- Test - lists.nanog.org

Question about normal ops - BGP Flaps nightly
by Christopher Morrow 27 Nov '19

27 Nov '19

Howdy! A question of interest to me, currently, is whether it's normal for providers to cause BGP flaps to their customers nightly... This seems, in my case, to be the provider PROBABLY updating prefix-filters on my session(s). Particularly AS56554 is currently getting v4/v6 transit from 2 providers, one of which we have 2 links toward. That provider appears to flap both of our ipv6 (only) bgp peers each night at about the same time each night. This smells like: "filter updates', but something that's different than the v4 filter update? (or perhaps they have no v4 filtering to update?) In the end, should customers expect nightly (or on a regular cadence) to see their sessions bounce? It hasn't been my experience in other situations... -chris

9 13

Landing Stations used as datacenter
by Mehmet Akcin 27 Nov '19

27 Nov '19

Hey there I have been putting my thoughts on Infrapedia blog and sharing with folks like https://www.infrapedia.com/post/top20cities-datacenters I am working on a new article and this time my topic will be looking at cable landing stations(cls). Do you consider cable landing stations as a datacenter? Do you have any experience deploying a pop in CLS? Are you able to share (on or off record) your experience which I can refer as your experience (good or bad) why deploying a pop inside a CLS is good or bad idea. Any additional comments.. I am not a big fan of CLS deployments. They have limited networks ( like only carriers and no eyeballs) and very expensive connectivity (usually) Thank you in advance sharing your experience Mehmet -- Mehmet +1-424-298-1903

12 18

Re: RIPE our of IPv4
by Willy Manga 27 Nov '19

27 Nov '19

Hello, On 26/11/2019 16:00, nanog-request(a)nanog.org wrote: > Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 00:13:48 -0800 (PST) > From: Sabri Berisha <sabri(a)cluecentral.net> > To: Doug Barton <dougb(a)dougbarton.us> > Cc: nanog <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Subject: Re: RIPE our of IPv4 > Message-ID: > <1383247942.183700.1574756028904.JavaMail.zimbra(a)cluecentral.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > ----- On Nov 26, 2019, at 1:36 AM, Doug Barton dougb(a)dougbarton.us wrote: > >> I get that some people still don't like it, but the answer is IPv6. Or, >> folks can keep playing NAT games, etc. But one wonders at what point >> rolling out IPv6 costs less than all the fun you get with [CG]NAT. > When the MBAs start realizing the risk of not deploying it. > > I have some inside knowledge about the IPv6 efforts of a large eyeball network. In that particular case, the cost of deploying IPv6 internally is not simply configuring it on the network gear; that has already been done. The cost of fully supporting IPv6 includes (but is probably not limited to): > > - Support for deploying IPv6 across more than 20 different teams; > - Modifying old (ancient) internal code; > - Modifying old (ancient) database structures (think 16 character fields for IP addresses); > - Upgrading/replacing load balancers and other legacy crap that only support IPv4 (yeah, they still exist); > - Modifying the countless home-grown tools that automate firewalls etc; > - Auditing the PCI infrastructure to ensure it is still compliant after deploying IPv6; > > If it was as simple as upgrading a few IP stacks here and there, it would be a non-issue. No matter how complex is your network (and your teams), from my humble point of view, there is always something you can do regarding IPv6. The key is not to solve one million problems on one day. The key is to go gradually, one small block after another one. You can even keep all your internal network on v4 (forever if that is your intent ) and use IPv6 on specific portions of your network. > Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating against IPv6 deployment; on the contrary. But it is not that simple in the real corporate world. Execs have bonus targets. IPv6 is not yet important enough to become part of that bonus target: there is no ROI at this point. In this kind of environment there needs to be a strong case to invest the capex to support IPv6. > > IPv6 must be supported on the CxO level in order to be deployed. I would have said the very very minimum could be to invest in a dual-stack 'proxy' for public-facing services; internal or external solution, you have the choice. And why even do that ? Because the other side is not only on IPv4. -- Willy Manga @ongolaboy https://ongola.blogspot.com/

3 2

Re: HPE SAS Solid State Drives - Critical Firmware Upgrade Required
by Stephen Cotton 27 Nov '19

27 Nov '19

HP tends to run their own firmwares on their drives especially for their blade enclosures etc. They have also had lots of bugs and vulns over the years. This isn’t the first. I know a lot of their spindle drives are hgst rebrands and their bugs don’t affect the manufacturers equivalent models. I think a lot of the ssds are either intel or Samsung rebrands. I’m glad I don’t have to manage them anymore I’ll say that. Having had debilitating firmware bug or two bite me in the past, once on the backup servers (commvault) dedup cache. ~Stephen Cotton > On Nov 26, 2019, at 3:59 PM, nanog08(a)mulligan.org wrote: > > Since this is a SSD manufacturer problem does it impact other servers that might have SSD from the same manufacturer??? > > HP hasn't said who the manufacturer is? > > Geoff > > >>> On 11/26/19 1:45 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >> I do not normally post about firmware bugs, but I have this nightmare scenario running through my head of someone with a couple of mirrored HPE SSD arrays and all the drives going POOF! simultaneously. Even with an off-site backup, that could be disastrous. So if you have HPE SSDs, check this announcement. >> https://support.hpe.com/hpsc/doc/public/display?docId=emr_na-a00092491en_us

1 0

replaying captured traffic
by harbor235 26 Nov '19

26 Nov '19

I am hoping someone can provide wisdom regarding the dos and don'ts replaying captured traffic? Is open source tools sufficient? Can PCAPs be replayed? How is this accomplished? partial rewriting IP headers Recommended tools? Mike

3 3

AT&T released DANOS code to Linux Foundation
by Jared Geiger 26 Nov '19

26 Nov '19

This past Friday, the code for DANOS was released as open source to the Linux Foundation and published at https://github.com/danos AT&T bought the Vyatta product from Brocade and developed on the DPDK Brocade Vyatta 5600 version. The software was renamed DANOS. So if it performs like other DPDK routers, you can expect about 10 Gbps of throughput per XEON 2600v4 or newer core you allocate to it. Other closed source DPDK router products are able to do 100+ Gbps with appropriate CPU and network interface resources. This would make it the first opensource fully functioning DPDK based router. The CLI configuration is slightly different even from the last vyatta 5600 version released but easy to adapt to if familiar with vyos or ubiquiti edgeos. AT&T is using it in production in various locations and roles. News articles reference IP Infusion as the vendor offering commercial support but it seems they may only support the cellsite gateway router. https://www.fiercetelecom.com/telecom/at-t-sets-a-date-to-drop-danos-into-l… The project's site is https://www.danosproject.org/ A bootable ISO is at https://danosproject.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/DAN/pages/753667/DANOS+1908 I'm only an enthusiast and not affiliated with the project. Regards, Jared Geiger

9 10

AS12042 contact?
by Bryan Holloway 26 Nov '19

26 Nov '19

If there's anyone from Consolidated (legacy Enventis) lurking, could you please reach out to me off-list? You're advertising a prefix from a Tier 1 to another Tier 1 which is causing occasional issues for us. E-mails to noc@ and repair@ have gone unanswered (and admittedly I'm not a direct customer.) Thank you ...

1 1

Marseille Colocation
by Rod Beck 26 Nov '19

26 Nov '19

Any suggestions on a good telecom hotel for a cloud provider in Marseille? Interxion has a campus there with 2 buildings, a huge number of carriers and serves as the hand off point for a large number of undersea cables. Does anyone know anything about the facility in terms of space and power availability and pricing, service and cross connect charges? Any alternatives to Interxion worth considering? Regards, Roderick. Roderick Beck VP of Business Development United Cable Company www.unitedcablecompany.com<http://www.unitedcablecompany.com> New York City & Budapest rod.beck(a)unitedcablecompany.com 36-70-605-5144 [1467221477350_image005.png]

3 2

Level 3/CL IP allocation contact
by Justin Hammond 25 Nov '19

25 Nov '19

Anyone have a contact at L3/CL that can deal with IP reassignment issues? The tech contact email is dead air, and phone support has been tepid at best. I have a block that needs to be moved to another OrgID/POC. Thanks, Justin H.

1 1

RE: RIPE our of IPv4
by Ryland Kremeier 25 Nov '19

25 Nov '19

RIP RIPE -----Original Message----- From: NANOG <nanog-bounces(a)nanog.org> On Behalf Of Andy Ringsmuth Sent: Monday, November 25, 2019 9:58 AM To: NANOG mailing list <nanog(a)nanog.org> Subject: Re: RIPE our of IPv4 > On Nov 25, 2019, at 8:56 AM, Dmitry Sherman <dmitry(a)interhost.net> wrote: > > Just received a mail that RIPE is out of IPv4: > > Dear colleagues, > > Today, at 15:35 UTC+1 on 25 November 2019, we made our final /22 IPv4 allocation from the last remaining addresses in our available pool. We have now run out of IPv4 addresses. Does this mean we are finally ripe for widespread IPv6 adoption? (Admit it, someone had to say it!) ---- Andy Ringsmuth 5609 Harding Drive Lincoln, NE 68521-5831 (402) 304-0083 andy(a)andyring.com

5 5