- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Cox.Net Contact
by Andy Ellifson 26 Nov '03

26 Nov '03

If there is a Cox.Net contact on this list please contact me off-list. I have an issue where I cannot get to my MCI IPs from Cox's backbone. Thanks! Andy Ellifson

1 0

RE: Above.net problems ??
by Arjan Hulsebos 26 Nov '03

26 Nov '03

> Is there any relationship between this "europeanwide" > above.net failure and the huge amount of > DNS requests to lockup.zonelabs.com which failed that every > ISP (at least in France) seem to > have encountered last night ? > The zonelabs.com zone is hosted on Above.net NS servers. The Netherlands were hit as well. We saw a massive flood of queries for lockup.zonelabs.com, too. It performed a nice DoS on our client name servers.... :-( You'd think that an unresponsive nameserver would be flagged dead, and such information be cached. Does anyone know whether that's actually done in Bind 8.3.4? Or perhaps not by default? Cheers, Arjan H Not even a clue-by-four would work with this clown. ________________________________ dr. Arjan Hulsebos Security Engineer Essent Kabelcom, @Home Benelux department 1042 AX Amsterdam Email: arjanh(a)corp.home.nl Tel: +31 20 88 55 407 Mob: +31 6 21 548 777

4 3

Re: looking for a review of traffic shapers
by Timo Janhunen 26 Nov '03

26 Nov '03

Check out http://www.ellacoya.com/products/products.html. They are tried and true. Their deep packet inspection to pick up all known P2P for example works extremely well. Regards, Timo At 01:35 PM 26/11/2003 -0500, Peter Murray wrote: >(caveat: I am not in sales - I'm a very happy PacketShaper user.) > >Traffic shaping comes in many shapes and forms. Many places who need to do >traffic shaping need to do it down to the application level, so those apps >that are of a mission-critical nature get through, while those that can >wait are made to wait. > >Trouble with the 'diskless' units is a) they can't distinguish enough >different applications to really be useful, b) they don't have control >over the incoming traffic, and c) they can't provide you with a historical >trend analysis (or event analysis) to correlate with issues that may be >happening on the network. Most make use of queueing, which can only >provide some control for outbound traffic, and at worst can lead to >further retransmissions and thus further congestion. > >The CMU study between the Allot and the Packeteer devices was not well >done, and I would encourage you to look further at each of these devices - >especially since a full year has passed since those reports, and that the >testing didn't even look at the rate-limiting features of them, which is >what would make all the difference. > >Certainly, the shaping devices out there are not inexpensive, but a box >that can shape 10MBit of traffic, broken out to over 500 different >classes, a PacketShaper 2500 can be had for well under US$10000. > >The ROI on these devices is proven, and depending on the scenario, it can >be months, not years before the device has paid for itself. In many >situations, it is the *only* solution to keeping control of >ever-increasing bandwidth demands in non-ISP (just move packets as fast as >possible) environments. > >I would be more than happy to discuss my experiences with these units. > >-Peter > >Peter Murray >Pittsburgh, PA > >On Wed, 26 Nov 2003, William Caban wrote: > > > On Tue, 2003-11-25 at 13:38, andrew(a)vivalibre.com wrote: > > > Note: delurk. > > > > > > Some of the commercial traffic shaping devices reviewed here are tens of > > > thousands of dollars. For a smaller ISP (i.e. less than a DS3 of > > > aggregate upstream bandwidth), that kind of expense doesn't make sense-- > > > but the need to control bandwidth consumption is still an issue. > > > >[snip] > > > > > > Is anyone on the NANOG list aware of a disk-less Linux solution? One > might > > > imagine a Knoppix-like bootable CD image (perhaps CD-RW, so config files > > > could be updated) that would turn an inexpensive Linux box into an > > > effective traffic shaping device, using tools like CBQinit, MRTG/RRDTOOL, > > > and a Webmin-like admin interface. The closest thing to this I've seen is > > > ETINC's BWMGR, but that's a closed-source solution and is still somewhat > > > expensive. > > > > > > -Andrew White

1 0

Re: [Re: [RE: MPLS billing model]]
by joshua sahala 26 Nov '03

26 Nov '03

Alex Rubenstein <alex(a)nac.net> wrote: > > > > we are still in the testing phases, but i believe that we are > > planning to use a port+traffic billing scheme, if/when we go live > > and start trying to sell it > > do you mean: > > $port + $traffic_through_port > > or: > > $port + $traffic_over_vpn_tunnel > > > I ask this, because, it's very possible that the customer facing port > could be a VLAN trunk, and that there would be a hub-and-spoke config > to multiple leaf ports; other variations exist, as well. > good question...i don't think that we had considered that. the expectation was that most of the ports would be serial. guess that is another wrench i can throw at the project ;) thanks /joshua > > -- Alex Rubenstein, AR97, K2AHR, alex(a)nac.net, latency, Al Reuben -- > -- Net Access Corporation, 800-NET-ME-36, http://www.nac.net -- > > "Walk with me through the Universe, And along the way see how all of us are Connected. Feast the eyes of your Soul, On the Love that abounds. In all places at once, seemingly endless, Like your own existence." - Stephen Hawking -

4 4

Anit-Virus help for all of us??????
by McBurnett, Jim 26 Nov '03

26 Nov '03

Thought this is on topic for the group with all the new virii and new problems out there. Would anyone here consider sending this out to all customers? Later, Jim Last week at the Comdex show in Las Vegas, Computer Associates International, Inc. (known to the world as CA) teamed up with Microsoft Corp to provide "qualified" Windows home computer users with a no-charge, one-year subscription to CA's eTrust EZ Armor antivirus and firewall desktop security suite. The move is designed to encourage home users to increase the protection of their Windows systems and CA has stated that the company will aggressively promote the offer as part of Microsoft's "Protect Your PC" campaign. SNIP The EZ Armor software carries a value of $49.95 and the free subscription offer for will be available for download until June 30, 2004 and comes complete with one year of personal firewall and antivirus protection including daily virus signature updates. http://www.it-analysis.com/article.php?articleid=11450

26 43

looking for a review of traffic shapers
by William Caban 26 Nov '03

26 Nov '03

I'm looking for a review/report on traffic/packet shapers products with a side-by-side comparison. Did any one has a clue where I can find one such report? Thanks, -W -- William Caban <william(a)hpcf.upr.edu>

6 7

Re: WLAN shielding
by Michael.Dillon＠radianz.com 26 Nov '03

26 Nov '03

>Planning on limiting signal using a physical mechanism of some sort's just >a little too scifi to be useful. It's too much effort to shield the room itself, but you might want to try making the inverse square law work for you by shielding all of the wireless antennae so that the signal is too weak to travel more than a meter or two. Put extra shielded wireless access points on the conference tables so that everyone can place their laptops within range of a signal. But make sure that you thoroughly test the reception both inside and outside the room to be certain that there are no leaks. No guarantees but I'd be interested to hear a report if you try this. --Michael Dillon

2 1

Re: Above.net problems ??
by Jerome Fleury 26 Nov '03

26 Nov '03

Hi there. Is there any relationship between this "europeanwide" above.net failure and the huge amount of DNS requests to lockup.zonelabs.com which failed that every ISP (at least in France) seem to have encountered last night ? The zonelabs.com zone is hosted on Above.net NS servers. --On mercredi 26 novembre 2003 09:49 -0500 Leo Bicknell <bicknell(a)ufp.org> wrote: > In a message written on Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 09:35:16AM +0100, Laurent Frigault wrote: >> The sessions reset again 35 minutes ago. Missing prefixes are back and >> above.net network seems reachable again. > > We did restore full service overnight last night (well, probably early > in the morning for those in Europe), our operations should be back to > normal. If anyone is still seeing above.net issues please open a ticket > through the normal channels. > > -- > Leo Bicknell - bicknell(a)ufp.org - CCIE 3440 > PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ > Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request(a)tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org -- Jerome Fleury Tiscali France Network Engineer Tel: +33 1 45082314

2 1

Activity logging & archiving tool
by Priyantha 26 Nov '03

26 Nov '03

In my company, there are several technical guys make changes to the existing network and it's very difficult to keep track of what we did when, etc. I'm looking for a simple tool, in which each and every one has to manually record whatever (s)he has done or any incident (s)he observed so that the tool archives that data someway. Later, in case if someone needs, (s)he should be able to search for that archive by date, by person, by a random phrase, etc. Any help in this regard is appreciated, Priyantha Pushpa Kumara --------------------------------------- Manager - Data Services Wightman Internet Ltd. Clifford, ON N0G 1M0 Fax: 519-327-8010

2 2

Above.net problems ??
by hostmaster 26 Nov '03

26 Nov '03

anyone having trouble with above.net at the moment ? cheers -Bert

5 6