Re: Ownership of Routers on Both Ends of Transnational Links
Thanks again for your insightful responses! The case we discuss above is Chinese ISPs renting routers located outside China and the IPs belong to other ISPs. How about the case that the IP belongs to a Chinese ISP and is located in US(from RTT result), can we say it is very likely or definitely owned/operated by the Chinese ISP? Why would some ISP try to rent routers of Chinese ISP in US? For example, a traceroute from Ohio to an IP in China. Hop 17 and hop 18 should be located in US based on the RTT, and yet they belong to a Chinese AS(China Telecom). Does this mean that Chinese Telecom is managing these two hops? HOST: Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev 6. AS??? 100.65.11.97 0.0% 100 2.0 1.0 0.4 12.6 1.3 7. AS??? 52.93.15.238 0.0% 100 2.4 2.0 1.5 11.4 1.1 8. AS??? 52.93.14.134 0.0% 100 21.9 26.3 4.2 54.4 11.3 9. AS??? 52.93.14.119 0.0% 100 2.6 2.1 1.6 10.8 1.2 10. AS??? 100.91.27.86 0.0% 100 25.8 26.2 25.6 34.9 1.2 11. AS??? 54.239.42.197 0.0% 100 25.5 25.9 25.4 35.8 1.5 12. AS??? 100.91.4.218 0.0% 100 25.9 26.2 25.1 38.3 1.6 13. AS??? 100.91.4.217 0.0% 100 25.4 26.0 25.3 41.4 2.0 14. AS??? 100.91.5.85 0.0% 100 25.3 25.8 25.2 29.1 0.9 15. AS??? 54.239.103.86 0.0% 100 25.6 30.0 25.2 49.1 3.8 16. AS??? 54.239.103.77 0.0% 100 25.3 25.6 25.2 28.1 0.5 17. AS4134 218.30.53.1 0.0% 100 28.0 29.1 25.2 33.1 2.3 18. AS4134 202.97.50.21 0.0% 100 32.4 29.1 25.2 33.5 2.4 19. AS??? ??? 100.0 100 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20. AS??? ??? 100.0 100 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21. AS4134 202.97.94.121 0.0% 100 186.8 185.6 181.8 189.8 2.3 22. AS4816 119.147.222.6 0.0% 100 182.6 183.5 182.4 195.8 1.8 23. AS4816 183.2.182.130 0.0% 100 181.7 183.3 181.5 207.0 3.9 24. AS??? ??? 100.0 100 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25. AS45102 116.251.113.158 0.0% 100 176.7 177.9 176.5 186.7 2.1 26. AS45102 116.251.115.141 0.0% 100 213.2 213.4 213.1 218.5 0.6 Best, Pengxiong Zhu Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of California, Riverside On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 7:37 PM Erik Sundberg <ESundberg@nitelusa.com> wrote:
May sure when you are dealing with transnational links to watch the latency so you can tell when the link goes international. Just because you are going from a US Network provider to China Telecom doesn't mean that your not connecting to them in the united states.
For example a traceroute from Denver to 27.29.128.1 which is an IP in China Telecom's network.
It's about 26ms between Denver and Los Angeles. Hop 5 to Hop 6
China Telecom connects to GTT in Los Angeles Hop7/8
On Hop 8 is in the United State and Hop 9 is across the pacific. Because the latency goes from 31 ms to 183 ms.
Just something to keep in mind.
Packets Pings Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev 1. _gateway 0.0% 14 1.0 1.2 1.0 2.8 0.5 2. te-0-0-26.ear2.den1.us.nitelusa.net 0.0% 14 0.9 1.0 0.8 2.1 0.4 3. te-0-0-26.ear1.den1.us.nitelusa.net 0.0% 14 1.1 1.6 1.1 2.9 0.7 4. te-0-0-1-0.cr1.den1.us.nitelusa.net 0.0% 14 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 0.0 5. ae1-122.cr0-den2.ip4.gtt.net 0.0% 14 0.5 1.2 0.3 6.9 2.0 6. et-0-0-47.cr3-lax2.ip4.gtt.net 0.0% 14 26.5 26.4 26.2 26.7 0.2 7. as4134.lax20.ip4.gtt.net 0.0% 14 27.7 28.7 26.8 30.1 1.1 8. 202.97.50.29 0.0% 14 31.4 30.6 26.8 34.1 2.4 9. 202.97.41.129 0.0% 14 183.3 187.1 183.3 190.8 2.4 10. 202.97.94.101 0.0% 14 187.9 188.6 186.1 211.2 6.8 11. 202.97.94.141 0.0% 13 177.8 180.7 177.2 184.2 2.3 12. 202.97.67.54 0.0% 13 199.5 201.2 197.4 205.1 2.6 13. 111.177.110.62 0.0% 13 205.9 206.3 205.9 208.2 0.7 14. 27.29.128.1 0.0% 13 202.6 202.8 202.5 203.9 0.4
Erik Sundberg
Sr. Network Engineer
Nitel
350 N Orleans Street
Suite 1300N
Chicago, Il 60654
Desk: 773-661-5532
Cell: 708-710-7419
NOC: 866-892-0915
Email: esundberg@nitelusa.com
web: www.nitelusa.com
------------------------------ *From:* Zhiyun Qian <zhiyunq@cs.ucr.edu> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 16, 2019 1:02:36 PM *To:* Erik Sundberg *Cc:* Pengxiong Zhu; Zhiyun Qian; Zhongjie Wang; Keyu Man *Subject:* Re: Ownership of Routers on Both Ends of Transnational Links
Erik,
Thanks a lot for the information! This is extremely helpful. We are conducting an analysis on performance/policy-related study on transnational links. We are hoping to submit a paper soon. Will be glad to share all the details once we have a draft!
Best, -Zhiyun
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 10:35 AM Erik Sundberg <ESundberg@nitelusa.com> wrote:
CPE is usually ran by the customer. Some provider do offer managed routers for a fee. Kinda like renting a cable modem from your provider.
What are your guys trying to accomplish or find out?
Erik
Erik Sundberg Sr. Network Engineer Nitel 350 N Orleans Street Suite 1300N Chicago, Il 60654 Desk: 773-661-5532 Cell: 708-710-7419 NOC: 866-892-0915 Email: esundberg@nitelusa.com web: www.nitelusa.com
------------------------------ *From:* Pengxiong Zhu <pzhu011@ucr.edu> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 16, 2019 12:32 PM *To:* Erik Sundberg *Cc:* Zhiyun Qian; Zhongjie Wang; Keyu Man *Subject:* Re: Ownership of Routers on Both Ends of Transnational Links
Thanks a lot!
Are the Customer Devices managed by Telia or the customer?
Best, Pengxiong Zhu Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of California, Riverside
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 7:43 AM Erik Sundberg <ESundberg@nitelusa.com> wrote:
I hope this helps with the breakdown for telia.
Telia i think is using /31's for there serial blocks now
62.115.170.56 (Telia Edge Rotuer)
62.115.170.57 (Customer Device)
chinaunicom-ic-341501-sjo-b21.c.telia.net.
<Customername>-<CircuitID>-<POP>-<router>.c.telia.net
Customer: ChinaUnicom
Telia Circuit ID's are: ic-123456
POP: SJO (Airport code)
Router: b21
Doamin: c.telia.net "Customer.telia.net"
Erik Sundberg
Sr. Network Engineer
Nitel
350 N Orleans Street
Suite 1300N
Chicago, Il 60654
Desk: 773-661-5532
Cell: 708-710-7419
NOC: 866-892-0915
Email: esundberg@nitelusa.com
web: www.nitelusa.com
------------------------------ *From:* NANOG <nanog-bounces@nanog.org> on behalf of Pengxiong Zhu < pzhu011@ucr.edu> *Sent:* Monday, April 15, 2019 11:36:45 PM *To:* nanog@nanog.org *Cc:* Keyu Man; Zhiyun Qian; Zhongjie Wang *Subject:* Ownership of Routers on Both Ends of Transnational Links
Howdy folks,
We are a group of researchers at UC Riverside conducting some measurement about transnational networks. In particular, we are interested in studying the ownership of routers on the two sides of transnational links.
We have some concrete questions which we hope someone can shed some light on. Basically when we send packets from US/Canada to China, through traceroute and the RTT of each hop, we can locate the last hop in the US before the packets enter China (*there is a large jump of RTT of 100+ms from this hop onwards*). Oftentimes the ownership of such routers is ambiguous.
These hops whose IPs seem to belong to US or European ISPs (*according to BGP info*) but their reverse DNS names have *chinaunicom* in it, which is a Chinese ISP. AS1299 Telia Company AB 62.115.170.57 name = chinaunicom-ic-341501-sjo-b21.c.telia.net. 62.115.33.230 name = chinaunicom-ic-302366-las-bb1.c.telia.net. 213.248.73.190 name = chinaunicom-ic-127288-sjo-b21.c.telia.net.
AS701 Verizon Business 152.179.103.254 name = chinaunicom-gw.customer.alter.net.
While the following routers, they don't have a reverse DNS name at all, which seem to be uncommon if they were managed by US or European ISPs but quite common for Chinese ISPs. AS6453 TATA COMMUNICATIONS (AMERICA) INC 63.243.205.90 66.110.59.118
Can anyone confirm that these are indeed managed by the Chinese ISPs (even though they are physically located in the US according to the traceroute and RTT analysis)?
Best, Pengxiong Zhu Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of California, Riverside
------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error please notify the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail. You must destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner. Thank you.
------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error please notify the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail. You must destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner. Thank you.
------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error please notify the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail. You must destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner. Thank you.
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:38 AM Pengxiong Zhu <pzhu011@ucr.edu> wrote:
Thanks again for your insightful responses!
The case we discuss above is Chinese ISPs renting routers located outside China and the IPs belong to other ISPs.
I think you are using all of the wrong verbs here... 'renting' does not make sense here, I'm unclear on what you actually mean, please try again with a different verb OR more clarifying text. \
Sorry for the confusion. I mean the IPs belong to non-Chinese ISPs but are actually controlled/managed by Chinese ISPs. Best, Pengxiong Zhu Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of California, Riverside On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 8:52 AM Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:38 AM Pengxiong Zhu <pzhu011@ucr.edu> wrote:
Thanks again for your insightful responses!
The case we discuss above is Chinese ISPs renting routers located
outside China and the IPs belong to other ISPs.
I think you are using all of the wrong verbs here... 'renting' does not make sense here, I'm unclear on what you actually mean, please try again with a different verb OR more clarifying text. \
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 12:31 PM Pengxiong Zhu <pzhu011@ucr.edu> wrote:
Sorry for the confusion. I mean the IPs belong to non-Chinese ISPs but are actually controlled/managed by Chinese ISPs.
this is, as I think was said earlier, normal practice. Sometimes you accept a /31 from your "provider" or "peer", sometimes they accept yours... sometimes this is because of seasons/reasons/etc, sometimes because it's how folk denote who's paying for the link in between. Those ips are not useful as a signal, which I think was also said previously in this thread.
Best, Pengxiong Zhu Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of California, Riverside
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 8:52 AM Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:38 AM Pengxiong Zhu <pzhu011@ucr.edu> wrote:
Thanks again for your insightful responses!
The case we discuss above is Chinese ISPs renting routers located outside China and the IPs belong to other ISPs.
I think you are using all of the wrong verbs here... 'renting' does not make sense here, I'm unclear on what you actually mean, please try again with a different verb OR more clarifying text. \
i suspect the OP is down the rabbit hole of what is known as "anti-aliasing," trying to find out whether IP address A on some router is actually on the same router as IP address B, and what AS(s) those IPs are in. your point is that an inter-as link may have IPs from either of the providers. yup. and, because it is an INTER-as link, it does not really belong to one or t'other. this particular rabbit digs deep holes. an early entrance to the burrow is the classic from the uw crew inproceedings{Spring:2002:MIT:633025.633039, author = {Spring, Neil and Mahajan, Ratul and Wetherall, David}, title = {Measuring ISP Topologies with Rocketfuel}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2002 Conference on Applications, Technologies, Architectures, and Protocols for Computer Communications}, series = {SIGCOMM '02}, year = {2002}, isbn = {1-58113-570-X}, location = {Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA}, pages = {133--145}, numpages = {13}, url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/633025.633039}, doi = {10.1145/633025.633039}, acmid = {633039}, publisher = {ACM}, address = {New York, NY, USA}, } randy
participants (3)
-
Christopher Morrow -
Pengxiong Zhu -
Randy Bush