- Test - lists.nanog.org

serious operational problem
by Randy Bush 09 Jun '02

09 Jun '02

nanog is in toronto, a city which has excellent restaurants. but, like many restaurants, my favorite (no, i will not tell you) is closed on sunday and monday. this is grim. now i don't care when nanog is in detroit or atlanta. but toronto?!!! randy, headin' for the airport

1 0

Re: OT: Re: Bogon list
by smd＠clock.org 09 Jun '02

09 Jun '02

| 2) That all NANOG subscribers read list E-mail on machines that have | procmail on them ? No, certainly not. Many enlightened subscribers know about http://www.gnus.org/manual/gnus_124.html#SEC123 or http://www.gnus.org/manual/gnus_171.html#SEC171 (which is a very gnus-ish documentation page) or both. Yours for the ability to enjoy quality rather than mere quantity, Sean.

5 4

Re: Bogon list
by smd＠clock.org 08 Jun '02

08 Jun '02

| Messy traceroutes make the helpdesk phone ring. Messy architecture is worse! There's two ways to deal with the "messy traceroute problem": 1. looking glasses - use them to compare traceroutes, point people at them, couple them with ample notes on how to interpret the results of multiple traceroutes launched from a variety of sources utility & education leads to wisdom, and away from "nuisance" phonecalls. everyone wins. 2. if you'd rather stem the tide of calls without helping your users much, break traceroute. a/ make it not work in practically all cases on the grounds that the catharsis of its spurious reputation as a powerful diagnostic tool is LONG overdue b/ intercept low-ttl packets and return them with "better" information some MPLS people have documented ways to do this, even it works, although if you do it some ways, you generate media attention. check your nanog records Basically, arguing that the routing system should carry around even more information is backwards. It should carry less. If IXes need numbers at all (why???) then use RFC 1918 addresses and choose one of the approaches above to deal with questions about why 1918 addresses result in "messy traceroutes." Fewer routes, less address consumption, tastes great, less filling. Sean.

8 10

The Cidr Report
by CIDR Report 08 Jun '02

08 Jun '02

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri Jun 7 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 07Jun02 0) General Status Table History ------------- Date Prefixes 310502 110978 010602 110824 020602 110920 030602 110922 040602 111222 050602 111490 060602 111589 070602 111313 Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr.plot.html for a plot of the table history. Possible Bogus Routes --------------------- *** Bogus 192.0.2.0 from AS1103 AS Summary ---------- Number of ASes in routing system: 13089 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix: 7961 (4467 cidr, 3494 classful) Largest number of cidr routes: 646 announced by AS701 Largest number of classful routes: 1359 announced by AS701 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level --- 07Jun02 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS701 1359 1091 268 19.7% UUNET Technologies, Inc. AS1221 1089 843 246 22.6% Telstra Pty Ltd AS17557 292 104 188 64.4% Pakistan Telecom AS852 590 431 159 26.9% Telus Advanced Communications AS7018 818 687 131 16.0% AT&T AS6595 177 57 120 67.8% DoD Education Activity Network As AS16473 194 76 118 60.8% Bell South AS705 304 204 100 32.9% UUNET Technologies, Inc. AS19632 98 4 94 95.9% Metropolis Intercom S.A. AS4151 234 141 93 39.7% USDA AS12302 120 32 88 73.3% MobiFon S.A. AS7303 150 65 85 56.7% Telecom Argentina Stet-France Tel AS7046 331 246 85 25.7% UUNET Technologies, Inc. AS16814 104 19 85 81.7% NSS, S.A. AS1239 506 421 85 16.8% Sprint AS2048 181 104 77 42.5% State of Louisiana AS577 267 194 73 27.3% Bell Advanced Communications Inc. AS4755 189 118 71 37.6% Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Autonom AS724 230 161 69 30.0% DLA Systems Automation Center AS4323 408 339 69 16.9% Time Warner Communications, Inc. AS226 154 91 63 40.9% Los Nettos AS3464 166 105 61 36.7% Alabama SuperComputer Network AS19834 64 4 60 93.8% NetForce, Inc. AS10620 83 23 60 72.3% TVCABLE BOGOTA AS1 450 392 58 12.9% GENUITY AS3908 308 251 57 18.5% Supernet, Inc. AS16758 63 6 57 90.5% IKON Office Solutions AS209 314 258 56 17.8% Qwest AS9051 79 27 52 65.8% INCONET Autonomous System AS6535 62 15 47 75.8% Chilesat Servicios Empresariales Total 55269 42687 12582 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

Last Call: NANOG Peering BOF
by William B. Norton 08 Jun '02

08 Jun '02

Hi All - At the Peering BOF Monday evening, so far I have Peering Coordinators lined up from Adelphia, CableVision, Comcast, Cox, DACOM Korea, Equinix, GNAPs, ICG, ISC, Japan Telecom, Merit, Powered, Shaw, TELUS, T-Systems, Videotron, Yahoo! and C&W. We can take another 5-7 folks on the agenda, so... If you are a peering coordinator and would like to introduce yourself to the other Peering Coordinators, please fill out and e-mail the RSVP form below to wbn(a)equinix.com. We had a lot of walk-ons last time and we will do that again this time, but if you RSVP I will have your contact info and RSVP info in the screen behind you as you introduce yourself, so it works better if you RSVP. A couple suggestions came from the field as well: Bring plenty of cards, network maps showing relevant info (peering points, backbone topology and size of pipes, etc). After the BOF we will break to the bar where the real work happens ;-) See you in Richmond Hill ! Bill --------------------------------------------- Previous Call for Participants ------------------------------------------ Hi all - NANOG is only three weeks away and Monday evening at NANOG there will be another Peering BOF ; thanks to those that suggested this on the survey forms! We'll do this the same way as last time / the same way the Peering Personals ran at the last GPF: *Peering Coordinators*: Send me the completed RSVP form below. I'll assemble these into logos, icons, AS#s and contact info With this backdrop, each of you in turn get a chance to stand up and a) introduce yourself, your network, b) what you are looking for in a peer, c) why folks should want to peer with you, and d) which locations you currently or plan to peer. Making the initial contact with the potential peer is (oddly enough) the most difficult parts of peering, and the Peering Personals has proven to be an effective (and lively!) way to make those initial contacts. So *Peering Coordinators* - send me those RSVPs ! Since we only have 90 minutes I'm going to limit the number of Peering Coordinators to 25 or so. If there is time remaining we'll use the rest of the time for ad hoc Peering Personals as we did last time. A couple comments: I noticed on the thread "Interconnects" folks were talking about willingness to peer and MLPAs. At least from the conversations I had during my research on Peering, I found relatively little interest in MLPAs. For those using contracts for peering, folks preferred to control peering using their own contracts written by their lawyers, stating their evolving peering terms and conditions, and generally felt somewhat like they were losing control by signing up to a MLPA document. At the same time, I have found from running these Peering Personals and talking with these Peering Coordinators, that maybe 80% of all Peering Coordinators had a relatively open peering policy. By "Relatively Open" I mean that they would peer in any single location or multiple location with companies that they would not consider to be a prospective customer. This openness was surprising given all the huff and puff on mailing lists over the years about *not* being able to get peering. We'll see if my 80% figure rings true at the Peering BOF, and I'll share a couple anecdotes about an emerging set of significant traffic open peers at the Peering BOF. Bill ------------------ RSVP FORM ------------------------------ Clip Here --------------------------- Please Fill out and e-mail to wbn(a)equinix.com with Subject: Peering BOF V Name: ______________________ Email: ______________________ Title: ______________________ Company: ___________________ AS#(s): _____________________ Check each that applies: ___ We are an ISP (sell access to the Internet) -- OR -- ___ We are a Non-ISP (content company, etc.) ___ We are Content-Heavy -- OR -- ___ We are Access-Heavy ___ We generally require peering in multiple locations -- OR -- ___ We will peer with anyone in any single location ___Peering with Content Players or Content Heavy ISPs is OK by us ___ We have huge volumes of traffic (lots of users and/or lots of content) (Huge: > 1 Gbps total outbound traffic to peers and transit providers) ___ We have a global network ___ We require written contracts for peering ___ We have a U.S. Nation-Wide Backbone (East Coast, West Coast, and at least one location in the middle) ------------------------------------------- snip ------------------------------------------------

3 2

www.worldnet.att.net routing problems
by Sean Donelan 07 Jun '02

07 Jun '02

Does anyone have information why ATT's Worldnet portal is being routed through Splitrock, UIUC and NCSA? It seems to have pretty much taken the Worldnet site off the net. > nslookup www.worldnet.att.net Server: localhost Address: 127.0.0.1 Non-authoritative answer: Name: www.worldnet.att.net Addresses: 204.127.43.37, 204.127.12.39 route-views.oregon-ix.net>show ip bgp 204.127.12.39 BGP routing table entry for 204.127.0.0/20, version 4137919 Paths: (1 available, best #1) Advertised to non peer-group peers: 64.166.72.140 1224 38 10514 7018 5731, (aggregated by 5731 204.127.128.251) 141.142.12.1 from 141.142.12.1 (141.142.12.1) Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external, atomic-aggregate, best route-views.oregon-ix.net>

1 0

Re: KPNQwest ns.eu.net server.
by Steven M. Bellovin 07 Jun '02

07 Jun '02

In message <200206061624.40230.dani(a)intelideas.com>, Daniel Concepcion writes: > >Yes Neil, > >It should be interesting to know the 'official' requirements/recommendations >for ccTLD's hosting >For example: diversity geographical, network needs, security needs, building >environment., etc > I don't know of any official requirements. But RFCs 2182 and 2870 offer good guidance. (Some of 2870 is root zone-specific, but most of it would apply to a ccTLD server.) --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me) http://www.wilyhacker.com ("Firewalls" book)

8 13

RE: Portable Fire Suppression
by Schleifer, Mark 07 Jun '02

07 Jun '02

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 ] Greetings; ] ] I would like to protect an unattended server enclosure in a remote ] location with some variety of fire suppression device. I ] imagine that ] some enterprising soul has invented a fire extinguisher with a nozzle ] that opens at a preset temperature (i.e. exploding head). Depending on the area you want to cover, you may be able to use marine units (designed for boat engine compartments). KIDDE makes units that use FM200 or FE-241 starting at about $200 for 75 cubic feet and go up to 1100 cf. I found prices, etc at http://www.westmarine.com/ Good luck, - Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.8 iQA/AwUBPQEBu+ze6cudrhHZEQJIagCbB/SJO5McZm6lT/hNIBlgnG8jp2UAn2Jh XRrGKNAUMNJp9f7sambDVYO2 =8lph -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Portable Fire Suppression
by Christopher J. Wolff 07 Jun '02

07 Jun '02

>From the first few responses I believe some clarification is in order...This specific 'unattended server enclosure' is sitting outside in the middle of the desert. Regards, Christopher J. Wolff, VP CIO Broadband Laboratories http://www.bblabs.com Greetings; I would like to protect an unattended server enclosure in a remote location with some variety of fire suppression device. I imagine that some enterprising soul has invented a fire extinguisher with a nozzle that opens at a preset temperature (i.e. exploding head). Thank you in advance for any advice you can provide. Regards, Christopher J. Wolff, VP CIO Broadband Laboratories http://www.bblabs.com

2 1

RE: Portable Fire Suppression
by Cheung, Rick 07 Jun '02

07 Jun '02

Well, aren't fire extinguishers supposed to explode anyway upon high temperature? Rick Cheung NPI IT Wan Team, CCNP -----Original Message----- From: Christopher J. Wolff [mailto:chris@bblabs.com] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 1:00 PM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Portable Fire Suppression Greetings; I would like to protect an unattended server enclosure in a remote location with some variety of fire suppression device. I imagine that some enterprising soul has invented a fire extinguisher with a nozzle that opens at a preset temperature (i.e. exploding head). Thank you in advance for any advice you can provide. Regards, Christopher J. Wolff, VP CIO Broadband Laboratories http://www.bblabs.com

1 0