- Test - lists.nanog.org

Looking for BGP resource utilization information...
by Thomas Gainer 07 May '01

07 May '01

Does anyone know of any good papers that explain memory resource utilization during the BGP table construction. TIA, Thomas Gainer Post Note: Yes, I have read the RFC. I am looking for additional resources.

1 0

HR 1542
by Joseph T. Klein 06 May '01

06 May '01

The ads on TV prompted me to look at this. In Section 4 ... `(1) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (c) and (d), the Commission shall not require an incumbent local exchange carrier to-- `(A) provide unbundled access to any network elements used in the provision of any high speed data service, other than those network elements described in section 51.319 of the Commission's regulations (47 C.F.R. 51.319), as in effect on January 1, 1999; or `(B) offer for resale at wholesale rates any high speed data service. `(2) AUTHORITY TO REDUCE ELEMENTS SUBJECT TO REQUIREMENT- Paragraph (1)(A) shall not prohibit the Commission from modifying the regulation referred to in that paragraph to reduce the number of network elements subject to the unbundling requirement, or to forbear from enforcing any portion of that regulation in accordance with the Commission's authority under section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, notwithstanding any limitation on that authority in section 10 of this Act.'. Hmmm .... I don't think this improves competition. -- Joseph T. Klein +1 414 915 7489 Senior Network Engineer jtk(a)titania.net Adelphia Business Solutions joseph.klein(a)adelphiacom.com "... the true value of the Internet is its connectedness ..." -- John W. Stewart III

7 10

Cable & Wireless "de-peering"?!?
by Kyle C. Bacon 06 May '01

06 May '01

Anyone else receive a "de-peering" letter from Cable & Wireless recently? It even included a friendly "a sales representative from C&W will be contacting you to offer alternative services to access 3561." We peered with MCI prior to the spin off as well as the original C&W network since 1997. Has C&W gotten so large and arrogant that they think they can de-peer with another transit free network and it won't hurt them? Who gets hurt more if a hole is created due to de-peering? The two networks in the dispute or the reputation of the Internet as an unstable network held together with loose agreements that seem to be revisited annually and always risk getting ripped apart by revenue driven management? Looks like it is time for another chapter in the "peering disputes" NANOG archive book. K -- | Kyle C. Bacon | http://www.fnsi.net | Fiber Network Solutions, Inc. | Executive Vice President & COO

4 3

Provider Experiences
by Grace, Terry 06 May '01

06 May '01

This is my first post to the list so please be gentle. :) If this is an inappropriate forum for this question, pointers to a more appropriate resource would be appreciated. My company is a Canada's largest daily newspaper in Toronto, ON, CA and currently has multihomed T3's to UUNet and PSI. Due to PSI's financial status, management has decreed we develop a contigency plan that would involve replacing PSI. Currently, the majority of our traffic is local (southern Ontario) with 70% of our visitors using dialup. We provide internet services (bandwidth, hosting, security, etc) for a number of our sister papers as well. Can anyone offer advice with regards to an alternative provider? We have short listed AT&T and Sprint who are offering burstable services on OC3 and DS3, respectively. If anyone is currently running a multihomed config with UUNet and either AT&T or Sprint, your experiences (good or bad) would be appreciated. TIA for any advice. Get to know us http://www.thestar.com - Canada's largest daily newspaper online http://www.toronto.com - All you need to know about T.O. http://www.workopolis.com - Canadas biggest job site http://www.torontostartv.com - Webcasting & Production http://www.newinhomes.com - Ontarios Largest New Home & Condo Website http://www.waymoresports.com - Canada's most comprehensive sports site

1 0

OT - Deregulation of Data Networks
by Scott Madley 05 May '01

05 May '01

Just wondering if anyone else had read up on the "Internet Freedom and Broadband Deployment Act of 2001". Haven't seen much news being made about this particular bill, figured I'd throw it out to the collective opinion of NANOG (since the desire is to allow RBOC's to offer InterLata data services). Cheers -Scott http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.1542:

4 3

The Cidr Report
by Tony Bates 05 May '01

05 May '01

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri May 4 23:00:00 PDT 2001 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. 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 xara.net for giving me access to their routing tables once a day. Please send any comments about this report directly to me. Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr-report.html for a daily update of this report. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CIDR REPORT for 04May01 0) General Status Table History ------------- Date Prefixes 270401 100797 280401 102051 290401 102329 300401 102763 010501 103252 020501 104027 030501 104798 040501 104512 Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr.plot.html for a plot of the table history. Possible Bogus Routes --------------------- *** Bogus 218.6.128.0/17 from AS4134 AS Summary ---------- Number of ASes in routing system: 10668 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix: 6344 (3599 cidr, 2745 classful) Largest number of cidr routes: 2588 announced by AS2149 Largest number of classful routes: 1404 announced by AS701 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level --- 04May01 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS1221 1396 1034 362 25.9% TELSTRA-AS AS701 1404 1217 187 13.3% Alternet AS2149 613 452 161 26.3% PSINET-2 AS705 380 250 130 34.2% part of AS assignment AS701 - AS7 AS4151 258 146 112 43.4% part of AS assignment AS4151 - AS AS4293 392 283 109 27.8% part of AS assignment AS4287 - AS AS6429 215 107 108 50.2% ATT LA Internet Chile AS6595 164 62 102 62.2% autonomous system number assigned AS13999 104 8 96 92.3% autonomous system number assigned AS4755 235 145 90 38.3% part of AS assignment AS4608 - AS AS8013 343 258 85 24.8% autonomous system number assigned AS7018 701 617 84 12.0% AT&T WorldNet Service Backbone AS577 236 167 69 29.2% autonomous system number assigned AS174 427 361 66 15.5% Performance Systems International AS6471 113 49 64 56.6% autonomous system number assigned AS5106 100 37 63 63.0% autonomous system number assigned AS3464 153 91 62 40.5% Alabama Research and Education Ne AS3749 119 58 61 51.3% autonomous system number assigned AS3602 254 195 59 23.2% Sprint Canada Inc. AS724 205 147 58 28.3% part of AS assignment AS721 - AS7 AS11252 91 33 58 63.7% autonomous system number assigned AS1 609 551 58 9.5% GTE Internetworking AS16758 63 6 57 90.5% autonomous system number assigned AS6413 67 11 56 83.6% autonomous system number assigned AS226 149 93 56 37.6% Los Nettos AS4323 232 179 53 22.8% Time Warner Telecom Internet AS17561 110 59 51 46.4% UNKNOWN AS852 206 157 49 23.8% autonomous system number assigned AS8151 183 137 46 25.1% autonomous system number assigned AS13544 68 22 46 67.6% autonomous system number assigned 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

Re: Carrier Circus (was RE: Intermedia (ICIX) brokenness...)
by Richard A. Steenbergen 05 May '01

05 May '01

On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 12:18:18PM -0700, Jonathan Disher wrote: > > Personally, I'm still trying to figure out why Exodus, in all their > apparent wisdom (or lack thereof), has stopped using the GBLX OC-48's > in the former GlobalCenter facilities (or at least SNV3), and is now > shuttling all its traffic out a single Exodus OC-12. Prior to > yesterday these traces would've shown gblx.net routers (on different > IPs), and would never have touched an exodus backbone... Hrm lets think about that for a momment shall we. Could it be, perhaps, that Exodus purchased GlobalCenter and is integrating those facilities into their network? Could it also be that Exodus has a well designed network where most of the traffic is quickly sent to peers and an OC48 backbone is not required? I don't see any congestion on that OC12, so perhaps that is the case? I also don't see a damn thing wrong with the traceroute you provided, and an OC12 peer to UU is pretty good. Was there some other complaint or do you just not like it when your traceroute changes? > Of course, this is probably a move I should've expected from Exodus, > after the mongolian flustercluck that was the AS change in SNV3. > You'd think they would do something like that carefully, as you can > -seriously- bone customers. But noooooo. One of our junior admins > made the change (since I was out of town, but hey, it's cut and > paste!). He, and all of the other affected customers in SNV3 on the > conference call, were left on hold for about half an hour (plus the > call started half an hour late), whereupon the exodus engineering team > popped back in and said "We're done with our side, you guys go > ahead!". Actually I was awake for that. I guess your junior engineer wasn't able to figure out that if he simply put in an additional neighbor statement with the new AS your downtime would have been less then 30 seconds as bgp came back up. 30 second outages are pretty light in the history of GCTR and GBLX outages, if you can't handle maint then you should have setup static routes out or multihomed, but you shouldn't blame your stupidity or lack of forethought on other networks. > Now. Does it seem logical to kill connectivity over BOTH of your > hosting routers at once, thus killing every single BGP-running > customer you have that isn't physically in their cage at the time? > Or would it seem better to do what I assumed they'd do, which is do > one router, wait for everyone to make changes, then do the other? ASN changes are not exactly easy or frequent, but I seem to recall that one going over rather smoothly. Customers were given ample warning and a conference call was setup to handle any outstanding issues, of which there were none. > I guess this is what happens when I assume intelligence at a > hosting/backbone provider. Or when we assume intelligent posts to nanog... -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras(a)e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)

3 2

Intermedia (ICIX) brokenness...
by Dominic J. Eidson 04 May '01

04 May '01

So who replaced Intermedia's routers with a lump of cheese? : 4 gw-swbell.digex.net (206.181.161.153) 8 ms 9 ms 10 ms 5 aus1-core3-pos1-0.atlas.icix.net (165.117.68.210) 9 ms 6 ms 7 ms 6 dfw3-core2-pos2-2.atlas.icix.net (165.117.68.218) 18 ms 15 ms 14 ms 7 dfw3-core1-pos7-0.atlas.icix.net (165.117.48.121) 28 ms 14 ms 14 ms 8 a3-0-14.crtntx1-cr12.bbnplanet.net (4.24.147.53) 1366 ms 1336 ms 1360 ms 9 p6-0.crtntx1-br2.bbnplanet.net (4.24.9.253) 1404 ms 1352 ms 1381 ms 10 p15-0.crtntx1-br1.bbnplanet.net (4.24.10.113) 1374 ms 1327 ms 1359 ms 11 p2-0.crtntx1-cr1.bbnplanet.net (4.24.5.2) 1368 ms 1392 ms 1364 ms 12 p3-0-0.aperian3.bbnplanet.net (4.24.104.98) 1423 ms 1328 ms 1369 ms 13 morannon.the-infinite.org (216.139.208.190) 1423 ms 1383 ms 1374 ms $ ... and the reverse ... 4 183.at-2-0-0.XR1.DFW7.ALTER.NET (152.63.96.241) 28 ms 28 ms 28 ms 5 191.ATM10-0-0.BR1.DFW7.ALTER.NET (146.188.241.177) 29 ms 30 ms 21 ms 6 137.39.52.34 (137.39.52.34) 29 ms 28 ms 28 ms 7 dfw3-core1-pos6-0.atlas.icix.net (165.117.48.133) 1370 ms 1377 ms 1369 ms 8 dfw3-core2-pos6-0.atlas.icix.net (165.117.48.122) 1306 ms 1357 ms 1353 ms 9 aus1-core3-pos3-0.atlas.icix.net (165.117.68.217) 36 ms 36 ms 36 ms 10 aus1-core1-pos9-0-0.atlas.icix.net (165.117.68.209) 37 ms 37 ms 37 ms 11 206.181.161.30 (206.181.161.30) 37 ms 38 ms austin-gw.swbell.com (206.181.161.154) 1363 ms 12 ded1-fa1-0-0.austtx.swbell.net (151.164.20.243) 38 ms 38 ms 37 ms 13 seton-medical-center-638746.cust-rtr.swbell.net (151.164.22.46) 34 ms 34 ms 34 ms $ -- Dominic J. Eidson "Baruk Khazad! Khazad ai-menu!" - Gimli ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.the-infinite.org/ http://www.the-infinite.org/~dominic/

4 3

pass the hat
by Eric A. Hall 04 May '01

04 May '01

* * WELCOME to ARIN Registration Services * * Sorry, the system load is temporarily too heavy. * * Please wait a while and try again. Thanks * I will start with $5 towards a third 386. -- Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/ Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/

1 0

60 hudson colo and BW
by Thomas Kernen 04 May '01

04 May '01

I'm looking for a half rack in 60 Hudson and some bandwidth between 25 Broadway and 60 Hudson. If anyone can help me out, please reply off-list. Thomas

1 0