October 2011 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Time Warner to centurylink/qwest
by Philip Lavine 02 Oct '11

02 Oct '11

Can not reach Centurylink/qwest from time Warner.

1 0

facebook spying on us?
by Glen Kent 02 Oct '11

02 Oct '11

Hi, I see that i have multiple TCP sessions established with facebook. They come up even after i reboot my laptop and dont login to facebook! D:\Documents and Settings\gkent>netstat -a | more Active Connections Proto Local Address Foreign Address State TCP gkent:3974 www-10-02-snc5.facebook.com:http ESTABLISHED TCP gkent:3977 www-11-05-prn1.facebook.com:http ESTABLISHED TCP gkent:3665 a184-84-111-139.deploy.akamaitechnologies.com:http ESTABLISHED [clipped] Any idea why these connections are established (with facebook and akamaitechnologies) and how i can kill them? Since my laptop has several connections open with facebook, what kind of information is flowing there? I also wonder about the kind of servers facebook must be having to be able to manage millions of TCP connections that must be terminating there. Glen

30 39

Mails to Google being blocked for illegal attachments
by foks 01 Oct '11

01 Oct '11

Hello, Since Sep 7 Google has bounced a specific type of our mails with this message: host aspmx.l.google.com[74.125.43.27] said: 552-5.7.0 Our system detected an illegal attachment on your message. Please 552-5.7.0 visit http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=6590 to 552 5.7.0 review our attachment guidelines. z4si211085bkd.116 (in reply to end of DATA command) The only attachment is a gif image so it seems that Googles check is wrong. Has anyone experienced this issue, or has any helpful contact information to Google? I have checked http://www.google.com/support/a/bin/static.py?page=contacting_support.ht ml and called these numbers, but they were not able to help me. Regards, Jörgen Nilsson

5 5

Cisco 7600 PFC3B(XL) and IPv6 packets with fragmentation header
by Mikael Abrahamsson 01 Oct '11

01 Oct '11

Just thought I'd share some operational info. PFC3B will by default punt IPv6 packets with fragmentation header to RP and route them there, with the obvious performance penalty this incurs. Workaround is to change this behaviour, meaning ACLs won't work for packets with fragmentation header anymore: #platform ipv6 acl fragment hardware ? drop Drop IPv6 fragments at hardware forward Forward IPv6 fragments at hardware PFC3C is supposed to not be affected. A lot of Teredo and 6to4 traffic has fragmentation headers, so this actually is a real problem. We discovered this at our Teredo relay upstream router. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike(a)swm.pp.se

9 21

FCC - with Klezmer backup
by bmanning＠vacation.karoshi.com 01 Oct '11

01 Oct '11

http://gcn.com/articles/2011/09/26/fcc-net-neutrality-rules-nov-20.aspx wondering who is going to publically announce any changes prior to the 20nov date. Or is this a non-issue for the Internet as we know it? /bill

4 4

Latency issue - TWC NYC / Roadrunner - AS12271 / AS7843
by Greg B - NANOG 01 Oct '11

01 Oct '11

Hi, If anyone from Time Warner Cable / Roadrunner is monitoring, there's been a high latency issue on your network in NYC both yesterday (for at least 10 hours) and again this evening to most/all of the internet. Please contact me off-list if you need more information. Thanks. Sample pings/traces below as of 10/01/2011 12:15 US Eastern: 1. >From my home TWC connection - see hop 7: ping www.xo.com --- www.xo.com ping statistics --- 12 packets transmitted, 12 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 143.868/146.355/149.656/2.064 ms traceroute www.xo.com traceroute to www.xo.com (205.158.160.76), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets 1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 3.751 ms 0.587 ms 0.651 ms 2 cpe-72-225-224-1.nyc.res.rr.com (72.225.224.1) 27.711 ms 29.453 ms 12.336 ms 3 g-2-0-nycmnya-rtr2.nyc.rr.com (24.29.139.66) 8.927 ms 8.468 ms 9.707 ms 4 nycmnytg-10g-0-0-0.nyc.rr.com (24.29.148.29) 17.222 ms 21.110 ms 15.531 ms 5 * * * 6 ae-4-0.cr0.nyc30.tbone.rr.com (66.109.6.78) 8.618 ms 107.14.19.24 (107.14.19.24) 8.880 ms ae-4-0.cr0.nyc30.tbone.rr.com (66.109.6.78) 7.763 ms 7 ae-1-0.pr0.nyc30.tbone.rr.com (66.109.6.161) 104.189 ms 107.14.19.153 (107.14.19.153) 100.793 ms 103.203 ms 8 216.55.0.109 (216.55.0.109) 105.266 ms 216.55.0.65 (216.55.0.65) 104.000 ms 216.55.0.61 (216.55.0.61) 101.070 ms 9 vb1011.rar3.washington-dc.us.xo.net (216.156.0.21) 138.200 ms 140.265 ms 142.332 ms 10 te-3-0-0.rar3.atlanta-ga.us.xo.net (207.88.12.9) 140.559 ms 140.501 ms 145.405 ms 11 te-3-0-0.rar3.dallas-tx.us.xo.net (207.88.12.2) 139.805 ms 141.493 ms 141.685 ms 12 ae0d0.mcr1.dallas-tx.us.xo.net (216.156.0.82) 140.758 ms 138.310 ms 140.159 ms 13 216.55.13.100 (216.55.13.100) 139.605 ms 142.972 ms 140.269 ms 14 txplan01-fw01a-eth1.dc.xo.com (205.158.160.201) 141.185 ms 165.681 ms 138.875 ms 15 xonlbvip.pla.dc.xo.com (205.158.160.76) 138.432 ms 136.816 ms 138.662 ms 2. >From my home TWC connection - see hop 7: ping www.level3.net --- www.level3.net ping statistics --- 12 packets transmitted, 12 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 58.380/60.156/61.647/0.937 ms traceroute www.level3.net traceroute to www.level3.net (4.68.90.77), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets 1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 3.703 ms 0.621 ms 0.588 ms 2 cpe-72-225-224-1.nyc.res.rr.com (72.225.224.1) 25.585 ms 30.256 ms 28.233 ms 3 g-2-0-nycmnya-rtr2.nyc.rr.com (24.29.139.66) 11.273 ms 11.575 ms 9.182 ms 4 nycmnytg-10g-0-0-0.nyc.rr.com (24.29.148.29) 21.087 ms 11.580 ms 11.638 ms 5 * * * 6 ae-4-0.cr0.nyc30.tbone.rr.com (66.109.6.78) 10.537 ms 107.14.19.24 (107.14.19.24) 8.745 ms 10.463 ms 7 ae-1-0.pr0.nyc30.tbone.rr.com (66.109.6.161) 108.194 ms 107.14.19.153 (107.14.19.153) 109.087 ms ae-1-0.pr0.nyc30.tbone.rr.com (66.109.6.161) 109.317 ms 8 * * * 9 ae-31-51.ebr1.newark1.level3.net (4.69.156.30) 112.040 ms 108.726 ms 107.861 ms 10 ae-2-2.ebr1.newyork1.level3.net (4.69.132.97) 110.525 ms 110.807 ms 109.539 ms 11 ae-4-4.ebr1.newyork2.level3.net (4.69.141.18) 105.738 ms 109.069 ms 110.558 ms 12 ae-1-100.ebr2.newyork2.level3.net (4.69.135.254) 110.856 ms 106.272 ms 101.736 ms 13 ae-2-2.ebr1.chicago1.level3.net (4.69.132.65) 137.025 ms 133.715 ms 150.440 ms 14 ae-6-6.ebr1.chicago2.level3.net (4.69.140.190) 129.500 ms 131.001 ms 132.307 ms 15 ae-3-3.ebr2.denver1.level3.net (4.69.132.61) 61.386 ms 58.412 ms 61.884 ms 16 ge-9-0.hsa1.denver1.level3.net (4.69.147.101) 60.336 ms 59.978 ms 60.035 ms 17 4.68.94.26 (4.68.94.26) 58.137 ms 57.445 ms 58.010 ms 18 4.68.94.33 (4.68.94.33) 61.125 ms 59.451 ms 60.578 ms 19 eth2.l3hqdc7705.idc1.broomfield1.level3.net (4.68.92.2) 61.251 ms 58.341 ms 61.785 ms 20 4.68.92.33 (4.68.92.33) 60.866 ms 60.884 ms 60.179 ms 21 * * * 22 * * * 3. >From my home TWC connection - see hop 7: ping www.globalcrossing.com --- wwwgblx.lb.globalcrossing.com ping statistics --- 12 packets transmitted, 12 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 115.264/119.452/123.780/2.929 ms traceroute www.globalcrossing.com traceroute: Warning: www.globalcrossing.com has multiple addresses; using 207.218.55.197 traceroute to wwwgblx.lb.globalcrossing.com (207.218.55.197), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets 1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 1.407 ms 0.758 ms 0.585 ms 2 cpe-72-225-224-1.nyc.res.rr.com (72.225.224.1) 18.393 ms 18.194 ms 10.682 ms 3 g-2-0-nycmnya-rtr2.nyc.rr.com (24.29.139.66) 7.720 ms 8.155 ms 9.412 ms 4 nycmnytg-10g-0-0-0.nyc.rr.com (24.29.148.29) 13.247 ms 11.104 ms 12.423 ms 5 * * * 6 107.14.19.24 (107.14.19.24) 10.703 ms 8.618 ms 9.633 ms 7 ae-1-0.pr0.nyc20.tbone.rr.com (66.109.6.163) 87.927 ms 88.377 ms 86.158 ms 8 tengigabitethernet3-3.ar7.nyc1.gblx.net (64.213.104.193) 88.005 ms 66.109.9.210 (66.109.9.210) 90.130 ms te7-4.ar1.nyc8.gblx.net (208.48.23.1) 90.725 ms 9 * * * 10 * * *

1 0

Cross posting: Call for Program Committee candidates for the NANOG PC
by Dave Temkin 30 Sep '11

30 Sep '11

All, If you've ever thought about helping to give back to the community and you regularly attend NANOG conferences, please consider running for the NANOG Program Committee. Committee nominations close on 10/11/2011, and we need your help! The seventeen-member NANOG Program Committee solicits talks, works with potential speakers to refine presentations, and reviews proposals for technical accuracy and relevance to the NANOG audience. We need people from all walks of life who can help us recruit and vet talks of interest to the broad spectrum of NANOG attendees. More information can be found about how the NANOG community governs itself here: http://www.nanog.org/governance/ . Thanks, -Dave Temkin

1 0