- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

The Cidr Report
by Tony Bates 15 May '98

15 May '98

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri May 15 12:00:00 PDT 1998 It is not checked before it leaves my workstation. However, hopefully you will find this report interesting and will take the time to look through this to see if you can improve the amount of aggregation you perform. The report is split into sections: 0) General Status List the route table history for the last week, list any possibly bogus routes seen and give some status on ASes. 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level This lists the "Top 30" players who if they decided to aggregate their announced classful prefixes at the origin AS level could make a significant difference in the reduction of the current size of the Internet routing table. This calculation does not take into account the inclusion of holes when forming an aggregate so it is possible even larger reduction should be possible. 2) Weekly Delta A summary of the last weeks changes in terms of withdrawn and added routes. Please note that this is only a snapshot but does give some indication of ASes participating in CIDR. Clearly, it is generally a good thing to see a large amont of withdrawls. 3) Interesting aggregates Interesting here means not an aggregate made as a set of classful routes. Thanks to xara.net for giving me access to their routing tables once a day. Please send any comments about this report directly to me. Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr-report.html for a daily update of this report. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CIDR REPORT for 15May98 0) General Status Table History ------------- Date Prefixes 080598 51559 090598 51630 100598 51503 110598 51419 120598 52655 130598 51474 140598 51492 150598 51370 Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr.plot.html for a plot of the table history. Possible Bogus Routes --------------------- *** Bogus 222.222.222.0 from AS701 AS Summary ---------- Number of ASes in routing system: 3564 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix: 1698 (890 cidr, 808 classful) Largest number of cidr routes: 367 announced by AS3561 Largest number of classful routes: 1069 announced by AS701 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level --- 15May98 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS4293 464 239 225 48.5% IMCI AS816 697 474 223 32.0% UUNET Canada (ASN-UUNETCA-AS4) AS2493 535 315 220 41.1% iSTAR Internet, Inc. AS174 819 626 193 23.6% Performance Systems International AS3602 484 307 177 36.6% Sprint Canada Inc. AS701 1069 896 173 16.2% Alternet AS3749 219 64 155 70.8% TECNET AS2048 162 90 72 44.4% LaNet AS5668 115 46 69 60.0% Century Telephone Inc. AS3221 110 41 69 62.7% EENet Autonomous System AS3248 128 60 68 53.1% VIAnet AS4755 95 28 67 70.5% Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. India AS10928 107 44 63 58.9% UNKNOWN AS7046 194 135 59 30.4% UUNET-CUSTOMER AS271 112 53 59 52.7% BCnet Backbone AS3804 200 142 58 29.0% Bell Solutions AS549 208 154 54 26.0% ONet Backbone AS1221 276 225 51 18.5% AARNET-AS AS72 85 37 48 56.5% Schlumberger Information Network AS1239 538 491 47 8.7% SprintLink Backbone AS4763 121 75 46 38.0% Telstra New Zealand AS4740 382 336 46 12.0% ASN-OZEMAIL (Ozemail Pty Ltd) AS7545 105 60 45 42.9% TPG Internet Pty Ltd AS852 157 117 40 25.5% AGT Advance Communication AS6335 64 24 40 62.5% NTRNET AS684 93 54 39 41.9% Manitoba Regional Network Backbon AS4200 127 88 39 30.7% AGIS (Apex Global Information Ser AS1982 154 115 39 25.3% Northwest Nexus, Inc. AS762 118 80 38 32.2% WELLFLEET-AS AS3493 164 126 38 23.2% INTERLINK For the rest of the previous weeks gain information please see http://www.employees.org:80/~tbates/cidr-report.html 2) Weekly Delta Please see http://www.employees.org:80/~tbates/cidr-report.html for this part of the report 3) Interesting aggregates Please see http://www.employees.org:80/~tbates/cidr-report.html for this part of the report

1 0

Contact!
by Hagberg, Kevin M (PB-kmhagbe) 15 May '98

15 May '98

This is in response to a posting on Merit. My name was added to the mailing list as a contact for Pacific Bell in California. I want to make clear what my role is @ Pacific bell. I am a technical Engineer and design and develop large Internet (DS3) connections, Frame Relay, Sonet and SMDS connectivity for private and public WANS/VPN. Thank you! **************************************************** Kevin M. Hagberg Pacific Bell P. O. Box 15038 2700 Watt Ave. Rm 4114, Sacramento, Ca 95851 800-972-5794 / 916-523-1370/pcs 916-601-3653 kmhagbe(a)pacbell.com Pacific Bell ***************************************************

1 0

Re: 1.1.1.0/24
by Jack Hahn 15 May '98

15 May '98

Any rational request or comment that any stakeholder (meaning user, network operator, etc) would like to present I will entertain and be more than happy to listen to. My duty as an AC member is to the public. -- -- Karl Denninger (karl(a)MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin http://www.mcs.net/ | T1's from $600 monthly / All Lines K56Flex/DOV | NEW! Corporate ISDN Prices dropped by up to 50%! Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| EXCLUSIVE NEW FEATURE ON ALL PERSONAL ACCOUNTS Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | *SPAMBLOCK* Technology now included at no cost On Thu, May 14, 1998 at 08:32:52PM -0400, Dean Robb wrote: > At 17:14 5/14/98 -0500, you wrote: > > > >Right now, I haven't seen any input from ARIN members indicating this > >is somethign desire. I don't see raising the issue to the advisory council > >unless the ARIN membership desires this. (If your not an ARIN member > >then your opinion may not have any weight with the AC.) > >I think its a reasonable idea, but I'm not inclined to go against the > >wishes of the membership. > > I must say I find your attitude....appalling. > > 1. How can you say you're not inclined to "go against the wishes of the > membership" if you don't even ask the membership what their wishes are? > I'd lay odds that no one has even thought about the issue, let alone decide > if it's a weighty matter. > > 2. You explicitly say that unless I'm a member, my opinion may carry no > weight with the AC. Does that mean that I can't have a good idea unless I > first pony up $1000? How positively absurd and insulting...to the other > members. > > Mr. Dillon said "IANA and ARIN and RIPE and APNIC are composed of some very > ordinary yet clueful Internet folks that are capable of recognizing a good > idea when it is explained to them.". He did NOT add the codicil that > people must have paid One Thousand Dollars for the privilege of presenting > an idea to these clueful folks. I sincerely hope and trust that others > don't think that only the elite few can have an idea. > > 3. It's too late, anyway. I'm NOT a member but have made the suggestion. > Hopefully, some forward-thinking, intellegent members may see this and > think it worthy of discussion. > > 4. Of course, you can ignore the issue and let the ARIN database > deteriorate to the state that InterNIC's WhoIs is in. Shall we take a poll > on how many people are happy with IT? Far better to deal with a problem > while it's small and keep it from becoming large. > > 5. I sincerely hope other members take you to task for your attitude. If > all members have your mindset, I wouldn't join even if I DID had a spare > grand sitting around. > > > > Spam(tm) is pressed meat. Spammers should be too. > > Dean Robb > PC-Easy > On-site computer services > (757) 495-EASY [3279] >

1 0

Re: Wired Q: Embedded NT
by Hank Nussbacher 15 May '98

15 May '98

>From: Jesse Freund <freund(a)wired.com> >i'm working on a piece about nt-embedded and i have a couple of questions. >i'm hoping you might be able to hook me up with a smart network operator or >someone else in the know or perhaps you know. basically, i'm curious why >the hell someone would want a version of nt embedded in a switch or router? >and who provides the custom solutions nt-embedded is meant to replace? Go read some competitor's mag: http://www.ncworldmag.com/ncworld/ncw-04-1998/ncw-04-nextten.html Bottom line: big mistake if this is to run in the 1998/1999 time frame. -Hank

1 0

Re: Wired Q: Embedded NT
by owen＠DeLong.SJ.CA.US 15 May '98

15 May '98

Given the brokenness of NT's networking stack, I would certainly reject any solution which involved embedding NT in a piece of networking hardware. Owen > Hi all, > > James Glave at Wired News again. This time around I am seeking opinions on > behalf of a friend up at Wired (the print magazine) -- concerning embedded > NT. I couldn't find any discussion in the nanog archive, so I'm wondering > if anoyne here has any experience with, or knowledge of, embedding NT in > networking hardware - if that even makes any sense....? > > >From: Jesse Freund <freund(a)wired.com> > >i'm working on a piece about nt-embedded and i have a couple of questions. > >i'm hoping you might be able to hook me up with a smart network operator or > >someone else in the know or perhaps you know. basically, i'm curious why > >the hell someone would want a version of nt embedded in a switch or router? > >and who provides the custom solutions nt-embedded is meant to replace? > > Thanks, all! > > jtg > > James Glave, Senior Technology Writer > Wired News http://www.wired.com (415) 276-8430 > > Unstoppable Force of the Week: "Gettin' jiggy wit' it!" >

4 3

Re: Privacy of Customer Information
by Bradley Dunn 15 May '98

15 May '98

On Thu, 14 May 1998, Bradley Dunn wrote: > > If you want to give your lawyer a heart attack, ask her if the > > data is covered under Title 47 Section 222 Privacy of Customer > > Information. > > http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/222.shtml > says > "Repealed". Sorry. It has been pointed out to me that the Telecom Act of '96 added a new Title 47 Section 222. ftp://ftp.loc.gov/pub/thomas/c104/s652.enr.txt Search down to "222". Bradley

1 0

Re: Privacy of Customer Information
by Sean Donelan 15 May '98

15 May '98

>> If you want to give your lawyer a heart attack, ask her if the >> data is covered under Title 47 Section 222 Privacy of Customer >> Information. > >http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/222.shtml >says >"Repealed". This is why you should talk to your lawyer. The US Code at the cornell site is from 1996. The Telecommunications Deregulation Act added a new section 222 when it was passed last year. -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

1 0

Privacy of Customer Information
by Sean Donelan 15 May '98

15 May '98

>However there are some companies that feel that their customer >data is confidential, and refuse to reveal it. (Also if they >use rwhois fixing swip won't solve the problem completely.) If you want to give your lawyer a heart attack, ask her if the data is covered under Title 47 Section 222 Privacy of Customer Information. Have you noticed the companies that are most likely to refuse to register their customer data, are also the the ones most likely to have a large direct sales organizations which uses such customer network information for its own marketing efforts. -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

2 1

Ligistics; Wireless..
by Andrew J. Doane 14 May '98

14 May '98

Which wireless standard will be supported? 802.11 or openair? /ajd/ -- _/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ Andrew J. Doane _/ _/ _/ _/ Director, Network Operations _/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ American Information Systems, Inc. _/ _/ _/ _/ Email: adoane(a)ais.net, http://www.ais.net _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ (312) 255-8500 Voice, (312) 255-8501 Fax For my PGP public key, email me with the subject "pgp request"

3 2

Re: 1.1.1.0/24
by Sean Donelan 14 May '98

14 May '98

>has a classfull C somewhere on the net. As for filtering 1.1.1.1/24 or >the entire block because it is reserved for that matter, who is to say >that with the address space thinning out that the IANA won't start >allocating it? Some poor provider is going to be route filtered on a >totally legitimate block if we use your reasoning. Its called "Network Management" and not "Network forget about it" for a reason. I'm making no statement about filtering by prefix length. Unassigned is true whether it is a unassigned traditional Class A 1.0.0.0/8 address or a unassigned Class ? 254.0.0.0/32 address. IANA has been exceptionally careful to document and put in a public place all its assignments. A careful network manager could check this public information on a regular basis and use it to verify the information they are hearing from others. Address hijacking is a major and growing problem. There are two ways to stop it, and I would suggest you need to do both. You can either trust everyone will only announce their own routes properly, or you can check the routes you recieve that they have in fact been delegated to the person announcing it. Or in the case of 1.1.1.0/24, delegated at all. There are extremes, you can check every single prefix or you can do no checking at all. Or you can do some intermediate level of checking such as filtering 'Martian' addresses, or addresses unassigned or reserved by IANA. -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

1 0