Re: BGP multihoming with two address spaces
How are you announcing your address space now? On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 12:32 PM, Joseph Jenkins wrote: > I am seeking some feedback/help with my BGP configuration. I am peering with > two providers level3 and tw. Unfortunately all of my address spaces are > preferring the route over tw rather than level3. I have tried Prepending my > AS and the carriers AS to the path on the tw side and I see those update > being accepted by internet routers, but everyone is still preferring to > install the tw routes rather than level3. I was trying to advertise each > provider's address space out their connections and then use the other for > backup. Now however everything is coming in through tw and no one seems to > like level3. > > > Thanks in advance for any guidance or assistance. > > Joe > -- Ristic Sasa -- mob: +381652221123 fax: +381618208488 -- Molim Vas da ne štampate ovaj e-mail ukoliko Vam zaista nije potreban na papiru. Hvala!
Re: ping me please...
works from AS15982 [admin@router] > ping 65.5.48.2 65.5.48.2 64 byte ping: ttl=245 time=141 ms 65.5.48.2 64 byte ping: ttl=245 time=141 ms 65.5.48.2 64 byte ping: ttl=245 time=141 ms 65.5.48.2 64 byte ping: ttl=245 time=141 ms 4 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 141/141.0/141 ms On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 15:15, Neil Robst wrote: > Works from here (AS30914) > > Regards, > Neil > >> -Original Message- >> From: Eric J Esslinger [mailto:eesslin...@fpu-tn.com] >> Sent: 23 June 2011 14:08 >> To: 'nanog@nanog.org' >> Subject: ping me please... >> >> I have just turned up and migrated to a new circuit. I'm getting a few >> reports >> from one customer that some of his users are unable to reach his system. >> If I could get people on the list to ping 65.5.48.2, and if it fails, to do a >> traceroute and email it to me offlist? I'd appreciate it. >> Thanks. >> __ >> Eric Esslinger >> Information Services Manager - Fayetteville Public Utilities http://www.fpu- >> tn.com/ >> (931)433-1522 ext 165 >> >> This message may contain confidential and/or proprietary information and is >> intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use >> by others is strictly prohibited. > > > This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the > addressee and may also be privileged or exempt from disclosure under > applicable law. If you are not the addressee, or have received this e-mail in > error, please notify the sender immediately, delete it from your system and > do not copy, disclose or otherwise act upon any part of this e-mail or its > attachments. > > Internet communications are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free. > ioko365 Limited does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from > unauthorised access to, or interference with, any Internet communications by > any third party, or from the transmission of any viruses. > > -- ricky
IPv6 6rd BR setup on Linux
hello all, can someone please share any info regarding a ipv6 6rd BR setup on linux (debian specific preferably)... goo.gl search didn't turn up much... thanks! -- Pozdrav,-- Sasa Ristic Department for network Senior network administrator VeratNet 37 Vojvode Misica Boulevard, Belgrade, Serbia
Re: IPv6 6rd BR setup on Linux
OK, I found this information too, but, if I'm not mistaken, this is all regarding 6rd "client" setup on *nix, while the BR is on Cisco ASR1K. I'm trying to setup BR on (any kind) Linux, but either there is no possibility or information on this topic, or I'm unable to find it. On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 3:44 AM, Shishio Tsuchiya wrote: > Sasa > Sakura internet,datacentor provider of JAPAN,is providing 6rd > BR(ASR1K),IPv6 internet and 6rd configuration information for their > customer. > We published the information as informational draft. > Debian 6.0's linux kernel is 2.6.32.So you might need upgrade kernel. > Basically information is 6rd CE configuration for host,but I think this > would be useful for you. > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sakura-6rd-datacenter-04#appendix-A.1.2.3 > http://research.sakura.ad.jp/6rd-trial/6rd-trial-debian60/ > (Japanese) > > Regards, > -Shishio > > (2013/04/16 7:57), Sasa Ristic wrote: > > hello all, > > > > can someone please share any info regarding a ipv6 6rd BR setup on linux > > (debian specific preferably)... goo.gl search didn't turn up much... > > > > thanks! > > > > > > > > > > -- ricky
Re: Berlin ISP
I can also recommend from personal business experience: www.kgtnewmedia.de very good prices, and excellent service quality. On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:55 PM, Markus wrote: > Am 17.04.2013 19:04, schrieb Eric: > > Hello, >> >> I'm looking for about a 10-20mbps ISP circuit for our Berlin office. Any >> recommendations on who provides access there and might be able to deal with >> us in English? >> >> Eric >> > > These two are reliable: > > http://www.ipb.de > kont...@ipb.de > > http://www.dns-net.de > sa...@dns-net.de > > > > -- ricky
Re: Office 365 broken on ipv6
from Europe, using ipv6, it seems to be working: --- master:~$ telnet -6 outlook.office365.com 443 Trying 2a01:111:f400:800::6... Connected to ipv6.exchangelabs.com. Escape character is '^]'. --- On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote: > https://outlook.office365.com does not work on ipv6; looks like this has > been broken for some while. > > Can someone from Microsoft please fix? > > > crumpet:/Users/nick% telnet -6 outlook.office365.com 443 > > Trying 2a01:111:f400:1000::9... > > telnet: connect to address 2a01:111:f400:1000::9: Connection refused > > Trying 2a01:111:f400:8000::2... > > telnet: connect to address 2a01:111:f400:8000::2: Connection refused > > Trying 2a01:111:f400:9800::6... > > telnet: connect to address 2a01:111:f400:9800::6: Connection refused > > Trying 2a01:111:f400:9814::12... > > telnet: connect to address 2a01:111:f400:9814::12: Connection refused > > telnet: Unable to connect to remote host > > crumpet:/Users/nick% > > Nick > > -- ricky
Re: Office 365 broken on ipv6
yes, you are correct... resolved at my local dns: master:~$ host outlook.office365.com outlook.office365.com is an alias for outlook.office365.com.glbdns.microsoft.com. outlook.office365.com.glbdns.microsoft.com is an alias for outlook-latam.office365.com. outlook-latam.office365.com has IPv6 address 2a01:111:f400:2c00::6 outlook-latam.office365.com has IPv6 address 2a01:111:f400:800::6 outlook-latam.office365.com has IPv6 address 2a01:111:f400:c00::6 outlook-latam.office365.com has IPv6 address 2a01:111:f400:1800::6 2a01:111:f400:c00::6 and 2a01:111:f400:1800::6 are not responding to queries on port 443, the other two (2a01:111:f400:2c00::6 and 2a01:111:f400:800::6) are working... MS should fix this... On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Aftab Siddiqui wrote: > > > Quite Interesting... > > from Europe, using ipv6, it seems to be working: >> --- >> master:~$ telnet -6 outlook.office365.com 443 >> >> Trying 2a01:111:f400:800::6... >> Connected to ipv6.exchangelabs.com. >> Escape character is '^]'. >> --- >> > > The IP address you have mentioned is working fine. > > [root@stingray ~]# telnet 2a01:111:f400:800::6 443 > > Trying 2a01:111:f400:800::6... > Connected to 2a01:111:f400:800::6. > > Escape character is '^]'. > > but outlook.office365.com is not resolving to the above address google n > he dns. > > Regards, > Aftab A. Siddiqui > -- ricky
Re: Traceroute explanation
Hi, nothing surprises me from Tinet any more... at one time all my traffic from Europe was routed through some Hong Kong router of theirs... but, enough jokes... this could be the path the packets are traversing through, nothing wrong with it, as long as everything is working fine... ie. packet gets delivered to destination, and reply comes back, within reasonable time frame... not like traveling across the globe... :) Regards, On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 20:12, Meftah Tayeb wrote: > Hey folks, > i see a strange traceroute there > > Détermination de l'itinéraire vers www.rri.ro [193.231.72.52] > avec un maximum de 30 sauts : > > 1 2 ms 1 ms 1 ms 172.28.0.1 > 2 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms localhost [10.16.0.2] > 3 10 ms 10 ms 13 ms 41.200.16.1 > 4 11 ms 10 ms 11 ms 172.17.2.25 > 5 21 ms 21 ms 21 ms 213.140.58.10 > 6 34 ms 31 ms 55 ms pos14-0.palermo9.pal.seabone.net > [195.22.197.125 > ] > 7 34 ms 33 ms 35 ms ae-5-6.bar2.marseille1.level3.net [4.69.151.13] > 8 106 ms 68 ms 67 ms xe-1-1-0.mil10.ip4.tinet.net [213.200.68.61] > 9 74 ms 73 ms 74 ms ae-1-12.bar1.budapest1.level3.net > [4.69.141.249] > 10 63 ms 63 ms 79 ms euroweb-gw.ip4.tinet.net [77.67.66.154] > 11 85 ms 84 ms 84 ms v15-core1.stsisp.ro [193.151.28.1] > 12 100 ms 100 ms 102 ms inet-crli1.qrli1.buh.ew.ro [81.24.28.226] > 13 81 ms 81 ms 81 ms 193.231.72.10 > 14 92 ms 92 ms 93 ms ip4-89-238-225-90.euroweb.ro [89.238.225.90] > 15 89 ms 89 ms 89 ms webrri.rri.ro.72.231.193.in-addr.arpa > [193.231.7 > 2.52] > Itinéraire déterminé. > C:\Documents and Settings\TAYEB> > Seabone, then level3, then Tinet, then level3, then tinet ? > if is that a routing stufs that i don't know, please let me know :) > i never saw that befaure > > Meftah Tayeb > IT Consulting > http://www.tmvoip.com/ > phone: +21321656139 > Mobile: +213660347746 > > > __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature > database 6695 (20111208) __ > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > -- ricky
Re: IP allocations / bogon - verification
from europe, serbia seems to be working via level3... # traceroute 66.185.0.198 traceroute to 66.185.0.198 (66.185.0.198), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 XX.verat.net (213.244.xx.xxx) 0.780 ms 1.692 ms 1.697 ms 2 XX.verat.net (217.26.xx.xxx) 3.062 ms 3.054 ms 3.018 ms 3 clint.noc.verat.net (62.108.96.77) 2.973 ms 2.938 ms 2.901 ms 4 195.178.34.125 (195.178.34.125) 2.839 ms 3.000 ms 2.968 ms 5 212.200.5.105 (212.200.5.105) 15.477 ms 15.383 ms 15.333 ms 6 212.73.203.245 (212.73.203.245) 15.400 ms 14.308 ms 14.914 ms 7 ae-0-11.bar1.vienna1.level3.net (4.69.153.149) 14.730 ms 14.615 ms 14.648 ms 8 ae-12-12.ebr2.frankfurt1.level3.net (4.69.153.146) 158.533 ms 158.503 ms 158.468 ms 9 ae-93-93.csw4.frankfurt1.level3.net (4.69.163.14) 159.090 ms ae-83-83.csw3.frankfurt1.level3.net (4.69.163.10) 158.330 ms 158.264 ms 10 ae-81-81.ebr1.frankfurt1.level3.net (4.69.140.9) 158.135 ms ae-71-71.ebr1.frankfurt1.level3.net (4.69.140.5) 158.150 ms ae-91-91.ebr1.frankfurt1.level3.net (4.69.140.13) 155.613 ms 11 ae-47-47.ebr2.paris1.level3.net (4.69.143.142) 158.885 ms * 158.402 ms 12 ae-41-41.ebr2.washington1.level3.net (4.69.137.50) 156.600 ms ae-44-44.ebr2.washington1.level3.net (4.69.137.62) 154.621 ms 157.051 ms 13 ae-72-72.csw2.washington1.level3.net (4.69.134.150) 156.779 ms ae-92-92.csw4.washington1.level3.net (4.69.134.158) 158.681 ms ae-72-72.csw2.washington1.level3.net (4.69.134.150) 164.913 ms 14 ae-81-81.ebr1.washington1.level3.net (4.69.134.137) 154.991 ms ae-91-91.ebr1.washington1.level3.net (4.69.134.141) 155.272 ms 156.546 ms 15 ae-2-2.ebr3.atlanta2.level3.net (4.69.132.85) 158.204 ms 158.965 ms 158.492 ms 16 ae-7-7.ebr3.dallas1.level3.net (4.69.134.21) 157.186 ms 157.565 ms 157.564 ms 17 ae-93-93.csw4.dallas1.level3.net (4.69.151.169) 159.837 ms ae-83-83.csw3.dallas1.level3.net (4.69.151.157) 158.034 ms ae-73-73.csw2.dallas1.level3.net (4.69.151.145) 156.320 ms 18 ae-82-82.ebr2.dallas1.level3.net (4.69.151.154) 161.284 ms ae-72-72.ebr2.dallas1.level3.net (4.69.151.142) 158.624 ms 159.402 ms 19 ae-5-5.car1.kansascity1.level3.net (4.69.135.229) 156.168 ms 156.481 ms 158.202 ms 20 ae-11-11.car2.kansascity1.level3.net (4.69.135.234) 160.914 ms 158.152 ms 160.836 ms 21 iowa-networ.car2.kansascity1.level3.net (4.53.34.114) 180.620 ms 180.514 ms 180.249 ms 22 ins-db1-et-12-1.desm.netins.net (167.142.67.6) 180.053 ms 179.767 ms 179.712 ms 23 prairieinet.desm.netins.net (167.142.53.18) 179.123 ms 178.434 ms 178.410 ms 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * * host is btw. pingable: # ping 66.185.0.198 -A -q -c 5 PING 66.185.0.198 (66.185.0.198) 56(84) bytes of data. --- 66.185.0.198 ping statistics --- 5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 657ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 162.617/163.933/165.772/1.296 ms, ipg/ewma 164.282/163.237 ms generally, it's visible from routers in Germany, and West Coast... On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 7:07 AM, Kenny Kant wrote: > Gang, > > I apologize for a double post on this same topic tonight however I thought > that broadening my request may help our cause. This month we had one of > our IP allocations revoked and just recently got everything squared away > with ARIN and things are "turned back" on so to speak. > > However I still have some customers having issues hitting a number of > financial related websites ..etc and I assume its because of bogons ..etc > > I saw some earlier posts on here where folks have posted their allocation > to ensure that others are routing it properly so I wanted to do the same. > > My allocation which has recently been revived: 66.185.0.0/20 > > Test point traceroute .etc 66.185.0.198 > > We do seem to be having some issues with some level 3 routing our range to > some desitnations and can provide specifics off list. > > Thanks all for the help / verification. > > Kenny > -- ricky
Re: admin-c/tech-c deny responsibility/ownership of netblock
What do you mean: "deny any responsibility"? I'm not sure I follow exactly, please be more specific? -- ricky
Re: IPv6 foot-dragging
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 05:14, ML wrote: > On 5/11/2011 11:03 AM, ja...@jamesstewartsmith.com wrote: >> >> I have had similar problems with our providers, and these are tier 1 >> companies that should have already been full deployed. These are also some >> of the more expensive providers on a per Mb basis. The one provider that >> was full IPv6 ready was Cogent. HE is also IPv6 (although we don't use them >> atm.) >> > > The same Cogent that asked me to pay extra for IPv6 and in return I get an > incomplete IPv6 routing table? Hi all, I can confirm this also, from HE I get 5411 routes on BGPv6, but only 4293 from Cogent... Although, they didn't charge me extra for v6 session... -- Ristic Sasa VeratNet ISP Serbia
