March 2005 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Clue on Europe
by Per Gregers Bilse 09 Mar '05

09 Mar '05

By popular request ... saves more people from asking. Q: What did MFS do to my (AS286, EUnet at the time) box at MAE-West? A: (You need to know that we were in Amsterdam in The Netherlands, and shipped a box to them for them to install.) It was installed offsite in another facility, in a private, colocated cabinet belonging to a local company (otherwise not in the Internet business, they just had a corporate WAN in the area), then connected back up with MFS's favourite ethernet-over-ATM kit; all undocumented. We never knew until we wanted to replace it. MFS agreed that they could see its MAC address in local ARP caches, so obviously it did exist and was connected, somehow, somewhere. I thought they would be able to find its port on the switch and trace the cabling from there, but that was somehow not possible (probably all unlabeled). I then set up a small script to stay logged in and repeatedly run "test leds", while two or three people on their side went through rack after rack looking for slow blinking LEDs. They found it on the third day of searching. On the positive side, they didn't try to deny facts, they openly explained what had happened. Also something mumbled about the original install engineer being known as "Loco".-) Best, -- Per

1 0

www.nanog.org returning 403 Forbidden error?
by Brent Chapman 09 Mar '05

09 Mar '05

I just tried accessing http://www.nanog.org/, and am getting back a 403 "Forbidden" error: Forbidden You don't have permission to access / on this server. Did somebody break the web server? -Brent -- Brent Chapman <Brent(a)GreatCircle.COM> Great Circle Associates, Inc. http://www.greatcircle.com/ +1 650 962 0841

5 6

Re: enom/name-services.com nameservers are severe broken
by Michael Tokarev 09 Mar '05

09 Mar '05

Big Wave Dave wrote: > I have seen a coupld different domains using their services be > similarly affected. Sending them an email would result in a bounce > marked "domain not found". It has been periodically occurring since The bounce/"domain not found" is exactly due to this problem with returning NXDOMAIN in the wrong place. I used plain SMTP in telnet to send them email ;) > November. By the time you track someone down that can fix it... it > has magically corrected itself. Well.. For me, it's just "Not My Problem (tm)". And no, the problem is still here ;) /mjt

1 0

Re: Heads up: Long AS-sets announced in the next few days
by Lorenzo Colitti 09 Mar '05

09 Mar '05

James A. T. Rice wrote: > So, the ASn's are not picked at random, yet mine might be included if I > don't specifically ask for them not to be included, yet you decline to > tell how my ASn might have been selected for this. Ok, I realize I might have given the wrong impression here. Sorry. So here's what we are doing: by artificially inserting ASes into the AS-set of an announcement, the ISP that makes the announcement can control where the announcement is propagated and thus discover paths followed by its announcements that are not usually visible, giving it a more complete knowledge of network topology in the vicinity. Since this is a new technique, it's not clear if it is actually effective, and to measure this we need to test it in the real world. If the experiments show that the technique performs as we hope, we intend to publish the results and provide the details for public use. We will post appropriate references to this list as soon as we have some hard data and have put it into a presentable form. But first we need to do the experiments... Regards, Lorenzo

9 18

enom/name-services.com nameservers are severe broken
by Michael Tokarev 09 Mar '05

09 Mar '05

Just noticied a weird behaviour of dns?.name-services.com nameservers. Here it goes (there are several problems, pls read the whole this message): $ host -t a -v name-services.com. dns1.name-services.com. this gives normal answer (details skipped): name-services.com. 7200 IN A 63.251.163.109 And this is Very Wrong (tm): $ host -t cname -v name-services.com. dns1.name-services.com. Host name-services.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN) In short: for *some* types of records for a valid name, the server returns NXDOMAIN, which it should not be. Obviously, when doing this query using a caching nameserver, the cache gets poisoned (remembering that the domain in question does not exists, as opposed to "No data of requested type" response). Another example for a domain hosted by them: $ host -t a -v jandg-cooper.com. dns1.name-services.com. NXDOMAIN $ host -t mx -v jandg-cooper.com. dns1.name-services.com. jandg-cooper.com. 3601 IN MX 10 cooper-linux.jandg-cooper.com. This happens with CNAME and A records so far, eg asking for AAAA record returns proper reply with empty answer section. And here's another brokeness: $ host -t ptr -v jandg-cooper.com. dns1.name-services.com. ;; Warning: ID mismatch: expected ID 15165, got 0 ;; Warning: ID mismatch: expected ID 15165, got 0 It returns "proper" (fsvo) reply but with wrong ID. Reportedly there's some (pretty legal) query which returns SERVFAIL but I can't reproduce it now. All dns?.name-services.com behaves the same way. I think it should be fixed ASAP.. ;) /mjt

2 2

route-views.oregon-ix.net
by Erik Sundberg 08 Mar '05

08 Mar '05

hello, is any one having troubles getting in to route-views.oregon-ix.net a.k.a.(route-views.oregon-ix.org) i can ping but no telnet into it. i have tried from a couple of places on and off my network. [box@box box]# telnet route-views.oregon-ix.net Trying 128.223.60.103... telnet: connect to address 128.223.60.103: Connection timed out [root@asp-12 root]# ping route-views.oregon-ix.net PING route-views.oregon-ix.net (128.223.60.103) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from g0-1.route-views.routeviews.org (128.223.60.103): icmp_seq=1 ttl=237 time=80.2 ms 64 bytes from g0-1.route-views.routeviews.org (128.223.60.103): icmp_seq=2 ttl=237 time=79.8 ms 64 bytes from g0-1.route-views.routeviews.org (128.223.60.103): icmp_seq=3 ttl=237 time=80.1 ms thanks erik --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Appsmail.com]

3 2

VoIP Port Blocking Draws Congressional Interest
by Fergie (Paul Ferguson) 08 Mar '05

08 Mar '05

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1773832,00.asp - ferg

2 1

Re: Clue on Europe
by christian.macnevin＠uk.bnpparibas.com 08 Mar '05

08 Mar '05

It's possible the WAN link was for customer-owned monitoring equipment. Internet alex(a)alex.org.uk - 08/03/2005 10:10 Please respond to alex(a)alex.org.uk To: Christian MACNEVIN, nanog cc: alex Subject: Re: Clue on Europe --On 08 March 2005 10:07 +0000 christian.macnevin(a)uk.bnpparibas.com wrote: > Also, when I dealt with them, I > believe their NOC was connected to the Net for external monitoring > purposes by a leased line which was frequently down. I don't think that's true. Their NOC has always been in either one data center or another (separated by a few hundred yards). Alex This message and any attachments (the "message") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. ********************************************************************************************** BNP Paribas Private Bank London Branch is authorised by CECEI & AMF and is regulated by the Financial Services Authority for the conduct of its investment business in the United Kingdom. BNP Paribas Securities Services London Branch is authorised by CECEI & AMF and is regulated by the Financial Services Authority for the conduct of its investment business in the United Kingdom. BNP Paribas Fund Services UK Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.

1 0

Re: Clue on Europe
by christian.macnevin＠uk.bnpparibas.com 08 Mar '05

08 Mar '05

A flaw in either their air conditioning or fire alarm system shut down their power last year sometime as well. Also, when I dealt with them, I believe their NOC was connected to the Net for external monitoring purposes by a leased line which was frequently down. Now you got to read the disclaimer regarding my opinion etc.. Internet bilse@networksignature.com@merit.edu - 08/03/2005 08:03 Sent by: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu To: subhi, acanvar cc: nanog Subject: Re: Clue on Europe On Mar 8, 5:22am, Subhi S Hashwa <subhi(a)thebigboss.com> wrote: > Avoid Redbux Hex (London) like the plague, just ask about their > recent power outages. AFAIK their other facilities are ok. I think that's a bit unfair. I've had my personal Internet connectivity (copper line and baseband modems) via RedBus and Harbour Exchange for four years now, and have no particular complaints. Something went wrong during a generator test or seomthing last week, but considering what I've experienced in other facilities, I don't think this colo is notably better or worse than most other colos; at least, I know several others that have a much worse history. Trouble is, things come and go. Expect problems during run-in and build-out, then a period of stability, then problems as places fill up and capacities max out; rinse; repeat. Is there any colo that doesn't come with its own set of horror stories and folklore? Ask me about what legendary MFS did to a router of mine at equally legendary MAE-West.-) Best, -- Per This message and any attachments (the "message") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. ********************************************************************************************** BNP Paribas Private Bank London Branch is authorised by CECEI & AMF and is regulated by the Financial Services Authority for the conduct of its investment business in the United Kingdom. BNP Paribas Securities Services London Branch is authorised by CECEI & AMF and is regulated by the Financial Services Authority for the conduct of its investment business in the United Kingdom. BNP Paribas Fund Services UK Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.

2 1

Clue on Europe
by Ashe Canvar 08 Mar '05

08 Mar '05

Hi all, Plan to set up a 2 rack outpost in a colo in Europe. I am looking for prior experience(s) -- Good or ugly. My research leads me to believe that London and Amsterdam have the most dense connectivity. Is this true ? If so, then what colo's / ISPs in these 2 cities would you recommend. The primary aim is to get smallest RTTs to most of western Europe. - I would prefer a carrier neutral facility. - Backhaul to the US is a lesser concern but, of course, cheaper is better. - I have a small setup in the Isle of Dogs (London) presently, but the local loop charges are atrocious. - I am posting here instead of Euronog because I want to get US based prespective. Will summarize to list, Thanks !

6 5