- Test - lists.nanog.org

Akamai Network Partnership
by email＠edylie.net 18 Oct '23

18 Oct '23

Dear All, May I know if anyone could guide me to the right contact for Akamai Network Partnership? We are a network operator in Indonesia and is keen to work with Akamai to speed up access to Akamai Content. Many Thanks. Best Regards, Edy

5 4

Amir Golestan sentenced to 5 years in prison for IP theft scheme
by goemon＠sasami.anime.net 18 Oct '23

18 Oct '23

https://krebsonsecurity.com/2023/10/tech-ceo-sentenced-to-5-years-in-ip-add… And a statement from ARIN: https://www.arin.net/blog/2023/10/16/micfo-golestan-sentencing/

3 3

Google ISP portal repeatedly denied for peer
by TJ Trout 18 Oct '23

18 Oct '23

Anyone from Google that could help get us isp portal access? We're directly period with Google but continually get denied portal access. Ticket 726155557. Thank you in advance, TJ Trout Volt Broadband ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: TJ Trout <tj(a)voltbb.com> Date: Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 6:06 AM Subject: Google ISP portal denied for peer To: nanog <nanog(a)nanog.org> Anyone from Google that could help get us isp portal access? We're directly period with Google but continually get denied portal access. Ticket 726155557. Thank you in advance, TJ Trout Volt Broadband

1 0

MX204 tunnel services BW
by behrnsjeff＠yahoo.com 17 Oct '23

17 Oct '23

Encountered an issue with an MX204 using all 4x100G ports and a logical tunnel to hairpin a VRF. The tunnel started dropping packets around 8Gbps. I bumped up tunnel-services BW from 10G to 100G which made the problem worse; the tunnel was now limited to around 1.3Gbps. To my knowledge with Trio PFE you shouldn't have to disable a physical port to allocate bandwidth for tunnel-services. Any helpful info is appreciated.

7 13

jon postel
by Randy Bush 17 Oct '23

17 Oct '23

25 years ago, jon postel died. we stand on the shoulders of jon and others, a number of whom died in october. not a cheering month for old timers. randy

4 4

Add communities on direct routes in Juniper
by Stanislav Datskevych 16 Oct '23

16 Oct '23

Dear all, Is there a way to add BGP communities on direct (interface) routes in Junipers? The task looks to be simple but the solution eludes me. In Cisco/Arista, for example, I could use "network 192.0.2.0/24 route-map <SOME_MAP_THAT_ADDS_COMMUNITIES>". In Juniper it seems to be impossible. I even tried putting interface-routes into rib-group with an import policy. But it seems the import policy only works on importing routes into Secondary routing tables (e.g. inet.50), and not into the Primary one (inet.0). I know it's possible to add communities on later stage while announcing networks to peers, in [protocols bgp group <name> export]. But I'd better slap the community on the routes right when they're imported into RIB, not when they announced to peers. Thanks in advance.

5 4

transit and peering costs projections
by Dave Taht 16 Oct '23

16 Oct '23

This set of trendlines was very interesting. Unfortunately the data stops in 2015. Does anyone have more recent data? https://drpeering.net/white-papers/Internet-Transit-Pricing-Historical-And-… I believe a gbit circuit that an ISP can resell still runs at about $900 - $1.4k (?) in the usa? How about elsewhere? ... I am under the impression that many IXPs remain very successful, states without them suffer, and I also find the concept of doing micro IXPs at the city level, appealing, and now achievable with cheap gear. Finer grained cross connects between telco and ISP and IXP would lower latencies across town quite hugely... PS I hear ARIN is planning on dropping the price for, and bundling 3 BGP AS numbers at a time, as of the end of this year, also. -- Oct 30: https://netdevconf.info/0x17/news/the-maestro-and-the-music-bof.html Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos

12 19

FCC and CISA host roundtable on Alerting Security Oct 30 2023
by Sean Donelan 16 Oct '23

16 Oct '23

The Federal Communications Commission’s Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB), together with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)’s Emergency Communications Division, will host a public roundtable on the cybersecurity of the nation’s public alert and warning systems. The roundtable will start at 9:30 a.m. EDT on Monday, October 30, 2023. This event will focus on cybersecurity in alerting, risk management frameworks as well as the cost and benefits of implementing these in incident reporting for alerting. https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-and-cisa-host-alerting-security-roundtable…

1 0

Re: ARIN whois contact abuse from ipv4depot aka Silicon Desert International Inc
by tim＠pelican.org 15 Oct '23

15 Oct '23

On Friday, 13 October, 2023 16:04, "Laura Smith via NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> said: > RIPE could do the same. And some might argue that it is easier for RIPE because > all we are asking is for a valid abuse contact, so its not like Nominet who have > to verify e.g. registrant company ID numbers. They do. In previous lives, I've regularly been on the receiving end of assorted audit requests from RIPE, some of which are to do with contact details in the DB (particularly when they find unreachable ones), and some of which are confirming that number resources are still in use by the organisation and for the purpose for which they were issued. I think the original complaint was that RIPE don't act (or less so than ARIN) to block or otherwise deal with people who are mining the DB for contacts, despite that being an incentive to put "real" data in the DB - not than that they don't push for accurate data in the DB. Thanks, Tim.

4 3

Re: maximum ipv4 bgp prefix length of /24 ?
by Geoff Huston 14 Oct '23

14 Oct '23

> On 6 Oct 2023, at 6:13 am, Owen DeLong <owen(a)delong.com> wrote: > > Ratio of FIB to RIB is only part of the equation. > > IPv6 is NOT under the disaggregation pressure that IPv4 is under because there is no pressure (other than perhaps scarcity mentality from those that don’t properly understand IPv6) to dense-pack IPv6 assignments or undersize IPv6 allocations. > > Look at the difference in prefixes per ASN across the two tables and that tells a much grimmer story for IPv4 in terms of RIB growth vs. IPv6. hmm - IPv4 is at [1], IPv6 is at [2] Now I’m trying to understand what your grimmer story for IPv4 might be here Owen. Since 2005 the number of IPv4 FIB entries per origin AS has increased fropm 8 to 12 in the past 20 years - or a 50% increase. Over ther same period the number of IPv6 prefix advertisements per origin AS has increased from 1.5 to 6, or a fourfold increase. If anything, the IPv6 story appears to me to be a far greater cause for concern, but you may have a different interpretation of this data. Geoff [1] https://bgp.potaroo.net/cgi-bin/plota?file=%2fvar%2fdata%2fbgp%2fas2%2e0%2f… [2] https://bgp.potaroo.net/cgi-bin/plota?file=%2fvar%2fdata%2fbgp%2fv6%2fas2%2…

7 15