- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: operational problems at mae-west?
by Jim Rowh 24 Jan '97

24 Jan '97

just got off the phone with the MFS NOC. Seems they are having problems now and are looking into it... jim

3 2

More Information
by Ali Dorji 24 Jan '97

24 Jan '97

Helo, I am working in internetworking and I was interested in recieving more information about NANOG. Please email me with more information. Ali Dorji email address: adorji(a)on.bell.ca

1 0

operational problems at mae-west?
by Brett D. Watson 24 Jan '97

24 Jan '97

is anyone aware of problems at mae-west? i've not seen anything on the mailing list but the following peers are getting reset every 15-30 minutes on my border router there: 198.32.136.1 4 4553 5640 35253 1009761 0 0 04:38:02 198.32.136.2 4 4553 6222 35267 1009761 0 0 02:37:47 198.32.136.5 4 1740 4957 35247 1009761 0 0 02:36:57 198.32.136.10 4 2041 3330 35168 1009761 0 0 00:09:51 198.32.136.11 4 1239 83187 35106 1009761 1 0 00:09:51 198.32.136.12 4 3561 46357 35154 1009761 5 0 00:09:51 it's *only* these peers and they keep resetting consistantly. the problem started happening after midnight last night i think. i believe at least mci and sprint have dedicated ports on the switch so i dont' understand what's happening. anyone else seeing something similar? -brett

6 5

Re: DNS contamination
by dvv＠sprint.net 24 Jan '97

24 Jan '97

Paul A Vixie writes: > > In my book, it is better to conform to the protocol, or change it, > then to have implementations drift in all directions. > No-question-asked consumption of bogus information can hardly be called a better conformity to the protocol. And, as I see it, there's nothing inherently wrong with the good old RFC-1034/1035/1123. Granted, some places could be more clear, but an implementation of the protocol can rather easily deal with the ambiguities and omissions. As of my stop gap (I emphasise - _stop gap_) patch and your examples of when it doesn't work - I never wrote it's _the_ solution, and it doesn't exactly jibe with the RFC-1034's wording about the behaviour of a delegating server WRT glue records - it relies on the delegating server's ability to respond with queries about A records of the servers it delegates the authority to as if these records were validly cached records (and named does exactly that). In the note accompanying my patch I wrote about what the correct (IMHO) behaviour should be like. Your example when my proposal doesn't work is effectively a loop in the chain of hierarchy, and is not better, in my view, than loops in CNAME chains. As of the financing the bind project - if asked, I wouldn't recommend to participate in it, as it's one mess of a project and the amount of time and money necessary to produce a robust operational product is comparable with the amount of time and money necessary to create a new product from scratch, addressing the operational issues in its very design. Too bad the major OS vendors don't usually have a clue and stick to the freely available product of an experimental, demonstration-of-concept project. Dima

2 1

Re: operational problems at mae-west?
by feldman＠MFSDatanet.COM 24 Jan '97

24 Jan '97

We're having air conditioning problems in the room where the MFS Gigaswitches are. One of the Gigaswitch ATM line cards is being flaky, so I've rearranged connections onto the other card for now. They tell me the air conditioning should be back on line in a few minutes, and I'll keep checking. Steve

1 0

Re: operational problems at mae-west?
by Brett D. Watson 24 Jan '97

24 Jan '97

> > 198.32.136.1 4 4553 5640 35253 1009761 0 0 04:38:02 > > 198.32.136.2 4 4553 6222 35267 1009761 0 0 02:37:47 > > 198.32.136.5 4 1740 4957 35247 1009761 0 0 02:36:57 > > 198.32.136.10 4 2041 3330 35168 1009761 0 0 00:09:51 > > 198.32.136.11 4 1239 83187 35106 1009761 1 0 00:09:51 > > 198.32.136.12 4 3561 46357 35154 1009761 5 0 00:09:51 > > Some (all?) of those are at Ames. Since Genuity is at 55 S. Market, my > suspicion rests on the FIX/MAE OC3. Perhaps it's cycling, or perhaps it is > now congested enough that the BGP keepalives aren't getting through (though > I thought everybody was running an IOS late enough that BGP keepalives had > queuing priority over customer traffic, to prevent just this problem.) i wasnt' aware that bgp keepalives had a queuiing priority... or are you talking about spd? -brett

1 0

NANOG Info
by Warren K. Williams 24 Jan '97

24 Jan '97

Folks, We've added some links at the bottom of the NANOG Info page on our NAP Web Page. These links have a ton of info on things to see/do in San Francisco... There are also some links re. the weather. Choose the guess/prediction (er, make that forecast) you want to believe most... http://www.pacbell.com/products/business/fastrak/networking/nap/event.html Sorry about the long URL :-( Kind regards, Warren ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Warren K. Williams, Director - Network Access Point Pacific Bell Business Communications Services Email: wkwilli(a)pacbell.com Phone: 510.867.9065 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: operational problems at mae-west?
by Jim Rowh 24 Jan '97

24 Jan '97

Turns out they lost an A/C unit at the facility. This caused one of their Gigaswitches to overheat and bounce a few times. MFS says it's fixed now... jim > The three mentioned are, respectively, CRL, Sprint, and MCI. Having > those three drop would certainly cause a few problems. :-) > > Likewise on my router, I show a group of about 5 peers that have reset > within the last 90 minutes so something seems to have happaned but I > couldn't say what.. > > -Wayne > >

1 0

DNS contamination
by dvv＠sprint.net 24 Jan '97

24 Jan '97

To all DNS admins: please check that you don't have 199.0.55.3 and 144.228.8.227 mentioned anywhere in your files. If you do, remove such records and change your DNS server software to something more reasonable. Dima fed up his ears with named's chronic inability to filter out bogus additional records

7 11

NANOG Meeting
by Pam Ciesla 24 Jan '97

24 Jan '97

The NANOG Meeting will be February 10 & 11 in San Francisco at the Grand Hyatt. Information is available on the web page http://www.nanog.org. If you need more info send me e-mail. Pam

1 0