- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: The Reg does 240/4
by Christian de Larrinaga 16 Feb '24

16 Feb '24

excuse top posting - I don't see a case for shifting 240/4 into public IP space if it is just going to sustain the rentier sinecures of the existing IPv4 incumbencies. In other words if RIRs don't use it boost new entrants it will just add another knot to the stranglehold we are in vis IPv4. I can see a potential case for shifting it from experimental to private space given the fact that "the rest of us" without public IP space and natted behind CGNATs have taken to use IPv4 for wireguard, containers, zero configs and so on, to tie our various locations, services and applications together within our own private distributed nets and expose our services for public consumption over IPv6. C Christian de Larrinaga Christian Christopher Hawker <chris(a)thesysadmin.au> writes > Hi Denis, > > It will only be burned through if RIR communities change policies to allow for larger delegations than what is > currently in place. I believe that some level of change is possible whilst limiting the exhaustion rate, e.g. allowing > for delegations up to a maximum holding of a /22, however we shouldn't go crazy (for want of a better phrase) > and allow for delegations of a /20, /19 etc. > > If this was only going to give us a potential 1-3 years' worth of space, then I would agree in saying that it is a waste > of time, would take far too long to make the space usable and wouldn't be worth it. However, as long as we don't > get greedy, change the maximum allowed delegation to large delegations, and every Tom/Dick/Harry applying > for a /16 allocation then 240/4 will last us a lengthy amount of time, at least a few decades. > > Regards, > Christopher Hawker > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+chris=thesysadmin.au(a)nanog.org> on behalf of Denis Fondras via NANOG > <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2024 11:10 PM > To: nanog(a)nanog.org <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Subject: Re: The Reg does 240/4 > > Le Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 03:24:21PM -0800, David Conrad a écrit : >> This doesn’t seem all that positive to me, particularly because it’s temporary >> since the underlying problem (limited resource, unlimited demand) cannot be >> addressed. >> > > I agree with this. > Yet I am in favor of changing the status of 240/4, just so it can get burned > fast, we stop this endless discussion and can start to deploy IPv6 again. > > Denis -- Christian de Larrinaga

5 5

Re: mail and IPv6, not The Reg does 240/4
by Matthew McGehrin 15 Feb '24

15 Feb '24

Tom, The solution is easy, just have a dual-stack MX record. $ host gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com. gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com has address 172.253.115.26 gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com has IPv6 address 2607:f8b0:4004:c06::1a Servers using IPv6 connect to IPv6 as needed. Matthew On 2/14/2024 9:26 PM, John Levine wrote: > It appears that Stephen Satchell<list(a)satchell.net> said: >> On 2/14/24 4:23 PM, Tom Samplonius wrote: >>> The best option is what is happening right now: you can’t get new IPv4 >>> addresses, so you have to either buy them, or use IPv6. The free market >>> is solving the problem right now. Another solution isn’t needed. >> Really? How many mail servers are up on IPv6? How many legacy mail >> clients can handle IPv6? How many MTA software packages can handle IPv6 >> tod

1 0

Lax dc / ix questiob
by Mehmet 15 Feb '24

15 Feb '24

Hey there Is it possible to connect Any2 IX from Equinix LA? OneWilshire used to be the place to be, is this still the case? I see in peeringdb Equinix has added a lot of networks. Appreciate if someone with recent experience to share their recommendations. The goal is to reach as many as asian isps thru pni/ix connectivity Thanks

2 1

Ongoing ARIN consultation on Resource Public Key Infrastructure/BGP intelligence
by John Curran 14 Feb '24

14 Feb '24

NANOGers - ARIN would like to remind the community about the ongoing consultation on Resource Public Key Infrastructure/BGP intelligence. This consultation is slated to close on Thursday, 29 February. Please be sure to submit your comments to the arin-consult mailing list before then. Read the full text of the consultation at: https://www.arin.net/participate/community/acsp/consultations/2024/2024-1/ As of 14 February 2024, we have received very few comments from the community regarding this consultation. We believe adding this feature would benefit many ARIN customers, and we are seeking input from our community for any additional information or capabilities that should be included in this proposed functionality development. If you have feedback you’d like to share with ARIN, please provide it to the arin-consult mailing list via arin-consult(a)arin.net. You may subscribe to this mailing list at https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult. ARIN will use the feedback provided to determine how we move forward with improvements to our routing security services. Thank you in advance for your participation in this community consultation. Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)

2 3

Anyone have contacts at the Amazon or OpenAI web spiders?
by John Levine 14 Feb '24

14 Feb '24

One day I set up the world's lamest content farm. You can see it here: https://www.web.sp.am/ While humans tend not to find its six billion pages very interesting, some web spiders are entranced. In the past week or so, Amazon's amazonbot has visited it 6 million times, and OpenAI's gptbot 2.6 million. (If you were wondering what they use to train ChatGPT, now you know.) I don't care that googlebot comes by every 5 or 10 minutes, but gptbot is every few seconds and amazon as fast as the server will respond. They both come from predictable IPs so I can set packet filters but they're still hammering pretty hard. Each has a URL in the user agent string, Amazon's page has an address to write to but OpenAI's doesn't. I wrote to the Amazon address, no response. If anyone has contacts at either I would appreciate it. A few years ago the bingbot got trapped but fortunately I knew someone at Microsoft who could pass the word. He reported back that while he could not go into detail, there was a great deal of animated conversation at the other end of the hall, and shortly after that it stopped. R's, John

4 4

route: 0.0.0.0/32 in LEVEL3 IRR
by Frank Habicht 14 Feb '24

14 Feb '24

Hi, I got 2 bounces for the email addresses seen below for an email similar to the below... Anyone want to remove this IRR entry before anyone notices...??? ;-) Frank I believe that the entry of route: 0.0.0.0/32 does not serve any good purpose? I was surprised to see it in a list of prefixes from bgpq4 and the very good https://irrexplorer.nlnog.net/prefix/0.0.0.0 guided me that it's in "Level3". I'm wondering how many auto-generated filters contain this unnecessary prefix.... PS: Oh, just seen - it's from TODAY. Maybe remove before anyone sees it...? Thanks for looking into this, Frank [frank@fisi ~]$ whois -h rr.level3.com 0.0.0.0/32 [Querying rr.level3.com] [rr.level3.com] route: 0.0.0.0/32 origin: AS10753 mnt-by: TCCGlobalNV-MNT changed: ankita.grewal(a)lumen.com source: LEVEL3 last-modified: 2024-01-30T11:04:49Z [frank@fisi ~]$ whois -h rr.level3.com TCCGlobalNV-MNT [Querying rr.level3.com] [rr.level3.com] mntner: TCCGlobalNV-MNT descr: TCC Global N.V. auth: CRYPT-PW DummyValue # Filtered for security upd-to: ripehostmaster(a)eu.centurylink.net tech-c: LTHM admin-c: LTHM mnt-by: TCCGlobalNV-MNT changed: ankita.grewal(a)lumen.com source: LEVEL3 last-modified: 2024-01-30T11:01:52Z

10 15

jaguar network contact?
by Bryan Holloway 13 Feb '24

13 Feb '24

If anyone here is lurking from Jaguar Network, could you reach out to me off-list, please? I think you're blocking at least one, possibly more of our subnets. Thank you! - bryan

1 1

Microwave Service- Oberkrämer, Germany
by Robert DeVita 13 Feb '24

13 Feb '24

I am looking for a microwave point to point provider in Oberkrämer, Germany. Any suggestions? This is for 1 gig of internet access. Thanks [cid:image001.jpg@01DA5E58.DCC39870] Robert DeVita CEO and Founder t: (469) 581-2160<tel:(469)%20581-2160> | m: (469) 441-8864<tel:(469)%20441-8864> e: radevita(a)mejeticks.com<mailto:radevita@mejeticks.com> | w: mejeticks.com<https://www.mejeticks.com/> a: 2323 N Akard Street , Dallas , 75201 [cid:image002.png@01DA5E58.DCC39870]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/mejeticks/> [cid:image003.png@01DA5E58.DCC39870]<https://twitter.com/mejeticks> [cid:image004.png@01DA5E58.DCC39870]<https://www.facebook.com/mejeticks> [cid:image005.png@01DA5E58.DCC39870]<https://linktr.ee/mejeticks>

2 1

Any AI or Data Science Projects?
by Adrian Bolster 13 Feb '24

13 Feb '24

Hi everyone, I am a masters student of Artificial Intelligence and Data Science at the University of Hull and I am in need of a suitable project for my final semester. Prior to studying I was heavily involved in the formation and building of an ISP network in my local area. We built out to approximately 15k customers using a mix of wireless and fibre before selling the business to a competitor in 2022. I am still very interested in all things Internet and would very much like a project within this sector. If anyone has any requirements or any ideas then please do not hesitate to contact me off list. Many thanks, Adrian. Sent from my iPhone

1 0

IRRD & exceptions to RPKI-filtering
by Job Snijders 13 Feb '24

13 Feb '24

Dear all, At NANOG 90, Merit presented on their IRRd v4 deployment. At the microphone Geoff Huston raised a comment which I interpreted as: "Can an exception be made for my research prefixes?" There are two sides to this: INSERTING RPKI-invalid route/route6 objects =========================================== By default, IRRd v4 rejects submitted route/route6 objects if the system detects the objects to be RPKI-invalid. This helps guard against typos, mistakes, and some forms of adversarial actions. However, some researchers find this protection annoying, because the 'noise filtering' mechanism interfers with their ability to insert noise to measure noise. ;-) In order to allow users to insert RPKI-invalid route/route6 objects into the database, the IRRD operator needs to make use of a so-called SLURM file. SLURM is an IETF-standardized JSON format to describe 'rules' to be applied to RPKI-derived information passing through a pipeline. RADB would need to adjust their configuration to point to a SLURM, and add the prefixes of researchers to the 'prefixFilter' section. https://irrd.readthedocs.io/en/stable/admins/rpki/#slurm-support Of course, RADB (or any IRRd v4 operator) will need to vet whether the researchers actually have some authority to make requests on behalf of the Resource Holder! I wouldn't like it if some random person could ask for ROAs related to my employer to be ignored! :-) It is up to each IRRD operator as to what their policy is on assisting researchers and making exceptions to the RPKI-filtering mechanism. QUERYING for RPKI-invalid route/route6 objects ============================================== By default, IRRd v4 returns RPKI-filter responses for WHOIS queries related to routes. This is done to help safe guard the ecosystem. Users can disable filtering of objects by issuing '!fno-rpki-filter' in the WHOIS connection. This is intended as a debugging aid. See this page for more information on the various WHOIS queries that IRRD v4 supports: https://irrd.readthedocs.io/en/stable/users/queries/whois/ Kind regards, Job

3 6