- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Colo Capacity quote in Renton, WA 98057, USA needed
by Don Gould 01 Jun '15

01 Jun '15

Hi, I have half a dozen servers in a DC in Renton, WA 98057, USA. I'm looking for quotes 7 RU with 100mbit PIR. I do need A and B side power. The pricing from my current provider has got out of hand and they have burnt the relationship. As a result I am interested in hearing from others who might be interested in servicing this small requirement. Cheers Don -- Don Gould 31 Acheson Ave Mairehau Christchurch, New Zealand Ph: + 64 3 348 7235 Mobile: + 64 21 114 0699 Ph: +61 3 9111 1821 (Melb)

2 2

Giganews/AS30094 Contact
by Carlos Friacas 01 Jun '15

01 Jun '15

Hello, Can someone from Giganews/AS30094 please contact me off-list? Thanks & Regards, ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carlos Friacas See: Network Services Area www.fccn.pt FCT - Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia www.fct.pt FCCN Unit www.geant.net Av. do Brasil, 101, 1700-066 Lisboa, Portugal, Europe www.gigapix.pt Tel:+351 218440100 NOC:+351 218440101 Fax:+351 218472167 www.6deploy.eu ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Internet is just routes (550752/22735), naming (billions) & ... people!"

1 0

Suddenlink RWHOIS = down
by Blair Trosper 01 Jun '15

01 Jun '15

Can someone from Suddenlink contact me offlist (or just handle) for the fact that your rwhois server is offline? Found a referral to rwhois.suddenlink.net:4321. connect: Connection refused

1 0

300+ms of hotel wifi bufferbloat - peaking at 1.5 sec!
by Dave Taht 01 Jun '15

01 Jun '15

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/578850 I would get a kick out of it if folk here tried this new speedtest periodically (on the "cable" setting) during the nanog conference. ;) There is a hires option for more detail on the resulting charts... (or fiddled with "flent" (flent.org)) -- Dave Täht What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone? https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast

4 5

Re: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial?
by Scott Weeks 01 Jun '15

01 Jun '15

--- nogs(a)border6.com wrote: From: Pawel Rybczyk <nogs(a)border6.com> platform where we included new feature called That might be interesting for you. ------------------------------------------- This might be interesting for you. https://www.nanog.org/list Please read #5 before going further. Product Evangelist -------------------------------------- BLECH! I need a shower. scott

2 1

Re: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial?
by Pawel Rybczyk 01 Jun '15

01 Jun '15

Hi, We've have recently published new version of our BGP routing optimization platform where we included new feature called: vRouter. That might be interesting for you. The vRouter provides route summarization support to BGP routers whose TCAM is unable to hold the entire actual feed of Internet prefixes. In this case BGP edge routers work in 'Selective Route Download' mode and transmit the full routing table to the vRouter. The NSI vRouter selects a number of prefixes to which the most data is routed and advertises the necessary routes back to the edge router. Thereby the edge router does not have to support the entire routing table, but only the routes it needs to reach. Please contact me off-list if you need more details. Regards, Pawel Rybczyk Product Evangelist Border 6 On 05/31/2015 10:46 PM, Jason Canady wrote: > If your traffic is small, you could setup a VyOS box. You can still get > redundancy by having two switches, each one connected to an upstream > provider receiving a default route. Then hookup your VyOS router to > each switch and receive full routes to that. You will need a /29 subnet > from your providers to pull this off. If your VyOS box goes down for > whatever reason, you will failover to using one or the other switch. > Announce your prefixes using the BGP session on each switch so that your > inbound traffic doesn't hit the VyOS box. >

1 0

Multiple vendors' IPv6 issues
by David Sotnick 31 May '15

31 May '15

Hi NANOG, The company I work for has no business case for being on the IPv6-Internet. However, I am an inquisitive person and I am always looking to learn new things, so about 3 years ago I started down the IPv6 path. This was early 2012. Fast forward to today. We have a /44 presence for our company's multiple sites; All our desktop computers have been on the IPv6 Internet since June, 2012 and we have a few AAAAs in our external DNS for some key services — and, there have been bugs. *Lots* of bugs. Now, maybe (_maybe_) I can have some sympathy for smaller network companies (like Arista Networks at the time) to not quite have their act together as far as IPv6 goes, but for larger, well-established companies to still have critical IPv6 bugs is just inexcusable! This month has just been the most disheartening time working with IPv6. Vendor 1: Aruba Networks. Upon adding an IPv6 address to start managing our WiFi controller over IPv6, I receive a call from our Telecom Lead saying that or WiFi VoIP phones have just gone offline. WHAT? All I did was add an IPv6 address to a management interface which has *nothing* to do with our VoIP system or SSID, ACLs, policies, roles, etc. Vendor 2: Palo Alto Networks: After upgrading our firewalls from a version which has a nasty bug where the IPv6 neighbor table wasn't being cleaned up properly (which would overflow the table and break IPv6), we now have a *new* IPv6 neighbor discovery bug where one of our V6-enabled DMZ hosts just falls of the IPv6 network. The only solution: clear the neighbor table on the Palo Alto or the client (linux) host. Vendor 3: Arista Networks: We are seeing a very similar ND bug with Arista. This one is slightly more interesting because it only started after upgrading our Arista EOS code — and it only appears to affect Virtual Machines which are behind our RedHat Enterprise Virtualization cluster. None of the hundreds of VMware-connected hosts are affected. The symptom is basically the same as the Palo Alto bug. Neighbor table gets in some weird state where ND breaks and the host is unreachable until the neighbor table is cleared. Oh, and the final straw today, which is *almost* leading me to throw in the IPv6 towel completely (for now): On certain hosts (VMs), scp'ing a file over the [Arista] LAN (10 gigabit LAN) takes 5 minutes over IPv6 and <1 second over IPv4. What happened? It really saddens me that it is still not receiving anywhere near the kind of QA (partly as a result of lack of adoption) that IPv4 has. Oh, and let's not forget everybody's "favorite" vendor, Cisco. Why is it, Cisco, that I have to restart my IPv6 OSPF3 process on my ASA every time my Palo Alto firewall crashes and fails over, otherwise none of my VPN clients can connect via IPv6? Why do you hurt me so, IPv6? I just wanted to be friends, and now I just want to break up with you. Maybe we can try to be friends again when your vendors get their shit together. -David

10 9

Re: westin hotel network
by Randy Bush 30 May '15

30 May '15

> only a 1.5 seconds of bufferbloat. Mind If I repost that result? > (would prefer you did to this list) http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/578850

1 0

westin hotel network
by Randy Bush 30 May '15

30 May '15

ryuu.psg.com:/Users/randy> ping rsync.tools.ietf.org PING zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (64.170.98.42): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 64.170.98.42: icmp_seq=0 ttl=53 time=11.751 ms 64 bytes from 64.170.98.42: icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=12.207 ms 64 bytes from 64.170.98.42: icmp_seq=2 ttl=53 time=11.444 ms 64 bytes from 64.170.98.42: icmp_seq=3 ttl=53 time=12.963 ms ^C --- zinfandel.tools.ietf.org ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 11.444/12.091/12.963/0.572 ms ryuu.psg.com:/Users/randy> rsync -vaHx --delete rsync.tools.ietf.org::xml2rfc.bibxml/bibxml3 $HOME/refs/id rsync: failed to connect to rsync.tools.ietf.org: Host is down (64) rsync error: error in socket IO (code 10) at /SourceCache/rsync/rsync-45/rsync/clientserver.c(105) [receiver=2.6.9] sheesh!

3 2

gmail security is a joke
by Markus 30 May '15

30 May '15

Did you know that anyone, anywhere in the world can get into a gmail account merely by knowing its creation date (month and year is sufficient) and the last login date (try "today")? What a joke. Try it by yourself, its "fun". Even worse, once the attacker had control of your account once, and you reset the PW and then enable 2-factor-authentication, he will always come back because it is sufficient for him to know one of the last passwords to reset it again. This will totally work around 2-factor-authentication and allows him to remove/change recovery E-Mail + phone + turn off 2FA. There's no way to get rid of him. What a mess! I have a gmail account that mostly sends mail and barely receives any. This is probably why it works so damn easy. Otherwise the PW recovery process will ask you for the E-Mail addresses of people that you have received mail from in the past. But even this can get easily guessed/researched.

34 61