November 2018 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Fitbit network contact
by Michael Crapse 13 Nov '18

13 Nov '18

Hoping to see if an network engineer from fitbit is on list. Our customers are having trouble logging into your app on our network. Perhaps an IP filtering/routing issue. Thanks

1 0

China ’s Maxim – Leave No Access Point Unexploited: The Hidden Story of China Telecom’ s BGP Hijacking
by Harley H 13 Nov '18

13 Nov '18

Curious to hear others' thoughts on this. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1050&context=mca This paper presents the view that several BGP hijacks performed by China Telecom had malicious intent. The incidents are: * Canada to Korea - 2016 * US to Italy - Oct 2016 * Scandinavia to Japan - April-May 2017 * Italy to Thailand - April-July 2017 The authors claim this is enabled by China Telecom's presence in North America.

6 6

Oracle abuse contact
by David Shaw 13 Nov '18

13 Nov '18

Hi, I could really use some help reaching someone at Oracle for a spam problem coming from 129.145.16.122. I've sent countless emails to their abuse contact with no response, tried their tech support chat system and even calling several times without any reaction beyond confusion. It's been almost two weeks now, and while I don't like asking on NANOG, I'm out of options. Any pointers would be very welcomed. David

3 2

Re: IGP protocol
by Scott Weeks 13 Nov '18

13 Nov '18

--- valdis.kletnieks(a)vt.edu wrote: On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 20:21:26 +0000, "Naslund, Steve" said: > 2. Most corporate networks will be running OSPF and/or EIGRP as an IGP. And I'm sure there's still some crazies out there using RIPv2. :) ---------------------------------------------- Yes, there are networks out there on the ragged edges doing that. They've been around since forever. I've worked for them. Show up on day 1: WTF??? Oh crap, what'd I get myself into *this* time?! scott

2 1

Zayo vs Coent
by Dovid Bender 12 Nov '18

12 Nov '18

Hi, We are in a facility where my only options are Cogent or Zayo. We plan on getting a 10G connection for a web crawler using v4 only. Looking for feedback on either or (keeping the politics out of it). TIA. Dovid

13 12

Escalation point at Google
by Alex Osipov 12 Nov '18

12 Nov '18

Hello – Does anyone have an escalation point or a human to speak to on the Google escalations or Google Safe Browsing team? Our entire SaaS business, 15 years in business, in a niche software industry with a good reputation has become blocked in ALL browsers. We are impacting 30k+ enterprise users in the financial space and have tried everything but all roads lead to automated systems. Can anyone please reach out with a contact if you have one? Sorry to spam this list if this is inappropriate content. Very desperate here. Thank you, Alex Osipov / CTO

4 3

RWHOIS
by Rodenhuis, John 12 Nov '18

12 Nov '18

Greetings list! We are testing implementation of an RWHOIS server to eliminating having to send SWIP emails to ARIN. Looking to see if anyone else is (successfully) using RWHOIS 1.5, and can hopefully provide any lessons-learned. Any other feedback would be welcomed. Thanks, John John Rodenhuis Sr. Broadband Operations Manager Atlantic Broadband w. 603.330.7702 | c. 603.767.6042

1 0

Well Known BGP Communities
by Bryce Wilson 12 Nov '18

12 Nov '18

I’m working on updating the BGP communities that are processed and used in my routers and I was interested as to what some of the common BGP communities that I might want to implement parsing for might be. As I understand it, it is somewhat required that no export, no advertise and no export subconfed are implemented. I believe that there is also a no peer option which asks that a prefix not be announced over a peering relationship, only transit and downstream. I do have my own informational prefixes for source location and peering vs transit prefixes so it would not be a stretch to add a version to allow for restrictions on where a prefix is announced and possibly prepending as well. I am aware that action communities exist for blackhole and setting of local preference but I can not find a consensus as to what those communities may be. Thanks ~ Bryce Wilson, AS202313, EVIX, AS137933

3 2

Windows sometimes lets temporary IPv6 addresses expire without renewing
by fireballiso 11 Nov '18

11 Nov '18

Hi! I'm experiencing an IPv6 issue with Windows that I wanted to ask if others are seeing, and get an idea of how widespread it might be. For background, I've been using a /64 tunnel from Hurricane for a few years to test IPv6 connectivity until my ISP offers native service. Linux works well with IPv6. However, I've isolated a problem in Windows 10 (version 1803, build 17134.345) where the Preferred Lifetime of *temporary* IPv6 addresses don't seem to be renewed properly sometimes. The Valid Life will start counting down again from 24 hours, but the Pref Life will stay at 0s; in this condition, the temporary addresses don't work on that interface until I disable and then re-enable it. Output of "netsh int ipv6 show addr", formatted to fit and for privacy: Addr Type DAD State Valid Life Pref. Life Address --------- ----------- ----------- ---------- ------- Public Preferred 23h58m22s 3h58m22s 2001:470:X:X:X:X:X:7a20 Temporary Deprecated 23h58m22s 0s 2001:470:X:X:bc72:8f4:7d98:3445 Public Preferred 23h58m22s 3h58m22s fd00:X::X:X:X:7a20 Temporary Deprecated 23h58m22s 0s fd00:X::bc72:8f4:7d98:3445 Other Preferred infinite infinite fe80::X:X:X:7a20%13 In this state, the Public addresses usually work, but these addresses don't change, so some privacy is lost. Occasionally, even the Public addresses stop working, (though the Valid and Pref Life values still have time left), which requires me to disable/enable the interface to regain any IPv6 connectivity to the internet. I've noticed some bug reports stating that the temporary address stops working after a while, but none I've found show the Pref Life staying on 0. Has anyone else seen this bug? Any idea whether there's a fix or workaround, other than an interface disable/re-enable? -- -Indy fireballiso(a)yahoo.com

1 1

Re: WIndows Updates Fail Via IPv6
by Willy MANGA 11 Nov '18

11 Nov '18

Hi, Le 11/11/2018 à 13:00, nanog-request(a)nanog.org a écrit : > [...] > Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2018 11:29:43 +0200 > From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka(a)seacom.mu> > Hi all. > Anyone ever figured out why Windows updates fail when the computer has > an IPv6 connection? Weird .. We have PC running Windows 10 pro (20+) in my organization (based in Cameroon) and dont have that issue. > [...] > I have a family PC at home running Windows 10 Pro, and noticed updates > would fail in recent months. It took me a moment to realize that this > started happening only after I enabled IPv6 in the TCP/IP stack. > Disabling it immediately solves the issue. > > Quite odd that this is happening in 2018... IMHO the issue is in the network somewhere ... -- Willy Manga @ongolaboy https://ongola.blogspot.com/

1 0