- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Datacenter Genset Summary
by Dan Lockwood 14 Apr '03

14 Apr '03

Everyone, I have finished compiling all of your responses into a summary document. I included all of the concerns that were surfaced and discuss why, for our particular situation, we will be using one technology vs another. I anticipate some controversy, so try to keep your criticism constructive in nature and I will revise the document to include those points as well. Thanks again to the operator community! http://www.danlockwood.com Dan Lockwood Microsoft Certified Professional CompTIA Network+ Certified Cisco Certified Network Associate

2 1

RE: Hijacking of address blocks assigned to Trafalgar House Group , London UK
by Temkin, David 13 Apr '03

13 Apr '03

Maybe they should do everyone a favor and return the hijacked blocks to ARIN.... I mean hell, does anyone really think that they have 6 /16's worth of machines directly accessible via the 'net? Obviously if they have been hijacked and the admins had the time to post here about it, it's not the end of the world for them... Just a little something to fuel a Sunday flamewar :-) -Dave -----Original Message----- From: bdragon(a)gweep.net [mailto:bdragon@gweep.net] Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2003 7:19 PM To: richard(a)mandarin.com Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: Hijacking of address blocks assigned to Trafalgar House Group, London UK > Hello! > > I've been asked to draw the attention of Network administrators to the > recent hijacking of various large blocks of ARIN IP-space: > particularly six /16 blocks allocated to the London-based Trafalgar > House Group. > > Trafalgar House Group (THG): > Trafalgar House Group TRAF (NET-144-176-0-0-1) 144.176.0.0/16 > Trafalgar House Group THIN1 (NET-144-177-0-0-1) 144.177.0.0/16 > Trafalgar House Group THIN3 (NET-144-179-0-0-1) 144.179.0.0/16 > Trafalgar House Group THIN4 (NET-144-180-0-0-1) 144.180.0.0/16 > Trafalgar House Group THIN5 (NET-144-181-0-0-1) 144.181.0.0/16 > Trafalgar House Group THIN2 (NET-158-181-0-0-1) 158.181.0.0/16 An example of why allocation boundary based prefix-filters are a good thing. IMPORTANT:The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.

4 7

AT&T NOC contact?
by Rick Ernst 13 Apr '03

13 Apr '03

Anybody have an AT&T NOC contact, or can an AT&T NOC person contact me off list? I have a bouncing DS-3 interface, but I'm remote from my office and don't have contact information. Thanks!

1 1

www.worldnet.att.net Network not in table
by Sean Donelan 13 Apr '03

13 Apr '03

Is anyone else having difficulty reaching ATT's Worldnet? traceroute to www.worldnet.att.net (204.127.43.37), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 e3-4.aggr2.bwi1.network.coloco.com (199.34.53.129) 1.769 ms 1.869 ms 1.777 ms 2 fa3-0.core1.bwi1.network.coloco.com (198.180.62.134) 2.162 ms 1.752 ms 1.836 ms 3 dca1-lan2-g6-0-102.cidera.net (208.184.7.229) 2.706 ms 3.114 ms 3.328 ms 4 dca1-lan2-g6-0-102.cidera.net (208.184.7.229) 2.566 ms !H * * C ***************************************************** AT&T Enhanced Network Services (CERFnet) route-server For questions please contact vandusb(a)attens.com ***************************************************** route-server>show ip bgp 204.127.43.37 % Network not in table

5 5

Hijacking of address blocks assigned to Trafalgar House Group, London UK
by Richard Cox 12 Apr '03

12 Apr '03

Hello! I've been asked to draw the attention of Network administrators to the recent hijacking of various large blocks of ARIN IP-space: particularly six /16 blocks allocated to the London-based Trafalgar House Group. Trafalgar House Group (THG): Trafalgar House Group TRAF (NET-144-176-0-0-1) 144.176.0.0/16 Trafalgar House Group THIN1 (NET-144-177-0-0-1) 144.177.0.0/16 Trafalgar House Group THIN3 (NET-144-179-0-0-1) 144.179.0.0/16 Trafalgar House Group THIN4 (NET-144-180-0-0-1) 144.180.0.0/16 Trafalgar House Group THIN5 (NET-144-181-0-0-1) 144.181.0.0/16 Trafalgar House Group THIN2 (NET-158-181-0-0-1) 158.181.0.0/16 I'm sure I don't need to remind people here why this is bad - a zombie block that can be announced and de-announced at an abuser's whim makes it far more difficult to trace the source of spam or the destination of responses: particularly where fraud and password-phishing has occurred. The company originally known as Trafalgar House is now part of Aker Kvaerner, headquartered in Norway, who have already set in train the processes to recover the ARIN and other handles associated with their Internet assets. Information about the original change of ownership is available, if anyone wants further confirmation or background, at http://www.brookes.ac.uk/other/conmark/IJCM/issue_02/010201.html and http://www.kvaerner.com/group/investor_relations/reports/1996/3q/Default.as… I could give a lot more details but do not want to bore those of you who have, inevitably, "heard it all before". I'm not claiming this is new - or any sort of special case. I'm posting this solely as a heads-up to help any admins who may have been asked to accept forged credentials authorising the announcement of the above blocks, and at the same time to ask for help from anyone who may have already been approached in similar terms. But if anyone does want more background they're welcome to mail me via the security account @ my domain. At the time of writing THIN5 is being announced via Level3 in Boston, and THIN2, plus two other hijacked blocks not owned by Aker Kvaerner (137.171.0.0/16 and 170.67.0.0/16) are being announced via Telia in Amsterdam. Sadly we have had difficulty reaching the right people at Telia, so if anyone from Telia is here, we'd be real pleased to hear from you. ARIN is now aware that handles ST58-ARIN and AMS87-ARIN are completely bogus, as is also the statement on the WHOIS for ST58-ARIN, that: "This company Is currently contracted by trafalgar House to provide network management services. Further information will be made avaiblible to request" (sic); If, therefore, any of you are asked to let through BGP announcements of any of the above blocks, or if you have been asked anything like this in the recent past - we ask you not to pass those announcements, but to get in touch with us urgently, taking care to preserve any documents that may have been sent to you to support that request: as these may be needed for prosecution and possible civil litigation against the perpetrators. Any valid authority for the use of these blocks would come directly from either Aker Kvaerner in Norway, or Equant (on their behalf). It certainly would NOT claim to be from Trafalgar House Group at any address because that Group is no longer trading under that identity. However I'm told that there are no plans to deploy those blocks in the immediate future, or until this incident has been cleared up. Thanks! -- Richard Cox Mandarin Technology Ltd, Penarth, UK

3 2

POTS in .IQ
by Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine 12 Apr '03

12 Apr '03

By now everyone probably knows that URUKLINK.NET is or was the only or primary ISP in Iraq. I came across this [1] and I thought that it was interesting. There's two items in the data -- which states are in which "tier" for POTS penetration, and where has POTS growth been negative. I've picked on the Iraq-adjacent states. Another source [2] is Iraq-specific w.r.t. telecommunications, and has a slightly higher penetration rate, prior to 1991. The Soviet Army withdrew from Afganistan on 02.15.89. Sanctions were imposed on Iraq in 1990. The numbers are CPE-to-PSTN w/dedicated port, per 100 persons. .af 1988 0.20 1998 0.00 (last date data available) .jo 1989 7.22 1998 8.34 (9.25 in 2000) .iq 1988 4.00 1998 3.10 (last date data available) .ir 1988 4.05 1998 11.18 (14.90 in 2000) .kw 1988 18.92 1998 23.59 (24.40 in 2000) .sy 1988 5.81 1998 9.38 (10.35 in 2000) .tr 1988 11.70 1998 25.45 (28.00 in 2000) Eric [1] http://www.sesrtcic.org/cgi-local/indquery.pl?indcode=GRPHN [2] http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/dp/dp5/telecomexecsum.html

2 1

600VDC and 802.11?
by Stephen Sprunk 12 Apr '03

12 Apr '03

Anyone know about the compatibility of high-voltage DC systems and 802.11b? The gear itself will be running on 120VAC via an inverter, but 600VDC/300A creates a strong EM field that messes with a lot of off-the-shelf RF gear and even some non-RF electronics. S Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

4 3

bandwidth estimation tools that `suck the least' [ippm] pathrate & pathload]
by k claffy 12 Apr '03

12 Apr '03

anyone willing to help by sending unsatisfying output back to the knightly development team (with as much information as you have about the infrastructure being gauged) will be of great help to some incredibly talented members of the research community beating at this holy grail trying it out and deciding it doesn't work as well as you need and not sending any feedback that might help the authors improve it doesn't help anyone at all but you knew that already k ----- Forwarded message from Constantine Dovrolis <dovrolis(a)cc.gatech.edu> ----- Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:47:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Constantine Dovrolis <dovrolis(a)cc.gatech.edu> Subject: [ippm] pathrate & pathload To: ippm(a)advanced.org cc: Manish Jain <jain(a)cc.gatech.edu>, Ravi Shanker Prasad <ravi(a)cc.gatech.edu> We would like to announce a new release of our bandwidth estimation tools: pathrate and pathload. Pathrate measures end-to-end capacity (aka bottleneck bandwidth), while Pathload measures end-to-end available bandwidth. Both tools are available at: http://www.pathrate.org The major differences in the new versions: Pathrate - 2.3.0 ---------------- * The tool has been also tested in Gigabit Ethernet paths. We added functionality to deal with interrupt coalescion at the receiver. * A "quick termination" mode (option -Q) was added for an estimate after just a few seconds. Useful for frequent light-weight measurements. * Support for netlogger output format. Pathload - 1.1.0 ---------------- * The previous version was able to measure available bandwidth only in the 2Mbps-120Mbps range. The latest version has been successfully tested in both low bandwidth paths (dial-up, DSL, cable modems), and in high bandwidth paths (OC-3, OC-12, GigEthernet). If the receiver does interrupt coalescion, the tool can only report a lower bound on the available bandwidth. * The tool can now automatically choose an appropriate bandwidth resolution (previously this was a user-specified parameter). * Support for netlogger output format. Enjoy, Constantinos, Manish, and Ravi. _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm(a)ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm ----- End forwarded message -----

1 0

RE: 600VDC and 802.11?
by James Smith 11 Apr '03

11 Apr '03

That would be more of a propagation problem. I'm assuming what he wants is near-field problems, like having the gear in the EM field of the of the wiring, and not the path between the antennas... 600VDC/300A? Running Frankenstiens Lab? James H. Smith II NNCSE NNCDS Senior Systems Engineer First Call Response Center The Presidio Corporation -----Original Message----- From: Jack Bates [mailto:jbates@brightok.net] Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 8:39 AM To: Stephen Sprunk Cc: North American Noise and Off-topic Gripes Subject: Re: 600VDC and 802.11? Stephen Sprunk wrote: > Anyone know about the compatibility of high-voltage DC systems and 802.11b? > The gear itself will be running on 120VAC via an inverter, but 600VDC/300A > creates a strong EM field that messes with a lot of off-the-shelf RF gear > and even some non-RF electronics. > To give you a vague idea, we had an issue with a 5 mile 802.11b run early on. It turns out that the signal was crossing a power line at less than 5 degrees. Cutting sharply across the power line fixed our problem. In general, it's best to just try it and see what happens. -Jack

1 0

RE: Comcast contact
by Jay Stewart 11 Apr '03

11 Apr '03

Can you please post the URL for that address? I've yet to find anyone responsive at Comcast for peering issues, and I looked *ALL* over the PAIX site for the contact you mentioned. Jay Stewart -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Scott Granados Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 12:56 PM To: Vinny Abello Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: Comcast contact There is a contact on the Paix site who is very responsive and knowledgable I think. He's more peering but could perhaps be a pointer. On Fri, 11 Apr 2003, Vinny Abello wrote: > > Can some network engineer/admin from Comcast contact me off list? Or > if anyone knows how to get in touch with someone at Comcast that is an > network engineer or admin for their network... There seems to be less > than the usual amount of contact information available for their > network people than most ISP's unless I'm just looking in the wrong > places which may be entirely possible. TIA... > > Vinny Abello > Network Engineer > Server Management > vinny(a)tellurian.com > (973)300-9211 x 125 > (973)940-6125 (Direct) > PGP Key Fingerprint: 3BC5 9A48 FC78 03D3 82E0 E935 5325 FBCB 0100 > 977A > > Tellurian Networks - The Ultimate Internet Connection > http://www.tellurian.com (888)TELLURIAN > > There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who understand binary > and those that don't. > >

1 0