December 2006 - Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: Undersea fiber cut after Taiwan earthquake - PCCW / Singtel / KT e tc connectivity disrupted
by Frank Coluccio 28 Dec '06

28 Dec '06

"Anderson, Matthew R [NTK] sent: >That map is incorrect at least with respect to >TAT-14. They depict it landing in New York City, >though its two North American landing sites are >actually well south of there in Manasquan and >Tuckerton, NJ." Thanks for highlighting the mis-placements of some of the cables. Offices in NY City serve as the International Transmission Maintenance Centers and Gateway Offices of multiple carriers, if those latter designations are still relevant today. There are some other generalizations made on the map, as well, but I think the general concept of their being, along with their general utility in the universe, comes across just the same. Unless, of course, one is organizing a fishing expedition;) Kidding aside, these "errors" are actually intentional, and the publisher makes no bones about it at the bottom of the page. See disclaimer under the South Atlantic Ocean: "Cable Routes do not represent all subsea cable networks and do not reflect actual location of cables" Frank ============== On Thu Dec 28 15:37 , "Anderson, Matthew R [NTK]" sent: >That map is incorrect at least with respect to TAT-14. They depict it landing in New York City, though its two North American landing sites are actually well south of there in Manasquan and Tuckerton, NJ. > >https://www.tat-14.com/tat14/stations.jsp > >I know that several of the other transatlantic cables do not land in NYC, for obvious diversity reasons, but this PDF shows them all landing there. > >Matthew Anderson > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [owner-nanog(a)merit.edu','','','')">owner-nanog(a)merit.edu] On Behalf Of Frank Coluccio >Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 12:58 AM >To: Gaurab Raj Upadhaya; Jared Mauch >Cc: nanog-post(a)rsuc.gweep.net; nanog(a)merit.edu >Subject: Re: Undersea fiber cut after Taiwan earthquake - PCCW / Singtel / KT e tc connectivity disrupted > > >I would expect that some of the affected cables have lost dc power used to drive >repeaters and amplifiers (10 kv d.c.) from their landing stations. Or that is at >least the hope at this time. The WSJ today published a superb article along with >a unusually detailed global route map. See intro along with some comments >concerning the route map (tinyurl): >-- > >Quake Damages Undersea Cables, >Disrupting Internet Service in Asia >By JASON DEAN >December 27, 2006 2:36 p.m. > >[FAC: Assuming the link below works, the article below contains an excellent >global view of what looks like most, if not all, of the major submarine cable >routes around the world in use today. It's a keeper, IMO, so I suggest >downloading it to your HD. Here's the pdf, which is probably subject to the same >shelf life constraint: http://tinyurl.com/ya45oo ] > >BEIJING -- A big earthquake near Taiwan disrupted phone and Internet traffic >across Asia Wednesday, highlighting the fragility of a global telecommunications >system that still relies on vulnerable undersea cables to carry data. > >The magnitude 6.7 temblor that struck late Tuesday off Taiwan's southern coast >cut several fiber-optic cables that carry communications traffic through a key >nexus in Asia, connecting Hong Kong and Southeast Asia with Japan and, >ultimately, North America. > >Continued at: >http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116719850925860370.html\?mod=djemTECH > >Enjoy! > >On Thu Dec 28 0:35 , Jared Mauch sent: > >> >>On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 04:55:25AM +0000, Gaurab Raj Upadhaya wrote: >>> >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1 >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Information seems to suggest that these all have one or other faults >>> due to the earthquake. Some probably have more serious problems then >>> others. >>> >>> SMW3 (Sea-me-we 3). >>> FNAL and FEA (FLAG North Asia Loop) ; >>> RNAL = Reach North Asia Loop >>> APCN2 (Asia Pacific Network 2) >>> >>> C2C - Singtel's coast to coast >>> EAC = East Asia Crossing (EAC) >>> >>> Traffic is gradually coming back through ad-hoc setups and re-routes, >>> but cable providers are saying minimum 3 weeks for full recovery. >> >> I've wondered how many boats/subs exist for these repairs >>and if attempting to do them all in parallel is going to be a big >>problem. With 6 systems having outages, it will be interesting to see >>when various paths/systems come back online and if there is a gating >>factor in underseas repair gear being available in the region. >> >> - jared >> >>-- >>Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared(a)puck.nether.net >>clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine. > > > >

2 1

RE: Collocation Access
by Alex Rubenstein 28 Dec '06

28 Dec '06

> Is this some new trend or have I just gotten lucky in the > past? Wouldn't someone like AT&T be better served by giving > their employees some company issued ID that they can submit > to secure facilities? I know it wouldn't be government I am shocked that the ATT employee did not have an ATT ID. In our facilities, we require all visiting telcos to produce company identification, and between telcove/level 3, Verizon, MCI, and several others, we have never had an issue. I'd be a bit more suspicious that he didn't have ATT ID. -- Alex Rubenstein, AR97, K2AHR, alex(a)nac.net, latency, Al Reuben Net Access Corporation, 800-NET-ME-36, http://www.nac.net

43 77

Re: Undersea fiber cut after Taiwan earthquake - PCCW / Singtel / KT e tc connectivity disrupted
by odlyzko＠dtc.umn.edu 28 Dec '06

28 Dec '06

A listing of cable ships around the world and their approximate locations (as of a couple of months ago) is available from the Submarine Telecoms Forum, at http://www.subtelforum.com/ and click on "Issue 29". There just aren't that many ships in the area, or any area, for that matter. The regional cooperative facilities for cable repair and maintenance are planned based on some standard risk assessments, and the recent quakes seem to have caused damage outside the planned envelope. > On Thu Dec 28, Gaurab Raj Upadhaya wrote: On Dec 28, 2006, at 5:35 AM, Jared Mauch wrote: > > I've wondered how many boats/subs exist for these repairs > and if attempting to do them all in parallel is going to be a big > problem. With 6 systems having outages, it will be interesting to see > when various paths/systems come back online and if there is a gating > factor in underseas repair gear being available in the region. Much of the affected cables are managed under the SEAIOCMA (South East Asia Indian Ocean Cable Maintenance Agreement). I am not sure how many ships they have on stand-by in the region, but probably not enough to send out one ship to each of the faults, given that multiple faults have been reported on most cable systems. I presume, the more important cable systems - those with higher stakes for the SEAIOCMA signatories will get repaired first followed by others. thanks

1 0

Re: Undersea fiber cut after Taiwan earthquake - PCCW / Singtel / KT e tc connectivity disrupted
by Fergie 28 Dec '06

28 Dec '06

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Reuters AlertNet says (props, Vicky Rode): [snip] While a tsunami warning came to nothing, the quake damaged at least six undersea telecommunication cables, affecting users in Taiwan and South Korea, and was felt in China and Hong Kong. [snip] More: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/TP172793.htm - - ferg - -- "Suresh Ramasubramanian" <ops.lists(a)gmail.com> wrote: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aYHaxhLE4rr0&refer=home Singapore Telecom, PCCW Say Internet Disrupted by Taiwan Quakes By Andrea Tan Dec. 27 (Bloomberg) -- Singapore Telecommunications Ltd. Southeast Asia's largest telephone company, and Hong Kong's PCCW Ltd. said Internet service in Asia slowed down after three earthquakes hit southern Taiwan yesterday. ``The Taiwan earthquake has affected several submarine cable systems in Asia, causing cable cuts near Taiwan late last night,'' Singapore Telecom spokesman Chia Boon Chong said by telephone today. ``Some customers might experience a slowdown in data or Internet access. Traffic diversion and restoration works are currently in progress.'' Taiwan was jolted by three earthquakes yesterday, killing two people and injuring 42 others, the island's National Fire Agency said. The tremors damaged undersea cables, causing a disruption to Internet traffic and some telephone calls in the region for customers including Singapore Telecom, PCCW, Chunghwa Telecom Co., Taiwan's biggest telephone operator, and KDDI Corp., Japan's second-largest telephone carrier. PCCW, Hong Kong's largest phone company, said data capacity on its networks was reduced to 50 percent due to the quake. ``Data service to Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and the U.S. were affected,'' said Hans Leung, a spokesman in Hong Kong. Two of Chunghwa Telecom's cables were damaged by the earthquake, resulting in ``near zero'' capacity for voice calls to Southeast Asia, apart from Vietnam, said Leng Tai-feng, the company's vice president of international business. ``The repairs could take two to three weeks,'' Leng said. ``We're doing our best to coordinate with other operators in the region to resolve the problem.'' Southern Taiwan The first earthquake, which was magnitude 6.7, occurred at 8:26 p.m. local time yesterday off Taiwan's south coast, the island's Central Weather Bureau said on its Web site. The second, magnitude 6.4, happened at 8:34 p.m. and the third, magnitude 5.2, occurred at 8:40 p.m. All three were centered in the same area, the bureau said. On Dec. 26, 2004, a magnitude 9.1 earthquake off Sumatra unleashed waves that destroyed coastal villages on the Indian Ocean from Indonesia to Sri Lanka, killing more than 220,000 people. Some of the areas have yet to recover. KDDI said its fiber-optic undersea cable in Taiwan was damaged, affecting fixed-line services to Southeast Asia. The company is re-routing phone calls to go through the U.S. and Europe and may take several weeks to two months to repair cables that are damaged, KDDI's Tokyo-based spokesman Haruhiko Maede said. KT Corp., South Korea's largest provider of fixed-line phone and Internet access service, said the outages affected overseas connections of the foreign ministry and Reuters, which use leased lines, said Kim Cheol Kee, a spokesman for Seongnam-based KT. KT is in discussions with foreign phone companies to redirect traffic elsewhere, Kim says. To contact the reporter on this story: Andrea Tan in Singapore at atan17(a)bloomberg.net Last Updated: December 26, 2006 22:57 EST - -- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists(a)gmail.com) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.2 (Build 4075) wj8DBQFFkg+5q1pz9mNUZTMRAipFAJ9OjJ/zSPPL0CTxvlXXZo3+eR7hzACfWAkE yQ6ittrZadD4GVS1kEcehK4= =mhgJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

6 6

Re: Undersea fiber cut after Taiwan earthquake - PCCW / Singtel / KT e tc connectivity disrupted
by Frank Coluccio 28 Dec '06

28 Dec '06

I would expect that some of the affected cables have lost dc power used to drive repeaters and amplifiers (10 kv d.c.) from their landing stations. Or that is at least the hope at this time. The WSJ today published a superb article along with a unusually detailed global route map. See intro along with some comments concerning the route map (tinyurl): -- Quake Damages Undersea Cables, Disrupting Internet Service in Asia By JASON DEAN December 27, 2006 2:36 p.m. [FAC: Assuming the link below works, the article below contains an excellent global view of what looks like most, if not all, of the major submarine cable routes around the world in use today. It's a keeper, IMO, so I suggest downloading it to your HD. Here's the pdf, which is probably subject to the same shelf life constraint: http://tinyurl.com/ya45oo ] BEIJING -- A big earthquake near Taiwan disrupted phone and Internet traffic across Asia Wednesday, highlighting the fragility of a global telecommunications system that still relies on vulnerable undersea cables to carry data. The magnitude 6.7 temblor that struck late Tuesday off Taiwan's southern coast cut several fiber-optic cables that carry communications traffic through a key nexus in Asia, connecting Hong Kong and Southeast Asia with Japan and, ultimately, North America. Continued at: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116719850925860370.html?mod=djemTECH Enjoy! On Thu Dec 28 0:35 , Jared Mauch sent: > >On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 04:55:25AM +0000, Gaurab Raj Upadhaya wrote: >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Hi, >> >> Information seems to suggest that these all have one or other faults >> due to the earthquake. Some probably have more serious problems then >> others. >> >> SMW3 (Sea-me-we 3). >> FNAL and FEA (FLAG North Asia Loop) ; >> RNAL = Reach North Asia Loop >> APCN2 (Asia Pacific Network 2) >> >> C2C - Singtel's coast to coast >> EAC = East Asia Crossing (EAC) >> >> Traffic is gradually coming back through ad-hoc setups and re-routes, >> but cable providers are saying minimum 3 weeks for full recovery. > > I've wondered how many boats/subs exist for these repairs >and if attempting to do them all in parallel is going to be a big >problem. With 6 systems having outages, it will be interesting to see >when various paths/systems come back online and if there is a gating >factor in underseas repair gear being available in the region. > > - jared > >-- >Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared(a)puck.nether.net >clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.

1 0

Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware)
by Scott Weeks 27 Dec '06

27 Dec '06

--- pete(a)he.iki.fi wrote: From: Petri Helenius <pete(a)he.iki.fi> Geo. wrote: > I know this is kind of a crazy idea but how about making cleaning up > all these infected machines the priority as a solution instead of > defending your dns from your infected clients. They not only affect > you, they affect the rest of us so why should we give you a solution > to your problem when you don't appear to care about causing problems > for the rest of us? > :: Has anyone figured out a remote but lawful way to repair :: zombie machines? Lawful in which country? scott

3 2

DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware)
by Luke 27 Dec '06

27 Dec '06

Hi, as a comsequence of a virus diffused in my customer-base, I often receive big bursts of traffic on my DNS servers. Unluckly, a lot of clients start to bomb my DNSs at a certain hour, so I have a distributed tentative of denial of service. I can't blacklist them on my DNSs, because the infected clients are too much. For this reason, I would like that a DNS could response maximum to 10 queries per second given by every single Ip address. Anybody knows a solution, just using iptables/netfilter/kernel tuning/BIND tuning, without using any hardware traffic shaper? Thanks Best Regards Luke

17 29

Home media servers, AUPs, and upstream bandwidth utilization.
by Roland Dobbins 27 Dec '06

27 Dec '06

I recently purchased a Slingbox Pro, and have set it up so that I can remotely access/control my home HDTV DVR and stream video remotely. My broadband access SP specifically allow home users to run servers, as long as said servers don't cause a problem for the SP infrastructure nor for other users or doing anything illegal; as long as I'm not breaking the law or making problems for others, they don't care. The Slingbox is pretty cool; when I access it, both the video and audio quality are more than acceptable. It even works well when I access it via EVDO; on average, I'm pulling down about 450kb/sec up to about 580kb/sec over TCP (my home upstream link is a theoretical 768kb/sec, minus overhead; I generally get something pretty close to that). What I'm wondering is, do broadband SPs believe that this kind of system will become common enough to make a signficant difference in traffic paterns, and if so, how do they believe it will affect their access infrastructures in terms of capacity, given the typical asymmetries seen in upstream vs. downstream capacity in many broadband access networks? If a user isn't doing something like breaking the law by illegally redistributing copyrighted content, is this sort of activity permitted by your AUPs? If so, would you change your AUPs if you saw a significant shift towards non- infringing upstream content streaming by your broadband access customers? If not, would you consider changing your AUPs in order to allow this sort of upstream content streaming of non-infringing content, with the caveat that users can't caused problems for your infrastructure or for other users, and perhaps with a bandwidth cap? Would you police down this traffic if you could readily classify it, as many SPs do with P2P applications? Would the fact that this type of traffic doesn't appear to be illegal or infringing in any way lead you to treat it differently than P2P traffic (even though there are many legitimate uses for P2P file-sharing systems, the presumption always seems to be that the majority of P2P traffic is in illegally- redistributed copyrighted content, and thus P2P technologies seem to've acquired a taint of distaste from many quarters, rightly or wrongly). Also, have you considered running a service like this yourselves, a la VoIP/IPTV? Vidoeconferencing is somewhat analogous, but in most cases, videoconference calls (things like iChat, Skype videoconferencing, etc.) generally seem to use a less bandwidth than the Slingox, and it seems to me that they will in most cases be of shorter duration than, say, a business traveler who wants to keep up with Lost or 24 and so sits down to stream video from his home A/V system for 45 minutes to an hour at a stretch. Sorry to ramble, this neat little toy just sparked a few questions, and I figured that some of you are dealing with these kinds of issues already, or are anticipating doing so in the not-so-distant future. Any insight or informed speculation greatly appreciated! ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <rdobbins(a)cisco.com> // 408.527.6376 voice All battles are perpetual. -- Milton Friedman

9 14

Undersea fiber cut after Taiwan earthquake - PCCW / Singtel / KT etc connectivity disrupted
by Suresh Ramasubramanian 27 Dec '06

27 Dec '06

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aYHaxhLE4rr0&refer=home Singapore Telecom, PCCW Say Internet Disrupted by Taiwan Quakes By Andrea Tan Dec. 27 (Bloomberg) -- Singapore Telecommunications Ltd. Southeast Asia's largest telephone company, and Hong Kong's PCCW Ltd. said Internet service in Asia slowed down after three earthquakes hit southern Taiwan yesterday. ``The Taiwan earthquake has affected several submarine cable systems in Asia, causing cable cuts near Taiwan late last night,'' Singapore Telecom spokesman Chia Boon Chong said by telephone today. ``Some customers might experience a slowdown in data or Internet access. Traffic diversion and restoration works are currently in progress.'' Taiwan was jolted by three earthquakes yesterday, killing two people and injuring 42 others, the island's National Fire Agency said. The tremors damaged undersea cables, causing a disruption to Internet traffic and some telephone calls in the region for customers including Singapore Telecom, PCCW, Chunghwa Telecom Co., Taiwan's biggest telephone operator, and KDDI Corp., Japan's second-largest telephone carrier. PCCW, Hong Kong's largest phone company, said data capacity on its networks was reduced to 50 percent due to the quake. ``Data service to Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and the U.S. were affected,'' said Hans Leung, a spokesman in Hong Kong. Two of Chunghwa Telecom's cables were damaged by the earthquake, resulting in ``near zero'' capacity for voice calls to Southeast Asia, apart from Vietnam, said Leng Tai-feng, the company's vice president of international business. ``The repairs could take two to three weeks,'' Leng said. ``We're doing our best to coordinate with other operators in the region to resolve the problem.'' Southern Taiwan The first earthquake, which was magnitude 6.7, occurred at 8:26 p.m. local time yesterday off Taiwan's south coast, the island's Central Weather Bureau said on its Web site. The second, magnitude 6.4, happened at 8:34 p.m. and the third, magnitude 5.2, occurred at 8:40 p.m. All three were centered in the same area, the bureau said. On Dec. 26, 2004, a magnitude 9.1 earthquake off Sumatra unleashed waves that destroyed coastal villages on the Indian Ocean from Indonesia to Sri Lanka, killing more than 220,000 people. Some of the areas have yet to recover. KDDI said its fiber-optic undersea cable in Taiwan was damaged, affecting fixed-line services to Southeast Asia. The company is re-routing phone calls to go through the U.S. and Europe and may take several weeks to two months to repair cables that are damaged, KDDI's Tokyo-based spokesman Haruhiko Maede said. KT Corp., South Korea's largest provider of fixed-line phone and Internet access service, said the outages affected overseas connections of the foreign ministry and Reuters, which use leased lines, said Kim Cheol Kee, a spokesman for Seongnam-based KT. KT is in discussions with foreign phone companies to redirect traffic elsewhere, Kim says. To contact the reporter on this story: Andrea Tan in Singapore at atan17(a)bloomberg.net Last Updated: December 26, 2006 22:57 EST -- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists(a)gmail.com)

1 0

RE: Home media servers, AUPs, and upstream bandwidth utilization.
by Joe St Sauver 26 Dec '06

26 Dec '06

Chris mentioned: #it might also be interesting to know how tcp-stack differences affect some #of the usage patterns as well. With the now widely deployed win* platform #tcp stach respecting tcp-reno things work according to well #understood/accepted models. Mac OSX, linux and Vista seem to NOT respect #tcp-reno, and may change the models somewhat... Will this cause more #spikiness on individual links? will this change in behaviour on a wide #scale (vista rollout to new computers or to existing platforms) causing #folks capacity planning models to fail? Capacity planning is a very important issue, but for other folks capacity *under*utilization is the flip side of that issue. For example, there are still scientific researchers who continue to be puzzled by low throughput for bulk data transfers, even with clean fast ethernet (or gig ethernet!) connections end-to-end. For example, looking at table 1 of http://netflow.internet2.edu/weekly/20061218/ we can see that on I2 95% of all bulk TCP data transfers are ~25Mbps or less -- however the top 1/10th of 1% successfully demonstrate 1Gbps throughput. The question then becomes one of "How do we help bridge that 'wizard gap' or transfer that expertise (of those who are demonstrably able to fully utilize the connections at their disposal) to all the other well-connected researchers out there?" Things like Web100, see http://www.web100.org/download/ are intended to help automate this for Linux users, although clearly there are still issues with applications (if you're curious, you can see the sort of improvements to SSH that were made by the folks at PSC at: http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/ and there's a lot of fascinating empirical work that's been done with applications such as GridFTP (where encryption is not the bottleneck). So what about Vista? Well, it has (or should have, I'll withold any final assertions until I see what actually finally gets shipped to consumers) a number of TCP performance enhancements which are described at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/community/columns/cableguy/cg1105.mspx (last updated September 22nd, 2006). If the network traffic load feels different post-Vista, well, it very well may *be* different. :-) But that's all host-based -- what about at the network level? I'm intrigued to see things like jumbo frames accounting for a non-negligible fraction of traffic on Internet2 (e.g., roughly 7% or so of octets, see http://netflow.internet2.edu/weekly/longit/perc-b-jumbo-packets.png ), and I also notice that at least one alternative TCP/IP implementation has elected to commercialize in the form of a 1U gateway appliance that does its mojo network wide, rather than working to retrofit individual hosts with high performance TCP stacks on a host-by-host basis. I think those sort of things have tremendous potential to change the aggregate network behavior we all see over time. Regards, Joe St Sauver (joe(a)uoregon.edu) http://www.uoregon.edu/~joe/ Disclaimer: all opinions strictly my own.

3 2