Re: AT Fiber Line / NOT MIS

[Alex Conner via NANOG]

Yep; but even IP Passthrough, routed subnet, etc. all count as NAT sessions
against the internal NAT table.

BTW, that's the feature you're looking for - routed subnet. That will pass
your /26 to another network device over an RFC1918 subnet. The steps depend
on what particular gateway hardware they have, but a quick Google of the
gateway model and "routed subnet" should get you to the right spot.
Assuming of course the other service limitations aren't a dealbreaker.

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 2:54 PM Dennis Burgess 
wrote:

> Ya not wishing to do NAT...
>
> Sent from mobile device..
>
> ------
> *From:* Alex Conner 
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 10, 2021 1:49:27 PM
> *To:* TJ Trout 
> *Cc:* Dennis Burgess ; nanog@nanog.org <
> nanog@nanog.org>
> *Subject:* Re: AT Fiber Line / NOT MIS
>
> Bonus points, the small business fiber has extremely limited NAT session
> limits (depends on hardware, but not greater than 16,000 sessions) and
> *everything *counts. Cold loading CNN.com (an AT company) in a default
> config without an adblocker will use close to 3000, which will saturate and
> cause errors on some of their gateway hardware (NVG595). If you want to use
> it for any serious purpose, stick a tunnel out to a real connection.
>
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 2:43 PM TJ Trout  wrote:
>
> Yeah not going to happen on U-verse
>
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 11:32 AM Dennis Burgess 
> wrote:
>
> Guess their broadband stuff☹
>
>
>
>
>
> *[image: LTI-Full_175px]*
>
> *Dennis Burgess*
>
>
> Author of "Learn RouterOS- Second Edition”
>
> *Link Technologies, Inc* -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>
> *Office*: 314-735-0270  Website: http://www.linktechs.net
>
> Create Wireless Coverage’s with www.towercoverage.com
>
> Need MikroTik Cloud Management: https://cloud.linktechs.net
>
>
>
> *From:* TJ Trout 
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 10, 2021 1:12 PM
> *To:* Dennis Burgess 
> *Cc:* nanog@nanog.org
> *Subject:* Re: AT Fiber Line / NOT MIS
>
>
>
> call back, i dont think that's accurate. What is the specific product?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 7:25 AM Dennis Burgess 
> wrote:
>
> I have a ATT fiber line for a customer that has a 300/300 circuit, but its
> not a MIS they are telling me we cannot route a /26 (they have allocated)
> to my device behind it.  ☹  Any options?
>
>
>
>
>
> *Dennis Burgess*
>
>
> * Mikrotik : **Trainer, Network Associate, Routing Engineer, Wireless
> Engineer, Traffic Control Engineer, Inter-Networking Engineer, Security
> Engineer, Enterprise Wireless Engineer*
>
> *Hurricane Electric: **IPv6 Sage Level*
>
> *Cambium: **ePMP*
>
>
>
> Author of "Learn RouterOS- Second Edition”
>
> *Link Technologies, Inc* -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>
> *Office*: 314-735-0270  Website: http://www.linktechs.net
>
> Create Wireless Coverage’s with www.towercoverage.com
>
> Need MikroTik Cloud Management: https://cloud.linktechs.net
>
> *How did we do today?*
>
>
> <https://app.customerthermometer.com/?template=log_feedback=5badbac1_data=dGVtcGVyYXR1cmVfaWQ9MSZ0aGVybW9tZXRlcl9pZD0xMTM1NjYmbnBzX3JhdGluZz0tMQ===Anonymous=Dennis=Burgess===>
>
>
>
>

Re: AT Fiber Line / NOT MIS

[Alex Conner via NANOG]

Bonus points, the small business fiber has extremely limited NAT session
limits (depends on hardware, but not greater than 16,000 sessions) and
*everything *counts. Cold loading CNN.com (an AT company) in a default
config without an adblocker will use close to 3000, which will saturate and
cause errors on some of their gateway hardware (NVG595). If you want to use
it for any serious purpose, stick a tunnel out to a real connection.

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 2:43 PM TJ Trout  wrote:

> Yeah not going to happen on U-verse
>
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 11:32 AM Dennis Burgess 
> wrote:
>
>> Guess their broadband stuff☹
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *[image: LTI-Full_175px]*
>>
>> *Dennis Burgess*
>>
>>
>> Author of "Learn RouterOS- Second Edition”
>>
>> *Link Technologies, Inc* -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>>
>> *Office*: 314-735-0270  Website: http://www.linktechs.net
>>
>> Create Wireless Coverage’s with www.towercoverage.com
>>
>> Need MikroTik Cloud Management: https://cloud.linktechs.net
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* TJ Trout 
>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 10, 2021 1:12 PM
>> *To:* Dennis Burgess 
>> *Cc:* nanog@nanog.org
>> *Subject:* Re: AT Fiber Line / NOT MIS
>>
>>
>>
>> call back, i dont think that's accurate. What is the specific product?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 7:25 AM Dennis Burgess 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I have a ATT fiber line for a customer that has a 300/300 circuit, but
>> its not a MIS they are telling me we cannot route a /26 (they have
>> allocated) to my device behind it.  ☹  Any options?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Dennis Burgess*
>>
>>
>> * Mikrotik : **Trainer, Network Associate, Routing Engineer, Wireless
>> Engineer, Traffic Control Engineer, Inter-Networking Engineer, Security
>> Engineer, Enterprise Wireless Engineer*
>>
>> *Hurricane Electric: **IPv6 Sage Level*
>>
>> *Cambium: **ePMP*
>>
>>
>>
>> Author of "Learn RouterOS- Second Edition”
>>
>> *Link Technologies, Inc* -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>>
>> *Office*: 314-735-0270  Website: http://www.linktechs.net
>>
>> Create Wireless Coverage’s with www.towercoverage.com
>>
>> Need MikroTik Cloud Management: https://cloud.linktechs.net
>>
>> *How did we do today?*
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: Survey on the use of IP blacklists for threat mitigation

[Alex Conner]

If we want to go down that rabbit trail, then aren’t we talking about
Reputation lists?

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 3:44 PM Harald Koch  wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020, at 15:08, J. Hellenthal via NANOG wrote:
>
> blacklists are not always deny/block/disallow and conformed of things that
> allow you to take actions whatever your choosing upon their contents and
> your policies.
>
> What’s next ? redlisting ? Don’t offend the Russians ... blue ? Don’t want
> to offend the police ...
>
>
> How about - don't use colour at all, since it's just a culture-specific
> proxy for the actual meaning? "blacklist" and "whitelist" are challenging
> for ESL and for people from other cultures. Block list, allow list, filter
> list, etc. are all more precise terms that happen to be easier for everyone
> to understand.
>
> Improving technical jargon is always worthwhile.
>
>
> --
> Harald Koch
> c...@pobox.com
>
>

Re: is 74.218.84.10 a road runner IP address?

[Alex Conner]

According to Whois that's a commercial roadrunner connection, and it 
falls in one of their netblocks.


Plenty of info here: http://bgp.he.net/ip/74.218.84.10

goe...@anime.net mailto:goe...@anime.net
March 3, 2012 9:45 PM
ab...@rr.com doesn't seem to think so.

-Dan