- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: satellite connections
by Brett D. Watson 05 Jun '97

05 Jun '97

> Hi, > > Stephen Sprunk wrote: > > > I'm not sure how many TCP/IP stacks still set those bits; it may be > > necessary to have a router manipulate the bits after examining the port > > numbers of a connection. > > Looks like a good place to use access lists that choose packets based on > tcp, udp, and port number. If I could get a 45 Mbps circuit over high-latency > geosatellite, one-way, I could use it for http and "push" traffic. > The requests, outbound stuff, and interactive traffic would fit into a T1 > under the ocean. if you're interested in that, cisco's new CoS stuff uses precedence (extended access lists, mac address, ports numbers) to do just such a thing. it would be most useful if isp's could have concensus on the precedence "classes" to work across the multiprovider internet (may not be practical though). -brett

1 0

Re: BGP Routing problem
by Danny McPherson 05 Jun '97

05 Jun '97

i believe (received-only) means that bgp soft-reconfiguration is configured for the peer and since some policy is denying the route, it won't be used .. unless a policy change occurs. here's what we're currently hearing from you folks... peer1.sjc1#sh ip bgp re 6180 BGP table version is 2830358, 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 * i196.6.121.0 192.41.177.248 10 80 0 701 5713 6180 i * i 198.32.176.2 10 80 0 701 5713 6180 i *> 198.32.184.42 10 80 0 701 5713 6180 i * i196.28.5.0 192.41.177.248 10 80 0 701 5713 6180 i * i 198.32.176.2 10 80 0 701 5713 6180 i *> 198.32.184.42 10 80 0 701 5713 6180 i h 206.49.228.0 198.32.184.42 10 80 0 701 5713 6180 i * i 192.41.177.243 10 80 0 4000 6187 6180 i * i 192.157.69.80 10 80 0 4000 6187 6180 i *> 198.32.136.94 10 80 0 4000 6187 6180 i * i206.49.229.0 192.41.177.243 10 80 0 4000 6187 6180 i * i 192.157.69.80 10 80 0 4000 6187 6180 i *> 198.32.136.94 10 80 0 4000 6187 6180 i and it appears as though routing via alternet is working for the networks you mentioned. -danny > Hi > > We are a ISP in South Africa and have a problem we are trying to > figure out rather urgently, without much success so far. > > We are currently multi-homed during the day and tripple homed at > night. (our peaks are at night and we get cheap bandwidth from > another ISP who has their peak in the day). Internic has refused to > give us our own block of addresses which would have made thins much > simpler. (despite repeated attempts, and we now have 7 /24's from > various places and badly need more). > > Basicaly we (AS6180) have been announcing all our adresses including > 196.25.116.0, 196.25.117.0 and 196.25.203.0 via AS 3741 at night, > and this gets switched of during the day. The problem seems to relate > to the fact that these addresses are part of AS 5713's CIDR > 196.25.0.0/16 and we thought we could get away with announcing them > like this. It did work fine for over a week, but now today we have a > problem. > > MAE-East (see example at end of message) , the Sprintnap and who > knows who else still have entries for these via AS3741 but they are > showing as received-only, and no best path. Yet via MAE West they are > fine. > > We are going to stop announcing these via AS3741 at night, but its > been 9 hours now since they were not announced and these > received-only entries are still sitting there blocking these routes > from it seems about a third of the internet. > > Can any one offer any comments on why they are still there, what > received-only means and how we can get if fixed? > > Many thanks > Regards > Anthony Walker > > > MAE-East Looking Glass Results > Query: bgp > Addr: 196.25.203.0 > BGP routing table entry for 196.25.203.0/24, version 5006458 > Paths: (1 available, no best path, advertised over IBGP) > 1673 1239 4005 3741 6180, (received-only) > 192.41.177.141 from 192.41.177.141 (140.223.57.217) > Origin IGP, external

1 0

RE: Loss of BGP peering monitoring via SNMP
by Chad Skidmore 05 Jun '97

05 Jun '97

Cisco routers will send a trap on BGP peering changes. The following is an example config: snmp-server community private RW 1 snmp-server community public RO 2 snmp-server trap-authentication snmp-server enable traps envmon snmp-server enable traps bgp snmp-server enable traps frame-relay snmp-server host XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX public tty frame-relay isdn envmon bgp snmp You must enable traps for BGP events and then define the SNMP console "host" to receive those traps and list the traps you want sent to that host. Hope this helps, Chad ------------------------------------------ Chad Skidmore VP Operations & Engineering Data Source, L.L.C. http://www.dsource.com cskidmore(a)dsource.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Curtis Generous [SMTP:generous@uucom.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 05, 1997 7:07 AM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Loss of BGP peering monitoring via SNMP > > We have been caught several times lately with some of our border > routers > loss of BGP peering going undetected for sometime. Is there a way > to enable BGP peering loss monitoring via SNMP from a CISCO router? > I've looked at both the public and private MIBS but haven't found > anything. > > I am aware of the 'nocol' package but really was hoping for an SNMP > based > approach to tie into our net-mgmt packages (sunnet and hpov). > > TIA > > --curtis > -- > Curtis Generous generous(a)uucom.com Phone: > (703) 461-1350 > UUcom Inc., Suite 250, 4875 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA > 22304-0797

1 0

RE: Loss of BGP peering monitoring via SNMP
by Rodney Joffe 05 Jun '97

05 Jun '97

Try "snmp-server enable traps bgp" on a cisco. Rodney (no more Mr. nice-guy) Joffe Genuity Inc., a Bechtel company http://www.genuity.net > -----Original Message----- > From: Curtis Generous [SMTP:generous@uucom.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 05, 1997 7:07 AM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Loss of BGP peering monitoring via SNMP > > We have been caught several times lately with some of our border > routers > loss of BGP peering going undetected for sometime. Is there a way > to enable BGP peering loss monitoring via SNMP from a CISCO router? > I've looked at both the public and private MIBS but haven't found > anything. > > I am aware of the 'nocol' package but really was hoping for an SNMP > based > approach to tie into our net-mgmt packages (sunnet and hpov). > > TIA > > --curtis > -- > Curtis Generous generous(a)uucom.com Phone: > (703) 461-1350 > UUcom Inc., Suite 250, 4875 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA > 22304-0797

1 0

BGP Routing problem
by Anthony Walker 05 Jun '97

05 Jun '97

Hi We are a ISP in South Africa and have a problem we are trying to figure out rather urgently, without much success so far. We are currently multi-homed during the day and tripple homed at night. (our peaks are at night and we get cheap bandwidth from another ISP who has their peak in the day). Internic has refused to give us our own block of addresses which would have made thins much simpler. (despite repeated attempts, and we now have 7 /24's from various places and badly need more). Basicaly we (AS6180) have been announcing all our adresses including 196.25.116.0, 196.25.117.0 and 196.25.203.0 via AS 3741 at night, and this gets switched of during the day. The problem seems to relate to the fact that these addresses are part of AS 5713's CIDR 196.25.0.0/16 and we thought we could get away with announcing them like this. It did work fine for over a week, but now today we have a problem. MAE-East (see example at end of message) , the Sprintnap and who knows who else still have entries for these via AS3741 but they are showing as received-only, and no best path. Yet via MAE West they are fine. We are going to stop announcing these via AS3741 at night, but its been 9 hours now since they were not announced and these received-only entries are still sitting there blocking these routes from it seems about a third of the internet. Can any one offer any comments on why they are still there, what received-only means and how we can get if fixed? Many thanks Regards Anthony Walker MAE-East Looking Glass Results Query: bgp Addr: 196.25.203.0 BGP routing table entry for 196.25.203.0/24, version 5006458 Paths: (1 available, no best path, advertised over IBGP) 1673 1239 4005 3741 6180, (received-only) 192.41.177.141 from 192.41.177.141 (140.223.57.217) Origin IGP, external

1 0

Wavelan & Linux @ NANOG
by Joe McGuckin 05 Jun '97

05 Jun '97

I have a Linux laptop & want to use one of the WaveLAN (Digital) wireless units. If someone has this working, I'd like to hear from you. Thanks, Joe McGuckin 1-888-371-4284 toll-free pager

2 1

Re: NSP ... New Information
by Eric Germann 05 Jun '97

05 Jun '97

The gist of the original question was in a multihomed environment. Which provider do I get my space from? Assuming the one I don't use address space from won't announce my routes, why bother? At 12:43 AM 6/5/97 -0400, Nathan Stratton wrote: >On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Eric Germann wrote: > >> Isn't the biggest problem with PI space having a big enough network so >> Sprint and everyone else doesn't filter you? Specifically a /19 or larger >> (~ 8000 addresses)? Can you justify to them 32 Class C's so you can be >> seen everywhere? I know of another startup provider who had this problem. >> Its a chicken and egg scenario. They needed to sell connectivity, but >> couldn't reach portions of the net, specifically Sprint. Kind of kills >> your marketing when you can't get to the entire 'Net. How do others deal >> with this scenario in a startup environment, or even an established >> environment where you can't justify 8000 addresses yet? > >Renumber a lot. It is hard for the Internic to hand out /19 when most of >the new providers will be out of business in 6 months. The only way to do >it is to get space from your ISP and then renumber if you move. After you >do that a few times if you do it will, you will be able to get a /19 and >then /18 and so on. > >Nathan Stratton President, NetRail,Inc. >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Phone (888)NetRail NetRail, Inc. >Fax (404)522-1939 230 Peachtree Suite 500 >WWW http://www.netrail.net/ Atlanta, GA 30303 >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >"No king is saved by the size of his army; no warrior escapes by his >great strength. - Psalm 33:16 > > > ============================================================================ ==== Eric Germann Computer and Communications Technologies ekgermann(a)cctec.com Van Wert, OH 45891 Phone: 419 968 2640 http://www.cctec.com Fax: 419 968 2641 Network Design, Connectivity & System Integration Services A Microsoft Solution Provider

1 0

NANOG
by Greg Skouby 05 Jun '97

05 Jun '97

Hello. I am currently in Tampa for the NANOG meeting. After a very lengthy and frustrating conversation with the lady at the desk it was determined that I could not stay at the Hyatt because I am under 21 and they will not let me check in. This was not a problem at the San Francisco meeting nor at Ann Arbor. Is there something that can be done, some strings to be pulled?

2 1

Re: Network Service Provider
by Danny McPherson 05 Jun '97

05 Jun '97

* I suppose this is only peripherally (at best) an * operations note. If there was an "internet-bureaucracy" * list, I'd rant there. :-) perhaps you folks should find/create one. i really don't care to read 300 messages about another off-the-wall issue .. nor does the rest of this list, i'd assume. -danny

1 0

Re: NSP ... New Information
by Stephen A Misel 04 Jun '97

04 Jun '97

Rob, I've acquired a few /18's from the NIC with simple text block lists of machines and IP addresses. Your miles may vary -- from your text it seems you're an ISP. We're a webfarm.com and we're multihomed (makes an excellent argument for portable space). Steve At 01:36 PM 6/4/97 -0400, Robert A. Pickering Jr. wrote: >Well, that was interesting. > >Thanks to everyone who has responded thus far. I've gotten a lot of >"sale" types of email, but also a lot of really good information. > >It appears as if I was right in my assumption that I needed to get my own >IP block of PI space from the InterNIC. > >So, my follow-up question is this: > >What exact documentation and formats does the InterNIC need to see. >I've been told network diagrams and IP allocations, but that to me >means diagrams, and that means I have to ship them some drawing format. >What do they use? > >Or, can I just great a table of IP addresses and hosts and how my >IPs are allocated to customers, etc. > >I want to make sure that I'm somewhat successful in securing some reasonable >amount of IP space from the NIC, and would like some advice from people >who have gone through this process. > >Thank You Again. > >-Rob > >-- >Robert A. Pickering Jr. Internet Services Manager >Cincinnati Bell Telephone rob(a)fuse.net > > A Rough Whimper of Insanity (Information Superhighway) > >PGP key ID: 75CAFF7D 1995/05/09 >PGP Fingerprint: B1 63 0C 09 D8 2E 5D 69 BB 61 A2 92 22 37 63 C3 > >

1 0