On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 1:34 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Mon, 07 Nov 2011 01:09:19 CST, Robert Bonomi said:
You're missing some 'obvious' considerations. Consider a spam complaint
sent with 'full headers' included. The rDNS _at_the_time_of_the_crime_
is present in the complaint.
LTE does not have the dual attachment problem since there is the
concept of having v4 and v6 in one attachment, but it does not change
the fact that there are not enough IPv4 addresses to go around,
especially from a strategic planning perspective (let's design this
once for 5 to 10+ year
Hi Cameron,
On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 21:31 -0800, Cameron Byrne wrote:
There are a variety of reasons. Most prominent is that if the issue
is lack of IPv4 addresses (public and private), dual-stack does not
solve this problem, each device still gets an IPv4 address. Another
major issue is
On 2 November 2011 17:57, Matt Chung itsmemattch...@gmail.com wrote:
I work for a regional ISP and very recently there has been an influx of
calls reporting slowness when accessing certain websites (i.e
google.com/voice/b) via HTTP. *snip*
I have been experiencing this same issue as an end
The practice of filling out the reverse zone with fake PTR record
started before there was wide spread support for UPDATE/DNS. There
isn't any need for this to be done anymore. Machines are capable
of adding records for themselves.
How do I setup this for DHCPv6-PD? Say, I delegate
On 7 Nov 2011, at 13:48, sth...@nethelp.no sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
The practice of filling out the reverse zone with fake PTR record
started before there was wide spread support for UPDATE/DNS. There
isn't any need for this to be done anymore. Machines are capable
of adding records for
Leigh Porter leigh.por...@ukbroadband.com writes:
Indeed, there is no way I would allow that either. But really,
providing a reverse zone and forward zone to match is a case of five
minutes and a shell script or a DNS that as Steinar said, will
synthesise results.
It's really not all that
We seem to be having some problems with our tata links - first seen in EU
about 45 minutes ago, now we're seeing problems in NA. I'm focused on DNS,
so I'm seeing a lot of timeouts/servfails, but our networking folks are
talking about links dropping.
Anyone else seeing oddness on the NA Internet
Gizmodo is reporting problems at Time Warner Telecom we're suffering
from it too and calls to the NOC have not been answered so far... does
anyone have any further information?
http://gizmodo.com/5857010/massive-time-warner-outage-hits-the-us
On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 10:00:34AM -0500,
Todd Snyder t...@borked.ca wrote
a message of 12 lines which said:
We seem to be having some problems with our tata links
They probably use Juniper routers :-)
The current line is Level3 is currently having an issue where they have certain
code versions of a certain router vendor deployed.
They haven't said anything yet, so it's still kind of sketchy.
-Original Message-
From: Peter Pauly [mailto:ppa...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 07,
Hi,
This issue seems to be much bigger, we lost about 20 Level3 and some
TATA sessions.
Also we lost about 15% of our total traffic.
On #IX there are rumours about Junos version 10.3R2.11 being core dumped
and rebooted, which makes sense.
Currently traffic is restored.
Tim
On 07-11-11
L3 reported multiple links bouncing nationwide in the US approx 30 minutes
ago. Causing multiple IP issues.
Lane
--
Lane Powers
On 11/7/11 9:04 AM, Peter Pauly ppa...@gmail.com wrote:
Gizmodo is reporting problems at Time Warner Telecom we're suffering
from it too and calls to the NOC
Any idea where this information can be found publically?
-Original Message-
From: Lane Powers [mailto:lane.pow...@swat.coop]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 10:06 AM
To: Peter Pauly; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Time Warner Telecom problems
L3 reported multiple links bouncing nationwide
I believe you are referring to Time Warner Cable. There is no such thing as
Time Warner Telecom anymore.
-Original Message-
From: Peter Pauly [mailto:ppa...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 8:04 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Time Warner Telecom problems
Gizmodo is reporting
If your an L3 transit customer you should be able to refer to event id
5197215.
Not sure if they have published anything otherwise, it is still very early.
In our case we had to drop our L3 sessions until the storm passes.
Lane
On 11/7/11 9:08 AM, Drew Weaver drew.wea...@thenap.com wrote:
Any
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 10:00 -0500, Todd Snyder wrote:
We seem to be having some problems with our tata links - first seen in EU
about 45 minutes ago, now we're seeing problems in NA. I'm focused on DNS,
so I'm seeing a lot of timeouts/servfails, but our networking folks are
talking about
On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Peter Pauly wrote:
Gizmodo is reporting problems at Time Warner Telecom we're suffering
from it too and calls to the NOC have not been answered so far... does
anyone have any further information?
http://gizmodo.com/5857010/massive-time-warner-outage-hits-the-us
I
On 7 Nov 2011, at 14:03, Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no wrote:
Leigh Porter leigh.por...@ukbroadband.com writes:
Indeed, there is no way I would allow that either. But really,
providing a reverse zone and forward zone to match is a case of five
minutes and a shell script or a DNS that as
On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 07:04:19AM -0800, Peter Pauly wrote:
Gizmodo is reporting problems at Time Warner Telecom we're suffering
from it too and calls to the NOC have not been answered so far... does
anyone have any further information?
On Nov 7, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Tom Hill wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 10:00 -0500, Todd Snyder wrote:
We seem to be having some problems with our tata links - first seen in EU
about 45 minutes ago, now we're seeing problems in NA. I'm focused on DNS,
so I'm seeing a lot of timeouts/servfails,
2011/11/7 Tom Hill t...@ninjabadger.net
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 10:00 -0500, Todd Snyder wrote:
We seem to be having some problems with our tata links - first seen in EU
about 45 minutes ago, now we're seeing problems in NA. I'm focused on
DNS,
so I'm seeing a lot of timeouts/servfails,
My 10.4r1.9 boxes died also but I saw interfaces go down whilst bgpd seemed
stable.
--
Leigh
On 7 Nov 2011, at 15:34, Pierre-Yves Maunier na...@maunier.org wrote:
2011/11/7 Tom Hill t...@ninjabadger.net
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 10:00 -0500, Todd Snyder wrote:
We seem to be having some
Gizmodo is reporting problems at Time Warner Telecom we're suffering
from it too and calls to the NOC have not been answered so far... does
anyone have any further information?
http://gizmodo.com/5857010/massive-time-warner-outage-hits-the-us
Actually, it looks to me like they mean
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 07:06, Tim Vollebregt t...@interworx.nl wrote:
On #IX there are rumours about Junos version 10.3R2.11 being core dumped and
rebooted, which makes sense.
Perhaps related to Juniper PSN-2011-08-327? Did the whole router
reboot, or just the service module?
We saw one TATA
Joe Greco wrote the following on 11/7/2011 9:54 AM:
Gizmodo is reporting problems at Time Warner Telecom we're suffering
from it too and calls to the NOC have not been answered so far... does
anyone have any further information?
FWIW, We saw issues here in Indianapolis between TWTC and L3 up until a few
minutes ago.
--Thomas York
-Original Message-
From: Blake Hudson [mailto:bl...@ispn.net]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:02 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Time Warner Telecom problems
Joe Greco wrote
On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Calkins, Mark wrote:
I believe you are referring to Time Warner Cable. There is no such thing as
Time Warner Telecom anymore.
It's just TW Telecom now.
http://www.twtelecom.com/
--
Jon Lewis, MCP :)
I am doing a survey to see what naming conventions are used for routers
and router interfaces as part of a measurement study that I am
conducting as a student at the University of Wisconsin Madison. If you
are interested in participating please fill out my form at:
On Nov 6, 2011 10:15 PM, David Hubbard dhubb...@dino.hostasaurus.com
wrote:
Hi all, I am looking at cellular-based devices as a higher
speed alternative to dial-up backup access methods for
out of band management during emergencies. I was
wondering if anyone had experiences with such devices
Can anyone point to any authoritative updates about this?
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
On Nov 7, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Tom Hill wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 10:00 -0500, Todd Snyder wrote:
We seem to be having some problems with our tata links -
We got a panic message about the PFE that core'd and looks like it restarted
our FPC's.
JUNOS 10.2R2.11
-Dan
On Nov 7, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Kelly Kane wrote:
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 07:06, Tim Vollebregt t...@interworx.nl wrote:
On #IX there are rumours about Junos version 10.3R2.11 being
I'm struggling to do the same. All the various Internet Health sites
show(ed) some upticks in negative performance but I don't have any
specifics. We are a Gomez customer and Gomez is showing issues In St.
Louis (SAVVIS) and Philly (L3) that specifically impacts the
availability of our
Joe,
I am doing a survey to see what naming conventions are used for routers and
router interfaces as part of a measurement study
On a related note, you might be interested in a study we did a few years ago
about errors in naming router interfaces, where a router in one location has a
name
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 11:09 -0500, Todd Snyder wrote:
Can anyone point to any authoritative updates about this?
I think Jared's suggestion was about as close as your going to get for
right now. Look at the size of the files he mentioned as compared to the
average size of the others.
On Nov 7, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Richard Golodner wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 11:09 -0500, Todd Snyder wrote:
Can anyone point to any authoritative updates about this?
I think Jared's suggestion was about as close as your going to get for
right now. Look at the size of the files he
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Richard Golodner
rgolod...@infratection.com wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 11:09 -0500, Todd Snyder wrote:
Can anyone point to any authoritative updates about this?
I think Jared's suggestion was about as close as your going to get
for
right now.
Level 3 was down in KC, Chi, and San Jose (at least) for us between
about 8:10 and 8:40, plus or minus. Brought down SureWest in KC too.
-Steve
-Original Message-
From: nanog-requ...@nanog.org [mailto:nanog-requ...@nanog.org]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 10:05 AM
To:
On 7 Nov 2011, at 16:41, Todd Snyder t...@hatescomputers.org wrote:
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Richard Golodner
rgolod...@infratection.com wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 11:09 -0500, Todd Snyder wrote:
Can anyone point to any authoritative updates about this?
I think
So the file size was 30% higher implies that the number of updates is
larger and therefore there is instability? I see the logic but if you
scroll thru that page (the whole month of November) there are tons of
1M files. Trying to see what is different about today
-Hammer-
I was a normal
2011/11/7 Kelly Kane ke...@hawknetworks.com
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 07:06, Tim Vollebregt t...@interworx.nl wrote:
On #IX there are rumours about Junos version 10.3R2.11 being core dumped
and
rebooted, which makes sense.
Perhaps related to Juniper PSN-2011-08-327? Did the whole router
Hi all
When I setup the server mtu as 9100. why I have to configure the
switch mtu 9300 to make it working?
What this extra 200 bytes is for what purpose? ls it standard?
What is disadvantage of setting our all internal networks (host /
equipment) mtu more than 1500?
Thank you for your advice.
On Nov 7, 2011, at 11:41 AM, -Hammer- wrote:
So the file size was 30% higher implies that the number of updates is larger
and therefore there is instability? I see the logic but if you scroll thru
that page (the whole month of November) there are tons of 1M files. Trying
to see what is
Thank you. This is somewhat of a learning opportunity for me. I hit all
the generic Internet health sites and I understand that there IS an
issue. Now I'm getting to learn how you guys attempt to understand WHY
we had an issue.
But my point is the same. If this is the case than the entire
On 11/7/11 08:37 , Jared Mauch wrote:
On Nov 7, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Richard Golodner wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 11:09 -0500, Todd Snyder wrote:
Can anyone point to any authoritative updates about this?
I think Jared's suggestion was about as close as your going to get for
right
Here's some real data for those interested. It seems a quick view seems many
TATA - Level3 and TATA - GBLX sets of instability.
Combined with the overall update levels seen over that 30 minutes, we saw
~1.566M updates at route views.
Compared with the 24h prior (2011.11.06 14:15 as
On 7 Nov 2011, at 17:45 , Deric Kwok wrote:
When I setup the server mtu as 9100. why I have to configure the
switch mtu 9300 to make it working?
What this extra 200 bytes is for what purpose? ls it standard?
To avoid problems you really want to set the MTU of all your IP devices on the
same
Jared,
This is good stuff and I'm understanding how you interpret the
data. So this confirms what we are seeing. How do we take this towards a
root cause? Mash it with the Juniper threads and see where it goes?
-Hammer-
I was a normal American nerd
-Jack Herer
On 11/07/2011 11:01 AM,
- Original Message -
From: Leigh Porter leigh.por...@ukbroadband.com
Just blame Shub Internet..
Oh no, I've said it now!
Nah; Brad took down everything but the webserver years ago. :-)
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink
On 11/7/11 8:45 AM, Deric Kwok wrote:
When I setup the server mtu as 9100. why I have to configure the
switch mtu 9300 to make it working?
What this extra 200 bytes is for what purpose? ls it standard?
MTUs above 2000 bytes are nonstandard. The most recent Ethernet spec,
802.3-2008, defines
We saw several customers go away this morning as well. Our network itself is
cisco so we did not see anything directly.
John van Oppen
@ AS11404.
-Original Message-
From: Tom Hill [mailto:t...@ninjabadger.net]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:09 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re:
I just got pointed towards the following :
https://twitter.com/#!/JuniperNetworks/status/133637820081389568
And a (re)post on Pastbin :
http://pastebin.com/HBWiH92j
Juniper Networks replied to my post on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/#!/erikbais/status/133641575585677312
That they are
On 11/7/2011 12:01 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
. It seems a quick view seems many TATA - Level3 and TATA - GBLX sets
of instability.
Combined with the overall update levels seen over that 30 minutes, we saw
~1.566M updates at route views.
Compared with the 24h prior (2011.11.06 14:15 as
Any thoughts on just how wide read this was? Did every Juniper that receives
Internet BGP updates with the affected software break? Or did it die out quite
quickly?
--
Leigh
On 7 Nov 2011, at 19:55, John van Oppen jvanop...@spectrumnet.us wrote:
We saw several customers go away this
This was posted on pastebin earlier today in case it helps.
1. View Bulletin PSN-2011-08-327
2. Title MX Series MPC crash in Ktree::createFourWayNode after BGP UPDATE
3. Products Affected This issue can affect any MX Series router
with port concentrators based on the Trio chipset --
On 2011-11-07, Leigh Porter leigh.por...@ukbroadband.com wrote:
LTE does not have the dual attachment problem since there is the
concept of having v4 and v6 in one attachment, but it does not change
the fact that there are not enough IPv4 addresses to go around,
especially from a strategic
On Nov 6, 2011 10:15 PM, David Hubbard dhubb...@dino.hostasaurus.com
wrote:
Hi all, I am looking at cellular-based devices as a higher
speed alternative to dial-up backup access methods for
out of band management during emergencies.
I've used the Digi devices for Clearwire site OOB
I would look into Uplogix. I've seen them demo their products at Cisco Live a
couple of times and they seem very good.
- You can connect a cellular modem to them.
- They can store backup device configs.
- They can store IOS images.
- They can even xmodem an image to a device if it gets stuck in
- Original Message -
From: Dustin Rhodes drho...@fiberutilities.com
Sounded like someone was broadcasting a BGP route with an invalid
attribute and caused BGP session restarts or Core Dumps/crashes on any
Juniper router running version 10.4
Well, it *is* getting on towards
- Original Message -
From: Jonathan Lassoff j...@thejof.com
tangential sidenote
It's too bad that Junipers bugs aren't listed publicly. For clueful
network operations, having this information available to them could
have enabled them to properly weigh the risk of evaluating and
I'm hoping someone has had the same experiences, and is further toward a
resolution on this than I am. About 6 months ago, we noticed that XO was
blackholing one specific IP out of a /24. Traces to that IP stopped on
XO's network, traces to anything else out of the block went through fine.
XO
- Original Message -
From: clay...@haydel.org
There have several more cases like this, and XO has not been forthcoming
with information. We're either looking to be exempted from this filtering
or at least get a detailed description of how the system works. I'm not
sure how they think
transit provider. Is XO the end-access provider for either you or the
destination site? Or are both of those on some other connection, and XO
is a bystander along the way?
We're a direct customer. The IP's that I've seen them block have been
both on our network and on remote networks, so I
Actually, Juniper does disclose code bugs. Though not always to the public
at first, importantly to Juniper customers. Juniper had advised all of
their customers last August of this bug, however Level3 chose to continue
running it on their peer routers. Thus if Level3 and its clue(full)
management
Oh yes! Good lord I about went insane with this. I was working with a
customer single homed to cBeyond. I spent 3 hours on the phone with cBeyond to
figure out what was going on, it looks like a broken route. Come to find out
it was an XO security null. The engineer on the phone from
For any of you who are working late, we are just about to start (2am-4am
EST) a live webcast of a Deployment Experience with IPv6 event from Hong
Kong. Fred Baker is the keynote speaker.
Webcast: http://www.livestream.com/internetsocietychapters/
More info: http://isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=2630
--
67 matches
Mail list logo
