Re: FCC proposes fines against 73 applicants of Rural Digital Opportunity Fund
On Fri, 22 Jul 2022, William Herrin wrote: On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 1:12 PM Sean Donelan wrote: The FCC proposes $4,353,773.87 in total fines against 73 applicants in the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Phase I Auction (Auction 904) that defaulted on their bids for support between July 26, 2021, and March 10, 2022. The overwhelming majority of the penalties were in the 4 and low 5 figures -- pocket change for a network business. The exceptions were: LTD Broadband LLC Kansas and Oklahoma $2.3M Time Warner Cable Information Services (Indiana), $276k Time Warner Cable Information Services (South Carolina) $276k Charter Fiberlink – Tennessee $231k RiverStreet Communications of Virginia, Inc North Carolina $117k What % of fines does FCC successfully collect, vs what they issue? -Dan
Re: FCC proposes fines against 73 applicants of Rural Digital Opportunity Fund
Once upon a time, William Herrin said: > The overwhelming majority of the penalties were in the 4 and low 5 > figures -- pocket change for a network business. The exceptions were: Some of these companies are very small rural outfits, where a 5 figure fine isn't exactly pocket change. I wonder how the supply chain issues are affecting this. I know a rural electric company that had a (just before pre-RDOF) grant for setting up Internet that couldn't get the routers they'd ordered and paid for; they were back-ordered for months. They had to scramble and get loaners out of a reseller's demo pool to meet their grant timeline requirements. -- Chris Adams
Re: FCC proposes fines against 73 applicants of Rural Digital Opportunity Fund
On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 1:12 PM Sean Donelan wrote: > The FCC proposes $4,353,773.87 in total fines against 73 applicants in the > Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Phase I Auction (Auction 904) that > defaulted on their bids for support between July 26, 2021, and March 10, > 2022. The overwhelming majority of the penalties were in the 4 and low 5 figures -- pocket change for a network business. The exceptions were: LTD Broadband LLC Kansas and Oklahoma $2.3M Time Warner Cable Information Services (Indiana), $276k Time Warner Cable Information Services (South Carolina) $276k Charter Fiberlink – Tennessee $231k RiverStreet Communications of Virginia, Inc North Carolina $117k Regards, Bill Herrin -- For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/
Re: Does anybody know if part of this enforcement involves STIR/SHAKEN?
On 7/22/22 4:00 PM, Sean Donelan wrote: On Fri, 22 Jul 2022, Michael Thomas wrote: Basically the jist that it's fake auto warranty fraud calls. Or is this just requiring providers to do the forensics whichever way to enforce this? https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/21/tech/fcc-robocall-crackdown/index.html As always speak with your corporate attorney or a licensed attorney familar with communications law. The FCC order is under the TRACED Act of 2019. The order doesn't depend on STIR/SHAKEN. The Traceback Consortium and providers use a variety of methods to identify the calls. "By this Order, the Bureau directs all U.S.-based voice service providers to investigate promptly the apparently illegal robocall traffic identified in section II.A. above. We further direct all voice service providers that locate any of the apparently illegal robocall traffic described in this Order to take immediate steps to effectively mitigate and prevent further transmission of the apparently unlawful calls." [...] "If the voice service provider concludes that the identified traffic was not illegal, the report must include an explanation as to why the provider has reasonably concluded that the identified calls were not illegal and what steps the voice service provider took to reach that conclusion." [...] The order is available https://www.fcc.gov/document/robocall-enforcement-order-all-us-based-voice-service-providers So the FCC could have done this well before with routes that don't involve crypto authentication? That's what I've always assumed. Mike
Re: Does anybody know if part of this enforcement involves STIR/SHAKEN?
On Fri, 22 Jul 2022, Michael Thomas wrote: Basically the jist that it's fake auto warranty fraud calls. Or is this just requiring providers to do the forensics whichever way to enforce this? https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/21/tech/fcc-robocall-crackdown/index.html As always speak with your corporate attorney or a licensed attorney familar with communications law. The FCC order is under the TRACED Act of 2019. The order doesn't depend on STIR/SHAKEN. The Traceback Consortium and providers use a variety of methods to identify the calls. "By this Order, the Bureau directs all U.S.-based voice service providers to investigate promptly the apparently illegal robocall traffic identified in section II.A. above. We further direct all voice service providers that locate any of the apparently illegal robocall traffic described in this Order to take immediate steps to effectively mitigate and prevent further transmission of the apparently unlawful calls." [...] "If the voice service provider concludes that the identified traffic was not illegal, the report must include an explanation as to why the provider has reasonably concluded that the identified calls were not illegal and what steps the voice service provider took to reach that conclusion." [...] The order is available https://www.fcc.gov/document/robocall-enforcement-order-all-us-based-voice-service-providers
Does anybody know if part of this enforcement involves STIR/SHAKEN?
Basically the jist that it's fake auto warranty fraud calls. Or is this just requiring providers to do the forensics whichever way to enforce this? https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/21/tech/fcc-robocall-crackdown/index.html Mike
Re: [ripe-list] AFRINIC SUSPENDED CEO TRYING TO ASK GOVERNMENT TO APPOINT DIRECTORS OF RIR
> Return-path: i would have hoped that moderation of the ripe list would have kept such pathetic and disgusting racist sickenss off list. randy
Re: Frontier Dark Fiber
Here's the list of CLLI codes where you're no longer able to order dark fiber: https://www.fcc.gov/clli-code-list It seems odd as I look through there, finding COs with no competitive fiber and yet, they're on the list. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: "Paul Timmins" To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2022 1:45:37 PM Subject: Re: Frontier Dark Fiber Your rights under the ICA are dead. Since 2002 you were only able to order it if one end was in a tier 3 wirecenter, and it was killed in 2021 as an orderable product. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/08/2020-25254/modernizing-unbundling-and-resale-requirements-in-an-era-of-next-generation-networks-and-services There's an 8 year transition for existing unbundled dark fiber (February 28, 2029). Dark fiber loops were dead in 2002 under the TRRO. On 7/13/22 07:45, Mike Hammett wrote: Oh, and I forgot to mention that my ICA has it. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2022 6:40:47 AM Subject: Frontier Dark Fiber I'm looking for a contact at Frontier that can discuss dark fiber. My current account exec says they don't offer it, yet prior conversations with him and a previous SE revealed that they very much did (just didn't have availability on the paths I wanted at the time). Their web site highlights it fairly proudly. I'm aware that availability varies. I'm aware that they likely don't want to sell it. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP
FCC proposes fines against 73 applicants of Rural Digital Opportunity Fund
The FCC proposes $4,353,773.87 in total fines against 73 applicants in the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Phase I Auction (Auction 904) that defaulted on their bids for support between July 26, 2021, and March 10, 2022. [...] The objective of Auction 904 was to facilitate the provision of broadband service to Americans in wholly unserved areas. https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-proposes-over-4-million-fines-against-auction-904-defaulters Applicant Name AMG Technology Investment Group, LLC Aspire Networks 2, LLC Bright House Networks Information Services (Florida), LLC BroadLife Communications, Inc. Central Scott Telephone Company, Inc. Charter Fiberlink - Alabama, LLC Charter Fiberlink - Georgia, LLC Charter Fiberlink - Michigan, LLC Charter Fiberlink - Missouri, LLC Charter Fiberlink - Tennessee, LLC Charter Fiberlink CCO, LLC Charter Fiberlink VA-CCO, LLC City of Farmington Cogeco US (Delmar), LLC Commnet Wireless, LLC Computer Techniques, Inc. dba CTI Fiber Conexon Connect LLC Consolidated Fiber, Inc. Cooperative Connect, Inc. Delta Communications, L.L.C. Direct Communications Rockland, Inc Edisto Electric Cooperative, Inc. Effective Systems Fiber Network, LLC Foursight Communications LLC, dba Trilight Great Plains Communications LLC Gtek Computers & Wireless L.L.C. Guernsey-Muskingum Electric Cooperative, Inc. HolstonConnect LLC HomeTown Broadband, Inc. Horry Telephone Cooperative, Inc. Hotwire Communications, Ltd iZone Broadband LLC. KanOkla Telephone Association Licking Rural Electrification LTD Broadband LLC Lynches River Communications Inc MCC Network Services, LLC Mountain West Technologies Corporation NEXT, Powered by NAEC, LLC NexTier Consortium NMSURF, Inc. NW Fiber, LLC OEConnect, LLC One Ring Networks, Inc Palmetto Link, LLC PIERCE PEPIN COOPERATIVE SERVICES QCOL, Inc. Redzone Wireless, LLC RiverStreet Communications of North Carolina, Inc. RiverStreet Communications of Virginia, Inc. Rural Electric Cooperative Consortium Shelby Fiber, LLC Snake River Solutions, LLC South Central Power, Inc. STEUBEN COUNTY RURAL ELECTRIC MEMERSHIP SW Arkansas Telecommunications & Technology, Inc. Talkie Communications, Inc. Tennessee Valley Electric Cooperative The Seimitsu Corporation Time Warner Cable Information Services (California), LLC Time Warner Cable Information Services (Indiana), LLC Time Warner Cable Information Services (Kentucky), LLC Time Warner Cable Information Services (Massachusetts), LLC Time Warner Cable Information Services (New Hampshire), LLC Time Warner Cable Information Services (North Carolina), LLC Time Warner Cable Information Services (Ohio), LLC Time Warner Cable Information Services (Pennsylvania), LLC Time Warner Cable Information Services (South Carolina), LLC Time Warner Cable Information Services (Texas), LLC United Services, Inc. WC Fiber, LLC Wilkes Telephone Membership Corporation Wood County Telephone Company d/b/a Solarus YAZOO VALLEY ELECTRIC POWER ASSOCIATION yondoo Broadband LLC
Weekly Global IPv4 Routing Table Report
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Global IPv4 Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, SAFNOG TZNOG, MENOG, BJNOG, SDNOG, CMNOG, LACNOG and the RIPE Routing WG. Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net. For historical data, please see https://thyme.apnic.net. If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith . IPv4 Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 23 Jul, 2022 BGP Table (Global) as seen in Japan. Report Website: https://thyme.apnic.net Detailed Analysis: https://thyme.apnic.net/current/ Analysis Summary BGP routing table entries examined: 904523 Prefixes after maximum aggregation (per Origin AS): 340800 Deaggregation factor: 2.65 Unique aggregates announced (without unneeded subnets): 436913 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 73449 Prefixes per ASN: 12.31 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 63038 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 25918 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 10411 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:392 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 4.3 Max AS path length visible: 55 Max AS path prepend of ASN (265020) 50 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 980 Number of instances of unregistered ASNs: 985 Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs: 39846 Number of 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 33050 Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table: 157447 Number of bogon 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:24 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table:1 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space:503 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 3068267136 Equivalent to 182 /8s, 226 /16s and 10 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 82.9 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 82.9 Percentage of available address space allocated: 100.0 Percentage of address space in use by end-sites: 99.6 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 307212 APNIC Region Analysis Summary - Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes: 236057 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 67078 APNIC Deaggregation factor:3.52 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 231112 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:95728 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 12801 APNIC Prefixes per ASN: 18.05 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 3692 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1750 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:4.7 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 24 Number of APNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 8023 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 773114368 Equivalent to 46 /8s, 20 /16s and 202 /24s APNIC AS Blocks4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079, 55296-56319, 58368-59391, 63488-64098, 64297-64395, 131072-151865 APNIC Address Blocks 1/8, 14/8, 27/8, 36/8, 39/8, 42/8, 43/8, 49/8, 58/8, 59/8, 60/8, 61/8, 101/8, 103/8, 106/8, 110/8, 111/8, 112/8, 113/8, 114/8, 115/8, 116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8, 120/8, 121/8, 122/8, 123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8, 133/8, 150/8, 153/8, 163/8, 171/8, 175/8, 180/8, 182/8, 183/8, 202/8, 203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8, 219/8, 220/8, 221/8, 222/8, 223/8, ARIN Region Analysis Summary Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes:264035 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation: 120828 ARIN Deaggregation factor: 2.19 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 264351 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks:127253 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:19057 ARIN Prefixes per ASN:
Re: Issues with AS 1239
We observed routing issues to our prefixes from Europe to Toronto via AS1239 at around 8AM Pacific Time. Needed to remove AS1239 from our transit blend to mitigate. On 2022-07-22 09:46, Lou D wrote: Anyone else seeing sub optimal route issues with AS 1239? Anyone from there contact me off list please ?
Issues with AS 1239
Anyone else seeing sub optimal route issues with AS 1239? Anyone from there contact me off list please ?
