- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Perceived Y2K problems
by Sean Donelan 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

On Tue, 30 November 1999, Jared Mauch wrote: > I find this quite an interesting challenge, if you can't place > a call, you can't get paged to know that your router in some remote > site just died, nor can they call to tell you, nor can you call the > utilities to determine why. For those deemed important enough, there are alternative switches and communication lines in place to contact utilities and such. ISPs providing necessary services can qualify for preferential treatment. The two buzzwords you need are GETS and TSP. Additional information is available from the FCC http://www.fcc.gov/ and NCS http://www.ncs.gov/ The FCC or NCS will act as the "sponsor" for qualifying ISPs. Yep, its like the ARPANET all over again, you need a "sponsor." When I applied, it took about two weeks. Interestingly enough, the Internet has been used as a backup communications channel for several events already. But because of the unreliable reputation of the Internet (FUD), agency managers haven't wanted to publicize they were using the net.

1 0

Perceived Y2K problems
by Eric Germann 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

Anyone thought on the telco side yet about perceived issues with Y2K? Specifically, I was discussing with one of my telco guys about the sociological effects, namely, everyone watching the ball drop, then going off hook to see if they have dial tone, or dialing in to the Internet to see if it still works. Since most switches aren't designed for 100% off hook load, anyone seen any studies as to whether the switches will crash from that? I do envision seconds to get dialtone. I remember in our college days the new Nortel from Sprint took about 4 seconds to give us dialtone right after the Gulf War bombing started (mostly paranoid college guys debating if they were eligible for the draft I believe). Anyways, thoughts? Eric ========================================================================== Eric Germann Inacom Info Systems ekgermann(a)cctec.com Lima, OH 45801 Ph: 419 331 9050 ICQ: 41927048 Fax: 419 331 9302 "It is so easy to miss pretty trivial solutions to problems deemed complicated. The goal of a scientist is to find an interesting problem, and live off it for a while. The goal of an engineer is to evade interesting problems :)" -- Vadim Antonov <avg(a)kotovnik.com> on NANOG

7 6

Re: Perceived Y2K problems
by David Lesher 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

Unnamed Administration sources reported that Alan Clegg said: > > But the phone system in Raleigh, North Carolina crashed for a day when > Garth Brooks tickets went on sale by phone. No matter where you called, > you got a busy signal IF you managed to get a dial-tone at all. Crashed?? Or just got molassas-slow? It's *designed* to do that, to protect itself.... (If M$ was as reliable as telco switches, then Jill Winecooler's UAE/GPF would be a lead story on the TV news....) -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz(a)nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

2 1

Re: gTLD DNS RFP
by Sean Donelan 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

On Tue, 30 November 1999, "Newell, Tom" wrote: > NSI recently released an RFP seeking hosts for gTLD DNS > servers for COM/NET/ORG. As it likely reached the "sales" > people at the organizations many of you represent, I > thought it appropriate to send a "heads-up" to this list. Is NSI replacing the current root-servers being used with its own gTLD servers, or is this for the gTLD servers already installed by NSI? Since NSI already controls over 40% of the servers used for COM/NET/ORG, and 40% seems to be the magic number for continued reliable operation of the zones, I would be interested in how diversity will be maintained.

1 0

Equal time among gamers?
by Sean Donelan 01 Dec '99

01 Dec '99

I keep a close eye on the game sites because serious gamers tend to be very serious about the quality of their network connections, and aren't shy about expressing their opinions. I've found them a usefull early warning of network problems. For the same reason I watch the on-line stock trading sites. However, I should have kept quiet about Everquest's network status page. Gamers hold some strong views. I was flooded with comments about Microsoft's Game Zone problems over the weekend. They had some network problems with their new Asheron's multi-player game. From what I could tell Microsoft's www.zone.com site was inaccessiable for part of Sunday Night. After my post about Everquest, several gamers asked what I knew about Microsofts's problems. The simple answer is not much. It didn't appear to be a general Internet problem, but specific to Microsoft's site. Yes, Randy, I did ask Microsoft's customer service and NOC. I got back answers either they didn't see a problem, or they saw a problem but their customer service people couldn't find out from their their technical staff what was happening either. Microsoft's Game Zone does have some status pages, but as far as I could tell, unlike Everquest, Microsoft doesn't actually update their status when there is a problem.

7 7

gTLD DNS RFP
by Newell, Tom 30 Nov '99

30 Nov '99

NSI recently released an RFP seeking hosts for gTLD DNS servers for COM/NET/ORG. As it likely reached the "sales" people at the organizations many of you represent, I thought it appropriate to send a "heads-up" to this list. Those parties interested in receiving a copy of the RFP should send an email request to gTLD(a)nsiregistry.net. All requests for copies of the RFP should be received no later than December 2, 1999. The request should include a mailing address, technical point of contact, a contractual point of contact, and an e-mail address. A copy of the RFP and associated terms and conditions will be provided. thanks --Tom

1 0

Does Teleglobe implements QoS ?
by Dmitry S. Esakov 30 Nov '99

30 Nov '99

Hello! Macomnet (ISP, AS8470, Moscow, Russia) uses world connectivity via Teleglobe. We have a router, managed by us, in NY. The interface pointing to America uses Teleglobe's address and another one, pointing to Moscow - ours. Regullary I see a quite strange heavy delays on Teleglobe to Alternet interconnect point. I traced the route to several destinations with SRC addresses from Teleglobe's and Macomnet's IP blocks. The problem is that packets with SRC from Teleglobe address space passes through with lower delays than packets with Macomnet's SRC addresses. The first thing what people expect is assymetric routing (i.e. route from Alternet goes another way back to us). But it's not possible. Our backup provider (AS8342) plugs into Teleglobe also. So Teleglobe advertises the right route to Alternet and it's quite impossible for Alternet to have another route to Macomnet. I believe it's not a routing problem. I contacted Teleglobe and they said that it could be a temporary congestion. I wonder how could congestion exist for Macomnet addresses and not to appear for Teleglobe itself!!! That is the question. Look at the traces below. The first one uses Teleglobe SRC address, the second - ours. ----------------------------------------- Trace with Teleglobe_SRC_ADDRESS : ----------------------------------------- nyy-1#trace Protocol [ip]: Target IP address: 204.71.127.3 Source address: 207.45.205.14 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Teleglobe's address Numeric display [n]: Timeout in seconds [3]: Probe count [3]: Minimum Time to Live [1]: Maximum Time to Live [30]: Port Number [33434]: Loose, Strict, Record, Timestamp, Verbose[none]: Type escape sequence to abort. Tracing the route to intrepid.net (204.71.127.3) 1 if-0-1-0.bb6.NewYork.Teleglobe.net (207.45.205.13) [AS 6453] 0 msec 4 msec 0 msec 2 if-6-0-0.bb1.NewYork.Teleglobe.net (207.45.221.67) [AS 6453] 0 msec 0 msec 4 msec 3 Serial0-1-0.GW2.NYC2.ALTER.NET (157.130.4.165) [AS 701] 0 msec 4 msec ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Teleglobe goes fine. 157.130.5.217 [AS 701] 4 msec 4 144.ATM2-0.XR2.NYC1.ALTER.NET (146.188.178.150) [AS 701] 4 msec 0 msec 4 msec 5 194.ATM3-0.TR2.NYC1.ALTER.NET (146.188.178.198) [AS 701] 0 msec 4 msec 0 msec 6 104.ATM7-0.TR2.DCA8.ALTER.NET (146.188.138.169) [AS 701] 8 msec 4 msec 12 msec 7 152.63.32.217 [AS 701] 4 msec 8 msec 8 msec 8 192.ATM6-0.GW5.TCO1.ALTER.NET (146.188.162.165) [AS 701] 8 msec 8 msec 8 msec 9 intrepid-gw2.customer.ALTER.NET (157.130.36.214) [AS 701] 20 msec 20 msec 32 msec 10 office-shep.intrepid.net (209.190.129.38) [AS 6359] 20 msec 20 msec 28 msec 11 intrepid.net (204.71.127.3) [AS 6359] 20 msec 16 msec 20 msec ---------------------------------------------------- AT THE SAME TIME Trace with Macomnet_SRC_ADDRESS : ---------------------------------------------------- nyy-1#trace Protocol [ip]: Target IP address: 204.71.127.3 Source address: 195.128.65.33 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Macomnet's address Numeric display [n]: Timeout in seconds [3]: Probe count [3]: Minimum Time to Live [1]: Maximum Time to Live [30]: Port Number [33434]: Loose, Strict, Record, Timestamp, Verbose[none]: Type escape sequence to abort. Tracing the route to intrepid.net (204.71.127.3) 1 if-0-1-0.bb6.NewYork.Teleglobe.net (207.45.205.13) [AS 6453] 0 msec 0 msec 4 msec 2 Teleglobe.net (207.45.221.99) [AS 6453] 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec 3 * Serial0-1-0.GW2.NYC2.ALTER.NET (157.130.4.165) [AS 701] 1248 msec ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ !!!!!! 157.130.5.217 [AS 701] 1276 msec 4 144.ATM2-0.XR1.EWR1.ALTER.NET (146.188.178.146) [AS 701] 1220 msec 1268 msec * 5 * * * 6 * * 105.ATM6-0.TR1.DCA8.ALTER.NET (146.188.138.121) [AS 701] 1272 msec 7 152.63.32.201 [AS 701] 1284 msec 1288 msec * 8 * 193.ATM6-0.GW5.TCO1.ALTER.NET (146.188.162.169) [AS 701] 2716 msec * 9 intrepid-gw2.customer.ALTER.NET (157.130.36.214) [AS 701] 1392 msec * 1356 msec 10 office-shep.intrepid.net (209.190.129.38) [AS 6359] 1244 msec 1244 msec 1328 msec 11 intrepid.net (204.71.127.3) [AS 6359] 1284 msec 1324 msec 1392 msec ---------------- Have a nice day! Esakov Dmitriy, Macomnet Internet Dpt.

3 3

I like Patrick no longer have enable (read NSI is ok, I am broke)
by John M. Brown 30 Nov '99

30 Nov '99

Given the recent (10 minutes ago) making of a fool before my peers and several other (classified) stewpids, my network people tell me to go play business man and leave the real work to them. my enable.rights have been revoked. I am just a!@# manager. And a manager that can't spell. as sage and wise person said (in private) "I am doomed". Yours in spirit John Brown iHighway.net

1 0

NSI's Biz parter dom reg broken??
by John M. Brown 30 Nov '99

30 Nov '99

We have not gotten a single reply from registerations(a)networksolutions.com since last wendesday. Anyone know whats up??? (please save the usual rant about NSI for later) tia jmbrown

1 0

question about PLCP T3 ATM interface
by Zheng Chen 29 Nov '99

29 Nov '99

Is any ISP using PLCP T3 ATM interface in the router to connect to ATM backbone? Thanks. Jane

1 0