January 2012 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Southwest US DNS issues?
by David Casey 16 Jan '12

16 Jan '12

My organization is getting SERVFAIL when attempting to look up www.wikipedia.org and some other URL's. Is anyone else seeing similar issues? Dave Sent from my iPhone

2 2

IP Management Software
by Shahab Vahabzadeh 16 Jan '12

16 Jan '12

Hi everybody, Can anybody share his/her experience with IP Management software's? Which I can use it managing near 100K IP Address? IPPlan is not good enough, I think its covering all my need and not fully flexible. If you have discuss this before here please share me the link. Thanks -- Regards, Shahab Vahabzadeh, IP Engineer, *nix Admin and Geek

14 17

Public route server in Hawaii
by Colin Gibbons 16 Jan '12

16 Jan '12

Can anyone recommend a public route server in Hawaii? Efforts to locate one through conventional means have so far been unsuccessful. Any helpful suggestions are appreciated.

1 0

Paging OpenDNS
by Marco Davids (Prive) 16 Jan '12

16 Jan '12

Hi, Can someone responsible for 'malware-block(a)opendns.com' please contact me offline? Thank you. -- Marco

1 0

Paging Occaid - can someone please contact me
by Suresh Ramasubramanian 16 Jan '12

16 Jan '12

I have a (grandfathered) free v6 tunnel from y'all and it went away today. The endpoint isn't pingable, and email to occaid (@) cnacs.occaid.org and haesu (@) towardex.com both bounce. thanks --srs -- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists(a)gmail.com)

2 2

Monday Night Footbal -- on Google?
by Jay Ashworth 16 Jan '12

16 Jan '12

In this week's CES coverage on Marketplace, venture capitalist Mark Suster of GRP Partners opines that Google will bid on the broadcast rights to MNF within the next 5 years. http://www.marketplace.org/topics/tech/ces-2012/future-television-way-we-wa… Is 'The Internet' ready to deliver live 1080p HD with very close to zero dropouts to 25-30 million viewers for 4 hours straight every week, yet? People don't mind buffering in cat videos, but I'm pretty sure they don't want Tim Tebow's last pass of the game interrupted by an hourglass for 5 seconds. Will CDN's help this? Multicast? Or is this just a yawn story for you guys who run "the backbone" these days? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra(a)baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274

13 19

Re: NANOG Digest, Vol 48, Issue 41
by Scot Loach 15 Jan '12

15 Jan '12

On 1/15/12, nanog-request(a)nanog.org <nanog-request(a)nanog.org> wrote: > Send NANOG mailing list submissions to > nanog(a)nanog.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > nanog-request(a)nanog.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > nanog-owner(a)nanog.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of NANOG digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Whois 172/12 (Alex Ryu) > 2. RE: Whois 172/12 (Network IP Dog) > 3. Re: Monday Night Footbal -- on Google? (Mark Tinka) > 4. Re: Whois 172/12 (Suresh Ramasubramanian) > 5. Re: Whois 172/12 (Jay Moran) > 6. accessing multiple devices via a script (Abdullah Al-Malki) > 7. Re: accessing multiple devices via a script (Phil Regnauld) > 8. Re: accessing multiple devices via a script (Joel jaeggli) > 9. Re: accessing multiple devices via a script (Justin Krejci) > 10. Re: accessing multiple devices via a script (Kurth Bemis) > 11. RE: Whois 172/12 (Keith Medcalf) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 09:43:24 -0600 > From: Alex Ryu <r.hyunseog(a)ieee.org> > To: bmanning(a)vacation.karoshi.com > Cc: nanog(a)nanog.org > Subject: Re: Whois 172/12 > Message-ID: > <CAM9zEH5_P2o2s8rT6TaE1OeE4dZC2GamWpgDAoZU_i1iq=p4Cw(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Similar to 1.0.0.0/8 case, which was allocated to APNIC last year or so... > > > On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 6:47 AM, <bmanning(a)vacation.karoshi.com> wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 06:36:12AM -0600, Robert Bonomi wrote: >>> > From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi.com(a)nanog.org ?Sun Jan 15 >>> > 02:02:00 2012 >>> > Subject: Re: Whois 172/12 >>> > From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick(a)ianai.net> >>> > Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 02:58:11 -0500 >>> > To: NANOG list <nanog(a)nanog.org> >>> > >>> > Read RFC1918. >>> > >>> > Likely a machine on his local network (i.e. behind the same NAT box) is >>> > hitting him. >>> >>> >>> Patrick, >>> ? I'v read RFC-1918. ? I cannot find *any* reference to ?172.0/12, as the >>> OP >>> was asking about. ?172.16/12, yes. but not 172.0/12. ?Can you please >>> clarify >>> your advice? >>> >>> ZZ >> >> >> ? ? ? ?so as a stylistic point, ? 172/12 ?is supposed to equal >> 172.0.0.0/12? >> >> ? ? ? ?if memory serves, back in the day, there were records of >> allocations in this space, >> ? ? ? ?pre-ARIN. When RFC 1918 was settled on, there were some folks >> blocking 172.0.0.0/8 >> ? ? ? ?so there was talk of relocating those folks into other space. >> >> /bill >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 08:16:42 -0800 > From: "Network IP Dog" <network.ipdog(a)gmail.com> > To: "'Suresh Ramasubramanian'" <ops.lists(a)gmail.com>, "'Patrick W. > Gilmore'" <patrick(a)ianai.net> > Cc: 'NANOG list' <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Subject: RE: Whois 172/12 > Message-ID: <4f12fbf5.a24de70a.66e1.fffff79b(a)mx.google.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > <quote>Jesus. 172.16/12 fine .. that's rfc1918. The rest of 172/8 is > mostly unallocated.</quote> > > What's with the language? > > Ephesians 4:32 & Cheers!!! > > -----Original Message----- > From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:ops.lists@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 12:35 AM > To: Patrick W. Gilmore > Cc: NANOG list > Subject: Re: Whois 172/12 > > Jesus. 172.16/12 fine .. that's rfc1918. The rest of 172/8 is mostly > unallocated. > > On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick(a)ianai.net> > wrote: >> Read RFC1918. >> >> Likely a machine on his local network (i.e. behind the same NAT box) is >> hitting him. >> >> But that is not guaranteed. A packet with a source address of 172.0.x.x > > > > -- > Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists(a)gmail.com) > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 00:17:55 +0800 > From: Mark Tinka <mtinka(a)globaltransit.net> > To: nanog(a)nanog.org > Subject: Re: Monday Night Footbal -- on Google? > Message-ID: <201201160017.59546.mtinka(a)globaltransit.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > On Thursday, January 12, 2012 12:06:42 PM Jay Ashworth > wrote: > >> I'm not saying you need the whole 19mbps (though, >> remember here, we are not talking about "Additional >> Carriage"; we are talking about *being the only way >> people can see that game* -- and my example was the >> Super Bowl).. but unless MPEG algorithms have gotten >> *much* better than I'm aware of, 5mb/s is probably not >> enough for the Super Bowl. And you'd really be better >> off with some FEC, too, even if it costs you a couple >> frames extra delay. > > For broadcast networks, what we're seeing they like is that > unlike satellite transmissions, there is more flexibility > for them on IP (IPTv), which would let them lift compression > rates and pack more data into a stream. > > But because most of them are primarily satellite > broadcasting houses, only starting to roll-out IPTv, they > need to maintain parity on both transmission media. > > Whatever the case, 5Mbps would be too low. At 1080i, we have > a customer pushing HD channels at about 13Mbps a piece, give > or take. > > Mark. >

2 1

Re: accessing multiple devices via a script
by Justin Krejci 15 Jan '12

15 Jan '12

Parallel ssh (pssh) might help you too ------Original Message------ From: Abdullah Al-Malki To: nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: accessing multiple devices via a script Sent: Jan 15, 2012 11:52 AM Hi fellows, I am supporting a big service provider and sometimes I face this problem. Sometimes I want to access my customer network and want to extract some verification output "show commands" from a large number of devices. What kind of scripting solutions you guys are using this case. Appreciate the feedback, Abdullah

1 0

Re: Whois 172/12
by Alex Ryu 15 Jan '12

15 Jan '12

Similar to 1.0.0.0/8 case, which was allocated to APNIC last year or so... On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 6:47 AM, <bmanning(a)vacation.karoshi.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 06:36:12AM -0600, Robert Bonomi wrote: >> > From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi.com(a)nanog.org Sun Jan 15 02:02:00 2012 >> > Subject: Re: Whois 172/12 >> > From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick(a)ianai.net> >> > Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 02:58:11 -0500 >> > To: NANOG list <nanog(a)nanog.org> >> > >> > Read RFC1918. >> > >> > Likely a machine on his local network (i.e. behind the same NAT box) is hitting him. >> >> >> Patrick, >> I'v read RFC-1918. I cannot find *any* reference to 172.0/12, as the OP >> was asking about. 172.16/12, yes. but not 172.0/12. Can you please clarify >> your advice? >> >> ZZ > > > so as a stylistic point, 172/12 is supposed to equal 172.0.0.0/12? > > if memory serves, back in the day, there were records of allocations in this space, > pre-ARIN. When RFC 1918 was settled on, there were some folks blocking 172.0.0.0/8 > so there was talk of relocating those folks into other space. > > /bill >

1 0

OpenTransit contact needed
by Meftah Tayeb 14 Jan '12

14 Jan '12

hello, if someone from opentransit is on this list, please contact me thank you Meftah Tayeb IT Consulting http://www.tmvoip.com/ phone: +21321656139 Mobile: +213660347746 __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6793 (20120113) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com

1 0