I have been having problems getting to (and keeping connections with) certain Exodus clients, such as HotBot and GeoCities. Anyone else noticed this? Traceroutes seem to be blowing up in the same place... Find route to: www.geocities.com. (209.1.224.12), Max 30 hops, 40 byte packets 1 ldeleski-isdn.cisco.com. (171.68.18.89): 11 ms 5 ms 5 ms 2 171.70.196.1 (171.70.196.1): 121 ms 116 ms 130 ms 3 171.70.192.131 (171.70.192.131): 118 ms 117 ms 117 ms 4 gaza-gw2.cisco.com. (171.68.0.91): 118 ms 117 ms 117 ms 5 sj-wall-1.cisco.com. (198.92.1.137): 118 ms 117 ms 117 ms 6 barrnet-gw.cisco.com. (192.31.7.37): 133 ms 119 ms 117 ms 7 s2-1-1.paloalto-cr18.bbnplanet.net. (131.119.26.9): 128 ms 121 ms 145 ms 8 p3-2.paloalto-nbr2.bbnplanet.net. (4.0.3.85): 120 ms 118 ms 125 ms 9 p9-0-0.paloalto-br1.bbnplanet.net. (4.0.1.221): 122 ms 127 ms 119 ms 10 ibr02-h8-1-0.sntc01.exodus.net. (209.1.169.233): 134 ms 121 ms 120 ms 11 dcr02-f2-1-0.sntc01.exodus.net. (209.185.9.37): 230 ms 137 ms 194 ms 12 209.1.217.19 (209.1.217.19): 123 ms 122 ms 122 ms 13 * * * 14 [more of the same] Find route to: www.hotbot.com. (209.185.151.128), Max 30 hops, 40 byte packets 1 ldeleski-isdn.cisco.com. (171.68.18.89): 5 ms 5 ms 5 ms 2 171.70.196.1 (171.70.196.1): 118 ms 118 ms 116 ms 3 171.70.192.130 (171.70.192.130): 119 ms 117 ms 117 ms 4 gaza-gw1.cisco.com. (171.68.0.44): 118 ms 117 ms 118 ms 5 sj-wall-1.cisco.com. (198.92.1.137): 121 ms 118 ms 117 ms 6 barrnet-gw.cisco.com. (192.31.7.37): 119 ms 120 ms 117 ms 7 s2-1-1.paloalto-cr18.bbnplanet.net. (131.119.26.9): 123 ms 119 ms 125 ms 8 p3-2.paloalto-nbr2.bbnplanet.net. (4.0.3.85): 120 ms 119 ms 118 ms 9 p9-0-0.paloalto-br1.bbnplanet.net. (4.0.1.221): 121 ms 120 ms 119 ms 10 ibr02-h8-1-0.sntc01.exodus.net. (209.1.169.233): 122 ms 121 ms 120 ms 11 dcr02-f10-1-0.sntc01.exodus.net. (209.1.169.145): 123 ms 121 ms 127 ms 12 209.1.231.166 (209.1.231.166): 367 ms 300 ms 229 ms 13 209.185.255.195 (209.185.255.195): 195 ms 207 ms 216 ms 14 * * * 15 * * [...yadda yadda...] Larry Deleski ldeleski@cisco.com
I have been having problems getting to (and keeping connections with) certain Exodus clients, such as HotBot and GeoCities. Anyone else noticed this?
Not until you mentioned it; I don't consider the content published by GeoCities or HotBot to be interesting at all, but I did a couple traceroutes special just for you and I can't reach either. Have you considered notifying the Exodus NOC? Or did you just want to share the fact that you can't reach Geocities and HotBot with a few thousand people to see how many agree? Stephen - ----- Stephen Stuart <stuart@tech.org>
On Sun, 03 Jan 1999 12:27:41 -0700, lad@inficad.com writes:
I have been having problems getting to (and keeping connections with) certain Exodus clients, such as HotBot and GeoCities. Anyone else noticed this?
When did nanog@merit.edu become the Exodus NCC? Come on folks, there has been too much of this crap lately.
<HTML> <HEAD> <TITLE>Problems @ Exodus?</TITLE>
Someone should make sure the NANOG mailing list charter forbids posting in HTML. Bleah. -Jon ----------------------------------------------------------------- * Jon Green * "Life's a dance * * jcgreen@netins.net * you learn as you go" * * Finger for Geek Code/PGP * * * #include "std_disclaimer.h" * http://www.quadrunner.com/~jon * -------------------------------------------------------------------------
At 03:20 PM 1/3/99 -0600, Jon Green wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 1999 12:27:41 -0700, lad@inficad.com writes:
I have been having problems getting to (and keeping connections with) certain Exodus clients, such as HotBot and GeoCities. Anyone else noticed this?
When did nanog@merit.edu become the Exodus NCC? Come on folks, there has been too much of this crap lately.
OK, so now even network problem assessments have been chided as being "off topic". What remains, and when was the last time anyone talked about it? It seems like any topic that has been brought up over the last few months, SOMEONE has complained (usually quite loudly) that "this isn't the place for that topic of discussion". Judging by the number of topics that have actually NOT received the vocal opposition (a paltry few that they were), it seems the mailing list should amount to like, what?, two messages a month maybe? Something's not right with that... D
On Sun, 03 Jan 1999 13:37:25 -0800, dredd@megacity.org writes:
At 03:20 PM 1/3/99 -0600, Jon Green wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 1999 12:27:41 -0700, lad@inficad.com writes:
I have been having problems getting to (and keeping connections with) certain Exodus clients, such as HotBot and GeoCities. Anyone else noticed this?
When did nanog@merit.edu become the Exodus NCC? Come on folks, there has been too much of this crap lately.
OK, so now even network problem assessments have been chided as being "off topic".
Considering that his problems were isolated to Exodus clients, yes, it's off-topic. Small network outages happen every day, and I don't think we need to hear about them all. IMHO, what DOES belong on this list are discussions of network design, router configuration, LARGE SCALE outages, emerging Internet technologies, and general knowledge-sharing of how to build better networks. It's not a mailing list for end users to say "I can't reach www.something.com, but before I report it to my ISP or to the far-end ISP I wanted to see if anyone else sees my problem." If that is what the list continues to turn into, I for one will be unsubscribing, because that is useless to me. -Jon ----------------------------------------------------------------- * Jon Green * "Life's a dance * * jcgreen@netins.net * you learn as you go" * * Finger for Geek Code/PGP * * * #include "std_disclaimer.h" * http://www.quadrunner.com/~jon * -------------------------------------------------------------------------
At 03:54 PM 1/3/99 -0600, Jon Green wrote:
Considering that his problems were isolated to Exodus clients, yes, it's off-topic. Small network outages happen every day, and I don't think we need to hear about them all. IMHO, what DOES belong on this list are discussions of network design, router configuration, LARGE SCALE outages, emerging Internet technologies, and general knowledge-sharing of how to build better networks. It's not a mailing list for end users to say "I can't reach www.something.com, but before I report it to my ISP or to the far-end ISP I wanted to see if anyone else sees my problem." If that is what the list continues to turn into, I for one will be unsubscribing, because that is useless to me.
I agree that "every little outage" isn't the purview of this list. It just seems like we have more messages on this list lately discussing what should/should-not be talked about than we do about "real" topics. This particular case may be more obviously "off-topic", but the reality is that it just seems (seems mind you) like a disproportionate amount of our traffic is complaining about other traffic. Dunno... D
What remains, and when was the last time anyone talked about it? It seems like any topic that has been brought up over the last few months, SOMEONE has complained (usually quite loudly) that "this isn't the place for that topic of discussion".
In the last week, there have been discussions of telco issues (the "DACS failure" thread) and tools (the "System And Network Monitoring" thread) that seem to have been generally received as on-topic. For all the topics that are regarded as being on-topic, there's a common aspect: they affect multiple providers. Telco issues. Tool issues. Vendor issues. Natural disaster issues. A given provider may have problems in their interior that affects lots of users, but that's still a problem with a single provider and not necessarily relevant to the list; one might consider exceptions like when the host is a root name server, but user complaints that they can't reach a web server are not well-received because there's an obvious place (a NOC) to go to report the problem to people who are paid to do something about it.
Judging by the number of topics that have actually NOT received the vocal opposition (a paltry few that they were), it seems the mailing list should amount to like, what?, two messages a month maybe?
I'd MUCH prefer two meaningful messages to a dozen complaints from people who don't know how to contact a NOC or configure DNS.
Something's not right with that...
Something's *definitely* not right with NANOG being used as a substitute for contacting a NOC for problems that are plainly within the interior of a single network. Interprovider issues that require cooperation between providers have generally been better received by the list than complaints from *users* that they can't reach a web server. Stephen
In the last week, there have been discussions of telco issues (the "DACS failure" thread) and tools (the "System And Network Monitoring" thread) that seem to have been generally received as on-topic.
But why WAS the System and Network Monitoring thread on-topic? As the "creator" of that topic, I'd like to think it was, but in reality, all it would really "affect" is a single provider. Asking how someone else monitors their internal network is very similar to asking someone how they configure their DNS server. I'm not saying that you're WRONG. My point here is that we really don't have any clear-cut guidelines. The old adage about "if I can't program it into my router, its not valid" would certainly flunk out the Monitoring topic, that's for sure, since the main thrust of the request was how to monitor individual servers (albeit about a thousand of them).
I'd MUCH prefer two meaningful messages to a dozen complaints from people who don't know how to contact a NOC or configure DNS.
Agreed. I'd much prefer low-volume-high-signal to the opposite. I just think we have a "charter" as it were that is a little too vague, and leaves too much up for debate as to what is on/off-topic. I mean, you can state what you did about what you think is on/off-topic, and I might agree with you, but the charter is much more vague, and leads itself to ambiguity. I hate rules and regulations as much as the next guy, but I think it needs to be spelled out somewhere much more clearly than it already is. That's all. My point wasn't to claim that the Exodus topic necessarily WAS on-topic, but that there's nothing that clearly states it WASN'T. Ya follow? D
On Sun, 3 Jan 1999, Derek Balling wrote:
When did nanog@merit.edu become the Exodus NCC? Come on folks, there has been too much of this crap lately.
OK, so now even network problem assessments have been chided as being "off topic".
You are not a kid anymore. You don't have to raise your hand and ask the teacher's permission to go to the bathroom. You are a network operator and when you detect an apparent network problem that is impacting your network then it is your RESPONSIBILITY to pick up the phone and call the NOC of the network that appears to have the problem. Maybe they don't know about it yet or maybe you will be able to provide valuable info that helps them diagnose the problem sooner. Or maybe you will have greater clue than the people on shift at the other NOC and you will tell them what is wrong and help them fix it. That's how the Internet has been able to scale so far and so fast. Posting a query to this list is basically useless except in a couple of instances. One is when you are reporting a post-mortem of an incident so that everyone can learn from it. And another is when you are asking for more info about a continuing problem that may be affecting many other networks. Examples are the week or so when everyone was figuring out how best to deal with syn flood attacks. Or the SMURF amplifier problems. The question about Exodus really was out of place on this list, however it would not be out of place on IRC. Maybe it would help the list if folks would let other list members know where to find the IRC channels that network operations staff hang out on. -- Michael Dillon - E-mail: michael@memra.com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com
participants (6)
-
Derek Balling -
Jon Green -
Lawrence A. Deleski -
Michael Dillon -
Randy Bush -
Stephen Stuart