- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
by Fergie 07 Jan '07

07 Jan '07

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - -- Joe Abley <jabley(a)ca.afilias.info> wrote: >If I acquire content the same time as many other people, since what I'm watching is some coordinated, streaming event, then it seems far more likely that the popularity of the content will lead to network congestion, or push up a peak on an interface somewhere which will lead to a requirement for a circuit upgrade, or affect a 95%ile transit cost, or something. > >If asynchronous delivery of content is as free as I think it is, and synchronous delivery of content is as expensive as I suspect it might be, it follows that there ought to be more of the former than the latter going on. > Completely agree here. $.02, - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.2 (Build 4075) wj8DBQFFoVX6q1pz9mNUZTMRArMxAKC1HcQzuRVtw7RizPH9Sxubpd4CyACfe9Mp IVrcy6mKMtdNdzu6qMMdpOs= =ehDE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

1 0

Anyone have details on MCI outage yesterday
by Owen DeLong 07 Jan '07

07 Jan '07

Yesterday, around 10:00 AM Pacific Time 1/5/07, Kwajalein Atoll lost all connectivity to the mainland. We were told this was because MCI "lost 40 DS-3s due to someone shooting up a telephone pole in California" This affected Internet, Telephones (although inbound phone calls to the islands were possible), and television. Kwajalein access to the mainlaind is via Satellite to Washington connected to terrestrial link to Georgia. The outage lasted more than 12 hours. It seems odd to me in this day and age that: 1. There wasn't a redundant path for these circuits. 2. It took 12 hours to restore or reroute these circuits. Any details would be appreciated. Thanks, Owen P.S. For those wondering "Where?" There are excellent resources in Wikipedia, but, the short answer is Kwajalein Atoll is part of the Marshall Islands and is about the midpoint on a line from Honolulu to Sydney. About 9N by 165E.

1 0

FON Router allows anonymous web access (fwd)
by Gadi Evron 07 Jan '07

07 Jan '07

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: 6 Jan 2007 19:49:56 -0000 From: l.friedrichs(a)gbs.nitag.de To: bugtraq(a)securityfocus.com Subject: FON Router allows anonymous web access Description: "La Fonera" routers distributed by FON allow web access to unauthenticated users via DNS tunneling. Explanation: The router gives a client an DHCP answer but does not forward ip traffic until the client authenticates via the captive portal. The given DNS server address is the router itself so there is a DNS forwarder running on the router. Even an unauthorized client is allowed to surf certain sites as of obvious reasons (google, skype and the accesspoint's owner's site) but instead of filtering the dns requests for these few domains, it resolves all domains. This is where an DNS tunnel comes handy... Environment: Tested with router's standard config on 01/04/07. Runs smoothly with NSTX (http://nstx.dereference.de/nstx/ Version 1.1-beta6) and an ssh-session for connection testing without any authentication via the FON captive portal. Impact: Unauthorized ressource usage (internet bandwidth) Solution: New firmware from FON, workaround can be rate limiting DNS traffic on the real router (if possible...)

2 1

Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
by odlyzko＠dtc.umn.edu 07 Jan '07

07 Jan '07

Responding to postings by Colm MacCarthaigh and Marshall Eubanks: 1. There is practically no live television (at least in the United States). After the Janet Jackson episode, networks are inserting a 5-second (or perhaps it is a 10-second, I don't recall) pause, in order to stop anything untoward from showing up on the screen. Admittedly, there are live events (videoconferencing, or sports events that some people get a thrill out of watching in real-time), but that is a small fraction of total traffic. 2. Business models (such as advertising-financed TV) are certainly slow to change, as both businesses and consumers do not alter their habits on Internet time. But neither business models nor consumer habits need to change when you move from streaming to file downloads. As long as the transmission does not have to be absolutely real-time (as it does with videoconferencing), you gain a lot. Say you have a 3 Mbps download link, and the transmission speed of your video is 1 Mbps, start shooting it down at 3 Mbps (possibly allowing the customer to start watching it right away), and after 5 seconds you will have the first 15 seconds in the buffer on the customer's device. Even if that person has been watching from the beginning, you now have a 10-second grace period when you can tolerate a complete network outage without disturbing your customer. Just think of how much simpler that makes the network! And if you do worry about long videos not being viewed to the end, shoot them down to the customers in 10-second increments. This solves concerns about advertising and everything else. And of course you can encrypt the files, and do whatever else you want. Andrew P.S. I have been puzzled by the fixation on streaming for over a decade. A couple of years ago I wrote about it in "Telecom dogmas and spectrum allocations," http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/telecom.dogmas.spectrum.pdf At my networking lectures, I often do a poll, asking how many people in the audience see any advantage (for consumer, or service providers, very vague requirement) in faster-than-real-time download of video. The response rate has ranged from 0 to 20%, with the 20% rate at two networking seminars at Stanford and CMU, full of networking graduate students, professors, VCs, and the like. There is a (small) fraction of people who see buffering and file downloads as the obvious thing, and others mostly have never even imagined such a thing. What's strangest is that the two camps seem to coexist without ever trying to debate the issue. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 09:09:19AM -0600, Andrew Odlyzko wrote: > 2. The question I don't understand is, why stream? There are other good reasons, but fundamentally; because of live telivision. > In these days, when a terabyte disk for consumer PCs is about to be > introduced, why bother with streaming? It is so much simpler to > download (at faster than real-time rates, if possible), and play it > back. That might be worse for download operators, because people may download an hour of video, and only watch 5 minutes :/ -- Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp(a)stdlib.net -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Andrew; On Jan 6, 2007, at 10:09 AM, Andrew Odlyzko wrote: > > A remark and a question: > > <snip> > 2. The question I don't understand is, why stream? In these days, > when a > terabyte disk for consumer PCs is about to be introduced, why > bother with > streaming? It is so much simpler to download (at faster than real- > time rates, > if possible), and play it back. > I can answer that very simply for myself : We are now making a profit with streaming from advertising. To answer what I suspect is your deeper question : Broadcast is a push model, and will not go away. If fact, I think that the Internet will revitalize the "long tail" in video content, and broadcast will be a crucial part of that. It, after all, has been making more for over a century now. Download appears to be very similar, but is really not the same business model at all IMHO. Doesn't mean it's bad or worse, it may even be better, but it's different. And as long as you can make a profit from broadcasting / streaming... > Andrew > > Regards Marshall -------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Jan 6, 2007, at 10:19 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 09:09:19AM -0600, Andrew Odlyzko wrote: >> 2. The question I don't understand is, why stream? > > There are other good reasons, but fundamentally; because of live > telivision. > >> In these days, when a terabyte disk for consumer PCs is about to be >> introduced, why bother with streaming? It is so much simpler to >> download (at faster than real-time rates, if possible), and play it >> back. > > That might be worse for download operators, because people may =20 > download > an hour of video, and only watch 5 minutes :/ > Our logs show that, for every 100 people who start to watch a stream, =20= only 2 or 5 % watch over 30 minutes in one sitting, even for VOD where they presumably have =20 some interest in the movie up front, and more more than 9% will watch all of VOD movie, even over multiple =20 viewings. This is also very consistent with time, but I don't have any pretty plots handy. (Our cumulative =20 audience in 2006 was 2.74 million people, I have lots of statistics.) So, from that standpoint, making a video file available for download =20 is wasting order of 90% of the bandwidth used to download it. Regards Marshall > --=20 > Colm MacC=E1rthaigh Public Key: colm=20 > +pgp(a)stdlib.net

2 1

Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
by Brandon Butterworth 06 Jan '07

06 Jan '07

> > If this application takes off, I have to presume that everyone's > > baseline network usage metrics can be tossed out the window... That'll happen anyway, what used to be considered high volume content is becoming the norm with lots of start ups and old school broadcasters getting involved. > P2P is a bandwidth sharing mechanism And a way to put off addressing the problem. We've been using it for VOD but we really do want people to do multicast for live TV (http://support.bbc.co.uk/multicast) It also exposes home PCs to more exploits by 3rd parties. Previously it was only our own servers we put at risk > As streaming video takes off, it will > use more or less the same amounts of bandwidth, P2P or no, as long as > the underlying transport is unicast ISPs might dislike peering with content providers, creating massive uncontrolled P2P gets round that at their expense. We've avoided trying to make unicast too big but we have content that many millions use (concurrently) that won't stay away >> > It downloads 320 megabytes (MB) per hour from users' computers, >> > meaning that users could reach their monthly download limits in >> > hours and that it could be unusable for bandwidth-capped users. Our multicast streams are 360K for legacy users but 1.2M, 3-5M (full DTV quality same as off air) and 18M (HD, the encoders aren't mature yet, may be down to 8M this summer. Less is possible but 2Mbit isn't HD in any codec yet if you want it to be good) At the higher rates P2P over current UK ADSL (gain < 1) is going to need a lot of benevolent users willing to donate b/w when they're not active. brandon

1 0

cold-potato at L3/Chi into UU?
by Bradley Urberg Carlson 06 Jan '07

06 Jan '07

In Chicago, L3 appears to be routing some traffic to UU directly, but for some other UU destinations, L3 is handing-off to UU via New York: trace from L3/Chi to 209.98.0.2 (AS8015 via 701) is carried to UU via New York (edited): > 1 ae-1-53.bbr1.Chicago1.Level3.net (4.68.101.65) 8 msec > 2 as-4-0.bbr2.NewYork1.Level3.net (64.159.0.238) 20 msec > 4 mci-level3-te-newyork1.Level3.net (4.68.110.234) 20 msec > 8 visi-gw.customer.ALTER.NET (157.130.98.2) [AS701 {ALTERNET}] 32 > msec Oddly, a L3/Chi trace to the last hop above within AS701 (157.130.98.2) enters UU immediately in Chicago, taking the shorter path to Minneapolis: > 1 ge-7-0-0-56.edge1.Chicago1.Level3.net (4.68.101.173) 0 msec > 2 0.so-0-3-0.BR2.CHI13.ALTER.NET (204.255.168.117) [AS701 {ALTERNET}] > 0 msec > 6 visi-gw.customer.ALTER.NET (157.130.98.2) [AS701 {ALTERNET}] 8 msec UU support has verified that AS8015 prefixes are advertised at UU's L3/Chi peering point; and L3 support reports this is "routing as designed". I would guess that UU requires its peers to use hot-potato routing, so I'm at a loss as to what kind of traffic engineering is being used. -- Bradley Urberg-Carlson VISI Network Operations; pgp keys avaialble at http://www.keyserver.net/

1 0

Reminders regarding NANOG-39
by Betty Burke 05 Jan '07

05 Jan '07

All: Welcome to 2007! I trust all had a wonderful end to 2006, and look forward to 2007 along with meeting again in Toronto for NANOG-39!!! I will keep this note short, however I know you will be interested in these few reminders:> Final drafts of presentation slides are due for review on January 19, and final versions for posting are due on January 26. The Program Committee will be completing the 2nd round presentation reviews early next week and a posted agenda is expected shortly thereafter. The agenda is looking great as you can see from the list of Topics currently posted at <http://nanog.org/mtg-0702/topics.html> We look forward to posting and sharing the full agenda information via the NANOG web site once the PC has completed its work. The full CFP with details can be found at: <http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0702/callforpresent.html> Do not miss out on NANOG-39 and Toronto! It is the place to be in February. If you have not already completed your meeting registration, consider doing so soon! The registration fee increases on January 16, 2007, and the room block rate expires on January 19, 2007. For further information refer to <https://www.nanog.org/registration/> and <http://nanog.org/mtg-0702/hotel.html> Lastly, we encourage all sponsors (small, large, etc.) to consider a sponsorship opportunity in Toronto. There is still time to let us know of your interest as Break and Beer & Gear opportunities remain available. If interested, send email to nanog-support(a)nanog.org and we will get right back to you with further information. As always, feel free to send your comments, questions, concerns, and praise:> to steering(a)nanog.org nanog-support(a)nanog.org All best, and see you in Toronto! Betty Burke NANOG Project Manager and NANOG SC Member Merit Network Inc. www.merit.edu www.nanog.org (734) 647-3743 Scholarship information, reminders: <http://www.nanog.org/postel-scholarship.html> <http://www.nanog.org/scholarship.html>

1 0

Weekly Routing Table Report
by Routing Analysis Role Account 05 Jan '07

05 Jan '07

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-stats(a)lists.apnic.net For historical data, please see http://thyme.apnic.net. If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith <pfs(a)cisco.com>. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 06 Jan, 2007 Analysis Summary ---------------- BGP routing table entries examined: 206844 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 111991 Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 100827 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 24049 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 20953 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 10138 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 3096 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 76 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 3.6 Max AS path length visible: 32 Max AS path prepend of ASN (20858) 18 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 1 Unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 2 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table: 0 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 9 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 1653079244 Equivalent to 98 /8s, 135 /16s and 252 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 44.6 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 63.3 Percentage of available address space allocated: 70.5 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 105139 APNIC Region Analysis Summary ----------------------------- Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes: 45898 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 18562 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 43505 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks: 19019 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 2808 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 796 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 419 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible: 3.7 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 16 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 274524512 Equivalent to 16 /8s, 92 /16s and 233 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 85.8 APNIC AS Blocks 4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911 APNIC Address Blocks 58/7, 60/7, 121/8, 122/7, 124/7, 126/8, 202/7 210/7, 218/7, 220/7 and 222/8 ARIN Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes: 102166 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation: 60488 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 75332 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 28694 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 11254 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 4305 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1040 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 3.4 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 21 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 311753344 Equivalent to 18 /8s, 148 /16s and 250 /24s Percentage of available ARIN address space announced: 68.8 ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106 (pre-ERX allocations) 2138-2584, 2615-2772, 2823-2829, 2880-3153 3354-4607, 4865-5119, 5632-6655, 6912-7466 7723-8191, 10240-12287, 13312-15359, 16384-17407 18432-20479, 21504-23551, 25600-26591, 26624-27647, 29696-30719, 31744-33791 35840-36863, 39936-40959 ARIN Address Blocks 24/8, 63/8, 64/5, 72/6, 76/8, 96/6, 199/8, 204/6, 208/7 and 216/8 RIPE Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 42720 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation: 27995 Prefixes being announced from the RIPE address blocks: 39492 Unique aggregates announced from the RIPE address blocks: 26431 RIPE Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 8986 RIPE Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 4735 RIPE Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1442 Average RIPE Region AS path length visible: 4.0 Max RIPE Region AS path length visible: 32 Number of RIPE addresses announced to Internet: 283511204 Equivalent to 16 /8s, 230 /16s and 9 /24s Percentage of available RIPE address space announced: 76.8 RIPE AS Blocks 1877-1901, 2043, 2047, 2107-2136, 2585-2614 (pre-ERX allocations) 2773-2822, 2830-2879, 3154-3353, 5377-5631 6656-6911, 8192-9215, 12288-13311, 15360-16383 20480-21503, 24576-25599, 28672-29695 30720-31743, 33792-35839, 38912-39935 40960-43007 RIPE Address Blocks 62/8, 77/8, 78/7, 80/5, 88/6, 193/8, 194/7, 212/7 and 217/8 LACNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------ Prefixes being announced by LACNIC Region ASes: 13510 Total LACNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 3996 Prefixes being announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 11599 Unique aggregates announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 7147 LACNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 754 LACNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 250 LACNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 130 Average LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.2 Max LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 20 Number of LACNIC addresses announced to Internet: 36014848 Equivalent to 2 /8s, 37 /16s and 139 /24s Percentage of available LACNIC address space announced: 53.7 LACNIC AS Blocks 26592-26623, 27648-28671, plus ERX transfers LACNIC Address Blocks 189/8, 190/8, 200/7 AfriNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------- Prefixes being announced by AfriNIC Region ASes: 2549 Total AfriNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 950 Prefixes being announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 1794 Unique aggregates announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 1128 AfriNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 171 AfriNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 52 AfriNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 32 Average AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 3.6 Max AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 15 Number of AfriNIC addresses announced to Internet: 5345024 Equivalent to 0 /8s, 81 /16s and 143 /24s Percentage of available AfriNIC address space announced: 15.9 AfriNIC AS Blocks 36864-37887 & ERX transfers AfriNIC Address Blocks 41/8, 196/8 APNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 4134 1259 8641 262 CHINANET-BACKBONE 4755 1043 384 68 Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Aut 9583 1022 109 16 Sify Limited 9498 903 467 64 BHARTI BT INTERNET LTD. 23577 769 34 698 KRNIC 4766 759 4946 312 Korea Telecom (KIX) 1221 578 1714 448 Telstra Pty Ltd 17488 565 35 21 Hathway IP Over Cable Interne 7545 555 126 73 TPG Internet Pty Ltd 17676 503 10935 66 Softbank BB Corp. 18101 492 87 28 Reliance Infocom Ltd Internet 9443 442 111 74 Primus Telecommunications 9942 439 81 131 COMindico Australia 4812 437 759 69 China Telecom (Shanghai) 17849 414 36 126 Telecommunications Technology 17974 362 129 12 PT TELEKOMUNIKASI INDONESIA 4802 360 86 150 Wantree Development 17557 352 35 169 Pakistan Telecom 2907 332 1749 309 SINET Japan 4837 332 3943 145 chinanet IDC center beijing n ARIN Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 7018 1536 6174 996 AT&T WorldNet Services 2386 1108 586 733 AT&T Data Communications Serv 4323 1060 821 299 Time Warner Telecom 6197 1021 639 500 BellSouth Network Solutions, 18566 983 272 8 Covad Communications 174 946 6791 872 Cogent Communications 701 924 6674 748 UUNET Technologies, Inc. 11492 844 99 17 Cable One 1239 825 2730 577 Sprint 19262 809 2528 181 Verizon Global Networks 721 780 21901 293 DLA Systems Automation Center 20115 769 670 408 Charter Communications 209 721 3764 568 Qwest 22773 713 1744 40 Cox Communications, Inc. 7011 688 211 432 Citizens Utilities 852 603 1092 391 Telus Advanced Communications 5668 568 161 19 CenturyTel Internet Holdings, 19916 567 48 57 OLM LLC 6198 549 535 257 BellSouth Network Solutions, 855 538 250 73 Canadian Research Network RIPE Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 702 544 1912 423 UUNET - Commercial IP service 3301 306 1199 288 TeliaNet Sweden 3320 296 4993 247 Deutsche Telekom AG 24863 295 45 25 LINKdotNET AS number 8220 270 473 261 COLT Telecommunications 6746 263 92 241 Dynamic Network Technologies, 680 257 2042 251 DFN-IP service G-WiN 3215 230 2104 96 France Telecom Transpac 8708 230 282 217 Romania Data Systems S.A. 1257 213 1069 170 SWIPnet Swedish IP Network 3269 210 2373 73 TELECOM ITALIA 30890 208 19 90 SC Kappa Invexim SRL 5416 206 13 9 BATELCO-BH 3246 205 353 195 Song Networks 8551 196 197 24 Bezeq International 3300 176 171 89 AUCS Communications Services 3352 176 1767 31 Ibernet, Internet Access Netw 12479 175 578 6 Uni2 Autonomous System 786 172 1795 172 The JANET IP Service 9116 170 134 23 Goldenlines main autonomous s LACNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ----------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 8151 824 2015 205 UniNet S.A. de C.V. 11830 483 299 19 Instituto Costarricense de El 11172 385 104 74 Servicios Alestra S.A de C.V 16814 329 20 8 NSS, S.A. 22047 307 206 11 VTR PUNTO NET S.A. 14117 258 16 13 Telefonica del Sur S.A. 6471 256 74 31 ENTEL CHILE S.A. 7303 227 102 36 Telecom Argentina Stet-France 6147 224 182 20 Telefonica Del Peru 6503 216 170 93 AVANTEL, S.A. 11556 211 104 6 Cable-Wireless Panama 10481 181 72 8 Prima S.A. 21826 156 20 35 INTERCABLE 23216 146 19 43 RAMtelecom Telecomunicaciones 18822 145 9 10 TELEFONICA MANQUEHUE 7910 144 10 31 ANDINET ON LINE 19429 142 84 35 E.T.B. 19169 139 9 22 Telconet 14522 131 21 10 SatNet S.A. 7738 116 442 21 Telecomunicacoes da Bahia S.A AfriNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ------------------------------------------ ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 3741 289 868 231 The Internet Solution 8452 230 60 7 TEDATA 15475 147 84 4 Nile Online 6713 144 135 11 Itissalat Al-MAGHRIB 2018 138 309 113 Tertiary Education Network 5536 123 8 15 Internet Egypt Network 24835 116 48 6 RAYA Telecom - Egypt 33783 109 6 4 EEPAD TISP TELECOM & INTERNET 2905 85 176 74 The Internetworking Company o 2561 60 6 2 Egyptian Universities Network 15706 55 12 4 Sudatel Internet Exchange Aut 23889 55 13 15 MAURITIUS TELECOM 5713 41 294 34 Telkom SA Ltd 12455 39 6 3 Jambonet Autonomous system 33774 38 12 22 AS Number for Telecom Algeria 16637 33 21 25 Johnnic e-Ventures 33766 33 2 1 Nyala Communications Pty Ltd 8524 30 2 6 AUCEGYPT Autonomous System 15804 27 2 1 AS of The Way Out Internet So 33776 27 2 5 Starcomms Nigeria Limited Global Per AS Maximum Aggr summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets Net Savings Description 9583 1022 1006 Sify Limited 4134 1259 997 CHINANET-BACKBONE 4755 1043 975 Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Aut 18566 983 975 Covad Communications 9498 903 839 BHARTI BT INTERNET LTD. 11492 844 827 Cable One 4323 1060 761 Time Warner Telecom 22773 713 673 Cox Communications, Inc. 19262 809 628 Verizon Global Networks 8151 824 619 UniNet S.A. de C.V. 5668 568 549 CenturyTel Internet Holdings, 17488 565 544 Hathway IP Over Cable Interne 6197 1021 521 BellSouth Network Solutions, 19916 567 510 OLM LLC 721 780 487 DLA Systems Automation Center 7545 555 482 TPG Internet Pty Ltd 855 538 465 Canadian Research Network 18101 492 464 Reliance Infocom Ltd Internet 11830 483 464 Instituto Costarricense de El 15270 495 461 PaeTec.net -a division of Pae List of Unregistered Origin ASNs (Global) ----------------------------------------- Bad AS Designation Network Transit AS Description 24409 UNALLOCATED 203.119.29.0/24 9808 Guangdong Mobile Com Advertised Unallocated Addresses -------------------------------- Network Origin AS Description 132.0.0.0/10 721 DLA Systems Automation Center 137.0.0.0/13 721 DLA Systems Automation Center 158.0.0.0/13 721 DLA Systems Automation Center 172.33.1.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Services 192.0.10.0/24 9498 BHARTI BT INTERNET LTD. 192.44.0.0/24 5501 Fraunhofer Gesellschaft 192.44.0.0/19 702 UUNET - Commercial IP service 192.70.164.0/24 25689 National Research Council of 192.172.0.0/19 721 DLA Systems Automation Center Number of prefixes announced per prefix length (Global) ------------------------------------------------------- /1:0 /2:0 /3:0 /4:0 /5:0 /6:0 /7:0 /8:19 /9:10 /10:13 /11:30 /12:115 /13:228 /14:409 /15:798 /16:9102 /17:3626 /18:5922 /19:12918 /20:14497 /21:12910 /22:16423 /23:17882 /24:110279 /25:629 /26:458 /27:352 /28:71 /29:43 /30:87 /31:0 /32:23 Advertised prefixes smaller than registry allocations ----------------------------------------------------- ASN No of nets Total ann. Description 18566 966 983 Covad Communications 9583 850 1022 Sify Limited 11492 830 844 Cable One 7018 828 1536 AT&T WorldNet Services 2386 827 1108 AT&T Data Communications Serv 6197 794 1021 BellSouth Network Solutions, 23577 755 769 KRNIC 7011 593 688 Citizens Utilities 4766 568 759 Korea Telecom (KIX) 9498 566 903 BHARTI BT INTERNET LTD. 19916 562 567 OLM LLC 4755 482 1043 Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Aut 15270 463 495 PaeTec.net -a division of Pae 5668 440 568 CenturyTel Internet Holdings, 855 435 538 Canadian Research Network 18101 425 492 Reliance Infocom Ltd Internet 1239 412 825 Sprint 17849 397 414 Telecommunications Technology 33588 396 418 Bresnan Communications, LLC. 17488 388 565 Hathway IP Over Cable Interne Number of /24s announced per /8 block (Global) ---------------------------------------------- 4:9 8:62 9:1 12:1657 13:1 15:15 16:3 17:3 18:5 20:36 24:844 25:1 32:55 38:274 40:57 41:56 44:2 47:10 52:4 53:1 55:1 56:3 57:25 58:279 59:357 60:189 61:973 62:1056 63:1892 64:3177 65:2289 66:3091 67:692 68:654 69:1694 70:404 71:130 72:1109 74:123 75:51 76:18 80:811 81:767 82:631 83:348 84:480 85:774 86:405 87:452 88:255 89:720 90:2 91:108 97:1 121:116 122:53 123:8 124:507 125:747 128:312 129:221 130:126 131:315 132:47 133:9 134:177 135:44 136:179 137:114 138:189 139:51 140:497 141:134 142:348 143:212 144:264 145:67 146:320 147:140 148:362 149:173 150:113 151:117 152:90 153:119 154:5 155:246 156:150 157:151 158:166 159:137 160:99 161:96 162:225 163:158 164:238 165:237 166:243 167:283 168:480 169:121 170:362 171:12 172:1 189:49 190:328 192:5738 193:3618 194:2871 195:2177 196:942 198:3778 199:3277 200:4631 201:946 202:7025 203:7233 204:3962 205:2108 206:2429 207:2900 208:2373 209:3589 210:2249 211:884 212:1314 213:1438 214:386 215:39 216:4087 217:1182 218:347 219:256 220:840 221:370 222:275 End of report Report Website: http://thyme.apnic.net

1 0

AS41961 not seen in many networks
by Sebastian Rusek 05 Jan '07

05 Jan '07

Hi, Since November 2006 we announce our 3 new prefixes: 194.60.78.0/24 194.60.204.0/24 194.153.114.0/24 from new AS41961. It seems that somewhere our announcements are blocked probably due to bogon lists. Our ASN is is in AS block allocated by RIPE on 13 April 2006 then somebody can have it still in as-path ACLs. Could you please check your configuration or help us to isolate the problem? -- Sebastian Rusek, Phone: +48 71 3352352 AXIT Polska Sp. z o.o., ul. Ruska 51b, 50-079 Wrocław, Poland

20 27

Southwestern Bell / SBC abuse/network contacts on list?
by Drew Weaver 05 Jan '07

05 Jan '07

Anyone, anyone?? thanks, -Drew

1 0