: Yesterday TW started advertising BGP for the ip blocks I have : (68.68.176.0/22 in /24's) before they had the circuit completed How did they get the routes into their table if the ckt was not up and you were not advertising the routes to them? Did they also announce the covering prefix? scott --- mailing-lists@brianraaen.com wrote: From: Brian Christopher Raaen <mailing-lists@brianraaen.com> To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Time Warner Routing Issue Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 15:46:52 -0500 I have a Time Warner circuit that has been giving me issues and what their tech support has been telling me has not matched my previous experience with other backbones. I have been trying to move the backbone on one site from a tier-3 provider to Time Warner. Yesterday TW started advertising BGP for the ip blocks I have (68.68.176.0/22 in /24's) before they had the circuit completed, so I had to make an emergency mid-day switch to move to Time Warner. Then yesterday night they stopped announcing my blocks so my site went down again and would still be completely down if we had not added NAT to the /30 point-to-point link. They said the reason was they didn't have an LOA (which they had gotten back in October) and the ip blocks were not in the Level3 Radb list. I could still see announcement to some peers (Shaw Cable in Canada) in a few looking glasses and BGP routers. However my network blocks were not showing for the larger US carriers like Qwest and AT&T. One of their techs just called me back and said that Level3 should be advertising it, but I still do not see the routes on the AT&T route server. After noting that the tech said that it may take another day for BGP to "propagate" to other peers as they update their radb tables. In my experience I've never seen anything where I had to wait for a route to propagate other than standard routing table updates which usually take less then an hour, and I'd really not expect this many problems between Tier1 and Tier2 providers. I need to know if this matches other's experience and wanting to know what other people were seeing with traceroutes and "show ip bgp". The networks in question at the following 4 /24's 68.68.176.0/24 68.68.177.0/24 68.68.178.0/24 68.68.179.0/24 the serial ip address is 72.43.84.254 Thanks for your assistance. --- Brian Raaen Zcorum Network Architect
Brian,
wanting to know what other people were seeing with traceroutes and "show ip bgp". The networks in question at the following 4 /24's
68.68.176.0/24 68.68.177.0/24 68.68.178.0/24 68.68.179.0/24
Here's what I'm seeing on our L3 connection here in Denver, CO:: route1:~$ show ip bgp | egrep '68.68.17[6-9]' *> 68.68.176.0/24 4.79.81.221 0 0 3356 7843 11351 i *> 68.68.177.0/24 4.79.81.221 0 0 3356 7843 11351 i *> 68.68.178.0/24 4.79.81.221 0 0 3356 7843 11351 i *> 68.68.179.0/24 4.79.81.221 0 0 3356 7843 11351 i traceroute to 68.68.176.1 (68.68.176.1), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 4.79.81.221 0.348 ms 0.343 ms 0.339 ms 2 4.69.147.94 0.310 ms 0.316 ms 0.337 ms 3 4.69.132.106 16.486 ms 21.091 ms 16.440 ms 4 4.69.151.165 14.695 ms 14.709 ms 4.69.151.129 22.556 ms 5 4.69.145.144 14.874 ms 14.890 ms 4.69.145.80 14.951 ms 6 4.28.152.110 14.697 ms 14.806 ms 4.59.32.18 16.736 ms 7 66.109.9.104 14.579 ms 66.109.6.208 14.686 ms 14.478 ms 8 66.109.9.40 30.662 ms 66.109.6.23 30.592 ms 30.638 ms 9 66.109.6.20 30.420 ms 30.595 ms 30.582 ms 10 66.109.6.73 44.523 ms 44.460 ms 44.498 ms 11 24.24.21.213 57.437 ms 57.642 ms 57.626 ms 12 74.76.241.191 57.340 ms 57.495 ms 57.388 ms 13 74.76.241.181 57.478 ms 57.450 ms 57.766 ms 14 * * * 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * 18 * * * 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 * * * 22 * * * 23 * * * 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * * traceroute to 68.68.179.1 (68.68.179.1), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 4.79.81.221 0.421 ms 0.429 ms 0.430 ms 2 4.69.147.94 0.384 ms 0.402 ms 0.404 ms 3 4.69.132.106 14.763 ms 14.725 ms 14.750 ms 4 4.69.151.141 14.817 ms 14.787 ms 4.69.151.165 14.687 ms 5 4.69.145.80 62.893 ms 4.69.145.208 14.992 ms 4.69.145.144 14.975 ms 6 4.28.152.110 14.994 ms 14.808 ms 14.805 ms 7 66.109.6.208 14.659 ms 14.658 ms 14.589 ms 8 66.109.6.23 30.599 ms 30.774 ms 30.725 ms 9 66.109.6.20 30.509 ms 30.713 ms 30.718 ms 10 66.109.6.73 44.476 ms 107.14.19.29 44.468 ms * 11 24.24.21.213 57.657 ms 57.583 ms 57.567 ms 12 74.76.241.191 57.356 ms 57.227 ms 57.183 ms 13 74.76.241.181 58.266 ms 57.402 ms 57.452 ms 14 * * * 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * 18 * * * 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 * * * 22 * * * 23 * * * 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * * Chris
Hi Brian, My school has 2x TW circuits. Tracing to 68.68.176.1 shows that it doesn't leave TW's network. In Chris's previous email, the origion is AS 11351 which is Road Runner (now owned by TW). It gets to Albany, NY then dies. C:\Users\ridderg>tracert 68.68.176.1 Tracing route to gw.princetowncable.com [68.68.176.1] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 <1 ms 1 ms <1 ms 155.92.105.254 2 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 155.92.10.17 3 2 ms 1 ms 1 ms 155.92.10.1 4 3 ms 1 ms 8 ms 155.92.10.130 5 2 ms 1 ms 2 ms 207-250-86-49.static.twtelecom.net[207.250.86.49] 6 4 ms 4 ms 4 ms chi2-pr1-xe-2-3-0-0.us.twtelecom.net[66.192.250.154] 7 49 ms 5 ms 4 ms ae-1-0.cr0.chi10.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.152] 8 18 ms 19 ms 18 ms 66.109.6.73 9 32 ms 31 ms 31 ms ae1-0.glflnyaq-rtr000.nyroc.rr.com[24.24.21.213] 10 31 ms 31 ms 33 ms rdc-74-76-241-191.alb.northeast.rr.com[74.76.241.191] 11 * * * Request timed out. 12 * * * Request timed out. 13 * * * Request timed out. 14 * * * Request timed out. 15 * * * Request timed out. 16 * * * Request timed out. 17 * * * Request timed out. 18 * * * Request timed out. 19 * * * Request timed out. 20 * * * Request timed out. 21 * * * Request timed out. 22 * * * Request timed out. 23 * * * Request timed out. 24 * * * Request timed out. 25 * * * Request timed out. 26 * * * Request timed out. 27 * * * Request timed out. 28 * * * Request timed out. 29 * * * Request timed out. 30 * * * Request timed out. Trace complete. -Grant On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Chris Stone <axisml@gmail.com> wrote:
Brian,
wanting to know what other people were seeing with traceroutes and "show ip bgp". The networks in question at the following 4 /24's
68.68.176.0/24 68.68.177.0/24 68.68.178.0/24 68.68.179.0/24
Here's what I'm seeing on our L3 connection here in Denver, CO::
route1:~$ show ip bgp | egrep '68.68.17[6-9]' *> 68.68.176.0/24 4.79.81.221 0 0 3356 7843 11351 i *> 68.68.177.0/24 4.79.81.221 0 0 3356 7843 11351 i *> 68.68.178.0/24 4.79.81.221 0 0 3356 7843 11351 i *> 68.68.179.0/24 4.79.81.221 0 0 3356 7843 11351 i
traceroute to 68.68.176.1 (68.68.176.1), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 4.79.81.221 0.348 ms 0.343 ms 0.339 ms 2 4.69.147.94 0.310 ms 0.316 ms 0.337 ms 3 4.69.132.106 16.486 ms 21.091 ms 16.440 ms 4 4.69.151.165 14.695 ms 14.709 ms 4.69.151.129 22.556 ms 5 4.69.145.144 14.874 ms 14.890 ms 4.69.145.80 14.951 ms 6 4.28.152.110 14.697 ms 14.806 ms 4.59.32.18 16.736 ms 7 66.109.9.104 14.579 ms 66.109.6.208 14.686 ms 14.478 ms 8 66.109.9.40 30.662 ms 66.109.6.23 30.592 ms 30.638 ms 9 66.109.6.20 30.420 ms 30.595 ms 30.582 ms 10 66.109.6.73 44.523 ms 44.460 ms 44.498 ms 11 24.24.21.213 57.437 ms 57.642 ms 57.626 ms 12 74.76.241.191 57.340 ms 57.495 ms 57.388 ms 13 74.76.241.181 57.478 ms 57.450 ms 57.766 ms 14 * * * 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * 18 * * * 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 * * * 22 * * * 23 * * * 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * *
traceroute to 68.68.179.1 (68.68.179.1), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 4.79.81.221 0.421 ms 0.429 ms 0.430 ms 2 4.69.147.94 0.384 ms 0.402 ms 0.404 ms 3 4.69.132.106 14.763 ms 14.725 ms 14.750 ms 4 4.69.151.141 14.817 ms 14.787 ms 4.69.151.165 14.687 ms 5 4.69.145.80 62.893 ms 4.69.145.208 14.992 ms 4.69.145.144 14.975 ms 6 4.28.152.110 14.994 ms 14.808 ms 14.805 ms 7 66.109.6.208 14.659 ms 14.658 ms 14.589 ms 8 66.109.6.23 30.599 ms 30.774 ms 30.725 ms 9 66.109.6.20 30.509 ms 30.713 ms 30.718 ms 10 66.109.6.73 44.476 ms 107.14.19.29 44.468 ms * 11 24.24.21.213 57.657 ms 57.583 ms 57.567 ms 12 74.76.241.191 57.356 ms 57.227 ms 57.183 ms 13 74.76.241.181 58.266 ms 57.402 ms 57.452 ms 14 * * * 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * 18 * * * 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 * * * 22 * * * 23 * * * 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * *
Chris
participants (3)
-
Chris Stone -
Grant Ridder -
Scott Weeks