March 2001 - Test - lists.nanog.org

core router bakeoff at Light Reading
by David Newman 12 Mar '01

12 Mar '01

(apologies for cross-posting) Readers of this list may be interested in the results of a four-vendor core router bakeoff just posted here: http://lightreading.com/testing Each vendor supplied: up to 12 x OC-192c up to 48 x OC-48c The entries were: Charlotte's Networks Aranea-1 Cisco 12416 Foundry NetIron Juniper M160 Tests included: IP baselines MPLS baselines BGP table capacity MPLS LSP capacity longest-match lookup route flapping route convergence filtering class of service There's also a discussion of packet reordering. Regards, David Newman Network Test

1 0

DNS - Bind database
by David Hares 11 Mar '01

11 Mar '01

I'm looking for a database to drive creation of the BIND config and zone files. I've been doing it for years myself, but have turned it over to Customer Service, who cannot seem to get the concept of maintaining forward and reverse mapping. I run BIND 8 on Solaris, so something that runs under Solaris (not MickeySoft) is preferable. Both web and local shell database modification is definitely a plus. I'd rather not reinvent the wheel by programming this myself. Dave ----------- David Hares Director, Network Engineering NetworkTwo Communications Phone: 734.827.3620 650 KMS Place FAX: 734.827.3690 Ann Arbor, MI 48108 Email: dhares(a)networktwo.net

5 4

Re: tcp,guardent,bellovin
by Steven M. Bellovin 11 Mar '01

11 Mar '01

In message <87hf0z59qe.fsf(a)lackawana.kippona.com>, Chris Beggy writes: > > >tcp,guardent,bellovin are all mentioned in a WSJ article on DOS >and session hijacking, but I don't see anything on CERT yet. > >Any details? Any incidents using the exploit guardent has >identified? Not to my knowledge... The folks at Guardent are talking to CERT and to various vendors about the problem before releasing any details. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb

4 3

The Cidr Report
by Tony Bates 11 Mar '01

11 Mar '01

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri Mar 9 23:00:00 PST 2001 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 09Mar01 0) General Status Table History ------------- Date Prefixes 020301 97761 030301 97965 040301 99978 050301 97915 060301 98487 070301 98007 080301 97909 090301 98107 Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr.plot.html for a plot of the table history. Possible Bogus Routes --------------------- *** Bogus 91.16.23.0/24 from AS11770 AS Summary ---------- Number of ASes in routing system: 10176 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix: 5971 (3385 cidr, 2586 classful) Largest number of cidr routes: 954 announced by AS701 Largest number of classful routes: 1612 announced by AS1221 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level --- 09Mar01 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS1221 1612 1211 401 24.9% Telstra Pty Ltd AS2764 754 539 215 28.5% connect.com.au pty ltd AS701 1416 1258 158 11.2% UUNET Technologies, Inc. AS8006 145 19 126 86.9% Systems & Software Consortium, In AS7545 190 70 120 63.2% TPG Internet Pty Ltd AS9269 162 53 109 67.3% Internet service Provider in Hong AS6429 213 107 106 49.8% RdC Internet AS6595 161 62 99 61.5% DoD Education Activity Network As AS705 331 238 93 28.1% UUNET Technologies, Inc. AS4293 380 287 93 24.5% Cable & Wireless USA AS13999 102 11 91 89.2% Mega Cable S.A. de C.V. AS8013 324 238 86 26.5% PSINet Ltd. Canada AS4151 229 147 82 35.8% USDA AS7018 648 569 79 12.2% AT&T AS4755 209 130 79 37.8% Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Autonom AS1942 136 64 72 52.9% FR-CICG-GRENOBLE AS816 386 315 71 18.4% UUNET Canada AS577 240 170 70 29.2% Bell Advanced Communications Inc. AS174 496 428 68 13.7% PSINet Inc. AS724 214 148 66 30.8% DLA Systems Automation Center AS5106 101 37 64 63.4% Ameritech Advanced Data Services, AS11170 64 1 63 98.4% Bewell Net AS7657 169 108 61 36.1% The Internet Group Limited AS3749 120 59 61 50.8% Tennessee Board of Regents AS3464 153 93 60 39.2% Alabama SuperComputer Network AS226 154 94 60 39.0% Los Nettos AS376 133 76 57 42.9% Reseau Interordinateurs Scientiqu AS16758 63 6 57 90.5% IKON Office Solutions AS6413 67 11 56 83.6% Southern Online Systems, Inc. AS7568 83 28 55 66.3% C.S. Communications Co., Ltd. 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

2 1

RE: UUNet/Chicago
by Jason Lixfeld 10 Mar '01

10 Mar '01

Hehe, everything on AS816 is fux0red :) -----Original Message----- From: Lee Watterworth [mailto:lwatterworth@rim.net] Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 5:46 PM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: RE: UUNet/Chicago BB1.TOR2.uunet.ca is fuxored as well. I shut down my link to uunet canada. 1 <10 ms <10 ms <10 ms 10.1.1.4 2 <10 ms <10 ms <10 ms 10.1.0.20 3 <10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 206.51.26.1 4 <10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 207.176.255.21 5 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 205.150.242.81 6 * * * Request timed out. 7 * * * Request timed out. 8 * * * Request timed out. 9 * * * Request timed out. 10 * * * Request timed out. 11 * * * Request timed out. 12 * * * Request timed out. 13 * * * Request timed out. 14 * * * Request timed out. 15 * * ^C -----Original Message----- From: nicholas harteau [ mailto:nrh@ikami.com <mailto:nrh@ikami.com> ] Sent: March 9, 2001 5:00 PM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: UUNet/Chicago In case anyone didn't know but was interested: a customer aggregation router failed, it's being replaced, eta of 1hr. nicholas harteau wrote: > > anyone know anything about a "widespread" uunet outage in chicago? the > noc is not being very helpful. > -- nicholas harteau nrh(a)ikami.com .

2 1

Re: Namespace conflicts
by Steven M. Bellovin 10 Mar '01

10 Mar '01

In message <20010309143229.C11331(a)eiv.com>, Shawn McMahon writes: > > >--1ccMZA6j1vT5UqiK >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-Disposition: inline >Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > >On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 09:10:09AM -0500, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: >>=20 >> In my area of NJ, virtually every town's "obvious" .com domain names were= >=20 >> grabbed by one of two competing would-be service providers. They had=20 >> absolutely no town-specific content -- but if the town wanted a Web=20 >> site, they had no choice but to deal with these folks. I have no major= >=20 > >Bull. Where is it written that towns MUST have a .com address? > >Those towns had .townname.nj.us available to them for FREE. > >They chose to use .com, they chose to have the problem. It's about choices. I chose a bad example, and folks are missing the point. I picked town names because it was a glaring case that I knew of personally -- but we've all seen similar behavior in "legitimate" .com space. But if you want to beat on my original point -- as I and others have noted, the townname.nj.us domains were also grabbed by speculators. In other words, that wasn't an option, either. I haven't tracked the process failure or the policy failure that gave rise to that situation, but it's very real. I live in Westfield -- try www.westfield.nj.us. Then try some neighboring towns -- Kenilworth, Cranford, Fanwood, Summit, and more. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb

4 3

RE: Namespace conflicts
by Roeland Meyer 10 Mar '01

10 Mar '01

Actually, the courts aren't well engaged right now. They've been short-circuted by the UDRP. UDRP arbitrators are NOT courts. > -----Original Message----- > From: Shawn McMahon [mailto:smcmahon@eiv.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 3:16 PM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: Namespace conflicts > > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 02:51:30PM -0800, bob bownes wrote: > > > > > On the other hand, if my TV let me type in "CNN" and it > came back with > > > the right channel, that would scale beautifully as long > as nobody else > > > was dumb enough to name their channel CNN. > > > > > > > Or dumb enough to name it IBM...Therein lies part of the problem. > > I don't see that it's a problem. First-come first-served worked fine > until the courts got involved. > >

2 1

Re: new.net
by Scott Gifford 10 Mar '01

10 Mar '01

Charles Scott <cscott(a)gaslightmedia.com> writes: > If one considers the structure of name useage, from local assumed names > to registered trademarks by international organizations, the only logical > conclusion is to move everything to the regional domain structure and > totally do away with .com .net .org .edu and even .gov! It would seem to > be the only structure compatible with all scales of naming requirements > and should make domain related trademark issues a bit cleaner. That doesn't help at all. If I have to know that Apple is located in Cupertino, CA to find their domain ("apple.cupertino.ci.ca.us"), I might as well use their IP address. If Joe Apple lives in Cupertino too, who has a better claim to this domain, Apple Computers or Joe Apple? If Apple Records has "apple.newyork.ci.ny.us" and moves to Cupertino, they have to completely change their domain name, and the obvious new name conflicts with Apple Computers. Geographical naming only makes sense for things that are geographically arranged and never or very rarely move. National or multi-national companies are not geographical in nature, and sometimes move. People are not geographical in nature, and sometimes move. Information is not at all geographical in nature and is in constant motion. I don't think this scheme works well for much besides landmarks. :-) -----ScottG.

2 1

NetSol Host Changes, NetSol Problems
by Andy Ellifson 10 Mar '01

10 Mar '01

I am trying to make a name and IP address change to one of my DNS hosts. The template is filled out correctly and set to modify as opposed to new. Every time I send a template in to NetSol, it comes back: ERROR: host <newhostname.domain.com> not registered Duah! I know its not registered because I'm trying to update the current host to become the new host. The last time I did this about 7 months ago I had the same problem. I called NetSol and they pushed the change through. Now I have called and spoken to two different agents. They open up a case and say that I'm filling out the form wrong and send me a new form (which I never get). I tried to call back today and their lines are busy. Anyone have any hints to changing a host NIC record? Besides creating a new host and updating the DNS on ALL the domain names? I'd like to change this host DNS stuff sometime this year. Andy Ellifson

4 3

Re: new.net: yet another dns namespace overlay play
by Paul A Vixie 10 Mar '01

10 Mar '01

> Too bad ICANN has been such a complete and utter failure that an > organization felt it necessary to start such a business, huh? ICANN's prospective failure is evidently in the mind of the beholder.

12 16