North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
FTC DNCR issues - Thank you ALL!!
- From: Callahan, Richard M, SOLGV
- Date: Sun Jun 29 08:22:04 2003
Perhaps along with soliciting advice from this community I would have
been better served to go right to Sister Mary Grace and asked for
assistance from a higher authority than even NANOG. God was clearly NOT
smiling on us this weekend!! But on the other hand He has deservedly
had a few issues with me:-)
I believe we are now operating in a stable mode and the application is
handling things as it was designed to. We will now be able to focus on
the tweaking, adjusting and changes typical of the first few days of a
launch of this size and scope.
Emails are now flowing and queues are almost gone. I am told we are now
compliant with at least major protocol and standards. The reverse DNS
issues was a side effect of our hardware problem, and is now working
1) If anyone has comment, suggestions or does still think we are
operating amateurishly, please let me know!! I actually may have time
to get these issues addressed now.
2) I know we were blocked by many ISPs for varying lengths of time due
to mostly to our lack of rDNS. I think we have lost these emails as
they were likely accepted
I am told we stopped sending permanent cookies Saturday afternoon. This
Webtrends and our requirements to report statistics. I am told session
cookies are still going to be necessary
3) Is this acceptable to the community?
We have identified some browser issues, particularly some older versions
4) Any issues being seen out there, we would love to ID and address.
It was great to find the NANOG community and even though I am
(obviously) not a techie (only one of those lowlife sales people that
get folks like you in trouble all the time), I will be hanging around on
the periphery and continue my education through this new resource. You
have all been helpful and I offer my sincere appreciation.
From: Mary Grace [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2003 1:03 AM
Subject: Newbie network upgrade question, apologies in advance to NANOG
This message was posted originally on the isp-bgp list, and I was told
it should have been posted on one of the network operator lists or a
list if I really wanted advice on Cisco equipment from veteran network
operators who have used this equipment extensively in the past for this
application. Please, forgive me if this is not appropriate, but I hope
that you will consider it appropriate and not flame me for my ignorance
Thank you most graciously for the incredible knowledge that God has
you, and to everyone that has responded so generously to this message
we posted this past week, regarding routers for T3 circuits!
I am thankful to you all for sharing your knowledge in response to such
newbie question that I was almost ashamed to ask of you.
Since the last email, Mother Superior has talked to our generous
contributor from the company who is a T3 circuit provider, and explained
this list's advice regarding how it was such a "mismatch between a T3 in
one port and a T1 in the other" and how BGP isn't really designed to
perform well in a multi-homed situation with such a large difference in
bandwidth between the two ports.
Thanks to your advice, and the wisdom of our MS, the provider has agreed
donate to our small teaching seminary and convent TWO DS3/T3 45 Mb/s
point-to-point HDLC circuits, homed into two different exchange points
two different major cities (NAPs).
So, is it still true that we do not need anything more powerful than a
or 4700 to run this system? I believe that is true if we take default
routes advertised by the upstream on both sides, and the two
circuits ARE being advertised out of the same upstream AS, but is it
true if we were nuts enough to want to take full routes anyway from this
same provider? And why would we even want to take full routes? It is
that, despite the gracious gift of the two DS3 circuits, we don't have
money to buy a router and so we want to find our what Cisco part numbers
are needed for whichever model will support two DS3/T3 and one or two
100base ethernet connections into our internal IP space.
Thanks again, and may God bless you all in many rich ways :-)
Your most thankful and humble servant before God,
At 03:45 PM 6/24/03 -0700, Mike wrote:
>Yeah, but 3600's are at least 3-4x more expensive than a 4500 or 4700.
>On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Brian Thoman wrote:
>:| Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 10:48:26 -0400
>:| From: Brian Thoman <email@example.com>
>:| Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
>:| To: email@example.com
>:| Subject: [isp-bgp] Re: Newbie Cisco upgrade question,
>:| apologies in advance:-)
>:| Wouldn't a 3640 or 3660 off of eBay do the same trick? We ran two
>DS3's off a 3640 for a while with maxed out RAM. It worked for us.
>:| ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
>:| From: Mike <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>:| Reply-To: email@example.com
>:| Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 00:18:40 -0700 (PDT)
>:| >If you're looking for really inexpensive, and don't need full
>:| >a 4500/4700 and put a HSSI card in it. With an external CSU, and
>:| >you could probably get the whole package for $600-750 on ebay.
>:| >Otherwise, I would suggest looking at a 7100 series (7120 or 7140)
>:| >built in DS-3 port (or two). Those can be had for dirt cheap on
>:| >have all the processing power of a comparable 7200, but they're a
>:| >smaller form factor and don't have as many port adapter slots
>:| >doesn't sound like you need, anyhow).
>:| >On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, E.B. Dreger wrote:
>:| >:| Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 21:54:12 +0000 (GMT)
>:| >:| From: E.B. Dreger <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>:| >:| Reply-To: email@example.com
>:| >:| To: firstname.lastname@example.org
>:| >:| Subject: [isp-bgp] Re: Newbie Cisco upgrade question,
>:| >:| apologies in advance :-)
>:| >:| MG> Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 20:43:03 -0400
>:| >:| MG> From: Mary Grace
>:| >:| MG> Our tiny little non-profit religious network has been using
>pair of T1
>:| >:| MG> lines running BGP4 for multihoming to two diverse-path
>upstream ASNs for
>:| >:| MG> many years now. We have our own portable IP address space
>:| >:| MG> course), and have just decided to install our first DS3,
>because a new
>:| >:| I think that's the first "tiny little non-profit religious
>:| >:| network" I've ever heard of that had/needed that kind of
>:| >:| bandwidth. You could run a moderate ISP using that...
>:| >:| MG> upstream is offerring us $30 per month per meg port for a
>:| >:| MG> HDLC-encapsulated point-to-point DS3 (yippee!).
>:| >:| MG>
>:| >:| MG> Our quandary is where to go to ask people with lots of clue
>:| >:| MG> tell us what the least expensive Cisco router we must buy to
>:| >:| MG> tired little 2600 series we currently have. The router,
>need not be
>:| >:| MG> as race-car fast as a 7206VXR NPE400, should be able to take
>:| >:| Do you really need full tables? For what you're doing, I doubt
>:| >:| it. If there is some weird reason why you do, how many full
>:| >:| views will you take?
>:| >:| MG> so I am told it must have at least 128 meg memory, and it
>be able to
>:| >:| Maybe.
>:| >:| MG> take a coax DS3 feed in to one card or module from the new
>provider, and a
>:| >:| Yes. PA-T3 or PA-2T3.
>:| >:| MG> lowly DS1 serial port now from an AdTran TSU on the other
>for one of
>:| >:| Keep the 2610 in service.
>:| >:| MG> the old DS1 providers, but be upgradeable someday to take a
>:| >:| No problem.
>:| >:| MG> card. OF course, with a DS3 on one side, it has to have a
>:| >:| MG> ethernet, unlike our blessed little sturdy cheapie 2610 :-)
>:| >:| MG>
>:| >:| MG> Again, please forgive this perhaps off-topic question, but
>:| >:| MG> which router can hit the double scores of least expensive
>able to take
>:| >:| MG> full BGP4 routes for a DS3 but you learned and knowledgeable
>:| >:| MG>
>:| >:| MG> Thanks in advance, and any charitable response that you may
>:| >:| MG> offer us will have our most humble thanks!
>:| >:| 7200 series would be best. No need for VXR.
>:| >:| Eddy
>:| >:| --
>:| >:| Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - EverQuick Internet Division
>:| >:| Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building
>:| >:| Phone: +1 (785) 865-5885 Lawrence and [inter]national
>:| >:| Phone: +1 (316) 794-8922 Wichita
>:| >:| DO NOT send mail to the following addresses :
>:| >:| email@example.com -or- firstname.lastname@example.org -or- email@example.com
>:| >:| Sending mail to spambait addresses is a great way to get