- Test - lists.nanog.org

Is this strange, or is it me?
by Alex Rubenstein 28 Jul '97

28 Jul '97

I am showing a route for the Penn NAP; is this normal? BGP routing table entry for 192.157.69.0/24, version 262837 Paths: (1 available, best #1, advertised over IBGP) 3561 204.70.65.53 from 204.70.65.53 (204.70.65.1) Origin IGP, valid, external, best Sprint NAP Team (NET-ICMNET-6) Netnumber: 192.157.69.0

1 0

RE: September COOK Report focus on net governance & IANA authority issues
by Jim Fleming 28 Jul '97

28 Jul '97

On Sunday, July 27, 1997 10:11 PM, Gordon Cook[SMTP:cook@netaxs.com] wrote: @ @ @ INTERNET GOVERNANCE NOT SCALING WELL @ This should not be a surprise to anyone... The obvious solution is for the U.S. Government to remove their Root Name Servers from commercial use and to discourage Universities and non-profit companies from supplying these commercial services. This action would leave the NSI server and the PSI server from the Legacy Root Name Server Confederation. Those severs could be combined with the existing eDNS Root Name Servers to make a Root Name Server Confederation with reasonable connectivity in North America. NSI could change the file that ISPs download to obtain their hints. The eDNS Root Name Server owners/operators and the people on the NANOG list might want to discuss this possible scenario. In light of the recent DNS disasters, it is good to do more advanced planning and of course to keep fixing the DNS software. -- Jim Fleming Unir Corporation

2 1

Another apology (was Re: Kim, where are youuuuuuuuuuu!)
by Eric Germann 27 Jul '97

27 Jul '97

Apparently there is a dead subscriber account (figuratively, hopefully not literally) on the NANOG list. postmaster(a)merit.edu and postmaster(a)energetic.com have been notified. Apologies to to Kim for this one. Pulling the burr out of my ass for the weekend, Eric At 06:58 AM 7/26/97 -0500, Larry Vaden wrote: >At 11:55 PM 7/25/97 -0400, Eric Germann wrote: >> >>>From: kimh(a)internic.net >>>Date: Fri, 25 Jul 97 19:16:56 PDT >>>To: ekgermann(a)cctec.com >>>Subject: Your mail to Kim Hubbard <kimh(a)internic.net> >>> >>>Your message was delivered to an email destination which is >>>no longer in service. >>> >>>Please contact Energetic Systems <info(a)energetic.com> for more information. > >Maybe Kim's favorite procmail recipe got updated by new management at NSI >(see Dr. Farber's IP article this week) > >:0 #regexp attributed to Randy Bush, !BuGless >* ^FROM_PLONKEES >/dev/null > >to generate your response `[8-)) > >And how do I configure my router for that? > > > > >

1 0

Apologies (Re: Internic does it again)
by Eric Germann 27 Jul '97

27 Jul '97

At 01:57 PM 7/27/97 PDT, Randy Bush wrote: >> Since when did InterNIC update their root servers on weekends? Last time I >> checked it was M-F. > >Not update on weekends! Those perfidious bastards! > >I demand my money back. They should be sued. Don't buy their stock. >Pillory them. > > > >Do these fools have no real work that they spend their time trying to catch >others in mistakes and then make asses of themselves on the lists? > >randy > > My gaffe. Around here, every day is a business day. After spending three days trying to jam shit through hostmaster(a)internic.net, when it finally does go through the template changes and you have to retype 50 templates then resubmit, just because they decided to add a 4 page "contract" at the beginning, and eliminate your selection of (P)ostal or (E)mail for invoice delivery :(. So my frustration level is rather high. Beat me, flog me. Sorry for the alarm. Just trying to see if the clients records were updated, after 2 1/2 days of trying. BTW Randy, from http://www.psg.com/clue.html Show some respect for other human beings and act as if you were in adult company. Stop talking about people. Talk about ideas. Do not use adjectives like good, bad, stoopid. If you are still frustrated and can't hold it in, go to Usenet and try k12.jr.chat. I'll abide if you will. Back to tabulating statistics on TCAP... Interesting stories. Best so far, 2 out of a /16 actually in use. And crawling in my hole... ============================================================================ ==== 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

Internic does it again
by Eric Germann 27 Jul '97

27 Jul '97

Heads up! Well our friends at Internic apparently forgot how to update their servers *.root-servers.net from here is showing a serial of 1997072500 with no updates made Friday night showing (11:30am EDT July 27). Oh well, out of date data is better than no data at all (the alternative), I suppose. Remind me not to buy their stock... Eric ============================================================================ ==== 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

5 4

RE: Non-ISP companies multi-homing?
by jan.novak＠aliatel.cz 27 Jul '97

27 Jul '97

Nice lecture, thanks. But I saw always when thinking about multihoming some other problems also. 2] Multihomed to different ISP without BGP, supposing I need only one /24. It will be PA or PI addressing space ?? With respect to CIDR aggregation effort, make it sense to require /24 PI address block?? How will route the second ISP my PA from the other ISP (he will de-aggregate the block of the second provider to announce more specific prefix??) ?? 2] Multihomed to different ISP with BGP , supposing I need only one /24. Again, make it sense to have my own AS and /24 PI block ?? Supposing to have IBGP to one ISP (to avoid assigning of independent AS) and EBGP to the second ISP, again will my router announce the /24 inside of the first ISP address block to the EBGP peer ?? 2. Multi-homed. Enterprise connects to more than one ISP. May or may not use BGP. Wishes to protect against problems in the ISP routing system, and will accept additional complexity and router requirements to get this. May also have differing service agreements for Internet access for different divisions.

7 15

PrimeNet's connectivity
by Vincent Poy 27 Jul '97

27 Jul '97

Greetings everyone, Does anyone know how PrimeNet is connected to the net? I know they claim to have a nationwide backbone but they aren't one of the nationwide backbone providers. Cheers, Vince - vince(a)MCESTATE.COM - vince(a)GAIANET.NET ________ __ ____ Unix Networking Operations - FreeBSD-Real Unix for Free / / / / | / |[__ ] GaiaNet Corporation - M & C Estate / / / / | / | __] ] Beverly Hills, California USA 90210 / / / / / |/ / | __] ] HongKong Stars/Gravis UltraSound Mailing Lists Admin /_/_/_/_/|___/|_|[____]

2 2

Re: Non-ISP companies multi-homing?
by Eric Germann 27 Jul '97

27 Jul '97

At 03:27 PM 7/26/97 -0400, Tim Gibson wrote: > > >On Fri, 25 Jul 1997, Eric Germann wrote: > >> Go back and sweep MCI and PSI and Sprint et. al. and SEE what they really >> use. Then follow your own guidelines and maybe the startups won't bitch so >> much... >> >> You can bet when people start paying for addresses there gonna be pretty >> pissed when they aren't fully routable. >> > >Eric, > Ping sweeping will only give NSI/InterNIC a rough estimate of >current online use. A route could be down at the time of sweep on one >end, and on the other a single web box could be using 50 IPs. Changes >would deffinately be welcome in policy. Policing via an "are you awake" >really shouldn't be one of them. > Which is why I agree ping sweeps won't work. And of course, we all keep our SWIP data up to date. BTW, I would hazard a guess that most of the wasted IP space is in the academic community. Does anyone really believe that MIT uses 16 million addresses? And I bet Internic asks for engineering diagrams to review from the big boys whenever they go back for an allocation. Kim, do you folks? I have a university client with 1200 hosts on 4 subnets. Guess what they've got? A /16. % Utilization: 1.83% % Waste: 98.17% Folks thats 64334 addresses. And we try and jam clients in to blocks of 8 or 16 discrete addresses. Squatters rights I guess :) I've seriously thought of approaching them for their "quality" IP real estate which isn't in the swamp. >From a post earlier this week to NANOG: BGP table version is 4043818, main routing table version 4043818 52606 network entries (146045/157874 paths) using <color><param>ffff,0000,0000</param>11039224</color> bytes of memory 12848 BGP path attribute entries using 1589828 bytes of memory 27663 BGP route-map cache entries using 442608 bytes of memory 0 BGP filter-list cache entries using 0 bytes of memory Dampening enabled. 245 history paths, 46 dampened paths Feel free to privately email me ( mailto:ekgermann@cctec.com )as to why if I can jam 128M+ into a backbone router for peering and from above a 53K routing table fits in about 11M, why all the NSP's complain about bloat in the table? Poor lookup algorithm? Input would be appreciated for design references. Mail me and let me know. I don't want to dampen the S/N ratio on NANOG anymore than I have to. >BTW I am one of those that constantly has to scrounge for IP space. > > >Tim Gibson >Skyscape Communications > > ================================================================================ 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

5 6

Re: Non-ISP companies multi-homing?
by Eric Germann 26 Jul '97

26 Jul '97

In honor of Ms. Hubbards pontification, I am starting a little archive: mailto:tcap@cctec.com This archive will be for people to send me (so we don't clog up NANOG) Totally Clueless Allocation Policies of providers. So all you consultants, send me your examples of hosed allocation policies from providers, large and small. You don't have to name your clients, but please do name the providers. I will summarize and forward to Kim and anyone else who cares at the end of two weeks and maybe we'll get an idea of who allocates correctly and who doesn't I'll start off with two examples: 1) Billion dollar company. MCI is their upstream. 5 divisions on one campus. Each has a mailgate, proxy, webserver, and router. Total need per division: 4 addresses. Total allocation: 5 x /24 . % Used: 1.6 % Waste: 98.4 MCI's response when we said take em back: "Why?" 2) Small office. PSI DDR LAN solution. 1 office, 2 PC's, one router. Total need: 3 Total Allocation: 1 x /24. % Used: 1.18% % Waste: 98.82 PSI's response when he said "All I need is a /29": "This is the way we do it. It's just easier for us." BTW Kim, I've gotten 4 responses in two hours on how to nail down all your addresses so a ping sweep shows them in use. Might just be a LITTLE more prevalent than ya'll think, eh? Go back and sweep MCI and PSI and Sprint et. al. and SEE what they really use. Then follow your own guidelines and maybe the startups won't bitch so much... You can bet when people start paying for addresses there gonna be pretty pissed when they aren't fully routable. Anyone care for the summary in two weeks? Mail me privately. Eric At 04:24 PM 7/25/97 -0400, Kim Hubbard wrote: >> >> I'm beginning to think there is a market for a device which has 1 Ethernet >> port and responds to any RANGE of addresses, so you can scam Internic into >> thinking you have 100% utilization of your address space, right off the bat... > >Yeah, because the conservation of IP space only helps InterNIC - it doesn't >help you or your customers or anyone else on the Internet. Let's just >use up all the address space....that'll teach the InterNIC! > >Kim > > > >> >> Eric >> > > > ============================================================================ ==== 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

2 1

Re: Sprint Flapping?
by asmith＠kwiksilver.com 26 Jul '97

26 Jul '97

just a little FYI nobody ever admit's that they are having a failure just that they are working with a new "feature"!:-) At 04:40 PM 7/23/97 -0400, you wrote: >On Tue, 22 Jul 1997, Robert Bowman wrote: > >> According to Sprint NOC at 800-669-8303 they are experiencing routing >> instabilities due to a "Cisco Feature". Not sure what that means. Earlier, > >Hmmm, this occurred pretty soon after Sprint eliminated their 'visible >confederations' hack. >http://www.cctec.com/maillists/nanog/current/msg00113.html > >Maybe they triggered a bug in the route reflector code? > >pbd >-- >Going to church does not make a person religious, nor does going to >school make a person educated, any more than going to a garage makes a >person a car. > > -Al Smith Peace is obtained through superior fire power.

2 1