- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

RE: NZNOG agenda Multicast Activation Workshop
by Andreas Girardet 16 Jan '02

16 Jan '02

I talked to the guys from triangle TV in Grey Lynn and I am sure they would be happy to join as a TV channel on such an experimental setup. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > [mailto:owner-nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz]On Behalf Of Dean Pemberton > Sent: Thursday, 17 January 2002 10:04 a.m. > To: Joe Abley > Cc: Vance McIndoe; nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: Re: NZNOG agenda Multicast Activation Workshop > > > How about we take the following tac then. > > 1) Secure some content. If there is no content then this is > a waste of > time anyway. It sounds like we have atleast some content availible in > the BBC World stuff. > > 2) Make this content availible at both WIX and APE. > > 3) Allow people to connect to this content via tunnels. > Sure it would > be cool if every ISP in the country got on the bandwagon and you could > just IGMP join from your modem or dsl. But it's just not going to > happen. > > If the ISP's don't already see the feature being used then they are > unlikely to put time into something 'just in case'. > > If on the otherhand, we get good content that people want to see. And > we make the tunneling operation easy to set up. Then we might get a > large audience. ISP's might notice this data crossing their > network and > start to engineer it so that the multicast (rather than many unicast > tunnels) can penetrate further into their networks. > > Just a thought anyway. And if not, well then we still have it on WIX > and APE or anyone who wants it. > > How does that sound? > > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 02:56:59PM -0500, Joe Abley wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 08:42:32AM +1300, Vance McIndoe wrote: > > > BTW. if you really want multicast widely available within > NZ - you need to > > > help Telecom with a business offering first - a > residential service would > > > surely follow :-) > > > > Good one :) > > > > There's nothing to stop anybody distributing multicast content > > right now, using tunnels. The ISPs to which multicast consumers > > connect don't need to necessarily be involved. > > > > If there's really such a huge demand for multicast services, > > how come people aren't already using them? > > > > > Perhaps an ISP or national/global corporate could put > > > their thinking cap on and convince Telecom of how much > money they can make > > > (or save) together... > > > > Hilarious :) > > > > > > Joe > > - > > To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to > majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > > where the body of your message reads: > > unsubscribe nznog > - > To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > where the body of your message reads: > unsubscribe nznog > - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re: NZNOG Conference 2002: Topics - Local loop unbundling -
by Donald Neal 16 Jan '02

16 Jan '02

-- Donald Neal Special Operations Network Delivery Telecom New Zealand Ltd >>> "Brian Gibbons" <brian(a)outersite.co.nz> 01/15/02 08:19 >>> [...] >Richard Naylor>>My own view on this is that the loop shouldn't be unbundled >The politics come from phone companies and their desire to deliver an >analogue dial tone to a subscriber - leave them to it. >Many subscribers to this list already use one of Telecom's "local loop >access" products - IPNet. How about a technical discussion at the conference >on IPNet - the good the bad and the ugly. >I am in the same camp as Richard (don't unbundle the copper) but IPNet >doesn't quite do it for me. >A technical presentation by Telecom on IPNet would probably be beneficial to >conference attendees. This could lead into a discussion on what ISPs really >want for their downstream via Telecom. Would you be looking for a presentation from operational staff on what IPNet does and how, or from development staff on plans for it? - Donald Neal This is a public communication. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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." ============================================================================== - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

4 3

Re: NZNOG Conference 2002: Topics - Local loop unbundling -
by John Lynch 15 Jan '02

15 Jan '02

At 07:42 PM 1/16/02 +1300, you wrote: >On Wed, 16 Jan 2002, Richard Naylor wrote: > > > > > Well sort of. I was actually offering to tell all about how to build > > high speed low cost networks without fiber........but maybe that would > > upset too many folks. Thats serious. Its about how to fit fiber media > > converters, and ethernet switches in weather proof box on poles, that > > survive static discharge, and lightning, etc. It works really well in a > > residential environment and delivers 100mbps. > >I would really like to hear about this. It would be inspirational for many >people, including some telcos that shall remain unnamed which might take >out a contract on Rich. I'd been a keen listner too. >-- >Regards, > >Juha >C program run. C program crash. C programmer quit. > >- >To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz >where the body of your message reads: >unsubscribe nznog John Lynch System Administrator (string and tape specialist) Wise Net - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re: just out of interest...
by Ewen McNeill 15 Jan '02

15 Jan '02

In message <20020115230309.H1724(a)buffoon.automagic.org>, Joe Abley writes: >On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 05:00:02PM +1300, Chris Hellberg wrote: >> I've got /48 block from freenet6 that could be peered directly with >> instead of bouncing back off the states. [... Only WIX, only one >> address in use...] > >Well, there's no reason we couldn't make a virtual IX. I have >a machine in Auckland that could probably be shifted to the APE >for the purpose; a v6-in-v4 tunnel from Wellington to Auckland >sucks a bit, but not as much as a v6-in-v4 tunnel from Wellington >to the US :) I suspect that we'd have to tunnel it outside of Citylink/APE at least for the moment -- for all the same reasons that v6 is being tunnelled at present most other places. It's also a whole lot easier to get things started that way. And as you say, a Wellington<->Auckland tunnel would be no where near as much of an issue as Wellington<->US. >It occurs to me that the number of people ready and willing to >attach routers with v6 code loads directly to the APE or WIX FWIW, I've got a small set of machines connected to Citylink via an OpenBSD-based router, which should be able to do v6 with a little prodding. I've also got some clients who are connected to Citylink (some of whom are also peering with the Citylink WIX route reflector) who have expressed an interest in playing with v6 at some stage. And I could probably dig up a few more who might be interested (including various SageNZ people who spent a while playing with v6 at a recent workshop). All that said, none of these people (including me) have "public" v6 space, and none of them are providers that could justify the cost of getting even "small ISP" sized chunks of v6 space. Something in the order of a few dozen addresses worth, costing very little indeed (or suballocated out of someone else's larger allocation) might be practical though. And as one of the people who emailed Donald early on and said "I'd definitely consider it", I should answer Dean's plea while I'm posting: >We have thusfar had a few people interested in Wireless, A few in DDos, >and a few in Multicast. All in all about 10 people. This does not a >conference make. > >I guess no one else is interested. I'm lurking here, and watching with interest the discussion going on, but have been trying to avoid adding too much to the noise, particularly since I'm not working for a provider, and have no provider clients at present. I'm still at a "definitely seriously consider it" stage. If it were held in conjunction with a Uniforum/SageNZ conference then it's virtually certain I'd go. If not, I'd have to look more closely at the costs of getting there/staying there. (No rich employer to send me -- I'm self employed :-) ) In the nznog-sort of area, things of interest (no particular order): - build your own redundant link out of easily obtainable parts (I'm thinking cable modem + ADSL + routing magic here) - routing magic in general (ie, more modern routing protocols, BGP, et al) - v6, and particularly how you can play with it before everyone else adopts it - voice-over-IP, particularly in a do-it-yourself kind of way (I was following the mailing list of Asterisk, a VoIP PBX that's being developed, for a while. It seems very promising, but I haven't had time to do much more about it) - anything that Richard or Simon can be persuaded to talk about :-) - Secure DNS/Bind v9/ways of enabling oportunistic IPSec Ewen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

4 3

Re: NZNOG Conference Organisation [was RE:NZNOG Conference2002: Feedback So Far]
by Dean Pemberton 15 Jan '02

15 Jan '02

On Wed, 2002-01-16 at 14:00, Donald Neal wrote: > > No, Thursday and Friday have traditionally been days for the > presentation of papers. Tutorials and workshops ran Monday to > Wednesday. > Ok, My bad. I got confused. It's been 5 years since I was at one =) You said that the conference was going to be run Thurs-Sat. I thought that as the first days used to be used for Tutorials etc that this was the idea here. sorry. > These have yet to be set, and I see a decision about charges as one to > be made by discussion between NZNOG representatives and the UniForum NZ > convenor. If we choose to take this course. Sure - I just wondered if you had any information on this yet > > I thought you were making reasonable progress collecting peoples' > preferences. There also remains the task of following up offers to > present or to provide speakers, which is a task I'm hoping not to end up > taking on alone. Yeah - I'm just not seeing the level of response that would make me comfortable that we have the right program. Sure we have a list of possible things. But the responses for "Yeah I'd come to see that" or "Nah thats dumb" have been deafening in their silence. We have thusfar had a few people interested in Wireless, A few in DDos, and a few in Multicast. All in all about 10 people. This does not a conference make. I guess no one else is interested. Dean - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

5 4

RE: NZNOG Conference 2002: Feedback So Far
by Donald Neal 15 Jan '02

15 Jan '02

-- Donald Neal Special Operations Network Delivery Telecom New Zealand Ltd >>> "Andy Linton" <asjl(a)lionra.net.nz> 01/14/02 10:01 >>> On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Donald Neal wrote: >> If not stopped, I'll proceed on the assumption that we can plan to do >> something without seeking a unifying reason for it. However, if people >> who would attend in the right circumstances do have goals they think we >> should be aiming to achieve, now's the time to speak up. >Perhaps it would be useful to revisit out terms of reference - see below. >I'm sure Donald will be keeping these points in mind but I'd like others >to consider them too. I'd suggest that some form of program committee need >to be consituted - this event need to be content driven not event driven. >Let's think about organising the event when we have something that looks >like a program that people want to see/hear. >The program committee could be the list if we want to keep the process >informal for now. If someone thinks they have something that people might >want to hear about post a short description and see who shows some >interest. I want to keep open - _if people are interested_ - the option of doing things which would not be appropriate for the mailing list. Most obviously, tutorials at a level too introductory for the content to belong here. Whether that's "What is BGP and why is it not used in Chinese cooking?" or whatever. I'm not sure that the format follows the programme. For one thing, we do have the option of bringing in an international speaker of some stature, but doing that would have an effect on the cost. We have had nine offers so far to be or provide speakers. I believe that what we do about that number depends on the format chosen - one day one stream will not allow that many. (That's one reason I haven't yet got back to those people.) Choosing a more ambitious style of event allows (requires?) us more actively to solicit contributions. So decisions about the format may well drive decisions about the content. More complex still, the decision about whether to run a demo network or how large it should be is both a format and a content decision. It has a lot to do with venue, too. So far, what feedback to the list there has been on format suggests that we're looking for a two-day residential event. If that is some sort of consensus, then I agree that it's time to think about content, but I'd like a more general organising group rather than merely a program committee, since decisions do need to be made about things like the venue and the price. Right now, I'd like more feedback to allow us to judge whether that is indeed a consensus view. See also http://www.dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/archive/images/dilbert20020111044613.… . - 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." ============================================================================== - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

3 2

just out of interest...
by Joe Abley 15 Jan '02

15 Jan '02

... is anybody here running a public v6 network? Is there any interest in peering over the APE? Joe - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 2

Re: NZNOG Conference Organisation [was RE:NZNOG Conference2002: Feedback So Far]
by Donald Neal 15 Jan '02

15 Jan '02

>>> "Dean Pemberton" <dean(a)flatnet.gen.nz> 01/16/02 03:29 >>> >Thursday and friday have traditionally been the practical workshop days. >Is it not possible to run a stream on the main conference days? Or is >it thought that room concerns may be too much? No, Thursday and Friday have traditionally been days for the presentation of papers. Tutorials and workshops ran Monday to Wednesday. >> In any case, we would be aiming to keep under the sort of cost figure >> Roger De Salis has mentioned. >> >Have you found out what the Uniforum conference fees are this year? >Would we just charge this? Or look to recover our own costs only? These have yet to be set, and I see a decision about charges as one to be made by discussion between NZNOG representatives and the UniForum NZ convenor. If we choose to take this course. [...] >I think we are still neglecting program content. We don't really have a >good idea what people want to see. Unless they are all mailing you >privatly, in which case fess up with the info =) I thought you were making reasonable progress collecting peoples' preferences. There also remains the task of following up offers to present or to provide speakers, which is a task I'm hoping not to end up taking on alone. - Donald Neal -- Donald Neal Special Operations Network Delivery Telecom New Zealand Ltd ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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." ============================================================================== - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Re router smashing contest
by Phill Groom 15 Jan '02

15 Jan '02

I seem to recall Peter Mott saying something along the lines of this recently; >I think a router smashing competition would be a good drawcard :-) http://cisco.ninjas.org/ Phill. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

NZNOG Conference 2002: Topics - Local loop unbundling -
by Brian Gibbons 14 Jan '02

14 Jan '02

Juha> > Local loop unbundling? J S Russell>>The other topics are pretty "pure" technical ones. J S Russell>>This topic you suggest has the stench of politics about it. :) Richard Naylor>>My own view on this is that the loop shouldn't be unbundled The politics come from phone companies and their desire to deliver an analogue dial tone to a subscriber - leave them to it. Many subscribers to this list already use one of Telecom's "local loop access" products - IPNet. How about a technical discussion at the conference on IPNet - the good the bad and the ugly. I am in the same camp as Richard (don't unbundle the copper) but IPNet doesn't quite do it for me. A technical presentation by Telecom on IPNet would probably be beneficial to conference attendees. This could lead into a discussion on what ISPs really want for their downstream via Telecom. Cheers BG. - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0