Re: experience with equinix exchange

On Nov 18, 2010, at 12:48 PM, Shacolby Jackson wrote: > Has anyone had any experience (good or bad) with their exchange at any of > their major datacenters, especially Great Oaks? We're wondering if people > really love or hate it. > > -shac Equinix does a fair job running 7 layers , however t

nanog 51 registration link is down

fyi, https://nanog.merit.edu/registration/ can someone take a look at this? mehmet

experience with equinix exchange

Has anyone had any experience (good or bad) with their exchange at any of their major datacenters, especially Great Oaks? We're wondering if people really love or hate it. -shac

Re: mtu question

I know in more recent Cisco IOS software (12.4.24T or later I think) the MTU of a GRE interface is that of the largest memory block on the box. I wouldn't be surprised if this is the same for loopbacks since they are a software concept. The logic behind this is that the largest frame the software

Re: Prefix 120.29.240.0/21

hey, Looks like this broken update was around from 08:32:15 UTC until 09:47:44 UTC (this matches what we saw): http://www.ris.ripe.net/dashboard/120.29.240.0/21 Other providers, like Easynet, have also hit news with unexpected trouble this morning. Go do RIS search for 87.80.0.0/13 - lots of pr

RE: mtu question

Thanks for the 411 Mark! Again, this NANOG list is such a valuable source of info and knowledge! > Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 08:18:10 +1030 > From: na...@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org > To: brandon@brandontek.com > CC: jba...@brightok.net; deric.kwok2...@gmail.com; n

RE: Outage between GBLX and HE?

> We saw further evidence of this on paths traversing global crossing > to a customer last night.I don't know about others but we are > intending to make some efforts to move traffic other places, this > type of repeated failure is just terrible, especially since they > still continue to an

Re: mtu question

On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 16:23:54 -0500 Brandon Kim wrote: > > Jack brings up a good point. MTU is basically pointless since packets never > traverse any real interface... > So in theory the size can be anything... > > Not quite. You hit packet length field limits. IPv4 packets can't be large

RE: mtu question

Jack brings up a good point. MTU is basically pointless since packets never traverse any real interface... So in theory the size can be anything... > Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:02:22 -0600 > From: jba...@brightok.net > To: deric.kwok2...@gmail.com > Subject: Re: mtu question > CC: nanog@

Re: mtu question

On 11/17/2010 11:08 AM, Deric Kwok wrote: Hi I just see that the mtu in lo is different from standard eth 1500 Any meaning of it? You transfer huge amounts of data on loopbacks similar to sockets. Supporting large MTU's is appropriate, and given the virtual nature of loopbacks, is probably

RE: Outage between GBLX and HE?

We saw further evidence of this on paths traversing global crossing to a customer last night.I don't know about others but we are intending to make some efforts to move traffic other places, this type of repeated failure is just terrible, especially since they still continue to announce rout

IETF Fellowship Applications

All - If you have young colleagues in emerging economic zones with an interest in Internet protocols, please pass this along. Thanks - Lucy From my colleague Connie Kendig, Sponsored Programs and Grants Manager for ISOC. - Dear Colleagues, The Internet Society has announced that it is

Re: The i-root china reroute finally makes fox news. And congress.

Forgot to include that the "18 minute" reference is on page 244. -J On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Jorge Amodio wrote: > I believe the entire mambo-jambo badly researched and digested news > piece comes from page 241 of the following report: > > http://www.uscc.gov/annual_report/2010/annual_re

Re: The i-root china reroute finally makes fox news. And congress.

I believe the entire mambo-jambo badly researched and digested news piece comes from page 241 of the following report: http://www.uscc.gov/annual_report/2010/annual_report_full_10.pdf Cheers Jorge

Re: IPv6 Space Management. Tracking, not Allocating

It seems Ipplan V6 is a pretty widely used tool after reading the recent discussions. I would encourage anyone using it to donate some money. The project page has some paypal buttons. I am not affiliated with IPPLAN at all but use it quite a bit. $5 is not too much to spare for such a valua

Re: IPv6 Space Management. Tracking, not Allocating

We ended up writing our own package, which we may end up offering commercially when it is polished enough. One of the perks of having a web development branch. -Blake

Re: IPv6 Space Management. Tracking, not Allocating

good for you Mike, for contributing. thanks. -g >> >> Open Source world - leaching off the good will and effort of the Open Source >> community, yet give nothing in return. > then you would also want to grab > the patch I posted to the bug tracker. Enjoy, I do. > > -- > Mike Oliver, KT2T

Re: IPv6 Space Management. Tracking, not Allocating

On 17/11/2010 17:22, chip wrote: > There's been lots of discussion on how we should allocate space to various > bits of the network. What I haven't yet seen is how people are tracking > these allocations. Is everyone using one of the two or three commercial > applications or some OSS solution or

Re: Outage between GBLX and HE?

On 11/17/10 10:33 AM, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: Probably another LSP blackholing issue, look at the archives a few weeks back you'll see the same issue on GX in Seattle. As for the issue this morning, they have a router that has been blackholing traffic in Ashburn for a good long while now. I

Re: IPv6 Space Management. Tracking, not Allocating

On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:41, Nick Hilliard wrote: > On 17/11/2010 18:30, Greg Whynott wrote: >> >> IPPlan does this fairly well for ipv4 space,  and they have recently added >> ipv6. > > Good to hear they've added ipv6 support.  Here's the old IPTrack FAQ entry > for IPv6 support.  It seems to h

Re: FUD: 15% of world's internet traffic hijacked

On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 11:45:14 -0500 Bob Poortinga wrote: > This article, which quotes Dmitri Alperovitch of McAfee, is full of > false data as far as I can tell. I assert that much less than 15%, > probably on the order of 1% to 2% (much less in the US) was actually > diverted. The correct state

Re: IPv6 Space Management. Tracking, not Allocating

On 17/11/2010 18:30, Greg Whynott wrote: IPPlan does this fairly well for ipv4 space, and they have recently added ipv6. Good to hear they've added ipv6 support. Here's the old IPTrack FAQ entry for IPv6 support. It seems to have been updated quite recently. -- Q: I want feature X impleme

Re: IPv6 Space Management. Tracking, not Allocating

I guess let me be a bit more specific. I'm an ISP, I want to track allocations to customers across pops across the globe. --chip On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Shahid Shafi wrote: > I want to add couple of more questions to this discussion if it's ok with > Chip. > > Are you all trying to g

Re: Outage between GBLX and HE?

On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:36:09AM -0500, Christopher J. Pilkington wrote: > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:55:10AM +, Paul Kelly :: Blacknight wrote: > > I may have spoken too soon... issues are on going. > > We were seeing routing irregularities with GBLX as well. It seems > they sending out o

Re: IPv6 Space Management. Tracking, not Allocating

I want to add couple of more questions to this discussion if it's ok with Chip. Are you all trying to get PI address space or PA is workable too. How are you planning to do multihoming with IPv6? Thanks Shahid On Wednesday, November 17, 2010, Leigh Porter wrote: > Darn it, I thought IPv6 manage

Re: IPv6 Space Management. Tracking, not Allocating

On 11/17/10 9:22 AM, chip wrote: > There's been lots of discussion on how we should allocate space to various > bits of the network. What I haven't yet seen is how people are tracking > these allocations. Is everyone using one of the two or three commercial > applications or some OSS solution or

Re: IPv6 Space Management. Tracking, not Allocating

IPPlan does this fairly well for ipv4 space, and they have recently added ipv6. -g On Nov 17, 2010, at 12:22 PM, chip wrote: > There's been lots of discussion on how we should allocate space to various > bits of the network. What I haven't yet seen is how people are tracking > these allocati

Re: Cisco 6500 QoS Priority Queuing (DSCP & EXP based)

On 17 November 2010 16:51, Manu Chao wrote: > May be Priority Queuing is not supported for MPLS traffic on 6700 modules ? Well, I'm not 100% sure I have this right but; if you are trusting traffic on ingress then doesn't EXP get copied into internal DSCP, which in turn is then copied into egress

RE: IPv6 Space Management. Tracking, not Allocating

Darn it, I thought IPv6 managed all that kind of stuff automatically ? You mean I still have to do some work? ;-) -- Leigh -Original Message- From: chip [mailto:chip.g...@gmail.com] Sent: 17 November 2010 17:23 To: nanog Subject: IPv6 Space Management. Tracking, not Allocating There'

Re: mtu question

I think that the MTU on LO is pretty irrelevant in general. If it does matter, larger is probably better. Owen On Nov 17, 2010, at 9:08 AM, Deric Kwok wrote: > Hi > > I just see that the mtu in lo is different from standard eth 1500 > > Any meaning of it? > > eg: > Standard eth 1500 > > in

IPv6 Space Management. Tracking, not Allocating

There's been lots of discussion on how we should allocate space to various bits of the network. What I haven't yet seen is how people are tracking these allocations. Is everyone using one of the two or three commercial applications or some OSS solution or a few large(ish) text files? Anyone have

mtu question

Hi I just see that the mtu in lo is different from standard eth 1500 Any meaning of it? eg: Standard eth 1500 in linux. lo mtu 16436 in solaris. lo mtu is 8232 How about cisco / juniper loopback? Thank you so much

Re: Cisco 6500 QoS Priority Queuing (DSCP & EXP based)

These are lan modules. They have fixed queues that you map traffic into. Research lan qos methods and it should make sense. On Nov 17, 2010 11:55 AM, "Manu Chao" wrote: > Thanks Jim, > > The line cards are 6700 series only. > > It seems (i will test it) that wrr commands can only be associated wit

Re: FUD: 15% of world's internet traffic hijacked

Anyone want to give me a quote for an AmericaFree.TV report ? Off-list, please. Regards Marshall On Nov 17, 2010, at 11:51 AM, Ryan Rawdon wrote: > > > On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 11:45:14 -0500, Bob Poortinga > wrote: >> This is starting to be picked up by mainstream media, but was was first >> rep

Re: Cisco 6500 QoS Priority Queuing (DSCP & EXP based)

Thanks Jim, The line cards are 6700 series only. It seems (i will test it) that wrr commands can only be associated with COS marking not DSCP nor EXP. May be Priority Queuing is not supported for MPLS traffic on 6700 modules ? On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Rampley Jr, Jim F < jim.ramp...@cha

Re: FUD: 15% of world's internet traffic hijacked

On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 11:45:14 -0500, Bob Poortinga wrote: > This is starting to be picked up by mainstream media, but was was first > reported here (I believe): > > > > "Cyber Experts Have Proof That China Has Hijacked U

Re: Prefix 120.29.240.0/21

Hi, (forgot list) On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:40:14 +0100, Fredy Kuenzler wrote: > Am 17.11.2010 10:19, schrieb Fredy Kuenzler: >> >> 4739 45158 {64512 64514 64516 64519 64521 64522 64525 64526 64528 64529 >> 64530 64535 64537 64538 64541 64542 64543 64544 64545 64546 64547 64548 >> 64549 64552 64553

FUD: 15% of world's internet traffic hijacked

This is starting to be picked up by mainstream media, but was was first reported here (I believe): "Cyber Experts Have Proof That China Has Hijacked U.S.-Based Internet Traffic" "For 18 minutes in April, China.s state-con

Re: Prefix 120.29.240.0/21

On (2010-11-17 14:40 +0100), Fredy Kuenzler wrote: > We asked some customers what gear they are running, and here is a > short compilation - all these systems were affected by the BGP > flaps: > > - Cisco 2821 - c2800nm-advipservicesk9-mz.124-20.T4 > - Cisco 2821 - c2800nm-advipservicesk9-mz.124-

Re: The i-root china reroute finally makes fox news. And congress.

two observations: ) this sounds/looks like a modern kremvax story ) what a slow news day --bill On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:07:26PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > I had the timeframe wrong then and it was the April 8 routing leaks. > Sorry for the false alarm. >

Re: The i-root china reroute finally makes fox news. And congress.

I had the timeframe wrong then and it was the April 8 routing leaks. Sorry for the false alarm. On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 8:07 PM, Lindqvist Kurt Erik wrote: > > > I can detect from the report that this has anything to do with i.root? Can > you explain that? > > Looking at the dates referred to it

RE: Cisco 6500 QoS Priority Queuing (DSCP & EXP based)

This depends on which line cards you have in your chassis. This configuration below won't work on 6700 series line cards. You have to use the wrr commands. I didn't test it, but MQC configuration below should work on ES series line cards. Jim -Original Message- From: Manu Chao

Re: Outage between GBLX and HE?

On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:55:10AM +, Paul Kelly :: Blacknight wrote: > I may have spoken too soon... issues are on going. We were seeing routing irregularities with GBLX as well. It seems they sending out our prefix to their peers, but blackholing the traffic coming back. We've shutdown our

Re: The i-root china reroute finally makes fox news. And congress.

On 17 nov 2010, at 15.37, Lindqvist Kurt Erik wrote: > > On 16 nov 2010, at 18.08, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> >> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/16/internet-traffic-reportedly-routed-chinese-servers/ > > I can detect from the report that this has anything to do with i.root? Can >

Cisco 6500 QoS Priority Queuing (DSCP & EXP based)

I would to translate following 7200 QoS configuration to Catalyst 6500: class-map match-any PQ match dscp ef match mpls experimental topmost 5 policy-map QOS-PE-OUT class PQ priority percent 33 class class-default AFAIK we need extra command on 6500 to enable Priority Queuing at the in

Re: Prefix 120.29.240.0/21

At 07:40 AM 11/17/2010, Fredy Kuenzler wrote: Am 17.11.2010 10:19, schrieb Fredy Kuenzler: We see a number of session towards downstreams flaps obviously caused by prefix 120.29.240.0/21, originated by AS45158, transited by AS4739 (see below). #sh ip bgp 120.29.240.0 Number of BGP Routes matchi

Re: The i-root china reroute finally makes fox news. And congress.

On 17 nov 2010, at 15.37, Lindqvist Kurt Erik wrote: > > On 16 nov 2010, at 18.08, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> >> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/16/internet-traffic-reportedly-routed-chinese-servers/ > > I can detect from the report that this has anything to do with i.root? Can >

Re: AS path question.

On 11/11/2010 03:03, Nick Hilliard wrote: On 11/11/2010 01:25, Scott Weeks wrote: Why did that make you feel safe? Other than a bug, and ignorance of BGP, what is unsafe about a lotta prepends? In theory, nothing. In practice: I admit it. I'm feeling smug today. Nick

Re: The i-root china reroute finally makes fox news. And congress.

On 17 nov 2010, at 07.17, Fred Baker wrote: > > > On Nov 17, 2010, at 1:08 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > >> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/16/internet-traffic-reportedly-routed-chinese-servers/ > > I have read the article and the list, and I'm puzzled. It's pretty clear that > t

Re: The i-root china reroute finally makes fox news. And congress.

On 16 nov 2010, at 18.08, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > > http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/16/internet-traffic-reportedly-routed-chinese-servers/ I can detect from the report that this has anything to do with i.root? Can you explain that? Looking at the dates referred to it seem more

Re: Prefix 120.29.240.0/21

Am 17.11.2010 10:19, schrieb Fredy Kuenzler: We see a number of session towards downstreams flaps obviously caused by prefix 120.29.240.0/21, originated by AS45158, transited by AS4739 (see below). #sh ip bgp 120.29.240.0 Number of BGP Routes matching display condition : 4 Status codes: s suppre

Re: flow analysis for juniper devices

On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 06:45:06PM -0600, Richard A Steenbergen wrote: > today. The only flow collector implementation which I've spent any > amount of time looking at besides the stuff I've written myself is > pmacct, which IMHO shows great promise, but I don't believe it supports > IPFIX yet.

Re: Prefix 120.29.240.0/21

hey, > The same here, but in my case we're downstream itself :) What version are you running? This seems to hit some versions in even worse way. -- tarko

RE: Outage between GBLX and HE?

I may have spoken too soon... issues are on going. -Original Message- From: Paul Kelly :: Blacknight [mailto:p...@blacknight.com] Sent: 17 November 2010 09:21 To: 'Brielle Bruns'; NANOG list Subject: RE: Outage between GBLX and HE? It looks like it's back now. I was seeing spotting US co

Re: The i-root china reroute finally makes fox news. And congress.

On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:13:39PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote a message of 17 lines which said: > Man in the middle rewriting of DNS query responses is the only thing I > can think of. And it's easy to detect since the rewriter tells the truth about its own name. From China, query "d

Re: The i-root china reroute finally makes fox news. And congress.

Greetings, > >> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/16/internet-traffic-reportedly-routed-chinese-servers/ > > Hard to decipher what the Fox report is actually talking about, > but I suspect it relates to > http://www.renesys.com/blog/2010/06/two-strikes-i-root.shtml I would echo the

Re: Prefix 120.29.240.0/21

On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:19:55AM +0100, Fredy Kuenzler wrote: > We see a number of session towards downstreams flaps obviously caused by > prefix 120.29.240.0/21, originated by AS45158, transited by AS4739 (see > below). The same here, but in my case we're downstream itself :) JunOS logs:

RE: Outage between GBLX and HE?

It looks like it's back now. I was seeing spotting US connectivity via GLBX upto 08:57 GMT. -Original Message- From: Brielle Bruns [mailto:br...@2mbit.com] Sent: 17 November 2010 03:32 To: NANOG list Subject: Outage between GBLX and HE? Hey All, Sorry to bother the list, but I'm notici

Prefix 120.29.240.0/21

We see a number of session towards downstreams flaps obviously caused by prefix 120.29.240.0/21, originated by AS45158, transited by AS4739 (see below). Best regards, Fredy Kuenzler Init7 / AS13030 #sh ip bgp 120.29.240.0 Number of BGP Routes matching display condition : 4 Status codes: s su

Re: Outage between GBLX and HE?

* Brielle Bruns [2010-11-17 04:34]: > Hey All, > > Sorry to bother the list, but I'm noticing that I've got no connectivity > to Hurricane Electric through GBLX from my Qwest DSL. > > In this case, I'm trying to get to tunnelbroker.net: > > ... > 3 184-99-65-41.boid.qwest.net (184.99.65.41) 3