- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: NTP Question
by James R Cutler 02 May '19

02 May '19

On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 02:35:58PM -0700, Harlan Stenn wrote: > - Why do folks want to have one or more NTP server masters that have at > least 1 refclock on them in a data center, instead of having their data > center NTP server masters that only get time over the internet? Answers to that include: Keeping the Auditors happy Knowing that “everyone does it” - the vendor told them so Bragging rights (expensive hardware) Being unbothered by fighting with facilities for building penetrations and antenna mounts Misunderstanding the beauty and economy Dave Mills marvelous algorithms for consistent time based on multiple sources, even those connected via internet Unwillingness or inability to leverage other local resources capacity to run ntpd with minimal impact in order to have a good constellation of local NTP servers Willingness to farm out time service without doing a deep dive into why and how, just leaving the design to the appliance vendors This covers most of what I have encountered in providing enterprise time services for $dayjob+clients. I probably left out some significant points, but it has been a few years...

3 2

AT&T contact
by Mehmet Akcin 01 May '19

01 May '19

Peering email is broken, looking for an AT&T contact. Please contact me off list. The original message was received at Tue, 30 Apr 2019 16:11:17 -0400 from m0053301.ppops.net [127.0.0.1] ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- <peering(a)att.com> (reason: 550 5.1.1 <peering(a)att.com>... User unknown) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to [144.160.112.16]: >>> DATA <<< 550 5.1.1 <peering(a)att.com>... User unknown 550 5.1.1 <peering(a)att.com>... User unknown <<< 503 5.0.0 Need RCP -- Mehmet +1-424-298-1903

3 4

DSL\POTS Testing Equipment
by Mike Hammett 01 May '19

01 May '19

We've got an EXFO Colt-250 and an EXFO CableSHARK P3. They're 10 - 15 years old, but as far as I know they work. Practically, what am I missing out on by not getting a newer tester? I'd like the CableSHARK's features in a smaller unit, but it seems like we're looking at a minimum of $2k to get something that does that. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com

2 1

looking for hostname router identifier validation
by Matthew Luckie 01 May '19

01 May '19

Hi NANOG, To support Internet topology analysis efforts, I have been working on an algorithm to automatically detect router names inside hostnames (PTR records) for router interfaces, and build regular expressions (regexes) to extract them. By "router name" inside the hostname, I mean a substring, or set of non-contiguous substrings, that is common among interfaces on a router. For example, suppose we had the following three routers in the savvis.net domain suffix, each with two interfaces: das1-v3005.nj2.savvis.net das1-v3006.nj2.savvis.net das1-v3005.oc2.savvis.net das1-v3007.oc2.savvis.net das2-v3009.nj2.savvis.net das2-v3012.nj2.savvis.net We might infer the router names are das1|nj2, das1|oc2, and das2|nj2, respectively, and captured by the regex: ^([a-z]+\d+)-[^\.]+\.([a-z]+\d+)\.savvis\.net$ After much refinement based on smaller sets of ground truth, I'm asking for broader feedback from operators. I've placed a webpage at https://www.caida.org/~mjl/rnc/ that shows the inferences my algorithm made for 2523 domains. If you operate one of the domains in that list, I would appreciate it if you could comment (private is probably better but public is fine with me) on whether the regex my algorithm inferred represents your naming intent. In the first instance, I am most interested in feedback for the suffix / date combinations for suffixes that are colored green, i.e. appear to be reasonable. Each suffix / date combination links to a page that contains the naming convention and corresponding inferences. The colored part of each hostname is the inferred router name. The green hostnames appear to be correct, at least as far as the algorithm determined. Some suffixes have errors due to either stale hostnames or incorrect training data, and those hostnames are colored red or orange. If anyone is interested in sets of hostnames the algorithm may have inferred as 'stale' for their network, because for some operators it was an oversight and they were grateful to learn about it, I can provide that information. Thanks, Matthew

10 16

Help needed to validate results of topology discovery research
by Bahador Yeganeh 30 Apr '19

30 Apr '19

Hi Nanog members, I am senior PhD student with the Oregon Network Research Group ( https://onrg.gitlab.io) at the University of Oregon, and sending this email to seek your help for validating the research results for one of our network measurement projects. We have conducted a large scale measurement study to infer the private (both physical and virtual) and public interconnections between Amazon/AWS network and all other ASes across the Internet along with their metro area where they are located. More information about this project can be found at https://ix.cs.uoregon.edu/~byeganeh/cloudx/. We are interested in validating at least part of our results against ground truth. If you are managing an AS that has one or more direct peerings with any of Amazon's networks (AS7224, AS16509, AS19047, AS14618, AS38895, AS39111, AS8987, and AS9059) and aware of their IPs and locations, it would be extremely valuable if you could validate our inferred peering between your AS and Amazon at the *aggregate level *(i.e. just indicating what fraction of our inferred interconnections for your network is correct). We will report this aggregate result in our study without revealing the identity of your network. If you have any questions or need more information about this project, please feel free to contact me. I appreciate your prompt response as we are trying to submit this study to a conference in a few weeks. Regards, Bahador Yeganeh

1 0

Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation (fwd)
by Carlos Friaças 30 Apr '19

30 Apr '19

Hi, Just to let everybody know that a petition was started in order to try to enable a policy discussion about "BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation". If you would like to read the proposal, it is available at: https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/proposals/2019/ARIN_prop_266_v2/ Discussions are already ongoing at RIPE and LACNIC. Best Regards, Carlos (sorry for the duplicates, if you also receive arin-ppml(a)arin.net) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 17:13:12 From: ARIN <info(a)arin.net> To: arin-ppml(a)arin.net Subject: [arin-ppml] Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation A petition has been initiated for the following: ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation This proposal was rejected due to scope at the 10 April meeting of the Advisory Council. Anyone may take part in this petition. Per the Policy Development Process (PDP), a successful petition against a rejected Proposal requires the support of ten individuals from ten organizations. To support this petition, simply send a response to the Public Policy Mailing list stating your support, name, and organization. This petition window will remain open for five days, closing 1 May. If successful, the petition will result in the Board of Trustees considering the Proposal's scope at their next meeting. For more information on the PDP, visit: https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/ Regards, Sean Hopkins Policy Analyst American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML(a)arin.net) Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact info(a)arin.net if you experience any issues.

11 27

Re: looking for hostname router identifier validation
by Scott Weeks 30 Apr '19

30 Apr '19

--- large.hadron.collider(a)gmx.com wrote: And 666 is Nero Caesar :-) ---------------------------------------------- It's the US Army. scott

2 1

Bing news feeds stale for 5 days (api.cognitive.microsoft.com)
by John Von Essen 29 Apr '19

29 Apr '19

Any Bing engineers on here? I work with a major search affiliate partner, and starting this morning news feeds from api.cognitive.microsoft.com <http://api.cognitive.microsoft.com/> were coming in stale, nothing new in the past 5 days. However, this was only effecting API calls originating outside the USA. In the US, api.cognitive.microsoft.com <http://api.cognitive.microsoft.com/> returns fresh news, but globally through GeoDNS, that URL resolves to different IPs, those IPs (Europe, Singapore, etc.,.) are returning 5 day old news. Sorry if this is slightly off-topic, but we dont have a good PoC at Bing for this… I figure there is a very good chance someone here could escalate. Thanks John

2 1

Call for Presentations ICANN65 Marrakesh - June 24, 2019
by Jacques Latour 29 Apr '19

29 Apr '19

Hi all! Call for Presentations ICANN65 Marrakesh Call for Presentations 39th TechDay at ICANN 65 in Marrakesh The ICANN Tech Working Group is again planning a technical workshop at the ICANN 65 meeting in Marrakesh on Monday 2019-06-24, Blocks 3-5, starting 13:30. The TechDay workshop has been a part of ICANN meetings since 2006 and has provided a forum for both experienced and new people to meet, present and discuss technical topics related to registry and DNS work and security. We are specially interested in: 1. IDN 2. Disaster Planning and Mitigation 3. Techniques for fighting abuse 4. DNSSEC In particular: Getting Africa signed) 5. RDAP - what is it, implementing, authentication, challenges 6. IDNA2008 - emoji 7. In addition, we welcome suggestions for additional topics. If you are interested in presenting, please email ccNSO-techday(a)icann.org<mailto:ccNSO-techday@icann.org> We hope that you can join us and request that you disseminate this Request to other lists where it might of interest. Greetings, Jacques, on behalf of the TechDay program Committee

1 0

Microsoft have releases a fix for the misbehaviour of their DNS servers.
by Mark Andrews 29 Apr '19

29 Apr '19

If you are using Microsoft for your DNS servers you really should update to a version that includes this fix from March 19, 2019 monthly updates. • Addresses minor issues with unknown options (unknown OPT) in the Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS) for the Windows DNS Server role. https://support.microsoft.com/en-nz/help/4489893/windows-8-1-update-kb44898… Older versions have even more egregious misbehaviour, with really old versions (pre-EDNS support) being flagged as dead by recursive servers as they do not respond consistently to EDNS queries. They respond a single time then do not respond at all for a period of time. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka(a)isc.org

1 0