320-48
48V power supply
- SP-320-48
ZyXEL DLSAM:
IES-2000:
- MSC1000A
- SLC1224-22 (shdsl line card)
ZyXEL DLSAM:
IES-2000:
- MSC1000A
- SLC1224-22 (shdsl line card)
- ALC1224-71 (adsl line card)
Bilder werden gerne auf anfrage zugestellt.
Bei Interesse melden Sie sich bitte per Mail an folgende Adresse:
verkauf(a)gmail.li
Freundliche Grüsse
Hi list
Is anyone of you using Gerty (https://github.com/ssinyagin/gerty) instead of
Rancid for doing network gear config backup? If yes, is it worth a try?
And for doing mass-config-updates on many switches, is it also usable?
Thanks for every input =)
Cheers,
Tobias
--
Nine Internet Solutions AG, Albisriederstr. 243a, CH-8047 Zuerich
Support +41 44 637 40 40 | Tel +41 44 637 40 00 | Direct +41 44 637 40 13
Skype nine.ch_support
Hi Swinogers,
I'm currently thinking about deploying a Sheevaplug or similar with mosh (http://mosh.mit.edu) as a login jumphost since I am several hours in mobile mode every day and I need a space outside of my network to host a *jump host*
please contact me offlist and offer me housing for something like that: http://www.plugcomputer.eu/
All I am taking up is some bandwith (expected bandwith in average probably 1mbit max, half of it for keepalives for outbound vpn tunnels,
Power consumption apparently less than 10watts.
Need v6 and v4 connection, 1 IP each, public, not firewalled, 1 Plug in the power strip
Since this is a rather non-standard thing I'm looking for, but I need it in a datacenter outside my infrastructure, I thought it's best to ask here.
Btw, for anyone experienced already or looking into mosh, looking forward for exchange here
Good Evening!
Silvan