Clueful BGP Engineers

2009-02-28 Thread Gregory Boehnlein
Can someone with a clue from the following two carriers please contact me off list? XO - ASN 2828 Level 3 - ASN 3356 I am currently experiencing a UDP/DNS DOS originating from 165.194.27.159 in Aisia. We have attempted to blackhole the subnet using BGP communities, but the requests are being filt

Can I know how this network works (resend)?

2009-02-28 Thread Deric Kwok
Hi all main router- 3 static routes ip route 192.168.0.0/24 10.0.0.1 (routerA) ip route 192.168.1.0/24 10.0.0.2 (routerB) same switch ---telecom company---client request ip route 192.168.2.0/24 10.0.0.3 (routerC) Diagram === ---routerA--- main

Can I know how this network works out?

2009-02-28 Thread Deric Kwok
Hi all main router- 3 static routes ip route 192.168.0.0/24 10.0.0.1 (routerA) ip route 192.168.1.0/24 10.0.0.2 (routerB) same switch ---telecom company---client request ip route 192.168.2.0/24 10.0.0.3 (routerC) Diagram === ---routerA--- ma

Re: MAC address confusion

2009-02-28 Thread Saku Ytti
On (2009-02-28 22:38 +0100), JAKO Andras wrote: Hey, > > http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/oui.txt > > 02-07-01 (hex)RACAL-DATACOM > > After enabling DECnet routing, the interface MAC address turns to > something like this: > Hardware is BCM1250 Internal MAC, address is aa00

Re: DPI or Flow Management

2009-02-28 Thread Steve Bertrand
Francois Menard wrote: > The Coalition of Internet Service Providers has filed a substantial > contribution at the CRTC stating: > > 1) The CRTC should forbid DPI, as it cannot be proven to be 98.5% > effective at trapping P2P, such as to guarantee congestion relief > > 2) The CRTC should allow f

Re: MAC address confusion

2009-02-28 Thread JAKO Andras
> http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/oui.txt > 02-07-01 (hex) RACAL-DATACOM > A0-6A-00 (hex) Verilink Corporation > > In either case two of the lowest or highest bits of 1st octet seems to be > happily used to assign addresses. What am I missing here? After enabli

ISP network re-design feedback requested

2009-02-28 Thread Steve Bertrand
Hi everyone, Hopefully my question is operational 'enough' to be asked here, as I don't know of any other place to ask... Still trying to redesign (as-I-go) our ISP network, I've realized that we are not large enough to deploy a full three layer approach (core, dist, acc), so I'm trying to consol

Re: MAC address confusion

2009-02-28 Thread Grzegorz Banasiak
> Whic one of these, is locally assigned unicast MAC address, when talking about > output format CSCO uses? > > 4000.. (Local IXPs choice) > 0200.. (My money is here) the second one. most significant byte is on the left, but within the byte, most significant bits are on the right.

Re: Peering Wars of 1998

2009-02-28 Thread J.D. Falk
nan...@yorku.ca wrote: I'm rsrching the Peering Wars of 1998...anyone able to provide info wd be greatly appreciated. MAE-East was knee-deep in blood. I still have nightmares. -- J.D. Falk Return Path Inc http://www.returnpath.net/

Re: 23456 without AS4_PATH?

2009-02-28 Thread Saku Ytti
On (2009-02-28 18:05 +0100), sth...@nethelp.no wrote: > > show route 195.128.231.0/24 detail > > [..omitted..] > > AS path: AS2 PA[5]: 39792 35320 AS_TRANS AS_TRANS 35748 > > AS path: AS4 PA[4]: 35320 3.21 AS_TRANS 35748 > > AS path: Merged[5]: 39792

Re: 23456 without AS4_PATH?

2009-02-28 Thread sthaug
> Take a watch on this route: > > show route 195.128.231.0/24 detail > [..omitted..] > AS path: AS2 PA[5]: 39792 35320 AS_TRANS AS_TRANS 35748 > AS path: AS4 PA[4]: 35320 3.21 AS_TRANS 35748 > AS path: Merged[5]: 39792 35320 3.21 AS_TRANS 35748 I > [

MAC address confusion

2009-02-28 Thread Saku Ytti
Whic one of these, is locally assigned unicast MAC address, when talking about output format CSCO uses? 4000.. (Local IXPs choice) 0200.. (My money is here) http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/oui.txt 02-07-01 (hex)RACAL-DATACOM A0-6A-00 (hex)

Re: 23456 without AS4_PATH?

2009-02-28 Thread Egor Zimin
Take a watch on this route: show route 195.128.231.0/24 detail [..omitted..] AS path: AS2 PA[5]: 39792 35320 AS_TRANS AS_TRANS 35748 AS path: AS4 PA[4]: 35320 3.21 AS_TRANS 35748 AS path: Merged[5]: 39792 35320 3.21 AS_TRANS 35748 I [...omitted...] AS

Re: 23456 without AS4_PATH?

2009-02-28 Thread sthaug
> Anyone else seeing this: > *> 91.196.186.0/24 62.237.167.25 0 3292 3549 15703 > 43531 23456 i > > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4893.txt > 6. Transition >An OLD BGP speaker MUST NOT use AS_TRANS as its Autonomous System >number. Seeing it here too. On our 4-byte

23456 without AS4_PATH?

2009-02-28 Thread Saku Ytti
Anyone else seeing this: *> 91.196.186.0/24 62.237.167.25 0 3292 3549 15703 43531 23456 i http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4893.txt 6. Transition An OLD BGP speaker MUST NOT use AS_TRANS as its Autonomous System number. -- ++ytti