Re: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Marshall Eubanks]

On Jul 3, 2009, at 5:11 PM, Jeffrey Lyon wrote:


That's a great idea, use some lame Web 2.0 trend to communicate with
actual real life customers. 



I would assume they figured it was better than just remaining silent.

Regards
Marshall


Jeff


On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Marshall Eubanks  
wrote:


On Jul 3, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Ben Carleton wrote:


Yes it was.

On Jul 3, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Jeffrey Lyon wrote:


Wasn't Authorize.net affected by this? We received a support ticket
about why Authorize.net is down today (I don't know either, I don't
ask too many questions).



Authorize.net was for a while completely off the air, and companies  
that

relied upon them
were not getting credit card authorizations (and, thus, no  
ecommerce). I

think it is still only
partially functional.

Authorize.net has been communicating with customers mostly  
(entirely ?) with

twitter - they are

@AuthorizeNet with a hash tab of #authorizenet

If you go there, you will see a lot of status messages like

#authorizenet (cont.) Do not manually submit ARB transactions b/c  
you run

the risk of your merchants being double billed.
10 minutes ago from web

(i.e., 4:47 EDT).

You will also see a lot of posts from annoyed people if you search on
#authorizenet

It's an interesting use of Web 2.0 for emergency communications.

Regards
Marshall



Jeff

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Tomas L. Byrnes  
wrote:





Earth is a single point of failure, where is your backup site?


[TLB:] Given that all my customers are on Earth, I don't need  
one if my

customers also are "down".








--
Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team
jeffrey.l...@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net
Black Lotus Communications of The IRC Company, Inc.

Look for us at HostingCon 2009 in Washington, DC on August 10th -  
12th

at Booth #401.














--
Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team
jeffrey.l...@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net
Black Lotus Communications of The IRC Company, Inc.

Look for us at HostingCon 2009 in Washington, DC on August 10th - 12th
at Booth #401.




Regards
Marshall Eubanks
CEO / AmericaFree.TV

BGP Update Report

[cidr-report]

BGP Update Report
Interval: 25-Jun-09 -to- 02-Jul-09 (7 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072

TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds %  Upds/PfxAS-Name
 1 - AS919886810  4.5% 299.3 -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 2 - AS475531871  1.6%  26.5 -- TATACOMM-AS TATA Communications 
formerly VSNL is Leading ISP
 3 - AS17488   28227  1.4%  24.6 -- HATHWAY-NET-AP Hathway IP Over 
Cable Internet
 4 - AS10474   17094  0.9% 416.9 -- NETACTIVE
 5 - AS22783   14699  0.8%2449.8 -- WEBPOWER - WebPower, Inc.
 6 - AS21104   14329  0.7%1023.5 -- AM-NETSYS-AS Netsys JVC 
Autonomous System Yerevan, Armenia
 7 - AS638914119  0.7%   3.3 -- BELLSOUTH-NET-BLK - 
BellSouth.net Inc.
 8 - AS21491   12942  0.7% 479.3 -- UTL-ON-LINE UTL On-line is RF 
broadband ISP in Uganda - Africa
 9 - AS23700   12849  0.7%  31.0 -- BM-AS-ID PT. Broadband 
Multimedia, Tbk
10 - AS33783   11714  0.6%  90.8 -- EEPAD
11 - AS30890   11347  0.6%  27.1 -- EVOLVA Evolva Telecom
12 - AS47408   11043  0.6% 525.9 -- MANDARIN-AS Mandarin WIMAX 
Sicilia SpA
13 - AS30969   10906  0.6% 605.9 -- TAN-NET TransAfrica Networks
14 - AS481210307  0.5%  11.5 -- CHINANET-SH-AP China Telecom 
(Group)
15 - AS8452 8289  0.4%   8.6 -- TEDATA TEDATA
16 - AS1221 8218  0.4%  14.1 -- ASN-TELSTRA Telstra Pty Ltd
17 - AS4134 8065  0.4%   8.2 -- CHINANET-BACKBONE 
No.31,Jin-rong Street
18 - AS8151 7899  0.4%   5.4 -- Uninet S.A. de C.V.
19 - AS248637693  0.4%   8.8 -- LINKdotNET-AS
20 - AS5668 7672  0.4%   7.5 -- AS-5668 - CenturyTel Internet 
Holdings, Inc.


TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS (Updates per announced prefix)
Rank ASNUpds %  Upds/PfxAS-Name
 1 - AS22783   14699  0.8%2449.8 -- WEBPOWER - WebPower, Inc.
 2 - AS366165425  0.3%1356.2 -- AGTLD - VeriSign Global 
Registry Services
 3 - AS476401315  0.1%1315.0 -- TRICOMPAS Tricomp Sp. z. o. o.
 4 - AS21104   14329  0.7%1023.5 -- AM-NETSYS-AS Netsys JVC 
Autonomous System Yerevan, Armenia
 5 - AS29508 850  0.0% 850.0 -- TANAT-AS TANAT LLC
 6 - AS41189 719  0.0% 719.0 -- ICONCEPT-AS iConcept
 7 - AS370113721  0.2% 620.2 -- MSTARTEL-AS
 8 - AS30969   10906  0.6% 605.9 -- TAN-NET TransAfrica Networks
 9 - AS47408   11043  0.6% 525.9 -- MANDARIN-AS Mandarin WIMAX 
Sicilia SpA
10 - AS255464205  0.2% 525.6 -- BROOKLANDCOMP-AS Brookland 
Computer Services
11 - AS354002555  0.1% 511.0 -- MFIST Interregoinal 
Organization Network Technologies
12 - AS276532015  0.1% 503.8 -- Alpha Communications Network
13 - AS21491   12942  0.7% 479.3 -- UTL-ON-LINE UTL On-line is RF 
broadband ISP in Uganda - Africa
14 - AS10474   17094  0.9% 416.9 -- NETACTIVE
15 - AS13403 415  0.0% 415.0 -- ALAWEB-INTERNET - ALAWEB 
Internet Services
16 - AS36975 403  0.0% 403.0 -- CBA-AS
17 - AS37083 403  0.0% 403.0 -- hiqos-as
18 - AS38136 764  0.0% 382.0 -- MBTELTRANSIT-BD MB TELECCOM 
LIMITED, INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER
19 - AS33074 370  0.0% 370.0 -- ISC-NBO1 ISC, Nairobi, Kenya
20 - AS5050 5932  0.3% 348.9 -- PSC-EXT - Pittsburgh 
Supercomputing Center


TOP 20 Unstable Prefixes
Rank Prefix Upds % Origin AS -- AS Name
 1 - 95.59.8.0/23  10566  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 2 - 95.59.2.0/23  10565  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 3 - 95.59.4.0/22  10565  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 4 - 92.46.244.0/2310561  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 5 - 89.218.220.0/23   10561  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 6 - 89.218.218.0/23   10560  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 7 - 95.59.1.0/24   9892  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 8 - 88.204.221.0/249866  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 9 - 80.86.238.0/24 7170  0.3%   AS21104 -- AM-NETSYS-AS Netsys JVC 
Autonomous System Yerevan, Armenia
10 - 80.86.239.0/24 6938  0.3%   AS21104 -- AM-NETSYS-AS Netsys JVC 
Autonomous System Yerevan, Armenia
11 - 72.23.246.0/24 5834  0.3%   AS5050  -- PSC-EXT - Pittsburgh 
Supercomputing Center
12 - 205.246.203.0/24   5686  0.3%   AS22783 -- WEBPOWER - WebPower, Inc.
13 - 63.163.66.0/24 5684  0.3%   AS22783 -- WEBPOWER

RE: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Michael J McCafferty]

On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 13:21 -0700, Tomas L. Byrnes wrote:
> 
> >
> >Earth is a single point of failure, where is your backup site?
> 
> [TLB:] Given that all my customers are on Earth, I don't need one if my
> customers also are "down".

Bad Day !

Re: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Jeffrey Lyon]

That's a great idea, use some lame Web 2.0 trend to communicate with
actual real life customers. 

Jeff


On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
>
> On Jul 3, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Ben Carleton wrote:
>
>> Yes it was.
>>
>> On Jul 3, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
>>
>>> Wasn't Authorize.net affected by this? We received a support ticket
>>> about why Authorize.net is down today (I don't know either, I don't
>>> ask too many questions).
>>>
>
> Authorize.net was for a while completely off the air, and companies that
> relied upon them
> were not getting credit card authorizations (and, thus, no ecommerce). I
> think it is still only
> partially functional.
>
> Authorize.net has been communicating with customers mostly (entirely ?) with
> twitter - they are
>
> @AuthorizeNet with a hash tab of #authorizenet
>
> If you go there, you will see a lot of status messages like
>
> #authorizenet (cont.) Do not manually submit ARB transactions b/c you run
> the risk of your merchants being double billed.
> 10 minutes ago from web
>
> (i.e., 4:47 EDT).
>
> You will also see a lot of posts from annoyed people if you search on
>  #authorizenet
>
> It's an interesting use of Web 2.0 for emergency communications.
>
> Regards
> Marshall
>
>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Tomas L. Byrnes wrote:


>
> Earth is a single point of failure, where is your backup site?

 [TLB:] Given that all my customers are on Earth, I don't need one if my
 customers also are "down".




>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team
>>> jeffrey.l...@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net
>>> Black Lotus Communications of The IRC Company, Inc.
>>>
>>> Look for us at HostingCon 2009 in Washington, DC on August 10th - 12th
>>> at Booth #401.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team
jeffrey.l...@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net
Black Lotus Communications of The IRC Company, Inc.

Look for us at HostingCon 2009 in Washington, DC on August 10th - 12th
at Booth #401.

Re: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Marshall Eubanks]

On Jul 3, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Ben Carleton wrote:


Yes it was.

On Jul 3, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Jeffrey Lyon wrote:


Wasn't Authorize.net affected by this? We received a support ticket
about why Authorize.net is down today (I don't know either, I don't
ask too many questions).



Authorize.net was for a while completely off the air, and companies  
that relied upon them
were not getting credit card authorizations (and, thus, no ecommerce).  
I think it is still only

partially functional.

Authorize.net has been communicating with customers mostly  
(entirely ?) with twitter - they are


@AuthorizeNet with a hash tab of #authorizenet

If you go there, you will see a lot of status messages like

#authorizenet (cont.) Do not manually submit ARB transactions b/c you  
run the risk of your merchants being double billed.

10 minutes ago from web

(i.e., 4:47 EDT).

You will also see a lot of posts from annoyed people if you search on   
#authorizenet


It's an interesting use of Web 2.0 for emergency communications.

Regards
Marshall



Jeff

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Tomas L. Byrnes  
wrote:





Earth is a single point of failure, where is your backup site?


[TLB:] Given that all my customers are on Earth, I don't need one  
if my

customers also are "down".








--
Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team
jeffrey.l...@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net
Black Lotus Communications of The IRC Company, Inc.

Look for us at HostingCon 2009 in Washington, DC on August 10th -  
12th

at Booth #401.

Re: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Darren Bolding]

Power to some of the affected sections of the building has been restored via
existing onsite generators.  The central power risers cannot be connected to
current generators in a timely manner due to excessive damage to the
electrical switching equipment (and those generators may still be in
standing water).  These provide power to a number of colocated systems.
 Temporary generators are on order to be connected to the central risers,
and the site expects that to be complete sometime late this evening.  As
best I can tell, there is still no utility power connected to any of the
systems.
The AC systems (chiller and crac) are currently not working.  It is not
clear to me whether these will be brought back on line when the temporary
generators are available, but I am assuming so.

It was pleasant to see the general positive attitude, sharing of information
and offers of assistance that were made by representatives of the various
tenants, customers and carriers that were on the scene.  The usual suspects
(companies and individuals) stepped up and took care of things, as they
always seem to.

--D

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Leo Bicknell  wrote:

> In a message written on Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 03:22:14PM -0400, Sean Donelan
> wrote:
> > Are you better off with a single "tier 4" data center, multiple
> > "tier 1" data centers, or something in between?
>
> It depends entirely on your dependency on connectivity.
>
> One extreme is something like a Central Office.  Lots of cables
> from end-sites terminate in the building.  Having a duplicate of
> the head end termination equipment on the opposite coast is darn
> near useless.  If the building goes down, the users going through
> it go down.  "Tier 4" is probably a good idea.
>
> The other extreme is a pure content play (YouTube, Google Search).
> Users don't care which data center they hit (within reason), and
> indeed often don't know.  You're better off having data centers
> spread out all over, both so you're more likely to only loose one
> at a time, but also so that the loss of one is relatively unimportant.
> Once you're already in this architecture, Tier 1 is generally
> cheaper.
>
> There are two problems though.  First, most folks don't fit neatly
> in one of these buckets.  They have some ties to local infrastructure,
> and some items which are not tied.  Latency as a performance penality
> is very subjective.  A backup 1000 miles away is fine for many
> things, and very bad for some things.
>
> Second, most folks don't have choices.  It would be nice if most
> cities had three each Tier 1, 2, 3 and 4 data centers available so
> there was choice and competition but that's rare.
>
> Very few companies consider these choices rationally; often because
> choices are made by different groups.  I am amazed how many times
> inside of an ISP the folks deploying the DNS and mail servers are
> firewalled from the folks deploying the network, to the point where
> you have to get to the President to reach common management.  This
> leads to them making choices in opposite directions that end up
> costing extra money the company, and often resulting in a much lower
> uptimes than expected.  Having the network group deploy a single point
> of failure to the "Tier 4" data center the server guys required is,
> well, silly.
>
> However, more important than all of this is testing your infrastructure.
> Would you feel comfortable walking into your data center and ripping
> the power cable out of some bit of equipment at random _right now_?
> If not, you have no faith your equipment will work in an outage.
>
> --
>   Leo Bicknell - bickn...@ufp.org - CCIE 3440
>PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
>



-- 
--  Darren Bolding  --
--  dar...@bolding.org   --

Re: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Leo Bicknell]

In a message written on Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 03:22:14PM -0400, Sean Donelan 
wrote:
> Are you better off with a single "tier 4" data center, multiple
> "tier 1" data centers, or something in between?

It depends entirely on your dependency on connectivity.

One extreme is something like a Central Office.  Lots of cables
from end-sites terminate in the building.  Having a duplicate of
the head end termination equipment on the opposite coast is darn
near useless.  If the building goes down, the users going through
it go down.  "Tier 4" is probably a good idea.

The other extreme is a pure content play (YouTube, Google Search).
Users don't care which data center they hit (within reason), and
indeed often don't know.  You're better off having data centers
spread out all over, both so you're more likely to only loose one
at a time, but also so that the loss of one is relatively unimportant.
Once you're already in this architecture, Tier 1 is generally
cheaper.

There are two problems though.  First, most folks don't fit neatly
in one of these buckets.  They have some ties to local infrastructure,
and some items which are not tied.  Latency as a performance penality
is very subjective.  A backup 1000 miles away is fine for many
things, and very bad for some things.

Second, most folks don't have choices.  It would be nice if most
cities had three each Tier 1, 2, 3 and 4 data centers available so
there was choice and competition but that's rare.

Very few companies consider these choices rationally; often because
choices are made by different groups.  I am amazed how many times
inside of an ISP the folks deploying the DNS and mail servers are
firewalled from the folks deploying the network, to the point where
you have to get to the President to reach common management.  This
leads to them making choices in opposite directions that end up
costing extra money the company, and often resulting in a much lower
uptimes than expected.  Having the network group deploy a single point
of failure to the "Tier 4" data center the server guys required is,
well, silly.

However, more important than all of this is testing your infrastructure.
Would you feel comfortable walking into your data center and ripping
the power cable out of some bit of equipment at random _right now_?
If not, you have no faith your equipment will work in an outage.

-- 
   Leo Bicknell - bickn...@ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/


pgpWheAQ4NuE8.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Ben Carleton]

Yes it was.

On Jul 3, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Jeffrey Lyon wrote:


Wasn't Authorize.net affected by this? We received a support ticket
about why Authorize.net is down today (I don't know either, I don't
ask too many questions).

Jeff

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Tomas L. Byrnes  
wrote:





Earth is a single point of failure, where is your backup site?


[TLB:] Given that all my customers are on Earth, I don't need one  
if my

customers also are "down".








--
Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team
jeffrey.l...@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net
Black Lotus Communications of The IRC Company, Inc.

Look for us at HostingCon 2009 in Washington, DC on August 10th - 12th
at Booth #401.

Re: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Jeffrey Lyon]

Wasn't Authorize.net affected by this? We received a support ticket
about why Authorize.net is down today (I don't know either, I don't
ask too many questions).

Jeff

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Tomas L. Byrnes wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Earth is a single point of failure, where is your backup site?
>
> [TLB:] Given that all my customers are on Earth, I don't need one if my
> customers also are "down".
>
>
>
>



-- 
Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team
jeffrey.l...@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net
Black Lotus Communications of The IRC Company, Inc.

Look for us at HostingCon 2009 in Washington, DC on August 10th - 12th
at Booth #401.

RE: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Tomas L. Byrnes]

>
>Earth is a single point of failure, where is your backup site?

[TLB:] Given that all my customers are on Earth, I don't need one if my
customers also are "down".

Re: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Stephen Stuart]

> Earth is a single point of failure, where is your backup site?

This reminds me of the 1996 thread about how MAE-East still had no
generator. Same topic, roughly, some of the same people (hi, Sean).

Sure, the line about the Earth SPOF is catchy, but in terms of more
likely scenarios: how many people stand *outside* the "tier 4"
datacenter and imagine a fire marshal pointing at the building and
saying, "Turn *that* off, now." I've seen that happen a couple times
since the WilTel POP thing in 1996.

Stephen

Re: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Sean Donelan]

On Fri, 3 Jul 2009, William Herrin wrote:

There is a useful standard: ANSI/TIA-942. It offers specifications for
four tiers of data centers ranging from tier 1 (a basic data center
with no redundancy) to tier 4 (fully fault tolerant).


Are you better off with a single "tier 4" data center, multiple
"tier 1" data centers, or something in between?

Distance and quantity versus complexity and scaling versus cost and risk. 
Sometimes no matter what you choose, you might be wrong.


Earth is a single point of failure, where is your backup site?

RE: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Michael K. Smith - Adhost]

-Original Message-
From: Tomas L. Byrnes [mailto:t...@byrneit.net]
Sent: Fri 7/3/2009 10:20 AM
To: David Hubbard; NANOG list
Subject: RE: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle
 
This begs the question of what basic parameters should be for a "carrier
hotel" or co-lo.

Given that we're getting designated "Critical Infrastructure", we'd
getter start coming up with some, or we'll have them defined for us.



I think the more important question is, "what do you consider redundancy?"  We 
have facilities in Plaza East (no down) and Plaza West (unaffected).  If you 
are critical infrastructure there is no amount of redundancy that you should 
offload onto a colo provider.  Instead, you build your redundancy across 
different data centers, different providers, different everything.  If you rely 
on a single provider for any of the aforementioned then you have built in at 
least one single point of failure, regardless of the resiliency of the 
underlying provider.

My .02, worth almost every penny.

Mike

Re: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[William Herrin]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Tomas L. Byrnes wrote:
> This begs the question of what basic parameters should be for a
> "carrier hotel" or co-lo. [...] The old NEBS standards were too much
> of a straightjacket.

Tomas,

There is a useful standard: ANSI/TIA-942. It offers specifications for
four tiers of data centers ranging from tier 1 (a basic data center
with no redundancy) to tier 4 (fully fault tolerant).

http://www.tiaonline.org/standards/catalog/search.cfm?standards_criteria=TIA-942
(the 2005 one)

Judging from 
http://www.techlinks.net/community/articles/article/1-article-submission-forms/14833-a-quick-primer-on-data-center-tier-classifications
there's even research that projects what sort of annual downtime you
can expect for each of the tiers described by the standard.

When I walk into a data center, I make a habit of asking which tier
they achieve, at least for the HVAC and electrical systems. And then I
ask to see the components which the tier claim says they should have.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William D. Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: 
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004

RE: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Erik Soosalu]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009415571_apwafisherpla
zafire1stldwritethru.html




-Original Message-
From: David Hubbard [mailto:dhubb...@dino.hostasaurus.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NANOG list
Subject: RE: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

From: Seth Mattinen [mailto:se...@rollernet.us] 
> 
> Apparently it took authorize.net with it, too:
> http://twitter.com/authorizenet
> 
> ~Seth

No technical explanation of course but it also took down
their 'backup facility' according to them on twitter;
I assume some bad routing/DNS if they do actually have
a backup facility.  Lots of online stores are
offline right now because of this, and the holiday is
unfortunately keeping those store owners from knowing
they are not making sales right now.  Life in ecommerce...

David

Weekly Routing Table Report

[Routing Analysis Role Account]

This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net

For historical data, please see http://thyme.apnic.net.

If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith .

Routing Table Report   04:00 +10GMT Sat 04 Jul, 2009

Report Website: http://thyme.apnic.net
Detailed Analysis:  http://thyme.apnic.net/current/

Analysis Summary


BGP routing table entries examined:  289924
Prefixes after maximum aggregation:  137398
Deaggregation factor:  2.11
Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 143783
Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 31638
Prefixes per ASN:  9.16
Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:   27506
Origin ASes announcing only one prefix:   13385
Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:4132
Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 99
Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table:   3.6
Max AS path length visible:  24
Max AS path prepend of ASN (12026)   22
Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table:   478
Unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 134
Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs:193
Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table:  65
Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table:0
Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space:345
Number of addresses announced to Internet:   2063493440
Equivalent to 122 /8s, 254 /16s and 105 /24s
Percentage of available address space announced:   55.7
Percentage of allocated address space announced:   64.4
Percentage of available address space allocated:   86.4
Percentage of address space in use by end-sites:   78.1
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  143430

APNIC Region Analysis Summary
-

Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes:69259
Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation:   24587
APNIC Deaggregation factor:2.82
Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks:   68669
Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:31173
APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:3691
APNIC Prefixes per ASN:   18.60
APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:   1002
APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:566
Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:3.5
Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 16
Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet:  463130240
Equivalent to 27 /8s, 154 /16s and 206 /24s
Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 86.3

APNIC AS Blocks4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431
(pre-ERX allocations)  23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079
APNIC Address Blocks58/8,  59/8,  60/8,  61/8, 110/8, 111/8, 112/8,
   113/8, 114/8, 115/8, 116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8,
   120/8, 121/8, 122/8, 123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8,
   180/8, 183/8, 202/8, 203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8,
   219/8, 220/8, 221/8, 222/8,

ARIN Region Analysis Summary


Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes:123352
Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation:65801
ARIN Deaggregation factor: 1.87
Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks:   124082
Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 51892
ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:13054
ARIN Prefixes per ASN: 9.51
ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:5015
ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:1280
Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 3.3
Max ARIN Region AS path length visible:  24
Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet:  1009850048
Equivalent to 60 /8s, 49 /16s and 22 /24s
Percentage of available ARIN address space announced: 194.2

ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106
(pre-ERX allocations)  2138-2584, 2615-2772, 2823-2

Re: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Seth Mattinen]

Tomas L. Byrnes wrote:
> This begs the question of what basic parameters should be for a "carrier
> hotel" or co-lo.
> 
> Given that we're getting designated "Critical Infrastructure", we'd
> getter start coming up with some, or we'll have them defined for us.
> 
> The old NEBS standards were too much of a straightjacket, but the
> current situation, where any buffoon who wants to can claim to be
> something they aren't (redundant and reliable) undermines the business
> of those who actually spend the money, and make the effort, to provide a
> true "carrier grade" co-lo.

Absolutely. Then your pricing is so far out of whack with the apparent
competition that it's hard to get customers when it appears one can get
the same/better for far less. Me, personally, I just don't say things
like "100% uptime" or claim to be a carrier-grade facility. But I think
that scares people off when my competitors (and I've seen the insides of
some of the horrid trash heaps they call a NOC) claim they do.


>
> This is life in the current Internet: Overpromise, and Underdeliver.
> 

"Our flywheel systems are so failure-proof and thinking outside the box
that we don't need a silly battery UPS that can cold-start!"

I know outages and related discussion end up attracting the off-topic
hammer here on NANOG, but I do find them interesting and worthwhile.

~Seth

RE: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Tomas L. Byrnes]

This begs the question of what basic parameters should be for a "carrier
hotel" or co-lo.

Given that we're getting designated "Critical Infrastructure", we'd
getter start coming up with some, or we'll have them defined for us.

The old NEBS standards were too much of a straightjacket, but the
current situation, where any buffoon who wants to can claim to be
something they aren't (redundant and reliable) undermines the business
of those who actually spend the money, and make the effort, to provide a
true "carrier grade" co-lo.

This is life in the current Internet: Overpromise, and Underdeliver.


>-Original Message-
>From: David Hubbard [mailto:dhubb...@dino.hostasaurus.com]
>Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 10:05 AM
>To: NANOG list
>Subject: RE: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle
>
>From: Seth Mattinen [mailto:se...@rollernet.us]
>>
>> Apparently it took authorize.net with it, too:
>> http://twitter.com/authorizenet
>>
>> ~Seth
>
>No technical explanation of course but it also took down
>their 'backup facility' according to them on twitter;
>I assume some bad routing/DNS if they do actually have
>a backup facility.  Lots of online stores are
>offline right now because of this, and the holiday is
>unfortunately keeping those store owners from knowing
>they are not making sales right now.  Life in ecommerce...
>
>David

Re: Wireless bridge

[Joel Jaeggli]

You've got to recall that the genesis of this is dicsussion was the
replacement of a pair for open-wrtized linksys wrt-54g routers, which
have 30mW 2.4ghz radios being used for an 800meter link... There are a
vast continuum (both in terms of performance and cost) of solutions
between that and a pair of 60ghz mm wave part 15 radios.

joel

Jorge Amodio wrote:
>> Also for this kind of link, 60 GHz gear is often cheaper and easier to deal
>> with, so what I would recommend.
> 
> I'd also take a look at 60GHz, check http://www.bridgewave.com/,
> I believe they have some sort of promotion going on for 60/80GHz gear.
> 
> My .02
> 

CN=Jesus Leung/OU=AHM/OU=AM/O=HONDA is out of the office.

[jesus_leung]

I will be out of the office starting  07/03/2009 and will not return until
07/09/2009.

Re: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Seth Mattinen]

Darren Bolding wrote:
>
> Interestingly, this building is also the production studios for several
> Seattle TV and radio stations.
> 
> There is no ETA for resolution.
> 

Apparently it took authorize.net with it, too:
http://twitter.com/authorizenet

~Seth

Re: Wireless bridge

[Jorge Amodio]

> Also for this kind of link, 60 GHz gear is often cheaper and easier to deal
> with, so what I would recommend.

I'd also take a look at 60GHz, check http://www.bridgewave.com/,
I believe they have some sort of promotion going on for 60/80GHz gear.

My .02

Re: Wireless bridge

[Matthew Kaufman]

Matthew Walster wrote:

I'd heartily recommend giving infra-red FSO a go, no Fresnel zone...


A nitpick, but there's nothing special about infra-red that makes it not 
electromagnetic just like microwave. So there's still a Fresnel zone, 
only smaller in diameter.


Also for this kind of link, 60 GHz gear is often cheaper and easier to 
deal with, so what I would recommend.


Matthew Kaufman

Re: Wireless bridge

[Matthew Walster]

2009/6/19 Peter Boone 
>
> - Get off the 2.4 GHz range. Move up to 5. As for licensed vs. unlicensed,
> I'm getting mixed input. I'm fairly certain that if the price is right and
> the frequency is 5GHz+, it won't be a factor. Also, I'll be very glad to
> separate the bridge from the client access points so that allows for more
> options. Every solution at this range can easily do 20+ Mbps so throughput
> is no longer a factor.
>

It looks like your fresnel zone is 14ft (according to a previous poster) and
you're currently using relatively low power radio waves.

Have you considered using something like Free Space Optics? For under $100,
you can build yourself a couple of RONJAs[1] and test out what the signal is
going to be like - that runs at 10Mbit, and can stay in place as a backup
once you then buy a FSO device from a proper manufacturer (MRV make some
nice ones) and you're looking at 100Mbit for some money, 1000Mbit for quite
a lot of money and 1Mbit for "it would have been cheaper to lay fiber".

I'd heartily recommend giving infra-red FSO a go, no Fresnel zone and it's
essentially bridged ethernet - no funky routing required, though I would
still set up OSPF or similar with it, to fail back to a slower link such as
the RONJA.

Matthew Walster

[1] http://ronja.twibright.com/

Re: ARIN and DNSSEC

[Steven M. Bellovin]

On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 12:21:36 +0900
Randy Bush  wrote:

> > On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Mark Kosters wrote:
> >> ARIN is now signing the /8 zones that it is authoritative for (eg
> >> 192.in-addr.arpa, etc).
> > Thanks!
> 
> indeed!
> 
Wonderful!


--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb

The Cidr Report

[cidr-report]

This report has been generated at Fri Jul  3 21:13:55 2009 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.

Check http://www.cidr-report.org for a current version of this report.

Recent Table History
Date  PrefixesCIDR Agg
26-06-09295286  183129
27-06-09295497  183044
28-06-09295496  183041
29-06-09295193  183133
30-06-09295131  183378
01-07-09295500  183533
02-07-09295531  183261
03-07-09295814  183377


AS Summary
 31731  Number of ASes in routing system
 13470  Number of ASes announcing only one prefix
  4291  Largest number of prefixes announced by an AS
AS4323 : TWTC - tw telecom holdings, inc.
  89737216  Largest address span announced by an AS (/32s)
AS27064: DNIC-ASBLK-27032-27159 - DoD Network Information Center


Aggregation Summary
The algorithm used in this report proposes aggregation only
when there is a precise match using the AS path, so as 
to preserve traffic transit policies. Aggregation is also
proposed across non-advertised address space ('holes').

 --- 03Jul09 ---
ASnumNetsNow NetsAggr  NetGain   % Gain   Description

Table 295702   183220   11248238.0%   All ASes

AS6389  4266  337 392992.1%   BELLSOUTH-NET-BLK -
   BellSouth.net Inc.
AS4323  4291 1806 248557.9%   TWTC - tw telecom holdings,
   inc.
AS4766  1811  528 128370.8%   KIXS-AS-KR Korea Telecom
AS17488 1537  279 125881.8%   HATHWAY-NET-AP Hathway IP Over
   Cable Internet
AS4755  1213  193 102084.1%   TATACOMM-AS TATA
   Communications formerly VSNL
   is Leading ISP
AS1785  1705  689 101659.6%   AS-PAETEC-NET - PaeTec
   Communications, Inc.
AS22773 1071   71 100093.4%   ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC -
   Cox Communications Inc.
AS18566 1062   95  96791.1%   COVAD - Covad Communications
   Co.
AS8151  1460  558  90261.8%   Uninet S.A. de C.V.
AS19262 1017  235  78276.9%   VZGNI-TRANSIT - Verizon
   Internet Services Inc.
AS8452   994  272  72272.6%   TEDATA TEDATA
AS18101  754  115  63984.7%   RIL-IDC Reliance Infocom Ltd
   Internet Data Centre,
AS17908  684   57  62791.7%   TCISL Tata Communications
AS6478  1206  617  58948.8%   ATT-INTERNET3 - AT&T WorldNet
   Services
AS4804   681  109  57284.0%   MPX-AS Microplex PTY LTD
AS9498   641   75  56688.3%   BBIL-AP BHARTI Airtel Ltd.
AS7029   612  107  50582.5%   WINDSTREAM - Windstream
   Communications Inc
AS11492 1122  619  50344.8%   CABLEONE - CABLE ONE, INC.
AS17676  564   80  48485.8%   GIGAINFRA Softbank BB Corp.
AS4808   651  170  48173.9%   CHINA169-BJ CNCGROUP IP
   network China169 Beijing
   Province Network
AS22047  601  126  47579.0%   VTR BANDA ANCHA S.A.
AS10620  920  457  46350.3%   TV Cable S.A.
AS7018  1504 1048  45630.3%   ATT-INTERNET4 - AT&T WorldNet
   Services
AS4134   977  530  44745.8%   CHINANET-BACKBONE
   No.31,Jin-rong Street
AS24560  724  278  44661.6%   AIRTELBROADBAND-AS-AP Bharti
   Airtel Ltd., Telemedia
   Services
AS9443   521   82  43984.3%   INTERNETPRIMUS-AS-AP Primus
   Telecommunications
AS7545   830  414  41650.1%   TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Internet
   Pty Ltd
AS7011   984  570  41442.1%   FRONTIER-AND-CITIZENS -
   Frontier Communications of
   America, Inc.
AS4668   693  285  40858.9%   LGNET-AS-KR LG CNS
AS7303   573  165  40871.2%   Telecom Argentina S.A.

Total  35669109672470269.3%   Top 30 total


Possible

BGP Update Report

[cidr-report]

BGP Update Report
Interval: 25-Jun-09 -to- 02-Jul-09 (8 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072

TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds %  Upds/PfxAS-Name
 1 - AS919886810  4.5% 299.3 -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 2 - AS475531871  1.6%  26.5 -- TATACOMM-AS TATA Communications 
formerly VSNL is Leading ISP
 3 - AS17488   28227  1.4%  24.6 -- HATHWAY-NET-AP Hathway IP Over 
Cable Internet
 4 - AS10474   17094  0.9% 416.9 -- NETACTIVE
 5 - AS22783   14699  0.8%2449.8 -- WEBPOWER - WebPower, Inc.
 6 - AS21104   14329  0.7%1023.5 -- AM-NETSYS-AS Netsys JVC 
Autonomous System Yerevan, Armenia
 7 - AS638914119  0.7%   3.3 -- BELLSOUTH-NET-BLK - 
BellSouth.net Inc.
 8 - AS21491   12942  0.7% 479.3 -- UTL-ON-LINE UTL On-line is RF 
broadband ISP in Uganda - Africa
 9 - AS23700   12849  0.7%  31.0 -- BM-AS-ID PT. Broadband 
Multimedia, Tbk
10 - AS33783   11714  0.6%  90.8 -- EEPAD
11 - AS30890   11347  0.6%  27.1 -- EVOLVA Evolva Telecom
12 - AS47408   11043  0.6% 525.9 -- MANDARIN-AS Mandarin WIMAX 
Sicilia SpA
13 - AS30969   10906  0.6% 605.9 -- TAN-NET TransAfrica Networks
14 - AS481210307  0.5%  11.5 -- CHINANET-SH-AP China Telecom 
(Group)
15 - AS8452 8289  0.4%   8.6 -- TEDATA TEDATA
16 - AS1221 8218  0.4%  14.1 -- ASN-TELSTRA Telstra Pty Ltd
17 - AS4134 8065  0.4%   8.2 -- CHINANET-BACKBONE 
No.31,Jin-rong Street
18 - AS8151 7899  0.4%   5.4 -- Uninet S.A. de C.V.
19 - AS248637693  0.4%   8.8 -- LINKdotNET-AS
20 - AS5668 7672  0.4%   7.5 -- AS-5668 - CenturyTel Internet 
Holdings, Inc.


TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS (Updates per announced prefix)
Rank ASNUpds %  Upds/PfxAS-Name
 1 - AS22783   14699  0.8%2449.8 -- WEBPOWER - WebPower, Inc.
 2 - AS366165425  0.3%1356.2 -- AGTLD - VeriSign Global 
Registry Services
 3 - AS476401315  0.1%1315.0 -- TRICOMPAS Tricomp Sp. z. o. o.
 4 - AS21104   14329  0.7%1023.5 -- AM-NETSYS-AS Netsys JVC 
Autonomous System Yerevan, Armenia
 5 - AS29508 850  0.0% 850.0 -- TANAT-AS TANAT LLC
 6 - AS41189 719  0.0% 719.0 -- ICONCEPT-AS iConcept
 7 - AS370113721  0.2% 620.2 -- MSTARTEL-AS
 8 - AS30969   10906  0.6% 605.9 -- TAN-NET TransAfrica Networks
 9 - AS47408   11043  0.6% 525.9 -- MANDARIN-AS Mandarin WIMAX 
Sicilia SpA
10 - AS255464205  0.2% 525.6 -- BROOKLANDCOMP-AS Brookland 
Computer Services
11 - AS354002555  0.1% 511.0 -- MFIST Interregoinal 
Organization Network Technologies
12 - AS276532015  0.1% 503.8 -- Alpha Communications Network
13 - AS21491   12942  0.7% 479.3 -- UTL-ON-LINE UTL On-line is RF 
broadband ISP in Uganda - Africa
14 - AS10474   17094  0.9% 416.9 -- NETACTIVE
15 - AS13403 415  0.0% 415.0 -- ALAWEB-INTERNET - ALAWEB 
Internet Services
16 - AS36975 403  0.0% 403.0 -- CBA-AS
17 - AS37083 403  0.0% 403.0 -- hiqos-as
18 - AS38136 764  0.0% 382.0 -- MBTELTRANSIT-BD MB TELECCOM 
LIMITED, INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER
19 - AS33074 370  0.0% 370.0 -- ISC-NBO1 ISC, Nairobi, Kenya
20 - AS5050 5932  0.3% 348.9 -- PSC-EXT - Pittsburgh 
Supercomputing Center


TOP 20 Unstable Prefixes
Rank Prefix Upds % Origin AS -- AS Name
 1 - 95.59.8.0/23  10566  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 2 - 95.59.2.0/23  10565  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 3 - 95.59.4.0/22  10565  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 4 - 92.46.244.0/2310561  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 5 - 89.218.220.0/23   10561  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 6 - 89.218.218.0/23   10560  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 7 - 95.59.1.0/24   9892  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 8 - 88.204.221.0/249866  0.5%   AS9198  -- KAZTELECOM-AS Kazakhtelecom 
Corporate Sales Administration
 9 - 80.86.238.0/24 7170  0.3%   AS21104 -- AM-NETSYS-AS Netsys JVC 
Autonomous System Yerevan, Armenia
10 - 80.86.239.0/24 6938  0.3%   AS21104 -- AM-NETSYS-AS Netsys JVC 
Autonomous System Yerevan, Armenia
11 - 72.23.246.0/24 5834  0.3%   AS5050  -- PSC-EXT - Pittsburgh 
Supercomputing Center
12 - 205.246.203.0/24   5686  0.3%   AS22783 -- WEBPOWER - WebPower, Inc.
13 - 63.163.66.0/24 5684  0.3%   AS22783 -- WEBPOWER

Re: Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Joe Richards]

Multiple folks on Twitter who are in the area are reporting a 5-6 hour
ETA.

-Joe

-- 
Joe Richards 
--
ipv4: http://www.disconformity.net [ 72.29.169.48/28 ]
ipv6: http://ipv6.disconformity.net  [ 2001:48c0:1001:1::/64 ]
blog: http://www.mainlined.org

Fire, Power loss at Fisher Plaza in Seattle

[Darren Bolding]

Fisher Plaza, a self-styled carrier hotel in Seattle, and home to multiple
datacenter and colocation providers, has had a major issue in one of its
buildings late last night, early this morning.
The best information I am aware of is that there was a failure in the
main/generator transfer switch which resulted in a fire.  The sprinkler
system activated.  From speaking to the fire battalion chief, I am under the
impression that Seattle Fire did use water on the fire as well, but I am
unsure of this.

Given the failure location, generator power was not available, and cooling
failed.  UPS power to systems continued, and I can personally vouch that
they held out for well over an hour.  When we were able to access our
equipment, ambient air temps were well over 100 degrees in the room our
equipment is located in.

At least some, if not many circuits were affected.  Several large
co-location providers and other datacenters are located in the facility,
these facilities have no power.

As this was the main/generator switch, and it is now highly damaged, the
circuits in the area are damaged, and the entire area is doused in water, a
rapid restoration of power does not seem likely.  Fisher Plaza's phone
numbers now result in fast-busy signals, so I have no recent update from
them directly.

Interestingly, this building is also the production studios for several
Seattle TV and radio stations.

There is no ETA for resolution.

--D

-- 
--  Darren Bolding  --
--  dar...@bolding.org   --

RE: OT: Bringing Cisco equipment to US

[Timothy Arnold]

> The courier will likely charge you less than a customs broker will for
> a single item - the brokers are mainly used for large transactions.
> While you're legally entitled to bring this equipment in carry-on
> luggage, proving and authenticating your right can be a costly and
> timely exercise.

Jumping on the back of this thread, does anyone have any recommendations for 
suppliers of Cisco kit in the states? I don't fancy dealing with customs & 
international shipping.

Thanks
Tim



Timothy Arnold
Senior Engineer, Operations (Network, Security & Facilities Group), UKSolutions

Telephone: 0845 004 1333, option 2
Email: timothy.arn...@uksolutions.co.uk
Web: http://www.uksolutions.co.uk/
UKS Ltd, Birmingham Road, Studley, Warwickshire, B80 7BG Registered in England 
Number 3036806
This email must be read in conjunction with the legal & service notices on 
http://www.uksolutions.co.uk/disclaimer