Re: OT: Jay Adelson Keynote Video?
http://bitcast-b.bitgravity.com/bitgravity/nanog_5Mbit_720p_30fps.mov I believe this is it -- kris On May 11, 2011, at 11:23 AM, Tom Daly wrote: > Folks, > > At NANOG 43, Jay Adelson had a video clip in his presentation which > celebrated the hilarity that customers create for network engineers. Does > anyone have a link to the video? A review of the abstract > (http://nanog.org/meetings/nanog43/abstracts.php?pt=NDMmbmFub2c0Mw==&nm=nanog43) > and google'ing high and low yielding no results. I seem to recall it being > on BitGravity, but I don't have the URL. > > Tom > > -- > Tom Daly, CTO, Dynamic Network Services, Inc. > ### We're hiring software engineers, network engineers, and web developers. > Learn more at http://dyn.com/why-dyn/careers. ### > >
Re: Membership model
On Feb 7, 2011, at 12:40 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: > I'll happily join Newnog/NANOG and pay my dues when I can reach the web site > to do so > on IPv6 rather than legacy IPv4. http://newnog.org/wg.php I'm sure the technical WG will be happy to hear you're volunteering. -- kris
Re: A fascinating piece of spam
All Taken care of (at least for the @yahoo address I received the spam from). Chris and Steven, mind fwd'ing the problem emails to adm...@nanog.org? Kris On Dec 7, 2010, at 6:19 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote: > same, sent via yahoomail webmail (I think): > srcaddr: 173.208.103.211 > > On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 8:46 PM, Scott Weeks wrote: >> >> >> --- s...@cs.columbia.edu wrote: >> From: Steven Bellovin >> >> Yup, same purported sender... >> >> >> >>> From what company? So we don't make the mistake of buying from them. >> >> scott >> >> >
Re: Lightning Debates at NANOG 51
This is nanog-futures stuff and/or community meeting stuff. Kris On Dec 7, 2010, at 2:12 PM, Christian Pena wrote: > I agree, I just joined the list today and was about to unsubscribe because of > all the realtively useless posts > > "Leo Bicknell" wrote: > >> >> I have a suggestion... >> >> Nanog Mailing List: Critical Operational Content vs. Break time >> Amusement >> >> *ducks* >> >> -- >> Leo Bicknell - bickn...@ufp.org - CCIE 3440 >> PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ > > -- > Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >
Re: 2010.10.05 NANOG50 Tuesday afternoon notes
On Oct 5, 2010, at 4:15 PM, Matthew Petach wrote: > I've posted the Tuesday afternoon notes at > http://kestrel3.netflight.com/2010.10.05-NANOG50-afternoon-notes.txt > > and now I'm dashing to the social, because they're turning out the lights > on me in the hall here. ^_^;; Thanks Matt, your notes during NANOG are always appreciated! -- kris
Re: A New TransAtlantic Cable System
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=lga-lhr -- kris On Oct 2, 2010, at 7:31 AM, Jon Meek wrote: > One of the ways that I have tormented WAN vendors over the years is > with a plot of RTT vs. great circle distance between the end points of > a circuit. Most RTTs usually sit at some constant offset above that > Physics limit straight line. Circuits taking a less than ideal have > their RTT far above the Physics limit line and we have used that > information to get routes fixed. > > Using my great circle program that accounts for the non-spherical > Earth for locations we have West of London and North of NYC, assuming > a 1.5 index of refraction I get: > > One way distance: 5520.6 km Round Trip Delay: 55.2 ms > > So Heath's estimate is right on, although depending on where he got > the distance maybe it does account for the shape of the Earth. > > Jon > > On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Heath Jones wrote: >> On 2 October 2010 10:52, Rod Beck wrote: >>> Is that a straight line calculation or did you take into account that a >>> straight line is not the shortest path on a curved surface? >> >> Well that is pretty obvious to most, but no - I didn't go to the >> effort of factoring in curvature of the earth - especially given that >> 1.5 is very rough figure anyway for RI of glass. If anything, my >> comment was compliment to your network being close to minimum possible >> latency! >> >> >
Re: off-topic: historical query concerning the Internet bubble
A comment from Jeremy Orbell at LINX: -- The period of growth being discussed predates my own involvement in the industry as I didn't join LINX until 2003. However I do know that LINX regularly announced new traffic milestones at the exchange as they happened back in the late 90s. I've looked back through our archive of press releases and noted a few of these so you will get an idea of how peak traffic was increasing at LINX at that time. 27 April 1998 - 200 Mbps 24 August 1999 - 850 Mbps 17 September 1999 - 1 Gbps 5 November 1999 - 1.25 Gbps 13 December 1999 - 1.5 Gbps 27 March 2000 - 2 Gbps 11 January 2001 - 5 Gbps Unfortunately I cannot post links the original material as it isn't available online at the moment but in the LINX 15th anniversary issue of HotLINX last year we reprinted a copy of a LINX press release from 17th September 1999 which said: "The London Internet Exchange is pleased to announce it has this week reached traffic levels of one Gigabit, positioning it clearly as one of the top 5 Internet Exchanges in the world. This shows a 455% increase in traffic from the level of 180 Mbps one year ago." Looking at that 180 Mbps number it looks like it might refer to a Spring 1998 figure rather than September 1998 because I did find a reference to a peak of 200 Mbps being achieved in April of that year. The discrepency could perhaps be explained by other means such as averages but like I say, it was before my time. Anyway, the full press release which I quoted from can be read on page 3 of the following PDF:https://www.linx.net/files/hotlinx/hotlinx-20.pdf I hope this will be of hope to you. Jeremy Orbell LINX Marketing & Communications On Aug 10, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Jeff Young wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > At the time these statements were made it was possible to make reasonable > assumptions about the size of the Internet. As a Tier 1 knew how much > traffic our > customer links generated by the size of the link. We knew exactly how much > traffic stayed within our backbones and how much traffic ended up in a > peering arrangement. We knew with some precision just how much of the > Tier 2 ISP market was connected to us and how much was connected to others, > and who the others were. I don't think the theory still holds but traffic > on-net > versus off-net was a pretty good indication of market share. > > Today's Internet handles much more traffic in-region and is bounded by > phenomenon such as language barrier (although the amount of spam I get > in Chinese characters has increased recently, who let the barrier down?). > This phenomenon wasn't as prominent in '98-'01 and while I wouldn't say > it's impossible I think you'd have to commission the folks at UCSD to get > anything that resembled a value for total Internet capacity today. > > Doubling in 9-12 months was a reasonable figure back then. 100 days > might have been a short-term spike caused by a back-log of activations > (we sometimes stopped the machine while we made upgrades) but it > certainly was an anomaly. > > jy > > > On 10/08/2010, at 9:01 AM, Kenny Sallee wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Jessica Yu wrote: >>> >>> I do not know if making such distinction would alter the conclusion of your >>> paper. But, to me, there is a difference between one to predict the growth >>> of >>> one particular network based on the stats collected than one to predict the >>> growth of the entire Internet with no solid data. >>> Thanks!--Jessica >>> >> >> Agree with Jessica: you can't say the 'Internet' doubles every x number of >> days/amount of time no matter what the number of days or amount of time is. >> The 'Internet' is a series of tubes...hahaha couldn't help itAs we all >> know the Internet is a bunch of providers plugged into each other. Provider >> A may see an 10x increase in traffic every month while provider B may not. >> For example, if Google makes a deal with Verizon only Verizon will see a >> huge increase in traffic internally and less externally (or vice versa). >> Until Google goes somewhere else! So the whole 'myth' of Internet doubling >> every 100 days to me is something someone (ODell it seems) made up to >> appease someone higher in the chain or a government committee that really >> doesn't get it. IE - it's marketing talk to quantify something. I guess if >> all the ISP's in the world provided a central repository bandwidth numbers >> they have on their backbone then you could make up some stats about Internet >> traffic as a whole. But without that - it just doesn't make much sense. >> >> Just my .02 >> Kenny >> > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin) > > iF4EAREIAAYFAkxh4LUACgkQxvthcni5E2+7AwD+Lx+Dm14XTn/qZpy2co3CrcI1 > dzA9QycoM2VmMBjmfxwA/1LD7gqI3zd80VozkHMDbDIREDPxKBPPtMlb+7Tu/nPV > =wt/O > -END PGP SIGNATURE- >
Re: Sample RFP/RFQs for routing/switching equipment
On Jul 1, 2010, at 8:45 PM, Don McMorris wrote: > I'm working with a very rapidly growing SME that is preparing an > RFP/RFQ for new routing and switching equipment. Nothing too > extravagant - 2 locations, <100mbps throughput. > > I'm seeking sample RFPs and RFQs for them to assist in the process - > specifically to see what to ask for in terms of features and other > considerations. There's a deep passion to get this "right the first > time". If you know of or have access to RFPs or RFQs you'd be willing > to share, it would be of great help. I briefly searched the NANOG > archives, and (somewhat surprisingly) did not find a similar request. Conference presentation archives: http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog46/abstracts.php?pt=MTM5MCZuYW5vZzQ2&nm=nanog46 -- kris
Re: Best Practices checklists
This is a good topic for nanog-futures and not the main list since it's about the organization. Kris On Jun 10, 2010, at 9:05 AM, Michael Dillon wrote: > I expect that the collected members of this list could do a good job > of defining some network security practices checklists. Now that NANOG > has been spun out as an independent entity, I would hate to see it > become just another conference organizer. In the recent past many > professions have learned how valuable a simple checklist is in > preventing errors and ensuring that work adheres to a certain > standard. > > So I am suggesting that NANOG take on the task of compiling and > publishing checklists for various areas of network operations. We > could have a NANOG wiki where people can publish, and work over, > suggestions for checklist topics and content. Then at the conferences, > a BOF-style meeting could hash out the official published versions. > > We could have an interesting debate on whether or not this would make > a difference and whether or not NANOG should take on this role. But I > hope that we are now at a point where we see that network sloppiness > and insecurity are becoming such major issues that action is needed. > Let's act first, and evaluate the usefulness of the work, later. > > --Michael Dillon >
Re: Time for a lounge mailing list
Everyone- this conversation should take place at nanog-futu...@nanog.org. That list is for meta-discussions like this. Thanks! Kris On Mar 31, 2010, at 9:25 AM, Jack Carrozzo wrote: > lounge is good - off topic seems to say that *no* operational content > will be discussed, whereas with "lounge" we can simply move long > threads most people don't care about over there (ie: trolling, TDM, > etc) > > -Jack Carrozzo > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Brandon Galbraith > wrote: >> nanog-c...@nanog.org? >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Azinger, Marla < >> marla.azin...@frontiercorp.com> wrote: >> >>> I'm sending this to the proper request email. >>> >>> This is a decent idea that I support. >>> >>> NANOG Crew please read the below email and consider establishing a separate >>> "socializing" email address so operational topics only exist on the current >>> email list. >>> >>> Cheers >>> Marla Azinger >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Daniel Senie [mailto:d...@senie.com] >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 8:47 AM >>> To: NANOG list >>> Subject: Time for a lounge mailing list >>> >>> It's been clear for a very long time that the NANOG crowd likes to >>> socialize. At NANOGs, social settings are where connections are made, beers >>> consumed, sometimes scuba dives shared or other local attractions explored. >>> It is certainly a good thing, and fosters much useful discussion among peers >>> who become friends. >>> >>> That said, the nanog@nanog.org mailing list often is overrun with >>> non-operational discussion. Certainly there are some good examples today, >>> such as job titles, or arguing about the best way to rid the list of a >>> troll. >>> >>> Creation of a second mailing list to handle non-operational, social traffic >>> for the nanog crowd would be one way to keep the main list on topic. Might >>> even boost productivity, as folks could more easily defer reading and >>> responding to the non-operational stuff until their off-hours. >>> >>> So how about it? lou...@nanog.org? offto...@nanog.org? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Brandon Galbraith >> Voice: 630.492.0464 >> >
Re: austin eats
Moved this thread over to its proper home at atten...@nanog.org Please carry on there, thanks! -- kris On Feb 16, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Jason J. W. Williams wrote: > For BBQ, Rudy's is hard to beat: > > http://www.rudys.com/ > > -J > > Jason J. W. Williams, COO/CTO > DigiTar > william...@digitar.com > > V: 208.343.8520 > F: 208.322.8522 > M: 208.863.0727 > > www.digitar.com > > On Feb 16, 2010, at 7:12 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > >> >> is there a nanog austin eats page somewhere? i lost my old link to some >> wiki we used to use. >> >> and, a completely unverified recco from an austin friend (who thinks >> chicken fried steak is the meat nearest heaven). >> >>> I spoke to my colleague who has lived in Austin more recently than I >>> have. >>> >>> He recommends North By Northwest highly, in the Arboretum area. >>> >>> http://www.nxnwbrew.com/ >>> >>> When I was a Texan in exile, I would always, on returning, worship at >>> the shrine of Chicken Fried Steak. Threadgill's is a timeless classic >>> that specializes in it. Ken Threadgill was an Austin legend, who gave >>> Janis Joplin one of her first paying gigs. Bonus: Manager Eddie Wilson >>> was the Ranch Boss at the Armadillo World Headquarters, and has a shrine >>> of posters and pictures from the font of Austin weirdness. >>> >>> http://www.threadgills.com/ >>> >>> He also recommends Urbanspoon as an online info source. >>> >>> http://www.urbanspoon.com/c/11/Austin-restaurants.html >>> >>> Welcome, y'all. >> >> !SIG:4b7b50f9162721632411545! >> >
Re: Using /31 for router links
On Jan 22, 2010, at 4:41 PM, Joe Provo wrote: > On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 04:08:28PM -0800, Seth Mattinen wrote: >> In the past I've always used /30's for PTP connection subnets out of old >> habit (i.e. Ethernet that won't take unnumbered) but now I'm considering >> switching to /31's in order to stretch my IPv4 space further. Has anyone >> else does this? Good? Bad? Based on the bit of testing I've done this >> shouldn't be a problem since it's only between routers. > > rfc3021 is over 9 years old, so should be no suprise that it works > well. :-) Works well if supported. Vendor b (nee f) apparently dropped it off their roadmap. -- kris
Re: question about Mark Koster's ARIN presentation
On Jun 18, 2009, at 12:35 PM, Michael Hallgren wrote: Le jeudi 18 juin 2009 à 12:05 -0400, Sandy Murphy a écrit : This message is sent to the whole nanog list, rather than the nanog-attendees list, How come there is a nanog-attendees list disjunct from the nanog list. Wouldn't it be natural to broadcast any kind of content to the entire community? nanog-attendees is intended to be used for social and specific conference related topics. Topics discussed at the conference with operational relevance should be here on the main list. If anyone feels the need to follow up on the nanog-attendees/nanog distinction, please do so on nanog-futures. Thanks! Kris MLC Chair
Re: Cogent input
On Jun 17, 2009, at 1:17 AM, Michael K. Smith wrote: On 6/11/09 7:37 AM, "Steve Bertrand" wrote: Stephen Kratzer wrote: And, they have no plans to support IPv6. Ouch! I hope this is a non-starter for a lot of folks. Steve To quote Randy, I encourage all my competitors to do this. Simply untrue, at the Peering BOF yesterday Cogent said they are rolling this out. -- kris
Re: IRC channel?
For the sake of everyone's sanity this thread has been moderated. Also, #nanog on efnet is in no way affiliated with NANOG. Kris MLC Chair
Re: Why is www.google.cat resolving?
Hi everyone This is a quick note to let you know that this thread has been moderated (trivially off topic). We will continue to assess follow ups in this thread for operational content, and forward relevant messages to the list. If you have any comments on this, please post them to the nanog- futures list. Kris MLC Chair On May 5, 2009, at 12:26 AM, Brielle Bruns wrote: On 5/5/09 1:22 AM, Tim Tuppence wrote: Hello, I am seeing that www.google.cat resolves from three different networks. It even resolves from here: http://www.squish.net/dnscheck/ What is going on? Thanks, Tim A quick google and wikipedia check shows... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.cat .cat is a sponsored top-level domain intended to be used to highlight the Catalan language and culture. Its policy has been developed by ICANN and Fundació puntCAT. It was approved in September 2005. :) -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org/ http://www.ahbl.org
Re: Is everyone getting the shimizuhar...@yahoogroups.jp ugliness?
We're working to correct this Kris, MLC Chair On Apr 28, 2009, at 10:57 AM, Jack Bates wrote: nanog-bounces+alamiki1623=yahoo.co...@nanog.org I'm rather shocked that yahoogroups.jp allows a group to have addresses included in it that haven't confirmed opt-in. The constant loop of nanog through the group to my mailbox as trash (I don't read foreign languages, thus trash) is annoying. Anyone else having this problem? Who can kindly kill that address from the list feed until the genius piping that address's email into shimizuhar...@yahoogroups.jp stops (and hopefully kindly deletes the group or removes my email address from it). Jack
Re: Phoenix Area Network Issues?
outa...@outages.org has been removed from the cc list. From the AUP: 3. Cross posting is prohibited. Thanks Kris, MLC Chair On Apr 27, 2009, at 2:31 PM, Paul Jasa wrote: Confirming outages in SoCal area affecting AT&T (lost a large circuit out there @ 1:24 PDT). I should add not all SoCal sites are affected, just some. Paul J. -Original Message- From: James Laszko [mailto:ja...@pcipros.com] Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 5:20 PM To: Kevin Loch; Ray Sanders Cc: outa...@outages.org; nanog Subject: RE: Phoenix Area Network Issues? Just got off the phone with AT&T MIS Support - there is some extremely large facility outages in the Southern California area. I'm seeing T1-OC3 facilities down from San Diego to Los Angeles to Riverside to Palm Springs. We've seen voice, data, legacy AT&T and legacy SBC/PacBell circuits affected. If anyone has any further details, it would be appreciated. MIS people said an "email was forthcoming shortly" Regards, James Laszko Pipeline Communications ja...@pcipros.com -Original Message- From: Kevin Loch [mailto:kl...@kl.net] Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 2:12 PM To: Ray Sanders Cc: outa...@outages.org; nanog Subject: Re: Phoenix Area Network Issues? Something is definately happening, 50% drop in inbound traffic to our PHX datacenter across all transit providers. - Kevin Ray Sanders wrote: Are there any fiber cuts or other routing issues anyone in the Phoenix area is aware of? Thanks. The information contained in this e-mail and any attached documents may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient you may not read, copy, distribute or use this information. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message and then delete it from your system
Re: IPv4 Anycast?
On Apr 22, 2009, at 12:12 AM, Zhenkai Zhu wrote: Ah, that's very possible. So I suppose the 90 prefixes with 3 origin ASes are due to the same reason.. Then there is basically no inter-As anycast besides the anycast prefix for DNS root, since I only noticed like 8 prefixes that are announced by more than 3 ASes.. There's lots of strangeness out there, for instance: http://www.ep.net/policy.html Bill lets anyone who has an IP assignment from an ep.net /24 announce that /24. The term 'anycast' has some vagueness at the edges. Kris
Re: IXP
On Apr 17, 2009, at 12:05 PM, Arnold Nipper wrote: On 17.04.2009 21:04 kris foster wrote On Apr 17, 2009, at 12:00 PM, Arnold Nipper wrote: On 17.04.2009 20:52 Paul Vixie wrote with the advent of vlan tags, the whole idea of CSMA for IXP networks is passe. just put each pair of peers into their own private tagged vlan and let one of them allocate a V4 /30 and a V6 /64 for it. as a bonus, this prevents third party BGP (which nobody really liked which sometimes got turned on by mistake) and prevents transit dumping and/or "pointing default at" someone. the IXP no longer needs any address space, they're just a VPN provider. shared-switch connections are just virtual crossconnects. Large IXP have >300 customers. You would need up to 45k vlan tags, wouldn't you? QinQ could solve this not really painfully, with multiple circuits into the IX :) I'm not advocating Paul's suggestion at all here Kris
Re: IXP
On Apr 17, 2009, at 12:00 PM, Arnold Nipper wrote: On 17.04.2009 20:52 Paul Vixie wrote with the advent of vlan tags, the whole idea of CSMA for IXP networks is passe. just put each pair of peers into their own private tagged vlan and let one of them allocate a V4 /30 and a V6 /64 for it. as a bonus, this prevents third party BGP (which nobody really liked which sometimes got turned on by mistake) and prevents transit dumping and/or "pointing default at" someone. the IXP no longer needs any address space, they're just a VPN provider. shared-switch connections are just virtual crossconnects. Large IXP have >300 customers. You would need up to 45k vlan tags, wouldn't you? QinQ could solve this Kris
[NANOG-announce] VERP now active on all NANOG mailing lists
Hi everyone All NANOG mailing lists were updated to use VERP (variable envelope return paths) at the beginning of the week. This will aid in bounce detection and help identify the subscriber. A more detailed description of VERP can be found here: http://wiki.list.org/display/DOC/So+what+is+this+VERP+stuff With this change some headers have changed. Depending on how you are performing your filtering this may or may not affect you. The header changes are: Old Return-Path: listname-boun...@nanog.org New Return-Path: listname-bounces+userid=dom...@nanog.org Old Errors-To: : listname-boun...@nanog.org New Return-Path: listname-bounces+userid=dom...@nanog.org I hope that this change does not cause any serious issues for you. The mailing list admins are always reachable at adm...@nanog.org if you have any technical questions. Thanks! Kris Foster MLC Chair ___ NANOG-announce mailing list nanog-annou...@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce
Re: McAfee/AT&T Issue
On Feb 18, 2009, at 9:58 AM, Calhoun, Matthew wrote: We are seeing intermittent connectivity issues via AT&T to McAfee's Update service network (208.69.152.0/21). 9 212 ms 200 ms * 12.118.225.22
Re: Anyone notice strange announcements for 174.128.31.0/24
On Jan 14, 2009, at 2:52 PM, Michienne Dixon wrote: Well, if you really want to pick knits you are welcome to. If I meant prepending, I would have said that. The example that I listed was setting up a router, advertising the ASNs listed and the random IP ranges gleaned from IANA. Sorry if I confused you. The point I believe John is trying to make is that *ASNs are not announced*. There are no advertisements that say "this is how to get to ASN X". BGP updates specifically announce network layer reachability. This is an important point in this discussion. There are a lot of comments being made that are just simply wrong and causing confusion because of slips in terminology regarding the path attribute. Kris -Original Message- From: John Payne [mailto:j...@sackheads.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 3:57 PM To: Michienne Dixon Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: Anyone notice strange announcements for 174.128.31.0/24 On Jan 14, 2009, at 10:50 AM, Michienne Dixon wrote: Interesting - So as a cyber criminal - I could setup a router, start announcing AS 16733, 18872, and maybe 6966 for good measure and their routers would ignore my announcements and IP ranges that I siphoned from searching IANA? Hm... Would that also prevent them from accessing my rogue network from their network? What do you mean "announcing AS 16733..." ? Putting 16733 in an AS PATH is not announcing it. - Michienne Dixon Network Administrator liNKCity 312 Armour Rd. North Kansas City, MO 64116 www.linkcity.org (816) 412-7990 -Original Message- From: Simon Lockhart [mailto:si...@slimey.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 2:07 AM To: Hank Nussbacher Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: Anyone notice strange announcements for 174.128.31.0/24 On Wed Jan 14, 2009 at 09:59:14AM +0200, Hank Nussbacher wrote: What if, by doing some research experiment, the researcher discovers some unknown and latent bug in IOS or JunOS that causes much of the Internet to go belly up? 1 in a billion chance, but nonetheless, a headsup would have been in order. Say we had a customer who connected to us over BGP, and they used some new experimental BGP daemon. Their announcement was "odd" in some way, but appeared clean to us (a Cisco house). Once their announcement hit the a Foundry router, it tickled a bug which caused the router to propogate the announcement, but also start to blackhole traffic. Oh dear, large chunks of the Internet have just gone belly up. Should we have given a heads up to the Internet at large that we were turning up this customer? Simon (Yes, I'm in the minority that thinks that Randy hasn't done anything bad) -- Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration * Director|* Domain & Web Hosting * Internet Consultancy * Bogons Ltd | * http://www.bogons.net/ * Email: i...@bogons.net *
Re: Anyone notice strange announcements for 174.128.31.0/24
On Jan 14, 2009, at 2:50 AM, Tim Franklin wrote: On Tue, January 13, 2009 8:57 pm, Joe Abley wrote: The fact that I choose to stick 701 in an AS_PATH attribute on a prefix I advertise in order to stop that prefix from propagating into 701 is entirely my own business, and it's a practice which, although apparently not commonplace, has been a well-known part of the IDTE toolbox for many years. For whatever reason, technical, political, or pure whim, I don't want AS Y to receive any of my announcements. What's the correct tool to do this? Exactly the method Randy used. Do we need a set of well-known communities X:AS that can be recognised everywhere as "do not announce to AS"? Communities are optional transitive attributes. No one is required to act on well-known communities. Kris
Re: Cogent Haiku v2.0
Hi everyone The Mailing List Committee would like to remind everyone that threads of this sort are not operationally relevant and go against the spirit of the AUP [1]. Haikus, one line jokes, and "me too" replies simply do not provide enough information for each of NANOG's 10,000 subscribers to determine if there is something operational they should be acting on. The MLC will be contacting the majority of participants in this thread to remind them of this. Please respect the inboxes of others. Kris Foster MLC Chair [1] #2: Postings of issues inconsistent with the charter are prohibited. Mailing list AUP: http://www.nanog.org/mailinglist/ NANOG Charter: http://www.nanog.org/governance/charter/
Re: Ethical DDoS drone network
On Jan 4, 2009, at 11:11 PM, Gadi Evron wrote: On Mon, 5 Jan 2009, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: On Jan 5, 2009, at 1:33 AM, Roland Dobbins wrote: On Jan 5, 2009, at 2:08 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: I can think of several instances where it _must_ be external. For instance, as I said before, knowing which intermediate networks are incapable of handling the additional load is useful information. But before any testing is done on production systems (during maintenance windows scheduled for this type of testing, naturally), it should all be done on airgapped labs, first, IMHO. Without arguing that point (and there are lots of scenarios where that is not at all necessary, IMHO), it does not change the fact that external testing can be extremely useful after "air-gap" testing. Fine test it by simulation on you or the transit end of the pipes. Do not transmit your test sh?t data across the `net. How do you propose a model is built for the simulation if you can't collect data from the real world? This is not "sh?t data". Performance testing across networks is very real and happening now. The more knowledge I have of a path the better decisions I can make about that path. Kris
Re: Blackhole route advertisements by AS14037 of our IP space - please filter them out at your end
On Nov 19, 2008, at 8:43 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: If you see 208.36.123.0/24 being announced from any other prefix than XO (2828 I guess) please ignore it. Especially if you see it announced from 19318 or 14037. You're unlikely to get any reasonable response or action here. The best course of action is to work through XO. You are their customer, and it is their address space, right? For what it's worth 208.36.123.0/24 was advertised recently but as a community we have no way of knowing the validity of it, or the operational impact. Kris (not speaking as MLC)
Re: Internet partitioning event regulations (was: RE: Sendingvs requesting. Was: Re: Sprint / Cogent)
Hi everyone, The Mailing List Committee would like to remind everyone that postings of a political nature are not considered operational. From the acceptable use policy [1]: 6. Postings of political, philosophical, and legal nature are prohibited. Please refrain from follow up posts on the subject in this thread. We encourage you to continue your conversation in a more appropriate forum. Kris Foster Mailing List Committee Chair [1] http://www.nanog.org/mailinglist/
[NANOG-announce] The new NANOG Mailing List Committee
Hi everyone The Steering Committee has selected new Mailing List Committee members. We would like to thank our outgoing member David Barak for all of his work over the last two years. The MLC members and their term lengths are: Randy Epstein - 11 / 2010 Kris Foster - 11 / 2009 Sue Joiner - Merit appointee Simon Lyall - 11 / 2009 Tim Yocum - 11 / 2010 Thank you to everyone who put their names forward to volunteer! Sincerely Kris Foster Mailing List Committee Chair ___ NANOG-announce mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce
[NANOG-announce] Mailing List Committee call for volunteers
Hi Everyone The Mailing List Committee (MLC) is now seeking volunteers to fill two terms ending November 2010. Please send expressions of interest to [EMAIL PROTECTED] by Monday, November 3rd. We aim to announce the new MLC members by Tuesday, November 11th. The current members of the MLC are Kris Foster, Simon Lyall, and Sue Joiner (Merit). David Barak and Tim Yocum currently hold the seats with expiring terms. The NANOG mailing list serves an important role in the community by providing a day-to-day forum for network operators. Participating in the MLC gives you the opportunity to make a noticeable contribution. The MLC is covered under section 7.1.2 of the NANOG Charter. If you have any questions about the MLC or its activities please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] . http://www.nanog.org/governance/charter/ Thanks Kris Foster MLC Chair ___ NANOG-announce mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce
Re: Nanog 44 Hockey Event -- Last Call
On Oct 7, 2008, at 9:20 PM, Ralph E. Whitmore, III wrote: For those that are attending NANOG 44 and interested in catching the: Hi Everyone A new list has been created for NANOG 44 attendees called nanog- attendee. You are automatically joined to this list if you registered for the conference (unless you selected to opt-out). If you would like to join manually you can do so here: http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-attendee Please help to keep the NANOG list operational in nature, and post other topics related to NANOG 44 (especially social events) to the nanog-attendee list. Thanks Kris Mail List Committee Los Angeles Kings vs. the San Jose Sharks NHL Hockey game If you are interested in going and have not already contacted me about the game please be sure to do so Before 3PM today Wednesday Oct. 8th at either 310-856-0550. You may speak to Myself Ralph or my Assistant Nancy. Tickets are $90.50 each and we will be sitting In sections 112-114 based on the total number of people that go. Thus far we have a group of 10 people going to the game. Be sure to let me ASAP. Ralph Whitmore InterWorld Communications, Inc. 310-856-0550 M-F 9A-6P
Re: high latency ds3 issue on unloaded line
John Even if this is happening, the distance you can travel at 2/3 sol says there is something else going wrong here (1 sec latency is a very long time). Kris On Sep 26, 2008, at 11:59 AM, John Lee wrote: Mike, Your latencies which suddenly appear for several hours and then go away and do this on a regular basis sounds like a layer 2, facility switching issue. As you indicated " the problem comes on during the day and then lets up late in the evening" sounds like the under lying facility is being switched back around the "long side" of the SONET ring or other facility. Some carrier facilities are scheduled for "one path or direction" say during the day that are supposed to be for lower latency time periods for interactive work and then switch for a lower cost, higher latency path in the evening when computer to computer backups do not care. If you can plot the times the issues start and end and that these occur daily during the week and not on weekends etc that would be a strong indicator. John (ISDN) Lee From: mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 12:04 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: high latency ds3 issue on unloaded line Hello, I have a ds3 from qwest which has daily issues with insane point-to-point latencies sometimes exceeding 1000ms for hours on end, and which suddenly disappear, and does not appear to correspond with actual measured link utilization (less than 20mbps most days). To make a long investigation short, the problem comes on during the day and then lets up late in the evening. I have tested and examined everything at the ip layer and no it's not high utilization, an ACL, router cpu or bad hardware, no line errors or other issues visible from interface or controller stats. yes I have flushed all hardware, and I have a 7204vxr/npe-400 with this single ds3. The only clue seems to be millions of 'output drops' from qwest's side. And at night I can hit popular ftp mirrors from a directly attached server and observe my interface reporting about %100 utilization combined with my users and customers, so yeah it really is a full line rate ds3. And historically Mrtg always shows around 20mbps or less utilization and it's only smokeping that goes off, usually in the afternoon when the point to point latencies between my router and qwest start heading north, and consistently at that. I also have another in house tool that takes 30 second snapshots of my ds3 interface in order to catch short bursts that would be smoothed out with mrtg's 5 minute average, but during these high latency times there aren't any spikes noted. And for added confusion (or fun!), the latency can start at any utilization level - I've observed it while we were pulling just 12mbps, and I have not had it while we were doing 34mbps, only the time of day seems to be the common factor. Qwest has not been able to identify the issue, only note that - yeah, this really is happening when there is otherwise no real load on the line - and I am certain we have done everything to rule out the ip layer. They have put in a 'request' to move me to another router, but I am not hopeful of a resolution that way as the router we're currently on doesn't appear otherwise to have the problem with any other subscriber. What I want to know, is it possible that the underlaying atm/sonet that carries my ds3 from my facility is somehow oversubscribed or misconfigured? We have an OC12 fiber entrance and this is the only circuit provisioned on it, and in our small tiny town the only other user on the ring with us is comcast (according to the att network engineer who installed this). I don't know enough about atm/sonet to imagine conditions that would cause the issues I am seeing here , but every ip layer tool I have only ever tells me there isn't an ip issue here. I can issue ping from my router directly to the attached qwest router and get > 1000ms and then other times (out of the problem window), I am getting 4ms. If anyone has laughs or beers to offer me, send 'em on cuz I could use both right about now Mike-
