- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

DHCPv6 relay software with RFC 6939 support
by Henri Wahl 26 Apr '17

26 Apr '17

Hello world, does anybody know of an open-source DHCPv6 relay software which supports client link-layer option as in RFC 6939? Thanks and regards Henri -- Henri Wahl IT Department Leibniz-Institut fuer Festkoerper- u. Werkstoffforschung Dresden tel: +49 (3 51) 46 59 - 797 email: h.wahl(a)ifw-dresden.de https://www.ifw-dresden.de Nagios status monitor Nagstamon: https://nagstamon.ifw-dresden.de DHCPv6 server dhcpy6d: https://dhcpy6d.ifw-dresden.de S/MIME: https://nagstamon.ifw-dresden.de/pubkeys/smime.pem PGP: https://nagstamon.ifw-dresden.de/pubkeys/pgp.asc IFW Dresden e.V., Helmholtzstrasse 20, D-01069 Dresden VR Dresden Nr. 1369 Vorstand: Prof. Dr. Burkard Hillebrands, Dr. Doreen Kirmse

2 1

Cogent LA issues
by Tim Embler 26 Apr '17

26 Apr '17

Recently it seems like anything that travels through te0-7-0-30.ccr41.lax04.atlas.cogentco.com is getting packet-loss and slowness. Is anyone else experiencing this?

1 0

Intros
by Benjamin Huang 24 Apr '17

24 Apr '17

Hey Guys; just joined this mailing list, trying to see if its still active -- Benjamin Huang JoinNecto.com 1(650) 488-1065

2 1

Covering prefix blackholing traffic to one of its covered prefixes....
by Steven Wallace 24 Apr '17

24 Apr '17

We have dual-homed sites that only accept routes from their peers, and default to their transit provider. A site may receive a covering prefix from a peer, but since they are not accepting the full table from their transit provider they don’t see the covered (i.e., more specific). In some cases the peer announcing the covering prefix blackholes traffic to the covered prefix. Is this accepted behavior, or should a peer announcing a covering prefix always delver packets to its covered routes? Does this happen often? Thanks! Steven Wallace Indiana University

3 2

Amazon EU-West 1 trouble
by Baldur Norddahl 23 Apr '17

23 Apr '17

Hello, We are currently experiencing massive packet loss from Amazon EU-West 1. This page http://ec2-reachability.amazonaws.com/ will show most of eu-west-1 as down but actually it is packet loss of 90+ %. I have found that if I shutdown our link to Hurricane Electric the problem disappears. Also it is only an IPv4 problem as IPv6 is fine (also going through Hurricane Electric). A traceroute shows everything ok until the first hop inside the Amazon network. The peering is apparently at AMS-IX. Right now we are ok because I am keeping the HE.Net connection down, but I managed to find another NLNOG Ring node that has the same problem: gigabit@casablanca01:~$ ping 52.16.0.2 PING 52.16.0.2 (52.16.0.2) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 52.16.0.2: icmp_seq=2 ttl=244 time=35.1 ms 64 bytes from 52.16.0.2: icmp_seq=34 ttl=244 time=35.2 ms 64 bytes from 52.16.0.2: icmp_seq=44 ttl=244 time=35.2 ms 64 bytes from 52.16.0.2: icmp_seq=52 ttl=244 time=35.2 ms ^C --- 52.16.0.2 ping statistics --- 72 packets transmitted, 4 received, 94% packet loss, time 71228ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 35.170/35.220/35.251/0.232 ms That IP is one from eu-west-1 taken from the ec2-reachability page. When I ping it with the HE.Net link down there is 0% packet loss. With it up we are seeing something like the above. However I notice that Casablanca is going out through Telia not HE. The return path could very well be via HE of course, there is no way to know that. From all the RING nodes I checked only Casablanca01 seems to experience the problem, so it appears it is not very wide spread. Anyone know how to get in contact with Amazon and have them debug this issue? Regards, Baldur

3 3

weebly.com contact
by rwebb 22 Apr '17

22 Apr '17

Anyone from weebly.com on here that can contact me off list about a possibly phishing site being hosted with you? Thanks,Robert Webb

3 2

Covering prefix blackholing traffic to one of its covered prefixes....
by Steven Wallace 21 Apr '17

21 Apr '17

We have dual-homed sites that only accept routes from their peers, and default to their transit provider. A site may receive a covering prefix from a peer, but since they are not accepting the full table from their transit provider they don’t see the covered (i.e., more specific). In some cases the peer announcing the covering prefix blackholes traffic to the covered prefix. Is this accepted behavior, or should a peer announcing a covering prefix always delver packets to its covered routes? Does this happen often? Thanks! Steven Wallace Indiana University

1 0

Meet up in San Francisco
by Benjamin Huang 21 Apr '17

21 Apr '17

Hey Guys: Piggy backing off a small meet up in SF yesterday, I've decided to start a monthly meet-up group where people can come and share to each other about stories they faced running a ISP Here's the event https://www.meetup.com/San-Francisco-Wireless-Broadband-Meet -Up/events/239368810/ -- Benjamin Huang JoinNecto.com 1(650) 488-1065

1 0

Vonage Security Contact
by Mark Rudholm 19 Apr '17

19 Apr '17

Anyone on here from Vonage who can contact me about an IRS scam that's using a live Vonage number as a callback number?

1 0

Lit buildings in Tysons Corner, VA?
by William Herrin 19 Apr '17

19 Apr '17

Hi folks, Does anyone have a map of who lights which buildings in Tysons Corner? Not the data centers themselves but the nearby office buildings. I'm trying to figure out who has service down westwood center drive, across from Equinix DC8/Tyco Road. Off list replies welcome; I'll summarize if I get any general-interest information. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin ................ herrin(a)dirtside.com bill(a)herrin.us Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>

1 0