- Test - lists.nanog.org

gitlab contact?
by Dave Taht 07 Apr '22

07 Apr '22

Most cloud operations websites are kept internal. gitlab's is not, which is pretty cool. In looking over this issue, today: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/gl-infra/production/-/issues/6768 They are tracking tcp syn retransmits, but not drops or other congestion control related info. And also using: sysctl net.ipv4.tcp_notsent_lowat=4294967295; where we've been getting good results with that set as low as 32k. Anyone know anyone at gitlab? -- I tried to build a better future, a few times: https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC

2 1

Hackathon Registration Opens + Scholarship Applications Available + More
by Nanog News 07 Apr '22

07 Apr '22

*Hackathon Registration is Now Open! * *Hack Your Way into Fun, Networking + More* *NANOG 85 Hackathon Dates* *Intro/Tutorial/Team Formation:* Wed., May 25 *Hacking:* Sat. + Sun., Jun. 4 - 5 *Theme:* Projects that Make a Difference The NANOG 85 Hackathon will make tools work better for ordinary users. For this Hackathon, we are looking to expand the event's reach to bring in non-developers who have an itch to get something fixed. *REGISTER NOW <https://www.nanog.org/events/nanog-85-hackathon/>* *Scholarship Applications are Now Available* NANOG will award two $10,000 scholarships this year (2022) to eligible undergrad and graduate students in network, electrical or computer engineering, computer science, and telecommunications. *The program deadline to submit your application is 3:00 p.m. Central Time on May 18, 2022.* *MORE INFO <https://www.nanog.org/outreach/higher-education/nanog-scholarship-program/>* *2022 Sponsorships Available * *Partner in Building the Internet of Tomorrow * The Internet, as we know it, was invented by a group of young, progressive rebels who dared to think differently. Support NANOG in our mission in the ongoing advancement of an open, secure, and robust Internet. *2022 Sponsorship opportunities are now available! * *MORE INFO <https://www.nanog.org/events/sponsorship/sponsorship-opportunities/>*

1 0

AT& T peering Contact?
by Justin Wilson (Lists) 07 Apr '22

07 Apr '22

Folks, I need an ATT Wireless/ATT Mobility peering contact. The emails on their peeringdb entries bounce back as non existent. Have a problem with a prefix that works everywhere except when folks are on AT&T LTE. Justin Wilson j2sw(a)mtin.net — https://j2sw.com (AS399332) https://blog.j2sw.com - Podcast and Blog

1 0

NANOG 85 Hackathon Call for Projects
by Valerie Wittkop 07 Apr '22

07 Apr '22

We need you! The NANOG Hackathon Committee is calling for project developers/maintainers to participate in the NANOG 85 Hackathon <https://www.nanog.org/events/nanog-85-hackathon/>. Wednesday, May 25, 2022 - Intro/Tutorial/Team Formation (via Zoom) Saturday + Sunday, June 4-5, 2022 - Hacking (via Zoom and/or in Montréal) An essential part of NANOG conferences, our Hackathons are designed to be both fun and engaging, as well as provide a platform that builds community and fosters greater networking and programming knowledge. NANOG Hackathons are hands-on, and educational at their core — directly supporting the most critical aspects of our mission. All levels are welcome to participate, and as always, Hackathon registration <https://www.nanog.org/events/nanog-85-hackathon/registration/> is free. Theme: Projects that Make a Difference The NANOG 85 Hackathon will focus on the theme of making tools work better for ordinary users. For this Hackathon, we are looking to expand the reach of the event to bring in non-developers who have an itch to get something fixed. So this is your opportunity to work with other community members to fix that itch and make life better for everyone. The improvements can include better tutorials, documentation, cookie-cutter templates that people can build on when accessing an API - in short, stuff that you would like to see that enables better use of the tools you use or want to use. Of course, we will welcome our usual range of project proposals if you want to dive deep into the code and hack in a communal environment, so send in those proposals as well. We are asking those who wish to bring a project be prepared to generally cover the items listed here. - Provide an intro/mini-tutorial on the skills needed to successfully hack on said project - Use time between the intro (May 25th) and the Hackathon (June 4-5) to be available for introductions and general questions relating to the project - Create a “ReadMe” file or webpage with the following information - Languages used in the project - Good first issues (if using GitHub on the project) - How to set-up/run tests in the development environment - How to use sandbox environment (if you have one) - Documentation updates/issues that need review/correcting In exchange for your work, NANOG will offer you a complimentary registration for NANOG 85 taking place in Montréal June 6-8, 2022. Learn more about the Hackathon schedule here: https://www.nanog.org/events/nanog-85-hackathon/ If you are interested in bringing a project to the NANOG 85 Hackathon, please send a message to hackathon-support(a)nanog.org. We look forward to working with you! -- *Valerie Wittkop* Program DirectorOn behalf of the NANOG Hackathon Committee

1 0

IP Multicast Persistent Duplicate Packet Issue
by Roman Islam 06 Apr '22

06 Apr '22

Hi Everyone, Has anyone experienced a TETRA Radio application issue if underlying IP multicast transport sends persistent duplicate packets? Here is my scenario as below: PIM is running on the MPLS L3 VPN environment. C multicast is running on a single VRF (TETRA) only. Source is running behind a dual home PE. HSRP, PIM DR path is via PE1 to the source. Anycast RP is configured with PE1 & PE2. On the receiver side there is a single PE. When I check (S,G) route on the receiver side PE default MDT is working as expected. After the threshold exceeds it switches to the data MDT. PIM Assert mechanism winner is PE2 though (Since PE 2 has the highest IP and source is behind dual home PE with equal cost I guess). Can this be a reason for persistent duplicate multicast packets at the receiver side; since the assert winner is PE2 but HSRP, PIM DR path is via PE1 to the source? If this is the case is there any way to manually configure the assert winner to PE1? Roman

2 3

Re: V6 still not supported
by Jared Brown 06 Apr '22

06 Apr '22

Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote: > When your ISP starts charging $X/Month for legacy protocol support Out of interest, how would this come about? - Jared

9 17

Re: Enhance CG-NAT Re: V6 still not supported
by Abraham Y. Chen 06 Apr '22

06 Apr '22

Hi, Bill: 0) Thanks for bringing up the NANOG posting guideline. We now have something tangible to discuss. 1) Section 6. looks most relevant. So, I copy and paste it below for our discussion: A. 6.1.1. "... > relevant excerpt 1 response to excerpt 1 ... ": This seems to be what I have been doing, except maybe how to interpret the keyword "excerpt". Perhaps you are expecting me to cite more text from the message that I am responding to, such as a complete paragraph, instead of only a short phrase or two? If so, I certainly will be glad to do so. B. On the other hand, the leading sentence "When posting to the NANOG list please avoid: Top-posting, i.e., putting your reply right on top of the message you're responding to, ... " seems to discourage threading the messages (keeping a long tail of the earlier texts)? Perhaps there is some kind of optimal trade-off between how much each of these two should be included in a message? 2) The two URLs are kind of odd: A. The first URL led me to a blank webpage. B. The second URL led me to a list of Q&A's that seem to be more humorous than instructive. *************** *6. Posting Conventions* 1. *Format* When posting to the NANOG list please avoid: 1. Top-posting, i.e., putting your reply right on top of the message you're responding to, rather than quoting and responding as follows: > relevant excerpt 1 response to excerpt > relevant excerpt 2 response to excerpt > relevant excerpt 3 response to excerpt 2. Using non-standard methods of quoting prior text; 3. Failing to quote, or to snip, as appropriate; 4. Sending in HTML or other non-standard attachment formats; 5. Starting or participating in flame wars. The linux-kernel mailing list FAQ provides detailed instructions for* quoting prior text*: http://www.tux.org/lkml/#s3-9 "Dear Emily Postnews" at http://www.templetons.com/brad/emily.html makes lots of good suggestions about *signatures* and other items of interest. *************** Please review and advise. Regards, Abe (2022-04-06 17:31) On 2022-04-06 11:33, William Nelson wrote: > <snip...> > > I am still learning the proper eMail etiquette on NANOG. Could you please echo back some of my writings as you received? So that I can see what they got transformed to. > > </snip> > > There is no transforming of your formatting after you send it. It's frustrating in the format you typed it in. > > https://archive.nanog.org/list/faq#posting > > -bn. > > > ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** > Confidentiality Notice: > > This email message, any attachment, and the information therein is confidential, intended only for the named recipient(s), and may contain material that is proprietary, privileged, or otherwise private under applicable law. If you have received this message in error, or are not a named recipient: > > (1) You are advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this email, or the information in its content, is strictly prohibited; > > (2) We ask you immediately to notify the sender by return email or contact Third Federal at 1-800-THIRD-FED (1-800-844-7333); > > (3) We instruct you to delete this email message and any attachment from your computer. > > Thank you. > ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** > -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

1 0

Looking for an Amazon Cloudfront contact
by Eric Kuhnke 06 Apr '22

06 Apr '22

It looks like I may have a range of recently put into use residential symmetric gigabit last mile IP space that's being filtered/blocked at the application level. Please contact me off-list.

1 0

Now open - 2022 ARIN Community Grants for Internet infrastructure development/research projects
by John Curran 06 Apr '22

06 Apr '22

NANOGers - The ARIN Community Grant program has opened its 2022 "call for applications”. If you are aware of a non-commercial development or research project that could enhance Internet operations and might benefit from additional funding, please bring this opportunity to their attention. More information attached below. Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers === From: ARIN <info(a)arin.net<mailto:info@arin.net>> Subject: [arin-announce] Apply Now for an ARIN Community Grant Date: 6 April 2022 at 11:11:35 AM EDT To: "arin-announce(a)arin.net<mailto:arin-announce@arin.net>" <arin-announce(a)arin.net<mailto:arin-announce@arin.net>> Do you have a project that needs funding, is non-commercial in nature, and benefits the Internet community with the ARIN service region? Apply now for a 2022 ARIN Community Grant. The ARIN Community Grant Program provides financial grants in support of operational and research projects that improve the overall Internet industry and Internet user environment that advance ARIN’s mission and broadly benefit the Internet community within the ARIN region. Projects must fit into one or more of these four broad categories: • Internet technical improvements that promote and facilitate the expansion, development, and growth of the infrastructure of the Internet consistent with the public interest • Registry processes and technology improvements that help maintain a globally consistent and highly usable Internet Number Registry system • Informational outreach that advances the Internet on topics such as, but not limited to: IPv6 deployment, Internet research, and Internet governance • Research related to ARIN’s mission and operations For 2022, the ARIN Board of Trustees has approved a total expenditure of up to $60,000 (USD) for grants of varying amounts, starting at $1,000 to $20,000 (USD) and based on project need. We invite you to learn more about ARIN’s Community Grant Program and to find the link to the application form at: https://www.arin.net/grants The call for applications is open now through 1 June 2022. We encourage all applicants to clearly demonstrate how projects meet eligibility guidelines and selection criteria through the application form to improve chances of selection. ARIN looks forward to funding important projects through the ARIN Community Grant Program in 2022. Regards, American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ===

1 0

Re: Enhance CG-NAT Re: V6 still not supported
by Abraham Y. Chen 06 Apr '22

06 Apr '22

Hi, Ant: 1) As I Cc:'ed you, I attempted to contact the author of the IPv4+ draft a few days ago to offer my reading of his work. I have not heard any response. In short, I believe that IPv4+ is paraphrasing the scheme of the unsuccessful RFC1385 that EzIP Draft cited as Informative Reference [12]. -- meaning that EzIP has avoided the trap of such approach. 2) I went back to earlier versions of the IPv4+ drafts and discovered a surprising trend. That is, through all eight revisions, there has been hardly any actual write-up text changes! It appears that the author is just keeping the six-months-timer ticking. 3) Since you indicated that IPv4+ was reported to NANOG, maybe you could retrieve that thread and check with the author about what is the status? 4) "Have you approached any vendors about the feasibility of IP Options being used for switching at line rate in silicon? ": No. For the first phase of implementing EzIP, the configuration is called RAN (Regional Area Network). It is essentially a numbering plan enhancement to CG-NAT. There is no change to the basic IPv4 Header. The only engineering effort is "disabling the program code that has been disabling the use of the 240/4 netblock", followed by retiring the NAT function. So that CG-NAT can operate as simple routers, by having the look-up state-tables capability as backup. 5) In the long run, yes, processing of the Option Word needs be considered and ideally be implemented in silicon to achieve the line rate switching. Many claim, however, such end-to-end connectivity is not needed according to the current trend, which is primarily Server / Client model by CDN business. So, EzIP is actually a forward looking two stage scheme. We can focus on the first phase for now to relieve the underlying issues. There will be plenty of lead time to upgrade the silicon when the demand for end-to-end connectivity begins to build up. 6) " ... but your replies are practically illegible because of formatting. ... ": I am still learning the proper eMail etiquette on NANOG. Could you please echo back some of my writings as you received? So that I can see what they got transformed to. Thanks, Abe (2022-04-06 11:25) On 2022-04-03 16:14, Anthony Newman wrote: > You should check outhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-tang-ipv4plus-08 which is still dragging on > after receiving similar treatment here to EzIP (although less patented by its author) and equally unlikely > to be possible to implement in the real world in a timely fashion. > > Have you approached any vendors about the feasibility of IP Options being used for switching at line rate in silicon? > Software IP stacks are the absolute least of your problem when proposing alterations to routing behaviour based on > packet contents. Apologies if this has been covered, but your replies are practically illegible because of formatting. > > -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

1 0