Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Arelion/Telia AS1299 issues?
Cogent doesn’t have any peer specific action communities. Brendan On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 at 9:01 am, Eric C. Miller wrote: > It’s definitely been an annoying day. Cogent’s “don’t advertise to telia” > BGP community doesn’t work, so we can’t route around this either. Then > again, my bad for using the “Wal-mart” of the internet. > > Eric >
Re: non-rate limited, automatable Looking Glasses?
Hi Lars, You should check out https://ring.nlnog.net/ by contributing resources yourself you also get access to a wide array of machines from all across the world you can use to turn traceroutes and pings. Some wrappers have already been made to run commands against multiple machines at the same time (https://ring.nlnog.net/toolbox/), you'll have SSH access to run any commands you want and there is an API to find the probes if you want to automate it all. I encourage anyone and everyone to join. The more networks the better! Brendan On Sun, 19 Jul 2020, 7:36 am Lars Prehn, wrote: > Hi everyone, > > In the next couple of months, I want to compare data plane and control > plane measurements on a larger scale. In particular, I'm looking for > (publicly accessible) devices that receive BGP feeds and can perform a > bunch of automated (paris) traceroutes. I currently do not have an exact > probing rate or target set in mind; however, I'm sure that manually > entering IP addresses as targets for usual Looking glasses won't cut it. > Does anyone know less-restricted (maybe even automatable?) Looking > Glasses (or similar devices) or is willing to provide access to one? > > BTW: I though about picking Atlas probes from ASes that feed BGP > Collector Projects (e.g. RIPE RIS or RouteViews). Unfortunately, the > respective probes are often really far apart from the feeding routers; > thus, their individual perspectives are likely misaligned :( > > Best regards, > > Lars > >
Re: Small IX IP Blocks
IPv4 and IPv6 subnets are different. While a single IPv4 is taken to be a single device, an IPv6 /64 is designed to be treated as an end user subnet. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3177 section 3. On 05/04/2015 9:05 am, Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net wrote: That makes sense. I do recall now reading about having that 8 bit separation between tiers of networks. However, in an IX everyone is supposed to be able to talk to everyone else. Traditionally (AFAIK), it's all been on the same subnet. At least the ones I've been involved with have been single subnets, but that's v4 too. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Valdis Kletnieks valdis.kletni...@vt.edu To: Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net Cc: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, April 4, 2015 5:49:37 PM Subject: Re: Small IX IP Blocks On Sat, 04 Apr 2015 16:06:02 -0500, Mike Hammett said: I am starting up a small IX. The thought process was a /24 for every IX location (there will be multiple of them geographically disparate), even though we nqever expected anywhere near that many on a given fabric. Then okay, how do we d o v6? We got a /48, so the thought was a /64 for each. You probably want a /56 for each so you can hand a /64 to each customner. That way, customer isolation becomes easy because it's a routing problem. If customers share a subnet, it gets a little harder
