March 2001 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Summary: Seattle earthquake - no impact
by Sean Donelan 01 Mar '01

01 Mar '01

It seems the biggest impact of the Seattle earthquake on the Internet was the brief unreachability of the KOMO-TV Station and Seattle Times web sites. No telecommunications companies report any reported network problems, although some reported they were on generator power for a short time. Abovenet/mfn ATT Genuity Internap Sprintlink Verio Verizon Worldcom/uunet/mfs/etc The Seattle Internet Exchange (SIX) appeared unaffected. I don't know the current status of either either the NIX or the SNNAP. I have out-dated URL's for them. I especially liked the part where the reporter could only reach the telephone spokepeople via e-mail at first because the phone lines were so overloaded. http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/DailyNews/quake_techstatus010228… http://seattlep-i.nwsource.com/local/telcom01.shtml

2 1

One ISP is working to solve problems in seattle
by Sean Donelan 01 Mar '01

01 Mar '01

Actually, one ISP did inform customers there may be some issues accessing their network in the Seattle area. Attention: Due to the earthquake in Washington State, some of our AT&T customers in Washington State may experience difficulties trying to access AT&T WorldNet Services. Our network engineers are working on this issue and will have the service available shortly. 4:55PM EST, 2/28/01 I suspect the difficulties are identical to the difficulties being experience by all customers of all ISPs in the region. But instead of sticking their fingers in their ears, and saying no one reported any problem (probably because the same problems prevents customers from reaching the customer service numbers to report the problem), ATT started working on problems before customers report them.

1 0

Covad SUCKS!
by Roeland Meyer 01 Mar '01

01 Mar '01

This is a blind message. I don't even know if it's getting out of my mail hub. Theoretically, it should. You won't be able to reply. I can route out, but nothing can get back in. Some of you may remember a poster of this huge eagle stooping on a mouse. The mouse was calmly standing, facing the eagle, flipping it the bird. The title was "Defiance". Covad is the eagle, MHSC is the mouse, and this message is the bird. MHSC has been down since 7Feb01 and Covad is the culprit. MHSC pays its bills, but Covad had a problem with my upstream. On Wednesday, 7Feb01, Covad cut off all links and feeds to my upstream. I've been down ever since. Everyone knows how quickly telcos turn up services, that's why co-lo centers have customers. Covad cut off MHSC access, without warning, without, compansation, and their SafetyNet program is the worst joke. I have a /24 and the new ISPs, that Covad is forcing me to use, can't assign a new /24. Shit, one of them can't even assign one static address. The one that this is going out thru tis trying to convince me that I can run 62 computers, using 130 IP addrs, on a /27 <heh>. We talked earlier about how non-portable addresses suck. Here is the reason why. I either use one of their SafetyNet providers or suffer up to 45 days of outage. Two weeks of warning and I would have been able to avoid the outage. (BTW, my ISDN backup feed is dead as well). I've tried contacting Covad, thier executive staff, etc. No joy there, Covad doesn't care. 100% of MHSC business is directly dependent on our Internet feed. 100% of February revenue is gone. I had two product roll-outs that were scheduled for the following week. Both are now dead issues. MHSC does CA for some of it's customers, renumbering invalidates all those CAs. Every lead we were working is now gone, probably forever, and so are many existing customers. I'm looking at probable business failure. MHSC could sue, but may not survive long enough to collect, even if we win. If MHSC survives this then "Damn, I good!" I urge everyone, do not; 1) Recommend Covad as a DSL provider 2) Become a Covad partner. 3) Remain on Covad service, find someone else (Rythyms sound good) Further, if you have any Covad stock ... sell it. The simple reason is that Covad has shown themselves unworthy of trust. They will cut off service arbitrarily, without direct cause, without compansation or recourse, and without warning. This is NOT the sort of behavior desired from an outfit in charge of your key infrastructure. We are not large, MHSC cannot afford an $80K+ revenue hit, and that's not counting the suits for failure to meet SLA. At this point, I'm not worried about any Covad law suits. What are they going to do ... put MHSC out of business? They've already taken care of that. I hope that this comes to the attention of Covad and I hope that they don't like it! MHSC will also be filing complaints with the CA-PUC and everywhere else that we can. But, a four-year process will not help MHSC stay in business. MHSC is already preparing a Marketing Communication plan to get this story out. MHSC tried dealing with this peacfully and got ignored, by Covad. Covad needs to be shunned by the rest of the Internet community, as a bad net-citizen. MHSC wasn't the ony business effected. There were 800 other busnesses involved in the cut off, that we know of. If any of you know anyone else that has been effected by this outage, please let me know. -- ROELAND M.J. MEYER Managing Director Morgan Hill Software Company, Inc. TEL: +001 925 373 3954 FAX: +001 925 373 9781 http://www.mhsc.com mailto: rmeyer(a)mhsc.com

9 8

RE: CANIX contact
by Jason Lixfeld 28 Feb '01

28 Feb '01

Unfortunatly finding some one person responsible for the CANIX entity is difficult, if not impossible. Apparently, WorldCom has routed CANIX administration related items through to it's Canadian sales staff, so I would assume that their Canadian Technical Support people would have some knowledge on how it's supported. support(a)uunet.ca // +1 (416) 216-5101 Will hopefully land you somewhere where someone can help ya out. BTW: TorIX is one floor down with the majority of CANIX' peers connected there aswell. Actually, @Home is already, but are you peering with all TorIX members? > -----Original Message----- > From: burgan(a)corp.home.net [mailto:burgan@corp.home.net] > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 10:00 PM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: CANIX contact > > > > Does anyone have an operational contact for the CANIX ethernet switch > located at 151 Front Street in Toronto? Our port is down. A private > email would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks, > Jeff > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------- > This email server is running an evaluation copy of the > MailShield anti- > spam software. Please contact your email administrator if you have any > questions about this message. MailShield product info: www.mailshield.com .

1 0

RE: Seattle Earthquake
by Matthew Schlegel 28 Feb '01

28 Feb '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Bellevue/Redmond area went for a ride, but no damage from my perspective. No land line interruption and T1 service stayed solid into the Westin. My sprint PCS service was getting fast busy dialing out to a land line, but wireless web browsing still worked fine. I had fully working cell service back by 12:30PM. As of 1:50PM, all service seems to be normal. Our service providers phones are currently non-op however, but no outages noticed so far. Reports I've seen so far are saying that this was not the big quake predicted for this area, so I'm wondering what effects this quake will have on the one building. Matthew Schlegel Network Engineer Crossgain Corporation - -----Original Message----- From: Charles Sprickman [mailto:spork@inch.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 1:13 PM To: Wilson, David Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: RE: Seattle Earthquake Hey all, We have some ATT cell phones for paging, and the number we dial for TAP is 1-800-841-8837. Currently we get a recording that "due to an earthquake in the area you are calling we cannot complete the call"... Anyone have alternate TAP numbers for ATT wireless? This one has been problematic pre-earthquake as well... Thanks, Charles | Charles Sprickman | Internet Channel | INCH System Administration Team | (212)243-5200 | spork(a)inch.com | access(a)inch.com On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Wilson, David wrote: > > > When it hits 8.0 SELL!! > > -----Original Message----- > Subject: Re: Seattle Earthquake > > > The US Geological Survey has revised the magnitude to 7.0. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> iQA/AwUBOp1z7CtAKYXwpQg1EQKbTQCgzbcqGijNA8KvMSH0LPxP3nTms1EAoLxO SjR9bO+x6BR9yS6rKH7KHbYR =zImT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

9 8

CANIX contact
by burgan＠corp.home.net 28 Feb '01

28 Feb '01

Does anyone have an operational contact for the CANIX ethernet switch located at 151 Front Street in Toronto? Our port is down. A private email would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jeff

1 0

RE: Seattle Earthquake
by Mathew Butler 28 Feb '01

28 Feb '01

Yeah, that's why it got numbered I405 instead of I450. I always knew there was something wrong with that... :) -Mat Butler -----Original Message----- From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy@psg.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 4:54 PM To: Chris Kilbourn Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Re: Seattle Earthquake >>> Major routes, such as I95 over Mercer Island are open and operating >> I5, you mean? > Nope, I-90 crosses Mercer Island and is East-West towards Boston. > I-5 is North-South and runs through downtown Seattle. and i95 is where they meet. locals know it as the additive interchange. we tried a multiplicative interchange, but the packet loss was too great due to the limited size of the signs. randy

1 0

Re: Seattle Earthquake
by Steven M. Bellovin 28 Feb '01

28 Feb '01

In message <E14YHLs-000Hh8-00(a)rip.psg.com>, Randy Bush writes: > >>>> Major routes, such as I95 over Mercer Island are open and operating >>> I5, you mean? >> Nope, I-90 crosses Mercer Island and is East-West towards Boston. >> I-5 is North-South and runs through downtown Seattle. > >and i95 is where they meet. locals know it as the additive interchange. >we tried a multiplicative interchange, but the packet loss was too great >due to the limited size of the signs. > But what tunneling protocol do they use to reach the east coast's I95? Or is there some form of address translation? --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb

1 0

DOE Review of Criticality Accidents
by Sean Donelan 28 Feb '01

28 Feb '01

Although published last year, I only learned about this report this year. Las Alamos National Labs published an update to the 1967 publication Review of Criticality Accidents. Ok, I know, what does a study about nuclear reactions has to do with Internet network operations. The answer is found by looking at the underlying causes of the accidents. Unless you are a nuclear engineer, you can skip directly to the chapter "C.OBSERVATIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED FROM PROCESS CRITICALITY ACCIDENTS" It is important to note that there have been no accidents that were caused by a single failure.That is, there were always multiple causes for each of the 22 accidents.It is also noteworthy that equipment failure or malfunction was either a minor or a non-contribut- ing factor in all of the accidents. All accidents have been dominated by design, managerial, and operational failures. The focus for accident prevention should be on these issues. http://lib-www.lanl.gov/la-pubs/00538245.pdf

1 0

RE: Seattle Earthquake
by Wilson, David 28 Feb '01

28 Feb '01

When it hits 8.0 SELL!! -----Original Message----- Subject: Re: Seattle Earthquake The US Geological Survey has revised the magnitude to 7.0.

3 2