- Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: akamai yesterday - what in the world was that
by Darrin Veit 18 Feb '20

18 Feb '20

Some clarifications on Xbox One behavior as it pertains to game updates, standby, and external hard drives: If an Xbox is set to 'Instant On' mode and it has settings configured to keep the console OS and games/apps updated, the Xbox will check for updates during an overnight maintenance window when it is in standby (adjusted to local time) and automatically download/apply those updates. If an Xbox customer launches a game that has a content update that is required that hasn't yet been installed, the customer will receive a prompt that the game needs an update and the customer can then decide if they want to take a foreground content update or play the game offline. These foreground content updates are most commonly encountered if the Xbox hasn't yet had an overnight maintenance window in standby prior to a game update becoming required. If an Xbox has games/apps installed on an external hard drive that have an available update during the maintenance window, the drive will power up to enable downloading and applying of the update. As others have mentioned, there is a setting to turn off external drives while in standby that is enabled by default. This setting is used to control external hard drives so that they will enter into a low power state while the console is in standby for power saving purposes. With this setting enabled, external hard drives should power up when called by the Xbox to enable content updates while the console is in standby. With that said, there may be some external hard drives that don't work properly with the power management commands being used, so this setting can be disabled to work around interop issues with those hard drives by keeping them powered up while the Xbox is in standby. Net-net, content on external hard drives should be updated when the Xbox is in standby with this setting enabled, barring any hard drive firmware interop issues. -----Original Message----- From: NANOG <nanog-bounces(a)nanog.org> On Behalf Of Chris Adams Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2020 12:04 PM To: nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: akamai yesterday - what in the world was that Once upon a time, Mike Hammett <nanog(a)ics-il.net> said: > Aren't most modern consoles on whether they're "on" or not? IE: It's not a full power up from a dead stop, 0 watts power usage. The Xbox One kind of does that - it can receive updates (both game and OS) in that state, but it depends on other settings. If you plug in an external hard drive, there's a separate setting that is off by default (so if a game is on the external drive, it doesn't get updates). -- Chris Adams <cma(a)cmadams.net>

1 0

ATT Microcell in Austin, TX
by Chris Boyd 18 Feb '20

18 Feb '20

Since people on here like to talk about the generatorn run time on cell towers, I thought y’all might like to see an ATT microcell in downtown Austin, TX. No apparent generator or battery on it. https://imgur.com/a/RY9Tg7h —Chris

13 14

Re: Reminiscing our first internet connections (WAS) Re: akamai yesterday - what in the world was that
by Scott Weeks 18 Feb '20

18 Feb '20

I can't help myself... :) My mother in the 1980s: "no one can ever call us because the phone line is always busy" Me with an Osborne 1 and a 300 baud modem: "We need a second phone line!" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_1) My mother: "That's too expensive. Quit clogging up the phone line with that toy!" Me: "Ok...Pshhhkkkkkkrrrrkakingkakingkakingtshchchchchchchchcch*ding*ding*ding*" (*) I never would've guessed in those days that it would provide me an entire professional career. scott (*) I copied Pshhhkkkkkkrrrrkakingkakingkakingtshchchchchchchchcch*ding*ding*ding* from a website as I could not spell that.

3 2

Call for Presentations - CHI-NOG 10 - (Chicago Network Operators Group) - May 28th, 2020
by Tom Kacprzynski 17 Feb '20

17 Feb '20

*CHI-NOG 10 - (Chicago Network Operators Group)May 28th, 2020, Chicago, IL* The Chicago Network Operators Group (CHI-NOG) is a vendor neutral organization. Our goal is to create a regional community of network professionals by presenting the latest technology trends, enabling collaboration and providing networking opportunities. CHI-NOG will be hosting its tenth annual conference on May 28th, 2020 in downtown Chicago. For more information on the conference please see event's page ( http://chinog.org/chi-nog-10/) The CHI-NOG Program Committee is seeking proposals for presentations on relevant networking technologies with the *focus on the following topics*: * Network Automation / DevOps / CI-CD * Edge Computing and Edge Networking * Interconnection/Peering * 5G Mobile Networks * BGP Security (RPKI) * Open Networking * Overlay Networking Technologies * Low Latency Networks / Financial NetworksNetwork * Security / DDoS * Academic Research in Networking and Related Infrastructure Fields * Internet Monitoring * AI in Network Analytics * Advanced BGP/MPLS Technologies * Optical Networking/Data Center Interconnect * Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) * Software Defined Networking (SDN) * Network Traffic Engineering (TE) * Data Center Fabric * Tutorials *Session Format*Each presentation is 30 minutes, which includes a question and answer time. The duration can be extended per individual request to 60 minutes and will be considered by the program committee. Presentations should not contain any marketing material and should avoid discussion of commercial products but rather focus on the underlying technology. *Key Dates* 2/04/2020 - Call For Presentation (CFP) 3/25/2020 - Presentation Abstract Submission Deadline 4/01/2020 - Program Committee's Selection Decision and Agenda Published 5/01/2020 - Full Presentation Slides Submission Deadline 5/28/2020 - Conference *Submission* Please submit presentation’s abstract proposal by filling out the submission form at http://chinog.org/chi-nog-10/abstract-submission/ . Once your presentation is selected please provide the program committee with your photo and a short bio for web publication. All accepted speakers will receive complimentary tickets to the conference. For past presentation please see the archives at <http://chinog.org/presentation-archive/> https://www.youtube.com/user/chicagonog/videos <http://chinog.org/presentation-archive/>The program committee is looking forward to your submission and attendance. Thank you, Tom Kacprzynski CHI-NOG Program Committee Chair

1 0

Why are IPsec SAs unidirectional
by Bart Hermans 17 Feb '20

17 Feb '20

Recently I did a dive into IPsec and the related RFCs describing the techniques used to setup a site-to-site tunnel. The RFCs I've been reading are quite clear. However, there's one thing I can't seem to put my finger on. From what I know is that the phase 1 ISAKMP Security Association (SA) is unidirectional. This tunnel is then used to setup two unidirectional tunnels (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4301 Section 4.1.). Does someone know why these IPsec SAs are unidirectional? Usually the RFC describes some reasoning behind certain design decisions. However, I can't seem to find a justification other than "It's by design". On the Internet however, I read that the two SA requirement is chosen from a security perspective; If the key material of one of the SAs leaks, only one way of the traffic can be inspected by a third party. The problem with this reasoning is that I can't seem to find an additional source claiming the same thing. Therefore, I'm not sure whether it's true.

4 3

Dual Homed BGP
by Brian 16 Feb '20

16 Feb '20

Hello all. I am having a hard time trying to articulate why a Dual Home ISP should have full tables. My understanding has always been that full tables when dual homed allow much more control. Especially in helping to prevent Async routes. Am I crazy?

21 28

Network configurations survey
by Usama Naseer 16 Feb '20

16 Feb '20

Hi NANOG, We have often read that CDNs/CSPs optimize their networking stack configurations (e.g., TCP, HTTP etc.) to meet their performance/service requirements. Please help us in exploring the configurations used in the wild by filling us this short survey (<10 minutes): CDN network configuration survey <https://forms.gle/vaGNC3gHxps3Esqs9> (https://forms.gle/vaGNC3gHxps3Esqs9) *Background:* There’s a plethora of protocols and configuration options (TCP congestion control, initial congestion windows, HTTP version, HTTP options etc.) available for networking stack to address a variety of realistic network conditions and devices. Content providers mostly hand-tune the network stack configurations to suit the needs of underlying networks and users. We aim to improve the tuning by building a dynamic network stack that delegates the choice of tuning configurations to a data-driven model and uses the optimal set of configurations for individual networks. *Purpose of Survey:* This survey aims to understand the networking configurations used in-the-wild by network operators and the extent of configuration tuning used to curate the networking stack according to the needs of underlying networks. We also aim to understand the rationale that goes behind tuning the stack to a certain configuration. We expect the survey to be filled by anyone involved with content delivery, protocol designing, next-gen protocols or network infrastructure. The survey and collected data are anonymous and the aggregate results will be used as part of a scientific study. Thanks in advance and we look forward to your responses. Usama Naseer (Brown University) PS: We would appreciate if you could forward the email to other operators who might not be a part of NANOG.

2 2

Time and Timing Servers
by Mike Hammett 16 Feb '20

16 Feb '20

There were a lot of NTP threads several weeks ago, but I didn't get an answer to my question amongst all of the other chatter. I'm looking for a device that can receive GPS inside a building without the assistance of an external antenna (Frontier says they no longer allow external antenna), will provide traditional NTP services, and will provide a timing signal that my Metaswitch can work with. I know that MicroSemi via Symmetricom makes these kinds of devices, but I'm hoping to look at multiple manufacturers and compare. Thanks. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP

13 21

Comcast NOC - Bad IPv6 Routing
by Robert Webb 16 Feb '20

16 Feb '20

Could someone from Comcast NOC contact me off list. Looks like IPv6 routing from Richmond, VA to Grafton, WV has issues. IPSEC tunnel between gets less than 5Mbps over IPv6, switching endpoints to IPv4, I get the full 25Mbps down capability of the WV connection. Traceroute looks like below: Tracing route to 2001:558:6035:3c:79bb:f773:ab2:6bcd over a maximum of 30 hops 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 2601:5ca:c301:4c90::1 2 11 ms 11 ms 10 ms 2001:558:4053:b::1 3 7 ms 7 ms 8 ms 2001:558:182:112::1 4 20 ms 9 ms 9 ms ae-45-ar02.staplesmllrd.va.richmond.comcast.net [2001:558:180:2005::1] 5 26 ms 30 ms 24 ms be-21508-cr02.56marietta.ga.ibone.comcast.net [2001:558:0:f787::1] 6 22 ms * 23 ms be-1202-cs02.56marietta.ga.ibone.comcast.net [2001:558:3:12::1] 7 * 28 ms * be-1211-cr11.56marietta.ga.ibone.comcast.net [2001:558:3:2::2] 8 * * * Request timed out. 9 * * * Request timed out. 10 36 ms * * be-1402-cr02.ashburn.va.ibone.comcast.net [2001:558:3:2d::2] 11 * * * Request timed out. 12 39 ms 43 ms 42 ms 2001:558:380:29c::2 13 42 ms 45 ms 50 ms te-5-1-0-cbr01.taylor.wv.pitt.comcast.net [2001:558:382:fe58::2] 14 * * * Request timed out. 15 * * * Request timed out. 16 * * * Request timed out.

2 2

Peering/Transit eBGP sessions -pet or cattle?
by adamv0025＠netconsultings.com 16 Feb '20

16 Feb '20

Hi, Would like to take a poll on whether you folks tend to treat your transit/peering connections (BGP sessions in particular) as pets or rather as cattle. And I appreciate the answer could differ for transit vs peering connections. However, I'd like to ask this question through a lens of redundant vs non-redundant Internet edge devices. To explain, a. The "pet" case: Would you rather try improving the failure rate of your transit/peering connections by using resilient Control-Plane (REs/RSPs/RPs) or even designing these as link bundles over separate cards and optical modules? Is this on the bases that doesn't matter how hard you try on your end (i.e. distribute your traffic to multitude of transit and peering connections or use BFD or even BGP-PIC Edge to shuffle thing around fast, any disruption to the eBGP session itself will still hurt you in some way, (i.e. at least some partial outage for some proportion of the traffic for not insignificant period of time) until things converge in direction from The Internet back to you. b. The "cattle" case: Or would you instead rely on small-ish non-redundant HW at your internet edge rather than trying to enhance MTBF with big chassis full of redundant HW? Is this cause eventually the MTBF figure for a particular transit/peering eBGP session boils down to the MTBF of the single card or even single optical module hosting the link, (and creating bundles over separate cards -well you can never be quite sure how the setup looks like on the other end of that connection)? Or is it because the effects of a smaller/non-resilient border edge device failure is not that bad in your particular (maybe horizontally scaled) setup? Would appreciate any pointers, thank you. Thank you adam

4 9