- Test - lists.nanog.org

SEC Launches formal Qwest review
by Eric Germann 06 Apr '02

06 Apr '02

http://www.msnbc.com/news/734349.asp?0cm=c20 Stocks at 7.26 right now. ANyone want to guess what bottom will be? Eric

2 1

The Cidr Report
by CIDR Report 06 Apr '02

06 Apr '02

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri Apr 5 23:00:00 PST 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is possible even larger reduction should be possible. 2) Weekly Delta A summary of the last weeks changes in terms of withdrawn and added routes.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 amont 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 05Apr02 0) General Status Table History ------------- Date Prefixes 290302 108300 300302 108315 310302 108324 010402 108317 020402 108544 030402 108663 040402 108562 050402 108885 Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr.plot.html for a plot of the table history. Possible Bogus Routes --------------------- *** Bogus 10.1.1.1/32 from AS(65301) *** Bogus 96.0.0.0/20 from AS3549 AS Summary ---------- 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level --- 05Apr02 --- 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

solutions to the spam problem
by Sabri Berisha 06 Apr '02

06 Apr '02

[sabri@bofh sabri]$ whois -h whois.apnic.net 172.21.3.168 % Rights restricted by copyright. See http://www.apnic.net/db/dbcopyright.html % (whois6.apnic.net) inetnum: 172.21.3.168 - 172.21.3.199 netname: DSB-KR (I heared about this via IRC so credits for discovery go somewhere else :) -- Sabri Berisha "I route, therefore you are" ~ my own opinions etc ~ Join Megabit LAN in open air! http://www.megabit.nl

8 8

Perspective on ARIN allocations to non-American entities
by Brian Wallingford 06 Apr '02

06 Apr '02

I've searched the IANA and ICANN sites, and have found no justification for what appear to be ARIN allocations to foreign entities within 66.231. Two serious UCE/hacking attempt offenders are as follows: 66.231.64.0/20 GIGA-BLK-1 66.231.128.0/20 ECON-BLK-1 Both of which appear to be completely unapologetic for their users' activities and refuse to take any action against repeat offenders (10's of thousands of attempts per week here). Why have these blocks apparently been allocated via ARIN? Am I missing something? Cheers, Brian

3 2

MAE-Phoenix info request
by Donn Lasher 05 Apr '02

05 Apr '02

I see from the great speadsheet (ep-in-addrs) that there is mention of a phoenix NAP. However, I can't find any info anywhere on the web / etc about it. Does it exist, either a MAE or otherwise? What's the physical address? Who is there? Offline answers are fine. -donn

2 1

PS top level domain expiration date
by Sean Donelan 05 Apr '02

05 Apr '02

Since root zone changes are handled through different processes, this doesn't mean an imminent operational change is about to take place. Why did the PS top level domain expire on March 22 2002, while most other TLD's have expiration dates decades in the future? US-DOM in 2087, CU-DOM in 2094. Its not political, because even the old Soviet Union SU1-DOM doesn't expire until 2092. Registrant: Palestinian Territories top-level domain (PS240-DOM) Government Computer Center, Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation Al-Remal, P.O. Box 4017 Gaza, Palestinian Territories PS Domain Name: PS Administrative Contact: Qadah, Ghassan (GQS14) gqadah(a)GOV.PS Government Computer Center, Ministry of Planning and Internation Al-Remal, P.O. Box 4017 Gaza, Palestinian Territories PS +972 7 822483 +972 7 822937 Technical Contact: Doleh, Yaser K [Dr.] (YD14) yaser(a)DOLEH.COM Doleh & Doleh, Inc. 17 RIDGEFIELD ROAD WARWICK, NY 10990 1-914-988-5679 (FAX) 1-914-088-9468 Record last updated on 20-Mar-2001. Record expires on 22-Mar-2002. Record created on 22-Mar-2000. Database last updated on 4-Apr-2002 15:05:00 EST. Domain servers in listed order: DNS3.GOV.PS 212.14.253.242 NS.DOLEH.COM 204.255.25.63 DNS1.GOV.PS 212.14.242.83 SLAVE1.STH.NETNOD.SE 192.36.144.116

1 0

fibre management
by Stefan Mink 05 Apr '02

05 Apr '02

Hi, I'm currently planing the "communications room" for our new computer center where the equipment of the carriers and our backbone-/ distribution-routers will be installed. To avoid all the pitfalls of unstructured cabling ;) I'd like to realise the cabling as structured as possible. My current scheme uses 3 "fibre cross connects": * one to connect carrier-lines and bb-routers (~500 SM ports) * one to connect bb-router and distr-routers (~400 MM ports) * one to connect distr-routers with access-routers/distribution switches in the rooms where servers are placed (~3000 MM ports) -> * maximum flexibility * connects are only done via short patch cables a) inside the rack of the equipment to a pach panel b) between ports off the cross connect * the way from one port to another is explicit Fibre cross connects which could cope with these port counts seem to be the Telect ADF and the ADC NGF, but they're probably the Ferraris (?) of the fibre management frames and probably quite expensive too (I must admit I have no experience at all with these beasts...) So my questions: * Does the general setup make sene? What could be done in a better way? * Are there some useful resources in the web about cabling structuring? (for other interested: http://stele.adc.com/Library/Literature/842.pdf is quite good IMHO) I'd be happy to hear if somebody did make some positive or negative experience and what vendors are having useful and price worthy products (or products I should avoid for certain reasons ;) ). Even though we'll have few copper lines (for E1/ISDN), I'd be happy about copper-cabling resources/infos too... thanks && tschuess Stefan -- Stefan Mink Schlund + Partner AG Tel: +49 721 91374 0 Netzwerkabteilung Erbprinzenstr. 4-12 Fax: +49 721 91374 212 D-76133 Karlsruhe Mail: mink(a)schlund.net

1 0

RE: Configure SNMP for non udp 161 port
by Tony Rall 04 Apr '02

04 Apr '02

Please explain how. The only form of PAT that I'm familiar with translates source ports, not destination ports. It is the latter that would be required in this situation. Cisco Pix, at least, has a feature that could do this on traffic passing through it - "port redirection". Of course, this would require sending the messages through an additional box. See: http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/28.html Tony Rall Sent by: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu To: "'Holmes, Daniel'" <dholmes(a)aprisma.com> cc: "'nanog(a)merit.edu'" <nanog(a)merit.edu> Subject: RE: Configure SNMP for non udp 161 port you could use PAT -----Original Message----- From: Holmes, Daniel [mailto:dholmes@aprisma.com] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 11:37 AM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Configure SNMP for non udp 161 port Does anyone know off hand how to configure a cisco router to respond to SNMP v1/v2 requests on a udp port other than 161 (default) Thanks - Dan

1 0

RE: Configure SNMP for non udp 161 port
by Casassa, Nathan 04 Apr '02

04 Apr '02

you could use PAT -----Original Message----- From: Holmes, Daniel [mailto:dholmes@aprisma.com] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 11:37 AM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Configure SNMP for non udp 161 port Does anyone know off hand how to configure a cisco router to respond to SNMP v1/v2 requests on a udp port other than 161 (default) Thanks - Dan

1 0

RE: de-peering and peering
by Kris Foster 04 Apr '02

04 Apr '02

> Let us say Network A has a peering Agreement with Network B. > Now let us > say Network X wants to reach Network B. X and B do not have a peering > agreement. Can Network A use the peering Link between A nd B to route > the traffic of network X. If there is an agreement in place (ie. A and B exchanging customer prefixes and X is a customer of A). > What are the mechanisms in place in B's network to detect > that Network A > is transiting the data( in this case network B looser) from Network X? You should be able to filter. RADB is one solution that may make it more manageable. But if your not filtering it will still require a transit provider to get the traffic back to X (think asymmetry). Kris > masquerading transit data as if its originating from its own n > Steve Naslund wrote: > > > Peering arrangements are when networks make connections > between each other. > > Usually networks of > > equal size (traffic wise) will try to peer with each other. > Although this > > may not be technically correct here > > are the basics. > > > > Peering - connections between networks that our > cooperative, there is no > > cost other than the physical > > connection itself. That cost might be shared or the > smaller network may pay > > for the physical connection. > > Carries traffic that terminates on one of the two networks. > i.e. you can't > > go through the peering connection > > you have with my network to get to another network. > Consider peering > > connections to be express routes between > > two networks. You generally can get this type of > connection if you are a > > service provider or public institution. > > It is harder to get if you are a private entity unless you > can show a > > benefit for me in peering with you. In > > other words, I would like the traffic flow to be as > symmetric as possible or > > improve service for an important > > customer. > > > > Transit - connections between networks that I pay for an > allow me to get to > > anything on the Internet. These > > are generally very expensive but allow you to reach anyone, > anywhere. > > Consider transit connections to be the > > superhighway with exits to everywhere but with a lot of > traffic. Anyone who > > buys service from an upstream > > provider has a transit connection although they usually > refer to full BGP > > sessions. > > > > Now you can see that if I am paying for a transit > connection through say > > UUnet and I have a ton of traffic going > > to say Exodus, it is in my best interest to try to > establish a peering > > agreement with Exodus so that I don't have > > to use my expensive bandwidth from UUnet. I can also get a > more direct > > route to where my customers want to go and > > avoid congestion. > > > > Peering and de-peering have a huge impact on traffic > engineering because > > lack of peering means that most traffic > > is being carried by the biggest transit providers like > UUnet and Cable & > > Wireless. Peering makes the Internet > > more redundant and reliable and evens out the loads better. Traffic > > engineering is all about peering and which > > paths are preferred over others. I your only connections > are transit then > > there are not many options for > > traffic engineering. > > > > Steve > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of >>Shashi Kumar >>Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 12:36 PM >>To: nanog(a)merit.edu >>Subject: de-peering and peering >> >> >>Dear List: >> >> Sorry for a naive question. Could some one on the list explain what is >>peering and de-peering ? and how peering and de-peering influence >>traffic engineering?. ( data traffic or otherwise..) >> >>thanks in advance, >>shashi >> >> >> > >

1 0