- Test - lists.nanog.org

Heeello Atlanta
by alex＠nac.net 08 Nov '98

08 Nov '98

I and others from nac.net are here if anyone wants to get together tonight. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Atheism is a non-prophet organization. I route, therefore I am. Alex Rubenstein, alex(a)nac.net, KC2BUO, ISP/C Charter Member Father of the Network and Head Bottle-Washer Net Access Corporation, 9 Mt. Pleasant Tpk., Denville, NJ 07834 Don't choose a spineless ISP; we have more backbone! http://www.nac.net -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2 1

This may sound like a stupid question, but.....
by LadyDiana 07 Nov '98

07 Nov '98

Okay, I admit it. I joined this group after a copy of the Wired article about backhoes was forwarded to me. My friend forwarded it something as a joke, I believe...she certainly was surprised when I told her she had NO IDEA how bad that was, nor some of the OTHER reasons for interruption of service (shotgun, anyone?) I work in telephony network management/switch surveillance, and as the backhoes are surely a thorn in our sides (anyone know where I can get a T-shirt? Actually, about twelve of them...) I made the somewhat founded assumption that this was a somewhat like-minded group. However, I don't know the first thing about routers, LANs (other than when ours is down) or other COMPUTER Network related issues, I'm beginning to feel somewhat out of place. Does anyone know if there is a telephony network operators group out there? And how I could go about joining it? It's not that I don't like the company of you fine people, but I haven't the FOGGIEST idea of what the *HELL* you are talking about. And I really would dig being able to trade the sort of (obviously important, even to a computer network idjit like me!) information with people that speak MY language. Diana

2 1

RE: FCC Ruling, Cost of Internet
by MacFarland, Chris 07 Nov '98

07 Nov '98

Steven- The reason for this is regarding settlement charges ( reciprocal compensation ) for intrastate calls from ILEC to CLEC. If the FCC rules that calls to ISP's are interstate then the settlement model dramatically changes for the LEC terminating the call. This would have a significant impact on revenues for CLEC's that use recip comp as part of their core business model. Thanks, Chris MacFarland Director, Data Engineering Allegiance Telecom, Inc. 214-261-7257 > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven J. Sobol [SMTP:sjsobol@nacs.net] > Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 1998 5:23 PM > To: Ivars Upatnieks > Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: FCC Ruling, Cost of Internet > > On Tue, Nov 03, 1998 at 01:39:29PM -0500, Ivars Upatnieks wrote: > > > The Commission intends to address next week, in a > > separate order, the broader issue of whether conventional dial-up access > > to the Internet, made through calls to information service providers, > > including Internet Service Providers (ISPs), is local or interstate in > > nature. > > This stupidity again? > > An Internet dialup call is an interstate call if you're in one state > dialing into a POP in another. Otherwise it's not. Duh. > > The FCC has much better things to do than debate a point for which the > answer is painfully obvious. If you're going to tell me that when I dial > up to my account in downtown Cleveland from my house ten minutes away, I'm > going to either laugh at you, tell you you're a flaming idiot, or quite > possibly both. > > Sorry. My ISDN line at home is serviced by Ameritech, and NACS's PRIs are > serviced by ICG/Netcom. Maybe I should get charged for a call from Chicago > to Denver since Ameritech is headquaratered in Chicago and ICG is in > Denver, > even though I'm calling from Cleveland to Cleveland. > > If there's something obvious that I'm missing here, please, PLEASE point > it > out to me... > > Oh yeah. Are they going to insist on charging per-minute for voice calls > as well as data calls? I bet not. > > > -- > Steve Sobol [sjsobol(a)nacs.net] > Part-time Support Droid [support(a)nacs.net] > NACS Spaminator [abuse(a)nacs.net] > >

3 2

Re: ARIN?
by Gary E. Miller 07 Nov '98

07 Nov '98

Yo John! I also checked the ARIN database. Many of those cable companies with 24/8 allocations appear to be @home franchises. The obvious one is rogers@home. I sure do not see any RoadRunner space in there. Also, there is NO allocation other than @home/s to about 24.100 so you are right that it is not a /8 , it is closer to a /9 now. Does anyone else have a buffer a fraction of that size? Those other 24/8s are sure jammed in together. RGDS GARY --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gary E. Miller Rellim 20340 Empire Ave, Suite E-3, Bend, OR 97701 gem(a)rellim.com Tel:+1(541)383-2435 On Fri, 6 Nov 1998, John Crain wrote: > Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 08:21:33 +0100 > From: John Crain <john(a)ripe.net> > To: gary miller <gem(a)rellim.com> > Cc: cjw(a)corp.home.net, nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: ARIN? > > > "Gary E. Miller" <gem(a)rellim.com> writes: > * Yo CJ! > * > * I was under the impression that although @home was currently allocate > * just part of the 24/8 space, that the entire space was RESERVED for > * future expansion of @home. Is this not true? Certainly no-one else > * is getting space from that block. > > > Hi Gary, > > This is not true. For clarity there are others using 24/8 space. > > A quick search of the whois databases quickly shows this. > > I wish people wouldn't make statements without checking the facts > first. > > I found 123 route objects in the routing registry. A few were double > and some were obviously @home but many weren't. > > > I agree we should drop the whole thread but we should not end it on a > misinformed statement. > > > John Crain

2 1

RE: time for a new list?
by Hank Nussbacher 07 Nov '98

07 Nov '98

At 11:57 PM 11/2/98 -0700, Forrest W. Christian wrote: Assuming we can't agree on what is valid and what is not - then how about a list where a user can only post 5 messages per month? If you need to post more than 5 messages a month to NANOG - then there is something wrong. This would eliminate the "I said, you said" flame wars between antagonists. If some emergency came along where one had to post more than 5 a month, they would have to approach merit anf justify why this month is an exception. The number 5 can be 3 or 7 for that matter. The only question is the list serving technology (majordomo, listserv, etc.). If it is able to handle such a function (or easily modified), we might be able to cut down on the noise a bit. -Hank >The problem I see is that there doesn't seem to be any real concensus on >what is a valid point of discussion on the list. > >There seems to be some (randy?) that basically feel that if you can't >configure a router to do it it doesn't belong here... Meaning that this >forum should be primarily about technical operation issues. > >On the other hand, there are those among us that when the subject of >router configuration comes up, usually in the context of the right way(tm) >to do BGP configuration, they yell and scream that this doesn't belong >here it should be elsewhere. > >I've personally been flamed for sending a simple "Hey, I can't get a hold >of someone at <insert provider here> using whois contact info. Could >someone from the provider or someone who has contact information for the >provider e-mail me?" > >So maybe the real question is what the heck is this list for? I've been >to two "live" NANOG's and it seems to me that the discussion on this list >seems pretty much in line with the "official" nanog agenda. > >Would someone like to clarify what is and isn't supposed to be on this >list before we try to moderate or split it? > > >- Forrest W. Christian (forrestc(a)imach.com) >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >iMach, Ltd., P.O. Box 5749, Helena, MT 59604 http://www.imach.com >Solutions for your high-tech problems. (406)-442-6648 >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >

1 0

Re: ARIN?
by Roeland M.J. Meyer 07 Nov '98

07 Nov '98

At 08:42 AM 11/7/98 -0800, Tim Wolfe wrote: >On Sat, 7 Nov 1998, Kevin Oberman wrote: > >> What you don't seem to understand is that cable modem customers are >> connected 24x7. @Home does use DHCP, but the address almost never >> changes since DHCP is designed to keep assigning the same address to >> the same host as long as possible. Think of them as pseudo-static. > >If this is the case, then all of the mid to large size ISPs should be able >to justify a whole bunch of new space based on DSL customers... They are >always connected so they can have a full time address too, whether through >static or DHCP... Yep, and most ISPs charge for the static block these days. There is no difference between static and dynamic address if it's on all the time. However, dynamic IPs for workstations make renumbering easier. You can't allow it for servers though. ___________________________________________________ Roeland M.J. Meyer, ISOC (InterNIC RM993) e-mail: <mailto:rmeyer@mhsc.com>rmeyer(a)mhsc.com Internet phone: hawk.mhsc.com Personal web pages: <http://www.mhsc.com/~rmeyer>www.mhsc.com/~rmeyer Company web-site: <http://www.mhsc.com/>www.mhsc.com/ ___________________________________________ I bet the human brain is a kludge. -- Marvin Minsky

1 0

Re: ARIN?
by Brandon Ross 07 Nov '98

07 Nov '98

On Fri, 6 Nov 1998, David R. Conrad wrote: > >Why do my users have to be dynamically addressed but @home's do not? > > Could it be because when the allocation was made, dynamic addressing was > not available for the cable boxes whereas dynamic assignment for dialup > has been available since dirt was new? And NAT boxes have been available almost as long. [unecessary rant removed] Brandon Ross Network Engineering 404-815-0770 800-719-4664 Director, Network Engineering, MindSpring Ent., Inc. info(a)mindspring.com ICQ: 2269442 Stop Smurf attacks! Configure your router interfaces to block directed broadcasts. See http://www.quadrunner.com/~chuegen/smurf.cgi for details.

2 1

Re: ARIN?
by Derek Balling 07 Nov '98

07 Nov '98

At 08:42 AM 11/7/98 -0800, Tim Wolfe wrote: >If this is the case, then all of the mid to large size ISPs should be able >to justify a whole bunch of new space based on DSL customers... They are >always connected so they can have a full time address too, whether through >static or DHCP... Yes, they should be able to (assuming proper utilization percentages, etc. etc.). Or is ARIN going to say NO, you can't have 1000 addresses for your 1000 customers all of whom have their address "in use" 24x7 and force ISP's to use IP Masquerading at the ISP level to service all their dedicated customers. Heh. At that point, we'll just assign each ISP *ONE* IP address, and demand that they make it work beyond that point on their own. :) Should make routing tables significantly easier to manage. D

1 0

8100 Boone power cutover
by Robert E. Seastrom 07 Nov '98

07 Nov '98

The power cutover at 8100 Boone completed 1/2 hour ago. ---Rob

1 0

The Cidr Report
by Tony Bates 06 Nov '98

06 Nov '98

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri Nov 6 12:00:00 PST 1998 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 06Nov98 0) General Status Table History ------------- Date Prefixes 301098 53608 311098 53383 011198 53362 021198 53333 031198 53404 041198 53761 051198 53388 061198 53673 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: 4196 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix: 2042 (1076 cidr, 966 classful) Largest number of cidr routes: 342 announced by AS3561 Largest number of classful routes: 963 announced by AS701 1) Gains by aggregating at the origin AS level --- 06Nov98 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS271 347 148 199 57.3% BCnet Backbone AS1785 603 409 194 32.2% NYSERNet Backbone AS4293 407 230 177 43.5% IMCI AS3749 232 72 160 69.0% TECNET AS2493 344 194 150 43.6% iSTAR Internet, Inc. AS701 963 832 131 13.6% Alternet AS174 688 560 128 18.6% Performance Systems International AS4200 190 98 92 48.4% AGIS (Apex Global Information Ser AS5668 127 40 87 68.5% Century Telephone Inc. AS4740 395 332 63 15.9% Ozemail Pty Ltd (ASN-OZEMAIL) AS7046 254 196 58 22.8% UUNET-CUSTOMER AS4755 120 64 56 46.7% Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. India AS7545 118 63 55 46.6% APNIC-AS-2-BLOCK AS8517 126 72 54 42.9% UNKNOWN AS6335 70 19 51 72.9% NTRNET AS549 197 147 50 25.4% ONet Backbone AS72 89 41 48 53.9% Schlumberger Information Network AS1239 522 476 46 8.8% SprintLink Backbone AS803 77 33 44 57.1% SaskNet Backbone AS3221 86 43 43 50.0% RIPE-ASNBLOCK4 AS1221 345 302 43 12.5% AARNET-AS AS10928 92 49 43 46.7% UNKNOWN AS852 166 125 41 24.7% AGT Advance Communication AS7122 121 80 41 33.9% MTS ADVANCED Network Policy AS3804 182 143 39 21.4% Bell Solutions AS6181 64 30 34 53.1% FUSE-NET AS4539 66 32 34 51.5% NETROPOLIS AS2707 65 32 33 50.8% WEC AS7496 66 34 32 48.5% APNIC-AS-2-BLOCK AS4307 32 1 31 96.9% SVINET-1 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