May 1999 - Test - lists.nanog.org

5/16 Ameritech exchange maintenance completed
by Mark A. Cnota 16 May '99

16 May '99

Just a quick follow-up: The maintenance scheduled for this morning has been successfully completed. Customers who find any problems which may be related to this activity should call the Ameritech NOC at 800.972.3441. thanks, -Mark >Delivered-To: nanog-outgoing(a)merit.edu >X-Sender: mcnota(a)mailhost.chi.ameritech.net >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 >Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 09:36:37 -0500 >To: nanog(a)merit.edu >From: "Mark A. Cnota" <mcnota(a)ameritech.net> >Subject: 5/16 maintenance: Ameritech exchange >Sender: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu >X-Loop: nanog > > >Hello everyone, > >Just a quick reminder- Ameritech's ATM exchange point will be undergoing >maintenance this weekend. The planned window is 12:00 am to 6:00 am >(Central Time) tonight (Sunday May 16th). All customers of this exchange >will experience an interruption in service during this window. I would >suspect many others may experience some indrect effects as well. Ameritech >customers are welcome to e-mail me privately with any questions. > >thanks, > >-Mark

1 0

Re: whois changes
by joe＠vpop.net 16 May '99

16 May '99

Yes, I can *guess* what the handle is. The point is that you can't get it via whois. You can *guess* that it $domain$x-DOM, but where is this documented? And why turn 2 whois queries into at least 3? A whois on a domain should at least return the handle - you think? -joe On Sat, 15 May 1999 18:02:26 -0700 (PDT), Andrew Doane <adoane(a)best.com> wrote: >wasn't very hard... -- NewsHub: http://www.NewsHub.com/tech/ | MultiTrace: http://www.MultiTrace.com/ | Explore Your Net! DomainSurfer: http://www.DomainSurfer.com/ |

2 1

Re: IXC Fiber cut Michigan
by Sean Donelan 15 May '99

15 May '99

hcb(a)clark.NET (Howard C. Berkowitz) writes: >Is this another argument for SONET rings and against tree structuring? It is an argument for diversity. SONET rings offer diversity against certain failure modes, but they too have other types of interesting failures. SONET failures tend to be more complex, and so far seem to take much, much longer to fix than a simple fiber cut. SONET rings have several good points. What is not good is thinking the buzzword "SONET" as uttered by salespeople (and some engineers) means more than it actually is. Automatic Protection Switches exist in the copper world too. Phone companies have been selling APS systems for decades, they still have trouble actually delivering on those promises. -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

2 1

Re: IXC Fiber cut Michigan
by Sean Donelan 15 May '99

15 May '99

Jared Mauch <jared(a)puck.Nether.net> writes: > IXC Ticket number 86537 Well, this fiber cut interrupted service between MICHNET's router at AADS and the rest of Merit/MICHNET. The problem for me was the michnet router was still advertising it could reach the rest of michnet, and therefore traffic (such as nanog mail) went into the IXC fiber blackhole until I could manually re-route through somewhere else. Of course, everyone else who was in the same boat, won't see this message until the circuit is restored. > the Sean/Claus FTL sled was NOT seen in the area. I can neither confirm nor deny access to Mr. Kringle's sled. Any sign of Qwest contractors in the area? :-) -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

6 6

Mbone receivers
by john heasley 15 May '99

15 May '99

anyone on the mbone have a moment or two to help test multicast connectivity in preparation for nanog in Eugene? preferrably, dvrmp/mbone and native mcast. i am sourcing some video in a session called 'heasley test'. the path is behind AS2914 to AS10888 for dvrmp. native for those who we mbgp with at paix, pennsauken, or ames mix's. Session Name: heasley test Description: testing native mc Group: 0.0.0.0, ttl: 0, Contiguous allocation: 1 Lifetime: from 18:00:00 UTC May 15 1999 until 18:00:00 UTC May 18 1999 Uptime: 02:50:31, Last Heard: 00:04:05 Announcement source: 205.238.1.71, destination: 224.2.127.254 Created by: heas 3135780259 3135780345 IN IP4 pita.shrubbery.net Phone number: heasley 503-641-6313 Email: heasley <heas(a)shrubbery.net> URL: Media: video 57672 RTP/AVP 31 Media group: 224.2.224.8, ttl: 127 tia. -heas

2 1

Re: Why doesn't Savvis follow Savvis model?
by Pete Kruckenberg 15 May '99

15 May '99

> How about giving us a brief description of what the Savvis > model is? > > > I've seen several comments over the last year or so about > > how Savvis doesn't follow the "Savvis model". As far as I understand it, the Savvis model was to set up "PNAPs" (private NAPs) which have a DS-3 from UUNet, Sprint and (at the time) MCI. There were something like 8 of these across the country. The PNAPs were interconnected with their own (probably public ATM) network, and that same network was supplemented with public peering at the public NAPs. At one piont, Savvis was offering one-hop (logical) connectivity to all 8 PNAPs for customers who could do ATM, but when I called about it, it had apparently died before it made it off the drawing board. The idea was that they could build a network with all of the performance (and more) of the Big 3, from the start. Technically, it seems to make a lot of sense. The question always was whether it made sense financially. Another question: if Savvis no longer follows the "Savvis model", what model do they follow? Their Web site [1] still talks about direct transit to each PNAP, though I noticed that they removed a lot of the information that used to be there (diagrams, etc). Are they moving to more centralized peering/transit arrangements, like the rest of the backbones? Is Savvis still considered to have a technically unusual backbone design? How is it that they can offer the SLA [2] they do (guaranteed average RTT anywhere on the internet < 200ms, guaranteed average packet loss < 5%, 100% uptime) without a different network design? Pete. [1] http://www.savvis.com/why_network_info.html http://www.savvis.com/about.html http://www.savvis.com/about_locations.html [2] http://www.savvis.com/network/sla.html

1 0

Why doesn't Savvis follow Savvis model?
by Pete Kruckenberg 15 May '99

15 May '99

I've seen several comments over the last year or so about how Savvis doesn't follow the "Savvis model". I'm curious to know why Savvis didn't continue to follow their own model, like if there was some kind of problem with it or what happened. Are other companies who follow the Savvis model considered to be good, bad, indifferent, short-term-thinkers, cash-burners, etc? I have heard that the Savvis model was presented at one of the NANOG (9?) conferences. Was there any follow-up at NANOG (or elsewhere) by Savvis or anyone else when Savvis decided to start breaking away from their original model? If this is contained within archives of this or another mailing list, my apologies if you'd be kind enough to point me to the right place. Pete.

1 0

5/16 maintenance: Ameritech exchange
by Mark A. Cnota 15 May '99

15 May '99

Hello everyone, Just a quick reminder- Ameritech's ATM exchange point will be undergoing maintenance this weekend. The planned window is 12:00 am to 6:00 am (Central Time) tonight (Sunday May 16th). All customers of this exchange will experience an interruption in service during this window. I would suspect many others may experience some indrect effects as well. Ameritech customers are welcome to e-mail me privately with any questions. thanks, -Mark

1 0

Re: whois changes
by Sanjay Dani 15 May '99

15 May '99

Is there a perl module someone is updating to take care of all these little changes? The Net:Whois I found on on cpan doesn't cover some of the odd ball cases where you are required to do a second who is based on the domain handle. Thanks. >This isn't strictly network related, but... > >The format of the WHOIS responses changed, which broke a script of mine.

3 2

Re: MAE-East weirdness on May 13, 1999 (fwd)
by Deepak Jain 14 May '99

14 May '99

Another MFS source has told us that someone was looping the MAE which is why everything kept going down. The offending customer has been taken off the MAE physically. I am sure some industrious ping testing could quickly determine who has been physically removed. Deepak Jain AiNET On Fri, 14 May 1999, Sean Donelan wrote: > > davediaz(a)netrail.NET (David Diaz) writes: > >Is anyone else still seeing problems @ MAE-E? We are still seeing > >issues that appear to be similar to yesterday's problems... > > Something is going on, official MFS sources have become ominously quiet > though. One unofficial on-site reporter indicated one of the gigaswitches > had gone belly up. > -- > Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO > Affiliation given for identification not representation > >

1 0