Re: Facebook outage?

cable was replugged, insta/fb back up here. /kc On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 02:04:58AM -0500, Zachary said: >Seems unlikely, probably taking credit for someone tripping over a cable. -- Ken Chase - m...@sizone.org Toronto

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Hello! Looks like somebody want to build Linux soft router!) Nice idea for routing 10-30 GBps. I route about 5+ Gbps in Xeon E5-2620v2 with 4 10GE cards Intel 82599 and Debian Wheezy 3.2 (but it's really terrible kernel, everyone should use modern kernels since 3.16 because "buggy linux route cach

Re: Facebook outage?

Some busted links there, but http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/30306319 /kc On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:58:21PM -0800, Chaim Rieger said: >Hacking group Lizard Sqaud claims to have taken down @facebook >@instagram >@Tinder >

Re: Facebook outage?

It is back now fwiw On Jan 27, 2015 12:18 PM, "Damien Burke" wrote: > Facebook outage? Everyone panic! > > https://twitter.com/search?q=facebook&src=typd > > -Damien >

Re: Facebook outage?

down from toronto. instagram too, of course. /kc -- Ken Chase - m...@sizone.org Toronto

Re: Facebook outage?

The js console for hipchat shows tons of connection errors and 503s to facebook.com. It's like just a facebook outage and breaking sites that have facebook login options. On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Chaim Rieger wrote: > Hacking group Lizard Sqaud claims to have taken down @facebook >

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

A Maxxwave Routermxx MW-RM1300-i7 (x86 mikrotik router) pulls full tables from two peers and converges in about 40 seconds. On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 9:51 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: > Depends on the hardware. 30 - 45 seconds for the higher end stuff? I'm not > sure how long it is on an RB750 (list pr

Re: Facebook outage?

On 1/27/2015 00:58, Larry Sheldon wrote: On 1/27/2015 00:47, Damien Burke wrote: Facebook outage? Everyone panic! https://twitter.com/search?q=facebook&src=typd Let the record show that I noticed it quite a while ago, but did NOT go for first NANOG mention. It is back up in Omaha. -- The u

Re: Facebook outage?

And it appears to be back for me. - Tim > On 27 Jan 2015, at 3:08 pm, Tim Raphael wrote: > > Instagram used to use Amazon AWS before being purchased by Facebook. > There has been a slow migration onto FB infrastructure, so yes, a mixture of > addresses like that makes sense. > > - Tim > >

Re: Facebook outage?

Instagram used to use Amazon AWS before being purchased by Facebook. There has been a slow migration onto FB infrastructure, so yes, a mixture of addresses like that makes sense. - Tim > On 27 Jan 2015, at 2:58 pm, Christopher Morrow > wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 1:56 AM, Jason Canady

Re: Facebook outage?

Seems unlikely, probably taking credit for someone tripping over a cable. On Jan 27, 2015 2:01 AM, "Trent Farrell" wrote: > https://twitter.com/LizardMafia/status/559963134006292481 > > On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:50 PM, Damien Burke > wrote: > > > I hear that AIM and hipchat is also having issue

Re: Facebook outage?

Dead here from a close peering link. 1 10ge11-3.core1.lax1.he.net (65.49.27.149) [AS 6939] 4 msec 12 msec 0 msec 2 10ge1-3.core1.lax2.he.net (72.52.92.122) [AS 6939] 0 msec 8 msec 4 msec 3 any2ix.coresite.com (206.72.210.161) 0 msec 4 msec 0 msec 4 be2.bb01.lax1.tfbnw.net (31.13.30.24) [AS

Re: Facebook outage?

On 1/27/2015 00:47, Damien Burke wrote: Facebook outage? Everyone panic! https://twitter.com/search?q=facebook&src=typd Let the record show that I noticed it quite a while ago, but did NOT go for first NANOG mention. -- The unique Characteristics of System Administrators: The fact that the

Re: Facebook outage?

Hacking group Lizard Sqaud claims to have taken down @facebook @instagram @Tinder @aim @Myspace

Re: Facebook outage?

snow, it's a terrible thing. On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 1:50 AM, Damien Burke wrote: > I hear that AIM and hipchat is also having issues. > > Any other major company down too? > > -Original Message- > From: John van Oppen [mailto:jvanop...@spectrumnet.us] > Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 10:

Re: Facebook outage?

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 1:56 AM, Jason Canady wrote: > Instagram appears to be down as well, but that would make sense since they > are part of Facebook. > $ dig +short facebook.com 173.252.120.6 NetRange: 173.252.64.0 - 173.252.127.255 CIDR: 173.252.64.0/18 NetName:FACE

Re: Facebook outage?

https://twitter.com/LizardMafia/status/559963134006292481 On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:50 PM, Damien Burke wrote: > I hear that AIM and hipchat is also having issues. > > Any other major company down too? > > -Original Message- > From: John van Oppen [mailto:jvanop...@spectrumnet.us] > Sen

Re: Facebook outage?

Instagram appears to be down as well, but that would make sense since they are part of Facebook. On Jan 27, 2015, at 1:50, Damien Burke wrote: > I hear that AIM and hipchat is also having issues. > > Any other major company down too? > > -Original Message- > From: John van Oppen [ma

RE: Facebook outage?

I hear that AIM and hipchat is also having issues. Any other major company down too? -Original Message- From: John van Oppen [mailto:jvanop...@spectrumnet.us] Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 10:49 PM To: Damien Burke; nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: Facebook outage? Dead here at AS11404 fr

RE: Facebook outage?

Dead here at AS11404 from all locations where we PNI or public peer... must be bad over there, v4 dies at their edge, v6 makes it in but no page loads. John

Facebook outage?

Facebook outage? Everyone panic! https://twitter.com/search?q=facebook&src=typd -Damien

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 04:59:12PM +1300, Alexander Neilson said: >For the CCR1036-12G-4S with one full table, one domestic table (NZ - ~26k entries) some peering and iBGP full convergence took about three minutes forty seconds last time I timed it from cold. That's terrible. I dont know what

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Under 30sec (more like 15 to 20) on an i7 based Mikrotik for full BGP Tables. Faisal Imtiaz - Original Message - > From: "Ken Chase" > To: nanog@nanog.org > Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 10:29:28 PM > Subject: Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations > > Hows convergenc

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

> On 27/01/2015, at 4:29 pm, Ken Chase wrote: > > Hows convergence time on these mikrotik/ubiquity/etc units for a full table? For the CCR1036-12G-4S with one full table, one domestic table (NZ - ~26k entries) some peering and iBGP full convergence took about three minutes forty seconds last

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

On Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:10:54 +0900, "Paul S." said: > Like Mike mentioned, the feature list in RouterOS is nothing short of > impressive -- problem is that pretty much everything in there is > inherently buggy. > > That and one hell of a painful syntax-schema to work with too. Latvian grammar is..

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Depends on the hardware. 30 - 45 seconds for the higher end stuff? I'm not sure how long it is on an RB750 (list price of like $40). ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Ken Chase" To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: M

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Hows convergence time on these mikrotik/ubiquity/etc units for a full table? /kc -- Ken Chase - m...@sizone.org Toronto

Re: AT&T uVerse blocking SIP?

I think this is due to the CPE using a particular ALG ... (from recollection having never been a UVerse customer, but having sat through a long, long, long set of discussions about the merits/demerits of sip blocking) On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:22 PM, Jared Mauch wrote: > Yes. If you move to ano

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

On 1/26/15 5:43 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: > Aren't most of the new whitebox\open source platforms based on > switching and not routing? I'd assume that the "cloud-scale" data > centers deploying this stuff still have more traditional big iron at > their cores. A L3 ethernet switch and a "router" are

Re: AT&T uVerse blocking SIP?

Yes. If you move to another port, e.g.: 5061 it works fine. If you’re running on a Linux based system, you can do this: /sbin/iptables -A PREROUTING -t nat -i eth1 -p udp --dport 5061 -j REDIRECT --to-port 5060 on the host to remap 5061 -> 5060 with no application change. - Jared > On Jan 26

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

I'm also in the research stage of building our own router. I'm interested in reading more if you can post links to some of this research and/or testing. David Sent from my iPad > On Jan 26, 2015, at 6:45 PM, Phil Bedard wrote: > > Kind of unsurprisingly, the traditional network vendors are

AT&T uVerse blocking SIP?

Has anyone seen issues where a end user on uVerse trying to connect to either another provider or AT&T non uVerse (in this case DIA) is having SIP blocked? SIP leaving the uVerse network going to another uVerse DSL account is fine, but it appears soon as it leave the uVerse network all SIP traffic

Requesting Consolidated Communications (AS5742) contact

Requesting to speak with Consolidated Communications (AS5742) regarding routing in Illinois region towards Gaikai (AS33353). Please contact me offline. Thank you, Chris Costa Gaikai cco...@gaikai.com

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Different (configuration) strokes for different folks. I look at a Cisco interface now and say, "Who the hell would use this?" despite my decade old Cisco training. I was corrected offlist that Vyatta does do MPLS now... but I can't find anything on it doing VPLS, so I guess that's still out.

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Like Mike mentioned, the feature list in RouterOS is nothing short of impressive -- problem is that pretty much everything in there is inherently buggy. That and one hell of a painful syntax-schema to work with too. On 1/27/2015 午前 10:57, Tony Wicks wrote: And the solution to this issue is -

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Must not have read my whole e-mail. ;-) There aren't very many people outside of my group that know more about Mikrotik. Trainers, MUM presenters, direct-line-to-Janis guys, etc. Still can't make those Latvians produce what we want. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions ht

RE: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

And the solution to this issue is - http://routerboard.com/ or http://www.mikrotik.com/software# on x86 hardware, plus any basic layer2 switch. Don't scoff until you have tried it, the price/performance is pretty staggering if you are in the sub 20gig space. -Original Message- From: NA

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Aren't most of the new whitebox\open source platforms based on switching and not routing? I'd assume that the "cloud-scale" data centers deploying this stuff still have more traditional big iron at their cores. The small\medium sized ISP usually is left behind. They're not big enough to afford

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

It really depends on the application that you are interested in beyond forwarding, but not knowing that and to scale forwarding ³at a reasonable price", things have to come off cpu and become more customized for forwarding, especially for low latency forwarding. The optimization comes in minimiz

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Kind of unsurprisingly, the traditional network vendors are somewhat at the forefront of pushing what an x86 server can do as well. Brocade (Vyatta), Juniper, and Alcatel-Lucent all have virtualized routers using Intel's DPDK pushing 5M+ PPS at this point. They are all also tweaking what Inte

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

One thing to note about Ubiquiti's EdgeMax products is that they are not Intel based. They use Cavium Octeon's (at least that's what my EdgeRouter Lite has in it). Oliver - Oliver Garraux Check out my blog: blog.garraux.net Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Cumulus Networks has some stuff, http://www.bigswitch.com/sites/default/files/presentations/onug-baremetal-2014-final.pdf Pretty decent presentation with more details you like. Mehmet > On Jan 26, 2015, at 8:53 PM, micah anderson wrote: > > > Hi, > > I know that specially programmed ASICs

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

> I know that specially programmed ASICs on dedicated hardware like Cisco, > Juniper, etc. are going to always outperform a general purpose server > running gnu/linux, *bsd... but I find the idea of trying to use > proprietary, NSA-backdoored devices difficult to accept, especially when > I don't h

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

On 1/26/15 14:53, micah anderson wrote: Hi, I know that specially programmed ASICs on dedicated hardware like Cisco, Juniper, etc. are going to always outperform a general purpose server running gnu/linux, *bsd... but I find the idea of trying to use proprietary, NSA-backdoored devices difficul

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Has anyone tested these setups with something more beefy like dual Xeons of Sandybridge or later vintage? Waiting to hear back from one NIC vendor (HotLava) what they think can be done on larger hardware setups. Put in two big Xeons and you're looking at 24 cores to work with as opposed to the <

Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Hi Micah, There is a segment in the Hardware Side of the industry that produces "Network Appliances". (Folks such as Axiomtek, Lanner Electronics, Caswell Networks, Portwell etc etc) These appliances are commonly used as a commercial (OEM) platform for a variety of uses.. Routers, Firewalls,

scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations

Hi, I know that specially programmed ASICs on dedicated hardware like Cisco, Juniper, etc. are going to always outperform a general purpose server running gnu/linux, *bsd... but I find the idea of trying to use proprietary, NSA-backdoored devices difficult to accept, especially when I don't have

Re: REMINDER: Leap Second

I'm pretty sure University College, London (UCL) had a 360/195 on the net in the late 1970s. I remember it had open login to I guess it was TSO? I'd play with it but couldn't really figure out anything interesting to do lacking all documentation and by and large motivation other than it was kind o

Re: Comcast Support (from NANOG Digest, Vol 84, Issue 24)

Thanks John and Ron, We'll definitely reach out to Juniper. Best regards, -- Rafael de Oliveira Ribeiro DAERO - Gerencia de Operacoes RNP - Rede Nacional de Ensino e Pesquisa Tel.: +55 21 2102 9659 - iNOC: 1916*767

Re: REMINDER: Leap Second

Barney Wolff wrote: >On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 06:42:51PM -0500, TR Shaw wrote: >> >> That made the transformers smaller/cooler and more efficient. I seem to >> remember a 195 as well but maybe it >is just CRS. > >Google says the 360/195 did exist. But my baby was the 360/95, >where the first me

Re: Comcast Support (from NANOG Digest, Vol 84, Issue 24)

Sorry Ron, just replied with the same information. = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable p) 484-962-0060 w) www.comcast6.net e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com = -Original Message- From: Ron Broersma Dat

Re: Comcast Support (from NANOG Digest, Vol 84, Issue 24)

From the looks of it, there is no IPv6 PD support per RFC3633. = John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable p) 484-962-0060 w) www.comcast6.net e) john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com = -Original Message- From: Rafae

Re: Comcast Support (from NANOG Digest, Vol 84, Issue 24)

Dear John, On 24/01/2015 10:00, nanog-requ...@nanog.org wrote: (...) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 17:14:11 + From: "Brzozowski, John" To: "nanog@nanog.org" Subject: Comcast Support (from NANOG Digest, Vol 84, Issue 23) Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" (...) For customers

Peering Track: Peering Personals - any new peers out there?

Everyone: As the NANOG 63 Peering Track moderator, I would like to make a call for "Peering Personals". This time around, I would like to limit the Personals to "new" - networks new to peering, existing networks with new locations, changes to peering policies, turning up v6 peering, etc. If yo

Re: REMINDER: Leap Second

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 06:42:51PM -0500, TR Shaw wrote: > > That made the transformers smaller/cooler and more efficient. I seem to > remember a 195 as well but maybe it is just CRS. Google says the 360/195 did exist. But my baby was the 360/95, where the first megabyte of memory was flat-film