- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

GLBX Outtage
by Karyn Ulriksen 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

Does anybody have any additional info on FroGlo's net outtage this morning. Their first level customer service reps don't seem to know which is the hole in the ground (which is somewhat expected), but I'm having a terrible time getting to their techs. The customer service line simply states that they are aware of the outtage in the southern part of the US and have no ETA on repair. As far as I can tell, it started at about 4am. Thanx in advance for any add'l info you might have. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Best regards, Karyn Ulriksen Director of Network Operations PublicHost, A SiteStream Company 22 Mauchly, Suite 200 Irvine, California 92618 USA Phone: (949) 743-2000 email: kulriksen(a)publichost.com URL: http://www.publichost.com ===========================================

1 0

RE: SLA monitoring software package
by Irwin Lazar 09 Nov '00

09 Nov '00

Have a look at Oblicore, they are focused a bit more on the ASP market at the moment, but they might be worth looking at for your application. You might also wish to look at Orchestream - http://www.orchestream.com/, it's more of a provisioning tool but the management/reporting capabilities are pretty sophisticated. Irwin > -----Original Message----- > From: Yu Ning [mailto:yuning@ns.chinanet.cn.net] > Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2000 3:58 AM > To: nanog-post > Subject: SLA monitoring software package > > > Hi All, > > As we know SLA is frequently referred by some major NSPs, I > wonder if there is any > vendor specific, or third party software package that can > help an NSP to monitor its > backbone network and to see if its network conform their SLA > agreement with customers? > > If there is any well-known SLA monitoring software ? How > about IPM (Internet Performance > Monitor) by Cisco? Anyone has any comment on using IPM ? > > thanks any input! > > best > > -------------------------------------- > (Mr.) Yu Ning, Chief Eng. > Internet Network Product Dep. > Data Com. Bureau, China Telecom > Beijing, P.R.C. +86-10-62072357/54 > -------------------------------------- >

1 0

Re: DoS issue, conclusion
by Sean Donelan 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

On Tue, 07 November 2000, Christian Nielsen wrote: > not that... it is just that most ISPs dont have large staff to deal with these > types of issues. And maybe, if you were being DoSed, and you offered to pay > for their time, they might answer differently. There is a family organization you can pay weekly not to burn down your store too.

3 2

Re: DoS attacks, NSPs unresponsiveness (fwd)
by Christopher L. Morrow 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

Having seen Ariel's message today, and NOT seeing my original response to his post (sent to him directly, did you NOT get this email Ariel?). I've reposted this message.. my original response to Ariel and Rubens. As to the others today, Steve Sobol, you too are not a UUNET direct customer, BUT if you are under attack and your Upstream tracks this traffic to UUNET have them follow the procedures outlined below and I will track the attack. UUNET DOES pay 4 people (six actually) to do nothing but stop and track DoS attacks on its backbone... and we are quite good at it. --Chris ####################################################### ## UUNET Technologies, Inc. ## ## Manager ## ## Customer Router Security Engineering Team ## ## (W)703-289-8479 (C)703-283-3734 ## ####################################################### ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 20:02:48 -0500 (EST) From: Christopher L. Morrow <cmorrow(a)uu.net> To: Ariel Biener <ariel(a)fireball.tau.ac.il>, rkuhljr(a)uol.com.br Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu, amos rosenboim <slick(a)xchange.wan.inter.net.il> Subject: Re: DoS attacks, NSPs unresponsiveness Ariel and Rubens, I'd like to address your concerns about UUNET NOT getting involved when you networks (both downstreams of UUNET customers) are under attack. In both of your cases I have personally, on more than one occasion, contacted your upstream providers to inform them of proper contact procedures for Live Attacks. To clarify those procedures for the 10th time in a public forum, if you are under attack and your upstream is either UUNET, or it's a customer of UUNET have the DIRECT CUSTOMER of UUNET Call the UUNET Security/Fraud/Abuse Department and ask for a Rotuer Engineer. The phone number is: 1-800-900-0241 options 2,3,1 or for those that live outside the USA: 1-703-206-5440 options 2,3,1. If you no one calls there can be no action taken... in the case of Rubens, your upstream (Embratel, correct?) has been emailing attack notifications and null routing your addresses. They have been told by me personally (I spoke to an individual named 'Jorge' I believe) several times to call us so we can stop and track the attack. I have 4 engineers dedicated to dealing with DoS attacks on UUNET customers. We track several attacks per day and are available 24/7. I will not be held accountable for people's issues when they do NOT follow the appropriate contact procedures. If you would like to talk with me personally about this I invite you to call or email me directly as I'd be more than happy to clarify anything I've written in this message, my contact information is included for your convenience. For the others on this list, if you are a UUNET customer you can call our Security Department if you ever have any issues with security, DoS, fraud, spam, or the like. If you are under DoS attack either one of my engineers will stop and track the attack, or I will do it... it's what we get paid to do. If you are NOT a UUNET customer you know that other ISP's (Tier 1's atleast) do NOT filter attack traffic, and they do NOT track attacks. The ONLY exceptions to this are: Genuity, Global Crossing and at one time Verio. --Chris ####################################################### ## UUNET Technologies, Inc. ## ## Manager ## ## Customer Router Security Engineering Team ## ## (W)703-289-8479 (C)703-283-3734 ## ####################################################### On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Ariel Biener wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > This e-mail comes to describe a common problem among a large number of > ISPs, mostly foreign, when dealing with US network service providers. I > don't want to talk about anyone I don't know of, so I will limit this > initial e-mail to talking about UUnet. > > As most of you know, some ISPs run irc servers, and provide an IRC > service to the community. The service is free, and maintenance and cost of > networking/hardware/human hours is on the ISPs expense. > > Irc tends to be a volatile medium, like interpersonal relationships in > real life. Thus, many times arguements turn into heated disputes, and > sometimes, some people pick up arms, and attack. The attacks usually take > out whole ISPs for hours, or days. > > The problem is that when trying to get help from the upstream provider > (UUnet in this example), you either receive a negative answer, or you're > just ignored completely. Thus, by terrorism, people get what they want, > and hold you at a threat of force, without any ability to defend yourself. > > Smurfing, icmp attacks, udp attacks, tcp synflooding (spoofed > sources) are just a number of these weapons. The problem with alot of > networking entities, be it ISPs, enterprises, and such, is that they allow > spoofed packets to leave their network (i.e. do not check if the packets > originate from within their netblocks before letting them leave their > routers). > > The question is, how can we defend ourselves, and why do the large NSPs > turn a blind eye, and act as if it's not their concern ? > > Is there a chance that by helping one another, and by implementing > Internet RFCs corrctly (rfc 1918 for example), we can contribute to the > elimination of this kind of electronic terrorism ? > > Any chance a UUnet person might answer ? > > > best regards, > > --Ariel > > -- > Ariel Biener > e-mail: ariel(a)post.tau.ac.il Work phone: 03-6406086 > fingerprint = 07 D1 E5 3E EF 6D E5 82 0B E9 21 D4 3C 7D 8B BC > >

5 7

Re: DoS issue, conclusion
by Ben Browning 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

At 15:17 11/7/2000 -0800, Christian Nielsen wrote: >not that... it is just that most ISPs dont have large staff to deal with these >types of issues. And maybe, if you were being DoSed, and you offered to pay >for their time, they might answer differently. One should not have to bribe ones upstream to make them behave in a reasonable and responsible manner. --- Ben Browning <benb(a)oz.net> oz.net Network Operations Tel (206) 443-8000 Fax (206) 443-0500 http://www.oz.net/

1 0

Those Pesky People at PSI
by Jeff Workman 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

Good morning NANOG. I present to you, for your entertainment: http://yahoo.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-3417237.html?pt.yfin.cat_fin.txt.ne Jeff Representing me, myself, and I. -- "For competitive reasons we can't tell you the location of our fiber." -- An anonymous representative of a very large telco "For competitive reasons we can't tell you the location of our backhoe." -- An anonymous representative of a contractor.

3 2

Re: Those Pesky People at PSI
by Mauro Lollo 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

Yes, I would generally agree :) >From: Scott Francis <scott(a)virtualis.com> >To: Mauro Lollo <mlollo(a)hotmail.com> >CC: nanog(a)merit.edu >Subject: Re: Those Pesky People at PSI >Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2000 06:56:15 -0800 > >Mauro Lollo wrote: > >> >>Quote from the article: >> >>"My general understanding is that we have a general anti-spamming >>policy..." >> >>Hmmm, what does this generally mean ? > >_my_ general understanding is that I have a generally large blackhole >for spam networks. :) > >-- >Scott Francis v i r t u a l i s . c o m >PGP fingerprint 7ABF E2E9 CD54 A1A8 804D 179A 8802 0FBA CB33 CCA7 >illum oportet crescere me autem minui > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.

1 0

Re: Those Pesky People at PSI
by Mauro Lollo 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

Quote from the article: "My general understanding is that we have a general anti-spamming policy..." Hmmm, what does this generally mean ? M. >From: Jeff Workman <jworkman(a)pimpworks.org> >To: nanog(a)merit.edu >Subject: Those Pesky People at PSI >Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 05:06:28 -0500 (EST) > > > >Good morning NANOG. I present to you, for your entertainment: > >http://yahoo.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-3417237.html?pt.yfin.cat_fin.txt.ne > > >Jeff >Representing me, myself, and I. > >-- >"For competitive reasons we can't tell you the location of our fiber." > -- An anonymous representative of a very large telco >"For competitive reasons we can't tell you the location of our backhoe." > -- An anonymous representative of a contractor. > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.

1 0

DoS attacks, NSPs unresponsiveness
by Ariel Biener 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

Hi, This e-mail comes to describe a common problem among a large number of ISPs, mostly foreign, when dealing with US network service providers. I don't want to talk about anyone I don't know of, so I will limit this initial e-mail to talking about UUnet. As most of you know, some ISPs run irc servers, and provide an IRC service to the community. The service is free, and maintenance and cost of networking/hardware/human hours is on the ISPs expense. Irc tends to be a volatile medium, like interpersonal relationships in real life. Thus, many times arguements turn into heated disputes, and sometimes, some people pick up arms, and attack. The attacks usually take out whole ISPs for hours, or days. The problem is that when trying to get help from the upstream provider (UUnet in this example), you either receive a negative answer, or you're just ignored completely. Thus, by terrorism, people get what they want, and hold you at a threat of force, without any ability to defend yourself. Smurfing, icmp attacks, udp attacks, tcp synflooding (spoofed sources) are just a number of these weapons. The problem with alot of networking entities, be it ISPs, enterprises, and such, is that they allow spoofed packets to leave their network (i.e. do not check if the packets originate from within their netblocks before letting them leave their routers). The question is, how can we defend ourselves, and why do the large NSPs turn a blind eye, and act as if it's not their concern ? Is there a chance that by helping one another, and by implementing Internet RFCs corrctly (rfc 1918 for example), we can contribute to the elimination of this kind of electronic terrorism ? Any chance a UUnet person might answer ? best regards, --Ariel -- Ariel Biener e-mail: ariel(a)post.tau.ac.il Work phone: 03-6406086 fingerprint = 07 D1 E5 3E EF 6D E5 82 0B E9 21 D4 3C 7D 8B BC

17 37

RE: DoS attacks, NSPs unresponsiveness (fwd)
by Christopher L. Morrow 08 Nov '00

08 Nov '00

Jim, I'm sure glad C&W is 24/7 could you publish a phone number that atleast other providers could use to get intouch with the proper security element in your org? I spent 4 hours today trying to get to an engineer who could help me track an attack through corerouter1.blookington.cw.net and got bounced through your NOC, your leased line crew, your contact at MCI (yeah, that was fun), your managed firewall services crew, two other engineers I had to explain what a Syn Attack was and finally got hung up on by someone who has yet to call me back... Perhaps you can call me to get this track finished? (Since it's still going strong at over 5kpps?) --Chris ####################################################### ## UUNET Technologies, Inc. ## ## Manager ## ## Customer Router Security Engineering Team ## ## (W)703-289-8479 (C)703-283-3734 ## ####################################################### On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, Jim Farrar wrote: > > Christopher, > > I'm sure other providers will find your comments equally interesting. > > http://www.security.cw.net/ > > 7x24 Naturally. > > > /jim > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of > Christopher L. Morrow > Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 9:09 PM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: DoS attacks, NSPs unresponsiveness (fwd) > > > > Having seen Ariel's message today, and NOT seeing my original response > to > his post (sent to him directly, did you NOT get this email Ariel?). > I've > reposted this message.. my original response to Ariel and Rubens. > > As to the others today, Steve Sobol, you too are not a UUNET direct > customer, BUT if you are under attack and your Upstream tracks this > traffic to UUNET have them follow the procedures outlined below and I > will > track the attack. > > UUNET DOES pay 4 people (six actually) to do nothing but stop and > track > DoS attacks on its backbone... and we are quite good at it. > > --Chris > > ####################################################### > ## UUNET Technologies, Inc. ## > ## Manager ## > ## Customer Router Security Engineering Team ## > ## (W)703-289-8479 (C)703-283-3734 ## > ####################################################### > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 20:02:48 -0500 (EST) > From: Christopher L. Morrow <cmorrow(a)uu.net> > To: Ariel Biener <ariel(a)fireball.tau.ac.il>, rkuhljr(a)uol.com.br > Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu, amos rosenboim <slick(a)xchange.wan.inter.net.il> > Subject: Re: DoS attacks, NSPs unresponsiveness > > Ariel and Rubens, > I'd like to address your concerns about UUNET NOT getting involved > when > you networks (both downstreams of UUNET customers) are under attack. > > In both of your cases I have personally, on more than one occasion, > contacted your upstream providers to inform them of proper contact > procedures for Live Attacks. To clarify those procedures for the 10th > time > in a public forum, if you are under attack and your upstream is either > UUNET, or it's a customer of UUNET have the DIRECT CUSTOMER of UUNET > Call > the UUNET Security/Fraud/Abuse Department and ask for a Rotuer > Engineer. The phone number is: 1-800-900-0241 options 2,3,1 or for > those > that live outside the USA: 1-703-206-5440 options 2,3,1. > > If you no one calls there can be no action taken... in the case of > Rubens, > your upstream (Embratel, correct?) has been emailing attack > notifications > and null routing your addresses. They have been told by me personally > (I > spoke to an individual named 'Jorge' I believe) several times to call > us > so we can stop and track the attack. I have 4 engineers dedicated to > dealing with DoS attacks on UUNET customers. We track several attacks > per > day and are available 24/7. > > I will not be held accountable for people's issues when they do NOT > follow > the appropriate contact procedures. If you would like to talk with me > personally about this I invite you to call or email me directly as I'd > be > more than happy to clarify anything I've written in this message, my > contact information is included for your convenience. > > For the others on this list, if you are a UUNET customer you can call > our > Security Department if you ever have any issues with security, DoS, > fraud, > spam, or the like. If you are under DoS attack either one of my > engineers > will stop and track the attack, or I will do it... it's what we get > paid > to do. If you are NOT a UUNET customer you know that other ISP's (Tier > 1's > atleast) do NOT filter attack traffic, and they do NOT track attacks. > The > ONLY exceptions to this are: Genuity, Global Crossing and at one time > Verio. > > --Chris > > ####################################################### > ## UUNET Technologies, Inc. ## > ## Manager ## > ## Customer Router Security Engineering Team ## > ## (W)703-289-8479 (C)703-283-3734 ## > ####################################################### > > On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Ariel Biener wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > This e-mail comes to describe a common problem among a large > number of > > ISPs, mostly foreign, when dealing with US network service > providers. I > > don't want to talk about anyone I don't know of, so I will limit > this > > initial e-mail to talking about UUnet. > > > > As most of you know, some ISPs run irc servers, and provide an > IRC > > service to the community. The service is free, and maintenance and > cost of > > networking/hardware/human hours is on the ISPs expense. > > > > Irc tends to be a volatile medium, like interpersonal > relationships in > > real life. Thus, many times arguements turn into heated disputes, > and > > sometimes, some people pick up arms, and attack. The attacks usually > take > > out whole ISPs for hours, or days. > > > > The problem is that when trying to get help from the upstream > provider > > (UUnet in this example), you either receive a negative answer, or > you're > > just ignored completely. Thus, by terrorism, people get what they > want, > > and hold you at a threat of force, without any ability to defend > yourself. > > > > Smurfing, icmp attacks, udp attacks, tcp synflooding (spoofed > > sources) are just a number of these weapons. The problem with alot > of > > networking entities, be it ISPs, enterprises, and such, is that they > allow > > spoofed packets to leave their network (i.e. do not check if the > packets > > originate from within their netblocks before letting them leave > their > > routers). > > > > The question is, how can we defend ourselves, and why do the > large NSPs > > turn a blind eye, and act as if it's not their concern ? > > > > Is there a chance that by helping one another, and by > implementing > > Internet RFCs corrctly (rfc 1918 for example), we can contribute to > the > > elimination of this kind of electronic terrorism ? > > > > Any chance a UUnet person might answer ? > > > > > > best regards, > > > > --Ariel > > > > -- > > Ariel Biener > > e-mail: ariel(a)post.tau.ac.il Work phone: 03-6406086 > > fingerprint = 07 D1 E5 3E EF 6D E5 82 0B E9 21 D4 3C 7D 8B BC > > > > > > > > > >

3 2