- Test - lists.nanog.org

C&W routing instability
by Timothy Brown 06 Apr '01

06 Apr '01

Can anyone confirm routing instability and/or huge path leakage from C&W? I'm hearing reports of this and seeing general instability/loss, but the route servers aren't showing anything funny. Thanks, Tim

4 4

PG&E files for chapter 11
by Zaid Ali 06 Apr '01

06 Apr '01

Folks, PG&E files for chapter 11. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2001/04/06/stat e1333EDT0194.DTL ------------------------------------------ Zaid Ali Network Architect WebEx Communications 110 Rose Orchard Way San Jose, CA 95134 Tel: 408-435-7251 fax: 408-435-7004 www.webex.com ----------------------------------------

2 1

RE: Possible IOS bug w/respect to incorrect nexthop advert
by Martin, Christian 06 Apr '01

06 Apr '01

I've seen this happen with Juniper peers, but not with Cisco. It is definitely a bug. chris > -----Original Message----- > From: John Fraizer [mailto:nanog@Overkill.EnterZone.Net] > Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 2:47 PM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Possible IOS bug w/respect to incorrect nexthop advert > > > > > One of our peers recently upgraded to IOS to: > > Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software > IOS (tm) RSP Software (RSP-PV-M), Version 12.1(4)E, EARLY DEPLOYMENT > RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) > Copyright (c) 1986-2000 by cisco Systems, Inc. > Compiled Tue 07-Nov-00 14:23 by eaarmas > Image text-base: 0x60010958, data-base: 0x60F7C000 > > ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 11.1(8)CA1, EARLY DEPLOYMENT RELEASE > SOFTWARE (fc1) > BOOTFLASH: RSP Software (RSP-BOOT-M), Version 12.1(4)E, EARLY > DEPLOYMENT > RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) > > > > Ever since this upgrade, we've been seeing the following behavior: > > When they announce prefixes to us, sometimes they get it > right, as in, the > nexthop is set correctly and sometimes they get it wrong as > in, the cisco > picks a random address from it's configured addresses and sends the > nexthop as that address. > > Example getting it right: > > 2001/04/06 13:51:42 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd UPDATE w/ attr: > nexthop 209.115.127.21, origin i, path 6259 6461 11042 8390 8431 > 2001/04/06 13:51:42 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd 195.230.6.0/24 > 2001/04/06 13:51:42 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd 195.230.7.0/24 > > > Examples getting it wrong: > > 2001/04/06 13:52:10 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd UPDATE w/ attr: > nexthop 216.28.125.77, origin i, path 6259 3549 701 7871 > 2001/04/06 13:52:10 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd UPDATE about > 206.162.212.0/22 -- DENIED due to: non-connected next-hop; > > 2001/04/06 13:57:57 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd UPDATE w/ attr: > nexthop 216.28.126.221, origin i, path 6259 7018 14046 14046 > 2001/04/06 13:57:57 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd UPDATE about > 216.241.140.0/23 -- DENIED due to: non-connected next-hop; > > > > This behavior began when the peer upgraded their IOS. > > Is this a documented issue or has anyone else seen this behavior? > > --- > John Fraizer > EnterZone, Inc > > >

1 0

CWI/ATT Peering in NYC
by Jeffrey Meltzer 06 Apr '01

06 Apr '01

FYI's, AT&T and Cable & Wireless are experiencing latency on their peering in NYC, ranging from 200ms to 1200ms. Both NOC's have acknowledged the issue and neither have an ETA. JEFF -- Jeffrey Meltzer VillageWorld.com, Inc. Voice 631-218-9090 620 Johnson Ave JFAX 516-977-3009 Bohemia, NY 11716

1 1

Sharing power quality data
by Sean Donelan 06 Apr '01

06 Apr '01

Last year, about this time, I asked if there was any interest in sharing power quality data. Whether it is Northern Virginia, or Silicon Valley, a lot of us drink from the same power pond. Its not so much a competitive matter, as bad power will make all of us sick. Internally we all have UPSes, generators, flywheels, etc. but we all get utility power from the same grid. Most of us collect a lot of data with power quality meters from our point of view of the utility grid. But since none of us share information, none of us really knows what the whole picture looks like. A few miles a way the major regional power outage may show up us just a blip in the data. And unless you were looking specifically for it, you might not have noticed. Nevertheless, the additional data might help with the analysis, if you knew who to ask to get it. AOL has one of the best designed, built and operated data centers in the world. Everyone I know who has ever seen it has been very impressed. It would take a remarkable event to affect AOL's operation. But we are always building based on the last earthquake, or the last hurricane or the last power problem. So we learn every time the extraordinary happens. Other data centers may use a very similar power design, so the extraordinary is very much of interest. Who knows, another data center might have already had the similar problem and found a fix.

2 1

Re: Carrier reliability and diversity
by Richard A. Steenbergen 06 Apr '01

06 Apr '01

On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 03:39:10PM -0700, Sean Donelan wrote: > > The air line reservation system Galileo had significant problems > earlier. > > Excerpt from Reuters: > "The outage began about 8:30 p.m. Mountain Daylight Time on Wednesday > and lasted until 10:55 a.m. MDT on Thursday, said Beth Tennis, vice > present of enterprise networks for Quantitude, Galileo's Denver-based > networking subsidiary. It affected three of the four T-1 high-speed > data transmission lines supplied to Galileo by AT&T Corp., said > Beth Tennis" 4 T1's were down in Denver? Stop the world, I want off. :P You missed the bigger story about the AOL Instant Messanger outtage for a large portion of the day (which I heard lots about from all my AIM loving friends). Doubtless many thousands of network engineers were cut off from their vital lines of communication. > Although I've found AT&T has the highest reliability of all the carriers > I've used. Redundant links from the same carrier frequently have a Personally I've found AT&T to be a packet motel, packets go in but they don't come out... To each their own... -- 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)

4 4

Presentation topics
by Susan Harris 06 Apr '01

06 Apr '01

Greetings, and thanks to everyone who made suggestions for future NANOG presentations on the Atlanta attendee survey. Here are some of the topics you said you'd like to hear about: - Use of new BGP attributes (best current practices overview) - Use of the Internet Routing Registry in day-to-day network operations - MPLS traffic engineering in the core - Operational experience with large-scale enterprise VPNs - Experiences with provisioning redundant fiber paths - Operational experience with IPv6 migration - Wide-area deployment experience with VOIP - Experiences with providing large-scale XDSL service It'd be great if we could hear talks on some of these topics -- or other subjects you'd like to suggest -- in Scottsdale. If you'd be interested in presenting, please send a one- or two-paragraph abstract describing the talk to nanog-support(a)nanog.org by April 16. Thanks -- Susan Harris

1 0

Northern Viriginia Power
by Sean Donelan 06 Apr '01

06 Apr '01

On Thu, 05 April 2001, John Starta wrote: > The service interruption was apparently a result of a major regional power > failure in Northern Virginia. I'm curious whether it was AOL or their > providers who suffered from the power failure. I would expect AOL would > have back-up power. > > http://www.techtv.com/news/internet/story/0,24195,3320700,00.html Was anyone else effected in Northern Virginia? Other than a couple of stories about AOL IM being down, I couldn't find any news coverage of a major regional power outage in Northern Viriginia. The only story I found was an electrical fire at Dullas Town Center near the Gap store. VEPCO customer service didn't know of any power outages.

6 5

Sorry, ping
by Roeland Meyer 06 Apr '01

06 Apr '01

Sorry guys, this one got loose. > -----Original Message----- > From: Roeland Meyer [mailto:rmeyer@mhsc.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 2:58 PM > To: 'idno-discuss(a)idno.org'; LIST Domain Policy (E-mail); LIST ORSC > (E-mail); DNSO. ORG Discuss (E-mail); 'wg-review(a)dnso.org'; NANOG > (E-mail) > Cc: Morfin, Jefsey; Teernstra, Joop > Subject: [wg-review] ping > > > Two things; > Does this list work? > Is my email working? > > MHSC is currently recovering from a one month outage caused > by our access > provider and our upstream ISP failing to play well together. > > We were forced to switch to another ISP and we have lost our > /24 net-block > in the process. I am now trying to shoe-horn 62 servers, > formerly using over > 130 IP addresses, into 32 addresses. SpeakEasy.Net does not seem to be > competent to manage delegation of /24s. > > I still have a lot of work to do ... > > The outage was unannounced and it wasn't technically-based. > MHSC got caught > in the cross-fire between two other companies (our vendors) > having a feud. > The two companies were Covad and DSLnetworks. Our new ISP > (SpeakEasy.Net) > doesn't have the level of competent service that we need so > we are still > looking for another provider. Hopefully, one that will let us > divorce Covad > (MHSC no longer trusts Covad to provide reliable access). > Until then, we are > forced to stay with SpeakEasy, by Covad, or we will suffer yet another > outage, which Covad guarantees to be at least 45 days. Over 60% of our > services will remain off-line until we can recover enough > revenue to pay for > co-lo space. > > Multiple T1's are looking real attractive right now, but > lead-times are > horrible. > > Covad claims non-payment, DSLnetworks claims otherwise. All I > know is that > MHSC got stomped as collateral damage. As far as we're > concerned, anyone > that lets a customer get 18 months, in arrearage, is > mis-managing their > market. IOW, the fault is on both sides. > -- > This message was passed to you via the wg-review(a)dnso.org list. > Send mail to majordomo(a)dnso.org to unsubscribe > ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message). > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html >

1 0

What IPv4 Multicast Groups Do You Black-Hole?
by Bill Nickless 06 Apr '01

06 Apr '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I'm working on an Internet Draft that describes current practice for IPv4 Multicast routing. This Internet Draft includes a table of IPv4 multicast groups that I've sort of picked up over time that are generally black-holed. Following is the table that I have; do you use the same table of known-bad groups? Are there any other groups that you believe should be included in this table? 224.0.1.2/32: SGI "Dogfight" game 224.0.1.3/32: RWHOD 224.0.1.22/32: SVRLOC 224.0.1.24/32: MICROSOFT-DS 224.0.1.35/32: SVRLOC-DA 224.0.1.39/32: Cisco's Rendezvous Point Announcement Protocol 224.0.1.40/32: Cisco's Rendezvous Point Discovery Protocol 224.0.1.60/32: HP's Device Discovery Protocol 224.0.2.2/32: Sun's Remote Procedure Call Protocol 229.55.150.208/32: Norton "Ghost" disk duplication software Please send me direct email and I'll summarize the results back to these lists (wg-multicast, nanog, and mboned). Thank you, === Bill Nickless http://www.mcs.anl.gov/people/nickless +1 630 252 7390 PGP:0E 0F 16 80 C5 B1 69 52 E1 44 1A A5 0E 1B 74 F7 nickless(a)mcs.anl.gov -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> iQCVAwUBOs0RVKwgm7ipJDXBAQHUUQP9EJOcCFZIsZTv4UH+S3/Hf9pYiWd7XSf9 QXFTwfUL7y31Xke0gp+PNq/Cyc0Xo+vkw6zmLgHQpGrkOW9MMXDSe1O2jsuJut/8 a2RYlnysl7U13QZSu3CZoElJAaAjtLEDAR3auj5cM0jsY3CRgtQ7POhzNMv/nw9R qpXBaCWFlaM= =LyCp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0