November 2001 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Anyone getting burned by Enron going under?
by Eric Germann 28 Nov '01

28 Nov '01

With the nearly imminent demise of Enron, does anyone see major impacts based on telecom's use of Enron Broadband services? Eric

1 0

out-of-band network experiences
by Michael Chang 28 Nov '01

28 Nov '01

Hello All, I would appreciate if you could share your experiences of settting up out-of-band management networks especially large # 50 - 100+ sites. Appreciate your experiences on the follwing and any other: - out-of-band network circuit going thru the same transport equipment as the managed network - topology (i.e Frame,ATM,leased circuits etc) - redundancy in out-of-band network for criticial monitoring ( Dual hub-spoke for redundancy etc, dial-on-demand with POTS, ISDN, wireless etc) - hierarchy with regional aggregation for out-of-band networks to reduce costs - SLAs for out-of-band monitoring -static routes versus dynamic protcols (RIP,OSPF, EIGRP) Michael Chang __________________________________________________ FREE voicemail, email, and fax...all in one place. Sign Up Now! http://www.onebox.com

3 2

RE: ACLs / Filter Lists - Best Practices
by Irwin Lazar 28 Nov '01

28 Nov '01

> jm> > jm> Is anyone aware of any current "best practices" related to the > jm> recommended set of filtering rules (Cisco ACL lists or Juniper filter > jm> sets) for reasons of Security, statistics collection, DoS attack > jm> analysis/prevention, etc.? I'm curious to see if there are any such I've got a collection of links to information on Cisco ACL's, including best practices, at: http://www.itprc.com/security.htm HTH, Irwin

1 0

Looking glass AS6762
by Pierfrancesco Caci 28 Nov '01

28 Nov '01

Hello, we finally have a looking glass. http://etabeta.noc.seabone.net/cgi-bin/lg.pl It's on Telecom Italia international backbone, as6762, seabone.net. Pf -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pierfrancesco Caci | System Administrator @ seabone.net p.caci(a)seabone.net | Telecom Italia S.p.A. - International Operations Linux paperino 2.4.16 #1 Mon Nov 26 16:28:11 CET 2001 i686 unknown

1 0

Re: 132.0.0.0/10 not in the databases
by Steven M. Bellovin 28 Nov '01

28 Nov '01

In message <5.1.0.14.2.20011128081413.00aa29f0@localhost>, Philip Smith writes: > >My theory is that DISO-UNRRA were originally allocated 132.1.0.0/16 through >132.15.0.0/16 in the classful world - these are all in the ARIN DB under >various military guises. When CIDR came along, it seems that someone must >have decided that because 132.0.0.0/16 was now available and part of a >bigger block, it could be added to the announcement, etc...? > >There are a total of four like this: > >Network Origin AS Description >132.0.0.0/10 568 DISO-UNRRA >135.0.0.0/13 10455 Lucent Technologies >137.0.0.0/13 568 DISO-UNRRA >158.0.0.0/13 568 DISO-UNRRA Umm -- how does Lucent fit into that? Last I checked, it wasn't part of DoD. Back in the mists of time, AT&T was allocated what we would now call 135.0.0.0/8. We allocated addresses according to what seemed like a rational scheme at the time, this being pre-CIDR. But a wandering neutron struck our CEO, inducing a fission event that produced (among other particles) AT&T and Lucent. 135.0.0.0/8 was split between the two companies as a collection of /16's, on the reasonably rational grounds of "whoever is using the block gets to keep it". This minimized disruption (or rather, avoided further disruption), at a time when there was plenty of other chaos involved in splitting companies, networks, buildings, and organizations. Unfortunately, it did not happen to correspond to CIDR principles, but as I said, the allocation to AT&T antedated CIDR and in no way anticipated what the CEO and the Board of Directors was going to do. >From 135.207.0.0/16, --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb Full text of "Firewalls" book now at http://www.wilyhacker.com

2 1

132.0.0.0/10 not in the databases
by Leo Bicknell 27 Nov '01

27 Nov '01

132.0.0.0/10 is floating around: route-views.oregon-ix.net>show ip bgp 132.0.0.0/10 BGP routing table entry for 132.0.0.0/10, version 12484641 Paths: (43 available, best #41) Advertised to non peer-group peers: 64.166.72.140 4513 13646 5696 568, (aggregated by 568 198.26.128.1) 195.66.224.82 from 195.66.224.82 (209.10.12.222) Origin IGP, metric 7602, localpref 100, valid, external, atomic-aggregate [snip, route-views has more than a page of entries for it] However, it doesn't apprar to be registered: % whois -h whois.arin.net 132.0.0.0 No match for "132.0.0.0". 568 regisitered to disa.mil, and a number of longer prefixes inside the /10 are registered to .mil addresses: % whois -h whois.arin.net 132.15.0.0 Kadena Air Base (NET-KADENA-NET) Bldg 792, Kadena AB JA APO, AP 96368-5149 US The question is, do they legitimately own the whole /10? If so, why isn't it marked in the databases? -- Leo Bicknell - bicknell(a)ufp.org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request(a)tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org

4 4

interliant / sagenetworks
by Dan Hollis 27 Nov '01

27 Nov '01

Does anyone have a confirmed working contact address for interliant / sagenetworks (AS 5697)? Ive gone through the usual channels and got no response from them. -Dan

1 0

RE: 132.0.0.0/10 not in the databases
by Borchers, Mark 27 Nov '01

27 Nov '01

This is all that shows up at http://www.nic.mil/: route: 132.0.0.0/10 descr: DISA, DSAC P. O. Box 1605 Columbus OH 43216-5002, USA origin: AS568 member-of: RS-COMM_US_FED mnt-by: MAINT-AS568 changed: nsfnet-admin(a)merit.edu 19940819 source: RADB > -----Original Message----- > From: Leo Bicknell [mailto:bicknell@ufp.org] > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 10:02 AM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: 132.0.0.0/10 not in the databases > > > > > 132.0.0.0/10 is floating around: > > route-views.oregon-ix.net>show ip bgp 132.0.0.0/10 > BGP routing table entry for 132.0.0.0/10, version 12484641 > Paths: (43 available, best #41) > Advertised to non peer-group peers: > 64.166.72.140 > 4513 13646 5696 568, (aggregated by 568 198.26.128.1) > 195.66.224.82 from 195.66.224.82 (209.10.12.222) > Origin IGP, metric 7602, localpref 100, valid, > external, atomic-aggregate > > [snip, route-views has more than a page of entries for it] > > However, it doesn't apprar to be registered: > > % whois -h whois.arin.net 132.0.0.0 > No match for "132.0.0.0". > > 568 regisitered to disa.mil, and a number of longer prefixes > inside the /10 are registered to .mil addresses: > > % whois -h whois.arin.net 132.15.0.0 > Kadena Air Base (NET-KADENA-NET) > Bldg 792, Kadena AB JA > APO, AP 96368-5149 > US > > The question is, do they legitimately own the whole /10? If > so, why isn't it marked in the databases? > > -- > Leo Bicknell - bicknell(a)ufp.org - CCIE 3440 > PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ > Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request(a)tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org >

1 0

Another national network has DSL problems
by Sean Donelan 27 Nov '01

27 Nov '01

These things seem to come in waves. Yet another large telco is having problems with their DSL service. Telstra Australia ADSL service went down about 9am local time (strange how these always happen at 9am, just as the dayshift starts working). Is this a trend, is there a common software fault or vendor these outages have in common? http://telstra.com/ServiceStatus/Default.asp

3 2

Re: how many roots must DNS have before it's considered broken (Re: ISP network design of non-authoritative caches)
by Simon Higgs 27 Nov '01

27 Nov '01

At 01:09 AM 11/22/01 -0500, Sean Donelan wrote: >I found an archive of NAMEDROPPERS going back to 1983. If you are >interested in the subject, or just want to know how we got here, its >an interesting read. > >Anonymous FTP at ftp://ops.ietf.org/lists/ in 1983, 1984, etc. > >If you don't know the past, you are doomed to repeat it. Even though >I disagree with some of them, I understand some of the decisions a >bit better. There are also some specific mailing lists such as newdom, where Draft Postel was hashed out. Due to various circumstances, the list moved a couple of times. There is an archive here (zip, gz, & mbx format): http://www.iahc.org/mail-lists.html Also there's the iahc-discuss mailing list, which unfortunately has been censored (between Jan 28, 1997 and May 14, 1997) because of the highly negative response to the IAHC's final report - i.e. the formation of eDNS on the IAHC mailing list: http://www.gtld-mou.org/gtld-discuss/mail-archive/ One of these days I'll get the shared-tld list archive online. Best Regards, Simon -- (A)bort, (R)etry, (T)ake down entire network?

1 1