- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

uunet
by Scott Granados 21 Jan '03

21 Jan '03

Is something up on uunet tonight? It looks to me that dns is broken forward and reverse but more likely it looks like a bad bogan fiilter popped up suddenly. I have issue as soon as I leave mfn's network and hit uunet.

14 17

Re: Peering BOF VI at NANOG
by ren 21 Jan '03

21 Jan '03

And for those attending the Gigabit Peering Forum in Los Angeles following NANOG, please drop me a line <ren(a)sbc.com> if you can make the dinner out in Malibu at http://www.gladstones.com on the 12th. Cheers, -ren At 08:16 AM 1/10/2003 -0800, William B. Norton wrote: >Hi all - > >If you are not a Peering Coordinator attending NANOG 27 then you needn't >read any further. > >The 6th Peering BOF at NANOG will be held Monday night and focuses on >helping Peering Coordinators make contact with other Peering Coordinators >using "Peering Personals." We solicit Peering Coordinators (via this >e-mail), asking them to characterize their networks and peering policies >in general ways ("content heavy" or "access (eyeball) -heavy," "Multiple >Points Required" or "Will Peer anywhere," "Peering with Content OK," >etc.). From the answers we will select a set of ISP Peering Coordinators >to present a 2-3 minute description of their network, what they look for >in a peer, etc., allowing the audience to put a face with the name of the >ISP. At the end of the Peering BOF, Peering Coordinators will have time to >speak with Peering Coordinators of ISPs they seek to interconnect with. >The expectation is that these interactions will lead to the Peering >Negotiations stage, the first step towards a more fully meshed and >therefore resilient Internet. > >If you are a Peering Coordinator and wish to participate in this BOF, >please fill out the following form and e-mail it to wbn(a)equinix.com with >Subject: Peering BOF VI . > > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Name: >Title: >Company: >AS#: > >Check each that applies: >___ We are an ISP (sell access to the Internet) > -- OR -- >___ We are a Non-ISP (content company, etc.) >___ We are Content-Heavy > -- OR -- >___ We are Access-Heavy >___ Peering with Content Players or Content Heavy ISPs is OK by us >___ We generally require peering in multiple locations >___ We will peer with anyone in any single location >___ We have huge volumes of traffic (lots of users and/or lots of content) > (huge: > 1 Gbps total outbound traffic to peers and transit > providers) >___ We have a global network >___ We require Contracts for Peering >Current Peering Locations: _______________________ >Planned (3-6 mos) Peering Locations: _______________________________ > >See you in Phoenix! > >Bill > >PS - This form is also on the NANOG web page at: >http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0302/norton.html > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >William B. Norton <wbn(a)equinix.com> 650.315.8635 >Co-Founder and Chief Technical Liaison Equinix, Inc.

1 0

TTM use in North America
by Josh Fleishman 21 Jan '03

21 Jan '03

I am interested in hearing how/if TTM (Test Traffic Measurements) is currently being used in North American networks. Practical experiences, gotcha's, value proposition, support, etc.. would be of interest. Also, are there any alternative projects that are also worth consideration? Thanks, Josh _______ Josh Fleishman Staff Network Engineer Network Earthlink

2 1

clear blue sf with out power
by Scott Granados 21 Jan '03

21 Jan '03

Anyone know what's up with Clearblue in SF, 650 Townsend St. I've been getting alerts that they have been with out power now for a couple days and are still on generator power. Thanks Scott

3 3

Lorain A50B50 Rectifier
by Brian Wallingford 21 Jan '03

21 Jan '03

I know this isn't an equipment list, but exhaustive searches have afforded no useable results. I'm in need of the above-mentioned rectifier. If anyone has such in stock, kindly send a quote off-list. Thanks in advance, Brian

1 0

RE: Cheap SONET mux recommendations
by Bender, Andrew 21 Jan '03

21 Jan '03

Don't think you can find products *without* NEBS/DC for products of this type, but have a look at: http://www.oasystel.com/ Regards, Andrew taqua.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Mathew Lodge [mailto:Mathew@CPlane.com] > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 7:17 PM > To: nanog(a)nanog.org > Subject: Cheap SONET mux recommendations > > > > I'm looking for recommendations for a small, cheap SONET ADM > for our labs. > It doesn't have to be fancy, just basic ADM and TDM mux > functionality -- we > don't care about NEBS, redundancy, remote management, cabling > simplicity, > power etc. > > Our ideal system would take in a channelized OC3/STM-1 and > drop out CT3 / > CE3 and T1 / E1 trunks. We're open to having a cheap > OC3/STM-1 to CT3/CE3 > ADM, and then using an M13 to demux the CT3/CE3, if that's a better > combination. > > Replies off-list appreciated (I can summarize if there is interest). > > Thanks, > > Mathew > > >

1 0

Cheap SONET mux recommendations
by Mathew Lodge 21 Jan '03

21 Jan '03

I'm looking for recommendations for a small, cheap SONET ADM for our labs. It doesn't have to be fancy, just basic ADM and TDM mux functionality -- we don't care about NEBS, redundancy, remote management, cabling simplicity, power etc. Our ideal system would take in a channelized OC3/STM-1 and drop out CT3 / CE3 and T1 / E1 trunks. We're open to having a cheap OC3/STM-1 to CT3/CE3 ADM, and then using an M13 to demux the CT3/CE3, if that's a better combination. Replies off-list appreciated (I can summarize if there is interest). Thanks, Mathew

1 0

RE: standard network symbols/icons
by Mark Segal 21 Jan '03

21 Jan '03

Try.. http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/503/2.html They are "cisco" icons.. But they are mostly the generic kinds as described by David in a follow up email. Mark -- Mark Segal Director, Data Services Futureway Communications Inc. Tel: (905)326-1570 > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael.Hawk(a)i-structure.com > [mailto:Michael.Hawk@i-structure.com] > Sent: January 20, 2003 12:01 PM > To: nanog(a)trapdoor.merit.edu > Subject: standard network symbols/icons > > > > Hello, > > Do any of the standards organizations (ISO?) have a set of > icons/symbols to represent network devices ranging from > routers to servers to load balancers? I've always used the > basic Cisco and Juniper icons, but I'm being directed to find > something not associated with a vendor in *any* way, but > prettier than rectangular boxes. > > My google and ISO website searches have turned up empty aside > from an apparently independent attempt at developing standard symbols: > http://www.meshuggeneh.net/shoki/symbols/ Does anyone know of any more official source? Thank you, -mike ------------ Michael Hawk Senior Network Engineer (i)Structure, Inc

2 1

Re: Is there a line of defense against Distributed Reflective attacks?
by Stewart, William C (Bill), RTLSL 21 Jan '03

21 Jan '03

> > > > Block all TCP 21 and 80 ? > > > Why not just block all incoming SYN ? > > Doesn't this stop kazaa/morpheus/gnutella/FTP/<some aim stuff like private chats>? > Indeed it does break that. P2P clients: Mostly transfer illegal content. [...] > Ftp/HTTP etc I believe most cable providers currently block these anyway :-) > There's a chance it'd break things like file transfers on IM clients but > I'm sure they'd be altered too. The policy of some cable modem companies against running anything resembling a server is even more clueless from a business perspective than it is from a technical perspective, but that's a rant for another list. I'd assumed the "block all SYN" was humor, but if we're discussing it seriously, it's a genuinely bad idea. A large number of applications really are servers, such as the listener clients for IM systems (including IRC as well as commercial ones), VOIP clients, Netmeeting and other videoconference tools, and Games, which are one of the critical markets for selling broadband. Some of them use UDP for everything that isn't central-server based, either for packet-loss-tolerant apps or else for reinventing TCP the hard way, or sometimes for NAT traversal, but many of them do or should use TCP. Bill Stewart Official Technical Spokesperson for ~0.00001% of Comcast cable network.

1 0

Re: Is there a line of defense against Distributed Reflective attacks?
by Steven M. Bellovin 20 Jan '03

20 Jan '03

In message <Pine.GSO.4.44.0301182004040.16112-100000(a)clifden.donelan.com>, Sean Donelan writes: > >On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: >> theory, trace a single packet. But the real problem with either idea >> is this: suppose that you know, unambiguously and unequivocally, that >> 750 zombies are attacking you. What do you do with that information? > >The reality is its not 750 zombies, its generally one person controlling >750 zombies attacking you. Right -- and neither itrace nor hash-based tracing are going to solve that: > > 3) Find and convict the true attacker Hash-based trace might help on that, *if* there was recording of the packets to the zombies. But doing that ubiquitously might -- would? -- turn the Internet into a surveillance state. > > 2) Track and stop DDOS quickly when it does happen That's the point of pushback. >So how do we > 1) Make end-user systems less vulnerable to being compromised That's my real goal... --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me) http://www.wilyhacker.com (2nd edition of "Firewalls" book)

6 6