- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: PCs as routers...
by Jonathan Heiliger 15 Aug '95

15 Aug '95

On Aug 15, 4:22pm, Nathan Stratton wrote: > Ok, yes you are correct you can't drop a DS3 into the back of a PC, but > why not use a 4500 or 7000 for your ds3's and then use a PC to do the > major BGP4? On a 4500 I only can put in 32 megs or ram. Yes gated will > use more ram for the same number of routes, but I can put 128 meg or more > in a PC. >-- End of excerpt from Nathan Stratton I don't know if others have mentioned it... but I seem to recall that DEC was developing a PCI based HSSI interface for PCs. It also recently surfaced on one of the zillions of mailing lists. Granted you'd still need a DL 3100 or Larse Access-T45 to do your DS3 <-> HSSI stuff though. -- Jonathan Heiliger oOo Technical Specialist Email: loco(a)MFSDatanet.COM ooo MFS Datanet, Inc. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Telephone: [408].975.2259 oOo NCC: [800].637.4872

1 0

Re: CIDR FAQ
by Vince Fuller 15 Aug '95

15 Aug '95

Please remove CIDRD from the CC list for further discussion of the relative merits of cisco vs. PC routers. This is NOT relavent to the charter of the CIDR Deployment Working Group. Thanks, --Vince (the silent co-chair)

1 0

Re: How do I change my subscription?
by Robert E. Seastrom 15 Aug '95

15 Aug '95

You have my deepest sympathies. I've been trying for over a year via messages to postmaster(a)merit.edu and others, to get rs(a)tiny.sprintlink.net taken off the nanog list (I left Sprint last July). I get mail as rs(a)digex.net directly, and I get mail forwarded to me via Sprint, which means that I get two copies of everything that comes along. Problem is, the folks at Merit consistently deny that rs(a)tiny.sprintlink.net is on the list, though if you telnet to merit.edu's smtp port and EXPN the list, you see rs(a)tiny.sprintlink.net there, plain as day. Well, you used to be able to. Now if you telnet to merit.edu port 25 and say "expn nanog", the expn will eventually time out. This situation wouldn't be so bad if I could have an ongoing dialog with the Merit folks until we got things straightened out, but the standard MO seems to be to ignore the mail for three weeks to a month before sending back a claim that I'm not on the list and never have been. Then when I respond to that message, it goes in the bit bucket. I went through three iterations of this, and then gave up and wrote an incoming mail action to simply delete all duplicate messages in my nanog mailbox. It's simpler. Since all other mailing lists I used to subscribe to have propagated to rs(a)digex.net and NANOG mail is the only mail to me that routinely traverses Sprint, it crossed my mind to ask Sprint to point all mail for rs@tiny to nanog(a)merit.edu, but that seemed a little mean-spirited. :) ---Rob > I've tried nanog-request(a)merit.edu, it's no a valid address, and > I've tried majordomo(a)merit.edu, ditto. I need to change my > subscription to point to my new address. > > In case anyone's reading this that can do it, I subscribed to this list > as either: > > patrick(a)amdahl.com > patrick(a)oes.amdahl.com > or pjh70(a)eng.amdahl.com > > Starting Monday, my address will be: > > patrick(a)verity.com > > Thanks, and we return you to regularly scheduled business;) > > Patrick

3 2

Re: CIDR FAQ
by sob＠academ.com 14 Aug '95

14 Aug '95

Here is a small list for you. Of couse, corrections are most welcome: Routers that don't support fully support CIDR: ASCEND Pipeline and MAX products Telebit Netblazer Compatible Systems -- Stan | Academ Consulting Services |internet: sob(a)academ.com Olan | For more info on academ, see this |uucp: amdahl!academ!sob Barber | URL- http://www.academ.com/academ |Opinions expressed are only mine.

5 5

Re: One alternative to CIDR... ASAP
by jnc＠ginger.lcs.mit.edu 14 Aug '95

14 Aug '95

From: Tim Bass <bass(a)linux.silkroad.com> Here is a very rough strawman idea just posted to the CIDRD-WG. ... Autonomous System Aggregation Protocol Without commenting on the technical details (I've always held that mapping from IPv4 addresses to something else is one way to provide routing that scales, as well as "portable" IPv4 "addresses"), let me just point out that this scheme requires a certain amount of protocol development and documentation, as well as implementation and deployment. As well all have seen, the Internet seems to have a hard time doing that in less than three years, flat out. Also, the CIDR RFC (RFC-1519, 1993, three years ago) explicitly says: the Internet ... is soon to face several serious scaling problems. These include: ... Growth of routing tables in Internet routers ... It has become clear that the first two of these problems are likely to become critical within the next one to three years. This memo attempts to deal with these problems by proposing a mechanism to slow the growth of the routing table In other words, the growth of the routing tables was seen as a problem even then, and CIDR (and "supernetting") was the solution that was proposed, in a timely fashion, to that problem. RFC-1519 goes on to note: The proposed solution is to topologically allocate future IP address assignment ... this plan neither requires nor assumes that already assigned addresses will be reassigned ... routing technology will be capable of dealing with the current routing table size and with some reasonably small rate of growth. If this was an unacceptable solution, the time to say so, and make alternate plans, was back then. We've put a lot of code in place assuming that this was going to be the way we solved this problem, and it's very late in the game to say "oops, not the right approach". Noel

1 0

Re: One alternative to CIDR... ASAP
by Vince Fuller 13 Aug '95

13 Aug '95

People keep sending me e-mail asking for my ideas on alternatives to renumbering and CIDR. Here is a very rough strawman idea just posted to the CIDRD-WG. There are similar variations on this ASN routing paradigm that also could be considered: I'd suggest that those considering this proposal also peruse the archives of the IPAE mailing list, since IPAE (IP Address Encapsulation) was, at least in its earlies form, precisely this - a mechanism for encapsulating IP addresses in such a way as to create an inter-AS routing scheme using a separate, 32-bit address space. If memory serves, there have also been other earlier proposals for doing AS-to-AS routing using either a separate address space or using IP options - I believe the Big-Internet mailing list archives contains volumnous discussion of these techniques. Re-inventing a square wheel doesn't make it roll any better... --Vince

1 0

Re: routing meltdown
by Sean Doran 13 Aug '95

13 Aug '95

| Knowing Sean for who he is, I'm fairly sure that no RADB or RS will ever be | suitable to him. In particular... On the contrary; I believe Peter Lothberg's proposals for an RS scheme are quite reasonable. I think his criticisms of the current RADB and RS models are pretty well known, and valid. I would point out one more thing though, and that's that at the Stockholm IETF I had a genial chat with a number of folks from MERIT and the RA Team in general, and suggested several ways that the RADB could be made incrementally useful. I hope that some good comes out of that conversation. I'll use any tool that will make my job easier, and help our operation and the Internet scale better. At the moment, though, the RADB does the opposite, and the RS has no value whatsoever. Sean.

1 0

Re: routing meltdown
by Vadim Antonov 13 Aug '95

13 Aug '95

>What you want is something that isn't the Internet or even >a hop-by-hop destination-based connectionless packet network, >but rather something akin to X.25 or ATM. > Sean. ...which requires even more state kept in gateways, and therefore more CPU required to maintain that state. Film at 11. --vadim

3 2

One alternative to CIDR... ASAP
by Tim Bass 13 Aug '95

13 Aug '95

Friends: People keep sending me e-mail asking for my ideas on alternatives to renumbering and CIDR. Here is a very rough strawman idea just posted to the CIDRD-WG. There are similar variations on this ASN routing paradigm that also could be considered: VR, Tim PS: I'm off to the Azores in Portugal Monday for three weeks, so hopefully I can find net access to see how much of a flame-fest my mbox is enjoying..... ***************************************************************** STRAWMAN Autonomous System Aggregation Protocol (ASAP) --------------------------------------------- Too simple, by a simple minded person.... :-) 1) Modify IP code in routers to route with ASN numbers between AS; 2) Modify core routers to add ASN numbers to IP packets by; i.) Temporarily using TOS or similar field(s) in IP header; ii.) Add proper hooks in next version of IP; iii.) Some better idea. 3) Develop details of new routing algorithm to route, filter, load balance, multi-home using ASN tags; 4) Modify core routers to add ASN tags to IP packets that do not have ASN tags assigned by originating host (for backwards compatability with version of TCP/IP that cannot add their ASN numbers to IP headers (or a better idea); 5) Modify core routers to transfer routing from the ASAP protocol to the appropriate IGP if-and-only-if ASN of destination matches the current ASN; 6) Create simple UDP based algorithm (similar to DNS) that manages a distibuted database that maps IP addresses to ASN numbers. For example: When sending a packet, the kernal checks its cache for a map between the IP address and ASN number. If it existing is the cache (get a hit) it adds the ASN destination number to the IP header..... if not the router or host sends a UDP packet to a distributed database that maintains the mappings.. (these could be local, remote, but distributed and caching each other ... in a similar, but more efficient manner than DNS (after all how often do IP networks change their home ASN) (instead of ARP.... its ASNRP...... ;-) 7) Create another database of SUPERNETTED ASN numbers for IP service providers that aggregate current ASN numbers into some meaningful structure and provide distribued SUPER-ASN to SUPER-ASN routing. 8) More ideas to develop and refine.... Advantages: 1) IP address space allocation is simplifed and renumbering not necessary; 2) ASN routing reduces the size of the routing tables ; 3) SUPER-ASN routing further reduces the size of ASAP routing tables; 4) Routers can add ASN tags to IP packets until users migrate to new IP kernels; 5) More.... but I'm packing for a trip... Disadvantages: 1) Must create new ASAP protocol and SUPER-ASAP protocol; 2) Must create distributed ASN-NETWORK database; 3) IP code must be modified and upgraded; 4) Non-cached initial packets will route slower mapping destination ASN to destination IP address. 5) Also more disadvantages..... Just a start.... needs work.... but living in a plane is a real drain.. :-) Tim +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Tim Bass | #include<campfire.h> | | Principal Network Systems Engineer | for(beer=100;beer>1;beer++){ | | The Silk Road Group, Ltd. | take_one_down(); | | | pass_it_around(); | | http://www.silkroad.com/ | } | | | back_to_work(); /*never reached */ | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+

1 0

Re: $320 for a .com domain registration?
by Hank Nussbacher 13 Aug '95

13 Aug '95

On Sat, 12 Aug 1995 00:02:35 -0700 (PDT) you said: > >I just finished browsing http://www.britain.eu.net/naming-co/couk-form.html >which is the registration form for the .co.uk domain. They charge 300 >pounds for each domain registered, approximately $320 is US funds. > >Comments? > >Michael Dillon Voice: +1-604-546-8022 >Memra Software Inc. Fax: +1-604-542-4130 >http://www.memra.com E-mail: michael(a)memra.com > Just for comparison, we in Israel charge $50USA one-time fee for a domain in the co.il, org.il, ac.il, etc. domain. Hank

1 0