June 2018 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Arista Layer3
by Romeo Czumbil 08 Mar '19

08 Mar '19

So I've been using Arista as layer2 for quite some time, and I'm pretty happy with them. Kicking the idea around to turn on some Layer3 features but I've been hearing some negative feedback. The people that I did hear negative feedback don't use Arista themselves. (they just heard....) So do we have any Arista L3 people out here that can share some negatives or positives? Use case: Just some MPLS IPv4/IPv6 routing, l2vpn OSPF/BGP Maybe 20k routes (no full internet routes) 7050 Series 7280 Series -Romeo

20 33

CGNAT
by Ahmed Munaf 07 Feb '19

07 Feb '19

Hi, Any recommendation regarding CGNAT appliance who try it and which brand is the best from his perspective! The throughput which I want to pass through the CGNAT is about 40Gbits and number of subscribers are about 40,000 subscribers. Regards, Ahmed

10 13

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

Hulu
by Mike Hammett 25 Oct '18

25 Oct '18

Could someone from Hulu reach out to me? My customers are getting the anonymous proxy page and I'm not sure why. They don't have any contact info in peeringdb and their ARIN whois looks more generic than useful (ipadmin@). ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com

2 2

Puerto Rico Internet Exchange
by Mehmet Akcin 16 Sep '18

16 Sep '18

Hey there! ... ok this time I am not going to call it PRIX ;) well name doesn't matter really. Nearly 13 years ago I have attempted to start Puerto rico Internet exchange in San Juan. I have lived there over 5 years and i just wanted to really watch videos faster. The project somewhat died when i moved to LA but now there are few interested party to start an internet exchange in Puerto rico. The jsland historically had one of the slowest broadband/internet services which seemed to have improved in recent years however as of 2017 there still is not an IX in Puerto rico. We , 3-4 internet engineers (on island and remote) , want to look into relaunch of this IX and hopefully find a way to keep local traffic exchanged at high speeds and low cost. We need expertise, and people who want to help any way they can. We are trying to make this IX a not-for-profit one and we are looking at opeeating models to adapt which has worked incredibly well like Seattle IX. We are hoping the relaunch to happen sometime in 2018. Thanks in advance hope to share more info and traffic data sometime , soon. Watch this space! Mehmet

15 22

California fires: smart speakers and emergency alerts
by Sean Donelan 01 Aug '18

01 Aug '18

Has anyone heard if the smart speaker companies (Amazon Echo, Google Home) plan to include emergency alert capability? An estimate 10% of households own a smart speaker, and Gartner (well-known for its forecasting accuracy) predicts 75% of US households will have a smart speaker by 2020. Although most silicon valley tech nerds are still in the "invincible" years, were the california fires close enough to silicon valley that smart speaker developers might think an emergency could affect them. And an emergency alert capability in their smart speakers might be important?

30 54

IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap
by Scott Weeks 24 Jul '18

24 Jul '18

--- cb.list6(a)gmail.com wrote: From: Ca By <cb.list6(a)gmail.com> > Meanwhile, FB reports that 75% of mobiles in the USA > reach them via ipv6 > > And Akaimai reports 80% of mobiles And they both report ipv6 is faster / better. ---------------------------------------- Hmm... Faster and better? The links seem to be an IPv6 cheerleader write up. I looked at the URLs and the URLs one pointed to and pulled out everything related to IPv6 being faster/better. Akamai URL: "For dual-stacked hostnames we typically see higher average estimated throughput over IPv6 than over IPv4. Some of this may be due to IPv6-connected users being correlated with better connectivity, but over half of dual-stacked hostnames (weighted by daily bytes delivered) have IPv6 estimated throughput at least 50% faster than IPv4, and 90% of these hostnames have the IPv6 estimated throughput at least 10% faster than IPv4." FB URL: "People using Facebook services typically see better performance over IPv6..." and it points to https://code.facebook.com/posts/1192894270727351/ipv6-it-s-time-to-get-on-b… which says: "We’ve long been anticipating the exhaustion of IPv in favor of the speed and performance benefits of IPv6." "We’ve observed that accessing Facebook can be 10-15 percent faster over IPv6." I'd sure like to see how they came up with these numbers in a technically oriented paper. There should be no difference, except for no CGN or Happy Eyeballs working better or something similar. Am I missing something? Same routers; same links; same RTTs; same interrupt times on servers; same etc, etc for both protocols. scott

17 35

AS3266: BitCanal hijack factory, courtesy of Cogent, GTT, and Level3
by Ronald F. Guilmette 10 Jul '18

10 Jul '18

Sometimes I see stuff that just makes me shake my head in disbelief. Here is a good example: https://bgp.he.net/AS3266#_prefixes I mean seriously, WTF? As should be blatantly self-evident to pretty much everyone who has ever looked at any of the Internet's innumeriable prior incidents of very deliberately engineered IP space hijackings, all of the routes currently being announced by AS3266 (Bitcanal, Portugal) except for the ones in 213/8 are bloody obvious hijacks. (And to their credit, even Spamhaus has a couple of the U.S. legacy /16 blocks explicitly listed as such.) That's 39 deliberately hijacked routes, at least going by the data visible on bgp.he.net. But even that data from bgp.he.net dramatically understates the case, I'm sorry to say. According to the more complete and up-to-the-minute data that I just now fetched from RIPEstat, the real number of hijacked routes is more on the order of 130 separate hijacked routes for a total of 224,512 IPv4 addresses: https://pastebin.com/raw/Jw1my9Bb In simpler terms, Bitcanal has made off with the rough equivalent of an entire /14 block of IPv4 addresses that never belonged to them. (And of course, they haven't paid a dime to anyone for any of that space.) Of couse we could all be shocked (Shocked!) at this turn of events if it were not for the fact that Bitcanal already has a rich, longstanding, and sordid history of involvement with IP space hijacks. All one has to do is google for "Bitcanal" and "hijack" to find that out. This isn't exactly a state secret. In fact if you lookup "IP space hijacking" in any modern Internet dictionary you'll find Mr. Joao Silveira's picture next to the definition: https://twitter.com/bitcanal :-) This guy Silveira has obviously decided that he is a law unto himself, and can grab whatever IP space happens to be lying around for his own purposes... and no need to fill out any tedious forms -or- pay any fees for using any of this space to any of those annoying Regional Internet Registries. As usual, and as I have said here previously, I generally don't mind too much when these kinds of greedy idiots decide to color outside the lines. As long as they just confine themselves to hijacking abandoned IP blocks belonging to banks and/or government agencies, well then it's no skin off my nose. But when they start reselling their stolen IP space to spammers, as Mr. Silveira is apparently in the habit of doing, then I get ticked off. And actually, Mr. Silveira must be *exceptionally* greedy in that he is apparently not satisfied to just sub-lease his own legitimate IP space to snowshoe spammers, as he is clearly doing: https://pastebin.com/raw/5P5rnQ2y Obviously, merely hosting snowshoe spammers in his own IP space isn't enough to keep Mr. Silveira in the style to which he has become accustomned, so he has to go out and rip off other people's IP space and then resell that to spammers also. The fact that there exists a jerk like this on the Internet isn't really all that surprising. What I personally -do- find rather surprising is that three companies that each outght to know better, namely Cogent, GTT, and Level3 are collectively supplying more than 3/4ths of this guy's IPv4 connectivity, at least according to the graph displayed here: https://bgp.he.net/AS197426 Without the generous support of Cogent, GTT, and Level3 this dumbass lowlife IP address space thief would be largely if not entirely toast. So what are they waiting for? Why don't their turf this jackass? Are they waiting for an engraved invitation or what? As I always ask, retorically, in cases like this: Where are the grownups? I would like everyone reading this who is a customer of Cogent, GTT, or Level3 to try to contact these companies and ask them why they are providing connectivity/peering to a hijacking jerk like this Silveira character. Ask them why -you- have to endure more spam in your inbox just so that -they- can make another one tenth of one percent profit by peering with this hijacking, spammer-loving miscreant. I would ask them myself, but I personally am not a direct customer of any of them, so they would all, most probably, just tell me to go pound sand. If you do manage to make contact, please be sure to mention all three of Mr. Silveira's ASNs, i.e. AS42229, AS197426, and AS3266. And don't let whoever you talk to try to weasel out of responsibility for this travesty, e.g. by claiming that they don't know anything about what's been going on with all those hijacks announced by AS3266, and/or that they only provide peering for AS197426. The hijacks may all be originating from Mr. Silveira's AS3266, but bgp.he.net makes clear that AS3266 has one, and only one peer, i.e. Mr. Silveira's AS197426: https://bgp.he.net/AS3266 So basically, Cogent, GTT, and Level3 are the prime enablers of this massive theft of IP space. (They might try to claim that BitCanal's historical propensity to engage in hijacks is sonmething "brand new" or at least that -they- may not have been aware of it until now, in which case you should ask them if they have anybody on staff who is paying attention. As noted above, it isn't as if Bitcanal just started pulling this crap yesterday. Far from it.) Oh! And you might also mention the fact that Spamhaus, and, I would guess, at least a few of the oether public blacklists already have most or all of Mr. Silveira's IP space... hijacked or otherwise... blacklisted, presumably for good and ample cause. As long as Cogent, GTT, and Level3 are willing to go along with this nonsense, i.e. by selling peering to this Silveira thief, crime on the Internet -does- pay, and the theft of other people's IP space will continue to be rewarded rather than punished, as it should be. If that becomes the new normal for Internet behavior, then god help us all. Regards, rfg

20 29

Re: [c-nsp] Leaked Video or Not (Linux and Cisco for internal Sales folks)
by Tails Pipes 09 Jul '18

09 Jul '18

No, things changed there as well. Lookup merchant sillicon, and revise this post every 6 months. have you heard of Barefoot networks? The days of ASICs from Cisco are gone and we are glad, we tested the P4 DSL (cisco never got that right with mantel) on Nexus and its wonderful. The asics you speak of are no longer important or valuable because people realized that in many networking planets and galaxies, the asic is reflects the network design, they are related, and specifically for the data center, the clos fabric design won, and that does not require fancy asics. I guess your knowledge is out dated a bit. Cisco itself is using those merchant sillicon ASICs happily. (lookup Chuck's comments on nexus9000, best selling cisco switch ever)...guess it is a good switch, because bright box pushed cisco to do that, and if any one on this list can disagree with me here, i'm up to that challenge. What i have discovered recently is that things happen in following way. Your boss or his boss picks a work culture (no one gets fired for buying IBM/Cisco), that culture (buying the shiny suits) impacts how you do work, it makes you select vendors (the ones that sends me to vegas every year) and not the right network design, you select cisco and you are stuck there for life, because once they tell you how things should work (aka : certificates), things are worse, now every time you make a new network purchase (afraid of new CLI ), you will not be able to look the other way because you just dont know any thing else (and loosing your certificate value). I wish the culture would change to, no one got fired for buying closed but didnt get promoted either. change requires boldness. https://toolr.io/2018/06/18/stop-abusing-the-word-open/ On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 9:41 AM, <adamv0025(a)netconsultings.com> wrote: > > Tails Pipes > > Sent: Friday, June 22, 2018 3:00 PM > > > > can you easily answer this question ? why packets are not pushed in > linux ? > > is it because of big switch, cumulus, pica8 ? > > > > can you push packets in linux without writing code to do that ? who is > writing > > that code ? > > > > this is supposedly a community effort, something that older generations > > dont understand. > > > If pure linux as NOS has some legs it'll fly regardless of cisco blessing, > don't worry no single company owns the whole industry. > Also we can argue that this is only about the OS but in reality it's also > the quality of apps running on top and the quality of the underlying HW > that plays a major role. > The quality of BGP app for instance, or the ability of the forwarding ASIC > to deliver the stated pps rate even if multiple features are enabled or > protect high priority traffic even if ASIC is overloaded. > > > Oh and with regards to: > < I am sick of having to learn all the cisco specific terms to all sorts > of different boxes and technologies > I'd recommend you read all the cisco books on networking to get yourself > educated on the topic and to get the difference between SW and HW > forwarding ( -on why packets are not routed in linux) > And while on that I suggest you read all Stanford university lectures on > how routers work too, it'll help you understand why Cisco and Juniper ASICs > are so much more expensive than white-box ASICs. > > adam > > netconsultings.com > ::carrier-class solutions for the telecommunications industry:: > > >

4 3

Time to add 2002::/16 to bogon filters?
by Job Snijders 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

Dear all, TL;DR: Perhaps it is time to add 2002::/16 to our EBGP bogon filters? It is kind of strange that in the default-free zone (where we don’t announce defaults to each other) - we will propagate what is effectively an IPv4 default-route, in the IPv6 DFZ. IETF has politely abandoned the prefix: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7526 Wes George highlighted operational problems from accepting 2002::/16 on the data-plane slide 6: http://iepg.org/2018-03-18-ietf101/wes.pdf Is there still really any legit reason left to accept, or propagate, 2002::/16 on EBGP sessions in the DFZ? Kind regards, Job

6 7