- Test - lists.nanog.org

Looking for input -- OSS tooling
by Leslie Daigle 30 Oct '19

30 Oct '19

I know that a number of people on this list use, and/or contribute to, open source software tools (e.g., *RTG). As I outlined in my lightning talk at the NANOG meeting last June, I’m collecting information about what operators find useful/off-putting in the use, contribution to, and support of open source software tools. My plan, and why I hope this project will be interesting to you, is to share the results of the data collection publicly so that supporters of OSS projects will be able to better tune them to what works for you. People who fund open source are asking for answers, so your thoughts would be appreciated! If you have 8 - 10 minutes to spare and would be willing to contribute your thoughts, you can get to the questionnaires here: https://possie.techark.org/operators-and-open-source-software-survey/ Thing 1 — “Questionnaires” because there’s one for individual contributors, and one for decision makers. You’re welcome to fill out both, if applicable. Thing 2 — the questionnaire does not require you to provide your name or contact info — that’s optional, if you’d like to do some follow up. Thanks for considering contributing your thoughts! Leslie. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------- Leslie Daigle Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises ldaigle(a)thinkingcat.com -------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Google/GMail contact
by Eric Dugas 30 Oct '19

30 Oct '19

Looking for a Google/GMail contact, off-list. Eric

1 0

RE: fuzzy subnet aggregation
by Jakob Heitz (jheitz) 30 Oct '19

30 Oct '19

Another thing to consider is how long it takes to download into forwarding hardware. Forwarding hardware is optimized for forwarding, not programming. The programming has to wait for time slots when forwarding is not using the memory. When you do smart aggregation, a single changed route could cause a massive change in your aggregates. Then the resulting download could be both long and cause glitches. Glitches, because you remove some aggregates while adding others within a finite time. During this finite time, you may have incorrect routing. Regards, Jakob.

1 0

IXP Renumbering: Equinix Miami (formerly known as NOTA)
by Fredy Künzler 30 Oct '19

30 Oct '19

It seems that many participants of the Equinix Miami Exchange (formerly Nap of the Americas NOTA) are unaware of the required IP renumbering. Init7 AS13030 sees at least 50% of the new BGP sessions still down. While the usefulness of the replacement of the peering mesh /23 with another /23 could be discussed, the process itself hasn't been announced, at least we didn't became aware of it until recently, and only because some peers asked for new sessions. Equinix provided a website with the necessary information, but it seems that they failed to announce it. Interestingly the schedule is already overdue. https://ix.equinix.com/home/ip-migration/mi/ I would propose that some IXP operators should write a BCOP to avoid future renumbering pain. -- Fredy Künzler Init7 (Switzerland) Ltd. Technoparkstrasse 5 CH-8406 Winterthur https://www.init7.net/

1 0

Amazon warehouse WAN contact
by Derek Dolan 29 Oct '19

29 Oct '19

I know this is a long shot, but if anyone from Amazon here would be willing to talk to me about your warehouse WAN connectivity in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, I would appreciate it. Working with the DFW Airport District is impossible, and I'd like to chat with someone with the power to make them do things (like Amazon) and how they pulled it off. Thanks, Derek

1 0

Verizon help
by JASON BOTHE 29 Oct '19

29 Oct '19

Hi all Is there anyone on from Verizon that could contact me off list in regards to provisioning for 701? Being here at NANOG77 and sorting face to face is a bonus. Thanks Jason

1 0

California network infrastructure status (FCC)
by Sean Donelan 29 Oct '19

29 Oct '19

>From the DIRS FCC report for October 29, 2019 https://www.fcc.gov/document/ca-power-shutoff-communications-status-report-… Cable and wireline services (combined): 223,937 subscribers out of service, down from 454,722 yesterday. I assume this only includes outages due to loss of outside plant and hub offices. It does not included Customer Premise Equipment (CPE) outages due to loss of power at the subscriber's premises. Broadcast services: 21 FM radio stations reported out of service, with 2 FM radio stations programming carried on another station 3 AM radio stations reported out of service No TV stations reported out of service (I have seen twitter reports of at least one TV station off the air) Most broadcasters are not reporting (up or down). Wireless services 463 cell sites out of service of 26,120 sites in all reporting counties. Top 5 counties by percentage out of service: 1. Marin County: 35.4% out of service (95 out of 268 sites) 2. Calaveras County: 32.6% out of service (14 out of 43 sites) 3. Sonoma County: 22.4% out of service (95 out of 424 sites) 4. Napa County: 15.6% out of service (20 out of 128 sites) 5. Lake County: 13.0% out of service (7 out of 54 sites)

1 0

Re: SP 800-189 (Draft), Resilient Interdomain Traffic Exchange
by Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) 29 Oct '19

29 Oct '19

I think Doug has already pointed to this: Email for comments: sp800-189(a)nist.gov mentioned in the link: https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-189/draft We are thankful that many helpful comments/suggestions were received from ISPs, other organizations and individuals earlier on the 1st (initial) public draft. For anyone interested to peruse .... those comments and authors' responses are compiled here: https://csrc.nist.gov/CSRC/media/Publications/sp/800-189/archive/2018-12-17… We are now welcoming comments on 2nd draft. Sriram -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 16:09:54 -0500 From: Job Snijders <job(a)ntt.net> ... Dear Douglas, Thanks for sharing the link. This is an impressive effort! Can you share with the group what the best way is to share feedback to effect changes in the document? Is there a difference between just emailing you or are there official channels to be considered? Kind regards, Job

1 0

fuzzy subnet aggregation
by Joe Maimon 29 Oct '19

29 Oct '19

Does anyone have or seen any such tool? I have a script that seems to work, but its terribly slow. Currently I can produce aggregated subnets that can be mising up to a specified number of individual addresses. Which can be fed back in for multiple passes. Doing RTBH on individual /32 does not scale well, if you are eyeing collaboration with external lists. I have found likely sources that could produce another 100k prefixes easily. Joe

8 13

SP 800-189 (Draft), Resilient Interdomain Traffic Exchange
by Montgomery, Douglas C. (Fed) 28 Oct '19

28 Oct '19

https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-189/draft / This document provides technical guidance and recommendations for technologies that improve the security and robustness of interdomain traffic exchange. Technologies recommended in this document for securing the interdomain routing control traffic include Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), BGP origin validation (BGP-OV), and prefix filtering. Additionally, technologies recommended for mitigating DoS and DDoS attacks include prevention of IP address spoofing using source address validation with access control lists (ACLs) and unicast Reverse Path Forwarding (uRPF). Other technologies such as remotely triggered black hole (RTBH) filtering, flow specification (Flowspec), and response rate limiting (RRL) are also recommended as part of the overall security mechanisms. dougm -- Doug Montgomery, Manager Internet & Scalable Systems Research @ NIST

2 2