January 2009 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Network topology
by Colin Alston 15 Nov '13

15 Nov '13

Hi all I'm considering trying to come up with some means to automatically detect a networks topology and draw pretty pictures. This is somewhat boring though if a network isn't well arranged with VLANs and q-tag trunk routers and so on (It will just look like a big cloud of junk connected off an assumed switch). Is there any kind of cunning trick to detect standard layer2 switches along a path without stuff like STP?

9 12

Inventory and workflow management systems
by vijay gill 26 May '13

26 May '13

What software solution do people use for inventory management for things like riser/conduit drawdown, fiber inventory, physical topology store, CLR/DLR, x-connect, contracts, port inventory, etc. Any experiences in integrating workflow into those packages for work orders, modeling, drawdown levels, etc. /vijay

10 13

Re: Re: What is the most standard subnet length on internet
by 정치영 03 Aug '09

03 Aug '09

Suresh, Yes, I guess my concern is close to the second meaning. It seems so simple. Currently annoucement of /24 seems to be okey, most upstream providers accept this. However I wonder if there is any ground rule based on any standard or official recommandation. If there is some standardized rule about prefix length to be annouced, I will make my bgp & IP allocation policy of each data center of my company, and I will be able to more fairly and squarely speak to my customer like this "You have to change your server's IP address if you want move your server to other place" chiyoung ============================================= Chi-Young Joung SAMSUNG NETWORKS Inc. Email: lionair(a)samsung.com Tel +82 70 7015 0623, Mobile +82 17 520 9193 Fax +82 70 7016 0031 ============================================= ------- Original Message ------- Sender : Suresh Ramasubramanian<ops.lists(a)gmail.com> Date : 2008-12-19 12:37 (GMT+09:00) Title : Re: What is the most standard subnet length on internet Chi Young, let me clarify one thing here .. Do you mean IP allocation as in subnet allocation, swipping in apnic or through a rwhois server etc? Or do you mean "what is the minimum subnet size I can announce on the internet and have other providers not drop it on the floor"? srs On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 8:10 AM, 정치영 <lionair(a)samsung.com> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'm going to rebuild IP allocation policy of my company and I am looking for some standard reference for my policy. > I have already studied some standard like RFC1518, RIPE181, RFC2050 and I got it is very important to maintain hierachy structure. > However, what I am really wondering is what is the most standard subnet length that always can be guaranteed through Internet. less than /24 bit ? > I could not find any documents about that, which subnet length is most proper value and pursue internet standard policy ? >

11 13

Re: Re: What is the most standard subnet length on internet
by 정치영 26 Jul '09

26 Jul '09

Hi all, I appreciate many people gave me advices, Some of persons asked me about my questions, I'm sorry for that I couldn't reply to everyone. Because of your help, I could get many opinions and standards regarding IP allocation policy. by the way, in APNIC's IP allocation sizes policy, there is a comments like below. "Below are the minimum sizes for allocations and assignments, This information is provided at the request of the ISP community to assist in filtering policy decisions " Currently, is there any provider filtering routes under LIR's minimum allocation size such as /22 ? Best regards, ============================================= Chi-Young Joung SAMSUNG NETWORKS Inc. Email: lionair(a)samsung.com Tel +82 70 7015 0623, Mobile +82 17 520 9193 Fax +82 70 7016 0031 ============================================= ------- Original Message ------- Sender : Danny McPherson<danny(a)tcb.net> Date : 2008-12-21 02:42 (GMT+09:00) Title : Re: What is the most standard subnet length on internet On Dec 18, 2008, at 9:43 PM, 정치영 wrote: > Suresh, > > Yes, I guess my concern is close to the second meaning. > > It seems so simple. Currently annoucement of /24 seems to be okey, > most upstream providers accept this. > However I wonder if there is any ground rule based on any standard > or official recommandation. > If there is some standardized rule about prefix length to be > annouced, I will make my bgp & IP allocation policy of > each data center of my company, and I will be able to more fairly > and squarely speak to my customer like this > "You have to change your server's IP address if you want move your > server to other place" Some useful guidance is provided here (and in subsequent references) as well: An Architecture for IP Address Allocation with CIDR <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1518> Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR): an Address Assignment and Aggregation Strategy <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1519> Network Renumbering Overview <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2071> A Framework for Inter-Domain Route Aggregation <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2519> HTH, -danny

16 21

Leap second tonight
by Kevin Day 18 Mar '09

18 Mar '09

Just a reminder that there's a leap second tonight. Last time I watched for what happened on 01/01/2006, there was a little bit of chaos: http://markmail.org/message/cpoj3jw5onzhhjkr?q=%22kevin+day%22+leap+second+… I've been told that some of the causes of these problems are fixed on any reasonably recent ntp distribution, but just in case, you might wanna keep an eye out if you're seeing any weirdness. The worst damage I'd heard from anyone after that event was their clock being significantly off for several hours. -- Kevin

20 27

New ISP to market, BCP 38, and new tactics
by Steve Bertrand 08 Feb '09

08 Feb '09

Although I've posted to this list before, I don't want to waste your time. This is an ops question, so I'm looking for direction, off-list if necessary. We are a *very* small I-SP, and am just now being put in the position to be a backup transit for a client. Currently, our 'upstream' advertises our route for us, 208.70.104.0/21 from my AS 14270 (SBE96-ARIN). As I've wanted to do this myself for some time, the upstream has had issues allowing me to do so. I've also been advertising 2607:f118::/32 via BGP peering to kind people who have been sensitive to the lack of my 'upstream's' inability to provide me with native access. Now, I am about to force my 'upstream' to allow me to bring my advertisement (v4) back to me, I would like off-list feedback of any/all documentation that I should be aware of regarding filtering. I've proven that my 'upstream' doesn't do pull-up routes, doesn't filter BOGON, and given that they have no clients other than myself that have their own IP space, most likely is not capable of doing anything beyond a simple peering session. I've done much research on RPSL, BCP 38, and other basic filter methods (and from a systems standpoint, I always follow an allow,allow,default-deny approach) , and I am willing to follow all standards and recommended practises to ensure compliance with current Internet standards. Although we are small with minimal resources, I feel that touching this list is my best approach to ensure that when I do begin advertising routes, I conform to the most practical, realistic and best current common standards regarding IPv4 route advertisement and filtering. I hate being a 'rat', so I won't state who does what for AS14270 (on the v4 side of things). I have a 100Mbps fibre link from Cobourg Ontario, to _provider_ in 151 Front Toronto. My 'new' connection (which I control), is a direct link to Hydro One. I am open to bandwidth/connection options regarding this feed to Toronto, if you are commercially inclined, Thanks, Steve

5 9

can I ask mtu question
by adrian kok 03 Feb '09

03 Feb '09

Hi What is max mtu in jumbo frame? ls it 9000? Do I need to reboot the switch to take effect after setting up it? if it doesn't need to reboot, How can I know the switch is running fine in this mtu 9000? eg: cisco any tools to check? Thank you for your help Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

12 14

All Google Search Results: "This site may harm your computer."
by Peter Beckman 01 Feb '09

01 Feb '09

This morning whilest Googling, I got a bunch of "Permission Denied" to "/interstitial?..." URLs on Google. Then all my search results got listed as "This site may harm your computer." Is Google broken, or is the functionality of listing sites as broken, broken? http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/423476/google-broken.gif Beckman --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman(a)angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

24 30

Re: Google search results leading to google "This site may harm your computer"
by aljuhani 31 Jan '09

31 Jan '09

Now clicking search results forward to "service unavailable" page within google. The error message about the site may harm your computer is also displayed in Arabic on google Saudi Arabia, www.google.com.sa image here: http://ns.mx04.com/google-sa.jpg looks like the whole database is gone! ..... Yahoo! search engine seem to be working fine as looks have no affiliation with google ----- Original Message ----- From: Jason Biel To: info(a)linuxmount.com Cc: nanog Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 18:12 Subject: Re: Google search results leading to google "This site may harm your computer" Looks like they are experiencing some "internal" issue.

4 3

News on Google fault
by aljuhani 31 Jan '09

31 Jan '09

Washington Post: Google: This Internet May Harm Your Computer: A glitch in a computer security program embedded deeply into Google's search engine briefly prevented users of the popular search engine from visiting any Web sites turned up in search results this morning. Instead, Google users were redirected to page that warned: "This site may harm your computer." ---also--- Update, 11:46 a.m.: Stopbadware.org, the consortium of industry and academia leaders that handles the database of sites Google lists as harmful, issued the following statement: "This morning, an apparent glitch at Google caused nearly every [update 11:44 am] search listing to carry the "Warning! This site may harm your computer" message. Users who attempted to click through the results saw the "interstitial" warning page that mentions the possibility of badware and refers people to StopBadware.org for more information. This led to a denial of service of our website, as millions of Google users attempted to visit our site for more information. We are working now to bring the site back up. We are also awaiting word from Google about what happened to cause the false warnings." ---full news link: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/01/google_this_internet_w… -aljuhani

1 0