- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Microsoft blocking mail
by Chris Garrett 15 Oct '15

15 Oct '15

Is there anyone on-list who can assist with an erroneous spam block to Outlook.com <http://outlook.com/>? One our our net blocks was added earlier today, 216.128.11.0/25 and I am having zero luck getting through to a clueful person at MS. Thank you! Chris Garrett | Network Operations Director tel: 678.370.2012 | mobile: 512.605.9620

11 17

Microsoft / Outlook.com contact???
by Robert Glover 15 Oct '15

15 Oct '15

Anyone from Microsoft / Outlook.com / Office365 around? We are having a problem with email from a certain IP being rejected with code FBLW15. We have gone through the normal channels but have received no communication/acknowledgement from Microsoft at all. Emails to any domain with *outlook.com MX records are rejected with the following: --- host klatencor-com0i.mail.eo.outlook.com[207.46.163.138] said: 550 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [65.111.<snip>.<snip>] blocked using FBLW15; To request removal from this list please forward this message to delist(a)messaging.microsoft.com (in reply to RCPT TO command) --- We have emailed delist(a)messaging.microsoft.com, with no response. The IP in question is not showing up on any blacklists that we have searched (mxtoolbox, multi-rbl-check, etc etc) Thanks -Robert

4 7

RE: IP-Echelon Compliance
by Seth Arnold 15 Oct '15

15 Oct '15

Hi All, Please feel free to get in touch with us to request changes. Expedited processing of your requests is offered through the Notice Recipient Management for ISPs section of our website located here: http://www.ip-echelon.com/isp-notice-management/ <http://www.ip-echelon.com/isp-notice-management/> If you are in the U.S., please also ensure that your change is reflected in the records of the US Copyright Office: http://copyright.gov/onlinesp/list/a_agents.html <http://copyright.gov/onlinesp/list/a_agents.html> Cheers, Seth

21 25

Re: IPv6 and Android auto conf
by Hugo Slabbert 15 Oct '15

15 Oct '15

On Mon 2015-Sep-28 21:15:02 +0530, Anurag Bhatia <me(a)anuragbhatia.com> wrote: >Hi Hugo > > >(My reply in line) > >On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 8:50 PM, Hugo Slabbert <hugo(a)slabnet.com> wrote: > >> >> On Mon 2015-Sep-28 17:33:46 +0530, Anurag Bhatia <me(a)anuragbhatia.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hello everyone >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I recently got IPv6 working at home LAN. My Android device (Google Nexus >>> 5) >>> is connected via wifi to LAN and LAN's core router is Map2N >>> <http://routerboard.com/RBmAP2n>. I have a /64 on the LAN with >>> "advertise" >>> enabled to make ND to work and have autoconfig working on all devices. >>> There are bunch of other layer 2 devices in LAN but all just acting as >>> layer 2 transparently and core L3 remains on Map2N. >>> >>> >>> All works well for most part but only trouble I am getting is on Nexus 5 >>> where after around 24hrs IPv6 stops working. >>> >> >> How, specifically, does it "stop working" on the Nexus 5? >> - temp addresses expired and does not generate new, valid, slaac addresses? >> - RA entry ages out and doesn't get refreshed? >> - cannot reach v6 gateway (ND fails somehow)? > >The last one - everything appears normal (with 4 IPv6 addresses on the >device) but I cannot point any neighbor in same VLAN. Nor I can ping from >them. > That sounds either like NDP is busted on the phone or the AP is eating the Android device's ND traffic. When this happens, does the Android device show up in the ND cache of the other devices on the network that you are trying to reach/ping? Does it show up in the ND cache of the segment's router? If the Android device isn't showing up in other hosts ND caches when you try to ping them, can you do a pcap on one of those hosts when you try to initiate pings from the Android device to confirm if NS packets are being received? Have you tried doing captures on the Android device directly [1][2][3] to see if it still receives RAs when this happens? The symptoms seem to possibly line up with Android issue #32662[4]. Possible you're being hit by that? > >The visible impact I see of it is slightly slow behavior of IPv6 enabled >apps/websites which take a few seconds, timeout and fallback to IPv4. > > > > >Thanks. > >> >> >> Only unusual thing I notice at that time is that phone 4 IPv6 as opposed >>> to 2 (autoconf and temporary randomised address). Seems like some kind of >>> issue in way NDP works either on Microtik or phone. The fix I am doing from >>> few days is to restart wifi and phone interface gets fresh (two) IPv6 >>> addresses and all works well >>> again. >>> >>> >>> >>> Anyone facing similar issue? (Note: No issues on OS X or iOS which are in >>> same LAN) >>> >>> >>> I can try DHCPv6 but I guess most of devices do not support it yet. (I see >>> support for that in routerboard though). >>> >>> >> Unless something's changed, DHCPv6 IA_NA isn't an option for getting an >> IPv6 address assigned to an Android device[1][2] >> >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> Anurag Bhatia >>> anuragbhatia.com >>> >>> >>> PGP Key Fingerprint: 3115 677D 2E94 B696 651B 870C C06D D524 245E 58E2 >>> >> >> >> -- >> Hugo >> >> hugo(a)slabnet.com: email, xmpp/jabber >> PGP fingerprint (B178313E): >> CF18 15FA 9FE4 0CD1 2319 >> 1D77 9AB1 0FFD B178 313E >> >> [1] https://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=32621 >> [2] http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2015-June/075915.html >> > > > >-- > > >Anurag Bhatia >anuragbhatia.com > > >PGP Key Fingerprint: 3115 677D 2E94 B696 651B 870C C06D D524 245E 58E2 -- Hugo hugo(a)slabnet.com: email, xmpp/jabber PGP fingerprint (B178313E): CF18 15FA 9FE4 0CD1 2319 1D77 9AB1 0FFD B178 313E (also on textsecure & redphone) [1] https://sites.google.com/site/androidarts/packet-sniffer (needs root) [2] https://www.kismetwireless.net/android-pcap/ (some limitations, but shouldn't need root) [3] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=lv.n3o.shark (needs root) [4] https://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=32662

2 1

Fw: important message
by Alberta Prieto 14 Oct '15

14 Oct '15

Hello! Important message, please read <http://break-your-fear.com/money.php?nbv> Alberta Prieto

1 0

Charter Communication internet issues in SE Washington State.
by Mark Keymer 13 Oct '15

13 Oct '15

Hi All, I was just wondering if anyone on the list might have some info on the ongoing issues with Charter in SE Washington state? I have heard that the issues are in Yakima WA. Off-list or on-list replies welcomed. Sincerely, -- Mark Keymer

1 0

Re: IP-Echelon Compliance
by Scott Weeks 13 Oct '15

13 Oct '15

--- seth(a)ip-echelon.com wrote: If you send the request via this webform or via email to the address specified in the notice... ----------------------------------- Maybe I'm cynical, but... :-) That's one good way to assure your email spam list is of a higher quality. Turn your automated spam cannon directly at network engineers, rather than to a whois email address. Shortcuts and all that... scott

1 0

GPON Optical Levels
by Colton Conor 13 Oct '15

13 Oct '15

We are deploying our first GPON network, and are trying to get a sense of what is a good optical level per ONT. The equipment install guide says the following: Measure the levels of the 1550 dBm and 1490 dBm receive optical inputs using an optical power meter. The input range should be between -27.0 dBm to -8 dBm. Attached are the measurements I can see and graph from the ONT side. Trying to get a sense of what range we would graph as good (green) measured within the clear, what we could consider yellow as working but out of optimal range, and what we could consider poor (red) range. What about the Laser Bias Current, Optics Module Voltage, and Optics Module temperature?

4 4

/27 the new /24
by Justin Wilson - MTIN 12 Oct '15

12 Oct '15

I was in a discussion the other day and several Tier2 providers were talking about the idea of adjusting their BGP filters to accept prefixes smaller than a /24. A few were saying they thought about going down to as small as a /27. This was mainly due to more networks coming online and not having even a /24 of IPv4 space. The first argument is against this is the potential bloat the global routing table could have. Many folks have worked hard for years to summarize and such. others were saying they would do a /26 or bigger. However, what do we do about the new networks which want to do BGP but only can get small allocations from someone (either a RIR or one of their upstreams)? Just throwing that out there. Seems like an interesting discussion. Justin Wilson j2sw(a)mtin.net --- http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman Internet Exchange - Peering - Distributed Fabric

51 131

IP-Echelon Compliance
by Baldur Norddahl 11 Oct '15

11 Oct '15

Hi I am sure all of you know of these guys. But what do you do when they keep spamming your abuse address with reports for illegal downloads from IP-addresses that are in no way related to our business? I tried contacting them. And was told repeatedly that I had to update whois information if I want the reports to be sent to another address. How I do that for IP-ranges that are not mine is a good question. Besides the whois information for said IP-ranges already have valid abuse information and it is not our email address. Do I just block them for spamming? Regards, Baldur

8 8