September 2000 - Test - lists.nanog.org

UUnet trouble ticket and response time
by Hank Nussbacher 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

Apologies in advance: Uunet placed a route object in RADB with origin AS701, even though the /24 belonged to us and messed up certain routings in certain places. So we sent them the problem and got issued a trouble ticket (UU2282116) on Sept 9. Till today, even after repeated emails to them on this TT, we received not a single response over the course of 3 weeks. In the end, MERIT went in and removed the brain-dead /24 route object. Is this how UUnet operates these days? -Hank

2 1

Seeking fiber/facility location consultant
by Pete Kruckenberg 29 Sep '00

29 Sep '00

This is kind of a once-in-a-lifetime, I have been approved to spend significant time and expense picking the right carriers and U.S. data centers for a large application network up-front. I am looking for resources (preferrably a consultant/consulting group) to help in picking the 'best' complementary carriers and data centers. The ideal resource(s) would help by providing information on where carriers' terrestial links and fiber are run, where their facilities are in the cities we are targeting, and other pertinent physical issues. Any pointers appreciated. Pete Kruckenberg Apologies if this is a re-hash, the searchable archives on CCTec.com have been broken for at least a few weeks.

1 0

Re: availability and resiliency
by Michael Shields 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

In article <0C875DC28791D21192CD00104B95BFE7EA9B4D@BGSLC02>, Irwin Lazar <ILazar(a)tbg.com> wrote: > Does anyone know if a template exists for what it takes to provide 5 9's of > availability, 4 9's etc.for Internet data centers? Specifically I'm looking > for something that would say "if you want 5 9's of availability, here's what > you need to do", and so on. If it were that easy, everyone would do it. -- Shields.

1 0

Address delegations & filters
by bmanning＠vacation.karoshi.com 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

Poking about, getting ready for the next in-addr audit, I came across the following bit of information that may have an effect on those ISPs who filter based on RIR delegation policy. If I remember correctly, a common tactic is to filter the traditional /16 space to ensure that nothing greater than a /16 in announced. For those folks who do this, there are implications for the following prefixes: 165.0.0.0/16 166.0.0.0/16 167.0.0.0/16 169.0.0.0/16 All of these /16s have portions of the /16 subdelegated as /24s and apparently have been this way for some period of time, e.g. pre ARIN. FWIW. --bill

1 0

RE: CEF RPF check w/ACLs (was: Re: netscan.org update)
by Segal, Mark 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

What a novel idea.. :). That would put all my expect programmers out of business though.. o well. If there are any Cisco folks listening.. This just makes sense. Mark -- Mark Segal Director, Network Engineering Axxent Corp. Tel: (416)907-2858 > -----Original Message----- > From: James A. T. Rice [mailto:James_R-nanog@jump.org.uk] > Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 9:49 AM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: CEF RPF check w/ACLs (was: Re: netscan.org update) > > > > Wow, I wonder what cisco would do with my wish list: > > > ip verify unicast reverse-exists > > i.e. only accept the packet on this interface if there is a > route back to > the source, *not necessarily on the same interface*.. > This should be safe to use on all interfaces and could use > the existing > CEF FIB, and might catch a lot of spoofed packets on a good day. > > > ip verify unicast destination-advertised > > This would check the destination address on any packet coming into an > interface, and drop it if a route to that destination WASNT > advertised out > of that interface - /ideal/ for NAPs & IX's. Couldnt use the > existing cef > tables, cisco would need to write an advertised-table for each > interface. Again this should be safe to use on almost any interface. > > > Regards > James > > > On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Tony Tauber wrote: > > > I was the one who asked for something like it and a friendly > > developer coded it up nice and quickly. > >

1 0

Courtesy Post..
by Robert Mathews-ICICX 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

All: This is a courtesy post with regard to a conference entitled: 4th Annual International Software & Internet Quality Week Europe. Thought that some of you might find it interesting -- professionally. Regards. > -----Original Message----- > From: Milligan James R Civ > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 9:06 AM > To: 'Robert Mathews @ AFRL' > Subject: FW: QWE2000: Detailed Conference Description > > > > FYI. > > -- Jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: Software Research [mailto:sr@netcom.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 7:26 PM > Subject: QWE2000: Detailed Conference Description > > > 4th Annual International Software & Internet Quality Week Europe > Conference Theme: Initiatives For The Future > > 20-24 November 2000 > Brussels, Belgium EU > > <http://www.soft.com/QualWeek> > > * * * * QWE2000 Conference Brochure Available * * * * > > The complete program for the 4th International Software & Internet > Quality Week Conference [QWE2000] (Theme: Initiatives For The Future) > to be held 20-24 November 2000 in Brussels, Belgium EU, is available > at: > > <http://www.soft.com/QualWeek/QWE2K/qwe2k.program.html> > > Download your own copy of the full-color 16-page brochure in > *pdf format from: > > <http://www.soft.com/QualWeek/QWE2K/qwe2k.down.brochure.html> > > Or, request your own printed copy by going to: > > <http://www.soft.com/QualWeek/QWE2K/qwe2k.send.brochure.html> > > * * * * QWE2000 Program Description * * * * > > The QWE2000 International Advisory Board has assembled a terrific > international team of over 60 speakers. Discover the state-of-the-art > in software and internet QA and testing from around the world: from > the USA to the UK, from Canada to Brazil, from Europe to China! > >The QWE2000 Program features: > > * Pressing questions discussed by distinguished Industrial Keynote > Speakers: > > - Tom Gilb (Results Planning) The Ten Most Powerful Principals for > Quality in Software Organizations > - Jens Pas (I2B) Test Out-Sourcing: From Necessary Evil to an > E-Competitive Advantage > - Lisa Crispin (iFactor-e) Stranger in a Strange Land: Bringing > QA to a Web Startup > - Hans Buwalda (CMG Finance) Soap Opera Testing > - Tom Drake (ICCI) The Future of Software Quality - Our Brave New > World - Are We Ready? > > * 12 pre-conference Tutorials by the foremost experts in their fields. > - Web Testing Master Class (G. Bazzana) > - Risk-Based Test Effort Estimate (R. Teunissen & R. Baarda) > - Component Architecture and Business Models (A. Wills) > - Quantitative Risk Assessment Model (A. Lee & E. Wong) > - Standards-Based Quality Framework for Web Portals (H-L. Hausen) > - Cool Q-Quality in WebSite Development (A. Cowderoy) > - Requirements Engineering for Software Developers (T. Gilb) > - The Effective SQA Manager (R. Sabourin) > - Specification Quality Control (T. Gilb) > - Quality Challenge for Network-Based Software Systems (T. Drake) > - WebSite Testing (T. Mayer & E. Miller) > > * Five Parallel Tracks that cover field of software quality: > - Technology: From browser-based website testing to UML methods > - Internet: E-commerce experience, Internet Time and Site Performance > - Applications: Hear solutions from researchers and practitioners > - Management: Managing Testing, Quality Improvement, Process > Innovations > - Vendor Technical Presentations allow you to broaden your tools and > services information. > > * * * * QWE2000 IESB Examination * * * * > > * For The First Time Ever... The Information Systems Examination Board > (ISEB)of the British Computer Society has accredited the standard full > course for delegates at Quality Week Europe with some experience in > testing, who wish to take the examination leading to the Foundation > Certificate in Software Testing. The course will take 18 hours > including the "closed book" exam which consists of forty > multiple-choice questions. The exam will be offered during the > conference supervised by an ISEB proctor. > > * * * * QWE2000 Exhibitors * * * * > > * Industry Exhibitors who will showcase their services and > latest products at the Two-Day Trade Show (Expo: 22-23 November 2000). > > Exhibitors include: > Amphora Quality Technologies, CMG, eValid, Gitek, I2B, McCabe & Associates, > NexusWorld.net, PolySpace, ps_testware, RadView, Rational, UpSpring > Software, SIM Group Limited, Technology Builders Inc., and more. > > * * * * QWE2000 Special Events * * * * > > * Special Events: Attendees will tour two small family-run > factories to sample Belgium's most famous products: Belgian Chocolate and Belgian Beer. > > Mark your calendars *NOW* for QWE2000, in beautiful downtown > Brussels, from 20-24 November 2000. Register early on-line and receive > Early Bird Special Pricing for the Quality Week Europe 2000 Conference. > > We look forward to seeing you in Brussels! > > Rita Bral, > Conference Director > (qw(a)soft.com) ******************************************************** Robert Mathews Senior Scholar-In-Residence on National Security Affairs & Industrial Preparedness University of Hawaii/CSATI Univ. of Hawaii Telephone: 808.974.7383 ALT Telephone: + 315.330.1868 (COM) / 587.1868 (DSN) Univ. of Hawaii Telecopier: 808.974.7693 ALT Telecopier: + 315.330.1894 (COM) / 587.1894 (DSN) E.mail: mathews(a)CSATI.EDU / Robert.Mathews(a)afrl.af.mil

1 0

Re: Port 139 scans
by vern＠ee.lbl.gov 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

> I am particularly concerned over this issue of these broadcasts > originating from Concentric.net I don't think they particularly are. Here at lbl.gov (128.3/16), we're getting scanned from cmu.edu (128.2/16). nersc.gov (128.55/16) is getting scanned from ucsd.edu (128.54/16). So it could well be that the ones being scanned from concentric.net are simply those with nearby address blocks, and it's just one small part of rampant scanning from all over the place. By the way, we identified a couple instances of the virus that Ken Lindahl mentioned in his earlier post. Vern

3 2

Re: NANOG 20 River Rafting *unofficial* Trip
by Kinnith Wallace 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

Sean Donelan> The rafting trip looks cool too. Yeah, and US$ 25 is great! But you have to sign up for 3 years of rafting. And whatever happened to 100 free hours? :] (Forgive me, Ron.) -Kinnith Wallace "...99 percent of all NT problems can be solved using the same technique: 'reinstall the (what for lack of strong ethics we call) Operating System, reinstall the applications...'" -reader quoted by Philip Greenspun, http://www.arsdigita.com/books/panda/server

3 2

Re: CEF RPF check w/ACLs (was: Re: netscan.org update)
by Patrick W. Gilmore 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

At 02:49 PM 9/28/2000 +0100, James A. T. Rice wrote: >ip verify unicast reverse-exists > >i.e. only accept the packet on this interface if there is a route back to >the source, *not necessarily on the same interface*.. >This should be safe to use on all interfaces and could use the existing >CEF FIB, and might catch a lot of spoofed packets on a good day. That would only stop Bogons on most core routers (full tables, right?). >ip verify unicast destination-advertised > >This would check the destination address on any packet coming into an >interface, and drop it if a route to that destination WASNT advertised out >of that interface - /ideal/ for NAPs & IX's. Couldnt use the existing cef >tables, cisco would need to write an advertised-table for each >interface. Again this should be safe to use on almost any interface. Hrmmm.... That would be nice.... But there are other ways to do this. They may or may not be useful / applicable in your environment, but it can be done without this feature. >James TTFN, patrick

2 1

RE: netscan.org update
by rdobbins＠netmore.net 28 Sep '00

28 Sep '00

Could you elaborate on this, please? Granted, I'm a hosting shop and not a backbone network, but I'm running CEF on my border without complaint, and to apparent good effect. Is there some sort of lossage in doing so that I'm missing? John Fraizer wrote: >snip< > > I have yet to find an easy way to implement CEF on the border that doesn't > break something in some funky way or another. > >snip<

8 8