March 2016 - NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Verizon Voice Engineering Contact?
by chris 11 Mar '16

11 Mar '16

Anyone from Verizon on the voice side on the list or if anyone has any good contacts they can share? We have customers in LATA 224 who cannot complete calls to a common carrier and are hearing an audible verizon message "we're sorry all circuits are busy now" Please contact offlist Thanks chris

1 0

Re: AW: Cogent - Google - HE Fun
by Mark Tinka 11 Mar '16

11 Mar '16

On 10/Mar/16 17:25, Jon Lewis wrote: > My guess is that GOOG is playing peering chicken with Cogent on "the > IPv6 Internet" because doing so is low impact. Doing this with v4 > routing would be far more painful to both GOOG and single-homed Cogent > customers (probably make the news and make one or both look bad). > Doing this with v6 keeps it off in the shadows...both parties know its > an issue, but its likely not seriously impacting anyone yet. GOOG > likely thinks they're big enough and their content desirable enough, > that Cogent should peer with them. Cogent clearly disagrees. I'm > sure GOOG would prefer SFI with Cogent for v4 and v6...but they're > working on getting v6 first. Assuming the IPv6 traffic is traversing the same physical ports as IPv4 between both networks, it is actually unnecessary pain to not pass IPv6 traffic across their interconnect relationship, unless removal of IPv6 peering lowers traffic utilization significantly to negate the need for Google to pay a higher rate to Cogent, and/or delay physical port speed upgrades. Mark.

1 0

Figuring out traceroute
by Reza Motamedi 11 Mar '16

11 Mar '16

2 1

Re: FW: [tld-admin-poc] Fwd: Re: .pro whois registry down?
by Doug Barton 10 Mar '16

10 Mar '16

Joseph, Thanks for the update. However the current state of things is not good ... My Ubuntu host tries to use whois.dotproregistry.net, which has no address records. FreeBSD by default uses pro.whois-servers.net, which resolves to whois.registrypro.pro (which has an A record), but never returns with any data (arguably worse than failing immediately with an obvious error). If it were me, I would have done the following: 1. Reach out to the OS vendors and the folks at whois-servers.net with information that the proper host name for your whois service is changing. Include a drop-dead date of 3 years in the future for the old names to stop working. 2. Place a CNAME at the two (or more?) old host names so that the service will continue to work in the meantime. The CNAME costs you nothing, and while I agree that it should be able to be removed at some point in the future, having things not work at all in the short term is not the right approach. It's also not realistic to expect folks to be able to chase this down on their own ... anyone familiar with using whois on the command line has most assuredly grown accustomed to the convenience of having it "just work," as it has for the last decade or so. While people certainly *can* go back to the "good old days" of having to hunt down each registry's whois server individually, it's hard to think of that as the best approach. Is there some reason that the above can't be/hasn't been done that I'm missing? Doug On 03/09/2016 02:17 PM, Joseph Yee wrote: > Hi Doug, > > Afilias had updated .PRO whois host in Jan 2016, and we filed the record > to ICANN & IANA (http://www.iana.org/domains/root/db/pro.html) > > The new host is 'whois.afilias.net <http://whois.afilias.net>' and not > 'whois.dotproregistry.net <http://whois.dotproregistry.net>' anymore. > > Some operating systems may not update their whois configuration yet. > You may need to check and update the configuration manually for PRO > WHOIS server before official patch were available. > > Best Regards, > Joseph Yee > Afilias > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Michael Flanagan <mflanagan(a)afilias.info > <mailto:mflanagan@afilias.info>> wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Doug Barton [mailto:dougb@dougbarton.us > <mailto:dougb@dougbarton.us>] > Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2016 4:54 PM > To: tld-admin-poc(a)afilias.info <mailto:tld-admin-poc@afilias.info>; > tld-tech-poc(a)afilias.info <mailto:tld-tech-poc@afilias.info> > Subject: [tld-admin-poc] Fwd: Re: .pro whois registry down? > > FYI > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: Re: .pro whois registry down? > Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 13:51:28 -0800 > From: Doug Barton <dougb(a)dougbarton.us <mailto:dougb@dougbarton.us>> > To: Bryan Holloway <bholloway(a)pavlovmedia.com > <mailto:bholloway@pavlovmedia.com>>, NANOG list <nanog(a)nanog.org > <mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> > > On 03/09/2016 01:24 PM, Bryan Holloway wrote: > > Anyone else noticing that the .pro TLD is failing for some > things, and > > their WHOIS registry appears to be unavailable? > > The delegation from the root to PRO, and the PRO name servers > themselves, > seem to be working. > > > I appear to be able to resolve, but whois times out, and we're > getting > > reports that mail isn't going through for some folks with this TLD. > > The address records for whois.dotproregistry.net > <http://whois.dotproregistry.net> are missing. > > Doug > >

8 12

anyone from google email / net ops here?
by Josh Reynolds 10 Mar '16

10 Mar '16

It seems like one of your email servers is on SORBS which is causing any email outbound from said server to be blocked by those using SORBS. IP in question is 209.85.214.170 Offlist responses are fine, thanks

1 0

Facebook & Traceroute
by Sam Norris 10 Mar '16

10 Mar '16

Why does Facebook spoof the source IP address of the hop before this server? They spoof the source IP address that is performing the traceroute. 66.220.156.68 --- 7 FACEBOOK-IN.ear1.Atlanta2.Level3.net (4.16.185.58) 51.736 ms 51.678 ms 52.075 ms 8 ae2.bb01.atl1.tfbnw.net (74.119.78.214) 51.636 ms 51.584 ms 51.720 ms 9 be36.bb01.frc3.tfbnw.net (31.13.26.199) 58.669 ms ae4.bb05.frc3.tfbnw.net (31.13.27.129) 61.085 ms ae16.bb06.frc3.tfbnw.net (74.119.76.117) 59.731 ms 10 ae5.bb04.iad3.tfbnw.net (31.13.26.57) 111.338 ms ae7.bb04.iad3.tfbnw.net (31.13.31.245) 110.007 ms 110.015 ms 11 ae9.dr07.ash3.tfbnw.net (31.13.29.29) 68.692 ms ae10.dr08.ash2.tfbnw.net (31.13.28.207) 67.846 ms ae12.dr08.ash3.tfbnw.net (31.13.29.191) 68.629 ms 12 * * * 13 * * * 14 8.25.38.1 (8.25.38.1) 68.571 ms 68.718 ms 68.132 ms 15 edge-star-mini-shv-07-ash4.facebook.com (66.220.156.68) 67.903 ms 67.752 ms 68.071 ms --- Hop 14 is the source ip of the traceroute which is forged. This essentially makes hop 14 reply using the same ip for src and dst. Sam

5 6

.pro whois registry down?
by Bryan Holloway 09 Mar '16

09 Mar '16

Anyone else noticing that the .pro TLD is failing for some things, and their WHOIS registry appears to be unavailable? I appear to be able to resolve, but whois times out, and we're getting reports that mail isn't going through for some folks with this TLD.

3 2

[NANOG-announce] NANOG 67 Chicago, IL - Call for Presentations is Open!
by L Sean Kennedy 09 Mar '16

09 Mar '16

NANOG Community, The NANOG Program Committee is excited to announce that we are accepting proposals for all sessions at NANOG 67 in Chicago, IL on June 13-15, 2016. I have included some key points from the Call for Presentations and the complete text is now available on the NANOG website: https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog67/callforpresentations Early bird registration is open for NANOG 67 and hotel reservations in the NANOG block are available for those interested in making advance travel plans. We look forward to seeing all of you in Chicago and are eager to get to work on building a strong program for the upcoming meeting. https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog67/home Sincerely, Sean NANOG Program Committee NANOG 67 Call for Presentations The North American Network Operators' Group (NANOG) will hold its 67th conference in Chicago, Illinois on June 13-15, 2016. EdgeConneX will be the Local Host at NANOG 67. The NANOG Program Committee seeks proposals for presentations, panels, tutorials, and tracks sessions for the NANOG 67 program. We welcome suggestions of keynote speakers or topic ideas. Presentations may cover current technologies already deployed or soon-to-be deployed in the Internet. Vendors are welcome to submit talks which cover relevant technologies and capabilities, but presentations must not be promotional or discuss proprietary solutions. NANOG 67 submissions can be entered on the NANOG Program Committee Site <https://pc.nanog.org/>. How To Submit The primary speaker, moderator, or author should submit a presentation proposal and an abstract on the Program Committee Site <https://pc.nanog.org/>. Please upload draft slides as soon as possible so the Program Committee can understand the intended structure and level of detail covered by the talk. Draft slides are not required for a proposal to be initiated, but they are usually expected before the Program Committee can definitively accept a submission. The following information should be included in the proposal: - Author's name(s) - Professional or Educational Affiliation - A preferred contact email address - A preferred phone number for contact - Submission category (General Session, Panel, Tutorial, or Track) - Presentation Title - Abstract - Slides (attachment or URL), in PowerPoint (preferred) or PDF format Timeline for submission and proposal review - Submitter enters Abstract (and draft slides if possible) in Program Committee Site <https://pc.nanog.org/>. - Any time following Call for Presentations and before deadline for Abstracts - PC performs initial review and assigns a “Shepherd” to help develop the submission. - Within 2-3 weeks - Submitter develops draft slides of talk - Please submit initial draft slides early - Panels and Track submissions should provide topic list and intended/confirmed participants - PC reviews slides and continues to work with Submitter as needed to develop topic - Draft presentation slides should be submitted prior to published deadline for slides - PC accepts or declines submission - Agenda assembled and posted - Submitters notified If you think you have an interesting topic but want feedback or suggestions for developing an idea into a presentation, please email the Program Committee <nanogpc(a)nanog.org>, and a representative of the Program Committee will respond. Otherwise, submit your talk, keynote, track, or panel proposal to the Program Committee Site <https://pc.nanog.org/> without delay! We look forward to reviewing your submission. Key Dates For NANOG 67 Event/Deadline Date Registration for NANOG 67 Opens Monday, 3/7/2016 CFP Opens for NANOG 67 Tuesday, 3/8/2016 CFP Deadline #1: Presentation Abstracts Due Monday, 4/4/2016 CFP Deadline #2: Presentation Slides Due Friday, 4/29/2016 CFP Topic List and NANOG Highlights Page Monday, 5/2/2016 Speaker FINAL presentations to PC Tool <https://pc.nanog.org/> Monday, 5/30/2016 On-site Registration Sunday, 6/12/2016 Lightning Talk Submissions Open (Abstracts Only) Sunday, 6/12/2016 Further Presentation Guidelines can be found under "Present at a NANOG" <https://www.nanog.org/meetings/presentation> and some general advice is available in Tips on Giving a Talk <https://www.nanog.org/meetings/presentation/tips>. The NANOG Program Committee seeks proposals for presentations, panels, tutorial sessions, and tracks in all areas of network operations, such as: - Network Connectivity, Interconnection, and Architecture - Network Management and Configuration including Automation - Network Performance, Measurement, and Telemetry - Data Center and Physical Plant including Cooling and Power Efficiency - Network Research - Internet Governance - Routing and Switching Protocols - Network Data and Control Plane Security - Optical and Transmission Technologies - Wireless Networks - DNS, Transport, and Applications - Network Operations and Engineering Professional Experiences Submissions are welcomed by and for network operators of all sizes. Presentations about difficult problems (and interesting solutions) that you encounter in the course of your job are encouraged. The NANOG registration fee is waived for: - General Session presentations: the conference registration fee will be waived for a maximum of one speaker. - General Session panels: conference registration fees will be waived for one panel moderator and all panelists. - Tracks: conference registration fees will be waived for one moderator. - Tutorials: conference registration fees will be waived for one instructor. _______________________________________________ NANOG-announce mailing list NANOG-announce(a)mailman.nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

1 0

IPV6 planning
by Laurent Dumont 09 Mar '16

09 Mar '16

Hiya, We are currently considering deploying IPv6 for a Lan event in April. We are assigned a /48 which we then split into smaller subnets for each player vlan. That said, what remains to be decided is how we are going to assign the IPv6. Basically, it seems that are two ways, one SLAAC where the endpoints uses RA to generate it's own IP and DHCPv6 which is basically DHCP but for IPv6. Large events like Dreamhack have used SLAAC and the feedback has been mostly positive. Can anyone comment regarding past experiences with IPv6 gotchas and things that you don't really expect when running dual-stack on a large-ish network? Thanks! Laurent

14 21

LighTower - Major issue - Anyone from LIGHTOWER please contact me off list.
by Bob Evans 08 Mar '16

08 Mar '16

Anyone out here from LIGHTOWER please contact me off list. Thank You Bob Evans CTO

1 0