- Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: Bandwidth Monitoring per AS
by Rodriguez, Mauricio 17 Nov '09

17 Nov '09

Apologies -- That was supposed to be addressed to Rick only... However, the truth is that we have outgrown our FCP. YMMV with the product... From: Rodriguez, Mauricio Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:08 PM To: nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: Bandwidth Monitoring per AS Sure, Rick. Maybe they can buy ours off of us!! ;-) Regards, Mauricio Rodriguez Manager of IP/Data Engineering, FPL FiberNet Email: Mauricio.Rodriguez(a)fpl.com Office: 305-552-3418 Mobile: 786-236-2665 Pager: 786-236-2665

1 0

Bandwidth Monitoring per AS
by Rodriguez, Mauricio 17 Nov '09

17 Nov '09

Sure, Rick. Maybe they can buy ours off of us!! ;-) Regards, Mauricio Rodriguez Manager of IP/Data Engineering, FPL FiberNet Email: Mauricio.Rodriguez(a)fpl.com Office: 305-552-3418 Mobile: 786-236-2665 Pager: 786-236-2665

1 0

Bandwidth Monitoring per AS
by Babak Pasdar 17 Nov '09

17 Nov '09

Could some of you share your recommendations on the best tools for monitoring per AS communications. I would like to track all source AS to Destination AS traffic utilization. Best Regards, Babak -- Babak Pasdar President & CEO | Certified Ethical Hacker Bat Blue Corporation | Integrity . Privacy . Availability (p) 212.461.3322 x3005 | (f) 212.584.9999 | (w) www.BatBlue.com Receive Bat Blue's Daily Security Intelligence Report Bat Blue's AS: 25885 | BGP Policy | Peering Policy Bat Blue's Legal Notice Reducing IT Security Budget, Burden & Risk - Video | Article

8 7

AH is pretty useless and perhaps should be deprecated
by Jack Kohn 17 Nov '09

17 Nov '09

Hi, Interesting discussion on the utility of Authentication Header (AH) in IPSecME WG. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec/current/msg05026.html Post explaining that AH even though protecting the source and destination IP addresses is really not good enough. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec/current/msg05056.html What do folks feel? Do they see themselves using AH in the future? IMO, ESP and WESP are good enough and we dont need to support AH any more .. Jack

13 18

Re: Juniper M120 Alternatives
by Gary Mackenzie 16 Nov '09

16 Nov '09

Thanks everybody for the feedback. I'll likely be getting a few quotes for MX series boxes I think, we're in the happy position of having a completely e-net infrastructure so we're not limited by interface options. Thanks again for recommendation, good to know other people are using them successfully. Cheers Gary > MX uses the I-Chip same as on M120/320 series. MX would be perfect for > any > location in the network P/PE if you are talking about E-Net services vs. > TDM. They would be a perfect peering box if you are using E-Net. > > > On 11/16/09 10:14 AM, "Gary Mackenzie" <net-ops(a)monolith-networks.net> > wrote: > >>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 09:04, Dale W. Carder <dwcarder(a)wisc.edu> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Nov 16, 2009, at 9:54 AM, Gary Mackenzie wrote: >>>> >>>>> Having slightly lost track of what everybody is using for peering >>>>> routers >>>>> these days, what is the consensus about the best alternative to >>>>> Juniper >>>>> M >>>>> series routers? >>>> >>>> have you looked at the MX series? >>> >>> +1 >>> ~Chris >>> >>>> >>>> Dale >>>> >> >> I had looked briefly, does anybody here actually use them as peering >> routers? I've seen a few implementations using them in the MPLS P and PE >> router roles but never as border routers. >> >> If there is some precedent for using them in this role that's good to >> hear >> and I'll take another look, I was loath to move away from Juniper as our >> current boxes are been the model of reliability. >> >> Cheers >> >> Gary >> >> > > > *************************************************************************************** > The information contained in this message, including attachments, may > contain > privileged or confidential information that is intended to be delivered > only to the > person identified above. If you are not the intended recipient, or the > person > responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, > Windstream requests > that you immediately notify the sender and asks that you do not read the > message or its > attachments, and that you delete them without copying or sending them to > anyone else. >

2 1

Alternatives to Cisco SFP-GE-S?
by Seth Mattinen 16 Nov '09

16 Nov '09

Does anyone have any practical long term experience with third party alternatives to the (must be made from solid gold) Cisco SFP-GE-S module that they'd like to share with me? I suppose I could just use compatible GLC-SX-MM instead, but I kind of want to have DOM support. ~Seth

2 1

ADMIN: List FAQ/Monthly Post.
by NANOG Mail List Committee 16 Nov '09

16 Nov '09

This 100-line document contains 62% of what you need to know to avoid annoying 10,000 people in your email to the NANOG list. It also contains pointers to another 23%. Please take 5 minutes to read it before you post [again]. General Information =================== About NANOG: http://www.nanog.org/about/ NANOG News: http://www.nanog.org/ NANOG lists and AUP: http://www.nanog.org/mailinglist/ NANOG List FAQ: http://www.nanog.org/mailinglist/listfaqs/ To Subscribe or Unsubscribe from the list: http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog To contact the list's admins: admins(a)nanog.org Posting Policy ============== The NANOG list has over 10,000 subscribers so it is very easy for a thread to have scores of posts while being off-topic and only of interest to only a small proportion of subscribers. Please consider before each post if your email will be of interest to the majority of members or might alternatively be emailed directly the people of interest or posted to another forum. Please read the FAQ and AUP policy before posting for more details. Especially the following are discouraged: * Is a certain site down? Other Outages not affecting half the Internet. Please use http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/ or a similar site. Please post to the Outages mailing list: http://wiki.outages.org * Spam Please use SPAM-L - http://spam-l.com/mailman/listinfo * Contacting People * http://puck.nether.net/netops/ * http://www.peeringdb.com * Please try other methods of contacting sites before you post to NANOG. Saying something like "I tried calling 213-555-3333 but no answer" shows you _have_ tried alternative methods first. * Political Issues * Topics such as ICANN policy, Government Policy or Law changes that do not have short term Operational impact should be avoided. * Operation topics with more specific lists * DNS - http://lists.oarci.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations * Email - http://www.mailop.org/ * NANOG Mailing list policy Please use the nanog-futures list or contact admins(a)nanog.org Please also avoid ================= * Sending posts to the list relevant to only one or two people on this list, such as tests or traceroutes in response to another post for comparison to those originally posted. * Jokes, Puns, amusing observations, spelling corrections. Other NANOG related lists ========================= * NANOG-futures - for discussion of the evolution of NANOG, including organizational structure, policies and procedures, and agendas for NANOG meetings. Such topics aren't appropriate for the main NANOG mailing list. http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures * nanog-attendee - For discussion of venue-specific issues relevant to attendees of the current NANOG physical meeting. http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-attendee * nanog-announce - For announcements of NANOG meetings an other Important NANOG related announcements. Low traffic and all posts are also sent to main list. http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce Other Mailing Lists =================== Information about related lists: http://www.nanog.org/mailinglist/listfaqs/otherlists.php

1 0

kaspersky anti-virus tech, with a clue?
by Jim Mercer 14 Nov '09

14 Nov '09

it seems that kaspersky anti-virus is "detecting" our hotspot captive portal login as a "Trojan-Downloader.Script.Generic". my googling on this seems to indicate that it isn't finding so much a signature, but something in the url that is "suspicious". unfortunately, this is causing some fairly unhappy, panicing calls to our support people from customers. can anyone point me at a Kaspersky tech with a clue? maybe we can re-craft our login url to not offend the Kaspersky suite. note: this hotspot suite has been in operation for 4+ years, and is based on the chillispot portal. note: these reports only started recently, so i suspect something was added to Kaspersky's virus database recently that kicked this off. -- Jim Mercer jim(a)reptiles.org +92 336 520-4504 "I'm Prime Minister of Canada, I live here and I'm going to take a leak." - Lester Pearson in 1967, during a meeting between himself and President Lyndon Johnson, whose Secret Service detail had taken over Pearson's cottage retreat. At one point, a Johnson guard asked Pearson, "Who are you and where are you going?"

2 1

Re: AH is pretty useless and perhaps should be deprecated
by sfouant＠shortestpathfirst.net 14 Nov '09

14 Nov '09

I've seen some vendor implementations in which ESP actually outperformed AH during performance testing... go figure... Stefan Fouant ------Original Message------ From: Jack Kohn To: nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: AH is pretty useless and perhaps should be deprecated Sent: Nov 13, 2009 7:22 PM Hi, Interesting discussion on the utility of Authentication Header (AH) in IPSecME WG. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec/current/msg05026.html Post explaining that AH even though protecting the source and destination IP addresses is really not good enough. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec/current/msg05056.html What do folks feel? Do they see themselves using AH in the future? IMO, ESP and WESP are good enough and we dont need to support AH any more .. Jack Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

2 1

ESPN360 Access
by Chris Gotstein 14 Nov '09

14 Nov '09

We've been getting more and more requests for ESPN360 from our customers. From what i understand, ESPN requires that the ISP "subscribe" to their content and pay a fee to do so. I have been unable to find much information on what it takes to subscribe and what the fees are to do so. Does anyone have more info on ESPN360? Thanks. -- ---- ---- ---- ---- Chris Gotstein, Sr Network Engineer, UP Logon/Computer Connection UP http://uplogon.com | +1 906 774 4847 | chris(a)uplogon.com

2 1