Re: IPv6 Test Pages for Fortune 500 and Top 100 web sites are back

[John Lightfoot]

Well that data is disappointing.

From: NANOG  on behalf of Owen 
DeLong via NANOG 
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 at 5:03 PM
To: NANOG list 
Subject: IPv6 Test Pages for Fortune 500 and Top 100 web sites are back
Don’t know how much anyone will still care about these pages as there are lots 
of other sources of similar data these days.

However, I finally got around to fixing the two pages I maintain:

http://www.delong.com/ipv6_fortune500.html and
http://www.delong.com/ipv6_alexa500.html

In the case of Alexa, the page is no longer based on Alexa since Amazon 
discontinued that service and now uses the Majestic 1,000,000 as a source 
(grabs the first 500 entries from their list). This page was broken since 
Amazon discontinued the Alexa service.

The Fortune 500 site still uses the same datasource, but the script was 
crashing due to sites with borked SSL implementations which caused PERL to 
abort on an exception that I never figured out how to trap or ignore. As such, 
I’m now manually maintaining an exception list of such sites in the script and 
testing them is bypassed to prevent the script from crashing. Obviously, this 
is not ideal, but I found no better solution so far.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled NANOG chatter.

Owen

Re: Treasurydirect.gov unreachable over IPv6?

[John Lightfoot]

Verizon has IPv6?

From: NANOG  on behalf of Jay 
Hennigan 
Date: Wednesday, May 17, 2023 at 3:21 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: Re: Treasurydirect.gov unreachable over IPv6?
On 5/17/23 11:30, holow29 wrote:
> Is anyone able to reach treasurydirect.gov 
> over IPv6? Unable to do so over Verizon Fios, and I'm not sure if it is
> a routing issue or an issue on Treasury's end.

Reachable from AS4927 in California.

--
Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net
Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
503 897-8550 - WB6RDV

Re: home router battery backup

[John Lightfoot]

In Vermont I have a Tesla Powerwall that Green Mountain Power paid for if I 
agreed to let them manage it.  Since then I’ve never had an outage of any kind, 
I usually figure out that there is one by seeing my neighbors’ lights go off.

I’ve also had great luck with my ISP, which is Comcast.  Even before we had the 
Powerwall, when the power would go out the (older) Comcast router would work on 
its own battery backup and my laptop would flip over to battery power, so I 
didn’t have any loss of connectivity even then.

--John

From: NANOG  on behalf of Scott T 
Anderson via NANOG 
Date: Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 8:28 AM
To: Scott T Anderson via NANOG 
Subject: RE: home router battery backup
Hi everyone,

Thanks very much for all the responses throughout the day. They are very 
helpful. Your (collective) answers triggered a couple follow-on questions:

For those individuals with backup battery power for their modem/router, do they 
maintain Internet access throughout a power outage (as long as their backup 
power solution works)? I.e., does the rest of the ISP network maintain service 
throughout a power outage?

Are the modems with backup power designed to operate for a specified period of 
time without power and if so, for how long and how was that duration identified?
If those with backup power do maintain Internet access during a power outage, 
do they lose that access if the power outage extends beyond a certain time? 
I.e., does the ISP network equipment go offline at some point in time due to 
batteries being drained and not having power generation capabilities?

Again, thanks for sharing your knowledge and experience!
Scott

From: NANOG  On Behalf Of 
richey.goldb...@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2022 12:38 PM
To: Scott T Anderson via NANOG 
Subject: Re: home router battery backup

At my last employer we installed lots of Adtrans at Car Dealerships, Hotels, 
and other SMBs.It was common for them to have a small UPS but 9 times out 
of 10 the UPS 2-3 times older than the life cycle of the battery and no one 
ever knew that you could change the battery in them.So they usually just 
had a heavy power strip that was prone to failing after a power loss.

We did have the option to install a battery back up on the Adtran but it would 
have been useless because most of them didn’t have any kind of backup power for 
their PBXs.


I’m pretty sure that my own power protection on my network gear and theater 
gear far exceeded the average end user’s remote offices.

-richey

From: NANOG 
mailto:nanog-bounces+richey.goldberg=gmail@nanog.org>>
 on behalf of Andy Ringsmuth mailto:a...@andyring.com>>
Date: Wednesday, January 12, 2022 at 1:16 PM
To: Scott T Anderson mailto:standers...@wisc.edu>>, Scott 
T Anderson via NANOG mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
Subject: Re: home router battery backup

> On Jan 12, 2022, at 11:35 AM, Scott T Anderson via NANOG 
> mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi NANOG mailing list,
>
> I am a graduate student, currently conducting research on how power outages 
> affect home Internet users. I know that the FCC has a regulation since 2015 
> (47 CFR Section 9.20) requiring ISPs to provide an option to voice customers 
> to purchase a battery backup for emergency voice services during power 
> outages. As this is only an option and only applies to customers who 
> subscribe to voice services, I was wondering if anyone had any insights on 
> the prevalence of battery backup for home modem/routers? I.e., what 
> percentage of home users actually install a battery backup in their home 
> modem/router or use an external UPS?
>
> Thanks.
> Scott

Given that most people barely even know what their home router is, I suspect 
the percentage would be somewhere south of 1 percent. Outside of my home, I 
honestly cannot recall EVER seeing someone’s home using a battery backup for 
their internet infrastructure.

I personally do, but of course I (and probably everyone on this list) am by no 
means representative of the population at large in this particular area.


Andy Ringsmuth
5609 Harding Drive
Lincoln, NE 68521-5831
(402) 304-0083
a...@andyring.com

Re: power to the internet

[John Lightfoot]

That's exactly what Powerwalls are.

In Vermont, Green Mountain Power had a deal where they bought 2000 Powerwalls 
and gave them to customers throughout the state.  Customers could get up to 
two, paying only $1500 each for the installation and agreeing to let GMP manage 
them.  GMP now has ~2.7 gWh of stored capacity, distributed throughout the 
state to minimize transmission costs.  In times of high electricity spot market 
prices or outages, GMP draws down the Powerwalls, then refills them at night 
when prices are lower.  

The Powerwalls also act as a UPS for the whole house.  When bad weather is 
predicted in an area, GMP makes sure your Powerwall is full.  My town had a 4+ 
hour outage a few weeks back and I had power the whole time, the microwave 
clock didn't even reset.  I only have one Powerwall but could easily last 2+ 
days with it, and it's silent, unlike a generator.

--John Lightfoot

-Original Message-
From: NANOG  on behalf of Howard Leadmon 

Date: Monday, December 30, 2019 at 3:09 PM
To: "nanog@nanog.org" 
Subject: Re: power to the internet

   Isn't that what the Tesla Power Wall's are?   I thought that was the 
fill measure for when the solar panels aren't generating.   I have never 
gotten anything, but know when you look on their site for Solar, they 
try and pitch the batter power walls to run your house for days if needed..


---
Howard Leadmon
PBW Communications, LLC
http://www.pbwcomm.com

On 12/26/2019 2:08 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
>> I just looked up Telsa's battery packs and they seem to be between
>> 60-100kwh. Our daily use is about 30kwh in the fall, so it's only 2-3
>> days. Admittedly we can turn off the hot tub, water heater, etc to
>> stretch it out. And of course, that means that you can't drive it... The
>> one thing that would be for everybody's good is using them during peak
>> hours. If you work normal hours, then that only gets part of the peak
>> load, unfortunately.
> Just buy three of them.  Two to leave in the garage as a "mobile battery 
> pack" and one to drive around.
>
> All problems solved.
>

Re: ✘Netflix

[John Lightfoot]

If your IP range includes an ipv6 tunnel, Netflix blocks it thinking it's a 
vpn.  You need to block the ipv6 routes to Netflix and force it to fall back to 
ipv4.

On 1/6/18, 2:19 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Gary E. Miller" 
 wrote:

Yo All!

Sorry to bother, but...

Netflis is blocking my IP range.  1st line support useless.  Months and
can not reah anyone with a clue.  Anyone got a Netflix contact?

RGDS
GARY
---
Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703
g...@rellim.com  Tel:+1 541 382 8588

Veritas liberabit vos. -- Quid est veritas?
"If you can’t measure it, you can’t improve it." - Lord Kelvin

Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too

[John Lightfoot]

Excuse the top post, but this seems to be an argument between people who 
understand big numbers and those who don't.  IPv4 has 2^32 addresses, IPv6 has 
2^128, which means 79 octillion people can each have their own internet.  I 
think Owen is being modest when he says no one alive will be around for the 
exhaustion of IPv6, I think we're debating whether it will run out in a 
thousand years or a million. 

On 12/29/17, 10:44 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Owen DeLong" 
 wrote:



> On Dec 28, 2017, at 18:54, Ricky Beam  wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 21:05:33 -0500, Owen DeLong  wrote:
>> If you want to make that argument, that we shouldn’t have SLAAC and we 
should use /96 prefixes, that wouldn’t double the space, it would multiply it 
by roughly 4 billion.
> 
> I'm saying I should be able to use whatever size LAN I want.

Sounds like you already are and nobody is telling you that you can’t. It’s 
a rather silly way to over-complicate your life, but if you want to be on the 
wrong side of a direcTV commercial, nobody’s trying to stop you. 

> 
>> The routing problem might be real if everyone goes to PI, but I think 
that’s an unlikely scenario.
> 
> Every scenario everyone has come up with is "unlikely". Home networks 
with multiple LANs??? Never going to happen; people don't know how to set them 
up, and there's little technical need for it.

Lots of home networks have multiple LANs today, so you’re patently wrong 
there already. 

> 
>> Your definition of “amazingly fast is pretty odd... we’ve allocated tiny 
fractions of 2 /3 prefixes to special uses (multicast, ULA, loopback, unknown, 
etc.). Beyond that, there’s a /3 delegated to IANA as unicast space for 
distribution to the RIRs. Of that /3, IANA has delegated a little more than 5 
/12s to RIRs. That’s the total of 20 years worth of turkey carving and 
constitutes well under 1/8th of the address space. Issued. By that measure, 
we’ve got well over 160 years to worry about runout.
> 
> After 20 years of not using IPv6, that's actually A LOT of carving. And 
if you look at what's been assigned vs. what's being announced vs. what's 
actually being used, there's a fantastic amount of waste. But nobody cares 
because there's plenty of space, and "we'll never use it all." (history says 
otherwise.)

Given that more than 50% of US mobile traffic is now IPv6, I find it hard 
to give credence to a claim of “not using”. It’s also north of 40% for US fixed 
wire line traffic. 

As I said, I don’t doubt that we may eventually run out. However, I doubt 
anyone alive today will still be alive when we do. 

Owen

Re: Netflix banning HE tunnels

[John Lightfoot]

How about:

Dear Netflix network engineer who’s on the NANOG list.  Could you please get 
Netflix to fall back to ipv4 if you block your customer’s ipv6 because it’s in 
an HE tunnel?  Lots of people who want to watch Netflix, be able to reach the 
whole internet, and have Verizon FiOS would really appreciate it.

Thanks,
John

John Lightoot

Re: turning on comcast v6

[John Lightfoot]

Since my Fios router has a way to configure IPv6 on it, I turned it on to
see but I couldn't get it to work.  I called their technical to ask for
help/information about IPv6 support and was told We don't even support
IPv5 yet, so it will be a while before we support v6.

John Lightfoot



On 12/9/13 9:14 AM, Justin M. Streiner strei...@cluebyfour.org wrote:

On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, Christopher Morrow wrote:

 if work doesn't eat my evening I'll make an attempt at that
tonight/tomorrow.

Thanks for reminding me that I need to get back on Verizon's case about
getting IPv6 on Fios... :|

jms

Re: Prism continued

[John Lightfoot]

Let's see:

Requires always-on internet connection

Only available with Kinect
Includes infrared sensor
Manufactured by Microsoft, the first company to sign up for Prism

When can I get my Xbox One??

http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/new-kinect-can-track-you-so-well-you-may-
not-6C10287970 



On 6/9/13 12:26 PM, Warren Bailey
wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com wrote:

I suppose this system was part of the 20MM as well?

http://gizmodo.com/meet-boundless-informant-the-nsa-tool-that-watches-the-
512107983



Sent from my Mobile Device.

RE: Re: Vixie warns: DNS Changer 'blackouts' inevitable

[John Lightfoot]

 
  Exactly how much can it cost to serve up those requests... I mean for
  9$ a month I have a cpu that handles 2000 *Recursive* Queries a
  second. 900 bux could net me *200,000* a second if not more.
  The government overspends on a lot of things.. they need some one whos
  got the experience to use a bunch of cheap servers for the resolvers
  and a box that hosts the IPs used and then distributes the query
  packets.
 
 For $50/mo I can have a connection from Comcast.  That doesn't mean that I
 could run my own cable to the nearest major exchange for anywhere near
$50.
 
 Also, what's the failover if your $9/mo CPU develops a bad RAM card?  Does
 your $9/mo CPU have sufficient geographic diversity to survive a backhoe?
 And about 4 zillion other things that people that actually have to run
production
 services worry about...

Why should the taxpayers pay for geographic diversity or any of those 4
zillion other things required to keep these DNS servers up so infected
computers can continue to reach the Internet?  I don't really mind paying
$9/300 millionths per month to help folks make a smooth transition back to
proper DNS, but I wouldn't want to pay much more.  The FBI should have just
pulled the plug and let the folks who can't connect inundate their ISPs with
support calls, which might encourage the ISPs to be a little more proactive
about shutting down the botnets they host.

RE: IP addresses are now assets

[John Lightfoot]

I have a boatload of IPv6 addresses I'm willing to sell at the low, low price 
of $.01 each.

-Original Message-
From: Christopher J. Pilkington [mailto:c...@0x1.net] 
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 12:18 PM
To: Michael R. Wayne
Cc: NANOG
Subject: Re: IP addresses are now assets

On Dec 1, 2011, at 23:04, Michael R. Wayne wa...@staff.msen.com wrote:

 After negotiating with multiple prospective buyers, Cerner Corp.
   agreed to buy the Internet addresses for $12 each. Other bids were
   as low as $1.50 each, according to a bankruptcy court filing.

Clearly the addresses with the last octet of 00 and ff should be discounted, 
since no one wants to be zero, and ff just seems to get everyone's attention.

-cjp

RE: Register.com DNS outages

[John Lightfoot]

My company uses register.com for DNS hosting and we were hit by its troubles
this weekend.  I know there are companies that offer backup DNS services,
but those seem to be aimed at companies that host their own DNS, which we're
not really interested in doing at this time.  Are there mainstream DNS
hosting companies that allow customers to use a second company for their
backup DNS?  Does register.com allow this?  

-Original Message-
From: Florian Weimer [mailto:f...@deneb.enyo.de] 
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 1:49 PM
To: Brandon Kim
Cc: nanog group
Subject: Re: Register.com DNS outages

* Brandon Kim:

 Times like this, makes you curious what kind of infrastructure 
 register.com has? How does one protect against DDOS?

You can outsource your DNS, but you better retain a server locally on your
network, so that you suffer less from that particular shared toothbrush.

RE: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?

[John Lightfoot]

That's Hedley.

-Original Message-
From: bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com [mailto:bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 10:34 AM
To: Simon Perreault
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 08:34:20AM -0400, Simon Perreault wrote:
 On 2010-04-22 07:18, William Herrin wrote:
 On the other hand, I could swear I've seen a draft where the PC picks 
 up random unused addresses in the lower 64 for each new outbound 
 connection for anonymity purposes.
 
 That's probably RFC 4941. It's available in pretty much all operating 
 systems. I don't think there's any IPR issue to be afraid of.

not RFC4941... think abt applying Heddy Lamars 
patents on spread-spectrum to source address selection.

--bill

RE: Best VPN Appliance

[John Lightfoot]

Can anyone tell me how to get the beta 64 bit client?  Thanks.

-Original Message-
From: Scott Howard [mailto:sc...@doc.net.au] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 12:47 PM
To: Blomberg, Orin P (DOH)
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Best VPN Appliance

On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Blomberg, Orin P  (DOH)
orin.blomb...@doh.wa.gov wrote:
 Thanks for the information.  I am just going on what we have been 
 formally told by our onsite Cisco engineers on several occasions.  It 
 may be that they were misinformed, or that they are trying to make the 
 sell for AnyConnect Licensing, but I had been going with the facts I 
 had.

It was neither, at least not specifically on the side of your engineers.
Cisco had absolutely no plans to release a 64-bit IPSec client - not because
they couldn't (they have had a working version for some time), but because
they have been trying to kill off the product for years to try and migrate
customers to their newer products (ie, AnyConnect).  So your Cisco engineers
were absolutely correct - at the time - in saying that there would never be
a 64 bit version.

Obviously it seems they have finally buckled to customer pressure (!) and
release a 64 bit version, which is good news for everyone except whoever's
job in Cisco it was to EOL the IPSec code.  It's unfortunate that they
didn't take the obvious approach and put IPSec into AnyConnect when it first
came out, which would have avoided all of these issues.

(I used to work for Cisco in the Security Technology Business Unit, but I
don't any more so I'm obviously not speaking on behalf of anyone other than
possibly myself!)

  Scott.