- Test - lists.nanog.org

Networks not reachable from VZ as if there's no route
by S Umple 09 Jul '21

09 Jul '21

Hi, Networks are not reachable from VZ FIOS as if there's no route. Upon further checking, issue appears to be widespread. I've checked two major SPs VZ/Sprint and neither has these networks, while ATT/HE.NET/ <http://he.net/>route-views all have them. root# for i in 8.8.8.8 121.51.175.17 121.51.22.64 182.254.52.163 182.254.60.11; do mtr -ur $i; done HOST: Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev 1.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.|-- 100.41.26.128 0.0% 10 10.9 11.7 8.7 14.3 1.7 3.|-- 140.222.10.38 0.0% 10 16.2 15.8 14.0 18.4 1.3 4.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.|-- 140.222.227.25 0.0% 10 16.9 16.4 14.8 22.4 2.4 7.|-- 72.14.208.130 0.0% 10 15.6 15.4 12.6 16.8 1.4 8.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 HOST: Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev 1.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.|-- 100.41.26.128 90.0% 10 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 0.0 HOST: Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev 1.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.|-- 100.41.26.126 90.0% 10 11.4 11.4 11.4 11.4 0.0 HOST: Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev 1.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.|-- 100.41.26.126 90.0% 10 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 0.0 HOST: Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev 1.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.|-- 100.41.26.128 80.0% 10 14.7 12.0 9.3 14.7 3.8

1 0

Email and Web Hosting
by Steve Saner 09 Jul '21

09 Jul '21

I hope this isn't too far off topic for this list. We acquired a small ISP a couple years ago that has its roots in the "local ISPs" of the 90s. This ISP is still hosting email and web services for customers both on company domains as well as customer domains. There is some decent revenue coming from these services, but cost of maintenance is becoming a challenge. We are looking at migrating to another platform or completely discontinuing those services. I'm wondering if others here have gone through that process and have any advice as to how to go about it. -- Steve Saner | Senior Network Engineer ideatek INTERNET FREEDOM FOR ALL Cell: 620-860-9433 | 111 Old Mill Lane, Buhler, KS 67522 | ideatek.com <http://www.ideatek.com/> This email transmission and any documents, files or previous email messages attached to it may contain confidential information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not or believe you may not be the intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately by return email or by calling 620.543.5026. Then, please take all steps necessary to permanently delete the email and all attachments from your computer system. No trees were affected by this transmission – though a few billion photons were mildly inconvenienced.

8 12

ATTN: Mentees, Mentors, and Future Students - We need your voice!
by Nanog News 08 Jul '21

08 Jul '21

*So, What is it Actually like to Participate in a Hackathon?* *You may have heard about this thing called a "Hackathon."* The weekend-long event <https://www.nanog.org/stories/nanog-hackathons/> that provides for epic networking, as fellow engineers from all over the world get together and share their passion for hacking; while having serious fun. *You are intrigued.* Yet, you are still on the fence. We get it, your time is valuable and who wants to get stuck committing to a weekend-long brain-drainer? That is why we have done the dirty work for you. *We asked a Hackathon alumni to share his experience. Check out our Q + A with *Google Cloud TSE,* Akshay Broota. <https://www.nanog.org/stories/so-what-is-it-actually-like-to-participate-in…>* READ NOW <https://www.nanog.org/stories/so-what-is-it-actually-like-to-participate-in…> *📢 ATTN:Mentors, Mentees and Future Students**We Need Your Voice!* Feedback from our community is vital to NANOG's success. If you have been thinking about becoming, or in need of a mentor, and/or taking an education course at NANOG, we need your voice! ✏️ *Please fill out the below surveys and help us best serve your needs. * ➕ <https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/nanog-mentorship-survey>Mentorship Feedback Survey <https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/nanog-mentorship-survey> ➕ Mentee Feedback Survey <https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/nanog-mentee-survey> ➕ <https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/nanog-education-survey>Course Developement Survey <https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/nanog-education-survey> *Community Forum is Now in Public BetaPlease take a look! 👀**Getting Started with the NANOG Community* *Forum* To access the Community Forum you must first have a user account on the NANOG website <https://www.nanog.org/>. You cannot create an account directly on the community forum website. The main NANOG website is OAuth 2 authority. GET STARTED <https://www.nanog.org/help/community-forum/>

1 0

GAO Report: 25/3 Mbps is likely not fast enough
by Sean Donelan 08 Jul '21

08 Jul '21

New report published by the Government Accountability Office. FCC Should Analyze Small Business Speed Needs https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-21-494.pdf "FCC’s minimum speed benchmark of 25/3 Mbps is likely not fast enough to meet the needs of many small businesses, particularly with regard to upload speeds. As part of its annual review and reporting regarding broadband deployment FCC has not analyzed information related to broadband access by small businesses." Recommendation 1: GAO is making one recommendation to FCC to solicit stakeholder input and analyze small business broadband speed needs and incorporate the results of this analysis into the benchmark for broadband. FCC agreed with this recommendation.

1 0

Spoofer Report for NANOG for Jun 2021
by CAIDA Spoofer Project 08 Jul '21

08 Jul '21

In response to feedback from operational security communities, CAIDA's source address validation measurement project (https://spoofer.caida.org) is automatically generating monthly reports of ASes originating prefixes in BGP for systems from which we received packets with a spoofed source address. We are publishing these reports to network and security operations lists in order to ensure this information reaches operational contacts in these ASes. This report summarises tests conducted within usa, can. Inferred improvements during Jun 2021: ASN Name Fixed-By 19624 SERVERROOM 2021-06-06 32035 CCDT 2021-06-09 Further information for the inferred remediation is available at: https://spoofer.caida.org/remedy.php Source Address Validation issues inferred during Jun 2021: ASN Name First-Spoofed Last-Spoofed 209 CENTURYLINK-US-LEGACY-QWEST 2016-08-16 2021-06-30 20412 CLARITY-TELECOM 2016-09-30 2021-06-30 6181 FUSE-NET 2016-10-10 2021-06-30 11427 TWC-11427-TEXAS 2016-10-21 2021-06-04 22898 ATLINK 2016-12-16 2021-06-29 63296 AWBROADBAND 2017-09-01 2021-06-17 546 PARSONS-PGS-1 2017-11-20 2021-06-02 393564 SPOKANE 2018-06-05 2021-06-15 33452 RW 2018-09-19 2021-06-16 20448 VPNTRANET-LLC 2018-09-20 2021-06-25 5078 ONENET-AS-1 2020-04-06 2021-06-17 61317 ASDETUK 2020-08-31 2021-06-08 208188 PUGET-SOUND-NETWORKS 2020-12-04 2021-06-29 13876 FIBER-64 2021-05-20 2021-06-26 1299 TELIANET 2021-06-02 2021-06-02 212000 2021-06-21 2021-06-29 22191 WILKES-COMM 2021-06-25 2021-06-29 Further information for these tests where we received spoofed packets is available at: https://spoofer.caida.org/recent_tests.php?country_include=usa,can&no_block… Please send any feedback or suggestions to spoofer-info(a)caida.org

1 0

route-views.oregon-ix.net
by Brian Turnbow 06 Jul '21

06 Jul '21

Hello, Does anyone know if the route-views.oregon-ix.net name been retired? ; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4-Ubuntu <<>> type=a route-views.oregon-ix.net @phloem.uoregon.edu ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: SERVFAIL, id: 44444 ; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4-Ubuntu <<>> type=aaaa route-views.oregon-ix.net @phloem.uoregon.edu ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: SERVFAIL, id: 35471 route-views.routeviews.org resolves fine. Thanks Brian

2 1

Internet Quality workshop CFP for the internet architecture board (IAB)
by Jared Mauch 06 Jul '21

06 Jul '21

I know that many operators shift traffic based on network and internet quality (or don’t use certain networks at all). This is a great chance to share information about things operators have experienced or do to actively measure or otherwise to inform those decisions. - snip - For complete details, please see: https://www.iab.org/activities/workshops/network-quality/ Submissions Due: Monday 2nd August 2021, midnight AOE (Anywhere On Earth) Invitations Issued by: Monday 16th August 2021 Workshop Date: This will be a virtual workshop, spread over three days: 1400-1800 UTC Tue 14th September 2021 1400-1800 UTC Wed 15th September 2021 1400-1800 UTC Thu 16th September 2021 Workshop co-chairs: Wes Hardaker, Evgeny Khorov, Omer Shapira The Program Committee members: Jari Arkko, Olivier Bonaventure, Vint Cerf, Stuart Cheshire, Sam Crowford, Nick Feamster, Jim Gettys, Toke Hoiland-Jorgensen, Geoff Huston, Cullen Jennings, Katarzyna Kosek-Szott, Mirja Kuehlewind, Jason Livingood, Matt Mathias, Randall Meyer, Kathleen Nichols, Christoph Paasch, Tommy Pauly, Greg White, Keith Winstein. Send Submissions to: network-quality-workshop-pc(a)iab.org. Position papers from academia, industry, the open source community and others that focus on measurements, experiences, observations and advice for the future are welcome. Papers that reflect experience based on deployed services are especially welcome. The organizers understand that specific actions taken by operators are unlikely to be discussed in detail, so papers discussing general categories of actions and issues without naming specific technologies, products, or other players in the ecosystem are expected. Papers should not focus on specific protocol solutions. The workshop will be by invitation only. Those wishing to attend should submit a position paper to the address above; it may take the form of an Internet-Draft. All inputs submitted and considered relevant will be published on the workshop website. The organisers will decide whom to invite based on the submissions received. Sessions will be organized according to content, and not every accepted submission or invited attendee will have an opportunity to present as the intent is to foster discussion and not simply to have a sequence of presentations. Position papers from those not planning to attend the virtual sessions themselves are also encouraged. A workshop report will be published afterwards. Overview: "We believe that one of the major factors behind this lack of progress is the popular perception that throughput is the often sole measure of the quality of Internet connectivity. With such narrow focus, people don’t consider questions such as: What is the latency under typical working conditions? How reliable is the connectivity across longer time periods? Does the network allow the use of a broad range of protocols? What services can be run by clients of the network? What kind of IPv4, NAT or IPv6 connectivity is offered, and are there firewalls? What security mechanisms are available for local services, such as DNS? To what degree are the privacy, confidentiality, integrity and authenticity of user communications guarded? Improving these aspects of network quality will likely depend on measurement and exposing metrics to all involved parties, including to end users in a meaningful way. Such measurements and exposure of the right metrics will allow service providers and network operators to focus on the aspects that impacts the users’ experience most and at the same time empowers users to choose the Internet service that will give them the best experience."

1 0

Fort Bug - FreeBSD
by Mark Tinka 06 Jul '21

06 Jul '21

Hi all. I ran into an issue getting Fort to run on FreeBSD: Jul 2 10:46:14 nms2 fort[14304]: ERR: - Resource temporarily unavailable Jul 2 10:46:14 nms2 fort[14304]: ERR: Client socket read interrupted Jul 2 10:46:14 nms2 fort[14304]: ERR: - Resource temporarily unavailable Jul 2 10:46:14 nms2 fort[14304]: ERR: Error sending IPv6 Prefix PDU to client. I reached out to the developers and they discovered a bug that appears to be FreeBSD-specific. They issued a pre-release fix that I tested yesterday, which resolves the problem. Details about it here: https://github.com/NICMx/FORT-validator/commit/bfb99704ad5c0476f401be57ee24… They expect to have a full release of the updated code in a couple of weeks, but just in case anyone runs into this problem, this is what you can do to repair it for the time being. This raises an interesting observation for me - how many people are running Fort on FreeBSD? Considering this bug's presence, it'd seem not a lot (fair point, I've only tested it on FreeBSD-13). Mark.

1 0

Connect team contact at Cloudflare
by Eric Dugas 05 Jul '21

05 Jul '21

Hello, I am currently building a PNI with Cloudflare. The PNI was approved in April, cross-connects ordered and installed in May but I haven't heard from them since. My initial contact (who was really helpful) did try to push internally multiple times but their connect team isn't following up at all so I'm searching for people who can help me push this forward. Thanks in advance Eric

1 0

FreeBSD's ping Integrates IPv6
by Mark Tinka 05 Jul '21

05 Jul '21

Hi all. I just noticed (although it appears to have come in version 13.0) that FreeBSD's "ping" app now defaults to IPv6, i.e., no need for ping6: https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=ping&sektion=8&format=html Does anyone know whether other *nix systems are doing this now? My Mac (Catalina) still requires ping6, and I don't have any recent Linux systems handy. #ThisIsGood Mark.

10 18