- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

The New Zealand Network Operators' Group
by Donald Neal 01 Jul '03

01 Jul '03

The New Zealand Network Operators' Group The New Zealand Network Operators' Group (NZNOG) has no king, president or formal membership. At present it consists of the subscribers to this mailing list, which anyone is free to join. NZNOG held a face to face gathering as part of the UniForum NZ conference in 2002, and is to do the same again from 10-12 July this year. That's next week. See http://www.uniforum.org.nz/conference_2003/conference.html for details. If you're going - and you are, aren't you? - you need to register NOW. NZNOG doesn't hold other national face to face meetings, but see http://thursdaynightcurry.com/ if you live in or near Wellington or Auckland. Operators' Contact List See http://www.usenet.net.nz/noc/ for operational contact details for most New Zealand ISP's. These are intended for use by other network operators rather than by most customers. Auckland Peering Exchange See http://www.ape.net.nz/ for details of the Auckland Peering Exchange and those connected there. About This Mailing List This list has around 480 addresses subscribed. You may only post to the list from a subscribed address. A number of people subscribe addresses which do not receive email purely to allow posting from them. The NZNOG mailing list is provided through a server at The University of Waikato, and is administered by an employee of Alcatel NZ Ltd. Neither of these organisations, nor the administrator, is responsible for its content. NZNOG Mailing List Acceptable Use Policy The NZNOG mailing list exists to provide a forum for the exchange of technical information and the discussion of implementation issues that require cooperation among New Zealand network service providers. In order to continue to provide a useful forum for discussion of relevant technical issues, users of the list are asked to respect the following guidelines. 1. Discussion will focus on Internet operational and technical issues. 2. Discussion related to meetings of network service providers is appropriate. 3. Discussion unrelated to these topics is not appropriate. 4. Postings to multiple mailing lists are discouraged. 5. Postings that include foul language, character assassination, and lack of respect for other participants are unacceptable. 6. Blatant product or service marketing is unacceptable. 7. Postings of a political, philosophical or legal nature are discouraged. 8. Postings to the list should be in ASCII or MIME encoded as text/plain. Attachments should not be sent to the list. To present a document, a suitable URL may be referred to. For documents of general interest, the use of proprietary file formats is discouraged. 9. Breaches of list etiquette should be dealt with privately with the offending list user, and should not result in complaints being sent to the list. 10. A person repeatedly breaching list etiquette shall receive warnings from the list administrator. A further breach after the second such warning within thirty days shall result in the offender being unsubscribed from the list. Other action may also be taken to block postings to the list by the offender. Any such unsubscription is to be immediately announced to the list. Mailing List Archives A full archive is available at http://list.waikato.ac.nz/archives/nznog/ Any message sent to the list will be archived and made available on the web automatically. Changes are not made to the archive on request, though the administrator remains happy to assist the Office of the Privacy Commissioner should any complaint be laid with that office. Subscribing to the List See http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog to subscribe. Donald Neal NZNOG Mailing List Owner/Administrator/Muggins ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

RE: [nznog] Multicast status in New Zealand
by Frank March 30 Jun '03

30 Jun '03

Electric fences are a problem with POTS when they are poorly designed and maintained. The major problem with ADSL in rural areas is the distance from the nearest enabled exchange - only a relatively small number of rural people are within the 5-7 km distance that ADSL will reach. It is likely that wireless technologies will be necessary to reach anyone more than this distance for an exchange and for some satellite will be the only practical solution. According to Fonterra, there could be as many as 5,000 farms (probably not dairy farms) in this category. --- Frank March Senior Specialist Adviser, IT Policy Group (and member of the PROBE project team) Ministry of Economic Development, PO Box 1473, Wellington, New Zealand Phone (+64 4) 474 2908; Fax (+64 4) 474 2659; Mobile (+64) 21 042 9205 -----Original Message----- From: Cameron Kerr [mailto:cameron.kerr(a)paradise.net.nz] Sent: Tuesday, 1 July 2003 00:35 To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] Multicast status in New Zealand On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 11:20:32PM +1200, Lin Nah wrote: > Some of the target audience in the groups above tend to live in > rural areas and it is a challenge for them to get a 56k dialup > connection going (without worrying about line quality, electric > fences etc) let alone worry about high speed internet. Hence the > need for Project Probe. That raises an interesting question. If a primary problem with POTS is with electric fences creating a large amount of interference, how on earth is ADSL going to fare??? Surely its higher frequencies would be even more messed up. Or would they use wireless for people in that position? _______________________________________________ Nznog mailing list Nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog http://www.govt.nz - connecting you to New Zealand central & local government services Any opinions expressed in this message are not necessarily those of the Ministry of Economic Development. This message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivery to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error and that any use is strictly prohibited. Please contact the sender and delete the message and any attachment from your computer.

1 0

RE: [nznog] Multicast status in New Zealand
by Michael Sutton 30 Jun '03

30 Jun '03

Over 500 clients of Xtra voluntarily registered and received Radio New Zealand and BBC World Live as Multicast on Telecoms dial up service for 3 years from 1998. I attended and observed when Telecom engineers enabled the same service via adsl in Wellington as multicast sourced from my servers in Akl in 2000. If i was in the Ministry of Health and needed to distribute 3,000 * 10m bytes PDF document from my source server to all distribution points within 60 minutes (3GigaBytes) no New Zealand network can do it. The distribution server and network would fail. If I used multicast and have a 256kbit multicast injection source the upload to all 3000 GPs will be complete in less than 10 minutes. The clients will still be billed for 3 gigabytes if they were being changed for local traffic and the rest of the national network would remain stable, especially for servers colocated with the originating server. If future spam blocking uses a signature system, multicast would enable this information to be distributed to all enterprise mail servers instantly and efficiently using multicast distribution... If I was implementing Maori Television and Youth Radio I would use multicast for distribution of the network transmission to reach 150 National distribution points where I would convert the multicast program for terrestrial transmission and in one step have positively changed the operational budget as well as reduced complexity of distribution. Yes I would still have to pay for each clients data charges... If I ran Correspondence School I would use multicast... If I was the TAB I would use it... I could give you 20 project scenarios that unicast can not implement in the real world. All unicast can do in every application is show the prototype concept - scale-up can not occur without multicast... This is really an Interconnect issue: customers should have network access to inject on a case by case situation... It is not up to the networks to be arbitrarily prohibiting this protocol... Please name another network protocol that could make such a difference and which is disabled ... Its like saying that the protocol extensions enabling mobile TXT messaging should have been blocked until each application was identified. I thought that Telecom, Telstra etc stopped "telling" customers what are permissible applications... Telecom and Telstra etc are supposed to implement enabling technologies which can be used by its customers who know there own current and future applications... In my professional opinion if the Boards of both these organisations understood the damage that this decision does to their clients network application capabilities, all of those executives involved would be gone. New Zealand has never had a real Internet as far as I am concerned due to this network management decision. Multicast is a broadcast service and without it the network remains unicast spaghetti, like pieces of string with empty cans of W* Baked Beans on each end... If Probe does not require multicast as a mandatory network service then the future of that service will be DOA... Due to public obfuscation of the process I don't know what they thought they required anyway. My final view on this is; turn it on and make the interconnect arrangements necessary for peering at wix and ape before one or more customers takes this to the Commissioner as an interconnect issue. Michael Sutton +64 4 4759235 www.awacs.co.nz -----Original Message----- From: Donald Neal [mailto:Donald.Neal(a)telecom.co.nz] Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 12:41 To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: RE: [nznog] Multicast status in New Zealand My own opinion - and I must stress that it is just my opinion - is that this will be exactly Telecom's attitude. To change the answer you'd need to change the question. If you say "Look, to provide new service X which your customers will want, you need to enable IP multicasting", that's a different issue. But that would require the identification of service X. - Donald Neal ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- _______________________________________________ Nznog mailing list Nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

4 3

Test the Nation, Request (REPOST)
by Chris O'Donoghue 29 Jun '03

29 Jun '03

Sorry had to repost from home email Hi all, We (TVNZ) are running a programme tonight that _may_ attract considerable audience online. To try and make things run smoothly and lower calls to our and your call centres, can those of you that aggressively cache make sure you don't cache the following URL http://ttndata.nzoom.com/batches/data.xml This is the XML data that defines the current batch of questions. It will change in content frequently between 19:30 and midnight Ta Chris Chris ODonoghue Technology Manager Online & Digital TVNZ codonoghue(a)tvnz.co.nz

1 0

Test the Nation, request
by Chris O'Donoghue 29 Jun '03

29 Jun '03

Hi all, We (TVNZ) are running a programme tonight that _may_ attract considerable audience online. To try and make things run smoothly and lower calls to our and your call centres, can those of you that aggressively cache make sure you don't cache the following URL http://ttndata.nzoom.com/batches/data.xml This is the XML data that defines the current batch of questions. It will change in content frequently between 19:30 and midnight Ta Chris Chris O'Donoghue Technology Manager Online & Digital TVNZ ================================================================ CAUTION: This e-mail and any attachment(s) contains information that is intended to be read only by the named recipient(s). It may contain information that is confidential, proprietary or the subject of legal privilege. This information is not to be used by any other person and/or organisation. If you are not the intended recipient, please advise us immediately and delete this e-mail from your system. Do not use any information contained in it. ================================================================ For more information on nzoom.com, visit us online at http://www.nzoom.com ================================================================

1 0

Re: [nznog] Multicast status in New Zealand
by Ewen McNeill 26 Jun '03

26 Jun '03

In message <5.2.0.9.0.20030627141054.038683c0(a)pele.citylink.co.nz>, Richard Naylor writes: >>[Multicast] >Well the biggest part of the business is video on demand and that can >really only be unicast as getting viewers to agree on what they watch is >like agreeing on a TV Channel in a huge flat - hopeless. Even aside from the live situation you mention (eg, LOTR last year), general overseas experience with video-on-demand has shown that people really only want (to pay for) video-soon-after-demanded. Eg, for a 1-2 hour thing, having to wait, say, 2-5 minutes for it to start isn't a big deal. Even waiting 1 minute for a 10 minute thing isn't _that big a deal. Which means that for popular stuff that is "on demand" it might not be enough to have one channel with it, where the wait time is, say, 15 minutes for it to cycle around -- but it might be fine to have 10-20 channels, suitably staggered, where the wait time was 1-2 minutes. (Add channels to reduce the wait time.) Especially if there was some nice front end whereby people could find out which channel would be showing their thing starting next, and tune into that one. And it's much easier to scale channels-starting-every-minute (say) than it is to scale each-stream-is-unicast-with-its-own-start-point. (Particularly if you don't both starting/continuing the channels if there's nobody receiving it after a few minutes -- that requires some feedback outside multicast, but wouldn't be hard to do with a suitable client application and, say, UDP upstream responses every minute or so.) >back to streaming live and did the LOTR premiere last year with 10,000 >clients. Its a lot of fun and didn't really stress much other than a few ISPs. At least once some traction was made on the urgent call for more peering from the source point to the main sink points. But multicast fully deployed would definitely have helped a lot there. Ewen

3 2

RE: [nznog] Multicast status in New Zealand
by Donald Neal 26 Jun '03

26 Jun '03

> From: Simon Lyall [mailto:simon.lyall(a)ihug.co.nz] > Sent: Thursday, 26 June 2003 17:46 > To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: Re: [nznog] Multicast status in New Zealand > > > On Thu, 26 Jun 2003, Craig Whitmore wrote: > > But wihtout having a killer ap or connections which can use > > them (like Telecom looking into enabling then DialIP/IPNET/Jetstream > > Network) 99% of the peopel conencted on these mediums won't > see anything) > > I'm sure there would be a few people that would jump through > the hoops to > get a non-commercial broadcast arrangement with APRA ( I > think one person > on this list has something along these lines) if they could multicast > their musical tastes to DSL people. Is anyone able to point me at some such people? - Donald Neal ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

RE: [nznog] Multicast status in New Zealand
by Donald Neal 26 Jun '03

26 Jun '03

> From: Michael Sutton [mailto:michael.sutton(a)awacs.co.nz] > Sent: Friday, 27 June 2003 14:55 > To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Cc: Donald Neal > Subject: RE: [nznog] Multicast status in New Zealand > > > Over 500 clients of Xtra voluntarily registered and received > Radio New Zealand and BBC World Live as Multicast on Telecoms > dial up service for 3 years from 1998. > > I attended and observed when Telecom engineers enabled the > same service via adsl in Wellington as multicast sourced from > my servers in Akl in 2000. > > If [...] What I'm looking for is someone who has _today_ content which they want to distribute where a) the availability of IP multicasting could reasonably be expected to make some difference to customer experience/network load, and b) the level of demand for this content can reasonably be expected to be such that either extra revenue for someone would come from making that content available OR its availability can reasonably be expected to increase the uptake of broadband service. The first of these is actually a harder test than it looks, given that there are other ways of doing point to multipoint comunication than unvarnished IP unicast or multicast. (The classic way to allow download of big documents many times is with proxy caching, to take just one example.) - Donald Neal All opinions my own. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

RE: [nznog] Multicast status in New Zealand <<< CORRECTION >>>
by Michael Sutton 26 Jun '03

26 Jun '03

Correction to my earlier post: Para 3 Please read 30 gigabytes in 60 minutes. I wrote 3 gigabytes... M -----Original Message----- From: Michael Sutton [mailto:michael.sutton(a)awacs.co.nz] Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 02:55 To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: RE: [nznog] Multicast status in New Zealand <snip> If i was in the Ministry of Health and needed to distribute 3,000 * 10m bytes PDF document from my source server to all distribution points within 60 minutes (30 GigaBytes) no New Zealand network can do it. The distribution server and network would fail. If I used multicast and have a 256kbit multicast injection source the upload to all 3000 GPs will be complete in less than 10 minutes. The clients will still be billed for 30 gigabytes if they were being changed for local traffic and the rest of the national network would remain stable, especially for servers colocated with the originating server. <snip>

1 0

Sobig.MM infected users?
by Neil Gardner 26 Jun '03

26 Jun '03

Hi guys, (specifially those at IHUG) any chance someone can do something about this user on IHUGs ADSL system? - (203-118-165-45.adsl.ihug.co.nz) This post is in desperation after the correct procedure for reporting this was followed twice with IHUG and no-one did anything about it except send a request for the full email which was given, and then sent me back a totally blank reply. IHUGs Helpdesk were apologetic, but said that no-one could do anything about it except between the hours of midnight and 8am (!!!!) Anyway, it wouldn't normally be an urgent issue, but the poor sucker that's infected has just subscribed to about 5 more lists that I'm on, as well as a lot of not so IT literate users, so he's going to catch a few of them... As an aside, what do most ISPs do if they find someone is infected and is sending out stuff lke this? (Yes, those dates in the email below are old - that's from the first bunch of emails he sent out when I first complained - and yes, I have checked the IP is still the same as of about 20 minutes ago) Cheers - Neil G > Return-Path: <big(a)boss.com> > Delivered-To: moderator for ultimate(a)nzfda.org.nz > Received: (qmail 32200 invoked from network); 18 Jun 2003 19:47:03 > -0000 > Received: from 203-118-165-45.adsl.ihug.co.nz (HELO MCNEILLJ-JLG772) > (203.118.165.45) > by 202-0-37-249.cable.paradise.net.nz with SMTP; 18 Jun 2003 19:47:03 > -0000 > From: <big(a)boss.com> > To: <ultimate(a)nzfda.org.nz> > Subject: Re: Movies > Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 7:47:09 +1200 > Importance: Normal > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 > X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > X-Priority: 3 (Normal) > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: multipart/mixed; > boundary="CSmtpMsgPart123X456_000_0001EFBA"

2 1