Re: Hurricane Irma: Florida, Puerto Rico and U.S. VI

2017-09-13 Thread Sean Donelan
Disclosure note: AT and Comcast public relations folks have been sending information about what they are doing for disaster recovery. I've included some of their information. From various official sources (FEMA, Dept. of Energy, FCC, NOAA, etc). Fatalities (FEMA) Georgia: 2

Re: Verizon issues | Looking glass

2017-09-13 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 8:47 PM, Van Dyk, Donovan via NANOG wrote: > Hello, > > Has anyone else been seeing issues today from routes being learnt through > the Verizon network, AS 701? > > Does anyone know if they have a looking glass? I can’t find one. > > they peer with

Verizon issues | Looking glass

2017-09-13 Thread Van Dyk, Donovan via NANOG
Hello, Has anyone else been seeing issues today from routes being learnt through the Verizon network, AS 701? Does anyone know if they have a looking glass? I can’t find one. Thanks -- Donovan Van Dyk SOC Network Engineer Fort Lauderdale, FL USA [cid:image001.png@01D32CD1.73DBD490] The

Re: 2017 NANOG Elections General Information

2017-09-13 Thread Dave Temkin
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:03 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > > So how do we fix it? > > this is most strongly an american disease. nanog has encouraged and > supported a frat boy ego parade and beauty contest. try the ietf > nomcomm approach, but with zero white boys on the nomcomm. >

Re: Protocol 17 floods from Vietnam & Mexico?

2017-09-13 Thread i mawsog via NANOG
The port info is in the first  fragmented packet as was mentioned elsewhere.   My guess is someone fragmenting large packets ( the mtu is set to  1464 or so). and  the host is receiving those fragment, but it not  reconstructing the packets.  If  it is possible to do a tcpdump/wireshark etc ,

Re: Reliability of looking glass sites / rviews

2017-09-13 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Matthew Huff wrote: > Both should have been similar. > > In the first case we lost power to all of our BGP border routers that are > peered with the upstream providers > In the second case, I did an explicit “shut” on the interface connected to >

Re: Reliability of looking glass sites / rviews

2017-09-13 Thread Matthew Huff
Both should have been similar. In the first case we lost power to all of our BGP border routers that are peered with the upstream providers In the second case, I did an explicit “shut” on the interface connected to the upstream provider that appeared “stuck” after an hour after the outage.

Re: Getting an RADB entry removed that was added by a previous peer

2017-09-13 Thread Sandra Murphy
Job should also have pointed to http://irrexplorer.nlnog.net (notes "Created by Job Snijders"). It notes multiple route objects (e.g., http://irrexplorer.nlnog.net/search/129.77.0.0/16). IMHO, worth a look or two from time to time for one’s own resources. —Sandy > On Sep 13, 2017, at 7:10

Re: Reliability of looking glass sites / rviews

2017-09-13 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 5:30 AM, Matthew Huff wrote: > This weekend our uninterruptible power supply became interruptible and we > lost all circuits. While I was doing initial debugging of the problem while > I waited on site power verification, I noticed that there was still paths

Re: Protocol 17 floods from Vietnam & Mexico?

2017-09-13 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Krunal Shah wrote: > It might be spoofed source IPs > > if you are seeing large fragmented udp packets.. it's almost always not spoofed. or historically speaking anyway it's not been spoofed. There are cases with dns reflection that include

RE: Protocol 17 floods from Vietnam & Mexico?

2017-09-13 Thread Krunal Shah
It might be spoofed source IPs Krunal Shah -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mark Andrews Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2017 10:45 PM To: Large Hadron Collider Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Protocol 17 floods from Vietnam & Mexico? In

Re: Getting an RADB entry removed that was added by a previous peer

2017-09-13 Thread Job Snijders
On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 at 13:08, Matthew Huff wrote: > It appears that Reliance Globalcom (AS6157) added an RADB entry for our > prefix (129.77.0.0/16) when we were a peer of theirs years ago, and it > was never removed when we ended the relationship. We are ASN 14607. > > I've

Getting an RADB entry removed that was added by a previous peer

2017-09-13 Thread Matthew Huff
It appears that Reliance Globalcom (AS6157) added an RADB entry for our prefix (129.77.0.0/16) when we were a peer of theirs years ago, and it was never removed when we ended the relationship. We are ASN 14607. I've reached out to their support, but does anyone have a suggestion on how I

Reliability of looking glass sites / rviews

2017-09-13 Thread Matthew Huff
This weekend our uninterruptible power supply became interruptible and we lost all circuits. While I was doing initial debugging of the problem while I waited on site power verification, I noticed that there was still paths being shown in rviews for the circuit that were down. This was over an