Re: (OT?) Anyone wanna address my ISP's issues? [CIDR/BGP question]
Elliot Finley wrote: On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:44:56 -0500, you wrote: Anyone up for further questions? The .70 --> .69 route on the modem has a metric of "5", but with the .252 mask, shouldn't it be required to be one hop away? We really need further information to debug/diagnose this problem. I'll give you a diagnosis for two different scenarios. #1) you are using private addresses on your LAN and your DSL modem/router is NATting for you: This is the case. possible problems: Your modem/router isn't routing. ( this is more common than it should be. we replace customers' routers because of this problem regularly.) We RMA'ed it already, it's the second box and same issues. :-( Do you mean it should be doing NAT, or routing outside (e.g., RIP)? I assume the latter? Your ISP has fat fingered a netmask - most likely changing a .252 to a .255. Well, not in the visible DSL modem's config. Possibly somewhere else? #2) you are using public addresses on your LAN and your DSL modem/router is just routing for you: possible problems: Same possibilities as above with the addition of: Your ISP has *not* put the route in for your public block of IPs. Granted it's "not the case", but: I was of the opinion that maybe they hadn't for the one block we're supposed to be in, thus my question re: BGP for the 68/30 CIDR, but, per your answer, I've no way to know unless they tell me since the route isn't publicized. Your ISP *HAS* put the route in for your public block of IPs, but for whatever reason, that route isn't propagating through their network. Obviously I couldn't say about that. I'm thinking it's still all about routing. Problem is it's possibly more complex, since the local Telco has the DSLAM and the ISP is just "leasing" over the top. Whenever they get on the phone with each other, I can only imagine the finger-pointing going on. AFAIK, the local telco doesn't actually offer DSL from the local C.O., so it could be as simple,> as someone actually going in the building and plugging some cable into the DSLAM, or punching a couple of buttons on said machine. OTOH, it could be a matter of someone with enough route-foo with either AT&T or the ISP actually doing a lot of investigation and configuration. Those will be the most likely problems. I'm betting on your modem being faulty. Well, hopefully not anymore. Maybe somebody *smart* will take up my case. Should I have 'em call you ;-) ?? Thanks (very much! .. once) again, Kevin Kinsey PS > Hah! Substitute "ISP" for "C.I.A." below -- Finding out what goes on in the C.I.A. is like performing acupuncture on a rock. -- New York Times, Jan. 20, 1981 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: (OT?) Anyone wanna address my ISP's issues? [CIDR/BGP question]
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:44:56 -0500, you wrote: >Elliot Finley wrote: >> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:07:07 -0500, you wrote: >> > >>> >>> The DSL modem's outside (static) IP is n.n.n.70, the gw >>> is n.n.n.69, and the mask is 255.255.255.252. From >>> inside, I can ping .70, but not .69 (and, needless to say, >>> nothing else, either). From the outside, it's the >>> other way 'round. Traceroute (from outside) shows different >>> endpoints for the two addresses (that is, the last hop >>> before .69 is one router, and, when looking for .70, it's >>> another router (but not the one that leads to .69)). >>> >>> If I did my CIDR homework correctly, the net is n.n.n.68/30. >>> Using "BGPlay" (http://bgplay.routeviews.org/bgplay/), I get >>> the message: "The selected data sources have no information on >>> prefix n.n.n.68/30. Please check that this prefix is globally >>> announced." >>> >>> My question: shouldn't it be 'announced', if the ISP intends >>> to route me TCP/IP traffic? I apologize for my ignorance, >>> but BGP isn't something I figured to need to know at this >>> point in my life (although, it doesn't hurt to learn, usually) >> >> anything smaller than a /24 will be filtered. The ISP would announce >> the larger block that your /30 lives in. > >Thank you very much, Elliot; You wouldn't believe how hard it's been >to get anyone at, err, "tech support", to even address the issue. >It makes sense, I suppose, otherwise the global routing table >would be much larger than it is (?) > >Anyone up for further questions? The .70 --> .69 route on the >modem has a metric of "5", but with the .252 mask, shouldn't it >be required to be one hop away? We really need further information to debug/diagnose this problem. I'll give you a diagnosis for two different scenarios. #1) you are using private addresses on your LAN and your DSL modem/router is NATting for you: possible problems: Your modem/router isn't routing. ( this is more common than it should be. we replace customers' routers because of this problem regularly.) Your ISP has fat fingered a netmask - most likely changing a .252 to a .255. #2) you are using public addresses on your LAN and your DSL modem/router is just routing for you: possible problems: Same possibilities as above with the addition of: Your ISP has *not* put the route in for your public block of IPs. Your ISP *HAS* put the route in for your public block of IPs, but for whatever reason, that route isn't propagating through their network. Those will be the most likely problems. I'm betting on your modem being faulty. Elliot ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: (OT?) Anyone wanna address my ISP's issues? [CIDR/BGP question]
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:07:07 -0500, you wrote: >[OT Warning] Not related to FBSD, other than the use of >ping(8), which is working as expected, apart from the fact >that the network *isn't*. > >If anyone cares to give an opinion, TIA! > >I'm trying to get a land-based (DSL) solution to my >rather remote office. Found a provider, they (supposedly) >made arrangements with the local telco, sent me the DSL >modem, etc. I set it up as instructed, but we're not >getting TCP/IP here on it. Hours and hours of frustrating >hold music on the telephone, WWW-chat sessions that get >nowhere, etc. The modem "sync" is fine, but, as one tech >put it, "sync but no surf". It's been this way for > >2 weeks. > >The DSL modem's outside (static) IP is n.n.n.70, the gw >is n.n.n.69, and the mask is 255.255.255.252. From >inside, I can ping .70, but not .69 (and, needless to say, >nothing else, either). From the outside, it's the >other way 'round. Traceroute (from outside) shows different >endpoints for the two addresses (that is, the last hop >before .69 is one router, and, when looking for .70, it's >another router (but not the one that leads to .69)). > >If I did my CIDR homework correctly, the net is n.n.n.68/30. >Using "BGPlay" (http://bgplay.routeviews.org/bgplay/), I get >the message: "The selected data sources have no information on >prefix n.n.n.68/30. Please check that this prefix is globally >announced." > >My question: shouldn't it be 'announced', if the ISP intends >to route me TCP/IP traffic? I apologize for my ignorance, >but BGP isn't something I figured to need to know at this >point in my life (although, it doesn't hurt to learn, usually) anything smaller than a /24 will be filtered. The ISP would announce the larger block that your /30 lives in. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: (OT?) Anyone wanna address my ISP's issues? [CIDR/BGP question]
Elliot Finley wrote: On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:07:07 -0500, you wrote: The DSL modem's outside (static) IP is n.n.n.70, the gw is n.n.n.69, and the mask is 255.255.255.252. From inside, I can ping .70, but not .69 (and, needless to say, nothing else, either). From the outside, it's the other way 'round. Traceroute (from outside) shows different endpoints for the two addresses (that is, the last hop before .69 is one router, and, when looking for .70, it's another router (but not the one that leads to .69)). If I did my CIDR homework correctly, the net is n.n.n.68/30. Using "BGPlay" (http://bgplay.routeviews.org/bgplay/), I get the message: "The selected data sources have no information on prefix n.n.n.68/30. Please check that this prefix is globally announced." My question: shouldn't it be 'announced', if the ISP intends to route me TCP/IP traffic? I apologize for my ignorance, but BGP isn't something I figured to need to know at this point in my life (although, it doesn't hurt to learn, usually) anything smaller than a /24 will be filtered. The ISP would announce the larger block that your /30 lives in. Thank you very much, Elliot; You wouldn't believe how hard it's been to get anyone at, err, "tech support", to even address the issue. It makes sense, I suppose, otherwise the global routing table would be much larger than it is (?) Anyone up for further questions? The .70 --> .69 route on the modem has a metric of "5", but with the .252 mask, shouldn't it be required to be one hop away? Guess I need to head back to "class", Kevin Kinsey ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
(OT?) Anyone wanna address my ISP's issues? [CIDR/BGP question]
[OT Warning] Not related to FBSD, other than the use of ping(8), which is working as expected, apart from the fact that the network *isn't*. If anyone cares to give an opinion, TIA! I'm trying to get a land-based (DSL) solution to my rather remote office. Found a provider, they (supposedly) made arrangements with the local telco, sent me the DSL modem, etc. I set it up as instructed, but we're not getting TCP/IP here on it. Hours and hours of frustrating hold music on the telephone, WWW-chat sessions that get nowhere, etc. The modem "sync" is fine, but, as one tech put it, "sync but no surf". It's been this way for > 2 weeks. The DSL modem's outside (static) IP is n.n.n.70, the gw is n.n.n.69, and the mask is 255.255.255.252. From inside, I can ping .70, but not .69 (and, needless to say, nothing else, either). From the outside, it's the other way 'round. Traceroute (from outside) shows different endpoints for the two addresses (that is, the last hop before .69 is one router, and, when looking for .70, it's another router (but not the one that leads to .69)). If I did my CIDR homework correctly, the net is n.n.n.68/30. Using "BGPlay" (http://bgplay.routeviews.org/bgplay/), I get the message: "The selected data sources have no information on prefix n.n.n.68/30. Please check that this prefix is globally announced." My question: shouldn't it be 'announced', if the ISP intends to route me TCP/IP traffic? I apologize for my ignorance, but BGP isn't something I figured to need to know at this point in my life (although, it doesn't hurt to learn, usually) Thanks again, Kevin Kinsey -- Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything. -- George Bernard Shaw ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
