December 2004 - Test - lists.nanog.org

ATM over T1
by Greg Boehnlein 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

Hello, This is my first post to the NANOG list, so please.. be gentle! ;) I am looking at consolidating several different POPs in a specific city that include a mixture of Point to Point and ATM T1 circuits. My goal is to shut down all of the physical infrastructure in that city, cross connecting all of the circuits onto a Muxed DS3 and backhaul them into a larger Metro POP. This is pretty simple for the standard DS1 and PRI circuits, but the ATM T1 connections have me wondering. I do not have a great deal of experience with ATM, and although we have a couple of T1 ATM interconnetions in our primary Metro POP, I am questioning wether it is truly possible to cross connect the ATM T1 interconnects to Verizon and SBC onto a standard M13T mux, backhaul them into my Metro POP and then hand them off to appropriate ATM interfaces. I've gotten conflicting answers from various sources, so I figured that I would ask here, as most likely there is someone here who can give a cogent answer as to why or why not. So, can I cross connect several ATM T1s onto a DS3 mux and break them out on the other side? Or do I need some sort of intelligent MUX that understands ATM? -- Vice President of N2Net, a New Age Consulting Service, Inc. Company http://www.n2net.net Where everything clicks into place! KP-216-121-ST

3 2

RE: is reverse dns required? (policy question)
by cjosephes＠ibsys.com 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

> Just a quick note: it's not a BCP yet, but it's also considered > /extremely/ friendly by mail admins and others, if you use a naming > convention for your rDNS that is easily placed into access.db > and other > "right-anchored" string matching mechanisms. e.g., if you have a > dynamically assigned DSL range, and want to assign rDNS to it based on > the IP, > > 123-45-67-89.dsl.dyn.example.net > > is a lot easier to block via rudimentary mechanisms than > > dsl-dyn-123-45-67-89.example.net > The bulkzone program will easily create right-anchored forward and reverse zonefiles for any size network block. http://backpan.cpan.org/authors/id/C/CH/CHRISJ/bulkzone.pl Just run it twice, and you've got it covered. On the bigger question of "charging" for reverse DNS: I would consider it part of the initial setup, or a deferred process tied to the initial setup. But if a customer swamps you with changes or updates beyond a reasonable amount, I'd consider delegating the reverse zone, or charging based on the number of changes. Just my 2 cents.

1 0

RE: is reverse dns required? (policy question)
by Hannigan, Martin 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] > Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 12:57 PM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: is reverse dns required? (policy question) > > > > > I thought I saw some 'MUST' statements in an RFC > > [*] From RFC 1912, section 2.1. > http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1912.html > > "Every Internet-reachable host should have a name. The consequences of > this are becoming more and more obvious. Many services > available on the > Internet will not talk to you if you aren't correctly > registered in the > DNS. > > Make sure your PTR and A records match. > ... > Failure to have matching PTR and A records can cause loss of Internet > services similar to not being registered in the DNS at all. Also, PTR > records must point back to a valid A record, not a alias defined by a > CNAME." > I think it's best practice, even if not written. As far back as I can remember, you couldn't access ftp.uu.net without a proper reverse and that's probably going on 14 years or so. The relevance there is that it was considered proper that far back all the way to this day. Many services won't respond or allow without reverses either. As far as charging, I've seen ISP's set limits on how many changes a month. Not on establishing the records. They're a required part of the service - in my mind. -M<

1 0

IRR Registration
by Jason Frisvold 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

Greetings, We just received our first ARIN allocation and I'm going through the motions to make sure we do everything right. Aside from dealing with DNS, BGP, and rwhois (which is a nightmare to set up), it was highly recommended that we register with an IRR. After looking a bit, I'm wondering which IRR I should be registering with ... It looks like ARIN has an IRR, but it's not something I can register with. The 2 specifically mentioned were raddb and altdb ... altdb obviously looks good because it's free... So .. is there a recommended registry to register with? Is it better to register with more than one? Am I staring a religious argument in the face here? Also, as an aside, does anyone have a checklist of sorts describing "best practices" for new allocations? Maybe something describing all the steps taken after a new allocation is assigned? Thanks! -- Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold XenoPhage0(a)gmail.com

2 1

NANOG topics we'd like to hear about
by Susan Harris 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

Our attendee survey in Reston yielded a lot of good suggestions for presentation topics, and they're listed below. We'd be delighted to have you propose a talk on any of these subjects for NANOG33 (Las Vegas, Jan. 30 - Feb. 1). The CFP is at www.nanog.org, and the deadline for abstracts and DRAFT slides is, um, soon ... Dec. 15. Also, you'll find tips for getting your talk accepted here: http://www.nanog.org/presentations.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - Hosting provider issues: firewalls, in particular shared virtual firewall services, load balancers, IDS, scaling large layer 2 networks shared with many different customers, automated traffic balancing systems, and DDoS mitigation. - Bridging the cultural divide between operators of legacy voice/TDM networks and IP networks, especially where each can learn different views on VoIP. This could include working with TDM/IP voice handoffs as well as technical and cultural hurdles, such as issues with equipment and issues with voice techs trying to relate to IP operations staff. How different are the languages and technical expectations of the two groups? - Broadband customer issues (DSL/cable) and fiber to the home/premises. - IPsec deployment experience - what's wrong with today's IPsec implementations? Hopefully this would provide feedback for vendors. - How network designers improve the availability of the network and what vendor availability features they find useful. - A talk by a defense/federal department on their network. - Research on IPv6 deployment measurement, multi-prefix routing, and new security models. - Instant messenger protocol traffic implications. - Cases of production use of QoS in ISP networks. - Internet Routing Registries and their current deployments and replication among the service providers. - Network management (SNMP) and dealing with polling and monitoring networks on a large scale (500,000+ devices). - IPv6 rollout strategies. - MPLS pseudo-wires/L2VPNS and faster convergence - where does it stand today? - Multicast voice and video streaming. - Network admission control. - P2P application-related topics; P2P traffic patterns. - Changing traffic patterns on the Internet.

1 0

Forum notify
by Dholtz 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

1 0

Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;)
by Owen DeLong 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

Bundusch Germania Politzei Forgive my lack of German spelling/grammar, but, hopefully I came close. Owen --On Tuesday, November 30, 2004 18:45 +0100 Florian Weimer <fw(a)deneb.enyo.de> wrote: > * Owen DeLong: > >> Why is my organization any less relevant on the global scale than >> say: > > May personal favorite is > > AS3280 BGS (German Border Police) > AS3281 BGS (German Border Police) > AS3282 BGS (German Border Police) > AS3283 BGS (German Border Police) > AS3284 BGS (German Border Police) > AS3285 BGS (German Border Police) > > Perhaps the "B" in BGP has confused them?

3 2

Re: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs [Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI]
by Owen DeLong 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

--On Wednesday, December 1, 2004 8:36 +0200 Pekka Savola <pekkas(a)netcore.fi> wrote: > On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Owen DeLong wrote: >>> if the prices were one or two orders of magnitude higher, that might be >>> true. That's way too cheap as it is. 10000$ upfront, 5000$/yr for >>> renewal might scare away who _really_ don't need them. Have the RIRs >>> donate the markup to ISOC or whoever and we're done. >>> >> So, you think that global resources should be allocated solely on the >> basis of wealth. Well... I don't subscribe to that theory, so, on this >> we will certainly have to agree to disagree. > > No. I'm just saying that they need to distributed based on who _really_ > needs them and based on who is sufficiently relevant in the global scale > of things that cannot use some other mechanisms which do not require > presence at the global routing table. > Well... You said that your intended criteria for determining need was to make them pay $10,000 up front and $5,000/year for renewal. If I'm Ford Motor Company or Donald Trump, then, that's easy. On the other hand, if I'm a rural ISP in the american south west, multihomed to 5 or 6 upstream providers and a number of local peers churning in annual profits in the neighborhood of $100,000 to $500,000, then, that's an awful lot of money just to get a single integer. > Unfortunately, putting a sufficient cost to the resources is one of the > few ways to measure real need. If you have real need, and you're big > enough to be globally relevant, you _can_ afford e.g. 5k/yr. > Except that it has a number of problems: 1. It has no association with need. 2. We already see that some of the worst abusing organizations in general are also some of the best funded. 3. It penalizes a number of organizations with real need and poor funding. 4. It is an arbitrary and capricious attack on a significant portion of the community. > The point is to make PI/ASN-based multihoming sufficiently unattractive > to those who should be using local instead of global means. > Herein lies the major difference between your position and mine. You seem to have this mystical idea of some clear cut distinction between "Should be able to use PI/ASN based multihoming" and "Should be using PA space and local instead of global means" (whatever that actually means). My questions are: 1. How do you determine the distinction between these two classes? (An actual rule that can be applied fairly and consistently by RIR staff when considering resource requests) 2. Why do you think that criteria is a valid criteria? (I can't really refute it until I know what it is.) > For example, my own consulting company certainly (currently with a /24) > falls under that category.. sure, it would be nice to have PI and BGP for > multihoming -- but I don't have any delusions of grandeour that my site > would be worth it in the global scale of things. Just because it might > be easiest way for _me_ doesn't mean it's the way multihoming should be > done because of the impacts on the rest of the world. My focus isn't easiest, but, frankly, it's far more important as far as I am concerned to more people in Europe to be able to reliably reach my site for my consulting company (and other purposes hosted there) than to be able to reach WalMart. Again, I'll be interested to see what your actual criteria for making this determination are, but, I suspect we will not agree about what they should be, and, that we will, in the end, have to agree to disagree about who should be in the position to make the decision of whether a given organization is worthy of PI and dynamic multihoming. Owen

1 0

Looking for some program that will do this...
by Dan Lockwood 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

Hi all, I'm looking for a program that can generate "real" looking traffic. It should be able to send TCP/UDP traffic to a large set of hosts (thousands), send traffic to random or semi-random ports and send packets/datagrams that are of random/semi-random size. Ideally it should run on windows or some sort of Perl script would be fine. Anyone have any ideas or should I dust off my programming books? Thanks, Dan

2 1

RE: Looking for some program that will do this...
by Dan Lockwood 01 Dec '04

01 Dec '04

No i'm not trying to DOS anyone. I want to stress test a netflow app that I wrote and need something that can generate the many flow cache entries that would be present with real traffic while i'm running it in my lab. Thanks all! ________________________________ From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu on behalf of Dan Lockwood Sent: Tue 11/30/2004 8:45 PM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Looking for some program that will do this... Hi all, I'm looking for a program that can generate "real" looking traffic. It should be able to send TCP/UDP traffic to a large set of hosts (thousands), send traffic to random or semi-random ports and send packets/datagrams that are of random/semi-random size. Ideally it should run on windows or some sort of Perl script would be fine. Anyone have any ideas or should I dust off my programming books? Thanks, Dan

1 0