Restoration after Hurricane Frances
In Florida after Hurricane Frances: 17 fatalities attributed to the Hurricane and its affects. Wireless companies are reporting 95% service restoration statewide. Wireline companies have restored over half of the damaged lines statewide. Bellsouth: 385,000 and Sprint: 177,000 out of service. No figures available from other individual wireline companies. Adelphia reported it had restored 68% of its service. Comcast reports significant progress. I heard of no reports of damage to any major co-location or Internet data center in Florida due to Hurricane Frances. NASA shutdown at least a portion of its computer networks at the Kennedy Space Center in advance of Hurricane Frances. Next up, Hurricane Ivan. The lower Florida Keys have evacuation orders for non-residents, RV's, boats and parks starting on September 10.
Re: ISP Policies
On a related note : Do ISPs ever tweak around with Local Prefs and weights so as to select BGP paths with greater AS PATH length? Would it ever make sense for a provider to chose a longer AS PATH length BGP route against a shorter AS PATH length route? Rohit MTech Comp Sc. Institute of Technology Banaras Hindu University - Original Message - From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 11:27 PM Subject: Re: ISP Policies > > At 11:04 AM +0530 9/9/04, Tulip Rasputin wrote: >>Hi Chris, >> >>>Or, you just don't want to send traffic through Bill Manning's ASN because >>>you dislike his hawiian T-Shirt Policy? There are probably a few hundred >>>reasosn why you'd avoid an ASN... In general though I'd think that like >>>Michel said: "It's a pain and its doing something that bgp should do for >>>you without lots of messing about" >> >>That's why i explicitly asked for some "social/political/etc." >>reasons where an ISP may not want his traffic to traverse some >>particular AS number(s). Something which is beyond BGP to determine >>as of now ! :-) Indiatimes Email now powered by APIC Advantage. Help! HelpClick on the image to chat with me
Re: ISP Policies
On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 11:36:58AM +0530, Rohit Gupta wrote: On a related note : Do ISPs ever tweak around with Local Prefs and weights so as to select BGP paths with greater AS PATH length? Would it ever make sense for a provider to chose a longer AS PATH length BGP route against a shorter AS PATH length route? Yes many do - Prefer your customer routes via customer interfaces, over transit and peering interfaces. Higher LP over cust interfaces = more bits = more revenue. There is nothing wrong with this IMO, considering many of them who do this, also provide a community for customers to override this behaviour. -J -- James JunTowardEX Technologies, Inc. Technical LeadNetwork Design, Consulting, IT Outsourcing [EMAIL PROTECTED] Boston-based Colocation Bandwidth Services cell: 1(978)-394-2867 web: http://www.towardex.com , noc: www.twdx.net
Re: ISP Policies
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 05:10:21AM +, Christopher L. Morrow wrote: I'm not a router guy (routing atleast), but perhaps there are performance problems inside an ASN along a path which you connect to other places? So you might lengthen paths through/to that ASN to force traffic across another ASN's direct connection which is less problematic? Or, you just don't want to send traffic through Bill Manning's ASN because you dislike his hawiian T-Shirt Policy? There are probably a few hundred reasosn why you'd avoid an ASN... In general though I'd think that like Michel said: It's a pain and its doing something that bgp should do for you without lots of messing about choosing a route whose AS path doesn't contain an AS is no garantee that packets won't flow through that AS nevertheless. Forwarding is being done hop-by-hop. Examples for that szenario are * more specifics that aren't distributed globally * broken/complicated routing setups where a router chooses a route it got via IBGP and where on the path to the corresponding nexthop another router decides to rather use his own route (e.g. a router chooses his own route due to step external vs. internal in the BGP decision process, but the original decision was based on lowest router id) This can happen in not-full-mesh environments, e.g. with route reflector setups... I use the AS-path rather to grab chunks of prefixes (e.g. all routes via ASxyz) to do loadbalancing over transit providers whose announcements look so similar that the decision is only based on lowest router id of the IBGP speaker. I know this can be somewhat solved via multi-path bgp but there are other issues with that (fib size, multiple exit points behind one route-reflector etc)... tschuess Stefan -- Stefan Mink, Schlund+Partner AG (AS 8560) Primary key fingerprint: 389E 5DC9 751F A6EB B974 DC3F 7A1B CF62 F0D4 D2BA pgpW8b1fkvfs8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Intel calls for Internet overhaul
On 9/9/2004 4:12 PM, Paul Vixie wrote: update SAN FRANCISCO--The Internet needs to be upgraded with a new layer of abilities that will deal with imminent problems of capacity, security and reliability, Intel Chief Technology Officer Pat Gelsinger said Thursday. hmmph. Many moons ago I used to argue that the IETF should adopt/hijack the DCE suite, and for the same basic reasons that this guy is arguing for their thingy. DCE is probably a better idea still, but his payscale and business card guarantee a wider audience so... Who knows, maybe he'll have better luck with it. I'll salute if its architected and spec'd right, with a good distributed directory, platform-neutral APIs, targetted use, etc. -- Eric A. Hallhttp://www.ehsco.com/ Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/
Re: Verisign vs. ICANN
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004, Joe Rhett wrote: On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 04:01:46PM -0700, Dan Hollis wrote: If the patent is strong enough, wouldnt some patent attorney be willing to defend it on a contingency basis? With the potential $$ in a patent violation judgement against verisign, I would think attorneys would be all over it. Patent violation can be easily gathered, but the penalty is always based on the lost revenue, which must be documented and validated. In short, if you want to make money selling your patent to someone then you must have a valid business that loses money so that your lawsuit against them will have teeth. So the attorney creates an IP holding company to which the patent is assigned, and the company offers to license the patent to Verisign. When Verisign refuses, they get sued for lost revenue. There are companies whos entire revenue stream revolves around licensing patents / litigating. This is quite normal. -Dan
Re: Spammers Skirt IP Authentication Attempts
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 04:59:51PM +, Paul Vixie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 27 lines which said: you could bet that by closing off this avenue, SPF will force spammers to use other methods that are more easily detected/filtered, and that if you play this catmouse game long enough, it will drive the cost of spam so high (or drive the volume benefit so low) that it'll just die out. Good summary. This is the right strategy. but to me, SPF is just a way to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic. I can swim but I believe that the water under the Titanic was quite too cold to stay. Any advice to the people on the NANOG mailing list before the boat goes down?
Re: Spammers Skirt IP Authentication Attempts
On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 03:15:14PM -0500, Robert Bonomi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 37 lines which said: Same thing applies for 'simple' forwarding via sendmails '~/.forward' mechanism. the mail server 'accepts' the mail from the original source, and then 're-sends' to the new destination. That re-send originates as the _forwarding_party_, WITH an 'envelope from' of that forwarding party, Sorry, this is simply not true (sendmail, postfix, etc, always keep the original envelope from when forwarding). An SPF check of the _immediate_ sender does *NOT* break forwarded mail. Even SPF people say it: http://spf.pobox.com/faq.html#forwarding
Re: Verisign vs. ICANN
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004, Joe Rhett wrote: In short, if you want to make money selling your patent to someone then you must have a valid business that loses money so that your lawsuit against them will have teeth. On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 12:46:07AM -0700, Dan Hollis wrote: So the attorney creates an IP holding company to which the patent is assigned, and the company offers to license the patent to Verisign. When Verisign refuses, they get sued for lost revenue. The holding company must be making money from the patent to demonstrate the value of the loss. It can't be a silent owner -- these have been fairly routinely tossed out of court as meritless. There are companies whos entire revenue stream revolves around licensing patents / litigating. This is quite normal. Yes, but they use complicated techniques of licensing and subcompanies with demonstratable revenue to achieve those goals. It's not as simple as was suggested here. -- Joe Rhett Senior Geek Meer.net
Re: Spammers Skirt IP Authentication Attempts
Robert Bonomi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote Same thing applies for 'simple' forwarding via sendmails '~/.forward' mechanism. the mail server 'accepts' the mail from the original source, and then 're-sends' to the new destination. That re-send originates as the _forwarding_party_, WITH an 'envelope from' of that forwarding party, On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 09:55:55AM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: Sorry, this is simply not true (sendmail, postfix, etc, always keep the original envelope from when forwarding). I'm not sure where true diverges from reality in your analysis, but perhaps you should create one of those mail environments and test before you put your foot in your mouth again? -- Joe Rhett Senior Geek Meer.net
Re: Verisign vs. ICANN
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004, Joe Rhett wrote: On Fri, 10 Sep 2004, Joe Rhett wrote: In short, if you want to make money selling your patent to someone then you must have a valid business that loses money so that your lawsuit against them will have teeth. On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 12:46:07AM -0700, Dan Hollis wrote: So the attorney creates an IP holding company to which the patent is assigned, and the company offers to license the patent to Verisign. When Verisign refuses, they get sued for lost revenue. The holding company must be making money from the patent to demonstrate the value of the loss. It can't be a silent owner -- these have been fairly routinely tossed out of court as meritless. Do you have an example of such a case? -Dan
Re: Spammers Skirt IP Authentication Attempts
On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 01:57:51AM -0700, Joe Rhett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 19 lines which said: I'm not sure where true diverges from reality in your analysis, but perhaps you should create one of those mail environments and test before you put your foot in your mouth again? Good idea, I plan to install a Fedora this week-end and to learn a bit about Postfix. Your wide experience will certainly help. If you think that sendmail or postfix modify the enveloppe from when forwarding, I suggest that you send your big discovery to the IETF MARID working group, where it may change a lot of things in the current discussion about Sender-ID :-)
The Cidr Report
This report has been generated at Fri Sep 10 21:50:46 2004 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of an AS4637 (Reach) router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org/as4637 for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date PrefixesCIDR Agg
03-09-04142564 98111
04-09-04142671 98023
05-09-04142645 97946
06-09-04142493 97997
07-09-04142498 98214
08-09-04142814 98395
09-09-04143221 98358
10-09-04143329 98574
AS Summary
17936 Number of ASes in routing system
7281 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix
1377 Largest number of prefixes announced by an AS
AS7018 : ATTW ATT WorldNet Services
86705664 Largest address span announced by an AS (/32s)
AS721 : DNIC DoD Network Information Center
Aggregation Summary
The algorithm used in this report proposes aggregation only
when there is a precise match using the AS path, so as
to preserve traffic transit policies. Aggregation is also
proposed across non-advertised address space ('holes').
--- 10Sep04 ---
ASnumNetsNow NetsAggr NetGain % Gain Description
Table 143397984814491631.3% All ASes
AS18566 7397 73299.1% CVAD Covad Communications
AS4134 781 172 60978.0% CHINANET-BACKBONE
No.31,Jin-rong Street
AS4323 778 217 56172.1% TWTC Time Warner Telecom
AS7018 1377 950 42731.0% ATTW ATT WorldNet Services
AS6347 539 116 42378.5% SAVV SAVVIS Communications
Corporation
AS7843 488 104 38478.7% ADELPH-13 Adelphia Corp.
AS22773 394 21 37394.7% CXAB Cox Communications Inc.
Atlanta
AS6467 385 30 35592.2% ACSI e.spire Communications,
Inc.
AS701 1247 899 34827.9% UU UUNET Technologies, Inc.
AS9583 530 201 32962.1% SATYAMNET-AS Satyam Infoway
Ltd.,
AS27364 365 36 32990.1% ARMC Armstrong Cable Services
AS22909 365 43 32288.2% CMCS Comcast Cable
Communications, Inc.
AS6197 717 396 32144.8% BNS-14 BellSouth Network
Solutions, Inc
AS1239 951 636 31533.1% SPRN Sprint
AS9929 346 34 31290.2% CNCNET-CN China Netcom Corp.
AS17676 346 43 30387.6% JPNIC-JP-ASN-BLOCK Japan
Network Information Center
AS11172 352 51 30185.5% Alestra
AS6478 357 71 28680.1% ATTW ATT WorldNet Services
AS4355 380 99 28173.9% ERSD EARTHLINK, INC
AS4766 545 266 27951.2% KIXS-AS-KR Korea Telecom
AS6140 396 125 27168.4% IMPSA ImpSat
AS21502 2683 26598.9% ASN-NUMERICABLE NUMERICABLE is
a cabled network in France,
AS14654 2576 25197.7% WAYPOR-3 Wayport
AS9443 359 109 25069.6% INTERNETPRIMUS-AS-AP Primus
Telecommunications
AS2386 826 592 23428.3% ADCS-1 ATT Data
Communications Services
AS6198 452 222 23050.9% BNS-14 BellSouth Network
Solutions, Inc
AS25844 244 16 22893.4% SASMFL-2 Skadden, Arps, Slate,
Meagher Flom LLP
AS721715 510 20528.7% DNIC DoD Network Information
Center
AS6327 228 29 19987.3% SHAWC-2 Shaw Communications
Inc.
AS5668 393 200 19349.1% CIH-12 CenturyTel Internet
Holdings, Inc.
Total 16120 6204 991661.5% Top 30 total
Possible Bogus Routes
24.138.80.0/20 AS11260 AHSICHCL Andara High Speed Internet c/o Halifax
Cable Ltd.
24.246.0.0/17AS7018 ATTW ATT WorldNet Services
24.246.38.0/24 AS25994 NPGCAB NPG Cable, INC
24.246.128.0/18 AS7018 ATTW ATT WorldNet Services
64.46.4.0/22 AS11711 TULARO TULAROSA COMMUNICATIONS
64.46.27.0/24AS8674 NETNOD-IX Netnod
Re: Intel calls for Internet overhaul
On Thu, 9 Sep 2004, Rachael Treu-Gomes wrote: And tunnels in tunnels in tunnels... I see some deep recursion fun here. I can see some nice routing loops coming up, with packets for tunnel endpoints being routed through the tunnel interface itself, etc... ;) Rik -- Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it. - Brian W. Kernighan
Odd behavior from p4-0-0.MAR1.Austin-TX.us.xo.net
We are originating traffic from AS11 and we are seeing an apparent loop downstream from the router listed in the header when attempting to connect to rsync1.spamhaus.org. Is this problem unique to us or are others seeing the same behavior. Scott C. McGrath
Re: Spammers Skirt IP Authentication Attempts
you could bet that by closing off this avenue, SPF will force spammers to use other methods that are more easily detected / filtered, and that if you play this catmouse game long enough, it will drive the cost of spam so high (or drive the volume benefit so low) that it'll just die out. Good summary. This is the right strategy. on the contrary. it has been a bad strategy and is still a bad strategy. but to me, SPF is just a way to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic. I can swim but I believe that the water under the Titanic was quite too cold to stay. Any advice to the people on the NANOG mailing list before the boat goes down? the boat will never go all the way down -- the internet, and e-mail, are survivable. however, it will get very cold where you are, since you'll be floating in atlantic icewater while clinging to floating wreckage. if that fate does not appeal to you, then embrace change. specifically, the kind of change that makes you cringe in fear because it is so alien. i'm referring to whitelists, webs of trust, trusted introducers, micropayments, and bonding. if you insist on an inbox that's open to all comers no matter what their intentions or reputation, then get out your snorkle.
Re: Odd behavior from p4-0-0.MAR1.Austin-TX.us.xo.net
The loop seems to be in AS 2828 (XO Communications) with router at 64.1.2.38. --Rob Crowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Original message --We are originating traffic from AS11 and we are seeing an apparent loop downstream from the router listed in the header when attempting to connect to rsync1.spamhaus.org. Is this problem unique to us or are others seeing the same behavior. Scott C. McGrath
Re: Odd behavior from p4-0-0.MAR1.Austin-TX.us.xo.net
Looking at this now. Justin Ryburn Tier II Router Support XO Communications - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Scott McGrath [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 12:10 PM Subject: Re: Odd behavior from p4-0-0.MAR1.Austin-TX.us.xo.net The loop seems to be in AS 2828 (XO Communications) with router at 64.1.2.38. -- Rob Crowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Original message -- We are originating traffic from AS11 and we are seeing an apparent loop downstream from the router listed in the header when attempting to connect to rsync1.spamhaus.org. Is this problem unique to us or are others seeing the same behavior. Scott C. McGrath
OT: Anybody from RBC.com read this?
Please contact me offlist. We're an account client of yours with periodic trouble getting mail to you for almost a year now, and Id like to get it resolved.
Weekly Routing Table Report
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. Daily listings are sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 11 Sep, 2004 Analysis Summary BGP routing table entries examined: 146736 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 87224 Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 70017 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 18024 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 15648 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix:7294 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:2376 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 78 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 4.8 Max AS path length visible: 22 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table:39 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table:0 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 16 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 1337060260 Equivalent to 79 /8s, 177 /16s and 235 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 36.1 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 58.3 Percentage of available address space allocated: 61.9 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 67256 APNIC Region Analysis Summary - Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes:28030 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 14146 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 26260 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:14223 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:2133 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:633 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:331 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:4.8 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 22 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 161753472 Equivalent to 9 /8s, 164 /16s and 41 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 73.8 APNIC AS Blocks4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 23552-24575 APNIC Address Blocks 58/7, 60/7, 202/7, 210/7, 218/7, 220/7 and 222/8 ARIN Region Analysis Summary Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes: 83838 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation:51137 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks:64173 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 22648 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 9534 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:3401 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 927 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 4.5 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 18 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 231930912 Equivalent to 13 /8s, 210 /16s and 252 /24s Percentage of available ARIN address space announced: 69.1 ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106 2138-2584, 2615-2772, 2823-2829, 2880-3153 3354-4607, 4865-5119, 5632-6655, 6912-7466 7723-8191, 10240-12287, 13312-15359, 16384-17407 18432-20479, 21504-23551, 25600-26591, 26624-27647,29695-30719, 31744-33791 ARIN Address Blocks24/8, 63/8, 64/6, 68/7, 70/7, 72/8, 198/7, 204/6, 208/7 and 216/8 RIPE Region Analysis Summary Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 27170 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation:18966 Prefixes being announced from the RIPE address blocks:24008 Unique aggregates announced from the RIPE address blocks: 15815 RIPE Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 5804 RIPE Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:3120 RIPE Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 996 Average RIPE Region AS path length visible: 5.4 Max RIPE Region AS path length visible: 21 Number of RIPE addresses announced to Internet: 170824000 Equivalent to 10 /8s, 46 /16s and 145 /24s Percentage
Re: Odd behavior from p4-0-0.MAR1.Austin-TX.us.xo.net
This should be corrected now. I still cannot ping the host in question but I am guessing that spamhaus has ICMP filters on their stuff. It is definitely routing to the correct place now. Our customer service department is following up with the customer (spamhaus' provider) to make sure they are seeing everything correctly. Justin Ryburn Tier II Router Support XO Communications - Original Message - From: Justin Ryburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Scott McGrath [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 12:42 PM Subject: Re: Odd behavior from p4-0-0.MAR1.Austin-TX.us.xo.net Looking at this now. Justin Ryburn Tier II Router Support XO Communications - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Scott McGrath [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 12:10 PM Subject: Re: Odd behavior from p4-0-0.MAR1.Austin-TX.us.xo.net The loop seems to be in AS 2828 (XO Communications) with router at 64.1.2.38. -- Rob Crowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Original message -- We are originating traffic from AS11 and we are seeing an apparent loop downstream from the router listed in the header when attempting to connect to rsync1.spamhaus.org. Is this problem unique to us or are others seeing the same behavior. Scott C. McGrath
Qwest engineer?
Sorry to bother the whole list with this...could someone involved in routing at Qwest ping me offlist? Thanks, Andrew
