[swinog] Request: invitation SwiNOG-BE 63 - Beer Event 63 - 7.7.2008

[Stephan Wolf]

Hi all,


there was no official announcement regarding the BE63 for July 2008.

@Steven:
can you do ?

Or should we organize it via the list - maybe Steven is on vacation etc.

Let's say:
if there is no reply until this Friday, please send some proposals
regarding location to the list.

Regards,

Stephan


___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

Re: [swinog] SwiNOG-BE63 - Beer Event 63 - 7th of July 2008 @ Don Weber /ZH

[Stephan Wolf]

stressed ? nope - just to much blood in alcohol ;)

many thanks, Steven

Regards,

Stephan



> hi everybody

> here's the announcement for the next beer event.
> unfortunately i'm not availble for some good reasons, 
> so marco huggenberger will take over to organize this event.

> the facts for the next event:
> -
> Date: 7th of July 2008

> Time:   starting around 18.30 o'clock

> Location:   @ the "Don Weber " (Heinrichstrasse 
> 213, Near TIX).
> It's between the Escher-Wys Platz and the Cinemax.
> Attention they moved!

> Registration deadline:05.07.2008 18:00:00

> Registration:
> -
> Please register here: http://swinog.mrmouse.ch/ since we have to make
> reservations, i need to know who's coming and who not. If you cannot
> attend and you're registered please inform marco asap. 
> marco's reachable on +41 44 313 30 19

> greetings

> -steven


> ___
> swinog mailing list
> swinog@lists.swinog.ch
> http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog



___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

Re: [swinog] []: Re: searching a manageable fanless gigabit switch

[Stephan Wolf]

Hello,


yes, we have the 1800- 8G and 24G

They can do SNMP, VLAN, have NO fan etc.
They have ONLY WebGUI for config, no CLI

Costs about 500 chf if you order some, and not one ;)
delivered only with german power cords, no CH-power cords.

quite easy to handle and manage.

only changing management VLAN and IP and adding the necessary VLAN
cuts you off, because you can not change this in one step - there you
need to have local access.  (2 steps on 2 different areas of the config website)
with CLI it is possible to activate this together.

but: 500chf for a 24 port GB-switch - 4 sure they had to cut of some
things.

but in usage we have seen not any impact until now and use this
switch general on all locations and datacenters.

24G:
activating a SFP needs a power off/on, because shared Cu/Fibre port.
works also fine with none-HP-SFP's.

regards,

stephan




Guten Tag Rainer Duffner,

am Dienstag, 8. Juli 2008 um 22:56 schrieben Sie:


> Am 08.07.2008 um 22:13 schrieb Peter Rohrer:

>> Hello
>>
>> I'm looking for a manageable fanless gigabit Ethernetswitch with
>> VLan-Tagging, SNMP and 16-24 port.
>> Unfortunately, everything I've seen so far has either no SNMP, no
>> VLAN-Tagging or a noisy fan.
>>
>> Do you know any such device?
>>


> Maybe HP's 1800-24G, available at (amongst others...) digitec.ch

> Web-managed, but apparently it does VLANs.
> I own a 1800-8G (same-same, but with 8 ports) - but I must confess I  
> didn't have time to do much with it.

> I'd give the 1800-8G a try and see if it does what you want, then buy
> the 1800-24G (which costs a bit more than double the price of the  
> 1800-8G).



> Regards,
> Rainer
> ___
> swinog mailing list
> swinog@lists.swinog.ch
> http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog



___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

[swinog] trouble to reach a DNS-server from a single network in switzerland

[Stephan Wolf]

hello all,

we have trouble from one datacenter in CH to reach a special DNS
server of one of our business partners in Argentina.
And only from this datacenter / IP-subnet.
but it doesn't look like a local problem.

from all other locations in Belarus/Brasil/Hungary/France/Germany and
also via ADSL-links of Sunrise in CH or via Cable Internet by
Cablecom in CH we can connect without any trouble.

so the problem can be:
- local
- on way
- remote side

see failure exemplary from one host in this datacenter:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# nslookup
>> server ns1.allytech.com
> Default server: ns1.allytech.com
> Address: 200.49.145.101#53
>> mail.rebel-management.com
> Server: ns1.allytech.com
> Address:200.49.145.101#53
>
> ** server can't find mail.rebel-management.com: SERVFAIL
>>
>>
>> server 200.49.145.101
> Default server: 200.49.145.101
> Address: 200.49.145.101#53
>> mail.rebel-management.com
> ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached


from all other locations in Belarus/Brasil/Hungary/France/Germany and
also via ADSL-links of Sunrise in CH we can connect without any
trouble:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/admin# nslookup
>>> server 200.49.145.101
>> Default server: 200.49.145.101
>> Address: 200.49.145.101#53
>>> mail.rebel-management.com
>> Server: 200.49.145.101
>> Address:200.49.145.101#53
>>
>> Name:   mail.rebel-management.com
>> Address: 200.49.145.27


we contacted already our provider of our datacenter, but we think the
problem is at the end DNS, or on  the way, because also every trace
from any location shows trouble near to this DNS:
> 12  cablevision-s-a.tengigabitethernet3-4.ar3.eze1.gblx.net
> (207.136.166.242)  334.160 ms  331.279 ms  332.844 ms
> 13  * * *
> 14  * * *
> 15  smtp1.dnscheck.com.ar (200.49.145.101)  339.278 ms  341.718 ms  364.889 ms

and we fond only problems with this single DNS there.
(sure, can be also local by our provider - we will see - but can not
believe it)


Please do me a favor:
try from your datacenter to resolve via this DNS
> Default server: ns1.allytech.com
> Address: 200.49.145.101#53

to resolve
> mail.rebel-management.com

and report also problems by connecting this DNS with infos of your
provider to:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


many thanks in advance

stephan




___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

Re: [swinog] []: Re: trouble to reach a DNS-server from a single network in switzerland

[Stephan Wolf]

hi,

we make direct resolution via root servers
but we found out that only this host is affected - so we tried
directly to connect.


but actual state:

we found out, that not only Nine @ ColoZH is affected, also Init7 from ColoZH
and also Init7 in Los Angeles. I received a private message with this 
information.

Reachability:
We can also reach this host / ping.
But only DNS resloving is NOT possible via ns1.allytech.com
and only from ColoZH ;-/

first I thought on the stopped peerings / prefixes with SwissIX, but
we can access, IP traffic is routed but only DNS not ?!!
So I can not imagine that it is a local problem at ColoZH and its
providers there.

hmm, keep u posted

If someone knows more, info is welcome

regards

stephan





Guten Tag Rainer Duffner,

am Donnerstag, 13. November 2008 um 01:05 schrieben Sie:


> Am 12.11.2008 um 20:28 schrieb Stephan Wolf:

>> rebel-management.com


> Yeah, works fine from here to.
> And from my colo-box in Nuremberg.

> Try one of the various public nslookup tools on the web, if you don't
> trust your local resolver.
> Or setup a quick dnscache installation and go directly via the root- 
> servers.



> Rainer
> ___
> swinog mailing list
> swinog@lists.swinog.ch
> http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog



___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

Re: [swinog] [clean]: Re: trouble to reach a DNS-server from a singlenetwork in switzerland

[Stephan Wolf]

well, our IP's are in 92.42./16 network, not in 77/8

so if they drop our dns requests, than not regarding a 77/8 list

we build a workarroud with an DNS forward for this zone to a
DNS which can connect to ns1.allytech.com

but also we see on the trace, that they really do NOT know their
business, droped pakets etc on route to them argentina jungle ;))

regards,

stephan


Guten Tag Silvan Gebhardt,

am Donnerstag, 13. November 2008 um 10:44 schrieben Sie:

> thank you very much, I suppose that could be it.


> I hope the threadstarter should check that out. I was only the remote gdb


> Silvan




> Am 13.11.2008 um 10:40 schrieb Marco Huggenberger:

> Hi Silvan

> 2008/11/13 Silvan Gebhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> WEIRD!
> Simon, which IP Range are you? I'm on the 77.109
> I suppose you have 82.197..?
> from my home VDSL it works, there I have the 82 Range

> Assumption: Could be that the DNS Server is using an old template
> of the bogon-list [1], we had that problem in the early days with the 77/8
> range as well.

> Cheers

> Marco







___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

[swinog] Cisco Devices for Sale / 2x Cisco ASA5520 / Cisco WS-C4507R + some modules

[Stephan Wolf]

hello all,


hopefully I do not break here a subscription-Law, so simply:

We have some Cisco parts / devices on Stock, which where nearly never
used:

2x Firewall Cisco ASA5520-AIP20-K9
(ASA 5520 Appl w/ AIP-SSM-20, SW,300 VPN, Prs,4GE+1FE,3DES/AES)

1x Switch Cisco WS-C4507R + some modules
(2x 24 port 10/100/1000 GBE / 2x V Console / 2x power supply etc

They where bought for a project, which was frozen, and there was no
fit in other needs / projects.


If you see need, please contact me directly in english or german.
mailto:swinog...@hightowernet.de

Detailed product list & photos available on request.

Condition of devices: nearly new

ASA's where tested only some hours
4507er was in use for about 2-3 months

Bougt end 2006. Used in Summer 2007

Will be sold on highest bid.

Test before possible, sold without warranty.

Device location: near to Zurich


Alternatively:
do you know company near Zurich, which makes business with
buying/selling used hardware in this class ?

We simply want to cleanup our stock ASAP.

-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Stephan Wolf
mailto:swinog...@hightowernet.de



___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

[swinog] IP network not reachable from switzerland - 69.162.65.122, but from outside, eg belarus/brasil

[Stephan Wolf]

hello all,


we can NOT reach the upper IP from:

- swisscom mobile
- cablecom.biz
- cablecom home
- swissix


but:
from our brasilian firewall I can ping host and reach smtp / http
sockets - also from a belarus provider.

and also from a testsite, hosted in germany / hetzner, the IP is
reachable.


but effectively from not any switzerland ISP reachable :-(

sad is, that reverse.lstn.net is dropping ICMP packets / traceroutes
not possible in any case

so host 69.162.65.122 is only answering to ICMP echo requests,
and listens to tcp25 and tcp80

could you be so kind and check, if you can connect to this host, and
tell me, via which ISP / peering ?

thanks in advance

stephan






http://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-69-162-65-120-1

Network
NetRange69.162.65.120 - 69.162.65.127
CIDR69.162.65.120/29
NameVOICONET-1
Handle  NET-69-162-65-120-1
Parent  LSN-DLLSTX-2 (NET-69-162-64-0-1)
Net TypeReassigned
Origin AS   AS46475
CustomerVoico.Net (C02455997) 




___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

Re: [swinog] []: Re: IP network not reachable from switzerland - 69.162.65.122, but from outside, eg belarus/brasil

[Stephan Wolf]

hi folks,

thanks to all for your fast help.
we try to get in touch with the owner of this dedicated hosting
server.

sad:
it is used by an important customer of our subsidiary in brasil.

best regards,

stephan



___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

[swinog] searching for used MS SQL 2000 Licence

[Stephan Wolf]

hello all,


sorry, a bit offtopic, but may you can help me

we have a migration by a customer with an app, based on microsoft SQL2000

by design a newer SQL is not usable - so we need for a 1st step in
migration a MS SQL 2000 licence, to separate his databases from a
shared server to an dedicated one.

is there somebody out there, who would sell such an licence ?

minimum SQL 2000 + 10 CALs, or (better) a 1 CPU licence

standard would fit, enterprise nice 2 have

we need to use SQL 2000, 32 bit, max SP3a (authentication sheme
changed afterwards and app is closed source)

best to sell/own is a licence, which was sold originaly boxed / as sysbuilder
(can be sold easily)

we had an offer, but:
usedsoft CH seems to be insolvent and can not deliver the offered licence any
more.

or:
any good used licence distributors known by you ?

thanks in advance

stephan





___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

[swinog] Cablecom Home to London via USA

[Stephan Wolf]

hello,

since longer I have seen, that UPC is routing Cablecom Home connetions via
US to London:


Tracing route to 82.129.64.250 over a maximum of 30 hops

  246 ms68 ms52 ms  77-56-176-1.dclient.hispeed.ch [77.56.176.1]
  358 ms58 ms43 ms
217-168-58-101.static.cablecom.ch[217.168.58.101]
  4   139 ms   140 ms   145 ms  84.116.211.22
  5   149 ms   145 ms   140 ms  84.116.204.225
  6   163 ms   171 ms   171 ms
fr-par02a-rd1-gi-15-0-0.aorta.net[84.116.130.213]
  7   147 ms   155 ms   163 ms  84-116-130-61.aorta.net [84.116.130.61]
  8   167 ms   135 ms   165 ms  84.116.134.66
  9   203 ms   233 ms   179 ms  te-4-1.car3.Washington1.Level3.net[4.79.168.201]
 10   147 ms   149 ms   145 ms
ae-2-70.edge3.Washington4.Level3.net[4.69.149.82]
 11   152 ms   144 ms   147 ms
Cogent-level3-1x10G.washington.Level3.net[4.68.63.174]
 12   158 ms   149 ms   171 ms
te0-5-0-2.mpd22.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.2.41]
 13   167 ms   150 ms   143 ms
te0-2-0-2.mpd22.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.5.49]
 14   243 ms   254 ms   246 ms
te0-2-0-2.mpd22.lon13.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.42.54]
 15   218 ms   223 ms   237 ms
te0-3-0-6.ccr22.lon01.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.74.61]
 16   253 ms   240 ms   232 ms
te2-1.ccr01.lon18.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.61.214]
 17   231 ms   246 ms   251 ms  149.14.8.34
 18   227 ms   241 ms   230 ms  82.129.64.250

which causes high latencies

via all other providers in CH which we have tried out, incl. and swissix,
we have much better connections / less latency.
also all our ISP's in germany have good connections

only UPC lames - that sucks ;-(

may someone of cablecom can check this, and contact me offlist ?

thanks in advance
stephan

___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

Re: [swinog] Cablecom Home to London via USA

[Stephan Wolf]

Hi Bernd,

uh, I started a big discussion here ;)


2013/2/5 Bernd SPIESS :
> hi stephan
> this is the reason why it is important to really really pick carefully your
> ip-access or ip-transit provider. ip is not a matter of price/mbit as you can 
> see here

from that point you are completely right.

we as service providers can choose.
also I did.
I have multiple ISP's @home (yess...),
and also in all datacenters.

bu see customer side:
- they can choose, too
- but they don't care
- they choose by price
- or because basis link is already there


effectively:
- imagine you offer a partners service in sitzerland
- and the access is slow for customers
- effectively cablecom customers
- reason is cablecom ('s peering policy) - but they don't care

so effectively technical this is not my problem here.
it is a problem from customers chosen ISP

but again:
tell this (just a guess) 1.5 milllion cablecom internet customers

no chance ;)

the only solution:
- most cablecom customers must be unhappy and cancel contract
- then they may change peering policy

but effectively they will cancel "the other side".
because they don't care.

cheers,
stephan

ps: got no feedback by upc at all


___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

Re: [swinog] Scenic route of the day: L3 towards UPC

[Stephan Wolf]

I have seen things here similar to this very often / permanently:

cablecom  to UK/NL often via level3 and washington instead going directly

may something to do with UPC and partnership with level3 - and the
"Nonpartners" of level3.

"we do not peer with you" politics ?!

imho   cogent vs level3

below a trace to system in london from cablecom home:

  2 9 ms17 ms 7 ms  x.dclient.hispeed.ch [x]
  310 ms11 ms10 ms
217-168-58-101.static.cablecom.ch[217.168.58.101]
  4   111 ms   101 ms   101 ms  84.116.211.22
  5   101 ms   183 ms   102 ms  84.116.204.225
  6   102 ms   101 ms   101 ms  84-116-130-181.aorta.net [84.116.130.181]
  7   102 ms   101 ms   101 ms  84.116.133.185
  8   101 ms   101 ms   110 ms  84.116.134.62
  9   110 ms   107 ms   158 ms  te-4-1.car3.Washington1.Level3.net[4.79.168.201]
 10 *  110 ms   117 ms
ae-3-80.edge3.Washington4.Level3.net[4.69.149.146]
 11   108 ms   107 ms   109 ms
Cogent-level3-1x10G.washington.Level3.net[4.68.63.174]
 12   149 ms   109 ms   109 ms
be2113.mpd21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.6.170]
 13   111 ms   174 ms   107 ms
te0-0-0-20.ccr21.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.42.22]
 14   180 ms   179 ms   191 ms
te0-2-0-2.mpd22.lon13.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.42.54]
 15   200 ms   179 ms   193 ms
te0-7-0-30.ccr21.lon01.atlas.cogentco.com[130.117.0.117]
 16   215 ms   232 ms   192 ms
te2-1.ccr01.lon18.atlas.cogentco.com[154.54.61.214]
 17   190 ms   191 ms   183 ms  149.14.8.34
 18   179 ms   179 ms   180 ms  y

tried multiple times to escalate this in ccom helpdesk.
was silted there..






2013/9/26 Fredy Kuenzler 

> Anyone else seeing this... do we have a new peering spat or is it just a
> random routing issue?
>
> Regards,
> Fredy
>
>
>
> traceroute to 84.116.204.234 (84.116.204.234), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
>  1  r1zlz1.core.init7.net (77.109.136.233) [AS13030]  23.682 ms  23.741
> ms  23.775 ms
>  2  r1zrh1.core.init7.net (77.109.128.209) [AS13030]  0.188 ms
> r1zrh2.core.init7.net (77.109.128.74) [AS13030]  0.199 ms
> r1zrh1.core.init7.net (77.109.128.209) [AS13030]  0.193 ms
>  3  r1bas1.core.init7.net (77.109.128.130) [AS13030]  1.090 ms  1.129 ms
> r1fra1.core.init7.net (77.109.128.250) [AS13030]  38.806 ms
>  4  r1fra2.core.init7.net (77.109.128.133) [AS13030]  5.997 ms  5.988 ms
>  6.016 ms
>  5  TenGigabitEthernet8-1.ar2.FRA4.gblx.net (64.213.54.33) [AS3549]
> 6.653 ms  6.134 ms  6.673 ms
>  6  ae7.edge2.SanJose3.level3.net (4.68.62.177) [AS3356]  153.420 ms
> 152.925 ms  153.399 ms
>  7  vlan70.csw2.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.69.152.126) [AS3356]  161.564 ms
> vlan90.csw4.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.69.152.254) [AS3356]  161.054 ms
> vlan70.csw2.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.69.152.126) [AS3356]  161.807 ms
>  8  ae-71-71.ebr1.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.69.153.5) [AS3356]  160.948 ms
> ae-61-61.ebr1.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.69.153.1) [AS3356]  160.512 ms
> 160.433 ms
>  9  ae-2-2.ebr2.NewYork1.Level3.net (4.69.135.186) [AS3356]  161.355 ms
>  161.310 ms  161.509 ms
> 10  ae-47-47.ebr2.NewYork2.Level3.net (4.69.201.34) [AS3356]  161.949 ms
> 4.69.201.38 (4.69.201.38) [AS3356]  161.581 ms  161.724 ms
> 11  ae-1-100.ebr1.NewYork2.Level3.net (4.69.135.253) [AS3356]  162.124
> ms  161.121 ms  161.658 ms
> 12  4.69.201.85 (4.69.201.85) [AS3356]  161.126 ms 4.69.201.93
> (4.69.201.93) [AS3356]  161.524 ms 4.69.201.85 (4.69.201.85) [AS3356]
> 161.193 ms
> 13  ae-72-72.csw2.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.134.150) [AS3356]
> 161.151 ms  161.558 ms ae-82-82.csw3.Washington1.Level3.net
> (4.69.134.154) [AS3356]  161.627 ms
> 14  ae-33-80.car3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.149.133) [AS3356]
> 185.388 ms ae-43-90.car3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.149.197) [AS3356]
>  263.449 ms ae-23-70.car3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.149.69) [AS3356]
>  264.054 ms
> 15  UPC-BROADBA.car3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.79.168.202) [AS3356]
> 161.118 ms  161.109 ms  160.838 ms
> 16  84.116.134.61 (84.116.134.61) [AS6830]  167.752 ms  167.674 ms
> 159.751 ms
> 17  at-vie15a-ra1-xe-2-2-0.aorta.net (84.116.130.245) [AS6830]  160.584
> ms  161.327 ms 84-116-130-62.aorta.net (84.116.130.62) [AS6830]  160.749
> ms
> 18  hu-bud02a-ra3-xe-1-1-0.aorta.net (84.116.130.194) [AS6830]  161.284
> ms  160.877 ms ch-zrh02a-ra1-xe-2-0-0.aorta.net (84.116.130.226)
> [AS6830]  160.285 ms
> 19  84.116.204.234 (84.116.204.234) [AS6830]  160.346 ms  160.831 ms
> 160.272 ms
>
>
> --
> Fredy Kuenzler
>
> Init7 (Switzerland) Ltd.
> AS13030
> St. Georgen-Strasse 70
> CH-8400 Winterthur
> Skype:   flyingpotato
> Phone:   +41 44 315 4400
> Fax: +41 44 315 4401
> Twitter: @init7 / @kuenzler
> http://www.init7.net/
>
>
>
> ___
> swinog mailing list
> swinog@lists.swinog.ch
> http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
>
>

___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

[swinog] TLD .email Registrar in Switzerland

[Stephan Wolf]

Hello,


we are looking for a registrar in Switzerland.
In this project it is not allowed to have an non Switzerland Registrar

Goal:
- registrar only
- to point Domain on customers infrastructure
- Use own DNS servers

Any hints are welcome

Cheers
Stephan

___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

[swinog] PoE / Port shut / power recycle > IEEE standard ?

[Stephan Wolf]

Hello all,


simply a technical question:

- when you shut / cycle a port with power over ethernet on a cisco switch,
the port also switches power off/on

Question:
- is this an IEEE standard, or a practical "cisco feature"

had some discussions onto this, but noone was sure about this.

thanks in advance
Stephan

___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

[swinog] RFC1918 IP's im Internet-Trace outbound - eine Unsitte - oder liege ich falsch ?

[Stephan Wolf]

Hallo Swinog,


seit gestern bin ich mit meinem 2. Internet-Homefeed wieder Sunrise Kunde.
Die haben nun RFC 1918 IP's im Trace, was ich als falsch empfinde.

Bisher hatte bis vor rund 1 Jahr die Unsitte nur Cablecom.
Nun auch wieder Sunrise.

Daher hier mal einfach eine Frage hierzu / Meinungen:

Ich finde es FALSCH, im Internet auf Routern RFC1918 IP's zu verwenden.
(ausser auf Management IP's die NICHT in Traces etc zu sehen sind)
Siehe unten.

Vielleicht liege ich auch ja falsch, oder sehe es zu "kleinkariert" - daher
hier meine offene Frage, um erstmal vor meiner (Wissens-) Türe zu kehren.

Ist das meine "best practice", KEINE RFC1918 IPs im Internet zu verwenden,
oder liege ich da falsch ?
Eigentlich sollen diese nach RFC auch nicht geroutet werden im Internet.
Klar kann man das "abschalten" - aber ich finde das NICHT korrekt diese im
Internet zu Routen.

Danke für eure Erleuchtung meinerseits


z.B.
Sunrise seit gestern:

Outbound:
Routenverfolgung zu adminsrv4.admin.ch [162.23.39.73] über maximal 30
Abschnitte:

  1 1 ms<1 ms 1 ms  [192.168.208.254] >> interner Router
  2 1 ms 1 ms 2 ms   [192.168.178.254] >> Sunrise Fritzbox /
ext IP 62.167.73.175
(und nun gehts los...)
  313 ms10 ms11 ms  10.136.71.241
  412 ms11 ms11 ms  172.16.22.150
  511 ms11 ms12 ms  172.16.18.177
  611 ms11 ms12 ms  194.230.109.141
  7 *** Zeitüberschreitung der Anforderung.
  8 *** Zeitüberschreitung der Anforderung.
  9 *** Zeitüberschreitung der Anforderung.
 1016 ms15 ms18 ms  212.161.180.50
 1116 ms16 ms16 ms  194.230.36.210
 1220 ms18 ms22 ms  pos20-bebun3isp-ipe1.inetbb.admin.ch
[162.23.16.254]
 1319 ms19 ms18 ms  gi03-bemon74isp-ipe1.inetbb.admin.ch
[162.23.16.245]
 1419 ms19 ms18 ms  gi101-befll15a-sge-ice1.inetbb.admin.ch
[162.23.17.250]
 15 *** Zeitüberschreitung der Anforderung.


Inbound:
traceroute 62.167.73.175
traceroute to 62.167.73.175 (62.167.73.175), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
(snipp)
10  r1gva3.core.init7.net (77.109.128.66)  8.529 ms  8.689 ms  8.773 ms
11  gw-sunrise.init7.net (82.197.163.10)  3.891 ms  3.828 ms  3.795 ms
12  * * *
13  * * *
14  oer02lsr01.xe-5-0-2.bb.sunrise.net (212.161.180.201)  7.590 ms
zur01are02.xe-4-0-0.bb.sunrise.net (212.161.180.206)  8.383 ms
195.141.215.45 (195.141.215.45)  7.451 ms
15  * * *
16  * * *
17  adsl-62-167-73-175.adslplus.ch (62.167.73.175)  17.696 ms !X  20.152 ms
!X  19.375 ms !X


VG
Stephan

___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

Re: [swinog] Bad Connectivity at UPC Home Internet

[Stephan Wolf]

Hi Tobias,


well, I have seen by lots of customers in area ZH Altstetten, ZH Uni and ZH
Seefeld in last weeks multiple interrupts as well as IP changes.
Normally they change quite rarely. So they may change something in their
network.

In general I have good performance with UPC.
simply with some prefixes upc is still having problems, may with some upper
tier carriers, or whatever - routing is often terrible and only via UPC.

most affected are prefixes located in UK. brexit ?-))

e.g. all my tested ISPs have not this issue, but cablecom:

- IaaS provider, 2 prefixes to same datacenter/servers
- prefix A fine (8 hops - 1 hop rfc1918 at cablecom), prefix B goes via USA
and back (17 hops - 1 @ccom).

- due to my tests it is not a routing issie by my IaaS provider, simply
cablecom goes a complete wired path...
- roundtrip time + > 100ms in case B

- e.g. via sunrise(home) it works fine (9 hops - and 3 are RFC1918 at
sunrise... wtf...)
- 5 hops / from nine via swissix to A and B :)


and general:
if you have these black actual cablecom modems, or older ones - a reboot
once a month helps. why ever this device lames with higher uptimes.
horizon was simply a mess

Cheers
Stephan


2016-08-16 7:24 GMT+02:00 Xaver Aerni :

> Hello,
> Last week i have had after 1 till 2 hours breaks during downloads. No
> Server
> give during 10 Sek. an answer. After this time it works normal for 1 or 2
> hour. We are using a horizon.
>
> Mit freundlichen Grüssen
>
>
> X. Aerni
>
>
>
> Xaver Aerni
>
>
>
> Xariffusion Informatik & Telecom
> Zürichstrasse 10a
> 8340 Hinwil
> Tel. +41 43 843 78 78
>+1 707 361 68 39
> Fax +41 43 843 78 70
> xae...@pop.ch
> Web: http://www.pop.ch
> http://www.xariffusion.ch
>
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: swinog-boun...@lists.swinog.ch [mailto:swinog-boun...@lists.swinog.ch
> ]
> Im Auftrag von Erik Rossen
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. August 2016 06:05
> An: Tobias Brunner 
> Cc: swinog@lists.swinog.ch
> Betreff: Re: [swinog] Bad Connectivity at UPC Home Internet
>
> There is a small possibility that you have a hardware problem.
>
> 10 years ago I bought a DECT telephone that interfered with my cable modem
> if the base station was placed within 50cm of the modem.  Got up to 8%
> packet loss when testing with "ping -f" to the gateway IP.
>
> Simply moving the base station to the other side of my desk fixed the
> problem.
>
> Did you recently buy something that emits a lot of radio waves?  Do you
> frequently pose your mobile phone near your modem?
>
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 09:24:27PM +0200, Tobias Brunner wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm having a hard time with my UPC Internet at home. Connections to f.e.
> > Github are nearly impossible since a few weeks (can't remember exactly
> > since when =( ), but when connecting through a VPN (exits at AS57118)
> > there are no performance issues other connection problems.
> > This connection troubles are not only to Github, but also to other
> > random destinations like Ifolor, sometimes Google, sometimes SRF, ...
> > I couldn't find patterns at the moment, SmokePing started collecting
> > them for me =) (currently it shows huge paketloss, but still have to
> > wait some more days for better graphs).
> >
> > Is anyone else having such issues with UPC home Internet?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Tobias
>
>
> --
> Erik Rossen
> ros...@rossen.ch
> http://www.rtfm-sarl.ch
> OpenPGP key: 2935D0B9
>
>
> ___
> swinog mailing list
> swinog@lists.swinog.ch
> http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
>
>
>
> ___
> swinog mailing list
> swinog@lists.swinog.ch
> http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
>

___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

[swinog] RFC 1918 usage in Internet routes - was: Re: Swinog Post RFC1918 IP's on BBCS and Cable based Services

[Stephan Wolf]

Hello Sunrise,


many thanks for your (anonymous) feedback.


Ok, I have not seen this other discussion - and simply I do NOT want to
start this "relegious" discussion about it.
For me personally it is "bad behaviour" to use RFC1918 in internet public
based services / routes.
For sure others CAN do, because it is not strictly forbidden.

This is for me also a general "problem" according RFC's:
what is "MUST" and what is "SHOULD"
So I stop it here.



Back to my case:

Here see the traces which use RFC1918 in your backbone.
So you assign it ! Or may send me an introduction why I am wrong.
May I missed something.

Many thanks in advance,

Best Regards
Stephan


remark:
192.168.12.254 is your CPE / Fritzbox

/root: traceroute local.ch
traceroute to local.ch (185.101.119.163), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets
 1  192.168.12.254 (192.168.12.254)  0.826 ms  0.650 ms  0.559 ms
 2  10.136.71.241 (10.136.71.241)  18.020 ms  18.421 ms  18.051 ms
 3  172.16.19.146 (172.16.19.146)  22.824 ms  22.594 ms  20.392 ms
 4  172.16.19.145 (172.16.19.145)  20.397 ms  23.046 ms  22.561 ms
 5  194.230.108.185 (194.230.108.185)  18.058 ms  19.911 ms  19.526 ms
 6  * * *
 7  * * *
 8  oer02pe05.ge1-0-19.bb.sunrise.net (212.161.250.138)  20.847 ms
oer02pe05.ge1-0-0.bb.sunrise.net (212.161.250.134)  22.801 ms  22.368 ms
 9  195.141.229.234 (195.141.229.234)  22.636 ms  22.517 ms  22.724 ms
10  * * *
11  * * *
(snip)

/root: traceroute -I local.ch
traceroute to local.ch (185.101.119.163), 64 hops max, 48 byte packets
 1  192.168.12.254 (192.168.12.254)  0.682 ms  0.543 ms  0.506 ms
 2  10.136.71.241 (10.136.71.241)  18.382 ms  20.533 ms  17.602 ms
 3  172.16.19.146 (172.16.19.146)  22.372 ms  22.011 ms  22.478 ms
 4  172.16.19.145 (172.16.19.145)  21.672 ms  21.664 ms  22.113 ms
 5  194.230.108.185 (194.230.108.185)  19.564 ms  19.532 ms  19.533 ms
 6  * * *
 7  * * *
 8  oer02pe05.ge1-0-19.bb.sunrise.net (212.161.250.138)  22.131 ms  22.230
ms  21.965 ms
 9  195.141.229.234 (195.141.229.234)  21.793 ms  22.007 ms  21.611 ms
10  * * *
11  * * *
(snip)

>tracert local.ch
Routenverfolgung zu local.ch [185.101.119.163]
über maximal 30 Hops:
  1<1 ms<1 ms 1 ms  192.168.12.254
  218 ms17 ms18 ms  10.136.71.241
  323 ms22 ms22 ms  172.16.19.146
  423 ms23 ms22 ms  172.16.19.145
  524 ms20 ms20 ms  194.230.108.185
  6 *** Zeitüberschreitung der Anforderung.
  7 *** Zeitüberschreitung der Anforderung.
  887 ms85 ms83 ms  oer02pe05.ge1-0-19.bb.sunrise.net
[212.161.250.138]
  987 ms86 ms79 ms  195.141.229.234
 10 *** Zeitüberschreitung der Anforderung.
 11 *** Zeitüberschreitung der Anforderung.
(snip)


Inbound:
(snip)

 6  e1-19.c-r1.es34.nine.ch (5.148.160.143)  12.509 ms  11.148 ms  11.102 ms
 7  194.230.36.32 (194.230.36.32)  1.271 ms  1.261 ms  1.214 ms
 8  * * *
 9  zur01are02.et-10-3-0.bb.sunrise.net (195.141.217.155)  1.355 ms  1.225
ms  1.088 ms
10  * * *
11  * * *
12  * * *
13  adsl-84-227-50-245.adslplus.ch (84.227.50.245)  22.971 ms  23.458 ms
23.962 ms



2016-08-16 13:44 GMT+02:00 peering :

> Hi
> Based on the current post at the swinog mailing list and a previous one
> which discussed the topic in detail. In fact there is no obligation to not
> use private IP Addresses for internet based Services.
> Therefore be aware, that the seen RFC1918 Addresses has not been assigned
> by sunrise.
> Many Thanks for your understanding
>
>
>
>
>
>

___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

Re: [swinog] RFC 1918 usage in Internet routes - was: Re: Swinog Post RFC1918 IP's on BBCS and Cable based Services

[Stephan Wolf]

Hello Sunrise,


friendly reminder

BR
Stephan


2016-08-16 14:22 GMT+02:00 Stephan Wolf :

> Hello Sunrise,
>
>
> many thanks for your (anonymous) feedback.
>
> 
> Ok, I have not seen this other discussion - and simply I do NOT want to
> start this "relegious" discussion about it.
> For me personally it is "bad behaviour" to use RFC1918 in internet public
> based services / routes.
> For sure others CAN do, because it is not strictly forbidden.
>
> This is for me also a general "problem" according RFC's:
> what is "MUST" and what is "SHOULD"
> So I stop it here.
> 
>
>
> Back to my case:
>
> Here see the traces which use RFC1918 in your backbone.
> So you assign it ! Or may send me an introduction why I am wrong.
> May I missed something.
>
> Many thanks in advance,
>
> Best Regards
> Stephan
>
>
> remark:
> 192.168.12.254 is your CPE / Fritzbox
>
> /root: traceroute local.ch
> traceroute to local.ch (185.101.119.163), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets
>  1  192.168.12.254 (192.168.12.254)  0.826 ms  0.650 ms  0.559 ms
>  2  10.136.71.241 (10.136.71.241)  18.020 ms  18.421 ms  18.051 ms
>  3  172.16.19.146 (172.16.19.146)  22.824 ms  22.594 ms  20.392 ms
>  4  172.16.19.145 (172.16.19.145)  20.397 ms  23.046 ms  22.561 ms
>  5  194.230.108.185 (194.230.108.185)  18.058 ms  19.911 ms  19.526 ms
>  6  * * *
>  7  * * *
>  8  oer02pe05.ge1-0-19.bb.sunrise.net (212.161.250.138)  20.847 ms
> oer02pe05.ge1-0-0.bb.sunrise.net (212.161.250.134)  22.801 ms  22.368
> ms
>  9  195.141.229.234 (195.141.229.234)  22.636 ms  22.517 ms  22.724 ms
> 10  * * *
> 11  * * *
> (snip)
>
> /root: traceroute -I local.ch
> traceroute to local.ch (185.101.119.163), 64 hops max, 48 byte packets
>  1  192.168.12.254 (192.168.12.254)  0.682 ms  0.543 ms  0.506 ms
>  2  10.136.71.241 (10.136.71.241)  18.382 ms  20.533 ms  17.602 ms
>  3  172.16.19.146 (172.16.19.146)  22.372 ms  22.011 ms  22.478 ms
>  4  172.16.19.145 (172.16.19.145)  21.672 ms  21.664 ms  22.113 ms
>  5  194.230.108.185 (194.230.108.185)  19.564 ms  19.532 ms  19.533 ms
>  6  * * *
>  7  * * *
>  8  oer02pe05.ge1-0-19.bb.sunrise.net (212.161.250.138)  22.131 ms
> 22.230 ms  21.965 ms
>  9  195.141.229.234 (195.141.229.234)  21.793 ms  22.007 ms  21.611 ms
> 10  * * *
> 11  * * *
> (snip)
>
> >tracert local.ch
> Routenverfolgung zu local.ch [185.101.119.163]
> über maximal 30 Hops:
>   1<1 ms<1 ms 1 ms  192.168.12.254
>   218 ms17 ms18 ms  10.136.71.241
>   323 ms22 ms22 ms  172.16.19.146
>   423 ms23 ms22 ms  172.16.19.145
>   524 ms20 ms20 ms  194.230.108.185
>   6 *** Zeitüberschreitung der Anforderung.
>   7 *** Zeitüberschreitung der Anforderung.
>   887 ms85 ms83 ms  oer02pe05.ge1-0-19.bb.sunrise.net
> [212.161.250.138]
>   987 ms86 ms79 ms  195.141.229.234
>  10 *** Zeitüberschreitung der Anforderung.
>  11 *** Zeitüberschreitung der Anforderung.
> (snip)
>
>
> Inbound:
> (snip)
> 
>  6  e1-19.c-r1.es34.nine.ch (5.148.160.143)  12.509 ms  11.148 ms  11.102
> ms
>  7  194.230.36.32 (194.230.36.32)  1.271 ms  1.261 ms  1.214 ms
>  8  * * *
>  9  zur01are02.et-10-3-0.bb.sunrise.net (195.141.217.155)  1.355 ms
> 1.225 ms  1.088 ms
> 10  * * *
> 11  * * *
> 12  * * *
> 13  adsl-84-227-50-245.adslplus.ch (84.227.50.245)  22.971 ms  23.458 ms
> 23.962 ms
>
>
>
> 2016-08-16 13:44 GMT+02:00 peering :
>
>> Hi
>> Based on the current post at the swinog mailing list and a previous one
>> which discussed the topic in detail. In fact there is no obligation to not
>> use private IP Addresses for internet based Services.
>> Therefore be aware, that the seen RFC1918 Addresses has not been assigned
>> by sunrise.
>> Many Thanks for your understanding
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

Re: [swinog] Zurich SwiNOG Beering 2017, dates, agenda, suggestions

[Stephan Wolf]

hi,


well lots of other events are on mondays, too.
a very common used day.

this is my personal reason why I can join only rarely.

I would prefer some other days than monday or tuesday.
So best would be wednesdays or thursdays.

what do you think about this ?

shegeeks - sure more would be fine - may more cocktail than beer events :-)

br
stephan



2016-12-20 11:26 GMT+01:00 Emanuel Kleindienst 
:

> Ladies & Gentlemen,
>
> 2017 is coming up. Yes, it really is. :D
>
> Before sending static "save the dates" out to you for 2017, I want to open
> a discussion about:
> - how shall we have the Beerings in 2017?
> - Still always on Mondays? Suggestions?
> - Different format? Different locations? Different agenda?
> - How we attract more Shegeeks?
>
> Discussion is open to everybody. If you contribute and participate, you
> may really influence the "how it's going to be in 2017".
> If you don't - you get the beer anyway. :D
>
> Open for you, let me know, drop me a note...
>
> Thanks, Season's Greetings and have a perfect restart in 2017!!!
>
> Emanuel
>
>
> --
> Emanuel Kleindienst
> CCO
>
> VSHN AG | Neugasse 10 | CH-8005 Zürich
> T: +41 44 545 53 00 | M: +41 79 382 73 77 | https://vshn.ch
> Talk to me! https://doodle.com/VSHNemanuel
>
>
>
> ___
> swinog mailing list
> swinog@lists.swinog.ch
> http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
>

___
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog