Re: Mystery MAC address

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

I think that is a randomized address. Look at the second character in a MAC
address, if it is a 2, 6, A, or E it is a randomized address.  Per
https://www.mist.com/get-to-know-mac-address-randomization-in-2020/
*Brandon Svec*



On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 9:24 AM JoeSox  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have something I have never seen before and was wondering if anyone in
> the community has seen something like this?
>
> So some active directory accounts are getting locked intermittently and I
> had to do some sniffing and I have an IP address showing up in a non-used
> subnet 10.1.2.x
> And it shows an unrecognized MAC address. This virtual machine is in a
> Nutanix environment.
>
> I am trying to figure this out without bringing in paid outside help.
> Thanks in advance for any responses.
> c2:ea:e4:c5:57:e6
> is the MAC in question. I don't fully understand this request. 10.1.2.18
> is the mystery ip that doesn't ping, 10.1.3.9 is the DC.
> AD Audit provides nonexistent machines making the requests and even blank.
> "User account 'Administrator' was locked from computer ''."
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> --
> Thank You,
> Joe
>

Re: "Permanent" DST

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

"..rational time worldwide"?  Like all of China in one timezone and Mumbai
:30 off center? and Arizona?  and that one county in Idaho?

I can't agree with any technical objections because there is already the
need to account for all these bizarre details worldwide and even DST in the
US changed in 2007.

There is however strong data and evidence that every year in November when
we set clocks back and hour traffic fatalities increase, crime increases,
retail sales drop and depression increases. Avoiding that is good enough
reason for me to support this.
*Brandon Svec*



On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 12:13 PM Jay R. Ashworth  wrote:

> In a unanimous vote today, the US Senate approved a bill which would
>
> 1) Cancel DST permanently, and
> 2) Move every square inch of US territory 15 degrees to the east.
>
> My opinion of this ought to be obvious from my rhetoric.  Hopefully, it
> will
> fail, because it's likely to be the end of rational time worldwide, and
> even
> if you do log in UTC, it will still make your life difficult.
>
> I'm poleaxed; I can't even decide which grounds to scream about this on...
>
> Hopefully, the House or the White House will be more coherent in their
> decision on this engineering construct.
>
> 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
>

Re: VoLTE and SRTP

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

I also read that the Russian military is depending on the mobile network
for some (much?) of their own communication which isn't that surprising if
the stories about their general ineptness are to be believed.  Maybe the
reverse is happening and Ukraine and allies are listening in on Russian
soldiers?  I would also think it serves a purpose to track targets in
either direction too.
*Brandon *


On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 2:00 PM Michael Thomas  wrote:

>
> Hi, I was reading an article on why Russia hasn't taken out Ukraine's
> mobile networks and one of the premises was that they could use it to
> eavesdrop on calls. Depending on how old their infrastructure is, that
> doesn't make sense as I would assume that along with e2e SIP that they'd
> be using SRTP with the SRTP keys exchanged using DTLS which is my
> understanding of the way they are secured. My understanding could be
> wrong though, or either outdated, or not uniformly deployed.
>
> The other thing that's weird is that the same article says they want to
> keep it up so they can use their bandwidth too which strikes me as sort
> of a crazy assumption in a war, but that's not much of an operational
> issue.
>
>
> https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/07/ukraine-phones-internet-still-work-00014487
>
> Mike
>
>

Re: Cogent cutting links to Russia?

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

I *think* I see the connection you are trying to make, but this seems very
much different if not completely opposite.  American social media companies
were/are banning/blocking some misinformation and lies.

This (today) is the Russian state (Putin) outlawing the truth and any
reporting that is not state sanctioned or agreeing completely with the
fake/false narrative they wish to push on their citizens to keep them in
the dark.
*Brandon *


On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 12:24 PM Ethan O'Toole  wrote:

>
>
> All the American social media platforms that banned Americans from having
> open discussions about things over the past 2 years?
>
> Oh no, how could they.
>
>
>- E
>
>

Re: Cogent cutting links to Russia?

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

It seems the much more concerning news coming out now is that Russia is
banning all foreign and independent media from BBC to Facebook and all in
between with heavy threats of prison and fines.  So they are cutting
themselves off presumably to keep the Russian people in the dark about what
is happening.

*Brandon *


On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 12:09 PM Michael Thomas  wrote:

> here's a Reuters which shouldn't be paywalled.
>
>
> https://www.reuters.com/technology/us-firm-cogent-cutting-internet-service-russia-2022-03-04/
>
> Mike
>
> On 3/4/22 12:02 PM, Anne Mitchell wrote:
> >
>  The link will not connect, cannot make secure connection with
> archive.php.
> >>> Here’s a paywall-free version:
> >>> https://archive.ph/TFgyg
> > FWIW, the WashPost link works for me, and I am not a paying subscriber,
> so I'd try that first, here it is again:
> >
> >>
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/04/russia-ukraine-internet-cogent-cutoff/
> > Anne
> >
> > ---
> > Outsource your email deliverability headaches to us, and get to the
> inbox, guaranteed!
> > www.GetToTheInbox.com
> >
> > Anne P. Mitchell,  Esq.
> > CEO Get to the Inbox by SuretyMail
> > Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal email
> marketing law)
> > Author: The Email Deliverability Handbook
> > Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
> > Dean Emeritus, Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School
> > Prof. Emeritus, Lincoln Law School
> > Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
> > In-house Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS) (Closed in 2004)
> >
>

Re: BANDWIDTH and VONAGE lose FCC rules exemption for STIR/SHAKEN

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

There is a company First Orion that does some surveys and reports on such
things: https://firstorion.com/2021-scam-call-trends/
*Brandon Svec*



On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 1:58 PM Michael Thomas  wrote:

>
> On 2/20/22 9:56 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> Mine exploded since the requirement date.  Some mornings I get a dozen
> before lunch.
>
> So our anecdotes don't agree :) I know, maybe we should find out somebody
> who's doing research on this?
>
> Does anybody know how this is being tracked for real?
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 2:33 PM Michael Thomas  wrote:
>
>>
>> On 2/17/22 11:58 AM, Sean Donelan wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-finds-two-providers-failed-fully-implement-stirshaken-0
>> >
>> >
>> > The Federal Communications Commission today took action to ensure that
>> > voice service providers meet their commitments and obligations to
>> > implement STIR/SHAKEN standards to combat spoofed robocall scams.
>> > Specifically, voice service providers Bandwidth and Vonage lost a
>> > partial exemption from STIR/SHAKEN because they failed to meet
>> > STIR/SHAKEN implementation commitments and have been referred to the
>> > FCC’s Enforcement Bureau for further investigation.
>>
>>
>> So for probably a year or so before the Stir/Shaken mandate came, I have
>> been seeing a lot less phone spam. I don't know if that's typical but it
>> was quite noticeable for me. What that tells me is that providers likely
>> started clamping down on their shady customers well ahead of the mandate
>> which says that regulatory fiat would have been sufficient too. But that
>> hinges on whether my situation is typical though.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>

Re: LEC copper removal from commercial properties

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

I found an alarmist email from a provider that I have not fact checked that 
states-

The FCC has issued Order 10-72A1 that mandates that all POTS Lines in the USA 
be replaced with an alternative service by August 2, 2022.

Brandon Svec 


> On Feb 16, 2022, at 6:16 PM, Brandon Svec  wrote:
> 
> Telcos have been trying/begging/warning of discontinuing copper for many 
> years. Maybe the political and regulatory environment is currently allowing 
> them to get on with it in some areas?
> 
> I don’t think there is an FCC rule requiring the fiber as much as allowing 
> the removal of copper. 
> 
> Brandon Svec 
> 
> 
>>> On Feb 16, 2022, at 6:01 PM, Martin Hannigan  wrote:
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> NANOG'ers;
>> 
>> At least in Boston, commercial property owners are receiving notices that 
>> 'copper  lines are being removed per FCC rules' and replaced with fiber. The 
>> property owner, not the network operators (or users of unbundled elements if 
>> that's even still a thing) are being presented with an agreement that 
>> acknowledges the removal, authorizes the fiber installation and provides for 
>> a minor oversight of the design. It suggests that no costs are involved in 
>> terms of hosting equipment. No power reimbursement. No rent for spaces used. 
>> 
>> There is an ominous paragraph in the letter that says if the property owner 
>> doesn't comply that tenants will lose all services including elevator 
>> phones, alarms, voice, internet and any copper/ds0 originated services. They 
>> didn't say 911, but that would go without saying. 
>> 
>> Has anyone heard of this?
>> What FCC rule requires this?
>> 
>> Thanks for any insights.
>> 
>> Warm regards,
>> 
>> Martin

Re: LEC copper removal from commercial properties

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

Telcos have been trying/begging/warning of discontinuing copper for many years. 
Maybe the political and regulatory environment is currently allowing them to 
get on with it in some areas?

I don’t think there is an FCC rule requiring the fiber as much as allowing the 
removal of copper. 

Brandon Svec 


> On Feb 16, 2022, at 6:01 PM, Martin Hannigan  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> NANOG'ers;
> 
> At least in Boston, commercial property owners are receiving notices that 
> 'copper  lines are being removed per FCC rules' and replaced with fiber. The 
> property owner, not the network operators (or users of unbundled elements if 
> that's even still a thing) are being presented with an agreement that 
> acknowledges the removal, authorizes the fiber installation and provides for 
> a minor oversight of the design. It suggests that no costs are involved in 
> terms of hosting equipment. No power reimbursement. No rent for spaces used. 
> 
> There is an ominous paragraph in the letter that says if the property owner 
> doesn't comply that tenants will lose all services including elevator phones, 
> alarms, voice, internet and any copper/ds0 originated services. They didn't 
> say 911, but that would go without saying. 
> 
> Has anyone heard of this?
> What FCC rule requires this?
> 
> Thanks for any insights.
> 
> Warm regards,
> 
> Martin

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

Crap, slow internet options in the heart of Silicon Valley, I think..

https://www.broadbandmap.ca.gov

You can look around the billion dollar football stadium and international
airport and see neighborhoods with 1-3Mbps only.


On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 1:38 PM Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> What is the embarrassment?
>
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 4:28 PM Michael Thomas  wrote:
>
>>
>> On 2/16/22 1:13 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> I'll once again please ask for specific examples as I continue to see the
>> generic "it isn't in some parts of San Jose".
>>
>> On the note of the generic area of San Jose, I'm all but certain this has
>> a lot to do with California and its extraordinarily complicated and near
>> impossible accessibility to obtain CLEC status.  This makes competition
>> pretty much impossible and makes the costs of operating one extraordinarily
>> high.  I'm obviously not going to be one that claims that government is
>> good or bad, just pointing out a certain correlation which could
>> potentially be causation.
>>
>> Sonic has been installing fiber in San Francisco and other areas, but
>> they are really small. Comcast can't be bothered that I've ever heard. The
>> only other real alternative is things like Monkeybrains which is a WISP.
>> It's really an embarrassment.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:52 PM Owen DeLong  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 11, 2022, at 13:14 , Josh Luthman 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Because literally every case I've seen along these lines is someone
>>> complaining about the coax connection is "only 100 meg when I pay for 200
>>> meg".  Comcast was the most hated company and yet they factually had better
>>> speeds (possibly in part to their subjectively terrible customer service)
>>> for years.
>>>
>>> >An apartment building could have cheap 1G fiber and the houses across
>>> the street have no option but slow DSL.
>>>
>>> Where is this example?  Or is this strictly hypothetical?
>>>
>>>
>>> There are literally dozens (if not thousands) of such examples in
>>> silicon valley alone.
>>>
>>> I am not seeing any examples, anywhere, with accurate data, where it's
>>> what most consider to be in town/urban and poor speeds.  The only one that
>>> was close was Jared and I'm pretty sure when I saw the map I wouldn't
>>> consider that in town (could be wrong) but again, there's gig fiber there
>>> now.  I don't remember if he actually got his CLEC, or why that matters,
>>> but there's fiber there now.
>>>
>>>
>>> Pretty sure you would have a hard time calling San Jose “not in town”.
>>> It’s literally #11 in the largest 200 cities in the US with a population of
>>> 1,003,120 (954,940 in the 2010 census) and a population density of 5,642
>>> people/sq. mile (compare to #4 Houston, TX at 3,632/Sq. Mi.).
>>>
>>> Similar conditions exist in parts of Los Angeles, #2 on the same list at
>>> 3,985,516 (3,795,512 in 2010 census) and 8,499/Sq. Mi.
>>>
>>> I speak of California because it’s where I have the most information.
>>> I’m sure this situation exists in other states as well, but I don’t have
>>> actual data.
>>>
>>> The simple reality is that there are three sets of incentives that
>>> utilities tend to chase and neither of them provides for the mezzo-urban
>>> and sub-urban parts of America…
>>> 1. USF — Mostly supports rural deployments.
>>> 2. Extreme High Density — High-Rise apartments in dense arrays, Not
>>> areas of town houses, smaller apartment complexes, or single family
>>> dwellings.
>>> 3. Neighborhoods full of McMansions — Mostly built very recently and
>>> where the developers would literally pay the utilities to pre-deploy in
>>> order to boost sales prices.
>>>
>>> Outside of those incentives, there’s very little actual deployment of
>>> broadband improvements, leaving vast quantities of average Americans
>>> underserved.
>>>
>>> Owen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 4:05 PM Brandon Svec via NANOG 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What is the point of these anecdotes? Surely anyone on this list with
>>>> even a passing knowledge of the broadband landscape in the United States
>>>> knows how hit or miss it can be.  An apartment building could have cheap 1G
>>>> fiber and the houses ac

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

Excellent example.  I see this all.the.time. She could probably get Comcast
just fine by paying $50k buildout or signing a 10 year agreement for
TV/Phone/Internet and convincing 5 neighbors too ;)
*Brandon *


On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 1:32 PM Blake Hudson  wrote:

> My mom moves to Olathe, KS. The realtor indicated that ATT, Comcast, and
> Google Fiber all provided service to the neighborhood and the HOA
> confirmed. Unfortunately for her, Google fiber laid fiber ~3 years
> before and her cul-de-sac was developed ~2 years before she moved in. No
> Google Fiber, no Comcast, just ATT. Both Comcast and Google Fiber were
> within 100 ft of her property and wouldn't serve her. Google has no
> plans to serve that cul-de-sac in the future. Comcast did eventually lay
> cable. I'm sure her and her neighbors aren't the only people in America
> to experience something similar.
>
> On 2/11/2022 3:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> >
> > >An apartment building could have cheap 1G fiber and the houses across
> > the street have no option but slow DSL.
> >
> > Where is this example?  Or is this strictly hypothetical?
> >
> >
>
>

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

My example is just from experience.  Not hypothetical, but also not a
specific address I can recall or feel like looking up now.

The reality on the ground as someone who sells access to smallish
businesses mostly in California is as I described.  You can't see it on a
map or database because the map may show a Comcast/att/whomever
pop/availability at an address, but to get said access across the parking
lot or street is a 6 figure build out cost and 6 months or more waiting for
permits and construction to complete so effectively a building right across
the lot or street from another has completely different options.  If you
want to zero in on an area to investigate/research I do recall fairly
recently some business parks in Hayward, CA near 880 that had no options
except bonded copper stuff up to maybe 50/50Mbps for a really high price.
One of them I sold fiber DIA to and they waited about 8 months for permits
and construction and signed a 5 year lease to reduce/avoid buildout costs.


I guess fair cost and speed are subjective, but that clarifies the point I
was making.

Best,
Brandon



On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 1:15 PM Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> Because literally every case I've seen along these lines is someone
> complaining about the coax connection is "only 100 meg when I pay for 200
> meg".  Comcast was the most hated company and yet they factually had better
> speeds (possibly in part to their subjectively terrible customer service)
> for years.
>
> >An apartment building could have cheap 1G fiber and the houses across the
> street have no option but slow DSL.
>
> Where is this example?  Or is this strictly hypothetical?
>
> I am not seeing any examples, anywhere, with accurate data, where it's
> what most consider to be in town/urban and poor speeds.  The only one that
> was close was Jared and I'm pretty sure when I saw the map I wouldn't
> consider that in town (could be wrong) but again, there's gig fiber there
> now.  I don't remember if he actually got his CLEC, or why that matters,
> but there's fiber there now.
>
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 4:05 PM Brandon Svec via NANOG 
> wrote:
>
>> What is the point of these anecdotes? Surely anyone on this list with
>> even a passing knowledge of the broadband landscape in the United States
>> knows how hit or miss it can be.  An apartment building could have cheap 1G
>> fiber and the houses across the street have no option but slow DSL.  Houses
>> could have reliable high speed cable internet, but the office park across
>> the field has no such choice because the buildout cost is prohibitively
>> high to get fiber, etc.
>>
>> There are plenty of places with only one or two choices of provider too.
>> Of course, this is literally changing by the minute as new services are
>> continually being added and upgraded.
>> *Brandon Svec*
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 12:36 PM Josh Luthman <
>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> OK the one example you provided has gigabit fiber though.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 8:41 AM Tom Beecher  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Can you provide examples?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twe6uTwOyJo_channel=NANOG
>>>>
>>>> Our good friend Jared could only get 1.5M DSL living just outside Ann
>>>> Arbor, MI, so he had to start his own CLEC.
>>>>
>>>> I have friends in significantly more rural areas than he lives in (
>>>> Niagara and Orleans county NYS , between Niagara Falls and Rochester ) who
>>>> have the same 400Mb package from Spectrum that I do, living in the City of
>>>> Niagara Falls.
>>>>
>>>> This is not to say that rural America is a mecca of connectivity; there
>>>> is a long way to go all the way around regardless. But it is a direct
>>>> example as you asked for.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 3:57 PM Josh Luthman <
>>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> >There are plenty of urban and suburban areas in America that are far
>>>>> worse off from a broadband perspective than “rural America”.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you provide examples?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 3:51 PM Owen DeLong via NANOG 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > On Jun 2, 2021, at 02:10 , Mark Tinka  wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On 6/2/21 11:04, Owen DeLong wr

Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

What is the point of these anecdotes? Surely anyone on this list with even
a passing knowledge of the broadband landscape in the United States knows
how hit or miss it can be.  An apartment building could have cheap 1G fiber
and the houses across the street have no option but slow DSL.  Houses could
have reliable high speed cable internet, but the office park across the
field has no such choice because the buildout cost is prohibitively high to
get fiber, etc.

There are plenty of places with only one or two choices of provider too.
Of course, this is literally changing by the minute as new services are
continually being added and upgraded.
*Brandon Svec*



On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 12:36 PM Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> OK the one example you provided has gigabit fiber though.
>
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 8:41 AM Tom Beecher  wrote:
>
>> Can you provide examples?
>>>
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twe6uTwOyJo_channel=NANOG
>>
>> Our good friend Jared could only get 1.5M DSL living just outside Ann
>> Arbor, MI, so he had to start his own CLEC.
>>
>> I have friends in significantly more rural areas than he lives in (
>> Niagara and Orleans county NYS , between Niagara Falls and Rochester ) who
>> have the same 400Mb package from Spectrum that I do, living in the City of
>> Niagara Falls.
>>
>> This is not to say that rural America is a mecca of connectivity; there
>> is a long way to go all the way around regardless. But it is a direct
>> example as you asked for.
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 3:57 PM Josh Luthman 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> >There are plenty of urban and suburban areas in America that are far
>>> worse off from a broadband perspective than “rural America”.
>>>
>>> Can you provide examples?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 3:51 PM Owen DeLong via NANOG 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > On Jun 2, 2021, at 02:10 , Mark Tinka  wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On 6/2/21 11:04, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> I disagree… If it could be forced into a standardized format using a
>>>> standardized approach to data acquisition and reliable comparable results
>>>> across providers, it could be a very useful adjunct to real competition.
>>>> >
>>>> > If we can't even agree on what "minimum speed for U.S. broadband
>>>> connections" actually means, fat chance having a "nutritional facts" at the
>>>> back of the "Internet in a tea cup" dropped off at your door step.
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm not saying it's not useful, I'm just saying that easily goes down
>>>> the "what color should we use for the bike shed" territory, while people in
>>>> rural America still have no or poor Internet access.
>>>> >
>>>> > Mark.
>>>>
>>>> ROFLMAO…
>>>>
>>>> People in Rural America seem to be doing just fine. Most of the ones I
>>>> know at least have GPON or better.
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile, here in San Jose, a city that bills itself as “The Capital
>>>> of Silicon Valley”, the best I can get is Comcast (which does finally
>>>> purport to be Gig down), but rarely delivers that.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, anything involving the federal government will get the full bike
>>>> shed treatment no matter what we do.
>>>>
>>>> There are plenty of urban and suburban areas in America that are far
>>>> worse off from a broadband perspective than “rural America”.
>>>>
>>>> Owen
>>>>
>>>>

Re: VPN recommendations?

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

Meraki may be considered expensive, requires perpetual license to operate
and is difficult to get currently (very long lead times) but is
dead.stupid.simple to install and maintain.  I have yet to find a business
or home network that it does not work on out of the box, but if you find
one it would be an issue to overcome for any solution, right? i.e. open
some ports on the up stream device one time.

https://documentation.meraki.com/MX/Site-to-site_VPN/Meraki_Auto_VPN_-_Configuration_and_Troubleshooting


*Brandon Svec*



On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 10:05 AM William Herrin  wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> Do you have any recommendations for VPN appliances? Specifically: I need
> to build a site to site VPNs at speeds between 100mpbs and 1 gbit where all
> but one of the sites are behind an IPv4 NAT gateway with dynamic public IP
> addresses.
>
> Normally I'd throw OpenVPN on a couple of Linux boxes and be happy but my
> customer insists on a network appliance. Site to site VPNs using IPSec and
> static IP addresses on the plaintext side are a dime a dozen but traversing
> NAT and dynamic IP addresses (and automatically re-establishing when the
> service goes out and comes back up with different addresses) is a hard
> requirement.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Bill Herrin
>
> --
> William Herrin
> b...@herrin.us
> <https://bill.herrin.us/>
> https://bill.herrin.us/
>

Re: Fiber Network Equipment Commercial Norms

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

Everything is negotiable.  The building owner/representative can negotiate
with the telco any terms they wish.


On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 9:30 AM  wrote:

> A few of the buildings that my firm represents have the local telco’s
> fiber distribution and/or repeater equipment located on the premises. My
> understanding is that when one of these links go down, (we’ve occasionally
> had to interrupt circuit power to do maintenance in a building for one
> reason or another), a local engineering tech always comes running to
> restore the link. The tech has led our maintenance staff to believe that
> these repeaters are an integral part of the local ring, which fits my
> understanding.
>
>
>
> When a network operator has equipment located at a third party premises,
> what is the norm for commercial contractual terms regarding the siting of
> that equipment? Any network equipment on site pre-dates my client’s
> ownership of the buildings, and they have no record of any agreements or
> easements governing who is responsible for power, maintenance, liability,
> etc.
>
>
>
> My client has no philosophical objection to having the equipment on site,
> but he’s asked why he has had to pay to power and cool this equipment for
> almost 20 years when it serves him no benefit (he is not utilizing that
> company’s services). I figure some of you may be able to give me an insight
> as to what is normal and reasonable. Feel free to contact me directly if
> this message is not suitable for this distribution list.
>
>
>
> Appreciate the insight,
>
>
>
>
>
> *Jeff Ray*
>
> O:  (956) 542-3642
>
> C:  (956) 592-2019
>
> jra...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
> This message has been sent as a part of a discussion between Jeff Ray and
> the intended recipient identified above. Some topics may be sensitive and
> subject to legal privilege, confidentiality, or other non-disclosure
> agreement. Should you receive this message by mistake, we would be most
> grateful if you informed us that the message has been sent to you. In that
> case, we also ask that you delete this message from your mailbox, and do
> not forward or speak of it (or its contents) to anyone else. Thank you for
> your cooperation and understanding.
>
>
>

Re: VoIP Provider DDoSes

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

Never heard of that one. WebRTC is maybe easier to protect from DDOS?

Brandon 

> On Sep 21, 2021, at 5:37 PM, Michael Thomas  wrote:
> 
> Which makes SIPoHTTP an inevitability.
> 
> Mike

Re: Mirai botnet is back — now as "Meris"

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

Oof.  I wonder if there is any connection to their DDNS service outage a
couple days ago?
https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=178256
*Brandon Svec*



On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 2:43 AM Töma Gavrichenkov  wrote:

> Peace,
>
> An undisclosed (or, even, yet undiscovered by the vendor)
> vulnerability in SOHO Mikrotik routers seems to be exploited by
> someone.
> Approx. 328 thousand devices already joined the botnet, with each
> having unrestricted access to the uplink (up to 1 Gbps).  42,6% of
> exploited devices reside in the U.S.
>
> https://blog.qrator.net/en/meris-botnet-climbing-to-the-record_142/
>
> I didn't know Mikrotik was so popular in North America!
> Patching all those SOHO WiFi routers must be fun...
>
> --
> Töma
>

Re: netflow in the core used for surveillance

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

I would go on the assumption they do (or allow others to), always have and
always will.  And if not this way, they will find other ways such as one
infamous example-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A
*-Brandon*


On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 2:16 PM Randy Bush  wrote:

> https://www.vice.com/en/article/jg84yy/data-brokers-netflow-data-team-cymru
>
> used to get dissidents, activists, and journos killed
>
> at, comcast, ... zayo, please tell us you do not do this.
>
> randy
>

Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021)

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

I’m getting the same or more, but did anyone really expect they would stop
July 1? It will take time for complaints to be tracked down and operators
to take actions, right?

Brandon

On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 6:49 AM Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> Subjectively speaking, I'm still getting the same amount of spam phone
> calls.
>
> I'm certainly getting a lot more spam SMS to my cell.  Almost all of them
> in my entire life starting July 1...
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> 24/7 Help Desk: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Wayne+St+Suite+1337+Troy,+OH+45373?entry=gmail=g>
> Suite 1337
> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Wayne+St+Suite+1337+Troy,+OH+45373?entry=gmail=g>
> Troy, OH 45373
> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1100+Wayne+St+Suite+1337+Troy,+OH+45373?entry=gmail=g>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 9:40 AM Jeff Shultz  wrote:
>
>> All I know is that I am getting a lot fewer bogus calls on my cell phone
>> than I was this time last month.
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 9, 2021, 06:17 Ryan Finnesey via NANOG 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> This should help with Robo calls a lot.
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: NANOG  On
>>> Behalf Of Sean Donelan
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2021 2:31 PM
>>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>>> Subject: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021)
>>>
>>>
>>> STIR/SHAKEN Broadly Implemented Starting Today
>>> https://www.fcc.gov/document/stirshaken-broadly-implemented-starting-today
>>>
>>> WASHINGTON, June 30, 2021—FCC Acting Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel
>>> today announced that the largest voice service providers are now using
>>> STIR/SHAKEN caller ID authentication standards in their IP networks, in
>>> accordance with the deadline set by the FCC. This widespread implementation
>>> helps protect consumers against malicious spoofed robocalls and helps law
>>> enforcement track bad actors. The STIR/SHAKEN standards serve as a common
>>> digital language used by phone networks, allowing valid information to pass
>>> from provider to provider which, among other things, informs blocking tools
>>> of possible suspicious calls.
>>
>> --
Brandon Svec
15106862204 ☎️ or 

Re: FCC Proposes Ban on Devices Deemed a Threat to National Security

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

I haven't listened yet, but this seems interesting and relevant:
https://pca.st/episode/6c78d419-4414-4b95-8107-057effc20478

"In this edition of the Communicators, Andy Purdy, Chief Security Officer
of Huawei Technologies USA, discussed how the Biden Administration's tech
policies may present new opportunities for Huawei, including 5G, innovation
and connectivity in the United States as U.S.-China relations evolve. He
also discussed the bans, past controversies and concerns about Huawei
products in the U.S."
*Brandon*



On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 2:41 PM Sean Donelan  wrote:

>
> FCC will vote July 13 to put "finishing touches" on the proposed
> $1.9-billion program to subsidize removal of Huawei and ZTE gear from U.S.
> wireless networks.
>
> https://www.fcc.gov/news-events/notes/2021/06/21/july-open-meeting-agenda
>
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, Sean Donelan wrote:
> > Today, June 17, 2021, the Federal Communications Commission voted to
> request
> > comments on proposed rules that would protect against national security
> > threats to the communications supply chain through the equipment
> > authorization and competitive bidding programs.
>

Re: Can somebody explain these ransomwear attacks?

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

I think a big problem may be that the ransom is actually very cost effective 
and probably the lowest line item cost in many of these situations where large 
revenue streams are interrupted and time=money (and maybe also health or life). 
 

The original thought that it should be handled like standard DR and tighten up 
security may apply to very small businesses though where they could afford to 
try to ignore the ransom request and rebuild more securely hoping the criminals 
will move on and not come back for revenge.

> On Jun 24, 2021, at 3:08 PM, Shane Ronan  wrote:
> 
> A lot of the payments for Ransomware come from Insurance Companies under 
> "Business Interruption Insurance". It in fact may be more cost effective to 
> pay the ransom, than to pay for continued business interruption. 
> 
> Of course along with paying the ransom, a full forensic audit of the 
> systems/network is conducted. The vector for many of these attacks is via a 
> worm triggered by someone opening an attachment on an email or downloading 
> compromised software from the Internet. Short of not allowing email 
> attachments or blocking Internet access, the best method is to properly train 
> users to not click on attachments or visit "untrusted" sites, but nothing is 
> perfect.
> 
> Shane
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 6:01 PM Michael Thomas  > wrote:
> 
> 
> On 6/24/21 2:55 PM, JoeSox wrote:
>> 
>> It gets tricky when 'your' company will lose money $$$ while you wait a 
>> month to restore from your cloud backups.
>> So Executives roll the dice to see if service can be restored quickly as 
>> possible keeping shareholders and customers happy as possible.
>> 
> But if you pay without finding how they got in, they could turn around and do 
> it again, or sell it on the dark web, right?
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 2:44 PM Michael Thomas > > wrote:
>> 
>> Not exactly network but maybe, but certainly operational. Shouldn't this 
>> just be handled like disaster recovery? I haven't looked into this much, 
>> but it sounds like the only way to stop it is to stop paying the crooks. 
>> There is also the obvious problem that if they got in, something (or 
>> someone) is compromised that needs to be cleaned which sounds sort of 
>> like DR again to me.
>> 
>> Mike
>> 

Re: DDoS attack with blackmail

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

did that rabbit go?
>>
>>
>>
>> The art of war taught me everything there is to know about DDoS attacks
>> even if it was written some 2500 years ago.
>>
>>
>>
>> I suspect that the attack that impacted Baldur’s assets was a very easy
>> DDoS to detect and block, but can’t confirm.
>>
>>
>>
>> @Baldur: do you care to share some metrics?
>>
>>
>>
>> Jean
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* NANOG  *On Behalf Of *Jean
>> St-Laurent via NANOG
>> *Sent:* May 21, 2021 10:52 AM
>> *To:* 'Lady Benjamin Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE' ; 'Baldur
>> Norddahl' 
>> *Cc:* 'NANOG Operators' Group' 
>> *Subject:* RE: DDoS attack with blackmail
>>
>>
>>
>> I also recommend book Art of War from Sun Tzu.
>>
>>
>>
>> All the answers to your questions are in that book.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jean
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* NANOG  *On Behalf Of *Lady
>> Benjamin Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE
>> *Sent:* May 20, 2021 7:18 PM
>> *To:* Baldur Norddahl 
>> *Cc:* NANOG Operators' Group 
>> *Subject:* Re: DDoS attack with blackmail
>>
>>
>>
>> 20 years ago I wrote an automatic teardrop attack.  If your IP spammed us
>> 5 times, then a script would run, knocking the remote host off the internet
>> entirely.
>>
>>
>>
>> Later I modified it to launch 1000 teardrop attacks/second…
>>
>>
>>
>> Today,  contact the FBI.
>>
>>
>>
>> And get a mitigation service above your borders if you can.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> —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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On May 20, 2021, at 12:26 PM, Baldur Norddahl 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello
>>
>>
>>
>> We got attacked by a group that calls themselves "Fancy Lazarus". They
>> want payment in BC to not attack us again. The attack was a volume attack
>> to our DNS and URL fetch from our webserver.
>>
>>
>>
>> I am interested in any experience in fighting back against these guys.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> Baldur
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
Brandon Svec
15106862204 ☎️ or 

Re: DDoS attack with blackmail

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

Not this Lazarus group, I hope: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w13xtvg9

Really good podcast, BTW..

Brandon


On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 12:28 PM Baldur Norddahl 
wrote:

> Hello
>
> We got attacked by a group that calls themselves "Fancy Lazarus". They
> want payment in BC to not attack us again. The attack was a volume attack
> to our DNS and URL fetch from our webserver.
>
> I am interested in any experience in fighting back against these guys.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Baldur
>
>

Re: Microsoft problems...

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

There is chatter on outages list outa...@outages.org 
 and some other forums so I think you are not alone.

> On Mar 15, 2021, at 1:04 PM, nano...@mulligan.org wrote:
> 
> Anyone else noticing major MAJOR problems with various MS services?
> 
> Geoff
> 

Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 11:37 AM Mel Beckman  wrote:

>
>
> Either weather events are getting worse, or they aren’t.


No, nothing is so black and white.  Certainly not science.

> I provided solid evidence that they are diminishing.


No, you didn't.  You shared an opinion piece written by the president of a
science denying lobbying group funded by Exxon Mobil

> The truth of this issue is important to NANOG, because we build the
> infrastructure that runs the Internet, and we can’t afford to waste finite
> resources on alarmist claims.
>

That I can partially agree with.  I would say even if science is 100% wrong
about climate change and what is causing it, it is still a good
investment to prepare for the unexpected and unprecedented when it comes to
building and supporting resilient systems.

Best

>
>
> > On Feb 22, 2021, at 10:23 AM, Rich Kulawiec  wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 05:48:06PM +, Mel Beckman wrote:
> >> Sorry Global Warmists,
> >
> > Right.  Sure.  Also, the earth is 6,000 years old (and flat), the moon
> > landings were faked, creationism is real, dinosaurs and humans
> co-existed,
> > vaccines cause autism, Elvis is alive, and...how does that line go?  Oh,
> > right: artificial sweeteners are safe, WMDs were in Iraq, and Anna Nicole
> > married for love. [shout-out to Levon Helm]
> >
> > This trash doesn't deserve rebuttal: it deserves ridicule.
> >
> > ---rsk
>
>

Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

OK, I looked closer.  I see it is a self titled opinion piece so there is
that.  Next, I see all the links in the article go to questionable sites
(not .edu or scientific organizations, etc.)  except one cherry picked NOAA
stat for a single event type for a single year.  Last, the writer is the
president of a right wing anti science lobbying group called "Spark of
Freedom" funded by Exxon Mobil.

Look, I and most everyone on this list are not qualified, experienced
climate scientists.  However, I think when you are not an expert you should
respect and believe what experts say as a group.  Picking outliers and
sharing opinions of obviously unqualified and biased people is
reprehensible and dishonest as far as I am concerned.

If you truly believe the scientific consensus around climate change is
wrong you are going to have to do a lot more than share links.  You will
have to do science and prove it.



Best.


On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 11:27 AM Mel Beckman  wrote:

> What offended you? The term “Global Warmist”? It’s an accurate description
> of people who hold that climate change is causing more frequent and severe
> weather, due to heating of the atmosphere.
>
> And your argument about “Forbes for something related to science” fails on
> the classic logical fallacy “appeal to authority”. Just because Forbes
> states easily verifiable public facts doesn’t make them untrustworthy.
> Scientific knowledge is best established by evidence and experiment rather
> than argued through authority by “consensus”. Science is not a consensus
> enterprise.
>
>  -mel
>
> > On Feb 22, 2021, at 10:16 AM, Brandon Svec via NANOG 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Feb 22, 2021, at 9:56 AM, Mel Beckman  wrote:
> >>
> >> Sorry Global Warmists,
> >
> >
> > Stopped taking you seriously or reading further right there.  Well, that
> and linking to Forbes for something related to science.
> >
> > Best.
>
>

Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Brandon Svec via NANOG]

> On Feb 22, 2021, at 9:56 AM, Mel Beckman  wrote:
> 
> Sorry Global Warmists,


Stopped taking you seriously or reading further right there.  Well, that and 
linking to Forbes for something related to science. 

Best. 

Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Brandon Svec]

Mismanagement and poor planning are primarily to blame.  One can't just
blame the weather.  We know weather will be bad and have extreme
variations.  I am sure Texas politicians are considering what they could
have done better right now..
https://twitter.com/blkahn/status/1361682089310052354
*Brandon *


On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 8:53 AM John Von Essen  wrote:

> I just assumed most people in Texas have heat pumps- AC in the summer and
> minimal heating in the winter when needed. When the entire state gets a
> deep freeze, everybody is running those heat pumps non-stop, and the
> generation capacity simply wasn’t there. i.e. coal or natural gas plants
> have some turbines offline, etc.,. in the winter because historically power
> use is much much less. The odd thing is its been days now, those plants
> should be able to ramp back up to capacity - but clearly they haven’t.
> Blaming this on wind turbines is BS. In fact, if it weren’t for so many
> people in Texas with grid-tie solar systems, the situation would be even
> worse.
>
> And of course, the real issue is Texas’ closed grid - any other state
> could pull in more power from neighbors.
>
> -John
>
> On Feb 15, 2021, at 11:34 PM, Cory Sell via NANOG  wrote:
>
> Ercot has already released actual documentation of the outputs. Wind is
> NOT the biggest loss here. Even if wind was operating at 100% capacity,
> we’d be in the same boat due to gas and fossil fuel-related generation
> being decimated. Estimated 4GW lost for wind doesn’t make up for the 30GW+
> estimated being lost from fossil fuels.
>
> I only interject because people are already pointing their fingers at
> renewables being the cause here and trying to pawn off the blame to
> wind/solar to further their agendas to reduce renewable energy R and
> adoption. Sure, wind isn’t perfect, but looks like solution relied on
> failed in a massive way.
>
> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 10:17 PM, Robert Jacobs 
> wrote:
>
> How about letting us Texans have more natural gas power plants or even let
> the gas be delivered to the plants we have so they can provide more power
> in an emergency. Did not help that 20% of our power is now wind which of
> course in an ice storm like we are having is shut off... Lots of issues and
> plenty of politics involved here..
>
> Robert Jacobs
>  |  Data Center Manager
> 
> Direct:  *832-615-7742* <832-615-7742>
> Mobile:  *281-830-2092* <281-830-2092>
> Main:  832‑615‑8000
> Fax:  *713-510-1650*
> 5959 Corporate Dr. Suite 3300; Houston, TX 77036
> [image: Facebook] 
> [image: LinkedIn] 
> [image: Twitter] 
>  A Certified Woman‑Owned Business
> 24x7x365 Customer Support: 832-615-8000 | supp...@pslightwave.com
>
> This electronic message contains information from PS Lightwave which may
> be privileged and confidential. The information is intended to be for the
> use of individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended
> recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of
> this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic
> message in error, please notify me by telephone or e-mail immediately.
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG  On Behalf
> Of Mark Tinka
> Sent: Monday, February 15, 2021 10:06 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts
>
>
>
> On 2/16/21 04:14, Sean Donelan wrote:
> >
> > Poweroutage.us posted a terrific map, showing the jurisdictional
> > borders of the Texas power outages versus the storm related power
> > outages elsewhere in the country.
> >
> > https://twitter.com/PowerOutage_us/status/1361493394070118402
> >
> >
> > Sometimes infrastructure planning failures are not due to "natural
> > hazards."
>
> I suppose having some kind of home backup solution wouldn't be too bad
> right now, even though you may still not get access to services. But at
> least, you can brew some coffee, and charge your pulse oximetre.
>
> Mark.
>
>
>
>
>

Re: DoD IP Space

[Brandon Svec]

That's a good one.  Perhaps you don't live/work in the US and can be
excused for not knowing that US corporations don't pay taxes.  In many
cases we subsidize them by giving tax credits to the point that the money
is flowing in the opposite direction entirely. It would be hard to give
them any more of a break ;)

>
>
> Financial incentives also work. Perhaps we can convince Mr. Biden to give
> a .5%
> tax cut to corporations that fully implement v6. That will create some
> bonus
> targets.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sabri
>

Re: Show NOCs: OIG report: Should you charge extra for NOC tours?

[Brandon Svec]

Don’t dismiss and underestimate the curiousity and amazement of those who have 
not seen such things in person. In the San Francisco Bay Area and Silicon 
Valley area tourists come from around the world to see signs and parking lots 
of places like Google, Twitter, etc. it is easy for me to scoff at them, but I 
try not to. 

It is not really different than most other tourist attractions. Some are amazed 
and curious to see the largest ball of twine and some think it is ridiculous. 

Brandon Svec 


> On Jan 7, 2021, at 10:38 AM, Sean Donelan  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 7 Jan 2021, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>> almost all of this seems like ... really not worth the time for
>> external people to bother with.
>> which is maybe why: "Sure, you wanna visit? pay me" (Oh, now you dont'
>> want to visit? ok, cool!)
> 
> I'm imagining a bunch of MBA's at large carriers thinking, gee the NOC is 
> treated as a cost center. How can we make the NOC a profit center?
> 
> I know -- Let's sell NOC tour tickets!
> 
> 
> On the other hand, NASA (or SpaceX) I would still go on a tour of Mission 
> Control during a launch (geek out)
> 
> 

Re: The Real AI Threat?

[Brandon Svec]

On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 9:25 AM Miles Fidelman 
wrote:

>
>
> (The point being:  We don't have to wait for "real" AI to see many of the
> dangers that folks fictionalize about - we are already seeing those dangers
> from mundane software - and it's only going to get worse while people are
> looking elsewhere.)
>
> Miles Fidelman
>
>
> Well put. No matter what you call it, algorithms are already dangerous and
can be unpredictable. People have a tendency to not want to make hard
choices and will often defer to computations or calculations.

Recommended reading on the topic:
https://smile.amazon.com/Weapons-Math-Destruction-Increases-Inequality/dp/0553418815

Re: Cable Company Hotspots

[Brandon Svec]

Comcast does exactly that in the US.  Some people turn it off though.  I
can't recall if just the guest hotspot can be disabled on it's own or you
have to just turn off wireless completely and use your own kit.
Probably depends on the provided gear.

Slightly off topic, but the cellular providers here also sell femtocells to
customers that want better cellular service in their home or office.  They
basically offload (and charge) their customers to expand the coverage over
the customer's own internet service.
*Brandon Svec*

*15106862204 <15106862204> voice|sms**teamonesolutions.com
<https://teamonesolutions.com/>*


On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 3:28 PM Rod Beck 
wrote:

> Hey Gang,
>
> How do the cable companies generally deliver this service? A friend
> insists it piggybacks off the WIFI radios of existing cable company
> subscribers. In other words, the cable company WIFI router in a flat is
> providing both a private link for the flat's subscriber, but also a public
> hotspot service.
>
> I concede it is possible, but I am skeptical that the high quality of
> hotspot service we get here in Budapest could be achieved that way.
>
>
>
> Roderick Beck
> VP of Business Development
>
> United Cable Company
>
> www.unitedcablecompany.com
>
> New York City & Budapest
>
> rod.b...@unitedcablecompany.com
>
> Budapest: 36-70-605-5144
>
> NJ: 908-452-8183
>
>
> [image: 1467221477350_image005.png]
>

Re: Technology risk without safeguards

[Brandon Svec]

I think the actual risk is the opposite of transmitting signals to damage or 
sabotage.

I have read about many cases of receiving weak signals from things like 
monitors and wireless keyboards that could be snooped in by receiving and 
decoding them. I suppose routers and switches could leak signals representing 
actual data packets like this too. Perhaps even before they are encrypted.

I could imagine a scenario where a neighboring cage in a DC attempted something 
like that. It would be much  harder to detect than a physical breach. 

Brandon

> On Nov 4, 2020, at 12:54 PM, William Herrin  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 11:37 AM Suresh Kalkunte  wrote:
>> Your comments gives me an overall impression that data center equipment are 
>> on average adequately protected, that is good. Also, public discussion on 
>> the risk of intentional EMI is a big positive.
> 
> I watched a T.V. program a few years ago where an investigative
> reporter did a piece on the risks of malicious electromagnetic
> interference (EMI). He did a demonstration where he tried to cause a
> car to malfunction. A bad actor could cause highway crashes! He had a
> great big apparatus about the size of the car's engine compartment and
> pointed at the car. Nothing happened. So he moved it about 3 feet from
> the car. Nothing happened. So he opened the car's hood and pointed it
> right at the engine. Finally the engine started sputtering and the
> dashboard electronics malfunctioned. The car, of course, remained
> completely controllable and when the EMI generator was turned off it
> resumed normal operation undamaged.
> 
> I've also had lightning hit about 50 feet from my unshielded computer
> room. It fried a little plastic COTS router that was connected by
> about 100 feet of UTP ethernet to my core router. The core router
> crashed but worked fine after a reboot. No other equipment was
> affected.
> 
> Vulnerability to EMI is a lot less than folks imagine.
> 
>> However, targeting a human using powerful RF is uncharacterized (please see 
>> https://github.com/sureshs20/De_Risk_Technology). If the RF emitters 
>> conducive for getting re-purposed for malice were prohibitively expensive 
>> _or_ the expertise to re-purpose RF for malice was very complex _or_ if 
>> there were diagnostic/forensic tests to detect foul-play using powerful RF, 
>> I would not be pursuing this initiative to safeguard 
>> unsuspecting/defenseless targets of opportunity.
> 
> Malicious use of EMI emitters to harm human health is definitely out
> of scope for this list.
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
> 
> -- 
> Hire me! https://bill.herrin.us/resume/

Re: FCC Announces All Of Puerto Rico To Have Access To High-Speed Broadband Service

[Brandon Svec]

Maybe it is for wireless. That would be more likely with those numbers, but 
still quite unbelievable. 

My company does low voltage cabling. We charge more than $100 per drop to 
provide CAT6 in a newly constructed office building. It would be impossible to 
provide wires to 1.2 million locations across PR for $100/each. 

Brandon

> On Nov 2, 2020, at 8:51 AM, Shane Ronan  wrote:
> 
> 
> Seems you could do something with Wireless much easier, guaranteeing access 
> to speed of +/- 300mbits by using the CBAND spectrum that is coming 
> available. Why run wires to the home at all?

Re: FCC Announces All Of Puerto Rico To Have Access To High-Speed Broadband Service

[Brandon Svec]

This seems like very good news. I am quite skeptical this can be accomplished 
per the provided numbers though. 

> On Nov 2, 2020, at 8:24 AM, Sean Donelan  wrote:
> 
> $127.1 million in funding over 10 years covering more than 1.2 million 
> locations

Re: FCC: rulemaking on STIR/SHAKEN and Caller ID Authentication

[Brandon Svec]

99%?  If a phone number was used than the PSTN was used. The fact that SIP
is involved in part or all of the call path is not very relevant except for
peer-to-peer stuff like whatsapp, skype, signal, telegram, etc. (and even
those don't use SIP, but I think you meant voip more than SIP specifically)
Even some of those can use e.164 for part or all of the path.

I do believe that if the robo call/scam/fraudulent call issue does not get
resolved people may eventually start to give up and just use apps like
that.  Many probably have already.

*Brandon Svec*

*15106862204 <15106862204> voice|sms**teamonesolutions.com
<https://teamonesolutions.com/>*


On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 1:11 PM Michael Thomas  wrote:

>
> On 9/10/20 9:49 AM, Sean Donelan wrote:
> >
> > At this month's FCC rulemaking meeting, it will consider
> >
> >
> https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-announces-tentative-agenda-september-open-meeting-6
> >
> >
> > Promoting Caller ID Authentication to Combat Spoofed Robocalls – The
> > Commission will consider a Report and Order that would continue its
> > work to implement the TRACED Act and promote the deployment of caller
> > ID authentication technology to combat spoofed robocalls.
> > (WC Docket No. 17-97)
>
>
> So I have a question: what percentage of traffic in the US is really
> coming from the legacy PSTN? My understanding is that it's pretty low
> these days.
>
> If that's true, it seems to me that this is a SIP problem, not an e.164
> problem.
>
> Mike
>
>

Re: Getting Fiber to My Town by Jared Mauch

[Brandon Svec]

I’ve heard people call cable lube elephant snot, lol.

> On Sep 10, 2020, at 1:29 PM, Josh Luthman  wrote:
> 
> I believe this is the stuff we used on our project:
> https://www.menards.com/main/electrical/electrical-tools-accessories/wire-conduit-installation/ideal-regyellow-77-wire-pulling-lubricant-5-gallon/31-355/p-133962344-c-6458.htm
>  
> 
>   
> 
> Josh Luthman
> 24/7 Help Desk: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> 
> 
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 4:25 PM Jared Mauch  > wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Sep 10, 2020, at 4:10 PM, Jared Geiger  > > wrote:
> > 
> > Another Jared with a question. What method did you use to blow the fiber 
> > through the conduit? You mentioned you had trouble figuring out the process 
> > relating to lubrication and building a contraption to blow the fiber.
> 
> You need the conduit lube.  The duraline summer blowing lube worked well for 
> me.
> 
> - Jared

Re: Question on BlackBox or Commworks

[Brandon Svec]

For national (U.S.), on site techs I can recommend
http://www.servicecommunications.com we subcontract for them on the regular
and they run a tight ship and have many large national accounts.  I would
not get hung up on choosing someone with their own employees vs.
contracting or hybrid, but more on choosing a company with experience
managing projects like yours and a good project management team to run the
show.

It all depends on the nature of your project, of course. There are "self
service" tools like Field Nation and Work Market that you can find all your
own techs and they handle 1099 and insurance, etc. for you.
*Brandon Svec*

*15106862204 <15106862204> voice | sms**teamonesolutions.com
<https://teamonesolutions.com/>*


On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 10:06 AM Joseph Jenkins 
wrote:

> Do you know or have experience with either company? Do they have their own
> techs are they just bidding out for local techs in the area? I have work
> that needs to be done all across the US and just trying to look for some
> options.
>

Re: cloud backup

[Brandon Svec]

I recently read about a way to get unlimited Google storage for $12 per month. 
Yes, really unlimited. I haven’t tried it, but my understanding is that it is 
based on 5 user or less GSuite account and they don’t enforce storage limits.  
If you have .edu email you may be able to get 100% free. Sorry, I can’t find 
the link now but it was discussed on reddit somewhere. 

Brandon Svec 



> On Jul 26, 2020, at 1:12 PM, Randy Bush  wrote:
> 
> i backup using arq on macos catalina.  on two macs, i need maybe 3-4tb
> max.  google seems to be $100/mo for 20tb (big jump from $100/yr for
> 2tb).  backblaze b2 looks more like $20/mo for 4tb ($0.005/gb/mo).
> anyone else done a similar analysis?
> 
> randy

Re: favorite network troubleshooting tools (online)

[Brandon Svec]

I have been using papertrailapp.com  a lot recently. 
 It is a cloud based syslog server with a free tier and nice GUI.  Email and 
webhook alerts can be created in a snap (and that is the part I like the most)

Brandon

> On Jul 15, 2020, at 10:37 AM, Mehmet Akcin  wrote:
> 
> hey there,
> 
> I recently have come across this http://ping.pe/  website, I 
> have no association with this but it's pretty awesome. This made me wonder 
> what other tools out there which I do not know about it. 
> 
> what are your favorite network troubleshooting tools? 
> 
> In addition to ping.pe , I like https://bgp.he.net 
>  but would love to hear your thought about other tool 
> recommendations as especially the ones that are distributed.
> 
> Mehmet

Re: Backup over 4G/LTE

[Brandon Svec]

All Cisco Meraki MX and Z units.  Some via USB and some with SIM slot.

https://meraki.cisco.com/products/appliances
*Security Made Simple with Cisco Meraki: *http://bit.ly/MerakiSecure

*Brandon Svec*
CA C-7 Lic. #822064
<https://www.cslb.ca.gov/OnlineServices/CheckLicenseII/LicenseDetail.aspx?LicNum=822064>
.ılı.ılı. Cisco Meraki CMNA

*15106862204 <15106862204> voice | sms**teamonesolutions.com
<http://teamonesolutions.com/>*


*14729 Catalina St. San Leandro, CA 94577*




On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 3:31 PM K MEKKAOUI  wrote:

> Dear NANOG Community,
>
>
>
> Can anyone help with any device information that provides redundancy for
> business internet access? In other words when the internet provided through
> the cable modem fails the 4G/LTE takes over automatically to provide
> internet access to the client.
>
>
>
> Thank you
>
>
>
> KARIM M.
>
>
>

Re: Carriers

[Brandon Svec]

I have a tool that tells me this at that address:

*ACC Business*
Distance:On-Net
222 W WASHINGTON AVE
*TPx*
Distance:On-Net
222 W WASHINGTON AVE
*CenturyLink*
Distance:On-Net
222 W WASHINGTON AVE
*Windstream*
Distance:On-Net
222 W WASHINGTON AVE
*Spectrum Business*
Distance:On-Net
222 W WASHINGTON AVE
*AT*
Distance:On-Net
222 W WASHINGTON AVE
*CenturyLink*
Distance: 37 feet
244 W WASHINGTON AVE
*TPx*
Distance: 37 feet
244 W WASHINGTON AVE
*ACC Business*
Distance: 37 feet
244 W WASHINGTON AVE
*Security Made Simple with Cisco Meraki: *http://bit.ly/MerakiSecure

*Brandon Svec*
CA C-7 Lic. #822064
<https://www.cslb.ca.gov/OnlineServices/CheckLicenseII/LicenseDetail.aspx?LicNum=822064>
.ılı.ılı. Cisco Meraki CMNA

*15106862204 <15106862204> voice | sms**teamonesolutions.com
<http://teamonesolutions.com/>*


*14729 Catalina St. San Leandro, CA 94577*




On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:49 AM Rod Beck 
wrote:

> Does anyone know who are the providers in this building? US Signal is
> there. Anyone else?
>
> 222 West Washington Ave, Madison.
>
> Roderick Beck
> VP of Business Development
>
> United Cable Company
>
> www.unitedcablecompany.com
>
> New York City & Budapest
>
> rod.b...@unitedcablecompany.com
>
> 36-70-605-5144
>
>
> [image: 1467221477350_image005.png]
>

Re: cisco nexus 9000 cctrl ERROR

[Brandon Svec]

Anyone can create a Cisco login.  I would do that and check the bug tracking 
tool.  I did a quick search on your error message and came up with this:

Bug Search CSCvp48462
Help <>  |  Feedback <>
NXA-PDC-1100W-PI PSU fail log F0411,F0413 in N9K-C9336C-FX2
CSCvp48462
Description <>
Symptom:
NXA-PDC-1100W-PI PSU will occur F0411.F0413 PSU fail log in N9K-C9336C-FX2.

F0411 Power supply failed
F0413 power supply missing

it is not real PSU fail, but only log issue.
in show system internal kernel messages. we can see NACK error on PSU sensor.

[1274386.802885] cctrl ERROR: cctrl_wait_for_pmbio_busy_status@ 35:NACK error 
tmp_data 0x3b58d00 mask = 0x8000 
[1274386.802885] 
[1274386.812815] cctrl ERROR: cctrl2_delay_pmbio_read@ 277:final busy wait 
check failed pid = 8701 (pfmclnt) cs_reg 0x270 win_id 0 dev_addr 0x5a off 0x8d
[1274386.812818] cctrl ERROR: cctrl2_delay_pmbio_read@ 278:write data 
0x82b58d00 read data 0x82b58d00 tmp_maks 0x600 dlen = 2
[1274386.812822] CPU: 1 PID: 8701 Comm: pfmclnt Tainted: PW  O 
3.14.62.0.0insieme-0 #1
[1274386.812824]   88055cd37c18 817ead67 
fffb
[1274386.812829]  82b58d00 88055cd37ca8 c25ad00a 
0002
[1274386.812832]  005a 8805008d c25a5c17 
c9001035c421
[1274386.812836] Call Trace:
[1274386.812844]  [] dump_stack+0x68/0x91
[1274386.812865]  [] cctrl2_delay_pmbio_read+0x28a/0x350 [klm_cctrli2]
[1274386.812873]  [] ? cctrl_read_reg2+0x177/0x190 [klm_cctrli2]
[1274386.812877]  [] ? strstr+0x37/0x90
[1274386.812886]  [] cctrl_psu_handle_sensor+0x16d/0x1e0 [klm_cctrli2]
[1274386.812899]  [] cctrl_tor_scrimshaw_sensor_op+0x1fd/0x240 [klm_cctrli2]
[1274386.812910]  [] sys_srvc_cctrl_sensor_op+0x80/0x190 [klm_cctrli2]
[1274386.812918]  [] sysServices+0x22b/0x880 [klm_sse]
[1274386.812922]  [] ? free_debug_processing+0x17d/0x1c1
[1274386.812928]  [] ? ring_buffer_lock_reserve+0xb3/0xf0
[1274386.812933]  [] sse_compat_ioctl+0x102/0x120 [klm_sse]
[1274386.812938]  [] ? trace_buffer_unlock_commit+0x43/0x60
[1274386.812944]  [] compat_sys_ioctl+0x1dc/0x11f0
[1274386.812948]  [] ? syscall_trace_enter+0x162/0x1b0
[1274386.812951]  [] ia32_do_call+0x13/0x13

Conditions:
NXA-PDC-1100W-PI PSU in N9K-C9336C-FX2

Workaround:
NA

Further Problem Description:
NA

Customer Visible


Notifications

Save Bug

Open Support Case
Was the description about this Bug Helpful?(0)
Details <>
Last Modified:
Jan 13,2020
Status:
Open
Severity:
2 Severe
Product:(1)
Cisco Nexus 9000 Series Switches
Support Cases:
3

> On Jan 17, 2020, at 11:08 AM, Scott Weeks  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have a login to cisco to find out what this 
> is and I'm having trouble finding anything about it 
> in search engines that doesn't require a login to 
> cisco.  I guess they only want certain folks to know 
> about it... :(  Does anyone know anything about this 
> and can explain it to me?  If not, I'll go join 
> cisco-nsp and ask there.
> 
> 
> %KERN-3-SYSTEM_MSG: [65292299.903992]  - kernel
> 
> %KERN-3-SYSTEM_MSG: [66730914.839059] cctrl ERROR: 
> cctrl_wait_for_pmbio_busy_status NACK error tmp_data 3b19600 - kernel
> 
> %KERN-3-SYSTEM_MSG: [67511639.312284] cctrl ERROR: 
> cctrl_wait_for_pmbio_busy_status NACK error tmp_data 1b18100 - kernel
> 
> 
> Those last numbers after tmp_data repeat over and over.
> 
> Thanks!
> scott

Re: all major US carriers received text messages overnight that appear to have been sent around Valentine's Day 2019

[Brandon Svec]

From:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2019/11/08/thousands-people-just-got-text-messages-sent-valentines-day/2527660001/

It seems there is a company that has everyone's text messages..

"Some mobile carriers rely on a third-party text platform called Syniverse
to relay messages. The vendor said in a statement that its IT staff
unknowingly caused the texts to be delivered this week."
-Brandon





On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:47 AM Brian J. Murrell 
wrote:

> On Thu, 2019-11-07 at 22:42 +, Chris Kimball via NANOG wrote:
> > Does anyone have any more information on this?
>
> Yeah, like who (in the private sector -- we all knew the NSA already
> are doing this) has access to and is archiving *everyone*s text
> messages?  And why?
>
> Cheers,
> b.
>
>

Re: Recommendation: Good paging / alerting software ?

[Brandon Svec]

https://papertrailapp.com  might meet your needs.  
They have a free tier and collect syslog messages in their cloud and then have 
various alerting methods such as SMS, web hooks, email, etc. you could leverage 
to get the alerts you want.  Good luck.


> On Sep 26, 2019, at 7:41 AM, Warren Kumari  wrote:
> 
> Hi there,
> 
> I'm looking for a recommendation for a good paging / alerting system
> *for personal use*.
> 
> I'm monitoring a number of servers, VMs, routers / switches and such,
> and currently get ~10 pages a week.
> 
> Things I've already tried:
> I'm currently using OpsGenie, but don't really like the UI.
> I briefly tried PagerTree, and have used PagerDuty in the past -- I
> was happy with PagerDuty, but don't really want to be paying $10 per
> month for this (it's just for personal use, and that seemed a bit
> excessive).
> I'm also a happy Pushover customer - this works well, but it's ability
> to customise / close alerts seems to be missing. It works really well
> for other types of notifications though.
> 
> Requirements:
> 1: Cheap!
> 
> 2 : AlertManager integration - I mainly use Prometheus for monitoring,
> and it sends alerts to AlertManager.
> 
> 3: I'd like an iOS / Android app - having things come in over SMS /
> messages makes it too easy to miss things. I also don't want to use
> e.g Slack for this because it's too easy to miss them amongst other
> messages.
> 
> 4:  A web interface would be nice, but not 100% necessary.
> 
> 5: "Alerts" - the ability to Ack / Close alerts. This signals back to
> AlertManger.
> 
> 6: Escalations would be nice - if I don't respond to an alert in N
> minutes, send it again, possibly with a more grumpy noise.
> 
> 
> Because this is just for personal use I really don't want to be
> spending money on this...
> 
> Thanks in advance for any suggestions...
> W
> 
> 
> -- 
> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
> idea in the first place.
> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
> of pants.
>   ---maf

Re: NANOG Digest, Vol 138, Issue 11

[Brandon Svec]

Having a somewhat bell shaped head, this sums it up pretty well, “.. Maybe
they don't actually care about this problem until they are
'forced' to care about it by their regulating body?”

As I understand, currently carriers are required to pass spoofed caller ID
because there are many legitimate reasons to do so.  There was some recent
legislation loosening that requirement and there is no requirement to
define what legitimate is, but still the issue is some one needs to care
about the problem.  That will require legislation and incentives to get to.



> >-Original Message-
> >From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Christopher
> >Morrow
> >Sent: Wednesday, 10 July, 2019 22:10
> >To: Sean Donelan
> >Cc: nanog list
> >Subject: Re: SHAKEN/STIR Robocall Summit - July 11 2019 at FCC
> >
> >On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:56 PM Sean Donelan 
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 9 Jul 2019, Sean Donelan wrote:
> >> > The agenda looks like lots of happy, happy talk from industry
> >> > representatives.
> >>
> >> In advance of the SHAKEN/STIR robocall summit, AT has issued a
> >press
> >> release announcing plans to automatically block robocalls for its
> >> customers.
> >>
> >> https://about.att.com/story/2019/att_call_protect.html
> >>
> >> Automatic Blocking of Fraud Calls Coming to Millions of AT
> >Customers
> >> AT* will add automatic fraud blocking and suspected spam-call
> >alerts to
> >> millions of AT consumer lines at no charge.
> >
> >oh goodie!
> >
> >So, not being a bell shaped headed person... a question:
> >  The calling path and data available inside the phone network smells
> >(to me) like:
> > ingress trunk + ANI + CallerID + outgoing trunk of destination
> >ds0/handset
> >
> >There seem like a bunch of pretty simple 'correlations' one could
> >make, that actually look a heck of a lot like 'netflow/log analysis
> >for ddos detection':
> >o is this trunk sourcing calls to 'too many' of my subs in
> >period-of-time-X
> >o is this trunk sourcing calls from a low distribution of ANI but
> >a different distribution of CallerID
> >o is this trunk sourcing calls from unmatched (as a percent of
> >total) ANI/CallerID
> >
> >I would think you could make similar correlations across the
> >destinations on your phone-network:
> >o Is there one ANI or CallerID talking to 'all' (a bunch, more
> >than X of type Y customer end point) of my endpoints?
> >o are there implausible callerid being used? (lots of 'NPA-NXX
> >matches destination, yet from a very different geography?)
> >
> >I imagine that with the number of calls here, this is just a splunk
> >correlation away from successful identification and then disabling of
> >these nuisance calls...
> >I imagine this doesn't need 'shaken' nor 'stir', but DOES take: "a
> >whiff of a care" on the part of the carrier(s), right?
> >Maybe they don't actually care about this problem until they are
> >'forced' to care about it by their regulating body?
> >'shaken' and 'stir' may not do anything at all useful for the
> >problem,
> >but they do make it appear that the carriers care about the
> >problem...
> >I'm certain that they know there are problems. The 5 items above
> >can't
> >be 'new and novel' concepts ... since this is basically 'logs
> >analysis' that any security engineer worth their salt does as a
> >matter
> >of course daily, right?
> >
> >-chris
>
>
>
>
>
> End of NANOG Digest, Vol 138, Issue 11
> **
>
-- 
Brandon Svec
15106862204 voice | fax | sms

teamonesolutions.com
14729 Catalina St. San Leandro, CA 94577

.ılı.ılı. Cisco Meraki CMNA