April 2003 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Missing registrations (when is a bogon not a bogon)
by Sean Donelan 29 Apr '03

29 Apr '03

Based on the e-mail I got, I think several people missed Hank Nussbacher and Barry Greene's presentation at the last NANOG. http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0302/ppt/hank.pdf In the presentation they list several ASN and Network blocks in use, but not registered in any database. The US Department of Defense (AS 568) wins the prize for the most unregistered network blocks being announced. But they weren't alone. If you are going to start blackholing unregistered network blocks, I suggest checking if the current user has nuclear weapons. But once again, which ISP's aren't filtering?

1 0

Re: mobile.att.net dead
by George William Herbert 29 Apr '03

29 Apr '03

>If you are relying on AT&T's paging/SMS service (for your phones) to be >alerted to (most certainly undesirable) operational events (or if you are >replying to them via the 2-way SMS service), this is a good time for a >backup pager: [...] >Both are dead like a door stop, and we can speculate on wether they >are located in the same physical building, on the same routed interface, >and the same physical switch, which failed the single processor >blade driving both of them. POI: AT&T wireless service response to wireless phone trouble report about 30 min ago was that AT&T wireless and AT&T long distance stopped communicating a little while ago for reasons not clearly known to AT&T wireless. Facility somewhere go boom? Cable cut? -george william herbert gherbert(a)retro.com

2 1

Opinions on Qwest
by Steve Francis 29 Apr '03

29 Apr '03

Anyone care to share their opinions on Qwest for transit currently? There was some talk about lack of clue/responsiveness in their noc about a year ago. How are things currently? Thanks. (No competing sales invitations, please sales people.)

2 1

Question about 223/8
by Jack Bates 29 Apr '03

29 Apr '03

I'm confused about the argument I believe that went on not too long ago concerning 223/8. What documentation governs how IANA allocates address space, including special use space? The reason I ask is that I was perusing RFC 3330 and noted that it specifically stated that the basis for the reservation of 223.255.255.0/24 no longer applied and that the block was subject to future allocation to a RIR. Yet there was an argument about it. -Jack

3 3

Time to bring back "Connected Status"
by Sean Donelan 29 Apr '03

29 Apr '03

In the beginning was the ARPANET, When SRI and BBN handled the NIC and NOC for the Internet, there was a field in the WHOIS database called "Connected Status." People could request IP networks (Class A/B/C) from SRI, but BBN would only route networks with the Connected Status on the ARPANET. You could do Whois queries to check the status of any network address. Companies could request IP addresses for internal use, without connected status. Around the time the NSFNET took over, the database sources started diverging. Connected Status was deleted from the WHOIS database. There was only one WHOIS database. NSFNET kept a seperate database of which networks were allowed to use the NSFNET. I know about all the routing specificiation language efforts, but is it possible to go back and do something simple? For networks which are announced on the Internet, add a Connected field to the regional address registries listing the AS Number(s) which could announce the network. Private, internal only networks would have an Unconnected status.

4 3

RE: Who is announcing bogons?
by McBurnett, Jim 29 Apr '03

29 Apr '03

Sean, I am not a BGP Guru by any means but as I see it: there are more than 25 /8 that should not be routed at all... And they are easily summarized.. some can be /6 or less... I never tried that.. But should work.... If I go to AT&T and ask for a list of what should be routed, That will be a huge list and not summarizeable. Although there are routers on the market that have massive amounts of RAM and can handle oodles of routes, and some ISP's may want to do this. BUT the average net user can easily take a BGP Feed of say 25 /8 and 50 /16 or so and /dev null all is fine. Using my example of the blockage of APNIC /8s.. SPAM SPAM GONE Away..... So can many other problems... (I ACL'd 4 /8 from APNIC on a Mail server and lost 60-70 % of the inbound SPAM... Nice test, Syslog didn't like it none.....) To me Rob provides a great service, which I am ashamed to say, I am falling down to implement... If I could /dev null some of the ole task list I would do it now.... Anyway, JMHO.... Jim >-----Original Message----- >From: Sean Donelan [mailto:sean@donelan.com] >Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 9:16 PM >To: nanog(a)merit.edu >Subject: Who is announcing bogons? > > > >On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, Rob Thomas wrote: >> ] Rob, on the other hand, has gained a lot of trust in maintaining >> ] a highly accurate list. >> Thanks very much. :) I can't accept all the credit though. > My thanks >> go out to all the members of Team Cymru. > >Unfortunately, no good deed goes unpunished. Jon Postel did a great >job maintaining the list of IP addresses. Paul Vixie did a great job >with the first Real-Time Blackhole List. But people move on, >and things >change. > >But my real question is why are negative bogon lists necessary? If you >ask providers, they all say they implement positive prefix list filters >on all their customers. So who is injecting the bogons? And >why do they >still have a network connection? > >Should we be spending time teaching people how to do positive prefix >filters, or trying to explain to them why the negative prefix filter >the last network administrator installed 2 years ago is out of date. > >What is the cross-over point? When does the number of lines in a bogon >list become larger than the positive prefix filter? If you >are going to >list every sub-allocation which isn't routed, why not just list the >allocations which should be routed? > > >

4 3

RE: Class "B" IP BLOCK
by Mark Segal 29 Apr '03

29 Apr '03

> I understand ARIN has made it difficult to sell IP addresses. > We have fixed > this problem by creating a corporation whose only asset is > the block of IP > addresses. How do you show effective utilization after the transfer? Its not just the assets.. It is also the customer base. mark -- Mark Segal Director, Data Services Futureway Communications Inc. Tel: (905)326-1570

1 0

IP Multicast Monitoring Tools
by Ben Hays 29 Apr '03

29 Apr '03

Hi- Im starting to work on a project involving IP Multicast, source specific MACs and IGMPv3 and don't have a way to manage it. Any suggestions for some software that would or could do the trick? TIA Ben

2 1

Re: Get as much IP space as you ever dreamed of, was: Re: Looking to buy IPv4 addresses from class C swamp
by Michael.Dillon＠radianz.com 29 Apr '03

29 Apr '03

>Thus spake "Daniel Golding" <dgold(a)FDFNet.Net> >> ARIN needs to repo any space that has [not] been advertised for a >> reasonable length of time, and reissue it. >So you're claiming that ARIN should revoke any allocations, including those >made before it came into existence, simply because the addresses aren't in >the global tables? Life's not that simple. First of all, there is a long-standing agreement that one can legitimately receive IPv4 address allocations even if the addresses are not to be used on the public Internet. Therefore it is unreasonable to use the fact that an address block is not announced to justify revocation. IPv4 addresses are allocated to organization who need to use globally unique IPv4 addresses. On the other hand, if an RIR is unable to verify contact information for an allocated netblock, then they should remove the existing bad contact information and tag the block in some standard way in the whois directory that they publish. Those who wish to may use this standard tag to add a block to their filters and disallow its use on their network. Of course, this would be easier if the RIRs would all publish their whois directories using the IETF standard directory protocol (LDAP) because then anyone could query for all blocks with this standard tag without having to suck down a copy of all of the RIR databases and parse it themselves. I really don't think it is productive to look at this as a revocation issue. It's really an issue of the RIRs maintaining an accurate database of contact information and then providing full disclosure of that information. Currently, if the RIRs are unable to contact an netblock holder, nobody knows about it. We don't even know if they have tried because the antiquated whois directory systems in place today make it hard for them to add additional attributes and hard for us to query additional attributes. The fact is that when an RIR allocates address space, there is a transfer of responsibility over the use of that address space. The public has a right to know who is taking responsibility for use of every block of IPv4 addresses. ISPs can then make their own routing and filtering decisions using that data if they choose to. This doesn't mean that the RIRs or ISPs should publish contact information about every DSL customer using a /30. In fact, the RIRs and ISPs should be publishing less information in their public whois directories, not more. The key factor here is responsibility. Sometimes when a block of IP space is allocated or assigned, the recipient is willing and *ABLE* to take public responsibility for the use and abuse of that space. In that case, their contact info should go in the public whois directory. But when the responsibility is not delegated to the recipient then there should be nothing in the public whois directory. If we had a clean and complete directory mapping the organizations repsonsible for every part of the IPv4 address space then things like revocation would simply be a non-issue because ISPs would have the information that they need to make their own independent decisions about routing and filtering. The RIRs should never be an enforcement agency however they should pay more attention to being an authoritative source of accurate and complete data. The whole RIR system today is mired in the past. They need to pull their socks up, cooperate more, clean their databases up, put the right information in their databases, and use the standard protocols that the IETF has already designed for directory service rather than wasting time on reinventing the wheel again. --Michael Dillon

2 1

Re: Get as much IP space as you ever dreamed of, was: Re: Looking to buy IPv4 addresses from class C swamp
by Michael.Dillon＠radianz.com 29 Apr '03

29 Apr '03

>> d) globally unique addresses for each participant using RIRs >d) is basically having the Internet community pay - both in real money >for staffing at RIRs and in scarce IP address space - for no benefit in >return at all for a function that those N companies should have an >institution perform for them via c). My company uses d) and we pay full ARIN fees at the highest level since our ARIN allocations falls into the largest fee slot. So your comment is simply not true in this case. --Michael Dillon

1 0