April 2015 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Low Cost CWDM or DWDM
by Colton Conor 07 Apr '15

07 Apr '15

What vendors do you recommend for low cost CWDM / DWDM gear? Assume you have a fiber ring of 50 miles of fiber, and want to have POPs evenly spaced around the ring that you want to jump on and off of. Assume you only have 2 fiber strands to work with, but can obtain two more at an additional cost. Does 2 vs 4 fibers make a difference? The goal is to be able to offer multiple 10G connections to clients on the ring. All ethernet/wave no support for legacy SONET needed. How do you decide between CWDM vs DWDM? There are so many manufacturers that make transport gear I do not even know where to begin. Is there a guide to navigating through the big optical transport vendors? There are over 20 of them, and they all seem to do the same thing on paper.

2 1

Charter plant/backbone engineers?
by jamie rishaw 07 Apr '15

07 Apr '15

I have a couple of questions re v6 and QoS'ing. If I can get an off list "what's up" from an infrastructure type I'd really appreciate it as neither resi nor business support seem to have a clue about what I'm asking. TIA, -jamie

1 0

Re: PoC for shortlisted DDoS Vendors
by Arzhel Younsi 06 Apr '15

06 Apr '15

Not an appliance but WanGaurd might be a good match as well. We're currently evaluating it. http://www.andrisoft.com/software/wanguard -- Arzhel On Fri, Apr 3, 2015, at 01:31, dennis(a)justipit.com wrote: > You should include Radware on that list . > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Mohamed Kamal" <mkamal(a)noor.net> > To: "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Subject: PoC for shortlisted DDoS Vendors > Date: Wed, Apr 1, 2015 9:51 AM > > In our effort to pick up a reasonably priced DDoS appliance with a > competitive features, we're in a process of doing a PoC for the > following shortlisted vendors: > > 1- RioRey > 2- NSFocus > 3- Arbor > 4- A10 > > The setup will be inline. So it would be great if anyone have done this > before and can help provide the appropriate tools, advices, or the > testing documents for efficient PoC. > > Thanks. > > -- > Mohamed Kamal > Core Network Sr. Engineer

2 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

Re: Small IX IP Blocks
by Brandon Butterworth 05 Apr '15

05 Apr '15

> When we renumbered LONAP from /24 to /22, we had to change netblocks too The LONAP change was the snoothest, speediest, no drama IXP addressing change I've seen. All IXP should copy their process. brandon

1 0

lotsa pcap reporting
by Hank Disuko 05 Apr '15

05 Apr '15

hi nanog folks, i have 7GB of darn pcap data separated into individual 50MB files. Collected via Wireshark. i need a tool that can slurp in all this data and regurgitate pretty, colourful and management-friendly reports. Windows or Linux. any suggestions? thanks, Hank

3 5

Small IX IP Blocks
by Mike Hammett 05 Apr '15

05 Apr '15

I am starting up a small IX. The thought process was a /24 for every IX location (there will be multiple of them geographically disparate), even though we never expected anywhere near that many on a given fabric. Then okay, how do we do v6? We got a /48, so the thought was a /64 for each. That one seems more cut and dry. A NANOG BCOP says to subnet no smaller than /64, so that makes sense to have one for each location. However, that brings me back to v4. Should I be cutting that /24 down into say /25s or /26s? We don't expect to have more than a /27 worth of networks at any one location, so a /26 should provide enough risk avoidance in not re-numbering an IX. That said... maybe best practice is to just leave it as /24. That's what I've seen at the other small IXes. Yes, I looked at NANOG's BCOPs and an article put out by Euro-IX. Didn't see much there. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

10 11

Re: Any google network admins out there?
by Randy 05 Apr '15

05 Apr '15

On 4/4/2015 3:11 AM, Lou Ashtonhurst wrote: > Randy, you can just use the contact details on their page about it: > > https://support.google.com/websearch/contact/ban > > Ask them for the netflow or other source of proof. My understanding > was they blocked on /32s not larger subnets which would indicate that > the traffic is coming from your network, and not someone with a > similar address, but you should be able to check once they give you > the info. > > Hope that helps a bit > Lou > I've gotten a new IP by my ISP and the issue has gone away, but it was extra cost and inconvenience as I have to resetup my "non google" related services back up. I'm a developer, and one whos adept at removing malware, of which I broke my computer twice trying to find any existence of. Google has not responded yet from that contact form from when I submitted that originally. I've also found several places/fourms where people are having the same issue I was, hopefully it doesn't come back. > > > On 3 April 2015 at 04:53, Randy <nanog(a)afxr.net > <mailto:nanog@afxr.net>> wrote: > > I've started to get some message today from google claiming that > my computer or network was sending automated queries, and they are > blocking me. > I'm not sending automated queries, Ive logged all of my outbound > traffic and there is only my browser traffic going to google. > > I'm not responsible for any one else on "my network" since it is > owned by my ISP, and solely blocking me based on what some one > else with an ip address close to mine is not an acceptable > practice to have for an address used for personal web browsing. > I would like to know if there is any way to get into contact with > google about this other then by legal means? > >

2 1

Google's Gmail SMTP SSL has expired (again)
by David Hubbard 04 Apr '15

04 Apr '15

It appears something Google allowed to happen in 2008 has happened again: # openssl s_client -starttls smtp -connect smtp.gmail.com:587 CONNECTED(00000003) depth=3 C = US, O = Equifax, OU = Equifax Secure Certificate Authority verify return:1 depth=2 C = US, O = GeoTrust Inc., CN = GeoTrust Global CA verify return:1 depth=1 C = US, O = Google Inc, CN = Google Internet Authority G2 verify error:num=10:certificate has expired notAfter=Apr 4 15:15:55 2015 GMT Just an FYI in case anyone has end users start reporting errors sending email.

3 2

Fwd: Google Apps Status Alert
by Colin Johnston 04 Apr '15

04 Apr '15

Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: Google Apps <apps-noreply(a)google.com> > Date: 4 April 2015 20:05:33 BST > To: colinj(a)mx5.org.uk > Subject: Google Apps Status Alert > > > > Status: Service disruption > We expect to resolve the problem affecting a majority of users of Gmail at April 4, 2015 1:00:00 PM PDT. Please note that this time frame is an estimate and may change. > smtp.gmail.com is displaying an invalid certificate. > April 4, 2015 11:58:00 AM PDT > > You are receiving this email as you have been subscribed to this alert. Unsubscribe | Learn more > > © 2013 Google Inc. 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043

1 0