February 2001 - Test - lists.nanog.org

re: Network for sale
by Troy Corbin 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

Sorry about my previous post... Was meant to be a private reply. ;-) Dont know how i cc:d the list... Again, my apologies. -troy

1 0

Re: Peering contract, needed or optional?
by Sean Donelan 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

On Tue, 20 February 2001, "Wolfgang Tremmel" wrote: > I just had a discussion with our legal advisor whether it is necessary or > not to sign a peering contract with every (little) peering partner. > > I know that a lot of the big ones require these contracts and I don't have > a problem with that, my opinion just is that a contract with a peer who > announces one /19 is not really necessary. You have gone to the right place, your legal advisor. Your lawyer is the only one with a duty to provide accurate legal advice for your situation. In the US, the subject of peering is not one which the Statute of Frauds requires a written contract. So it is possible to have a binding legal agreement without one. However, I expect most lawyers would advise their clients it is best to have a written agreement, if only to prevent future misunderstandings about what is and is not included. Some people believe "peering" is an asset, and accounting rules require written evidence of an agreement to perform. > Another question is if there has ever been any lawsuit about peering... I have never heard of a decision rendered by jury or court about peering. There have been legal squabbles, but so far, they've all been settled between the parties before a court entered a judgement. Several, but not all peering agreements include arbitration clauses. In the US, arbitration is considered private.

1 0

Re: RED deployment testing
by John Kristoff 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

> I have a related Question, what OID are you using to display Dropped > Packets?? A number of people have asked me how to monitor dropped packets so rather than answer another either... .1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.19.n (or just ifOutDiscards.n) where n is the interface number. What would really be nice is if I could do trending on the queue length (ifOutQLen), if anyone has any ideas on how to systematically monitor that, I'd be interested in hearing how you it is done. John

1 0

Re: Network for Sale
by Paul Vixie 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

nanog(a)Overkill.EnterZone.Net (John Fraizer) writes: > I suspect that your new technology simply adds another variable to the > best-path-selection process based on your ping/traceroute script RTT's to > a specific network based on what you have divolged thusfar. Oh god, I hope not. RTT has never been an accurate predictor of end-to-end performance. (Just ask anyone who bought into ping-based global server load balancing.) ASPATH length is almost as bad (as a predictor) as RTT. Serve to learn, man.

1 0

Re: Network for Sale
by Paul Vixie 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

dan(a)netrail.net ("Daniel L. Golding") writes: > I would suspect Savvis, perhaps, or Epoch? Curt is certainly not involved > with NetRail in any way. I just liked the description, "small tier-1". (I guess if you have a PC and a modem, you're tier-1 now?)

15 30

RE: Network for Sale
by Jason Lixfeld 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

Heh, nah keep it on-list. It's 3:30am over here where I am, but alas, I'm sure getting a kick out of sitting up in anticipation waiting for stuff to hit my NANOG folder. This is a hoot! :) > Again, if you want to have a flame-war, let's take it off-list. .

1 0

RE: Network for Sale
by Daniel L. Golding 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

Nick, Savvis was first by a very long time. As I understand it, they cooled to the idea after a while. InterNAP came later, and executed (at least marketing and sales-wise), much better. Regardless of the hype, there's a big difference between a PNAP/POP from one of these guys, and what is conventionally thought of as a NAP. - Daniel Golding On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Kampeas, Nick (EPIK.ORL) wrote: > > Now that you brought up that point, let me interject with two question. > What is the difference between Internap and Savvis (short of the names and > financial status)? Who came up with the minnaps first? > > Nick Kampeas > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel Golding [mailto:dan@netrail.net] > Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 4:20 PM > To: Majdi S. Abbas; Alex Bligh > Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: RE: Network for Sale > > > > InterNAP has done the tier-0 marketing dance for some time. Quite > successfully, as a matter of fact. Secret Sauce sells like hotcakes. Wall > Street likes it as well. Not much of a performance increase, though. > > - Daniel Golding > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of > > Majdi S. Abbas > > Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 3:09 PM > > To: Alex Bligh > > Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu > > Subject: Re: Network for Sale > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 07:51:30PM +0000, Alex Bligh wrote: > > > If you refuse to peer with anyone at all, you can be tier-0. This > > > can be achieved with considerable savings to phone line utilization. > > > > Actually, we already have a tier-0. See: > > > > http://www.opnix.net/perl/PressRelease.cgi?article=100032 > > > > (And many other things on their website.) > > > > Particularly amusing is: > > > > http://www.opnix.net/whatwedo/performance.shtml > > > > --msa > > >

1 0

uRPF enhancement
by Stephen Stuart 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

For those of you at the Network Policy BOF who were asking about the less strict form of unicast RPF checking on Cisco, here's a pointer to the paper: ------- Forwarded Message From: "Barry Raveendran Greene" <bgreene(a)cisco.com> To: xxx, xxx Cc: <cisco-nsp(a)puck.nether.net> Subject: RE: [nsp] ip spoofing prevention Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 09:50:48 -0800 FYI - I've updated the uRPF Enhancement whitepaper: http://www.cisco.com/public/cons/isp/documents/uRPF_Enhancement.pdf Barry ------- End of Forwarded Message Stephen

1 0

MPLS and VLAN info
by Michael Long 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

I need to educate some coworkers (who aren't all that familiar with networks) and my boss on the security advantages of MPLS and VLAN's. I guess I don't seem to be communiating it very well because they just don't get it. Can anyone point me to some good technical docs that specifically deal with some of the benefints of MPLS and VLAN's. Specifically security related would help. TIA, Michael Long

2 1

RE: MPLS and VLAN info
by Irwin Lazar 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

Michael, Network Magazine just ran a fairly lengthy article on various approaches to VPN's, including network-based versus CPE approaches. You can find it at: http://www.networkmagazine.com/article/NMG20010125S0013 If memory serves me correctly, they did address the security issues of MPLS vs. encrypted VLANs. In a nutshell, MPLS VPN's, from a security aspect, aren't all that different from other PVC based services such as Frame Relay and ATM. Traffic is basically isolated into the MPLS label switch path (or PVC). IPsec-based VPNs provide additional security by encrypting the traffic that rides on top fo the MPLS LSP. Depending on where the encryption occurs, it is quite possible to run IPsec over an MPLS-VPN. The real benefit to MPLS-VPNs is the elimination of the need for dedicated intelligent CPE, which "in-theory" should make it easier and cheaper for service providers to roll out IP-VPN services. In terms of VLAN security, have a look through the archives of the firewall wizards mailing list at http://www.nfr.com/pipermail/firewall-wizards/. This topic has been addressed quite a bit in the past. You might also want to check out my MPLS site at www.mplsrc.com for links to articles & drafts on MPLS topics. Irwin ------ Irwin Lazar, Senior Consultant The Burton Group - www.tbg.com ilazar(a)tbg.com 703-742-9659 (office) 703-402-4119 (cell) The Ultimate Resource For Network Architects > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Long [mailto:mlong@sac.verio.net] > Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 8:00 PM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: MPLS and VLAN info > > > > > I need to educate some coworkers (who aren't all that familiar with > networks) and my boss on the security advantages of MPLS and VLAN's. I > guess I don't seem to be communiating it very well because > they just don't > get it. Can anyone point me to some good technical docs that > specifically > deal with some of the benefints of MPLS and VLAN's. > Specifically security > related would help. > > TIA, > > Michael Long > >

1 0