September 2007 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Good Stuff [was] Re: shameful-cabling gallery of infamy - does anybody know where it went?
by Scott Weeks 26 Sep '07

26 Sep '07

vinny(a)tellurian.com wrote: Scott Weeks wrote: > --- streiner(a)cluebyfour.org wrote: ------------- > Note that telcos are not immune to shoddy cabling/installation work. > <snip> > http://www.cluebyfour.org/~streiner/mbr-pop-2000-ladder.JPG > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Do that at the telco in Hawaii and you won't be working here very long. ;-) The installation work and wiring here is something to swoon over. One of the stranger things a field tech of ours encountered wasn't necessarily bad wiring (although it's not great), but the fact that the demarc was located next to the toilet in the bathroom. Naturally, the constant humidity caused bad corrosion problems and other issues with their telco services. :) So as a general rule of thumb, avoid putting your telco and/or network gear next to the crapper or the services the equipment is meant to provide might also stink. http://users.tellurian.com/vabello/bathroom-demarc.jpg ------------------------------------------------------- It was brought to my attention that some of the folks here may not have ever seen good wiring, so I snapped a few photos of good wiring here and wrote a quickie web page for the photos. I couldn't get pictures of Ethernet wiring, but it's the same. Except the last photo, it's all wax string done very neatly. This is the goal. ;-) http://mauigateway.com/~surfer/wiring.html scott

10 12

Re: Fw: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6)
by Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu 26 Sep '07

26 Sep '07

On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 00:48:33 -0000, bmanning(a)vacation.karoshi.com said: > true enough. i guess this means that we get IPv6 "as is, where is" > and there will be limited new development of same. I can't conceive of any possible solution to IPv6 mobility, multihoming, routing, <insert deficiency here> which would find the mere fact that the WG is closed a problem, given that a decade of the WG being *open* didn't produce deployable results.

1 0

Anyone from AOL/ATDN on list (network operational issue)
by Drew Weaver 26 Sep '07

26 Sep '07

Please shoot me a message. Thanks, -Drew

1 0

Anyone here about comcast issues?
by Yamasaki, Charles 25 Sep '07

25 Sep '07

-------------------------- Sent using BlackBerry

3 2

RE: Route table growth and hardware limits...talk to the filter
by Church, Charles 25 Sep '07

25 Sep '07

I'm willing to bet that Cisco's sales team is pushing back a little on this enhancement. Given the choice between prolonging the usefulness of Sup2 for another year or two versus selling a massive amount of new Sup720-3BXLs, I'm betting they'll do the later. Chuck -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Sam Stickland Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 10:55 AM To: Forrest Cc: nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: Re: Route table growth and hardware limits...talk to the filter > There's a couple of feature requests open at Cisco that would do this. Rodney Dunn (at Cisco) pushed quite hard for these but couldn't get any traction. As he's previously pointed out it would have if people would vote for them (attach a case to). FORWARDED MESSAGE: Rodney Dunn wrote: Take your pick. :) CSCsa45474 Ability to block overlapping BGP prefixes from being installed in RIB or better: CSCsa46049 IOS RIB should not install overlapping routes with same next hop Rodney

23 42

New TransPacific Cable Projects:
by Deepak Jain 24 Sep '07

24 Sep '07

This is what happens when I stay late at the office on a Friday. http://www.commsday.com/node/186 - Google participating in a new Transpacific Cable Project http://www.networkworld.com/news/2006/121806-verizon-business.html - Verizon on a different transpacific project And all the same articles say there is already an overpriced glut of capacity along these routes and a glut of fiber laying ocean vessels. Good times. Rather than having competition, everyone is just building their own routes that they won't share at wholesale prices to folks in the wholesale buying business. :) Ahh... reminds me of the late 90s when everyone was building dark fiber networks for the surge of demand that was coming. Now, the remaining folks are buying up all the unused bits to constrain capacity. If I were a stakeholder in transpacific cables, I'd be leasing up the next 3-6 years of the entire global cable laying fleet. :) Deepak Jain AiNET

6 8

RE: Going dual-stack, how do apps behave and what to do as an operator (Was: Apple Airport Extreme IPv6 problems?)
by michael.dillon＠bt.com 24 Sep '07

24 Sep '07

> >> - setup a 6to4 relay + route 192.88.99.1 + 2002::/16 > > > > How? > > This is reasonably well documented for a Cisco but here's a > minimal sample > config: Thanks. I used your info, and other sources, to put up a page at http://www.getipv6.info/index.php/First_Steps_for_ISPs which describes how to set up 6to4 relay on Cisco, where to get Teredo relay software that you can run, and where to get tunnel broker software. There are a couple of gaps. I can find no info on how to set up 6to4 relay services on Juniper routers. Does JUNOS support this at all? If you know, go to the above page, click on Juniper, and tell us what needs to be done. In addition, CSELT in Italy distributed an IPv6 tunnel broker package at one time. I cannot find this anywhere. If you know where this software can be acquired or if you know of better IPv6 tunnel broker software, add it to the above page. I now know why people are so quick to give advice on what to do without explaining how to do it. It just is not easy to find out how to setup 6to4 relay services, Teredo relay services and IPv6 tunnel broker services. No doubt you can hire a consultant to do this for you, but if we want to get significant deployment we cannot rely on consultants who keep their toolkits secret. --Michael Dillon

9 14

Re: Apple Airport Extreme IPv6 problems?
by Barrett Lyon 24 Sep '07

24 Sep '07

On Sep 15, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Rich Groves wrote: > Are there any reliable stats on the number of 6in4 tunnel connects > after the Extreme was released ? I'm just wondering if this is > something that we as a community can easily track. > > Some DNS analysis at the provider I worked for in the past showed > the bulk of AAAA requests (to my surprise) were for Nintendo Wii > specific content (the weather app and news app) . When the > Nintendo folk decide to do something more interesting and latency > sensitive this could be a real problem I suppose. We removed AAAA on our production hosts shortly after we deployed it, our global v6 deployment goes production next week, at which time I may re-add the AAAA to limited production. If we do this, I publish a report of the stats once I have more accurate figures.

15 45

Call for Nominations to the NANOG Programme Committee
by Joe Abley 24 Sep '07

24 Sep '07

The NANOG PC is a group of sixteen individuals from the NANOG community who together are responsible for the solicitation and selection of material for NANOG meeting programmes. A new NANOG Programme Committee will be selected by the NANOG Steering Committee after the SC election in October. Eight positions are to be filled, and the SC is now seeking nominations. http://www.nanog.org/pccandidates07.html Per the NANOG charter (6.2.1), eligible candidates are individuals who have attended at least one NANOG meeting in the past 12 months (i.e. one or more of NANOG 39, NANOG 40 or NANOG 41). Broad technical knowledge of Internet operations and familiarity with NANOG meetings are useful attributes. Having constructive opinions and ideas about how NANOG meetings might be improved is of high value. If you are interested in nominating someone else or yourself, please send a brief note to steering(a)nanog.org. The note should include the nominee's contact details, and a brief description of why (in your opinion) the individual concerned would be a good addition to the PC. The SC will accept nominations received before the end of NANOG 41 on October 16. Joe (for the NANOG SC)

1 0

Apple Airport Extreme IPv6 problems?
by Barrett Lyon 24 Sep '07

24 Sep '07

Apple is nice enough to provide an automatic v6 tunnel from their new Airport Extreme units. They even get all the machines on the network to participate -- by default! At first this did not seem to be much of an issue, it was even pretty cool. However, I noticed as I roll out more v6 services to support native v6 users, I am impacting the network performance of almost all of the Apple airport population that has an inefficient tunnel configuration. The user obviously will take the AAAA v6 published IP over the v4 A record. Don't get me wrong v6 tunnels are great, when you opt-in and know what you are getting into. For example, my grandparents tunnel in California goes to Virginia. This impacts the user experience rather significantly with the first hop being nearly 100ms where their services to California are ~20ms. It's painful for a lot of users, especially when they don't even know what's going on. Has anyone else ran into this? It's not pretty for a CDN or anyone trying to provide a quality service over v6, shunting users over inefficiently tunneled routes does not sit well with me. I think Apple has made a mistake by enabling this by default. -Barrett

4 4