October 2005 - Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: Cogent/Level 3 depeering
by Hannigan, Martin 05 Oct '05

05 Oct '05

> > Just curious - Has this activity impacted voice services for > anyone, and/or > has either opened a FCC NORS report? Why could you open a NORS unless it's impacting LD and meet-me minutes? :-) -M<

2 1

Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering
by Mike Tancsa 05 Oct '05

05 Oct '05

At 02:47 PM 05/10/2005, Douglas Dever wrote: > > fact remains that Cogent is not providing the service I'm paying them > > for and they need to get it fixed. > >Really? As you already pointed out, your packets are reaching their >destination. So, they don't "need" to get anything "fixed." I think what people are upset about is that you now have less redundancy now if you are a cogent transit customer. If I tell my customers, "I have 3 full transit links", I now have to put an * there. If my 2 non cogent links go down, I dont have a full visibility of the Internet. I see everything, except Level3. It becomes more acute if you have just 2 transit links-- Cogent and one other. What if your other provider has a lossy path to Level 3 ? You cant work around it by preferencing 174 3356 ---Mike

2 1

AW: Cogent/Level 3 depeering
by John van Oppen 05 Oct '05

05 Oct '05

I think in all the recent cases, cogent ended up buying transit from verio. That was the case for access to AOL and Sprint when I turned off my cogent feed a week ago. I think that is also what they did with france telecom but I am not sure on that one as I never checked (I had other transit). Thanks, John van Oppen -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Christopher Woodfield [mailto:rekoil@semihuman.com] Gesendet: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 9:39 AM An: Jon Lewis Cc: nanog(a)nanog.org Betreff: Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering I am curious - how did prior depeering "events" wind up being eventually resolved? What were the resolution times, if anyone remembers? -C On Oct 5, 2005, at 12:32 PM, Jon Lewis wrote: > > In the end, both providers lose, as customers buy real Internet > transit from someone else. > > OTOH, the industry as a whole probably gains. I have a client > who's massively overprovisioned, multihomed with multiple Ts each > to 3 or 4 providers now after being bitten a couple years ago when > singlehomed to C&W and they depeered PSI. Funny that those PSI > customers are getting screwed again now. > > On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Christopher Woodfield wrote: > > >> >> Ah, the problem with playing chicken is what happens when neither >> player blinks... >> >> -C >> >> On Oct 5, 2005, at 11:29 AM, Vince Hoffman wrote: >> >> >>> On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: >>> >>>> A couple weeks later than expected, but as of Oct 5 02:51AM EDT >>>> it looks >>>> like 3356 and 174 are no longer reachable. >>>> lg.level3.net: >>>> Show Level 3 (Washington, DC) BGP routes for 38.9.51.20 >>>> No matching routes found for 38.9.51.20. >>>> www.cogentco.com looking glass: >>>> Tracing the route to www.Level3.com (209.245.19.42) >>>> 1 f29.ba01.b005944-0.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.250.56.189) 4 >>>> msec 4 msec 0 msec >>>> 2 * * * >>>> 3 * * * >>>> I guess the earlier reports of (3)'s lack of testicular >>>> fortitude may have >>>> been exagerated after all. :) >>>> >>> It's sure causing a few headaches here. >>> (from level3 looking glass) Show Level 3 (London, England) BGP >>> routes for 38.9.51.20 >>> No matching routes found for 38.9.51.20 >>> As of 16:22 BST Level3 still seems to have no routes for cogent's >>> space. thats about 5 hours now. >>> Vince >>> >>>> -- >>>> Richard A Steenbergen <ras(a)e-gerbil.net> http://www.e- >>>> gerbil.net/ras >>>> GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA >>>> F8B1 2CBC) >>>> >> >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Jon Lewis | I route > Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are > Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/ > ~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________ > >

2 1

Re: TLD anycast clouds?
by Steve Gibbard 05 Oct '05

05 Oct '05

Thanks! Am I reading your CENTR presentation correctly as saying that you're announcing all four prefixes from all five locations? -Steve On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Gustavo Lozano wrote: > Steve, > > .mx NS servers (a,b,c,d.ns.mx) are anycasted. > > We announce dns servers prefixes from: > > Verio > ISC > Telmex > Avantel > Alestra ATT > NYIIX trough ISC > > If you want more details, we gave a presentation about our dns infrastructure > in the last CENTR technical meeting. > <http://www.centr.org/docs/2005/07/centr-tech14-lozano-dotmx.pdf>http://www.centr.org/docs/2005/07/centr-tech14-lozano-dotmx.pdf > > At 05:07 p.m. 04/10/2005 -0700, Steve Gibbard wrote: > >> I'm attempting to come up with a list of all the top level domain DNS >> servers that are anycasted. I already know about the anycast clouds run by >> PCH, Neustar, Verisign, DENIC, and UltraDNS, and .mx appears from >> traceroutes to be anycasted as well. >> >> (I know about the anycasted root servers as well; they're out of scope for >> this question...) >> >> Are there others that I'm missing? >> >> Thanks, >> -Steve > > > gus -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Gibbard scg(a)gibbard.org +1 415 717-7842 (cell) http://www.gibbard.org/~scg +1 510 528-1035 (home)

2 1

TLD anycast clouds?
by Steve Gibbard 05 Oct '05

05 Oct '05

I'm attempting to come up with a list of all the top level domain DNS servers that are anycasted. I already know about the anycast clouds run by PCH, Neustar, Verisign, DENIC, and UltraDNS, and .mx appears from traceroutes to be anycasted as well. (I know about the anycasted root servers as well; they're out of scope for this question...) Are there others that I'm missing? Thanks, -Steve

7 11

(What If?) ccTLD Delegation Question
by Joe Johnson 05 Oct '05

05 Oct '05

Call it Monday Boredom, if you will, but a funny DNS question just popped into my head: if I were to, say, win the lotto and buy my own Island (which, of course, would technically be its own country), would I be able to receive a ccTLD for said island nation? Kind of like .joejohnsonisland or .jji? If so, would the DNS have to be actually contained inside of said island? I think not, as it was mentioned earlier that .iq was run from Texas, but it's always good to ask. Joe Johnson joe(a)sendjoeanemail.com

9 9

Cogent Dep(3)(3)ring
by Adam Rothschild 05 Oct '05

05 Oct '05

Cogent and Level(3) appear to be fully partitioned as of 5:50AM EST. You heard it here first. :) Let the games begin... -a

1 1

Is this data bogus?
by Vish Yelsangikar 05 Oct '05

05 Oct '05

According to Keynote, Sprint is losing substantial packets and it has been going for the last 24 hrs!! http://scoreboard.keynote.com/scoreboard/Main.aspx?Metric=AvailNtwk

1 0

Charter
by Jeffrey Sharpe 04 Oct '05

04 Oct '05

Could a mail admin from Charter please contact me off-list? ------------------------------------------------ Jeffrey Sharpe CyberLynk Helpdesk and Support 414.858.9335 or 800.942.8022 JSharpe(a)cyberlynk.net ------------------------------------------------

3 2

GigE Peering Router
by Network Lists 04 Oct '05

04 Oct '05

Hello, I was looking for some opinions on Cisco vs. Foundry (specifically Cisco's NPE-G1 vs a NetIron 4802). The application is mainly content delivery - outbound heavy traffic with an emphasis on quality of delivery. Basically I'm looking at the 4802 because we're able to provision GigE for all the providers, so we don't really need an architecture that can support OC-type interfaces. The size is also attractive for some of our smaller PoPs. I'm also intereted in failover/hot-standby capabilities on the Foundry as we have had much experience with them. Best, Lance

1 0