August 2012 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Testing 1gbps bandwidth
by Scott Weeks 14 Aug '12

14 Aug '12

--- creynolds(a)tsieda.com wrote: From: Chuck Reynolds <creynolds(a)tsieda.com> for a small investment with PacketExpert from TSI. Reach out for a demo thanks --------------------------------------------------- Router#conf t Enter configuration commands, one per line. End with CNTL/Z. Router(config)#no ip sales-critters-on-nanog Router(config)#^Z Router# wr mem Router# lo scott

2 1

Trouble with IPv6 setup on Quagga
by Anurag Bhatia 14 Aug '12

14 Aug '12

Hello everyone I am having trouble with Quagga in setting up IPv6 BGP. So far it was failing with external providers. Just now I gave it a try to setup BGP session (IPv6 only) within our ASN between two routers. >From our other end router I see there is no acconcement, while I see blocks being announced via Quagga. Also strange enough is that the number of blocks I account - they all come as "withdrawl routes" on other router as soon as Quagga is turned on. E.g this is what I see on Quagga: node4# show bgp ipv6 summary BGP router identifier 199.116.78.28, local AS number 54456 RIB entries 18741, using 1757 KiB of memory Peers 1, using 4560 bytes of memory Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down State/PfxRcd 2607:1b00:10:a::1 4 54456 6865 5 0 0 0 00:00:05 9798 Total number of neighbors 1 node4# So BGP session is up. Next if I check advertised routes, it goes like: node4# show bgp ipv6 neighbors 2607:1b00:10:a::1 advertised-routes BGP table version is 0, local router ID is 199.116.78.28 Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal, r RIB-failure, S Stale, R Removed Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path *> 2607:1b00:d1::/48 :: 0 100 32768 i *> 2607:1b00:d2::/48 :: 0 100 32768 i Total number of prefixes 2 node4# I don't see these routes in other router at all. Here's what my Quagga bgpd.conf looks like: hostname node4 timers bgp 4 16 router bgp 54456 bgp router-id 199.116.78.28 redistribute connected metric 1 redistribute static metric 1 neighbor 2607:1b00:10:a::1 remote-as 54456 neighbor 2607:1b00:10:a::1 next-hop-self address-family ipv6 network 2607:1b00:d1::/48 network 2607:1b00:d2::/48 neighbor 2607:1b00:10:a::1 activate exit-address-family Was wondering if someone can point in me right direction since both of these prefixes are (annnounced and ?) withdrawn as soon as I restart Quagga. Thanks. -- Anurag Bhatia Web: anuragbhatia.com Skype: anuragbhatia.com Linkedin <http://in.linkedin.com/in/anuragbhatia21> | Twitter<https://twitter.com/anurag_bhatia>| Google+ <https://plus.google.com/118280168625121532854>

7 7

voip network hopping
by shawn wilson 14 Aug '12

14 Aug '12

i'm curious if there is any spec in the voip protocol suite that allows one to maintain a call while changing networks? what i want to do is setup a softphone on an android phone. however, this won't work very well if i can't switch from wifi -> 3g -> wifi (i doubt wifi -> wifi is possible because of hardware limitations). my alternative is to get asterisk to put the call on hold and play an automated message if a reconnection (and unhold) takes >1 second. i would expect that ip telephony would allow for some type of hopping though, i just don't know what to google for?

4 5

Does anyone use anycast DHCP service?
by Joe 14 Aug '12

14 Aug '12

hi, We are considering setup reduant DHCP server clusers by using anycast. In our situation customer get IP address with DHCP, DHCP server authenticate customer by radius.Authentication information is carried by option60 and option82. does anybody has some suggestion on this ? if anycast is suitable for our situation, does it possible to introduce load balancer in anycast node ? that is, DHCP service availabilty is guaranteed by multiple anycast nodes, inside anycast node dhcp service availability is guaranteed by server farm behind load balancer? Joe

4 3

NANOG 56 - Dallas, TX: Call For Presentations
by David Temkin 13 Aug '12

13 Aug '12

NANOG Community, After a great NANOG in Vancouver, BC, the survey results are in from 55 and we are already assembling a world-class program for NANOG 56. The North American Network Operators' Group (NANOG) will hold its 56th meeting in Dallas, TX on October 21 - 23, 2012 and join with ARIN on October 24, 2012. Terremark, a Verzion company, will be our host for NANOG 56. The NANOG Program Committee is now seeking proposals for presentations, panels, tutorials, tracks sessions, and keynote materials for the NANOG 56 program. We invite presentations highlighting issues relating to technology already deployed or soon-to-be deployed in the Internet. Vendors are encouraged to work with operators to present real-world deployment experiences with the vendor's products and interoperability. NANOG 56 submissions are welcome at http://pc.nanog.org <http://pc.nanog.org/> For further information on what the Program Committee is seeking, please see http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog56/callforpresentations.html When considering submitting a presentation, keep these important dates in mind: Presentation Abstracts and Draft Slides Due: 06-August-2012 Final Slides Due: 27-August-2012 Draft Program Published: 17-September-2012 Final Agenda Published: 1-October-2012 Please submit your materials to http://pc.nanog.org Looking forward to seeing everyone in Dallas! -Dave Temkin (Chair, NANOG Program Committee)

1 1

Re: Does anyone use anycast DHCP service?
by Ryan Malayter 13 Aug '12

13 Aug '12

From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell () ufp org> > Assuming your DHCP servers are properly clustered, simply have your > routers relay all requests to both servers. Here's instructions > on setting up ISC DHCPD for redundant (pooled) servers: > http://www.madboa.com/geek/dhcp-failover/ .. > Works great, no single point of failure, no anycast. It may very well work *most* of the time, or during controlled failover, but it looks pretty creaky to me. Some thoughts: 1) No third-party "witness" service for the cluster, making split-brain scenarios a very real possibility. 2) Multi-master databases are quite challenging in practice. This one appears to rely on timestamps from the system clock for conflict detection, which has been shown to be unreliable time and again in the application space. 3) There are single points of failure. You've traded hardware as a single point of failure for "bug-free implementation of clustering code on both DHCP servers" as a single point of failure. In general, software is far less reliable than hardware. I think it would be far more reliable to simply have two independent DHCP servers with mutually exclusive address ranges, and have one system be secondary and "delay" its responses by 2s so it always "loses" when the primary is up and running well. Yes, you lose the ability for clients to get the same IP during a lease refresh if the primary is down, but that is a small price to pay for simplicity and robustness. -- RPM

4 4

IPV6 Anycast for streaming
by Voice of the Blind ™ Network Operation 13 Aug '12

13 Aug '12

Hello, is a anycasted Prefix a good idea for Streaming? here's what we're thinking about: 1. get a /48 from a LIR or a RIR and anounce it through Hurricanne through several Tunnel server including Singapor, New york and Amsterdam 2. run 3 diferent Icecast server in each of the locations where frankfurd would be the Master Server while the 2 others would be a slave relay 3. Assign same Ipv6 address to each of the icecast server where we would be using other prefix to do Inter server communication so if someone is in North America would go through new york, if is in south east asia would be throug SG, otherwise africa/Europ would go through Frankfurd is that a good idea for streaming performance ? any other suggestion is welcome Thank you -- Voice of the Blind ™ Network Operation http://www.vobradio.org/ Phone: +1-347-759-5883

3 3

IPSec Problems
by Bret Clark 13 Aug '12

13 Aug '12

Anyone seeing their customers having problems with IPSec tunnels? Its a strange problem where the customer can ping the other end, but are having trouble keeping the IPSec tunnels active. I was able to preference some of our customer routes out of another BGP edge router which solved their problem. The only common issue (so far) is that the issue seems to occur when traffic goes over a Level3 connection otherwise the IPSec tunnels work fine. Its a rather strange problem though why IPSec is only being affecting but nothing else and I not saying L3 is the reason, but not sure. I opened a support ticket with one of our upstream providers and they mention their own customers have seen similar problems. Scratching my head on this one! Thanks, Bret

1 0

Re: IPV6 Anycast for streaming
by Ryan Malayter 13 Aug '12

13 Aug '12

From: Voice of the Blind ™ Network Operation <noc () vobradio org> > Hello, is a anycasted Prefix a good idea for Streaming? Maybe. I've used TCP anycast-based CDNs (CacheFly and MaxCDN/NetDNA), and they work very well. I observe they generally work something like this: 1. DNS resolution with long TTLs returning anycasted IPs. 2. Smaller HTTP requests served directly from anycast IP with http keepalives enabled. 3. Large objects and streams do an application layer redirect (HTTP or whatever stream protocol) to a DNS name that returns unicast IPs for the node you initially reached via anycast. I would recommend looking at CDNs however, as this is an area where scale does matter and you will find it very difficult to do this better or cheaper yourself.

3 2

Comcast outage
by Grant Ridder 11 Aug '12

11 Aug '12

Does anyone know about or experiencing a Comcast outage in the Santa Clara area? -Grant

2 1