June 1997 - NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: Internet outages
by sob＠academ.com 17 Jun '97

17 Jun '97

> At 02:40 PM 06/15/97 PDT, Randy Bush wrote: > > > > >Maybe Stan should subscribe it to the outage lists of all major ISPs. > > I like this suggestion. > > - paul > > > This mailing list is hosted by Academ Consulting Services. Okey. I could do this. Let me hear from more folks about it. -- Stan | Academ Consulting Services |internet: sob(a)academ.com Olan | For more info on academ, see this |uucp: {mcsun|amdahl}!academ!sob Barber | URL- http://www.academ.com/academ |Opinions expressed are only mine.

9 8

Re: nanog options
by Barry Raveendran Greene 17 Jun '97

17 Jun '97

APRICOT - Asia & Pacific Rim Internet Conference on Operational Technologies. It happens near the last part of Jan. The next one will be in Philippines in Jan'98. Barry Paul R.D. Lantinga wrote: >Things are looking as though I'll be spending the next year in my >company's Bangalore, India office. Attendance of NANOG meetings probably >won't be so easy. Does anyone know of any similar brain sharing forums in >that part of the world? > >thanks, Paul. > >-- >Paul R.D. Lantinga #planting(a)vfi.com# >Systems/Network Administrator, Verifone ICD > > > -- -- -- Barry Raveendran Greene | || || | Senior Consultant | || || | Corporate Consulting Engineering | |||| |||| | tel: +65 738-5535 ext 235 | ..:||||||:..:||||||:.. | e-mail: bgreene(a)cisco.com | c i s c o S y s t e m s |

1 0

is rs.internic.net/whois still down?
by Wayne D. Correia 17 Jun '97

17 Jun '97

Makes domain registrations a bitch. -w

4 3

Re: is rs.internic.net/whois still down?
by Postmaster 17 Jun '97

17 Jun '97

>Subject: is rs.internic.net/whois still down? >Makes domain registrations a bitch. Working fine from our side of the world MarkG Postmaster(a)usemail.net

1 0

Re: NANOG 10
by Rudy Amid 17 Jun '97

17 Jun '97

Go to Toronto, Canada then! Summers are nice here. It can be as warm as the Sahara desert. :) There are so many ISPs here in Toronto alone, they may benefit from NANOG's wisdom. --- Rudy Amid (rudy(a)hcl.com) Systems "I'm IT!" Administrator NB: IMHO! >/` Hummingbird Communications, Ltd. 1 Sparks Ave. Toronto, Ont. __ " Canada. M2H 2W1. 416-496-2200 Fax 496-2207 [URL] http://www.hcl.com | PGP key fingerprint is on my home page at http://www.warped.com/~radix \_) ---------- > From: Len Rose <len(a)netsys.com> > To: nanog(a)home.merit.edu > Subject: Re: NANOG 10 > Date: Tuesday, March 18, 1997 4:33 PM > > Who in their right mind would want to go to Florida in the middle of > summer? > > Len > > > len(a)netsys.com > http://www.netsys.com

5 4

Any ideas what is happening to Alternet's backbone?
by Curtis Generous 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

Anyone have any info on Alternet's outage? We have had to shutdown several interfaces to Alternet routers in the Washington DC area as they appear to have been blackholing our packets. Calls to their NOC have not been able to gather any further information. --curtis -- Curtis Generous generous(a)uucom.com Phone: (703) 461-1350

3 2

Re: Any from PSI on this list?
by Alex Rubenstein 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

#1, we are not a customer of PSI, #2, we are near the NYC pop, which I would be sure is noe overloaded when it comes to peering (I would assume). At 09:41 AM 6/16/97 -0700, Wayne Bouchard wrote: >I've heard this from various networks as well. While I find it >annoying, it does serve usefull purposes. More peering sessions mean >higher CPU load. higher CPU load can mean more instability within the >router. When the router crashes or otherwise reboots, it takes it >longer to resynchronize which means longer delays in convergance and >poorer overall service. Limiting the number of peering sessions on >really busy routers is a benefit, not a problem. The only thing that >could be asked of them would be that they investigate installing a >second router to offload some of the peering sessions so they don't >have such a backlog of requests and maybe provide load balancing. if >they are accepting applications, they need to provide facilities for >those requests to be implemented. > >However, I still second the comment below.. > >> Please commend PSI for not making the situation at the MAEs worse, don't >> criticize them. By connecting any more peers at ME/MW, it will simply >> add to the packetloss levels for all of us. >> >> Rob >> > >> > Alex, >> > >> > We executed peering agreements with PSI in May (1997) for peering at >> > MAE-EAST and MAE-WEST (signed, mailed, etc...) >> > >> > One of our engineers contacted them last week to turn up these peering >> > sessions and was told by PSI that even though we have an executed peering >> > agreement with you, "our routers at the MAE's are overloaded and we are not >> > currently turning up any new peers." >> > >> > >> > K >> > >> > -- >> > | Kyle C. Bacon >> > | VP Operations >> > | kbacon(a)fibernet.net >> > | http://www.fibernet.net >> > >> > connecting your world... >> > >> > On Jun 16, 10:11am, Alex Rubenstein wrote: >> > > Subject: Any from PSI on this list? >> > > >> > > I can't seem to reach anyone at PSI who knows what I am talking about, so >> > > I thought I would try here. >> > > >> > > Lately, our connectivity to PSI has gotten worse; to the point where >> > > customers complaing about getting to sites from PSI. >> > > >> > > The thing is, PSI has a 'MEGA-PoP' about 14 feet away from me at 33 >> > > Whitehall Street, in NYC. >> > > >> > > I know PSI peers there with a few folks; are they adding? How do you >> > > become considered for peering with PSI? >> > > >> > > Thanks for your time. >> > > >> > >-- End of excerpt from Alex Rubenstein >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > | Kyle C. Bacon >> > | VP Operations >> > | kbacon(a)fibernet.net >> > | http://www.fibernet.net >> > >> > connecting your world... >> > >> > >> >> > > >-- > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Wayne Bouchard GlobalCenter >web(a)primenet.com >Primenet Network Engineering Internet Solutions for >(602) 416-6422 800-373-2499 x6422 Growing Businesses >FAX: (602) 416-9422 >http://www.primenet.com http://www.globalcenter.net >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >

1 0

Peering, part 2
by Alex Rubenstein 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

I just had an idea. If there is any one else in the WorldCom Frame Relay cloud, you could add a 32k CIR pipe for $31.80 per month. We could peer. It would be cool. Is anyone interested? I think it would be good.

1 0

Re: Any from PSI on this list?
by John Curran 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

At 12:11 6/16/97, Doug Davis wrote: >... >I have a similer problem with BBN. They have a pop <14 feet from me in >Dallas. I can't get past the "retail sales" blockage to reach a >technical person inorder to discuss peerage. Email to ops@bbnplanet >eventually dissapears. This even after BBN people at nanog have said >that in these type of cases they could be interested in this sort of >private peerage. Mumble... requests should be sent to "peering(a)bbnplanet.com"; you'll get back a reply/questionaire which starts the process. If you don't have nationwide infrastructure, you may not be terribly impressed by our response. >Everyone probably just has too much work to do :-( It beats the alternative... :-), /John

1 0

Re: Any ideas what is happening to Alternet's backbone?
by Danny McPherson 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

> Anyone have any info on Alternet's outage? We have had to shutdown several > interfaces to Alternet routers in the Washington DC area as they appear to have been > blackholing our packets. Calls to their NOC have not been able to gather > any further information. nope, although i see that uunet (among others) are still reachable via psi :-( peer1.sjc1#sh ip bgp re 174_2713_5727 BGP table version is 5259866, local router ID is 207.240.24.10 Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path * 4.0.0.0 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 1 i * 12.64.0.0/12 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 5074 i * 36.0.0.0 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 1 32 i *> 62.0.0.0 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 1 1239 568 400 ? *> 62.72.0.0/18 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 701 3491 5427 i * 62.192.0.0/19 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 701 3491 6705 i * 62.216.0.0/19 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 701 4000 5583 i etc... i've asked psi to correct the problem... -danny

1 0