December 1998 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Is the US domain screwed up, or is it Internic, or whut?
by Ehud Gavron 29 Dec '98

29 Dec '98

jp.co.pima.az.us is a perfectly good domain with servers kappa.jp.co.pima.az.us ns.pima.gov arizona.edu The root servers claim the following can give me good answers: Server: A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET Address: 198.41.0.4 Authoritative answers can be found from: US nameserver = VENERA.ISI.EDU US nameserver = EXCALIBUR.USC.EDU US nameserver = NS.ISI.EDU US nameserver = RS0.INTERNIC.NET US nameserver = NS.UU.NET US nameserver = ADMII.ARL.MIL However, of those, only the first three respond correctly to a lookup. RS0.INTERNIC.NET and NS.UU.NET give me an obsolete server (tophat). ADMII.ARL.MIL gives me no records found. Is it that I'm just too stupid to use nslookup/dig on a Tuesday, or is there a configuration issue here somewhere? Ehud

1 0

IGP Implementation
by Dan Rabb 29 Dec '98

29 Dec '98

Can anyone refer me to a good whitepaper on IS-IS and/or any documents that compare IS-IS to OSPF as an IGP? Private replies would be appreciated, I will post a summary of all resources. Thank you, Dan Rabb digital broadcast network (314) 733-3127 dan(a)dbn.net

1 0

Re: OUTAGE: DACS failure in USWEST/spokane
by Nathan Stratton 28 Dec '98

28 Dec '98

On Mon, 28 Dec 1998, Deepak Jain wrote: > In all cases where the telco/clec/ixc demarcs the equipment in the > customer's offices/pop doesn't the customer not only provide power, but > space and cooling? Yep. > I don't think we have a facility that doesn't provide power, cooling and > space to each carrier we use. They still provide their own battery > shelves, rectify their own D.C. power in some cases, but we still provide > the "line A/C" that runs through our batteries and generators. Yep. > Most facilities I have toured seemed to be setup similarly. > > Are these facilities' setups different than most others? Most larger ISPs are able to get the IXC/ILECs to place there hardware in the customers space, but with many smaller ISPs this is not the case. The is more then case with ILECs who like to place SONET hardware in a common building location and not in the customers space. Many times when the ILEC does put a MUX in the customers space it is just a stub off of a MUX somewhere in the building. -- Check out the new CLEC mailing list at http://www.robotics.net/clec ><> Nathan Stratton Telecom & ISP Consulting www.robotics.net nathan(a)robotics.net > -Deepak. > AiNET

1 0

VoIP at last (Atlanta) NANOG?
by Pete Kruckenberg 28 Dec '98

28 Dec '98

Hate it when this happens... I'm having a conversation with someone about VoIP, and I am remembering something about the last NANOG where someone was talking about building VoIP gateways where they used DSPs to work directly with the digitally-encoded voice (PCM?) signal rather than the "normal" way. If anyone remembers this presentation (I may have been in an alternate reality at the time), could you remind me who gave it? Thanks. Pete.

1 0

Re: OUTAGE: DACS failure in USWEST/spokane
by Sean Donelan 28 Dec '98

28 Dec '98

SEAN(a)dra.COM (Sean Donelan) writes: >This morning USWEST lost a DACS serving Spokane (and other places >in Washington State). Now the story starts changing. The telco is now saying it was a power outage, and the standby power failed at the central office. -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

5 5

Re: OUTAGE: DACS failure in USWEST/spokane
by Sean Donelan 28 Dec '98

28 Dec '98

rmeyer(a)mhsc.COM (Roeland M.J. Meyer) writes: >After five years of dealing with USworst ... dumb management. Those guys >couldn't find a clue in a clue factory. The Colorado Public utilities The reason I asked is the "problem" doesn't seem to be confined to USWEST. I've experienced the DACS problem with different RBOCS and several inter-exchange carriers. So I don't think it is just a USWEST issue. I don't know the DACS vendor used in the various incidents, so there may be a correlation by equipment vendor. In this incident, it turned out not to be a DACS problem, but a power problem. Nevertheless, my initial comments did cause a number of people to go Hmm? I received a several responses. From the anedoctal reports, something seems amiss. Several people reported a detectable up-tick in DACS related problems this year. Was there some sort of upgrade everyone installed their DACS in the last year? Even if it is just customer service reps playing the "Wheel of Excuses," there is usually some problem trend which leads them to start using a particular problem to close trouble tickets. Most customer serice reps wouldn't know a DACS if it fell on them. Someone must be using the term in their presence. -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

1 0

Re: New resource available!
by jprovo＠ma.ultranet.com 27 Dec '98

27 Dec '98

[snip] >> Care to explain why the heck we need yet another forum for that sort of stuff? > If you can point me to other forums where it belongs and that do >the same thing I would be interested in knowing. I have yet to see a list >(Which doesn't mean one doesn't exist) where people (Hopefully ISPs and >NSPs and the likes) talk about where they are seeing a smurf attack, or >who is strobing them or other such activities. Funny, ongoing attacks that one wishes to be pubilc about sure sound "operational" in nature to me. If one didn't wish to be public, sending data to the appropriate molassas-agency (CERT, et al) would make sense. Was anyone yelled at on NANOG for talking about ongoing attacks? I don't think so. Personally, I'm so pleased to see the current commodity nature of domain names put to such good use; the internet version of one-hit-wonders/one trick ponies/etc. Joe

1 0

OUTAGE: DACS failure in USWEST/spokane
by Sean Donelan 27 Dec '98

27 Dec '98

This morning USWEST lost a DACS serving Spokane (and other places in Washington State). That isn't very unusual, but did spark my interest in a continuing pattern of DACS failures around the country. Not only have several telco's we use had DACS failures (usually a power supply), but the mean time to repair (and reprogram) them was over 12 hours. Whatever method of quickly re-loading the repaired DACS configuration doesn't seem to be working, or the operational procedures of several telephone companies are lacking. Generally after 10-12 hours, the telco usually informs us they are manually re-programming the DACS circuit by circuit. Have other network operators seen the same thing from their facility departments or providers? Is this a problem with the DACS vendor, user- interface design, operator procedures, or dumb management? -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

3 2

Urgently need help: Question about Japanese leased line
by Tatsuya Kawasaki 26 Dec '98

26 Dec '98

Dear Operators, I believe this type of leased line service is only in Japan. Does anyone explain the REAL different bwtn DA(digital accesss), DR (ditial Reach) and true leased line called HSD? Better yet NO MORE DA NOR DR!!!!!!!!!! I know from our experience, DA, DR are cheap and always gives us the problem when either sides of leased line goes off, ie power failure. In the past, all I can do is to ask NTT to check the line, needless to say the result comes back with OKAY but with not our supprise-- hey what would I expect from NTT anyhow..., without changing anything, the network comes back normal. Once someone explains in the past that it might be something to do with electric charge in DSU which "lock" circuit and when it is disconnected to check, it will be discharged and back to normal or something like that. Anyone can add this or correct what I have just said. Suggestion in either English or Japanese is accepted. Sincerely urgently yours, Tatsuya かわさき TK3197 = = = = = = Business Network Telecom (BNT) ビジネスネットワークテレコム株式会社〒111-0053　東京都台東区浅草橋3-8-5 31山京ビル6階 TEL 03-5687-0307 FAX 03-5687-6009 http://www.giganet.net

1 0

Re: New resource available!
by TTSG 26 Dec '98

26 Dec '98

> Hi there, too, > > And we need this because.... ? *blank obviously clueless stare, wildly waving > hands* > I'm sorry you felt my message was a spam. > > Care to explain why the heck we need yet another forum for that sort of stuff? > If you can point me to other forums where it belongs and that do the same thing I would be interested in knowing. I have yet to see a list (Which doesn't mean one doesn't exist) where people (Hopefully ISPs and NSPs and the likes) talk about where they are seeing a smurf attack, or who is strobing them or other such activities. The idea was originally brought up on Inet-Access and met with very little interest. Then, within the span of a week, over a dozen multi-site hacks were attempted. People would post something like "Is anyone seeing probing from '1.2.3.4'?" We then worked to stop the hacking. Sometimes it took multiple people to call the contact for them to believe us. Sometimes people had to ask how to contact someone, or where to look for information, or "Gee, how can I tell if this is happening to me". Rather than junk up the news groups (Inet-Access, Nanog) we started another one, allowing people to concentrate on the other issues on the other lists. The announcement list should be a low volume list (Unless the occurances of attacks warrants it) so many can join that and be fairly certain that only important messages will be posted. I hope I've made this clear enough, but if not I welcome more comments or criticism. Tuc/TTSG > Thanks & happy holidays, > Chris > > On Fri, Dec 25, 1998 at 09:41:35PM -0500, TTSG wrote: > [.. <spam imploded> ..] > > -- > Frisbeetarianism, n.: > The belief that when you die, your soul goes up on the roof and gets stuck. >

1 0