- Test - lists.nanog.org

Broadcast ICMP's at Mae East
by Eric D. Madison 25 Aug '97

25 Aug '97

There are still a lot of broadcast ICMP's at Mae East and they are coming from Nacamar's Interface. I have tried to contact them, but they are not cooperative. Anyone have a good POC for them that speaks English and might be willing to help? Eric _______________________________________________________ Eric D. Madison - Senior Network Engineer - ACSI - Advanced Data Services - ATM/IP Backbone Group 24 Hour NMC/NOC (800)291-7889 Email: noc(a)acsi.net

1 0

Atlanta-NAP down (fwd)
by Jon Lewis 25 Aug '97

25 Aug '97

I don't have any first hand knowledge of the info below, but I was asked for forward this to the list. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Return-Path: <jgarzik(a)pobox.com> Received: from pretzel.normnet.org (pretzel.normnet.org [206.240.111.163]) by inorganic5.fdt.net with ESMTP id BAA11315 for <jlewis(a)inorganic5.fdt.net>; Sun, 24 Aug 1997 01:58:58 -0400 Received: from pretzel (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pretzel.normnet.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id BAA03008; Sun, 24 Aug 1997 01:59:33 -0400 Sender: jgarzik(a)pretzel.normnet.org Message-ID: <33FFCDC4.4E8A10C6(a)pobox.com> Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 01:59:32 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik(a)pobox.com> Reply-To: jgarzik(a)pobox.com Organization: Spinne http://spinne.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (X11; I; Linux 2.0.30 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Thomas P. Koltai" <tomk(a)koltai.com>, Joe Rhett <jrhett(a)ISite.Net>, Jon Lewis <jlewis(a)inorganic5.fdt.net> Subject: Atlanta-NAP down Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm not on the NANOG mailing list, so I picked you guys because you've posted there recently. Could one of you be kind enough to forward this announcement to the NANOG list, if it has not already appeared there: The Atlanta NAP (www.atlanta-nap.net run by Nathan Stratton) is down, probably for good. We're a customer (luckily a multihomed one!), and the word is WORLDCOM pulled all their circuits due to debts. So all the netrail.net mailing lists and stuff will be down too. Jeff Garzik News Administrator Spinne, Inc.

2 1

Re: Anyone Deployed Ascend's GRF IP Switch?
by Gary Zimmerman 25 Aug '97

25 Aug '97

Joe, I agree with you. We have several of the GRF2s (16 slot) and a few GRF400s, (1 - 7513) almost cisco fee. I have been working with the GRF since last August and we like it alot. It does take a while to get the gated stuff down, but once you get past that then these routers will handle some traffic and some large BGP tables. We run a ATM network and believe that IP switching is the right way to go and the GRFs are the first step in that direction. Move the processing to the board instead of a central processor also makes alot of sense. Gary Zimmerman V.P. Network Engineering SAVVIS Communication Inc. http://www.savvis.com ---------- > From: Joe Shaw <jshaw(a)insync.net> > To: Lane Patterson <lane(a)isi.net> > Cc: Christofer Hoff <hoff(a)nodewarrior.net>; nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: Anyone Deployed Ascend's GRF IP Switch? > Date: Sunday, August 24, 1997 1:32 PM > > > The new name for the BFR (Big F**king Router) is the GSR. As much as I > like cisco and it's configurablility, The Ascend GRF is still a very > powerful box for a lot less than the biggest cisco out there that can't > perform close to it. The only problem I have with the GRF is that if > you're a newbie to GateD, then it will take you a bit of tinkering to get > a working setup. This was my case since I'm much more accustomed to the > Cisco way of doing things. However, the GRF is a nice change. > > Joe Shaw - jshaw(a)insync.net > NetAdmin - Insync Internet Services > "Learn more, and you will never starve." - Paraphrase of Lee > > > On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Lane Patterson wrote: > > > Talk to Nathan Stratton at Netrail. He's our collective test case :-) > > > > Aren't you looking at Cisco's BFR too? > > > > -Lane > > > > On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Christofer Hoff wrote: > > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > We are in the development phase of engineering the deployment of > > > approximately > > > 60 POPs throughout the US. Our 'standard' configuration is normally > > > based upon > > > cisco equipment and more often than not consists of a 7513 connected > > > to a Catalyst > > > 5000/5500 via FDDI with the various internal LAN segments switched > > > from there via FD 100BaseTX. > > > > > > We've begun to explore the viability of deploying the GRF for several > > > reasons, > > > not the least of which is cost and performance. Given (and taken > > > with a grain > > > of salt) the apparent performance differential between the cisco 7513 > > > and the > > > Ascend GRF (the GRF outperforms the 7513 substantially in our tests,) > > > my > > > concerns are more operations-related. > > > > > > The GRF DOES support the 'full' implementation (including extensions) > > > of > > > BGP4 and the other 'vanilla' TCP services that you'd come to expect > > > from > > > a router (er, layer 3 switch?) of this caliber. Since it's NOT a > > > cisco, > > > we'd have to deviate and not utilize EIGRP as our IGP of choice, and > > > deploy > > > OSPF which poses its own set of issues. > > > > > > SO, the bottom line...has anyone else deployed multiple GRF400's with > > > success. > > > Ascend will tell you that UUNET has deployed (or is going to) a > > > hundred or so. > > > I want to talk to people USING the technology, not thinking about it. > > > > > > Your comments and opinions are welcomed. > > > > > > TIA, > > > > > > Christofer Hoff > > > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 > > > Charset: noconv > > > > > > iQA/AwUBM/3KcnRoVZYHVpX1EQKKwgCgsnu30mTvCXZRyH68TOWeq3z0uZkAnj0F > > > Kmgl0te7Wq6AzsQ1/0GjMV5N > > > =d5NC > > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > > > ,,, > > > (o-o) > > > ------.oOO--(_)--OOo.--------------------------------- > > > Christofer L. Hoff \ No true genius is > > > Chief Nerd, \ possible without a > > > NodeWarrior Networks, Inc \ little intelligent > > > \ madness! > > > hoff(a)nodewarrior.net \ > > > http://www.nodewarrior.net \ -Peter Uberoth > > > "Nuthin' but Net!" \ > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > 310.568.1700 vox - 310.568.4766 fax > > > > > > > > > > >

1 0

8th Maryland Workshop on Very High Speed Networks
by Account of Maryland Center for Telecommunications Research 25 Aug '97

25 Aug '97

*************************************************************** 8th Maryland Workshop on Very High Speed Networks November 11-12, 1997 *************************************************************** Maryland Center for Telecommunications Research Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering University of Maryland Baltimore County The Maryland Center for Telecommunications Research (MCTR) at the University of Maryland Baltimore County (UMBC) will hold the 8th Maryland Workshop on Very High Speed Networks (VHSN '97) on November 11-12 1997 at the UMBC campus. The Workshop will be held in the Ballroom of the University Center on the UMBC campus. The goal of the workshop is to provide a forum where researchers and developers can meet to exchange ideas and report on leading- edge developments in the area of high speed networks. Each of the previous workshops attracted approximately 150 researchers representing academia, industry and government. The two day meeting will include invited speakers and contributed presentations. Papers on selected presentations will appear in a special issue of the Journal of High Speed Networks. A registration fee of $325 will include two lunches and conference proceeding. For questions regarding the technical content of the workshop or giving a presentation, please contact the workshop organizer: Dr. Deepinder Sidhu, Tel: (410) 455-3028 or 3063, Fax: (410) 455-3969, Email: mctr(a)cs.umbc.edu. Mail checks (payable to University of Maryland Foundation) and registration form to Dr. D. Sidhu, Maryland Center for Telecommunications Research, University of Maryland Baltimore County, 1000 Hilltop Circle, Baltimore, MD 21250. All funds for this event will be managed by the UM foundation. Please DO NOT include hotel accommodation expenses in your payment for the Workshop Registration. Room payment should be made directly to the hotel you selected for stay. The following hotels are closest to UMBC campus. Some hotels may offer reduced rate. To obtain the reduced rate, you must identify yourself as an attendee of this workshop. BWI Airport is approximately five miles from UMBC Campus. * Sheraton International Hotel - BWI Airport. Closest to airport and UMBC campus. Tel: (410) 859-3300 or (800) 638-5858 * Holiday Inn - BWI Airport. Close to airport and UMBC campus. Tel: (410) 859-8400 or (800) HOLIDAY * Omni Inner Harbor Hotel. Close to Downtown Baltimore/Inner Harbor. About 20 minutes drive to UMBC campus. Tel: (410) 752-1100 or (800) 843-6664 For more information on the workshop and directions to UMBC, check our home page on WWW (http://www.mctr.umbc.edu) --------------------------------------------------------------- VHSN '97 REGISTRATION FORM (November 11-12, 1997) Name: Affiliation: Address: Tel: Fax: Email: Dietary Restrictions: Vegetarian ------ Kosher -------- ---------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Trans-Atlantic Traffic
by Thomas P. Koltai 25 Aug '97

25 Aug '97

To anyone that replied direct or through the list to the above, please note that a small accident occurred to my email on Friday and I have not received any mail sent from 5:30 pm on thursday through to 6:00 pm on Friday. Tom -------------------------------------------------- Thomas P. Koltai Phone: +61-2-9261-4884 Mobile: +61-419-333331 Facimile: +61-2-9267-0231 Email: tomk(a)koltai.com 187 Liverpool Street, Sydney NSW Australia 2000 --------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Trans-Atlantic Traffic
by Sean M. Doran 23 Aug '97

23 Aug '97

Per Gregers Bilse <bilse(a)EU.net> writes: Well, other people's memories vary somewhat I guess. I'll ask you your version of things over beer at the next RIPE meeting. :) > If you think rationally, why didn't we stay with Ebone? > Warm, cosy, cooperative -- why would anybody break away voluntarily? Expensive. --:) (Well, that's been the recent reason, though there are funding politics inolved in many cases of that too, I guess) > And, of course, if Ebone > wants to be part of EUnet, we can probably work something out. Wouldn't this mean changing your business model? :) :) > Your somewhat glorifying description of Ebone and the > lumping of everybody else belies Any implication of "guilt by association" was completely unintentional. Also, any implication that EUNET is somehow less than Ebone was also unintentional. As I said, EUNET is cool. :) > I didn't exactly imply that (it could be a hot discussion topic, > though), That can be the second or third round of beer. :-) Sean.

1 0

RE: ICMP Attacks???????
by Steve Carter 23 Aug '97

23 Aug '97

As Alex said earlier, we have experienced(?) a few ping floods recently, and it is very difficult to use technology to trace the real culprit, because you would have to follow the L2 signature (router ARP tables at every hop, show ip arp, on a Cisco) through the Internet to the source which means that you would have to have privs (or cooperate with engineers) on all the transit networks that the culprit uses. By the time this is in place the flood has usually stopped and then we are SOL >:) I would suggest that you interview the specific person targeted (if there is one) and ask, in good old Colombo style, 'Did the deceased have any enemies that you know of?' You never know! Knowing/suspecting is not enough and tangible proof is a different thing however! ----------------------------- > Does anyone have any ideas from where its coming from???? We have had > no > luck with this at all???? > > On Fri, 15 Aug 1997, Alex Rubenstein wrote: > > > > > Yes. It was interesting. My understanding is that what I am about to > tell > > you is old news, but here: > > > > Attacker sends a packet with a source address of the victim, with a > dest > > address to the broadcast of a (pick any) network. Every machine on > the > > network will then respond with a ICMP reply to the 'source' (the > victim). > > > > My understanding is that a 28.8 users could easily fill a T1 (or > more) > > with this method. We have no proof, but someone did this to us from > what > > appears to be a ISDN account from PSI, and filled 6 - 7 mb/s of our > > Ethernet genuity connection in doing so. It was *not* cool. > > > > > > On Fri, 15 Aug 1997, Network Admin Account wrote: > > > > > > > > Has anyone been resently attacked by massive flood pings?????? We > are > > > trying to locate any other ISP's or anyone else having the same > problem. > > > > > > > >

14 24

Re: Blocking spoofing at the source (was: ICMP Attacks??)
by Joe Rhett 23 Aug '97

23 Aug '97

> > This won't work on anything with multiple diverse paths. And I don't know > > many companies with their own WANs that don't have such. > This rule could be made to work only on links that aren't doing any dynamic > routing protocols, which makes it useful for things like dialup servers. > Since it becomes next to impossible to filter at the core router level, I > think the proper place to do this is at the edge of the network (dialup > servers, static-routed links back to customers), rather than the center. You're assuming that all non-Internet networks have cores. Very untrue. -- Joe Rhett Systems Engineer JRhett(a)ISite.Net ISite Services PGP keys and contact information: http://www.navigist.com/Staff/JRhett

1 0

Premeditated Murder of Microsoft
by cameo 22 Aug '97

22 Aug '97

Something to worry about? I don't know. http://www.freeyellow.com/members/obione/ -Cameo

3 2

Re: Premeditated Murder of Microsoft
by Eric Germann 22 Aug '97

22 Aug '97

Not to mention its only one of about 16 of their servers sitting on approx 8 T-3's (last I heard) At 11:55 AM 8/22/97 -0700, Wayne D. Correia wrote: >At 1:29 PM -0400 8/22/97, cameo wrote: >>Something to worry about? I don't know. >> >>http://www.freeyellow.com/members/obione/ >> >>-Cameo > >Depends on how much or how little you appreciate/rely upon/are Microsoft. >Hint: this will not affect my life whatsoever. :-) > > >-- > Wayne D. Correia tel:415-826-6000 fax:415-826-6100 > > > > ============================================================================ ==== Eric Germann Computer and Communications Technologies ekgermann(a)cctec.com Van Wert, OH 45891 Phone: 419 968 2640 http://www.cctec.com Fax: 419 968 2641 Network Design, Connectivity & System Integration Services A Microsoft Solution Provider

1 0