- Test - lists.nanog.org

Another fiber cut in Maryland?
by Sean Donelan 10 Aug '01

10 Aug '01

Its either the continuation, or a new fiber cut in Maryland between Baltimore and Washington DC this afternoon in addition to the one this morning.

2 1

Re: Strange trace to netsol...
by John Fraizer 10 Aug '01

10 Aug '01

Well, if you try to go directly to the IP address, it takes a long trip on the UUnet network to the "REAL" 63.36.1.69. 6 180.at-6-0-0.XR1.CMH2.ALTER.NET (152.63.66.154) [701] 3.670 ms 3.747 ms 5.977 ms 7 189.at-1-1-0.TR1.CHI4.ALTER.NET (152.63.66.218) [701] 14.291 ms 14.748 ms 14.497 ms 8 106.at-6-1-0.TR1.LAX9.ALTER.NET (146.188.141.242) [701] 68.313 ms 68.335 ms 68.843 ms 9 0.so-0-0-0.XR1.LAX9.ALTER.NET (152.63.15.117) [701] 75.470 ms 79.128 ms 67.845 ms 10 191.at-3-1-0.HR2.LAX9.ALTER.NET (152.63.114.129) [701] 68.275 ms 68.263 ms 68.353 ms 11 112.ATM3-0.DR4.LAX3.ALTER.NET (152.63.113.141) [701] 70.499 ms 71.405 ms 70.741 ms 12 tnt36.lax3.da.uu.net (206.115.220.185) [701] 73.373 ms !H 73.859 ms I'm nearly certain that it's a config typo inside Winstar where they hijacked (accidently?) some address space for use on p-t-p links between routers. The reply I'm seeing is simply sourced from 66.36.1.69 so, that is what shows up in the traceroute. This is something that could happen a lot if people don't take care when configuring devices. It will be hard to track inside the misconfigured network because, almost certainly, the address will be in the IGP so, traceroutes to that address from inside Winstars net (and for people who default to winstar) will go to that address. This just showed up within the past few days. I've not seen that address in there in traces previoiusly. --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, Peter Helmenstine wrote: > You provide two very good points that I didn't bother looking at. Very > interesting. > > I wonder what you would get for ping times if you pinged directly to the > tnt box. I don't usually trust the times that traceroute gives you. > > -Pete > > On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, John Fraizer wrote: > > > > > I'm not buying that there's a 20ms rtt from Columbus, OH to LA. Beyond > > that, the reverse would indicate that it is a dialup address on a > > TNT. Beyond that, if you will notice, it goes winstar->UU->winstar. > > > > If I had to guess myself, I would say that someone at Winstar hosed the > > addresses when configuring a p-t-p link from Columbus, OH to NJ or NY. > > > > > > --- > > John Fraizer > > EnterZone, Inc > > > > > > > > On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, Peter Helmenstine wrote: > > > > > Seems that if reverse lookups on 63.36.1.69 are resolving to uunet then it > > > wouldn't be a winstar DNS issue. I think it actually goes through that > > > router. I wonder if there is a preferred (static) route through set to > > > point to UUnet on 1.ATM6-0.CMH-0.WINSTAR.NET and UUnet points right back > > > at them. > > > > > > -Pete > > > --- > > > Backbone Engineering V:206-504-5363 > > > Internap Network Services C:206-849-7263 > > > 601 Union Street, Suite 1000 P:888-463-4188 > > > Seattle WA 98101-4064 Text Message:pete-pager@internap.com > > > *The contents of this e-mail message are confidential and proprietary* > > > > > > On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, John Fraizer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Did someone at WINSTAR typo an address on a ptp link? > > > > > > > > > > > > 1 1.ATM6-0.CMH-0.WINSTAR.NET (209.140.29.9) [AS 5696] 4 msec 0 msec 4 msec > > > > 2 4Cust5.tnt36.lax3.da.uu.net (63.36.1.69) [AS 701] 20 msec 20 msec 16 msec > > > > 3 pos2-0.wdc1-bb1.winstar.net (216.172.247.117) [AS 5696] 20 msec 24 msec 24 msec > > > > 4 7.atm8-0.vienna-0.winstar.net (65.36.0.130) [AS 5696] 24 msec 24 msec 24 msec > > > > 5 internic-goodnet.internic.net (209.54.51.90) [AS 5696] 24 msec 28 msec 28 msec > > > > 6 www.netsol.com (216.168.224.111) [AS 6245] 28 msec 28 msec 28 msec > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > John Fraizer > > > > EnterZone, Inc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

1 0

Strange trace to netsol...
by John Fraizer 09 Aug '01

09 Aug '01

Did someone at WINSTAR typo an address on a ptp link? 1 1.ATM6-0.CMH-0.WINSTAR.NET (209.140.29.9) [AS 5696] 4 msec 0 msec 4 msec 2 4Cust5.tnt36.lax3.da.uu.net (63.36.1.69) [AS 701] 20 msec 20 msec 16 msec 3 pos2-0.wdc1-bb1.winstar.net (216.172.247.117) [AS 5696] 20 msec 24 msec 24 msec 4 7.atm8-0.vienna-0.winstar.net (65.36.0.130) [AS 5696] 24 msec 24 msec 24 msec 5 internic-goodnet.internic.net (209.54.51.90) [AS 5696] 24 msec 28 msec 28 msec 6 www.netsol.com (216.168.224.111) [AS 6245] 28 msec 28 msec 28 msec --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc

1 0

RE: Static routes in an AS vs BGP advertised routes
by Murphy, Brennan 09 Aug '01

09 Aug '01

If the theoretical AS advertised its /19 itself to the ISPs, and then one of the /24 networks became inaccessible via the asteroid ISP, wouldn't withdrawing the /19 take all traffic off of the asteroid ISP? What if the outage was not an asteroid but something more common, like uncontrolled testing of the network while the stock market is in session? More specifically, what if there was reason to believe the affected ISP could still deliver service in the unaffected areas? I have examined the responses to my query thus far and it seems there are two options: 1) have both ISPs advertise both the /19 and /24s all the time 2) change nothing til the asteroid hits. call the unaffected ISP and have them send out the /24 for the affected site Option 1 creates larger route tables but automatically handles the asteroid situation. Option 2 respects the desire for smaller route tables but requires a manual process of phoning in a service request. In the meantime, the customers served by that connection may receive sub-optimal routing, ie, if the /19 is still advertised by the asteroid ISP, traffic reaches that AS and where does it go? Am I understanding this correctly? If so, this seems to be a case where being internet friendly conflicts with a theoretical entity's desire for uptime. Maybe I am missing something fundamental here though. Comments? Thanks much to those who responded! -----Original Message----- From: Brandon Ross [mailto:bross@netrail.net] Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 1:25 PM To: Greg Pendergrass Cc: 'Nanog@Merit. Edu' Subject: RE: Static routes in an AS vs BGP advertised routes On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Greg Pendergrass wrote: > The problem is if they aggregate and advertise only a /19 instead of > individual /24s In this case you could: > > - Ask the pulverized ISP to withdraw the aggregate in favor of the specific > /24s > - Ask your second ISP to advertise your specific /24 in that city Better yet, advertise your own /19 aggregate, mark your /24's with communities that mean to your provider that they shouldn't be propagated outside of their network and their customers (if they can't do this, fire them) to be a good neighbor by not polluting the global routing table with unnecessary routes. Then when the asteroid hits, just pull down the /19 advertisement (or if you're lucky, they are so destroyed they won't get the announcement out to the world anymore anyway). -- Brandon Ross 404-522-5400 EVP Engineering, NetRail http://www.netrail.net AIM: BrandonNR ICQ: 2269442 Read RFC 2644!

2 1

Cingular disruption in Washington DC
by Sean Donelan 09 Aug '01

09 Aug '01

I don't think wireless carriers are required to report outages to the FCC yet, at least I haven't seen the report on the FCC web site. Cingular wireless service was disrupted for almost all wireline to wireless, wireless to wireline and voice mail service in the 301 and 202 area codes in Washington DC and surrounding areas. On Wednesday night, a tranformer connection failed, which may have been related to the heat wave in the area. Potomic Electric Power Company responded to the call from Cingular on Wednesday at 6pm, but found the building deserted and the gates locked. No other Potomic Power customers in the area had any problems. The PEPCO crew checked the utility transformer in the area, and found it working. Because there was no one at the site to let them in, the PEPCO crew left. The Cingular switch lost power at approximately 4am, approximately 10 hours later. I'm guessing when the batteries completely discharged. A cingular spokesperson said the system is designed to operate without outside power for up to a month, but the switch failed as the automated system tried to transfer from battery to generator power. A Department of Energy study found it experiences approximately 250 failures a year in emergency power systems at various DOE sites. NRIC reports have been showing an increasing trend in power problems in telephone facilities for several quarters. Would it be useful if ISPs contributed information about problems in their networks, so the industry could address any root-causes which may be affecting systems across providers?

1 0

RE: BGP with AT&T owned space
by Jeff Harper 09 Aug '01

09 Aug '01

yeah, thanks, this answered my question.... -----Original Message----- From: kysi ferul [mailto:redwingblakburdz@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 3:26 PM To: Christian Nielsen; Jeff Harper Cc: 'nanog(a)merit.edu' Subject: Re: BGP with AT&T owned space RE: PAC BELL REVENUES; BILLING PRACTICES (& BONUSES!); Attn: IETF, NANOG & ICANN Dear Ladies & Gentlemen, It is high time we ask the Public Utilities Commission to NAIL Pac Bell! Really! Last night on San Francisco's ABC Channel 7, Reporter Michael Finney "helped' some 65-year-old European-American males figure out how the "BILL" was something in the area of $680 pr hour...that is $11.08 for a two second call! Here is Mr. Finney finessing in behalf of Pac Bell's finagled fudged fiduciaries... "Oh, see first you accientally touched or nearly touched the 'O' for Operator BEFORE you dialled the O for Operator...it is really like ROULETTE there is a D"DOUBLE OWE"...or sometimes if your assigned Peoples Republic of China 'neighbor is at his post on your line...a "DOUBLE LOW" or funny sound which if you dialed 611 would cost you $108 extra for snooping around...where you are not wanted such as in your own backyard which has been PRIVATIZED by the GOVERNMENT so now belongs to THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS who live in back of you in front of you next door to you...in fact of the 200 HOUSE which comprise LAKESHORE AVE OCEAN AVENUE and COUNTRY CLUB...BERKSHIRE..HUNTINGTON,..etc out at LAKE MERCED in SAN FRANCISCO...only TWO individuals are REAL.."Asian-Americans"...that is SAN FARNCISCO-CHINESE! One girl on the 400 Block of Lakeshore and an older male on the 4700 Block of OCEAN...and the 'neighborhood' is clearly 98% "ASIAN!" ASIAN? They are all from CHINA! RED CHINA! Not ONE is from SINGAPORE! No one from any 'asian' places outside of MACAU...TAIWAN...HONG KONG... and MAINLAND CHINA....NONE were BORN in the USA! NOT ONE! And that is very STARNGE in that the 'BOYS' in the 3-people families...are all about 25-years-old...got here about 8-years ago from CHINA.... RED CHINA.....speaking 'perfect AMERICAN English without ANY TRACE of an ACCENT? NONE? Hell THEMS SPIES! How do I know? Channel 60 KCSM "First TV in Classrooms" PBS....says so! Yeah! The show NEW CALIFORNIA MEDIA a show about MINORITIES had the Chinese-American PArent-Teacher Association on which was SUING the 'Nutty' CITY of SAN FRANCISCO for RACIAL & NATIONAL ORIGINS DISCRIMINATION! Yes! Here was the headlines from the SF CHRONICLE..."SF SCHOOLS RE-INSTATES SEGRAGATION" about how LOWELL HIGH SCHOOL had specially OVERTURNED the NEW FEDERAL LAW which in itself had superceded 'AFFIRAMTIVE ACTION' and called for a level playing field...but to AID & ABET Foreign Nationals posing as 'typical' American TEENS...these dirty bastards not only are HIDING these SPIES out up at LOWELL...but when the SUIT was launched, quickly set about to 'recontour' the PARKING LOT...an effort which will require 80 double-trucks & the CLEVELAND WRECKING CO.? IN otherwords they are going to BULL DOZE the EEVIDENCE! More proof that a "SPACE COLONY" of COMMUNIST RED CHINESE were 'planted' here is in the 'fixing-up of the LAKESHORE PLAZA area...just before the 'INVASION" upon our shores...:"SHELTER BAY" of Mill Valley, LUCKY's , ALBERTSON, the UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA and the SOCIAL SECURITY AGENCY of the US Gov. are but a few deeply involved entities. There is NOPOLICE PROTECTION in an area which is 'supposed' to have something like a DOZEN various Law Enforcement & Peace Oficers looking in from time to time...but the REALITY is that the area is MONITORED by CHINESE GANGS...in their NEW CARS without LICENSE PALTES on the CELL_PHONE and with CAMERAS on the HOUSES and in their cars...so that AMERICANS are SURVEILLED! (IN OUR OWN COUNTRY! HOLY JESUS! WE NEED TO GET THE FBI TO UPROOT THIS NEST AT ONCE ! INTERN....INTERROGATE AND DEPORT! Now! The idea that a CHINESE NATIONAL who may have been raised in a "Potemkin Village" ( I mean we are letting AIWAN institute ENGLISH as the FIRST LANGUAGE...and whats more this is AFTER we allowed them to pas! ! ! ! ! ! ! s a LAW making FATHER to SON Homosexual UNIONS legally sanctioned in MARRIAGE! And that is another thing...we have given TAiwan to CHINA at least TWO Times now! Why do we go abck & forth? Why give it up the firsat time? Why this "STRATEGIC AMBIGUITY" policy? (That means if a Chinaman is so retarded to think we actually REQUIRE their 'services' here in the USA that no one is supposed to "HIP" him to the TRUTH? HOLY CRAP! Staop this NONSENSE NOW! 1st of ALL these PEOPLE do not know WHOPPS just got a call-back from someone caliming to be th eparty at "LEGAL" at "PUC" that I left a phone message with this morning...BUT,,BIY! Was she MAD! What is SHE mad about? I asked...and she said..."Well you are misrepresenting what the laws are about phone bills..." Urps! I think you got me mixed up with a recently goobled indigestible BURRITO from TACO BELL! (Don't WORRY...she has a YIDDISH name...adn MEXICAN FOOD was INVENTED in LONG BEACH by ROWAN & MARTIN after those two clowns go! ! ! ! ! ! ! t out of the AIR FORCE...CHI-CHI;s EL Doritos, El Toritos, TACO BELL MISSION BELL MISSION TACO etc..all invented by EL GRINGO! Anyway she said you can SUE but NOT PUC...which is tehre to protect PAC BELL from CITIZEN INQUIRIES..everything must go through "FILTER" or "MUFF" called PUBIC UTITILTIES COMMOTION http://www.trun.org <http://www.trun.org> http://www.cpuc.org <http://www.cpuc.org> http://www.cpuc.ca.gov <http://www.cpuc.ca.gov> http://www.pacbell.com <http://www.pacbell.com> http://www.telesis.com <http://www.telesis.com> http://www.sbc.com <http://www.sbc.com> http://://www.nanog.org <http://://www.nanog.org> http://www.ietf.org <http://www.ietf.org> ttp://www.icaan.org Christian Nielsen <cnielsen(a)nielsen.net> wrote: Jeff, Are you a peer or customer of ATT? or are you seeing these from your upstream? If it is the first case, you can ask ATT to not leak more specific routes to you. Also, they have a community you can use to block them. If it is the second, please talk to your upstream. That means they are leaking ATT more specifics. I know of one provider that has done this more than once in the past... Contact them and make sure they have the correct route-maps/filters in place. And if you really dont like seeing them... prefix-list idontlikethis 12.0.0.0/8 le 8 that should solve your problem. On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, Jeff Harper wrote: > Just curious if anyone has noticed the leaking of the more specific routes > of AT&T's IP space in their BGP table. Here's what we're seeing in ours: > > #s ip ro 12.0.0.! ! ! ! ! ! ! 0 > Routing entry for 12.0.0.0/8, 589 known subnets > Variably subnetted with 9 masks > > B 12.23.26.0/23 [20/0] via x.x.x.x > B 12.28.18.0/24 [20/0] via x.x.x.x > B 12.33.46.0/24 [20/0] via x.x.x.x, etc..... > > > I should just see the aggregation of the /8, but something changed on > 8/7/2001 at precisely 8 AM Eastern time. The same is with their 24/8 and > their other networks as well. I have about 40,000 superfluous networks in > my BGP table. ;) > > Jeff > > > Kysi Ferul redwingblakburdz(a)yahoo.com <mailto:redwingblakburdz@yahoo.com> _____ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ <http://phonecard.yahoo.com/?.refer=mailtagline>

1 0

BGP with AT&T owned space
by Jeff Harper 09 Aug '01

09 Aug '01

Just curious if anyone has noticed the leaking of the more specific routes of AT&T's IP space in their BGP table. Here's what we're seeing in ours: #s ip ro 12.0.0.0 Routing entry for 12.0.0.0/8, 589 known subnets Variably subnetted with 9 masks B 12.23.26.0/23 [20/0] via x.x.x.x B 12.28.18.0/24 [20/0] via x.x.x.x B 12.33.46.0/24 [20/0] via x.x.x.x, etc..... I should just see the aggregation of the /8, but something changed on 8/7/2001 at precisely 8 AM Eastern time. The same is with their 24/8 and their other networks as well. I have about 40,000 superfluous networks in my BGP table. ;) Jeff

2 1

Worldcom outage
by Jason Beltrame 09 Aug '01

09 Aug '01

Has anyone heard of the worldcom problem in the Baltimore/Philly area? ---------------------------------------------------------- Jason Beltrame INetU, Inc.(tm)- http://www.INetU.net Electronic commerce - Web development - Web hosting jbeltram(a)INetU.net - Phone: (610) 266-7441

4 3

RE: Static routes in an AS vs BGP advertised routes
by Greg Pendergrass 09 Aug '01

09 Aug '01

If you are advertising a /24 through both ISPs in each city then you won't need them to do anything special as routers always put the most specific route in their routing table. If you are advertising specific /24s to the ISPs and one of the peering links drop then that /24 will be withdrawn from that ISP's table and henceforth to the internet making the only available route your other ISP. The problem is if they aggregate and advertise only a /19 instead of individual /24s In this case you could: - Ask the pulverized ISP to withdraw the aggregate in favor of the specific /24s - Ask your second ISP to advertise your specific /24 in that city I'd choose the second option because if your first ISP was truly hit by an asteroid they'll be spending too much time a. Attempting to make people actually believe they were hit by a piece of ancient space debris b. Trying to recover their network c. Working on an appropriate press release showing lack of fault and sorrow for the loss of several competent engineers and d. All the surviving employees will be trying to sign a bunch of book and movie deals about their experience :> All in all your second ISP will be better equipped to get your traffic up and running. Greg Pendergrass Manager of Operations ____________________________________________ BAND-X, Inc. www.band-x.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Murphy, Brennan Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 10:16 AM To: 'nanog(a)merit.edu' Subject: Static routes in an AS vs BGP advertised routes Suppose you had a scenario where your AS is multi-homed to two ISPs in, for example, 8 cities around North America. Every site is connected to both ISPs and all of your address space occupies a /19. To your ISPs, you advertise specific /24s in each city. In turn, each ISP advertises your /19 to the rest of the Internet. Everything is going along smoothly until an asteroid crashes into the data center of one of your ISPs in one of the cities. It causes extensive damage and a certain amount of hysteria but to you, it means that only one of your ISPs can truly reach your full /19. That is, the /24 you were advertising in that city is now only reachable via one of the ISPs. But the ISP taken out by the asteroid is still advertising the full /19. Under the circumstances (loss of life, hysteria, sub-optimal routing), would it be appropriate to ask the unfortunate ISP to create a static route on their network to push traffic destined for that particular /24 over to the other ISP's network? This way, the /19 advertisements can be maintained and when traffic destined for that one /24 reaches the asteroid ISP, it can get passed over to the non-asteroid ISP. The route wouldnt be advertised to other carriers.....just used to make sure traffic reached the correct final destination. Will ISPs make these types of accommodations? Suppose the reason was less unexpected than an asteroid. For example, suppose you open a site in a 9th city, but only one carrier is available there. In other words, are ISPs reluctant to slap in static routes for every customer who comes along with some sob story about poor planning and/or unexpected growth? Your comments on this theoretical scenario are much appreciated. -BM

2 1

Re: Worldcom
by Jason Beltrame 09 Aug '01

09 Aug '01

Are line is still up, but only at half capacity ---------------------------------------------------------- Jason Beltrame INetU, Inc.(tm)- http://www.INetU.net Electronic commerce - Web development - Web hosting jbeltram(a)INetU.net - Phone: (610) 266-7441 On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, Richard Golodner wrote: > Jason, I have dozens of circuits through MCI in that area and I > still have service. I have not noticed anything unusual either. > Richard >

1 0