Re: Network visibility

[Mark Tinka]

On 10/21/21 03:19, Brian Johnson wrote:


+1 on -48VDC.


Wasn't much fun when half the router would shutdown because power 
supplies failed, due to what was known as "power zoning" those days.


I haven't deployed a larger router on DC in over 13 years. I'm not sure 
if this is still a thing, even.


Mark.

Re: Network visibility

[Mark Tinka]

On 10/20/21 20:37, Lady Benjamin Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE wrote:


-48VDC power is still the best.


I really envy folk that love DC for networking gear :-).

Work in 2007 was an all-DC network. I rebuilt it into AC, considering 
the ISP also owned the data centre (most of whose customers bought AC). 
The space we freed up and the ease of deployment was night & day.


Currently, we obviously need DC for the terrestrial Transport and wet 
plants (because that's just how classic telco rolls), but I also 
switched all IP/MPLS gear to AC soon as I arrived. Heck, even the Arbor 
(now Netscout) gear, as well as the HP server rack, was loaded with DC 
power supplies. Those things just had to go.


There is an avenue of pleasure in not having to spend inordinate amounts 
of time adding major electrical planning to deploying/decommissioning a 
router, switch or server.


But yeah, I know the AC vs. DC discussion can become a rat hole.

I'm aware of data centre operators now providing DC as an option for 
their expansion projects, when they previously had it as the norm, FWIW.


Mark.

Re: abha

[Patrick W. Gilmore]

On Oct 20, 2021, at 1:45 PM, Brett Watson  wrote:
> On Oct 20, 2021, at 10:41, Randy Bush  wrote:
>> 
>> abha died 20 years ago today
> 
> Still miss her, she was a ray of sunshine.

I can still hear her laugh, see her smile. Which makes me happy and sad at the 
same time.

We all owe her. NANOG would not be what it is today without her efforts.

-- 
TTFN,
patrick

Re: [External] Re: Anyone else getting the 'spam' bomb threat?

[Martin Hannigan]

Hi Omar,

This is likely a hoax. Probably a “joe job” - making it appear as someone
innocent is responsible. Its good to share this info to raise  network
operators awareness since even if it is fake its concerning how many
received it.

I’ll leave it to the pros here to tell us if we shouldn’t worry.

Warm regards,

-M<



On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 21:18 Omar Haider  wrote:

> I feel uncomfortable in this newsletter
>
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2021, 10:56 AM Martin Hannigan  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I put what we received up on pastebin entirely with headers (and redacted
>> our info).
>>
>> https://pastebin.com/kLjPm8Nk
>>
>> Warm regards,
>>
>> -M<
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 9:19 AM Radu-Adrian Feurdean <
>> na...@radu-adrian.feurdean.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2021, at 16:00, Hunter Fuller via NANOG wrote:
>>> > We have a distinct abuse address (not just abuse@) and that is where
>>> > the messages were sent.
>>> >
>>> > We didn't receive the bomb threat ones. We only received the (somewhat
>>> > more amusing) messages entitled "Your network has been PWNED" and
>>> > "Fuck you".
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We got the same here at France-IX. It was on friday 15th. Hopefully,
>>> they "PWNED" all our Cisco and Mikrotik routers (of which we have none).
>>>
>>> > The situation loses its humor entirely with the introduction of bomb
>>> > threats. Seems like a script kiddie taking things way too far.
>>>
>>> I heard that yesterday (19th) evening there was law enforcement
>>> deployment and evacuation in the area of a major Paris (FR, EU) telco
>>> hotel, apparently due to "threats to a business in the area". Details
>>> (popcorn) on FrNOG (in french) :
>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/frnog@frnog.org/msg67540.html
>>>
>>

Re: Smokeping - EchoPingHttps

[John Adams]

I sort of feel like echopinghttps is a near 20-year old tool with little to
no bearing on the reality of where TLS is today.

The owner of this tool has discontinued it ( see
https://github.com/bortzmeyer/echoping ) and it is no longer maintained. I
wouldn't rely on it anymore.

-john


On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 4:26 PM Mike Hammett  wrote:

> I used EchoPingHttps for the first time today.
>
> I pulled up the top 20 sites (well, removing duplicate sites from the same
> company) from Alexa and put them in to trend response times. I've had "this
> feels slow" over the years, but no way to really track that other than
> feels and pings.
>
> I noticed that a few (Facebook, Salesforce, ESPN, and Zillow) don't chart
> at all, with varying errors in a smokeping --debug. I've noticed that a
> couple more (Amazon and Etsy) are fickle in their responses. I assume if
> they're not responding, they're poo pooing on my fake client. Am I in the
> right ballpark?
>
>
> Next, is there a better way of doing this? I saw the curl plugin, but it
> was only after I had seen EchoPingHttps, so maybe curl is "better."
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
>

Re: Network visibility

[Brian Johnson]

+1 on -48VDC.

> On Oct 20, 2021, at 1:38 PM, Lady Benjamin Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE 
>  wrote:
> 
>> On Oct 20, 2021, at 8:04 AM, Mark Tinka > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> At any rate, you may very well need more than one system to monitor your 
>> entire network.
>> 
>> Mark.
> 
> Not the least of reasons for this: Redundancy.  We have more than 1 tool 
> doing every job, incase there’s a bug with something someday, or some 
> platform reboots during a hurricane, etc.  2 is 1 and 1 is none and -48VDC 
> power is still the best. 
> 
> Happy Birthday Internet <3 
> 
> —L.B.
> 
> Ms. Lady Benjamin PD Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE
> 6x7 Networks & 6x7 Telecom, LLC 
> CEO 
> l...@6by7.net 
> "The only fully end-to-end encrypted global telecommunications company in the 
> world.”
> FCC License KJ6FJJ
> 
> 
> 
> 

Smokeping - EchoPingHttps

[Mike Hammett]

I used EchoPingHttps for the first time today. 


I pulled up the top 20 sites (well, removing duplicate sites from the same 
company) from Alexa and put them in to trend response times. I've had "this 
feels slow" over the years, but no way to really track that other than feels 
and pings. 


I noticed that a few (Facebook, Salesforce, ESPN, and Zillow) don't chart at 
all, with varying errors in a smokeping --debug. I've noticed that a couple 
more (Amazon and Etsy) are fickle in their responses. I assume if they're not 
responding, they're poo pooing on my fake client. Am I in the right ballpark? 




Next, is there a better way of doing this? I saw the curl plugin, but it was 
only after I had seen EchoPingHttps, so maybe curl is "better." 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

Re: Network visibility

[scott]

On 10/20/21 6:52 PM, Kain, Becki (.) wrote:


Oh and I remember the day we first got mosaic and I thought “why would 
I need pictures on the internet?”



-


When Mosaic first got  I remember thinking what the heck do I do 
with that?


scott

Re:

[Grant Taylor via NANOG]

On 10/20/21 3:26 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
Just as an interesting aside if you're interested in the history of 
networking, When Wizards Stayed Up Late is quite elucidating.


+10 to Where Wizards Stay Up Late.

I recently re-acquired (multiple copies of) it.  (Multiple because I 
wanted the same edition that I couldn't locate after multiple moves.)




--
Grant. . . .
unix || die



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: Network visibility

[Daniel Seagraves]

> On Oct 20, 2021, at 4:59 PM, Mel Beckman  wrote:
> 
> For several years we had UCSB’s IMP control panel hanging in our office as a 
> wall decoration (it belonged to Larry Green, one of the UCSB IMPlementors). I 
> still have the manuals. The actual IMP with 56Kbps modem was in a huge rack 
> with lifting eyes for a fork lift, and weighed about 500 lbs. Every IMP had a 
> unique customized host interface, which packetized bit-serial data from the 
> host over the host’s usually proprietary I/O bus. 

I know of at least one actual hardware PDP-10 (Not PDP-11) that is still 
connected to the public internet.

Mine will be if/when I ever get it working.

Re: Network visibility

[Mel Beckman]

For several years we had UCSB’s IMP control panel hanging in our office as a 
wall decoration (it belonged to Larry Green, one of the UCSB IMPlementors). I 
still have the manuals. The actual IMP with 56Kbps modem was in a huge rack 
with lifting eyes for a fork lift, and weighed about 500 lbs. Every IMP had a 
unique customized host interface, which packetized bit-serial data from the 
host over the host’s usually proprietary I/O bus. 

While this was part of computers internetworking with each other, it was not 
the capital-I Internet.

 -mel 

> On Oct 20, 2021, at 2:20 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote:
> 
> 
>> On October 20, 2021 at 16:08 m...@beckman.org (Mel Beckman) wrote:
>> Mark,
>> 
>> Before 1983, the ARPANET wasn’t an internet, let alone The Internet. Each
>> ARPANET connection required a host-specific interface (the “IMP”) and simplex
>> Network Control Protocol (NCP). NCP used users' email addresses, and routing
>> had to be specified in advance within each NCP message.
> 
> Then again there were IMPs fitted to various systems like TOPS-10,
> ITS, Vax/BSD Unix, IBM370, etc.
> 
> So was that really all that different from ethernet vs, oh, wi-fi or
> fiber today, you needed an adapter?
> 
>> 
>> Even so, the Internet as a platform open to anyone didn’t start until 1992. I
>> know you joined late, in 1999, so you probably missed out on this history. :)
> 
> Well, we certainly tried in 1989 :-) We had customers from all over
> The World, um, the big round one you see when you look down.
> 
>> 
>> -mel
>> 
>> 
>>On Oct 20, 2021, at 8:43 AM, Mark Tinka  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>On 10/20/21 17:26, Mel Beckman wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>Mark,
>> 
>>As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered the
>>official birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let different
>>kinds of computers on different networks talk to each other. 
>> 
>>It’s 2021, hence the Internet is less than, not more than, 40 years
>>old.  Given your mathematical skills, I put no stock in your claim 
>> that
>>we still can’t “buy an NMS that just works.” :)
>> 
>> 
>>Hehehe :-)...
>> 
>>I guess we can reliably say that the ARPANET wasn't keen on pretty
>>pictures, then, hehe :-)...
>> 
>>Mark.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
>-Barry Shein
> 
> Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | 
> http://www.TheWorld.com
> Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD   | 800-THE-WRLD
> The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*

Re: Network visibility

[bzs]

On October 20, 2021 at 13:09 m...@mtcc.com (Michael Thomas) wrote:
 > Yeah, I miss DECUS too. I remember one plenary when somebody asked when the 
 > VAX
 > would support the full 4G address space to laughs and guffaws from panel.

We had an 8MB Vax 11/780 at Harvard Chemistry ca 1982 (VMS) which
involved a second double-wide cabinet.

Groups on site visits to Harvard, I remember one bunch of physicists
from Japan for example, would actually drop by to see it and ooh and
ahh.

-- 
-Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD   | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*

Re:

[Michael Thomas]

Just as an interesting aside if you're interested in the history of 
networking, When Wizards Stayed Up Late is quite elucidating.


Mike

On 10/20/21 2:16 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
*Mel Beckman*mel at beckman.org 
 
wrote:

Mark,

Before 1983, the ARPANET wasn’t an internet, let alone The Internet. Each 
ARPANET connection required a host-specific interface (the “IMP”) and simplex 
Network Control Protocol (NCP). NCP used users' email addresses, and routing 
had to be specified in advance within each NCP message.


This is just so completely wrong as to be ludicrous.

First of all, the IMP was the box.  Computers connected using the 
protocols specified in BBN Report 1822 
(https://walden-family.com/impcode/BBN1822_Jan1976.pdf)


NCP was alternately referred to as the Network Control PROGRAM and the 
Network Control Protocol.  It essentially played the role of TCP, 
managing pairs of simplex connections.


Routing was completely dynamic - that was the whole point of the IMP 
software. And routing did NOT require email addresses - those operated 
much further up the protocol stack.


Perhaps you're confusing this with UUCP mail addressing ("bang" 
paths).  Or possibly BITNET or FidoNet - which I believe also were 
source routed (but memory fails on that.


re.

Even so, the Internet as a platform open to anyone didn’t start until 1992. I 
know you joined late, in 1999, so you probably missed out on this history. :)
You know, there are people on this list who were back there in 1969, 
and actually wrote some of that code - so you might want to stop 
spouting nonsense.  (Not me, I was a user, starting in 1971, didn't 
get to BBN until 1985 - when we were still dealing with stragglers who 
didn't quite manage to cutover to TCP/IP on the Flag Day.)


--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   Yogi Berra

Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown

Re: Network visibility

[bzs]

On October 20, 2021 at 16:08 m...@beckman.org (Mel Beckman) wrote:
 > Mark,
 > 
 > Before 1983, the ARPANET wasn’t an internet, let alone The Internet. Each
 > ARPANET connection required a host-specific interface (the “IMP”) and simplex
 > Network Control Protocol (NCP). NCP used users' email addresses, and routing
 > had to be specified in advance within each NCP message.

Then again there were IMPs fitted to various systems like TOPS-10,
ITS, Vax/BSD Unix, IBM370, etc.

So was that really all that different from ethernet vs, oh, wi-fi or
fiber today, you needed an adapter?

 > 
 > Even so, the Internet as a platform open to anyone didn’t start until 1992. I
 > know you joined late, in 1999, so you probably missed out on this history. :)

Well, we certainly tried in 1989 :-) We had customers from all over
The World, um, the big round one you see when you look down.

 > 
 >  -mel
 >  
 > 
 > On Oct 20, 2021, at 8:43 AM, Mark Tinka  wrote:
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > On 10/20/21 17:26, Mel Beckman wrote:
 > 
 > 
 > Mark,
 > 
 > As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered the
 > official birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let different
 > kinds of computers on different networks talk to each other. 
 > 
 > It’s 2021, hence the Internet is less than, not more than, 40 years
 > old.  Given your mathematical skills, I put no stock in your claim 
 > that
 > we still can’t “buy an NMS that just works.” :)
 > 
 > 
 > Hehehe :-)...
 > 
 > I guess we can reliably say that the ARPANET wasn't keen on pretty
 > pictures, then, hehe :-)...
 > 
 > Mark.
 > 
 > 
 > 


-- 
-Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD   | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*

re:

[Miles Fidelman]

*Mel Beckman*mel at beckman.org 
 
wrote:

Mark,

Before 1983, the ARPANET wasn’t an internet, let alone The Internet. Each 
ARPANET connection required a host-specific interface (the “IMP”) and simplex 
Network Control Protocol (NCP). NCP used users' email addresses, and routing 
had to be specified in advance within each NCP message.


This is just so completely wrong as to be ludicrous.

First of all, the IMP was the box.  Computers connected using the 
protocols specified in BBN Report 1822 
(https://walden-family.com/impcode/BBN1822_Jan1976.pdf)


NCP was alternately referred to as the Network Control PROGRAM and the 
Network Control Protocol.  It essentially played the role of TCP, 
managing pairs of simplex connections.


Routing was completely dynamic - that was the whole point of the IMP 
software. And routing did NOT require email addresses - those operated 
much further up the protocol stack.


Perhaps you're confusing this with UUCP mail addressing ("bang" paths).  
Or possibly BITNET or FidoNet - which I believe also were source routed 
(but memory fails on that.


re.

Even so, the Internet as a platform open to anyone didn’t start until 1992. I 
know you joined late, in 1999, so you probably missed out on this history. :)
You know, there are people on this list who were back there in 1969, and 
actually wrote some of that code - so you might want to stop spouting 
nonsense.  (Not me, I was a user, starting in 1971, didn't get to BBN 
until 1985 - when we were still dealing with stragglers who didn't quite 
manage to cutover to TCP/IP on the Flag Day.)


--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   Yogi Berra

Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown

Re: Network visibility

[Mark Tinka]

On 10/20/21 19:32, Mel Beckman wrote:


such tinkaing...


Cute...


  is rare. It certainly doesn’t rise to the level of “never works out of the 
box.”


Luck you.

Mark.

Re: Network visibility

[Michael Thomas]

On 10/20/21 12:38 PM, james.cut...@consultant.com wrote:
I don’t remember hearing about IP for VAX/VMS 2.4, but I was part of a 
group at Intel in 1981 looking at ARPAnet for moving designer tools 
and design files as an alternate to leased bandwidth from $TELCOs 
using DECnet and BiSync HASP. The costs of switching from 56 Kbps to 
ARPAnet’s 50 Kbps convinced us to wait. Clearly, private demand drove 
the subsequent transition as the TCP/IP stack became effectively free.


I'm not sure how we heard and got a copy of the CMU IP stack, but it was 
probably Mark Reinhold who now owns Java. It was definitely after 1981 
and definitely before 1985, probably somewhere in the middle. Just the 
fact that we could get such a thing was sort of remarkable in those 
early days, and especially for VMS which was, I won't say hostile, but 
had their own ideas. I don't know when early routing came about but DEC 
charged extra for routing for DECNet, so that was yet another reason IP 
was interesting is that it took little investment to check it all out.





 I miss DECUS, but not DELNIs.


Yeah, I miss DECUS too. I remember one plenary when somebody asked when 
the VAX would support the full 4G address space to laughs and guffaws 
from panel.


Mike




-
James R. Cutler - james.cut...@consultant.com
GPG keys: hkps://hkps.pool.sks-keyservers.net
cell 734-673-5462


On Oct 20, 2021, at 3:09 PM, Michael Thomas  wrote:

I think the issuing of rfc 791 was much more important than the flag 
day. ARPAnet was a tiny, tiny universe but there were a lot of people 
interested in networking at the time wondering what to do with our 
neat new DEUNA and DEQNA adapters. There was tons of interest in all 
of the various protocols coming out around then because nobody knew 
what was going to win, or whether there would be *a* winner at all. 
Being able to get a spec to write to was pretty novel at the time 
because all of the rest of them were proprietary so you had to 
reverse engineer them for the most part. It may be that alone that 
pushed IP along well before the public could hook up to the Internet. 
We had lots of customers asking for IP protocols in the mid to late 
80's and I can guarantee you most weren't part of the Internet. They 
were using IP as the interoperating system glue on their own networks.


Also: the flag day was pretty much an example of how not to do a 
transition. as in, let's not do that again.


Mike, trying to remember when CMU shipped their first version of 
their IP stack for VMS



On 10/20/21 11:47 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:

Since we seem to be getting pedantic...

There's "The (capital I) Internet" - which, most date to the flag 
day, and the "Public Internet" (the Internet after policies changed 
and allowed commercial & public use over the NSFnet backbone - in 
1992f, as I recall).


Then there's the more general notion of "internetworking" - of which 
there was a considerable amount of experimental work going on, in 
parallel with TCP/IP.  And of (small i) "internets" - essentially 
any Catenet style network-of-networks.


Miles Fidelman

Mel Beckman wrote:

Michael,

“Looking into” isn’t “is” :)

 -mel


On Oct 20, 2021, at 10:39 AM, Michael Thomas  wrote:




On 10/20/21 8:26 AM, Mel Beckman wrote:

Mark,

As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered 
the official birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let 
different kinds of computers on different networks talk to each 
other.


It’s 2021, hence the Internet is /less/ than, not more than, 40 
years old.  Given your mathematical skills, I put no stock in 
your claim that we still can’t “buy an NMS that just works.” :)


Pedantically, IP is 40 years old as of last month. What you're 
talking about is the flag day. People including myself were 
looking into internet protocols well before the flag day.


Mike




--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   Yogi Berra

Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown

Re: Network visibility

[Jay Hennigan]

On 10/20/21 11:52, Kain, Becki (.) wrote:
Oh and I remember the day we first got mosaic and I thought “why would I 
need pictures on the internet?”


Couple that with the early search engines such as Lycos and WebCrawler 
and there's a story to tell.


I was a volunteer at a local non-profit fledgling ISP way back in the 
day. Sparc 10, bank of Practical Peripherals modems, Portmaster 2e, 
blistering fast frame-relay T-1 to the net, typical state-of-the-art 
setup for its time.


I was doing a lot of the early network stuff, and another guy was the 
system admin. He put together a quick personal page that included a 
picture of a potted plant. No real reason for it, he threw it together 
primarily so he could test the new Mosaic browser.


Somewhat as a joke, he included an ALT tag on the photo of the plant, 
"This is not a picture of a naked woman." This was for the benefit of 
the majority of the visitors using Lynx.


About a week later, the blistering fast T-1 line became quite saturated 
with visitors to his personal test page. Search engines picked up the 
keywords and people on the Internet did what people on the Internet are 
still doing today.


ALT tag got changed pretty quickly.

--
Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net
Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
503 897-8550 - WB6RDV

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge

[Matthew Walster]

On Wed, 20 Oct 2021 at 19:53, Jared Brown  wrote:

> “When the rules were created 25 years ago I don’t think anyone would have
> envisioned four or five companies would be driving 80% of the traffic on
> the world’s internet. They aren’t making a contribution to the services
> they are being carried on; that doesn’t feel right.”
>

In the UK, for regular residential geographic telephone numbers, only one
side pays for the call -- the calling party, the one that dials the number.

The user initiates the connection to the CDN. The user is paying for a
level of access to the internet via the BT network, with varying tiers of
speed at particular costs. They are advertised as "Unlimited broadband: With
no data caps or download limits, you can do as much as you like online." on
their website. Many CDNs bring the data closer to the customer, either
embedded within their network, or meeting at various PoPs/IXPs around the
country.

Seems pretty disingenuous to now say the called party has to pay as well,
in stark contrast to decades of precedent with their telephone product,
just because their customers are actually using what they were sold.

All in all, this raises an interesting question. Is British Telecom running
> their networks so hot, that just keeping the lights on requires capacity
> upgrades or are they just looking for freebies?


Taking advantage of a situation and jumping on the bandwagon, some would
say. After decades of chronic underinvestment in UK broadband, they're
finally starting to offer competitive products, and aren't used to having
to pay for it -- though as it happens, it would appear the public purse is
picking up the costs anyway:
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2020/08/govs-1bn-helps-493600-uk-premises-get-gigabit-broadband.html

M

Re: Network visibility

[james.cut...@consultant.com]

I don’t remember hearing about IP for VAX/VMS 2.4, but I was part of a group at 
Intel in 1981 looking at ARPAnet for moving designer tools and design files as 
an alternate to leased bandwidth from $TELCOs using DECnet and BiSync HASP. The 
costs of switching from 56 Kbps to ARPAnet’s 50 Kbps convinced us to wait. 
Clearly, private demand drove the subsequent transition as the TCP/IP stack 
became effectively free.

 I miss DECUS, but not DELNIs.

-
James R. Cutler - james.cut...@consultant.com
GPG keys: hkps://hkps.pool.sks-keyservers.net
cell 734-673-5462

> On Oct 20, 2021, at 3:09 PM, Michael Thomas  wrote:
> 
> I think the issuing of rfc 791 was much more important than the flag day. 
> ARPAnet was a tiny, tiny universe but there were a lot of people interested 
> in networking at the time wondering what to do with our neat new DEUNA and 
> DEQNA adapters. There was tons of interest in all of the various protocols 
> coming out around then because nobody knew what was going to win, or whether 
> there would be *a* winner at all. Being able to get a spec to write to was 
> pretty novel at the time because all of the rest of them were proprietary so 
> you had to reverse engineer them for the most part. It may be that alone that 
> pushed IP along well before the public could hook up to the Internet. We had 
> lots of customers asking for IP protocols in the mid to late 80's and I can 
> guarantee you most weren't part of the Internet. They were using IP as the 
> interoperating system glue on their own networks.
> 
> Also: the flag day was pretty much an example of how not to do a transition. 
> as in, let's not do that again.
> 
> Mike, trying to remember when CMU shipped their first version of their IP 
> stack for VMS
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/20/21 11:47 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>> Since we seem to be getting pedantic... 
>> 
>> There's "The (capital I) Internet" - which, most date to the flag day, and 
>> the "Public Internet" (the Internet after policies changed and allowed 
>> commercial & public use over the NSFnet backbone - in 1992f, as I recall).
>> 
>> Then there's the more general notion of "internetworking" - of which there 
>> was a considerable amount of experimental work going on, in parallel with 
>> TCP/IP.  And of (small i) "internets" - essentially any Catenet style 
>> network-of-networks.
>> 
>> Miles Fidelman
>> 
>> Mel Beckman wrote:
>>> Michael,
>>> 
>>> “Looking into” isn’t “is” :)
>>> 
>>>  -mel 
>>> 
 On Oct 20, 2021, at 10:39 AM, Michael Thomas  
  wrote:
 
 
 
 
 On 10/20/21 8:26 AM, Mel Beckman wrote:
> Mark,
> 
> As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered the 
> official birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let different kinds 
> of computers on different networks talk to each other. 
> 
> It’s 2021, hence the Internet is less than, not more than, 40 years old.  
> Given your mathematical skills, I put no stock in your claim that we 
> still can’t “buy an NMS that just works.” :)
> 
 Pedantically, IP is 40 years old as of last month. What you're talking 
 about is the flag day. People including myself were looking into internet 
 protocols well before the flag day.
 
 Mike
 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>> In practice, there is.   Yogi Berra
>> 
>> Theory is when you know everything but nothing works. 
>> Practice is when everything works but no one knows why. 
>> In our lab, theory and practice are combined: 
>> nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown

[NANOG-announce] NANOG 83 Agenda is LIVE + MORE - Register Now!

[Nanog News]

*NANOG 83 Agenda is LIVE *
Less than 2 weeks away! Register TODAY!

*Mark the date. *Our full NANOG 83 schedule is live and ready for your
viewing pleasure! Coordinate your calendars now, so you are sure not to
miss out on any of the incredible programming in store.

Full details are available for upcoming talks and keynote presentations.
NANOG 83 will be available virtually +/or in-person in Minneapolis, MN.
The conference takes place Nov. 1 - 3 + Hackathon will kick off on Oct. 22.


*VIEW AGENDA  *

*NANOG 83 EXPO Coming Soon*
Network + Meet with Tech Reps

Meet + network with reps from North American companies, at the NANOG
83 Virtual Expo!

Visit booths throughout the conference to learn about the latest
technologies + fun raffles. Doors will open on Monday, Nov. 1, and stay
open until Nov. 12.

*Join us for our N83 Community Meeting *
An Opportunity for your Voice to be Heard

Mark your calendar for the upcoming NANOG 83 Community Meeting, which will
take place Wednesday, Nov. 3 from 2:30 - 3:00 pm EDT. We invite your
feedback on recent developments within the organization.

Community Meeting will cover:

   - Impact of COVID on NANOG
   - Future technology updates on the website
   - Mentorship + Education Programs
   - Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN + ISOC
   - Most recent developments with current + future programming by PC
   leadership
   - Carriers shutting down 3G in 2022, send us your 5G talks for N84!
   - 10th Anniversary of World IPv6 Day - June 6, 2022
   - PC Nominations in January/February 2022 - ask us now about serving.

Speakers:
NANOG, Edward McNair
Apple, Cat Gurinsky

*LEARN MORE* 

*MANRS Steering Committee Needs You! *
Nominations will Close Next Friday

MANRS Steering Committee Needs You!!  Nominations will close on Oct. 28th.

The MANRS community is looking for volunteers to serve on its new Steering
Committee. The Steering Committee will lead the community toward collective
responsibility for the resilience and security of the Internet’s global
routing system.

*LEARN MORE *

___
NANOG-announce mailing list
NANOG-announce@nanog.org
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

NANOG 83 Agenda is LIVE + MORE - Register Now!

[Nanog News]

*NANOG 83 Agenda is LIVE *
Less than 2 weeks away! Register TODAY!

*Mark the date. *Our full NANOG 83 schedule is live and ready for your
viewing pleasure! Coordinate your calendars now, so you are sure not to
miss out on any of the incredible programming in store.

Full details are available for upcoming talks and keynote presentations.
NANOG 83 will be available virtually +/or in-person in Minneapolis, MN.
The conference takes place Nov. 1 - 3 + Hackathon will kick off on Oct. 22.


*VIEW AGENDA  *

*NANOG 83 EXPO Coming Soon*
Network + Meet with Tech Reps

Meet + network with reps from North American companies, at the NANOG
83 Virtual Expo!

Visit booths throughout the conference to learn about the latest
technologies + fun raffles. Doors will open on Monday, Nov. 1, and stay
open until Nov. 12.

*Join us for our N83 Community Meeting *
An Opportunity for your Voice to be Heard

Mark your calendar for the upcoming NANOG 83 Community Meeting, which will
take place Wednesday, Nov. 3 from 2:30 - 3:00 pm EDT. We invite your
feedback on recent developments within the organization.

Community Meeting will cover:

   - Impact of COVID on NANOG
   - Future technology updates on the website
   - Mentorship + Education Programs
   - Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN + ISOC
   - Most recent developments with current + future programming by PC
   leadership
   - Carriers shutting down 3G in 2022, send us your 5G talks for N84!
   - 10th Anniversary of World IPv6 Day - June 6, 2022
   - PC Nominations in January/February 2022 - ask us now about serving.

Speakers:
NANOG, Edward McNair
Apple, Cat Gurinsky

*LEARN MORE* 

*MANRS Steering Committee Needs You! *
Nominations will Close Next Friday

MANRS Steering Committee Needs You!!  Nominations will close on Oct. 28th.

The MANRS community is looking for volunteers to serve on its new Steering
Committee. The Steering Committee will lead the community toward collective
responsibility for the resilience and security of the Internet’s global
routing system.

*LEARN MORE *

Re: Network visibility

[Michael Thomas]

I think the issuing of rfc 791 was much more important than the flag 
day. ARPAnet was a tiny, tiny universe but there were a lot of people 
interested in networking at the time wondering what to do with our neat 
new DEUNA and DEQNA adapters. There was tons of interest in all of the 
various protocols coming out around then because nobody knew what was 
going to win, or whether there would be *a* winner at all. Being able to 
get a spec to write to was pretty novel at the time because all of the 
rest of them were proprietary so you had to reverse engineer them for 
the most part. It may be that alone that pushed IP along well before the 
public could hook up to the Internet. We had lots of customers asking 
for IP protocols in the mid to late 80's and I can guarantee you most 
weren't part of the Internet. They were using IP as the interoperating 
system glue on their own networks.


Also: the flag day was pretty much an example of how not to do a 
transition. as in, let's not do that again.


Mike, trying to remember when CMU shipped their first version of their 
IP stack for VMS



On 10/20/21 11:47 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:

Since we seem to be getting pedantic...

There's "The (capital I) Internet" - which, most date to the flag day, 
and the "Public Internet" (the Internet after policies changed and 
allowed commercial & public use over the NSFnet backbone - in 1992f, 
as I recall).


Then there's the more general notion of "internetworking" - of which 
there was a considerable amount of experimental work going on, in 
parallel with TCP/IP.  And of (small i) "internets" - essentially any 
Catenet style network-of-networks.


Miles Fidelman

Mel Beckman wrote:

Michael,

“Looking into” isn’t “is” :)

 -mel


On Oct 20, 2021, at 10:39 AM, Michael Thomas  wrote:




On 10/20/21 8:26 AM, Mel Beckman wrote:

Mark,

As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered the 
official birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let different 
kinds of computers on different networks talk to each other.


It’s 2021, hence the Internet is /less/ than, not more than, 40 
years old.  Given your mathematical skills, I put no stock in your 
claim that we still can’t “buy an NMS that just works.” :)


Pedantically, IP is 40 years old as of last month. What you're 
talking about is the flag day. People including myself were looking 
into internet protocols well before the flag day.


Mike




--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   Yogi Berra

Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge

[Jared Brown]

Not to be outdone, British Telecom joins the cephalopod games:

“Every Tbps (terabit-per-second) of data consumed over and above current levels 
costs about £50m,” says Marc Allera, the chief executive of BT’s consumer 
division. “In the last year alone we’ve seen 4Tbps of extra usage and the cost 
to keep up with that growth is huge.”

“When the rules were created 25 years ago I don’t think anyone would have 
envisioned four or five companies would be driving 80% of the traffic on the 
world’s internet. They aren’t making a contribution to the services they are 
being carried on; that doesn’t feel right.”

“A lot of the principles of net neutrality are incredibly valuable, we are not 
trying to stop or marginalise players but there has to be more effective 
coordination of demand than there is today”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/oct/10/squid-games-success-reopens-debate-over-who-should-pay-for-rising-internet-traffic-netflix


For reference British Telecom has about 10 million broadband subscribers, so 
apparently those £200m capacity upgrades are stinging.

All in all, this raises an interesting question. Is British Telecom running 
their networks so hot, that just keeping the lights on requires capacity 
upgrades or are they just looking for freebies?


- Jared

RE: Network visibility

[Kain, Becki (.)]

Oh and I remember the day we first got mosaic and I thought “why would I need 
pictures on the internet?”




From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Miles 
Fidelman
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2021 2:47 PM
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Network visibility

WARNING: This message originated outside of Ford Motor Company. Use caution 
when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.

Since we seem to be getting pedantic...

There's "The (capital I) Internet" - which, most date to the flag day, and the 
"Public Internet" (the Internet after policies changed and allowed commercial & 
public use over the NSFnet backbone - in 1992f, as I recall).

Then there's the more general notion of "internetworking" - of which there was 
a considerable amount of experimental work going on, in parallel with TCP/IP.  
And of (small i) "internets" - essentially any Catenet style 
network-of-networks.

Miles Fidelman

Mel Beckman wrote:
Michael,

“Looking into” isn’t “is” :)
 -mel


On Oct 20, 2021, at 10:39 AM, Michael Thomas 
 wrote:



On 10/20/21 8:26 AM, Mel Beckman wrote:
Mark,

As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered the official 
birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let different kinds of computers on 
different networks talk to each other.

It’s 2021, hence the Internet is less than, not more than, 40 years old.  Given 
your mathematical skills, I put no stock in your claim that we still can’t “buy 
an NMS that just works.” :)


Pedantically, IP is 40 years old as of last month. What you're talking about is 
the flag day. People including myself were looking into internet protocols well 
before the flag day.

Mike




--

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.

In practice, there is.   Yogi Berra



Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.

Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.

In our lab, theory and practice are combined:

nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown

Re: Network visibility

[Miles Fidelman]

Since we seem to be getting pedantic...

There's "The (capital I) Internet" - which, most date to the flag day, 
and the "Public Internet" (the Internet after policies changed and 
allowed commercial & public use over the NSFnet backbone - in 1992f, as 
I recall).


Then there's the more general notion of "internetworking" - of which 
there was a considerable amount of experimental work going on, in 
parallel with TCP/IP.  And of (small i) "internets" - essentially any 
Catenet style network-of-networks.


Miles Fidelman

Mel Beckman wrote:

Michael,

“Looking into” isn’t “is” :)

 -mel


On Oct 20, 2021, at 10:39 AM, Michael Thomas  wrote:




On 10/20/21 8:26 AM, Mel Beckman wrote:

Mark,

As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered the 
official birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let different 
kinds of computers on different networks talk to each other.


It’s 2021, hence the Internet is /less/ than, not more than, 40 
years old.  Given your mathematical skills, I put no stock in your 
claim that we still can’t “buy an NMS that just works.” :)


Pedantically, IP is 40 years old as of last month. What you're 
talking about is the flag day. People including myself were looking 
into internet protocols well before the flag day.


Mike




--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   Yogi Berra

Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown

Re: Network visibility

[Lady Benjamin Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE]

> On Oct 20, 2021, at 8:04 AM, Mark Tinka  > wrote:
> 
> 
> At any rate, you may very well need more than one system to monitor your 
> entire network.
> 
> Mark.

Not the least of reasons for this: Redundancy.  We have more than 1 tool doing 
every job, incase there’s a bug with something someday, or some platform 
reboots during a hurricane, etc.  2 is 1 and 1 is none and -48VDC power is 
still the best. 

Happy Birthday Internet <3 

—L.B.

Ms. Lady Benjamin PD Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE
6x7 Networks & 6x7 Telecom, LLC 
CEO 
l...@6by7.net 
"The only fully end-to-end encrypted global telecommunications company in the 
world.”
FCC License KJ6FJJ

Re: Network visibility

[Miles Fidelman]

Jay Hennigan wrote:

On 10/20/21 10:30, Mel Beckman wrote:

Owen,

LOL! Yeah, and in 1838 Samuel Morse’s telegraph system used 
electric impulses to transmit encoded messages over a wire to 
Speedwell Iron Works in Morristown, New Jersey. Was/ that /the Internet?


Nope. And it wasn't even the first digital encoding of text. Braille 
preceded it, and arguably semaphore.


There's a wonderful book, "The Victorian Internet" - that talks about 
telegraphy, including optical telegraphy - and how the various telegraph 
networks were internetworked.


When it came to message traffic, it really was a lot like the modern 
Internet.


Miles Fidelman

--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   Yogi Berra

Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown

Re: Network visibility

[Mel Beckman]

Michael,

“Looking into” isn’t “is” :)

 -mel

On Oct 20, 2021, at 10:39 AM, Michael Thomas  wrote:




On 10/20/21 8:26 AM, Mel Beckman wrote:
Mark,

As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered the official 
birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let different kinds of computers on 
different networks talk to each other.

It’s 2021, hence the Internet is less than, not more than, 40 years old.  Given 
your mathematical skills, I put no stock in your claim that we still can’t “buy 
an NMS that just works.” :)


Pedantically, IP is 40 years old as of last month. What you're talking about is 
the flag day. People including myself were looking into internet protocols well 
before the flag day.

Mike

Re: Network visibility

[Jay Hennigan]

On 10/20/21 10:30, Mel Beckman wrote:

Owen,

LOL! Yeah, and in 1838 Samuel Morse’s telegraph system used 
electric impulses to transmit encoded messages over a wire to Speedwell 
Iron Works in Morristown, New Jersey. Was/ that /the Internet?


Nope. And it wasn't even the first digital encoding of text. Braille 
preceded it, and arguably semaphore.


--
Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net
Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
503 897-8550 - WB6RDV

Re: abha

[Brett Watson]

> On Oct 20, 2021, at 10:41, Randy Bush  wrote:
> 
> abha died 20 years ago today

Still miss her, she was a ray of sunshine.

abha

[Randy Bush]

abha died 20 years ago today

Re: Network visibility

[Michael Thomas]

On 10/20/21 8:26 AM, Mel Beckman wrote:

Mark,

As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered the 
official birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let different 
kinds of computers on different networks talk to each other.


It’s 2021, hence the Internet is /less/ than, not more than, 40 years 
old.  Given your mathematical skills, I put no stock in your claim 
that we still can’t “buy an NMS that just works.” :)


Pedantically, IP is 40 years old as of last month. What you're talking 
about is the flag day. People including myself were looking into 
internet protocols well before the flag day.


Mike

Re: Network visibility

[Mel Beckman]

Mark,

I haven’t. With SNMP and other standards, and most NMS’ having extensible 
interfaces, such tinkaing is rare. It certainly doesn’t rise to the level of 
“never works out of the box.” 

 -mel

> On Oct 20, 2021, at 10:06 AM, Mark Tinka  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/20/21 18:38, Mel Beckman wrote:
>> I’ve used many commercial NMS platforms. I’ve yet to find one that doesn’t 
>> work “out of the box”. Unless by “out of the box” you mean “clairvoyantly 
>> configured”.
>> 
>> Please identify the ones you think fail your test.
> 
> Have you always used an NMS that you've never had to have the vendor (or 
> community) tweak in a manner that was mostly unique to your operation?
> 
> If not, you're a very lucky man...
> 
> Mark.

Re: Network visibility

[Mel Beckman]

Owen,

LOL! Yeah, and in 1838 Samuel Morse’s telegraph system used electric impulses 
to transmit encoded messages over a wire to Speedwell Iron Works in Morristown, 
New Jersey. Was that the Internet?

Sorry, not buying your supposed argument. People experimenting with TCP/IP 
doesn’t an Internet make.

“January 1, 1983 is considered the official birthday of the Internet. "
https://www.usg.edu/galileo/skills/unit07/internet07_02.phtml

  -mel

On Oct 20, 2021, at 9:54 AM, Owen DeLong 
mailto:o...@delong.com>> wrote:



On Oct 20, 2021, at 08:26 , Mel Beckman 
mailto:m...@beckman.org>> wrote:

Mark,

As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered the official 
birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let different kinds of computers on 
different networks talk to each other.

January 1, 1983 is actually not that… TCP/IP was running in many locations 
prior to that date.

January 1, 1983 was the day that support for the NCP based internet prior to 
TCP/IP implementation ended.

Further, NCP had actually allowed different kinds of computers on different 
networks to talk to each other, as had UUCP.

It’s 2021, hence the Internet is less than, not more than, 40 years old.  Given 
your mathematical skills, I put no stock in your claim that we still can’t “buy 
an NMS that just works.” :)

No, not really. The Internet is older than the death of NCP, which is the day 
you are referring to as the birthday of the internet.

Owen


 -mel

On Oct 20, 2021, at 8:04 AM, Mark Tinka 
mailto:mark@tinka.africa>> wrote:



On 10/20/21 11:55, Nat Fogarty wrote:

Hi there,

I'm interested in what you good folks do in terms of network visibility.

My interests are around Service Provider space - visibility for IPoE, PPPoE, 
TCP(User Experience).

I use a product called "VoIPmonitor" for all things VoIP - and it is one of my 
favourite tools.  It is a web gui for sip/rtp/etc.

Is there a similar tool in the Ethernet(L2)/IP(L3) space?

Are operators using tcpdump/wireshark for this - or is there a 
voipmonitor-esque tool out there?

It's 2021, and more than 40 years of the Internet, we still can't walk into a 
shop and buy an NMS that just works :-).

Oddly, I was searching for a good system to manage subscriber management on our 
end (Broadband), and we eventually landed on Splynx.

So not sure if you want to see things on the wire (Layer 1 - 4), or if you are 
interested in pretty pictures...

At any rate, you may very well need more than one system to monitor your entire 
network.

Mark.

Re: Network visibility

[Mark Tinka]

On 10/20/21 18:38, Mel Beckman wrote:

I’ve used many commercial NMS platforms. I’ve yet to find one that doesn’t work 
“out of the box”. Unless by “out of the box” you mean “clairvoyantly 
configured”.

Please identify the ones you think fail your test.


Have you always used an NMS that you've never had to have the vendor (or 
community) tweak in a manner that was mostly unique to your operation?


If not, you're a very lucky man...

Mark.

Re: Network visibility

[Owen DeLong via NANOG]

> On Oct 20, 2021, at 08:26 , Mel Beckman  wrote:
> 
> Mark,
> 
> As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered the official 
> birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let different kinds of computers 
> on different networks talk to each other. 

January 1, 1983 is actually not that… TCP/IP was running in many locations 
prior to that date.

January 1, 1983 was the day that support for the NCP based internet prior to 
TCP/IP implementation ended.

Further, NCP had actually allowed different kinds of computers on different 
networks to talk to each other, as had UUCP.

> It’s 2021, hence the Internet is less than, not more than, 40 years old.  
> Given your mathematical skills, I put no stock in your claim that we still 
> can’t “buy an NMS that just works.” :)

No, not really. The Internet is older than the death of NCP, which is the day 
you are referring to as the birthday of the internet.

Owen

> 
>  -mel
> 
>> On Oct 20, 2021, at 8:04 AM, Mark Tinka > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/20/21 11:55, Nat Fogarty wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi there,
>>> 
>>> I'm interested in what you good folks do in terms of network visibility.
>>> 
>>> My interests are around Service Provider space - visibility for IPoE, 
>>> PPPoE, TCP(User Experience).
>>> 
>>> I use a product called "VoIPmonitor" for all things VoIP - and it is one of 
>>> my favourite tools.  It is a web gui for sip/rtp/etc.
>>> 
>>> Is there a similar tool in the Ethernet(L2)/IP(L3) space?
>>> 
>>> Are operators using tcpdump/wireshark for this - or is there a 
>>> voipmonitor-esque tool out there?
>> 
>> It's 2021, and more than 40 years of the Internet, we still can't walk into 
>> a shop and buy an NMS that just works :-).
>> 
>> Oddly, I was searching for a good system to manage subscriber management on 
>> our end (Broadband), and we eventually landed on Splynx.
>> 
>> So not sure if you want to see things on the wire (Layer 1 - 4), or if you 
>> are interested in pretty pictures...
>> 
>> At any rate, you may very well need more than one system to monitor your 
>> entire network.
>> 
>> Mark.
> 

Re: Network visibility

[Mel Beckman]

I’ve used many commercial NMS platforms. I’ve yet to find one that doesn’t work 
“out of the box”. Unless by “out of the box” you mean “clairvoyantly 
configured”. 

Please identify the ones you think fail your test. 

-mel via cell

> On Oct 20, 2021, at 9:18 AM, Mark Tinka  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 10/20/21 18:08, Mel Beckman wrote:
>> 
>> Mark,
>> 
>> Before 1983, the ARPANET wasn’t an internet, let alone The Internet. Each 
>> ARPANET connection required a host-specific interface (the “IMP”) and 
>> simplex Network Control Protocol (NCP). NCP used users' email addresses, and 
>> routing had to be specified in advance within each NCP message.
> 
> I do know all of this, mate... I was just being dramatically facetious from 
> my first response to the OP.
> 
> My point being that considering how long TCP/IP has been around, the best 
> monitoring we have gotten, even today, doesn't work out-of-the-box. So a 
> single solution is likely impractical, even with the best of intentions, and 
> none of the massaging.
> 
> 
>> Even so, the Internet as a platform open to anyone didn’t start until 1992. 
>> I know you joined late, in 1999, so you probably missed out on this history. 
>> :)
> 
> 1995, actually. But that's not important...
> 
> Mark.

Re: Network visibility

[Mark Tinka]

On 10/20/21 18:08, Mel Beckman wrote:


Mark,

Before 1983, the ARPANET wasn’t an internet, let alone The Internet. 
Each ARPANET connection required a host-specific interface (the “IMP”) 
and simplex Network Control Protocol (NCP). NCP used users' 
email addresses, and routing had to be specified in advance within 
each NCP message.


I do know all of this, mate... I was just being dramatically facetious 
from my first response to the OP.


My point being that considering how long TCP/IP has been around, the 
best monitoring we have gotten, even today, doesn't work out-of-the-box. 
So a single solution is likely impractical, even with the best of 
intentions, and none of the massaging.



Even so, the Internet as a platform open to anyone didn’t start until 
1992. I know you joined late, in 1999, so you probably missed out on 
this history. :)


1995, actually. But that's not important...

Mark.

Re: Network visibility

[Mel Beckman]

Mark,

Before 1983, the ARPANET wasn’t an internet, let alone The Internet. Each 
ARPANET connection required a host-specific interface (the “IMP”) and simplex 
Network Control Protocol (NCP). NCP used users' email addresses, and routing 
had to be specified in advance within each NCP message.

Even so, the Internet as a platform open to anyone didn’t start until 1992. I 
know you joined late, in 1999, so you probably missed out on this history. :)

 -mel

On Oct 20, 2021, at 8:43 AM, Mark Tinka 
mailto:mark@tinka.africa>> wrote:



On 10/20/21 17:26, Mel Beckman wrote:

Mark,

As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered the official 
birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let different kinds of computers on 
different networks talk to each other.

It’s 2021, hence the Internet is less than, not more than, 40 years old.  Given 
your mathematical skills, I put no stock in your claim that we still can’t “buy 
an NMS that just works.” :)

Hehehe :-)...

I guess we can reliably say that the ARPANET wasn't keen on pretty pictures, 
then, hehe :-)...

Mark.

Re: PowerSwitch S4100 (S4148-ON) chipset

[Tom Hill]

On 20/10/2021 16:50, Tom Hill wrote:
> On 19/10/2021 14:50, Tim Jackson wrote:
>> It's a lower bandwidth Trident2+ with some different I/O options iirc.
>> Same featureset, but a mix of 10G and 25G serdes, targeted at like
>> 48x10g+4x100G boxes.
> 
> That was my understanding of Maverick... For some reason there's
> something in my head that said Extreme had one. Was it the X450-G2?
> 

Also, worth keeping the Cumulus HCL handy for the older BRCM chipset
references. :)

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/networking/ethernet-switching/hardware-compatibility-list/

(Filter by ASIC, et voila.)

-- 
Tom

Re: PowerSwitch S4100 (S4148-ON) chipset

[Tom Hill]

On 19/10/2021 14:50, Tim Jackson wrote:
> It's a lower bandwidth Trident2+ with some different I/O options iirc.
> Same featureset, but a mix of 10G and 25G serdes, targeted at like
> 48x10g+4x100G boxes.

That was my understanding of Maverick... For some reason there's
something in my head that said Extreme had one. Was it the X450-G2?

-- 
Tom

Re: Network visibility

[Mark Tinka]

On 10/20/21 17:26, Mel Beckman wrote:


Mark,

As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered the 
official birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let different 
kinds of computers on different networks talk to each other.


It’s 2021, hence the Internet is /less/ than, not more than, 40 years 
old.  Given your mathematical skills, I put no stock in your claim 
that we still can’t “buy an NMS that just works.” :)


Hehehe :-)...

I guess we can reliably say that the ARPANET wasn't keen on pretty 
pictures, then, hehe :-)...


Mark.

Re: Network visibility

[Mel Beckman]

Mark,

As long as we’re being pedantic, January 1, 1983 is considered the official 
birthday of the Internet, when TCP/IP first let different kinds of computers on 
different networks talk to each other.

It’s 2021, hence the Internet is less than, not more than, 40 years old.  Given 
your mathematical skills, I put no stock in your claim that we still can’t “buy 
an NMS that just works.” :)

 -mel

On Oct 20, 2021, at 8:04 AM, Mark Tinka 
mailto:mark@tinka.africa>> wrote:



On 10/20/21 11:55, Nat Fogarty wrote:

Hi there,

I'm interested in what you good folks do in terms of network visibility.

My interests are around Service Provider space - visibility for IPoE, PPPoE, 
TCP(User Experience).

I use a product called "VoIPmonitor" for all things VoIP - and it is one of my 
favourite tools.  It is a web gui for sip/rtp/etc.

Is there a similar tool in the Ethernet(L2)/IP(L3) space?

Are operators using tcpdump/wireshark for this - or is there a 
voipmonitor-esque tool out there?

It's 2021, and more than 40 years of the Internet, we still can't walk into a 
shop and buy an NMS that just works :-).

Oddly, I was searching for a good system to manage subscriber management on our 
end (Broadband), and we eventually landed on Splynx.

So not sure if you want to see things on the wire (Layer 1 - 4), or if you are 
interested in pretty pictures...

At any rate, you may very well need more than one system to monitor your entire 
network.

Mark.

Re: Network visibility

[Mark Tinka]

On 10/20/21 11:55, Nat Fogarty wrote:


Hi there,

I'm interested in what you good folks do in terms of network visibility.

My interests are around Service Provider space - visibility for IPoE, 
PPPoE, TCP(User Experience).


I use a product called "VoIPmonitor" for all things VoIP - and it is 
one of my favourite tools.  It is a web gui for sip/rtp/etc.


Is there a similar tool in the Ethernet(L2)/IP(L3) space?

Are operators using tcpdump/wireshark for this - or is there a 
voipmonitor-esque tool out there?


It's 2021, and more than 40 years of the Internet, we still can't walk 
into a shop and buy an NMS that just works :-).


Oddly, I was searching for a good system to manage subscriber management 
on our end (Broadband), and we eventually landed on Splynx.


So not sure if you want to see things on the wire (Layer 1 - 4), or if 
you are interested in pretty pictures...


At any rate, you may very well need more than one system to monitor your 
entire network.


Mark.

Re: [External] Re: Anyone else getting the 'spam' bomb threat?

[Martin Hannigan]

I put what we received up on pastebin entirely with headers (and redacted
our info).

https://pastebin.com/kLjPm8Nk

Warm regards,

-M<



On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 9:19 AM Radu-Adrian Feurdean <
na...@radu-adrian.feurdean.net> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 19, 2021, at 16:00, Hunter Fuller via NANOG wrote:
> > We have a distinct abuse address (not just abuse@) and that is where
> > the messages were sent.
> >
> > We didn't receive the bomb threat ones. We only received the (somewhat
> > more amusing) messages entitled "Your network has been PWNED" and
> > "Fuck you".
>
> Hi,
>
> We got the same here at France-IX. It was on friday 15th. Hopefully, they
> "PWNED" all our Cisco and Mikrotik routers (of which we have none).
>
> > The situation loses its humor entirely with the introduction of bomb
> > threats. Seems like a script kiddie taking things way too far.
>
> I heard that yesterday (19th) evening there was law enforcement deployment
> and evacuation in the area of a major Paris (FR, EU) telco hotel,
> apparently due to "threats to a business in the area". Details (popcorn) on
> FrNOG (in french) :
> https://www.mail-archive.com/frnog@frnog.org/msg67540.html
>

Re: Geo-location - IP Location Websites

[Lukas Tribus]

Hello,

On Wed, 20 Oct 2021 at 13:38, Pascal Masha  wrote:
>
> Apart from that, how do you all get them to quickly
> change their records especially for a block that
> you recovered from one country and moved to
> another within the same RIR region/continent?

There is no such thing as "get them all to quickly update geolocation data".

First make sure you've done your due diligence:

- SWIP / (R)WHOIS updated, with country and even better newer geoloc: attributes
- reverse DNS updated, if you can, use a country TLD
- route object and RPKI ROA created for the routing part
- check for obsolete routing objects in IRR (use irrexplorer) and have
them clean it up (any conflicting data can create doubts in someone
else's mind)
- after all this, wait for a few days before contacting people, so
local copies of databases are updated

Then comes the real fun. Contacting geolocation and blacklists
operators requires writing many emails, submitting tickets on broken
contact webforms, finding key persons on social media and contacting
them directly, time, patience. This could take anywhere from 1 to 3
months and some blacklist or geolocation provider may never update or
respond (fortunately that only happens with niche players).

Don't believe that there is a method to have it all fixed within two
weeks. It doesn't work like that.


Lukas

Re: DNS pulling BGP routes?

[Masataka Ohta]

Baldur Norddahl wrote:


Around here there are certain expectations if you sell a product called IP
Transit and other expectations if you call the product paid peering.


That some word is used for marketing hype with an intentional
self-contradicting definition is not my problem, at all.


The so-called "tier" of a company is a meaningless term.


I have been using that term properly, which means it is meaningful
if people use it properly. So is "peering".

Sabri Berisha wrote:

> The term "network neutrality" was invented by people who want to
> control a network owned and paid for by someone else.

Excellent theory.
Masataka Ohta

Re: Geo-location - IP Location Websites

[Andrew Dampf]

The support for most geoip websites answers my requests within a few days
at most. It's easiest if you self publish a geofeed as described at
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-google-self-published-geofeeds-02 and keep
it up to date. At that point you can just point them to that feed and
they'll happily scrape the data at regular intervals (usually weekly).

On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 7:42 AM Pascal Masha  wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> If you are running a website that provides IP Location data; it's only
> fair that you be updating your data fast enough (not more than a month) and
> poll the correct information provided by the respective RIRs and more
> especially if other services rely on your data to lock services.
>
> Apart from that, how do you all get them to quickly change their records
> especially for a block that you recovered from one country and moved to
> another within the same RIR region/continent?
>
> Regards,
> Paschal Masha.
>

Re: [External] Re: Anyone else getting the 'spam' bomb threat?

[Radu-Adrian Feurdean]

On Tue, Oct 19, 2021, at 16:00, Hunter Fuller via NANOG wrote:
> We have a distinct abuse address (not just abuse@) and that is where
> the messages were sent.
>
> We didn't receive the bomb threat ones. We only received the (somewhat
> more amusing) messages entitled "Your network has been PWNED" and
> "Fuck you".

Hi,

We got the same here at France-IX. It was on friday 15th. Hopefully, they 
"PWNED" all our Cisco and Mikrotik routers (of which we have none).

> The situation loses its humor entirely with the introduction of bomb
> threats. Seems like a script kiddie taking things way too far.

I heard that yesterday (19th) evening there was law enforcement deployment and 
evacuation in the area of a major Paris (FR, EU) telco hotel, apparently due to 
"threats to a business in the area". Details (popcorn) on FrNOG (in french) : 
https://www.mail-archive.com/frnog@frnog.org/msg67540.html

Network visibility

[Nat Fogarty]

Hi there,

I'm interested in what you good folks do in terms of network visibility.

My interests are around Service Provider space - visibility for IPoE,
PPPoE, TCP(User Experience).

I use a product called "VoIPmonitor" for all things VoIP - and it is one of
my favourite tools.  It is a web gui for sip/rtp/etc.

Is there a similar tool in the Ethernet(L2)/IP(L3) space?

Are operators using tcpdump/wireshark for this - or is there a
voipmonitor-esque tool out there?

Cheers,
Nathaniel

Geo-location - IP Location Websites

[Pascal Masha]

Dear All,

If you are running a website that provides IP Location data; it's only fair
that you be updating your data fast enough (not more than a month) and poll
the correct information provided by the respective RIRs and more especially
if other services rely on your data to lock services.

Apart from that, how do you all get them to quickly change their records
especially for a block that you recovered from one country and moved to
another within the same RIR region/continent?

Regards,
Paschal Masha.

Re: S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge

[Owen DeLong via NANOG]

> On Oct 19, 2021, at 08:47 , Tom Beecher  wrote:
> 
> Vs. an ISP that is causing the problem or trying to run a protection racket 
> against content providers, I think it wouldn’t be hard for the content
> provider to supply appropriate messaging inserted at the front end of 
> playback to explain the situation to their mutual customers. Instead of the
> typical FBI notice, imagine the movie starting with an ad that explains how 
> the ISP is trying to increase consumer costs by forcing Netflix to
> pass along additional fees paid to the ISP to deliver content the customer 
> has already paid said same ISP to deliver.
> 
> Wouldn't be hard, but doubtful it would be effective. 
> 
> Consumers already get the same message on a few TV channels during the annual 
> carriage dispute-a-palooza, with both sides telling them to call the other 
> one to complain. It clearly doesn't work. 

I don’t think that’s as commonplace in S. Korea as it is here.

It appears that the Netflix Verizon notices had the desired effect.

> Outside of our sphere, nobody cares about this stuff. They just want their 
> thing to work. 

Agreed… The trick is which side is able to convince the users that the other is 
the one preventing that.

Owen

> 
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 9:37 PM Owen DeLong via NANOG  > wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Oct 18, 2021, at 14:48 , Jay Hennigan  > > wrote:
> > 
> > On 10/18/21 07:02, Josh Luthman wrote:
> > 
> >>Netflix, as an example, has even been willing to bear most of the cost
> >>with peering or bringing servers to ISPs to reduce the ISP's costs and
> >>improve the ISP customer's experience.
> > 
> > Netflix doesn't do those things because it cares about the ISP's costs and 
> > the ISP customers' experience.
> > 
> > Netflix does these things because Netflix cares about Netflix's costs and 
> > Netflix's customers' experience.
> 
> Of course, that doesn’t change the fact that it does lower the ISP’s costs 
> and improve the ISP customers’ experience.
> 
> >>It's about time Netflix played
> >>chicken with one of these ISPs and stopped offering service  (or
> >>offered
> >>limited service) to the ISPs that try to extort them and other content
> >>providers:
> > 
> > Then Netflix would risk losing those customers, especially if the ISP in 
> > question is a cable company or offers its own video streaming services.
> 
> Vs. an ISP that is causing the problem or trying to run a protection racket 
> against content providers, I think it wouldn’t be hard for the content
> provider to supply appropriate messaging inserted at the front end of 
> playback to explain the situation to their mutual customers. Instead of the
> typical FBI notice, imagine the movie starting with an ad that explains how 
> the ISP is trying to increase consumer costs by forcing Netflix to
> pass along additional fees paid to the ISP to deliver content the customer 
> has already paid said same ISP to deliver.
> 
> Somehow, I don’t see the ISP doing well against such a PR onslaught.
> 
> > Also, by peering and bringing servers to ISPs, Netflix improves its 
> > customers' experience and reduces Netflix's costs because they no longer 
> > need to pay a transit provider to deliver content.
> 
> Where the ISP in question isn’t trying to force them to pay transit costs 
> within said eyeball network, sure. But in SK’s case, it looks like they’re 
> trying to force Netflix to pay to reach their eyeballs, even though the 
> eyeballs in question are already paying them to deliver Netflix (and other) 
> content.
> 
> >>Sorry, your service provider does not believe in net
> >>neutrality and has imposed limitations on your Netflix experience.
> > 
> > They actually did pretty much exactly that with Verizon back in 2014.
> > 
> > https://www.cnet.com/tech/home-entertainment/netflix-takes-aim-at-verizon-over-slow-data-speeds/
> >  
> > 
> 
> It appears to have worked out fairly well for them, too.
> 
> Owen
>