- Test - lists.nanog.org

dump of NOS config examples
by guardian.wheel9069＠fastmail.com 22 Aug '22

22 Aug '22

Hi, I am looking for a large dump of example, real but scrubbed, whatever, nx-os, junos, panos, ios, eos, hell any common NOS, configs. (Right now I really need nx-os but I'll get to the rest soon) To be clear, I am not looking for anyone's private config or network info. I just need a large sample of configs to test some config parsing code I have. Looking for every random ugly feature / config option out there. The bigger and uglier the better. (Files that still even have the horrid control chars ^M, \r\n and worse that come out of network devices are the best!!) Once again, not looking for hack dump of random company X(though I'll take anything legal). Hoping to not going fishing in malware infested waters for questionable zip files. While I cannot really think of what kind of source would give me what I am looking for on the up and up, that's what I am hoping for. Thanx for any help anyone can provide.

3 3

Anyone from Cloudflare peering about?
by Bryan Holloway 21 Aug '22

21 Aug '22

Trying to fix a peer and not getting much traction through peering@ ... Feel free to contact me off-list. Thanks!

1 1

if you make the peace today i will call mr.obama
by VOLKAN KIRIK 21 Aug '22

21 Aug '22

if you make the peace today i will call mr.obama i mean the biden. and shut down your operations both white house should call me immediately. ps. turkish translator is required. however i may correct him/her in case of bad translation isnt this list moderated or.. trolling allowed!??

2 3

Re: (off list) Re: cogent and henet not peering
by VOLKAN KIRIK 21 Aug '22

21 Aug '22

you can always be at my service. as i am the god. working 7/24 at no markup. +905520094078 god's hotline. IM always responded. calls maybe. i mean the allah. 21.08.2022 05:06 tarihinde jkinney23(a)yahoo.ca yazdı: > I am still all riled up. I can't get over him sending that message. > I'm glad I want to check out his linkedin profile. > > Happy I could be of service to you. :) > On Saturday, August 20, 2022, 07:00:15 p.m. PDT, VOLKAN KIRIK > <volkirik(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > if you are happy i am happy. > > i dont care negative people much. > > > 21.08.2022 04:53 tarihinde jkinney23(a)yahoo.ca > <mailto:jkinney23@yahoo.ca> yazdı: > Hey Volkan, > > I just emailed the list moderator to let them know it was optional to > post my message to the list. As long as you know some twit with > three years experience running around calling himself executive > director just harassed you, I'm happy. > > Have a great day! > > Jason > On Saturday, August 20, 2022, 06:50:05 p.m. PDT, VOLKAN KIRIK > <volkirik(a)gmail.com> <mailto:volkirik@gmail.com> wrote: > > > lol > > 21.08.2022 04:28 tarihinde jkinney23(a)yahoo.ca > <mailto:jkinney23@yahoo.ca> yazdı: > Good thing they have someone with a dish washing skill-set to clean up > their inbox's for them. > On Saturday, August 20, 2022, 06:01:34 p.m. PDT, Peter Potvin via > NANOG <nanog(a)nanog.org> <mailto:nanog@nanog.org> wrote: > > > Hey all, > > Removing Cogent personnel and peering departments from this thread as > I'm sure they don't appreciate the nonsense coming from this list. > > Regards, > Peter Potvin | Executive Director > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Accuris Technologies Ltd.* > 11-300 Earl Grey Drive, Suite #124, Kanata, Ontario K2T1C1 Canada > Email: peter.potvin(a)accuristechnologies.ca > <mailto:peter.potvin@accuristechnologies.ca> > Office: +1 (877) 352-6105 > Network Operations Centre: +1 (877) 321-1662 > > > On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 8:51 PM VOLKAN KIRIK <volkirik(a)gmail.com > <mailto:volkirik@gmail.com>> wrote: > > yea whatever.. > > its upto mike leber and dave schaeffer to decide. they can either > accept or reject the solution > > I have been always believing content creator/provider should pay > expenses (at least excess traffic). > > because they put their server in some datacenter and reach all of > the internet.. their backbone expenses are less.. > > i can understand that todays datacenters including he.net > <http://he.net> are interested to participate in 200-300 IXPs. > > well that acceptable. it should be considered too > > so i would offer both companies 3 cent per mbps for excess traffic. > > ok bye > > > 21.08.2022 03:25 tarihinde Forrest Christian (List Account) yazdı: >> But that traffic was likely requested by and for the benefit of >> the person the traffic is being sent to. >> >> I've always found the argument that the quantity of traffic is >> the indicator of who should pay to be questionable. >> >> If I'm an end user on an eyeball user and request a big download >> or streaming from a provider, isn't it me that caused that >> traffic to flow? One could argue that I am the one that needs to >> pay. >> >> On the other hand, one could argue that it's the provider of the >> content that I requested that needs to pay, since it's their >> content which is being distributed. >> >> When you get to peering between two providers it's almost >> impossible to decide who needs to pay. As I mentioned above, >> passing that traffic is actually to the benefit of both providers. >> >> About the only settlement I could see is where one of the >> providers is bearing most of the transport costs. For example a >> regional provider only peering at one exchange point might expect >> some settlement costs with a big international provider that is >> effectively carrying their traffic both directions around the >> globe. But the quantity of that type of traffic is likely >> minimal in the grand scheme of things. Even then one might >> argue that connectivity to the small provider is still valuable >> to the customers of the large provider. >> >> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022, 9:32 AM VOLKAN KIRIK <volkirik(a)gmail.com >> <mailto:volkirik@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> the more uploading side pays each month for the excess amount. >> >> as content networks are supposed to pay expenses. >> >> >> what do you think? >> >> >> 19.08.2022 18:28 tarihinde Mike Hammett yazdı: >>> The problem them becomes *who* pays? When do the tables turn >>> as to who pays? >>> >>> The alpha gets paid and the beta does the paying? >>> >>> The network with more POPs gets paid? >>> >>> The network with more downstream ASes gets paid? >>> >>> Is it the same for IPv4 as it is for IPv6? >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp><https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> *From: *"VOLKAN KIRIK" <volkirik(a)gmail.com> >>> <mailto:volkirik@gmail.com> >>> *To: *"Rubens Kuhl" <rubensk(a)gmail.com> >>> <mailto:rubensk@gmail.com> >>> *Cc: *nanog(a)nanog.org <mailto:nanog@nanog.org>, >>> dschaeffer(a)cogentco.com <mailto:dschaeffer@cogentco.com>, >>> peering(a)cogentco.com <mailto:peering@cogentco.com> >>> *Sent: *Friday, August 19, 2022 10:22:00 AM >>> *Subject: *Re: cogent and henet not peering >>> >>> this is 50/50 situation. nobody has to peer for free. >>> >>> but everyone can. >>> >>> lets just say above 1:1 ratio he.net <http://he.net> pays >>> their own ip transit price to cogent for paid peering excess >>> amount and both sides monitor traffic >>> >>> we can solve this issue by becoming middlemen worldwide... >>> >>> both operators are cheap and they could all compete in quality. >>> >>> level3 pays comcast reasonable (cheap) price (under NDA >>> maybe?). why wouldnt mleber? >>> >>> but to make it fair, as he.net <http://he.net> becomes ww >>> tier-1 operator day-by-day, lets just limit pricing to >>> excess amount of traffic >>> >>> thanks for reading >>> >>> would appreciate your support >>> >>> >>> 19.08.2022 18:09 tarihinde Rubens Kuhl yazdı: >>> >>> OTOH, knowing that Cogent loves splitting the global Internet is onegood reason to not contract their services.I think they sell traffic to their private Intranet. Which is huge,but doesn't encompass the whole Internet.RubensOn Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 12:04 PM VOLKAN KIRIK<volkirik(a)gmail.com> <mailto:volkirik@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> lets just say cogent gives 400GE in each pop they have in common withhe.net <http://he.net> for free.BUT they will rate-limithe.net <http://he.net> links to previous month's 95th percentile upload or download (which is minimum) rate (each month)to make ratio 1:1... to make downstream and upstream traffics fair...okay?fine?come on people,segmentation is bad. >>> >>> > > The information contained in this message may be privileged, > confidential and protected from disclosure. This message is intended > only for the designated recipient(s). It is subject to access, review > and disclosure by the sender's Email System Administrator. If you have > received this message in error, please advise by return e-mail so that > our address records can be corrected and please delete immediately > without reading, copying or forwarding to others. Any unauthorized > review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. > Copyright © 2022 Accuris Technologies Ltd. All Rights Reserved. > > L'information contenue dans ce message pourrait être de nature > privilégiée, confidentielle et protégée contre toute divulgation. Ce > message est destiné à l'usage exclusif du(des) destinataire(s) > visé(s). Le gestionnaire de système du courrier électronique de > l'expéditeur pourrait avoir accès à ce message, l'examiner et le > divulguer. Si ce message vous est transmis par erreur, veuillez nous > en aviser par courrier électronique à notre adresse, afin que l'on > puisse corriger nos registres, puis veuillez le supprimer > immédiatement, sans le lire, le copier ou le transmettre à des tiers. > Tout examen, toute utilisation, divulgation ou distribution non > autorisé de cette information est interdit. > Droit d'auteur © 2022 Accuris Technologies Ltd. Tous droits réservés.

2 2

[correction fluid] if you make the peace today i will call mr.obama
by VOLKAN KIRIK 21 Aug '22

21 Aug '22

if you *dont* make the peace today i will call mr.obama i mean the biden. and shut down your operations both white house should call me immediately. ps. turkish translator is required. however i may correct him/her in case of bad translation isnt this list moderated or.. trolling allowed!?? why correction fluid: i am confused after i couldnt shutdown both nsps so i decided to shutdown both

1 0

Re: cogent and henet not peering
by VOLKAN KIRIK 21 Aug '22

21 Aug '22

lol 21.08.2022 04:28 tarihinde jkinney23(a)yahoo.ca yazdı: > Good thing they have someone with a dish washing skill-set to clean up > their inbox's for them. > On Saturday, August 20, 2022, 06:01:34 p.m. PDT, Peter Potvin via > NANOG <nanog(a)nanog.org> wrote: > > > Hey all, > > Removing Cogent personnel and peering departments from this thread as > I'm sure they don't appreciate the nonsense coming from this list. > > Regards, > Peter Potvin | Executive Director > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Accuris Technologies Ltd.* > 11-300 Earl Grey Drive, Suite #124, Kanata, Ontario K2T1C1 Canada > Email: peter.potvin(a)accuristechnologies.ca > Office: +1 (877) 352-6105 > Network Operations Centre: +1 (877) 321-1662 > > > On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 8:51 PM VOLKAN KIRIK <volkirik(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > yea whatever.. > > its upto mike leber and dave schaeffer to decide. they can either > accept or reject the solution > > I have been always believing content creator/provider should pay > expenses (at least excess traffic). > > because they put their server in some datacenter and reach all of > the internet.. their backbone expenses are less.. > > i can understand that todays datacenters including he.net > <http://he.net> are interested to participate in 200-300 IXPs. > > well that acceptable. it should be considered too > > so i would offer both companies 3 cent per mbps for excess traffic. > > ok bye > > > 21.08.2022 03:25 tarihinde Forrest Christian (List Account) yazdı: >> But that traffic was likely requested by and for the benefit of >> the person the traffic is being sent to. >> >> I've always found the argument that the quantity of traffic is >> the indicator of who should pay to be questionable. >> >> If I'm an end user on an eyeball user and request a big download >> or streaming from a provider, isn't it me that caused that >> traffic to flow? One could argue that I am the one that needs to >> pay. >> >> On the other hand, one could argue that it's the provider of the >> content that I requested that needs to pay, since it's their >> content which is being distributed. >> >> When you get to peering between two providers it's almost >> impossible to decide who needs to pay. As I mentioned above, >> passing that traffic is actually to the benefit of both providers. >> >> About the only settlement I could see is where one of the >> providers is bearing most of the transport costs. For example a >> regional provider only peering at one exchange point might expect >> some settlement costs with a big international provider that is >> effectively carrying their traffic both directions around the >> globe. But the quantity of that type of traffic is likely >> minimal in the grand scheme of things. Even then one might >> argue that connectivity to the small provider is still valuable >> to the customers of the large provider. >> >> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022, 9:32 AM VOLKAN KIRIK <volkirik(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> the more uploading side pays each month for the excess amount. >> >> as content networks are supposed to pay expenses. >> >> >> what do you think? >> >> >> 19.08.2022 18:28 tarihinde Mike Hammett yazdı: >>> The problem them becomes *who* pays? When do the tables turn >>> as to who pays? >>> >>> The alpha gets paid and the beta does the paying? >>> >>> The network with more POPs gets paid? >>> >>> The network with more downstream ASes gets paid? >>> >>> Is it the same for IPv4 as it is for IPv6? >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp><https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> *From: *"VOLKAN KIRIK" <volkirik(a)gmail.com> >>> <mailto:volkirik@gmail.com> >>> *To: *"Rubens Kuhl" <rubensk(a)gmail.com> >>> <mailto:rubensk@gmail.com> >>> *Cc: *nanog(a)nanog.org, dschaeffer(a)cogentco.com, >>> peering(a)cogentco.com >>> *Sent: *Friday, August 19, 2022 10:22:00 AM >>> *Subject: *Re: cogent and henet not peering >>> >>> this is 50/50 situation. nobody has to peer for free. >>> >>> but everyone can. >>> >>> lets just say above 1:1 ratio he.net <http://he.net> pays >>> their own ip transit price to cogent for paid peering excess >>> amount and both sides monitor traffic >>> >>> we can solve this issue by becoming middlemen worldwide... >>> >>> both operators are cheap and they could all compete in quality. >>> >>> level3 pays comcast reasonable (cheap) price (under NDA >>> maybe?). why wouldnt mleber? >>> >>> but to make it fair, as he.net <http://he.net> becomes ww >>> tier-1 operator day-by-day, lets just limit pricing to >>> excess amount of traffic >>> >>> thanks for reading >>> >>> would appreciate your support >>> >>> >>> 19.08.2022 18:09 tarihinde Rubens Kuhl yazdı: >>> >>> OTOH, knowing that Cogent loves splitting the global Internet is onegood reason to not contract their services.I think they sell traffic to their private Intranet. Which is huge,but doesn't encompass the whole Internet.RubensOn Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 12:04 PM VOLKAN KIRIK<volkirik(a)gmail.com> <mailto:volkirik@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> lets just say cogent gives 400GE in each pop they have in common withhe.net <http://he.net> for free.BUT they will rate-limithe.net <http://he.net> links to previous month's 95th percentile upload or download (which is minimum) rate (each month)to make ratio 1:1... to make downstream and upstream traffics fair...okay?fine?come on people,segmentation is bad. >>> >>> > > The information contained in this message may be privileged, > confidential and protected from disclosure. This message is intended > only for the designated recipient(s). It is subject to access, review > and disclosure by the sender's Email System Administrator. If you have > received this message in error, please advise by return e-mail so that > our address records can be corrected and please delete immediately > without reading, copying or forwarding to others. Any unauthorized > review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. > Copyright © 2022 Accuris Technologies Ltd. All Rights Reserved. > > L'information contenue dans ce message pourrait être de nature > privilégiée, confidentielle et protégée contre toute divulgation. Ce > message est destiné à l'usage exclusif du(des) destinataire(s) > visé(s). Le gestionnaire de système du courrier électronique de > l'expéditeur pourrait avoir accès à ce message, l'examiner et le > divulguer. Si ce message vous est transmis par erreur, veuillez nous > en aviser par courrier électronique à notre adresse, afin que l'on > puisse corriger nos registres, puis veuillez le supprimer > immédiatement, sans le lire, le copier ou le transmettre à des tiers. > Tout examen, toute utilisation, divulgation ou distribution non > autorisé de cette information est interdit. > Droit d'auteur © 2022 Accuris Technologies Ltd. Tous droits réservés.

1 0

cogent and henet not peering
by VOLKAN KIRIK 21 Aug '22

21 Aug '22

lets just say cogent gives 400GE in each pop they have in common with he.net for free. *BUT* they will rate-limit he.net links *to* previous month's 95th percentile upload or download (which is minimum) rate (*each month*) to make ratio 1:1... to make downstream and upstream traffics fair... okay? fine? come on people, segmentation is bad.

5 9

Re: Read: IPv6 internet broken, cogent/hurricane not peering
by VOLKAN KIRIK 20 Aug '22

20 Aug '22

the lesson of (/for) the he.net kolayın tuzağına düşme do not fall into trap of the easy way. now tier1 league of them will take like forever for never

2 1

Weekly Global IPv4 Routing Table Report
by Routing Table Analysis Role Account 19 Aug '22

19 Aug '22

This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Global IPv4 Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, SAFNOG TZNOG, MENOG, BJNOG, SDNOG, CMNOG, LACNOG and the RIPE Routing WG. Daily listings are sent to bgp-stats(a)lists.apnic.net. For historical data, please see https://thyme.apnic.net. If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith <pfsinoz(a)gmail.com>. IPv4 Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 20 Aug, 2022 BGP Table (Global) as seen in Japan. Report Website: https://thyme.apnic.net Detailed Analysis: https://thyme.apnic.net/current/ Analysis Summary ---------------- BGP routing table entries examined: 906799 Prefixes after maximum aggregation (per Origin AS): 341924 Deaggregation factor: 2.65 Unique aggregates announced (without unneeded subnets): 438673 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 73575 Prefixes per ASN: 12.32 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 63118 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 25979 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 10457 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 392 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 4.3 Max AS path length visible: 55 Max AS path prepend of ASN (265020) 50 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 970 Number of instances of unregistered ASNs: 970 Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs: 40018 Number of 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 33216 Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table: 158507 Number of bogon 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 12 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table: 1 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 512 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 3070880896 Equivalent to 183 /8s, 9 /16s and 236 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 82.9 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 82.9 Percentage of available address space allocated: 100.0 Percentage of address space in use by end-sites: 99.6 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 307937 APNIC Region Analysis Summary ----------------------------- Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes: 236463 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 67388 APNIC Deaggregation factor: 3.51 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 231571 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks: 96339 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 12882 APNIC Prefixes per ASN: 17.98 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 3733 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1764 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.6 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 26 Number of APNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 8120 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 773185536 Equivalent to 46 /8s, 21 /16s and 224 /24s APNIC AS Blocks 4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079, 55296-56319, 58368-59391, 63488-64098, 64297-64395, 131072-151865 APNIC Address Blocks 1/8, 14/8, 27/8, 36/8, 39/8, 42/8, 43/8, 49/8, 58/8, 59/8, 60/8, 61/8, 101/8, 103/8, 106/8, 110/8, 111/8, 112/8, 113/8, 114/8, 115/8, 116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8, 120/8, 121/8, 122/8, 123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8, 133/8, 150/8, 153/8, 163/8, 171/8, 175/8, 180/8, 182/8, 183/8, 202/8, 203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8, 219/8, 220/8, 221/8, 222/8, 223/8, ARIN Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes: 264708 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation: 120974 ARIN Deaggregation factor: 2.19 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 264954 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 127622 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 19052 ARIN Prefixes per ASN: 13.91 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 6911 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1919 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 3.8 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 34 Number of ARIN region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 4590 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 1295730432 Equivalent to 77 /8s, 59 /16s and 71 /24s ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106 (pre-ERX allocations) 2138-2584, 2615-2772, 2823-2829, 2880-3153 3354-4607, 4865-5119, 5632-6655, 6912-7466 7723-8191, 10240-12287, 13312-15359, 16384-17407 18432-20479, 21504-23551, 25600-26591, 26624-27647, 29696-30719, 31744-33791 35840-36863, 39936-40959, 46080-47103 53248-55295, 62464-63487, 64198-64296, 393216-401308 ARIN Address Blocks 3/8, 4/8, 6/8, 7/8, 8/8, 9/8, 11/8, 12/8, 13/8, 15/8, 16/8, 17/8, 18/8, 19/8, 20/8, 21/8, 22/8, 23/8, 24/8, 26/8, 28/8, 29/8, 30/8, 32/8, 33/8, 34/8, 35/8, 38/8, 40/8, 44/8, 47/8, 48/8, 50/8, 52/8, 53/8, 54/8, 55/8, 56/8, 57/8, 63/8, 64/8, 65/8, 66/8, 67/8, 68/8, 69/8, 70/8, 71/8, 72/8, 73/8, 74/8, 75/8, 76/8, 96/8, 97/8, 98/8, 99/8, 100/8, 104/8, 107/8, 108/8, 128/8, 129/8, 130/8, 131/8, 132/8, 134/8, 135/8, 136/8, 137/8, 138/8, 139/8, 140/8, 142/8, 143/8, 144/8, 146/8, 147/8, 148/8, 149/8, 152/8, 155/8, 156/8, 157/8, 158/8, 159/8, 160/8, 161/8, 162/8, 164/8, 165/8, 166/8, 167/8, 168/8, 169/8, 170/8, 172/8, 173/8, 174/8, 184/8, 192/8, 198/8, 199/8, 204/8, 205/8, 206/8, 207/8, 208/8, 209/8, 214/8, 215/8, 216/8, RIPE Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 260394 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation: 119511 RIPE Deaggregation factor: 2.18 Prefixes being announced from the RIPE address blocks: 257688 Unique aggregates announced from the RIPE address blocks: 153309 RIPE Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 28203 RIPE Prefixes per ASN: 9.14 RIPE Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 12083 RIPE Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 4016 Average RIPE Region AS path length visible: 4.3 Max RIPE Region AS path length visible: 36 Number of RIPE region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 10793 Number of RIPE addresses announced to Internet: 717746048 Equivalent to 42 /8s, 199 /16s and 239 /24s RIPE AS Blocks 1877-1901, 2043, 2047, 2107-2136, 2585-2614 (pre-ERX allocations) 2773-2822, 2830-2879, 3154-3353, 5377-5631 6656-6911, 8192-9215, 12288-13311, 15360-16383 20480-21503, 24576-25599, 28672-29695 30720-31743, 33792-35839, 38912-39935 40960-45055, 47104-52223, 56320-58367 59392-61439, 61952-62463, 64396-64495 196608-213403 RIPE Address Blocks 2/8, 5/8, 25/8, 31/8, 37/8, 46/8, 51/8, 62/8, 77/8, 78/8, 79/8, 80/8, 81/8, 82/8, 83/8, 84/8, 85/8, 86/8, 87/8, 88/8, 89/8, 90/8, 91/8, 92/8, 93/8, 94/8, 95/8, 109/8, 141/8, 145/8, 151/8, 176/8, 178/8, 185/8, 188/8, 193/8, 194/8, 195/8, 212/8, 213/8, 217/8, LACNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------ Prefixes being announced by LACNIC Region ASes: 116175 Total LACNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 27773 LACNIC Deaggregation factor: 4.18 Prefixes being announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 115864 Unique aggregates announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 48967 LACNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 10980 LACNIC Prefixes per ASN: 10.55 LACNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 2668 LACNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 2249 Average LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 5.0 Max LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 55 Number of LACNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 8709 Number of LACNIC addresses announced to Internet: 176428800 Equivalent to 10 /8s, 132 /16s and 23 /24s LACNIC AS Blocks 26592-26623, 27648-28671, 52224-53247, 61440-61951, 64099-64197, 262144-273820 + ERX transfers LACNIC Address Blocks 177/8, 179/8, 181/8, 186/8, 187/8, 189/8, 190/8, 191/8, 200/8, 201/8, AfriNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------- Prefixes being announced by AfriNIC Region ASes: 28088 Total AfriNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 5525 AfriNIC Deaggregation factor: 5.08 Prefixes being announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 36210 Unique aggregates announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 11999 AfriNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1674 AfriNIC Prefixes per ASN: 21.63 AfriNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 584 AfriNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 326 Average AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 5.1 Max AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 34 Number of AfriNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 1004 Number of AfriNIC addresses announced to Internet: 107498752 Equivalent to 6 /8s, 104 /16s and 77 /24s AfriNIC AS Blocks 36864-37887, 327680-329727 & ERX transfers AfriNIC Address Blocks 41/8, 45/8, 102/8, 105/8, 154/8, 196/8, 197/8, APNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 9808 9098 8883 47 CHINAMOBILE-CN China Mobile Communicati 7545 5921 789 700 TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Telecom Limited, AU 4538 4712 4192 75 ERX-CERNET-BKB China Education and Rese 7552 3587 1330 20 VIETEL-AS-AP Viettel Group, VN 7713 3509 1042 61 TELKOMNET-AS-AP PT Telekomunikasi Indon 45899 3376 1877 67 VNPT-AS-VN VNPT Corp, VN 4766 2492 11123 599 KIXS-AS-KR Korea Telecom, KR 9498 2425 499 238 BBIL-AP BHARTI Airtel Ltd., IN 45090 2181 1438 79 TENCENT-NET-AP Shenzhen Tencent Compute 24560 2170 847 406 AIRTELBROADBAND-AS-AP Bharti Airtel Ltd Complete listing at https://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-APNIC ARIN Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 16509 6857 10400 2723 AMAZON-02, US 11492 4532 300 580 CABLEONE, US 7155 3906 265 32 VIASAT-SP-BACKBONE, US 22773 3820 3064 353 ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC, US 16625 3469 1790 2501 AKAMAI-AS, US 6327 3450 1319 63 SHAW, CA 749 3034 50728 2292 DNIC-AS-00749, US 30036 2603 369 268 MEDIACOM-ENTERPRISE-BUSINESS, US 396982 2528 3387 363 GOOGLE-CLOUD-PLATFORM, US 209 2367 4936 405 CENTURYLINK-US-LEGACY-QWEST, US Complete listing at https://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-ARIN RIPE Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 12479 6873 1730 144 UNI2-AS, ES 9121 6611 1692 17 TTNET, TR 20940 4059 3348 219 AKAMAI-ASN1, NL 39891 4006 234 46 ALJAWWALSTC-AS, SA 8551 3999 374 39 BEZEQ-INTERNATIONAL-AS Bezeqint Interne 12389 2941 2290 911 ROSTELECOM-AS, RU 6849 2759 355 21 UKRTELNET, UA 9009 2592 252 1323 M247, GB 34984 2248 358 631 TELLCOM-AS, TR 47331 2062 324 1562 TTNET, TR Complete listing at https://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-RIPE LACNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ----------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 8151 10851 3393 556 Uninet S.A. de C.V., MX 10620 3488 515 783 Telmex Colombia S.A., CO 11830 2335 369 64 Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad 13999 1959 318 525 Mega Cable, S.A. de C.V., MX 28573 1359 2328 264 Claro NXT Telecomunicacoes Ltda, BR 6503 1288 338 520 Axtel, S.A.B. de C.V., MX 3816 1272 697 155 COLOMBIA TELECOMUNICACIONES S.A. ESP, C 6147 1127 369 21 Telefonica del Peru S.A.A., PE 11664 1051 177 460 Techtel LMDS Comunicaciones Interactiva 26615 976 2466 43 TIM SA, BR Complete listing at https://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-LACNIC AfriNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ------------------------------------------ ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 24835 1546 521 31 RAYA-AS, EG 24863 1532 393 21 LINKdotNET-AS, EG 36992 1324 1519 268 ETISALAT-MISR, EG 36903 1268 550 99 MT-MPLS, MA 29571 983 67 46 ORANGE-COTE-IVOIRE, CI 36935 810 520 42 Vodafone-, EG 6713 611 1863 34 IAM-AS, MA 15399 520 52 39 WANANCHI-, KE 37342 481 32 1 MOVITEL, MZ 23889 401 232 16 MauritiusTelecom, MU Complete listing at https://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-AFRINIC Global Per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 8151 10851 3393 556 Uninet S.A. de C.V., MX 9808 9098 8883 47 CHINAMOBILE-CN China Mobile Communicati 12479 6873 1730 144 UNI2-AS, ES 16509 6857 10400 2723 AMAZON-02, US 9121 6611 1692 17 TTNET, TR 7545 5921 789 700 TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Telecom Limited, AU 4538 4712 4192 75 ERX-CERNET-BKB China Education and Rese 11492 4532 300 580 CABLEONE, US 20940 4059 3348 219 AKAMAI-ASN1, NL 39891 4006 234 46 ALJAWWALSTC-AS, SA Complete listing at https://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet Global Per AS Maximum Aggregation summary ----------------------------------------- ASN No of nets Net Savings Description 9808 9098 9051 CHINAMOBILE-CN China Mobile Communications Grou 12479 6873 6729 UNI2-AS, ES 9121 6611 6594 TTNET, TR 7545 5921 5221 TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Telecom Limited, AU 4538 4712 4637 ERX-CERNET-BKB China Education and Research Net 16509 6857 4134 AMAZON-02, US 39891 4006 3960 ALJAWWALSTC-AS, SA 8551 3999 3960 BEZEQ-INTERNATIONAL-AS Bezeqint Internet Backbo 11492 4532 3952 CABLEONE, US 7155 3906 3874 VIASAT-SP-BACKBONE, US Complete listing at https://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-CIDRnet List of Unregistered Origin ASNs (Global) ----------------------------------------- Bad AS Designation Net Originated Transit AS Transit AS Name 398083 UNALLOCATED 5.133.124.0/24 399587 UT, US 33123 UNALLOCATED 8.10.69.0/24 11168 SCC, US 53775 UNALLOCATED 8.20.88.0/24 7029 WINDSTREAM, US 62828 UNALLOCATED 8.21.130.0/24 3356 LEVEL3, US 393266 UNALLOCATED 8.23.52.0/24 46887 LIGHTOWER, US 18604 UNALLOCATED 8.25.204.0/24 3356 LEVEL3, US 394936 UNALLOCATED 8.33.224.0/24 22442 HOU-PHONOSCOPE, US 54338 UNALLOCATED 8.33.241.0/24 6461 ZAYO-6461, US 18798 UNALLOCATED 8.40.106.0/24 6461 ZAYO-6461, US 394856 UNALLOCATED 8.40.216.0/24 3356 LEVEL3, US Complete listing at https://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-badAS Prefixes from the Special Purpose Address Registry (Global) ----------------------------------------------------------- Prefix Origin AS Description 192.88.99.0/24 6939 HURRICANE, US Complete listing at https://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-spar Advertised Unallocated Addresses -------------------------------- Unassigned Network ASN Information AS Name 23.128.80.0/24 Origin: 397372 UNASSIGNED 23.128.80.0/24 Transit: 577 BACOM, CA 23.139.184.0/24 Origin: 27408 1371467, CA 23.139.184.0/24 Transit: 24875 NOVOSERVE-AS, NL 23.141.0.0/24 Origin: 395350 UNASSIGNED 23.141.0.0/24 Transit: 11426 TWC-11426-CAROLINAS, US 27.100.7.0/24 Origin: 56096 UNASSIGNED 27.100.7.0/24 Transit: 45455 TH-2S1N-AP Two S One N Co Ltd, Internet 41.57.124.0/22 Origin: 37442 UNASSIGNED 41.57.124.0/22 Transit: 37204 TELONE, ZW Complete listing at https://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-add-IANA Number of prefixes announced per prefix length (Global) ------------------------------------------------------- /1:0 /2:0 /3:0 /4:0 /5:0 /6:0 /7:0 /8:16 /9:13 /10:40 /11:101 /12:303 /13:595 /14:1209 /15:2065 /16:13534 /17:8341 /18:13941 /19:25114 /20:44460 /21:52285 /22:109097 /23:97154 /24:537729 /25:802 /26:0 /27:0 /28:0 /29:0 /30:0 /31:0 /32:0 Advertised prefixes smaller than registry allocations ----------------------------------------------------- ASN No of nets Total ann. Description 12479 5858 6873 UNI2-AS, ES 9121 5768 6611 TTNET, TR 8151 4580 10851 Uninet S.A. de C.V., MX 8551 3457 3999 BEZEQ-INTERNATIONAL-AS Bezeqint Internet Backbo 11492 3447 4532 CABLEONE, US 6327 3261 3450 SHAW, CA 39891 3189 4006 ALJAWWALSTC-AS, SA 7155 2995 3906 VIASAT-SP-BACKBONE, US 22773 2834 3820 ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC, US 6849 2616 2759 UKRTELNET, UA Complete listing at https://thyme.apnic.net/current/data-sXXas-nos Number of /24s announced per /8 block (Global) ---------------------------------------------- 1:1964 2:1027 3:157 4:5 5:3850 6:114 7:6 8:1587 9:1 11:173 12:1643 13:338 14:2363 15:242 16:45 17:379 18:190 20:243 21:4 22:188 23:5847 24:2418 25:6 27:2614 29:19 31:2415 32:95 34:7 35:87 36:1834 37:4466 38:3413 39:721 40:153 41:3897 42:1145 43:2199 44:291 45:16088 46:4167 47:331 49:1709 50:1957 51:239 52:1460 54:385 55:792 56:8 57:58 58:1796 59:1165 60:974 61:2292 62:2547 63:1926 64:5581 65:2364 66:4868 67:2966 68:1206 69:4155 70:1318 71:682 72:3024 74:2656 75:1405 76:582 77:2246 78:3960 79:3126 80:2021 81:1780 82:1495 83:1217 84:1376 85:3715 86:745 87:1909 88:2810 89:3406 90:547 91:7652 92:2047 93:2546 94:3522 95:4801 96:1301 97:351 98:1021 99:721 100:77 101:1050 102:2239 103:29660 104:4572 105:470 106:887 107:2549 108:879 109:4332 110:2006 111:3332 112:2057 113:1538 114:1485 115:1985 116:1917 117:2454 118:2313 119:1814 120:1791 121:1077 122:2512 123:2075 124:1580 125:2137 128:1243 129:1046 130:1007 131:2049 132:784 133:378 134:1935 135:300 136:853 137:876 138:2508 139:1505 140:936 141:1451 142:1324 143:1396 144:1201 145:341 146:1848 147:1512 148:2218 149:1778 150:859 151:1077 152:1876 153:465 154:3730 155:1456 156:1703 157:1274 158:1037 159:2207 160:2522 161:1331 162:3507 163:1371 164:1634 165:1631 166:786 167:1757 168:3839 169:880 170:4502 171:840 172:3329 173:3133 174:1023 175:1143 176:3638 177:4732 178:3563 179:2181 180:2341 181:3256 182:3238 183:1939 184:2375 185:19637 186:4515 187:3838 188:3988 189:3426 190:8979 191:1437 192:10983 193:8695 194:7103 195:5072 196:2968 197:2426 198:6010 199:6039 200:7640 201:5779 202:10470 203:10022 204:4515 205:3441 206:3758 207:3442 208:4068 209:4716 210:4367 211:2407 212:4042 213:3472 214:1136 215:66 216:6393 217:2622 218:1288 219:574 220:2014 221:951 222:828 223:1988 End of report

1 0

Fwd: RFC 9288 on Recommendations on the Filtering of IPv6 Packets Containing IPv6 Extension Headers at Transit Routers
by Fernando Gont 19 Aug '22

19 Aug '22

Hi, FYI. RFC 9288, "Recommendations on the Filtering of IPv6 Packets Containing IPv6 Extension Headers at Transit Routers" (available at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9288) FWIW, IMO most of the value is in the analysis of what protocols/features use what EHs, and what would break (if anything) if packets with EHs are dropped. These other two are useful for context: * RFC 9098, "Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers" (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9098.html) * RFC 7872, "Observations on the Dropping of Packets with IPv6 Extension Headers in the Real World (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7872.html) Thanks! Cheers, Fernando -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: RFC 9288 on Recommendations on the Filtering of IPv6 Packets Containing IPv6 Extension Headers at Transit Routers Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 16:21:47 -0700 (PDT) From: rfc-editor(a)rfc-editor.org To: ietf-announce(a)ietf.org, rfc-dist(a)rfc-editor.org CC: rfc-editor(a)rfc-editor.org, drafts-update-ref(a)iana.org, opsec(a)ietf.org A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 9288 Title: Recommendations on the Filtering of IPv6 Packets Containing IPv6 Extension Headers at Transit Routers Author: F. Gont, W. Liu Status: Informational Stream: IETF Date: August 2022 Mailbox: fgont(a)si6networks.com, liushucheng(a)huawei.com Pages: 33 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-10.txt URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9288 DOI: 10.17487/RFC9288 This document analyzes the security implications of IPv6 Extension Headers and associated IPv6 options. Additionally, it discusses the operational and interoperability implications of discarding packets based on the IPv6 Extension Headers and IPv6 options they contain. Finally, it provides advice on the filtering of such IPv6 packets at transit routers for traffic not directed to them, for those cases where such filtering is deemed as necessary. This document is a product of the Operational Security Capabilities for IP Network Infrastructure Working Group of the IETF. INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor(a)rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce(a)ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce

1 0