Re: validating reachability via an ISP

[Andrew Wentzell]

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 7:22 PM, Andy Litzinger
 wrote:
> Hi all,
>   I have an enterprise network and do not provide transit. In one of our
> datacenters we have our own prefixes and rely on two ISPs as BGP neighbors
> to provide global reachability for our prefixes.  One is a large regional
> provider and the other is a large global provider.
>
> Recently we took our link to the global provider offline to perform
> maintenance on our router.  Nearly immediately we were hit with alerts that
> our prefix was unreachable and BGPMon alerted that nearly 80 AS's noted our
> route had been withdrawn.  We were not unreachable from every AS, but we
> certainly were from some of the largest.
>
> The root cause is that the our prefix is not being adequately
> re-distributed globally by the regional ISP.  This is unexpected and we are
> working through this with them now.
>
> My question is, how can I monitor global reachability for a prefix via this
> or any specific provider I use over time?  Are there various route-servers
> I can programmatically query for my prefix and get results that include AS
> paths? Then I could verify that an "acceptable" number of paths exist that
> include the AS of the all the ISPs I rely upon.  And what would an
> "acceptable" number of alternate paths be?

I did something similar a few years ago, by querying routeviews and
validating AS paths using python and pexpect. You could adapt it for
your use pretty easily. The code's here:

https://github.com/awentzell/check-as-path

Re: ridiculous problems getting an ATT circuit port mode changed

[Andrew Wentzell]

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Joe Maimon  wrote:
> Apparently there is still raison d'etre for everyone not a giant telco.
>
> We placed the circuit with tagging expected for the service vlan.
>
> We got it delivered without.
>
> We requested it be changed.
>
> Apparently that takes a change order, which when it is finally filed, takes
> 7-10BD to complete.
>
> However, there is another complication. The vlan has to be different or the
> order cant be accepted, since the vlan is in use.
>
> Options presented range from just reconfigure all your equipment, use it
> without the tag, reorder the UNI and expect at least a week of downtime.
>
> This when we all know, and the TAC group flat out confirmed, the change is a
> push of button, a flick of a switch, a twist of a knob, etc, etc..
>
> I view circuits with such change difficulties as liabilities.
>
> Does anyone know anybody over in ATT land who can sort through this
> nonsense?

Did you already accept delivery? If not, call whatever number you have
for "test and turn up" and request the tech to make these changes.
This will be a different group than the one that handles changes to
existing circuits.

If you accepted, then you're out of luck and in for a wait. It doesn't
matter how trivial the change is, or how big a customer you are. Of
course, you'll be billed for the service in the meantime.

> Thanks and enjoy the holidays!
>
> Joe

Re: Most energy efficient (home) setup

[Andrew Wentzell]

On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org wrote:
 I'd love a low powered motherboard with 6-8 SATA, and a case with
 perhaps 6 hot swap bays but designed for a low powered, fanless
 motherboard.  IX Systems's FreeNAS Mini is the closest I've seen,
 but it tops out at 4 drives.

Look at Supermicro's X7SPA-H. It's an Atom board with the ICH9R
chipset, and 6 on-board SATA ports.

That one has been out for a while, so there may be something newer
available now too.