- Test - lists.nanog.org

Cisco bgp neighbor command: "local-as"
by Yu Ning 29 May '00

29 May '00

Hi Nanog, In one of the Cisco doc, I saw a bgp command called "neighbor x.x.x.x local-as" because it's very useful to our topology, can anyone tell me which IOS version support that command? It seems 12.0 not, because I can't find the discription of tha command. pls help, thanks! Yu Ning ------------------------------------------- (Mr.) Yu(2) Ning(2) ChinaNet Backbone Operation Networking Dep.,Datacom Bureau China Telecom.,Beijing(100088),P.R.C +86-10-66418121/66418122/66418123(fax) -------------------------------------------

2 1

Re: UUNet?
by Martin Cooper 29 May '00

29 May '00

Steve Kann <stevek(a)SteveK.COM> writes: > I have to say, that in my experience, the only company who practices > full disclosure is AboveNet. Even to outsiders, they have the current > capacity and usage levels of just about every single link in their > network, as well as their tech announcements archive open to the public. > I've seen other "pretty" network status pages from providers, but none > show you the useful information you need. INSnet (admittedly not a tier-1) has a pretty neat policy on disclosure, even including a detailed description of the fixes for problems as well as the causes of them, which is nice. See <URL:http://www1.insnet.net/> for an idea of it. M.

3 2

Re: UUNet?
by Sean Donelan 29 May '00

29 May '00

On Fri, 26 May 2000, Alex Rubenstein wrote: > Welp, they had another 'something' in the northeast today, and no more > information than a "there is an outage and we're fixing it" was released. > > I think the funniest part of the whole thing was when a UU sales driod > called me mid-afternoon today trying his monthly sell-thing on me, and > when I asked him about the current outage, he said he was unaware and that > he'd get right back to me. I've not heard from him yet. This seems pretty SOP for Worldcom. After the AT&T frame-relay outage, worldcom sales reps were calling to let everyone know about it. But when worldcom had a frame-relay outage, you couldn't reach a worldcom sales person for days and then they didn't know anything. After the abovenet IP network outage, worldcom sales people were calling letting everyone know about. But when worldcom/uunet had an ip network problems, the sales droids know nothing about their own network. > When will large companies learn that hiding from outages like this is a > bad thing? Because its not a bad thing from their point of view. Look at the difference in coverage in the places shareholders look at. Abovenet's "full disclosure" earned it a lot of ugly press, which will get quoted every time there is a story in the future because most reporter's "research" consists of punching the company name into NEXIS. UUNET's disclosure policy earns it a few disgruntled posts on mailing lists, which Worldcom's PR people will likely dismiss as gossip, but no permanent coverage. While us techies may say we like abovenet's reaction more than uunet's reaction to their respective incidents, most of the buying decisions are made by managers who find abovenet's honesty scary and uunet's lack of publicly reported incidents comforting. If you talk to the PR people, they will all tell you if you have "major problem" you should be as honest and transparent as possible. But if it is a "minor problem" you don't want to attract more attention to it than the problem deserves. The "problem" is you don't know what type of problem you have until its too late.

4 3

Opportunity Knocks!!!
by kae36＠mega.net.id 29 May '00

29 May '00

Hello, I am interested in knowing if you would allow me to share some information with you about a Wealth Building Program. This is a legal and legitimate opportunity that could change your life forever. I am looking for individuals who are committed to achieving financial stability in their lives. ARE YOU INTERESTED IN LEARNING MORE ? If you like what you've read so far, and want to hear about real people who are making more money than they have ever made before - then I'll send instructions to my website that has two great Opportunity Overview Real Audio messages on it! If you would like more information; SEND an email with "INFO" as the subject to: moreinfo(a)1pamail.com ------------------------------------------------------- If do not wish receive any email hereafter we will honor your request. Send an email to s_middleton(a)angelfire.com ------------------------------------------------------- 832426230747549232032 o_kae36(a)mega.net.id

1 0

Regular Expressions ......
by Ally Gudgeon 29 May '00

29 May '00

Hi All, I am having a few problems getting my BGP filtering to work - and am experiencing some strange results.. I have two routers connected to a peering point, we have decided that we want to set local preferences of 110 to 1-deep AS-paths (as-path ACL 1) 100 to 2-deep AS-paths (as-path ACL 2) and 90 to 3-deep AS-paths (as-path ACL 3) and to not accept 4-deep AS-paths (as-path ACL 4) I have the following as-path ACLs to try to set that and am using route maps. ip as-path access-list 1 permit ^[0-9]*$ ip as-path access-list 2 permit ^[0-9]*_[0-9]*$ ip as-path access-list 3 permit ^[0-9]*_[0-9]*_[0-9]*$ ip as-path access-list 4 permit .* This appears to have failed miserably....It is not setting local prefs correctly if they are 3-deep and have a repetition of an AS number it sees it as 4-deep If they are 4 AS's deep it doesn't apply a local preference but if it knows it from our other core router it sets a local pref of 100 but prefers the direct route? (ALSO: If I do a sh ip bgp reg ^[0-9]*_[0-9]*$ it lists both 1-deep and 2-deep AS's....surely it should just list 2-deep?) Any help would be greatly appreciated!...... Thanks in advance.. Ally email - alison.gudgeon(a)kingston-internet.net ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. The views expressed in the email and files transmitted with it are those of the individual, not the company. If you have received this email in error please notify admin(a)kingston-internet.net +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

6 5

Re: pop server in an ISP environment
by Michael Shields 26 May '00

26 May '00

In article <20000526173743.J5100(a)mail-sg.siemens.com.sg>, Muljawan Hendrianto <muljawan.hendrianto(a)siemens.com.sg> wrote: > I am thinking about using QPOPPER+procmail, but some people say that it is not scalable because its authentication is based on /etc/passwd. Fortunately you have the source code. -- Shields.

1 0

The Cidr Report
by Tony Bates 26 May '00

26 May '00

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri May 26 12:00:00 PDT 2000 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 26May00 0) General Status Table History ------------- Date Prefixes 080400 75151 090400 75137 100400 75215 110400 75403 120400 75730 130400 75919 010500 76182 020500 76265 Check http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr.plot.html for a plot of the table history. Possible Bogus Routes --------------------- AS Summary ---------- Number of ASes in routing system: 5027 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix: 1865 (0 cidr, 1865 classful) Largest number of cidr routes: 0 announced by Largest number of classful routes: 1002 announced by AS701 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level --- 26May00 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS271 437 152 285 65.2% BCnet Backbone AS7046 500 336 164 32.8% COQUI-NET PRTC Internet AS9269 167 29 138 82.6% Hong Kong CTI AS9706 153 26 127 83.0% Pusan Metropolitan City Office of AS1221 529 408 121 22.9% TELSTRA-AS AS2609 123 18 105 85.4% EUnet-TN AS7545 164 66 98 59.8% TPG Internet Pty Ltd AS7657 264 168 96 36.4% The Internet Group Limited AS174 552 464 88 15.9% Performance Systems International AS7496 126 39 87 69.0% Power Up AS9304 109 24 85 78.0% Hutchcity AS9557 100 17 83 83.0% Pakistan Telecommunication Compan AS6429 204 121 83 40.7% RDC-INTERNET AS577 248 172 76 30.6% Bell Backbone AS7029 146 71 75 51.4% ALLTELNET AS209 463 392 71 15.3% Qwest Communications AS7018 529 463 66 12.5% AT&T WorldNet Service Backbone AS1727 162 98 64 39.5% MRMS-WEST AS4293 253 190 63 24.9% Internal ASN for C&W AS724 205 143 62 30.2% DLA-ASNBLOCK-AS AS7260 111 50 61 55.0% NORLIGHT AS705 270 209 61 22.6% ALTERNET-AS AS3749 121 61 60 49.6% TECNET AS3602 307 249 58 18.9% Sprint Canada Inc. AS6595 107 50 57 53.3% DODDSEUR AS4740 336 279 57 17.0% Ozemail Pty Ltd (ASN-OZEMAIL) AS5106 81 29 52 64.2% AADS-COLUMBUS AS7568 63 18 45 71.4% C.S. Communications Co., Ltd. AS816 308 266 42 13.6% UUNET Canada (ASN-UUNETCA-AS4) AS6528 48 6 42 87.5% WORLD-LYNX 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

TEWG Interim Meeting: Agenda
by Randy Bush 26 May '00

26 May '00

From: Daniel Awduche <awduche(a)UU.NET> To: te-wg(a)UU.NET Cc: ejk(a)digex.net, Daniel Awduche <awduche(a)UU.NET> Subject: TEWG Interim Meeting: Agenda Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 11:51:20 -0400 Message-ID: <20000526115120.B14982(a)uu.net> Here's the agenda for the TEWG Interim meeting: [Attendance is free courtesy of Jim Boyle and Level3 who have agreed to sponsor the meeting]: Date: June 14, 2000. Venue: Hyatt Regency Albuquerque Convention Center 330 Tijeras Albuquerque New Mexico 87102 [This is the same venue as the Nanog meeting] Agenda: - draft-ietf-tewg-framework-01.txt (TEWG Framework Draft) - draft-wright-mpls-te-policy-00.txt Policy-Based Load-Balancing in Traffic-Engineered MPLS Networks Steven Wright, et al. - "Traffic Engineering Issues in Optical Networks with IP-centric Control" Bala Rajagopalan, Debanjan Saha [Note: Preliminary overview of work in progress). - Discussion on focused work items for the WG and call for contributions (Ed Kern and Dan Awduche) Regards, /Dan

1 0

Re: UUNet?
by Sean Donelan 26 May '00

26 May '00

On Wed, 24 May 2000, "Jeff Wheat" wrote: > Does anyone know what happened on Monday? Seems like it has been > hushed up as I can find no information about it anywhere. Contacting > UUNet results in them telling us that their legal department is > working on a press release... Didn't want to affect Worldcom's stock price with unfounded rumors. I was assured by a Worldcom V.P. last summer Worldcom will do a better job keeping any customer affected fully informed. I have to give Worldcom a fair shot at showing they will live up to their word.

4 3

Re: pop server in an ISP environment
by Shawn McMahon 26 May '00

26 May '00

On Fri, 26 May 2000, Muljawan Hendrianto wrote: > > I am thinking about using QPOPPER+procmail, but some people say that it > is not scalable because its authentication is based on /etc/passwd. And > in Unix environment there is certain recommendation not to have more than > 5000 users in /etc/passwd file. That is outdated information, in my opinion. You should be able to control the scaling on that with sufficient machines in your cluster; for 20,000 users, /etc/passwd (or, one would hope, /etc/shadow) should be fine. Now, the question is; how sure are you you're not going to greatly exceed 20,000 users?

1 0