- Test - lists.nanog.org

Routing table in a file
by Roy 15 Jun '02

15 Jun '02

Does anyone dump their copy of the routing table to a flat file regularly and make this available? I need do some queries. The web based versions don't accept modifiers like "lon" on the show ip bgp commands.

5 4

Re: LEAP Security Vulnerabilities??
by Steven M. Bellovin 15 Jun '02

15 Jun '02

In message <20020613212153.GN71564(a)overlord.e-gerbil.net>, Richard A Steenberge n writes: > >On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 02:34:29PM -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> >> WEP's only real failure was the failure to specify keying; vendors (and >> users) with less security experience interpreted this to mean static >> keys were sufficient. >> >> The choice of RC4 was unfortunate given the above problem, but the >> coming switch to AES should fix that. > >Most existing wireless APs cannot keep up with 802.11b doing RC4 (which is >EXTREMELY light on the cpu) at line rate. RC4 if used properly is light-weight. 802.11 is employing it in an unnatural environment, and that causes trouble, including performance issues. More specifically -- RC4 is a stream cipher, which means that it must be employed over a reliable underlying data stream. It's perfect above TCP, for example. But 802.11 is a packet environment, with no underlying stream. Accordingly, the base RC4 key -- 40 bits or 112 bits -- is combined with a 24-bit number (sometimes a counter, sometimes random, but in either case sent in the clear in the packet) to form an actual RC4 key that's used to encrypt just a single packet. The problem is that key setup is roughly as expensive as encrypting 300 bytes or thereabouts. So all those 40-byte TCP ACK packets are a lot more expensive for crypto processing than they should be. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me) http://www.wilyhacker.com ("Firewalls" book)

1 0

The Cidr Report
by CIDR Report 15 Jun '02

15 Jun '02

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri Jun 14 23:00:00 PDT 2002 It is not checked before it leaves my workstation. However, hopefully you will find this report interesting and will take the time to look through this to see if you can improve the amount of aggregation you perform. Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr-report.html for a daily update of this report. NEW: Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr-report-region.html for the regional version of this report. NEW: Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/autnums.html for a complete list of autonomous system number to name mappings as used by the CIDR-Report. The report is split into sections: 0) General Status List the route table history for the last week, list any possibly bogus routes seen and give some status on ASes. 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level This lists the "Top 30" players who if they decided to aggregate their announced classful prefixes at the origin AS level could make a significant difference in the reduction of the current size of the Internet routing table. This calculation does not take into account the inclusion of holes when forming an aggregate so it is possible even larger reduction should be possible. 2) Weekly Delta A summary of the last weeks changes in terms of withdrawn and added routes. Please note that this is only a snapshot but does give some indication of ASes participating in CIDR. Clearly, it is generally a good thing to see a large amount of withdrawls. 3) Interesting aggregates Interesting here means not an aggregate made as a set of classful routes. Thanks to GX Networks for giving me access to their routing tables once a day. Please send any comments about this report directly to CIDR Report <cidr-report(a)cisco.com>. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CIDR REPORT for 14Jun02 0) General Status Table History ------------- Date Prefixes 070602 111313 080602 111271 090602 111270 100602 111336 110602 111462 120602 111353 130602 111438 140602 111440 Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr.plot.html for a plot of the table history. Possible Bogus Routes --------------------- AS Summary ---------- Number of ASes in routing system: 13109 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix: 7989 (4485 cidr, 3504 classful) Largest number of cidr routes: 646 announced by AS701 Largest number of classful routes: 1351 announced by AS701 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level --- 14Jun02 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS701 1351 1084 267 19.8% UUNET Technologies, Inc. AS1221 1090 845 245 22.5% Telstra Pty Ltd AS17557 299 113 186 62.2% Pakistan Telecom AS852 569 415 154 27.1% Telus Advanced Communications AS7018 815 684 131 16.1% AT&T AS6595 181 58 123 68.0% DoD Education Activity Network As AS16473 194 76 118 60.8% Bell South AS705 305 205 100 32.8% UUNET Technologies, Inc. AS19632 98 4 94 95.9% Metropolis Intercom S.A. AS4151 233 140 93 39.9% USDA AS12302 120 27 93 77.5% MobiFon S.A. AS7303 151 65 86 57.0% Telecom Argentina Stet-France Tel AS16814 104 19 85 81.7% NSS, S.A. AS226 176 92 84 47.7% Los Nettos AS1239 501 417 84 16.8% Sprint AS7046 319 236 83 26.0% UUNET Technologies, Inc. AS4755 203 130 73 36.0% Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Autonom AS2048 180 107 73 40.6% State of Louisiana AS577 261 189 72 27.6% Bell Advanced Communications Inc. AS724 230 161 69 30.0% DLA Systems Automation Center AS4323 409 340 69 16.9% Time Warner Communications, Inc. AS3464 165 105 60 36.4% Alabama SuperComputer Network AS19834 64 4 60 93.8% NetForce, Inc. AS10620 83 23 60 72.3% TVCABLE BOGOTA AS209 317 260 57 18.0% Qwest AS16758 63 6 57 90.5% IKON Office Solutions AS3908 304 248 56 18.4% Supernet, Inc. AS1 446 390 56 12.6% GENUITY AS9051 81 26 55 67.9% INCONET Autonomous System AS6535 69 16 53 76.8% Chilesat Servicios Empresariales Total 55229 42614 12615 22.8% For the rest of the previous weeks gain information please see http://www.employees.org:80/~tbates/cidr-report.html 2) Weekly Delta Please see http://www.employees.org:80/~tbates/cidr-report.html for this part of the report 3) Interesting aggregates Please see http://www.employees.org:80/~tbates/cidr-report.html for this part of the report

1 0

DDos attack in progress?
by Scott Granados 14 Jun '02

14 Jun '02

Does anyone know anything about a DDos attack underway pointed at machines in 66.54.0.0/19 or AS 15217? I'd heard something about this from internal channels but was wondering if anyone else knew about one under way? Thanks Scott

3 2

KPNQWEST cease operation?
by 矢田部 14 Jun '02

14 Jun '02

Hi All: I heard that NOC of KPQWEST in Frankfurt would cease operation at 1400 hour (local time) today. Is there any additional information about this? Thanks Ryouichi Yatabe

6 7

RE: GigEth regenerators
by Daniska Tomas 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

a brief summary of responses up to now: - there are several vendors making some kind of sx-to-zx gbe converters (they call it gbe extenders), which gives an equivalent of a device with a zx gbic. these vendors include jdsu, luxn, extreme etc. - two companies were found making gbe optical regenerators - imcnetworks and transmode - other solution is to try with edfa mikael: which exact gbic did you use? i was comparing cisco-reselled gbics and their cwdm gbics seem to be more than 10dB better on power budget... anybody tried this in real life? thanks again -- Tomas Daniska systems engineer Tronet Computer Networks Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia tel: +421 2 58224111, fax: +421 2 58224199 A transistor protected by a fast-acting fuse will protect the fuse by blowing first. > -----Original Message----- > From: Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:swmike@swm.pp.se] > Sent: 12. júna 2002 17:48 > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: GigEth regenerators > > > > On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Daniska Tomas wrote: > > > but for gigeth in this case - we need to connect two sites > about 200km > > apart over dark fiber > > Check out the 7020 from Transmode > <http://www.transmode.se/products/sing_dual.htm> > > Btw, my personal best so far is 150km over dark fiber using a > extra long > haul GBIC, 32dB loss over the fiber and it worked perfectly. > Only tested > it for 10 minutes, but there were no CRC errors during that time. > > +4dB output from the GGBIC, now we have to worry to not look into the > laser :) > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike(a)swm.pp.se > >

3 2

LEAP Security Vulnerabilities??
by Hyska, Jason [JJCUS] 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

I am well aware of the many security vulnerabilities that exist on wireless networks as well as the inadequacies of WEP. I was curious if anyone has had any experiences with Cisco's LEAP authentication protocol? I have scoured the net for reviews or documents examining any potential vulnerabilities, but have not been able to find any. Any and all help or information would be appreciated. Thanks in advance, Jason Hyska Worldwide Information Security Johnson & Johnson jhyska1(a)corus.jnj.com

3 3

RE: LEAP Security Vulnerabilities??
by Rowland, Alan D 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

If you're serious enough about security to find 128 WEP inadequate, I would think you would be doing some sort of VPN or other SSL solution anyway, making WEP redundant. Or am I missing something? Best, -Al Rowland -----Original Message----- From: Hyska, Jason [JJCUS] [mailto:JHyska1@CORUS.JNJ.com] Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 10:15 AM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: LEAP Security Vulnerabilities?? I am well aware of the many security vulnerabilities that exist on wireless networks as well as the inadequacies of WEP. I was curious if anyone has had any experiences with Cisco's LEAP authentication protocol? I have scoured the net for reviews or documents examining any potential vulnerabilities, but have not been able to find any. Any and all help or information would be appreciated. Thanks in advance, Jason Hyska Worldwide Information Security Johnson & Johnson jhyska1(a)corus.jnj.com

1 0

Re: Level 3
by Kyle C. Bacon 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

haha, be careful saying "off" these days. :) K "Pawlukiewicz Jane" To: "nanog(a)merit.edu" <nanog(a)merit.edu> <pawlukiewicz_jan cc: e(a)bah.com> Subject: Level 3 Sent by: owner-nanog@merit .edu 06/13/2002 02:16 PM Hi, Is there a network status page for level 3? Their website seems a bit off today. Thanks much, Jane (See attached file: pawlukiewicz_jane.vcf)

1 0

Level 3
by Pawlukiewicz Jane 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

Hi, Is there a network status page for level 3? Their website seems a bit off today. Thanks much, Jane

1 0