- Test - lists.nanog.org

RPKI Documentation as an open source project
by Alex Band 01 Feb '19

01 Feb '19

Hey all, A couple on months ago we started putting together an FAQ on RPKI [0] which led to quite a number of community contributions. We decided to expand upon this project and write comprehensive RPKI documentation, as an open source project. Other than reading every RFC on the topic, this should give operators a good understanding of the moving parts involved, and how to use RPKI in the real world. We got to the point where we think we have all the basics covered and made it available here: https://rpki.readthedocs.io As this is a project on GitHub [1] and managed using the Sphinx documentation tooling, we welcome corrections, additions, readability improvements and even translations. Feel free to create an issue or pull request on GitHub. Hope this is useful! See y’all in S.F. Cheers, Martin, Tim & Alex The NLnet Labs RPKI Team [0] https://github.com/NLnetLabs/rpki-faq [1] https://github.com/NLnetLabs/rpki-doc

1 0

Google you have a problem.
by Mark Andrews 01 Feb '19

01 Feb '19

[beetle:~/git/bind9] marka% fetch -v https://www.google.com/jsapi looking up www.google.com connecting to www.google.com:443 SSL connection established using ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 Certificate subject: /C=US/ST=California/L=Mountain View/O=Google LLC/CN=www.google.com Certificate issuer: /C=US/O=Google Trust Services/CN=Google Internet Authority G3 requesting https://www.google.com/jsapi fetch: https://www.google.com/jsapi: Bad Gateway [beetle:~/git/bind9] marka% curl -v https://www.google.com/jsapi * Trying 2607:f8b0:4007:80e::2004... * TCP_NODELAY set * Trying 172.217.14.100... * TCP_NODELAY set * Connected to www.google.com (2607:f8b0:4007:80e::2004) port 443 (#0) * ALPN, offering http/1.1 * Cipher selection: ALL:!EXPORT:!EXPORT40:!EXPORT56:!aNULL:!LOW:!RC4:@STRENGTH * successfully set certificate verify locations: * CAfile: /opt/local/share/curl/curl-ca-bundle.crt CApath: none * TLSv1.2 (OUT), TLS header, Certificate Status (22): * TLSv1.2 (OUT), TLS handshake, Client hello (1): * TLSv1.2 (IN), TLS handshake, Server hello (2): * TLSv1.2 (IN), TLS handshake, Certificate (11): * TLSv1.2 (IN), TLS handshake, Server key exchange (12): * TLSv1.2 (IN), TLS handshake, Server finished (14): * TLSv1.2 (OUT), TLS handshake, Client key exchange (16): * TLSv1.2 (OUT), TLS change cipher, Change cipher spec (1): * TLSv1.2 (OUT), TLS handshake, Finished (20): * TLSv1.2 (IN), TLS change cipher, Change cipher spec (1): * TLSv1.2 (IN), TLS handshake, Finished (20): * SSL connection using TLSv1.2 / ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 * ALPN, server accepted to use http/1.1 * Server certificate: * subject: C=US; ST=California; L=Mountain View; O=Google LLC; CN=www.google.com * start date: Jan 15 13:15:00 2019 GMT * expire date: Apr 9 13:15:00 2019 GMT * subjectAltName: host "www.google.com" matched cert's "www.google.com" * issuer: C=US; O=Google Trust Services; CN=Google Internet Authority G3 * SSL certificate verify ok. > GET /jsapi HTTP/1.1 > Host: www.google.com > User-Agent: curl/7.63.0 > Accept: */* > < HTTP/1.1 502 Bad Gateway < Content-Length: 0 < Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 22:20:34 GMT < Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 < Alt-Svc: quic=":443"; ma=2592000; v="44,43,39" < * Connection #0 to host www.google.com left intact [beetle:~/git/bind9] marka% curl -4 -v https://www.google.com/jsapi * Trying 172.217.14.100... * TCP_NODELAY set * Connected to www.google.com (172.217.14.100) port 443 (#0) * ALPN, offering http/1.1 * Cipher selection: ALL:!EXPORT:!EXPORT40:!EXPORT56:!aNULL:!LOW:!RC4:@STRENGTH * successfully set certificate verify locations: * CAfile: /opt/local/share/curl/curl-ca-bundle.crt CApath: none * TLSv1.2 (OUT), TLS header, Certificate Status (22): * TLSv1.2 (OUT), TLS handshake, Client hello (1): * TLSv1.2 (IN), TLS handshake, Server hello (2): * TLSv1.2 (IN), TLS handshake, Certificate (11): * TLSv1.2 (IN), TLS handshake, Server key exchange (12): * TLSv1.2 (IN), TLS handshake, Server finished (14): * TLSv1.2 (OUT), TLS handshake, Client key exchange (16): * TLSv1.2 (OUT), TLS change cipher, Change cipher spec (1): * TLSv1.2 (OUT), TLS handshake, Finished (20): * TLSv1.2 (IN), TLS change cipher, Change cipher spec (1): * TLSv1.2 (IN), TLS handshake, Finished (20): * SSL connection using TLSv1.2 / ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 * ALPN, server accepted to use http/1.1 * Server certificate: * subject: C=US; ST=California; L=Mountain View; O=Google LLC; CN=www.google.com * start date: Jan 15 13:15:00 2019 GMT * expire date: Apr 9 13:15:00 2019 GMT * subjectAltName: host "www.google.com" matched cert's "www.google.com" * issuer: C=US; O=Google Trust Services; CN=Google Internet Authority G3 * SSL certificate verify ok. > GET /jsapi HTTP/1.1 > Host: www.google.com > User-Agent: curl/7.63.0 > Accept: */* > < HTTP/1.1 502 Bad Gateway < Content-Length: 0 < Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 22:24:43 GMT < Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 < Alt-Svc: quic=":443"; ma=2592000; v="44,43,39" < * Connection #0 to host www.google.com left intact [beetle:~/git/bind9] marka% traceroute 172.217.14.100 traceroute to 172.217.14.100 (172.217.14.100), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets 1 172.30.42.65 (172.30.42.65) 1.340 ms 3.278 ms 1.673 ms 2 * * * 3 * * * 4 59.154.18.232 (59.154.18.232) 13.710 ms hu0-5-0-0.22btpr01.optus.net.au (59.154.18.234) 24.311 ms 13.662 ms 5 72.14.219.128 (72.14.219.128) 12.445 ms 43.781 ms 10.760 ms 6 108.170.247.74 (108.170.247.74) 12.743 ms 12.797 ms 108.170.247.59 (108.170.247.59) 14.167 ms 7 216.239.50.172 (216.239.50.172) 159.864 ms 162.324 ms 157.546 ms 8 108.170.230.130 (108.170.230.130) 147.234 ms 151.094 ms 152.088 ms 9 108.170.247.129 (108.170.247.129) 152.073 ms 149.194 ms 149.055 ms 10 108.170.230.137 (108.170.230.137) 149.697 ms 150.042 ms 74.125.252.75 (74.125.252.75) 149.363 ms 11 lax31s01-in-f4.1e100.net (172.217.14.100) 158.438 ms 147.982 ms 149.593 ms [beetle:~/git/bind9] marka% -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka(a)isc.org

2 5

Re: Waves between Buffalo and Manhattan
by Rob Wcislo 31 Jan '19

31 Jan '19

GTT has this route via legacy Hibernia [Image] Rob Wcislo VP, Sales GTT (954)305-2289 On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:00 AM -0500, wrote: GTT can sell waves between Buffalo-NYC bypassing Albany via Newark. From: NANOG <nanog-bounces(a)nanog.org> On Behalf Of Tom Beecher Sent: Friday, January 18, 2019 3:58 PM To: NANOG Mailing List <nanog(a)nanog.org> Subject: Re: Waves between Buffalo and Manhattan If it's for the use case I suspect it would be for, Firstlight and Windstream should bring you closer to where you'll want to be on the Buffalo side. On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 1:38 PM Benjamin Hatton <bhatton(a)htva.net<mailto:bhatton@htva.net>> wrote: The regional players in the area that may have something that would bypass Albany would be Firstlight (Formerly Finger Lakes Technology Group) and Uniti. Firstlight has more fiber in the area, and would be my choice over Uniti, I have services with both. Contact me off list if you want an introduction to a sales guy. On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 1:00 PM Mehmet Akcin <mehmet(a)akcin.net<mailto:mehmet@akcin.net>> wrote: hi Jason https://dev.networkatlas.org<https://url.emailprotection.link/?a-r1D0y9U1MOQhiHHdIdbG_R7A0sKCid4QH4OqBWz…> shows Zayo, Windstream (and Earthlink) there. We are working with Charter , Level3/CL to load their fiber routes , but it will be there and you will be able to connect with the sales teams directly by clicking on a route. . In addition to that there are other small players in this region. Mehmet On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 9:49 AM Jason Lixfeld <jason+nanog(a)lixfeld.ca<mailto:jason%2Bnanog@lixfeld.ca>> wrote: Hello, Does anyone have knowledge of carriers who are able to deliver 10G or 100G waves between Buffalo and Manhattan that *do not* touch Albany? I know Zayo is one. I’m waiting to hear back from CenturyLink. I’ve reviewed networkatlas.org<https://url.emailprotection.link/?a1AgcS990NxBSGfMW_Ik8M_uM9FRuu3jqLwqpqIvy…>, to see if anything pops up there, but otherwise I’m coming up empty. Thanks in advance.

1 0

Effects of Cold Front on Internet Infrastructure - U.S. Midwest
by Mark Tinka 31 Jan '19

31 Jan '19

For anyone running IP networks in the Midwest, are you having to do anything special to keep your networks up? For the data centres, is this cold front a chance to reduce air conditioning costs, or is it actually straining the infrastructure? I'm curious, from a +27-degree C summer's day here in Johannesburg. Mark.

12 20

Latency between Dallas and west coast
by Nathanael Catangay Cariaga 31 Jan '19

31 Jan '19

I would like to know if anyone here maintains average latency ranges between Dallas and Internet Exchanges at the west coast? Is it normal to have around 192ms to 200ms between the two points? Thanks in advance -nathan

5 5

Re: BGP Experiment
by hank＠interall.co.il 31 Jan '19

31 Jan '19

On 23/01/2019 19:40, Job Snijders wrote: I agree with Job. Continue the experiment and warn us in advance. -Hank > Dear Ben, all, > > I'm not sure this experiment should be canceled. On the public Internet > we MUST assume BGP speakers are compliant with the BGP-4 protocol. > Broken BGP-4 speakers are what they are: broken. They must be fixed, or > the operator must accept the consequences. > > "Get a sandbox like every other researcher" is not a fair statement, one > can also posit "Get a compliant BGP-4 implementation like every other > network operator". > > When bad guys explicitly seek to target these Asian and Australian > operators you reference (who apparently have not upgraded to the vendor > recommended release), using *valid* BGP updates, will a politely emailed > request help resolve the situation? Of course not! > > Stopping the experiment is only treating symptoms, the root cause must > be addressed: broken software. > > Kind regards, > > Job

1 0

Re: DNS Flag Day, Friday, Feb 1st, 2019
by Mark Andrews 31 Jan '19

31 Jan '19

Don’t forget the reverse tree as well. > On 31 Jan 2019, at 5:40 pm, Hank Nussbacher <hank(a)efes.iucc.ac.il> wrote: > > On 31/01/2019 07:18, Mark Andrews wrote: > > There is some secret, silent block on my postings to NANOG that the admins have not yet discovered. In the interim can one of you please proxy to the list that people should not forget about testing their inverse as well - *.in-addr.arpa via https://ednscomp.isc.org/ednscomp > > Regards, > Hank -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka(a)isc.org

1 0

Calling Jason Lixfeld @ DE-CIX NY
by Marijana Novakovic 31 Jan '19

31 Jan '19

Greetings Jason, Do you see your new IPv4 session UP at DE-CIX NY with LinkedIn? Thanks ! Kind regards, Mara

1 0

Amazon Peering
by Darin Steffl 30 Jan '19

30 Jan '19

Hey all, Does anyone have a direct contact to get a peering session established with Amazon at an IX? I sent a peering request Dec 2017 and two more times this Sept and Nov with no response. I sent to peering(a)amazon.com and received one automated response back so I know they received my email but nothing since. -- Darin Steffl Minnesota WiFi www.mnwifi.com 507-634-WiFi <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

11 18

Call for Presentations - CHI-NOG 09 (May 23rd)
by Tom Kacprzynski 30 Jan '19

30 Jan '19

CHI-NOG 09 - (Chicago Network Operators Group) May 23rd, 2019, Chicago, IL The Chicago Network Operators Group (CHI-NOG) is a vendor neutral organization. Our goal is to create a regional community of network professionals by presenting the latest technology trends, enabling collaboration and providing networking opportunities. CHI-NOG will be hosting its ninth annual conference on May 23rd, 2019 in downtown Chicago. For more information on the conference please see event's page ( http://chinog.org/chi-nog-09/) The CHI-NOG Program Committee is seeking proposals for presentations on relevant networking technologies with the focus on the following topics: * Network Automation / DevOps / CI-CD * Edge Computing and Networking * Interconnection/Peering * 5G Mobile * Open Networking * Overlay Networking Technologies * Low Latency Networks/Financial Networks * Network Security / DDoS * Academic Research in Networking and Related Infrastructure Fields. * Internet Monitoring * AI in Network Analytics * Advanced BGP/MPLS Technologies * Optical Networking/Data Center Interconnect * Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) * Software Defined Networking (SDN) * Network Traffic Engineering (TE) * Data Center Fabric * Tutorials Session Format Each presentation is 30 minutes, which includes a question and answer time. The duration can be extended per individual request to 60 minutes and will be considered by the program committee. Presentations should not contain any marketing material and should avoid discussion of commercial products but rather focus on the underlying technology. Key Dates 3/25/2019 - Presentation Abstract Submission Deadline 4/02/2019 - Program Committee's Selection Decision 4/15/2019 - Full Presentation Slides Submission Deadline 5/23/2019 - Conference Submission Please submit presentation’s abstract proposal by filling out the submission form at http://chinog.org/chi-nog-09/abstract-submission/ . Once your presentation is selected please provide the program committee with your photo and a short bio for web publication. All accepted speakers will receive complimentary tickets to the conference. For past presentation please see the archives at http://chinog.org/presentation-archive/. The program committee is looking forward to your submission and attendance.

1 0