- Test - lists.nanog.org

Next-hop Reachability on ATM NAPs
by Reid Knuttila 14 May '01

14 May '01

NANOG members, I have a question to the group regarding how best to avoid blackholing routes to peers on an ATM NAP when using route servers. There is a case wherein my peering partner and I both have active PVCs to the route servers, but the PVC between my peering partner and my router is down. Thus, we both see routes from the route server with each other's IP as next-hop, but since our direct PVC is down that next-hop is no good. It'd like a way to automatically and efficiently detect loss of next-hop and discard routes accordingly. Are folks generally using OAM keepalives, and if so, any parameters for OAM interval time and dead/alive count that seem practical? Thanks, -- Reid Knuttila Network Engineer Onvoy

1 0

RE: To CAIS Engineers - WAKE UP AND TAKE CARE OF YOUR CUSTOMERS
by Roeland Meyer 14 May '01

14 May '01

> From: Dominic J. Eidson [mailto:sauron@the-infinite.org] > Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 7:09 AM > > On Mon, 14 May 2001, Roeland Meyer wrote: > > > Agreed, but some code requires it. Which was my point. I'm > talking smaller > > vendors, like Oracle. BTW, how do I fake in-addr.arpa > responses for NAT'd > > space? My Oracle 8i server keeps checking the reverse addr > every time I try > > to create a DB. It's really annoying. Funny thing, my DB2 > servers do the > > same thing ... > > I find it funny that PostgreSQL - while being used as replacement for > Oracle by more and more people - does _not_ have this > problem... I didn't > even have a NIC in the server when I installed it... > > (And yes, PostgreSQL does have ACL's - but the ACL list is checked at > connection time - not everytime you execute a DML statement.) Are you seriously suggesting using PostgreSQL over Oracle, in production? Mind you, I do pgsql too. But, not in high-volume production.

1 0

Next-hop Reachability on ATM NAPs
by Reid Knuttila 14 May '01

14 May '01

NANOG members, I have a question to the group regarding how best to avoid blackholing routes to peers on an ATM NAP when using route servers. There is a case wherein my peering partner and I both have active PVCs to the route servers, but the PVC between my peering partner and my router is down. Thus, we both see routes from the route server with each other's IP as next-hop, but since our direct PVC is down that next-hop is no good. It'd like a way to automatically and efficiently detect loss of next-hop and discard routes accordingly. Are folks generally using OAM keepalives, and if so, any parameters for OAM interval time and dead/alive count that seem practical? Thanks, -- Reid Knuttila Network Engineer Onvoy

1 0

RE: To CAIS Engineers - WAKE UP AND TAKE CARE OF YOUR CUSTOMERS
by John Murphy 14 May '01

14 May '01

I stand corrected. I checked with our service delivery department, who actually does our SWIPs these days, and they don't do anything larger than a /29 any more either, for the same reason that Hunter doesn't. My apologies for the flawed data. -----------------------Original Message----------------------- >From: Christopher A. Woodfield >To: Hunter Pine >Cc: John Murphy;Roeland Meyer;nanog(a)nanog.org >Date: 5/14/01 3:38 PM >Subject: Re: To CAIS Engineers - WAKE UP AND TAKE CARE OF YOUR CUSTOMERS > >s/larger/smaller, you mean? > >I actually haven't SWIPped a /30 myself - I was referring to John Murphy's >statement implying that he has successfully. I have SWIPped /29's, >however. > >-C > >On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 04:36:11PM -0400, Hunter Pine wrote: >> ARIN returns my /30's and says I can't do netblocks larger than /29 so I >> stopped doing /30's. Are you paying them something on the side or just not >> reading all the replies from them? :) >> >> Hunter Pine >> Vice President, Network Operations >> hunter(a)compuhelp.com >> CompuHelp Technologies >> 11 Lispenard Street >> New York, NY 10013 >> 212-995-2955 x21 >> http://www.compuhelp.com >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Christopher A. Woodfield" <rekoil(a)semihuman.com> >> To: "John Murphy" <nanog(a)mail.murfnet.com> >> Cc: "Roeland Meyer" <rmeyer(a)mhsc.com>; <nanog(a)nanog.org> >> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 11:39 AM >> Subject: Re: To CAIS Engineers - WAKE UP AND TAKE CARE OF YOUR CUSTOMERS >> >> >> > >> > Yes, ARIN won't _prevent_ you from SWIPping /29s and /30s, but ARIN >> _requires_ >> > you to SWIP any suballocation larger than a /28, and won't issue >> > additional blocks to you if your current blocks aren't properly SWIPped. >> > >> > -C >> > >> > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 10:07:26PM -0500, John Murphy wrote: >> > > >> > > I'm sorry Roeland, but your statement about SWIP'ing anything less than >> a >> > > /24 is just inaccurate. We SWIP /29s and /30s daily, for both our Frame >> > > and our DSL customers. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -----------------------Original Message----------------------- >> > > From: Roeland Meyer >> > > To: nanog(a)nanog.org >> > > Date: 5/13/01 4:21 PM >> > > Subject: RE: To CAIS Engineers - WAKE UP AND TAKE CARE OF YOUR >> CUSTOMERS >> > > >> > > >> > > I've had similar problem at SpeakEasy. They still don't have a >> reverse-DNS >> > > clue. >> > > >> > > http://www.mhsc.com/recovery.htm >> > > >> > > None of the DSL ISPs can do larger than /27 anymore, even when they're >> > > ILECs. Anything less than a /24 can't be SWIP'd and if you don't control >> > > your in-addr.arpa entries you don't control your domain and have no >> > > security. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > From: John Palmer (NANOG Acct) [mailto:nanog@adns.net] >> > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 1:40 PM >> > > >> > > > <FLAME ON> >> > > >> > > > PSINet dumped all of their DSL customers onto CAIS. Covad is >> > > > the backhaul >> > > > provider for them both. Need I say more? >> > > > >> > > > Bottom line, I dont know how many thousands of people were >> > > > without service >> > > > for more than a day because the whole transfer was botched. >> > > > >> > > > We have a situation where we had a DSL connection from PSI >> > > > and were using >> > > > our own IP addresses. Problem is that no one changed the >> > > > routing tables and the packets dead-ended at PSI. >> > > > >> > > > Getting CAIS to fix this problem has been a nightmare. At >> > > > first, PSI didnt >> > > > stop announcing the routes and now that they have, it seems that >> > > > CAIS will not announce the routes till Monday becuase "no one >> > > > at our NOC >> > > > knows how to do this and the one guy (ONE GUY IN THE WHOLE >> > > > COMPANY - AND THEY ARE A NATIONWIDE PROVIDER????) who knows >> > > > how doesn't work >> > > > weekends." >> > > >> > > > <flame off - sorry to the list for being so loud> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > --------------------------- >> > Christopher A. Woodfield rekoil(a)semihuman.com >> > >> > PGP Public Key: >> http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xB887618B >> > >-- >--------------------------- >Christopher A. Woodfield rekoil(a)semihuman.com > >PGP Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xB887618B

1 0

Re: Dont Knock The Technology, was Re: People who purchase unproven technologies to support theirBusiness, and whine about it.
by Vincent J. Bono 14 May '01

14 May '01

After viewing this whole thread and having come from a use-to-be the-great-white-hope "DLEC" I can say that the problem really doesn't lie with the technology but rather with the self deceptions the IPO-happy corporate officers told themselves and their investors about how easy it is to run a carrier and possibly in the outright deceptions of certain "you've got to use our equipment to use our neat little marketing logo" manufacturers. But over all, basic DSL technology has been used for over 15 years by ILECs to provide T1 services over long spans. I guess I agree taht it should be "People who purchase from unproven companies to support their Business and whine about it" -vb ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Palmer (NANOG Acct)" <nanog(a)adns.net> To: <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 2:00 PM Subject: Dont Knock The Technology, was Re: People who purchase unproven technologies to support theirBusiness, and whine about it. > > I have never had any line problems with my DSL connection. Never had to have > anyone come out and repair it and its never been down due to a line isssue > and we've had the connection since Jan 2000. > > All of the issues have to due with mess-ups by PSINet or Covad. PSINet had > the wrong IP address information in their database and they sent that over > to CAIS when they transferred the account. Thats what started it all. > > I have to say that I don't see where DSL is a flawed technology, just that > some of the players in the game are not very good at providing support. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dan Hollis" <goemon(a)anime.net> > To: "Wojtek Zlobicki" <wojtekz(a)idirect.com> > Cc: <jmarr(a)twmaine.com>; "'John Palmer (NANOG Acct)'" <nanog(a)adns.net>; > <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 12:40 PM > Subject: Re: People who purchase unproven technologies to support > theirBusiness, and whine about it. RE: To CAIS Engineers - WAKE UP AND TAKE > CAREOF YOUR CUSTOMERS > > > > On Mon, 14 May 2001, Wojtek Zlobicki wrote: > > > performance and other characteristics. The work that I have done > working > > > for a CLEC has shown me that a line that works well from the start is > likely > > > to stay up for weeks/months. > > > > The DSL from work to home has been up 24/7 for about 4 years now without a > > single interruption. Quite different from our PTP T1's which each go down > > regularly. > > > > -Dan > > > > > >

1 0

noc list fixed
by Jared Mauch 14 May '01

14 May '01

as a number of people may have noticed the noc listing that i provide at http://puck.nether.net/netops/ has been broken since yesterday. it's now back up. I'm also wondering if it would be useful to have something to search the list as it's getting quite long these days. please provide feedback on that and other items related to the page(s) and content to me directly. apologies for it being down for so long. forgot to uncomment the correct line in the httpd.conf after an upgrade :( - jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared(a)puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.

1 0

Anybody from gblx here ?
by Clemens Zauner 14 May '01

14 May '01

We have a problem reaching Hosts where packtes traverse AS3549 (GBLX.NET) for instance a hosting in .au [202.174.228.90] bgp AS path to destination: 8918 3549 4648 2764 9240 is *not* reachable here - looks like there is some kind of filter active (problem started 5 days ago) vienna->australia ... 7 gigabitethernet1-0.lon-ixr-01.carrier1.net (212.4.193.42) 31 ms 32 8 fe3-0-0.ar1.lon2.gblx.net (195.66.224.112) 30 ms 34 ms 32 ms 9 pos5-0-622M.cr1.LON3.gblx.net (208.49.136.53) 35 ms 37 ms 34 ms 10 * * * Case # at Carrier1 is: 49908 Sorry for bothering the whole list, but as I cant reach the gblx Mailexchangers and the contact phone number given by whois is only an 0800 (*please* US NOCs ... there are other parts of the world too and US 0800's are not valid phone numbers here, thank you for paying attention) cu Clemens. -- /"\ / The race to maintain an up-to-date \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN / system is long and, in the end, it's X AGAINST HTML MAIL / only with yourself. / \ AND POSTINGS / (Ben(a)lspace.org)

2 1

Re: People who purchase unproven technologies to support their Business, and whine about it. RE: To CAIS Engineers - WAKE UP AND TAKE CARE OF YOUR CUSTOMERS
by Hunter Pine 14 May '01

14 May '01

You really need to do your math. - 768x2 = 1536. DSL is full duplex. And yes, DSL HAS been around for 20 years. The need for broadband at inexpensive prices to the public at large has not been necessary until now, and it's expensive to set up dslams at all these phone company CO's. Not to mention that the phone companies, until recently, had a monopoly on the industry, and weren't about to introduce an inexpensive broad band solution to the public when they could make a killing off of T1 loops. /H ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Gibson" <wa3pxx(a)pimmitrun.com> To: "Hunter Pine" <hunter(a)compuhelp.com> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 8:03 AM Subject: Re: People who purchase unproven technologies to support their Business, and whine about it. RE: To CAIS Engineers - WAKE UP AND TAKE CARE OF YOUR CUSTOMERS > A T1 is capable of 1.55MB/s in each direction, so a dull 768DSL would only > do about 1/2 the data capablity. DSL has not been around for 20 years, so > that is not correct either. > Bob Gibson > > On Mon, 14 May 2001, Hunter Pine wrote: > > > > > You are aware that a good percentage of the T1's you purchase nowadays are > > just a pair of bonded 768 dsl lines, right? The phone companies have been > > doing that for over 20 years to save on copper. > > > > Hunter Pine > > Vice President, Network Operations > > hunter(a)compuhelp.com > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Joe Marr" <jmarr(a)twmaine.com> > > To: "'John Palmer (NANOG Acct)'" <nanog(a)adns.net> > > Cc: <nanog(a)nanog.org> > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 9:31 PM > > Subject: People who purchase unproven technologies to support their > > Business, and whine about it. RE: To CAIS Engineers - WAKE UP AND TAKE CARE > > OF YOUR CUSTOMERS > > > > > > > > > > Why would anyone purchase dsl to run their business on. Let me guess, the > > > price was right. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of > > > Alex Rubenstein > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 9:03 PM > > > To: John Palmer (NANOG Acct) > > > Cc: nanog(a)nanog.org > > > Subject: Re: To CAIS Engineers - WAKE UP AND TAKE CARE OF YOUR CUSTOMERS > > > > > > > > > > > > Welp, you are the one who picked xDSL for your business... > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 13 May 2001, John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > <FLAME ON> > > > > > > > > It has been a trying time at CAIS in the last few days, I'm sure. > > > > > > > > PSINet dumped all of their DSL customers onto CAIS. Covad is the > > backhaul > > > > provider for them both. Need I say more? > > > > > > > > Bottom line, I dont know how many thousands of people were without > > service > > > > for more than a day because the whole transfer was botched. > > > > > > > > We have a situation where we had a DSL connection from PSI and were > > using > > > > our own IP addresses. Problem is that no one changed the > > > > routing tables and the packets dead-ended at PSI. > > > > > > > > Getting CAIS to fix this problem has been a nightmare. At first, PSI > > didnt > > > > stop announcing the routes and now that they have, it seems that > > > > CAIS will not announce the routes till Monday becuase "no one at our NOC > > > > knows how to do this and the one guy (ONE GUY IN THE WHOLE > > > > COMPANY - AND THEY ARE A NATIONWIDE PROVIDER????) who knows how doesn't > > > work > > > > weekends." > > > > > > > > Bottom line from CAIS:" S***W the customers, we dont work weekends. We > > > don't > > > > care that your entire business has been dead in the water since > > > > Wednesday, you can go to H**L, we'll get to it Monday, if we feel like > > > it." > > > > > > > > Our lawyers are looking at what actions we can take against them. It may > > > be > > > > trickey, but we will try. > > > > > > > > Needless to say, we will be moving our connection. I have some choice > > > words > > > > for them when they send us our first monthly bill, which I'm certain, > > they > > > > will do on weekends just fine. > > > > > > > > IF SOMEONE IS THERE AT CAIS - GET OFF OF YOUR LAZY A** AND PUT THOSE > > > > ANNOUNCEMENTS INTO YOUR BGP4 > > > > TABLES TODAY (NOT MONDAY, NOT LATER IN THE WEEK)- THERE ARE ABOUT 6 OF > > > YOUR > > > > CUSTOMERS (NOT JUST US) > > > > WHO ARE DEAD IN THE WATER BECAUSE YOU ARE TOO LAZY TO DO A 20 SECOND > > JOB. > > > > > > > > <flame off - sorry to the list for being so loud> > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

3 2

Re: To CAIS Engineers - WAKE UP AND TAKE CARE OF YOUR CUSTOMERS
by John Palmer (NANOG Acct) 14 May '01

14 May '01

>* Roeland Meyer <rmeyer(a)mhsc.com> [20010513 13:45]: >> >> None of the DSL ISPs can do larger than /27 anymore, even when they're >> ILECs. >What does being an ILEC have to do with layer 3 routing? > >'sides there are plenty of DSL ISPs that offer larger than a /27. Heck, I >count some of them among my clients who consist primarily of smaller >regional players. If you are looking for more major player examples that >offer larger IP blocks: Actually we have a /23 block that PSINet was routing just fine. A lot of people complain about the DSL technology itself, but I don't think the technology is the problem, but the competence (or lack of it) amongst the major players. All of our problems have not been related to the DSL technology itself, but rather the screwups of the providers. John

3 4

RE: To CAIS Engineers - WAKE UP AND TAKE CARE OF YOUR CUSTOMERS
by Roeland Meyer 14 May '01

14 May '01

> From: John Murphy [mailto:nanog@mail.murfnet.com] > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 8:07 PM > > I'm sorry Roeland, but your statement about SWIP'ing anything > less than a > /24 is just inaccurate. We SWIP /29s and /30s daily, for > both our Frame > and our DSL customers. Tell it to SpeakEasy.

2 1