April 2013 - Test - lists.nanog.org

IPv6 Cogent customers
by Chris Conn 10 Apr '13

10 Apr '13

Hello, Any single-homed or more IPv6 AS174 customers willing to take a 5 minute test for me? Please contact me off-list. We are not single homed to them but we have a particular destination that is having issues, and the funky part is that any outbound traffic over the Cogent transit is just bezerk. TCP SYN packets never reach the remote end. Return traffic, even when forced over Cogent however, is fine. I can force outbound traffic to flow over two other transit providers, and all is kosher so long as I never use AS174 to try and _get_ there. Cogent is blaming Level3 just because they appear in the traceroute, therefore I would like if possible a third party to help me since Cogent doesn't seem inclined to do anything other than ping. Thanks in advance and sorry for the noise, Chris

2 1

Re: Noction?
by Chris McDonald 10 Apr '13

10 Apr '13

I think you answered your own question ------Original Message------ From: Ray Wong To: nanog list Subject: Noction? Sent: Apr 10, 2013 5:30 PM gotten a few cold calls from Noction. All I see is some PR about BGP happiness and good feelings with no technical hints about what they actually have to offer. They haven't even hit me directly, rather seem to be chasing us down via corporate listings, so are giving me not-confident feelings I should even return a call to them. Anyone know anything about them? -R>

1 0

RPKI Support on the Juniper SRX line
by Carlos M. martinez 10 Apr '13

10 Apr '13

Hello all, I'm working with a Juniper partner in Colombia on a possible RPKI deployment. As far as I understand Juniper's website, only the T, M and MX lines support RPKI, yet the partner insists that Junos 12.3 / 13.1 supports RPKI on the SRX line. I cannot find any document or reference confirming this. Any comments would be appreciated. regards, ~Carlos

2 1

NANOG - csi reset request (was: RE: NANOG Digest, Vol 63, Issue 45)
by Martin Hotze 10 Apr '13

10 Apr '13

to be fair: cloudmark did its best to contact me and it seems that we've been able to resolve the issue. thanks! as a side note: it might be a good idea to have some sort of lookup-tool on the website or an email notification to the netblock owner. thanks again (and also to the people off-list), martin > Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 03:43:57 +0000 > From: Martin Hotze <m.hotze(a)hotze.com> > To: "nanog(a)nanog.org" <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Cc: "bwilliams(a)cloudmark.com" <bwilliams(a)cloudmark.com> > Subject: RE: NANOG Digest, Vol 63, Issue 45 > Message-ID: > <F02A0931E2E6254680832D6A24940C2DED1964(a)hx01.srv.hotze.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Bryan, > > nope, it didn't make it through to my inbox . I try to contact you through > other channels. > > > Martin > > > Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 02:41:42 +0000 > > From: Bryan Williams <bwilliams(a)cloudmark.com> > > To: "nanog(a)nanog.org" <nanog(a)nanog.org> > > Subject: NANOG - csi reset request > > Message-ID: <CD8A4959.62CFA%bwilliams(a)cloudmark.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > Martin, > > > > I sent you this email from our corporate email, and haven't heard back. > Did > > you receive this? > > > > Regards, > > Bryan Williams > > Sr. Solutions Architect > > Cloudmark, Inc > > > > From: Bryan Williams > > <bwilliams(a)cloudmark.com<mailto:bwilliams@cloudmark.com>> > > Date: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 12:58 PM > > To: "m.hotze(a)hotze.com<mailto:m.hotze@hotze.com>" > > <m.hotze(a)hotze.com<mailto:m.hotze@hotze.com>> > > Subject: NANOG - csi reset request > > > > I searched through the recent requests, and couldn't find any with your > email > > address as the contact email. Can you give me the IP you tried to > unblock? > > > > Or, try it again and let us know that you did it so we can watch. If > there's a > > bug, we'd like to fix it. > > > > Regards, > > Bryan Williams > > Sr. Solutions Architect

1 0

Open Resolver Dataset Update
by Jared Mauch 10 Apr '13

10 Apr '13

I've continued to update my dataset originally posted about two weeks ago. Please take a moment and review your CIDRs which may be running an open resolver. I've exposed one additional bit in the user-interface that may be helpful. Some DNS servers will respond with RCODE=0 (OK) but not provide recursion. nearly 90% of the servers in the database provide recursion. Some raw stats are also available via the 'breakdown' link on the main site. If you operate a DNS server, or have an internal group that does, please take a moment and review your networks. If you email me in private from a corporate address for your ASN, I can give you access to a per-ASN report. Due to a change in methodology, I have increased the number of servers observed from 27.2 million to 30.2 million hosts. 2013-04-07 results 30269218 servers responded to our udp/53 probe 731040 servers responded from a different IP than probed 25298074 gave the 'correct' answer to my A? for the DNS name queried. 13840790 responded from a source port other than udp/53 27145699 responses had recursion-available bit set. 2761869 returned REFUSED In addition, please do continue to deploy BCP-38 to prevent spoofing wherever possible. I know at $dayjob we have been auditing this and increased the number of customer interfaces that can not spoof. - Jared

4 7

RE: NANOG Digest, Vol 63, Issue 45
by Martin Hotze 09 Apr '13

09 Apr '13

Bryan, nope, it didn't make it through to my inbox . I try to contact you through other channels. Martin > Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 02:41:42 +0000 > From: Bryan Williams <bwilliams(a)cloudmark.com> > To: "nanog(a)nanog.org" <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Subject: NANOG - csi reset request > Message-ID: <CD8A4959.62CFA%bwilliams(a)cloudmark.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Martin, > > I sent you this email from our corporate email, and haven't heard back. Did > you receive this? > > Regards, > Bryan Williams > Sr. Solutions Architect > Cloudmark, Inc > > From: Bryan Williams > <bwilliams(a)cloudmark.com<mailto:bwilliams@cloudmark.com>> > Date: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 12:58 PM > To: "m.hotze(a)hotze.com<mailto:m.hotze@hotze.com>" > <m.hotze(a)hotze.com<mailto:m.hotze@hotze.com>> > Subject: NANOG - csi reset request > > I searched through the recent requests, and couldn't find any with your email > address as the contact email. Can you give me the IP you tried to unblock? > > Or, try it again and let us know that you did it so we can watch. If there's a > bug, we'd like to fix it. > > Regards, > Bryan Williams > Sr. Solutions Architect

1 0

NANOG - csi reset request
by Bryan Williams 09 Apr '13

09 Apr '13

Martin, I sent you this email from our corporate email, and haven't heard back. Did you receive this? Regards, Bryan Williams Sr. Solutions Architect Cloudmark, Inc From: Bryan Williams <bwilliams(a)cloudmark.com<mailto:bwilliams@cloudmark.com>> Date: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 12:58 PM To: "m.hotze(a)hotze.com<mailto:m.hotze@hotze.com>" <m.hotze(a)hotze.com<mailto:m.hotze@hotze.com>> Subject: NANOG - csi reset request I searched through the recent requests, and couldn't find any with your email address as the contact email. Can you give me the IP you tried to unblock? Or, try it again and let us know that you did it so we can watch. If there's a bug, we'd like to fix it. Regards, Bryan Williams Sr. Solutions Architect Message: 4 Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 14:24:17 +0000 From: Martin Hotze <m.hotze(a)hotze.com<mailto:m.hotze@hotze.com>> To: "nanog(a)nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>" <nanog(a)nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> Subject: cloudmark? Message-ID: <F02A0931E2E6254680832D6A24940C2DEC5989(a)hx01.srv.hotze.com<mailto:F02A0931E2E6254680832D6A24940C2DEC5989@hx01.srv.hotze.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi, <rant> it seems that many large providers are using cloudmark services. As far as I can tell: their policy is unclear, they can hardly be reached, mails to support are bouncing (delayed, then bounce). yes, the mailserver from one of our customers was blocked and this was OK and rightful, because they had a problem (cracked account). After the problem was resolved we started removing their IPv4 address from blacklists and almost all lists removed the ban immediately. cloudmark CSI service (reset request form) wants a form to be filled ... and they claim that they send out an email ... but it doesn't make its way to my inbox (no, no filters ...) and support can't be reached. Where are the good old times when the 'net was controlled by techs and not by lawyers? I can't recommend cloudmark. </rant> greetings, martin

1 0

need help about free bandwidth graph program
by Deric Kwok 09 Apr '13

09 Apr '13

Hi all Do you know any opensource program bandwidthgraph by ipaddess? Thank you

8 7

IANA AS Numbers registry update
by Selina Harrington 09 Apr '13

09 Apr '13

The IANA AS Numbers registry has been updated to reflect the allocation of 1 block to LACNIC in 2013-04-08: 61440-62463 You can find the IANA AS Numbers registry at: http://www.iana.org/assignments/as-numbers/as-numbers.xml Regards, Selina Harrington IANA Request Specialist ICANN

1 0

Re: cloudmark?
by Martin Hotze 09 Apr '13

09 Apr '13

> Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 10:31:08 -0400 > From: Chris Conn <cconn(a)b2b2c.ca> > To: nanog(a)nanog.org > Subject: Re: cloudmark? > Message-ID: <5164262C.3070806(a)b2b2c.ca> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > On 2013-04-09 10:27, Chris Conn wrote: > > (...) > Your experience does not mirror mine at all. I have less than 30 good for you. :-) > minutes of wait time for any support case, and they are few and far > between. Reliability is high and FP rate is low. I have no idea what > your reference to lawyers pertains to, however the only issue we have > ever had was for them to take our money when we renewed for the > umpteenth time. We are not a paying cloudmark customer. We just want to get one of our IPv4 address off of their list. #m

1 0