Re: carrier comparison

[Joshua Goldbard]

Cogent always has the cheapest rates but they also have the most peering 
disputes of any operator. I've seen intra-data center hops between cogent and 
Verizon take over 150ms.

As with all things Internet, your mileage may vary. I would not put something 
with a 5 9'a uptime requirement on cogent without a failover circuit. For less 
sensitive applications it seems like a win.

The Internet is both incredibly robust and fragile simultaneously.

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 6, 2014, at 8:06 AM, "Vlade Ristevski"  wrote:

> We have had Cogent over Verizon's Fiber for more than a few years now. Cogent 
> goes down once at year at minimum. They had 2 outages in a single day a 
> couple days ago in Northern NJ.  One in the AM "..caused by a power outage in 
> a vendor data center where Cogent is collocated." They went on to have 
> another outage at around 9:30 PM on the same day for which I'm still waiting 
> for an RFO. During this outage, they still were advertising our BGP routes so 
> we didn't fail over to our 2nd provider. I notice that happens alot with 
> them. When they go down, they still advertise your routes.
> 
> As far as price goes, for us Cogent is cheap but Lightpath is cheaper.
> 
> Our college is kind of far from things so we don't have a lot of outside 
> fiber coming. The last mile fiber for both of our connections are different 
> from our Internet providers. I've never had a big issue with the two working 
> with each other. The only issue we had is I suspected we weren't getting as 
> much bandwidth as we paid for. They had to work out where the policer and/or 
> bottle neck was. This is the only issue we had in 5 years with this set up 
> and it got resolved. IME, when there is a full outage, it's always been clear 
> who the responsible party is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 2/6/2014 10:17 AM, Adam Greene wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>>  
>> We're a small ISP / datacenter with a Time Warner fiber-based DIA contract
>> that is coming up for renewal.
>> 
>>  
>> We're getting much better pricing offers from Cogent, and are finding out
>> what Level 3 can do for us as well. Both providers will use Time Warner
>> fiber for last mile.
>> 
>>  
>> My questions are:
>> 
>> -  Will we be sacrificing quality if we spring for Cogent?
>> (yesterday's Cogent/Verizon thread provided some cold chills for my spine)
>> 
>> -  Is there a risk with contracting a carrier that utilizes another
>> carrier (such as Time Warner) for the last mile? (i.e. if there is a
>> downtime situation, are we going to be caught in a web of confusion and
>> finger-pointing that delays problem resolution)?
>> 
>> -  How are peoples' experiences with L3 vs TWC?
>> 
>>  
>> Although I assume everyone on the list would be interested in what others
>> have to say about these questions, out of respect for the carriers in
>> question, I encourage you to email frank opinions off list.
>> 
>>  
>> Or if there are third party tools or resources you know that I could consult
>> to deduce the answers to these questions myself, they are most welcome.
>> 
>>  
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Adam
>> 
> 

Re: How to get DID local numbers (IP Telephony)

[Joshua Goldbard]

Hey,

We use a number of different carriers. Have had very good experience with 
Bandwidth.com. If you're doing anything with numbering APIs they have a good 
one. Most CLEC's or ILEC's will sell you DID blocks but you need to do 
something with them (attach to PRI or allocate via SIP). I assume you know this 
already, but the bind is that a lot of carriers won't sell you blocks of DIDs 
without other associated products.

Hope that helps.

Cheers,
Joshua

Community Manager for http://www.2600hz.com

On Dec 5, 2012, at 12:06 PM, 
 wrote:

> I'm not sure about the license that you may need IANAL but you can get
> DIDs from a number of resellers I use http://www.voxbeam.com/, Level3
> http://www.level3.com, and vitelity http://www.vitelity.com
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> Sam Moats
> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hi there,
>> 
>> Can someone explain me how can I get an block of DID (Telephony numbers)?
>> For example I need 200 numbers. Is that special organization or I must buy
>> it somewhere? 
>> What the rule for USA (NY) about telephony providing ? Should I have a
>> licence to sale ip telephony?
>> 
>> Thanks. 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?

[Joshua Goldbard]

They haven't changed for you: 
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTzJPvwOhWoL2afxBdl7a-LmYYWwzgQNpiHSXr4ppIMgsZuWP6Oy1NVnrpN

Cheers,
Joshua

On Dec 20, 2012, at 10:29 AM, 
mailto:tech-li...@packet-labs.net>>
 wrote:

On 2012-12-20 12:20, Michael Thomas wrote:
I was looking at a Raspberry Pi board and was struck with how large the ethernet
connector is in comparison to the board as a whole. It strikes me: ethernet
connectors haven't changed that I'm aware in pretty much 25 years. Every other
cable has changed several times in that time frame. I imaging that if anybody
cared, ethernet cables could be many times smaller. Looking at wiring closets,
etc, it seems like it might be a big win for density too.

So why, oh why, nanog the omniscient do we still use rj45's?

Mike


The primary reason that pops to mind is backwards compatibility...   Ubiquitous 
availablity of the
parts for RJ45 connectors (end connectors, wall plates, panels, etc.) also 
means that it is more
economical to continue using the well established connector.   A new connector 
would
drive up costs initially, whereas continuing to use RJ45 is cheap and already 
works.

Jay

Re: regions.com down??

[Joshua Goldbard]

Http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/regions.com

Down.

Sent from my iPad

On Dec 26, 2012, at 1:45 PM, "Positively Optimistic" 
 wrote:

> Is http://www.regions.com down globally?

Re: Join my network on LinkedIn

[Joshua Goldbard]

But what will we complain about now???

Thanks for doing that Alex. We'll see if it works.

Cheers,
Joshua

On Jan 8, 2013, at 11:52 AM, Alex Brooks 
mailto:askoorb+na...@gmail.com>>
 wrote:

Hello all,

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Owen DeLong 
mailto:o...@delong.com>> wrote:
I could be wrong, but I'm guessing that there's no legitimate circumstance for 
mem...@linkedin.com
to be sending to nanog@nanog.org.

Couldn't the list be taught to filter these?

Owen


Since this seems to be causing everyone a lot of stress, I reached out
to LinkedIn today.  I've just had a reply saying that nanog 
nanog.org has been added to their "do not contact" list. That 
means,
assuming their processes work, the address will no longer receive any
emails from LinkedIn or their members though LinkedIn.

If anyone from NANOG management doesn't like this, LinkedIn confirmed
that this block can be revered if required.

Hopefully that will solve the issue and let everyone go back to
running the Intertubes.

Alex

Re: Contact at Tucows domains?

[Joshua Goldbard]

Tucows is awesome. Their CEO has his email on the whois entry.

Cheers,
Joshua

Joshua Goldbard
VP of Marketing, 2600hz

116 Natoma Street, Floor 2
San Francisco, CA, 94104
415.886.7923 | j...@2600hz.com<mailto:j...@2600hz.com>

On Jan 21, 2013, at 9:24 AM, Rob McEwen 
mailto:r...@invaluement.com>>
 wrote:

RE: Contact at Tucows domains?

Anyone know a good high-level contact at Tucows Domains? I have a
customer who is having a problem with a Tucows Reseller. (massive
problems!)... and Tucow's own domain support line isn't being very
helpful. (the guy just wants to pay with a credit card for the renew his
domain... he is NOT asking for much!)

--
Rob McEwen
http://dnsbl.invaluement.com/
r...@invaluement.com
+1 (478) 475-9032

Re: Interesting debugging: Specific packets cause some Intel gigabit ethernet controllers to reset

[Joshua Goldbard]

I just want you to know that this was the best piece of technical debugging 
I've read in years. Absolutely awesome. Thank you so much for sharing what I 
can only imagine was an endless series of nightmares.

I've done debugging like this before and I can only say: I feel your pain and I 
wish I documented my previous efforts. Great writing sir.

Cheers,
Joshua

Joshua Goldbard
VP of Marketing, 2600hz

116 Natoma Street, Floor 2
San Francisco, CA, 94104
415.886.7923 | j...@2600hz.com<mailto:j...@2600hz.com>

On Feb 8, 2013, at 12:50 PM, Kristian Kielhofner 
mailto:k...@kriskinc.com>>
 wrote:

Update with a response to the statement from Intel:

http://blog.krisk.org/2013/02/packets-of-death-update.html

On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Kristian Kielhofner  wrote:
Over the year I've read some interesting (horrifying?) tales of
debugging on NANOG.  It seems I finally have my own to contribute:

http://blog.krisk.org/2013/02/packets-of-death.html

The strangest issue I've experienced, that's for sure.

--
Kristian Kielhofner



--
Kristian Kielhofner

Re: Any experience with Grandstream VoIP equipment ?

[Joshua Goldbard]

We've used the HT502 ata's on a number of deployments, but voiceops has a 
thread going now about a buffer overflow issue that leaks credentials.

We're evaluating the issue now to see if any of our units are on the old 
firmware and, if so, how best to handle it.

That being said they're great little ata's. No issues.

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 9, 2013, at 1:35 PM, "Benny Amorsen"  wrote:

> "John Levine"  writes:
> 
>> Any ATAs that people acually like?
> 
> Strangely enough, "Cisco" SPA-112. Formerly known as Sipura, then
> Linksys. I do not know if they move to Belkin as part of the Linksys
> sale.
> 
> They are not perfect, but they are pretty good.
> 
> 
> /Benny
> 
> 

Re: Quantifying the value of customer support

[Joshua Goldbard]

Hey,

So usually this is done by the business unit leaders. At AT&T people used to 
call it "pushing the wastebasket". The idea is that each department runs as a 
separate business and in order to evaluate the business you debit and credit 
departments as if they were counterparties in a trade. Someone usually ends up 
on the outside looking in.

Typically, for call centers, this evaluation is done on a cases handled versus 
calls placed manner with time/$ values associated with every ticket.

Tier 2 support costs more per person than tier 1. If tier 2 doesn't actually 
speed or reduce call traffic, there's no point in having a tier 2. Now, as one 
might imagine, there is a great deal of subjectivity in these numbers. Many 
teams try to tackle this by dividing salaries by hours on the phone. This can 
hide a lot of the value of tier 2 as the whole point is to eliminate extra time 
someone would've spent in tier 1 looking for the answer.

Your challenge is to quantify how much time you're saving and multiply it by 
your salary per hour number.

That's a good place to start.

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 14, 2013, at 12:59 PM, "Kasper Adel"  wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> We are a 2nd level of escalation in a service provider, trying to put a $
> value on the support we give to our NOC and other implementation teams,
> when they email us about problems they face. But we are merely bits and
> bytes engineers that cant quantify and justify the value of what we do to
> the management team. I guess these smart suits want to see an excel sheet
> with a table of how much they save or gain by the support we do. We respond
> to technical questions and simulate problems in a lab.
> 
> Can anyone help me with an idea or any material i can reuse? Templates? Has
> any one been in a similar situation.
> 
> Thanks
> Kim

Re: What are y'all doing for CALEA compliance?

[Joshua Goldbard]

I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice. If you make decisions about what 
you should be doing in your business based solely on emails from strangers you 
won't do well. Get a second opinion from a lawyer.

This comes up about once every 6 months on the voice ops mailing list. If you 
are a CLEC and you are not CALEA compliant, you are in for a world of hurt.

If you're a non-facilities based reseller this is open for interpretation, but 
many folks believe that if you don't have gear inside the carrier pops, you 
aren't subject to CALEA. In practice, who is and who isn't effected by CALEA is 
directly proportional to the number of CALEA requests to your network (ergo, if 
you don't have any CALEA requests no one cares if you're out of compliance).

That being said, there are further problems underfoot. CALEA does not specify 
what technologies should be used when presenting the data to law enforcement, I 
forget the exact wording but its something like "a reasonable format". CDRs are 
not sufficient as CALEA requires the ability to tap sessions, but in the past 
we've seen most legal requests placated with an excel sheet.

As far as monitoring your connection, if your 10gig is coming in over fiber you 
should just buy a vampire tap and be done with it.

I hope this helps, but CALEA is inherently messy.

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 15, 2013, at 8:07 AM, "Christopher Morrow"  
wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Ben Bartsch  wrote:
>> What are you RENs out there doing for CALEA compliance?  Is there actually
> 
> being happy we solved it 6 yrs ago?
> 
>> any teeth to the law?  Our systems guys have tried a product called 'Open
> 
> teeth as in the 100k/day fine?
> 
>> CALEA' but the router and the server simply can't keep up with mirroring
>> from a 10Gbps connection into a 1Gbps link.  I'm no legal expert
> 
> that seems like a suboptimal design ... why would you mirror 10lbs of
> poo into a 1lb bag? that seems like it's bound to fail from the
> get-go.
> 
>> eitherany lawyers on this list?
> 
> you should find a lawyer... srsly.
> 
>> Thanks for all the great advice.  This is a great community!
> 
> -chris
> 

Re: What are y'all doing for CALEA compliance?

[Joshua Goldbard]

God I want one of those PA firewalls just to play with in the lab. I can't 
justify the expense, but as far as firewalls go they're gorgeous. From the 
chassis to the UI, PA is just doing it right.

If anyone has a different experience, I'd love to hear it.

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 15, 2013, at 8:29 AM, "Warren Bailey" 
mailto:wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>>
 wrote:

We used 7206vxr with the lawful intercept mib, and some DPI jazz from Palo 
Alto. Worked okay, never did have to execute a warrant or anything.


>From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G network.



---- Original message 
From: Joshua Goldbard mailto:j...@2600hz.com>>
Date: 03/15/2013 8:25 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: Christopher Morrow mailto:morrowc.li...@gmail.com>>
Cc: NANOG mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
Subject: Re: What are y'all doing for CALEA compliance?


I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice. If you make decisions about what 
you should be doing in your business based solely on emails from strangers you 
won't do well. Get a second opinion from a lawyer.

This comes up about once every 6 months on the voice ops mailing list. If you 
are a CLEC and you are not CALEA compliant, you are in for a world of hurt.

If you're a non-facilities based reseller this is open for interpretation, but 
many folks believe that if you don't have gear inside the carrier pops, you 
aren't subject to CALEA. In practice, who is and who isn't effected by CALEA is 
directly proportional to the number of CALEA requests to your network (ergo, if 
you don't have any CALEA requests no one cares if you're out of compliance).

That being said, there are further problems underfoot. CALEA does not specify 
what technologies should be used when presenting the data to law enforcement, I 
forget the exact wording but its something like "a reasonable format". CDRs are 
not sufficient as CALEA requires the ability to tap sessions, but in the past 
we've seen most legal requests placated with an excel sheet.

As far as monitoring your connection, if your 10gig is coming in over fiber you 
should just buy a vampire tap and be done with it.

I hope this helps, but CALEA is inherently messy.

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 15, 2013, at 8:07 AM, "Christopher Morrow" 
mailto:morrowc.li...@gmail.com>> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Ben Bartsch 
> mailto:uwcable...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> What are you RENs out there doing for CALEA compliance?  Is there actually
>
> being happy we solved it 6 yrs ago?
>
>> any teeth to the law?  Our systems guys have tried a product called 'Open
>
> teeth as in the 100k/day fine?
>
>> CALEA' but the router and the server simply can't keep up with mirroring
>> from a 10Gbps connection into a 1Gbps link.  I'm no legal expert
>
> that seems like a suboptimal design ... why would you mirror 10lbs of
> poo into a 1lb bag? that seems like it's bound to fail from the
> get-go.
>
>> eitherany lawyers on this list?
>
> you should find a lawyer... srsly.
>
>> Thanks for all the great advice.  This is a great community!
>
> -chris
>

Re: Cloudflare, and the 120Gbps DDOS "that almost broke the Internet"

[Joshua Goldbard]

That was a really big attack.

The scary part is that it's all DNS reflection, meaning the attackers only need 
3Gbps of bandwidth to generate 300Gbps of DDoS.

Imagine if they compromised some of the medium sized corporate networks along 
with these Botnets. I don't know if the exchanges could hold up against 1Tbps 
of DDoS, and the difference between 300 and 1000Gbps is not a lot.

While I'm excited that CloudFlare is doing such a good job bringing this to the 
attention of the masses I can't help but feel that this is essentially a time 
bomb. If this attack was an order of magnitude larger, things might be very 
different.

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 27, 2013, at 12:10 PM, "Warren Bailey" 
 wrote:

> Is someone pissed off at Spamhaus, or was the intention to packet them so
> hard their entire network ceased to exist so they can no longer offer
> DROP/RBL/xyz service?
> 
> Seldom do hax0r nations target things without some type of
> "justification". I don't really care who is being internet murdered, I
> care why. 
> 
> It's probably the same people who have been posting news articles from
> Ashworth's email.
> 
> On 3/27/13 11:44 AM, "Jay Ashworth"  wrote:
> 
>> http://blog.cloudflare.com/the-ddos-that-almost-broke-the-internet
>> 
>> Yes: 120 gigabits/second, primarily of DNS amplification traffic.
>> 
>> Still think it's optional to implement BCP38 pervasively?
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> -- jra
>> -- 
>> Jay R. Ashworth  Baylink
>> j...@baylink.com
>> Designer The Things I Think   RFC
>> 2100
>> Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land
>> Rover DII
>> St Petersburg FL USA   #natog  +1 727 647
>> 1274
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 

New Product Launch from 2600hz

[Joshua Goldbard]

Hello,

Normally I wouldn't bother the respected members of NANOG with a product launch 
email, but this is such a unique application that I felt it was necessary.

2600hz is saying goodbye to SMS, Voice and even Video. Today we're launching a 
service we'd like to call BrainRTC. It's going to completely revolutionize 
communications.

Check it out here: 
http://blog.2600hz.com/post/46886639094/voice-and-video-are-dead-heres-the-future

Cheers,
Joshua

Joshua Goldbard
VP of Marketing, 2600hz

116 Natoma Street, Floor 2
San Francisco, CA, 94104
415.886.7923 | j...@2600hz.com<mailto:j...@2600hz.com>

Re: Google Wants to Create a Dotless Domain Called "Search"..?

[Joshua Goldbard]

I'm hoping google is doing this for m2m and not human interaction, but I could 
be wrong.

I just envision years of re-educating grandparents and less technical users and 
I'm dreading it.

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 11, 2013, at 10:14 AM, "Warren Bailey" 
 wrote:

> I try not to flood Nanog with articles, but I thought I'd ask for some 
> opinions on this. For the moment, most browsers treat a single line with no 
> tld as a search request, why have a tld-less tld? Would this not open the 
> door for others to claim they need a word as a tld (cisco = http://routers or 
> Al Gore http://internets), and how would that be handled by most modern(ish) 
> browsers and devices?
> 
> 
> http://m.gizmodo.com/5994354/google-wants-to-create-a-dotless-domain-called-search
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device

Q&A for Telecom Nerds

[Joshua Goldbard]

Hello,

We're starting a series of Q&A Webinar sessions for those that love Telecom. 
The first topic we're going to touch on is Virtualization vs Bare Metal 
(http://2600hzqa1.eventbrite.com/) this Friday, 4/19, at 10am Pacific. Two 
fridays after that, on May 3rd, we'll be covering faxing 
(http://2600hzqa2.eventbrite.com/), also at 10am Pacific. We hope you'll join 
us.

This is intended to be a non-marketing event, you won't hear sales pitches on 
these calls, but you will get insight from companies and individuals that have 
built large telecom infrastructures. We are an open-source company and this is 
part of giving back to the community of giants on whose shoulders we stand. I 
hope you'll join us, and if anyone has any questions prior to the event, please 
don't hesitate to ask.

Cheers,
Joshua

Joshua Goldbard
VP of Marketing, 2600hz

116 Natoma Street, Floor 2
San Francisco, CA, 94104
415.886.7923 | j...@2600hz.com<mailto:j...@2600hz.com>

Re: CenturyLink Outage?

[Joshua Goldbard]

Outages list is going bananas right now:

Same thing happened in Monroe LA that took down all of north Louisiana. It was 
an update that went bad and the switch had to be manually checked line by line. 
No backup was done before the maintenance. 16 hours of downtime about 45 days 
ago.

On Tuesday, May 7, 2013, Frank Bulk wrote:
Sounds like it was scheduled maintenance gone bad:
"Perrine said he spoke with CenturyLink at 6 
a.m.
where they advised him the company was doing scheduled
maintenance. At 7:35 a.m. they told him 
something
had gone wrong during the maintenance and it was
affecting customers in 13 states."
http://www.tallahassee.com/article/20130507/NEWS/130507010/Centurylink-outag
e-affecting-local-internet-provider?nclick_check=1

I bite my tongue in regards to Network Tallahasee's singlehomedness and
Perrine's comment on his questioning of the timing of the update.

I encourage all my competitors to stay single homed and to do their
maintenance Sunday morning, while their vendors are 
at their lowest staffing
levels.

Frank

-Original Message-
From: Outages 
[mailto:outages-boun...@outages.org]
 On Behalf Of Frank Bulk
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 8:29 AM
To: 'Marco Prechel'; 
outa...@outages.org
Subject: Re: [outages] Centurylink nationwide outage

I first saw timeouts with www.qwest.com over IPv6 at 
3:08 am Central -- I
was wondering why, now I know. =)

Frank

-Original Message-
From: Outages 
[mailto:outages-boun...@outages.org]
 On Behalf Of Marco
Prechel
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 7:33 AM
To: 
outa...@outages.org
Subject: [outages] Centurylink nationwide outage

Saw our Centurylink Ethernet circuit lose L3 connectivity in SWFL around
0400 EDT.
ANS/ABS states it's a nationwide routing issue. No ETR.
___
Outages mailing list
outa...@outages.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages


___
Outages mailing list
outa...@outages.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages


___
Outages mailing list
outa...@outages.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages


--
Jeremie Chism
Triton Communications
___
Outages mailing list
outa...@outages.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages

Sent from my iPad

On May 7, 2013, at 10:16 AM, "Jason Lester" 
mailto:jles...@wcs.k12.va.us>> wrote:

Does anyone know what is going on with the nationwide CenturyLink outage?
Their NOC recording says it is a BGP routing issue with their upstream
peers affecting Internet traffic and traffic between regions.  Our outside
connectivity with them has basically been down since about 4:00AM (EDT)
this morning.  The prefixes we were receiving from them were fluctuating
between a few hundred and a few thousand all morning.  We are getting the
full BGP table from them now (for about the last hour), but still not
seeing any incoming traffic.  Seems like a major issue since it has been
almost 9 hours now.

Thanks,
Jason
--

Jason Lester
Administrator for Instructional Technology
Washington County Public Schools
Tel: 276-739-3060
Fax: 276-628-1893
http://www.wcs.k12.va.us

Re: What hath god wrought?

[Joshua Goldbard]

Like the comment below the article says, that line about turning off recursive 
DNS is pretty lame. Tantamount to saying "if you don't want me coming in your 
house you shouldn't have used wooden doors n00b!". It's still breaking and 
entering.

Call me crazy but I tend to think every service has a Backdoor these days. It's 
not surprising to see one for a Ddos service.

In other news, the sky is still blue.

Thanks for sharing the article though! Was a fun read.

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPhone

On May 19, 2013, at 4:59 PM, "Michael Painter"  wrote:

> http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/05/ddos-for-hire-service-works-with-blessing-of-fbi-operator-says/
> 

Re: Homegrown SIP load testing platform

[Joshua Goldbard]

Hey Jon,

This comes up on the voice ops list pretty regularly. Some folks have mentioned 
SIPVicious as a method for sip testing, but I think that's more for pentesting.

The Empirix stuff seems to be the state of the art today. On a previous thread 
I talked a bit about quality monitoring and why the stuff in the industry today 
isn't really giving you the kinds of feedback you're looking for, but load 
testing is a different problem.

If you do end up playing with the interrupt timers on the NICs, and you're 
successful, I'd love to hear what worked.

Some food for thought: we've got a set of tickets open with the TAC because a 
large router (sorry I don't have the model number) bricked in a repeatable 
fashion at 300 calls per second. It shouldn't be true, but sometimes the 
gateway device is the limitation, although I don't know if this is applicable 
in your example.

Anyways, I'm sorry I can't be of more help, but I personally see load testing 
at scale as a big unsolved problem for operators.

Cheers,
Joshua 

Sent from my iPad

On Jul 25, 2013, at 7:32 AM, "Jon Chleboun"  wrote:

> I am interested to see if y'all have recommendations for putting together a
> SIP load testing platform using general purpose hardware and open-source
> (or inexpensive) software. We are aware of Empirix Hammer and similar
> solutions, and we are looking to see if there is an alternative option.
> 
> Goals:
> - Generate somewhere on the order of 20k phone calls with real SIP and RTP.
> - Route the flows through our VoIP infrastructure to test performance
> limits.
> - Receive and analyze the SIP and RTP on the other end to find out at what
> load the signaling and/or media start to break down.
> 
> Attempted already:
> - SIPp spread across many servers. Here the limiting factor seemed to be
> the CPU load from the interrupts from each packet. The CPU on the  servers
> sending and receiving the phone calls got bogged down before the VoIP core.
> - We have dabbled with interrupt moderation in the NIC drivers, but this
> has not seemed to help very much.
> 
> Looks interesting:
> - Has anyone had success using PF_RING with Direct NIC Access and libzero
> from the folks at ntop? Has anyone been able to use this with SIPp or some
> other SIP and RTP generator?
> 
> 
> Many thanks,
> 
> Jon Chleboun

Re: Data Mining/Crawling through a Mailing List

[Joshua Goldbard]

Dump it all into Hadoop and run a word cloud analysis :3.

Honestly it sounds like a cool idea, and I'm sure someone has worked on it 
before but I don't know anything off the top of my head.

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPad

On Sep 5, 2013, at 11:23 AM, "Kasper Adel"  wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> A bit off topic but i was looking for a way/tool that could crawl through
> nanog(or other) archives and try to filter most common discussions and
> things like that, if anyone is aware of such a tool, pls let me know.
> 
> Thanks,
> Kim

Re: Point to Point Ethernet request

[Joshua Goldbard]

Buzz me offline and I'll connect you to them. I used to work there.

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPad

> On Oct 23, 2013, at 11:13 PM, "Crist Clark"  wrote:
> 
> Got 10 GbE service from a data center in Santa Clara to a campus in San
> Mateo California from Comcast. Been pretty solid. Only blips have been
> anounced maintenance. When I have contacted support, I really can't
> complain.
> 
> It's L2. I see my BPDUs and LLDPDUs come through.
> 
> So, yeah, it exists.
> 
> Related, maybe:
> 
> Has anyone actually seen Comcast's "ethernet" service? This is
> advertised as a symmetrical, high-speed (100mb+?) business service not
> consumer stuff.
> 
> I called several times out of curiosity. Using the phone number for
> this service on their website got me switched around several times by
> people who seemed to barely know what I was talking about.
> 
> One wanted to engage me in a debate about why asymmetrical 20/7
> (whatever it was) isn't good enough I assume because that's all she
> was involved with so I muttered something about routing net blocks etc
> so she gave up and switched me again. Fine.
> 
> Then I'd finally get someone who seemed reasonable, seemed to know
> what I was asking about, took down my call back info and promised
> someone would get back to me within one business day.
> 
> Never got a callback. Tried this a few times, same result.
> 
> So, does it exist?
> 
> I suppose if sales won't call you back you have to wonder what support
> would be like.
> 
> P.S. Their website for this service invites you to enter your address
> to see if it's available and assures me it is, that's where you get
> the phone number to call sales.
> 
> --
>-Barry Shein
> 
> The World  | b...@theworld.com   |
> http://www.TheWorld.com
> Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD| Dial-Up: US, PR,
> Canada
> Software Tool & Die| Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*

Re: Meraki

[Joshua Goldbard]

I've used them on a bunch of field deployments. Love'em. When clients have them 
it makes documenting any part of the experience a technician level task.

Need a pcap? Built into the GUI. Want the switch to SMS you when ports get 
knocked out? Built into the GUI. Do you like visuals that actually make some 
goddamn sense? Meraki has it.

I never had to go into the command line for any reason, at least not so far.

I can say they had some issues detecting the ubiquiti access points at a client 
site but I think that had more to do with faulty internal wiring than anything 
else.

Anyways, I like'em.

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 19, 2013, at 9:26 AM, "Hank Disuko"  wrote:

> Hi folks, 
> 
> I've traditionally been a Cisco Catalyst shop for my switching gear.
> 
> I am doing a significant hardware refresh in one of my offices, which will 
> entail replacing about 20 access switches and a couple core devices.  Pretty 
> simple L3 VLAN environment with VRRP/HSRP, on the physical end I have 1G 
> fibre/copper and 10G fibre.  My core switch of choice will likely be the Cat 
> 4500 series.
> 
> I'm considering Cisco's Meraki platform for my access layer and I'm looking 
> for deployment stories of folks that have deployed Meraki in the 
> past...good/bad/ugly kinda stuff.
> 
> I know Meraki hardcores were upset when Cisco acquired them, but not exactly 
> sure why.
> 
> Anyway, any thoughts would be useful.  Thanks!
> 
> -Hank
> 

Re: Meraki

[Joshua Goldbard]

For what it's worth...

We did a conference, KazooCon, with Meraki Gear and Ubiquiti Access Points. I 
am not a wizard but I set the whole network up except the access points which 
failed to detect at first. I think it took about an hour to setup in total; 
really easy even with the stutter. The network gear was:

2x Meraki Firewall
2x Meraki 48 port switch
4x Ubiquiti APN

Comcast dropped two cable modems in for us, 200Mbps for 2 days of bliss. The 
conference network was ridiculous, but all parts held up well. The wifi was 
fast and the LAN for the SIP phones was perfect. It was kind of overkill, but 
can you ever really have too much bandwidth?

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 20, 2013, at 12:12 PM, "William Waites"  wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Nov 2013 14:08:53 -0500, Ray Soucy  said:
> 
>> I'm very interested in other user experiences with Ubiquity for
>> smaller deployments vs. traditional Cisco APs and WLC.
>> Especially for a collection of rural areas.  The price point and
>> software controller are very attractive.
> 
> I've never used the software controller but we use a lot of Ubiquiti
> kit in rural Scotland. We use it mostly in transparent bridge mode
> with more capable routers speaking ethernet - FreeBSD on Soekris boards
> and Mikrotik mostly. In general the RF part is great, but the software
> part is buggy. We have been extensively bitten by transparent bridge
> not being transparent enough and eating multicast packets which of
> course completely hoses OSPF. Using NBMA and being very careful about
> which firmware version mostly works. Don't try to make them do
> anything sophisticated.
> 
> -w
> --
> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
> 

Re: Question related to Cellular Data and restrictions..

[Joshua Goldbard]

TL;DR: peering is not free in wireless.

Hi,

So as you may or may not be aware, most operators do not, in fact have 
nationwide networks, just as you, as I assume you're an operator, do not run 
last mile connectivity to all your customers (or every intervening interconnect 
for that matter). The same is true in wireless.

Sprint (arbitrary example) has coverage in most of the top 100 metros but 
supplements this coverage with domestic roaming agreements (usually with 
Verizon or a group of independent tower aggregators). Sprint pays Verizon for 
the traffic they send to their network.

The pricing you receive as a consumer is based upon the majority of your 
traffic hitting sprints towers (and not being ferried over a more expensive 
channel, like a roaming agreement). When you send your data over a partners 
network it raises your wireless company's cost of delivering service, in some 
cases so much so that you become unprofitable. Sprint isn't a charity and 
therefore cuts you loose.

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 4, 2013, at 2:06 PM, "Warren Bailey" 
 wrote:

> All,
> 
> I realize this is not exactly relevant to the usual topics on NANOG, but I 
> thought this list was a decent place to ask a question related to cellular 
> data usage limits.
> 
> Have any of you experienced or been subjected to a "domestic data roaming 
> policy"? I am a customer of a carrier who advertises "Unlimited Nationwide 4G 
> data", but limits their customers to 50MB per month while traveling in an 
> area they do not have coverage (Alaska, for example). I've never heard of 
> such a policy in regards to a "Nationwide" plan.. I thought the entire idea 
> of saying nationwide was to represent you were covering the ENTIRE NATION.
> 
> Happy to receive replies on or off-list.
> 
> Thanks!
> //warren
> 

Re: Question related to Cellular Data and restrictions..

[Joshua Goldbard]

Ting is an MVNO (just like my company 2600hz) and while it would violate the 
terms of my NDA to confirm the 10x number I can say that we found it to be 
prohibitively expensive.

One should be aware that, just like in the IP transit world, the small players 
have different rules than the big kids. It might be prohibitively expensive for 
us, but it's a different order of magnitude for a carrier like Sprint proper.

Hope that helps.

Cheers,
Joshua

P.S. shameless plug: we provide white-label cellular service to operators 
including full provisioning and call control plus it can be tied back into 
corporate phone systems (and it's open source!!).

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 4, 2013, at 2:59 PM, "Henry Yen"  wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 22:18:12PM +, Joshua Goldbard wrote:
>> ...  When you send your data
>> over a partners network it raises your wireless company's cost of
>> delivering service, in some cases so much so that you become
>> unprofitable.
> 
> Some folks over at Ting(.com) suggest that the cost for data roaming is as
> high as ten times that for voice/SMS roaming, which is why they don't charge
> extra for the latter, and do not at all provide the former.
> 
> -- 
> Henry YenAegis Information Systems, 
> Inc.
> Senior Systems Programmer   Hicksville, New York
> (800) AEGIS-00 x949 1-800-AEGIS-00 (800-234-4700)
> 
> 

Re: Question related to Cellular Data and restrictions..

[Joshua Goldbard]

Tier 1 ISPs engage in settlement-free peering. Everyone else pays for transit.

I had a giant reply about politics but figured I'd save everyone the reading 
time.

Suffice it to say, the regulatory environment in Wireless is different. It 
costs more money than their model allows for you to use their service. They are 
not making the profits they need to and cut the service, it's that simple. 
Roaming costs money, you're not crazy, this is 2013.

A DS1 and a cellular link are completely different.

Cheers,
Joshua

P.S. A puck with 10GB is a ton of data; I'd also wager you couldn't use the 
full 10GB on a roaming tower without a warning, but I could be wrong.

Sent from my iPad

On Dec 4, 2013, at 11:30 PM, "Warren Bailey" 
mailto:wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>>
 wrote:

Blanket reply.. :)

So at what point does unlimited mean unlimited? Roaming agreements have always 
been two sided. In my case.. I roam on to AT&T's network, the same as AT&T folk 
roam into tmo when they do not have coverage. At the end of the month the two 
are reconciled and someone gets paid. If you are selling a service that is 
making generalized assurances in connectivity (nationwide 4g let netwokr) , you 
should make a best effort to honor that. It wasn't even a fair amount of 
bandwidth.. I could deal with a 2gb a month cap or something.. But I am now 
able to use my unlimited data in 100 countries without incurring additional 
charges.. Are we going to start saying that international roaming costs are 
lower than domestic on a regularly used network?

I literally feel like I'm taking crazy pills here. Tmo and Att are far from 
small fish.. And a 50mb per month cap is absolute bullshit. Figure it into your 
business line.. Or do the honest thing and don't offer the service. How you 
guys are justifying this is BEYOND me. You can buy a ds1 for several hundred 
dollars per month.. And unlimited customers get 50 megs a month for data.. You 
can't even check email over the month on that. I'm not an abusive user.. I 
don't download or use my cellular data connection for hacked hotspot use.. Not 
to mention the hotspot I do have with them has 10gb a month nationwide.. So I 
can use my puck for 10gb..but my phone (on the SAME TOWER) is different?

That is like saying sms costs network providers money.. (don't bring up ran 
gear or smsc costs.. It's not related)


Sent from my Mobile Device.


 Original message 
From: Joshua Goldbard mailto:j...@2600hz.com>>
Date: 12/04/2013 4:10 PM (GMT-09:00)
To: Henry Yen mailto:he...@aegisinfosys.com>>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>
Subject: Re: Question related to Cellular Data and restrictions..


Ting is an MVNO (just like my company 2600hz) and while it would violate the 
terms of my NDA to confirm the 10x number I can say that we found it to be 
prohibitively expensive.

One should be aware that, just like in the IP transit world, the small players 
have different rules than the big kids. It might be prohibitively expensive for 
us, but it's a different order of magnitude for a carrier like Sprint proper.

Hope that helps.

Cheers,
Joshua

P.S. shameless plug: we provide white-label cellular service to operators 
including full provisioning and call control plus it can be tied back into 
corporate phone systems (and it's open source!!).

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 4, 2013, at 2:59 PM, "Henry Yen" 
mailto:he...@aegisinfosys.com>> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 22:18:12PM +, Joshua Goldbard wrote:
>> ...  When you send your data
>> over a partners network it raises your wireless company's cost of
>> delivering service, in some cases so much so that you become
>> unprofitable.
>
> Some folks over at Ting(.com) suggest that the cost for data roaming is as
> high as ten times that for voice/SMS roaming, which is why they don't charge
> extra for the latter, and do not at all provide the former.
>
> --
> Henry Yen mailto:henry@aegis00.com>>   
> Aegis Information Systems, Inc.
> Senior Systems Programmer   Hicksville, New York
> (800) AEGIS-00 x949 1-800-AEGIS-00 (800-234-4700)
>
>

Re: Question related to Cellular Data and restrictions..

[Joshua Goldbard]

You are misunderstanding the political reality and are instead making 
impermissible technical inferences.

Is moving bits between networks hard or expensive? No.

Is moving bits between asymmetric power relationships trivial? No.

When you think about how much roaming costs, you're thinking of the settlement 
free model which is not how cellular roaming works. Cellular roaming is a 
fiefdom. There is no common carriage. No one is obligated to carry anyone 
else's traffic.

Therefore roaming is artificially more expensive. It is political not technical.

Bear in mind, you are preaching to the converted. You don't get much more 
hippie-status in the telecom world than writing open-source infrastructure 
(which is what my company does). I know where you're coming from and I'm trying 
to explain why the networks are not behaving in an optimally efficient manner: 
because it isn't profitable.

We can sit here and rail about how bad TMobile is on a mailing list but the 
behavior they are displaying is entirely rational given the rules of the game.

You asked how someone could claim nationwide network without owning all of the 
assets, I answered you and you don't like the answer. Sorry.

If you don't like it, write Tom Wheeler or put in a false advertising claim, 
but you should understand that TMobile's behavior is politically rational.

Cheers,
Joshua

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 5, 2013, at 9:36 AM, "Warren Bailey" 
mailto:wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>>
 wrote:

I've been talking to their executive officer after doing that exact thing. 15 
years ago roaming was very expensive.. But when you are selling something using 
terminology like "free" or "unlimited", I believe you should be extremely 
careful. I don't know how or who implemented this policy.. But they have been 
claiming to rock AT&T with this "actual nationwide" and this "uncarrier" talk. 
If you claim to be unlike your competitors.. At least make an attempt to be.. 
NOT like your competition. I was floored seeing the Nanog tribe reply with "it 
was a business decision over cost".. It's 2013 and nearly 14...get your lives 
together. Make these people who give you a paycheck accountable.


Sent from my Mobile Device.


 Original message 
From: "cb.list6" mailto:cb.li...@gmail.com>>
Date: 12/05/2013 5:33 AM (GMT-09:00)
To: Warren Bailey 
mailto:wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>>
Cc: Henry Yen mailto:he...@aegisinfosys.com>>,Joshua 
Goldbard 
mailto:j...@2600hz.com>>,nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>
Subject: Re: Question related to Cellular Data and restrictions..



On Dec 4, 2013 11:31 PM, "Warren Bailey" 
mailto:wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>>
 wrote:
>
> Blanket reply.. :)
>
> So at what point does unlimited mean unlimited? Roaming agreements have 
> always been two sided. In my case.. I roam on to AT&T's network, the same as 
> AT&T folk roam into tmo when they do not have coverage. At the end of the 
> month the two are reconciled and someone gets paid. If you are selling a 
> service that is making generalized assurances in connectivity (nationwide 4g 
> let netwokr) , you should make a best effort to honor that. It wasn't even a 
> fair amount of bandwidth.. I could deal with a 2gb a month cap or something.. 
> But I am now able to use my unlimited data in 100 countries without incurring 
> additional charges.. Are we going to start saying that international roaming 
> costs are lower than domestic on a regularly used network?
>
> I literally feel like I'm taking crazy pills here. Tmo and Att are far from 
> small fish.. And a 50mb per month cap is absolute bullshit. Figure it into 
> your business line.. Or do the honest thing and don't offer the service. How 
> you guys are justifying this is BEYOND me. You can buy a ds1 for several 
> hundred dollars per month.. And unlimited customers get 50 megs a month for 
> data.. You can't even check email over the month on that. I'm not an abusive 
> user.. I don't download or use my cellular data connection for hacked hotspot 
> use.. Not to mention the hotspot I do have with them has 10gb a month 
> nationwide.. So I can use my puck for 10gb..but my phone (on the SAME TOWER) 
> is different?
>
> That is like saying sms costs network providers money.. (don't bring up ran 
> gear or smsc costs.. It's not related)
>

If you have a beef with tmo, here is the complaint department 
https://mobile.twitter.com/JohnLegere or you can email him at 
john.leg...@t-mobile.com<mailto:john.leg...@t-mobile.com>

You can probably just forward this thread

Given that tmo now has free (rate limited) intl data roaming, it is a bummer to 
see domes