- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: PBI down?
by Walter Prue 16 Nov '00

16 Nov '00

Roy, >Anyone know about an outage in PacBell Internet? That doesn't narrow it down very much. PacBell Internet is island service. PBI can't provide interlata service so they buy backbone service from various service providers. So for each LATA that PBI would provide service they would have their own local island of service. Each island is then interconnected through backbone providers. I have PBI Internet access, among others, from the Los Angeles area and that island appears to be OK. I have a T3 and I saw no dip in load in or out in the last 24 hours. Walt

1 0

Re: Any "standard" name for ISP time services?
by Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu 16 Nov '00

16 Nov '00

On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 12:14:59 PST, you said: > http://www.ucop.edu/irc/wp/wp_Reports/wpr008/wpr008_Wasley.html > suggests using ntp.foo.com or nettime.foo.com Yes, but does 'ntp.aol.com' or 'ntp.mindspring.com' or.... you get the idea actually *work* in The Real World? I am *NOT* looking for a list of "what I use" or similar - the question is a resource location problem. For a piece of shareware that could be on *any* machine in the Internet, is it worth trying 'ntp.<my-isp-here>.com', or similar? I've heard back from a guy at Exodus (thanks!! ;) regarding their scheme. Yes, I know many domains have a 'clock' or 'time' or 'clepsydra' or similar. Maybe what's NEEDED here is a DHCP option.. that would help. ;) -- Valdis Kletnieks Operating Systems Analyst Virginia Tech

2 2

Re: Any "standard" name for ISP time services?
by Steven M. Bellovin 16 Nov '00

16 Nov '00

In message <200011162031.eAGKV5w31046(a)black-ice.cc.vt.edu>, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt .edu writes: > >Maybe what's NEEDED here is a DHCP option.. that would help. ;) > It exists, of course -- section 8.3 of RFC 2132. --Steve Bellovin

1 0

Re: Please send me your comments
by Randy Bush 16 Nov '00

16 Nov '00

folk concerned with asn exhaustion should see draft-chen-as4bytes-00.txt and comment if they see operational issues. randy

3 3

(cisco) ATM interfaces and flow stats
by Thomas P. Brisco 16 Nov '00

16 Nov '00

Has anyone else noticed any oddities with GSRs, ATM interface and flow statistics? We're seeing a GSR (12.0(11)S) occasionally stop sending out flow stats (though logging them as being sent out). I've done the rudimentary checking, but (curiously enough) a "clear ip flow stat" seems to tickle it enough to actually start sending data to the collector again. After the ATM/dCEF debacle, I'm pretty immediately suspicious of the line card. Has anyone else seen anything similar to this? - TP -- -- Thomas P. Brisco tbrisco(a)globix.net

1 0

Uunet to Level 3 San Jose peering problems?
by Rusty H. Hodge 16 Nov '00

16 Nov '00

FYI- Seeing problems with Uunet to Level 3 connections out of San Jose. 5 192.ATM7-0.GW3.SJC2.ALTER.NET (146.188.144.37) 9.891 ms 5.801 ms 6.792 ms 6 L3OC3-sjc2-gw.customer.ALTER.NET (157.130.197.118) 2922.661 ms 2936.127 m 2999.177 ms 7 so-4-1-0.mp1.SanJose1.level3.net (209.247.11.5) 3029.523 ms 3121.549 ms 3101.799 ms 8 pos9-0.core1.SanFrancisco1.level3.net (209.247.10.234) 2002.210 ms 1978.46

4 4

Re: [doable?] peer filtering (was Re: Trusting BGP sessions)
by Sean Donelan 16 Nov '00

16 Nov '00

No I'm not suggesting basing it on what a provider is currently advertising. But rather on what the provider has registered and is authorized to announce. The set of authorized routes may be the same or a superset of what the routes the provider is currently announcing. If you want asymetric routes, you can register and authorize traffic via either route; and then dynamically announce which route you want to use moment to moment. On Wed, 15 November 2000, "Bora Akyol" wrote: > If I understand you correctly, you want to filter inbound traffic from a > service provider to another based on what that service provider is > advertising and based on the decision process that we run. > > How do you suggest we handle asymmetric routes? > > Bora > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sean Donelan" <sean(a)donelan.com> > To: <heas(a)shrubbery.net> > Cc: <nanog(a)merit.edu> > Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 2:05 PM > Subject: Re: [doable?] peer filtering (was Re: Trusting BGP sessions) > > > > > > On Wed, 15 November 2000, john heasley wrote: > > > > > > great, that must be why these problems dont occur. which solution are > > > you using? i'm not flinging s*!@ over the fence; i'm truely interested. > > > > > > If the problem is truely no router vendor make a router capable of > > holding a fully filtered route table we need to tell the router vendors > > this is a mandatory requirement or we won't buy their routers. Remember, > > once upon a time when no router could handle more than 30,000 routes or > > 64,000 routes. Once the router vendors were told what was needed, they > > built a box to meet that need. > > > > It is not a given that no router will never support filtering a full > > tier-1 ISP's route table. Its just no one has made it a requirement. > > > > Lets make it a requirement of the router vendors. > > > > > >

3 4

at&t?
by jamie rishaw 16 Nov '00

16 Nov '00

anyone have a trouble # to report at&t ds1 problems? i am at home, left the palm at work, blah.. TIA jamie

1 0

Re: PSINet outage?
by Ben Browning 16 Nov '00

16 Nov '00

At 14:14 11/15/2000 -0500, John Fraizer wrote: >Does anyone care to explain how it could effect one or the other >exclusively? RFC 1149 - A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on Avian Carriers http://www.landfield.com/rfcs/rfc1149.html --- Ben Browning <benb(a)oz.net> oz.net Network Operations Tel (206) 443-8000 Fax (206) 443-0500 http://www.oz.net/

3 2

Qwest fiber contractor hiring practices
by Sean Donelan 16 Nov '00

16 Nov '00

I hope besides appealling the verdict, Qwest considers revamping its contractor hiring, training and oversight practices. Reporting on the Qwest/AT&T fiber lawsuit, Newsbytes had this paragraph. http://www.newsbytes.com/news/00/158214.html > But it wasn't three outages that bugged the jury. What they didn't > like, one juror said, was Qwest's attitude, according to the Austin > American-Statesman. Attorney Joe Latting, who represented AT&T, said > a Qwest supervisor testified at trial, "We just hire these people > from the neck down," the paper said. AT&T had accused Qwest of hiring > unqualified personnel. Here was my message on Qwest's fiber trenching operations last year. >Subject: Call for Qwest to conduct a training stand-down >From: Sean Donelan <SEAN(a)SDG.DRA.COM> >Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 23:48:22 -0500 >Delivered-To: nanog-outgoing(a)merit.edu >Sender: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu > >I'm seeing a disturbing pattern develop. Qwest contractors seem to be >involved in an unusual number of cases of damaging other providers >fiber. I understand that everyone makes mistakes, and a wide-variety of >other equipment operators have caused many fiber cuts. But Qwest's name >seems to show up with unusual frequency in the last year. Here are the >ones I found in my notes. > >Milwaukee-to-Chicago May 4, 1999 >Smyrna, GA March 11, 1999 >Gurnee, IL November 19, 1998 (drilled fiber three times over > a mile) > >Anyone have notes about others? I have a vague recollection of a couple >of more, but couldn't find them in my notes. > >I don't know who Qwest is hiring to bury its fiber, but I would like >to call on Qwest to conduct an immediate stand-down until it can review >its fiber installation practices, training and supervision with its >contractors. Including review of safe digging/drilling practices around >other providers' fiber. >-- >Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO > Affiliation given for identification not representation

1 0