2000::/6
hey, 2000::/6 with aspath 3257 3549 has appeared in global routing table. Surely we can't be only ones seeing it. Looks like someone messed up interface/route config at 3549 by omitting 4 from the prefixlen. According to https://stat.ripe.net/2000%3A%3A%2F6#tabId=routing 2000::/6 is visible by 79% of 92 IPv6 RIS full peers. -- tarko
Re: 2000::/6
As of 8h30m EST. *i 2000::/6 ipv6 peer1001000 3257 3549 i Last update to IP routing table: 21h23m56s - Alain Hebertaheb...@pubnix.net PubNIX Inc. 50 boul. St-Charles P.O. Box 26770 Beaconsfield, Quebec H9W 6G7 Tel: 514-990-5911 http://www.pubnix.netFax: 514-990-9443 On 09/10/14 07:20, Tarko Tikan wrote: hey, 2000::/6 with aspath 3257 3549 has appeared in global routing table. Surely we can't be only ones seeing it. Looks like someone messed up interface/route config at 3549 by omitting 4 from the prefixlen. According to https://stat.ripe.net/2000%3A%3A%2F6#tabId=routing 2000::/6 is visible by 79% of 92 IPv6 RIS full peers.
Re: 2000::/6
Hi, ::/24 is also present: AS-PATH 8455 13030 9498 7602 Mailed the tech-c 2 weeks ago, no response so far. On 10 September 2014 14:33, Alain Hebert aheb...@pubnix.net wrote: As of 8h30m EST. *i 2000::/6 ipv6 peer1001000 3257 3549 i Last update to IP routing table: 21h23m56s - Alain Hebertaheb...@pubnix.net PubNIX Inc. 50 boul. St-Charles P.O. Box 26770 Beaconsfield, Quebec H9W 6G7 Tel: 514-990-5911 http://www.pubnix.netFax: 514-990-9443 On 09/10/14 07:20, Tarko Tikan wrote: hey, 2000::/6 with aspath 3257 3549 has appeared in global routing table. Surely we can't be only ones seeing it. Looks like someone messed up interface/route config at 3549 by omitting 4 from the prefixlen. According to https://stat.ripe.net/2000%3A%3A%2F6#tabId=routing 2000::/6 is visible by 79% of 92 IPv6 RIS full peers. -- Wouter Prins w...@null0.nl
Re: 2000::/6
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 02:20:45PM +0300, Tarko Tikan wrote: 2000::/6 with aspath 3257 3549 has appeared in global routing table. Surely we can't be only ones seeing it. Looks like someone messed up interface/route config at 3549 by omitting 4 from the prefixlen. According to https://stat.ripe.net/2000%3A%3A%2F6#tabId=routing 2000::/6 is visible by 79% of 92 IPv6 RIS full peers. This problem has been solved. Kind regards, Job
Re: [outages] Verizon fiber ring down in LA
- Original Message - From: Owen Roth via Outages outa...@outages.org Is anyone else being impacted or have more information about a Verizon fiber ring repair in LA that went south yesterday afternoon? A client's fiber is STILL down more than 16 hours later, and the only information I have is that it is a configuration/provisioning issue with no ETR! This is new ground -- I have never an outage of this type, and rarely of this duration. Any further information is appreciated. This is the first I've seen of this here or on NANOG; what was your source for the outage reason you mention? (Assuming you can say. :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
CEF problem - Traffic forwarding
Hello, I have a very strange problem on my ASR-1006 BRAS router. This router is having two equal paths toward a P router via IS-IS. The BRAS is seeing the P router over the two paths and the two paths are installed in the RIB and FIB as follows: bng.rams.ca.asr1#sh ip cef 10.10.10.141 internal 10.10.10.141/32, epoch 3, RIB[I], refcount 6, per-longest-match-prefix sharing sources: RIB, LTE feature space: IPRM: 0x00028000 Broker: linked, distributed at 1st priority LFD: 10.10.10.141/32 1 local label local label info: global/592 contains path extension list disposition chain 0x7FCE5CB8C440 label switch chain 0x7FCE5CB82FC0 ifnums: GigabitEthernet0/0/0(8): 172.17.11.9 GigabitEthernet1/0/0(24): 172.17.11.17 path 7FCE67248388, path list 7FCE5FF51A40, share 1/1, type attached nexthop, for IPv4 MPLS short path extensions: MOI flags = 0x0 label implicit-null nexthop 172.17.11.9 GigabitEthernet0/0/0, adjacency IP adj out of GigabitEthernet0/0/0, addr 172.17.11.9 7FCE5C406958 path 7FCE6724B5B8, path list 7FCE5FF51A40, share 1/1, type attached nexthop, for IPv4 MPLS short path extensions: MOI flags = 0x0 label implicit-null nexthop 172.17.11.17 GigabitEthernet1/0/0, adjacency IP adj out of GigabitEthernet1/0/0, addr 172.17.11.17 7FCE5079A540 output chain: IP adj out of GigabitEthernet0/0/0, addr 172.17.11.9 7FCE5C406958 The problem is, CEF is seeing the two paths equal, but the output chain is only having one exit interface and the traffic is traversing this interface only! This is the interface config: bng.rams.ca.asr1#sh run all | sec 0/0/0 interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0 description Connected to p1 router mtu 1600 ip address 172.17.11.10 255.255.255.252 ip redirects ip unreachables ip proxy-arp ip mtu 1600 no ip load-sharing per-longest-match-prefix ip cef accounting non-recursive internal ip router isis ip flow monitor adsl input ip flow monitor adsl output ip pim dr-priority 1 ip pim query-interval 30 ip mfib forwarding input ip mfib forwarding output ip mfib cef input ip mfib cef output ip route-cache cef ip route-cache ip split-horizon ip igmp last-member-query-interval 1000 ip igmp last-member-query-count 2 ip igmp query-max-response-time 10 ip igmp version 2 ip igmp query-interval 60 ip igmp tcn query count 2 ip igmp tcn query interval 10 interface GigabitEthernet1/0/0 description Connected to p1 router mtu 1600 ip address 172.17.11.18 255.255.255.252 ip redirects ip unreachables ip proxy-arp ip mtu 1600 no ip load-sharing per-longest-match-prefix ip cef accounting non-recursive internal ip router isis ip flow monitor adsl input ip flow monitor adsl output ip pim dr-priority 1 ip pim query-interval 30 ip mfib forwarding input ip mfib forwarding output ip mfib cef input ip mfib cef output ip route-cache cef ip route-cache ip split-horizon ip igmp last-member-query-interval 1000 ip igmp last-member-query-count 2 ip igmp query-max-response-time 10 ip igmp version 2 ip igmp query-interval 60 ip igmp tcn query count 2 ip igmp tcn query interval 10 So, what do you think? Regards, Mohamed Kamal
MEF certifications recommendations?
Hi all, As our organization has matured, we've discovered the joy of speaking the same carrier ethernet languages as our vendors and as such we're going through a process of aligning our service-offerings with MEF-centric terminology. Anyone out there taken any MEF-certification training programs and had a good enough experience to recommend one to us? I'm looking for two types of training-- one for the customer-facing folks and one for the engineering folks. We're in Seattle, so local recommendations or nationally-know recommendations are preferred. Thanks, Dan
