- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Is your ASN advertising v6 prefixes?
by Scott Weeks 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

--- mpetach(a)netflight.com wrote: From: Matthew Petach <mpetach(a)netflight.com> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 6:21 PM, Fred Richards <fredr(a)geexology.org> wrote: > Mine is. eh...not many. http://bgp.he.net/AS10310 ---------------------------------------- Prefixes Originated (v6): 4 Why 4? scott

3 2

ARIN and IPv6 Requests
by ADWebb＠dstsystems.com 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

Why does ARIN require detailed usage of IPv4 space when requesting IPv6 space? Seems completely irrelevant to me. -- Adam Webb EN & ES Team desk: 816.737.9717 cell: 916.949.1345 --------------------------------------- The biggest secret of innovation is that anyone can do it. --------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- Please consider the environment before printing this email and any attachments. This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the individual or company to which it is addressed and may contain information which is privileged, confidential and prohibited from disclosure or unauthorized use under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, or copying of this e-mail or the information contained in this e-mail is strictly prohibited by the sender. If you have received this transmission in error, please return the material received to the sender and delete all copies from your system.

3 2

Self-referential whois queries
by Rubens Kuhl 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

I'm noticing an increase in getting "query rate exceeded" at whois services that might be connected to a symptom described by ARIN at NANOG 48/ARIN XXV and ARIN XXVI where machines ask for the whois record of their own IP address. Are there any clues of what is causing this ? Rubens

2 2

10GBASE-T Switches
by Roberts, Brent 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

Looking for feedback/recommendations on higher density Switch’s in the 10GBASE-T arena. Preferably TOR switches if possible. Minimum 16 ports usable for Rack Server connectivity + Uplinks to Collapsed Twin Distro/Core setup. Found the Arista 7X00 family to have the density I am looking for but others of similar spec would be appreciated. Any Thoughts and/or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. ________________________________ This email and any attached files may contain confidential and/or privileged material and is intended solely for the use of the person to whom it is addressed. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete it and all attachments from your computer. Progressive Solutions is not liable for any errors or omissions in the content or transmission of this email.

6 7

box.net network engineer
by Andrew Matthews 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

Can someone with the box.net engineering group email me off list. I have a peering issue with you guys at any2 in socal. Thanks, Drew

2 1

Comcast BGP issue?
by Wallace Keith 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

Not quite sure what the issue is, but I suspect Comcast announcements are not quite right? Trying to get from Verizon Business to a Comcast address in NH (on 75.15.64.0/18), and it's going through San Jose. Anyone else having similar issues or suggestions? Opened a ticket with Comcast, but they want to check the cable modem (sigh) 6 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms 0.so-3-2-0.XL3.BOS4.ALTER.NET [152.63.22.178] 7 13 ms 14 ms 13 ms 0.xe-6-1-2.XL3.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.0.166] 8 14 ms 46 ms 13 ms 0.ae3.BR3.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.16.181] 9 14 ms 14 ms 13 ms te-7-0-0.edge2.NewYork2.level3.net [4.68.110.69] 10 13 ms 13 ms 14 ms vlan52.ebr2.NewYork2.Level3.net [4.69.138.254] 11 14 ms 14 ms 14 ms ae-6-6.ebr2.NewYork1.Level3.net [4.69.141.21] 12 85 ms 88 ms 90 ms ae-2-2.ebr4.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.69.135.185] 13 85 ms 85 ms 89 ms ae-94-94.csw4.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.69.134.254] 14 83 ms 83 ms 84 ms ae-4-99.edge1.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.68.18.206] 15 97 ms 95 ms 95 ms COMCAST-IP.edge1.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.79.43.134] 16 125 ms 125 ms 124 ms pos-0-14-0-0-cr01.denver.co.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.85.129] 17 135 ms 129 ms 125 ms pos-0-14-0-0-cr01.chicago.il.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.85.117] 18 122 ms 121 ms 121 ms pos-1-15-0-0-ar01.woburn.ma.boston.comcast.net [68.86.93.122] 19 128 ms 127 ms 127 ms po-66-ur02.manchester.nh.boston.comcast.net [68.85.69.170] 20 123 ms 121 ms 121 ms 68.85.161.226 21 116 ms 118 ms 119 ms x-x-x-x-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [75.150.80.x] -Keith

1 1

Re: My upstream ISP does not support IPv6
by TR Shaw 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

On Feb 10, 2011, at 10:28 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote: > T-mobile USA has a nationwide ipv6 beta. You can google it. Regarding iphone, its more an iPhone issue than anything else > Nope its ATT. My iPhone works fine on IPv6. I connect wifi at home and can go anywhere but on on ATT wireless. Tom

2 1

Ipv6 addressing for Core network
by Vikas Sharma 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

Hi, I am looking for the recommendation for core interfaces IP addressing schema for Ipv6. Some different views are (PE- P - PE, point to point link) as below - 1- Use Public Ipv6 with /122 and do not advertise to Internet 2- Use Public Ipv6 with /127 and do not advertise to Internet 3- Use Unique local ipv6 address 4- Use Public Ipv6 with /64 Also I am interested to understand the impact on TCAM ... Regards, Vikas

10 21

Strange L2 failure
by Jack Bates 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

Has anyone seen issues with IOS where certain MACs fail? 54:52:00 (kvm) fails out an old 10mbit port on a 7206 running 12.2 SRE. I've never seen anything like this. DHCP worked, ARP worked, and arp debugging showed responses for arp to the MAC, however, tcpdump on the host system showed no unicast or arp responses coming from the router, while the switch management ip and other stuff on the local segment communicated fine with the vm. This broke for IPv6 as well. I changed the vm's MAC to 54:51:00, 50:52:00 and still failed. Changed it to 40:52:00 and it works for both v4 and v6. Was there a change which would cause certain hardware to not accept a MAC starting with 50: or higher? Jack

4 5

Is your ASN advertising v6 prefixes?
by Fred Richards 10 Feb '11

10 Feb '11

Mine is. Well? -- Fred

6 5