- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: att or sonic "residential" fiber service at a "nontraditional" residence.
by Mark Seiden 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

> On Nov 1, 2020, at 5:32 PM, Fletcher Kittredge <fkittred(a)gwi.net> wrote: > > > Sonic builds their own fiber; they are insurgents. This is a good thing and society would be better off with more competition among infrastructure providers. It needs to be funded somehow. > > You can cheat, but if you are a nonprofit doesn't that kinda go against mission? > > according to https://www.sonic.com/residential for the offering “fusion IP Broadband” Delivered over AT&T’s IP network using Fiber-to-the-Home or Fiber-to-the-Node Technology (technology based on location) This service uses AT&T infrastructure and is installed by an AT&T technician, you are required to use an AT&T supplied modem. This will be provided during your installation. > -- > Fletcher Kittredge > GWI > 207-602-1134 > www.gwi.net <http://www.gwi.net/>

3 2

Re: att or sonic "residential" fiber service at a "nontraditional" residence.
by Mark Seiden 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

> On Nov 1, 2020, at 5:32 PM, Fletcher Kittredge <fkittred(a)gwi.net> wrote: > > > Sonic builds their own fiber; they are insurgents. This is a good thing and society would be better off with more competition among infrastructure providers. It needs to be funded somehow. > in san francisco, i know sonic was running their own fiber. but i was surprised when in my suburban residential neighborhood sonic started advertising availability to me suspiciously close to when att started aggressively marketing ftth as a substitute for ftt <neighborhood> > You can cheat, but if you are a nonprofit doesn't that kinda go against mission? > well, depends what you think the mission of an arts organization or a library is in these troubled times. that’s why i asked if this is cheating at any level other than that asserted by some vendor’s sales people. (i wtouldn’t want to violate a tariffed offering if only because they would have a legitimate reason to terminate service and some regulator or puc decided on the equities of the pricing.) i’ve never understand the “value of service” pricing (originated by ATT when it was “The Bell System") when it is deliberately decoupled from the cost of providing service. recall that the phone company charged more for touchtone service for decades, even though dialing register holding times were much lower for touchtone than dialpulse, so their costs were in fact lower for touchtone. Ridge Winery (started by engineers) uses tasting glasses which are designated “water glasses” by a famous glass maker. the bowls of the glasses (where the art is) are identical to those of their wine glasses, but the stems are an inch or so shorter. the price is about half. are they cheating? naah. they’re just smart glass hackers. > > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2020 at 8:23 PM Mark Seiden <mis(a)seiden.com <mailto:mis@seiden.com>> wrote: > att 1Gb/sec symmetric fiber is about $70/month. > > their “business class” service costs >10x that price. > > if i don’t want an SLA, does anything keep a non-profit organization from ordering (from att or sonic) residential service at what normally would be considered a business location? > sonic seems to overlay on the att fiber network (in parts of the sf bay area)? > > (say, for example, you have a caretaker who lives on premises and you terminate the fiber in or near the caretaker’s apartment…) > > (would this violate some tariff? could they refuse to install?) > > (for me this harkens back to much earlier days where i would order dry copper loops intended for alarm purposes and run data or conditioned audio over them…) > > > -- > Fletcher Kittredge > GWI > 207-602-1134 > www.gwi.net <http://www.gwi.net/>

1 0

att or sonic "residential" fiber service at a "nontraditional" residence.
by Mark Seiden 02 Nov '20

02 Nov '20

att 1Gb/sec symmetric fiber is about $70/month. their “business class” service costs >10x that price. if i don’t want an SLA, does anything keep a non-profit organization from ordering (from att or sonic) residential service at what normally would be considered a business location? sonic seems to overlay on the att fiber network (in parts of the sf bay area)? (say, for example, you have a caretaker who lives on premises and you terminate the fiber in or near the caretaker’s apartment…) (would this violate some tariff? could they refuse to install?) (for me this harkens back to much earlier days where i would order dry copper loops intended for alarm purposes and run data or conditioned audio over them…)

5 4

100G over 100 km of dark fiber
by Jared Brown 31 Oct '20

31 Oct '20

Hello NANOG! I need to push 100G over 100 km of dark fiber. Since there are no 100G pluggable optics with this reach (~25 dB), I have been offered coherent transport systems to solve my problem. This is all good and well, except total system costs start from high five figures. So, my question is, do I have any other options? I can't help noticing that you can break out a 100G QSFP into four 25G QSFPs. 25G DWDM systems are relatively inexpensive (low five figures), but can you make 25G DWDM go 100 km? I only need the one 100G, so I don't really need a highly scalable DWDM system. I can't put anything midspan, or if I could it would cost more than just going with a coherent system. Jared

11 12

Re: 100G over 100 km of dark fiber
by Jürgen Jaritsch 31 Oct '20

31 Oct '20

Hi Jared, Easiest thing would be breaking into sub-100G channels (e.g. 4x 25G) and using DWDM optics + Amp + Compensation + Pre-Amp to transport it across the 100km. Same parts for all configs: *) 1x Amplifier => 1 slot *) 1x 100km dispersion compensation => separate 1U *) 1x Pre-Amplifier => 1 slot Sample config per site: *) 1U chassis (4 slots) *) 1x Mgmt card => 1 slot *) [same parts for all configs] *) 1x 25G converter (100G client port split into 4x 25G SFP28 line ports) => 1 slot *) 1x 8 channel DWDM Mux/Demux => separate 1U *) 4x 25G SFP28 DWDM 10km *) 1x 100G QSFP28 SR/LR (this is only for the client port on the converter - you need a second one for your device) => footprint per site ~6200 USD for 1x 100G The above setup requires 3U of rack space per site and provides 4 more DWDM channels as spares for further upgrades and the DWDM unit will have an separate upgrade port, to expand the number of filters (if you do not want to replace the whole filter with a bigger one). If you you want to go for a solution which starts with 4x 100G you're on the 13k USD range (per site): *) 2U chassis (8 slots) *) 1x Mgmt card => 1 slot *) [same parts for all configs] *) 4x 25G converter (100G client port split into 4x 25G SFP28 line ports) => 4 slots *) 1x 16 channel DWDM Mux/Demux => separate 1U *) 16x 25G SFP28 DWDM 10km *) 4x 100G QSFP28 SR/LR (this is only for the client port on the converter - you need a second one for your device) => footprint per site ~13000 USD for 4x 100G Even expansion to 12x 100G is more or less "cheap": *) 5U chassis (16 slots) *) 1x Mgmt card => 1 slot *) [same parts for all configs] *) 12x 25G converter (100G client port split into 4x 25G SFP28 line ports) => 12 slots *) 1x 48 channel DWDM Mux/Demux => separate 1U *) 48x 25G SFP28 DWDM 10km *) 12x 100G QSFP28 SR/LR (this is only for the client port on the converter - you need a second one for your device) => footprint per site ~31000 USD for 12x 100G I typically go for Sintai, FS.com and Edgeoptics components. Regarding the compensation and AMPs stuff: it's just math, nothing else :). Best regards Jürgen

1 0

outlook inbound email issues?
by nanog 31 Oct '20

31 Oct '20

I have a client who is receiving 50% of their mail on outlook servers for the past few hours. MX records point to: xxxxx-com.mail.protection.outlook.com has address 104.47.38.36 xxxxx-com.mail.protection.outlook.com has address 104.47.36.36 Anyone aware of outlook issues or have someone they can poke to check into this? (Both answer smtp requests, guessing a queue is backed up somewhere.) thanks bill -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

2 1

Incorrect GeoIP filtering of 185.83.72.0/22
by Adam Pavlidis 31 Oct '20

31 Oct '20

Hello, We are reaching out to NANOG since the following issue is mostly observed in US-based service providers. We are advertising the prefix *185.83.72.0/22 <http://185.83.72.0/22>*, that seems to be blocked by various popular US-based services, thus our customers originating from this prefix have trouble reaching such services. Indicatively: Atlassian (AMAZON), Adobe (AKAMAI) . To the best of our understanding, the blocking is enforced due to US / EU sanctions against Iran. The prefix was purchased by us - Lamda Hellix SA ( *AS56910* based in *GREECE, EUROPE* ) - approximately 8 months ago. We followed the necessary process as instructed by RIPE for changing the ownership of the prefix. Therefore, we kindly ask those of you that use/maintain/operate GeoIP databases to update your records. Most importantly, we would be grateful if you could share with us ( net(a)lamdahellix.com) which Geo databases are mainly used in the US for this purpose. Kind regards, Adam Pavlidis

3 2

dark fiber connection between 111 E 8th and Coresite NYC1 or NYC2
by Eric Germann 31 Oct '20

31 Oct '20

Looking for a recommendation of a provider who can give us a dark fiber cross connect or an L2 connection between the two in the subject for an AWS Direct Connect out of Coresite Thanks Eric

3 2

urpf - evil?
by Baldur Norddahl 30 Oct '20

30 Oct '20

Hello While working on my ACLs I noticed that I was successful in blocking some apparently spoofed IPv6 traffic. The destination was Facebook and the source was IPv6 range belonging to a mobile operator that sells 4G Wifi router based solutions. So thinking about how and why a few customers end up sending packets to our network with the wrong source, I came up with a theory (not validated): What if the customer connects his 4G Wifi router to one of the LAN ports of our CPE (or visa versa)? His computer would then pick up an IPv6 range from both ISPs along with two default routes. But only one default route would be used, and in this case that was apparently the default route going to our network. But still his computer might use the IPv6 address from the other ISP as source and therefore he ends up "spoofing" by sending that to us. We deliver the packets to Facebook and I assume Facebook will route the replies just fine through the other ISP. Now the thing is that my impression is that it actually works so long I do not actively block it with uRPF or ACLs on our edge. I have learned that spoofing is evil and I should be blocking this - but why am I sabotaging something that apparently is doing just fine at some customers? Regards, Baldur

2 1

Anyone have a contact at Microsoft RE: Microsoft Defender SmartScreen removal?
by Matt Rauch 30 Oct '20

30 Oct '20

Hello, We have a hosting customer who had a brand new domain flagged from day one. Reported the site safe several weeks ago, and still no change. Microsoft Support chat said it could take a couple weeks to review. Matt Rauch

1 0