- Test - lists.nanog.org

2000::/3 Being Announced and Accepted
by Douglas Fischer 13 Nov '19

13 Nov '19

I have been recommending to many friends to check in daily at http://irrexplorer.nlnog.net/ to make sure everything is healthy with their prefixes ... Today a colleague reported a problem with an AS58299 ad appearing in "their prefixes". I went look and was showing up on our ASNs too. It took me a while (dããã) to understand what was going on ... Why was irrexplorer showing that prefix in our query? Could anyone reach somebody from OpenFactory/NetShelter/level66network about this? http://lg.ring.nlnog.net/prefix_bgpmap/lg01/ipv6?q=2000::/3 2000::/3 [LEVEL66NETWORK1 11:35:27 from 2a09:11c0::1] * (100/-) [AS58299i] Type: BGP unicast univ BGP.origin: IGP BGP.as_path: 209844 49697 58299 BGP.next_hop: 2a09:11c0::1 BGP.local_pref: 100 BGP.community: (49697,1000) (49697,1007) (49697,2302) BGP.ext_community: (RPKI Origin Validation State: not-found) BGP.large_community: (209844, 100, 13) -- Douglas Fernando Fischer Engº de Controle e Automação

2 2

Re: Marseille Colocation
by Jürgen Jaritsch 13 Nov '19

13 Nov '19

+1 for the IX in Marseille! Cross-connect charges are always the same with IX: you need to buy the pre-cabling (see below) and afterwards you pay CC with MRC: Costs for pre-cabling from your rack to the MMR (NRC): 6 SMD pairs: 2.475,00 Eur 12 SMD pairs: 4.125,00 Eur 24 SMD pairs: 5.960,00 Eur Copper-CC pre-cabling from your rack to the MMR (NRC): 6x UTP/STP RJ45: 1.950,00 Eur 12x UTP/STP RJ45: 2.600,00 Eur 24x UTP/STP RJ45: 3.650,00 Eur Copper CC MRC (same building): 45,00 Eur Copper CC MRC (doesn't matter to which IX building on the IX campus): 85,00 Eur Copper CC MRC (between your own racks): 25,00 Eur SMD CC MRC (same building): 85,00 Eur SMD CC MRC (doesn't matter to which IX building on the IX campus): 85,00 Eur SMD CC MRC (between your own racks): 45,00 Eur I heard something about a raise from 85,00 to 95,00 Eur MRC, but as of yet I didn't have a proof for this. Connecting the CC to your equipment: 275,00 Eur NRC Best regards Jürgen

1 0

Disney+ Geolocation Issues
by Mat Perkins 13 Nov '19

13 Nov '19

Hey Everyone, I'm working with 3 ISPs currently who are having Geo Location issues with clients being told they are out of the US. When their IPs are checked via a free Geo IP tool everything is showing up correctly. Anyone have any insight on who Disney+ is using for their GeoLocation services and if anyone here can help out with getting updated to be in the correct location / type of service provider? Mat

1 0

Re: Disney+ Streaming
by Clayton Zekelman 12 Nov '19

12 Nov '19

At 03:17 PM 12/11/2019, Brian J. Murrell wrote: >Fair enough, in the cases where operators are Netflix OC partners and >might see a shift in network use from a Netflic OC appliance to >external their network to other streaming services. > >But for an operator who doesn't have an OC Appliances, is there likely >to be much difference? I suppose that was the context I was thinking >in. Sure. You could see changes in where traffic comes from. It may shift from peering to transit. >That said, I (admittedly, idly) wonder what percentage of users (world- >wide, by nation, geographical area, etc.) are served by OC Appliances. >I really have no clue as to the penetration of OC Appliances. OCAs make a huge difference in our network. Between the two ASs we operate in different regions - to the tune of maybe 40 Gbps. -- Clayton Zekelman Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi) 3363 Tecumseh Rd. E Windsor, Ontario N8W 1H4 tel. 519-985-8410 fax. 519-985-8409

1 0

Re: Disney+ Streaming
by Clayton Zekelman 12 Nov '19

12 Nov '19

Netflix has done a great job deploying OC Appliances. A Netflix user != Amazon, Hulu, etc... At 02:58 PM 12/11/2019, Brian J. Murrell wrote: >On Tue, 2019-11-12 at 19:49 +0000, Justin Krejci wrote: > > > > As the service grows in popularity, and its breadth of content and > > manageable price is likely to attract a lot of growth, I'd like to > > plan for any necessary augmentations to the network. > > From the end-user/viewer network capacity perspective is a new >streaming service likely to (significantly) "add new viewers" or more >likely to just shift existing viewers away from an existing service >(i.e Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, etc.) to Disney, resulting in a net-wash >from the end-user/viewer network capacity perspective? > >I guess the question is, will Disney content compel users who are not >already streaming to start streaming? > >Cheers, >b. > > -- Clayton Zekelman Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi) 3363 Tecumseh Rd. E Windsor, Ontario N8W 1H4 tel. 519-985-8410 fax. 519-985-8409

2 1

How can CDN and Cloud providers effectively contribute to routing security?
by Andrei Robachevsky 12 Nov '19

12 Nov '19

Hello, Following up on my lightning talk at NANOG77 (https://pc.nanog.org/static/published/meetings/NANOG77/2147/20191030_Robach…) here is the draft MANRS action set for CDN and Cloud operators: https://www.manrs.org/cdn-cloud-providers/cfc-draft-action-set/ Your feedback is welcome, please send it to: manrs-cdn-cloud(a)elists.isoc.org You can also provide your feedback by participating in a 5-min survey at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/8LXV9W2 Please read the full document first - as the survey provides a very abbreviated version of the Actions. And please provide your contact info, so we can reach out to you for additional info, especially if you disagree with the wording of the Actions. Thanks, Andrei

1 0

AS136165 103.100.107.0/24
by Radu Anghel 12 Nov '19

12 Nov '19

Hi all, Any idea what is wrong/happening with AS136165 103.100.107.0/24? https://stat.ripe.net/103.100.107.0%2F24#tabId=routing 240k announces & 30k withdraws / hour continuously since Friday seems a bit much. Radu

2 1

Last Call: <draft-ietf-opsec-v6-21.txt> (Operational Security Considerations for (fwd)
by valdis.kletnieks＠vt.edu 12 Nov '19

12 Nov '19

Those of you who worry about opsec for IPv6 but aren't already following this IETF draft may wish to get your comments in.

1 0

RE: AS136165 103.100.107.0/24
by Mathew Heard 12 Nov '19

12 Nov '19

Hi Radu, Maintainer of that range. Currently it's unallocated, pending reallocation to a new product line shortly. It's not announced by us. It appears China Mobile (AS40676 <https://bgp.he.net/AS40676>) attempted theft via unauthorized announcement (RADB listed). I've just enabled RPKI & ROA on that range. Thanks for the notification, sorry for the delay it came indirect as we are not a member here. For further correspondence could I perhaps request a contact at the technical contact or abuse contact for the range. Regards, Mathew

1 0

Any info on devices that are running eBGP on the Internet?
by Compton, Rich A 11 Nov '19

11 Nov '19

Hi, I am working with MANRS (https://www.manrs.org) on a tool for checking router configs for BGP security / spoofing prevention (e.g. uRPF) https://github.com/manrs-tools/MANRS-validator We are wondering if there is any research on the percentages of different types of devices running BGP on the Internet. Something like: Cisco IOS 30% Junos 30% Mikrotik 20% etc… We are looking to focus our tool on the most prevalent types of devices doing BGP (and the most prevalent with BGP security/spoofing issues) so that we can have the greatest impact. Does anyone have any information on this or know where I can obtain this information? Thanks in advance! -Rich E-MAIL CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, copying, or storage of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited.

10 10