Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and ETR?
Thanks,
Ben
Facebook seems to also be affected.
-Original Message-
From: R. Benjamin Kessler
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: cisco.com
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:34:46 -0400
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas
Both work from Austin, TX.
- d.
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Alex Nderitu wrote:
Facebook seems to also be affected.
-Original Message-
From: R. Benjamin Kessler
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: cisco.com
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:34:46 -0400
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from
Not sure the ETA but the network that the address for cisco.com resolves
to (198.133.219.0/24) is no longer in BGP.
--
-
Aaron Millisor
R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
> I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
> (including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and ETR?
Here too
-- snip --
core-01.fra1#sh ip bgp 198.133.219.25
BGP4 : None of the BGP4 routes match the display condition
-- snap --
Facebook up. Cisco down. From eastern canada
--Original Message--
From: Alex Nderitu
To: R. Benjamin Kessler
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cisco.com
Sent: Aug 4, 2009 10:42 AM
Facebook seems to also be affected.
-Original Message-
From: R. Benjamin Kessler
To: nanog@nanog.or
Seeing same issue from Chicago via Qwest and HE.
>
> Both work from Austin, TX.
>
>
>
> - d.
>
> On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Alex Nderitu wrote:
>
>> Facebook seems to also be affected.
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: R. Benjamin Kessler
>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>> Subject: cisco.com
>> Dat
We have seen the route for cisco withdrawn from 208 and 2828. Facebook
seems fine
Dominic J. Eidson wrote:
>
> Both work from Austin, TX.
>
>
>
> - d.
>
> On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Alex Nderitu wrote:
>
>> Facebook seems to also be affected.
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: R. Benjami
Am 04.08.2009 um 15:42 schrieb Alex Nderitu:
Facebook seems to also be affected.
facebook works fine from germany
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and
ETR?
An error occurred while processin
So cisco has no BGP is that what I'm hearing... Oh the irony :)
--Original Message--
From: Aaron Millisor
To: R. Benjamin Kessler
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cisco.com
Sent: Aug 4, 2009 10:45 AM
Not sure the ETA but the network that the address for cisco.com resolves
to (198.133.219.
See: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/2009-August/001386.html
I do not have a route to that IP (198.133.219.25) in BGP either..
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 8:34 AM, R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
> Hey Gang -
>
> I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
> (including downfore
can't get to cisco.com from here atm either, but can get to facebook. looks like
facebook is now coming from ashburn, va.
cisco dies within level3 for us, and for route-views.oregon-ix.net:
5 eugn-core1-gw.nero.net (207.98.64.161) [AS 3701] !H * !H
don't see that address (198.133.219.25) in t
On Tue Aug 04, 2009, Jon Auer wrote:
> See: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/2009-August/001386.html
> I do not have a route to that IP (198.133.219.25) in BGP either..
Route is not longer in the routing table since (CET)
08/04 13:55:57 Withdraw 198.133.219.0/24>
German
pgpMuXvcWuWc
Same here in Prague (various upstreams in Central Europe)
MK
Jon Auer napsal(a):
See: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/2009-August/001386.html
I do not have a route to that IP (198.133.219.25) in BGP either..
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 8:34 AM, R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
Same here via Verizon, Level3 and Comcast.
Btw... all 3 resolve to the same 198.133.219.25 addr.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Gotstein [mailto:ch...@uplogon.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:48 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cisco.com
Seeing same issue from Chicago via Qwest
Hello friendly NANOGers,
we'll have to move out of a colo in the NYC area (Verizon DC Elmsford)
soon and I need two guys to disassemble half a rack full of equipment,
pack the stuff securely and send it away in two batches (one within the
US, one to Germany).
Packing material needs to be brought,
Missing route on Internap also.
Netraft shows cisco.com went down right at 12:00GMT.
http://uptime.netcraft.com/perf/graph?site=www.cisco.com
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 8:48 AM, sjk wrote:
> We have seen the route for cisco withdrawn from 208 and 2828. Facebook
> seems fine
>
> Dominic J. Eidson wro
No route for 198.133.219.0/24 in 22820 from our upstream (3356 and 174).
-Scott W
-Original Message-
From: sjk [mailto:s...@sleepycatz.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
To: Dominic J. Eidson
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cisco.com
We have seen the route for cisco withdrawn
Hi everyone,
same issue from Italy, via Fastweb and Retelit.
deles...@gmail.com ha scritto:
Facebook up. Cisco down. From eastern canada
FB up, Cisco down, from SATX (Time Warner Road Runner)
J
Just watched the rviews via bgplay for the aforementioned /24, shows them
converging from AT&T internet, to AT&T Worldnet, to Sprint + Globix, to
AAAaah!
-Original Message-
From: Marc Manthey [mailto:m...@let.de]
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 9:50 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subje
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 09:34:46AM -0400, R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
> Hey Gang -
>
> I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
> (including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and ETR?
Instead of the hoot-n-holler line, maybe check bgp?
route-views.orego
The IP is back in BGP and the website is working for me now.
Maybe that has to do with the end of life notice they put for BGP. You
can find the thread at
https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/2009-August/062865.html
deles...@gmail.com wrote:
> So cisco has no BGP is that what I'm hearing... Oh the irony :)
> --Original Message--
> From: Aaro
I'm reaching them from Time-Warner in Portland, Maine.
1<1 ms<1 ms<1 ms 10.0.1.10
2 1 ms<1 ms<1 ms rrcs-24-39-42-66.nys.biz.rr.com
[24.39.42.66]
3 3 ms 1 ms 1 ms rrcs-24-39-42-65.nys.biz.rr.com
[24.39.42.65]
4 5 ms 3 ms 4 ms ten1-1-1.ptl
Looks like it's back.
rtr-inet1#show ip bgp 198.133.219.0/24
BGP routing table entry for 198.133.219.0/24, version 4296794
Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table)
Advertised to update-groups:
1
6128 7132 109, (received & used)
69.74.151.237 from 69.74.151.237
Can get to facebook but not to cisco from Denver (level 3).
Traces reach SJC and die in ATT net. Possibly a local data center outage /
black-holing event.
- Gaurav
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 7:50 AM, Marc Manthey wrote:
>
> Am 04.08.2009 um 15:42 schrieb Alex Nderitu:
>
> Facebook seems to also b
http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/final_update_ciscocom_outage/
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 4:51 PM, wrote:
> So cisco has no BGP is that what I'm hearing... Oh the irony :)
> --Original Message--
> From: Aaron Millisor
> To: R. Benjamin Kessler
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: cisco.c
Seeing them off of Sprint now. . . weird
sjk wrote:
> We have seen the route for cisco withdrawn from 208 and 2828. Facebook
> seems fine
>
>
On Aug 4, 2009, at 9:59 AM, Jason Vanick wrote:
Same here via Verizon, Level3 and Comcast.
No trouble in Virginia with either Cox Cable or Cogent.
Btw... all 3 resolve to the same 198.133.219.25 addr.
That's what I get
;; ANSWER SECTION:
cisco.com. 86400 IN A
On Tue Aug 04, 2009, Steve Rossen wrote:
Route is back
08/04 13:55:57 Withdraw 198.133.219.0/24
08/04 16:04:53 Update 198.133.219.0/24
Times are CET.
German
> Missing route on Internap also.
>
> Netraft shows cisco.com went down right at 12:00GMT.
>
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/perf/graph?si
On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:03 AM, Scott Wolfe wrote:
No route for 198.133.219.0/24 in 22820 from our upstream (3356 and
174).
-Scott W
Through Cogent
tme$ traceroute 198.133.219.26
traceroute to 198.133.219.26 (198.133.219.26), 64 hops max, 40 byte
packets
1 dmz-mct2.americafree.tv (63.10
All Ok from France through Sprintlink and Telia
sh ip bgp 198.133.219.25
Number of BGP Routes matching display condition : 2
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i internal
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
NetworkNext HopMetric Loc
I now have a route to 198.133.219.0/24
Cisco.com is back up.
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:03, Scott Wolfe wrote:
> No route for 198.133.219.0/24 in 22820 from our upstream (3356 and 174).
>
> -Scott W
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: sjk [mailto:s...@sleepycatz.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August
I see it now via
6453 7132 109
174 1239 109
---Mike
Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400
Sentex Communications,m...@sentex.net
Providing Internet since 1
FACEBOOK: UP
CISCO: UP
LOCATION: PORTLAND, OR
David Hiers
CCIE (R/S, V), CISSP
ADP Dealer Services
2525 SW 1st Ave.
Suite 300W
Portland, OR 97201
o: 503-205-4467
f: 503-402-3277
-Original Message-
From: Scott Wolfe [mailto:scott.wo...@cybera.net]
Sent: Tuesday, Augus
Well, Cisco *did* EoS/EoL BGP last week. I guess there really wasn't
all that much industry traction on whatever protocol they decided to
replace it with.
https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/2009-July/062646.html
;p
On 4-Aug-09, at 9:45 AM, Aaron Millisor wrote:
Not sure the ETA b
Cisco.com up again in Italy.
Regards,
German Martinez ha scritto:
On Tue Aug 04, 2009, Jon Auer wrote:
See: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/2009-August/001386.html
I do not have a route to that IP (198.133.219.25) in BGP either..
Route is not longer in the routing table sin
See Cisco as Up
Qwest, Cogent, Att, and L3
Midwest-US
~J
-Original Message-
From: Jorge Amodio [mailto:jmamo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 9:07 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cisco.com
FB up, Cisco down, from SATX (Time Warner Road Runner)
J
Cisco.com (198.133.219.25) is alive from .au (from ASN7474)
Traceroute shows:
9 448 ms 419 ms 389 ms sjck-dmzbb-gw1.cisco.com [128.107.224.6]
10 427 ms 268 ms 279 ms sjck-dmzdc-gw2-gig5-1.cisco.com
[128.107.224.77]
Did a quick check on a few .au looking glass sites and getting e
Up via Sprintlink in London...
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:14 AM, Matthew Huff wrote:
Looks like it's back.
rtr-inet1#show ip bgp 198.133.219.0/24
BGP routing table entry for 198.133.219.0/24, version 4296794
Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table)
Advertised to update-groups:
1
6128 7132 109, (recei
Sam Oduor wrote:
http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/final_update_ciscocom_outage/
I don't think the Kool-Aid powder is blending with the water...that's
from (almost) two years ago.
pt
Cisco is aware of the issue and they are working on it.
David Hiers
CCIE (R/S, V), CISSP
ADP Dealer Services
2525 SW 1st Ave.
Suite 300W
Portland, OR 97201
o: 503-205-4467
f: 503-402-3277
-Original Message-
From: R. Benjamin Kessler [mailto:r...@mnsginc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 0
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Sam Oduor wrote:
> http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/final_update_ciscocom_outage/
Nice, except that the blog entry is from two years ago. What happened _today_?
On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:21 AM, Sam Oduor wrote:
http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/final_update_ciscocom_outage/
That blog post is from 2007 so I'm assuming this was sent as a joke.
Didn't you hear? Cisco EoLed BGP this time last week. I guess they
really meant it!
Justin
deles...@gmail.com wrote:
So cisco has no BGP is that what I'm hearing... Oh the irony :)
--Original Message--
From: Aaron Millisor
To: R. Benjamin Kessler
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cisc
[1]http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/final_update_ciscocom_outage/
FINAL UPDATE: Cisco.com Outage
Service to [2]Cisco.com has been restored and all applications are now
fully operational. The issue occurred during preventative maintenance
of one of our data centers when a hum
Disregard. This was from 2 years ago. Copied the link and verbage
without verifying it. My bad.
Matthew Huff | One Manhattanville Rd
OTA Management LLC | Purchase, NY 10577
http://[1]www.ox.com | Phone: 914-460-4039
aim: matthewbhuff | Fax: 914-460-4139
[ci
> Well, Cisco *did* EoS/EoL BGP last week. I guess there really wasn't
> all that much industry traction on whatever protocol they decided to
> replace it with.
>
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/2009-July/062646.html
What happened could be:
a) they were smoking something and indeed
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, h...@efes.iucc.ac.il wrote:
a) they were smoking something and indeed decided to use EIGRP rather than
BGP.
b) they were testing out 4 byte ASNs and had a software issue in their IOS
c) someone in Cisco wanted to download a new IOS and got frustrated with
their new site so
andrew.wallace wrote:
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:48 PM, Dragos Ruiu wrote:
at the risk of adding to the metadiscussion. what does any of this have to
do with nanog?
(sorry I'm kinda irritable about character slander being spammed out
unnecessarily to unrelated public lists lately ;-P )
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 13:32:42 EDT, Curtis Maurand said:
> > What does this have to do with Nanog, the guy found a critical
> > security bug on DNS last year.
> >
> He didn't find it. He only publicized it. the guy who wrote djbdns
> fount it years ago. Powerdns was patched for the flaw a yea
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
Yes, but a wise man without a PR agent doesn't do the *rest* of the
community much good. A Morris or Bernstein may *see* the problem a
decade before, but it may take a Mitnick or Kaminsky to make the *rest*
of us able to see it...
Same thin
> Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 13:32:42 -0400
> From: Curtis Maurand
>
> andrew.wallace wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:48 PM, Dragos Ruiu wrote:
> >
> >> at the risk of adding to the metadiscussion. what does any of this have to
> >> do with nanog?
> >> (sorry I'm kinda irritable about charac
There is NO fix. There never will be as the problem is architectural
to the most fundamental operation of DNS. Other than replacing DNS
(not
feasible), the only way to prevent this form of attack is DNSSEC. The
"fix" only makes it much harder to exploit.
Randomizing source ports and QIDs simp
Curtis Maurand writes:
>> What does this have to do with Nanog, the guy found a critical
>> security bug on DNS last year.
>
> He didn't find it. He only publicized it. the guy who wrote djbdns fount
> it years ago.
first blood on both the DNS TXID attack, and on what we now call the
Kashpuref
On 3-Aug-09, at 9:43 PM, andrew.wallace wrote:
Hi,
Read my post one more time and think though: Only "zf0" are legally
in the shit.
The guy "Dragos Ruiu" has absolutely no case against me.
Copy & paste doesn't count as defamation, speak to Wired's legal team
if you have an issue.
Cheers,
On 5/08/2009, at 1:34 AM, R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and
ETR?
CCNAs everywhere panic as their monitoring tools tell them that the
'Internet' is down.
All,
We have been experimenting with Instant Messaging as
an interface for providing easier access to a route-server.
(no longer need to telnet xyz or use annoying web forms).
We have essentially created a BGP chat bot. You can
reach it by adding AIM: bgpbotz ( or Jabber: bgpb...@jabber.merit.
2009/8/5 Nathan Ward
> On 5/08/2009, at 1:34 AM, R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
>
> Hey Gang -
>>
>> I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
>> (including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and ETR?
>>
>
>
> CCNAs everywhere panic as their monitoring tools t
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:
> i didn't pay any special heed to it since there was no way to get enough
> bites at the apple due to negative caching. when i saw djb's announcement
> (i think in 1999 or 2000, so, seven years after schuba's paper came out) i
> said, geez, that's
62 matches
Mail list logo
