Anyone seeing BGP weirdness?
I know this post sounds like a noobish thing to ask, but I've got sites in three different cities - Tucson, Arizona; Devnver, Colorado and Salt Lake City, Utah, and all three of them can't reach certain IPs of our clients whom we have IPsec tunnels to. In one case I can traceroute to 4.2.2.2 fine, but the traceroute to the public IP of one of my clients dies at the second hop, right after my ASA. Is anyone else seeing general routing weirdness on the Internets, or at least can someone point me at a good "BGP dashboard" site that monitors the state of routing tables at various places? Thanks, Eric
Re: Happy 1234567890 everyone!
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Nathan Malynn wrote: > Question about 2k38: Aren't most Unixoid systems using 64-bit clocks now? > Exactly! What are we going to do when we're at the end of the 2^64 epoch?? (after the sun burns out and.. oh wait) -- Eric http://nixwizard.net
Re: real hardware router VS linux router
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Bill Nash wrote: > Having carped, I'm obligated to offer a solution: > The technical discussion is certainly interesting to a small subset of NANOG > participants, I'm sure (I do find it interesting, I promise), but I'm > thinking this conversation is better elsewhere, like a beer & gear, or might > I recommend forming some kind of nanog-shoptalk sub list? Is there one like > it? Something for discussing the network substrata and not the weather a few > layers up? I wouldn't mind seeing a nanog-shoptalk list actually... I know according to the NANOG guidelines this thread is off topic: "The NANOG list has over 10,000 subscribers so it is very easy for a thread to have scores of posts while being off-topic and only of interest to only a small proportion of subscribers. Please consider before each post if your email will be of interest to the majority of members or might alternatively be emailed directly the people of interest or posted to another forum." (from the email everyone received) ...but I found this thread very interesting, and relevant to at least networking in general. I've had my eyes on Vyatta products in the past, for example, and seeing the smattering of experienced NANOG folks "chew the fat" about Linux routers is something I'm interested in, even if it has nothing specifically to do with really long BGP advertisements or getting to http://lolcats.com Just my .02 -- Eric http://nixwizard.net
Re: comcast price check
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Steven King wrote: > I can't even get reliable home cable internet service from them. No way > I would ever consider using them for transit. I would only consider a > stub peer with them to help out the poor Comcast customers who are also > trying to get to my data centers. Whaa? You're using your home internet service as your guide for business-class carrier service? Isn't that a bit like comparing home DSL versus a business T1 that has SLAs attached to it? You're comparing apples to oranges when you compare home vs. business service, IMO... -- Eric http://nixwizard.net
Re: switch speed question
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 2:33 AM, Bruce Grobler wrote: > Hi, > > It depends on how heavily loaded your switch is expected to be, for instance > two machines using the switch will be able to get a full 1Gbps, however > depending on the backplane (switching fabric), it limits how many ports will > receive full 1Gbps when the switch is congested, e.g. a 2 gig backplane > against a 24 gig. > > Regards, > > Bruce Note that the traffic to a switch is bi-directional (full duplex) - so a 24 port gigabit switch can max out its 32 Gig backplane, if all 24 ports have a gig coming in and going out (24 X 2 is 48, more than the 32 gig backplane). This isn't immediately apparent - the other day someone at my work asked the exact question "Why's the 32 gig backplane > the 24 ports on the switch?" -- Eric http://nixwizard.net
Re: [ MDVSA-2009:054 ] nagios (fwd)
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Gadi Evron wrote: > > > -- Forwarded message -- > Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 01:05:01 +0100 > From: secur...@mandriva.com > Reply-To: xsecur...@mandriva.com > To: bugt...@securityfocus.com > Subject: [ MDVSA-2009:054 ] nagios > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > ___ > > Mandriva Linux Security Advisory MDVSA-2009:054 > http://www.mandriva.com/security/ > ___ > > Package : nagios > Date : February 24, 2009 > Affected: Corporate 4.0 I hate to be pedantic but is this something that should get forwarded to NANOG? I guess the relevance is justified because a lot of network folks run Nagios...? -- Eric http://nixwizard.net
Re: [ MDVSA-2009:054 ] nagios (fwd)
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 3:23 PM, jamie rishaw wrote: > srsly? > > I didnt find this OT, considering its scope. > > Want to dictate policy? Join the MLC. > > Till then, /dev/null > > thx Thanks for the professional response there bud
Re: Hostile probe recording
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Lou Katz wrote: > I happen to have some non-standard applications running on port 80 > on one of my machines. From time to time I get log messages noting > improper syntax (for my app) of the form: > > 'GET /roundcube/CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > 'GET /mail/CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > 'GET /webmail/CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > 'GET /roundcubemail/CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > 'GET /rcmail/CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > 'GET //CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > 'GET /rc/CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > 'GET /email/CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > 'GET /mail2/CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > 'GET /Webmail/CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > 'GET /components/com_roundcube/CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > 'GET /squirrelmail/CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > 'GET /vhcs2/tools/webmail/CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > 'GET /round/CHANGELOG HTTP/1.1' 200.19.191.98 > > (200.19.191.98 is the IP address of the attacking machine, not me) > > > Is this sort of information of use to anyone here? > Is the above an old vulnerability - since I don't run > whatever it is probing for, I have not paid much attention to these. It looks like it's probing for various versions of web-based email apps... RoundCube and SquirrelMail are two that I recognize offhand -- Eric http://nixwizard.net
