March 2015 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Prefix hijack by INDOSAT AS4795 / AS4761
by Randy 27 May '15

27 May '15

On Thursday March 26th 2015 at 12:18 UTC (and on-going) we are seeing more specifics on one of our prefixes. Anyone else seeing similar or is it just us? 198.98.180.0/23 4795 4795 4761 9304 40633 18978 4436 29889 198.98.182.0/23 4795 4795 4761 9304 40633 18978 4436 29889 -- Randy

12 20

Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality
by Scott Fisher 04 May '15

04 May '15

Funny, but in my honest opinion, unprofessional. Poor PR. On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Scott Fisher <littlefishguy(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Funny, but in my honest opinion, unprofessional. Poor PR. > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:05 AM, Larry Sheldon <larrysheldon(a)cox.net> wrote: >> http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/fccs-throwback-thursday-move-imp… >> -- >> 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 > > > > -- > Scott -- Scott

73 337

Re: Low cost WDM gear
by Kenneth McRae 16 Apr '15

16 Apr '15

I will live vicariously though your experiences with them. I'm good on FiberStore. :-) Thanks for the feedback.. On Feb 07, 2015, at 01:27 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> wrote: Maybe, your experience was the pivotal event that became a turning point in their customer service attitudes... :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: Support(a)Snappytelecom.net From: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> Cc: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br>, "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 4:24:18 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear Point taken on the specs.. Still doesn't excuse poor customer service and tech support. I never expect to be told that no refund will be issued when I am dissatisfied with the product. A request for RMA because something is not working as expected should not have to be escalated to the President of the company. Other than that I am sure FiberStore is a great company :-) On Feb 07, 2015, at 01:17 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> wrote: My point is...... ... The thing to rely on is/are the Specs. If the Specs are right or specs are wrong, that is what determines the product's mfg shortcoming (defect). Mfg. Engineers are people, just like you and me.... and people can make mistakes... Being an Engineer, when I ask someone to do the design work, I ask them to explain it, and this way I double check their work.... Yes Mfg. Engineers are known to F***up too. While it is expected to be disappointed when something does not work.. and having a bad taste for dealing with that mfg, claiming that all of that mfg products are bad is a whole different issue. I deal with FiberStore, my experience have been very different, when stuff purchased from them, did not meet the specs, they took it back no questions asked. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: Support(a)Snappytelecom.net From: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> Cc: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br>, "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 4:01:29 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's true up to a point. Specs are only as good as the entity providing the data. I can tell you a few stories about specs and some MAJOR fails by a major network equipment manufacturer failing to meet advertised specs. When you engage the engineering folks to assist in a build, they should know the true specs of their gear better than anyone else. If they say for a certain distance that A+B will work, then that is exactly what I expect. That is pretty basic. On Feb 07, 2015, at 12:56 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> wrote: More power to you .... I always get a chuckle out of statements such as ... "Compared FiberStore to another Vendor"... It was pointed out to me long time ago.... when someone said.. "My Chevy is better than a Ford".... Someone pointed out, hey, which Chevy ? the Chevette ? or the Corvette ? and Which Ford the Fiesta or Mustang ? Every mfg. has a lots and lots of products, and they are always getting improved... One has to pay attention to the specs.. even the same model products at different times don't have the same specs ! :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: Support(a)Snappytelecom.net From: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> Cc: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br>, "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:49:16 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's why I engage the engineering resources on their end to make sure the chosen candidate will support the use case. I have now performed an A/B comparison and the FiberStore gear is inferior. Excessive loss on the mux and optics. On Feb 07, 2015, at 12:44 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> wrote: If you pay close attention to the Spec Sheets, on power output, insertion loss, sensitivity, and do the proper calculation for your link, then using anyone's products, passive or active will work unless the devices do not meet specified specs. If you don't do your homework, cals on the design, loss, and just buy stuff based on whatever, then it does not matter who the mfg. is, you are very very likely to be surprised in a bad way. :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br> To: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:24:43 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear What others vendors do you using? Here in Brazil only PADTEC have this passive solution... Some days ago Digitel contact me to show your multiplex solution... Is a active solution... We import this from fiberstore, but i don't know others vendors to buy 10G sfp+ cwdm and this mux/demux... Enviado via iPhone  Grupo Connectoway > Em 07/02/2015, às 16:04, Kenneth McRae <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> escreveu: > > Hi Enviado, > > I cannot recommend FiberStore as I had a bad experience with them. I > needed to cover only 3km from A to B side. When using 10km optics, I saw > a loss of over 5db with their passive mux inserted into the path which > created a total loss of over -20db which is outside of the tolerances for > our equipment with 10km SFP+. Using another vendors low insertion loss > mux corrected our issue. I am sure if you are using an 80km optic, you > may be able to tolerate a higher insertion loss to cover < 60km. I also > notice that their CDWM optics averaged about 3db less in power output when > compared to other vendors. > > Thanks > > Kenneth > >> On Feb 07, 2015, at 10:33 AM, Rodrigo 1telecom <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br> >> wrote: >> > >> Hi kenneth... which the distance do you have from side A to side B when >> you using passive solutions from fiberstore( mux and demux)? >> I buy this mux and demux(4 channels single fiber) and only make a test >> about 60km( mux side A and demux on side B) with sfp+10gb for 80km... ( >> only see ddm on my ex3300( about -19db for 60km). Test switch access with >> ssh and pinging tests... >> What kind os issue do you have? For distances less than 60km is this >> solution good? >> Thanks!!! >> >> Enviado via iPhone  >> Grupo Connectoway >> >>> Em 07/02/2015, às 14:55, Kenneth McRae <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> escreveu: >>> Mike, >>> I just replaced a bunch of FiberStore WDM passive muxes with OSI Hardware >>> equipment. The FiberStore gear was a huge disappointment (excessive >>> loss, poor technical support, refusal to issue refund without >>> threatening legal action, etc.). I have had good results from the OSI >>> equipment so far. I run passive muxes for CWDM (8 - 16 channels). >>> On Feb 07, 2015, at 09:51 AM, Manuel Marín <mmg(a)transtelco.net> wrote: >>> Hi Mike >>> I can recommend a couple of vendors that provide cost effective >>> solutions. >>> Ekinops & Packetlight. >>> On Saturday, February 7, 2015, Mike Hammett <nanog(a)ics-il.net> wrote: >>> I know there are various Asian vendors for low cost (less than $500) >>> muxes >>> to throw 16 or however many colors onto a strand. However, they don't >>> work >>> so well when you don't control the optics used on both sides (therefore >>> must use standard wavelengths), obviously only do a handful of channels >>> and >>> have a distance limitation. >>> What solutions are out there that don't cost an arm and a leg? >>> ----- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> -- >>> TRANSTELCO| Manuel Marin | VP Engineering | US: *+1 915-217-2232* | MX: >>> *+52 >>> 656-257-1109* >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the use >>> of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain >>> information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure >>> under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this >>> information, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, >>> or >>> copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. >>> AVISO DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: Esta comunicación es sólo para el uso de la >>> persona o entidad a la que se dirige y puede contener información >>> privilegiada, confidencial y exenta de divulgación bajo la legislación >>> aplicable. Si no es el destinatario de esta información, se le notifica >>> que >>> cualquier uso, difusión, distribución o copia de la comunicación está >>> estrictamente prohibido.

2 1

[OT]call for backers: open source hardware for networking innovation (ONetSwitch)
by huc＠ieee 07 Apr '15

07 Apr '15

Sorry for a little bit off topic. This email is to inform you a new open source hardware for networking innovation called ONetSwitch. It is an all-programmable networking platform combining ARM and FPGA in a 17cm*13cm area (notebook size) for testing and verifying research idea related to networking. Different from previous FPGA develop board like NetFPGA/Xilinx PCIe board, host PC is not required any more for ONetSwitch, and it is smaller, cheaper, and more power efficient. and more flexible. We have launched the ONetSwitch project on Kickstarter.com weeks ago. You can get an abstract from the short video, which will not take you long to get our idea :-) https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/onetswitch/onetswitch-open-source-hard… We had a paper at ONS 2014 presenting the preliminary design of ONetSwitch (https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/ons2014/ons2014-paper-hu_che…) and a demo at SIGCOMM'14 setting a data center testbed on only desktop using ONetSwitch (http://nskeylab.xjtu.edu.cn/people/huc/Pub/DesktopDC_2014.pdf) In the new version now at kickstarter, we add further physical support on 802.11 AC, mSATA, which suits for more scenarios. Also, we have open source ref. design and supporting wiki available at github (https://github.com/MeshSr/wiki/wiki/REF-OpenFlowSwitch-HWFT) The processing logic can be modified in both software (ARM) and hardware (FPGA) to fit your own needs. Although it is currently highlighted mainly on SDN and DCN, we aim to provide the research community a way to set their testbeds for any networking innovations easily. I send the info. about ONetSwitch to this mail list since I think it may be useful to guys in this community. Please do us a favor and back us to get your own programmable testbed. We believe ONetSwitch would give much help to your research and development work. Also, can you help distribute it to friends and colleagues who will be interested with this? Even for the guys, who do not need ONetSwitch but think it is good, we greatly appreciate you to back us with $1 for encouraging. Regards, Chengchen ======================================================================= Dr. Chengchen Hu, ERCIM Fellow Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Associate Professor (Sabbatical leave till Oct., 2015) Xi'an Jiaotong University http://nskeylab.xjtu.edu.cn/people/cchu =======================================================================

1 1

Usage data from Turkey
by Mehmet Akcin 06 Apr '15

06 Apr '15

Hello Today March 31 , 2015 GMT +0200 1030am-4pm Turkey has suffered a major power outage impacting nearly 70M people. I am writing a blog post about power outage vs impact to network usage. I am looking for as much as useful network usage information possible related to Turkey. If you can share network usage information, i will be making sure to buy you some drinks at next nanog ;) Cheers Mehmet

8 8

Denver
by Mike Hammett 02 Apr '15

02 Apr '15

So in Denver Comfluent\CoreSite seems to be the place to be... except as someone that predominately serves eyeball networks, I'm interested in NetFlix. NetFlix is in EdgeConneX... where no other significant peering is happening. Also, my partner who has been looking into the Denver market said that CoreSite costs more than Chicago Equinix. Any recommendations for where to go? Seems like both main options suck, but there aren't any better. This would be for eyeball networks getting peering with the big content guys and cheaper transit than the tier 4\5\6\7\8 (how small of markets get numbers?) where they're located. Any significant web hosting operations in the Denver market? Someone that's bigger than "Bob's DS3 Web Hosting", but not SoftLayer size where they can't get creative with their services. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

2 1

How are you doing DHCPv6 ?
by Randy Carpenter 02 Apr '15

02 Apr '15

I am wondering how people out there are using DHCPv6 to handle assigning prefixes to end users. We have a requirement for it to be a redundant server that is centrally located. DHCPv6 will be relayed from each customer access segment. We have been looking at using ISC dhcpd, as that is what we use for v4. However, it currently does not support any redundancy. It also does not do very much useful logging for DHCPv6 requests. Certainly not enough to keep track of users and devices. So, my questions are: How are you doing DHCPv6 with Prefix Delegation? What software are you using? When DHCPv6 with Prefix Delegation seems to be about the only way to deploy IPv6 to end users in a generic device-agnostic fashion, I am wondering why it is so difficult to find a working solution. thanks, -Randy -- | Randy Carpenter | Vice President - IT Services | Red Hat Certified Engineer | First Network Group, Inc. | (800)578-6381, Opt. 1 ----

13 37

Experience Brocade ICX7750 and other vendor SFP
by Florian Figula 31 Mar '15

31 Mar '15

Hi all, does anyone have experiences regarding Brocade ICX7750 and other vendors SFP. Information will be helpful for planing new infrastructure and costs. Thanks to all! Greets, Florian

5 5

WEBCAST TODAY: NEDAS NYC In-Building Wireless Summit
by Joly MacFie 31 Mar '15

31 Mar '15

FYI, I will webcast the NENAS NYC Summit today. What: NEDAS NYC In-Building Wireless Summit When: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 9am-5pm EDT | 1300-2100 UTC Agenda: https://www.nedas.com/events/nedas-nyc-spring-building-wireless-summit-agen… Webcast: https://new.livestream.com/internetsociety/nedasnyc -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -

1 0

Broken SSL cert caused by router?
by Mike 30 Mar '15

30 Mar '15

Hi, I have a very odd problem. We've recently gotten a 'real' ssl certificate from godaddy to cover our domain (*.domain.com) and have installed it in several places where needed for email (imap/starttls and etc) and web. This works great, seems ok according to various online TLS certificate checkers, and I get the green lock when testing using my own browsers and such. I have a customer however that uses our web mail system now secured with ssl. I myself and many others use it and get the green lock. But, whenever any station at the customer tries using it, they get a broken lock and 'your connection is not private'. The actual error displayed below is 'cert_authority_invalid' and it's "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2". And it gets worse - whenever I go to the location and use my own laptop, the very one that 'works' when at my office, I ALSO get the error. AND EVEN WORSE - when I connect to my cell phone provided hotspot, the error goes away! As weird as this all sounds, I got it nailed down to one device - they have a Cisco/Meraki MX64W as their internet gateway - and when I remove that device from the chain and go 'straight' out to the internet, suddenly, the certificate problem goes away entirely. How is this possible? Can anyone comment on these devices and tell me what might be going on here? Mike-

14 18