nanog mailing list archives
Re: NAT Multihoming
From: Donald Stahl <don () calis blacksun org>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 00:07:24 -0400 (EDT)
I definitely meant "when" not if. And Cox is by no means the only ISP to do this.You write "when" rather than "if" - is ignoring reasonable TTLs current practice?Definitely. We've seen 15 minute TTLs regularly go 48 hours without updating on Cox or Comcast's name servers. I believe the most I've seen was 8 days (Cox).
-Don
Current thread:
- NAT Multihoming (was:Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted), (continued)
- NAT Multihoming (was:Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) Lamar Owen (Jun 02)
- Re: NAT Multihoming (was:Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) Paul Vixie (Jun 02)
- Re: NAT Multihoming (was:Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) Donald Stahl (Jun 02)
- Re: NAT Multihoming Simon Leinen (Jun 03)
- Re: NAT Multihoming Chris Owen (Jun 03)
- Re: NAT Multihoming Randy Bush (Jun 03)
- Re: NAT Multihoming Stephen Satchell (Jun 03)
- Re: NAT Multihoming Stephane Bortzmeyer (Jun 04)
- Re: NAT Multihoming Donald Stahl (Jun 04)
- Re: NAT Multihoming Iljitsch van Beijnum (Jun 04)
- Re: NAT Multihoming Donald Stahl (Jun 03)
- NAT Multihoming (was:Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) Lamar Owen (Jun 02)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Donald Stahl (Jun 03)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Igor Gashinsky (Jun 03)
- IPv6 transition work was RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted michael.dillon (Jun 03)
- Re: IPv6 transition work was RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (Jun 03)
- Re: IPv6 transition work was RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted Igor Gashinsky (Jun 03)
- Re: IPv6 transition work was RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted John Curran (Jun 03)
- Re: IPv6 transition work was RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted matthew zeier (Jun 03)
- Re: IPv6 transition work was RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted william(at)elan.net (Jun 03)
- Re: IPv6 transition work was RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted matthew zeier (Jun 03)