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
Will an IP engineer from Level3 contact me off list. We having trouble routing
traffic through.. Possible bogon update issue ?
Thanks
Sent from my iPhone
I'll make this short. Is our OpenVPN server prone?
Hi Parthiv,
.-- My secret spy satellite informs me that at 2013-08-01 7:00 AM Shah,
Parthiv wrote:
> My apology if I am asking for a repeat question on the list. On 7/29/13 I
> read an incident about accidental BGP broadcast see article here
> https://isc.sans.edu/diary/BGP+multiple+banking+ad
Thanks for the replies.
I think I saw somewhere around the Cloudflare outage post someone mentioning
that since the person at Juniper that was responsible for Flowspec left it all
went down hill.
I take it then Flowspec is still used internally then? I am still wondering if
its best to avoid F
NANOGers,
You are invited to attend NANOG's first one-day meeting, "NANOG on the
Road"joint with ARIN
on September 10, 2013 in Portland, OR.
ARIN + NANOG on the Road Portland will provide an opportunity to network
with colleagues, access to a day's worth of professional education and
current Int
On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 10:00:49AM +1000, Mark Tees wrote:
> Howdy listers,
>
> I remember reading a while back that customers of nLayer IP transit
> services could send in Flowspec rules to nLayer. Anyone know if that
> is true/current?
We were forced to stop offering flowspec connections to c
Good Morning Nanog List,
I'm not normally the tinfoil hat type howerver I do want to know other
operators opinions on the FCC 477, 499 and the 214 license requirements
in light of the recent revealations.
Do you think the info is actually for the stated purposes? I'm trying
hard not to become a
On 2013-08-01 10:57, Sam Moats wrote:
Good Morning Nanog List,
I'm not normally the tinfoil hat type howerver I do want to know
other operators opinions on the FCC 477, 499 and the 214 license
requirements in light of the recent revealations.
Do you think the info is actually for the stated purpos
-Original Message-
From: Shah, Parthiv [mailto:parthiv.s...@theclearinghouse.org]
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 9:00 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: BGP related question
>1) I would like to understand how can we detect and potentially
prevent activities like this? I understand nati
Good Morning Nanog List,
I'm not normally the tinfoil hat type howerver I do want to know
other operators opinions on the FCC 477, 499 and the 214 license
requirements in light of the recent revealations.
Do you think the info is actually for the stated purposes? I'm trying
hard not to become a mem
For detection, there are a few solutions, but mostly it's just monitoring
the route table for your specific routes and being alerted when things
change. For prevention there are things like RPKI (
https://www.arin.net/resources/rpki/index.html) that can help. There are a
few other possibilities a
My apology if I am asking for a repeat question on the list. On 7/29/13 I read
an incident about accidental BGP broadcast see article here
https://isc.sans.edu/diary/BGP+multiple+banking+addresses+hijacked/16249 or
older 2008 incident http://www.renesys.com/2008/02/pakistan-hijacks-youtube-1/
M
On (2013-08-01 11:35 +0400), Alexandre Snarskii wrote:
> You can match flow actions by extended communities and not accept
> actions you do not like. For example, to permit only "discard" action
> you can match
>
> community flow_discard members traffic-rate:*:0;
>
> Or am I missing somethi
On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 09:13:59AM +0300, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On (2013-08-01 10:00 +1000), Mark Tees wrote:
>
> > I remember reading a while back that customers of nLayer IP transit
> > services could send in Flowspec rules to nLayer. Anyone know if that is
> > true/current?
>
> Anyone planning to
15 matches
Mail list logo
