Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]

[Patrick W. Gilmore]

[Perhaps this thread should migrate to Multi6?]

On Sep 9, 2005, at 11:55 PM, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:


On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Daniel Golding wrote:


Getting back on-topic - how can this be? I thought only service  
providers
(with downstream customers) could get PI v6 space. Isn't this what  
policy
proposal 2005-1 is about? Can someone (from ARIN?) explain the  
current

policy?


what if they didn't ask for a prefix but instead just hammered their
providers for /48's? What's the difference to them anyway?  
(provided we
are just talking about them lighting up www.google.com in v6 of  
course)


If they wanted to start offering more 'services' (ip services  
perhaps?)

then they could say they were a 'provider' (All they need is a plan to
support 200 customers to get a /32) and start the magic of /32-ness...


Suppose they not only have no plan but couldn't really put together a  
plan to support 200 customers?  Does this mean Google, or any other  
content provider, is "unworthy" of globally routeable space?


IPv6 is a nice idea, and as soon as people realize that ISPs are not  
the only organizations who have a need to multi-home - and I mean  
really multi-home, not stupid work-arounds - then it might actually  
start to happen.


--
TTFN,
patrick

Re: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google

[Christopher L. Morrow]

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Daniel Golding wrote:

>
>
> Getting back on-topic - how can this be? I thought only service providers
> (with downstream customers) could get PI v6 space. Isn't this what policy
> proposal 2005-1 is about? Can someone (from ARIN?) explain the current
> policy?

what if they didn't ask for a prefix but instead just hammered their
providers for /48's? What's the difference to them anyway? (provided we
are just talking about them lighting up www.google.com in v6 of course)

If they wanted to start offering more 'services' (ip services perhaps?)
then they could say they were a 'provider' (All they need is a plan to
support 200 customers to get a /32) and start the magic of /32-ness...

>
> - Daniel Golding
>
> On 9/9/05 2:16 PM, "Steven J. Sobol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
> >
> >
> >> I was thinking yesterday that IPv6 evangelization is a good reason,
> >> specially when recalling that Google asked for a prefix some time ago
> >> (http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=1001) and something is probably
> >> being baked there ?
> >
> > So is the idea that Google adopts IPv6 and then, seeing that a large,
> > well-trafficked(sp?) website is actually using the technology, lots of
> > service providers and smaller sites follow suit?
> >
> > How widespread *is* IPv6 adoption, anyhow?
>
>

Re: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google

[william(at)elan.net]

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:

However there is a difference between company becoming LIR and becoming 
member of ARIN and paying annual membership fee (based on network size) and 
company applying for single IPv6 assignment (as per 2005-1) and not having 
to pay membership fee then (only one-time fee for assignment) and not being 
able to participate at ARIN as a member.


Tho from what I have read of 2005-1 this requires a AS .


Correct. We only want RIR assigned ip blocks to those who multihome,
i.e. such blocks would be expected to be in global BGP routing table.


That requires a memebership unless there is some loophole around
that I have not seen ?


No, ASN assignent does provide you with ARIN membership. You do pay
annual maintaince fee to ARIN (fairly small at $100/year) though.


Can you site the section in 2005-1 that allows an entity to
pay the onetime fee & not have to pay the yearly fee ?


With IPv4 end-user organization that qualifies for > /20 asks ARIN to have 
that assigned instead of asking its ISP. Such organization then pays one 
time fee listed in http://www.arin.net/billing/fee_schedule.html
as "IPv4 Assignments, Initial Assignment Fee" which is as an example 
is $2,250 for /19 and /20. The organization would then pay annual

database maintanance fee of $100/year (its a per organization fee,
that does not change no matter how many ASNs or ip block are assigned
to that organization in the future).

For ip blocks allocated to ISPs by ARIN, the ISP pays $2250/year
(for /20 and /19) and this fee depends on size of allocated ip space.

I'm not yet entirely sure how that would be for IPv6 because direct
assignent policies just don't exist in any real way for IPv6 (except
special cases of micro-allocations), so basicly those who got IPv6
space from ARIN are all considered LIRs and pay annual fee for that
block. It may stay in similar way or we may end up changing it to
something like it is with IPv4 - I suppose this is something that is
to be discussed as part of ARIN public policy development process.

--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google

[Mr. James W. Laferriere]

Hello William ,

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, william(at)elan.net wrote:

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Daniel Golding wrote:


Getting back on-topic - how can this be? I thought only service providers
(with downstream customers) could get PI v6 space. Isn't this what policy
proposal 2005-1 is about? Can someone (from ARIN?) explain the current
policy?


Its my understanding that large company (or large university) can
become LIR too - they'd have to show that they have complex network
infrastructure with multiple semi-independent departments and/or subsidiaries 
with main company's IT department serving as network

provider for those units.

However there is a difference between company becoming LIR and becoming 
member of ARIN and paying annual membership fee (based on network size) and 
company applying for single IPv6 assignment (as per 2005-1) and not having to 
pay membership fee then (only one-time fee for assignment) and not being able 
to participate at ARIN as a member.

Tho from what I have read of 2005-1 this requires a AS .  That
requires a memebership unless there is some loophole around
that I have not seen ?

Can you site the section in 2005-1 that allows an entity to
pay the onetime fee & not have to pay the yearly fee ?
Tia ,  JimL
--
+--+
| James   W.   Laferriere | SystemTechniques | Give me VMS |
| NetworkEngineer | 3542 Broken Yoke Dr. |  Give me Linux  |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Billings , MT. 59105 |   only  on  AXP |
+--+

Re: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google

[william(at)elan.net]

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Daniel Golding wrote:


Getting back on-topic - how can this be? I thought only service providers
(with downstream customers) could get PI v6 space. Isn't this what policy
proposal 2005-1 is about? Can someone (from ARIN?) explain the current
policy?


Its my understanding that large company (or large university) can
become LIR too - they'd have to show that they have complex network
infrastructure with multiple semi-independent departments and/or 
subsidiaries with main company's IT department serving as network

provider for those units.

However there is a difference between company becoming LIR and becoming 
member of ARIN and paying annual membership fee (based on network size) 
and company applying for single IPv6 assignment (as per 2005-1) and not 
having to pay membership fee then (only one-time fee for assignment) and 
not being able to participate at ARIN as a member.


--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google

[Daniel Golding]

Getting back on-topic - how can this be? I thought only service providers
(with downstream customers) could get PI v6 space. Isn't this what policy
proposal 2005-1 is about? Can someone (from ARIN?) explain the current
policy?

- Daniel Golding

On 9/9/05 2:16 PM, "Steven J. Sobol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
> 
>  
>> I was thinking yesterday that IPv6 evangelization is a good reason,
>> specially when recalling that Google asked for a prefix some time ago
>> (http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=1001) and something is probably
>> being baked there ?
> 
> So is the idea that Google adopts IPv6 and then, seeing that a large,
> well-trafficked(sp?) website is actually using the technology, lots of
> service providers and smaller sites follow suit?
> 
> How widespread *is* IPv6 adoption, anyhow?

Re: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google

[George William Herbert]

>How widespread *is* IPv6 adoption, anyhow?

It's easier convincing some people to have root canals
or elective brain surgery than to broach the subject of
their software gaining IPv6 compatibility.

It's really annoying.  It shouldn't be this hard.


-george william herbert
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

China Telecom Blocking Skype

[Fergie (Paul Ferguson)]

Okay, don't get too excited. I'm not trying to incite the
whole off-topic thread that was going here earlier regarding
ethical issues regarding China content, etc,

However, on the issue of services denial (thinking back to
the discussion of various ISP's around the world blocking
various service, e.g. Vonage, other VoIP traffic, etc.), I
have to say that I think I see a lot of hypocritical folks
out there that, well... you can see the issue.

Via Red Herring:

[snip]

China Telecom, China’s largest telecommunications carrier, has begun blocking 
VoIP calls in an effort to stanch the massive loss of revenue it could sustain 
if a substantial percentage of that country’s 100 million Internet users switch 
their long-distance calling to Skype.

Reuters cited media reports and Internet postings as the source of its 
information that the former monopoly carrier has begun blocking Internet users 
from accessing Skype’s voice services in the city of Shenzhen.

The news service also cites a report in the Shanghai Daily that China Telecom 
plans to block Skype’s service throughout the country, eventually.

News reports said the carrier, which owns a large broadband network and 
controls a large network of ISPs, has created a “blacklist” of Skype users in 
Shenzhen and threatened punitive action against those who try to circumvent the 
carrier’s Skype blocks.

[snip]

http://www.redherring.com/article.aspx?a=13516

- ferg

--
"Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
 Engineering Architecture for the Internet
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

Re: 12/8 problems?

[Petri Helenius]

Drew Linsalata wrote:



Richard A Steenbergen wrote:


$10 says someone forgot "ip classless".



Is there a valid argument for making "ip classless" the default in the 
IOS?  Seems to me that it would only solve problems, but I don't 
profess to be a routing guru, especially in comparison to folks in 
this forum.



It has been that way for a while now?

Pete

need a contact at verizon...

[Perry E. Metzger]

I need a contact at Verizon (or at least for whatever portion of their
IP network is AS 6167). Anyone know who to talk to?

I've discovered a badly screwed up router inside the network that
serves their EVDO wireless customers but trying to fight my way up
through the normal channels turns out to be too hard -- there are too
many people there who don't know what an IP address is etc. and won't
escalate to someone to whom you can say "can you log in to
66.174.105.14 and try pinging the following hosts and note that the
behavior is anomalous?"  I briefly managed to get that high up after
literally 2.5 hours of fighting, but the guy I got put me on hold for
30 minutes and then promised to call me back and did not.

My usual friend of a friend contacts have failed, so I'd appreciate help.

-- 
Perry E. Metzger[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google

[Valdis . Kletnieks]

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 14:12:45 EDT, "Steven J. Sobol" said:

> I'm sure there are a lot of ways Dr. Cerf could benefit the company. I 
> guess I'm a little surprised that they hired him outright and just didn't 
> give him a seat on the board of directors. 

Why is that surprising?  How much *actual* authority does the average
C-level exec have in an organization?  How much *actual* authority does the
average member of the BoD have?

In general, figureheads go on the BoD.  To actually *do* something, you hire
somebody competent, and give them a goal, authority, and resources, and stand
back.



pgpkQywJagGvW.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Correct inclusion of rwhois info in WHOIS server output?

[Albert Meyer]

Thanks to everyone who replied on and off-list. I'm concluding that there is a 
problem with WHOIS server output, caused mostly by a lack of standards, but 
people with more influence than me are already working on fixing that. In the 
meantime I'll see if I talk to the gnu maintainer about making jwhois more 
rwhois-friendly.

Not OT: Why Cerf jumped to Google

[Steven J. Sobol]

There seems to be some operational content in this C|Net News.com 
article:



Specifically,

"The Mountain View, Calif., company has been investing heavily in a
communications infrastructure, buying up dark fiber, or fiber-optic cable
that's already been laid but is not yet in use. In July, it also invested
in Current Communications, a company that provides technology for
delivering broadband Net access over power lines."

-- 
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek   888-480-4638   PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

Re: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google

[Steven J. Sobol]

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:

 
> I was thinking yesterday that IPv6 evangelization is a good reason,
> specially when recalling that Google asked for a prefix some time ago
> (http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=1001) and something is probably
> being baked there ?

So is the idea that Google adopts IPv6 and then, seeing that a large, 
well-trafficked(sp?) website is actually using the technology, lots of 
service providers and smaller sites follow suit?

How widespread *is* IPv6 adoption, anyhow?

-- 
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek   888-480-4638   PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

Katrina Network Damage Report

[Todd Underwood]

As promised, Renesys has released a brief paper on the effects of
Hurricane Katrina as seen from the Internet.  We cover the period of
land fall in some detail and also review the recovery efforts.  

http://www.renesys.com/resource_library/Renesys-Katrina-Report-9sep2005.pdf

People who are interested should obviously read the report (and I'm
pretty sure it's on-topic, for once!  This might be the second
on-topic thread today.  Danger!).  But highlights include:

--the Internet was fine
--the Gulf Coast wasn't
--Louisiana was hit particularly hard
--many outaged prefixes still haven't been restored, 10 days later

We're happy to take questions on the report, the data, the
methodology, etc.

t.

-- 
_
todd underwood
director of operations & security
renesys - interdomain intelligence
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   www.renesys.com

RE: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google

[Steven J. Sobol]

On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Mark Bodley wrote:
 
> His name has never "hurt" a companies stock price. Remember MCI--Um,
> Worldcom. Remembering.. Um lost a ton of money... just remember. First time
> I have noticed Google do anything so blatant. Time to sell Google? Are they
> spending money on figure heads? 

I'm sure there are a lot of ways Dr. Cerf could benefit the company. I 
guess I'm a little surprised that they hired him outright and just didn't 
give him a seat on the board of directors. 
  
-- 
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek   888-480-4638   PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

Re: 12/8 problems?

[Robert E . Seastrom]

"Israel, David B." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Actually, my practical solution to this one is max-prefixing your peers.
> It means you have to watch your peers slow growth, but frankly, you
> should be watching that anyway.

Max-prefix is part of the battle.

A corollary "max-aggregate" where for instance one could say "shut the
connection down if these guys try to announce more than a /14 worth of
space total to me - I don't believe it" would be convenient.

None of this works of course if people don't turn it on though.

---rob

Weekly Routing Table Report

[Routing Table Analysis]

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 10 Sep, 2005

Analysis Summary


BGP routing table entries examined:  169983
Prefixes after maximum aggregation:   97203
Unique aggregates announced to Internet:  82000
Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 20445
Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:   17787
Origin ASes announcing only one prefix:8431
Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:2658
Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 73
Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table:   4.5
Max AS path length visible:  26
Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table:21
Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table:0
Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 12
Number of addresses announced to Internet:   1419431168
Equivalent to 84 /8s, 154 /16s and 205 /24s
Percentage of available address space announced:   38.3
Percentage of allocated address space announced:   57.7
Percentage of available address space allocated:   66.4
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:   80774

APNIC Region Analysis Summary
-

Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes:35338
Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation:   15719
Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks:   33197
Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:16372
APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:2356
APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:700
APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:362
Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:4.5
Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 18
Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet:  197369344
Equivalent to 11 /8s, 195 /16s and 158 /24s
Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 73.2

APNIC AS Blocks4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431
(pre-ERX allocations)  23552-24575, 37888-38911
APNIC Address Blocks   58/7, 60/7, 124/7, 126/8, 202/7, 210/7, 218/7,
   220/7 and 222/8

ARIN Region Analysis Summary


Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes: 90654
Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation:55107
Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks:70887
Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 26032
ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:10182
ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:3765
ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 950
Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 4.3
Max ARIN Region AS path length visible:  16
Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet:   266366720
Equivalent to 15 /8s, 224 /16s and 111 /24s
Percentage of available ARIN address space announced:  66.2

ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106
(pre-ERX allocations)  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, 29696-30719, 31744-33791
   35840-36863
ARIN Address Blocks24/8, 63/8, 64/6, 68/7, 70/6, 74/7, 76/8,
   198/7, 204/6, 208/7 and 216/8

RIPE Region Analysis Summary


Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 32763
Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation:22377
Prefixes being announced from the RIPE address blocks:29810
Unique aggregates announced from the RIPE address blocks: 20148
RIPE Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 7070
RIPE Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:3728
RIPE Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:1170
Average RIPE Region AS path length visible: 5.1
Max RIPE Region AS path length visible:  26
Number of RIPE addresses announced to 

Re: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google

[Steven J. Sobol]

On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Joe McGuckin wrote:

> 
> They're just collecting all the big brains, putting them in big glass jars

mmhmm, someone's been watching too much Futurama, eh?

-- 
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek   888-480-4638   PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

RE: 12/8 problems?

[Steve Gibbard]

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Israel, David B. wrote:





Richard A Steenbergen wrote on Friday, September 09, 2005 11:57 AM:

On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 11:44:05AM -0400, Drew Linsalata wrote:


Looks like 26210 is originating the prefixes and Telefonica is

happily

passing them along to the world, at least some portion of which is

glad

to go along for the ride.



$10 says someone forgot "ip classless".


I'll take that bet.  My $10 says they turned on auto-summary.


Here's what Telefonica is or has been announcing to peers with a
_12956_26210_ AS path (note that a bunch of these are currently history
entries, so aren't being announced at the moment).  It looks like a
corresponding classful announcement for every CIDR announcement, plus a
few more.


From http://lg.pch.net:


equinix-ashburn>sh ip bgp regex _12956_26210_
BGP table version is 8836678, local router ID is 157.22.13.84
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - 
internal,

  r RIB-failure, S Stale
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete

   Network  Next HopMetric LocPrf Weight Path
 h 12.0.0.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 ?
 h 12.144.80.0/24   206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 i
 h 12.144.82.0/23   206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 ?
 h 12.144.84.0/22   206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 i
 h 64.0.0.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 ?
 h 65.0.0.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 ?
 h 65.173.56.0/21   206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 i
 h 200.11.68.0  206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 ?
 h 200.58.64.0/21   206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 ?
*> 200.58.160.0/23  206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.162.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.163.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.164.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.165.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.166.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.167.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.168.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i

   Network  Next HopMetric LocPrf Weight Path
*> 200.58.169.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.170.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.171.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.172.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.173.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.174.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.175.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.176.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.177.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.178.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.179.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.180.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.181.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.182.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.183.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.184.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.185.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.186.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.187.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.188.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.189.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.58.190.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i

   Network  Next HopMetric LocPrf Weight Path
*> 200.58.191.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
25620 i
*> 200.75.160.0/20  206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
22541 22541 i
*> 200.85.128.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
27714 i

*> 200.85.128.0/23  206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 ?
*> 200.85.129.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
27714 i
*> 200.85.130.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
27714 i
*> 200.85.131.0 206.223.115.1070 12956 26210 
27714 i
*> 200.85.132.0 206.223.115.

Re: 12/8 problems?

[John Neiberger]

>12.0.0.0/8
>64.0.0.0/8
>65.0.0.0/8 

And wouldn't you know it, we have an application that needs to reach
servers in 12/8 and 65/8, and someone just came over to me asking for
help in figuring out why that application isn't working. I guess I
should have checked my NANOG mail before I told them I had no idea what
was going on. :) It just so happens that our two providers are the ones
previously mentioned that are accepting the offending routes from
Telefonica.

John
--

RE: 12/8 problems?

[Israel, David B.]

Richard A Steenbergen wrote on Friday, September 09, 2005 11:57 AM: 
>On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 11:44:05AM -0400, Drew Linsalata wrote:
>> 
>> Looks like 26210 is originating the prefixes and Telefonica is
happily 
>> passing them along to the world, at least some portion of which is
glad 
>> to go along for the ride.
>> 
>> Q. How does the Internet work?
>> A. Spit and glue.

> $10 says someone forgot "ip classless".

I'll take that bet.  My $10 says they turned on auto-summary.

> $20 says this devolves into a discussion about pgp key signed bgp 
> announcements or some other impractical soapbox within less than 10 
> emails. :)

Actually, my practical solution to this one is max-prefixing your peers.
It means you have to watch your peers slow growth, but frankly, you
should be watching that anyway.

> Now if only they made "no ip clueless".

Or at least correctly set the "evil" bit on appropriate packets.

Re: 12/8 problems?

[Drew Linsalata]

Richard A Steenbergen wrote:


$10 says someone forgot "ip classless".


Is there a valid argument for making "ip classless" the default in the 
IOS?  Seems to me that it would only solve problems, but I don't profess 
to be a routing guru, especially in comparison to folks in this forum.


--

Drew Linsalata
The Gotham Bus Company, Inc.
Dedicated Servers and Colocation Solutions
Long Island, New York
http://www.gothambus.com

Re: 12/8 problems?

[Richard A Steenbergen]

On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 11:44:05AM -0400, Drew Linsalata wrote:
> 
> Looks like 26210 is originating the prefixes and Telefonica is happily 
> passing them along to the world, at least some portion of which is glad 
> to go along for the ride.
> 
> Q. How does the Internet work?
> A. Spit and glue.

$10 says someone forgot "ip classless".

$20 says this devolves into a discussion about pgp key signed bgp 
announcements or some other impractical soapbox within less than 10 
emails. :)

Now if only they made "no ip clueless".

-- 
Richard A Steenbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)

Re: 12/8 problems?

[Drew Linsalata]

Richard A Steenbergen wrote:

Looks like 12956 is announcing some /8s to every peer and transit. Worse 
still, Sprint and GX are propagating it. This is not the first time that 
Telefonica has leaked a lot of garbage routes with serious network impact 
as a result (nor is it the second or third, actually).


12.0.0.0/8
64.0.0.0/8
65.0.0.0/8 


I'd say both GX and Sprint have a lot to answer for right about now.



Looks like 26210 is originating the prefixes and Telefonica is happily 
passing them along to the world, at least some portion of which is glad 
to go along for the ride.


Q. How does the Internet work?
A. Spit and glue.

--

Drew Linsalata
The Gotham Bus Company, Inc.
Dedicated Servers and Colocation Solutions
Long Island, New York
http://www.gothambus.com

Re: 12/8 problems?

[Richard A Steenbergen]

On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 11:25:25AM -0400, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> 
> Looks like 12956 is announcing some /8s to every peer and transit. Worse 
> still, Sprint and GX are propagating it. This is not the first time that 
> Telefonica has leaked a lot of garbage routes with serious network impact 
> as a result (nor is it the second or third, actually).
> 
> 12.0.0.0/8
> 64.0.0.0/8
> 65.0.0.0/8 
> 
> I'd say both GX and Sprint have a lot to answer for right about now.

Minor apologies to GX, it looks like Telefonica isn't a customer any more, 
just a direct peer. I'm still annoyed from the last outage caused when 
Telefonica leaked routes to GX as a transit customer. Sprint on the other 
hand propagated this as full transit. I'm glad to see no one has learned 
from AS7007. :)

As for how to prevent this from happening again... I know many people who 
aren't able to implement full peer filtering are at least enforcing simple 
as-path checks on the largest ASNs (making sure that customers and peers 
don't reannounce paths which have 7018 in them, for example), but it 
doesn't look like anyone is trying to filter things on a largest prefix 
basis. When AS26210 decides to start originating the prefixes themselves 
instead of just leaking it from 7018, boom.

-- 
Richard A Steenbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)

Re: 12/8 problems?

[william(at)elan.net]

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:


On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 11:12:25AM -0400, Drew Linsalata wrote:


Apologies for a post of an operational nature, but is anyone else seeing
problems with AT&Ts 12/8 block?

From a New York router connected to Global Crossing and Peer 1:

border-1.nycmny> sh ip bgp 12.xxx.xxx.xxx

BGP routing table entry for 12.0.0.0/8, version 86901457
Paths: (2 available, best #1)
  Not advertised to any peer
  3549 12956 26210
64.213.176.97 from 64.213.176.97 (208.50.59.1)
  Origin incomplete, metric 2602, localpref 100, valid, external,
best, ref 2
  Community: 232589665 232618104
  13768 12956 26210, (received-only)
64.34.84.117 from 64.34.84.117 (216.187.124.10)
  Origin incomplete, localpref 100, external, ref 2

Route views is showing a 12/8 with a fair amount of dampening/flap
penalties in the last 10-12 minutes.


Looks like 12956 is announcing some /8s to every peer and transit


It looks like 12956 is propagating announcements from their customer
26210 of these /8 routes. It looks like 12956 does not have correct
policies in place to block such announcements from their customers as 
many of the large ISPs in US do (mostly by requiring customers to 
pre-authorize and give list of blocks that they would be announcing)

and that is why from time-time things like this leak out (which they
deal with each time after the fact). It does seem appropriate that if 
12956 is unable to put  appropriate policies in place to make sure things 
like this do not happen, then all its announcements will have to be 
double-checked and pre-authorized by its transits i.e. GBLX and Sprint.


---
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: 12/8 problems?

[Richard A Steenbergen]

On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 11:12:25AM -0400, Drew Linsalata wrote:
> 
> Apologies for a post of an operational nature, but is anyone else seeing 
> problems with AT&Ts 12/8 block?
> 
> From a New York router connected to Global Crossing and Peer 1:
> 
> border-1.nycmny> sh ip bgp 12.xxx.xxx.xxx
> 
> BGP routing table entry for 12.0.0.0/8, version 86901457
> Paths: (2 available, best #1)
>   Not advertised to any peer
>   3549 12956 26210
> 64.213.176.97 from 64.213.176.97 (208.50.59.1)
>   Origin incomplete, metric 2602, localpref 100, valid, external, 
> best, ref 2
>   Community: 232589665 232618104
>   13768 12956 26210, (received-only)
> 64.34.84.117 from 64.34.84.117 (216.187.124.10)
>   Origin incomplete, localpref 100, external, ref 2
> 
> Route views is showing a 12/8 with a fair amount of dampening/flap 
> penalties in the last 10-12 minutes.

Looks like 12956 is announcing some /8s to every peer and transit. Worse 
still, Sprint and GX are propagating it. This is not the first time that 
Telefonica has leaked a lot of garbage routes with serious network impact 
as a result (nor is it the second or third, actually).

12.0.0.0/8
64.0.0.0/8
65.0.0.0/8 

I'd say both GX and Sprint have a lot to answer for right about now.

-- 
Richard A Steenbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)

12/8 problems?

[Drew Linsalata]

Apologies for a post of an operational nature, but is anyone else seeing 
problems with AT&Ts 12/8 block?


From a New York router connected to Global Crossing and Peer 1:

border-1.nycmny> sh ip bgp 12.xxx.xxx.xxx

BGP routing table entry for 12.0.0.0/8, version 86901457
Paths: (2 available, best #1)
  Not advertised to any peer
  3549 12956 26210
64.213.176.97 from 64.213.176.97 (208.50.59.1)
  Origin incomplete, metric 2602, localpref 100, valid, external, 
best, ref 2

  Community: 232589665 232618104
  13768 12956 26210, (received-only)
64.34.84.117 from 64.34.84.117 (216.187.124.10)
  Origin incomplete, localpref 100, external, ref 2

Route views is showing a 12/8 with a fair amount of dampening/flap 
penalties in the last 10-12 minutes.



--

Drew Linsalata
The Gotham Bus Company, Inc.
Dedicated Servers and Colocation Solutions
Long Island, New York
http://www.gothambus.com

The Cidr Report

[cidr-report]

This report has been generated at Fri Sep  9 21:46:59 2005 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
02-09-05165291  111606
03-09-05165338  111486
04-09-05165293  111545
05-09-05165398  111659
06-09-05165583  111665
07-09-05165590  111899
08-09-05165820  111854
09-09-05165951  111749


AS Summary
 20325  Number of ASes in routing system
  8424  Number of ASes announcing only one prefix
  1502  Largest number of prefixes announced by an AS
AS7018 : ATT-INTERNET4 - AT&T WorldNet Services
  91294208  Largest address span announced by an AS (/32s)
AS721  : DLA-ASNBLOCK-AS - 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').

 --- 09Sep05 ---
ASnumNetsNow NetsAggr  NetGain   % Gain   Description

Table 165916   1117985411832.6%   All ASes

AS4323  1160  232  92880.0%   TWTC - Time Warner Telecom
AS18566  843   22  82197.4%   COVAD - Covad Communications
AS721   1082  317  76570.7%   DLA-ASNBLOCK-AS - DoD Network
   Information Center
AS4134   961  239  72275.1%   CHINANET-BACKBONE
   No.31,Jin-rong Street
AS27364  554   22  53296.0%   ACS-INTERNET - Armstrong Cable
   Services
AS7018  1502  980  52234.8%   ATT-INTERNET4 - AT&T WorldNet
   Services
AS22773  523   30  49394.3%   CCINET-2 - Cox Communications
   Inc.
AS3602   553  151  40272.7%   SPRINT-CA-AS - Sprint Canada
   Inc.
AS6197   939  541  39842.4%   BATI-ATL - BellSouth Network
   Solutions, Inc
AS17676  465  104  36177.6%   JPNIC-JP-ASN-BLOCK Japan
   Network Information Center
AS6467   432   78  35481.9%   ESPIRECOMM - e.spire
   Communications, Inc.
AS15270  330   27  30391.8%   AS-PAETEC-NET - PaeTec.net -a
   division of
   PaeTecCommunications, Inc.
AS4766   590  289  30151.0%   KIXS-AS-KR Korea Telecom
AS14654  2926  28697.9%   WAYPORT - Wayport
AS9929   325   46  27985.8%   CNCNET-CN China Netcom Corp.
AS6167   330   58  27282.4%   CELLCO-PART - Cellco
   Partnership
AS19916  369   99  27073.2%   ASTRUM-0001 - OLM LLC
AS9583   777  509  26834.5%   SIFY-AS-IN Sify Limited
AS812284   20  26493.0%   ROGERS-CABLE - Rogers Cable
   Inc.
AS5668   495  235  26052.5%   AS-5668 - CenturyTel Internet
   Holdings, Inc.
AS1239   860  610  25029.1%   SPRINTLINK - Sprint
AS17488  319   83  23674.0%   HATHWAY-NET-AP Hathway IP Over
   Cable Internet
AS6140   419  185  23455.8%   IMPSAT-USA - ImpSat
AS9498   337  106  23168.5%   BBIL-AP BHARTI BT INTERNET
   LTD.
AS2386   902  676  22625.1%   INS-AS - AT&T Data
   Communications Services
AS6198   472  249  22347.2%   BATI-MIA - BellSouth Network
   Solutions, Inc
AS7545   520  306  21441.2%   TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Internet
   Pty Ltd
AS11456  287   73  21474.6%   NUVOX - NuVox Communications,
   Inc.
AS16814  298   85  21371.5%   NSS S.A.
AS23126  267   58  20978.3%   CENTURYTEL-SOLUTIONS-LLC -
   CenturyTel Solutions, LLC

Total  17487 64361105163.2%   Top 30 total


Possible Bogus Routes

24.246.0.0/17AS7018  ATT-INTERNET4 - AT&T

Re: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google

[Andre Oppermann]

Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:


On Sep 8, 2005, at 5:09 PM, Mark Bodley wrote:


His name has never "hurt" a companies stock price. Remember MCI--Um,
Worldcom. Remembering.. Um lost a ton of money... just remember.  
First time
I have noticed Google do anything so blatant. Time to sell Google?  
Are they

spending money on figure heads?


Dr. Cerf is still well in possession of his enormous faculties and  has 
an excellent grasp of both business and technical issues.  He is  an 
asset to any company he joins.


Figure Head?  Possibly.  But certainly not an empty one.


I'm not so sure he still up to it.  His performance as ICANN chairman
is not exactly stellar...

--
Andre