February 1998 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Inexperienced Seeks Partner
by Patrick W. Gilmore 13 Feb '98

13 Feb '98

At 08:50 AM 2/13/98 -0500, Adam Rothschild wrote: >> friends and I have a dialup connection to 5 exchange points. We are >> using 33.6 US Robotics Sportster Win-Modems with a linux box running >> gated. We are applying for our own ASN, and we expect to get it soon. > >Winmodems with a Linux box? Last I checked, there was no software driver, >nor was there any intent on developing one (given USR's strict >non-disclosure policies)... Am I missing something here? Yes. The punch line. ;) TTFN, patrick P.S. Heh. "1337 h4ck3r" ;) ************************************************************** Patrick W. Gilmore voice: +1-650-482-2840 Director of Operations, CCIE #2983 fax: +1-650-482-2844 PRIORI NETWORKS, INC. http://www.priori.net "Tomorrow's Performance Today" **************************************************************

2 1

Re: Inexperienced Seeks Partner
by Gerald Andrew Winters 13 Feb '98

13 Feb '98

> Thank you for your time. Yours Sincerely, > > Chuck U. Farley Should I brush the dust off my pig-latin, Chuck? Let's just say that this is not the best way to get people to take you seriously. --Gerald Winters

1 0

Broken domain statistics...
by Dalvenjah FoxFire 13 Feb '98

13 Feb '98

Hi all, I'd finally had it up to here with people coming from misconfigured domains trying to connect to my servers and filling up the logs with 'Host name mismatch..' errors, so I decided to put together a bunch of scripts to try and see exactly how widespread the problem of bogus DNS info is. What I found was kind of surprising. Here're the raw stats for my test (done on the entire com zone): Total domains checked: 1401150 Domains with NO good nameservers (all responded non-auth): 236008 Domains with NO good nameservers (some timed out): 107482 Domains with at least one bad non-auth (but most/all answering):99211 Bringing that into percentages, about 17% of all domains in COM have NO good nameservers listed. If one adds in the nameservers that timed out, that number goes up to 25%, and adding in domains with at least one bad nameserver brings the number up to 32% of the domains in .com that have bad nameserver info registered. Please note, it appears that it's not entirely accurate to view the nameservers that timed out as necessarily 'bad' in my test - several known good nameservers timed out during the runs, and I only had a retry of 1 (so the nameservers got 1 chance to give the correct data within 4 seconds). It's very interesting, however, that the number of domains that had all listed nameservers respond, all of which responded non-authoritatively (i.e. 'I don't know about this domain') is so high. Here is my testing methodology: I read in the entire com zone, and when I found a line containing dom IN NS server I would spawn off a 'dig ANY dom @server +retry=1', and parse the output to see if it contained 'aa', the authoritative flag. If it did, it was a good domain. If it didn't, it was a bad domain. Timeouts and non-authoritative responses were counted separately. I then had three variables for each domain - goodResponses, badResponses, and timeouts. Domains where badResponses and timeouts were both 0 were considered 'good'. Domains where goodResponses and timeouts were both 0 were considered to have 'no good nameservers (but all responded)'. Else, domains where goodResponses was 0 were considered bad (noting that some queries timed out). Beyond that, if there was 1 or more badResponses, it was listed in the 'at least one bad non-auth NS' list. The processes that did this would fork out about 80 processes per host to run the digs; I was on a reasonably fast connection, so bandwidth shouldn't have become a problem as far as increasing the timeouts I got. I split the com zone file into 200,000 line sections and ran one section per host. I then stopped the stats collection server after every few runs to gather statistics. The queries occurred over a period of 12 hours between 3pm and 3am Pacific Time, Tuesday 2/9 - Wednesday 2/10. I've put up the code, results, and the logs of non-auth queries and timed-out queries at ftp1.dal.net:/pub/misc/domain-test/. The files haven't (and won't) propogate to the mirror sites. (Note, this machine will be switching IPs sometime this week, so there may be a period of an hour or two when the machine will be unreachable.) If I've got some sort of flaw in my logic, please let me know; I'm willing to correct it and run the test again. But it looks right. I haven't tested the net/edu/org domains, but I suspect that since folks using those are slightly more clued than the folks using .com, the numbers of bogus domains will be lower. And if it is, it means that 17% of the folks on the internet are paying for domains that don't work. Either that, or something else is broken. I'm posting here because I feel it is an operational issue; that, plus I feel there're more folks here who can and will hammer at InterNIC to start doing something to enforce their policies that require real, authoritative nameservers. One last request - if you plan to use this data somewhere, *please* listen to any responses that may show up here explaining how it might be wrong, and *please* go through my methodology and find out for yourself if it looks right. I don't want to be responsible for any false/overinflated claims out there }:P . And please provide context, too, especially where the 'nameserver timed out' statistics are concerned. Anyhow, there it is. -dalvenjah -- Dalvenjah FoxFire (aka Sven Nielsen) Stupid people shouldn't breed. Founder, the DALnet IRC Network e-mail: dalvenjah(a)dal.net WWW: http://www.dal.net/~dalvenjah/ whois: SN90 Try DALnet! http://www.dal.net/

14 13

Re: Broken domain statistics...
by Mike Bird 13 Feb '98

13 Feb '98

>Phillip Vandry <vandry(a)Mlink.NET> writes: > How do you find them all? You could check your DNS logs for lame > delegations and collect a list, but that's not all that great. 1) whois yourdomain.com Look for the FQDN of the first nameserver, say dns1.yourdomain.com. This is what the Internic calls it which may be different from what reverse DNS calls it. 2) whois dns1.yourdomain.com Look for the record identifier at the top, say DNS123-HST. 3) whois "server DNS123-HST" Lists the domains served by that name server. ---------------------------------------------------------- Mike Bird Tel: 209-742-5000 FAX: 209-966-3117 President POP: 209-742-5333 NOC: 209-742-9979 Iron Mtn Systems http://member.yosemite.net/

1 0

Seeking European (ISPs?) for bandwidth exchange
by hhui＠arcfour.com 12 Feb '98

12 Feb '98

OK I know NANOG may not be the right place to post a personals ad, but young, attractive content provider with good connexions seeks European partner for bandwidth exchange and maybe more. Should have spacious racks and big pipes, a desire to see foreign lands, money and age not an issue. We'll start off slow and see what it could lead to. If interested please contact: hhui(a)arcfour.com

1 0

Need Cisco stuff, part two
by Alex Rubenstein 12 Feb '98

12 Feb '98

Hi. This is the last message of this type I will send for a while, but: I need a few cards, and I am specifically looking to see if anyone has any *used* (read; cheaper than new) of the following: PA-H, Single HSSI Card for the 7206 NP-1HSSI, Single HSSI Card for the 4700 And a DS-3 ATM Card for the 4700 (Coax). I am looking for this stuff to be shipped to me Friday, or if nearby we will pick it up. If you want to sell it to me new, don't bother, I already have a source. Thanks!

1 0

Re: MTU of the Internet?
by Sean M. Doran 12 Feb '98

12 Feb '98

"Jay R. Ashworth" <jra(a)scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us> writes: > Browsers, and other software which open multiple connections should > temper their connection counts based on the size of the perceived pipe; > ie: some connect-level heuristics to do proper PMTUD and _make the > answer available to applications_ would probably be > useful. Um, no, all the path MTU discovery process tells you is the upper bound to the size of a non-fragmented datagram at some point in the immediate past. Surely the thing to do would be to adjust the congestion window to send more or less data at a size bounded by path MTU or advertised MSS, whichever is the lower? If you really want to get into remote tweaking to deal with what is perceived to be a long queueing delay somewhere in the path, then maybe (just maybe) this could be done by sending segments smaller than the maximum size. One could imagine a receiving end system comparing multiple inbound streams for decent interleaving, and inferring nearby queue occupation from them, and signalling desired behaviour back to the sending end systems. However, when it comes down to it, what you really want is to avoid the situation where queues are full to the point where there is heavy occupation by a small number of "fat" flows. This is what RED accomplishes. Deploy RED, it works particularly well in the case of big queues in front of a slow (dialup) interface, and with a little more pressure from ISPs and some nagging by Van Jacobson it'll be in the field much faster than reliable end-to-end signalling mechanisms for adjusting desired segment size will ever be invented, let alone deployed. Sean.

11 24

Sprint bbone
by Gregory Soo 12 Feb '98

12 Feb '98

Hello NANOGers, re: Sprint backbone talk given by Ted Studwell this Monday. - Does anyone know whose ADMs they are installing? - Does anyone recall how the "Moore's Law for Routers" was expressed?

1 0

I NEED A CISCO CARD
by Alex Rubenstein 12 Feb '98

12 Feb '98

Hello. I need the DS-3 ATM Card for a Cisco 7206. It actually has a DS-3 ATM Coax Port, and (4) T1 Emulation ports. I need it *pronto* (like in a day or two). If someone has one or there is a reseller who can really get me one in a few days, please let me know.

1 0

RA/RV Feeds from RBN
by William B. Norton 12 Feb '98

12 Feb '98

Hi all - Regarding RBN at NANOG 12...I think it is worth pointing out that: 1) RBN offered to fly in for NANOG 12 and provide casting to the NANOG community for free, given a net connection and mixed audio and video feed, 2) RBN casting didn't work well during Monday because of connectivity issues, not because of any inherent problems with the technology, 3) no one else had stepped up to the plate to help get the MBone magic set up (although we did not ask the nanog list, we did make contacts with volunteers who had done this stuff in the past.) Personally, I think we owe RBN a thanks and an apology -- they cast meetings almost every day for a fee, and went to considerable expense to do this for us, but they didn't get a sufficient chance to demonstrate their technology and provide the service to the community. As for providing source code, open architecture stuff... The #1 intent of casting NANOGs is to provide the content to the broader community. This is a different goal than to advocate certain forms of communications technology. Bill -------------------------------------------------------------- William B. Norton <wbn(a)merit.edu> (734) 764-9430 (New Area Code)

1 0