Re: Dormant space on blacklists, how can I resolve this?

[TJ Trout]

https://thebrotherswisp.com/index.php/geo-and-vpn/

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 6:51 AM Matthew Crocker 
wrote:

>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> I run Crocker Communications (AS7849) and have ARIN allocations of
> 161.77.0.0/16 & 66.59.48.0/20.   The 66.58.48.0/20 space was used for our
> datacenter which shutdown a couple years ago.  The space has mostly been
> dormant for the past couple years.   I’m now starting to assign
> 66.59.[55-60].0/24 to a new group of residential FTTH customers.   The
> customers are getting access denied messages from Akamai based websites.
>
>
>
> What can I do to get Akamai to unblock the 66.59.48.0/20 space.
>
> Is there a website I can look to research the reputation of the subnets?
> They haven’t been used in years so I would expect them to be pretty clean.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> -Matt
>
>
>
>
>

Looking for sales from comcast

[Brandon Zhi]

Hello guys,

Our company is looking for a way to get IP Transit from comcast, can
someone give me the email of their sales team?

Also, does anyone know about whether AT-Tand T-Mobile provide IP Transit or
not?


Best wishes,

Re: BGP Books

[Warren Kumari]

On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 7:20 PM, Steven G. Huter  wrote:

> On 4/25/23 3:55 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TFX/VE6BBM) wrote:
>
> It has been a couple of decades since I've done any BGP in anger, but it
> looks like I will be jumping into the deep end again, soon, and I
> desperately need to get up to speed again.
>
> There seem to be a lot of good guides out there from Cisco, Juniper, and
> the like, but naturally they are very product oriented. What I'm looking
> for is more like the Stevens networking bibles (i.e.
> "BGP Illustrated Vol I and II"). Something that covers more than just the
> raw protocols, and includes things like RPKI. (The world sure has changed
> since the last time I was doing this!)
>
> Any/all suggestions welcome.
>
> https://learn.nsrc.org/bgp
>


Yes, this. Much of it (all of it?) is presented by Philip Smith, and he's a
sufficiently entertaining speaker that it's worth watching even if you are
already a bgp "expert".

As for books — I used to buy a copy of "BGP4: Inter-Domain Routing in the
Internet" by John W Stewart for all of my new hires —
https://amzn.to/3VdqdfK . It's really short and sweet, and covers just the
stuff that you need to know. It is old at this point (1998!), but still
well worth the read.

W


> Steve
>

NWS service assessment on 2021 Hurricane Ida

[Sean Donelan]

Just published, buried in the after-action report on 2021 Hurricane 
Ida


Commodity internet access is now part of life-safety.


National Weather Service
Service Assessment
August-September 2021 Hurricane Ida
April 2023

https://www.weather.gov/media/publications/assessments/Hurricane_Ida_Service_Assessment.pdf
[...]
The Assessment Team found commodity internet access as important to the 
completion of the NWS mission as the AWIPS Wide Area Network (WAN) is to 
disseminating life-saving warnings. The lack of reliable, consistent 
internet access, to include sufficient bandwidth, would have led
to mission failure during Ida if not for extraordinary measures taken by 
staff at WFO New Orleans/Baton Rouge and the LMRFC. WFO New Orleans/Baton 
Rouge and the LMRFC sent people to telework from a forecaster’s home, 
where they had reliable commodity internet, to provide IDSS.


[...]

Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Doug McIntyre]

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 09:51:36AM -0400, Chuck Church wrote:
> Hey all.  Question about standard 4 post racks.  We bought some that are
> adjustable.  Unfortunately, the posts are very flimsy, as these are some
> fancy cabinets with spacing on the sides for vertical patch panels, etc.  We
> found that 2 post mounting of most Cisco devices (namely Cat 9500 1RU
> switches) are sagging quite bad.

A perpetual problem with Cisco all the way back to their 2501 routers.
Sometimes they seem to come out with a better design, only to
revert back to the worst design the next generation of gear.

> Is there a 'standard' distance between front and back rails
> that devices usually adhere to?

I've got about 5 different "standard" depths in my datacenter. The
most common I have is 29.5" because that is the depth of a whole bunch of
fixed (ie. not adjustable) shelves I have are.

I've seen 32" and 36" in use for newer setups, as the eqiupment keeps getting 
deeper,
and deeper. Most equipment today will adjust for different depths quite
readily, and stick out past the back rails (so those 1050mm or 1200mm deep 
cabinets really
don't give you lots of empty space when the gear inside requires all that 
depth, then
power cables take up the rest).

So, ultimately the depth doesn't matter much as the rails will adjust to what 
you have
within reason now-a-days.

Gone are the days where equipment (ie. Sun, DEC) only fit in that one
rack that Sun paired with that specific Sun line. And when you bought different
Sun gear, you needed to buy a different rack to hold that.

RE: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Warren Kumari]

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 2:38 PM, Adam Thompson 
wrote:

> Fascinating.  I’ve never had an ASR-1001 come with two sets of ears, and I
> also note that the text of the instruction manual doesn’t reference the
> rear set at all.  I’ve never seen rear ears on any Cisco gear of my own,
> nor on anything the local ILEC has installed either.  I think the diagram
> is in error here.
>
> However, the “optional” step 1 is a pretty solid hint (i.e. pretty much a
> clue-by-four upside the head, here!) that you really should use a shelf.
> As in you REALLY SHOULD USE A SHELF of some kind.
>


Hah! Your mention of clue-by-fours while we are talking about drooping
routers reminds me of one of my more useful tools. I have a bunch of bits
of 2x4 which I've cut to around 1.75",  3.5", 7".

These are really really helpful when trying to mount a piece of
equipment under something which is either not screwed in, or is drooping at
the back.
You can use these as spacers when replacing a bit of gear which is
supporting other bits of gear, or, with a small shim/flat screwdriver as a
way to jack up a devices which is drooping at the back (and so slide in
another device). There are much more elegant solutions (like a
machinist jack), but a few off-cuts of 2x4 are cheap, light, and
non-marring.

This thread feels somewhat like "old NANOG" - people discussing actual
issues that they run into, and then sharing tips and tricks to help with
those issues. I miss this…

W


>
> It doesn’t even have to be a full shelf – any rail kit that relies on an
> “L”-shaped profile instead of interlocking sliding bits should support an
> ASR-1001 just fine,  e.g. Tripp-Lite’s 4POSTRAILKIT1U.  RackSolutions’ 
> Universal
> Fixed Server Rack Rails 
> shows an example of a slightly different design that some prefer – it all
> works about the same way.
>
>
>
> The other thing I’ve done is used a shallow cantilever shelf to support
> the rear end of equipment that only comes with ears, if it’s deep enough –
> something like StarTech’s CABSHELFV1U; the trick is finding a shelf that
> simultaneously doesn’t have the structural fold at the rear in the way AND
> doesn’t interfere with the device immediately below.  You’d think there’re
> only 2 geometries of product to worry about, but there are actually more
> b/c there’s no standard – so test-fit first, or examine photos really
> carefully.  This is usually more of a hack than a permanent, supportable
> solution, but sometimes it can work very well and very cheaply.
>
>
>
> Or, just make sure you’re installing the ASR immediately above something
> that does have proper 4-post mounting rails.  This is probably the single
> most common way to safely & securely mount “eared” devices in a 4-post rack
> that I’ve seen – that Dell PowerEdge server in the rack suddenly starts
> doing double-duty as a shelf!  (Or the UPS, or the KVM, or the ethernet
> switch, or…)
>
>
>
> -Adam
>
>
>
> *Adam Thompson*
>
> Consultant, Infrastructure Services
>
>
>
> 100 - 135 Innovation Drive
>
> Winnipeg, MB R3T 6A8
>
> (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only)
>
> https://www.merlin.mb.ca
>
> Chat with me on Teams
> 
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* NANOG  *On Behalf
> Of *Chuck Church
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 27, 2023 10:36 AM
> *To:* 'Mark Stevens' ; nanog@nanog.org
> *Subject:* RE: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question
>
>
>
> Hey all, sorry I did mean to say ASR1001 (an X model to be exact).  The 4
> post mounting they show in a hardware mounting doc uses front and back
> ears, which I’ve never done:
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/routers/asr1000/install/guide/
> asr1routers/asr-1000-series-hig/asr-hig-1001.html#task_1205646
> see figure 16 slightly down from there.
>
> I do see some generic rails from TrippLite that probably would work, as
> well as shelves.   I was hoping a standard depth that most vendors honored
> for 4 post existed, but it doesn’t seem likely.  We’ll have a variety of
> PaloAlto, Cisco, Checkpoint, and others co-habiting.
>
>
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> *From:* NANOG  *On Behalf
> Of *Mark Stevens
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 27, 2023 11:17 AM
> *To:* nanog@nanog.org
> *Subject:* Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question
>
>
>
> Lucky you with a 19" data rack. All I have are 23" telco racks but I will
> say, the 23" extension ears from Cisco are serious and my router chassis'
> don't sag.
>
> Mark
>
> On 4/27/2023 10:04 AM, Chris Marget wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 9:53 AM Chuck Church 
> wrote:
>
> for a Cisco ASA1001, there aren’t rails, but rather front and back ‘ears’
> you use to hit both front and back posts.
>
>
>
> Front *and* back ears? I'm not sure what an ASA 1001 is (ASR?) but my
> experience with these boxes is that they have a single pair of ears which
> can be mounted front OR back.
>
> The heavier / deeper 1RU devices do tend to sag alarmingly.
>

RE: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Adam Thompson]

Fascinating.  I’ve never had an ASR-1001 come with two sets of ears, and I also 
note that the text of the instruction manual doesn’t reference the rear set at 
all.  I’ve never seen rear ears on any Cisco gear of my own, nor on anything 
the local ILEC has installed either.  I think the diagram is in error here.
However, the “optional” step 1 is a pretty solid hint (i.e. pretty much a 
clue-by-four upside the head, here!) that you really should use a shelf.  As in 
you REALLY SHOULD USE A SHELF of some kind.

It doesn’t even have to be a full shelf – any rail kit that relies on an 
“L”-shaped profile instead of interlocking sliding bits should support an 
ASR-1001 just fine,  e.g. Tripp-Lite’s 4POSTRAILKIT1U.  RackSolutions’ 
Universal Fixed Server Rack 
Rails shows an example of a 
slightly different design that some prefer – it all works about the same way.

The other thing I’ve done is used a shallow cantilever shelf to support the 
rear end of equipment that only comes with ears, if it’s deep enough – 
something like StarTech’s CABSHELFV1U; the trick is finding a shelf that 
simultaneously doesn’t have the structural fold at the rear in the way AND 
doesn’t interfere with the device immediately below.  You’d think there’re only 
2 geometries of product to worry about, but there are actually more b/c there’s 
no standard – so test-fit first, or examine photos really carefully.  This is 
usually more of a hack than a permanent, supportable solution, but sometimes it 
can work very well and very cheaply.

Or, just make sure you’re installing the ASR immediately above something that 
does have proper 4-post mounting rails.  This is probably the single most 
common way to safely & securely mount “eared” devices in a 4-post rack that 
I’ve seen – that Dell PowerEdge server in the rack suddenly starts doing 
double-duty as a shelf!  (Or the UPS, or the KVM, or the ethernet switch, or…)

-Adam

Adam Thompson
Consultant, Infrastructure Services
[cid:image002.png@01D9790D.8F568C90]
100 - 135 Innovation Drive
Winnipeg, MB R3T 6A8
(204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only)
https://www.merlin.mb.ca
[cid:image003.png@01D9790B.395F2C40]Chat with me on 
Teams


From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Chuck 
Church
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2023 10:36 AM
To: 'Mark Stevens' ; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

Hey all, sorry I did mean to say ASR1001 (an X model to be exact).  The 4 post 
mounting they show in a hardware mounting doc uses front and back ears, which 
I’ve never done:
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/routers/asr1000/install/guide/asr1routers/asr-1000-series-hig/asr-hig-1001.html#task_1205646
see figure 16 slightly down from there.

I do see some generic rails from TrippLite that probably would work, as well as 
shelves.   I was hoping a standard depth that most vendors honored for 4 post 
existed, but it doesn’t seem likely.  We’ll have a variety of PaloAlto, Cisco, 
Checkpoint, and others co-habiting.

Chuck

From: NANOG 
mailto:nanog-bounces+chuckchurch=gmail@nanog.org>>
 On Behalf Of Mark Stevens
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2023 11:17 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

Lucky you with a 19" data rack. All I have are 23" telco racks but I will say, 
the 23" extension ears from Cisco are serious and my router chassis' don't sag.

Mark

On 4/27/2023 10:04 AM, Chris Marget wrote:

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 9:53 AM Chuck Church 
mailto:chuckchu...@gmail.com>> wrote:
for a Cisco ASA1001, there aren’t rails, but rather front and back ‘ears’ you 
use to hit both front and back posts.

Front *and* back ears? I'm not sure what an ASA 1001 is (ASR?) but my 
experience with these boxes is that they have a single pair of ears which can 
be mounted front OR back.

The heavier / deeper 1RU devices do tend to sag alarmingly.

 Is there a ‘standard’ distance between front and back rails that devices 
usually adhere to?

If you're thinking of setting the front/back distance to accommodate a specific 
device, table 2 might be of some interest:
https://i.dell.com/sites/doccontent/business/solutions/engineering-docs/en/Documents/rail-rack-matrix.pdf

Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Randy Bush]

> It's super annoying, and somewhat terrifying to be banging on a rack
> containing a bunch of spinning rust, but all too often it's necessary

we just moved a rack's content from the westin to komo plaza [0] and
only had one questionable drive.  terrifying is the right word.

randy

[0] - we may be the first rat off the sad westin ship

Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Warren Kumari]

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 2:21 PM, Randy Bush  wrote:

> "small mounting shelf"
>
> we use mounting shelves for all sorts of recalcitrant devices
>


Yah, and for recalcitrant screws [0] ,  one of these:
https://amzn.to/41Z0YQq . It's super annoying, and somewhat terrifying to
be banging on a rack containing a bunch of spinning rust, but all too often
it's necessary…

W
[0]: You know, the ones that someone decided to put in with an electric
drill with the clutch set to "drill", or the ones where someone put a 10/32
screw into an M6 hole, or…



> randy
>

Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Randy Bush]

> "small mounting shelf"

we use mounting shelves for all sorts of recalcitrant devices

randy

Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Warren Kumari]

A bunch of devices (eg Juniper MX240) come with a "small mounting shelf" —
see Figure1, Figure 2 at
https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/hardware/mx240/topics/topic-map/mx240-installing-the-router.html#id-installing-the-mx240-router-mounting-hardware-for-a-rack-or-cabinet

Their theory is that these get mounted on the "back" of the front rail, and
it supports the weight of the chassis. I generally just put these on the
font of the rear rail, and rest the back of the router on that. Seems to
work well - the chassis is narrow enough to slide if the cabinet is very
shallow, and the shelf is usually wide enough to deal with deeper
cabinets...

The other option is "Universal Rails" (AKA "those funny sort of L bracket
half shelf thingies") — e.g:
https://www.cablesandkits.com/racks-cabinets/rack-mount-shelves-and-rails/rackmount-rails/ck-rckmntrls/pro-18146

W


On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 10:03 AM, Mel Beckman  wrote:

> We use shelves rather than hanging all the weight of racked gear on the
> ears. That rarely works well, but a 4-post shelf for every half-dozen or so
> devices works wonderfully. These shelves are usually quite adjustable.
>
>  -mel beckman
>
> On Apr 27, 2023, at 6:54 AM, Chuck Church  wrote:
>
> 
>
> Hey all.  Question about standard 4 post racks.  We bought some that are
> adjustable.  Unfortunately, the posts are very flimsy, as these are some
> fancy cabinets with spacing on the sides for vertical patch panels, etc.
> We found that 2 post mounting of most Cisco devices (namely Cat 9500 1RU
> switches) are sagging quite bad.   We’re used to the new server type rails
> that extend to support most reasonable distances front rails to back for 4
> post mounting.  However, for a Cisco ASA1001, there aren’t rails, but
> rather front and back ‘ears’ you use to hit both front and back posts.
> These would appear to not have any adjustability, the front to back post
> distance would seem to need to match the ears, I assume they don’t adjust
> placement on the router much.  Is there a ‘standard’ distance between front
> and back rails that devices usually adhere to?  Googling didn’t find an
> answer readily.  These are 19” wide cabinets by the way.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Chuck
>
>

[NANOG-announce] Upcoming Event: ABQNOG + New ISOC Course

[Nanog News]

*Register Now for ABQNOG! *

ABQNOG will take place next Thursday 4, May 2023 in Albuquerque, NM.

ABQNOG allows industry professionals to network with others in the region
and learn more about the latest technology trends.

*REGISTER NOW* 
*New ISOC Course: Fundamentals of Designing and Deploying Computer Networks*

*Enroll in this New ISOC Moderated Course with an Instructor! *

*This course will feature:*

   - Fundamentals of Networking
   - Ethernet
   - WIFI Technologies
   - Planning, Design, and Deployment of Simple LANs
   - How to Connect a LAN to the Internet


*MORE INFO
*
*Join the Women in Tech Affinity Group! *
*Have You Checked out our Online Community Discussion Threads? *

The NANOG Affinity Groups are part of the Community Forum and allow our
members to connect over shared interests.

Did you know NANOG has a Women in Tech (WIT) Affinity group? Connect with
other females in the tech industry and find mentorship and support while
sharing your experiences.
*MORE INFO  *
___
NANOG-announce mailing list
NANOG-announce@nanog.org
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

Upcoming Event: ABQNOG + New ISOC Course

[Nanog News]

*Register Now for ABQNOG! *

ABQNOG will take place next Thursday 4, May 2023 in Albuquerque, NM.

ABQNOG allows industry professionals to network with others in the region
and learn more about the latest technology trends.

*REGISTER NOW* 
*New ISOC Course: Fundamentals of Designing and Deploying Computer Networks*

*Enroll in this New ISOC Moderated Course with an Instructor! *

*This course will feature:*

   - Fundamentals of Networking
   - Ethernet
   - WIFI Technologies
   - Planning, Design, and Deployment of Simple LANs
   - How to Connect a LAN to the Internet


*MORE INFO
*
*Join the Women in Tech Affinity Group! *
*Have You Checked out our Online Community Discussion Threads? *

The NANOG Affinity Groups are part of the Community Forum and allow our
members to connect over shared interests.

Did you know NANOG has a Women in Tech (WIT) Affinity group? Connect with
other females in the tech industry and find mentorship and support while
sharing your experiences.
*MORE INFO  *

Re: Dormant space on blacklists, how can I resolve this?

[Jared Mauch]

I’ll help you off-list.  

- Jared

> On Apr 27, 2023, at 9:46 AM, Matthew Crocker  wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello,
>  
> I run Crocker Communications (AS7849) and have ARIN allocations of 
> 161.77.0.0/16 & 66.59.48.0/20.   The 66.58.48.0/20 space was used for our 
> datacenter which shutdown a couple years ago.  The space has mostly been 
> dormant for the past couple years.   I’m now starting to assign 
> 66.59.[55-60].0/24 to a new group of residential FTTH customers.   The 
> customers are getting access denied messages from Akamai based websites.
>  
> What can I do to get Akamai to unblock the 66.59.48.0/20 space.
> Is there a website I can look to research the reputation of the subnets?  
> They haven’t been used in years so I would expect them to be pretty clean.
>  
> Thanks
>  
> -Matt

RE: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Chuck Church]

Hey all, sorry I did mean to say ASR1001 (an X model to be exact).  The 4 post 
mounting they show in a hardware mounting doc uses front and back ears, which 
I’ve never done:
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/routers/asr1000/install/guide/asr1routers/asr-1000-series-hig/asr-hig-1001.html#task_1205646
see figure 16 slightly down from there.  

I do see some generic rails from TrippLite that probably would work, as well as 
shelves.   I was hoping a standard depth that most vendors honored for 4 post 
existed, but it doesn’t seem likely.  We’ll have a variety of PaloAlto, Cisco, 
Checkpoint, and others co-habiting.

 

Chuck

 

From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Mark 
Stevens
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2023 11:17 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

 

Lucky you with a 19" data rack. All I have are 23" telco racks but I will say, 
the 23" extension ears from Cisco are serious and my router chassis' don't sag.

Mark

On 4/27/2023 10:04 AM, Chris Marget wrote:

 

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 9:53 AM Chuck Church mailto:chuckchu...@gmail.com> > wrote:

for a Cisco ASA1001, there aren’t rails, but rather front and back ‘ears’ you 
use to hit both front and back posts.

 

Front *and* back ears? I'm not sure what an ASA 1001 is (ASR?) but my 
experience with these boxes is that they have a single pair of ears which can 
be mounted front OR back.

The heavier / deeper 1RU devices do tend to sag alarmingly.

 

 Is there a ‘standard’ distance between front and back rails that devices 
usually adhere to?

 

If you're thinking of setting the front/back distance to accommodate a specific 
device, table 2 might be of some interest:

https://i.dell.com/sites/doccontent/business/solutions/engineering-docs/en/Documents/rail-rack-matrix.pdf

 

 

RE: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Travis Garrison]

We have used these with great luck. Might be able to find some 1U rails instead 
of the standard 2U.

https://www.amazon.com/APC-SU032A-4-Post-Rackmount-Rails/dp/B7L3MX

Thanks
Travis

From: NANOG  On Behalf Of 
Chuck Church
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2023 8:52 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

Hey all.  Question about standard 4 post racks.  We bought some that are 
adjustable.  Unfortunately, the posts are very flimsy, as these are some fancy 
cabinets with spacing on the sides for vertical patch panels, etc.  We found 
that 2 post mounting of most Cisco devices (namely Cat 9500 1RU switches) are 
sagging quite bad.   We're used to the new server type rails that extend to 
support most reasonable distances front rails to back for 4 post mounting.  
However, for a Cisco ASA1001, there aren't rails, but rather front and back 
'ears' you use to hit both front and back posts.  These would appear to not 
have any adjustability, the front to back post distance would seem to need to 
match the ears, I assume they don't adjust placement on the router much.  Is 
there a 'standard' distance between front and back rails that devices usually 
adhere to?  Googling didn't find an answer readily.  These are 19" wide 
cabinets by the way.

Thanks,

Chuck

Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Mark Stevens]

Lucky you with a 19" data rack. All I have are 23" telco racks but I 
will say, the 23" extension ears from Cisco are serious and my router 
chassis' don't sag.


Mark

On 4/27/2023 10:04 AM, Chris Marget wrote:


On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 9:53 AM Chuck Church  
wrote:


for a Cisco ASA1001, there aren’t rails, but rather front and back
‘ears’ you use to hit both front and back posts.


Front *and* back ears? I'm not sure what an ASA 1001 is (ASR?) but my 
experience with these boxes is that they have a single pair of ears 
which can be mounted front OR back.


The heavier / deeper 1RU devices do tend to sag alarmingly.

 Is there a ‘standard’ distance between front and back rails that
devices usually adhere to?


If you're thinking of setting the front/back distance to accommodate a 
specific device, table 2 might be of some interest:

https://i.dell.com/sites/doccontent/business/solutions/engineering-docs/en/Documents/rail-rack-matrix.pdf

Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Thomas Bellman]

On 2023-04-27 16:05, Dobbins, Roland via NANOG wrote:

> There isn’t a standard for rack depth, AFAIK, but one typically sees
> anywhere from 27in/69cm – 50in/127cm, in my experience.  42in/106.7cm
> & 48in/122cm are quite common depth dimensions.

You are talking about the depth of the entire *cabinet*, right?
I.e, how much floor space it occupies.  Because the OP asked about
the distance between the front and rear mounting *posts*, not the
full cabinet depth.  (127 cm between the posts would require the
cabinet to be 150-160 cm deep at least, and I have never seen racks
that deep.  Last time I checked, the deepest racks from e.g. Rittal
were 120 cm.)


/Bellman



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Dobbins, Roland via NANOG]

On 27 Apr 2023, at 20:51, Chuck Church 
mailto:chuckchu...@gmail.com>> wrote:

  Is there a ‘standard’ distance between front and back rails that devices 
usually adhere to?

There isn’t a standard for rack depth, AFAIK, but one typically sees anywhere 
from 27in/69cm – 50in/127cm, in my experience.  42in/106.7cm & 48in/122cm are 
quite common depth dimensions.

Others here may have more specific information.

Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Chris Marget]

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 9:53 AM Chuck Church  wrote:

> for a Cisco ASA1001, there aren’t rails, but rather front and back ‘ears’
> you use to hit both front and back posts.
>

Front *and* back ears? I'm not sure what an ASA 1001 is (ASR?) but my
experience with these boxes is that they have a single pair of ears which
can be mounted front OR back.

The heavier / deeper 1RU devices do tend to sag alarmingly.


>  Is there a ‘standard’ distance between front and back rails that devices
> usually adhere to?
>

If you're thinking of setting the front/back distance to accommodate a
specific device, table 2 might be of some interest:
https://i.dell.com/sites/doccontent/business/solutions/engineering-docs/en/Documents/rail-rack-matrix.pdf

Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Mel Beckman]

We use shelves rather than hanging all the weight of racked gear on the ears. 
That rarely works well, but a 4-post shelf for every half-dozen or so devices 
works wonderfully. These shelves are usually quite adjustable.

 -mel beckman

On Apr 27, 2023, at 6:54 AM, Chuck Church  wrote:


Hey all.  Question about standard 4 post racks.  We bought some that are 
adjustable.  Unfortunately, the posts are very flimsy, as these are some fancy 
cabinets with spacing on the sides for vertical patch panels, etc.  We found 
that 2 post mounting of most Cisco devices (namely Cat 9500 1RU switches) are 
sagging quite bad.   We’re used to the new server type rails that extend to 
support most reasonable distances front rails to back for 4 post mounting.  
However, for a Cisco ASA1001, there aren’t rails, but rather front and back 
‘ears’ you use to hit both front and back posts.  These would appear to not 
have any adjustability, the front to back post distance would seem to need to 
match the ears, I assume they don’t adjust placement on the router much.  Is 
there a ‘standard’ distance between front and back rails that devices usually 
adhere to?  Googling didn’t find an answer readily.  These are 19” wide 
cabinets by the way.

Thanks,

Chuck

Re: Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Justin Wilson (Lists)]

I have not seen a standard on cabinets.  I have gear in a wide variety of 
racks.  Some of are real shallow.  Some are deep.  I use these to generically 
solve the sagging issue.


https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00XXDJASY?ref=nb_sb_ss_w_as-reorder-t1_k1_1_11==EFCM0EZP8BMA==navpoint+ra
NavePoint Universal 1U Rack Mount 4-Post Shelf Rail for Dell Compaq IBM HP APC 
- 33.5 Inches deep
amazon.com





Justin Wilson
j...@mtin.net

—
https://j2sw.com (AS399332)
https://blog.j2sw.com - Podcast and Blog

> On Apr 27, 2023, at 9:51 AM, Chuck Church  wrote:
> 
> Hey all.  Question about standard 4 post racks.  We bought some that are 
> adjustable.  Unfortunately, the posts are very flimsy, as these are some 
> fancy cabinets with spacing on the sides for vertical patch panels, etc.  We 
> found that 2 post mounting of most Cisco devices (namely Cat 9500 1RU 
> switches) are sagging quite bad.   We’re used to the new server type rails 
> that extend to support most reasonable distances front rails to back for 4 
> post mounting.  However, for a Cisco ASA1001, there aren’t rails, but rather 
> front and back ‘ears’ you use to hit both front and back posts.  These would 
> appear to not have any adjustability, the front to back post distance would 
> seem to need to match the ears, I assume they don’t adjust placement on the 
> router much.  Is there a ‘standard’ distance between front and back rails 
> that devices usually adhere to?  Googling didn’t find an answer readily.  
> These are 19” wide cabinets by the way.  
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Chuck

Standard DC rack rail distance, front to back question

[Chuck Church]

Hey all.  Question about standard 4 post racks.  We bought some that are
adjustable.  Unfortunately, the posts are very flimsy, as these are some
fancy cabinets with spacing on the sides for vertical patch panels, etc.  We
found that 2 post mounting of most Cisco devices (namely Cat 9500 1RU
switches) are sagging quite bad.   We're used to the new server type rails
that extend to support most reasonable distances front rails to back for 4
post mounting.  However, for a Cisco ASA1001, there aren't rails, but rather
front and back 'ears' you use to hit both front and back posts.  These would
appear to not have any adjustability, the front to back post distance would
seem to need to match the ears, I assume they don't adjust placement on the
router much.  Is there a 'standard' distance between front and back rails
that devices usually adhere to?  Googling didn't find an answer readily.
These are 19" wide cabinets by the way.  

 

Thanks,

 

Chuck

Dormant space on blacklists, how can I resolve this?

[Matthew Crocker]

Hello,

I run Crocker Communications (AS7849) and have ARIN allocations of 
161.77.0.0/16 & 66.59.48.0/20.   The 66.58.48.0/20 space was used for our 
datacenter which shutdown a couple years ago.  The space has mostly been 
dormant for the past couple years.   I’m now starting to assign 
66.59.[55-60].0/24 to a new group of residential FTTH customers.   The 
customers are getting access denied messages from Akamai based websites.

What can I do to get Akamai to unblock the 66.59.48.0/20 space.
Is there a website I can look to research the reputation of the subnets?  They 
haven’t been used in years so I would expect them to be pretty clean.

Thanks

-Matt

Re: [External] Spectrum networks IPv6 access issue

[Francis via NANOG]

I’m in the northeast and I can confirm on a Spectrum Enterprise connection I 
have issues tracerouting to 2604:1380:4641:c500::1.

Gets to e0-33.core1.nyc7.he.net and then packets just disappear:

 Host   
  Loss%   Snt   Last   Avg  Best  Wrst StDev
 1. _gateway
   0.0%   1081.0   1.7   0.8  26.3   3.3
 2. 2602:XXX::X::X  
   0.0%   1084.4   6.6   4.2  27.9   4.0
 3. 2602:XXX::X::XXX
   0.0%   1083.1   3.0   3.0   3.5   0.0
 4. 2604::X:X::X:   
   0.0%   1085.2   4.8   3.3  37.1   5.0
 5. lag-15.srspny0101h.netops.charter.com   
   0.0%   1083.9  20.8   3.6 371.6  45.4
 6. lag-32.albynyyf02r.netops.charter.com   
  44.4%   1084.9   4.9   4.8   5.5   0.1
 7. lag-26.rcr01albynyyf.netops.charter.com 
  80.4%   1085.1   5.3   5.0   7.7   0.6
 8. lag-416.nycmny837aw-bcr00.netops.charter.com
  57.9%   108   37.4  14.5  12.7  54.4   7.1
 9. lag-1.pr2.nyc20.netops.charter.com  
   0.0%   108   49.8  17.1  12.3  65.7  11.0
10. e0-33.core1.nyc7.he.net 
   0.0%   108   12.9  13.2  12.8  19.8   0.7
11. (waiting for reply)

Trying from another network and I was able to get through:

 Host   
  Loss%   Snt   Last   Avg  Best  Wrst StDev
 1. ca.tor.ix.caramelfox.net
   0.0%25   45.7  45.9  43.9  50.9   2.0
 2. (waiting for reply)
 3. (waiting for reply)
 4. ve955.core2.stl1.he.net 
  56.0%25   62.0  63.9  62.0  67.6   2.0
 5. (waiting for reply)
 6. (waiting for reply)
 7. (waiting for reply)
 8. equinix-ix.dfw2.packet.net  
   0.0%25   81.2  86.0  77.8 103.3   8.4
 9. (waiting for reply)
10. (waiting for reply)
11. dfw.source.kernel.org   
   0.0%24   77.6  78.1  77.0  82.5   1.1


Maybe something in Hurricane Electric’s network potentially not getting these 
packets where they need to go?


> On Apr 26, 2023, at 5:27 PM, Jeff P  wrote:
> 
> For what it's worth, on Spectrum Residential here in LAX and I can reach 
> ip6echo.net and Google's public ipv6.google.com sites via residential 
> service...  I have my own modems and routers, which may make the difference 
> in my case... Spectrum does indicate that IPv6 my need to be enabled on their 
> routers... 
> 
> https://www.spectrum.net/support/internet/ipv6-faq
> 
> jeffp@jeffp-Linux:~$ ping -6 ip6echo.net 
> PING ip6echo.net(ip6echo.net (2600:5c01:f876:10::53)) 56 data bytes 
> 64 bytes from ip6echo.net (2600:5c01:f876:10::53): icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 
> time=76.1 ms 
> 64 bytes from ip6echo.net (2600:5c01:f876:10::53): icmp_seq=2 ttl=51 
> time=78.4 ms 
> 64 bytes from ip6echo.net (2600:5c01:f876:10::53): icmp_seq=3 ttl=51 
> time=76.5 ms
> 
> jeffp@jeffp-Linux:~$ ping -6 ipv6.google.com 
> PING ipv6.google.com(lax31s06-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4007:811::200e)) 56 
> data bytes 
> 64 bytes from lax31s06-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4007:811::200e): 
> icmp_seq=1 ttl=116 time=12.6 ms 
> 64 bytes from lax31s06-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4007:811::200e): 
> icmp_seq=2 ttl=116 time=14.4 ms 
> 
> 
> I normally use the Google IPv6 site for such tests to avoid irritating 
> private hosts, so a big thanks to Brandon for offering that alternative!
> 
> Jeffp
> 
> On 4/26/23 10:46, Saunders, Brandon wrote:
>> If it is helpful, I am on Spectrum in Ohio and I can reach that address from 
>> my IPv6 test system.  This is on a commercial account with a provider 
>> assigned network.  My system is at ip6echo.net.  You are welcome to ping and 
>> traceroute to it if that is helpful to you.  
>> 
>> A friend CANNOT get to that address from a Spectrum residential account also 
>> in my area.
>> 
>> Brandon
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: NANOG  
>>  On Behalf Of Tom Rini
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2023 2:13 PM
>> To: nanog@nanog.org 
>> Subject: [External] Spectrum networks IPv6 access issue
>> 
>> Use caution with links and attachments.
>> 
>> Hey all,
>> 
>> I'm posting this here in hopes of getting the attention of someone that can 
>> get this 

Re: Questionnaire on building real network configuration dataset

[J. Hellenthal via NANOG]

It might be a better option for you to un-signin this survey...

Just a suggestion.

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 01:46:49PM +0800, 徐惠三 wrote:
>Dear NANOG community members,
> 
>We are post graduate students majoring in computer network and we are now
>conducting a research project aimed at setting up an open dataset of real
>network configurations for experiment needs. We think it will be a
>contributing work for network verification evaluations. As part of this
>effort, we are reaching out to the community to request your help in
>filling out a short questionnaire.
> 
>Your participation in this survey would be greatly appreciated and
>valuable for our research. It will take only about 2-3 minutes of your
>time and your responses will be kept strictly confidential. 
> 
>To participate in the survey, please click on the following
>link: 
> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1XPBxVH40UcQRMZf-H-ENj4AUZQDEw8xxQtllyylCl4E/edit
> 
>Please note that the survey will be open for one month, and we kindly ask
>you to complete it by the end of May. Thank you in advance for your
>participation and support of our research. 
> 
>Best regards,
> 
>Huisan

-- 
The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a 
lot about anticipated traffic volume.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Questionnaire on building real network configuration dataset

[徐惠三]

Dear NANOG community members,




We are post graduate students majoring in computer network and we are now 
conducting a research project aimed at setting up an open dataset of real 
network configurations for experiment needs. We think it will be a contributing 
work for network verification evaluations. As part of this effort, we are 
reaching out to the community to request your help in filling out a short 
questionnaire.




Your participation in this survey would be greatly appreciated and valuable for 
our research. It will take only about 2-3 minutes of your time and your 
responses will be kept strictly confidential. 




To participate in the survey, please click on the following link: 
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1XPBxVH40UcQRMZf-H-ENj4AUZQDEw8xxQtllyylCl4E/edit




Please note that the survey will be open for one month, and we kindly ask you 
to complete it by the end of May. Thank you in advance for your participation 
and support of our research. 




Best regards,

Huisan

Re: [External] Spectrum networks IPv6 access issue

[Jeff P]

For what it's worth, on Spectrum Residential here in LAX and I can reach 
ip6echo.net and Google's public ipv6.google.com sites via residential 
service...  I have my own modems and routers, which may make the 
difference in my case... Spectrum does indicate that IPv6 my need to be 
enabled on their routers...


https://www.spectrum.net/support/internet/ipv6-faq

jeffp@jeffp-Linux:~$ ping -6 ip6echo.net
PING ip6echo.net(ip6echo.net (2600:5c01:f876:10::53)) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from ip6echo.net (2600:5c01:f876:10::53): icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 
time=76.1 ms
64 bytes from ip6echo.net (2600:5c01:f876:10::53): icmp_seq=2 ttl=51 
time=78.4 ms
64 bytes from ip6echo.net (2600:5c01:f876:10::53): icmp_seq=3 ttl=51 
time=76.5 ms


jeffp@jeffp-Linux:~$ ping -6 ipv6.google.com
PING ipv6.google.com(lax31s06-in-x0e.1e100.net 
(2607:f8b0:4007:811::200e)) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from lax31s06-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4007:811::200e): 
icmp_seq=1 ttl=116 time=12.6 ms
64 bytes from lax31s06-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4007:811::200e): 
icmp_seq=2 ttl=116 time=14.4 ms



I normally use the Google IPv6 site for such tests to avoid irritating 
private hosts, so a big thanks to Brandon for offering that alternative!


Jeffp

On 4/26/23 10:46, Saunders, Brandon wrote:

If it is helpful, I am on Spectrum in Ohio and I can reach that address from my 
IPv6 test system.  This is on a commercial account with a provider assigned 
network.  My system is at ip6echo.net.  You are welcome to ping and traceroute 
to it if that is helpful to you.

A friend CANNOT get to that address from a Spectrum residential account also in 
my area.

Brandon



-Original Message-
From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Tom Rini
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2023 2:13 PM
To:nanog@nanog.org
Subject: [External] Spectrum networks IPv6 access issue

Use caution with links and attachments.

Hey all,

I'm posting this here in hopes of getting the attention of someone that can get 
this issue resolved, or at least an internal ticket filed. I've tried the 
customer-facing tech support and not been able to get such a thing done.

In short, from within Spectrum's US IPv6 network (verified in both North 
Carolina and Ohio), dfw.source.kernel.org (2604:1380:4641:c500::1) is 
unreachable and connections time out. This site is otherwise fine and globally 
accessible via IPv6, tested on both Qwest and T-Mobile hosted systems.  This is 
a regression from some time in early April this year.

--
Tom


--
JeffP

"It is not for me to place expectations on someone and fail them for not meeting 
them. It's my goal to encourage others to raise their expectations of themselves, to 
educate them and help them gain the skills needed to meet their goals and encourage them 
to succeed in attaining them."