December 2018 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Amazon Peering
by Darin Steffl 30 Jan '19

30 Jan '19

Hey all, Does anyone have a direct contact to get a peering session established with Amazon at an IX? I sent a peering request Dec 2017 and two more times this Sept and Nov with no response. I sent to peering(a)amazon.com and received one automated response back so I know they received my email but nothing since. -- Darin Steffl Minnesota WiFi www.mnwifi.com 507-634-WiFi <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

11 18

IPv6 Residential Deployment Survey
by John Curran 24 Jan '19

24 Jan '19

NANOGers - If you are providing residential Internet service with IPv6 (or are a customer of same), please take a moment to complete Jordi’s survey - this will help provide insight into the actual technical practices being used in residential IPv6 deployment. More details in attached email - Thanks! /John Begin forwarded message: From: John Curran <jcurran(a)arin.net<mailto:jcurran@arin.net>> Subject: [arin-ppml] IPv6 Residential Deployment Survey Date: May 22, 2016 at 6:24:17 AM GMT+2 To: ARIN PPML <ppml(a)arin.net<mailto:ppml@arin.net>> Folks - Jordi Palet Martínez is conducting a brief survey regarding IPv6 deployment in residential Internet service. Having insight into the various practices that are in use may help to inform IPv6 number resource policy development, and thus I ask that you take a moment to complete the survey if you are providing such services (whether production or trial basis.) Jordi notes - "The results will be published and updated every month or so - No personal data will be published. (If you know your network, it takes less than 2 minutes to complete it) The survey can be responded even if is not yet a commercial service, and customers can also respond, not just the ISP. However, to avoid duplicate data, make sure to include the country and ISP name.” The IPv6 Residential Deployment Survey may be found here - <http://survey.consulintel.es/index.php/175122> Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN

9 16

Anyone using AT&T's ECOMP/ONAP?
by adamv0025＠netconsultings.com 18 Jan '19

18 Jan '19

Hi gents, I'm looking for physical network services orchestration framework for network service providers that could later be used/extended to orchestrate other areas of the business (virtualized services in DC, etc..). So far it appears to me that there's no such ready-made commercial product on the market that would contain all the building blocks I'd be interested in (well especially the easy to use service designer tool). ECOMP and now OANP seem to have it all and much more I'm just curious if anyone is using it in anger (or parts of it for that matter) for orchestration/design/automation of services on physical network. I'd like to hear some stories from trenches with regards to the implementation, but I'd be also interested in your thoughts in case you just assessed the tool for implementation (why did liked not liked about it). Thank you adam netconsultings.com ::carrier-class solutions for the telecommunications industry::

4 4

Announcing Peering-LAN prefixes to customers
by Dominic Schallert 17 Jan '19

17 Jan '19

Hi all, this might be a stupid question but today I was discussing with a colleague if Peering-LAN prefixes should be re-distributed/announced to direct customers/peers. My standpoint is that in any case, Peering-LAN prefixes should be filtered and not announced to peers/customers because a Peering-LAN represents some sort of DMZ and there is simply no need for them to be reachable by third-parties not being physically connected to an IXP themselves. Also from a security point of view, a lot of new issues might occur in this situation. I’ve been seeing a few transit providers lately announcing (even reachable) Peering-LAN prefixes (for example DE-CIX Peering LAN) to their customers. I’m wondering if there is any document or RFC particularly describing this matter? Thanks Dominic

14 20

Stupid Question maybe?
by Aseem Choudhary 17 Jan '19

17 Jan '19

Hi Christian, Discontinuous mask for IPv6 was supported in IOS-XR in release 5.2.2. You can refer below link for details: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/routers/asr9000/software/ip-addresses… Regards, Aseem On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 8:32 AM Saku Ytti <saku at ytti.fi <https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog>> wrote: >* On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 at 02:55, Philip Loenneker *>* <Philip.Loenneker at tasmanet.com.au <https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog>> wrote: *>>* > I had a heck of a time a few years back trying to troubleshoot an issue *>* where an upstream provider had an ACL with an incorrect mask along the *>* lines of 255.252.255.0. That was really interesting to talk about once we *>* discovered it, though it caused some loss of hair beforehand... *>>* Juniper originally didn't support them even in ACL use-case but were *>* forced to add later due to customer demand, so people do have *>* use-cases for them. If we'd still support them in forwarding, I'm sure *>* someone would come up with solution which depends on it. I am not *>* advocating we should, I'll rather take my extra PPS out of the HW. *>>* However there is one quite interesting use-case for discontinuous mask *>* in ACL. If you have, like you should have, specific block for customer *>* linknetworks, you can in iACL drop all packets to your side of the *>* links while still allowing packets to customer side of the links, *>* making attack surface against your network minimal. * And unfortunately is still not supported by IOS-XR for IPv6, which could mean not having a scaleable way on your edge to protect your internal network. -- Christian e-mail/xmpp: christian at errxtx.net <https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog> PGP Fingerprint: B458 E4D6 7173 A8C4 9C75315B 709C 295B FA53 2318

2 1

Service Provider NetFlow Collectors
by Erik Sundberg 16 Jan '19

16 Jan '19

Hi Nanog.... We are looking at replacing our Netflow collector. I am wonder what other service providers are using to collect netflow data off their Core and Edge Routers. Pros/Cons... What to watch out for any info would help. We are mainly looking to analyze the netflow data. Bonus if it does ddos detection and mitigation. We are looking at ManageEngine Netflow Analyzer PRTG Plixer - Scrutinizer PeakFlow Kentik Solarwinds NTA Thanks in advance... Erik ________________________________ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error please notify the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail. You must destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner. Thank you.

23 27

IP Dslams
by Nick Edwards 06 Jan '19

06 Jan '19

Howdy, We have a requirement for an aged care facility to provide voice and data, we have the voice worked out, but data, WiFi is out of the question, so are looking for IP-Dslams, preferably a system that is all-in-one, or self contained, as in contains its own BBRAS/LNS/PPP server/Radius, such as has a property managment API, or even just a webpage manager where admin can add in new residents when they arive, or delete when they depart I know these used to be available many years ago, but that vendor has like many vanished, only requirement is for ADSL2+, prefer units with either 48 ports or multiples of (192 etc) and have filtered voice out ports (telco50/rj21 etc) If anyone knows of such units, would appreciate some details on them, brand/model suppliers if known, etc, we can try get out google fu back if we have some steering:) Thank Y'all (resent - original never made it to the list for some gremlin reason)

14 23

How to choose a transport(terrestrial/subsea)
by Mehmet Akcin 04 Jan '19

04 Jan '19

Thank you everyone incredible amounts of responses for my how to choose a transit provider smail earlier. How do you choose transport & backbone? Looking at key aspects like route information, diversity, aerial vs under ground fiber, age of fiber, outage history, length, but what else? I will get both transport and transit as two seperate blogs. I will also submit as a nanog paper for the meeting after next, or maybe next? I am probably too late by now. Thank you for all your help. I will add your names to the thank you line ;-) -- Mehmet +1-424-298-1903

14 25

CenturyLink RCA?
by Saku Ytti 02 Jan '19

02 Jan '19

Apologies for the URL, I do not know official source and I do not share the URLs sentiment. https://fuckingcenturylink.com/ Can someone translate this to IP engineer? What did actually happen? >From my own history, I rarely recognise the problem I fixed from reading the public RCA. I hope CenturyLink will do better. Best guess so far that I've heard is a) CenturyLink runs global L2 DCN/OOB b) there was HW fault which caused L2 loop (perhaps HW dropped BPDU, I've had this failure mode) c) DCN had direct access to control-plane, and L2 congested control-plane resources causing it to deprovision waves Now of course this is entirely speculation, but intended to show what type of explanation is acceptable and can be used to fix things. Hopefully CenturyLink does come out with IP-engineering readable explanation, so that we may use it as leverage to support work in our own domains to remove such risks. a) do not run L2 DCN/OOB b) do not connect MGMT ETH (it is unprotected access to control-plane, it cannot be protected by CoPP/lo0 filter/LPTS ec) c) do add in your RFP scoring item for proper OOB port (Like Cisco CMP) d) do fail optical network up -- ++ytti

15 22

Auto-configuring IPv6 transition mechanisms on customer devices
by Brandon Martin 02 Jan '19

02 Jan '19

Are there any (draft, standard, or otherwise) defined mechanisms for indicating to customer-provided devices that they should configure IPv6 to IPv4 transition mechanisms such as MAP, 4rd, 464XLAT, etc. and providing the configuration details thereof? I'm not aware of any. It seems like this is something that, if defined, would make deployment of such mechanisms a lot easier even if SPs provide the customer edge router that implements said mechanisms. I guess they'd probably be implemented as extensions to DHCPv6 or similar or embedded in RAs (the latter seems ugly). -- Brandon Martin

4 8