September 1998 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: NSI Bulletin 098-010 | Update on Whois
by Derek Balling 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

At 11:59 AM 9/2/98 -0500, Andy Walden wrote: > >> Was this company "an abuser" because they wanted to do lookups of a useful >> nature? (And yes, they put in caching and such so they wouldn't be querying > >Yes. Thats not the intent of the whois database in my opinion. Marketing >and general greed causes the most problems on the Internet and generates >the most instances of someone trying to exploit something for the almighty >dollar. I guess I would tend to disagree. The whois database is there so that the Internet users - be they marketing types or technical types - can obtain information about a domain name. I might not be interested in that aspect of it MYSELF (for me, it is generally the technical contact I am looking for, or rarely the admin contact), but for others it is the company name. What makes their use "WRONG" and mine "RIGHT"? D

6 6

The Cidr Report
by Tony Bates 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri Sep 4 12:00:00 PDT 1998 It is not checked before it leaves my workstation. However, hopefully you will find this report interesting and will take the time to look through this to see if you can improve the amount of aggregation you perform. The report is split into sections: 0) General Status List the route table history for the last week, list any possibly bogus routes seen and give some status on ASes. 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level This lists the "Top 30" players who if they decided to aggregate their announced classful prefixes at the origin AS level could make a significant difference in the reduction of the current size of the Internet routing table. This calculation does not take into account the inclusion of holes when forming an aggregate so it is possible even larger reduction should be possible. 2) Weekly Delta A summary of the last weeks changes in terms of withdrawn and added routes. Please note that this is only a snapshot but does give some indication of ASes participating in CIDR. Clearly, it is generally a good thing to see a large amont of withdrawls. 3) Interesting aggregates Interesting here means not an aggregate made as a set of classful routes. Thanks to xara.net for giving me access to their routing tables once a day. Please send any comments about this report directly to me. Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr-report.html for a daily update of this report. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CIDR REPORT for 04Sep98 0) General Status Table History ------------- Date Prefixes 280898 53151 290898 53143 300898 53149 310898 53251 010998 53157 020998 53162 030998 53176 040998 52828 Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr.plot.html for a plot of the table history. Possible Bogus Routes --------------------- AS Summary ---------- Number of ASes in routing system: 3962 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix: 1903 (997 cidr, 906 classful) Largest number of cidr routes: 350 announced by AS701 Largest number of classful routes: 1174 announced by AS701 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level --- 04Sep98 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS701 1174 950 224 19.1% Alternet AS271 349 152 197 56.4% BCnet Backbone AS4293 445 260 185 41.6% IMCI AS3749 224 67 157 70.1% TECNET AS2493 374 219 155 41.4% iSTAR Internet, Inc. AS174 696 569 127 18.2% Performance Systems International AS4200 192 98 94 49.0% AGIS (Apex Global Information Ser AS5668 133 42 91 68.4% Century Telephone Inc. AS2685 234 154 80 34.2% IBM Global Network - US AS4755 124 47 77 62.1% Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. India AS4740 419 344 75 17.9% Ozemail Pty Ltd (ASN-OZEMAIL) AS3221 116 45 71 61.2% EENet Autonomous System AS7046 236 171 65 27.5% UUNET-CUSTOMER AS3493 220 156 64 29.1% INTERLINK AS3804 215 157 58 27.0% Bell Solutions AS3403 182 127 55 30.2% TIAC AS549 203 150 53 26.1% ONet Backbone AS8517 123 71 52 42.3% ULAKNET-ASN AS10928 100 48 52 52.0% UNKNOWN AS719 469 418 51 10.9% LANLINK autonomous system AS6335 69 20 49 71.0% NTRNET AS72 87 39 48 55.2% Schlumberger Information Network AS1239 552 504 48 8.7% SprintLink Backbone AS803 78 34 44 56.4% SaskNet Backbone AS6181 66 26 40 60.6% FUSE-NET AS4539 67 27 40 59.7% NETROPOLIS AS852 158 119 39 24.7% AGT Advance Communication AS7122 119 80 39 32.8% MTS ADVANCED Network Policy AS10459 45 10 35 77.8% WANSASN AS4763 100 66 34 34.0% Telstra New Zealand For the rest of the previous weeks gain information please see http://www.employees.org:80/~tbates/cidr-report.html 2) Weekly Delta Please see http://www.employees.org:80/~tbates/cidr-report.html for this part of the report 3) Interesting aggregates Please see http://www.employees.org:80/~tbates/cidr-report.html for this part of the report

1 0

RE: MAE-EAST / MAE-WEST Interfaces
by Kyle_Bacon/Fnsi/US＠fnsi.net 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

Confirmed with the ATM MAE's Product Manager, Caleb Williford. There will be no connectivity between the "legacy" FDDI MAE and the new ATM based MAE. Current FDDI users will most likely pay for FDDI MAE connections for quite some time in addition to their new ATM MAE connection during transition. WorldCom/MFS is supposed to be "looking into incentives to migrate FDDI customers to the ATM side, (see below from Caleb Williford) K -- Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 10:58:15 -0500 From: "J. Caleb Williford" <jcwillif(a)gwsmtp.wcom.com> To: jmparks(a)gwsmtp.wcom.com Subject: Fwd: Re: Scaling of interconnections at MAE-EAST and MAE-WEST -Reply Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Although we are looking into some incentives to migrate customers from the Legacy platform to ATM, our current pricing is pretty much inline with what the other ATM-based NAPs are offering (I've pasted the URLs with their pricing below for your reference). However, I'd like to point out that there are a number of aspects that are unique to the new platform (higher actual throughput, scalability to OC-12, PVCs, etc.). Please call me at your earliest convenience and we can have a chat about the specifics. -Caleb PacBell NAP: http://www.pacbell.com/products/business/fastrak/networking/nap/pricing.htm l Ameritecy NAP: http://www.aads.net/napPricing.htm "Bono, Vinny J (CORP, ITDG)" <VBono(a)comstor.com> on 09/04/98 01:02:27 PM To: Brian Horvitz <horvitz(a)shore.net> cc: nanog(a)merit.edu (bcc: Kyle Bacon/Fnsi/US) Subject: RE: MAE-EAST / MAE-WEST Interfaces > On Thu, 3 Sep 1998, Richard Almeida wrote: > > > Just be careful here, MFS are launching new ATM MAE's certainlty > > at Mae-east - but you can only see other ATM connected people > > You sure this is true? > > Brian This is absolutely true. -vb

1 0

NANOG 14
by Pam Ciesla 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

If you are planning on attending the NANOG 14 meeting please make hotel reservations early. I have been told that Atlanta will be very busy with conventions durning the time of our meeting. The meeting will be held at the Atlanta Marriott Marquis (404-521-0000). Be sure to mention the NANOG Meeting to get the $149 rate. Please contact me if you have any problems getting this rate. The registration page and agenda items will be available real soon on the NANOG webpage!!! http://www.nanog.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Pam Ciesla 734-936-0172 - phone Merit Network, Inc. 734-647-3185 - fax University of Michigan 4251 Plymouth Road Bldg. I, Suite C Ann Arbor, MI 48105-2785 -----------------------------------------------------------------------

5 5

RE: MAE-EAST / MAE-WEST Interfaces
by Bono, Vinny J (CORP, ITDG) 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

> On Thu, 3 Sep 1998, Richard Almeida wrote: > > > Just be careful here, MFS are launching new ATM MAE's certainlty > > at Mae-east - but you can only see other ATM connected people > > You sure this is true? > > Brian This is absolutely true. -vb

1 0

Re: Director Database Marketing (Herndon VA US)
by Jim Fleming 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

-----Original Message----- From: Stephen Wolff <swolff(a)cisco.com> To: William Allen Simpson <wsimpson(a)greendragon.com>; nanog(a)merit.edu <nanog(a)merit.edu> Date: Friday, September 04, 1998 10:17 AM Subject: Re: Director Database Marketing (Herndon VA US) >SRI lost to NSI in a competitive procurement run by DISA, and SRI turned >over the database to NSI as a consequence. > >The DISA contract with NSI only covered USG-related material (e.g., .GOV, >.MIL), so NSF and DISA executed an agreement under which NSI would convert >and maintain *all* of the database in return for a month-to-month payment >of (memory's a bit hazy here) $20k, while NSF prepared, issued, and >executed a competitive solicitation for NIC services for non-USG customers >- including .EDU, obviously but also .COM. > >When the dust settled on the peer-reviewed and competitive NSF >solicitation, NSI had won the registration piece; this avoided yet another >transfer of the non-USG-related part of the database to the winner. > You might also note that Jon Postel and Joyce Reynolds were listed by NSI as "NSI subcontractors" on the NSI proposal. Some would note that it would be almost impossible to not win with Jon Postel's name on the proposal. That appears to still be the case today. Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.com

1 0

Re: Director Database Marketing (Herndon VA US)
by William Allen Simpson 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

Actually, there is a nice US Supreme Court ruling that any documents under the _control_ of the agency _are_ subject to FOIA. The database that moved from SRI to NSI did so as part of a contract with NSF (and DARPA before them). Therefore, the control argument should hold. But you'd have to test it in court. WSimpson(a)UMich.edu Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32

2 1

TCG Chicago
by Bradley Reynolds 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

TCG is currently experiencing a major fibre cut in chicago. Their NCC could not give me a firm commit to the number of ds3s which have been affected, but estimates already range over 100. TCG was unable to provide an estimated time of completion on the emergency maintenance. BR

1 0

MAE-EAST / MAE-WEST Interfaces
by Jan Czmok 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

Hi! Does anybody know if the statement "mfs can offer atm ds3 connection to the mae-west and mae-east ehternet from colo space" issued by a german salesperson is true. According to the www.mfst.com webpage i only see possiblities for 10 Mbit Ethernet, HSSI or FDDI. Any help is appreciated! Jan -- Jan Czmok, IPF.NET Senior Network Engineer email: czmok(a)ipf.de, Phone +49 69 17084-52

6 6

Re: MAE-EAST / MAE-WEST Interfaces
by dlr＠bungi.com 04 Sep '98

04 Sep '98

[In the message entitled "Re: MAE-EAST / MAE-WEST Interfaces" on Sep 4, 1:11, "David Diaz/I.P.O.F.-Netrail, Inc." writes:] > Ive heard different stories. Of course UUNET. There was an anouncement > from Quest.net (not Quest) a small ISP in Ft Lauderdale that was connecting > to ATM MAE Dallas. ATM MAE-W is not up. MAE-E ATM is in test mode with a > handfull of people. Im still asking for exactly who is there. > > If anyone has see the MAE ATM doc they are charging for setup of PVC, $50 a > shot a side, and also any config changes they make. They dont understand > NAPs are not under Tarrif. Pacbell does not charge for these services. > However they are still in flux so we'll see what the final policies are. > > Has anyone had any feedback from their MFS/Worldcom reps? Has anyone > experienced any problems during the testing? Issues with the Stratacom? > Uhh - I think that the mae-w atm is up... MTU 4470 bytes, sub MTU 4470, BW 156250 Kbit, DLY 80 usec, rely 255/255, load 14/255 Encapsulation ATM, loopback not set, keepalive set (10 sec) Encapsulation(s): AAL5, PVC mode 256 TX buffers, 256 RX buffers, 2048 maximum active VCs, 1024 VCs per VP, 10 current VCCs VC idle disconnect time: 300 seconds Last input never, output 00:00:00, output hang never Last clearing of "show interface" counters 1d19h Queueing strategy: fifo Output queue 0/300, 0 drops; input queue 0/300, 0 drops 5 minute input rate 1083000 bits/sec, 1017 packets/sec 5 minute output rate 8819000 bits/sec, 1569 packets/sec 106741382 packets input, 2409410335 bytes, 0 no buffer Received 0 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants 0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored, 0 abort 217158168 packets output, 665172079 bytes, 0 underruns 0 output errors, 0 collisions, 0 interface resets 0 output buffers copied, 0 interrupts, 0 failures m -- Dave Rand dlr(a)bungi.com http://www.bungi.com

1 0