Re: The End-To-End Internet (was Re: Blocking MX query)
On 09/09/2012 23:24, Masataka Ohta wrote: Oliver wrote: Just because something is documented in RFC does not automatically make it a standard, nor does it necessarily make anyone care. That's not a valid argument against text in the RFC proof read by the RFC editor as the evidence of established terminology of the Internet community. you may want to read rfc 1796, and then retract what you said because it sounds silly. Nick
[SPAM]BGP Issue with L3?
Doing a looking glass from the locally connected BGP peer for AS 16843,
they are receiving it, the top path, but showing it received-only, and
they want to use the prepended Path. The rest of L3, outside the local
peer looking glass, i.e. the rest of the planet does not even show this
path ? Thoughts suggestions?
Dennis
Paths: (3 available, best #3)
23077 174 7843 11427 16843, (received-only)
AS-path translation: { SUNCOM COGENT ADELPHIA SCRR-11427
NORTHEAST-COMNET }
WIRELESS-ME.car1.Houston1 from WIRELESS-ME.car1.Houston1
(8.24.196.1)
Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external
Community: 174:21000 174:22013
3549 3491 7459 16843 16843 16843 16843 16843 16843 16843
AS-path translation: { GBLX CAIS-ASN THRIFTYCALL NORTHEAST-COMNET
NORTHEAST-COMNET NORTHEAST-COMNET NORTHEAST-COMNET NORTHEAST-COMNET
NORTHEAST-COMNET NORTHEAST-COMNET }
edge4.Dallas3 (metric 3827)
Origin IGP, metric 10, localpref 88, valid, internal
Community: North_America Lclprf_86 United_States Level3_Peer
Dallas 3491:200 3549:300 3549:4292 3549:30840
Originator: edge4.Dallas3
3549 3491 7459 16843 16843 16843 16843 16843 16843 16843
AS-path translation: { GBLX CAIS-ASN THRIFTYCALL NORTHEAST-COMNET
NORTHEAST-COMNET NORTHEAST-COMNET NORTHEAST-COMNET NORTHEAST-COMNET
NORTHEAST-COMNET NORTHEAST-COMNET }
edge4.Dallas3 (metric 3827)
Origin IGP, metric 10, localpref 88, valid, internal, best
Community: North_America Lclprf_86 United_States Level3_Peer
Dallas 3491:200 3549:300 3549:4292 3549:30840
Originator: edge4.Dallas3
Re: Are people still building SONET networks from scratch?
In my neck of the woods, critical locations often exist in the middle of nowhere, resulting in underserved facilities, where best effort networks such as metro Ethernet cannot be trusted to remain available 24x7x365. Many times, during prime business hours, I will see a telco metro Ethernet spanning tree convergence which results in my traffic re-routing for 20-30 seconds over my private backup network path, then switching back to the metro Ethernet path after the telco technicians have finished their maintenance. Several times when I have called in a trouble ticket, the telco tech has asked what is the big deal, it was only a 20 second outage?. In the Enterprise environment, a planned spanning tree convergence in the middle of business hours is one of the quickest ways for a network engineer to be relieved of their duties, but apparently the bar is considerably lower in the telco environment. Not only that, but the telco SLAs associated with metro Ethernet are totally bogus, with a best round trip SLA of 20 milliseconds, ranging up to 50 milliseconds for bronze service. For short distances of 100 miles or less (rule of thumb is that light travels over fiber at 0.80 x speed of light, or 1000 miles in 10 milliseconds), an SLA of 20-50 milliseconds amounts to fraud, just another way for the telcos to scam the consumer. The tone of many of the entries on this thread where the user is depicted as being unreasonable, underscores the need for a coordinated national broadband policy in the USA, based upon the Australian model in which the government is building out fiber to every residence and business, no matter where they are located. Regards, David On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Will Orton w...@loopfree.net wrote: We've run into an issue with a customer that has been confounding us for a few months as we try to design what they need. The customer has a location in the relative middle of nowhere that they are trying to build a protected OC3 to. Ultimately, their traffic on it will be packet data (IP/ethernet, not channelized/voice). But they seem to be absolutely 100% set on the idea that they build with Cisco ONS boxes and that they run and control the D1-D12 bytes in order to manage protection switching on the OC3 (and have their DCC channel for management). Since this is the middle of nowhere, we are having to piece it together from a few runs of dark fiber here and there and lit services from about 3 other providers to get from the desired point A to the desired point B. The issues we seem to be hitting are: -We seem to be unable to find anyone who sells lit OC3 with D1-D12 transparency for the client. Sometimes we can get D1-D3, but that's it. -lit OC3/12/48 is ridiculously expensive comapred to 1g ethernet waves or 10g waves (choice LAN/WAN ethernet or OC192) 10g waves are cheap enough that we have entertained the idea of buying them and putting OC-192/muxponders on the ends to provide the OC-3, but even then I'm having trouble finding boxes that will do D1-D12 transparency for client OC-3. Building the whole thing on dark fiber so that we could specify the exact equipment on every hop isn't going to happen, as the protect path is about 1000 miles and the geography is such that we don't really have a market for all the other wasted capacity there would be on that path. Having much more experience with ethernet/packet/MPLS setups, we are trying to get the client to admit that 1g/10g waves running ethernet with QoS would be as good as or better in terms of latency, jitter, and loss for their packet data. So far they will barely listen to the arguments. And then going the next leap and showing them that we could work towards 50ms protection switching with MPLS/BFD/etc packet-based protocols is another stretch. Am I missing something here that my customer isn't, or is it the other way around? -Will
Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs...
For the last ~15 minutes I've been receiving complaints about DNS issues. GoDaddy DNS is apparently b0rked. I'm also seeing a lot of tweets about their hosting and VPS being down. I'm unable to access the control panel for one of my customer accounts. -A
Re: Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs...
Wow. Their own site is even down. On Sep 10, 2012, at 2:07 PM, Aaron C. de Bruyn aa...@heyaaron.com wrote: For the last ~15 minutes I've been receiving complaints about DNS issues. GoDaddy DNS is apparently b0rked. I'm also seeing a lot of tweets about their hosting and VPS being down. I'm unable to access the control panel for one of my customer accounts. -A
Re: Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs...
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Aaron C. de Bruyn aa...@heyaaron.comwrote: For the last ~15 minutes I've been receiving complaints about DNS issues. GoDaddy DNS is apparently b0rked. I'm also seeing a lot of tweets about their hosting and VPS being down. I'm unable to access the control panel for one of my customer accounts. -A This is already being covered on outages list seems be very widespread
RE: Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs...
Looks like this may be a DDoS attack from Anonymous: http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/10/godaddy-outage-takes-down-millions-of-sites/ -Original Message- From: Aaron C. de Bruyn [mailto:aa...@heyaaron.com] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 1:07 PM To: NANOG mailing list Subject: Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs... For the last ~15 minutes I've been receiving complaints about DNS issues. GoDaddy DNS is apparently b0rked. I'm also seeing a lot of tweets about their hosting and VPS being down. I'm unable to access the control panel for one of my customer accounts. -A
Re: Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs...
Of course, it could be a case of Hanlon's Razor. -Steve On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 3:13 PM, bill.ing...@t-systems.com wrote: Looks like this may be a DDoS attack from Anonymous: http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/10/godaddy-outage-takes-down-millions-of-sites/ -Original Message- From: Aaron C. de Bruyn [mailto:aa...@heyaaron.com] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 1:07 PM To: NANOG mailing list Subject: Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs... For the last ~15 minutes I've been receiving complaints about DNS issues. GoDaddy DNS is apparently b0rked. I'm also seeing a lot of tweets about their hosting and VPS being down. I'm unable to access the control panel for one of my customer accounts. -A
Re: Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs...
Yeah, I heard about downtime from couple of our clients. Seems like US West coast datacenter has issues specially with DNS. I see DNS working fine in Asia (via Singapore nodes), and in other parts of US as well. Here's a failing DNS node (checking from my Europe test server) traceroute to 216.69.185.46 (216.69.185.46), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 gw.giga-dns.com (91.194.90.1) 1.141 ms 1.134 ms 1.346 ms 2 62.140.24.125 (62.140.24.125) 1.835 ms 1.830 ms 1.820 ms 3 ae-19-19.ebr1.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.153.246) 6.560 ms 6.560 ms 6.552 ms 4 ae-46-46.ebr2.Paris1.Level3.net (4.69.143.138) 15.286 ms ae-47-47.ebr2.Paris1.Level3.net (4.69.143.142) 15.270 ms ae-45-45.ebr2.Paris1.Level3.net (4.69.143.134) 15.246 ms 5 ae-42-42.ebr2.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.137.54) 95.934 ms 95.928 ms ae-43-43.ebr2.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.137.58) 95.820 ms 6 ae-82-82.csw3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.134.154) 94.157 ms ae-92-92.csw4.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.134.158) 96.707 ms 98.696 ms 7 ae-23-70.car3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.149.69) 95.490 ms ae-43-90.car3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.149.197) 93.731 ms 96.204 ms 8 THE-GO-DADD.car3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.79.168.54) 94.708 ms 97.039 ms 95.756 ms 9 208.109.112.253 (208.109.112.253) 95.244 ms 94.401 ms 94.388 ms 10 208.109.112.253 (208.109.112.253) 94.378 ms 93.864 ms 95.172 ms 11 208.109.113.58 (208.109.113.58) 94.387 ms 94.359 ms 94.042 ms 12 * * * I am very curious to know what prevents Godaddy from withdrawling prefixes from that specific region and let other working datacenters to handle DNS? Can that cause issue on other stable nodes during DOS attack? On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:43 AM, bill.ing...@t-systems.com wrote: Looks like this may be a DDoS attack from Anonymous: http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/10/godaddy-outage-takes-down-millions-of-sites/ -Original Message- From: Aaron C. de Bruyn [mailto:aa...@heyaaron.com] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 1:07 PM To: NANOG mailing list Subject: Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs... For the last ~15 minutes I've been receiving complaints about DNS issues. GoDaddy DNS is apparently b0rked. I'm also seeing a lot of tweets about their hosting and VPS being down. I'm unable to access the control panel for one of my customer accounts. -A -- Anurag Bhatia anuragbhatia.com Linkedin http://in.linkedin.com/in/anuragbhatia21 | Twitterhttps://twitter.com/anurag_bhatia| Google+ https://plus.google.com/118280168625121532854
Re: Are people still building SONET networks from scratch?
This *was* a troll, right...? On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:55 AM, david peahi davidpe...@gmail.com wrote: In my neck of the woods, critical locations often exist in the middle of nowhere, resulting in underserved facilities, where best effort networks such as metro Ethernet cannot be trusted to remain available 24x7x365. Many times, during prime business hours, I will see a telco metro Ethernet spanning tree convergence which results in my traffic re-routing for 20-30 seconds over my private backup network path, then switching back to the metro Ethernet path after the telco technicians have finished their maintenance. Several times when I have called in a trouble ticket, the telco tech has asked what is the big deal, it was only a 20 second outage?. In the Enterprise environment, a planned spanning tree convergence in the middle of business hours is one of the quickest ways for a network engineer to be relieved of their duties, but apparently the bar is considerably lower in the telco environment. Not only that, but the telco SLAs associated with metro Ethernet are totally bogus, with a best round trip SLA of 20 milliseconds, ranging up to 50 milliseconds for bronze service. For short distances of 100 miles or less (rule of thumb is that light travels over fiber at 0.80 x speed of light, or 1000 miles in 10 milliseconds), an SLA of 20-50 milliseconds amounts to fraud, just another way for the telcos to scam the consumer. The tone of many of the entries on this thread where the user is depicted as being unreasonable, underscores the need for a coordinated national broadband policy in the USA, based upon the Australian model in which the government is building out fiber to every residence and business, no matter where they are located. Regards, David If service is critical enough to me that 20 second hiccups make a difference, I'll find two providers to provide connectivity to the location via relatively cheap waves, and I'll run link-node protection at my layer to get fast reconvergence in the sub-second range. And I'd warrant it'll still come out cheaper than the government-built costs we see in Australia. I really, really don't think more government intervention is the right answer. Matt
Re: The End-To-End Internet (was Re: Blocking MX query)
Nick Hilliard wrote: Just because something is documented in RFC does not automatically make it a standard, nor does it necessarily make anyone care. That's not a valid argument against text in the RFC proof read by the RFC editor as the evidence of established terminology of the Internet community. you may want to read rfc 1796, and then retract what you said because it sounds silly. Anything written in RFC1796 should be ignored, because RFC1796, an informational, not standard track, RFC, states so. Or, is it time to retract your silliness? Masataka Ohta
Re: Are people still building SONET networks from scratch?
Matthew, On Sep 10, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Matthew Petach mpet...@netflight.com wrote: This *was* a troll, right…? I suspect it wasn't. There's some people who equate various types of services with others. I've been following this thread with some head-scratching going on. Some folks think ethernet can only be a metro solution with STP/RSTP/MSTP/VPLS in the cloud of another network. Others realize that saying ethernet as the encoding on the PHY is entirely different. (lan-phy, wan-phy, otu2, otu2e, etc). When it comes to talking SONET vs Ethernet it is good to be very explicit. There are a variety of ways to provide a redundant and protected service with ethernet vs sonet/sdh framing. Some of the carrier provided ethernet products result in weird pricing, or plain fear. I recall one ILEC that got an entire team on the phone with me for an ask about a 100m service purchase, because it was huge to them. Their price reflected it as well :) It was easier to stick with the city fiber network for backhaul as the pricing was sane. - Jared
[NANOG-announce] Upcoming NANOG mail list maintenance notification - 13-Sept-2012
On Thursday, September 13, 2012 beginning at 6 AM Eastern, the NANOG mail list service will be unavailable. Mailman will be upgraded and moved to a new location, and all lists will be synced, thus ensuring that no messages or archives are lost in the transition. We expect the outage to last no longer than 30 minutes. Regards, Randy Epstein NANOG CC Chair On behalf of the NANOG Communications Committee ___ NANOG-announce mailing list nanog-annou...@nanog.org https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce
Re: Are people still building SONET networks from scratch?
On 10/09/2012 21:43, Matthew Petach wrote: If service is critical enough to me that 20 second hiccups make a difference, I'll find two providers to provide connectivity um, what do you mean, two providers? to the location via relatively cheap waves This *is* a troll, right...? just sayin' that not everywhere has functional competition... Nick
Re: The End-To-End Internet (was Re: Blocking MX query)
On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Masataka Ohta mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp wrote: Oliver wrote: You're basically redefining the term end-to-end transparency to suit your own Already in RFC3102, which restrict port number ranges, it is stated that: This document examines the general framework of Realm Specific IP (RSIP). RSIP is intended as a alternative to NAT in which the end- to-end integrity of packets is maintained. We focus on implementation issues, deployment scenarios, and interaction with other layer-three protocols. Just because something is documented in RFC does not automatically make it a standard, nor does it necessarily make anyone care. That's not a valid argument against text in the RFC proof read by the RFC editor as the evidence of established terminology of the Internet community. In case Nick's comment wasn't obvious enough: RFC 1796: Not All RFCs Are Standards It is a regrettably well spread misconception that publication as an RFC provides some level of recognition. It does not, or at least not any more than the publication in a regular journal. RFC 3102: This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. As to your original point that software could be constructed that restores end-to-end through a NAT device by some kind of dynamic but published assignment of incoming ports to specific hosts behind the NAT... that's not really true. End-to-end is generally described as a layer 3 phenomenon. Dinking around with ports means you're at layer 4. Which means that only specific pre-programmed transports can pass even it you would like all protocols to be able to. There is another technology, also called NAT and described in RFC 1631, which translates layer 3 addresses 1:1, exactly one address inside for one address outside. While it's possible to talk about end-to-end with that technology, we are for practical, operational purposes just shy of -never- talking about or using that kind of NAT. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/ Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
Level3 BGP Issue
I have a prefix that is having an issue with BGP, its all inside of L3If there is someone that would be willing to assist with L3, shoot me a e-mail offlist J Dennis Burgess,
Re: The End-To-End Internet (was Re: Blocking MX query)
William Herrin wrote: In case Nick's comment wasn't obvious enough: Anything written in RFC1796 should be ignored, because RFC1796, an informational, not standard track, RFC, states so. It's so obvious. RFC 1796: It is a regrettably well spread misconception that publication as an RFC provides some level of recognition. It does not, or at least not any more than the publication in a regular journal. Your silliness, too, is appreciated. End-to-end is generally described as a layer 3 phenomenon. Read the original paper on it: http://groups.csail.mit.edu/ana/Publications/PubPDFs/End-to-End%20Arguments%20in%20System%20Design.pdf to find that the major example of the paper is file transfer, an application. we are for practical, operational purposes just shy of -never- talking about or using that kind of NAT. For practical operational purposes, it is enough that PORT command of ftp works transparently. Masataka Ohta
Re: Are people still building SONET networks from scratch?
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote: On 10/09/2012 21:43, Matthew Petach wrote: If service is critical enough to me that 20 second hiccups make a difference, I'll find two providers to provide connectivity um, what do you mean, two providers? to the location via relatively cheap waves This *is* a troll, right...? just sayin' that not everywhere has functional competition... Nick *heh* Fair enough. I guess it's really a question of what scale you're looking at. Even when building a greenfield datacenter in the middle of an empty field in an out-of-the-way corner of a state with cheap electricity, you can generally find two fiber providers that will run fiber into the location based on the premise of the long-term payback a 50MW datacenter brings with it. At smaller scales, I could see how it could become more challenging to convince a second provider it's worth their while to build out to your location. point taken--thanks! Matt
Traffic Burstiness Survey
Dear Nanog members, I am a PhD student at University of Toronto and I am working on traffic burstiness in data centers. In the following I am asking two questions to raise motivation for my research. I appreciate if anyone could answer these questions to their best knowledge. *The questions are:* 1) ‘Bursty’ is a word with no agreed meaning. How do you define a bursty traffic? 2) If you are involved with a data center, is your data center traffic bursty? -- If yes, -- Do you think that it will be useful to supress the burstiness in your traffic? (For example by pacing the traffic into shorter bursts) -- If no: -- Are you already supressing the burstiness? How? -- Would you anticipate the traffic becoming burstier in the future? Thanks, Monia -- Monia Ghobadi PhD Student University of Toronto http://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~monia/
Re: Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs...
I thought I saw an article on routergod.com from Dance Patrick regarding anycast DNS.. ~oliver Sent via DynaTAC. Please forgive spelling and grammar. -Original Message- From: bill.ing...@t-systems.com Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 19:13:27 To: aa...@heyaaron.com; nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs... Looks like this may be a DDoS attack from Anonymous: http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/10/godaddy-outage-takes-down-millions-of-sites/ -Original Message- From: Aaron C. de Bruyn [mailto:aa...@heyaaron.com] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 1:07 PM To: NANOG mailing list Subject: Heads-Up: GoDaddy Broke the Interwebs... For the last ~15 minutes I've been receiving complaints about DNS issues. GoDaddy DNS is apparently b0rked. I'm also seeing a lot of tweets about their hosting and VPS being down. I'm unable to access the control panel for one of my customer accounts. -A
Re: Are people still building SONET networks from scratch?
In message CAE_aTPPCPXMN-Rx2zRjG7FcbyDSqaT=gr7hc6+zhrj0pmts...@mail.gmail.com , david peahi writes: In my neck of the woods, critical locations often exist in the middle of nowhere, resulting in underserved facilities, where best effort networks such as metro Ethernet cannot be trusted to remain available 24x7x365. Many times, during prime business hours, I will see a telco metro Ethernet spanning tree convergence which results in my traffic re-routing for 20-30 seconds over my private backup network path, then switching back to the metro Ethernet path after the telco technicians have finished their maintenance. Several times when I have called in a trouble ticket, the telco tech has asked what is the big deal, it was only a 20 second outage?. In the Enterprise environment, a planned spanning tree convergence in the middle of business hours is one of the quickest ways for a network engineer to be relieved of their duties, but apparently the bar is considerably lower in the telco environment. Not only that, but the telco SLAs associated with metro Ethernet are totally bogus, with a best round trip SLA of 20 milliseconds, ranging up to 50 milliseconds for bronze service. For short distances of 100 miles or less (rule of thumb is that light travels over fiber at 0.80 x speed of light, or 1000 miles in 10 milliseconds), an SLA of 20-50 milliseconds amounts to fraud, just another way for the telcos to scam the consumer. The tone of many of the entries on this thread where the user is depicted as being unreasonable, underscores the need for a coordinated national broadband policy in the USA, based upon the Australian model in which the government is building out fiber to every residence and business, no matter where they are located. The NBN is to be delivered over a mixture of fibre (93% of homes), wireless and satellite services[1]. [1] http://www.nbn.gov.au/about-the-nbn/what-is-the-nbn/ Regards, David -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
Re: Traffic Burstiness Survey
Hi Monia, 'Burst' is a very broad term. It would be useful to clarify to what you are referring.. I can think of a few possibilities: - Data Transmission: The length of an uninterrupted flow of information. - Traffic Engineering: The ability for traffic to temporarily exceed it's allocated (average) bandwidth share. - Internal Event: A backup (scheduled) or a server failure (adhoc) altering traffic patterns. - External Event: Marketing campaign / event coinciding with increased traffic towards say, a website. Perhaps - Over what period of time is a 'Burst'..? Cheers, Heath On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Monia Ghobadi mo...@cs.toronto.edu wrote: Dear Nanog members, I am a PhD student at University of Toronto and I am working on traffic burstiness in data centers. In the following I am asking two questions to raise motivation for my research. I appreciate if anyone could answer these questions to their best knowledge. *The questions are:* 1) ‘Bursty’ is a word with no agreed meaning. How do you define a bursty traffic? 2) If you are involved with a data center, is your data center traffic bursty? -- If yes, -- Do you think that it will be useful to supress the burstiness in your traffic? (For example by pacing the traffic into shorter bursts) -- If no: -- Are you already supressing the burstiness? How? -- Would you anticipate the traffic becoming burstier in the future? Thanks, Monia -- Monia Ghobadi PhD Student University of Toronto http://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~monia/
