Re: Security Intelligence [Was: Re: Netblock reassigned from Chile to US ISP...]
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008, Christopher Morrow wrote: On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Gadi Evron wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008, Rich Kulawiec wrote: On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 05:51:13PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote: but you need to be much more specific about what you want from medium and smaller isps, and what the immediate payoffs (cf. the financial secions of the newpaper) will be to them to justify the costs. Inferior people look solely for financial payoff. Superior people recognize their fundamental obligation to prevent their operation from being a menace to others, and do it based on ethics. They don't need t be moral, they need to understand 4 years down the line it will cost them significantly to the point of losing a lot of business. A good example is registrars. They lose quite a bit now. do they lose 'quite a bit' now? how much is 'quite a bit'? and is that more or less than they take home at the end of the day? I'm curious because near as I can tell there doesn't seem to be really any change in how registrars handle transactions... even domains knowingly bought with stolen credit cards seem to hang around (and change) long after the CC company frauded out the transaction(s)... If there really was a large loss, wouldn't they make changes to process/procedures/activities to limit their exposure? The ones that don't take the "legal risk" now handle fraud quite differently. They are required to handle such purchases with the credit companies, and that costs them (the ones which do as they are required depending on law) on a scale which is .. very disturbing. -chris
Re: e300 vs mx240 for border router ?
ubaidali_abdul_raz...@3com.com wrote: Have you tried 3Com's 6040 / MSR-50 routers? No offense / no flame, but really, do you actually compare 3Com with Juniper ?
Re: e300 vs mx240 for border router ?
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Eugeniu Patrascu wrote: > ubaidali_abdul_raz...@3com.com wrote: >> >> Have you tried 3Com's 6040 / MSR-50 routers? > > No offense / no flame, but really, do you actually compare 3Com with Juniper > ? Patriotism :) -- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.li...@gmail.com)
Re: Netblock reassigned from Chile to US ISP...
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 01:13:59PM -0600, Frank Bulk wrote a message of 52 lines which said: > Is there an easy way to get past history on an IP block? Most sites > will show you aspects of that *now* http://www.renesys.com/blog/2008/11/for-sale-clean-lightly-used-ip.shtml (That's just an idea, not a real service.)
Re: Net Mgmt Tools and supporting OS
Thanks to all who replied. Due to ease of deployment I will probably go with the Cent)S based server and tools and modify things as I need it afterwards. Best of luck, Vitto, On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Claudia de Luna wrote: > Vito, > > I"m currently consulting to the state of California corrections department > on their wan and this question continually comes up. > > My recommendation is to get started with CactiEZ as you SNMP management > tool. CactiEZ is a CentOS based Cacti server that essentially loads > everything you need to get up and running. If you already have an > authoratative and complete list of all your network infrastructure equipment > it is then a simple matter of adding the devices to the server. > Out of the box you get your syslog server (essential) with some basic > search capabilities, your monitoring for bandwidth utilization, errors, > latency (ping based) and router CPU. > > You can grow from there with notification (it's pretty basic but better > than nothing), availability reports, and even a weather map. > > As someone else already said, use the OS you are most comfortable with. > Running monitoring on a network is a full time job in and of itself so don't > complicate things! > > Tools like OpenNMS and Nagios are a little more complex. The CactiEZ CD is > pretty much turnkey and gives you most, if not all, the tools to get you up > and running. From there you can see what needs it does not meet and grow > from there. > > Claudia > > > This link lists the "plug ins" available out of the box but there are > others as Cacti has a very good plug in architecture. > http://cactiusers.org/wiki/Homepage > > Example WeatherMap > > > > -- > *From:* vitto malitani > *To:* nanog@nanog.org > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 9, 2008 9:17:40 AM > *Subject:* Net Mgmt Tools and supporting OS > > I am fairly new user of nanog mail list so I am not sure if the question > below is appropriate for this list. If not, please excuse it. > - I am building a new low-budget customer WAN/LAN network and need some > ideas for network management tools. I've seen couple of email threads > regarding all sort of "net goodies". However, since I haven't used them > all, I am not sure which OS would be the most appropriate for these aps? > Can anyone share their ideas in regards of apps and supporting platforms? > I would be most comfortable with free distribution of linux, but I am not > sure which distro supports most of the tools? Is the paid OS required for > all these tools, like RedHat Server or SuSe or Windows platforms? > > Thanks much, > > Vitto >
No route to verizon
Hello, This is my first post. Can anyone provide some info or Verizon why there is no connectivity to Verizon CA(Verizon Business UUNETCA8-A)? Can not reach the following net range: 66.48.66.160 - 66.48.66.175 --sharlon
Re: No route to verizon
Sharlon R. Carty wrote: > Hello, > > > > This is my first post. > > Can anyone provide some info or Verizon why there is no connectivity to > Verizon CA(Verizon Business UUNETCA8-A)? > Can not reach the following net range: 66.48.66.160 - 66.48.66.175 > 11. ae-4-99.edge2.NewYork2.Level 0.0% 12. mci-level3-xe.newyork2.Level 0.0% 13. 0.xe-5-0-3.XL4.NYC4.ALTER.NE 0.0% 14. ??? 100.0 It gets into Verizons network and as far as New York. Maybe a fault between Verizon and the customer ? After all, Alter.net is Verizon. /Martin -- Airwire - Ag Nascadh Pobal an Iarthar http://www.airwire.ie Phone: 091-865 968
Re: No route to verizon
Sharlon R. Carty wrote: > Hello, > > > > This is my first post. > > Can anyone provide some info or Verizon why there is no connectivity to > Verizon CA(Verizon Business UUNETCA8-A)? > Can not reach the following net range: 66.48.66.160 - 66.48.66.175 > > > > --sharlon > > > That network is assigned to a customer: Tremor Technology Group Inc TREMORUU2 (NET-66-48-66-160-1) 66.48.66.160 - 66.48.66.175 You would have to contact them. Lots of possibilities: line failure, equipment failure, or they didn't pay their bill.
Re: No route to verizon
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008, Sharlon R. Carty wrote: This is my first post. Can anyone provide some info or Verizon why there is no connectivity to Verizon CA(Verizon Business UUNETCA8-A)? Can not reach the following net range: 66.48.66.160 - 66.48.66.175 Your best bet might be to call Verizon directly, as a range this small is not likely to be seen in the global routing table as a free-standing route. I see 66.48.0.0/16 from my transit providers, originated from AS701, which is what I'd expect to see. Beyond that, your post doesn't contain enough information to do much more troubleshooting. jms
RE: No route to verizon
Ok thanks everyone. I'll be contacting Verizon. I do not believe the issue lies with the customer not paying their bills. -Original Message- From: Justin M. Streiner [mailto:strei...@cluebyfour.org] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 3:21 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: No route to verizon On Mon, 15 Dec 2008, Sharlon R. Carty wrote: > This is my first post. > > Can anyone provide some info or Verizon why there is no connectivity to > Verizon CA(Verizon Business UUNETCA8-A)? > Can not reach the following net range: 66.48.66.160 - 66.48.66.175 Your best bet might be to call Verizon directly, as a range this small is not likely to be seen in the global routing table as a free-standing route. I see 66.48.0.0/16 from my transit providers, originated from AS701, which is what I'd expect to see. Beyond that, your post doesn't contain enough information to do much more troubleshooting. jms
Re: No route to verizon
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 15:05:44 -0400 "Sharlon R. Carty" wrote: Hello, This is my first post. Can anyone provide some info or Verizon why there is no connectivity to Verizon CA(Verizon Business UUNETCA8-A)? Can not reach the following net range: 66.48.66.160 - 66.48.66.175 My traceroute also ends with ALTER.NET: traceroute to 66.48.66.160 (66.48.66.160), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets ... 7 los-edge-01.inet.qwest.net (63.147.28.181) 1.701 ms 1.870 ms 1.734 ms 8 los-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.32.33) 1.755 ms 1.670 ms 1.823 ms 9 lap-brdr-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.32.10) 1.722 ms 2.082 ms 2.676 ms 10 0.so-4-3-0.BR1.LAX7.ALTER.NET (204.255.169.193) 2.094 ms 2.046 ms 1.720 ms matthew black e-mail postmaster california state university, long beach
Re: No route to verizon
Matthew Black wrote: On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 15:05:44 -0400 "Sharlon R. Carty" wrote: Hello, This is my first post. Can anyone provide some info or Verizon why there is no connectivity to Verizon CA(Verizon Business UUNETCA8-A)? Can not reach the following net range: 66.48.66.160 - 66.48.66.175 My traceroute also ends with ALTER.NET: traceroute to 66.48.66.160 (66.48.66.160), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets ... 7 los-edge-01.inet.qwest.net (63.147.28.181) 1.701 ms 1.870 ms 1.734 ms 8 los-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.32.33) 1.755 ms 1.670 ms 1.823 ms 9 lap-brdr-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.32.10) 1.722 ms 2.082 ms 2.676 ms 10 0.so-4-3-0.BR1.LAX7.ALTER.NET (204.255.169.193) 2.094 ms 2.046 ms 1.720 ms matthew black e-mail postmaster california state university, long beach whoops meant that to go to the list. I thought i had their website..but i didn't.
Re: No route to verizon
It may be. If the customer is BGP customer, and they have connectivity problem, your traffic will flow into Verizon since Verizon have supernet. But within Verizon network, Verizon router doesn't have specific route info to route into. So you may see time-out as soon as it hit Verizon network. Alex Sharlon R. Carty wrote: > Ok thanks everyone. > I'll be contacting Verizon. > > I do not believe the issue lies with the customer not paying their bills. > > -Original Message- > From: Justin M. Streiner [mailto:strei...@cluebyfour.org] > Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 3:21 PM > To: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: No route to verizon > > On Mon, 15 Dec 2008, Sharlon R. Carty wrote: > > >> This is my first post. >> >> Can anyone provide some info or Verizon why there is no connectivity to >> Verizon CA(Verizon Business UUNETCA8-A)? >> Can not reach the following net range: 66.48.66.160 - 66.48.66.175 >> > > Your best bet might be to call Verizon directly, as a range this small is > not likely to be seen in the global routing table as a free-standing > route. I see 66.48.0.0/16 from my transit providers, originated from > AS701, which is what I'd expect to see. > > Beyond that, your post doesn't contain enough information to do much more > troubleshooting. > > jms > > > > > > begin:vcard fn:Alex Ryu n:Ryu;Alex org:Norlight Large Enterprise / KDL, Inc. ;IP Engineering adr:;;13935 Bishops Drive;Brookfield;WI;53005;USA email;internet:r.hyuns...@ieee.org title:Senior Network Engineer tel;work:+1-262-792-7965 tel;fax:+1-812-206-4682 tel;cell:+1-262-389-0638 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:www.kdlinc.com version:2.1 end:vcard
