- Test - lists.nanog.org

Qwest CenturyLink / Telia issues near Seattle?
by Aaron C. de Bruyn 29 Mar '19

29 Mar '19

For the past ~36 hours I have been seeing 15% packet loss between CenturyLink and Telia. I regularly access equipment in a Wave Broadband datacenter in Longview, WA from my office connected via ToldeoTel and the traffic transits Qwest/CenturyLink over to Telia before hitting Wave. I have a handful of clients affected too. I contacted Wave yesterday and they said CenturyLink is aware that the link to Telia is 'completely saturated' and working on it. I contacted Wave again today to see if they had an update and they said no. ToledoTel didn't have any update either. Can anyone shed some light on it? Or an ETA for resolving it? Thanks, -A

1 0

Weekly Routing Table Report
by cscora＠apnic.net 29 Mar '19

29 Mar '19

This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, SAFNOG TZNOG, MENOG, BJNOG, SDNOG, CMNOG, LACNOG and the RIPE Routing WG. Daily listings are sent to bgp-stats(a)lists.apnic.net For historical data, please see http://thyme.rand.apnic.net. If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith <pfsinoz(a)gmail.com>. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 30 Mar, 2019 Report Website: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net Detailed Analysis: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/ Analysis Summary ---------------- BGP routing table entries examined: 742948 Prefixes after maximum aggregation (per Origin AS): 285249 Deaggregation factor: 2.60 Unique aggregates announced (without unneeded subnets): 358190 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 63769 Prefixes per ASN: 11.65 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 54888 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 23710 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 8881 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 269 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 4.4 Max AS path length visible: 34 Max AS path prepend of ASN ( 25081) 32 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 29 Number of instances of unregistered ASNs: 32 Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs: 26387 Number of 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 21522 Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table: 94294 Number of bogon 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 28 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table: 0 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 267 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 2845039488 Equivalent to 169 /8s, 147 /16s and 219 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 76.8 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 76.8 Percentage of available address space allocated: 100.0 Percentage of address space in use by end-sites: 99.2 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 248634 APNIC Region Analysis Summary ----------------------------- Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes: 200727 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 57903 APNIC Deaggregation factor: 3.47 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 197663 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks: 82276 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 9640 APNIC Prefixes per ASN: 20.50 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 2717 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1422 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.5 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 30 Number of APNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 4617 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 769678720 Equivalent to 45 /8s, 224 /16s and 93 /24s APNIC AS Blocks 4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079, 55296-56319, 58368-59391, 63488-64098, 64297-64395, 131072-139577 APNIC Address Blocks 1/8, 14/8, 27/8, 36/8, 39/8, 42/8, 43/8, 49/8, 58/8, 59/8, 60/8, 61/8, 101/8, 103/8, 106/8, 110/8, 111/8, 112/8, 113/8, 114/8, 115/8, 116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8, 120/8, 121/8, 122/8, 123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8, 133/8, 150/8, 153/8, 163/8, 171/8, 175/8, 180/8, 182/8, 183/8, 202/8, 203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8, 219/8, 220/8, 221/8, 222/8, 223/8, ARIN Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes: 219503 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation: 103821 ARIN Deaggregation factor: 2.11 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 218452 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 104995 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 18421 ARIN Prefixes per ASN: 11.86 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 6869 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1884 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 3.9 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 23 Number of ARIN region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 2638 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 1079403648 Equivalent to 64 /8s, 86 /16s and 100 /24s ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106 (pre-ERX allocations) 2138-2584, 2615-2772, 2823-2829, 2880-3153 3354-4607, 4865-5119, 5632-6655, 6912-7466 7723-8191, 10240-12287, 13312-15359, 16384-17407 18432-20479, 21504-23551, 25600-26591, 26624-27647, 29696-30719, 31744-33791 35840-36863, 39936-40959, 46080-47103 53248-55295, 62464-63487, 64198-64296, 393216-399260 ARIN Address Blocks 3/8, 4/8, 6/8, 7/8, 8/8, 9/8, 11/8, 12/8, 13/8, 15/8, 16/8, 17/8, 18/8, 19/8, 20/8, 21/8, 22/8, 23/8, 24/8, 26/8, 28/8, 29/8, 30/8, 32/8, 33/8, 34/8, 35/8, 38/8, 40/8, 44/8, 45/8, 47/8, 48/8, 50/8, 52/8, 53/8, 54/8, 55/8, 56/8, 57/8, 63/8, 64/8, 65/8, 66/8, 67/8, 68/8, 69/8, 70/8, 71/8, 72/8, 73/8, 74/8, 75/8, 76/8, 96/8, 97/8, 98/8, 99/8, 100/8, 104/8, 107/8, 108/8, 128/8, 129/8, 130/8, 131/8, 132/8, 134/8, 135/8, 136/8, 137/8, 138/8, 139/8, 140/8, 142/8, 143/8, 144/8, 146/8, 147/8, 148/8, 149/8, 152/8, 155/8, 156/8, 157/8, 158/8, 159/8, 160/8, 161/8, 162/8, 164/8, 165/8, 166/8, 167/8, 168/8, 169/8, 170/8, 172/8, 173/8, 174/8, 184/8, 192/8, 198/8, 199/8, 204/8, 205/8, 206/8, 207/8, 208/8, 209/8, 214/8, 215/8, 216/8, RIPE Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 205008 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation: 97638 RIPE Deaggregation factor: 2.10 Prefixes being announced from the RIPE address blocks: 201350 Unique aggregates announced from the RIPE address blocks: 119435 RIPE Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 25936 RIPE Prefixes per ASN: 7.76 RIPE Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 11511 RIPE Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 3677 Average RIPE Region AS path length visible: 4.6 Max RIPE Region AS path length visible: 34 Number of RIPE region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 7962 Number of RIPE addresses announced to Internet: 718072960 Equivalent to 42 /8s, 204 /16s and 236 /24s RIPE AS Blocks 1877-1901, 2043, 2047, 2107-2136, 2585-2614 (pre-ERX allocations) 2773-2822, 2830-2879, 3154-3353, 5377-5631 6656-6911, 8192-9215, 12288-13311, 15360-16383 20480-21503, 24576-25599, 28672-29695 30720-31743, 33792-35839, 38912-39935 40960-45055, 47104-52223, 56320-58367 59392-61439, 61952-62463, 64396-64495 196608-210331 RIPE Address Blocks 2/8, 5/8, 25/8, 31/8, 37/8, 46/8, 51/8, 62/8, 77/8, 78/8, 79/8, 80/8, 81/8, 82/8, 83/8, 84/8, 85/8, 86/8, 87/8, 88/8, 89/8, 90/8, 91/8, 92/8, 93/8, 94/8, 95/8, 109/8, 141/8, 145/8, 151/8, 176/8, 178/8, 185/8, 188/8, 193/8, 194/8, 195/8, 212/8, 213/8, 217/8, LACNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------ Prefixes being announced by LACNIC Region ASes: 96714 Total LACNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 21583 LACNIC Deaggregation factor: 4.48 Prefixes being announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 98073 Unique aggregates announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 42028 LACNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 8223 LACNIC Prefixes per ASN: 11.93 LACNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 2179 LACNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1533 Average LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 5.1 Max LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 27 Number of LACNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 5768 Number of LACNIC addresses announced to Internet: 173549824 Equivalent to 10 /8s, 88 /16s and 41 /24s LACNIC AS Blocks 26592-26623, 27648-28671, 52224-53247, 61440-61951, 64099-64197, 262144-270748 + ERX transfers LACNIC Address Blocks 177/8, 179/8, 181/8, 186/8, 187/8, 189/8, 190/8, 191/8, 200/8, 201/8, AfriNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------- Prefixes being announced by AfriNIC Region ASes: 20966 Total AfriNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 4282 AfriNIC Deaggregation factor: 4.90 Prefixes being announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 27143 Unique aggregates announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 9218 AfriNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1262 AfriNIC Prefixes per ASN: 21.51 AfriNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 434 AfriNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 246 Average AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.9 Max AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 21 Number of AfriNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 537 Number of AfriNIC addresses announced to Internet: 104060672 Equivalent to 6 /8s, 51 /16s and 215 /24s AfriNIC AS Blocks 36864-37887, 327680-328703 & ERX transfers AfriNIC Address Blocks 41/8, 102/8, 105/8, 154/8, 196/8, 197/8, APNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 7545 4720 545 547 TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Telecom Limited, AU 4538 4660 4192 74 ERX-CERNET-BKB China Education and Rese 7552 3125 1297 53 VIETEL-AS-AP Viettel Group, VN 45899 3034 1733 110 VNPT-AS-VN VNPT Corp, VN 9829 2708 1490 563 BSNL-NIB National Internet Backbone, IN 4766 2612 11120 761 KIXS-AS-KR Korea Telecom, KR 9808 2435 8699 27 CMNET-GD Guangdong Mobile Communication 9394 2183 4906 31 CTTNET China TieTong Telecommunications 4755 2148 429 186 TATACOMM-AS TATA Communications formerl 9498 2030 426 167 BBIL-AP BHARTI Airtel Ltd., IN Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-APNIC ARIN Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 11492 3605 234 580 CABLEONE - CABLE ONE, INC., US 6327 3600 1325 94 SHAW - Shaw Communications Inc., CA 22773 3382 2976 162 ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC - Cox Communi 16509 2612 5902 1080 AMAZON-02 - Amazon.com, Inc., US 16625 2345 1293 1788 AKAMAI-AS - Akamai Technologies, Inc., 20115 2151 2747 535 CHARTER-20115 - Charter Communications, 30036 2143 353 142 MEDIACOM-ENTERPRISE-BUSINESS - Mediacom 18566 2111 405 108 MEGAPATH5-US - MegaPath Corporation, US 5650 2086 3074 1462 FRONTIER-FRTR - Frontier Communications 209 2065 5103 576 CENTURYLINK-US-LEGACY-QWEST - CenturyLi Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-ARIN RIPE Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 12479 5432 1628 139 UNI2-AS, ES 39891 3778 203 20 ALJAWWALSTC-AS, SA 8551 3265 378 45 BEZEQ-INTERNATIONAL-AS Bezeqint Interne 20940 2643 537 1914 AKAMAI-ASN1, US 12389 2225 2221 636 ROSTELECOM-AS, RU 34984 2073 342 536 TELLCOM-AS, TR 9121 1683 1693 19 TTNET, TR 13188 1605 100 47 TRIOLAN, UA 9009 1410 146 767 M247, GB 8402 1249 545 15 CORBINA-AS OJSC "Vimpelcom", RU Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-RIPE LACNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ----------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 8151 5654 3337 588 Uninet S.A. de C.V., MX 10620 3484 537 369 Telmex Colombia S.A., CO 11830 2705 384 34 Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad 7303 1449 987 252 Telecom Argentina S.A., AR 6503 1369 433 53 Axtel, S.A.B. de C.V., MX 28573 1328 2248 179 CLARO S.A., BR 6147 1254 377 29 Telefonica del Peru S.A.A., PE 3816 1023 506 114 COLOMBIA TELECOMUNICACIONES S.A. ESP, C 13999 956 522 248 Mega Cable, S.A. de C.V., MX 11172 953 144 66 Alestra, S. de R.L. de C.V., MX Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-LACNIC AfriNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ------------------------------------------ ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 24863 1176 393 21 LINKdotNET-AS, EG 37611 892 107 9 Afrihost, ZA 36903 827 416 126 MT-MPLS, MA 36992 825 1531 71 ETISALAT-MISR, EG 24835 824 620 22 RAYA-AS, EG 8452 683 1731 19 TE-AS TE-AS, EG 29571 484 70 12 ORANGE-COTE-IVOIRE, CI 37492 470 470 57 ORANGE-, TN 15706 421 32 6 Sudatel, SD 37342 420 32 1 MOVITEL, MZ Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-AFRINIC Global Per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 8151 5654 3337 588 Uninet S.A. de C.V., MX 12479 5432 1628 139 UNI2-AS, ES 7545 4720 545 547 TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Telecom Limited, AU 4538 4660 4192 74 ERX-CERNET-BKB China Education and Rese 39891 3778 203 20 ALJAWWALSTC-AS, SA 11492 3605 234 580 CABLEONE - CABLE ONE, INC., US 6327 3600 1325 94 SHAW - Shaw Communications Inc., CA 10620 3484 537 369 Telmex Colombia S.A., CO 22773 3382 2976 162 ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC - Cox Communi 8551 3265 378 45 BEZEQ-INTERNATIONAL-AS Bezeqint Interne Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet Global Per AS Maximum Aggr summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets Net Savings Description 12479 5432 5293 UNI2-AS, ES 4538 4660 4586 ERX-CERNET-BKB China Education and Research Net 7545 4720 4173 TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Telecom Limited, AU 39891 3778 3758 ALJAWWALSTC-AS, SA 6327 3600 3506 SHAW - Shaw Communications Inc., CA 22773 3382 3220 ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC - Cox Communications 8551 3265 3220 BEZEQ-INTERNATIONAL-AS Bezeqint Internet Backbo 10620 3484 3115 Telmex Colombia S.A., CO 7552 3125 3072 VIETEL-AS-AP Viettel Group, VN 11492 3605 3025 CABLEONE - CABLE ONE, INC., US Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-CIDRnet List of Unregistered Origin ASNs (Global) ----------------------------------------- Bad AS Designation Network Transit AS Description 230105 UNALLOCATED 38.110.79.0/24 23015 CMC180-TOR-AS - Cambridge Merc 266842 UNALLOCATED 45.238.156.0/22 265680 HNTELCO S.A, HN 65550 DOCUMENT 81.8.34.0/24 15924 BORUSANTELEKOM-AS, TR 65550 DOCUMENT 81.8.35.0/24 15924 BORUSANTELEKOM-AS, TR 1358592 UNALLOCATED 103.134.14.0/23 63956 COLO-AS-AP Colocation Australi 1358592 UNALLOCATED 103.134.14.0/24 63956 COLO-AS-AP Colocation Australi 1358592 UNALLOCATED 103.134.15.0/24 63956 COLO-AS-AP Colocation Australi 65550 DOCUMENT 104.232.236.0/24 138005 LENOVO-AS1-AP LENOVO (HONG KON 65549 DOCUMENT 117.239.163.0/24 65544 UNKNOWN 64339 UNALLOCATED 143.0.108.0/22 18747 IFX18747 - IFX Corporation, US Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-badAS Advertised Unallocated Addresses -------------------------------- Network Origin AS Description 5.180.104.0/24 209737 MERICHOSTING, TR 5.180.105.0/24 209737 MERICHOSTING, TR 5.180.106.0/24 209737 MERICHOSTING, TR 5.180.107.0/24 209737 MERICHOSTING, TR 27.100.7.0/24 56096 UNKNOWN 27.126.156.0/22 55827 UNKNOWN 27.126.156.0/23 55827 UNKNOWN 27.126.158.0/23 55827 UNKNOWN 41.76.136.0/22 37500 -Reserved AS-, ZZ 41.76.140.0/22 37500 -Reserved AS-, ZZ Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-add-IANA Number of prefixes announced per prefix length (Global) ------------------------------------------------------- /1:0 /2:0 /3:0 /4:0 /5:0 /6:0 /7:0 /8:12 /9:10 /10:36 /11:100 /12:291 /13:567 /14:1136 /15:1909 /16:13349 /17:7956 /18:13904 /19:25672 /20:39960 /21:46165 /22:92979 /23:75705 /24:422219 /25:978 /26:0 /27:0 /28:0 /29:0 /30:0 /31:0 /32:0 Advertised prefixes smaller than registry allocations ----------------------------------------------------- ASN No of nets Total ann. Description 12479 4345 5432 UNI2-AS, ES 6327 3374 3600 SHAW - Shaw Communications Inc., CA 39891 2946 3778 ALJAWWALSTC-AS, SA 11492 2819 3605 CABLEONE - CABLE ONE, INC., US 8551 2718 3265 BEZEQ-INTERNATIONAL-AS Bezeqint Internet Backbo 22773 2620 3382 ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC - Cox Communications 11830 2050 2705 Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad y Telec 18566 2006 2111 MEGAPATH5-US - MegaPath Corporation, US 30036 1890 2143 MEDIACOM-ENTERPRISE-BUSINESS - Mediacom Communi 5650 1754 2086 FRONTIER-FRTR - Frontier Communications of Amer Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-sXXas-nos Number of /24s announced per /8 block (Global) ---------------------------------------------- 1:1610 2:927 4:22 5:2954 6:45 7:1 8:1284 9:1 11:3 12:1845 13:322 14:1969 15:36 16:4 17:241 18:58 20:49 23:2652 24:2528 25:2 27:2503 31:2095 32:97 35:36 36:851 37:3027 38:1707 39:294 40:120 41:3250 42:757 43:2018 44:148 45:7062 46:3245 47:254 49:1361 50:1101 51:322 52:1031 54:289 55:2 56:9 57:42 58:1788 59:1072 60:505 61:2126 62:2114 63:1814 64:4949 65:2211 66:4840 67:2701 68:1170 69:3526 70:1327 71:603 72:2447 74:2753 75:514 76:550 77:1718 78:1766 79:2323 80:1813 81:1510 82:1134 83:902 84:1114 85:2295 86:554 87:1569 88:1050 89:2572 90:219 91:6581 92:1377 93:2447 94:2553 95:3206 96:923 97:345 98:949 99:210 100:87 101:1153 102:489 103:20775 104:3520 105:248 106:846 107:1781 108:691 109:3742 110:1642 111:1901 112:1485 113:1392 114:1140 115:1731 116:1721 117:1900 118:2180 119:1645 120:1025 121:1037 122:2351 123:1660 124:1472 125:1981 128:1264 129:815 130:532 131:1676 132:733 133:219 134:1052 135:242 136:563 137:715 138:2042 139:844 140:577 141:855 142:797 143:1057 144:841 145:509 146:1265 147:834 148:1716 149:818 150:784 151:1010 152:1042 153:322 154:2819 155:902 156:1679 157:941 158:640 159:1919 160:1514 161:921 162:2699 163:800 164:1161 165:1562 166:439 167:1393 168:3291 169:868 170:4152 171:568 172:1127 173:2201 174:1035 175:917 176:2354 177:4196 178:2542 179:1465 180:2176 181:2398 182:2662 183:1074 184:1199 185:14899 186:3656 187:2475 188:2877 189:1981 190:8303 191:1528 192:10027 193:6662 194:5401 195:4077 196:3024 197:1747 198:5867 199:5987 200:7239 201:5106 202:10386 203:10112 204:4547 205:3008 206:3225 207:3258 208:3967 209:4239 210:3927 211:2008 212:3131 213:2928 214:1091 215:55 216:5939 217:2234 218:880 219:580 220:1875 221:968 222:988 223:1370 End of report

1 0

Was wrong Re: Did IPv6 between HE and Google ever get resolved?
by David Hubbard 29 Mar '19

29 Mar '19

Oops, I was corrected that HE doesn’t have IPv6 issues with Google, not sure why I had that in my head. Cogent certainly does but something had me thinking there’s another big name that has the same problem. David From: NANOG <nanog-bounces(a)nanog.org> on behalf of David Hubbard <dhubbard(a)dino.hostasaurus.com> Date: Thursday, March 28, 2019 at 12:40 PM To: NANOG List <nanog(a)nanog.org> Subject: Did IPv6 between HE and Google ever get resolved? Hey all, I’ve been having bad luck searching around, but did IPv6 transit between HE and google ever get resolved? Ironically, I can now get to them cheaply from a location we currently have equipment that has been Cogent-only, so if it fixes the IPv6 issue I’d like to make the move. Anyone peer with HE in general and want to share their experience offlist? With the price, if they’re a good option, I’d consider rolling them in to other locations where we have redundancy already, so the v6 isn’t as big a deal there. Thanks

4 4

Banned by Akamai (or some websites hosted with Akamai)
by Siyuan Miao 28 Mar '19

28 Mar '19

Hi, I got some complaints from customers and found out that all IP addresses announced in one of our ASN are banned by Akamai or some websites hosted with Akamai. I've tried to contact one of the website owners but didn't get any response. Could someone from Akamai contact me off-list? Regards, Siyuan Miao

6 7

Advertisement of Equinix Chicago IX Subnet
by Graham Johnston 28 Mar '19

28 Mar '19

This afternoon at around 12:17 central time today we began learning the subnet for the Equinix IX in Chicago via a transit provider; we are on the IX as well. The subnet in question is 208.115.136.0/23. Using stat.ripe.net I can see that this subnet is also being learned by others, see the snip below. On our network this caused a nasty routing loop until we figured out what was wrong. My current best understanding is that because the route was learned via eBGP it trumped the OSPF learned route. As soon as I filtered the advertisement from my transit provider everything returned to normal. What am I doing that isn’t best practices that would have prevented this? Thanks, graham RIPE Info 1 RRCs see 1 peers announcing 208.115.136.0/23 originated by AS32703<https://stat.ripe.net/AS32703> * ▼RRC00 in Amsterdam, Netherlands sees 1 ASN orginating 208.115.136.0/23.AS32703 o ▼AS32703<https://stat.ripe.net/AS32703> is seen as the origin by 1 peer.192.102.254.1 § ▼192.102.254.1<https://stat.ripe.net/192.102.254.1> is announcing route AS395152<https://stat.ripe.net/AS395152> AS63297<https://stat.ripe.net/AS63297> AS6327<https://stat.ripe.net/AS6327> AS36280<https://stat.ripe.net/AS36280>AS32703<https://stat.ripe.net/AS32703>. § Origin: IGP § Next Hop: 192.102.254.1 § Peer: 192.102.254.1 § Community: 63297:1000 § AS Path: 395152 63297 6327 36280 32703 § Last Updated: 2019-03-27T17:17:19 Route-views route-views.chicago.routeviews.org> show ip bgp 208.115.136.0 BGP routing table entry for 208.115.136.0/23 Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table) Not advertised to any peer 32709 32703 208.115.136.134 from 208.115.136.134 (63.134.128.248) Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external, best AddPath ID: RX 0, TX 64414249 Last update: Wed Mar 27 17:16:09 2019

7 8

Nexus 9396 SNMP Issues
by Mike Hammett 28 Mar '19

28 Mar '19

Does anyone else have issues with the 9396 sending out bum SNMP responses? Seemingly all DDM information for the optic modules return just a single digit. IE: [redacted]# show int eth 1/3 trans det Ethernet1/3 transceiver is present type is 1000base-LH name is Fiberstore part number is SFP1G-LH-31 revision is A0 serial number is F16ACO17646 nominal bitrate is 1300 MBit/sec Link length supported for 9/125um fiber is 10 km cisco id is 3 cisco extended id number is 4 SFP Detail Diagnostics Information (internal calibration) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Current Alarms Warnings Measurement High Low High Low ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Temperature 40.72 C 100.00 C -50.00 C 85.00 C -40.00 C Voltage 3.35 V 3.79 V 2.80 V 3.46 V 3.13 V Current 15.89 mA 90.00 mA 0.00 mA 85.00 mA 0.00 mA Tx Power -6.05 dBm -1.50 dBm -10.50 dBm -3.00 dBm -9.03 dBm Rx Power -6.32 dBm -3.00 dBm -26.98 dBm -5.00 dBm -23.97 dBm Transmit Fault Count = 0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: ++ high-alarm; + high-warning; -- low-alarm; - low-warning [redacted]:~$ /usr/bin/snmpget -v2c -c [redacted] .1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300003533 .1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300003534 iso.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300003533 = INTEGER: -6 iso.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300003534 = INTEGER: -6 [redacted]:/opt/librenms# tcpdump host [redacted] tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 262144 bytes 11:13:33.360509 IP [redacted].49594 > [redacted].snmp: C="[redacted]" GetRequest(62) E:cisco.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300003533 E:cisco.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300003534 11:13:33.362093 IP [redacted].snmp > [redacted].49594: C="[redacted]" GetResponse(64) E:cisco.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300003533=-6 E:cisco.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300003534=-6 ^C 2 packets captured 2 packets received by filter 0 packets dropped by kernel Here I have a 3064 that reports just fine. [redacted]# show int eth 1/17 trans det Ethernet1/17 transceiver is present type is 1000base-LH name is FiberStore part number is SFP1G-LX-31 revision is A0 serial number is D87B1487283 nominal bitrate is 1300 MBit/sec Link length supported for 9/125um fiber is 10 km cisco id is 3 cisco extended id number is 4 SFP Detail Diagnostics Information (internal calibration) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Current Alarms Warnings Measurement High Low High Low ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Temperature 33.38 C 100.00 C -50.00 C 85.00 C -40.00 C Voltage 3.33 V 3.79 V 2.80 V 3.46 V 3.13 V Current 19.60 mA 90.00 mA 0.00 mA 85.00 mA 0.00 mA Tx Power -6.10 dBm -1.50 dBm -10.50 dBm -3.00 dBm -9.03 dBm Rx Power -6.94 dBm 0.99 dBm -30.00 dBm -1.00 dBm -26.98 dBm Transmit Fault Count = 0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: ++ high-alarm; + high-warning; -- low-alarm; - low-warning [redacted]:/opt/librenms# /usr/bin/snmpget -v2c -c [redacted] .1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300028173 .1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300028174 iso.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300028173 = INTEGER: -6968 iso.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300028174 = INTEGER: -6090 [redacted]:/opt/librenms# tcpdump host [redacted] tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 262144 bytes 11:54:01.211115 IP [redacted].36131 > [redacted].snmp: C="[redacted]" GetRequest(62) E:cisco.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300028173 E:cisco.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300028174 11:54:01.261027 IP [redacted].snmp > [redacted].36131: C="[redacted]" GetResponse(66) E:cisco.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300028173=-6968 E:cisco.9.91.1.1.1.1.4.300028174=-6090 ^C 2 packets captured 2 packets received by filter 0 packets dropped by kernel ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com

1 0

TestIT app to measure rural broadband access
by Courtney Smith 27 Mar '19

27 Mar '19

Saw this today in a press release from my county. https://www.naco.org/resources/press/naco-rural-lisc-and-rcap-launch-mobile… Washington, DC (February 26, 2019) – The National Association of Counties (NACo), the Rural Community Assistance Partnership (RCAP) and Rural LISC (Local Initiatives Support Corporation) have partnered to address the critical need for affordable high-speed internet for rural communities across the country. Together, the three organizations developed a mobile app that gives mobile phone users the power to accurately identify areas with low or no internet connectivity and share that information to push for change. Armed with that data, the organizations will advocate for adequate funding for broadband infrastructure across the country.

1 0

Contacts wanted: OVH, DigitalOcean, and Microsoft (Deutschland)
by Ronald F. Guilmette 27 Mar '19

27 Mar '19

OVH, DigitalOcean, and Microsoft... Is there anybody awake and conscious at any of these places? I mean anybody who someone such as myself... just part of the Great Unwashed Masses... could actually speak to about a real and ongoing problem? Maybe most of you here will think that this is just a trivial problem, and one that's not even worth mentioning on NANOG. So be it. Make up you own minds. Here is the problem... For some time now, there has been an ongoing campaign of bitcoin extortion spamming going on which originates primarily or perhaps exclusively from IPv4 addresses owned by OVH and DigitalOcean. These scam spams have now been publicised in multiple places: https://myonlinesecurity.co.uk/fake-cia-sextortion-scam/ Yea, that's just one place, I know, but there's also no shortage of people tweeting about this crap also, in multiple languages even! https://twitter.com/SpamAuditor/status/1107365604636278784 https://twitter.com/dvk01uk/status/1107510553621266433 https://twitter.com/bortzmeyer/status/1107737034049900544 https://twitter.com/ariestess69/status/1107468838596038656 https://twitter.com/bernhard_mahr/status/1107513313020297216 https://twitter.com/jzmurdock/status/1107679858945974272 https://twitter.com/gamamb/status/1107384186548207617 https://twitter.com/davidgsIoT/status/1107725201331097606 https://twitter.com/cybers_guards/status/1107675396076560384 https://twitter.com/ThatHostingCo/status/1107588660831105024 https://twitter.com/fladna9/status/1107554090765242368 https://twitter.com/JUSTADACHI/status/1107549777607184384 https://twitter.com/okhin/status/1107627379650908160 https://twitter.com/Purple_Wyrm/status/1107454618705887232 https://twitter.com/LadyOFyre/status/1107349022220550144 https://twitter.com/laurelvail/status/1107345980062523392 https://twitter.com/Alex__Rubio/status/1107595560440217600 The thing of it is that ALL of this crap... al of these scam spams... are quite obviously originating out of the networks of OVH and DigitalOcean. And it's not even all that hard to figure out where from, exactly and specifically. I generated the following survey, on the fly, last night, based on a simple reverse DNS scan of the evidently relevant addrdess ranges: https://pastebin.com/raw/WtM0Y5yC As anyone who isn't as blind as a bat can easily see, there's a bit of a pattern here. All of the spam source IPs are on just two ASNs: AS16276 - OVH SAS AS4061 - DigitalOcean, LLC It's equally clear that there have already been numerous reports about this ongoing and blatantly criminal activity that have been sent to the low-level high school dropout interns that these companies, like most others on the Internet these days, choose to employ as their first-level minions in their "not a profit center" abuse handling departments. So, guess what? Surprise, surprise! None of those clue-deprived flunkies have apparently yet managed to figure out that there's a pattern here. Duh!. As a result, the scamming and the spamming just go on and on and on, and the spammer-scammer just keeps on getting fresh new IP addresess on both of these networks... and fresh (and utterly free) new domain names from the equally careless company called Freenom. So, you know, I really would appreciate it if someone could either put me in touch with some actual sentient being at either OVH or DigitalOcean... assuming that any such actually exist... or at the very least, try to find one to whom clue may be passed about all this, because although these scam spams were kind of humorous and novel at first, the novelty has now worn off and they're really not all that funny anymore. Oh! And while we are on the subject, I'd also like to obtain a contact, preferbly one which is also and likewise in possession of something roughly approximating clue, at this place: AS200517 - Microsoft Deutschland MCIO GmbH The reason is that although MS Deutschland is most probably not the source of any of the spams, they, or at least their 51.18.39.107 address, do appear to be mixed up in all of this somehow: https://pastebin.com/raw/ziVNCmZ8 I dunno. Maybe Microsoft has managed to engineer a merger with the CIA (?) If not, then maybe they would be so kind as to rat out this specific criminal customer of their's to appropriate authorities. Don't get me wrong. I heartily applaud Microsoft's Digital Crimes Unit for all of the admirable work they do, but you know the old saying... charity begins at home. So my hope is that they will seek to get this low-life off their network immediately, if not sooner, and then also seek to arrange suitable long term accomodations for him in, say, Florence, Colorado, or, if he/she/it has a higher than average level of tan, I hope that they will make all necessary inquiries to find out if there are still any open bunks available in Gitmo. Regards, rfg P.S. In recent days, the popular media has fanned the flames of controversy, as it is their habit to do, over the question of whether or not the various social media companies could have somehow automagically spotted and deleted, in real time, with some sort of yet-to-be-invented artificial intelligence wizardry, the shooter videos from New Zealand. Of course, none of the TV personalities who so cavalierly offer up their totally uninformed opinions on this question have ever themselves gotten within a country mile of the kinds of AI that could, perhaps in another decade or three, reliably distinguish between a video of a msss shooting and a video of a particularly raucous birthday party. It's a hard problem. In contrast to that hard problem, spotting the kind of trivial reverse DNS pattern I've noted above is child's play and a no brainer. Why then, one might reasonbly ask, have the combined abuse departments of both OVH and DigitalOcean been either utterly unable or else utterly unwilling to do so? Solving these kinds of trivial problems does not await the development of some advanced new artificial intelligence. It just requires the judicious application of a small bit of the non-artificial kind of intelligence. But the industry, it seems, can't, or won't, even manage that.

9 11

criterio
by Randy Bush 27 Mar '19

27 Mar '19

a bit of research has led us to wonder about some (non-hostile or worrisome) net activity of criterio autonomous systems. do any friends of the family know these folk and could introduce me so i can try to learn a bit of ground truth? thanks. randy

3 2

Re: residential.smb internet access in 2019 - help?
by Kovich Greg 27 Mar '19

27 Mar '19

Good luck David. Even up here in the Chicagoland Comcast footprint, I had a horror story when I moved into my home in 2002 wrt ATT. Anyway, I’m not sure how far you are from Ocala, but they do offer residential internet via their municipal fiber. https://www.ocalafl.org/government/city-departments/telecommunications/resi… $60/month for 300 Mbps… ------- Greg Kovich Director, Global Education Sales Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise ALE USA 3015 Abby Lane | Suite 301-B Schererville, IN 46375 t: +1-818-878-4667<tel:+1-818-878-4667> m: +1-219-276-2320<tel:+1-219-276-2320> e: Greg.Kovich(a)al-enterprise.com<mailto:greg.kovich@al-enterprise.com> w: www.al-enterprise.com<https://www.al-enterprise.com/en> @ALUEnterprise [LinkedIn]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/alcatellucententerprise> [Twitter] <https://twitter.com/aluenterprise> [YouTube] <https://www.youtube.com/user/EnterpriseALU> [Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/ALUEnterprise> [Rainbow] <https://web.openrainbow.com/app/1.31.7/index.html#/login> [https://www.al-enterprise.com/en/-/media/assets/internet/images/logo.png]<https://www.al-enterprise.com/en> The Alcatel-Lucent name and logo are trademarks of Nokia used under license by ALE. This communication is intended to be received only by the individual or entity to whom or to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged/confidential or subject to copyright. Any unauthorized use, copying, review or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete this message from your e-mail box and information system (including all files and documents attached) and notify the sender by reply email. On Mar 27, 2019, at 7:00 AM, nanog-request(a)nanog.org<mailto:nanog-request@nanog.org> wrote: Message: 7 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 01:30:34 -0400 From: Ross Tajvar <ross(a)tajvar.io<mailto:ross@tajvar.io>> To: Mike Bolitho <mikebolitho(a)gmail.com<mailto:mikebolitho@gmail.com>> Cc: david raistrick <drais(a)icantclick.org<mailto:drais@icantclick.org>>, "North American Network Operators' Group" <nanog(a)nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> Subject: Re: residential/smb internet access in 2019 - help? Message-ID: <CA+FDdDR-8teoFrGCuWGzN4WWdJv8ZgjsuKUFAMJ8Qo2m7C+wqw(a)mail.gmail.com<mailto:CA+FDdDR-8teoFrGCuWGzN4WWdJv8ZgjsuKUFAMJ8Qo2m7C+wqw@mail.gmail.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Wed, Mar 27, 2019, 12:30 AM Mike Bolitho <mikebolitho(a)gmail.com<mailto:mikebolitho@gmail.com>> wrote: Agreed....this is why monopolies are bad and municipal fiber is good. It's not like municipal fiber has some magic spell to make last mile affordable though. On OP's instance he would run into the same issue and would be paying that five figure amount to bring FTTP. Municipal fiber is only good if you happen to live where a municipality has already buried conduit. I'm not saying we should support monopolistic practices, but "municipal fiber everywhere!" isn't necessarily the answer either. That's fair. What I really meant, and didn't take the time to think through and express properly, was this: financing a large fiber buildout like it's a long-term investment, rather than something that should make back its capital cost in 1-3 years, gets fiber to more people. Most commercial ISPs do not want to do this because they want immediate profit. Municipalities are used to making long-term infrastructure investments (like bridges, etc.) and are more amenable to doing it with fiber. Even if there were a municipality which had done a fiber buildout near OP's desired house, he may have still run into the same issue of no fiber being close enough to be financially viable. But the more fiber plant there is, the less likely that scenario becomes.

1 0