- Test - lists.nanog.org

Cisco Switch Matrix
by Shawn L 08 Aug '14

08 Aug '14

Has anyone seen a good matrix of Cisco switches and their port-types, etc? I'm looking for something where I can say 'I need a switch with X 10-gig ports and Y 1-gig sfp ports, which models meet that criteria?' I know I can look through all of the data sheets at cisco's website, but there has to be a better way to see the specs of a large array of switches at a glance. thanks

6 6

Verizon FiOS/Alter.net reachability issues
by Prabhu Gurumurthy 08 Aug '14

08 Aug '14

Can somebody from Verizon FiOS/Alter.net contact me off-list, we are having issues with customers in FiOS going through Alter.net have bad latency. Thanks, Prabhu -

2 1

BGP hijacking to steal bitcoins
by Stephane Bortzmeyer 08 Aug '14

08 Aug '14

Good report (although I do not understand why they hide the name of the offending ISP since anyone can see it in RouteViews, or in its own BGP traffic). It's ordinary BGP hijacking but the goal is new: stealing bitcoins since the connections inside the mining pool are not authenticated. http://www.secureworks.com/cyber-threat-intelligence/threats/bgp-hijacking-… Here is an example in RouteViews@LINX, for (among others) the OVH prefix 142.4.195.0/24 (bitcoin pool Hashfaster). This route was withdrawn at 18:35:08. TIME: 03/23/14 18:32:38 TYPE: BGP4MP/MESSAGE/Update FROM: 195.66.224.21 AS6939 TO: 195.66.225.222 AS6447 ORIGIN: IGP ASPATH: 6939 21548 34272 2093 2871 3721 NEXT_HOP: 195.66.224.21 ANNOUNCE 192.99.20.0/24 198.27.75.0/24 192.241.211.0/24 192.99.18.0/24 146.185.179.0/24 162.243.89.0/24 54.197.251.0/24 46.229.169.0/24 107.170.244.0/24 108.61.49.0/24 54.214.242.0/24 107.170.227.0/24 54.194.173.0/24 50.117.92.0/24 95.85.61.0/24 54.84.236.0/24 54.213.177.0/24 162.243.142.0/24 162.243.226.0/24 142.4.195.0/24 107.170.47.0/24 54.194.173.0/24 50.117.92.0/24 95.85.61.0/24 54.84.236.0/24 54.213.177.0/24 162.243.142.0/24 162.243.226.0/24 142.4.195.0/24 107.170.47.0/24

1 0

Fwd: New IETF I-D: IPv6 Extension Headers in the Real World
by Fernando Gont 08 Aug '14

08 Aug '14

Folks, FYI: <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-in-real-world…>. Comments welcome. Thanks! Fernando -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: New I-D: IPv6 Extension Headers in the Real World Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 00:04:37 -0400 From: Fernando Gont <fgont(a)si6networks.com> To: IPv6 Operations <v6ops(a)ietf.org> Folks, We have published a new I-D on the topic of IPv6 Extension Headers (EHs). The I-D is available at: <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-in-real-world…>. Abstract: IPv6 Extension Headers allow for the extension of the IPv6 protocol, and provide support for some core functionality such as IPv6 fragmentation. However, IPv6 Extension Headers are deemed to present a challenge to IPv6 implementations and networks, and are known to be intentionally filtered in some existing IPv6 deployments. This summarizes the issues associated with IPv6 extension headers, and presents real-world data regarding the extent to which packets with IPv6 extension headers are filtered in the public Internet, and where in the network such filtering occurs. Additionally, it provides some guidance to operators in troubleshooting IPv6 blackholes resulting from the use of IPv6 extension headers. Finally, this document provides some advice to protocol designers, and discusses areas where further work might be needed. Comments and suggestions are welcome. Thanks! Best regards, Fernando -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-in-real-world-00.txt Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 20:57:17 -0700 From: internet-drafts(a)ietf.org To: J. Linkova <furry(a)google.com>, Shucheng LIU (Will) <liushucheng(a)huawei.com>, Tim Chown <tjc(a)ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Tim Chown <tjc(a)ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Fernando Gont <fgont(a)si6networks.com>, Fernando Gont <fgont(a)si6networks.com>, Will (Shucheng) Liu <liushucheng(a)huawei.com>, J. Linkova <furry(a)google.com> A new version of I-D, draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-in-real-world-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Fernando Gont and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-in-real-world Revision: 00 Title: IPv6 Extension Headers in the Real World Document date: 2014-08-07 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 15 URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-in-real-world… Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-in-real-world/ Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-in-real-world-00 Abstract: IPv6 Extension Headers allow for the extension of the IPv6 protocol, and provide support for some core functionality such as IPv6 fragmentation. However, IPv6 Extension Headers are deemed to present a challenge to IPv6 implementations and networks, and are known to be intentionally filtered in some existing IPv6 deployments. This summarizes the issues associated with IPv6 extension headers, and presents real-world data regarding the extent to which packets with IPv6 extension headers are filtered in the public Internet, and where in the network such filtering occurs. Additionally, it provides some guidance to operators in troubleshooting IPv6 blackholes resulting from the use of IPv6 extension headers. Finally, this document provides some advice to protocol designers, and discusses areas where further work might be needed. Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. The IETF Secretariat -- Fernando Gont e-mail: fernando(a)gont.com.ar || fgont(a)si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1

1 0

IPv6 route annoucement
by John York 07 Aug '14

07 Aug '14

Hoping to not start a war... We (a multi-homed end-user site) are finally getting IPv6-enabled Internet connectivity from one of our ISPs. In conversations regarding our BGP config, the ISP has balked at allowing us to advertise our ARIN-assigned /44, saying things like, "do you know how many addresses that is!!??" Am I way off base in thinking this network size is not out of the norm? I know it's a lot of addresses (19 octillion-something?), but that assignment was based on the same criteria that got us a /22 in v4 space. Should accepting a /44 in v6 not be equivalent, policy-wise, to accepting a /22 in v4? Thanks, John -- John York Information Technology | Network Administrator Phone: 615-399-7000 x:333 Griffin Technology 2030 Lindell Avenue Nashville, TN 37203 USA

6 6

AutoTask as a ticketing system in a MNS NOC
by Chris Garrett 07 Aug '14

07 Aug '14

Does anyone on list have any firsthand experience with this software as a primary ticketing platform in a high volume NOC? We are moving away from SolarWinds WebHelpDesk as our ticketing platform and this one came into the bidding late. http://www.autotask.com

4 5

Anyone running Knot?
by Jay Ashworth 07 Aug '14

07 Aug '14

LWN this week covers the Knot DNS server, written by/for the .cz root zone ops, which can, amongst other interesting attributes, load the entire 35 million record .net zone in 10 seconds. It also does generated synthetic A, 4A, and PTR records, like the old DENTS server written for mindspring. Is anybody here using it? Or knows of it being used somewhere they're permitted to discuss? Is it suitable for running on... much smaller zones? or does the optimization make it impractical? Cheers, -jra -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

3 2

Cisco Security Advisory: Cisco IOS Software and Cisco IOS XE Software EnergyWise Crafted Packet Denial of Service Vulnerability
by Cisco Systems Product Security Incident Response Team 06 Aug '14

06 Aug '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Cisco IOS Software and Cisco IOS XE Software EnergyWise Crafted Packet Denial of Service Vulnerability Advisory ID: cisco-sa-20140806-energywise Revision 1.0 For Public Release 2014 August 6 16:00 UTC (GMT) +--------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary ======= A vulnerability in the EnergyWise module of Cisco IOS and Cisco IOS XE Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to cause a reload of the affected device. The vulnerability is due to improper parsing of crafted EnergyWise packets destined to an affected device. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted EnergyWise packet to be processed by an affected device. An exploit could allow the attacker to cause a reload of the affected device. Cisco has released free software updates that address this vulnerability. There are no workarounds for this vulnerability. This advisory is available at the following link: http://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-… -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJT4ivWAAoJEIpI1I6i1Mx30KoP/iN0KYzG01VMF0fbwLcZjIg+ JQn8lY0mTsetm98hLMCRBKB0STTwLZnbDUcfP0HDfncUJKL4Z2/ACIOE/+D4qDmh Mq6EoUwVIP3+w2fdjk2QNbuixbDAfc2RK4c8kT8B/9M2Za+B2+Joz8PjliNzio9j +zCizkbG78k+iPXQUNMeP57Roj8iayh33r2EF5daFp7okhmOkyTcTH2OMHh9FLaz bj7VGP6/ppysmA9zekZE4IeYMVQfCFr6Sb7VbS80jDB8XhjYEmiEtNboumqrdXkG 4syzvYRtNV9JDeRe9sGzBoJYx47EBH89uF8Y9UlPdk0U5iOvFkCc2O/tZsR6GHvt yjHreBvDuZoE/wIksPaAo/BZVudqyH5qz4Hy6Cz3w+XJC4E0Po/IzdKJEIeqt1+b tsgBvKONGUClaDmb501h+V4NKb2JBYapMSl/ohtxDLO43wqGJiY/yNZ5QnJwTjwh mJMTxBofeZTS2sCf9jGWwayNrEO3xAmngzkWy1eTybAB6QiU3VeS3spSsoGnEu5E 3MmfJz8BX6i6XFeQj9tjw5oLs0NXTx1+B85zI7tPzL1D9g4wdUiawZHuBnsg13ME jk9+F8USc2/xGHQ3GJ9OU9Gm0IoFinFyRI1BuzqPZ42XaEJaRnMbWP7jmaksEJew M9tnNIY0SSE5m3JGXZq8 =Hax4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: [j-nsp] Viability of EX4300 in a primarily l3 environment?
by Paul S. 06 Aug '14

06 Aug '14

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't OSPF require the AFL license anyway to be 'legitly' ran? Price difference might be a lot smaller depending on that. On 8/6/2014 午後 08:30, Yucong Sun wrote: > I used ex4200 to do exactly what you did before. ex4200 releases is pretty > rock solid, feature extensive, although with lower arp entry limits. > > Given the price difference maybe you can connect each l2 domain to its own > ex4200 and have them do ospf routing among selves, which maybe give you > better failure tolerances compare to a single core. > > > On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Giuliano Cardozo Medalha < > giuliano(a)wztech.com.br> wrote: > >> we are using ex4300 with the last release available >> >> the setup is pretty simple using virtual chassis, lag, L3 and poe >> >> it works pretty fine and we do not have any serious problems >> >> sometimes the poe controller goes down but we have a case oppened in jtac >> to try solve it >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On 06/08/2014, at 07:15, Sebastian Wiesinger <juniper-nsp(a)ml.karotte.org> >> wrote: >>> * Paul S. <contact(a)winterei.se> [2014-08-02 05:18]: >>>> Hi folks, >>>> >>>> We're considering the EX4300 to run routing (l3) for a few >>>> hypervisors of ours that are connected via l2. >>>> >>>> Primarily interested due to the rather massive arp limit (64, 000) >>>> on the switch, but we've been told (and searched for ourselves to >>>> find out) that the 4300 platform has been plagued by random issues >>>> since launch. >>> I don't have hands-on experience but I looked at the EX4300 platform >>> for a new deployment. If you look at the current release notes: >>> >>> >> http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos13.2/information-products/topic-… >>> There are a lot of (serious) bugs still getting fixed so I'm not sure >>> how mature this platform is. One big reason for that is probably >>> because EX4300 uses other chips than the rest of the 4xxx series >>> (Broadcom). >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Sebastian >>> >>> -- >>> GPG Key: 0x93A0B9CE (F4F6 B1A3 866B 26E9 450A 9D82 58A2 D94A 93A0 B9CE) >>> 'Are you Death?' ... IT'S THE SCYTHE, ISN'T IT? PEOPLE ALWAYS NOTICE THE >> SCYTHE. >>> -- Terry Pratchett, The Fifth Elephant >>> _______________________________________________ >>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp(a)puck.nether.net >>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp >> _______________________________________________ >> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp(a)puck.nether.net >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp >> > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp(a)puck.nether.net > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

3 3

FCC Releases Tenth Broadband Inquiry NOI
by Jay Ashworth 05 Aug '14

05 Aug '14

""" Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended (1996 Act), requires the Commission to determine and report annually on "whether advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion". 1) This Notice of Inquiry (Inquiry) initiates the Commission’s assessment of the availability of advanced telecommunications capability to all Americans (including, in particular, elementary and secondary schools and classrooms). 2) In conducting this Inquiry, the Commission must “determine whether advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion and, if the answer is negative, the Commission "shall take immediate action to accelerate deployment of such capability" through a variety of means. 3) In this Inquiry, we solicit data and information that will help the Commission make this determination. """ The PDF versions are at: https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-14-113A1.pdf https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-14-113A2.pdf https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-14-113A3.pdf https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-14-113A4.pdf Unless I'm badly misreading this, in particular, if you have a problem with the FCC's broadband penetration numbers being predicated on "this zip has broadband because *these six houses on the north edge of town have DSL*, then this is where your comments on that will get ignored. (Their current cutoff, for those who did not know, is 4/1, so DSL actually *does not qualify as broadband* for Section 706 purposes.) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra(a)baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274

1 0