- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Avalanche botnet takedown
by Scott Weeks 01 Dec '16

01 Dec '16

--- rfg(a)tristatelogic.com wrote: From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg(a)tristatelogic.com> The Internet, viewed as an organism, quite clearly has, at present, numerous autoimmune diseases. It is attacking itself. And its immune system, such as it is, clearly ain't working. There's going to come a day of reckoning when it will no longer be possible to paper over this sad and self-evident fact. (And no, I'm *not* talking about the fabled "Digital Pearl Harbor". I'm talking instead about the Internet equivalent of the meteor that wiped out the dinosaurs.) --------------------------------------------------- What is your suggestion to keep the sky from falling? scott

3 2

10G switch drops traffic for a split second
by TJ Trout 01 Dec '16

01 Dec '16

I recently upgraded my core network from 1G to 10G and after the upgrade I have noticed that my 10G switch during peak traffic (1500mbps, 100,000pps) seems to be dropping traffic for a split second across all ports and all vlans. I immediately replaced the switch with a different brand/model and the problem persists. Sometimes traffic drops to zero, others it drops to 50%, problem is very random but seems to occur with much more frequency during high PPS (pushing high traffic / iperf does not induce problem) Could this be MTU? I've tried flow control, hard code duplex, stp on/off etc I'm at a loss any ideas? TJ Trout Volt Broadband

9 13

Brocade MLXe Selective FIB Population
by Graham Johnston 30 Nov '16

30 Nov '16

Does anybody have information on how to selective populate the IPv4 FIB on a Brocade MLXe? Graham Johnston Network Planner Westman Communications Group 204.717.2829 johnstong(a)westmancom.com<mailto:johnstong@westmancom.com> P think green; don't print this email.

2 1

BFD on back-to-back connected BGP-speakers
by Hugo Slabbert 29 Nov '16

29 Nov '16

Good morning, nanog, Is there any/sufficient benefit in adding BFD onto BGP sessions between directly-connected routers? If we have intermediate L2 devices such that we can't reliably detect link failures BFD can help us quickly detect peers going away even when link remains up, but what about sessions with: - eBGP with peering to interface addresses (not loopback) - no multi-hop - direct back-to-back connections (no intermediate devices except patch panels) Possible failure scenarios where I could see this helping would be fat fingering (filters implemented on one or the other side drops traffic from the peer) or e.g. something catastrophic that causes the control plane to go away without any last gasp to the peer. Or is adding BFD into the mix in this type of setup getting into increasing effort/complexity (an additional protocol) for dimishing returns? -- Hugo Slabbert | email, xmpp/jabber: hugo(a)slabnet.com pgp key: B178313E | also on Signal

4 3

Re: 10G switch drops traffic for a split second
by John Kristoff 29 Nov '16

29 Nov '16

On Tue, 29 Nov 2016 09:06:00 +0000 TJ Trout <tj(a)pcguys.us> wrote: > Could this be MTU? I've tried flow control, hard code duplex, stp on/off etc > I'm at a loss any ideas? This sounds like a common problem that certain data center environments run into with 10 Gb/s and higher loads. In a nutshell, a simple throw money at it solution to the problem is to use a switch with larger buffers. Nonetheless, there are plenty of good sources of material about the phenomenon, such as: <http://fasterdata.es.net/network-tuning/router-switch-buffer-size-issues/> <https://people.ucsc.edu/~warner/buffer.html> John

1 0

Accepting a Virtualized Functions (VNFs) into Corporate IT
by Kasper Adel 29 Nov '16

29 Nov '16

Hi, Vendor X wants you to run their VNF (Router, Firewall or Whatever) and they refuse to give you root access, or any means necessary to do 'maintenance' kind of work, whether its applying security updates, or any other similar type of task that is needed for you to integrate the Linux VM into your IT eco-system. Would this be an acceptable offering in today's IT from different type of Enterprises (Minux the Googles, Facebooks...etc) ? Thanks

9 10

Softlayer abuse contact
by Brian Ellwood 28 Nov '16

28 Nov '16

Could someone with Softlayer abuse contact me off list? I have a netblock that cannot communicate with your network - emailed abuse@ about 2 weeks ago and didn't hear back. Thank you.

2 1

IPv6 dumps on Oregon route views
by Anurag Bhatia 28 Nov '16

28 Nov '16

Hello everyone Was wondering if anyone is aware of mrt dump link for IPv6 dumps of Oregon route views? I see on the website it links to http://archive.routeviews.org/ipv6/ which gives a list of various collectors except for Oregon. The default "bgpdata" directory inside has dumps which are empty. On the Oregon route-views route-views.routeviews.org CLI: route-views> sh bgp ipv6 unicast summary BGP router identifier 128.223.51.103, local AS number 6447 BGP table version is 46628425, main routing table version 46628425 36322 network entries using 9879584 bytes of memory 700439 path entries using 100863216 bytes of memory 331618/17259 BGP path/bestpath attribute entries using 82241264 bytes of memory 3607348 BGP AS-PATH entries using 175182046 bytes of memory 111346 BGP community entries using 11638354 bytes of memory 793 BGP extended community entries using 34044 bytes of memory 0 BGP route-map cache entries using 0 bytes of memory 0 BGP filter-list cache entries using 0 bytes of memory BGP using 379838508 total bytes of memory BGP activity 8323321/7623230 prefixes, 545522618/517975111 paths, scan interval 60 secs Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down State/PfxRcd 2001:388:1::13 4 7575 0 0 1 0 0 never Active 2001:388:1::16 4 7575 57344 1861 46628302 0 0 14:12:16 34047 2001:418:0:1000::F016 4 2914 148129 7618 46628302 0 0 2d10h 32871 2001:470:0:1A::1 4 6939 14390766 202805 46628302 0 0 18w2d 32990 2001:590::451F:6FF4 4 4436 0 0 1 0 0 never Active 2001:668:0:3:FFFF:0:ADCD:39EA 4 53364 1255881 57104 46628302 0 0 5w1d 33142 2001:918:0:5::1 4 3303 61123 3849 46628302 0 0 2d10h 32994 and much more. I am trying to look for mrt dump of this specific collector. Thanks. -- Anurag Bhatia anuragbhatia.com

2 2

Voice channels (FTTH, DOCSIS, VoLTE)
by Jean-Francois Mezei 28 Nov '16

28 Nov '16

I need to verify some claims made by incumbents in Canada that VoLTE data travels on a totally separate channel between the phone and the antenna. Does anyone have links to relevant VoLTE documentation that would provide how VoLTE is provisioned ? I was under the impression that it was more of an "app" on the phone that used the same IP address given for access to Internet. Does the phone get a separate IP and possibly separate VLAN with dedicated bandwidth to ensure voice call quality? Or are all the performance tricks done on land beyond the antenna once the packets are identified as VoLTE, but the phone itself just treats them as a normal app ? I know that for FTTH, there is a separate "channel" where the "POTS" emulation can be provided with its own dedicated IP and bandwidth. Would DOCSIS be the same as FTTH, with the cableco voice service riding isnide the same DOCSIS bandwidth but with pre-allocated bandwidth, or do they allocate separate NTSC channels with a totally separate data pipe ? (in which case, in systems with only 42mhz of uplink frequencies, the voice would have its own NTSC channel on uplink?

7 11

CGNAT - Seeking Real World Experience
by Adam 27 Nov '16

27 Nov '16

I'm crunching the numbers on the cost effectiveness of implementing CGN vs IPv4 auctions. The determining factor is how many ephemeral ports are reserved for each customer. This is for a residential broadband environment. Is anybody doing deterministic NAT/PAT (i.e. each customer gets X ports - no more, no less)? My thinking is that X=8192 would cover even the power users. However, with only 8 customers per public IPv4 address, CGN is not worth the trouble. With X=8192, our money and time would better be spent acquiring additional IPv4 space. Are people successfully using a smaller deterministic port allocation? What's your X? If I can't make the numbers work for deterministic NAT, I might be able to live with dynamic port assignments. Specifically, I'm referring to what vendor J calls "Port Block Allocation". I was thinking 1024 ports per block, with up to 8 blocks per customer (and a bunch of log correlation to determine who was using which ip:port tuple at a given datetime). I *can* make the math work out in favor of CGN if the average customer uses <= 3072 ports (3 blocks). But is that going to be enough? I'd love to hear other people's experiences. Thanks! -Adam

4 3