February 2011 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: quietly....
by Brandon Butterworth 03 Feb '11

03 Feb '11

> Some applications will still require ALG functionality (or modification) > to manage the state in the stateful firewall. This is where I think the end to end mantra has lead us astray. The users do not care, they just want stuff to work despite security and other real world complexities that have been handled with ALG, SPF and NAT (I agree NAT as bodged on v4 is evil) > There might be some additional signaling required between the host > and the firewall in order to let the firewall know If v6 had allowed for indirect end to end, such as with SOCKS, then people who want ALG, SPF, NAT could do them without having to infer intent and end up breaking apps. brandon

1 0

Re: quietly....
by Brandon Butterworth 03 Feb '11

03 Feb '11

> > Just need to add default route in there and make dhcpd do RA > > then the user can turn off RA on their routers and not care > > that DHCPv6 doesn't include default router. > > Having a DHCP server generate RA messages kind of defeats the point of > having RA messages in the first place, resulting in loss of robustness, > and now a new mode of failure. We've already established that the people who want a complete dhcpv6 do not care, they are going to maintain their dhcp server as much as their router, they are equally robust to the same degree of arm waving that the router is robust. That this is still being asked for in dhcp should be enough to convince people IETF "RA is all you'll ever need" mind tricks aren't going to make them go away. I say they as I work on both sides. I know today we have to work with what's been specced though we can choose how to implement them and continue to raise the issues for future development rather than let them be swept aside. brandon

1 0

5.7/5.8 GHz 802.11n dual polarity MIMO through office building glass, 1.5 km distance
by Anonymous List User 03 Feb '11

03 Feb '11

For architectural and building management reasons we cannot mount our antennas in a rooftop or outdoor location at either end. The distance between two buildings is 1.5 km, and the fresnel zone is clear. Antennas need to be located indoors at both ends and will be placed on small speaker stand tripod pointing at windows. This has been done successfully before with 2.4 GHz 802.11g equipment and a link from an office in the Westin to a nearby apartment building, but I am unsure of what effect glass will have on 5 GHz. Has anyone tried this? The goal of this link is to achieve a 10 Mbps+ full duple bridge to a building which is only serviced by ADSL2+ Telus service in a Western Canadian city. Telus' upstream speed offering do not exceed 1 Mbps. Equipment. These have been used successfully for MCS13/MCS14 50 Mbps+ bridges at 11 km distance between towers. http://ubnt.com/nanobridge http://www.ubnt.com/downloads/nb5_datasheet.pdf

13 13

Verizon acquiring Terremark
by Ryan Finnesey 02 Feb '11

02 Feb '11

With Verizon acquiring Terremark does the group fell the NAPs will change from being carrier-neutral environments to pro Verizon? Has Verizon acquired carrier-neutral centers in the past? Cheers Ryan

11 14

2011.02.02 NANOG51 day 3 morning session notes
by Matthew Petach 02 Feb '11

02 Feb '11

Final set of notes for NANOG51 have been posted up at http://kestrel3.netflight.com/2011.02.02-NANOG51-morning-notes.txt (not that many people will see them, as everyone is clearing out of the room and heading for flights at this point. ^_^; ) Thanks again to Josh and Terremark for hosting another successful conference; would have loved to be able to join the party, but alas, lack of budget ruled that out this time around. Thanks also to all the presenters and speakers, and to the technical crew who provide the online streams; in spite of my grumblings about the occasional spottiness this time around, it really is awesome to be able to follow along remotely. :) Thanks! Matt

3 2

Primus Canada AS 6407 Contact needed
by Jared Geiger 02 Feb '11

02 Feb '11

Hi, I'm seeking a contact at AS6407 to help troubleshoot a huge spike in latency I'm seeing to them. Thanks, Jared

1 0

AS numbers and multiple site best practices
by Andy Litzinger 02 Feb '11

02 Feb '11

Are there any best practices or guidelines surrounding whether or not one should use the same or unique AS numbers when advertising via BGP from 2 or more physically separate locations? Each location would be advertising at least their own unique /24. My specific scenario is that we are moving our QA Lab to a datacenter that we will multi-home with two providers via BGP. We also plan to multi-home our corporate office with two providers (not likely to be the same providers) also via BGP. We currently have an AS that is in use for our multi-homed production data center. In the interest of keeping production totally segregated from QA/corp I would prefer to not use our production datacenter AS for our QA Lab or corporate network, but I've had trouble finding any technical reason not to use it. ARIN is asking for a detailed technical explanation to justify my request. Thanks in advance, -andy

4 4

OT: References for i/o Phoenix Datacenter
by Adam Leff 02 Feb '11

02 Feb '11

My company is considering taking space in the i/o "Phoenix One" datacenter in Arizona. If anyone has any feedback of this facility in general or any of i/o's facilities, good or bad, I would certainly appreciate an off-list reply. As you would expect, the company you're intending to do business with is never going to give you a negative reference. :) Thanks everyone and my apologies for the quick off-topic distraction. Adam

1 0

Connectivity to Brazil
by Steve Danelli 02 Feb '11

02 Feb '11

Hello all!!! First post here Some carrier, somewhere between us and the service provider is selectively dropping the IKE packets originating from our VPN gateway and destined for our Brazil gateway. Other traffic is able to pass, as are the IKE packets coming back from Brazil to us. This is effectively preventing us from establishing the IPSEC tunnel between our gateways. Also something else is awry, for two given hosts on the same subnet (x.y.z.52 and x.y.z.53), they take two wildly divergent paths: For dest x.y.x.52 16 ms 3 ms 3 ms xe-2-3-0.cr1.lga5.us.above.net [64.125.31.34] 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms xe-0-1-0.er1.lga5.us.above.net [64.125.27.61] 12 ms 3 ms 13 ms e2-4-10000m.ar9.nyc1.gblx.net [208.178.58.197] 117 ms 118 ms 118 ms te3-4-10g.asr1.gru1.gblx.net [67.16.142.238] 136 ms 137 ms 136 ms ctbc-multimidia-data-net-s-a.gigabitethernet1-2.ar5.gru1.gblx.net [207.138.94.102] 157 ms 136 ms 138 ms xe-3-2-0-0.core-b.ula001.ctbc.com.br [201.48.44.165] 132 ms 132 ms 141 ms ge-3-0-0-0.core-b.spo511.ctbc.com.br [201.48.44.14] 135 ms 133 ms 134 ms ae1-0.edge-a.spo511.ctbc.com.br [201.48.44.93] For dest x.y.x.53 3 ms 2 ms 3 ms xe-2-3-0.cr1.lga5.us.above.net [64.125.31.34] 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms xe-1-1-0.er1.lga5.us.above.net [64.125.26.162] 19 ms 3 ms 12 ms e2-4-10000m.ar9.nyc1.gblx.net [208.178.58.197] 117 ms 117 ms 117 ms te3-4-10g.asr1.gru1.gblx.net [67.16.142.238] 117 ms 117 ms 118 ms 64.209.106.170 118 ms 118 ms 118 ms ae1-0.edge-a.spo511.ctbc.com.br [201.48.44.93] Anyone have any insight on to what may be occurring? Sent from my iPhone

7 14

Egypt
by JDuffy＠nww.com 02 Feb '11

02 Feb '11

Hi again from Network World... We're now looking into a story on how Egypt may have restored service -- did they bring up all routes at once? Stagger the re-introduction of routes so as not to overwhelm routers? Any specific ISPs brought up before others and why? ie, Noor and the stock exchange brought up before any others, etc. Any thoughts from NANOG on how best -- or worst -- to restore Internet service following, reportedly, the largest government-mandated blackout ever? Also, are any of you in touch with any Egyptian ISPs and sharing this type of information? Or hearing any "war stories" from over there? Thanks again, and best regards, Jim Duffy Network World

1 0