October 2011 - mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Re: MICE Akamai Issues

by Jay Hanke

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)mnvoip.com> wrote: > ** > Do you need me to go to 511 today to assist? > Thanks for the offer. We've exceeded the allotment of cache flow bandwidth. We're working with Akamai on solutions. jay ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 25, 2011

Re: MICE Akamai Issues

by Jeremy Lumby

Do you need me to go to 511 today to assist? From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Jay Hanke Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 8:32 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Akamai Issues The MICE Akamai cluster is currently running at reduced capacity. Jay To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 25, 2011

MICE Akamai Issues

by Jay Hanke

The MICE Akamai cluster is currently running at reduced capacity. Jay ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 25, 2011

Re: Participants List Web Page

by Richard Laager

I've attached an updated version of the participants page. This builds on my previous submission by adding peering contacts for all networks. Can someone with access to the website post this? Thanks, Richard ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 21, 2011

Akamai (20940) Live at MICE. Peering anyone?

by Hannigan, Martin

Dear North Star Staters (and others), Akamai is pleased to announce that we are live and in production on the MICE. We very much appreciate being part of the growing fabric of Minnesota's internet! It's ironic that as I write this email I am in the great State of Maine, the home of the finest Blueberry in the world and that Minnesota's state muffin is, of course, Blueberry! :-) We are available for peering both multilaterally (route servers) and bilaterally (directly). For peering requests, peering issues and other questions related to peering with AKAMAI at the MICE: Peering policies, technical and contact information: http://as20940.peeringdb.com Warmest Regards, Martin Hannigan\Akamai AS20940 ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 21, 2011

Re: mailing list errors

by Mike Horwath

TL;DR So vote, and quickly. keep Reply-To in place so that messages, by default, go back to the list for the conversations hampering easy (r)eply to author tiny (and private) conversations ignore Reply-To and let a bunch of tiny (and private) conversations occur and consider that users use a (g)roup-reply mechanism in their mail programs to keep public conversations going I'll watch what I receive and make a final decision later today or tomorrow. My diatribe: I find references to Mailman people talking about this, the URL you mentioned and a few others. (more than a few, the debate has been going on for a very long time) I am on the side of option #1 to keep conversations by default public and list-bound (ie; using the Reply-To header). I also consider the Reply-To header a perfect mechanism for getting this done as this is a *discussion* list, not an announcement list and keeping conversations within the list unless explicitly decided by the end user. More searching around this morning finds this: Mailman uses the List-Post header (described in RFC2369) in some of the mailing lists I am on but not all, and I am finding during my 90+ minutes of testing this morning that most MUAs don't honor this regardless of what the RFC says. FreeBSD mailing lists are Mailman and use the Reply-To header but not consistently across the board. All three anti-spam lists I am on use the Reply-To header and a mix of Mailman vs home-grown list software. Multiple Mailman lists I am on are using Reply-To for announcement and discussion lists. Discussion lists are running ~20% Reply-To included, the other 80% are not. Multiple LISTSERV lists I am on are using Reply-To for announcement and discussion lists. Discussion lists are running ~70% Reply-To included, the other 30% are not. BTW: RFC2822 is a proposed item and has not reached the final standard level. But that's the problem with RFCs isn't it? -- Mike Horwath ipHouse - Welcome home! drechsau(a)iphouse.net The universe is an island, surrounded by whatever it is that surrounds universes. - Berkeley Fortune ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 20, 2011

Re: mailing list errors

by Andrew Hoyos

On Oct 20, 2011, at 10:34 AM, Mike Horwath wrote: > You are being overly draconian in your filter; this is not the fault of the mailing list software by any means. > > It is completely RFC and BCP compliant. Actually, if you read RFC2822, it indicates: "When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it indicates the mailbox(es) to which the author of the message suggests that replies be sent." As the link Richard sent describes, the list software is not the "author" of the message. The sender of the message should be the only one setting the Reply-To header. > Fix your filters which must cause other mailing lists because of the same issue. Looking at a sampling of other lists that I'm subscribed to, none of them have this behavior. (including NANOG, c-nsp, j-nsp, arin-ppml, etc). -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 20, 2011

Re: mailing list errors

by Mike Horwath

This is LISTSERV, software that has been running since the 1980s. You are being overly draconian in your filter; this is not the fault of the mailing list software by any means. It is completely RFC and BCP compliant. If you are bouncing email you sent which is being resent from LISTSERV, then take one of two choices: Fix your filters which must cause other mailing lists because of the same issue. Go to the list site, then turn off sending of your own messages back to you. -- Mike Horwath via iPad 2, electric boogaloo! ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 20, 2011

Re: Multicast Traffic / 00:04:96:37:14:c3 -> 224.0.0.1

by Matthew Beckwell

Multicast is fine…just keep it off my port :) From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Steve Howard Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 9:42 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Multicast Traffic / 00:04:96:37:14:c3 -> 224.0.0.1 Is multicast a bad thing at the exchange? Is there some reason that we want to avoid it? On 10/19/2011 11:22 PM, Matthew Beckwell wrote: Could I convince the owner of an Extreme Networks device with license plate: 00:04:96:37:14:c3 to disable cause of the multicast traffic that seems to be directed at the exchange every 2 minutes? :) No. Time Source Destination Protocol Length Info 1 0.000000 69.147.218.100 224.0.0.1 IGMP 60 V2 Membership Query, general Frame 1: 60 bytes on wire (480 bits), 60 bytes captured (480 bits) Ethernet II, Src: ExtremeN_37:14:c3 (00:04:96:37:14:c3), Dst: IPv4mcast_00:00:01 (01:00:5e:00:00:01) Internet Protocol Version 4, Src: 69.147.218.100 (69.147.218.100), Dst: 224.0.0.1 (224.0.0.1) Internet Group Management Protocol -- Matthew Beckwell - Senior Network and Application Engineer Advanced Integrated Technologies Office: 952-829-5511 x204 matthewb(a)aitech.net<mailto:matthewb@aitech.net> ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 20, 2011

Re: Multicast Traffic / 00:04:96:37:14:c3 -> 224.0.0.1

by Steve Howard

Is multicast a bad thing at the exchange? Is there some reason that we want to avoid it? On 10/19/2011 11:22 PM, Matthew Beckwell wrote: > Could I convince the owner of an Extreme Networks device with license > plate: 00:04:96:37:14:c3 > to disable cause of the multicast traffic that seems to be directed at > the exchange every 2 minutes? :) > > > > No. Time Source Destination > Protocol Length Info > 1 0.000000 69.147.218.100 224.0.0.1 IGMP > 60 V2 Membership Query, general > > Frame 1: 60 bytes on wire (480 bits), 60 bytes captured (480 bits) > Ethernet II, Src: ExtremeN_37:14:c3 (00:04:96:37:14:c3), Dst: > IPv4mcast_00:00:01 (01:00:5e:00:00:01) > Internet Protocol Version 4, Src: 69.147.218.100 (69.147.218.100), > Dst: 224.0.0.1 (224.0.0.1) > Internet Group Management Protocol > > > -- > Matthew Beckwell - Senior Network and Application Engineer > Advanced Integrated Technologies > Office: 952-829-5511 x204 > matthewb(a)aitech.net <mailto:matthewb@aitech.net> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > <http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1> > ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 20, 2011