January 1996 - Test - lists.nanog.org

208/8 announcements
by Alan Hannan 03 Jan '96

03 Jan '96

I am under the impression that the 208/8 network has not yet been assigned to anyone. It appears we are only up to 207.19/16. However, as someone (Avi?) pointed out earlier: | Cis3#sh ip bgp 208.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 long | BGP table version is 34728, local router ID is 192.35.171.193 | Status codes: s suppressed, * valid, > best, i - internal | Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete | | Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path | *>i208.0.1.0 192.35.171.34 1 50 0 3561 1280 3847 ? | *>i208.0.4.0 192.35.171.34 1 50 0 3561 1280 3847 ? | *>i208.0.5.0 192.35.171.34 1 50 0 3561 1280 3847 ? | *>i208.0.9.0 192.35.171.34 1 50 0 3561 1280 3847 ? | Cis3# Is anyone filtering these routes? From a customer perspective, I think it would be nice if my providers would do so. Or maybe these guys would filter them: | anka:~# whois 3847 | [rs.internic.net] | Internet Media Network, Inc. (ASN-IMN) | 20417 NORDHOFF STREET | CHATSWORTH, CA 91311 | | Autonomous System Name: IMN | Autonomous System Number: 3847 | | Coordinator: | Joffe, Rodney (RJ48) rjoffe(a)IMN.NET | 818-407-0000 | Alternate Contact: | Gibbs, Mark (MG148) mgibbs(a)RAIN.ORG | 818-700-6900 | | Record last updated on 23-Sep-94. | | The InterNIC Registration Services Host contains ONLY Internet Information | (Networks, ASN's, Domains, and POC's). | Please use the whois server at nic.ddn.mil for MILNET Information. | anka:~# I dunno, maybe I should filter them. What are other people doing? -alan

5 8

Re: Interconnects at NANOG
by salo＠msc.edu 03 Jan '96

03 Jan '96

> Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1996 12:03:48 -0700 (MST) > From: Ehud Gavron <GAVRON(a)ACES.COM> > Subject: Re: Interconnects at NANOG > To: srh(a)merit.edu > Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu, GAVRON(a)ACES.COM > > Can we agree that there's no longer any difference between MAE, NAP, and > Interconnect? [with the exception of ``the four priority NAPs''] > > Nit: Tucson has the C before the S... It is probably still appropriate to use the term "NAP" to refer to those interconnect points which are sponsored by the NSF under solicitation 93-52. The solicitation specifies the duties of a NAP Manager organization; read it for details. I believe that the NSF has three or four contracts (Cooperative Agreements to be more precise) in place with NAP Managers for the Sprint, MFS, Ameritech and PacBell NAPs. (I don't know whether Ameritech and PacBell are one or two Cooperative Agreements, although it is probably easy to look it up.) -tjs

1 0

Re: Interconnects at NANOG
by Ehud Gavron 03 Jan '96

03 Jan '96

Susan Harris writes: ... >MAE Phoenix, and the Tuscon NAP. Can we agree that there's no longer any difference between MAE, NAP, and Interconnect? [with the exception of ``the four priority NAPs''] Nit: Tucson has the C before the S... Ehud -- Ehud Gavron (EG76) gavron(a)Hearts.ACES.COM * Unsolicited Commercial E-Mail will cost $500/message under USC 47 * * which can be found online at http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/ *

1 0

208.0.x.x
by Christian Nielsen 03 Jan '96

03 Jan '96

not only are they in the bgp tables, one can even traceroute to them bash# traceroute 208.0.1.5 traceroute to 208.0.1.5 (208.0.1.5), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 slc-t1.eli.ut (206.29.221.1) 3 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 cir-OC48.a.slc-t1.vii.net (206.29.193.25) 5 ms 3 ms 3 ms 3 border2-hssi2-0.Denver.mci.net (204.70.29.9) 14 ms 14 ms 13 ms 4 core-fddi-1.Denver.mci.net (204.70.3.113) 16 ms 14 ms 14 ms 5 core-hssi-3.SanFrancisco.mci.net (204.70.1.38) 81 ms 183 ms 38 ms 6 border3-fddi-0.SanFrancisco.mci.net (204.70.2.163) 291 ms 257 ms 337 ms 7 smds.west.cix.net (149.20.64.1) 336 ms 76 ms 41 ms 8 149.20.21.2 (149.20.21.2) 61 ms 116 ms 54 ms 9 santa-barbara.la-frame.imn.net (204.74.127.253) 106 ms 54 ms 54 ms 10 208.0.1.1 (208.0.1.1) 58 ms 61 ms 58 ms 11 208.0.1.2 (208.0.1.2) 58 ms 58 ms 60 ms 12 208.0.1.1 (208.0.1.1) 61 ms 61 ms 61 ms and a traceroute to bash# traceroute 208.0.1.1 traceroute to 208.0.1.1 (208.0.1.1), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 slc-t1.eli.ut (206.29.221.1) 3 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 cir-OC48.a.slc-t1.vii.net (206.29.193.25) 5 ms 3 ms 3 ms 3 border2-hssi2-0.Denver.mci.net (204.70.29.9) 60 ms 112 ms 108 ms 4 core-fddi-1.Denver.mci.net (204.70.3.113) 134 ms 31 ms 16 ms 5 core-hssi-3.SanFrancisco.mci.net (204.70.1.38) 44 ms 44 ms 37 ms 6 border3-fddi-0.SanFrancisco.mci.net (204.70.2.163) 42 ms 38 ms 38 ms 7 smds.west.cix.net (149.20.64.1) 48 ms 41 ms 43 ms 8 149.20.21.2 (149.20.21.2) 61 ms 54 ms 54 ms 9 santa-barbara.la-frame.imn.net (204.74.127.253) 54 ms 54 ms 54 ms 10 204.74.97.254 (204.74.97.254) 67 ms 58 ms 58 ms and bash# ping 208.0.1.1 208.0.1.1 is alive what is going on.... bash# telnet 208.0.1.1 Trying 208.0.1.1 ... Connected to 208.0.1.1. Escape character is '^]'. ComOS - Livingston PortMaster login: holly cow, bash# ping 208.0.1.2 208.0.1.2 is alive bash# telnet 208.0.1.2 Trying 208.0.1.2 ... Connected to 208.0.1.2. Escape character is '^]'. User Access Verification Password: which is a cisco... so, someone has gotten around getting ips from the nic and gave them to themselves Christian Nielsen Vyzynz International Inc. cnielsen(a)vii.com,CN46,KB7HAP Phone 801-568-0999 Fax 801-568-0953 PS :) Private Email christian(a)nielsen.net ********************************************************************* * Unsolicited Commercial E-Mail will cost $500/message under USC 47 * * which can be found online at http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/* *********************************************************************

2 2

MAE-LA
by bmanning＠ISI.EDU 02 Jan '96

02 Jan '96

Hi, MAE-LA is now active at 4676 Admiralty Way. Expected turn-up at 1 Wilshire is 15 Jan 96. --bill

1 0

Interconnects at NANOG
by Susan R. Harris 02 Jan '96

02 Jan '96

Greetings - at the upcoming NANOG we'll be highlighting activities at several new U.S. interconnection points, including MAE Houston, MAE Phoenix, and the Tuscon NAP. Are there folks out there from other interconnects who'd also like to give a presentation? --Susan Harris

1 0

Routing Arbiter Daily Route Flap Reports
by Sean Doran 02 Jan '96

02 Jan '96

http://www.ra.net/~ra/statistics/flap.html is actually proving to be quite useful. Thanks RA gang. BTW, highlights from the 24 hours of Dec 31st: 1:AS1849 prefixes=159 flaps=5145 2:AS174 prefixes=54 flaps=3239 3:AS1257 prefixes=180 flaps=2987 4:AS278 prefixes=43 flaps=2984 5:AS114 prefixes=77 flaps=2777 6:AS3250 prefixes=68 flaps=2298 7:AS2018 prefixes=25 flaps=1393 8:AS2697 prefixes=25 flaps=1346 9:AS1324 prefixes=3 flaps=1218 10:AS1267 prefixes=16 flaps=1111 13:AS701 prefixes=22 flaps=912 16:AS2551 prefixes=16 flaps=717 19:AS813 prefixes=4 flaps=471 29:AS3561 prefixes=8 flaps=194 57:AS279 prefixes=3 flaps=79 118:AS86 prefixes=1 flaps=19 This is slightly different from what sl-mae-e.sprintlink.net sees, but not enough to make big complaints about, and largely it's because not everyone peers with the RSes. What's really appalling to me is that the top 10 origin ASes -- and in fact, only a tiny handful of prefixes in these origin ASes -- in the list account for 17 flaps a minute, or about 1/9th of the entire flap we were seeing at MAE-EAST alone during the same 24 hours. In practice, it's really only a fraction of these 650 prefixes that cause this amout of flap. Please everyone run bgp route dampening as close to the edges of their networks as much as possible so that individual prefixes like this one: SL-MAE-E>sh ip bgp 204.157.1.0 BGP routing table entry for 204.157.1.0 255.255.255.0,version 590853 Paths: (2 available, best #2, advertised over EBGP) 4200 5696, (suppressed due to dampening) 192.41.177.145 from 192.41.177.145 (205.137.59.254) Origin incomplete, metric 1, localpref 90, valid, external Dampinfo: penalty 10567, flapped 3175 times in 14:25:55, reuse in 0:57:10 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ don't have this amount of flap propagated throughout the Internet (except those bits that run bgp dampening at their edges). While manual fixes are fine and dandy, it just doesn't scale if the only practical tool is the occasional Seanogram to people's NOCs whenever I manually eyeball a really heavily flapping prefix. BGP dampening is well tested and well understood, and will eliminate this particular case of flap, which is to the good of everyone. Sean.

1 0