February 2015 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: [j-nsp] draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6-16
by Tim Durack 20 Feb '15

20 Feb '15

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Adam Vitkovsky <Adam.Vitkovsky(a)gamma.co.uk > wrote: > > Of Tim Durack > > Sent: 20 February 2015 14:00 > > IPv6 control plane this decade may yet be optimistic. > > > > And most importantly it's not actually needed it's just a whim of network > operators. > > adam > > > ------------------------------ > This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely > by Mimecast. > For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com > ------------------------------ > I don't consider unique addressing of infrastructure a whim. -- Tim:>

1 0

NYC Metro Ethernet Providers
by Bryn Sadler 20 Feb '15

20 Feb '15

Hi all, We're currently a UK based managed service provider looking to open up in the New York area. Part of our service model involves buying quite a lot of L2 ethernet tails from customer prems back to our DCs, usually 100Mb and 1Gb, but sometimes smaller 10-50Mb services for backups. I was wondering if anyone on the list would be able to recommend reliable providers in that region, we'd essentially just want pure Layer 2 so we can run our own VLANs etc across them, with a number of circuits aggregated and handed off in a DC as a trunk, each circuit as an SPVLAN that we can then strip. Thanks in advance for any feedback, Bryn Sadler

1 0

LiveAction?
by Adam Greene 20 Feb '15

20 Feb '15

Hi all, Has anyone used this product? http://www.liveaction.com/ Cisco seems to tout it: http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/enterprise-networks/intelligent-wan/i ndex.html (scroll down) We're evaluating it as a way to manage customer bandwidth utilization on our service provider network. To me, it looks like an affordable alternative to deploying extremely expensive bandwidth management appliances. It's centrally managed on a VM, and I like that it does not impose scalability limitations like some bandwidth management vendors who charge every time you want to push more bandwidth through their devices. Interested in whether anyone has rolled it out and how their experience has been. Thanks, Adam

1 0

FYI: An Easy way to build a server cluster without top of rack switches (MEMO)
by NAOTO MATSUMOTO 20 Feb '15

20 Feb '15

Hi all! We wrote up TIPS memo "an easy way to build a server cluster without top of rack switches" concept. This model have a reduce switches and cables costs and high network durability by lightweight and simple configuration. if you interest in, please try to do yourself this concept ;-) An Easy way to build a server cluster without top of rack switches (MEMO) http://slidesha.re/1EduYXM Best regards, -- Naoto MATSUMOTO

3 4

Re: v6 deagg
by Brandon Butterworth 20 Feb '15

20 Feb '15

> From: Saku Ytti <saku(a)ytti.fi> > Is deaggregation inherently undesirable? I'd say yes when the only limit to deaggregation is /48. Given the opportunity people will do whatever they see fit at everyone elses expense > What is the correct solution here? Deaggregate or allocate space you don't > need? Whichever comes with sensible deagg control. The desired effect is people advertise exactly sufficient prefixes and, I'd say, a simple universal mechanism for everyone else to limit them to that so they don't feel the need to advertise more to prevent hijacks etc. > Or some others solution, should route object creation be limited to LIR > and be controlled by specific policy? It would allow inject information about > the reason for it. There is always a good reason to the person doing it. > Correct solution is not to use some so called 'strict' ipv6 filters, which > break Internet, by not allowing discontinuous pops having connectivity. Yes, strict would be best if based on good data. With no prefix length police there is no good data, RIPE gave up and said /48 everywhere removing the simpler mechanism to do this (I've not noticed what the others are doing) brandon

1 0

RE: OT - Small DNS "appliances" for remote offices.
by Robert Webb 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

What I do not like about the Pi is the network port is on the USB bus and thus limited to USB speeds. <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Maxwell Cole <mcole.mailinglists(a)gmail.com> </div><div>Date:02/18/2015 4:30 PM (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: "nanog(a)nanog.org >> 'NANOG list'" <nanog(a)nanog.org> </div><div>Subject: Re: OT - Small DNS "appliances" for remote offices. </div><div> </div>

15 22

Call For Presentations RIPE 70, submission deadline 1 March 2015
by Benno Overeinder 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

Dear colleagues, Please find the CFP for RIPE 70 below. The deadline for submissions is 1 March 2015. Please also note that speakers do not receive any extra reduction or funding towards the meeting fee at the RIPE Meetings. Kind regards, Benno Overeinder for the RIPE Programme Committee http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-meetings/pc ---------------------------------------- Call for Presentations A RIPE Meeting is an open event where Internet Service Providers, network operators and other interested parties get together. Although the meeting is mostly technical, it is also a chance for people to meet and network with others in their field. RIPE 70 will take place from 11-15 May 2015 in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The RIPE Programme Committee (PC) is now seeking content proposals from the RIPE community for the plenary session presentations, BoFs (Birds of a Feather sessions), panels, workshops, tutorials and lightning talks at RIPE 70. The PC is looking for presentations covering topics of network engineering and operations, including but not limited to: - IPv6 deployment - Managing IPv4 scarcity in operations - Commercial transactions of IPv4 addresses - Data centre technologies - Network and DNS operations - Internet governance and regulatory practices - Network and routing security - Content delivery - Internet peering and mobile data exchange Submissions RIPE Meeting attendees are quite sensitive to keeping presentations non-commercial, and product marketing talks are strongly discouraged. Repeated audience feedback shows that the most successful talks focus on operational experience, research results, or case studies. For example, presenters wishing to describe a commercial solution should focus on the underlying technology and not attempt a product demonstration. The RIPE PC accepts proposals for different presentation formats, including plenary session presentations, tutorials, workshops, BoFs (Birds of a Feather sessions) and lightning talks. See the full descriptions of these formats at https://ripe70.ripe.net/submit-topic/presentation-formats/ Presenters who are proposing a panel or BoF are encouraged to include speakers from several (perhaps even competing) companies and/or a neutral facilitator. In addition to presentations selected in advance for the plenary, the RIPE PC also offers several time slots for "lightning talks", which are selected immediately before or during the conference. The following general requirements apply: - Proposals for plenary session presentations, BoFs, panels, workshops and tutorials must be submitted for full consideration no later than 1 March 2015, using the meeting submission system at https://ripe70.ripe.net/submit-topic/submission-form/. Proposals submitted after this date will be considered on a space-available basis. Important Dates regarding RIPE 70 can be found at: https://ripe70.ripe.net/programme/important-dates/ - Lightning talks should also be submitted using the meeting submission system (https://ripe70.ripe.net/submit-topic/submission-form/) and can be submitted just days before the RIPE Meeting starts or even during the meeting week. The allocation of lightning talk slots will be announced in short notice – in some cases on the same day but often one day prior to the relevant session. - Presenters should indicate how much time they will require. See more information on time slot allocations per presentation format at https://ripe70.ripe.net/submit-topic/presentation-formats/. - Proposals for talks will only be considered by the PC if they contain at least draft presentation slides (slides may be updated later on). For panels, proposals must contain a clear description, as well as the names of invited panellists, presenters and moderators. - Due to potential technical issues, it is expected that most, if not all, presenters/panellists will be physically present at the RIPE Meeting. If you have any questions or requests concerning content submissions, please email pc [at] ripe [dot] net. -- Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

2 1

FW: HTTPv6 access to www.centurylink.com and www.qwest.com are down
by Frank Bulk 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

Emails to what I thought were CenturyLink's NOC have gone unanswered, and the other email address resulted in an automated "you're not allowed to send emails to that group". Frank -----Original Message----- From: Frank Bulk Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 8:22 AM To: network(a)centurytel.net; 'noc(a)qwest.net' Subject: HTTPv6 access to www.centurylink.com and www.qwest.com are down According to our monitoring system, HTTPv6 access to www.centurylink.com and www.qwest.com have been down since 12:05 am U.S. Central, responding with a "Connection refused". I've tested from two vantage points to confirm that it's not just our prefix. Diagnostic output can be found below. Regards, Frank Bulk Premier Communications root@nagios:~/tmp/ipv6# wget -6 www.centurylink.com --2015-02-12 08:18:22-- http://www.centurylink.com/ Resolving www.centurylink.com... 2001:428:b21:1::20 Connecting to www.centurylink.com|2001:428:b21:1::20|:80... failed: Connection refused. root@nagios:~/tmp/ipv6# root@nagios:~/tmp/ipv6# tcptraceroute6 www.centurylink.com traceroute to www.centurylink.com (2001:428:b21:1::20) from 2607:fe28:0:1000::5, port 80, from port 60661, 30 hops max, 60 bytes packets 1 router-core.mtcnet.net (2607:fe28:0:1000::1) 0.555 ms 19.811 ms 1.632 ms 2 sxct.sxcy.mtcnet.net (2607:fe28:11:1002::197) 0.185 ms 0.196 ms 0.115 ms 3 v6-premier.sxcy-mlx.fbnt.netins.net (2001:5f8:7f0a:2::1) 1.641 ms 1.617 ms 1.585 ms 4 v6-ins-db4-te-0-6-0-4-219.desm.netins.net (2001:5f8:1:1::1) 8.146 ms 8.003 ms 8.051 ms 5 v6-ins-dc1-te-7-4.desm.netins.net (2001:5f8::26:2) 8.035 ms 7.954 ms 7.928 ms 6 2610:18:18b:c000::11 (2610:18:18b:c000::11) 12.925 ms 12.941 ms 12.896 ms 7 mcr1.minneapolis-mn.us.xo.net (2610:18::30b8) 22.254 ms 22.234 ms 22.238 ms 8 2610:18::5802 (2610:18::5802) 32.891 ms 25.156 ms 22.868 ms 9 2610:18::2072 (2610:18::2072) 23.894 ms 22.264 ms 22.759 ms 10 2610:18:16:3000::da (2610:18:16:3000::da) 18.543 ms 18.513 ms 18.569 ms 11 2001:428::205:171:2:52 (2001:428::205:171:2:52) 28.482 ms 28.512 ms 28.549 ms 12 2001:428:1c02:2::2 (2001:428:1c02:2::2) 28.254 ms 28.277 ms 28.238 ms 13 * 2001:428:b21:fc03::2 (2001:428:b21:fc03::2) 28.871 ms 28.608 ms 14 * * * 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * 18 * * * 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 * * * 22 * * * 23 * * * 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * * root@nagios:~/tmp/ipv6#

1 1

Intrusion Detection recommendations
by Andy Ringsmuth 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

NANOG'ers, I've been tasked by our company president to learn about, investigate and recommend an intrusion detection system for our company. We're a smaller outfit, less than 100 employees, entirely Apple-based. Macs, iPhones, some Mac Mini servers, etc., and a fiber connection to the world. We are protected by a FreeBSD firewall setup, and we stay current on updates/patches from Apple and FreeBSD, but that's as far as my expertise goes. Initially, what do people recommend for: 1. Crash course in intrusion detection as a whole 2. Suggestions or recommendations for intrusion detection hardware or software 3. Other things I'm likely overlooking Thank you all in advance for your wisdom. ---- Andy Ringsmuth andy(a)newslink.com News Link – Manager Technology & Facilities 2201 Winthrop Rd., Lincoln, NE 68502-4158 (402) 475-6397 (402) 304-0083 cellular

17 27

Re: Intrusion Detection recommendations
by Randy Bush 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

> I've been tasked by our company president to learn about, investigate and > recommend an intrusion detection system for our company. > > We're a smaller outfit, less than 100 employees, entirely Apple-based. > Macs, iPhones, some Mac Mini servers, etc., and a fiber connection to the > world. We are protected by a FreeBSD firewall setup, and we stay current > on updates/patches from Apple and FreeBSD, but that's as far as my > expertise goes. > > Initially, what do people recommend for: > > 1. Crash course in intrusion detection as a whole > 2. Suggestions or recommendations for intrusion detection hardware or > software > 3. Other things I'm likely overlooking if you were comfortable enough with freebsd to use it as a firewall, you can run your traffic through, or mirror it to, a freebsd box running https://www.bro.org/ or https://www.snort.org/ two quite reasonable and powerful open source systems randy

6 6