- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: Strange BGP announcement.
by Dave Curado 08 Nov '98

08 Nov '98

> (We saw the problem start around 1640 GMT tonight) > > Problem at AS6218 perhaps ? (of course if this is the result of some > random corruption that can't be relied on... ) > > Anyone else see anything ? Yes, we've got the same issue with the same announcement. It is blowing up GRFs with an invalid AS path. davec

1 0

[fibrnet-client-tech] Outages since about 11:00AM (fwd)
by Joe Shaw 08 Nov '98

08 Nov '98

This came from one of our upstreams regarding the problems we've been seeing today. Joseph Shaw - jshaw(a)insync.net NetAdmin/Security - Insync Internet Services Free UNIX advocate - "I hack, therefore I am." ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1998 13:31:35 -0600 (CST) From: John P. Nelson <jpn(a)fibrcom.com> To: FIBRNET Client Technical Contacts <fibrnet-client-tech(a)lists.fibr.net> Subject: [fibrnet-client-tech] Outages since about 11:00AM Since about 11:00AM this morning, the Internet has been experiencing major BGP problems due to the invalid routing information that is propogated around the Internet. We have open trouble tickets with Sprint, Cable and Wireless (formerly internetMCI), and Bay Networks (our router vendor). Our upstream providers have assured us that this is a major problem they are experiencing throughout their networks, and have open "master tickets" due to the volume of calls coming in. I will send out an update regarding this problem as soon as I receive more information. Thank you for your patience, --------------------------------------------------------------------- John P. Nelson Internet Systems Technician jpn(a)fibrcom.com Time Warner Telecom (FIBRCOM) 210-524-5583 Repair Line: 800-945-7989 --------------------------------------------------------------------- E-mail support requests to support(a)fibr.net to ensure prompt response! --- You are currently subscribed to fibrnet-client-tech as: [jshaw(a)insync.net] To unsubscribe, forward this message to unsubscribe-fibrnet-client-tech(a)lists.fibr.net

1 0

NANOG Notes from June 1998
by sob＠academ.com 08 Nov '98

08 Nov '98

No,I didn't forget. I just have been unable to find time, so I am pushing them out now. They are not all there yet. I will try to complete before tomorrow. http://www.academ.com/nanog/june1998 Enjoy. -- Stan | PGP Key ID: 55CB6421 | Opinions expressed are only mine. Olan | Phone: +1-713-793-0222 | Email: sob(a)academ.com Barber | Fax: +1-713-793-0221 | http://www.academ.com/~sob

1 0

UUNET routing trouble (Sunday, 12:20est)
by mark＠vielle.datasys.net 08 Nov '98

08 Nov '98

UUNET is having routing instability throughout their backbone. I've seen bouncing of routers and more bouncing on my BGP session with them; our 3640 is quite taxed. Network status can be had at 800-900-0241, option 1.

1 0

Terminal Room?
by alex＠nac.net 08 Nov '98

08 Nov '98

I can't fine the terminal room. Where is it? (BTW: Wireless is working, but only under the elevators. Wierd.) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Atheism is a non-prophet organization. I route, therefore I am. Alex Rubenstein, alex(a)nac.net, KC2BUO, ISP/C Charter Member Father of the Network and Head Bottle-Washer Net Access Corporation, 9 Mt. Pleasant Tpk., Denville, NJ 07834 Don't choose a spineless ISP; we have more backbone! http://www.nac.net -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

1 0

Heeello Atlanta
by alex＠nac.net 08 Nov '98

08 Nov '98

I and others from nac.net are here if anyone wants to get together tonight. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Atheism is a non-prophet organization. I route, therefore I am. Alex Rubenstein, alex(a)nac.net, KC2BUO, ISP/C Charter Member Father of the Network and Head Bottle-Washer Net Access Corporation, 9 Mt. Pleasant Tpk., Denville, NJ 07834 Don't choose a spineless ISP; we have more backbone! http://www.nac.net -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2 1

This may sound like a stupid question, but.....
by LadyDiana 07 Nov '98

07 Nov '98

Okay, I admit it. I joined this group after a copy of the Wired article about backhoes was forwarded to me. My friend forwarded it something as a joke, I believe...she certainly was surprised when I told her she had NO IDEA how bad that was, nor some of the OTHER reasons for interruption of service (shotgun, anyone?) I work in telephony network management/switch surveillance, and as the backhoes are surely a thorn in our sides (anyone know where I can get a T-shirt? Actually, about twelve of them...) I made the somewhat founded assumption that this was a somewhat like-minded group. However, I don't know the first thing about routers, LANs (other than when ours is down) or other COMPUTER Network related issues, I'm beginning to feel somewhat out of place. Does anyone know if there is a telephony network operators group out there? And how I could go about joining it? It's not that I don't like the company of you fine people, but I haven't the FOGGIEST idea of what the *HELL* you are talking about. And I really would dig being able to trade the sort of (obviously important, even to a computer network idjit like me!) information with people that speak MY language. Diana

2 1

RE: FCC Ruling, Cost of Internet
by MacFarland, Chris 07 Nov '98

07 Nov '98

Steven- The reason for this is regarding settlement charges ( reciprocal compensation ) for intrastate calls from ILEC to CLEC. If the FCC rules that calls to ISP's are interstate then the settlement model dramatically changes for the LEC terminating the call. This would have a significant impact on revenues for CLEC's that use recip comp as part of their core business model. Thanks, Chris MacFarland Director, Data Engineering Allegiance Telecom, Inc. 214-261-7257 > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven J. Sobol [SMTP:sjsobol@nacs.net] > Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 1998 5:23 PM > To: Ivars Upatnieks > Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: FCC Ruling, Cost of Internet > > On Tue, Nov 03, 1998 at 01:39:29PM -0500, Ivars Upatnieks wrote: > > > The Commission intends to address next week, in a > > separate order, the broader issue of whether conventional dial-up access > > to the Internet, made through calls to information service providers, > > including Internet Service Providers (ISPs), is local or interstate in > > nature. > > This stupidity again? > > An Internet dialup call is an interstate call if you're in one state > dialing into a POP in another. Otherwise it's not. Duh. > > The FCC has much better things to do than debate a point for which the > answer is painfully obvious. If you're going to tell me that when I dial > up to my account in downtown Cleveland from my house ten minutes away, I'm > going to either laugh at you, tell you you're a flaming idiot, or quite > possibly both. > > Sorry. My ISDN line at home is serviced by Ameritech, and NACS's PRIs are > serviced by ICG/Netcom. Maybe I should get charged for a call from Chicago > to Denver since Ameritech is headquaratered in Chicago and ICG is in > Denver, > even though I'm calling from Cleveland to Cleveland. > > If there's something obvious that I'm missing here, please, PLEASE point > it > out to me... > > Oh yeah. Are they going to insist on charging per-minute for voice calls > as well as data calls? I bet not. > > > -- > Steve Sobol [sjsobol(a)nacs.net] > Part-time Support Droid [support(a)nacs.net] > NACS Spaminator [abuse(a)nacs.net] > >

3 2

Re: ARIN?
by Gary E. Miller 07 Nov '98

07 Nov '98

Yo John! I also checked the ARIN database. Many of those cable companies with 24/8 allocations appear to be @home franchises. The obvious one is rogers@home. I sure do not see any RoadRunner space in there. Also, there is NO allocation other than @home/s to about 24.100 so you are right that it is not a /8 , it is closer to a /9 now. Does anyone else have a buffer a fraction of that size? Those other 24/8s are sure jammed in together. RGDS GARY --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gary E. Miller Rellim 20340 Empire Ave, Suite E-3, Bend, OR 97701 gem(a)rellim.com Tel:+1(541)383-2435 On Fri, 6 Nov 1998, John Crain wrote: > Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 08:21:33 +0100 > From: John Crain <john(a)ripe.net> > To: gary miller <gem(a)rellim.com> > Cc: cjw(a)corp.home.net, nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: ARIN? > > > "Gary E. Miller" <gem(a)rellim.com> writes: > * Yo CJ! > * > * I was under the impression that although @home was currently allocate > * just part of the 24/8 space, that the entire space was RESERVED for > * future expansion of @home. Is this not true? Certainly no-one else > * is getting space from that block. > > > Hi Gary, > > This is not true. For clarity there are others using 24/8 space. > > A quick search of the whois databases quickly shows this. > > I wish people wouldn't make statements without checking the facts > first. > > I found 123 route objects in the routing registry. A few were double > and some were obviously @home but many weren't. > > > I agree we should drop the whole thread but we should not end it on a > misinformed statement. > > > John Crain

2 1

RE: time for a new list?
by Hank Nussbacher 07 Nov '98

07 Nov '98

At 11:57 PM 11/2/98 -0700, Forrest W. Christian wrote: Assuming we can't agree on what is valid and what is not - then how about a list where a user can only post 5 messages per month? If you need to post more than 5 messages a month to NANOG - then there is something wrong. This would eliminate the "I said, you said" flame wars between antagonists. If some emergency came along where one had to post more than 5 a month, they would have to approach merit anf justify why this month is an exception. The number 5 can be 3 or 7 for that matter. The only question is the list serving technology (majordomo, listserv, etc.). If it is able to handle such a function (or easily modified), we might be able to cut down on the noise a bit. -Hank >The problem I see is that there doesn't seem to be any real concensus on >what is a valid point of discussion on the list. > >There seems to be some (randy?) that basically feel that if you can't >configure a router to do it it doesn't belong here... Meaning that this >forum should be primarily about technical operation issues. > >On the other hand, there are those among us that when the subject of >router configuration comes up, usually in the context of the right way(tm) >to do BGP configuration, they yell and scream that this doesn't belong >here it should be elsewhere. > >I've personally been flamed for sending a simple "Hey, I can't get a hold >of someone at <insert provider here> using whois contact info. Could >someone from the provider or someone who has contact information for the >provider e-mail me?" > >So maybe the real question is what the heck is this list for? I've been >to two "live" NANOG's and it seems to me that the discussion on this list >seems pretty much in line with the "official" nanog agenda. > >Would someone like to clarify what is and isn't supposed to be on this >list before we try to moderate or split it? > > >- Forrest W. Christian (forrestc(a)imach.com) >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >iMach, Ltd., P.O. Box 5749, Helena, MT 59604 http://www.imach.com >Solutions for your high-tech problems. (406)-442-6648 >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >

1 0