- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Facebook dropping MSS on congestion
by Denys Fedoryshchenko 20 Mar '19

20 Mar '19

Good day, I am writing here, as in technical support ticket I will most likely end up to the outsourcing guys, who will try to write some formal reply and close the ticket quickly to keep KPI high:) I have a faint hope that someone will read and listen. It may also be useful to colleagues. I noticed at last few month, if some congestion occurs on the network (specific subnet), facebook reduces the maximum segment size (MSS), even down to 256 bytes. Purely academically, on paper - this will reduce latency. In reality - it will cause avalanche effect. If ISP have CGNAT, or some other appliances - with great probability they will encounter the fact that pps will increase 4-5 times, and might hit pps limit on hardware. Additionally, overhead on IP headers will increase significantly, especially on ipv6, and this will further aggravate the congestion. Facebook don't do that, please. And thank you, if you listen to suggestions. Denys

1 0

Contacts wanted: OVH, DigitalOcean, and Microsoft (Deutschland)
by Ronald F. Guilmette 20 Mar '19

20 Mar '19

Nikolas Geyer <nik at neko.id.au> wrote: >I have passed your email on to the relevant team within DO to have a look at. Thank you, but that wasn't what I requested, I asked for a contact there. (I know that this may be hard to understand, but it's like the difference between giving a man a fish, and teaching him how to fish. I'm sure that you would make a fine long term conduit between me and whatever mystery people you think you have made contact with at DigitalOcean, but really, it would be best if you would simply introduce me to those people directly. That way, if you die or go on vacation, incidents like these won't need to be put on hold until you get back and resume your role as our designated go-between.) >I'd like to thank you for your deriding commentary to bring attention >to this problem. No problem. My pleasure. >I am not sure it is the most effective way to try and engage the wider >industry on a public list, but each to their own. I am not sure that there is any other way that a lone outsider can or could engage either OVH or DigitalOcean in a way that would actually cause either company to take action on the issues I've reported on. Complaints from ordinary Internet end-lusers about this, which both companies must surely be drowing in by now, don't seem to be doing the job. In any case, I would be more than happy to have you tell me the "right way" to engage with any actual live human beings at either of these companies, especially if you also are able to identify one or more such receptive individuals by name and email address, which is what I was requesting in the first place. >Oh, and additionally, as an Australian citizen with many Aussie and >Kiwi colleagues working at DO of various religious persuasions; your >postscript relating this back to the recent terror attacks is abhorrent >and disgusting. You should be completely ashamed. It's pretty clear to me that you have rather dramatically misread my the aforementioned postscript to my earlier post, and that a fair and clear-eyed reading of that should be quite entirely inoffensive to all, with the possible exception of some few people who work in mass media and/or the "news" business, such as it currently is. In that postscript, I merely used a recent mass media controversy relating specifically and only to the social media -handling- of recent events to illustrate two blatant absurdities at opposite ends of a spectrum, neither of which itself has anything at all do do with those recent news events specifically, much less with the race, creed, color or gender of any of the people who have, most sadly and regretably, been caught up in those events. Please consider again the two polar opposite absurdities that I was actually attempting to call attention to. One the one hand, we have TV talking heads, with essentially no technical knowledge whatsoever, wondering aloud why social media tech companies cannot do what is clearly technically impossible, and even more absurdly, why they can't do it in real time no less. On the other hand, and in contrast to that absurdity, we have the present example of this spamming operation that appears to be well and truly ensconsed on the networks of both OVH and DigitalOcean, where even large multi-billion dollar Internet hosting companies seem utterly unable to spot even trivial and easily identifiable patterns of bad behavior, in and among their own respective customer bases, even though, as I have now illustrated, a single lone unpaid volunteer guy, sitting in his basement and in his sweaty underwear and a bathrobe -can- easily and quickly spot the problem, within just a couple of hours in fact, provided that he has access to a decent quality passive DNS service and an ample supply of electricity, margaritas and cigarettes. I'm only kidding, of course. I don't actually have a basement. Regards, rfg P.S. Your apparent misreading of my earlier postscript is entirely understandable and forgiveable in light of the rather unfortunate quip that I made just prior to that, about sending this specific miscreant to Guantanamo if his skin color was sufficiently dark. I seriously regret and apologize for that inartful phrasing, and ask every charitable person to believe me when I say that that was said entirely in jest (albeit a bad one), and that if anything, it was intended to be an expression of my own personal outrage about my own country's abundant inequity and unfairness when dealing with people of color, either within our so-called justice system or elsewhere. Our justice system should be color blind. Alas, there is much evidence that it falls far short of this goal at the present time.

8 10

Webzilla
by Ronald F. Guilmette 18 Mar '19

18 Mar '19

[[ My apologies to thos eof you who may see this twice. I have posted the message below also to the RIPE Anti-Abuse Working Group mailing list, so any of you who are on that list also will see this twice. But I believe that it is relevant here also. ]] ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Perhaps some folks here might be interested to read these two reports, the first of which is a fresh news report published just a couple of days ago, and the other one is a far more detailed investigative report that was completed some time ago now. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/kenbensinger/dossier-gubarev-russian-h… https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5770258-Fti.html Please share these links widely. The detailed technical report makes it quite abundantly clear that Webzilla, and all of its various tentacles... many of which even I didn't know about until seeing this report... most probably qualifies as, and has qualified as a "bullet proof hosting" operation for some considerable time now. As the report notes, the company has received over 400,000 complaints or reports of bad behavior, and it is not clear to me, from reading the report, if anyone at the company even bothered to read any more than a small handful of those. I have two comments about this. First, I am inclined to wonder aloud why anyone is even still peering with any of the several ASNs mentioned in the report. To me, the mere fact that any of these ASNs still have connectivity represents a clear and self-evident failure of "self policing" in and among the networks that comprise the Internet. Second, its has already been a well know fact, both to me and to many others, for some years now, that Webzilla is by no means alone in the category commonly refered to as "bullet proof hosters". This fact itself raises some obvious questions. It is clear and apparent, not only from the report linked to above, but from the continuous and years-long existance of -many- "bullet proof hosters" on the Internet that there is no shortage of a market for the services of such hosting companies. The demand for "bullet proof" services is clearly there, and it is not likely to go away any time soon. In addition to the criminal element, there are also various mischevious governments, or their agents, that will always be more than happy to pay premium prices for no-questions-asked connectivity. So the question naturally arises: Other than de-peering by other networks, are there any other steps that can be taken to disincentivize networks from participating in this "bullet proof" market and/or to incentivize them to give a damn about their received network abuse complaints? I have no answers for this question myself, but I felt that it was about time that someone at least posed the question. The industry generally, and especially in the RIPE region, has a clear and evident problem that traditional "self policing" is not solving. Worse yet, it is not even discussed much, and that is allowing it to fester and worsen, over time. It would be Good if there was some actual leadership on this issue, at least from -some- quarter. So far I have not noticed any such worth mentioning. And even looking out towards the future horizon, I don't see any arriving any time soon. Regards, rfg

5 5

NANOG 76 call for presentations is open
by Benson Schliesser 18 Mar '19

18 Mar '19

NANOG Community, The NANOG Program Committee (PC) is excited to announce that we are now accepting proposals for all sessions at NANOG 76 in Washington, DC, June 10-12, 2019. Below is a summary of key details and dates from the Call For Presentations on the NANOG website, which can be found at http://www.cvent.com/d/s6qzk4/6K Given by many of the industry’s top minds, presentations at NANOG meetings are meant to spark the imagination, encourage dialog, and drive new solutions to our greatest networking challenges. The PC is currently seeking proposals, and also welcomes suggestions for speakers and topics. Presentations may cover current technologies, soon-to-be deployed technologies, and industry innovation. Vendors are welcome to submit talks which cover relevant technologies and capabilities, but presentations should not be promotional, or discuss proprietary solutions. The primary speaker, moderator, or author should submit a presentation proposal and abstract via the PC Tool at: https://pc.nanog.org - Select “Propose Talk” from the “Talks” menu - Select NANOG 76 from the Meeting menu - Select the appropriate *Session* the talk will be presented in - General Session (30-45 minutes) - Tutorial (90-120 minutes) - Track (90-120 minutes) Timeline for submission and proposal review: - Submitter enters abstract (and draft slides if possible) in PC Tool prior to the deadline for slide submission. - PC performs initial review and assigns a “shepherd” to help develop the submission — within 2 weeks. - Submitter develops draft slides of talk if not already submitted with the initial proposal. Please submit initial draft slides early — the PC typically does not accept submissions until draft slides are available for review. NANOG Staff is available to assist with slide templates upon request from the submitter. - Panel and Track submissions should provide a topic list and intended/confirmed participants in the abstract. - PC reviews the slides and continues to work with Submitter as needed to develop the topic. - Draft presentation slides should be submitted prior to the published deadline for slides (May 06, 2019). - PC accepts or declines the submission. - Agenda assembled and posted. - Submitters notified. - Final presentation slides must be submitted prior to the published deadline for slides (Jun. 03, 2019). If you think you have an interesting topic but want feedback or suggestions for developing an idea into a presentation, please email the PC ( nanogpc(a)nanog.org) and a representative will respond to you in a timely manner. Otherwise, submit your talk, keynote, track, or panel proposal to the PC Tool at your earliest convenience. We look forward to reviewing your submission! Key dates for NANOG 76: Date Event/Deadline Mar. 18, 2019 CFP Opens & Agenda Outline Posted, Early Registration Begins Apr. 15, 2019 Standard Registration Begins May 06, 2019 CFP Deadline: Presentation Slides Due May 13, 2019 CFP Topic List & NANOG Meeting HIghlights Page posted May 28, 2019 NANOG 76 Agenda Posted, Late Registration Begins Jun. 03, 2019 Speaker FINAL presentations DUE (NO CHANGES accepted after this date) Jun. 09, 2019 Lightning Talk Submissions Open, Onsite Registration Begins Final slides must be submitted by Monday, June 3, 2019, and no changes will be accepted between that date and the conference. Materials received after that date may be updated on the website after the completion of the conference. We look forward to seeing you in June in Washington, DC! Sincerely, Benson Schliesser On behalf of the NANOG PC

1 0

Yahoo/Oath GeoDNS Issue (AS36647)
by John Von Essen 17 Mar '19

17 Mar '19

If anyone from Yahoo/Oath is here, please email me off-list. Have a GeoDNS issue with yahoo API URLs in Australia, DNS results are returning IPs that are not ideal for the region (like on the other side of the world), it so bad (excess latency), we have to override them locally which I really rather not have to do. This is related to operations of a major/global search engine platform. In Australia, these Yahoo URLs should be resolving to Singapore, but instead are resolving to central USA. The issue started a few weeks back, prior to that DNS resolution was working to Singapore. Thanks John

2 1

OT: friday fun - geko outsge
by Scott Weeks 16 Mar '19

16 Mar '19

I thought some here might enjoy this. ------------------------------------------ Technician arrived onsite and found no issue with the fiber connection back to the CO. Tech then attempted to reseat the SM-A card and found a gecko in the card slot. Technician removed the gecko and verified that equipment was back in service after slotting back the card. ------------------------------------------ Troubleshooting in the tropics... :-) scott

3 2

Proposed National Emergency Communications Plan Updates
by Sean Donelan 16 Mar '19

16 Mar '19

2019 Update to the NECP https://www.dhs.gov/cisa/national-emergency-communications-plan CISA is seeking feedback on proposed updates to the NECP — the Nation’s strategic plan to improve emergency communications. Informed by last year’s SAFECOM Nationwide Survey, the NECP provides guidance to those that plan for, coordinate, invest in, and use communications to support response and recovery operations. This includes traditional emergency responder disciplines (e.g., law enforcement, fire, emergency medical services, dispatch) and other entities that share information during emergencies, such as medical facilities, utilities, nongovernmental organizations, as well as the media and private citizens. To prepare stakeholders for a rapidly evolving emergency communications landscape, CISA is leading a national effort to update the NECP (last published in 2014). Proposed updates reflect the expanding ecosystem of people, technologies, and functions involved in supporting emergency communications to aid public safety entities with addressing today's challenges while also planning for future advancements. To provide comments on the updated NECP, complete the feedback form on the DHS website and submit it to OECNECP(a)hq.dhs.gov by March 22, 2019.

1 0

sending again in case Zoom didn't email it correctly
by Casey Russell 15 Mar '19

15 Mar '19

SIP failover call. Casey Russell is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting. Join Zoom Meeting https://kanren.zoom.us/j/7858569809 <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fkanren.zoom.us%2Fj%2F7858569809&…> One tap mobile +16699006833,,7858569809# US (San Jose) +16465588656,,7858569809# US (New York) Dial by your location +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose) +1 646 558 8656 US (New York) Meeting ID: 785 856 9809 Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/adjAi5zj6Y <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fu%2FadjAi5zj6Y&sa=D&us…> Sincerely, Casey Russell Network Engineer [image: KanREN] <http://www.kanren.net> [image: phone]785-856-9809 2029 Becker Drive, Suite 282 Lawrence, Kansas 66047 [image: linkedin] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/92399?trk=tyah&trkInfo=clickedVertical%3Ac…> [image: twitter] <https://twitter.com/TheKanREN> [image: twitter] <http://www.kanren.net/feed/> need support? <support(a)kanren.net>

5 6

Re: Analysing traffic in context of rejecting RPKI invalids using pmacct
by Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) 15 Mar '19

15 Mar '19

Jay: >When we (as7018) were preparing to begin dropping invalid routes >received from peers earlier this year, that is exactly the kind of >analysis we did. In our case we rolled our own with a two-pass >process: we first found all the traffic to/from invalid routes by a >bgp community we gave them, then outside of our flow analysis tool we >further filtered the traffic for invalid routes which were covered by >less-specific not-invalid routes. What remained was the traffic we >would lose once invalid routes were dropped. Had the pmacct >capability existed at that time, we would have used it. We (NIST) did a detailed analysis of Invalid routes (with Routeviews data) that was presented at IETF 101: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-sidrops-origi… See slides 10-13. We tried to drill down on Invalid routes which were covered by less-specific not-invalid routes. We examined questions like: how often does the less-specific route have the same origin AS (OAS) as the Invalid, and, if not, then how frequently is the OAS of the less specific route a transit provider of the OAS of the Invalid route? We plan to update the results periodically. Sriram

3 3

Weekly Routing Table Report
by cscora＠apnic.net 15 Mar '19

15 Mar '19

This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, SAFNOG TZNOG, MENOG, BJNOG, SDNOG, CMNOG, LACNOG and the RIPE Routing WG. Daily listings are sent to bgp-stats(a)lists.apnic.net For historical data, please see http://thyme.rand.apnic.net. If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith <pfsinoz(a)gmail.com>. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 16 Mar, 2019 Report Website: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net Detailed Analysis: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/ Analysis Summary ---------------- BGP routing table entries examined: 742746 Prefixes after maximum aggregation (per Origin AS): 284987 Deaggregation factor: 2.61 Unique aggregates announced (without unneeded subnets): 357165 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 63650 Prefixes per ASN: 11.67 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 54847 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 23682 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 8803 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 268 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 4.2 Max AS path length visible: 30 Max AS path prepend of ASN ( 16327) 25 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 28 Number of instances of unregistered ASNs: 32 Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs: 26173 Number of 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 21355 Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table: 93575 Number of bogon 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 27 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table: 1 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 266 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 2844073699 Equivalent to 169 /8s, 133 /16s and 30 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 76.8 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 76.8 Percentage of available address space allocated: 100.0 Percentage of address space in use by end-sites: 99.2 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 249117 APNIC Region Analysis Summary ----------------------------- Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes: 202186 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 58207 APNIC Deaggregation factor: 3.47 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 198865 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks: 82260 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 9619 APNIC Prefixes per ASN: 20.67 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 2700 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1413 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.1 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 29 Number of APNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 4579 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 769643394 Equivalent to 45 /8s, 223 /16s and 211 /24s APNIC AS Blocks 4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079, 55296-56319, 58368-59391, 63488-64098, 64297-64395, 131072-139577 APNIC Address Blocks 1/8, 14/8, 27/8, 36/8, 39/8, 42/8, 43/8, 49/8, 58/8, 59/8, 60/8, 61/8, 101/8, 103/8, 106/8, 110/8, 111/8, 112/8, 113/8, 114/8, 115/8, 116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8, 120/8, 121/8, 122/8, 123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8, 133/8, 150/8, 153/8, 163/8, 171/8, 175/8, 180/8, 182/8, 183/8, 202/8, 203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8, 219/8, 220/8, 221/8, 222/8, 223/8, ARIN Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes: 219026 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation: 103651 ARIN Deaggregation factor: 2.11 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 218231 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 104548 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 18424 ARIN Prefixes per ASN: 11.84 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 6859 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1865 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 3.9 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 24 Number of ARIN region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 2621 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 1079341216 Equivalent to 64 /8s, 85 /16s and 112 /24s ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106 (pre-ERX allocations) 2138-2584, 2615-2772, 2823-2829, 2880-3153 3354-4607, 4865-5119, 5632-6655, 6912-7466 7723-8191, 10240-12287, 13312-15359, 16384-17407 18432-20479, 21504-23551, 25600-26591, 26624-27647, 29696-30719, 31744-33791 35840-36863, 39936-40959, 46080-47103 53248-55295, 62464-63487, 64198-64296, 393216-399260 ARIN Address Blocks 3/8, 4/8, 6/8, 7/8, 8/8, 9/8, 11/8, 12/8, 13/8, 15/8, 16/8, 17/8, 18/8, 19/8, 20/8, 21/8, 22/8, 23/8, 24/8, 26/8, 28/8, 29/8, 30/8, 32/8, 33/8, 34/8, 35/8, 38/8, 40/8, 44/8, 45/8, 47/8, 48/8, 50/8, 52/8, 53/8, 54/8, 55/8, 56/8, 57/8, 63/8, 64/8, 65/8, 66/8, 67/8, 68/8, 69/8, 70/8, 71/8, 72/8, 73/8, 74/8, 75/8, 76/8, 96/8, 97/8, 98/8, 99/8, 100/8, 104/8, 107/8, 108/8, 128/8, 129/8, 130/8, 131/8, 132/8, 134/8, 135/8, 136/8, 137/8, 138/8, 139/8, 140/8, 142/8, 143/8, 144/8, 146/8, 147/8, 148/8, 149/8, 152/8, 155/8, 156/8, 157/8, 158/8, 159/8, 160/8, 161/8, 162/8, 164/8, 165/8, 166/8, 167/8, 168/8, 169/8, 170/8, 172/8, 173/8, 174/8, 184/8, 192/8, 198/8, 199/8, 204/8, 205/8, 206/8, 207/8, 208/8, 209/8, 214/8, 215/8, 216/8, RIPE Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 204462 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation: 97382 RIPE Deaggregation factor: 2.10 Prefixes being announced from the RIPE address blocks: 200655 Unique aggregates announced from the RIPE address blocks: 118971 RIPE Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 25885 RIPE Prefixes per ASN: 7.75 RIPE Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 11501 RIPE Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 3644 Average RIPE Region AS path length visible: 4.4 Max RIPE Region AS path length visible: 30 Number of RIPE region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 7901 Number of RIPE addresses announced to Internet: 717893568 Equivalent to 42 /8s, 202 /16s and 47 /24s RIPE AS Blocks 1877-1901, 2043, 2047, 2107-2136, 2585-2614 (pre-ERX allocations) 2773-2822, 2830-2879, 3154-3353, 5377-5631 6656-6911, 8192-9215, 12288-13311, 15360-16383 20480-21503, 24576-25599, 28672-29695 30720-31743, 33792-35839, 38912-39935 40960-45055, 47104-52223, 56320-58367 59392-61439, 61952-62463, 64396-64495 196608-210331 RIPE Address Blocks 2/8, 5/8, 25/8, 31/8, 37/8, 46/8, 51/8, 62/8, 77/8, 78/8, 79/8, 80/8, 81/8, 82/8, 83/8, 84/8, 85/8, 86/8, 87/8, 88/8, 89/8, 90/8, 91/8, 92/8, 93/8, 94/8, 95/8, 109/8, 141/8, 145/8, 151/8, 176/8, 178/8, 185/8, 188/8, 193/8, 194/8, 195/8, 212/8, 213/8, 217/8, LACNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------ Prefixes being announced by LACNIC Region ASes: 96351 Total LACNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 21437 LACNIC Deaggregation factor: 4.49 Prefixes being announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 97712 Unique aggregates announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 41886 LACNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 8174 LACNIC Prefixes per ASN: 11.95 LACNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 2189 LACNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1526 Average LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 5.0 Max LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 25 Number of LACNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 5721 Number of LACNIC addresses announced to Internet: 173387264 Equivalent to 10 /8s, 85 /16s and 174 /24s LACNIC AS Blocks 26592-26623, 27648-28671, 52224-53247, 61440-61951, 64099-64197, 262144-270748 + ERX transfers LACNIC Address Blocks 177/8, 179/8, 181/8, 186/8, 187/8, 189/8, 190/8, 191/8, 200/8, 201/8, AfriNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------- Prefixes being announced by AfriNIC Region ASes: 20692 Total AfriNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 4288 AfriNIC Deaggregation factor: 4.83 Prefixes being announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 27017 Unique aggregates announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 9261 AfriNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1261 AfriNIC Prefixes per ASN: 21.43 AfriNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 433 AfriNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 251 Average AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.4 Max AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 21 Number of AfriNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 533 Number of AfriNIC addresses announced to Internet: 103540480 Equivalent to 6 /8s, 43 /16s and 231 /24s AfriNIC AS Blocks 36864-37887, 327680-328703 & ERX transfers AfriNIC Address Blocks 41/8, 102/8, 105/8, 154/8, 196/8, 197/8, APNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 7545 4666 542 544 TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Telecom Limited, AU 4538 4658 4192 74 ERX-CERNET-BKB China Education and Rese 7552 3100 1240 49 VIETEL-AS-AP Viettel Group, VN 45899 3037 1737 111 VNPT-AS-VN VNPT Corp, VN 4766 2813 11125 767 KIXS-AS-KR Korea Telecom, KR 9829 2749 1496 550 BSNL-NIB National Internet Backbone, IN 9808 2431 8699 26 CMNET-GD Guangdong Mobile Communication 9394 2335 4906 30 CTTNET China TieTong Telecommunications 4755 2140 422 179 TATACOMM-AS TATA Communications formerl 9498 2019 426 163 BBIL-AP BHARTI Airtel Ltd., IN Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-APNIC ARIN Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 6327 3616 1326 91 SHAW - Shaw Communications Inc., CA 11492 3548 229 616 CABLEONE - CABLE ONE, INC., US 22773 3367 2977 164 ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC - Cox Communi 16509 2504 5372 1065 AMAZON-02 - Amazon.com, Inc., US 16625 2245 1280 1763 AKAMAI-AS - Akamai Technologies, Inc., 20115 2150 2746 536 CHARTER-20115 - Charter Communications, 30036 2126 352 145 MEDIACOM-ENTERPRISE-BUSINESS - Mediacom 18566 2113 405 108 MEGAPATH5-US - MegaPath Corporation, US 5650 2093 3074 1462 FRONTIER-FRTR - Frontier Communications 209 2081 5094 582 CENTURYLINK-US-LEGACY-QWEST - CenturyLi Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-ARIN RIPE Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 12479 5417 1628 138 UNI2-AS, ES 39891 3778 203 20 ALJAWWALSTC-AS, SA 8551 3282 378 45 BEZEQ-INTERNATIONAL-AS Bezeqint Interne 20940 2644 543 1918 AKAMAI-ASN1, US 12389 2227 2221 637 ROSTELECOM-AS, RU 34984 2060 340 538 TELLCOM-AS, TR 9121 1680 1693 19 TTNET, TR 13188 1604 100 46 TRIOLAN, UA 9009 1395 148 762 M247, GB 8402 1294 545 15 CORBINA-AS OJSC "Vimpelcom", RU Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-RIPE LACNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ----------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 8151 5628 3333 590 Uninet S.A. de C.V., MX 10620 3520 539 333 Telmex Colombia S.A., CO 11830 2706 384 34 Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad 6503 1467 433 54 Axtel, S.A.B. de C.V., MX 7303 1435 971 232 Telecom Argentina S.A., AR 28573 1331 2247 180 CLARO S.A., BR 6147 1242 377 29 Telefonica del Peru S.A.A., PE 3816 1022 505 113 COLOMBIA TELECOMUNICACIONES S.A. ESP, C 13999 951 518 247 Mega Cable, S.A. de C.V., MX 11172 928 144 66 Alestra, S. de R.L. de C.V., MX Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-LACNIC AfriNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ------------------------------------------ ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 24863 1207 393 21 LINKdotNET-AS, EG 37611 902 107 9 Afrihost, ZA 24835 848 636 22 RAYA-AS, EG 36903 828 416 125 MT-MPLS, MA 36992 800 1531 70 ETISALAT-MISR, EG 8452 700 1731 19 TE-AS TE-AS, EG 29571 485 70 12 ORANGE-COTE-IVOIRE, CI 37492 470 470 57 ORANGE-, TN 15399 429 45 11 WANANCHI-, KE 37342 420 32 1 MOVITEL, MZ Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-AFRINIC Global Per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 8151 5628 3333 590 Uninet S.A. de C.V., MX 12479 5417 1628 138 UNI2-AS, ES 7545 4666 542 544 TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Telecom Limited, AU 4538 4658 4192 74 ERX-CERNET-BKB China Education and Rese 39891 3778 203 20 ALJAWWALSTC-AS, SA 6327 3616 1326 91 SHAW - Shaw Communications Inc., CA 11492 3548 229 616 CABLEONE - CABLE ONE, INC., US 10620 3520 539 333 Telmex Colombia S.A., CO 22773 3367 2977 164 ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC - Cox Communi 8551 3282 378 45 BEZEQ-INTERNATIONAL-AS Bezeqint Interne Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet Global Per AS Maximum Aggr summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets Net Savings Description 12479 5417 5279 UNI2-AS, ES 4538 4658 4584 ERX-CERNET-BKB China Education and Research Net 7545 4666 4122 TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Telecom Limited, AU 39891 3778 3758 ALJAWWALSTC-AS, SA 6327 3616 3525 SHAW - Shaw Communications Inc., CA 8551 3282 3237 BEZEQ-INTERNATIONAL-AS Bezeqint Internet Backbo 22773 3367 3203 ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC - Cox Communications 10620 3520 3187 Telmex Colombia S.A., CO 7552 3100 3051 VIETEL-AS-AP Viettel Group, VN 11492 3548 2932 CABLEONE - CABLE ONE, INC., US Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-CIDRnet List of Unregistered Origin ASNs (Global) ----------------------------------------- Bad AS Designation Network Transit AS Description 230105 UNALLOCATED 38.110.79.0/24 23015 CMC180-TOR-AS - Cambridge Merc 266842 UNALLOCATED 45.238.156.0/22 265680 HNTELCO S.A, HN 65550 DOCUMENT 81.8.34.0/24 15924 BORUSANTELEKOM-AS, TR 65550 DOCUMENT 81.8.35.0/24 15924 BORUSANTELEKOM-AS, TR 1358592 UNALLOCATED 103.134.14.0/23 63956 COLO-AS-AP Colocation Australi 1358592 UNALLOCATED 103.134.15.0/24 63956 COLO-AS-AP Colocation Australi 65549 DOCUMENT 117.239.163.0/24 65544 UNKNOWN 224413 UNALLOCATED 131.221.136.0/24 264413 Conecta Telecom Ltda, BR 64339 UNALLOCATED 143.0.108.0/22 18747 IFX18747 - IFX Corporation, US 64355 UNALLOCATED 156.40.196.0/24 30387 NIH-NET-NCCS - National Instit Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-badAS Prefixes from private and non-routed address space (Global) ----------------------------------------------------------- Prefix Origin AS Description 198.18.1.19/32 7497 CSTNET-AS-AP Computer Network Information Cente Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-dsua Advertised Unallocated Addresses -------------------------------- Network Origin AS Description 27.100.7.0/24 56096 UNKNOWN 27.126.156.0/22 55827 UNKNOWN 27.126.156.0/23 55827 UNKNOWN 27.126.158.0/23 55827 UNKNOWN 41.76.136.0/22 37500 -Reserved AS-, ZZ 41.76.140.0/22 37500 -Reserved AS-, ZZ 41.78.92.0/22 14988 BTC-GATE1, BW 41.78.180.0/23 37265 -Reserved AS-, ZZ 41.220.48.0/20 36900 -Reserved AS-, ZZ 43.255.80.0/24 36351 SOFTLAYER - SoftLayer Technologies Inc., US Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-add-IANA Number of prefixes announced per prefix length (Global) ------------------------------------------------------- /1:0 /2:0 /3:0 /4:0 /5:0 /6:0 /7:0 /8:12 /9:10 /10:36 /11:100 /12:291 /13:566 /14:1136 /15:1911 /16:13356 /17:7943 /18:13895 /19:25659 /20:39907 /21:46216 /22:92831 /23:75798 /24:420122 /25:965 /26:845 /27:903 /28:27 /29:7 /30:13 /31:0 /32:197 Advertised prefixes smaller than registry allocations ----------------------------------------------------- ASN No of nets Total ann. Description 12479 4294 5417 UNI2-AS, ES 6327 3391 3616 SHAW - Shaw Communications Inc., CA 39891 2946 3778 ALJAWWALSTC-AS, SA 11492 2780 3548 CABLEONE - CABLE ONE, INC., US 8551 2736 3282 BEZEQ-INTERNATIONAL-AS Bezeqint Internet Backbo 22773 2607 3367 ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC - Cox Communications 11830 2051 2706 Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad y Telec 18566 2008 2113 MEGAPATH5-US - MegaPath Corporation, US 30036 1873 2126 MEDIACOM-ENTERPRISE-BUSINESS - Mediacom Communi 5650 1761 2093 FRONTIER-FRTR - Frontier Communications of Amer Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-sXXas-nos Number of /24s announced per /8 block (Global) ---------------------------------------------- 1:1606 2:839 4:22 5:2899 6:45 7:1 8:1187 9:1 11:3 12:1858 13:313 14:1931 15:37 16:4 17:237 18:59 20:49 23:2622 24:2536 25:2 27:2543 31:2074 32:97 35:36 36:839 37:3036 38:1688 39:295 40:120 41:3161 42:749 43:2024 44:147 45:6934 46:3252 47:251 49:1356 50:1099 51:322 52:1023 54:289 55:2 56:9 57:41 58:1720 59:1076 60:496 61:2076 62:2001 63:1812 64:4998 65:2213 66:4838 67:2702 68:1150 69:3530 70:1329 71:602 72:2444 74:2763 75:512 76:549 77:1717 78:1760 79:2328 80:1770 81:1503 82:1127 83:883 84:1101 85:2270 86:532 87:1553 88:1034 89:2469 90:215 91:6585 92:1317 93:2436 94:2588 95:3187 96:919 97:347 98:946 99:206 100:88 101:1153 102:465 103:20546 104:3548 105:248 106:857 107:1768 108:689 109:3719 110:1637 111:1880 112:1472 113:1392 114:1135 115:1725 116:1714 117:1892 118:2179 119:1641 120:1023 121:1033 122:2299 123:1656 124:1448 125:1968 128:1264 129:830 130:531 131:1624 132:736 133:219 134:1050 135:242 136:560 137:711 138:2012 139:846 140:573 141:843 142:798 143:1052 144:836 145:514 146:1262 147:800 148:1707 149:824 150:782 151:1005 152:1022 153:322 154:2906 155:899 156:1722 157:921 158:641 159:1918 160:1521 161:920 162:2685 163:795 164:1139 165:1583 166:441 167:1400 168:3272 169:842 170:4052 171:571 172:1112 173:2190 174:1014 175:905 176:2321 177:4150 178:2537 179:1416 180:2131 181:2393 182:2687 183:1068 184:1186 185:14855 186:3647 187:2479 188:2898 189:1987 190:8291 191:1527 192:10044 193:6644 194:5393 195:4066 196:3007 197:1637 198:5822 199:5987 200:7199 201:5105 202:10372 203:10242 204:4563 205:3011 206:3229 207:3287 208:3962 209:4237 210:3931 211:2000 212:3092 213:2887 214:1086 215:55 216:5933 217:2227 218:875 219:580 220:1866 221:967 222:998 223:1414 End of report

1 0