June 2015 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Call for presentations RIPE 71
by Benno Overeinder 30 Jun '15

30 Jun '15

Dear colleagues, Please find the CFP for RIPE 71 below or at https://ripe71.ripe.net/submit-topic/cfp/. The deadline for submissions is 13 September 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 RIPE PC Chair https://www.ripe.net/participate/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 71 will take place from 16-20 November 2015 in Bucharest, Romania. The RIPE Programme Committee (PC) is now seeking content proposals from the RIPE community for the plenary sessions, BoFs (Birds of a Feather sessions), panels, workshops, tutorials and lightning talks at RIPE 71. See the full descriptions of the different presentation formats, https://ripe71.ripe.net/submit-topic/presentation-formats/. Proposals for plenary sessions, BoFs, panels, workshops and tutorials must be submitted for full consideration no later than 13 September 2015. Proposals submitted after this date will be considered depending on the remaining available space in the programme. 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. Presenters should indicate how much time they will require. In general, the time allocated for the different presentation formats is as follows: - Plenary presentations: 20-25 minutes presentation with 5-10 minutes discussion - Tutorials: up to two hours (Monday morning) - Workshops: one hour (during evening sessions) to two hours (Monday morning) - BoFs: approximately one hour - Lightning talks: 10 minutes The following general requirements apply: - Proposals must be submitted using the meeting submission system, https://ripe71.ripe.net/submit-topic/submission-form/. - Lightning talks should also be submitted using the meeting submission system (https://ripe71.ripe.net/submit-topic/submission-form/) and can be submitted any time up to and including the meeting week. The allocation of lightning talks will be announced on short notice---in some cases on the same day but often one day prior to the time slot allocated. - Presenters who propose a panel or BoF are encouraged to include speakers from several (perhaps even competing) companies and/or a neutral facilitator. - All presentation proposals 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, presenters/panellists should 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/

1 0

GRE performance over the Internet - DDoS cloud mitigation
by Ramy Hashish 30 Jun '15

30 Jun '15

Good day All, I just want to raise the issue that has not been addressed so far by the DDoS cloud mitigation providers, either in the always-ON solution or the on-demand solution, a BGP session has to be established over a GRE tunnel over the internet between the ISP/NSP/DC and the cloud scrubbing center, the BGP/GRE are used for two main purposes; advertising the victim /24 subnet during the attack, and sending the traffic back to from the scrubbing center to the provider. The question is how can we guarantee the GRE/BGP performance (control traffic) during the time between detection and mitigation? Experts from Arbor, Prolexic(AKAMAI), Radware, Incapsula, Defense.net (F5), Verisign, nexus guard, neustar ......etc are most welcomed to give opinions. Thanks, Ramy "Only the best is good enough"

3 4

RE: Thoughts On Cheap Chinese xDSL Testers
by Robert Glover 30 Jun '15

30 Jun '15

The local ILEC (Verizon) use Colt 250+. They are pretty cool. They do not do layer 3 like the meter you referenced. I'm actually looking for a cost-effective meter that does ADSL+ / VDSL2 / e.SHDSL. it's easy to find one that does the first two, but not all three. -------- Original message -------- From: Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon(a)orthanc.ca> Date: 06/29/2015 5:50 PM (GMT-08:00) To: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog(a)nanog.org> Subject: Thoughts On Cheap Chinese xDSL Testers I've been poking around looking for an inexpensive xDSL circuit tester to do some measurements on my home DSL line, in opposition to the telco. $2K+ is not in the budget, so I'm curious about the accuracy of the $300 Chinese units kicking around eBay (e.g. the ST332B). Anyone out there have experience with them? Are they even remotely close to accurate? --lyndon

3 2

Re: How long will it take to completely get rid of IPv4 or will it happen at all?
by Alexander Maassen 30 Jun '15

30 Jun '15

Before that will happen. Isp's will first try cgnat and the alikes. They rather spend money on hardware supporting that then make the networks dualstack. Why? you may ask. Simple. Most customer service centers have ppl with less then basic skills. Explaining how ipv4 even looks like took them long enough. Abuse ticket systems and logparsers are probably also v4 based. And the one who wrote them, probably got fired and replaced by a younger/cheaper guy who just got out of school with no real field experience. When will the change happen then you might ask. Very simple. If the largest destinations like fb/twitter and others start to drop v4. So what we really would need is not an ipv6 day, but, you might have guessed it, an ipv6 ONLY day. On such a day, a hell of a lot isps will have their support queue overfilled with people asking why they cannot visit their favourite sites. And all the isp can say is: our network infrastructure is too old. -------- Oorspronkelijk bericht -------- Van: Bob Evans <bob(a)FiberInternetCenter.com> Datum: Aan: Rafael Possamai <rafael(a)gav.ufsc.br> Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog(a)nanog.org> Onderwerp: How long will it take to completely get rid of IPv4 or will it happen at all? Our fundamental issue is that an IPv4 address has no real value as networks still give them away, it's pennies in your pocket. Everything of use needs to have a cost to motivate for change. Establishing that now won't create change it will first create greater conservation. There will be a cost that will be reached before change takes place on a scale that matters. Networks set the false perception and customer expectation that address space is free and readily available. Networks with plenty, still land many customers today by handing over a class C to customer with less than 10 servers and 5 people in an office. We have a greater supply for packets to travel than we do for addresses required to move packets. Do you know how many packets a single IP address can generate or utilize, if it was attached too "The World's Fastest Internet" in someplace like Canadaland or Sweden on init7's Fiber7 ? No matter how large the pipe the answer is always, "all of it". It's address space we should now place a price upon. Unlike, My Space's disappearance when Facebook arrived there is no quick jump to IPv6. There is no coordinated effort required that involves millions of people to change browser window content. But to answer your question... Everything that is handed over for free is perceived as having no value. Therefore, IPv4 has to cost much more than the cost to change to IPv6 today. While the IPv6 addresses are free, it is expensive to change. Businesses spend lots of money on a free lunches. It's going to take at least the price of one good lunch per IP address per month to create the consideration for change. That's about $30 for 2 people in California. Offering a /48 of free IPv6 space to everyone on the planet didn't make it happen. There is no financial incentive to move to IPv6. In fact there is more reason "not to change" than "to change". The new gear cost $$$ (lots of it didn't work well and required exploration to learn that), IT people need hours to implement (schedules are full of day-to-day issues), networks keep growing with offerings that drop Internet costs and save everyone money, business as usual is productive on IPv4 (business doesn't have time for distraction), many of us get distracted by something more immediate and interesting than buying a new wi-fi router for the home. What will come first ? A) the earths future core rotation changes altering the ionosphere in such a way that we are all exposed to continuous x-rays that shorten our lifespan OR B) the last IPv4 computer running will be reconfigured to IPv6 Thank You Bob Evans CTO > Randy, > > How long do you think it will take to completely get rid of IPv4? Or is it > even going to happen at all? > > On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 4:57 AM, Randy Bush <randy(a)psg.com> wrote: > >> the rirs have run out of their free source of short ints to rent to us. >> i am sure everyone will move to ipv6 in a week. news at eleven. >> >> randy >> >

6 5

Re: NTT->HE earlier today (~10am EDT)
by Hank Nussbacher 30 Jun '15

30 Jun '15

Kudos Mike for saying it very clearly! Hank On Jun 30, 2015 12:18 AM, Mike Leber <mleber(a)he.net> wrote: > > NTT's customer Sofia Connect leaked our routes to NTT. NTT accepted > these routes instead of properly filtering their customer > announcements. As a network of non-trivial size, announcing over 75,000 > customer routes which is nearly 15% of the IPv4 routing table, we'd > expect the common courtesy of having our ASN included in their customer > facing AS-PATH filters, as we extend this same courtesy to other > networks of this size (such as AS2914). > > Mike. > > On 6/29/15 2:04 PM, Jim Popovitch wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I haven't seen anything to explain this, so I'm asking a larger > > audience. Did anyone notice any unusual NTT or HE routing this AM? > > > > Here's what I saw: > > > > > > 2.|-- xe-0-1-0-17.r04.atlnga05.us.bb.gin.ntt.net 0.0% 20 0.8 > > 0.7 0.6 0.9 0.1 > > 3.|-- ae-2.r20.atlnga05.us.bb.gin.ntt.net 0.0% 20 4.6 > > 6.2 0.5 13.6 4.8 > > 4.|-- ae-4.r22.asbnva02.us.bb.gin.ntt.net 0.0% 20 15.3 > > 15.0 13.9 15.8 0.7 > > 5.|-- ae-4.r20.frnkge04.de.bb.gin.ntt.net 0.0% 20 127.3 > > 106.7 98.5 127.3 11.1 > > 6.|-- ae-2.r02.frnkge04.de.bb.gin.ntt.net 0.0% 20 126.8 > > 126.0 125.7 126.8 0.2 > > 7.|-- ae-1.r00.sofibu01.bg.bb.gin.ntt.net 0.0% 20 131.1 > > 130.0 128.7 131.4 1.2 > > 8.|-- 83.217.227.42 80.0% 20 148.5 > > 146.0 144.2 148.5 2.0 > > 9.|-- ip-48-93.sofia-connect.net 90.0% 20 184.5 > > 163.8 143.1 184.5 29.3 > > 10.|-- ??? 100.0 20 0.0 > > 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 > > 11.|-- 10ge5-4.core1.vie1.he.net 75.0% 20 160.7 > > 150.4 143.9 160.7 6.3 > > 12.|-- 10ge1-4.core1.prg1.he.net 80.0% 20 158.4 > > 159.5 157.9 161.1 1.6 > > 13.|-- 10ge10-12.core1.fra1.he.net 75.0% 20 154.5 > > 159.2 145.9 174.4 10.7 > > 14.|-- 100ge5-2.core1.par2.he.net 75.0% 20 187.9 > > 172.9 157.1 187.9 11.1 > > 15.|-- 100ge7-1.core1.nyc4.he.net 78.9% 19 147.2 > > 146.2 144.6 147.5 1.4 > > 16.|-- 100ge7-2.core1.chi1.he.net 78.9% 19 165.6 > > 172.1 165.6 183.5 8.0 > > 17.|-- 10ge15-2.core1.den1.he.net 89.5% 19 201.3 > > 204.7 201.3 208.1 4.8 > > > > > > -Jim P.

1 0

RE: Charter and IPV6?
by Robert Glover 30 Jun '15

30 Jun '15

As of 3mos ago, no :( -------- Original message -------- From: Roy <r.engehausen(a)gmail.com> Date: 06/29/2015 2:15 PM (GMT-08:00) To: nanog <nanog(a)nanog.org> Subject: Charter and IPV6? Has Charter rolled out IPV6 yet? I have both fiber and cable connections to Charter but I stopped asking them months ago. Roy

3 2

Thoughts On Cheap Chinese xDSL Testers
by Lyndon Nerenberg 30 Jun '15

30 Jun '15

I've been poking around looking for an inexpensive xDSL circuit tester to do some measurements on my home DSL line, in opposition to the telco. $2K+ is not in the budget, so I'm curious about the accuracy of the $300 Chinese units kicking around eBay (e.g. the ST332B). Anyone out there have experience with them? Are they even remotely close to accurate? --lyndon

2 1

Trusted Networks Initiative: DDoS fallback set of AS'es
by David Hofstee 30 Jun '15

30 Jun '15

Hi, I saw the following and thought it would be interesting to share. In case of a persistent DDoS an ASy can fallback to a small set of (more trustable) AS'es for their routing: http://www.trustednetworksinitiative.nl/ They have a policy with procedural and technical parts, which may be upgraded later, for parties who want to participate: https://www.thehaguesecuritydelta.com/images/20141124_Trusted_Networks_Poli… Without having an opinion if everybody in the world should join this (I don't know the desired scope of this group), but the idea is interesting. I had not seen something like it before. Yours sincerely, David Hofstee Deliverability Management MailPlus B.V. Netherlands (ESP)

10 16

Re: ARIN just subdivided their last /17, /18, /19, /20, /21 and /22. Down to only /23s and /24s now. : ipv6
by Johnny Eriksson 29 Jun '15

29 Jun '15

Javier Henderson <javier(a)kjsl.org> wrote: > > Or XNS. On the other hand, people did have a nice career with > SNA...but they weren't trying to push packets over the > > LAT .daytime Monday 29-Jun-2015 20:10:46 .pjob Job 3 at ODEN User BYGG [10,335] TTY4 .where tty4 LAT PC78(LATD for FreeBSD) TTY4 Is there anyting wrong with LAT? > -jav --Johnny

4 3

Charter and IPV6?
by Roy 29 Jun '15

29 Jun '15

Has Charter rolled out IPV6 yet? I have both fiber and cable connections to Charter but I stopped asking them months ago. Roy

2 1