cDonald Richards
> <mcdonald.richa...@gmail.com>
> Cc: ausnog@lists.ausnog.net
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] HE Routing (not a joke)
>
> A beancounter must have realised they had lots of unused Australia -> US
> capacity and decided they wanted to make some profit from it.
>
nald Richards <
> mcdonald.richa...@gmail.com>
> Cc: ausnog@lists.ausnog.net
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] HE Routing (not a joke)
>
> A beancounter must have realised they had lots of unused Australia -> US
> capacity and decided they wanted to make some profit from it.
>
&
> Original message
> From: Nick Stallman <n...@agentpoint.com>
> Date: 16/5/18 7:32 am (GMT+08:00)
> To: Pieter Berkel <pieter.ber...@gmail.com>, McDonald Richards <
> mcdonald.richa...@gmail.com>
> Cc: ausnog@lists.ausnog.net
> Subject: Re: [Au
I requested a direct BGP session with HE and they had it configured in
under 10 minutes, received a *lot* more prefixes than from the Equinix
RS but it hasn't fixed the problem.
I've also set my Vocus transit to no-export to HE, but I suspect this
will just push it on to my other transit (TPG
gmail.com>, McDonald Richards <
mcdonald.richa...@gmail.com>
Cc: ausnog@lists.ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] HE Routing (not a joke)
A beancounter must have realised they had lots of unused Australia -> US
capacity and decided they wanted to make some profit from it.
On 16/05/18 09:29, Piete
A beancounter must have realised they had lots of unused Australia -> US
capacity and decided they wanted to make some profit from it.
On 16/05/18 09:29, Pieter Berkel wrote:
Fair -- but where does "bits we both end up paying for" fit into that
spectrum?
On 16 May 2018 at 09:25, McDonald
Fair -- but where does "bits we both end up paying for" fit into that
spectrum?
On 16 May 2018 at 09:25, McDonald Richards
wrote:
> standard route policy: bits you pay me for > bits I get for free > bits I
> pay for.
>
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 9:23 AM, Pieter
standard route policy: bits you pay me for > bits I get for free > bits I
pay for.
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 9:23 AM, Pieter Berkel
wrote:
> Matt and Gavin are right: this asymmetric routing seems to only impacts
> providers that buy transit from HE in SJC (TPG and Vocus
Matt and Gavin are right: this asymmetric routing seems to only impacts
providers that buy transit from HE in SJC (TPG and Vocus being the two main
ones I've noticed). It would appear from the below post that HE policy is
to preference transit over peering links (presuming that AS paths for both
All good if on MegaIX SYD
Tracing route to tserv1.syd1.he.net [216.218.142.50]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1<1 ms<1 ms<1 ms vl666.cr01.b1.bne.qld.au.sentrian.net.au
[103.226.9.138]
215 ms16 ms14 ms vl3.cr01.s1.syd.nsw.au.sentrian.net.au
[103.226.9.245]
313 ms
That's not congestion at the IX, that's HE.net routing traffic back to
you (and me) via California. They're prefering my Vocus transit in SJC
over the shorter AS path in Sydney.
Try doing a traceroute from their Sydney router on http://lg.he.net
Matt.
On 16/05/2018 10:46 AM, Edwin
>From Internode there seems to be congestion at the exchange point:
traceroute to tserv1.syd1.he.net (216.218.142.50), 64 hops max, 52 byte
packets
1 192.168.129.1 (192.168.129.1) 2.043 ms 2.373 ms 1.887 ms
2 lo0.bras1.syd2.on.ii.net (150.101.32.61) 30.334 ms 31.081 ms 30.884
ms
3
Based on a traceroute from my Comcast connection in the San Jose area, it's
definitely located in Sydney.
Looks to me like the path back from HE to you is going via the US.
10ge5-10.core1.sjc2.he.net 0.0%14 15.9 16.4
15.6 20.4 1.1
9. 10ge4-4.core1.sjc1.he.net
TPG buys transit from HE /in the US/ so routing via the US is expected,
twice.
TPG SYD -> TPG SJC -> HE SJC -> HE SYD -> HE SJC -> TPG SJC -> TPG SYD
Yours looks like it's staying in Sydney on the way there, and coming back
via the US I agree.. You don't have any indications in your traceroute
Hi,
On 15/05/2018 4:06 PM, Christopher Hawker wrote:
Hi All,
I've seen that HE now supposedly run a IPv6 Tunnel Server in Sydney,
although I have doubts as to it's location after a few traceroutes. This
is from SY4 via NSW-IX:
The traffic being sent to the destination looks correct, but
Hi All,
I've seen that HE now supposedly run a IPv6 Tunnel Server in Sydney, although I
have doubts as to it's location after a few traceroutes. This is from SY4 via
NSW-IX:
default.master@cr1:~$ traceroute 216.218.142.50
traceroute to 216.218.142.50 (216.218.142.50), 30 hops max, 38 byte
16 matches
Mail list logo