- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: internet - sparkle
by Scott Weeks 16 May '18

16 May '18

--- aaron1(a)gvtc.com wrote: From: Aaron Gould <aaron1(a)gvtc.com> What's an eyeball network ? ----------------------------------------------- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyeball_network scott

1 0

Verizon/UUNET AS701 blocking Tor "directory" server (IPv4 86.59.21.38)
by Neel Chauhan 16 May '18

16 May '18

Hi nanog mailing list, Keep in mind that I am not a practicing network engineer, although I do have interest and knowledge on networking topics. I do not work for Verizon. I subscribe to Verizon FiOS, but not Verizon Wireless or Verizon's enterprise services. The Tor "directory" server with the IPv4 address 86.59.21.38 has been blocked by Verizon's AS701 backbone for a few months now. AS701 provides Internet connectivity to Verizon FiOS and Wireless. The design of Tor is that even though anyone can set up a "relay", there are a few central directory servers which clients go to first to get a list of relay servers and build a circuit (which is a path of three relays to reach a destination). A more descriptive overview of Tor is available here: https://www.torproject.org/about/overview.html.en . While I can still access other Tor directory servers from Verizon FiOS as running Tor as a client or relay does not require every directory server be unblocked, blocking one of them could possibly mean breaking some part of the Internet for a Verizon customer. A traceroute to 86.59.21.38 from FiOS shows that I can get through verizon-gni.net which is Verizon's internal FiOS network, but not ALTER.NET, which is Verizon's UUNet backbone: neel@xb2:~ % traceroute 86.59.21.38 traceroute to 86.59.21.38 (86.59.21.38), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 unknown (192.168.1.1) 1.128 ms 0.780 ms 0.613 ms 2 lo0-100.NYCMNY-VFTTP-401.verizon-gni.net (173.68.77.1) 1.001 ms 3.632 ms 0.900 ms 3 B3401.NYCMNY-LCR-22.verizon-gni.net (100.41.137.96) 2.291 ms B3401.NYCMNY-LCR-21.verizon-gni.net (100.41.137.94) 3.172 ms 4.046 ms 4 * * * 5 * * * 6 * * * 7 * * * 8 * * * 9 * * * ^C neel@xb2:~ % In a normal traceroute, I would see ALTER.NET on hop 5. Also, this filtering is not a subnet filtering. A traceroute to 86.59.21.1 works: neel@xb2:~ % traceroute 86.59.21.1 traceroute to 86.59.21.1 (86.59.21.1), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 unknown (192.168.1.1) 0.863 ms 0.757 ms 0.579 ms 2 lo0-100.NYCMNY-VFTTP-401.verizon-gni.net (173.68.77.1) 1.010 ms 1.545 ms 1.034 ms 3 B3401.NYCMNY-LCR-22.verizon-gni.net (100.41.137.96) 3.616 ms B3401.NYCMNY-LCR-21.verizon-gni.net (100.41.137.94) 5.696 ms 10.062 ms 4 * * * 5 0.et-5-1-5.BR3.NYC4.ALTER.NET (140.222.2.127) 3.492 ms 3.506 ms 2.996 ms 6 204.255.168.118 (204.255.168.118) 8.462 ms 7.479 ms 7.252 ms 7 144.232.4.84 (144.232.4.84) 5.041 ms 4.688 ms sl-crs3-lon-0-6-3-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.9.165) 71.865 ms 8 sl-crs2-lon-0-0-3-0.sprintlink.net (213.206.128.181) 72.214 ms 73.579 ms 72.339 ms 9 213.206.129.142 (213.206.129.142) 81.390 ms sl-crs4-ams-0-7-0-3.sprintlink.net (213.206.129.139) 85.854 ms 93.238 ms 10 217.149.47.46 (217.149.47.46) 79.004 ms 85.669 ms 79.392 ms 11 ams5-core-1.bundle-ether1.tele2.net (130.244.82.54) 86.507 ms 78.374 ms 77.740 ms 12 ams-core-2.bundle-ether9.tele2.net (130.244.82.57) 79.642 ms 77.926 ms 81.515 ms 13 wen3-core-2.bundle-ether15.tele2.net (130.244.71.47) 105.400 ms 105.089 ms 109.751 ms 14 tele2at-bundle2-vie3.net.uta.at (212.152.189.65) 122.716 ms 110.820 ms 114.354 ms 15 86.59.21.1 (86.59.21.1) 106.389 ms * 105.379 ms neel@xb2:~ % I had posted this finding on Tor's mailing list (https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2018-May/015218.html) I am posting here as (I believe) Verizon NOC people are more likely to read NANOG mailing lists than Tor mailing lists, although this post is modified from the original because not all network engineers may know how Tor works. From Tor developer Roger Dingledine (at the Tor mailing list), the reason why Verizon blocked 86.59.21.38 in the first place is probably the WannaCry ransomware, and the VZ NOC didn't realize it was a Tor IP address (or how Tor works), and then whoever did this block forgot about it and moved on. I can understand that you all may not know how Tor works either, so I included an overview link above. It could also be possible that it's the NN repeal (but less likely since it is on the level of UUNET not FiOS). I also contacted the operator of 86.59.21.38 as well as Verizon FiOS support, and neither were of much help (the former is obvious as he's Austrian). Well, thank you for reading. Best, Neel Chauhan === https://www.neelc.org/

1 0

USB Ethernet Adapters
by Colton Conor 16 May '18

16 May '18

Our new laptops like most do not have an Ethernet adapter build in as they are too slim. What USB to Ethernet adapter do you recommend and why? Ideally it would be compatible with Windows 10, and have the ability to set speed, duplex and VLAN IDs if possible.

11 13

ProofPoint
by ConsulTIC - Cyprien Laleau 16 May '18

16 May '18

Could a proofpoint e-mail blacklist contact, contact me? We are trying to solve undelivered mails and can't get ahold of anyone. Thank you in advance,

2 1

RE: is odd number of links in lag group ok
by Jakob Heitz (jheitz) 16 May '18

16 May '18

Many routers do not rehash everything when a link breaks. Doing so would disturb flows that were not broken, causing possible misordered packets or jitter. The flows on the broken link will get rehashed, of course. Note that even if a hash function can distribute the flows evenly, you may get some heavy flows, so you need to expect some imbalance. Regards, Jakob -----Original Message----- From: Ben Cannon <ben(a)6by7.net> It will work fine if you have a good modern router. Consider this; all evenly grouped LAGs are odd in their failed conditions. -Ben > On May 15, 2018, at 8:28 AM, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka(a)seacom.mu> wrote: > > > >> On 15/May/18 17:20, Jared Mauch wrote: >> >> Much of this depends on the hardware, software and what hashing is used inbound >> outbound traffic directions, etc. >> >> It will likely work the way you expect, but one may be warmer than the other if >> traffic ends up overloading a single bucket in the hash. > > We haven't had a major issue when loading traffic over even or odd > links. If you have decent hardware and software, it should all be fine, > particularly if your traffic is all or mostly IP. > > If you've got non-IP traffic in there, and your box cannot look into the > payload to determine entropy, then things could get interesting. But > this will happen even when you have even links... it's not anything > specific to how many member links you have in the LAG, but rather, the > router's need to maintain per-flow load balancing with limited > information beyond Layer 2 data. > > That said, an even number of links just leaves the warm & fuzzies turned > on :-)... > > Mark.

1 0

ALTDB - Getting records removed
by John Hurley 16 May '18

16 May '18

Hi All, Recently acquired a new 2-byte AS number from ARIN. It had a previous owner whom had records setup at ALTDB. I've sent emails to request removal but haven't heard anything back. Any tips or a different venue I can use to get in touch with the altdb folks?

4 4

Level 3 Looking Glass Broken
by Gary T. Giesen 15 May '18

15 May '18

I'm seeing issues with Level 3's looking glass (https://lookingglass.level3.net) since they rolled out the new one with the CenturyLink branding. Any query results in "Invalid usage. POST variable not set.". Also, the radio buttons under the "Information Category" selection allow more than one selection (and no way of deselecting anything). I tried opening a ticket L3 under one of my transit circuits and was told that the NOC doesn't deal with it, and I should talk to our account team (as fun as that sounds, I'd rather stick my head in a blender). Anyone on this list have any clout inside L3 to get this fixed? Cheers, GTG

3 3

Needed: Verizon Wireless DNS technical contact
by Alan Clegg 15 May '18

15 May '18

Hi! I'm dealing with an issue with the mnc480.mcc311.3gppnetwork.org zone and need to talk to someone at Verizon Wireless. Any direct contacts or pointers would be very much appreciated. Thanks! AlanC

1 0

AltDB bouncing emails
by Brian Rak 15 May '18

15 May '18

I've been trying to get some super old entries removed from altdb, however the db-admin email bounces: The mail system <db-admin(a)altdb.net>: host pobox.rubinbroadcasting.com[65.50.205.32] said: 550 5.7.1 Unable to relay (in reply to RCPT TO command) Is there another contact here? Also, if anyone from Internap/Voxel.net is around... I've been trying to find someone with a clue to remove some IRR entries, ref ticket 3190091

1 0

WiFi Technical Book Recommendations
by Mario Eirea 15 May '18

15 May '18

Salutations Looking for recommendations on books with a deepdive of WiFi infrastructure, protocol layout, best practices, etc. Hopefully including the newest specs. Input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks -ME Sent from Nine<http://www.9folders.com/>

4 3