October 2014 - Test - lists.nanog.org

ISP Shaping Hardware
by Skeeve Stevens 22 Oct '14

22 Oct '14

Hey all, Just wondering what/if people are using any shaping hardware/appliances these days, and if so, what. I have a client which has thousands of customers on Satellite and needs to restrict some users who are doing a lot. So I wanted to see what the current popular equipment out there is. ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd skeeve(a)eintellegonetworks.com ; www.eintellegonetworks.com Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; <http://twitter.com/networkceoau> linkedin.com/in/skeeve experts360: https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9 twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering

12 14

[DHCP Relay agent] send packets to different dhcp servers based on client options
by Stephan Alz 21 Oct '14

21 Oct '14

Hello Folks, I looking for an opensource project (can be a modification of the original isc-relay agent), which able to send packets to different DHCP servers based on DHCP options such as: The Vendor Class Identifier (Option 60) Vendor Class Identifier (Option 60) can be used by DHCP clients to identify the vendor and functionality of a DHCP client. The information is a variable length string of characters or octets which has a meaning specified by the vendor of the DHCP client. If my vendor class identifier contains lets say: "motorola.fw0512.5112" string, send it to DHCP server 1 on ip 192.168.1.1 "cisco.fw06411.111" string, send it to DHCP server 2 on ip 172.16.15.44 The existent relay agents (isc-relay, dhcp-helper) send a copy of all the dhcp servers of the dhcpdiscover message. This is definitely not what I want. Thanks!

2 1

Re: ISP Shaping Hardware
by Alex Nderitu 21 Oct '14

21 Oct '14

Not sure if Allot has GA on the virtual appliances but they did a demo earlier this month http://www.allot.com/index.aspx?id=3797&itemID=158923 On 21 Oct 2014 00:37, "Skeeve Stevens" <skeeve+nanog(a)eintellegonetworks.com> wrote: What I'd really love is a vAppliance. Some of these hardware solutions are VERY expensive for offering only an average solution. I'd also rather not rely on their hardware, but servers with VMware (or whatever) that we can design our own redundancy. Does anyone know if Allot does a Virtual Appliance? I've also heard that pfSense is an interesting option... That could easily be virtualised I would assume. ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd skeeve(a)eintellegonetworks.com ; www.eintellegonetworks.com Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; <http://twitter.com/networkceoau> linkedin.com/in/skeeve experts360: https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9 twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering On 20 October 2014 22:31, Nurul Islam Roman <nurul(a)apnic.net> wrote: > Used following two product to shape traffic on packet level (L3). Had no > issue with several thousand customer. > > Allot > http://www.allot.com/netenforcer.html > > ET > http://www.etinc.com/ > > Found "Allot" is very popular for satellite based Internet specially in > south pacific island countries. > > -R > > > On 20/10/14 2:55 PM, "Skeeve Stevens" > <skeeve+nanog(a)eintellegonetworks.com> wrote: > > >Hey all, > > > >Just wondering what/if people are using any shaping hardware/appliances > >these days, and if so, what. > > > >I have a client which has thousands of customers on Satellite and needs to > >restrict some users who are doing a lot. > > > >So I wanted to see what the current popular equipment out there is. > > > >...Skeeve > > > >*Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd > >skeeve(a)eintellegonetworks.com ; www.eintellegonetworks.com > > > >Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve > > > >facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; <http://twitter.com/networkceoau> > >linkedin.com/in/skeeve > > > >experts360: https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9 > > > >twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com > > > > > >The Experts Who The Experts Call > >Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering >

4 3

Tinet on strike?
by Adam Rothschild 20 Oct '14

20 Oct '14

Provided without commentary, in case this impacts some operations: https://www.facebook.com/Tinetworkers/ https://twitter.com/TinetStrike/with_replies

1 0

Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
by Larry Sheldon 20 Oct '14

20 Oct '14

On 10/20/2014 17:09, manning bill wrote: > FNC “reserved” .gov and .mil for the US. > > And Postel was right… there was/is near zero reason to technically > extend/expand the number of TLDs. It appears to this outsider that Postel and others never understood at all that the sole purpose and destiny of what they were inventing was Marketing, with secondary importance in social networking and politics. -- The unique Characteristics of System Administrators: The fact that they are infallible; and, The fact that they learn from their mistakes. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

1 0

Netgear
by Eric C. Miller 20 Oct '14

20 Oct '14

Is there anyone from Netgear on this list? If you could contact me off-list, it was be appreciated. Thanks! Eric Miller, CCNP Network Engineering Consultant (407) 257-5115

2 1

large BCP38 compliance testing
by Mikael Abrahamsson 20 Oct '14

20 Oct '14

Hi, To fix a lot of the DDOS attacks going on, we need to make sure BCP38 compliance goes up. Only way to do this I can think of, is large scale BCP38 testing. One way of doing this, is to have large projects such as OpenWRT, RIPE Atlas project, perhaps even CPE vendors, implement something that would spoof 1 packet per day or something to a known destination, and in this packet the "real" source address of the packet is included. I have been getting pushback from people that this might be "illegal". Could anyone please tell me what's illegal about trying to send a packet with a random source address? If we can get consensus in the operational world that this is actually ok, would that help organisations to implement this kind of testing. I could see vendors implement a test like "help verify network stability and compliance, these tests are anonymous" checkbox during the initial install, or something like this. Why isn't this being done? Why are we complaining about 300 gigabit/s DDOS attacks, asking people to fix their open resolvers, NTP servers etc, when the actual culprit is that some networks in the world don't implement BCP38? -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike(a)swm.pp.se

16 27

Softlayer (AS36351) network contact
by Humberto Galiza 20 Oct '14

20 Oct '14

Can someone from softlayer/networklayer contact me off list please. thks, Humberto Galiza

1 0

Re: GApps admin = rogered
by Larry Sheldon 20 Oct '14

20 Oct '14

On 10/9/2014 18:07, Blair Trosper wrote: > Just a heads up to our friends at Google Apps. > > Despite the status page saying all is peachy: > http://www.google.com/appsstatus#hl=en&v=status > > ...the administration page for any Google Apps for domains is totally > rogered. It's either an endless redirect loop or a deluge of errors. For me and any others here in the "F" row, a question about the use and meaning and implication of the use of the word "rogered". Until this very moment that word has ALWAYS (correctly used) meant "received" or "receipt acknowledged" and OCCASIONALLY (under the influence of [H|B]ollywood) incorrectly "I agree". What does it mean here? -- The unique Characteristics of System Administrators: The fact that they are infallible; and, The fact that they learn from their mistakes. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

3 2

Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
by Bryan Fields 20 Oct '14

20 Oct '14

On 10/19/14, 8:05 AM, Matthew Petach wrote: > Wondering if some of the long-time list members > can shed some light on the question--why is the > .gov top level domain only for use by US > government agencies? Where do other world > powers put their government agency domains? > > With the exception of the cctlds, shouldn't the > top-level gtlds be generically open to anyone > regardless of borders? > > Would love to get any info about the history > of the decision to make it US-only. The USA funded the early internet and so it got to make it's own legacy rules. `murica :D -- Bryan Fields 727-409-1194 - Voice 727-214-2508 - Fax http://bryanfields.net

2 1