Re: [Ext] Re: G root not responding on UDP?

[Jim Glassford]

fyi,

some discussion and below link from the bind mailing list on this

https://atlas.ripe.net/dnsmon/group/g-root



On 4/14/2016 7:36 AM, Nicholas Suan wrote:

I'm see the same thing from multiple networks.

$ dig  NS . @g.root-servers.net

; <<>> DiG 9.9.5 <<>> NS . @g.root-servers.net
;; global options: +cmd
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 7:30 AM, Anurag Bhatia  wrote:

Hello everyone


I wonder if it's just me or anyone else also finding issues in g root
reachability?


ICMP, trace, UDP DNS queries all timing out. Only TCP seem to work.


Trace is timing out on 208.46.37.38.



traceroute to 192.112.36.4 (192.112.36.4), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
  1  router01.home (172.16.0.1)  4.926 ms  1.863 ms  1.845 ms
  2  103.60.176.101 (103.60.176.101)  24.007 ms  24.507 ms  22.330 ms
  3  nsg-static-137.49.75.182-airtel.com (182.75.49.137)  64.435 ms  64.359
ms  66.108 ms
  4  182.79.206.46 (182.79.206.46)  331.787 ms
 182.79.206.53 (182.79.206.53)  228.497 ms
 182.79.222.189 (182.79.222.189)  224.966 ms
  5  ldn-brdr-01.qwest.net (195.66.225.34)  162.745 ms  162.139 ms  162.031
ms
  6  lon-ddos-01.inet.qwest.net (67.14.63.58)  162.138 ms  162.125 ms
  162.916 ms
  7  * * *
  8  chp-edge-01.inet.qwest.net (208.46.37.37)  242.819 ms  242.793 ms
  242.575 ms
  9  208.46.37.38 (208.46.37.38)  253.176 ms  253.066 ms  252.807 ms
10  * * *
11  * * *
12  * * *




dig @192.112.36.4 . ns

; <<>> DiG 9.8.3-P1 <<>> @192.112.36.4 . ns
; (1 server found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached





dig @192.112.36.4 . ns  +tcp +noauth

; <<>> DiG 9.8.3-P1 <<>> @192.112.36.4 . ns +tcp +noauth
; (1 server found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 29674
;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 13, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 24
;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;. IN NS

;; ANSWER SECTION:
. 518400 IN NS g.root-servers.net.
. 518400 IN NS l.root-servers.net.
. 518400 IN NS f.root-servers.net.
. 518400 IN NS h.root-servers.net.
. 518400 IN NS k.root-servers.net.
. 518400 IN NS b.root-servers.net.
. 518400 IN NS c.root-servers.net.
. 518400 IN NS e.root-servers.net.
. 518400 IN NS j.root-servers.net.
. 518400 IN NS i.root-servers.net.
. 518400 IN NS m.root-servers.net.
. 518400 IN NS a.root-servers.net.
. 518400 IN NS d.root-servers.net.

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
a.root-servers.net. 360 IN A 198.41.0.4
b.root-servers.net. 360 IN A 192.228.79.201
c.root-servers.net. 360 IN A 192.33.4.12
d.root-servers.net. 360 IN A 199.7.91.13
e.root-servers.net. 360 IN A 192.203.230.10
f.root-servers.net. 360 IN A 192.5.5.241
g.root-servers.net. 360 IN A 192.112.36.4
h.root-servers.net. 360 IN A 198.97.190.53
i.root-servers.net. 360 IN A 192.36.148.17
j.root-servers.net. 360 IN A 192.58.128.30
k.root-servers.net. 360 IN A 193.0.14.129
l.root-servers.net. 360 IN A 199.7.83.42
m.root-servers.net. 360 IN A 202.12.27.33
a.root-servers.net. 360 IN  2001:503:ba3e::2:30
b.root-servers.net. 360 IN  2001:500:84::b
c.root-servers.net. 360 IN  2001:500:2::c
d.root-servers.net. 360 IN  2001:500:2d::d
f.root-servers.net. 360 IN  2001:500:2f::f
h.root-servers.net. 360 IN  2001:500:1::53
i.root-servers.net. 360 IN  2001:7fe::53
j.root-servers.net. 360 IN  2001:503:c27::2:30
k.root-servers.net. 360 IN  2001:7fd::1
l.root-servers.net. 360 IN  2001:500:9f::42
m.root-servers.net. 360 IN  2001:dc3::35

;; Query time: 259 msec
;; SERVER: 192.112.36.4#53(192.112.36.4)
;; WHEN: Thu Apr 14 16:59:09 2016
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 744





Is UDP blocked recently or it has been like this from long?



--


Anurag Bhatia
anuragbhatia.com

Square-Enix redirect to maintenance page?

[Jim Glassford]

Greetings,

Any chance someone has a support contact I could reach out to at Square 
Enix?


Our Class B is redirected to a Maintenance Page:
https://secure.square-enix.com/account/app/svc/info

Our Class C networks under same ASN do work OK, get to their account 
login page:

https://secure.square-enix.com/

Trying to work with their front line support and no luck getting anywhere.

Any pointers appreciated!
Jim Glassford

Re: Switchport Counters - Take two

[Jim Glassford]

I have no experience with a Nexus 4001i, seems this could be counting up 
due to frames of no interest, wrong VLAN, Spanning tree, other.

Not by chance on a IBM BladeCenter?



The "input discard" counter on any internal interface (Ethernet1/1 - 
Ethernet1/14) may increment on Cisco Nexus 4001i switches, even when the 
connected blade is started into Unified Extensible Firmware Interface 
(UEFI) and not sending Operating System (OS) data.
This has been observed with QLogic Dual-Port 10 GB Converged Network 
Adapter (CFFh) for IBM BladeCenter, Option part number 42C1830, but may 
occur with other Network Interface Controllers (NICs).


Workaround:
This is a reporting issue. The 'input discards' are not counting actual 
packet loss.

Do not replace any hardware or update firmware.


On 3/27/2014 12:51 PM, rw...@ropeguru.com wrote:
Apologies to everyone for the original email with no subject. I am 
having some senior email moments today.


Anyway

So I certainly admit I am a basic networking guy and in the past have 
not had to get into the nitty gritty of port statistics.


I am trying to understand some statistics off a switch port in a Nexus 
4001i.


All TX and RX counters look normal except on the TX side, I am showing 
1107597 input discards. Last clearing of show counters is 1d8h ago.


I have it in my mind that this particular counter is dropping packets 
coming in from another port inside the switch that are to be 
transmitted out to the end server.


So lets say the interface I am looking at is port 2 on the switch. So 
server 1 sends a packet to port 1 on the switch. That packet then 
traverses to backplane, or inside the same ASIC, to port 2 on the 
switch. It is then dropped and not transmitted out to server 2.


Is the scenario I just presented correct? Not looking for the reason 
in this email, just that my logical understanding is correct.


Robert