- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Brocade FCX 624/648 experiences?
by Ulf Zimmermann 30 Nov '10

30 Nov '10

Anyone with Brocade FCX 624/648 experience, please give me a shout off the list. Looking any feedback, bad or good. I am looking at a number of switches right now, the Brocade is one which looks interesting and isn't too badly priced. Thanks! -- Regards, Ulf.

1 0

RE: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast'sActions
by Ben Butler 30 Nov '10

30 Nov '10

And what happens when the content providers have multicast to the BGP edge and the access provider has to carry it from there on in their network. This is solely about money and the brokenness of the current ISP / access / carrier / content provider commercial model. This has been coming for years once access speed (long since) got upto a sufficient speed to sustain 1 to 2 Mbit and they sorted out their copyright issues on the content. Now all the access providers who spoke big in marketing and delivered little in service are being exposed and trying to fudge the issue. This has been coming for at least five years with video, and the next one is SIP with call revenues. Show me the money! -----Original Message----- From: Steven Fischer [mailto:sfischer1967@gmail.com] Sent: 30 November 2010 02:03 To: Marshall Eubanks Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast'sActions Trying to follow this - so, if I have followed it correctly, L3 hosts high-bandwitdh services (namely NetFlix) to which an abundance of Comcast users subscribe? And Comcast is crying foul, and claiming a portion of L3's revenue is rightfully theirs, for being "last mile" to a significant portion of the CDN/NetFlix customer base? Does L3 even service a home user market, in the same vein as Comcast or Verizon? On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Marshall Eubanks <tme(a)americafree.tv>wrote: > > On Nov 29, 2010, at 6:24 PM, Phil Bedard wrote: > > > Is L3 hosting content for Netflix? > > You bet. > > > http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2010/11/11/level-3-signs-deal-to-b… > > * NOVEMBER 11, 2010, 9:13 AM ET > > Level 3 Signs Deal To Be A Primary Netflix CDN; Shares Rally > > Regards > Marshall > > > Netflix has become a large source of > > traffic going to end users. L3 likely could have held out on this one if > > the content they were hosting is valuable enough to Comcast's customers, > > but maybe what Comcast was asking for wasn't much in the grand scheme of > > things. > > > > Obviously someone has to pay for the access infrastructure and Comcast > > would much rather get the content provider to pay for it versus passing > it > > along to their customers. I think they probably just took a stab and L3 > > complied. > > > > Phil > > > > > > > > On 11/29/10 5:28 PM, "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick(a)ianai.net> wrote: > > > >> < > http://www.marketwatch.com/story/level-3-communications-issues-statement- > >> concerning-comcasts-actions-2010-11-29?reflink=MW_news_stmp> > >> > >> I understand that politics is off-topic, but this policy affects > >> operational aspects of the 'Net. > >> > >> Just to be clear, L3 is saying content providers should not have to pay > >> to deliver content to broadband providers who have their own product > >> which has content as well. I am certain all the content providers on > >> this list are happy to hear L3's change of heart and will be applying > for > >> settlement free peering tomorrow. (L3 wouldn't want other providers to > >> claim the Vyvx or CDN or other content services provided by L3 are > >> competing and L3 is putting up a "toll booth" on the Internet, would > >> they?) > >> > >> -- > >> TTFN, > >> patrick > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > -- To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy -------------------------------------------------------------------------- BODY { MARGIN: 0px}.footerdark { LINE-HEIGHT: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; COLOR: #001a35; FONT-SIZE: 9px; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none}.blackcopy { LINE-HEIGHT: 12px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10px; FONT-WEIGHT: bold; TEXT-DECORATION: none}.bluecopy { LINE-HEIGHT: 12px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; COLOR: #29aae2; FONT-SIZE: 10px; FONT-WEIGHT: bold; TEXT-DECORATION: none}.address { LINE-HEIGHT: 12px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10px; TEXT-DECORATION: none}.footerlight { LINE-HEIGHT: 13px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; COLOR: #667891; FONT-SIZE: 9px; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none}.pinkcopy { LINE-HEIGHT: 12px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; COLOR: #ed174d; FONT-SIZE: 10px; FONT-WEIGHT: bold; TEXT-DECORATION: none} Ben Butler Director Tel: 0333 666 3332 Fax: 0333 666 3331 C2 Business Networking Ltd The Paddock, London Road, Nantwich, Cheshire, CW5 7JL http://www.c2internet.net/ Part of the Atlas Business Group of Companies plc Registered in England: 07102986 Registered Address: Datum House, Electra Way, Crewe CW1 6ZF Vat Registration No: 712 9503 48 This message is confidential and intended for the use only of the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient you are strictly prohibited from reading, disseminating, copying, printing, re-transmitting or using this message or its contents in any way. Opinions, conclusions and other information expressed in this message are not given or authorised by the Company unless otherwise indicated by an authorised representative independent of this message. The Company does not accept liability for any data corruption, interception or amendment to any e-mail or the consequences thereof.Emails addressed to individuals may not necessarily be read by that person unless they are in the office.Calls to and from any of the Atlas Business Group of Companies may be recorded for the purposes of training, monitoring of quality and customer services.

1 0

Jumbo frame Question
by Harris Hui 29 Nov '10

29 Nov '10

Hi Does anyone have experience on design / implementing the Jumbo frame enabled network? I am working on a project to better utilize a fiber link across east coast and west coast with the Juniper devices. Based on the default TCP windows in Linux / Windows and the latency between east coast and west coast (~80ms) and the default MTU size 1500, the maximum throughput of a single TCP session is around ~3Mbps but it is too slow for us to backing-up the huge amount of data across 2 sites. The following is the topology that we are using right now. Host A NIC (MTU 9000) <--- GigLAN ---> (MTU 9216) Juniper EX4200 (MTU 9216) <---GigLAN ---> (MTU 9018) J-6350 cluster A (MTU 9018) <--- fiber link across site ---> (MTU 9018) J-6350 cluster B (MTU 9018) <--- GigLAN ---> (MTU 9216) Juniper EX4200 (MTU 9216) <---GigLAN ---> (MTU 9000) NIC - Host B I was trying to test the connectivity from Host A to the J-6350 cluster A by using ICMP-Ping with size 8000 and DF bit set but it was failed to ping. Does anyone have experience on it? please advise. Thanks :-)

19 21

RE: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast'sActions
by David Hubbard 29 Nov '10

29 Nov '10

Wonder if comcast will try that with google's tv service; would like to see them explain to their users why they can't get to google. Level 3's unfortunately a much easier target. > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Wall [mailto:ospfisisis@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 5:47 PM > To: Patrick W. Gilmore > Cc: NANOG list > Subject: Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement > Concerning Comcast'sActions > > Between the lines: Comcast wants to end mutual peering > agreements (due to: > ratios, politics , greed) but we are going to spin it due to > net neutrality > making it main stream media and hoping we can get comcast clients to > complain... > > Not the worse angle we've seen > > > > > > > >

1 0

Cacti Bandwidth Monitoring
by Peter Rudasingwa 29 Nov '10

29 Nov '10

Hi, I have a cacti server running and it has been working fine so far except for one interface which has an average of 150Mbps going through it now. Before when I had less than 120Mbps I got proper graphs but of late it gives me graphs of 20Mbps when it should be giving me the correct reading (150Mbps). Is there a maximum bandwidth it graphs or can this be edited so that I get proper graphs? -- Best Regards, Peter Rudasingwa *ALTECH STREAM RWANDA Ltd* ICT Park Boulevard de L'Umuganda P.O.Box 6098 Kigali, Rwanda Telephone: (+250) 580532/5 Mobile: (+250) 0788406685 ------------------------------------ *Affordable Broadband Solutions*

9 9

Targeted Phishing Attack
by J.D. Falk 29 Nov '10

29 Nov '10

Last week, the security team at Return Path discovered that we were the source of a list of addresses used in a targeted phishing attack against a number of ESPs. We're sharing the results of our investigation with the larger community, in order to help others avoid similar attacks. I'm including NANOG in this distribution because, even though this particular attack was focused on mail operators, the same tactics could work equally well on network operators. http://www.returnpath.net/blog/received/2010/11/phishing-attack-an-open-let… -- J.D. Falk Internet Standards & Governance Return Path

1 0

Re: Cacti Bandwidth Monitoring
by jkrejci＠usinternet.com 29 Nov '10

29 Nov '10

Might also look into the fix64bit plugin for cacti to modify your existing 32bit graphs so you don't have recreate them and all the extra changes you may need such as adding to graph trees, updating reports, thresholds, etc. ------Original Message------ From: Peter Rudasingwa To: Bill Blackford To: nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: Re: Cacti Bandwidth Monitoring Sent: Nov 29, 2010 9:50 AM Thanks to all. I used the 64 bit template and it's now working fine. Peter R. Bill Blackford wrote: > Sounds like you need to use the 64 bit templates as your data may be > "rolling over". > -b > -- Best Regards, Peter Rudasingwa *ALTECH STREAM RWANDA Ltd* ICT Park Boulevard de L'Umuganda P.O.Box 6098 Kigali, Rwanda Telephone: (+250) 580532/5 Mobile: (+250) 0788406685 ------------------------------------ *Affordable Broadband Solutions* Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

2 1

Facebook and Yahoo contact
by Roman 29 Nov '10

29 Nov '10

Hi, Is there anyone from Facebook and Yahoo dealing with hosting their mirror site in IX. Please contact off list. Thanks Rom

1 0

Network Planning Tool
by William Jobs 29 Nov '10

29 Nov '10

In terms of network planning tools three names appear to be at the top of the list namely: - Cariden MATE - Opnet SP Guru Network Planner - WANDL IP/MPLS View We are currently considering all of them and I would appreciate any feedback from those who have experience with any/all of them (whether on or off-list). Thanks.

1 0

Re: wikileaks unreachable
by andrew.wallace 29 Nov '10

29 Nov '10

Hi Nanog, Some more information here - http://www.reddit.com/r/netsec/comments/ecwnn/wikileaks_hacked_ahead_of_sec… The hacker has featured previously in a news article on his attack platform - https://www.infosecisland.com/blogview/3258-Hacker-Releases-Second-Video-of… Regards, Andrew ----- Original Message ----- From:Joel Esler <joel.esler(a)me.com> To:Marshall Eubanks <tme(a)americafree.tv> Cc:North American Network Operators Group <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent:Monday, 29 November 2010, 1:56:34 Subject:Re: wikileaks unreachable I've heard it's a DOS (not DDOS) according to twitter. Allegedly according to the person doing the DOS: Just so we are all straight and clear - wikileaks hit is not a 'Distributed' DoS, its a simple DoS - I dont use intermediaries or botnets. Sun Nov 16 - 15:28 EST http://twitter.com/th3j35t3r Joel On Nov 28, 2010, at 6:42 PM, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > > On Nov 28, 2010, at 5:19 PM, Wil Schultz wrote: > >> DOS is probably because they released some more stuff. >> >> "Secret US Embassy Cables" >> http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/ >> > > DDOS according to this > > http://www.securityweek.com/wikileaks-under-denial-service-attack-ddos > > Regards > Marshall > >> -wil >> >> On Nov 28, 2010, at 1:38 PM, James Downs wrote: >> >>> >>> On Nov 28, 2010, at 1:34 PM, Randy Bush wrote: >>> >>>> anyone know why https://www.wikileaks.org/ is not reachable? nations >>>> state level censors trying to close the barn door after the horse has >>> >>> Reported they were under attack: http://bgg.lv/h2pmsd >>> >>> >> >> >> > >

2 1