Re: And Verio too? (was Re: Level3 problems)

[Dorian Kim]

On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 01:30:05PM -0600, Pete Kruckenberg wrote:
> 
> Authoritative sources report that Verio coincidentally had major problems 
> last night also:
> 
> http://www.boingboing.net/2005/10/21/two_tierone_isps_are.html
> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/21/0958232
>  ("is this the end for Level3?" heh)
> 
> Odd.
> 
> The last time there was major instability due to multiple backbones 
> upgrading was ... oh crap. So I'm going to get a major PSIRT "upgrade now 
> or die" notice while I'm at NANOG. Good thing Monday evening is open...

The Verio part seems to be an observational anormaly caused by
the frame of reference of the observer.

-dorian 

Re: Peering vs SFI (was Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering)

[Dorian Kim]

On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 04:01:51PM -0500, Richard Irving wrote:
>  Brzzzt!  lost both points.
> 
>   My prior email was [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charter Nanog member.

What is this "Charter Nanog member" and how does one get to be it?

Do you get a cool t-shirt with it?

-dorian

Re: NANOG Evolution

[Dorian Kim]

On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 07:40:43AM -0400, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
> Perhaps using the ARIN model for this would be a good idea.
> 
> IIRC, after someone in nominated, they are asked to fill out a small 
> questionnaire. Things like Organization, Org URL, Why do you want to serve 
> on the AC?, Describe how your professional goals and experience are 
> relevant, Describe your technical (especially IP) and professional 
> qualifications for filling an AC seat, etc.
> 
> Also, an important question is:
> 
> Please provide detailed biographical information to include all 
> experience, activities, associations, and affiliations (national and 
> international) relevant to serving on the AC. Describe positions held, and 
> your specific duties, achievements, and levels of responsibility. Include 
> the names of organizations served and dates of service.
> 
> Realising the above is specific to the AC, I believe with simple 
> modifications, these questions would serve the NANOG community well in 
> letting us feel comfortable with the nominees.

While it's not quite as specific as above, don't the candidate bios
 serve much the same purpose?

Quick glance at the bios seem to fairly cogently list candidates' 
current employment and responsibilities as well as relevant activities.

So, are we missing something? Should we be adding candidate position 
statements and such? 

-dorian

Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]]

[Dorian Kim]

On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 02:27:56PM -0600, John Dupuy wrote:
> I was looking at it from a route announcement point of view. Transit is 
> where AS A advertises full routes to AS B. Thus, AS B is getting transit 
> from A. Peering is where A & B only advertise their network and, possibly, 
> the networks that stub or purchase transit from them.
> 
> It is my understanding that the top ISPs "trade transit". They provide full 
> routes to each other without payment, regardless of how or where the route 
> was learned from. They are willing to pass some traffic without 
> compensation because it makes for better connectivity. From an announcement 
> POV they are not peering.
>
> I am still curious: do any of the larger ISPs on this list want to 
> confirm/deny the previous paragraph?

ISPs formerly known as tier1s in general peer with each other, not trade 
transit. 
If one of the peers started sending us full routes, that would quickly result 
in a 
NOC to NOC chat about route leaks.

If they exchanged full routes, wouldn't that be mutual transit, not peering?

This isn't meant to imply that networks don't play kinky games with each other
at various times that can confuse outside observers, but peering is peering
and transit is transit, most of the time.

-dorian

Re: OT: Re: Critters

[Dorian Kim]

On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 04:16:06AM -0400, Jeff Cole wrote:
> >Reliance Infocomm is installing 80,000 km of fiber in India. I wonder if
> >they have any tiger stories.
> 
> Oh no. You find lions only in Kenya

This is sooo way OT, but given the subject line...

There is still a remnant population of Asiatic lion (Panthera Leo Persica) in the 
Gir forests of Gujarat. I don't think Gir forest is a significant right of way
for fibre, but one never knows..

-dorian

Re: route filtering in large networks

[Dorian Kim]

On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 12:21:10AM -0500, Andy Dills wrote:
> But then, if configuration of routers is automated, it would seem even
> easier to implement the route filtering. Verio has a history of being a
> prefix length nazi, but were they that way about route validity? Plenty of
> networks are stringent on what they accept from their customers, but are
> they as stringent with the routes they send?

Route filtering and route validation are not necessarily the same things.
AFAIK, there are no scalable mechanisms for route validation deployed
today.

As far as route filtering is concerned, Verio currently does prefix filter
many of its public peers based on IRR registrations. 

However, our experience to date indicates that filtering peer networks via
IRR information is not a scalable solution. Some of the non-exhaustive reasons 
for this are:

o platform performance limitations with large prefix lists (some do a better
job, but they all fall short of acceptable, let alone ideal)
o GIGO, aka IRR data sanity
o lack of route registrations for large peer networks

Due to this, our direction is to move away from IRR based peer route filtering.

-dorian

Re: AP IX locations

[Dorian Kim]

On Sun, Sep 29, 2002 at 01:27:38PM -0700, Barry Raveendran Greene wrote:
> 1:1 figure for people age 18 - 60. Add these indicators to the fact that
> most of the Internet market dominating companies are the old PTTs. All these
> PTT (control freaks) are now Telcos (out to maximize share holder profit).
> All of them took a lot of hard knocks in the early years, learned from their
> mistakes, and now know where their markets are now going. So instead of
> dealing with clueless Asian PTTs in 1995 you are dealing with really clueful
> IP savvy Telcos in 2002. IP savvy Telcos who are members of the
> trans-oceanic cable businesses and are the ones buying up the excess
> capacity built by the failed "independent" trans-oceanic cable businesses.

And speaking of control.. don't expect those PTTs to give up control
(i.e. peering) in their home markets easily.

-dorian

Re: AP IX locations

[Dorian Kim]

On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 01:30:42PM -0500, keichii wrote:
> 
> From: "Neil J. McRae" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > I'm looking to improve my connectivity into the AP region, in
> > a cost effective [i.e. for as little as possible :-)]. I have
> > ruled out buying transit as it doesn't help the issue that I'm
> > trying to resolve, so I was wondering if there was a location/IXP
> > in the AP region that would enable me to interconnect with
> > as many AP carriers as possible.
> 
> Above.net and AT&T are your best bets for operations based in the Americas.
> Above has a .jp IX/colo that is almost "the" best connected place in AP.
> ATT and Above.net provide almost 80 to 90% of the bandwidth from
> the Americas to AP.

A handful of incumbent telcos of AP region countries as well as few others 
operate multigigabit IP networks across the Pacific. I don't think they'd 
agree with your statement.

-dorian