- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: Any from PSI on this list?
by Alex Rubenstein 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

#1, we are not a customer of PSI, #2, we are near the NYC pop, which I would be sure is noe overloaded when it comes to peering (I would assume). At 09:41 AM 6/16/97 -0700, Wayne Bouchard wrote: >I've heard this from various networks as well. While I find it >annoying, it does serve usefull purposes. More peering sessions mean >higher CPU load. higher CPU load can mean more instability within the >router. When the router crashes or otherwise reboots, it takes it >longer to resynchronize which means longer delays in convergance and >poorer overall service. Limiting the number of peering sessions on >really busy routers is a benefit, not a problem. The only thing that >could be asked of them would be that they investigate installing a >second router to offload some of the peering sessions so they don't >have such a backlog of requests and maybe provide load balancing. if >they are accepting applications, they need to provide facilities for >those requests to be implemented. > >However, I still second the comment below.. > >> Please commend PSI for not making the situation at the MAEs worse, don't >> criticize them. By connecting any more peers at ME/MW, it will simply >> add to the packetloss levels for all of us. >> >> Rob >> > >> > Alex, >> > >> > We executed peering agreements with PSI in May (1997) for peering at >> > MAE-EAST and MAE-WEST (signed, mailed, etc...) >> > >> > One of our engineers contacted them last week to turn up these peering >> > sessions and was told by PSI that even though we have an executed peering >> > agreement with you, "our routers at the MAE's are overloaded and we are not >> > currently turning up any new peers." >> > >> > >> > K >> > >> > -- >> > | Kyle C. Bacon >> > | VP Operations >> > | kbacon(a)fibernet.net >> > | http://www.fibernet.net >> > >> > connecting your world... >> > >> > On Jun 16, 10:11am, Alex Rubenstein wrote: >> > > Subject: Any from PSI on this list? >> > > >> > > I can't seem to reach anyone at PSI who knows what I am talking about, so >> > > I thought I would try here. >> > > >> > > Lately, our connectivity to PSI has gotten worse; to the point where >> > > customers complaing about getting to sites from PSI. >> > > >> > > The thing is, PSI has a 'MEGA-PoP' about 14 feet away from me at 33 >> > > Whitehall Street, in NYC. >> > > >> > > I know PSI peers there with a few folks; are they adding? How do you >> > > become considered for peering with PSI? >> > > >> > > Thanks for your time. >> > > >> > >-- End of excerpt from Alex Rubenstein >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > | Kyle C. Bacon >> > | VP Operations >> > | kbacon(a)fibernet.net >> > | http://www.fibernet.net >> > >> > connecting your world... >> > >> > >> >> > > >-- > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Wayne Bouchard GlobalCenter >web(a)primenet.com >Primenet Network Engineering Internet Solutions for >(602) 416-6422 800-373-2499 x6422 Growing Businesses >FAX: (602) 416-9422 >http://www.primenet.com http://www.globalcenter.net >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >

1 0

Peering, part 2
by Alex Rubenstein 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

I just had an idea. If there is any one else in the WorldCom Frame Relay cloud, you could add a 32k CIR pipe for $31.80 per month. We could peer. It would be cool. Is anyone interested? I think it would be good.

1 0

Re: Any from PSI on this list?
by John Curran 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

At 12:11 6/16/97, Doug Davis wrote: >... >I have a similer problem with BBN. They have a pop <14 feet from me in >Dallas. I can't get past the "retail sales" blockage to reach a >technical person inorder to discuss peerage. Email to ops@bbnplanet >eventually dissapears. This even after BBN people at nanog have said >that in these type of cases they could be interested in this sort of >private peerage. Mumble... requests should be sent to "peering(a)bbnplanet.com"; you'll get back a reply/questionaire which starts the process. If you don't have nationwide infrastructure, you may not be terribly impressed by our response. >Everyone probably just has too much work to do :-( It beats the alternative... :-), /John

1 0

Re: Any ideas what is happening to Alternet's backbone?
by Danny McPherson 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

> Anyone have any info on Alternet's outage? We have had to shutdown several > interfaces to Alternet routers in the Washington DC area as they appear to have been > blackholing our packets. Calls to their NOC have not been able to gather > any further information. nope, although i see that uunet (among others) are still reachable via psi :-( peer1.sjc1#sh ip bgp re 174_2713_5727 BGP table version is 5259866, local router ID is 207.240.24.10 Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path * 4.0.0.0 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 1 i * 12.64.0.0/12 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 5074 i * 36.0.0.0 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 1 32 i *> 62.0.0.0 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 1 1239 568 400 ? *> 62.72.0.0/18 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 701 3491 5427 i * 62.192.0.0/19 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 701 3491 6705 i * 62.216.0.0/19 198.32.136.23 10 80 0 174 2713 5727 701 4000 5583 i etc... i've asked psi to correct the problem... -danny

1 0

Re: Any from PSI on this list?
by Kyle C. Bacon 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

Alex, We executed peering agreements with PSI in May (1997) for peering at MAE-EAST and MAE-WEST (signed, mailed, etc...) One of our engineers contacted them last week to turn up these peering sessions and was told by PSI that even though we have an executed peering agreement with you, "our routers at the MAE's are overloaded and we are not currently turning up any new peers." K -- | Kyle C. Bacon | VP Operations | kbacon(a)fibernet.net | http://www.fibernet.net connecting your world... On Jun 16, 10:11am, Alex Rubenstein wrote: > Subject: Any from PSI on this list? > > I can't seem to reach anyone at PSI who knows what I am talking about, so > I thought I would try here. > > Lately, our connectivity to PSI has gotten worse; to the point where > customers complaing about getting to sites from PSI. > > The thing is, PSI has a 'MEGA-PoP' about 14 feet away from me at 33 > Whitehall Street, in NYC. > > I know PSI peers there with a few folks; are they adding? How do you > become considered for peering with PSI? > > Thanks for your time. > >-- End of excerpt from Alex Rubenstein -- | Kyle C. Bacon | VP Operations | kbacon(a)fibernet.net | http://www.fibernet.net connecting your world...

5 4

Any from PSI on this list?
by Alex Rubenstein 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

I can't seem to reach anyone at PSI who knows what I am talking about, so I thought I would try here. Lately, our connectivity to PSI has gotten worse; to the point where customers complaing about getting to sites from PSI. The thing is, PSI has a 'MEGA-PoP' about 14 feet away from me at 33 Whitehall Street, in NYC. I know PSI peers there with a few folks; are they adding? How do you become considered for peering with PSI? Thanks for your time.

2 1

Re: Any from PSI on this list?
by Matthew Pearson 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

At 11:10 AM 6/16/97 -0400, Kyle C. Bacon wrote: > One of our engineers contacted them last week to turn up these peering >sessions and was told by PSI that even though we have an executed peering >agreement with you, "our routers at the MAE's are overloaded and we are not >currently turning up any new peers." We have heard this as well. We are still awaiting execution of our Peering Agreement with PSI. They are having some slowness in building out new facilities on their network in general it seems. M ---------------------------------------------------------- Matthew E. Pearson mpearson(a)websecure.net Network Administrator (617)867-2300 Tel WebSecure Inc. (617)867-2775 Fax

1 0

Re: cache parms
by Barry Raveendran Greene 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

Hello Randy, I'll forward this note to ircache(a)nlanr.net. This has the vast majority of the serious caching community - mainly outside of the US. Barry Randy Bush wrote: >Is anyone aware of *specific* cache sites which forcefully ignore page >expiration in a way which would throw off content providers' hit counting? >If so, I would like to talk with the cache admin to understand a few things. > >randy > > -- -- -- Barry Raveendran Greene | || || | Senior Consultant | || || | Corporate Consulting Engineering | |||| |||| | tel: +65 738-5535 ext 235 | ..:||||||:..:||||||:.. | e-mail: bgreene(a)cisco.com | c i s c o S y s t e m s |

2 1

NIC IP group - new phone #
by Einar Bohlin 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

Hello, The Domain Registration group moved to a new building this weekend and took the phone number with them. The IP Group at the InterNIC has a new phone number: (703) 742-4700. FYI we do IP and AS number registration, network inverse mapping (IN-ADDR), and SWIP. Regards, Einar Bohlin IP Numbers Group InterNIC Registration Services /edb =================================================================== email einarb(a)internic.net phone (703) 742-4700 ===================================================================

1 0

Woes PSI & AT&T
by Golan Ben-Oni 16 Jun '97

16 Jun '97

FYI, I just had to setup a filter on path 174 2713 5727 : Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path *> 9.2.0.0/16 204.6.110.1 200 174 2713 5727 701 1673 1675 1747 i * i 192.41.177.245 230 100 0 174 2713 5727 701 1673 1675 1747 i *> 12.64.0.0/12 204.6.110.1 200 174 2713 5727 5074 i * 206.34.91.137 0 1 174 2713 5727 5074 i * i 192.41.177.245 230 100 0 174 2713 5727 5074 i ..etc *> 132.72.0.0/14 204.6.110.1 200 174 2713 5727 701 2685 2686 3339 378 i *> 132.76.0.0/15 204.6.110.1 200 174 2713 5727 701 2685 2686 3339 378 i *> 132.81.0.0 204.6.110.1 200 174 2713 5727 1 568 724 ? h 132.82.0.0/15 204.6.110.1 200 174 2713 5727 1 568 i h 132.84.0.0/14 204.6.110.1 200 174 2713 5727 1 568 i

2 1