₦airaland Forum

Brilliant locations suggested. Other locations though still under construction could be the Eko Atlantic and Energy City in Lekki. My understanding is that these locations will have their own internally generated power and also because of the status of Eko Atlantic for instance, all ISP will be scrambling to have POPs in there. Security pretty much handles itself. Think Canary Wharf in London. The only set back I can think of is cost of space rental.

Does this sound like something feasible?

It's a rumour jooor.

Dayo is doing buyday? Ah Happy buyday ooo.

Bros you won't even confirm if you got it running or not. Haba!
Confirming that it works could be crucial info for other people.

sleekman:
I purposely didn't want to answer some guys that in my opinion K2M syndrome. I'm IT learned myself & when I say I downloaded a 1GIG file in approx 5mins perhaps u should ask me for proof bf blabbing its not possible. U think say Nigeria still dey where u leave am besides who told u its only in d US u have the fastest download speeds? Where do you put Sweden & Japan? My guy go look 4 illiterate & a less travelled person deceive. When next ure in Nigeria u can probably try out Glo in a less congested area and come deliver your findings. Mr I2K. By the way ask for sonnet in Sweden or better still Google.

Though three months late, dude you cannot download 1G in 5mins. Absolutely impossible with those naija bandwidths.
IT learned my foot. You cannot transfer data at a faster rate than your configured speed and that completely blows your theorem out the window.

Why is anyone even even talking about speed in terms of KBps? What's the point doing that? 
Data is put on the wire and the wireless in bits - 1s and 0s - and that's where the bits come from, not bytes. Why even bring in the confusion having to divide by 8 when the accepted standard is Kbps?

Dude you are one big education. Thanks for those links. I am overwhelmed by the amount of info you've downloaded on one page. Thank you very much. I am particularly impressed with Phase3 telcomms, how far they've come and their plan to lay 14,000km of fibre. One smart thing is the overhead laying of cables. and opposed to the underground laying Glo are deploying.

More info if you find mate. . . but good lord how expensive are those MTN rates? My ADSL connection will probably cost 500k with MTN.

I am in Nigeria in the next few weeks and I hope to gather as much info as I can.

@Euromeko.

For the power demands of a data-centre, I am not quite convinced that there is wide-spread technology for alternatives to PHCN and where it can be implemented, there are severe cost implications. I am not averse to implementing alternatives to main-stream power sources for data-centres.

Uptime as well as quality of service are words that are foreign in Nigeria and I don't know if any company is willing to commit to any sort of service level agreement.



Secondly the state of of internet in Nigeria is still way below acceptable. I will be very surprised if anyone can get T1 without annual costs equivalent to building a house. I hear only a handful of enterprise networks have the luxury of DSL lines. I once heard of a company called Surburban Networks who had a MAN around the island, not sure if it's on a fibre backbone. Not even sure if the company still operates. I heard MTN may have bought them.

Most people still rely on cellular access to the internet.

tkb417:
@Ritchie

why u dey cry na

lol

No mind am. . . I chose to leave the argument.
Even Debo knows. He chose to do padi padi. .

I need to have a connection to the internet. I need these details.

Price details.
What's the minimum download speed you offer?
What's the minimum upload speed you offer? (much more important to me)
Can you commit to a service level agreement?

As long as the sub-station is not a generating station, it won't make a difference. What we need is a working system.

@Laidback.

I can see the spambot is blocking your posts. No I am not using a simulator. I have 2 live ADSL circuits to the internet with 5 public IP addresses on each circuit in my home lab. So I am able to replicate many problems live, not just on a simulator.

I have subsequently simulated your network with the exact set-up and the problem is solved. Follow the corrections I stated above and all your PCs will reach the internet. If you need more help, you can register a new username to post in here.

Hey laidback,


I just got home and I just realized something on a second look. You are not permitting addresses assigned to your LAN to nat.

So you have

access-list 10 permit 10.13.2.5
access-list 10 permit 10.13.2.4
access-list 10 permit 10.13.2.6
access-list 10 permit 10.13.2.1
access-list 10 permit 10.13.2.3
access-list 10 permit 10.13.2.2


but these are the same addresses excluded in your DHCP excluded address configuration as shown below.

ip dhcp excluded-address 10.13.2.1 10.13.2.8


So effectively all addresses in the the excluded address range will get natted but consider that the router will not assign the PCs in your LAN any address in this range since you have asked it not to do so.  The first assignable address in your LAN will therefore be 10.13.2.9 and I don't see any access lists permitting this address and any higher.

What you need to do is to then clear off that access list and replace with

access list 10 permit 10.13.2.0 0.0.0.255

It doesn't have be 0.0.0.255 permitting the whole subnet, Iam just assuming you may want to as I don't know how many hosts you have in your LAN. You can adjust to what is appropriate.

Also, there isn't any need for the ip access-group 10 out command that you applied to the outside interface. This command is telling the access list to try to route traffic directly to the outside interface thereby by-passing the nat configuration and that's why you are getting the "destination net unreachable" ICMP replies. Remove that command and effect the suggestions and you should have you PCs able to route to the internet.



Let's know how you get on.

I am sorry. I just had a some time to look at your config.
Off the top of my head, I could not see anything wrong with it.

Can you please give me till the evening? I am leaving work now, when I get home I will try to simulate your network, run a few tests and let you know what the problem is.

Can you copy and paste the running config of the router.
If the spam bot won't allow, copy and paste on a notepad and attach to your post.

I am assuming that your modem and the Cisco router's fa0/1 address are in the same subnet right?

Sorry I thought you said earlier that you are not natting on the Cisco router.

Let's know how you get on.

That means you are not natting.
You need to configure nat on your cisco router.

ip nat source list 1 interface fa0/1 overload.


This configures the router to nat all addresses in the list 1 which you will define as.

access list 1 permit 10.x.x.x 0.0.0.255

The 10.x.x.x is the internal network.


You then need to define interface fa0/0 as inside nat interface and interface fa0/1 as the outside nat interface.


int fa0/0
ip address x.x.x.x
ip nat inside


int fa0/1
ip address x.x.x.x
ip nat outside


and correct, you don't need any routing protocols.
define your static route this way.

ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 int fa0/1


And this should get you up and running.

So when you connect a laptop to the back of the modem,

1. do you assign a static IP address to the laptop or does the laptop pick up an address from the modem (DHCP)?.

2. If you assign an addresss to the laptop, what address do you assign? (Just write the first two octets of the address)

3. if DHCP please respond.

So what's the mode of configuration of IP addresses on the PCs in your LAN, DHCP or static?

If DHCP, which of the devices on the network is configured as your DHCP server?

laidback:
Hi,

Have been troubleshooting a connection i created between a Cisco 2800 router and an Idirect X3 modem for hours. The X3 connects to the internet and works fine. so to improve the networks capabilities, I recently installed a Cisco 2800 router between the LAN and the Modem. but I cant seem to open web pages from any system on the LAN!#
Is it a NAT issue? Didn't configure NAT on the Cisco router, cos i expect that to be configured on the X3.
I dont think its a routing issue though, cos i just created a single default route pointing at the X3, and I can traceroute to internet sites from the router but not from a system on the network.
Any Cisco Guru in the house please help. Thanks.

A few things.

How do you mean your modem connects to the internet and works fine? Are you saying you are trying to reach the internet using a PC on the back of the modem? If you have not, then let's start by doing that.


There a number of reasons your PCs are unable to reach the internet. I can help. Just do this first and let's take it from there.

coogar:
i know you na. . . . . . .i saw your pic once on this forum.
you have this big dome on your undulated head plus 4 tribal marks on each cheek

If that's what you saw, you should have gone to spec savers.

coogar:
debosky is self-employed.
a contractor who gets paid per hour like these football players. . . . . don't mess with debo.
his newsmedia deboskysports.com is about to launch on sky channel-666

Debosky Sports is DOA. What's he gonna talk about? Types of muscles?

coogar:
are you in fulham welcoming lukaku?
i saw a dude looking like you with nateevs printed at the back of his chelsea shirt.
is that you?

Certainly not me. At this time, I am earning for a living.
I am not like Debosky. 

And WTF do you mean by "looking like me"? Niggah you don't even know what I look like.

debosky:
@ Nateevs

Still clutching straws you have the best defence?

'Phat phool'

You sha want to draw me into an argument.
I swear I am not gay.

I mean this is like saying I do not agree that Chelsea were the best team in the land when JM was manager despite the fact that I couldn't stand the style of football we played. He was effective. He won games but I could not stand his type of football. What has one got to do with the other?

Is this what you are getting at?




Jeez. I am out.

Ibime:
Cool down bro. . . . all this insult just for me? 

You can have the best midfield and replace one player - Lamps, but you said this earlier today. . .
And we already know you have problem with Essien. . . .
So I guess Mikel, Benayoun and Josh McEachran constitute the best midfield in the Prem. . . . 
Nateevs! Nateevs! Nateevs!
Stop typing. . . . and take record of all you have typed today!
You too emotional! 

Dude there is clear difference between what I cannot stand and what the manager wants.
Ramires may not be my kind of player. Lamps may not be my kind of player.
They may not tickle my fancy but that has not got anything to do with not being effective.
I don't have a problem with Essien. We both understand why he should move on.

Is it impossible for things to be seen this way?

Ibime:
Nateevs says we have the best midfield, next minute we need to change all our midfielders. If our midfield is the best, then why is he always focused on improving the midfield. If your midfield is "the best" and you still can't win the league, the rational decision would be to improve the wingers (or any other part of the team that let you down).

I am sorry but that is just a very s.tupid accusation. How dare you say that?
Can you fetch out post where I want "All our mid-fielders" changed?
You are a damn right phocking dim-wit for coming out with such delirious accusations in the middle of something much more serious. Anoufia.

And yes, you can have the best midfield and still replace one player (Lampard). In case you haven't heard of the word, it's called "improvement".

A. You cannot conclude team A has a better attack than team B based on ONE season's statistics.
B. You cannot conclude team A has a better attack than team B based on ONE competition's(EPL) statistics.
C. You cannot conclude team A has a better attack than team B based on statistics alone when statistics in general can never paint the full picture.

This has to go down as the dumbest thing ever posted by a nairalander in years.
Come on man!. It's a league for heaven's sake.

Since stats never always paint the full picture, we might as well wait for 3 seasons to know who the champions really are, that way we've had more a season's stats to prove the undoubtedly best team. Because the team that wins the PL is called the best team. So how are we allowed to call a team the best in one season, yet can't say another has a better attack based on one season?

However according to your daft logic, "one team cannot be said to be better than the rest in one season"

I am sorry Alfa Ritchboy, in the 2010/11 season, Blackpool's attack was just as good as Spurs' because they scored 55 goals a piece. All this megede fegede you are yarning is trash.

What you are saying is like telling me no team deserves relegation in one single season because one season is not sufficient to adjudge a team the poorest team in the league.

Because they have far better attacking players. I have put it as succinctly as possible since comprehension is not your forte.

If you actually believe Blackpool have a better attack than Spurs then i should be apologizing to hard-boiled eggs the world over for comparing their intelligence to yours.

Hehehehe. Brain Spasm.
Ricthboy 2011. "A team has a better attack when it has far better attacking players" Let's just archive this for future reference. It doesn't matter how many goals they score. Succinctly put indeed!. How daft can one single person?
Get your foot up dude, you are stepping on your brains.

In case this is your first time Witchboy, there is a gulf of difference between attackers and attack.
And better attackers does not equal better attack. How hard can that be?

debosky:
This is not grammar - that's the only intelligent part of that post. It is, yet again, a shocking lack of logical reasoning by Nateevs.

If you have the best midifield and defence, this should show when you face your biggest rivals - the evidence from last season does not support your ludicrous assertion.

Since we're talking about 'finishing on top' and 'winning trophies' - you did neither last season, in fact you didn't even make a single final so again, where is the evidence/basis for such a ridiculous claim of having the best midifield and best defence?

As usual you just write rubbish and hope no one will notice - sort of reminds me of the Barca no wingers gaffe of a few weeks ago.

Abeg go siddon.
Talking about finishing on top doesn't only mean ending on top. It also means talking about how close.
And you have no business with that.

As who has the better midfield or defence, check out the stats.
According to you, it's impossible to have the best defence and still lose games.
Why do games against rivals have any more significance in adjudging the best defence?

That's a statement bereft of common sense.

ritchboy:
You are a phat phool!

"Blackpool have a better attack than Spurs" - Nateevs 2011. I should frame this and show it to your grandchildren, provided they don't inherit your stupidity, otherwise they'd think it's brilliant!

As for midfield:

Lamps Cesc
Essien Wilshere
Mikel        Song
Benayoun        Nasri
Ramires Ramsey
Josh        Rosicky
Romeu             Diaby

Of course only one with the brain-power of a hard-boiled egg would say Chelsea have the best midfield in the league

It's not ok to tell me how phat a fool I am without saying why you think otherwise.
You have not an iota of sense left in you to stage a meaningful counter with.

Ahhhhh, you are a fool, hard boiled egg, Nateevs 2011. . . . . . blah blah blah! A lot of typing without saying much.
Tell me why you believe Spurs' attack is better than Blackpool's.


As for midfield, can you tell me how you have come to the conclusion that Arsenal's better.
Listing the players I already know doesn't help.

coogar:
arsenal's midfield is better than chelsea. i will take city's midfield over chelsea's as well.

so the number of games lost don't count?
what's laudable about a defence that loses more games than their rivals?
nateevs, it's the combination of those 3 factors. . . . .although, it's usual for the meanest defence to concede the fewest goals, the highest number of clean sheets and lose the fewest number of games.

To be fair I will give it to you. Only because it's more sensible to argue for it than against it.

coogar:
it's a combination of many variables.
--number of goals conceded
--number of clean sheets.

Now correct!