Jeremy Stretch's networking blog, with protocol explanations, cheat sheets, and notes on TCP, BGP, and network gear.
HN commenters recommend its networking cheat sheets and cite its TCP selective acknowledgment post for lossy links and its RIPE 1.0.0.0/8 post.
I wish they had at least made an effort to link to RFCs[0][1][2][3][...] that define SSH2 protocol and that also explain the handshake portion more accurately and in more detail (found one link to rfc4253 from article).
I also hope they didn't decide to roll their own SSH2 stack for their product (article doesn't mention if they did or did not).
Another thing I wish people would do is to include a link to .pcap of the network traffic they are trying to explain. Found one[pcap].
[0] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4251
[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4252
[2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4253
[3] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4254
[...] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4250 (and others)
[pcap] https://packetlife.net/captures/protocol/ssh/
Previously (February 2010);
"As part of an effort to de-bogonise this newly allocated address space, RIPE, in cooperation with APNIC, made some test advertisements to the global BGP table for several prefixes with 1.0.0.0/8. Specifically, these networks included 1.1.1.0/24 and 1.2.3.0/24. Why these networks? Because they contain the novel (and illegal) IPv4 addresses 1.1.1.1 and 1.2.3.4, of course.
"Shortly after announcing the routes to the world, RIPE's RIS was flooded with over 50 Mbps of traffic destined for what is still an unallocated network; it should not appear on the global Internet."
* http://packetlife.net/blog/2010/feb/5/ripe-plays-with-1-0-0-0-network-apnic-allocation
The problem with this is that you will get X million "new" IP addresses. But in Y years you will have the same problems as we have now again, because the X million IPs are again consumed.
So it is much better to focus on the implementation of IPv6.
The E block is a lost cause: http://packetlife.net/blog/2010/oct/14/ipv4-exhaustion-what-about-class-e-addresses/
NANOG[0] warned about it in May, and there is a blog post [1] that expands on the risk. Cisco 6500/7600 (if they are set to hold the complete BGP table) are known to be affected.
[0] http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2014-May/066880.html
[1] http://packetlife.net/blog/2014/may/6/global-ipv4-routing-table-hits-500k-routes/
Well that's just dandy. They are plagiarising.
http://packetlife.net/blog/2016/mar/9/dont-be-discouraged-plagiarists/
All those PDFs that they have taken without permission and stored in their GitHub repository are the giveaway:
https://github.com/overthecs/overthecs.github.io/tree/master/static/cs
Many years ago, Jeremy Stretch created a series of (networking-centric) "cheat sheets" [0] which may be of interest.
As boring as they can be to read, the RFCs are still the best single reference WRT network protocols and such.
---
[0]: https://packetlife.net/library/cheat-sheets/