He said that they would want $2,200 per month for transport from pretty
much any location to us. brutal....
On the bright side, he did point me towards the CTF thing.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jones, MikeCA <Mike_Jones(a)cable.comcast.com>
Date: Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 2:01 PM
Subject: RE: Transport Rates from Hurricane Electric Fremont
To: max b <maxb.personal(a)gmail.com>
Hi Max,
Here’s the link to the California Teleconnect Fund website and application
process. One or all of your non-profits may qualify. In that case, we can
give you a 50% discount on our fiber circuits. For Example, 100meg fiber
connection at $1000, would be $500. This is layer 2 dedicated enterprise
class fiber with sla’s.
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/Telco/Public+Programs/CTF/Application.htm
Thanks
Mike
*Mike Jones | Enterprise Ethernet Fiber Division *
Comcast Business Services | Western Region
Cell: 916-903-3761 best | Office: 916-830-6719
mike_jones(a)cable.comcast.com
It's at maybe the worst possible time (6pm tonight) but there's
nothing we can do about it. We'll try to make it as quick & smooth as
possible.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <support(a)linode.com>
Date: Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 11:35 AM
Subject: Linode Support Ticket 4254236 - Critical Xen Maintenance /
Reboot Schedule
Hello,
Linode recently received several Xen Security Advisories (XSAs) that
require us to perform updates to our host servers. In order to apply
the updates, hosts and the Linodes running on them must be rebooted.
The XSAs will be publicly released by the Xen project team on March
10th, therefore we must complete the updates before that date.
These updates are required to protect the security and safe operations
of not only our infrastructure, but yours as well. We understand that
a disruption with such limited notice is inconvenient, and we hope you
understand that these measures are warranted due to the severity of
the XSAs.
Your Linodes have been assigned a maintenance window in which a reboot
will occur. These times are listed within the Linode Manager[1] in the
timezone set in your user's My Profile[2]. Your schedule in UTC
timezone is as follows:
* 2015-03-06 2:00:00 AM UTC - sudoserver
During the maintenance window Linode instances will be cleanly shut
down while we perform the updates. Your Linode will be inaccessible
during this time. A two-hour window is allocated, however the actual
downtime can be much less. After the maintenance, each Linode will
then be booted. See our Reboot Survival Guide[3] for tips and hints on
configuring and testing that your Linode services boot properly after
the maintenance.
Unfortunately, due the logistical demands of this effort, your
assigned windows are not changeable and the host reboots are
mandatory.
For general information, please see our status post:
<http://status.linode.com/incidents/2dyvn29ds5mz>
Please let us know if there is anything we can do to assist.
[1] <https://manager.linode.com/linodes>
[2] <https://manager.linode.com/profile>
[3] <https://www.linode.com/docs/uptime/reboot-survival-guide>
-Linode
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:37 PM, niki <niki.shelley(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I have the ip address and we're getting over 100Mbps down if what the LMI
> guy said is to be trusted.
Great. It's important that it configured to be a static IP address. Do
you know if it was?
It looks like we haven't touched our router, it's still connected to
the old uplink, so that will have to be migrated. Let's do that at a
less high traffic time than Tuesday night and also wait to cancel
Sonic service until we finish doing that?
Hey Niki,
Let me know if you can't get a hold of Marc, or if they're still looking
for someone. I wasn't aware that they were coming over today, but we
definitely need to get this together and I'd be happy to run over and hold
their hand and/or whatever they need.
Max
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:56 PM, niki <niki.shelley(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I guess we have new internet now!
>
> Someone from LMI came by looking for Marc.
>
> I'd like to ask people that if, in the future, you schedule a service like
> this you try to find someone to be here if you are not able to be, please.
>
> So anyway, let me know who I need to give the relevant information to.
>
> N
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss(a)lists.omnicommons.org
> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/discuss
>
>
Hey just wanted to mention that it does appear as though 100.0.0.0/12 does
get routed by a number of internet hosts:
traceroute -n 100.1.1.1
> 1 192.168.2.1 16.953 ms 18.672 ms 26.622 ms
> 2 192.168.1.1 63.993 ms 66.595 ms 67.210 ms
> 3 50.185.26.1 81.620 ms 84.669 ms 87.114 ms
> 4 68.87.196.89 91.254 ms 91.479 ms 92.388 ms
> 5 68.87.57.221 87.381 ms 68.87.55.229 104.986 ms 68.87.55.225 106.784
> ms
> 6 68.85.155.234 109.069 ms 68.85.155.238 91.181 ms 68.85.155.234
> 102.066 ms
> 7 * * *
> 8 68.86.86.102 106.262 ms 106.159 ms 106.481 ms
> 9 68.86.82.94 100.819 ms 104.484 ms 101.623 ms
> 10 23.30.206.94 139.012 ms 138.273 ms 158.165 ms
> 11 130.81.209.171 193.143 ms * *
> 12 * * *
> 13 100.1.1.1 159.241 ms 155.888 ms 156.733 ms
>
or
traceroute 100.1.1.1
> traceroute to 100.1.1.1 (100.1.1.1), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
> 1 192.168.2.1 (192.168.2.1) 41.102 ms 41.890 ms 44.911 ms
> 2 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 50.067 ms 50.663 ms 51.156 ms
> 3 50.185.26.1 (50.185.26.1) 60.095 ms 61.839 ms 87.606 ms
> 4 GE-2-37-ur01.fremontcev2.ca.sfba.comcast.net (68.87.196.89) 103.734
> ms 104.030 ms 177.000 ms
> 5 te-0-7-0-21-sur03.oakland.ca.sfba.comcast.net (68.87.57.221) 176.024
> ms te-0-7-0-19-sur03.oakland.ca.sfba.comcast.net (68.85.57.141) 176.480
> ms te-0-7-0-21-sur03.oakland.ca.sfba.comcast.net (68.87.57.221) 176.684
> ms
> 6 te-0-2-0-5-ar01.sfsutro.ca.sfba.comcast.net (69.139.199.78) 178.344
> ms te-0-2-0-0-ar01.sfsutro.ca.sfba.comcast.net (68.85.155.234) 19.639 ms
> te-0-2-0-7-ar01.sfsutro.ca.sfba.comcast.net (68.87.194.50) 41.532 ms
> 7 * * *
> 8 he-2-9-0-0-cr01.losangeles.ca.ibone.comcast.net (68.86.86.102)
> 59.336 ms 98.858 ms 98.859 ms
> 9 be-13-pe02.11greatoaks.ca.ibone.comcast.net (68.86.82.94) 98.056 ms
> 102.286 ms 99.433 ms
> 10 23.30.206.94 (23.30.206.94) 273.404 ms 274.855 ms 276.308 ms
> 11 B200.NWRKNJ-LCR-22.verizon-gni.net (130.81.209.171) 301.458 ms
> P0-15-0-0.NWRKNJ-LCR-22.verizon-gni.net (130.81.199.17) 301.773 ms
> 302.699 ms
> 12 * * *
> 13 L101.NWRKNJ-VFTTP-142.verizon-gni.net (100.1.1.1) 378.294 ms
> 379.111 ms 378.479 ms
>
I think we agreed that this is okay as it's supposed to be strictly for
internal NAT only, and so any public routing is sort of incidental. Just
wanted folks to be apprised of the situation.
Hey just checking in to see what folks think about node mounting at Sudo
tomorrow. I'm a little nervous about how ready some of the firmware configs
are, but I could get over there early to try to get things in order if need
be.
Just let me know what people want to do?
