Re: Microwave link capacity

[Robert Glover]

How well does Siklu handle rain at closer to 1mi. range?

On 4/5/2016 7:08 AM, Huffman, Timothy wrote:

Agree with Mike that WISPA is probably the place to get real world experience 
from people who make a living with microwave links.

We use primarily Dragonwave (in FCC part 101 frequencies: 11, 18, and 23GHz), 
which can get ~600-800Mbpas over the air, depending primarily on channel width 
and distance. For shorter links (~1 mile), we use Siklu 80GHz, which can do 
1-2Gbps over the air.

--
Tim Huffman
Staff Manager – Fixed Wireless Engineering | Windstream
999 Oak Creek Dr | Lombard, IL 60148
timothy.huff...@windstream.com | windstreambusiness.com
o: 630.590.6012 | m: 630.340.1925 | f: 630.986.2496


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2016 9:16 PM
Cc: Nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Microwave link capacity

You might be better served with the lists over at wispa.org. Not saying the 
people here don't have the answers, but that's what those guys do.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com


- Original Message -

From: "Jean-Francois Mezei" 
To: Nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Monday, April 4, 2016 12:28:41 PM
Subject: Microwave link capacity


In a context of providing rural communities with modern broadband.

Reading some tells me that Microwave links can be raised to 1gbps. How
common is that ?

I assume that cell phone towers have modern microwave links (when not
directly on fibre). What sort of capacity would typically be provided ?

And in the case of a remote village/town served by microwave originally
designed to handle just phone calls, how difficult/expensive is it to
upgrade to 1gbps or higher capacity ? Just a change of radio ? or radio
and antenna, keeping only the tower ?

(keeping spectrum acquisition out of discussion as that is a whole other
ball game).


--
This email message and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended 
recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is 
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by 
reply email and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments.


--
Sincerely,
Bobby Glover
Director of IS & Engineering
SVI Incorporated

Re: The IPv6 Travesty that is Cogent's refusal to peer Hurricane Electric - and how to solve it

[Robert Glover]

On 1/21/2016 10:40 AM, Daniel Corbe wrote:

On Jan 21, 2016, at 1:07 PM, Matthew D. Hardeman  wrote:

Since Cogent is clearly the bad actor here (the burden being Cogent's to prove 
otherwise because HE is publicly on record as saying that they’d love to peer 
with Cogent), I’m giving serious consideration to dropping Cogent come renewal 
time and utilizing NTT or Zayo instead.

While that would not immediately solve the problem that if the NTT or Zayo link 
went down, single-homed Cogent customers would loose access to me via IPv6, I’m 
actually ok with that.  It at least lets ensures that when there is a problem, 
the problem affects only single-home Cogent clients.  Thus, the problem is 
borne exclusively by the people who pay the bad actor who is causing this 
problem.  That tends to get uncomfortable for the payee (i.e. Cogent).



Take two transit providers that aren’t in the group of (HE, Cogent).  Cogent is 
probably banking on this being the response; figuring that they have the 
financial resources to outlast HE if they’re both shedding customers.

If you really wanted to stick it to Cogent, take 3 transit providers: HE and 
two of any other providers besides Cogent.

Cogent clearly aren’t going to cave to their own customers asking them to peer 
with HE.  Otherwise it would have happened by now.

Cogent sucks for lots of reasons and this one isn’t even in the top 5 IMHO.



Let's hear the top 5.   Peering disputes are up there, but what else?

We've had them as one of our providers going on 8 years, and we can only 
complain about the occasional peering disputes.


-Robert

Re: Microsoft / Outlook.com contact???

[Robert Glover]

On 10/13/2015 10:49 PM, Michael J Wise wrote:

Unfortunately, that's not going to work if the refusal reason was FBLW15
(or TBLW15).

You're not dealing with an issue on the Outlook/Hotmail side of the house.

If you had provided the last two octets, I might have been able to give
some advice earlier, but alas, everyone seems loathe to actually say which
IP is having issues.


IP in question: 65.111.224.51

Not trying to hide anything, but seeing the posts with obfuscated IPs 
has rubbed off on me I suppose (for better or for worse.


I appreciate if you can help us out here.

-Bobby

Microsoft / Outlook.com contact???

[Robert Glover]

Anyone from Microsoft / Outlook.com / Office365 around?

We are having a problem with email from a certain IP being rejected with 
code FBLW15.  We have gone through the normal channels but have received 
no communication/acknowledgement from Microsoft at all. Emails to any 
domain with *outlook.com MX records are rejected with the following:


---
host
klatencor-com0i.mail.eo.outlook.com[207.46.163.138] said: 550 5.7.1 
Service
unavailable; Client host [65.111..] blocked using 
FBLW15; To request

removal from this list please forward this message to
del...@messaging.microsoft.com (in reply to RCPT TO command)
---

We have emailed del...@messaging.microsoft.com, with no response.

The IP in question is not showing up on any blacklists that we have 
searched (mxtoolbox, multi-rbl-check, etc etc)


Thanks
-Robert

Re: Microsoft / Outlook.com contact???

[Robert Glover]

On 10/13/2015 5:44 PM, Robert Story wrote:

On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:25:27 -0700 Robert wrote:
RG> We are having a problem with email from a certain IP being rejected
RG> with code FBLW15.  We have gone through the normal channels but have
RG> received no communication/acknowledgement from Microsoft at all. Emails
RG> to any domain with *outlook.com MX records are rejected with the
RG> following:
RG> []
RG> We have emailed del...@messaging.microsoft.com, with no response.

This has happened to me twice this year. Both times I got an auto-response
fairly quickly, and a followup message within a week, and was delisted.
Never could get any info on why I was listed in the first place, though.


Robert


An MS engineer reached out earlier, gave me this:

https://postmaster.live.com/snds/addnetwork.aspx

Signing for and using that tool, I was able to pin-point the cause. You 
can also sign-up for their junk-mail feedback loop.


Hope this helps you next time!

--
Sincerely,
Bobby Glover
Director of IS & Engineering
SVI Incorporated

Re: cisco.com unavailable

[Robert Glover]

On 9/21/2015 11:51 AM, Murat Kaipov wrote:

Hi folks!
Is cisco.com  unavailable or it is affected just for 
Rostelecom?


All is well from Cogent, Charter, and Verizon Wireless

Re: [BULK] Verizon exiting California

[Robert Glover]

On 7/30/2015 9:26 AM, Matthew Black wrote:

Verizon sent me a letter the other day stating that they are selling their 
landline business to Frontier Communications. It was a very terse letter and as 
a customer I don't know if it affects me. While stating they aren't exiting the 
Wireless business, I want to know which parts are being sold off. Just the 
copper lines, POTS, DSL, FIOS (TV, Internet, phone)? Some clarity would be 
great.  I am a FIOS only customer. Can anyone recall if GTE was blocked from 
doing the same thing a few decades ago?

matthew black
california state university, long beach


All wireline assets in the Verizon West footprint (California, Texas, 
and Tampa, FL area) are being aquired by Frontier


Here's the Press Release from Frontier: 
http://investor.frontier.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=895055


All wireless assets remain with Verizon.

RE: Charter and IPV6?

[Robert Glover]

As of 3mos ago, no :(



 Original message 
From: Roy r.engehau...@gmail.com 
Date: 06/29/2015  2:15 PM  (GMT-08:00) 
To: nanog nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: Charter and IPV6? 


Has Charter rolled out IPV6 yet?  I have both fiber and cable 
connections to Charter but I stopped asking them months ago.

Roy
​​​

RE: Thoughts On Cheap Chinese xDSL Testers

[Robert Glover]

The local ILEC (Verizon) use Colt 250+.  They are pretty cool.  They do not do 
layer 3 like the meter you referenced.
I'm actually looking for a cost-effective meter that does ADSL+ / VDSL2 / 
e.SHDSL.  it's easy to find one that does the first two, but not all three.

 Original message 
From: Lyndon Nerenberg lyn...@orthanc.ca 
Date: 06/29/2015  5:50 PM  (GMT-08:00) 
To: North American Network Operators' Group nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: Thoughts On Cheap Chinese xDSL Testers 

I've been poking around looking for an inexpensive xDSL circuit tester to do 
some measurements on my home DSL line, in opposition to the telco. $2K+ is not 
in the budget, so I'm curious about the accuracy of the $300 Chinese units 
kicking around eBay (e.g. the ST332B).  Anyone out there have experience with 
them?  Are they even remotely close to accurate?

--lyndon

​

Re: fire ants

[Robert Glover]

On 8/12/2014 11:52 AM, Eduardo A. Suárez wrote:
 Hi,

 it's not a joke. Here we have a fire ants nest in the fiber patch panel.
 Are there any DIY ways to manage that?

 Thanks, Eduardo.-

Shop vac?

Re: IPV6 and Charter Cable

[Robert Glover]

HA!

I've been bugging Charter for 2 years.  There was a beta program that 
they metioned on NANOG a while back that I tried to get on-board wth.  
That never came to fruition..  As of 2 months ago, they are still not 
offering IPv6



On 6/13/2014 12:39 PM, Roy wrote:
Does Charter Cable have IPV6 for businesses yet?  If so can someone 
point me in the right direction.  Their NOC seems to be clueless on 
their IPV6 plans

Cogent - Verizon peering congestion

[Robert Glover]

Hello,

For the last several months, we have been tracking a congestion issue 
between Cogent - Verizon


 Host Loss%   Snt   Last   Avg  Best  Wrst StDev
 1. router.garlic.com 0.0%290.3   6.1   0.2 160.6  29.7
 2. vl203.mag03.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0%292.2   8.1   2.1 
161.1  29.5
 3. te0-0-0-14.ccr22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0%292.9   2.7   
2.4   3.6   0.2
 4. be2165.ccr22.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0%294.1   4.0   
3.7   4.8   0.2
 5. be2047.ccr21.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0%294.5   4.7   
4.3   5.5   0.3
 6. verizon.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com 22.2%28  169.3 171.5 168.1 
193.5   6.9
 7. so-1-0-0-0.SJC01-CORE-RTR2.verizon-gni.net 37.0%28  205.8 180.6 
171.6 271.6  24.8
 8. A12-0-135.SNFCCA-DSL-01.verizon-gni.net 33.3%28  172.3 177.5 
171.7 250.8  18.3
 9. pool-71-116-122-235.snfcca.btas.verizon.net 25.0%28  197.9 
197.6 195.5 199.2   0.8


We have smokeping's from our side showing 30%+ packet loss from us 
(AS4307) to Verizon.


All I have gotten from Cogent is a canned response:

---
The latency and/or packet loss that you are experiencing to this 
destination is due to occasional high traffic with Verizon. We have 
repeatedly requested augments to these congestion points and hope 
Verizon will comply soon.  While this has been escalated internally to 
the CEO level, we encourage you to also contact Verizon customer support 
with your concerns and complaints.  Their delay is a major impediment to 
internet traffic overall and contrary to net neutrality requirements.  
Our peering engineers will continue to address this on a daily basis 
until resolved.

---

It seems to have gotten a lot worse in recent days, to the point where 
we have customers who are trying to access us from Verizon's network 
(i.e. they have Verizon DSL, or via Verizon 3G/4GLTE) complaining they 
are having a very hard to checking their email, etc.


Has anyone else been experiencing these issues?  Or does anyone have 
more information that what Cogent provided me in their canned statement?


-Bobby

Re: Cogent - Verizon peering congestion

[Robert Glover]

FYI, here's the latest response from Cogent when I prodded them about
the issue (just received this about 30 minutes ago:

---
The issue on this peer involves a high amount of traffic being sent to
Cogent from the Verizon network. In order to resolve the congestion on
that peer, Verizon needs to engineer thier routing to another peering
point with Cogent that has more available space for the traffic. We have
reached out to Verizon for assistance and are still awaiting a response
from their peering engineers. We will continue to reach out to them
until they respond.
---

Sounds like more fluff to me :-/

-Bobby

Re: -48VDC supply for home lab?

[Robert Glover]

On 2/3/2014 1:02 PM, Mark Leonard wrote:
 Greetings NANOG'ers!

 I have a small home lab which I mostly use for learning and testing.  I'm
 likely to receive some gear that needs negative 48VDC (ie: positive
 ground).  Mains is a typical 120VAC, 60Hz.

 Can anyone recommend a power supply, reasonably priced, to go from 120VAC
 down to -48VDC@10Amps?  Something that fits in a two post rack would be
 preferred, but not required.

 Thanks,
 Mark


Mark,

I'd recommend a Kepco PRR 48-22M.  We have one in-office, used it for
some -48VDC equipment (Adtran Total Access gear) that we tested
in-office.  Worked great, and can be found on eBay for under $400

-Bobby

Megapath/Covad DNS broken?

[Robert Glover]

Hello,

Seems like some Megapath/Covad DNS servers are non-responsive:

64.105.172.26
64.105.172.27

We have dozens of end-users down that utilize these servers.  Anyone 
from MP/Covad alive this morning??


Thanks,
-Bobby

Cogent packet loss to Verizon in San Jose

[Robert Glover]

Anyone from Cogent around?  Normal support channels aren't getting me
anywhere.

We have been seeing consistent packet loss to Verizon over Cogent in San
Jose for several days:

HOST: noc-auth1.garlic.com   Loss%   Snt  
Last   Avg  Best  Wrst StDev
  1. router.garlic.com   0.0%100.4  
0.3   0.2   0.4   0.0
  2. vl203.mag03.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com0.0%102.2  
2.3   2.1   2.4   0.1
  3. te0-2-0-1.mpd21.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com0.0%102.6  
2.6   2.4   2.8   0.1
  4. be2166.ccr21.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com   0.0%103.9  
3.9   3.7   4.2   0.1
  5. be2000.ccr21.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com   0.0%104.7  
4.4   4.3   4.7   0.1
  6. verizon.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com   40.0%10   80.0 
80.8  79.9  81.8   0.7
  7. so-1-0-0-0.SJC01-CORE-RTR1.verizon-gni.net  30.0%10   82.2 
87.9  81.1 114.6  11.3
  8. A8-0-1710.SNFCCA-DSL-01.verizon-gni.net30.0%10   83.2 
83.8  82.1  85.9   1.3
  9. static-71-116-125-210.snfcca.dsl-w.verizon.net 20.0%10  108.1
107.2 105.7 108.7   1.1


We have had to route some customer's traffic out through our alternate
provider (AS20115), as their VPN's were borked by the packet loss.

Thanks,
-Bobby

Re: Cogent IPV6 connectivity to fireball.acr.fi

[Robert Glover]

All good from AS4307 via Cogent:

Sending 20, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 2001:1BC8:100D::2, timeout is 2 seconds:

Success rate is 100 percent (20/20), round-trip min/avg/max = 200/203/204 ms

Traceroutes fail altogether.


On 11/3/2013 10:30 AM, Clinton Work wrote:
 IPV6 connectivity to fireball.acr.fi is failing inside Cogent AS174.  I
 have already contacted the Cogent NOC, but I haven't heard anything back
 yet. I'm wondering if somebody else with Cogent IPV6 connectivity can
 run some tests.   IPV4 connectivity is working fine.  

Re: Possible DNS issues at Networksolutions aka WORLDNIC.COM?

[Robert Glover]

On 10/22/2013 9:59 AM, Mark Keymer wrote:
 Anyone else seeing resolving issues on WORLDNIC.COM DNS servers?

Yes.  We started getting calls from customers with domains using
*.worldnic.com (i.e. Network Solutions) in the last 15 minutes or so.

-Bobby

Re: Cogent 100M DIA in Denver

[Robert Glover]

We've had them since May 2008.  Recently upgraded from 100Mb to 250Mb. 
Had minor issues here and there (no outages to speak of).

I've had some IPv6 issues since moving the link to dual-stack a few
months back, but we are not deploying IPv6 to end-users yet, so I'll let
them slide on that.

On 10/14/2013 12:57 PM, Tri Tran wrote:
 They're lit in the bulding and have a much faster installation interval. How 
 reliable are they? 
 Tri Tran

Any from O1 alive today?

[Robert Glover]

Dear O1,

Your managed modem service appears to not be authenticating users at
this time.  We have some grumpy dial-up users this morning.  Our RADIUS
is functioning normally (other services are able to authenticate against
it successfully).

Your support line (1-888-444-) rings fast-busy about 80% of the time
I call it this morning (the other 20%, it works fine)

Your on-call staff that I paged has yet to respond.

Thanks,
-Bobby

Anyone from Bluehost?

[Robert Glover]

Hello,

Can someone from Bluehost please contact me?

Email blacklist issue.  We have gone through the normal support
channels, but have come up with the support staff @ Bluehost not
understanding the nature of our request.

Thanks,
-Bobby

Re: www.att.net ipv6 traceroute

[Robert Glover]

On 07/01/2013 07:34 AM, David Hill wrote:
 Anyone else noticing odd ipv6 traceroutes to www.att.net
 (2001:1890:1c01:2::40)?

 For example, the first traceroute originating in Chicago, and if the
 hostnames are anything to go by:

 Chicago - Dallas - Atlanta - Miama - NYC - Amsterdam -
 Frankfurt - France - D.C. - Atlanta...


Looks OK from here:

(From 2607:4B00::/32 - SF Bay Area, Native):

mushroom#traceroute www.att.net 
Translating www.att.net...domain server (216.139.32.37) [OK]

Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to www.att.net (2001:1890:1C01:2::40)

  1 2001:550:2:C::2:1 0 msec 4 msec 4 msec
  2 2001:550::142 40 msec
2001:550::113 52 msec
2001:550::142 48 msec
  3 2001:550::1040 40 msec
2001:550::1041 48 msec
2001:550::1040 48 msec
  4 2001:550:4::4C 44 msec 36 msec 44 msec
  5 2001:550:3::7A 40 msec 40 msec 44 msec
  6 sffca22crs.ipv6.att.net (2001:1890:FF::12:122:86:122) 112 msec
108 msec 112 msec
  7 la2ca22crs.ipv6.att.net (2001:1890:FF::12:122:31:133) 104 msec
112 msec 108 msec
  8 dlstx22crs.ipv6.att.net (2001:1890:FF::12:122:28:177) 108 msec
104 msec 112 msec
  9 attga21crs.ipv6.att.net (2001:1890:FF::12:122:28:173) 108 msec
100 msec 108 msec
 10 attga409me3.ipv6.att.net (2001:1890:FF::12:122:120:244) 112 msec
124 msec 100 msec
 11  *
2001:1890:C00:8802::11CC:6C6D 108 msec 104 msec
 12  *  *  *
 13  *  *  *
 14  *  *  *


-Robert

Charter - IPv6 peering

[Robert Glover]

Anyone from Charter have any information on when IPv6 peering will be
available to Charter Business customers?

My response from support was Charter is not currently providing IPV6
customer peering

Looking back in the NANOG archives, I see back in May there was mention
of a field trial for Charter Business customers.  Did that become a thing?

-Robert

Re: Charter - IPv6 peering

[Robert Glover]

 Looking back in the NANOG archives, I see back in May there was mention
 of a field trial for Charter Business customers.  Did that become a thing?
Forgot to add, that is May of *2012*

Re: Charter - IPv6 peering

[Robert Glover]

On 6/28/2013 3:27 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
 I've had native IPv6 from Charter since January 2013.

 ~Seth

Are you a Charter Business fiber customer doing BGP with IPv6 PI space?

-Robert

Anyone from O1?

[Robert Glover]

Anyone from O1 around?

Your support line (888-444-) is failing to All Circuits are Busy.

Managed Modem service numbers in Area Codes 530  916 are failing to
All Circuits are Busy.

Any ETA for service to be restored?  I have some grumpy dial-up users
this morning.

-Robert

Fiber cut in SF Bay Area?

[Robert Glover]

Hello,

I'm only posting this here because the Outages list appears to be broken.

I've got confirmed reports (from Cogent and Megapath) that there is a 
fiber cut affecting service through the South Bay.


We have Cogent fiber circuits down in Campbell and San Martin.   In San 
Martin, ATT cell phones have no service whatsoever, DSL service is 
spotty.  Landline and DSL service in Gilroy is almost completely gone.  
We know of a Cogent fiber link in Campbell that is down as well.


Anyone have any additional info?

-Robert


Anyone have any further details?   The issue seems to have started 
around 1:00am PDT or so.


-Robert

Re: Fiber cut in SF Bay Area?

[Robert Glover]

I just spoke to Cogent about 10 minutes ago.  They confirmed with ATT 
that it was vandalism, but ATT gave them an ETR of 4:00PM PDT.


On 4/16/2013 12:18 PM, Siegel, David wrote:

The information that I have is consistent with that...the cut appears to be 
vandalism related.

Splicing has been under way for several hours and is expected to be completed 
within the next 30 minutes.

Dave


-Original Message-
From: Zaid Ali Kahn [mailto:z...@zaidali.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 11:27 AM
To: Ravi Pina
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Fiber cut in SF Bay Area?

Level3 is also impacted. This cut seems to be vandalism but only heard this 
from one source.

Zaid

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 16, 2013, at 12:51 PM, Ravi Pina r...@cow.org wrote:


Our Zayo provided ETR is 11:00 - 11:30 PDT.

XO is one of the impacted providers as well.

-r

On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 08:55:56AM -0700, Raul Rodriguez wrote:

Lost a Zayo circuit from Palo Alto to Los Angeles. ETR was given as 11AM PDT.

-RR

Re: Fiber cut in SF Bay Area?

[Robert Glover]

All,

Just got off the horn with Cogent.  They called ATT while they had me 
on hold, ATT told them they have extracted the fiber, which was, 
according to them, very heavily damaged.  They have brought a new 
cable in, and are in the process of splicing.


-Robert

On 4/16/2013 12:21 PM, Robert Glover wrote:
I just spoke to Cogent about 10 minutes ago.  They confirmed with ATT 
that it was vandalism, but ATT gave them an ETR of 4:00PM PDT.


On 4/16/2013 12:18 PM, Siegel, David wrote:
The information that I have is consistent with that...the cut appears 
to be vandalism related.


Splicing has been under way for several hours and is expected to be 
completed within the next 30 minutes.


Dave


-Original Message-
From: Zaid Ali Kahn [mailto:z...@zaidali.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 11:27 AM
To: Ravi Pina
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Fiber cut in SF Bay Area?

Level3 is also impacted. This cut seems to be vandalism but only 
heard this from one source.


Zaid

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 16, 2013, at 12:51 PM, Ravi Pina r...@cow.org wrote:


Our Zayo provided ETR is 11:00 - 11:30 PDT.

XO is one of the impacted providers as well.

-r

On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 08:55:56AM -0700, Raul Rodriguez wrote:
Lost a Zayo circuit from Palo Alto to Los Angeles. ETR was given as 
11AM PDT.


-RR

Symantec / Message Labs contact?

[Robert Glover]

Hello,

We are having a really hard time getting a hold of Symantec / Message 
Labs regarding one of our mail servers getting a Connection Refused 
when trying to send to any domains hosted with Symantec / Message Labs.


Can someone please contact me?

Sincerely,
Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
SVI Incorporated

Re: authority to route?

[Robert Glover]

Another big-name-big-$$$ vendor whose name begins with C.  Sounds like 
a conspiracy to me


On 11/14/2012 5:09 PM, Mark Gauvin wrote:

Careful though cause the crayons must be crayola approved

Sent from my iPhone

On 2012-11-14, at 5:28 PM, joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:


On 11/14/12 2:40 PM, Joe Abley wrote:

On 2012-11-12, at 14:43, Jim Mercer j...@reptiles.org wrote:


Is there a common practice of providers to vet / validate requests to advertise
blocks?

Yes, most providers whose customers request a particular route to be pointed 
towards them will ask for ambiguous instructions, written on letterhead with 
crayon, and signed illegibly by someone who may or may not have authority to do 
so but who in any case cannot be identified clearly by their scrawl.

Some providers ask for route objects and appropriate import/export
policy in RADB. that fandamently no higher quality an attestation than a
LOA but it's a lot easier to read.

Ideally the letterhead should be crudely constructed in photoshop and then 
faxed across a noisy analogue line.

Once you have one of those babies in your file, no lawyer can touch you.


Joe

Re: BGP Play broken?

[Robert Glover]

On 08/15/2012 10:16 AM, Anurag Bhatia wrote:
 
 Seems like BGP Play - http://bgplay.routeviews.org/ does not works anymore?
 It is not accepting prefixes and gives error to check if prefix is
 announced globally or not.


I sent an email to the contacts listed on the BGPlay feedback page back
on July 20 letting them know it was broken.  I never received a
response, so it has likely been broken since then.

-Robert

Re: UCSF Network Admin??

[Robert Glover]

On 08/01/2012 10:51 AM, Robert Glover wrote:
 Hello,
 
 Is there anyone with clue from UCSF on-list?  Or if someone knows how to
 put me in contact with them, that would be great.
 
 We are not able to query their DNS servers from our network.  We've got
 users not able to access anything UCSF due to this.
 
 Thus far, their response has been to manually put DNS entries into our
 users hosts file, not actually fix the real issue.
 
 Thanks,
 -Robert
 

I should have been a little more forthcoming with information.

We are having issues with getting responses from these servers:

NSMEDCTR1.UCSFMEDICALCENTER.ORG
NSMEDCTR2.UCSFMEDICALCENTER.ORG

Which are authoritative for ucsfmedctr.org and ucsfmedicalcenter.org.

We ARE able to resolve ucsf.edu and things associated with that entity,
just NOT the medical center.

Thanks,
-Robert

Akamai infrastructure tech

[Robert Glover]

If someone with Akamai is watching, can you please have someone from
infrastructure contact me?  We host an Akamai server, a drive started
taking errors, Akamai shipped us a new drive, but did not tell us which
of the eight drives in the server needs to be replaced.

Normal contact channels have resulted in voicemail or no clue :(

Thanks,
-Robert

Re: Akamai infrastructure tech

[Robert Glover]

Thanks to everyone who responded; we've got this completely taken care of!

On 07/13/2012 11:32 AM, Robert Glover wrote:
 If someone with Akamai is watching, can you please have someone from
 infrastructure contact me?  We host an Akamai server, a drive started
 taking errors, Akamai shipped us a new drive, but did not tell us which
 of the eight drives in the server needs to be replaced.
 
 Normal contact channels have resulted in voicemail or no clue :(
 
 Thanks,
 -Robert
 

West Coast Charter Outage

[Robert Glover]

Does anyone have any information on a Charter outage on the West Coast?

Re: NANOG Operational TTL Alert for 160-bit Headers (aka IPv4)

[Robert Glover]

Someone get this man a Xanax!

-Original message-
From: Guru NANOG nanog.g...@gmail.com
To: nanog nanog@nanog.org
Sent: 2012 Mar, Sun, 4 00:01:04 GMT+00:00
Subject: NANOG Operational TTL Alert for 160-bit Headers (aka IPv4)

Common Misconception - IPv4 is Out of Address Space

NANOG Operational TTL Alert for 160-bit Headers (aka IPv4)

The 8-bit TTL field is reduced to 4-bits plus two 11 bits stuck at 1
for a long time

The new 8-bit fields are: SD11

Packets without the 11 will enter Deep Packet Inspection processing (slow)

SD are new Source and Destination Address bits set via the generic
 128-bit records

4+8+12+30+6 = 60 + 68 = 128

VRHL+111.T1.000+Port12+30+Frag6

T1 sets the TTL bits - Use T0 at your own risk - VRHL=0101=5

NANOG.GURU.☺

Any Covad / MegaPath folks around?

[Robert Glover]

Hi,

Looks like the Connect portal has been down for hours.  Can someone from 
Covad / MegaPath ping me off-list?


Thanks!

Sincerely,
Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
South Valley Internet

ATT / prodigy.net mail admin

[Robert Glover]

Hello,

Can an ATT mail admin contact me off-list please?  I have attempted to 
get a resolution for an issue through the normal channels and have not 
gotten anywhere.


Sincerely,
Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
SVI Incorporated

Postini / Google admin needed

[Robert Glover]

I apologize for the noise.

We are not getting anywhere regarding issues with Postini through the 
normal support channels.  Can someone from Postini please contact me 
off-list?


Sincerely,
Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
SVI Incorporated

Anyone from Covad here?

[Robert Glover]

Covad (or should I say Megapath now..),

You have DNS servers that are failing to resolve anything at this time:

64.105.172.26 and 64.105.172.27 are both failing.

This is a Bad Thing as these are the servers that the majority of our 
Covad customers use.


Sincerely,
Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
SVI Incorporated

Cogent -- Google Public DNS routing issue

[Robert Glover]

Hello,

We have noticed that from our Cogent link (as well as from ALL U.S. 
based points we tested via the Cogent Looking Glass: 
http://www.cogentco.com/en/network/looking-glass), traceroutes to 
8.8.8.8 and 8.8.5.5 all seem to go over to Europe:


TRACE from Los Angeles to 8.8.4.4
1 gi2-6.99.mpd03.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.3.81) 0.514 ms 0.332 ms
2 te0-0-0-6.ccr22.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.145) 0.401 ms 0.518 ms
3 te0-3-0-6.ccr22.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.3.185) 36.538 ms 
te0-2-0-5.ccr22.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.27.18) 36.449 ms
4 te0-0-0-2.ccr22.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.5.93) 63.200 ms 
te0-2-0-7.ccr22.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.89) 62.909 ms
5 te0-1-0-2.ccr22.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.230) 62.985 ms 
te0-0-0-7.ccr22.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.221) 62.894 ms
6 te0-5-0-6.ccr22.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.30) 69.434 ms 
te0-5-0-2.ccr22.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.26) 69.229 ms
7 te0-3-0-2.ccr22.lon13.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.22) 144.224 ms 
te0-2-0-2.ccr22.lon13.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.133) 146.474 ms
8 te8-1.mpd02.lon01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.57.182) 143.890 ms 
te7-1.mpd02.lon01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.57.178) 146.320 ms

9 ldn-b4-link.telia.net (213.248.70.237) 145.967 ms 145.872 ms
10 80.91.247.93 (80.91.247.93) 155.170 ms ldn-bb1-link.telia.net 
(213.155.130.46) 145.971 ms
11 ldn-b3-link.telia.net (213.155.133.33) 143.909 ms 80.91.249.170 
(80.91.249.170) 146.213 ms

12 google-ic-126258-ldn-b3.c.telia.net (213.248.67.66) 146.158 ms 146.291 ms
13 64.233.175.25 (64.233.175.25) 146.166 ms 64.233.175.27 
(64.233.175.27) 144.256 ms

14 209.85.253.92 (209.85.253.92) 146.435 ms 146.401 ms
15 72.14.232.134 (72.14.232.134) 150.128 ms 66.249.95.173 
(66.249.95.173) 152.591 ms
16 209.85.252.83 (209.85.252.83) 149.993 ms 209.85.251.231 
(209.85.251.231) 152.270 ms

17 209.85.243.85 (209.85.243.85) 152.514 ms 152.332 ms
18 google-public-dns-b.google.com (8.8.4.4) 152.436 ms 152.299 ms

The routes from our backup carrier stay state-side and result in ~30ms 
ping times.  Through Cogent, the ping times are around ~164ms


What is going on here?  Can someone from Cogent chime in on this?

-Robert

Re: Facebook issue

[Robert Glover]

Facebook Goes Down Amid Rollout of New Brand Pages - 
http://on.mash.to/f36qqA


Sincerely,
Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
South Valley Internet

On 12/16/2010 1:34 PM, andrew.wallace wrote:

Anyone having issue with Facebook?

Andrew

Re: reporting physical plant damage to ATT?

[Robert Glover]

Paul,

Try calling 1-800-332-1321.  It is a general repair number for POTS and DSX  
circuits.  They are clueful, and if they aren't the right people to call,  
they will likely be able to point you in the right direction.


Sincerely,
Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
South Valley Internet

-Original message-
From: Paul Vixie vi...@isc.org
To: na...@merit.edu
Sent: 2010 Nov, Thu, 25 21:38:18 GMT+00:00
Subject: reporting physical plant damage to ATT?

there's a pacific telephone j-box at the edge of a parking lot in san mateo
california that's been hit by a car hard enough to spring the door open.   
the
copper punchdowns are now freely and publically accessible.  i think it's  
not

pac tel or pac bell or sbc any more, so what i need is to know how to tell
ATT that they've got a physical plant problem that will soon be customer
affecting, especially with the weather like it is.  there was a call-before-
you-dig sticker on it so i called that number and they said it wasn't their
problem.  i'm trying to do the right thing by asking ATT to make it so if
i google for report damage to att it will give a useful result.   
meanwhile

if someone from att asks me i will tell them the road address of the box.

(i am not an att customer and calling 1-800-CALL-ATT did me no good at  
all.)

Re: Huawei PTN 910

[Robert Glover]

Minimal time needed

http://lmgtfy.com/

On 6/29/2010 12:18 PM, Jeff Harper wrote:

Lol, you must have way too much time on your hands to make that. ;)

   

-Original Message-
From: Christopher Morrow [mailto:morrowc.li...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 1:40 PM
To: Uri Joskovitch
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Huawei PTN 910

On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Uri Joskovitch
uri.joskovi...@telrad.com  wrote:
 

URGENT !!!

I got into trouble with this product, any one has its user manual?

Installation guide? , Other documentation?
   

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Huawei+PTN+910+documentation

see like the 5th link down?

 

Thanks

Uri



   


   

Re: Edu versus Speakeasy Speedtest

[Robert Glover]

Adjust your TCP window size.

-Original Message-
From: Murphy, William william.mur...@uth.tmc.edu
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 10:53:01 
To: nanog@nanog.orgnanog@nanog.org
Subject: Edu versus Speakeasy Speedtest

I work for an Edu with multi-gigabit Internet connectivity and I get
questions from users saying Why am I only getting 14Mb when I run this
speed test?  I have got to believe that the various Internet speed tests
(Speakeasy or dslreports) are rate limited to prevent someone from shutting
them down.  I am able to get 300-400Mb running from a PC inside my network
to NDT servers located on Internet2, so that tells me my border and internal
network is healthy.  Can someone on this list shed some light regarding
reliability and accuracy of these various speed tests especially for an Edu
with lots'o bandwidth?  Thanks.

 

Bill Murphy

University of Texas Health Science Center - Houston

 

Re: Using /31 for router links

[Robert Glover]

[Michael Sokolov said:]

*snip*
but 99.999% of all ATM'd xDSL
lines out there carry a single PVC at 0*35 or 0*38.  So what then is the point 
of running ATM?!?!
*snip*

We've got several ADSL and SDSL circuits that carry two PVC's: 0/35 and 0/36.  

Covad has a product called Voice Optimized Access.  I won't go into the gory 
details of the underlying technology, but the second PVC is utilized for voice. 
 Essentially two separate IP networks over one physical network, one with 
guaranteed bandwidth (by way of vbr-rt)  and QoS through Covad's network.

Sincerely,
Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
South Valley Internet
-Original Message-
From: msoko...@ivan.harhan.org (Michael Sokolov)
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 18:52:51 
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Using /31 for router links

Mark Smith na...@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org wrote:

 What about NAT, ATM cell tax, unnecessary addressing fields in PTP
 protocols (including your beloved HDLC), SSAP, DSAP fields not being big
 enough in 802.2 necessitating SNAP, IPX directly over 802.3, AAL1
 through AAL4, PPPoE dumbell MTUs and MSS hacks? Some of those are far
 worse sins in my opinion.

Hmm.

PPPoE: this kludge is a direct fallout of abusing Ethernet for WAN/PTP.
If all those xDSL users were willing to stick V.35 cards in their PCs
and use modems that put out V.35 instead of Ethernet, the whole PPPoE
kludge with all of its attendant MTU issues would have been completely
unnecessary.  Want PPP for authentication etc?  Just run straight PPP
(RFC 1662) over V.35 instead of Ethernet/PPPoE, HDLC has no fixed MTU
unlike Ethernet (jogging my memory, all HDLC controllers which I recall
working with allowed maximum frame size up to just a little under 2^16
octets or so), and one can thus have the standard MTU of 1500 octets on
that PPP link!

Oh, and yet another soapbox of mine, an xDSL modem that puts out V.35
instead of goddamn Ethernet would be a true modem: a modulator/demodulator
that modulates/demodulates the bits at the electrical level without
caring about what's in those bits.  What everyone else in this fubared
world calls an xDSL modem (a black box that puts Ethernet out) is not
a modem at all (i.e., total misappropriation of the term), it is
actually a bastardized router!  These boxes forward packets between two
network interfaces: the presented Ethernet interface and the internal
(often horrendously non-standard and proprietary) HDLC or ATM interface
on the actual line.  A device that forwards packets between two
different network interfaces is by definition a router, hence what
everyone calls a modem is actually a bastardized router - bastardized
because its routing (packet forwarding) function is something
incomprehensible.  The Ethernet-to-Ethernet NAT boxes that everyone else
calls routers should be called NATters or something like that,
anything but a router!  A true router is a box with a few AUIs and a few
V.35 ports sticking out of it, running some very capable, flexible and
totally user-configurable packet forwarding software stack that supports
all networking models: IP routing, MAC bridging, VC cross-connect.

As for ATM...  The part that totally baffles me about the use of ATM on
xDSL lines is that I have never, ever, ever seen an xDSL line carrying
more than one ATM VC.  OK, there may be someone out there who has set up
a configuration like that just for fun, but 99.999% of all ATM'd xDSL
lines out there carry a single PVC at 0*35 or 0*38.  So what then is the
point of running ATM?!?!  All the hyped benefits of ATM (a little cell
can squeeze in the middle of a big packet without waiting for it to
finish, yadda yadda yadda) are contingent upon having more than one
VPI/VCI going across the interface!  If every single non-idle cell going
across that ATM interface is 0*35 or 0*38, the interface will never
carry anything other a direct succession of cells making up an AAL5
packet, strictly in sequence and without interruption.  So what's the
point of ATM then?  Why chop that packet up into cells only to transmit
those cells in direct sequence one after another?  Why not simply send
that same packet in plain HDLC over the same copper pairs/fiber?  OK,
the backhaul network upstream of the DSLAM may be ATM and that one does
have many VCs, so ATM *might* be of use there, but even in that case why
not do FRF.8 in the DSLAM and keep the ATM strictly on the backhaul,
sending HDLC down the copper pairs?

off the soapbox for the moment

MS

Re: Cogent Outage?

[Robert Glover]

Hello,

Our 100Mb Metro-E link is up and running just fine...  We are fed out of 
their San Francisco, CA facility.


However, this is posted on the Cogent Status page:


**
** Cogent Network Status Report Last Updated Thu Jan 14 10:38:30 2010 **
**
**
*Network Status:* Warning
*DNS Servers Status:* Normal
*Dialup/IPASS Status: *Normal
*Mail Servers Status:* Normal
*Webservers Status: *Normal


*Cogent Network Status/DNS Server Status Description: * Welcome to 
Cogent Communications' Network Status Message. Customers with traffic 
going through or on the east coast may be experiencing packet loss and 
higher than normal latency due to a fiber cut in New Jersey. There is no 
ETR at this time. The Cogent ticket to reference for this issue is 
HD2082680.



Sincerely,
Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
South Valley Internet

On 1/14/2010 9:31 AM, Joe Johnson wrote:

We just lost Cogent across the country, along with several sister companies. 
Can't get through to a support person. Any idea what's going on?

Joe Johnson
Chief Information Officer
Riverside Consulting Group, Ltd.
Phone: 708.442.6033 x3456
Fax: 708.442.9722
j...@riversidecg.com
www.riversidecg.com




   

Re: Cogent Outage?

[Robert Glover]

Hello,

Internet Pulse shows some bad-mojo right now:

http://www.internetpulse.com/Main.aspx?OriginValue=CogentOriginLevel=1

Sincerely,
Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
South Valley Internet

On 1/14/2010 9:36 AM, Aaron Wendel wrote:

Sitting on hold with them now.  We lost them completely in Kansas City for
about 5 minutes.  We're back but connectivity through them is spotty.  Can't
even resolve google.com.  Same with other DCs in the area.



-Original Message-
From: Joe Johnson [mailto:j...@riversidecg.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 11:31 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Cogent Outage?

We just lost Cogent across the country, along with several sister companies.
Can't get through to a support person. Any idea what's going on?

Joe Johnson
Chief Information Officer
Riverside Consulting Group, Ltd.
Phone: 708.442.6033 x3456
Fax: 708.442.9722
j...@riversidecg.com
www.riversidecg.com





No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.725 / Virus Database: 270.14.140/2621 - Release Date: 01/14/10
06:39:00


   

Re: delays to google

[Robert Glover]

We are not experiencing any issues seeing google:

[r...@hermes ~]# traceroute www.google.com
traceroute: Warning: www.google.com has multiple addresses; using 
66.102.7.104

traceroute to www.l.google.com (66.102.7.104), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1  router (216.139.0.65)  0.271 ms  0.746 ms  0.986 ms
2  vl1192.na21.b003122-0.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (38.99.42.233)  3.142 ms 
3.424 ms  4.115 ms
3  gi1-11.3503.mpd01.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.64.161)  4.051 ms 
3.193 ms  3.374 ms
4  te9-4.mpd01.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.182)  5.106 ms  22.628 ms 
4.882 ms
5  te7-2.mpd01.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.74)  5.026 ms  21.801 ms 
10.957 ms
6  google.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.10.146)  5.204 ms  4.281 ms 
4.724 ms
7  216.239.46.194 (216.239.46.194)  5.557 ms  5.157 ms 72.14.239.250 
(72.14.239.250)  9.921 ms
8  72.14.238.131 (72.14.238.131)  16.955 ms  17.620 ms 216.239.43.145 
(216.239.43.145)  17.566 ms

9  72.14.239.246 (72.14.239.246)  29.737 ms  29.334 ms  18.046 ms
10  mc-in-f104.google.com (66.102.7.104)  16.538 ms  17.477 ms  17.061 ms

Sincerely,
Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
South Valley Internet (AS4307)
- Original Message - 
From: Steve Williams willi...@csr.utexas.edu

To: na...@merit.edu
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 8:48 AM
Subject: delays to google


am seeing significant delays in getting to google.  anyone else seeing 
this?


$ traceroute www.google.com
traceroute: Warning: www.google.com has multiple addresses; using 
74.125.53.147
traceroute to www.l.google.com (74.125.53.147), 30 hops max, 40 byte 
packets

1  cisco-190 (129.116.190.250)  0.430 ms  0.350 ms  0.353 ms
2  ser10-v758.gw.utexas.edu (128.83.10.29)  1.138 ms  1.099 ms  1.057 ms
3  ser2-gi1-9.gw.utexas.edu (128.83.10.2)  10.475 ms  1.174 ms  1.584 ms
4  aust-utnoc-core-ge-6-0-0-0.tx-bb.net (192.12.10.1)  1.215 ms  1.209 ms 
1.134 ms
5  te2-1--570.tr01-lsanca01.transitrail.net (137.164.131.221)  40.649 ms 
40.699 ms  40.678 ms

6  * * *
7  * * *
8  * * *
9  * * *
10  * * *
11  72.14.232.10 (72.14.232.10)  261.262 ms * *
12  * * pw-in-f147.google.com (74.125.53.147)  251.867 ms

--


'''
   (O O)
,-- oOO-(_)-OOo -,
|Stephen Williams|
|  Manager of Computer Services  |
|   Center for Space Research|
| University of Texas at Austin  |
| 3925 W. Braker Ln., Suite 200  |
|  Austin, TX 78759-5321 |
|512.471.7235  512.471.3570 (fax)|
|   willi...@csr.utexas.edu  |
| Oooo __|
   oooO   (   )
  (   )) /
   \ ((_/
\_)

Re: Cart and Horse

[Robert Glover]

This bears investigating.  I live 3 blocks away. Looks like I'm going on a 
stroll after work tonight.


Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
South Valley Interet (AS4307)
- Original Message - 
From: Roy r.engehau...@gmail.com

To: nanog na...@merit.edu
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 8:06 AM
Subject: Cart and Horse



A friend mentioned at dinner yesterday that he spotted several ATT
trucks next to manholes in the area affected by the fiber cut.  They
were busy welding the manhole covers to their rims.

Re: Outside plant protection, fiber cuts, interwebz down oh noes!

[Robert Glover]

*SNIP*
located ten feet down a manhole on
Monterey Highway, north of Blossom Hill Road in San Jose.

Authorities also found two other locations where fiber optic cables were
similarly cut -- near Hayes Avenue and Cottle Road in San Jose
*SNIP*

Just for clarification, these locations are one in the same.  

And as an update, the splicing operations are done at this location.  (I live 3 
blocks away The multitudes of crews that were at the site were gone when I 
drove by at 3:30PM PST today.  The splice trailers were still there around 
9:30AM PST working on cable.

Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
South Valley Internet (AS4307)

Re: Outside plant protection, fiber cuts, interwebz down oh noes!

[Robert Glover]

- Original Message - 
From: Ravi Pina r...@cow.org

To: Charles Wyble char...@thewybles.com
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2009 5:41 PM
Subject: Re: Outside plant protection, fiber cuts, interwebz down oh noes!




2) Why didn't an alarm go off that someone had entered the area? It was
after business hours, presumably not in response to a trouble ticket,
and as such a highly suspicious action. Does it make sense for these
access portals to have some sort of alarm? I mean there is fiber running
through and as such it could carry the signaling. Would this be a
massive cost addition during construction?



I can comment on this, I live three blocks from the scene of the cut.

The manholes themselves sit along railroad tracks and an overpass.  At 2am, 
it's a very dark area, and there is very little traffic at that time.  It 
would be an ideal area to perform this type of vandalism.


On a side note, when I was passing the area this morning at around 10am PDT, 
there were two fiber-trailers working in two separate manholes.


My company (AS4307) fell off the map from about 2am until roughly 10:42pm 
when one of our upstreams (AS20115) finally came back.  Our primary (AS174) 
came back about 11:30pm.  Of course during the majority of the outage, we 
also had no land-lines or cell-phones, so were effectively isolated.


Bobby Glover
Director of Information Services
South Valley Internet