RE: IPV4 as a Commodity for Profit
Hi Randy- ARIN has produced the histogram as requested and posted it to our website. It can be found at http://www.arin.net/statistics/index.html#ipv4org Regards, Leslie Nobile Director, Registration Services ARIN -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Bush Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 4:32 AM To: Roland Perry Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: IPV4 as a Commodity for Profit dear arin hostfolk. could we please have the histogram for the last few years where the Y axis is the amount of allocation and the X axis is the number of organizations with that total size of new allocations during the period? you'll have to bucket alloc size in some useful way, probably a /16 or shorter or something. thanks. randy
RE: Yahoo! Mail/Sys Admin
Hello Everyone, It's been a while since I posted on this topic, and unfortunately I'm still having trouble with Yahoo deferrals. The links that were provided in this post worked, but after the forms were received by what I *think* is a human I still got a canned reply. I've tried replying with specific details about our problem, but is either answered with another generic reply or not at all. We are running Imall, and each domain has it's own IP address. Queue Timer and Tries before returning to sender are set to 30 minutes / 5 attempts. According to yahoo they do want you to attempt to resend if you get a 421 error. SPF is also set on a per-domain basis. I'm not sure what else to try. Does anyone have a better understanding of how Yahoo greylisting works? Thanks in advance! Justin Wilson
RE: AS 2828
Hi, For those who may be interested, you can see how this outage was perceived by routeviews' peers at LINX, using Rcat at http://rcat.rd.francetelecom.com/ Set the following options: starting date: 2008-02-26 11:30:00 ending date: 2008-02-26 11:40:00 time zone value: Etc/GMT-6 logical query: ori2828 It's event: RV_LINX_2008_02_66828 It shows that the different routeviews' eBGP peers at LINX have announced to the trace collector their path to join AS2828 had become unavailable at about 11:28. More precisely, it shows (when displaying the path exploration* undergone by the eBGP routers connected at LINX) that prefixes 205.159.169.0/24 and 63.244.0.0/16 (originated by XO) were unreachable between 11:29 and 11:47. What is more, it also shows that prefixes from 15 ASs behind XO (mostly customers) were also impacted by the outage (some only switched to another path but some also experienced unreachability between 11:29 and 11:47) Finally it shows that at 11:47 all the peers at LINX reconverged to the path they were using before the outage. It can also be noticed that Rcat had indeed identified AS2828 as the originator of this outage, which agrees with the core router failure claimed by XO (as explained at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) Best * To display the path exploration for a prefix you have to click on the prefix :) -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Wallace Keith Envoyé : mardi 26 février 2008 21:57 À : nanog@merit.edu Objet : RE: AS 2828 You might want to check the thread at [EMAIL PROTECTED], But everything looks a lot better on keynote then it did a few hours ago. -Keith -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Zaid Ali Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 2:09 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: AS 2828 I seem to have lost connectivity to AS 2828/XO communications. I can't get through to anyone on the BGP team at XO either. Anyone else experiencing this? Reply just to me, don't need to hold up thread time. Zaid
IETF Journal Announcement (fwd)
All - Forwarded on Mirjam's behalf. Aside: If you find the Thaler/Aboba article on protocol success interesting you might also want to check out the plenary slides from the last IETF: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/07dec/slides/plenaryt-1.pdf - Lucy -- Forwarded message -- Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 08:55:40 +0100 Subject: IETF Journal Announcement Hello, The new issue of the IETF Journal - Volume 3, Issue 3 - is now available at http://ietfjournal.isoc.org This issue's main focus is Security and Unwanted Traffic. Please also note the previous issue (Volume 3, Issue 2) which covered many topics related to IPv6. You can read this publication online or choose to download the full issue in PDF format. You can also keep up to date with the latest issue of the IETF Journal by subscribing to one of our RSS or Atom feeds. For comments or suggestions, please do not hesiate to contact us at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kind Regards, Mirjam Kuehne Internet Society (ISOC)
RE: Yahoo! Mail/Sys Admin
Hello, Try encorporating DomainKeys and applying for their feedback loop. http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/mail/postmaster/forms_index.html I still have the same problem. Do you have any users who forward their email to their free @yahoo.com addresses from your server? Let me know if you get in touch with anyone :) -Ray From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 10:01 AM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: RE: Yahoo! Mail/Sys Admin Hello Everyone, It's been a while since I posted on this topic, and unfortunately I'm still having trouble with Yahoo deferrals. The links that were provided in this post worked, but after the forms were received by what I *think* is a human I still got a canned reply. I've tried replying with specific details about our problem, but is either answered with another generic reply or not at all. We are running Imall, and each domain has it's own IP address. Queue Timer and Tries before returning to sender are set to 30 minutes / 5 attempts. According to yahoo they do want you to attempt to resend if you get a 421 error. SPF is also set on a per-domain basis. I'm not sure what else to try. Does anyone have a better understanding of how Yahoo greylisting works? Thanks in advance! Justin Wilson
RE: Power outages in Florida
For power conservation the units might automatically shut down data services. Frank From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Diaz Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 11:44 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Power outages in Florida Being that Miami is my home town. I found it interesting today that in areas affected by the black out services like verizon EVDO lost their backbone connections. The towers were up with signal but no one could get to the IP gateway. Driving a few miles to a lit area provided connectivity. This is a concern for those of us with hurricane experience in the area. David On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Scott Weeks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Being in the lightning capital of the world systems are generally well protected from power issues. None of our peers have had any issues. --- There has been a lot of lightning there recently... http://flash.ess.washington.edu/TOGA_network_global_maps.htm http://webflash.ess.washington.edu/AmericaL_plot_weather_map.jpg http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/us/26cnd-florida.html?hp says: The company and state officials said the blackout began with a failure in an electrical substation near the Turkey Point nuclear station south of Miami, the division of emergency management said. That failure caused other parts of the system to shut down to protect the integrity of the electrical grid. scott
Re: IETF Journal Announcement (fwd)
Don't worry if the ISOC website times out, their firewall isn't TCP ECN compatible. It was going to be fixed a couple of years ago when I enquired about it, but obviously hasn't been. Being liberal in what they'll accept seems to be a bit of a problem for them. It's the last remaining non-ECN compatible website that I've tried to access over the last couple of years. The others I'd had trouble with have all become ECN friendly. On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 08:33:43 -0800 (PST) Lucy Lynch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All - Forwarded on Mirjam's behalf. Aside: If you find the Thaler/Aboba article on protocol success interesting you might also want to check out the plenary slides from the last IETF: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/07dec/slides/plenaryt-1.pdf - Lucy -- Forwarded message -- Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 08:55:40 +0100 Subject: IETF Journal Announcement Hello, The new issue of the IETF Journal - Volume 3, Issue 3 - is now available at http://ietfjournal.isoc.org This issue's main focus is Security and Unwanted Traffic. Please also note the previous issue (Volume 3, Issue 2) which covered many topics related to IPv6. You can read this publication online or choose to download the full issue in PDF format. You can also keep up to date with the latest issue of the IETF Journal by subscribing to one of our RSS or Atom feeds. For comments or suggestions, please do not hesiate to contact us at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kind Regards, Mirjam Kuehne Internet Society (ISOC) -- Sheep are slow and tasty, and therefore must remain constantly alert. - Bruce Schneier, Beyond Fear
Re: IPV4 as a Commodity for Profit
ARIN has produced the histogram as requested and posted it to our website. It can be found at http://www.arin.net/statistics/index.html#ipv4org leslie, thank you ever so much. but the way it depects the date kinda obscures my point. my apologies for being a pita, but could the y axis please be normalized to /24 or /32 equivalents, i.e. the amount of address space? thank you! randy
RE: Yahoo! Mail/Sys Admin
Do you have any users who forward their email to their free @yahoo.com addresses from your server? That is likely the core of Justin's problem. We've found the way to minimize issues with yahoo mail are: 1. Clean up (ideally eliminate) the .forwarders on your end. This requires some effort on your part to educate your customers on how they are making their own lives more difficult with their behaviors. Always a tough task. 2. Scour your outbound queues of garbage be conservative in what you send 3. Agressive delivery retries, but early discards. In other words, we've noted the yahoo MX machines seem to operate their greylists independantly, so if one stops you the next one may not. Don't wait too long before you retry but dump mail after X hours if yahoo won't accept it. We've settled on 6 hours. Any longer and it just stays backed up forever. Let me know if you get in touch with anyone :) -Ray I agree with Ray on this one... I'll gladly buy a sushi lunch for the first real yahoo mail admin that ever appears in meatspace. I'm convinced that there are no real humans working mail ops there. --chuck
RE: Yahoo! Mail/Sys Admin
On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 14:03 -0800, chuck goolsbee wrote: I agree with Ray on this one... I'll gladly buy a sushi lunch for the first real yahoo mail admin that ever appears in meatspace. I'm convinced that there are no real humans working mail ops there. Wearing my academic IT hat for a moment, a Real Person! (tm) appeared on the HIED-EMAILADMIN list (hosted by nd.edu) earlier today, in answer to a lot of talk about how bad things have got with Yahoo recently. Out of politeness (since his email was obviously aimed at the list membership, which isn't NANOG) I have asked if he minds my forwarding it to other lists (well, I started with the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, but I'll work from there). His title, not giving too much away, is: Anti-Abuse Product Manager Yahoo! Mail And you may, or may not, find his details in the list archives of the first list I mentioned above. I hope someone finds my not mentioning this fruitful :) Graeme
Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity
I found this section of a Telephony Online article interesting: Though networking trends point toward an evolution to mesh networks, nationwide carrier networks currently lack the physical diversity that would help carriers realize the benefits of true mesh networking, Poll said. Qwest, for example, has about three or four cross-country arteries that correspond to railway rights of way. Replacing that with a more mesh-like architecture would increase the complexity of operating the network. For one thing, it would require more uniformity in the capacities of various network routes. You'd have to have units of 10 Gb/s traffic between all points on the network before this becomes economically viable, Poll said. When you place IP capacity, you have to place a lot of standby capacity to carry traffic along different paths. If we could get greater physical diversity in place, we could greatly diminish the amount of standby capacity we have to take. In order to realize the benefits of mesh networking, Poll said, carriers will need to cooperate with each other more than they currently do, using fiber swaps to increase the geographic diversity of network paths. http://telephonyonline.com/access/news/ofc-qwest-optical-0226/ To keep this OT as much as possible, my question is if a mesh-configuration of backup routes (where one link could provide 'protection' for many) would be considered a sufficient replacement for SONET rings, or if the Qwest CTO is really trying to get out of providing sub 50-msec protected loops and encouraging L3 and above protection schemes, so that they can even further over-subscribe their network. Frank
Re: Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity
Frank Bulk - iNAME wrote: To keep this OT as much as possible, my question is if a mesh-configuration of backup routes (where one link could provide 'protection' for many) would be considered a sufficient replacement for SONET rings, or if the Qwest CTO is really trying to get out of providing sub 50-msec protected loops and encouraging L3 and above protection schemes, so that they can even further over-subscribe their network. It's cool that the telecommunications companies have caught up with the times. they're only about 44 years late. http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_memoranda/RM3097/RM3097.chapter2.html That said the 3 cross country fiber paths they have weren't dictated by the network model they were operating under but rather Southern/Union Pacific's available right-of-way and Philip Anschutz's relatively efficent use of capital.
Re: Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 9:37 PM, Frank Bulk - iNAME [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://telephonyonline.com/access/news/ofc-qwest-optical-0226/ To keep this OT as much as possible, my question is if a mesh-configuration of backup routes (where one link could provide 'protection' for many) would be considered a sufficient replacement for SONET rings, or if the Qwest CTO is really trying to get out of providing sub 50-msec protected loops and encouraging L3 and above protection schemes, so that they can even further over-subscribe their network. Frank UU/MFS tried running IP on the 'protect' path of their SONET rings 10 years ago. It didn't work then. More seriously, you *can* avoid using protected links for IP (which is what Qwest seems to suggest) easily, and allegedly using MPLS/FRR you could have sub-second reroute times without having full dedicated protect path. Building your network on preemptable links (the protect-side) as UU did back in the day is probably of the I encourage my competitors to do this solutions. Paul Selling more grillz than George Foreman Wall
