- Test - lists.nanog.org

[NANOG-announce] 2009 Elections
by Betty Burke 20 Oct '09

20 Oct '09

Everyone: Hope all at NANOG47 in person or remote are enjoying a great Program!! A couple of reminders.... PC Nominations have closed. Merit is working to process the last minute nominations and acceptance. As soon we we catch up the information will be posted on the website. MLC Nominations continue. 2009 Election process closes at 9:15 Wednesday am. Please do support the process, it is your community... so VOTE! http://nanog.org/governance/elections/2009elections/ Lastly, we need your input, do take a moment and complete the survey! http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=OGYmCMKmi88ROAl_2fPAlEHw_3d_3d All Best. Betty Merit and SC representative _______________________________________________ NANOG-announce mailing list NANOG-announce(a)nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

1 0

109/8 - not a BOGON
by Matthew Walster 20 Oct '09

20 Oct '09

Hi there, A customer of mine is reporting that there are a large number of addresses he can not reach with his addresses in the 109/8 range. This was declassified as a BOGON and assigned by IANA to RIPE in January 2009. If you have a manually updated BOGON list, can I please ask that you review it and update it as soon as possible please? His addresses in 89/8 and 83/8 work just fine, hence this presumption of BOGON filtering. Matthew Walster

6 7

Science vs. bullshit
by Patrick W. Gilmore 20 Oct '09

20 Oct '09

Lightning talk followup because I want to make sure there was not a miscommunication. A two sentence comment at the mic while 400+ of your not-so-close friends are watching does not a rational discussion make. The talk in question: <http://nanog.org/meetings/nanog47/presentations/Lightning/Cowie_Recession_l… > The disagreement is whether Renesys can reliably find out how many transit providers an AS has. Remember, we are discussing transit providers here, not peers. My point is if an AS has _transit_, then it must be visible in the global table (assuming a reasonably large set of vantage points), or it would not be transit. Of course, this is not perfect, but it is a pretty close approximation for fitting curves over 10s of 1000s of ASes. So things like "I have two transit providers, and one buys transit from the other" is a small number and not relevant to fitting curves. (It also means you are an idiot, or in a corner of the Internet where you should probably be considered as having only one provider.) Majdi has pointed out other corner cases where transit is not viewable through systems like Rensys. For instance, announcing prefixes to Provider 2 with a community to local-pref the announcement below peer routes. That means only one transit is visible in BGP data. There were several reasons some of us did not think edge cases like this were important. For instance, Renesys keeps -every- update ever, so if Provider 1 ever flaps, Rensys will see Provider 2. Also, when looking for the number of providers, a "backup path" may not be relevant since no packets take that path. More importantly, I thought the point of the talk was to show that the table was growing during the recession and people were still getting more providers. The result is a curve, not a hard-and-fast number. Corner cases like the one above are barely noise, so the curve it still valid. It is true that finding peering edges with things like route-views is problematic at best, so finding ASes with one transit plus peering might be problematic. But since I do not think that was the point of the talk, I do not consider that problem. If anyone who still thinks the problems with finding transit edges somehow make the talk 'bullshit' could clarify their position, I would be grateful. -- TTFN, patrick

4 3

Cisco VSS-1440 migration query
by Leland Vandervort 20 Oct '09

20 Oct '09

Hi All, Trying to find an answer to a single technical point concerning a migration of a fleet of Catalyst 6500's to VSS-1440. I've had a scan through the documentation on CCO (whitepapers, config guides, migration guides, etc.) but cannot find anything dealing with this one specific point. Background: Assume that on both stand-alone chassis, you have a specific vlan interface with L3 configuration, such as: switch1: vlan 10 name testing ! interface vlan10 ip address 10.100.100.1 255.255.255.0 glbp 1 ip 10.100.100.254 glbp 1 preempt glbp 1 load-balancing round-robin ! switch2: vlan 10 name testing ! interface vlan10 ip address 10.100.100.2 255.255.255.0 glbp 1 ip 10.100.100.254 glbp 1 preempt glbp 1 load-balancing round-robin ! Once switch 1 is converted to VSS mode and is brought up as ACTIVE/MASTER, it will keep it's layer3 configuration on the VLAN interface. The question is what happens to the L3 configuration on switch2 when it comes up in STANDBY/SLAVE? I can foresee one of two possibilities, but not sure which to expect before trying to do this in a live enviroment: either: 1. switch2 will boot up straight into NSF/SSO, inheriting its [new L3] configuration from the active master, overwriting the pre-VSS L3 configuration. (would be preferable). or 2. switch2 will boot up and enter RPR mode with incompatible configuration for the interface, forcing me to have to manually remove the L3 configuration from the interface before I can proceed with the migration. (not really ideal with hundreds of vlans on these things...) Any idea which one of these would be the case ? (the glbp will be retained, as it will be running between two VSS pairs with 10G trunks between them). Thanks in advance Leland

3 4

Any Google Mail admins on the list?
by Mike Lyon 20 Oct '09

20 Oct '09

Howdy All, Trying to resolve a possible Google Mail blockage from a certain domain. Would like to check to see if you are blocking this domain or not. If you are with google and could help, please hit me up off-list. Cheers, Mike

2 1

Hotmail/MSN Issues
by Cody Appleby 20 Oct '09

20 Oct '09

Can a Hotmail/MSN admin please contact me off-list.

2 1

IPv6 Allocations
by Esposito, Victor 20 Oct '09

20 Oct '09

Since there is a lot of conversation about IPv6 flying about, does anyone have a document or link to a good high level allocation structure for v6? It seems there are 100 different ways to sub allocate the /32, and I am trying to find a simple but scalable method... . Thanks! Victor Esposito

5 5

Maximum devices in OSPF area 0
by Serge Vautour 20 Oct '09

20 Oct '09

Hello, We are looking to deploy a greenfield MPLS network with OSPF as the IGP. I'm told OSPF areas don't play well with OSPF TED. For this reason, we are looking at using only area 0. Only Loopback interfaces and p-p core ethernet links will be in OSPF. What are the maximum number of Routers & Links that folks would be comfortable with putting in 1 area? If folks are already using this type of approach, could you share your current numbers? Thanks, Serge __________________________________________________________________ Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com

6 5

Re: Webcasts of NANOG47
by Tom Daly 19 Oct '09

19 Oct '09

Hi Folks, Here's the skinny: Sunday tutorials were not live broadcast, but were recorded, and will be encoded and placed online shortly after the meeting. The General Session from Monday and Tuesday was/will be broadcasted live. Also, Dani Rosiman's talk on Tuesday on the BGP Metric System will be broadcasted. The ISP Security Track and Peering Track are not broadcast live, no recorded. Regards, Tom Daly ----- "Warren Bailey" <wbailey(a)gci.com> wrote: > Or just fly out ;) lol > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Leigh Porter <leigh.porter(a)ukbroadband.com> > To: Justin Shore <justin(a)justinshore.com>; NANOG <nanog(a)merit.edu> > Sent: Mon Oct 19 14:06:17 2009 > Subject: RE: Webcasts of NANOG47 > > > Hey, > > I don't know for sure but I think only the Grand Room is televised. > > Get somebody there with a webcam to do ustream.tv or livestream.com or > whatever ;-) > > -- > Leigh > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Justin Shore [mailto:justin@justinshore.com] > Sent: Mon 10/19/2009 9:06 PM > To: NANOG > Subject: Webcasts of NANOG47 > > Does anyone know if there will be video streams of the events from > rooms > other than what's in the Grand room? For example I would like to see > > the ISP Security Track BOF or the one tomorrow on Peering. I don't > see > a way to select those specific feeds though. > > Thanks > Justin

1 0

Re: Webcasts of NANOG47
by Warren Bailey 19 Oct '09

19 Oct '09

Or just fly out ;) lol ----- Original Message ----- From: Leigh Porter <leigh.porter(a)ukbroadband.com> To: Justin Shore <justin(a)justinshore.com>; NANOG <nanog(a)merit.edu> Sent: Mon Oct 19 14:06:17 2009 Subject: RE: Webcasts of NANOG47 Hey, I don't know for sure but I think only the Grand Room is televised. Get somebody there with a webcam to do ustream.tv or livestream.com or whatever ;-) -- Leigh -----Original Message----- From: Justin Shore [mailto:justin@justinshore.com] Sent: Mon 10/19/2009 9:06 PM To: NANOG Subject: Webcasts of NANOG47 Does anyone know if there will be video streams of the events from rooms other than what's in the Grand room? For example I would like to see the ISP Security Track BOF or the one tomorrow on Peering. I don't see a way to select those specific feeds though. Thanks Justin

2 1