Akron OH CO outage
Anyone else in North East Ohio seeing an outage of ATT's CO in Akron? Local news is reporting 911 is out across multiple counties, so can't be good. If anyone has any information, feel free to reach out off-list. David
Re: Charter ARP Leak
On 12/29/14, 12:51 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote: Ok. But the interface to which the cablemodem is attached, in the general single-DHCP-IP case, is a /24, is it not? I'm on TWC. The IP address I get from them is on a /20. 104.230.32.0/20 dev eth7 proto kernel scope link src 104.230.32.x The example Valdis posted had 5 or 6 different /24s from all over the v4 address space; that seems exceptionally sloppy routing... fw-1:/root # tcpdump -ni eth7 arp tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode listening on eth7, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535 bytes 12:54:21.354278 ARP, Request who-has 173.89.105.161 tell 173.89.96.1, length 46 12:54:21.355881 ARP, Request who-has 104.230.27.232 tell 104.230.0.1, length 46 We all knows it's easier to add another secondary IP to the interface and add a new DHCP scope than to try to expand a subnet. Not sure I understand what all the excitement is about?
Re: TWC IPv6 access ...
Which market are you in? Working for me in Cleveland, OH. fw-1:/root # ping6 -I eth7 fe80::201:5cff:fe66:fe46 PING fe80::201:5cff:fe66:fe46(fe80::201:5cff:fe66:fe46) from fe80::21a:8cff:fe17:6c47 eth7: 56 data bytes 64 bytes from fe80::201:5cff:fe66:fe46: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=19.2 ms 64 bytes from fe80::201:5cff:fe66:fe46: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=9.27 ms ^C --- fe80::201:5cff:fe66:fe46 ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 1001ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 9.270/14.278/19.287/5.009 ms On 11/14/14, 7:12 AM, Jorge Amodio wrote: Hi There, anybody seeing problems with TWC broadband access and IPv6? After a brief outage this morning I no longer have IPv6 in my residential line and don't see any IPv6 neighbor at the other end of the coax :-( -Jorge
Re: Time Warner outage?
I've have residential twc in Cleveland. My router has an ip in the 104.139.34/24 network that isn't being advertised via bgp anymore either. I can still trace route out from here half a dozen hops, so seems like an edge/peering issue somewhere. Sent from my iPad On Aug 27, 2014, at 6:17 AM, David Hubbard dhubb...@dino.hostasaurus.com wrote: Hey all, anyone else having issues with Time Warner residential or business connections? One of our offices is down and the route is not currently in bgp. http://downdetector.com/status/time-warner-cable shows thousands of reports of outages on the consumer side starting an hour or so ago so I figure it's a larger issue than just my one office; couldn't reach anyone by phone. Thanks, David
Re: Time Warner outage?
Just came back up for me. Sent from my iPad On Aug 27, 2014, at 6:48 AM, Rick Coloccia coloc...@geneseo.edu wrote: BGPMON shows my routes falling off the net at around 5:49am. We now sit at their mercy -- Sent from my iPhone On Aug 27, 2014, at 6:46 AM, Adam Greene maill...@webjogger.net wrote: Same here. Seems like no traffic is exiting TWC: Tracing route to ns03.savvis.net [204.70.25.234] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 10049.webjogger.net [204.8.80.49] 227 ms 6 ms 5 ms cpe-24-29-112-25.nyc.res.rr.com [24.29.112.25] 312 ms 8 ms 7 ms rdc-69-193-225-74.nyc.bc.twcable.com [69.193.225.74] 4 9 ms 9 ms12 ms rdc-69-193-225-137.nyc.bc.twcable.com [69.193.225.137] 5 9 ms10 ms 8 ms rdc-69-193-225-222.nyc.bc.twcable.com [69.193.225.222] 6 *** Request timed out. 7 *** Request timed out. 8 *** Request timed out. 9 *** Request timed out. -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Rick Coloccia Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 6:43 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Time Warner outage? My whole campus (~1 users) is down... Since roughly 6am. TWC is our upstream. -- Sent from my iPhone On Aug 27, 2014, at 6:28 AM, Rob Barbeau rob.barb...@gmail.com wrote: David, I have a branch office in Syracuse,NY that appears to be down at the moment that uses a time warner business connection for internet access. -rob On Aug 27, 2014 5:20 AM, David Hubbard dhubb...@dino.hostasaurus.com wrote: Hey all, anyone else having issues with Time Warner residential or business connections? One of our offices is down and the route is not currently in bgp. http://downdetector.com/status/time-warner-cable shows thousands of reports of outages on the consumer side starting an hour or so ago so I figure it's a larger issue than just my one office; couldn't reach anyone by phone. Thanks, David
Re: Apple iMessage
http://www.apple.com/support/icloud/systemstatus/ On 11/18/12 3:12 PM, Grant Ridder wrote: Hi, Is anyone having trouble with apples iMessage service? A friend and I are in Wisconsin and Illinois respectfully and messages via iMessage are taking up to several minutes to send. I am using a 4s on iOS 5 and my friend is using a 3GS. Thanks Grant
Re: job screening question
On 7/10/12 6:56 AM, Bret Clark wrote: Hence the reason he mentioned skilled person... Right. A skilled person knows not to commit to anything in a meeting, or to at least validate what they think before they open their mouth. Depends on the audience, of course. At least in my environment, there is not an expectation for someone to be able to rattle off technical specifics from memory on demand - I've got an iPad and Google for that. General concepts and functionality/limitations/whatever are great in that setting, but no one asks for the level of detail that takes 30 minutes to research and digest in a meeting. The ability to remember obscure command line arguments, or parts of a protocol header don't have much value, when you can look it about 10 seconds. Anyone else noticed their memory has gotten worse since Google came along? :) David
Re: job screening question
That's a horrible question for a non-technical HR person to pose to a candidate - It's impossible for the candidate to ask clarifying questions to make sure they understand what you are looking for, plus you may have a strong candidate who gets it wrong (for whatever reason), but if they were talking to a technical person you would realize they were 99% of the way there. What if they said it would cause the generation of port-unreachable ICMP packets to cease, and applications may hang until they timeout? Not the answer you're looking for, but not wrong either. I leave HR to their standard screening stuff, and do the technical part myself. Less chance to skip over a good candidate, even if it takes a bit longer in the whole process. On 7/5/12 1:02 PM, William Herrin wrote: Hi folks, I gave my HR folks a screening question to ask candidates for an IP expert position. I've gotten some unexpected answers, so I want to do a sanity check and make sure I'm not asking something unreasonable. And by unexpected I don't mean naively incorrect answers, I mean oh-my-God-how-did-you-get-that-cisco-certification answers. The question was: You implement a firewall on which you block all ICMP packets. What part of the TCP protocol (not IP in general, TCP specifically) malfunctions as a result? My questions for you are: 1. As an expert who follows NANOG, do you know the answer? Or is this question too hard? 2. Is the question too vague? Is there a clearer way to word it? 3. Is there a better screening question I could pass to HR to ask and check the candidate's response against the supplied answer? Thanks, Bill Herrin
Re: job screening question
Bill- So, I'm curious, and others probably are too. What's the most popular 'wrong' answer? :) David On 7/5/12 1:35 PM, William Herrin wrote: On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:16 PM, David Coulson da...@davidcoulson.net wrote: That's a horrible question for a non-technical HR person to pose to a candidate - It's impossible for the candidate to ask clarifying questions to make sure they understand what you are looking for, plus you may have a strong candidate who gets it wrong (for whatever reason), but if they were talking to a technical person you would realize they were 99% of the way there. What if they said it would cause the generation of port-unreachable ICMP packets to cease, and applications may hang until they timeout? Not the answer you're looking for, but not wrong either. Hi David, To clarify: I asked HR to forward me the candidate's answer along with their resume. Just in case of answers like that one. Which would be more than enough to proceed to a phone screen directly with me. Regards, Bill
Re: Level 3 Agrees to Purchase Global Crossing
On 4/11/11 10:41 AM, Mike Walter wrote: I find it amusing that the article says - The deal will combine two unprofitable companies So I guess the thinking is that two negatives make a positive? -Mike Since they will be saving a whole $40mm annually, profitability is pretty much guaranteed - right? ;-) Wasn't there a telco CEO who would blow that much in strip clubs? Savvis springs to mind, but I don't remember. David
Re: Level 3 Agrees to Purchase Global Crossing
On 4/11/11 12:24 PM, Justin M. Streiner wrote: I seem to recall several dot-com-era CxOs spending very lavishly on themselves, or getting their employers to give them large 'loans' that were never paid back. Ken Lay, Jeff Skilling, Bernie Ebbers, Gary Winnick, Joe Nacchio, etc... This is what I was thinking of - Awesome photo too. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9750948/ns/business-small_business/ The story of former Tyco CEO Dennis Kozlowski spending $2 million on his wife's 40th birthday party springs to mind... Tyco paid for half of it, under the guise of the party being a shareholder meeting... Wish I could have been a fly on the wall during the meeting when someone suggested that idea. David
Re: non operational question related to IP
Prefixing the octet with 0 makes it interpret it as octal, not decimal. Pretty typical on a UNIX system. On 11/22/2010 2:52 PM, Greg Whynott wrote: i was pinging a host from a windows machine and made a typo which seemed harmless. the end result was it interpreted my input differently than what I had intended. thinking this was a m$ issue I quickly took the opportunity to poke fun at windows as the senior m$ admin was near by. look at how brain dead this os is, it can't even do simple math! He is now looking at my screen scratching his head….. watch, i'll open a shell on os x and show you how it can add 0 +10 I open a shell on os x, same behavior as windows. ok so apple is brain dead too, watch, it'll work on linux! same deal… long story short, it does work as expected on all our hardware routing gear. still not sure what is happening here… osx-gwhynott:~ gwhynott$ ping 10.010.10.1 PING 10.010.10.1 (10.8.10.1): 56 data bytes gwhyn...@ops:~$ ping 10.010.10.1 PING 10.010.10.1 (10.8.10.1) 56(84) bytes of data. CORE1ping 10.010.10.1 Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.10.10.1, timeout is 2 seconds: ! anyone happen to know how the OS's are interpreting the 010? doesn't appear work out in base[2-10] (1010,101,22,20,14,13,12,11,10,A) thanks! greg -- This message and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by anyone other than the person for whom it was originally intended is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies. Opinions, conclusions or other information contained in this message may not be that of the organization.
Re: Low end, cool CPE.
On 11/11/10 8:41 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote: Something a NANOGer might want at home would be a good baseline. I realize the exact product may differ depending on DSL/Cable/Cell/ISDN, that's ok, let's get some various good solutions going here. What is the state of the art, and who has it? I've been pretty happy with the Astaro firewall product - It's basically a Linux system with a nice web-based interface for management. Either get their appliance, or throw it on a x86 box. Only thing out of your wish list I've really had a problem with is lack of IPv6 support. They have a free home version that I've got all sorts of weird stuff running through on a cable modem without any problems. www.astaro.com David
Re: Layer 2 vs. Layer 3 to TOR
Seth Mattinen wrote: I'd always wondered how you make a subnet available across racks with L3 rack switching. It seems that you don't. You could route /32s within your L3 environment, or maybe even leverage something like VPLS - Not sure of any TOR-level switches that MPLS pseudowire a port into a VPLS cloud though. Kinda makes L3 and spanning tree sound like a great option, doesn't it?
Re: Layer 2 vs. Layer 3 to TOR
Raj Singh wrote: We are actually looking at going Layer 3 all the way to the top of rack and make each rack its own /24. This provides us flexibility when doing maintenance (spanning-tree). Also, troubleshooting during outages is much easier by using common tools like ping and trace routes. I'm confused where STP fits into this. If you're doing /24s to each switch, why even bring STP into the picture? Do /31s to each TOR switch and use OSPF or ISIS. I don't know too many people who have not had an awful experience with STP at some point.
Re: Layer 2 vs. Layer 3 to TOR
Jonathan Lassoff wrote: I was recently looking into this (top-of-rack VPLS PE box). Doesn't seem to be any obvious options, though the new Juniper MX80 sounds like it can do this. It's 2 RU, and looks like it can take a DPC card or comes in a fixed 48-port GigE variety. The MX-series are pretty nice. That should be able to do VPLS PE, however I've never tried it - MX240 did it pretty well last time I tried. I've no clue how the cost of that switch compares to a cisco 4900 or something (not that a 4900 is anything special - L3 is all in software). Are there any applications that absolutely *have* to sit on the same LAN/broadcast domain and can't be configured to use unicast or multicast IP? The biggest hurdle we hit when trying to do TOR L3 (Cisco 4948s w/ /24s routed to each one) was devices that either required multiple physical Ethernet connections that we typically use LACP with, or any environments that do IP takeover for redundancy. Both are obviously easily worked around if you run an IGP on your servers, but that was just insanely complex for our environment. It's hard to convince people that a HP-UX box needs to work like a router now. So now we have a datacenter full of 4948s doing pure L2 and spanning tree... What a waste :-)
Re: facebook DNS
No, when you do a whois for 'fakebook.com' it will pull any registered NS entries containing facebook.com anywhere in the whois db. Digging a.gtld-servers.net is the best way to find authoritative NS for facebook.com, not whois. Clay Haynes wrote: Looks like someone is messing with the domain nameservers. Possibly a domain hijack? panzer:~ chaynes$ whois facebook.com Whois Server Version 2.0 Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net for detailed information. FACEBOOK.COM.Z.GET.LAID.AT.WWW.SWINGINGCOMMUNITY.COM FACEBOOK.COM.Z.DOWNLOAD.MOVIE.ONLINE.ZML2.COM FACEBOOK.COM.MORE.INFO.AT.WWW.BEYONDWHOIS.COM FACEBOOK.COM To single out one record, look it up with xxx, where xxx is one of the of the records displayed above. If the records are the same, look them up with =xxx to receive a full display for each record. - Clay -Original Message- From: Maria Iano [mailto:ma...@iano.org] Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 11:56 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: facebook DNS It looks like facebook is having DNS troubles. The www.facebook.com subdomain is delegated to some servers that are no longer answering. Also apps.facebook.com is a cname to www-college.facebook.com which gets no reply. Maria
Re: Level 3 issues
http://www.internetpulse.net/ (if you can get to it). Does not look pretty for L3. I can't get to most web sites if I go via Level3 (Cleveland, OH). Ping/traceroute look good though. marco wrote: is anyone having issues with Level3?
Re: Gigabit Linux Routers
It doesn't - It's just an x86 PC. I have Vyatta running inside VMware ESX, not well, but it works ;-) Comparing Imagestream and Vyatta to Juniper is crazy. The first two are software based platforms (with perhaps some hardware off-load for checksums and whatnot), where as the Juniper pretty much just uses BSD for control-plane features (BGP, for example, and controlling the hardware that actually does packet switching/routing). Brandon Galbraith wrote: I wasn't aware of imagestream using any custom (asic) hardware, except the T1/3 cards in the concentrator we bought from them (worked like a champ, btw).
Re: Gigabit Linux Routers
Ingo Flaschberger wrote: Multipath, yes, but flow-based, not per packet. There exists a patch for 2.4 kernel, but not for 2.6 Or tinker with iptables. And last I checked, even with multiple 'nexthop' entries, it still wasn't smart enough to drop a route if you lose an interface.
Re: Gigabit Linux Routers
The boxes (3650s) came with Broadcom BCM5708 on-board, but I push most of my traffic over these: 1c:00.1 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82571EB Gigabit Ethernet Controller (rev 06) Subsystem: Intel Corporation PRO/1000 PT Dual Port Server Adapter Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 58 Memory at c7ea (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K] Memory at c7e8 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K] I/O ports at 6020 [size=32] Capabilities: [c8] Power Management version 2 Capabilities: [d0] Message Signalled Interrupts: 64bit+ Queue=0/0 Enable+ Capabilities: [e0] Express Endpoint IRQ 0 Capabilities: [100] Advanced Error Reporting There are four Intel ports in the boxes, so traffic may or may not stay on the same PCI-X card depending how things are flowing. Chris wrote: David: May I ask which NICs you use in the IBM boxes ? I see the Intels recommended by Mike have dual ports on one board (the docs say Two complete Gigabit Ethernet connections in a single device • Lower latency due to one electrical load on the bus).
Re: Gigabit Linux Routers
I've been pretty happy running IBM x-series hardware using RHEL4. Usually it's PPS rather than throughput that will kill it, so if you're doing 250Mbit of DNS/I-mix/HTTP, you'll probably have very different results. There are some rx-ring tweaks for the NICs that are needed, but on the most part it's all out of the box (No custom kernel patches, and such - Just some sysctl settings). I have two x3650s (Quad core) doing around 6-700Mbit/sec (40k pps) at around 20% CPU right now. No Quagga BGP, but that's minimal in terms of CPU. I've not been able to get much beyond 1Gb/sec on this environment because my ASAs are not configured to support more than one Gig into that particular network. Chris wrote: Hi All, Sorry if this is a repeat topic. I've done a fair bit of trawling but can't find anything concrete to base decisions on. I'm hoping someone can offer some advice on suitable hardware and kernel tweaks for using Linux as a router running bgpd via Quagga. We do this at the moment and our box manages under the 100Mbps level very effectively. Over the next year however we expect to push about 250Mbps outbound traffic with very little inbound (50Mbps simultaneously) and I'm seeing differing suggestions of what to do in order to move up to the 1Gbps level. It seems even a dual core box with expensive NICs and some kernel tweaks will accomplish this but we can't afford to get the hardware purchases wrong. We'd be looking to buy one live and one standby box within the next month or so. They will only run Quagga primarily with 'tc' for shaping. We're in the UK if it makes any difference. Any help massively appreciated, ideally from those doing the same in production environments. Thanks, Chris
Re: Cable Colors
Jon Kibler wrote: Not based on any standard, but here is a schema I have used many times: snip Where I used to work - ISP. All of the above - Yellow. Where I work now - Enterprise. All of the above - Grey. David
Re: Cable Colors
Steve Bertrand wrote: LOL, simplicity via obscurity at its finest ;) Colour coding works great, and it's easy to follow. Then there is that issue that pops up where *that* cable over there will work! 90% of our movable cable patches (aka stuff that is not hard wired into a patch panel) are less than three feet long and are totally enclosed within individual racks (e.g. server to top of rack switch, switch to patch panel, other side of patch panel to core) - Each end of the cable is labeled, so it's pretty easy to trace it. I care more about cable management when you have something like a 6513 with a bunch of 48 port Ethernet blades. Not figured out a way to deal with that which doesn't look like complete crap - Doesn't matter what color they are. The vertical 7600s/6509-VE models are nice, but of course, we don't have those :) David
Re: www.Amazon.com down?
They took someone's advice, because it 503s now :) David
Re: OT: www.Amazon.com down?
I expect this means that DNS has been compromised somewhere. I see that whois is wonky, but DNS looks right. cr1:~# dig amazon.com @j.gtld-servers.net | grep NS ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2 amazon.com. 172800 IN NS udns1.ultradns.net. amazon.com. 172800 IN NS udns2.ultradns.net. There is weird whois data for facebook.com, youtube.com, myspace.com and some others
Re: Querstions about COGENT and their services...
There have been a few discussions over the last few months on Cogent - Seems the response is mixed, depending if you're on Cogent or old PSINet facilities. My experience has been that you get what you pay for - They're the cheapest, that's for sure. I've not heard anything about them in the last couple of months, but the last year has been filled with almost monthly service outages or congestion. David TS Glassey wrote: So at one time Cogent was one of the lowest performing bandwidth providers. Anyone have any responses to their current operations?
Re: Querstions about COGENT and their services...
Mike Tancsa wrote: They are also one of the biggest providers... Proportionally speaking, if they had the same percentage of failures as a provider 10% of their size, it would appear Cogent is worse as there would be more reports. Also, in my experience, I find Cogent pretty good about admitting to outages, even if we didnt notice it. Some providers on the other hand do everything possible to hide any issues... Sorry - I don't buy the They're big, so they have more problems. I've never seen the frequency of network issues with any Tier 1 (for want of a better nomenclature) that I have seen with Cogent. Admitting a problem does not help when their facilities do not have enough capacity to route around the failure of one of their POPs. Cogent's pricing in Canada is not that far off from a number of other providers I could choose from so to say you get what you pay for misses a bit of detail. They are not the cheapest, but in that price range, I like the service they offer and have found them a relatively reliable provider. There are other premiere / Tier 1 providers that I found gave worse service, had billing that would drive my AP people crazy and were far more difficult to deal with from a trouble ticket perspective. Cogent have been 50% cheaper than most other providers I have used, as far as raw IP services go. They have also had exponentially more network issues than other transit providers. Usually it's stuff that makes life difficult, such as a failure at a POP that causes congestion somewhere else - I'd be okay if their local POP died and took out my BGP session, but alas that only happened once when they blew some breakers one day. David
Re: Renumbering, was: [NANOG] Multihoming for small frys?
Deepak Jain wrote: Can we all agree that while renumbering sucks, a /24 (or less) is a pretty low-pain thing to renumber (vs. say, renumbering a /20 or shorter prefix?) In an ideal world, you never have to renumber because your allocations were perfect from the get-go. Depends - If you're an Enterprise where 90% of the equipment is managed by people who work in the same building, it's not horrible. I renumbered a bunch of /20s onto a /18 where 75% of the equipment was not in my (or the company's) control. That sucked big time. David
Re: Renumbering, was: [NANOG] Multihoming for small frys?
Jack Bates wrote: I had the same issue. Add to that recursive DNS servers and the support issues of everything that depends on them in and not in your direct control. Indeed. I recall Proxy ARP and a lot of NAT was involved :) At least you can keep track of the people who didn't update their configs, even though they said they did. David
Re: [NANOG] auth*.ns.uu.net
jamie wrote: Anyone seeing the same? Yep. When you try to dig a domain on their NS, it refers back to the root-servers. Nice. cr1:~# dig cunamutual.com @198.6.1.202 ; DiG 9.3.4 cunamutual.com @198.6.1.202 ; (1 server found) ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 22286 ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 13, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;cunamutual.com.IN A ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: . 360 IN NS A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 360 IN NS B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 360 IN NS C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 360 IN NS D.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 360 IN NS E.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 360 IN NS F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 360 IN NS G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 360 IN NS H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 360 IN NS I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 360 IN NS J.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 360 IN NS K.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 360 IN NS L.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 360 IN NS M.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. ;; Query time: 52 msec ;; SERVER: 198.6.1.202#53(198.6.1.202) ;; WHEN: Thu May 8 23:10:02 2008 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 243 ___ NANOG mailing list NANOG@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
Re: [NANOG] Did Youtube not pay their domain bill?
Depends - It doesn't help if the DNS server is dead, but the front-end is still advertising the routes. It came back to life for me a few moments ago (via Cogent) and it looks like the routing did not change (there is a bunch of 10/8 stuff in the traceroute). Eric Spaeth wrote: If they were anycasted, shouldn't they be reachable from _somewhere_ ? Those servers are dead from the 4 corners of the US that I have resources to use for testing. ___ NANOG mailing list NANOG@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
Re: [Nanog] Cogent Router dropping packets
Joe Greco wrote: For those unfamiliar, Cogent has a system where you set up an EBGP peering with the Cogent router you're connected to, for the purposes of announcing your routes into Cogent. However, these are typically smaller, aggregation class routers, and do not handle full tables - so you don't get your routes from that router. To get a full table FROM Cogent, you need to set up an EBGP multihop session with them, to their nearest full-table router. I believe they actually do all their BGP connections in that manner. Depends on the service you purchase. Fast Ethernet seems to be delivered as eBGP-multihop (the first hop is just a L3 switch), however DS-3 is handled as a single BGP session. I'm not sure if GigE or SONET services are handled as multihop or not. Probably all depends what hardware they have at each POP ___ NANOG mailing list NANOG@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010
Steve Gibbard wrote: Maybe I just don't spend enough time around the leave the TV on all day demographic. Is that a realistic number? Is there something bigger than HDTV video that ATT expects people to start downloading? I would not be surprised if many households watch more than 10hrs of TV per day. My trusty old series 2 TiVo often records 5-8hrs of TV per day, even if I don't watch any of it. Right now I can get 80 or so channels of basic cable, and who knows how many of Digital Cable/Satellite for as many TVs as I can fit in my house without the Internet buckling under the pressure. I assume ATT is just saying We use this pipe for TV and Internet, hence all TV is now considered Internet traffic? How many people are REALLY going to be pulling 10hrs of HD or even SD TV across their Internet connection, rather than just taking what is Multicasted from a Satellite base station by their TV service provider? Is there something significant about ATT's model (other than the VDSL over twisted pair, rather than coax/fiber to the prem) that makes them more afraid than Comcast, Charter or Cox? Maybe I'm just totally missing something - Wouldn't be the first time. Why would TV of any sort even touch the 'Internet'. And, no, YouTube is not TV as far as I'm concerned. ___ NANOG mailing list NANOG@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010
Stephen John Smoogen wrote: I think that is based off the all American TV going to HDD that is supposed to happen in 2009. ( I think I read that currently only 40% of Americans have HDD TV's and the 60% were not going to buy one until it became too late. ) This is not accurate. In 2009 the US is terminating analog (NTSC) transmission of 'over the air' broadcasts. It has nothing to do with 'high definition' broadcasts. OTA broadcasts will just be done using ATSC, rather than NTSC. It will continue to provide SD programming. David ___ NANOG mailing list NANOG@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
Re: [Nanog] ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010
Dragos Ruiu wrote: Bet you a beer it won't happen. :) I will let you know next February when my rabbit ears stop working :) ___ NANOG mailing list NANOG@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
