April 2002 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: UUNET instability? (fwd)
by sigma＠smx.pair.com 25 Apr '02

25 Apr '02

We have seen the same thing at 10:10am Eastern time and now at 11:45am. In fact, it's ongoing but we've not received any official explanation. And as always, www.noc.uu.net reports 'all is well'. Kevin >> Anyone else seeing routing instability through UUNET or have any more >> details? I saw a significant drop in my inbound and outbound traffic to >> them around 10:00AM EDT. UUNET has a prompt on their phone menus about >> network instability, but didn't elaborate. Their NOC doesn't have any >> more details as of yet that they're passing along. > >I got similiar when I called in. I also saw my circuit to them drop at >7:07:42 PDT and a series of up/downs until 7:13 PDT (along with a few BGP >resets). NOC claims that that's due to backbone routing issues, which I had >a hard time believing (at least the up/downs). I escalated it and got a >more knowledgable NOCite who re-iterated the instability issues and said >he'd get back to me with more info.

1 0

Announcement: IRRToolSet version 4.7.2 released.
by Katie Petrusha 25 Apr '02

25 Apr '02

[ Apologies for duplicate mails ] Dear collegues, We are pleased to announce the release of Version 4.7.2 of the IRRToolSet, formerly known as RAToolSet. Changes: - aoe is back and working, RPSL compliant - several bugfixes in roe/RtConfig/prpath have been made You can download this release by anonymous FTP from the following URL: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/tools/IRRToolSet/IRRToolSet-4.7.2.tar.gz You may also want to check IRRToolSet page: http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/pub-services/db/irrtoolset/index.html The mailing list archive is available here: http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/mail-archives/irrtoolset/index.html We want to thank everyone participated in testing and sending us suggestions and bug reports. We appreciate your help and feedback. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact katie(a)ripe.net. -- Kind regards, Katie Petrusha RIPE NCC

1 0

incorrect NXDOMAIN response from DNS server
by Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 25 Apr '02

25 Apr '02

the issue was originally raised on 6bone(a)isi.edu. there are name server implementations (probably load balancing product) that responds with NXDOMAIN, when it should respond with NOERROR with empty reply. one example is news.bbc.co.uk. this symptom not only confuse IPv6-ready client resolvers, but also has bad effect against negative caching and email delivery (if MX is responded with NODOMAIN). do you know: - name of particular implementation which have/had this bug? - other examples of nameservers that behave like this? (windowsupdate.microsoft.com behaved like this in Feb 2002, but they are already fixed) - how can we get people to fix it? (client side workaround should not be populated, just to be sure) itojun % dig news.bbc.co.uk. aaaa ; <<>> DiG 9.1.2 <<>> news.bbc.co.uk. aaaa ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 60945 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;news.bbc.co.uk. IN AAAA ;; ANSWER SECTION: news.bbc.co.uk. 1770 IN CNAME newswww.bbc.net.uk. ;; Query time: 2362 msec ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(0.0.0.0) ;; WHEN: Thu Apr 25 11:25:45 2002 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 62 % dig news.bbc.co.uk. a ; <<>> DiG 9.1.2 <<>> news.bbc.co.uk. a ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 11225 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;news.bbc.co.uk. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: news.bbc.co.uk. 1761 IN CNAME newswww.bbc.net.uk. newswww.bbc.net.uk. 300 IN A 212.58.240.33 ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: bbc.net.uk. 14360 IN NS ns0.thny.bbc.co.uk. bbc.net.uk. 14360 IN NS ns0.thdo.bbc.co.uk. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: ns0.thdo.bbc.co.uk. 6362 IN A 212.58.224.20 ns0.thny.bbc.co.uk. 6362 IN A 38.160.150.20 ;; Query time: 2341 msec ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(0.0.0.0) ;; WHEN: Thu Apr 25 11:25:53 2002 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 156

3 3

Re: UUNET instability?
by nanog＠jamesstewartsmith.com 25 Apr '02

25 Apr '02

I tried to get a couple of messages to the list earlier, but I guess the problems stop it. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 10:07:37 -0400 (EDT) From: James S. Smith <jssmith(a)jamesstewartsmith.com> To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Problems with UUNet backbone Maybe this is unrelated, but myself and some other collegues I've contact by phone just in the past few minutes have noticed some connectivity problems with the Worldcom backbone. Particularly, some routers on 152.63.131.0 seem to be down. The result is I can't get to the root name servers. I've tried tracerouting to all 13 root name server and I can only get to 3. The traceroutes all die in the block I mentioned about. Anybody else noticing this? Can anybody responsible for the IP block confirm? On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, Streiner, Justin wrote: > > Anyone else seeing routing instability through UUNET or have any more > details? I saw a significant drop in my inbound and outbound traffic to > them around 10:00AM EDT. UUNET has a prompt on their phone menus about > network instability, but didn't elaborate. Their NOC doesn't have any > more details as of yet that they're passing along. > > jms > --

1 0

CIA Warns of Chinese Plans for Cyber-Attacks on U.S.
by Steve Goldstein 25 Apr '02

25 Apr '02

I have no idea how real the implied threat may be. Just passing this along. --SG ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Defense: Analysts fear government and private efforts to sabotage federal Internet sites. By ERIC LICHTBLAU Times Staff Writer April 25 2002 WASHINGTON -- U.S. intelligence officials believe the Chinese military is working to launch wide-scale cyber-attacks on American and Taiwanese computer networks, including Internet-linked military systems considered vulnerable to sabotage, according to a classified CIA report. The complete article can be viewed at: http://www.latimes.com/la-042502china.story

1 0

RE: The Significance of Five 9's Reliability (fwd)
by Brennan_Murphy＠NAI.com 25 Apr '02

25 Apr '02

If you include leap years in the calculation, ie, 525,960 min/yr then yes, availability of 99.999 comes out to 5 min of downtime. The techniques the telcos follow to achieve 5 9s are amusing but here's a few comments. If I had the level of availability of my home phone on my frame/atm networks, I could probably get my handicap down to around 2 or 3. As it is, I have alot of trouble breaking 80. (golf reference) Another thing, some of the comments in this thread make me understand why the availability of the voice network infrastructure is so much superior to that of the data side of things. For one, alot of network engineers that I know don't know the ins and outs of how to calculate availability. This is troubling since it means that even if they accidently design a highly available network, they are left guessing and not predicting how available it will actually be. Every person who calls himself/herself a network *engineer* should be familiar with calculating 3 sorts of availability: 1) Device availability calculated by combining the availabilities of all the significant components of that device 2) The availability of serial vs parallel systems/designs 3) End to End availability calculated by combining the availabilities of groups of devices which function together to achieve a common purpose Some networks do not merit such analysis but you can bet that the 911 emergency services network does and should have this and much more detailed analysis. Another rant if I may. An engineer who can't calculate availability also can't calculate ROI. The cost of employing a certain network design is largely a factor of how available it's going to be. If you build a $2mil network where hour long outages cost the business $400k, maybe you should have built a $4mil network....especially if you know that you can count on 20 hours of outages during normal business hours.... If you've read this far, you may be interested in a book tip on High Availability Networks: Cisco Press: "High Availability Network Fundamentals" by Chris Oggerino. Seems to cover enough detail...to have an impact on awareness... -----Original Message----- From: blitz [mailto:blitz@macronet.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 8:59 PM To: brucewms(a)pacbell.net Subject: RE: The Myth of Five 9's Reliability (fwd) But THAT was when phones had cranks on the side. ;) 5 nines is a myth, conjured up by sales cretins to have something to sell...If I remember, 5 nines translates to 6 minutes outage a YEAR..? (Correct me if I'm wrong here) It's a marketing ploy for liar sales people and CEO's, it has absolutely NOTHING to do with real-world conditions. >BTW - One of my best friends growing up ( and we took EE together ) >grandfather was the V.P. in charge of AT&T's LongLines division while a lot >of the "wire was pulled". From what he said of his grandfather's remarks, >they didn't think about five 9's. The question was how much spare/redundant >capacity did you have, both for dependability and to support the countries >growth. Not exactly "this quarter's profit" thinking -sigh-.

1 0

Cisco blunders with insecure web page
by blitz 25 Apr '02

25 Apr '02

Cute..like they didn't know any better, sheesh! >http://www.silicon.com/public/door?6004REQEVENT=&REQINT1=52897&REQSTR1=sili… > >Wednesday 24th April 2002 > >Cisco has been forced to close an online registration form after >neglecting to secure the web page. > >The page was part of a marketing programme which offered Cisco's >second-tier resellers in Europe the chance to increase marketing funds >if they upped sales of certain Cisco products. > >But applicants registering for the programme online discovered their >banking and company details were going onto an open web page. When one >irate silicon.com reader called the Cisco helpdesk, he was informed >that the company was aware of the problem because several other users >had complained. > >Helpdesk staff recommended that users enter fake details on the web >and forward the real information in the post, a course of action our >reader regarded as an extreme waste of time. > >In a statement, Cisco said it had pulled the registration URL for 48 >hours to install SSL (secure sockets layer) - a common way of securing >web pages. > >A spokesman for the company said: "I can only put it down to an >unfortunate oversight in corporate procedure&not a great deal of >people have been affected but that's no excuse." > >The registration site had been running for 10 days before it was taken >down on Monday. Cisco said just 100 people had registered in that >time.

3 2

What extent do ISPs care about diff types of Traffic Engineering?
by Shivkuma 24 Apr '02

24 Apr '02

Dear NANOGers, I'd like to get a sense of how much ISPs care about different types of traffic engineering (at the routing level): Intra-domain: - multiple-paths between selected nodes - different (previleged) routing for specific traffic classes - traffic trunking and mapping to routing (eg: through MPLS) - OSPF/IS-IS parameter tweaking(i.e. link weights) for TE purposes - Dont care at all: use plain OSPF/IS-IS Inter-domain: - Hot potato/cold potato routing - Inbound load balancing (between peering links) - Inbound load balancing (between transit links or a mix of peering/transit) - Outbound load balancing (between peering links) - Outbound load balancing (between transit links or a mix of peering/transit) - Dont care about TE Are there other important categories of TE missed above? best -Shiv

2 1

bulk email
by James Cronin 24 Apr '02

24 Apr '02

Hi, I'm working on a bulk (opt in!) email delivery system at the moment, and over the years I've heard a number of possibly apocryphal stories about people requiring contracts with large email suppliers (Hotmail, AOL, Yahoo, MSN etc..) in order to be able to guarantee delivery and lower the risk of email that's been requested by an end user being mistakenly blackholed or treated as spam by their ISP (or webmail provider). Has anyone ever actually come across such a contract in real life or are they just urban myths? Cheers, J.

12 14

CPE Router question
by Sonya Blake 24 Apr '02

24 Apr '02

Does anyone have information regarding what type of low end routers people are using to provide Internet connectivity via DS3 and OC3 interfaces to customers without costing an arm and a leg! Very interested in pricing/vendors. Thanks in advance! Sonya Blake sblake(a)arch.bellsouth.net 678-441-7973

1 0