- Test - lists.nanog.org

UUnet in SJC/SNV/SFO?
by Ted Mektrakarn 14 Sep '00

14 Sep '00

Anyone have any experience with UUnet datacenters in SJC/SNV/SFO? I'm in the market for a providor up in northern cali. Comments and suggestions are welcome. -ted -- Ted Mektrakarn ted(a)MP3.COM Network Ninja MP3.com, Inc. - The Premier Music Service Provider (MSP) http://www.mp3.com

1 0

Re: GiGE performance question(s)
by Richard A. Steenbergen 13 Sep '00

13 Sep '00

On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Scott Michel wrote: > On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, RJ Atkinson wrote: > > >Anyone out there have any Cisco GigE operational experience? I've got a > > >customer who's evaluating GigE to 100 switched Ethernet, and they want > > >a homogeneous vendor network (I don't know why, I just help them write > > >the trade study...) So far, there's a huge question about Cisco GigE > > >to 100 switched performance and I was wondering if anyone's willing to > > >cough up numbers. > > > > What sort of numbers are you after ? > > Well, given the customer, often the numbers their looking for are pretty > nebulous and often not as well defined as anyone'd like, but getting a > customer's requirements are usually that way to begin with. > > Basically, they want to be all Cisco, contemplating GiGE fiber for their > backbone, with switched 100 to the desktop. The numbers they're > interested in are number of sustainable 100 ports to GigE port. With a > 45Gbs backbone quoted for the Cisco box, that would appear to be > pretty limited. > > > >Although, if there are numbers for other non-Cisco vendors, they'd be > > >helpful ammo as well. > > Published and "what I'm really operating and seeing" would be really > useful. This particular customer has a number of applications where > they could easily have multiple ports running pretty close to 40-80 > Mbs in distributed applications. > > Thanks for the question. Hope this narrows things down a little. It doesn't. I think you are highly confused. Layer 2 (switching) GigE is (relatively speaking) easy, Layer 3 (routing) is much harder. Within the basic limitations of understanding your port density and backplane capacity (because 9999 time out of 10000 you don't need real line rate on all ports to all ports, but you do need port density), if you can't do line rate layer 2 you need to take that switch and throw it in the garbage. I don't know where you got the number of 45Gbps, but if you really want that kind of line rate performance check out the Foundry products, which can do 32, 64, and 120 gige ports on the 4000, 8000, and 15000 respectively. I highly doubt this is what you need at all, and if this customer was really doing this kind of traffic they would know what they needed to begin with. I don't know where you got 45Gbps from, but if they're just interested in being "All Cisco", call Cisco and I'm sure they'll sell you what you need. -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras(a)e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/humble PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)

1 0

napster & ISPs
by Scott Bradner 13 Sep '00

13 Sep '00

I was just told that someone got a court order requiring an ISP to block napster - does anyone have any information on this alleged order? Scott

1 0

RE: 128 bit Encryption
by Richard Welty 13 Sep '00

13 Sep '00

From: Mufti Ahmed [mailto:Mufti.Ahmed@reuters.com] > Does Anyone know if 128Bit Encryption is allowed outside the > US? the issue is not where it's allowed, but whether US companies are allowed to sell it overseas. the law was recently eased, but there are still some issues with respect to export licenses. getting a suitable license is feasible. i know that we (VPNet) can sell it overseas (subject to a couple of restrictions, such as the State Department's list of Very Bad Countries), but some of our competitors are not yet so fortunate. richard

1 0

RE: When IPv6 ... if ever?
by Roeland M.J. Meyer 13 Sep '00

13 Sep '00

> From: Masataka Ohta > Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2000 10:41 PM > Batz; > > :Are you saying that there has been some studies done on > IPv6 that it > > :does offer dynamic addressing, authentication and improved > security? > > : > > :Where can I find it? > > > > I'm assuming you're being facetious. > > I* (including but not limited to "I" and "IPv6") are facetious, > of course. ??? please clarify ... > > If not, how long should we expect to have to tolerate vendor > > hubris and bad hacks to get around depleted address space? > > First, vendors of IPv6 address space should seriously tell vendors of > Internet service supply IPv6 service. > > Then, vendors of Internet service should seriously tell vendors of > routers that they really supply IPv6 capable routers. > > And there will be a v6-capable Internet, only after which there > will be some good reason, beyond curiosity, to deploy v6 on > private production networks. > > And then, we can get around depleted address space. This appears to be a classic chicken and egg issue. Which comes first? I am perfectly willing to deploy private-side IPv6, if I had a reason to do so. Without IPv6 support in the core, there seems little reason to do so. Perhaps, IPv6 substituting for NAT'd space? I don't know if it's even possible. The bottom-line appears that everyone is waiting for everyone else to twitch first, then the shoot-out starts. However, no one is all that interested in twitching. It also appears that everyone seems to be pointing at the legacy /8's whenever the subject of IP allocation shortages come up (with some possible justification). IPv6 seems to be a means of ignoring that problem and everyone knows it. The issue seems to be whether the consensus will allow us to ignore that problem and move on, or rat-hole on that problem while we live with IP rationing. The real question is whom is benefiting from sustaining the current situation?

5 7

gblx problems *sigh*
by Ted Mektrakarn 13 Sep '00

13 Sep '00

Anyone have problems with gblx up in snv2 tonight? -- Ted Mektrakarn ted(a)MP3.COM Network Ninja MP3.com, Inc. - The Premier Music Service Provider (MSP) http://www.mp3.com

2 2

Brand NEW $1000 FREE Satellite System
by getfreesatellitea9＠indiatimes.com 13 Sep '00

13 Sep '00

FREE SATELLITE T.V. SYSTEM Watch over 500 channels of Digital Broadcast quality television on your own FREE satellite television system. These new Digital satellite systems use the new 18 inch satellite dish antenna. For a limited time we'll give you this top of the line Digital Satellite System for FREE! We'll even include Free installation and 3 FREE months of all the movie channels! This is the New Dishplayer 500. It has a built Digital 12 hour recording system so you can throw that old VCR away, built in WEB T.V. and interactive T.V and game systems, on screen graphics, 2 dual LNB's, stereo receiver and infrared remote. Normal cost for all these items is over $900 but we're giving it away for FREE! All you have to do is call us to arrange delivery and order the channels you want to receive. The monthly cost of satellite television is usually much less than cable T.V and satellite television offers over 500 channels of all digital broadcast video quality and CD audio sound. You even get local channels now. Don't miss this offer it's only available while supplies last. For your Free Satellite System call 888-514-6881 24 hours a day. To be removed send email to carlbot1(a)yahoo.com

1 0

GiGE performance question(s)
by Scott Michel 13 Sep '00

13 Sep '00

Anyone out there have any Cisco GigE operational experience? I've got a customer who's evaluating GigE to 100 switched Ethernet, and they want a homogeneous vendor network (I don't know why, I just help them write the trade study...) So far, there's a huge question about Cisco GigE to 100 switched performance and I was wondering if anyone's willing to cough up numbers. Although, if there are numbers for other non-Cisco vendors, they'd be helpful ammo as well. -scooter

1 0

Re: Napster.com moved to 64.124.41.0/24?
by vern＠ee.lbl.gov 12 Sep '00

12 Sep '00

> Anyway, apart from the questionable practice of using these IPs for > access-lists, this information is useful for some of us in the > measurement community to write detectors that are less likely to get > false hits, such as might happen when counting Napster traffic based > solely on TCP port numbers. You might find the following paper interesting: Detecting Backdoors Yin Zhang (Cornell) & Vern Paxson (ACIRI) Proc. USENIX Security Symposium, August 2000 http://www.aciri.org/vern/papers/backdoor-sec00.ps.gz http://www.aciri.org/vern/papers/backdoor/index.html Along with security-oriented backdoors such as Telnet & SSH, we also developed backdoor detectors for Napster and Gnutella. We developed general detectors that run on reconstructed TCP streams (implemented in the Bro intrusion detection system) and also fast-cheap-and-definite-hack detectors that use just tcpdump filters. The tcpdump detector for Napster is: # look for "SEND" or "GET" in a # packet by itself (so payload of # 4 or 3 bytes, respectively) ((ip[2:2] - ((ip[0]&0x0f)<<2) - (tcp[12]>>2)) = 4 and tcp[(tcp[12]>>2):4] = 0x53454e44) or ((ip[2:2] - ((ip[0]&0x0f)<<2) - (tcp[12]>>2)) = 3 and tcp[(tcp[12]>>2):2] = 0x4745 and tcp[(tcp[12]>>2)+2]=0x54) and the one for Gnutella is: # look for "GNUTELLA " as first # 9 characters of payload tcp[(tcp[12]>>2):4] = 0x474e5554 and tcp[(4+(tcp[12]>>2)):4] = 0x454c4c41 and tcp[8+(tcp[12]>>2)] = 0x20 Another fun one to run (a total hack) is a root backdoor detector: # look for '# ' in a packet with # exactly 2 bytes of payload tcp[(tcp[12]>>2):2] = 0x2320 and (ip[2:2] - ((ip[0]&0x0f)<<2) - (tcp[12]>>2)) == 2 All of these work surprisingly well, and with kernel BPF can run at Gbps speeds. Vern

1 0

Re: MAE-ATM Wire Speed PVC Interest Poll
by Mike Leber 12 Sep '00

12 Sep '00

On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Nick Gerber wrote: > I don't have any MAE-ATM access ports, but I would be interested in how > line rate ATM works. > I supported the Sprint ATM backbone for several years and never heard of > something like this before. Could you forward me some info or links? > Or am I misunderstanding the meaning in your email? A few people have asked me questions like this so I am clarifying to the list. BTW, I have had excellent positive response to my original email. If you are interested and haven't responded yet please do so. Currently MAE-ATM customers can only create what amounts to CBR PVCs to other peers by using a web interface called PeerMaker. This means that you must allocate a fraction of the capacity of your port to each of your peers which typically results in PVC sizes betweem 5 amd 10 Mbps if you have an OC3 port. Due the the configuration of the MAE-ATM switches, any traffic sent in excess of the configured PVC size is dropped (we have verified this repeatedly). This results in a large amount of wasted capacity and unecessary droppage of packets. Traffic tends to grow and shift; continual reconfiguration of PVCs is not realistic. By comparison, Pac Bell NAP and Ameritech NAP customers talk via wirespeed UBR PVCs, which generally results in better utilization of the service. Better in this case being measured by larger amounts of traffic being carried with less loss and less management cost. The benefit of using UBR vs CBR at an exchange for most users is based on the premis of connections not being saturated. Even in the case of a saturated connection CBR does not fix things; in fact it creates another bottleneck with a much lower saturation threshold. > > > mleber(a)he.net wrote: > > > > MAE-ATM users, if you are interested in having the option to set a PVC to > > wirespeed (like Pac Bell or Ameritech) (which can increase your effective > > utilization of your MAE-ATM port and reduce management costs) please send > > me email with your name, your company name, your phone number and your > > email address. I will pass the collected list onto this manager (email > > below) at Worldcom. The information will be used for that purpose only. > > > > Thank you, > > > > Mike. > > > > +------------------- H U R R I C A N E - E L E C T R I C -------------------+ > > | Mike Leber Direct Internet Connections Voice 510 580 4100 | > > | Hurricane Electric Web Hosting Colocation Fax 510 580 4151 | > > | mleber(a)he.net http://www.he.net | > > +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 13:11:42 -0400 > > From: Alla Reznik <Alla.Reznik(a)wcom.com> > > To: Mike Leber <mleber(a)he.net> > > Subject: RE: MAE OC40 requirements?? - Hurricane Electric (fwd) > > > > Would be very very helpful - please send if you could, thanks > > > > Alla Reznik > > Manager > > Int'l Internet/MAE/Paging/Packet > > WorldCom Business Markets > > V227-6441 or (703)343-6441 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mike Leber [mailto:mleber@he.net] > > Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2000 8:26 PM > > To: Alla Reznik > > Subject: RE: MAE OC40 requirements?? - Hurricane Electric (fwd) > > > > If I could give you a list (with contact names and phone numbers) of > > MAE-ATM customers that want this feature would it help? > > > > On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Alla Reznik wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the feedback, Mike. > > > > > > Alla Reznik > > > Manager > > > Int'l Internet/MAE/Paging/Packet > > > WorldCom Business Markets > > > V227-6441 or (703)343-6441 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Mike Leber [mailto:mleber@he.net] > > > Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2000 2:24 AM > > > To: Alla.Reznik(a)wcom.com > > > Subject: Re: MAE OC40 requirements?? - Hurricane Electric (fwd) > > > > > > > > > > > > Our number one request is for wirespeed PVCs like Pac Bell NAP or > > > Ameritech. This feature could be added with a checkbox in peermaker. > > > > > > > Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 15:17:41 -0400 > > > > From: Alla Reznik <Alla.Reznik(a)wcom.com> > > > > To: peering(a)he.net > > > > Subject: MAE OC40 requirements?? - Hurricane Electric > > > > > > > > Dear customer, our records indicate that you are using OC12 MAE ATM > > > service > > > > from WorldCom. We would like to find out from you if you have any plans > > to > > > > move up to OC48 level of service and what are your specific requirements > > > for > > > > such service would be. As you might already know Worldcom does not > > offer > > > > MAE service above OC12 level at this time, but we recognize it as a > > > > requirements going forward and have made plans to offer it next year. > > > > However, we would like to hear from you and learn more about your > > > > requirements as well as timeframe as to when you are planning to make > > such > > > > move, so that we can respond in the best manner possible with the > > service > > > > suitable to your requirements. > > > > > > > > Alexandra (Alla) Reznik > > > > WorldCom Business Markets > > > > Data and Enterprise Product Marketing > > > > Int'l Internet, MAE, and Packet Services > > > > (703) 343-6441 > > > > http://datamarketing.wcomnet.com/index.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +------------------- H U R R I C A N E - E L E C T R I > > > C -------------------+ > > > | Mike Leber Direct Internet Connections Voice 510 580 > > 4100 > > > | > > > | Hurricane Electric Web Hosting Colocation Fax 510 580 > > 4151 > > > | > > > | mleber(a)he.net > > http://www.he.net > > > | > > > > > +--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > + > > > > > > > +------------------- H U R R I C A N E - E L E C T R I > > C -------------------+ > > | Mike Leber Direct Internet Connections Voice 510 580 4100 > > | > > | Hurricane Electric Web Hosting Colocation Fax 510 580 4151 > > | > > | mleber(a)he.net http://www.he.net > > | > > +--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > + > > -- > Nick Gerber > Sprint Broadband Wireless Group > Voice: 913 534 7317 > Pager: 877 344 3821 > Email: nick.c.gerber(a)mail.sprint.com > +------------------- H U R R I C A N E - E L E C T R I C -------------------+ | Mike Leber Direct Internet Connections Voice 510 580 4100 | | Hurricane Electric Web Hosting Colocation Fax 510 580 4151 | | mleber(a)he.net http://www.he.net | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+

2 1