starlink ixp peering progress

One of the things I learned today was that starlink has published an extensive guide as to how existing BGP AS holders can peer with them to get better service. https://starlink-enterprise-guide.readme.io/docs/peering-with-starlink I am curious if there is a way to see how many have peered

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

Hi Seth, LOAs can't be considered more trustworthy than IRR objects. The RIRs operate IRRdb services as part of the services they offer which network operators should be using instead of the free and paid non-authoritative IRRdb operators. If you don’t mind, could you please reach out to me

Re: BGP Monitoring

Ray mentioned precisely that he wants to monitor BGP announcements and route changes. Leak detection is kind of on a different level. You need a bit more data to effectively detect them. ( I kind of know that). It makes discussion more colorful to my taste. You can do a lot with colorful bgp

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

We just switched over to IRR routing with Cogent, it is available.  It's just not on by default. Best Regards, Jason On 2/26/24 3:14 PM, Aaron Wendel wrote: I don't have any examples of anyone still using paper LOAs except for Cogent. Aaron On 2/26/2024 12:57 PM, Seth Mattinen via NANOG

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

On 2/26/24 10:57, Seth Mattinen via NANOG wrote: Why do companies still insist on, or deploy new systems that rely on paper LOA for IP and ASN resources? How can this be considered more trustworthy than RIR based IRR records? * They're an authoritative signed document with legal penalties for

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

Also known as an cross-connect order form. Why FAX a piece of paper? Nobody cross-checks it, until after it goes wrong. On Mon, 26 Feb 2024, Ren Provo wrote: Most important parts on the LOA are the explicit ASN, the name to be found in the cross-connect order portal and local contact data. 

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

I don't have any examples of anyone still using paper LOAs except for Cogent. Aaron On 2/26/2024 12:57 PM, Seth Mattinen via NANOG wrote: Why do companies still insist on, or deploy new systems that rely on paper LOA for IP and ASN resources? How can this be considered more trustworthy than

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

There is one purpose: to facilitate IP fraud, and maintain currently fraudulently routed IPs. Anyone can dummy up a LOA. And there is still quite a lot of unrouted IP space. VPS providers know this, and know their customers are submitting fake LOAs. But it is sort of the business VPS

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

Most important parts on the LOA are the explicit ASN, the name to be found in the cross-connect order portal and local contact data. Contractors need that. Global networks rarely have a contact appropriate for provisioning in a public facing database. On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 14:50 Sean Donelan

Re: Verizon Business Contact

To close the loop on this, Verizon Wireless reported to me that they fixed the issue (whatever it was). They further said that 63.56.37.4 was a typo; all IPs should have been in 63.59.x.x. I am able to reach the 63.59.0.0/16 IPs in question: 63.59.39.232 & 63.59.67.68. Justin: Thanks for

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

Authentication by letterhead? Paper LOAs are unauthenticated documents, not worth the paper they are written on. Usually FAXed, which is even less authenticatable (is that a word?). Prosecutors are capable of using digital documents. Do it all the time with echecks, credit cards, ecommerce

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

I can’t speak for all providers but when it comes to some downstream networks we will usually request an LOA as additional proof that the customer is authorized to announce the prefixes, in addition to the IRR objects and (where possible) RPKI ROAs. Mainly only a thing where RPKI is not possible

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

Highly anecdotal, but we’ve always refused to provide them, and they’ve always set it up without an LOA. YMMV since we negotiate larger contracts, but we’ve only ever been asked maybe twice? Both times they admitted they had no idea why they asked for it, so it just seems like some process

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

One thing that I recently read on this mailing list, is that at least in the US, a transmitting a fraudulent LOA is a federal crime - wire fraud. [0] Being able to hopefully charge and convict someone performing fraud is a useful deterrent. -joe [0] -

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

A paper LOA is a legally binding document, an IRR record is an IRR record. Falsifying an LOA that is transmitted digitally is wire fraud and can basically be handed right over to a DA for injunction and prosecution. Falsifying IRR records on the other hand leaves more work for the ISP's lawyers

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 10:57:05 -0800 Seth Mattinen via NANOG wrote: > Why do companies still insist on, or deploy new systems that rely on > paper LOA for IP and ASN resources? How can this be considered more > trustworthy than RIR based IRR records? For routing, some have been proposing that

Re: Why are paper LOAs still used?

Perhaps the provider only had a single person maintaining the tooling they used to interact with the IRR records, that person left/was laid off, and it broke. Perhaps they don't have anyone else that can make it work again, and they don't want to hire someone else, so they fell back to paper.

Re: BGP Monitoring

nanog@nanog.org (Alexander Lyamin via NANOG) wrote: > RIPE RIS > https://www.ripe.net/analyse/internet-measurements/routing-information-service-ris/ > is also good, but as Job Snijders pointed me out doesn't send emails out > of the box. It does provide a filterable live feed that we use for

Why are paper LOAs still used?

Why do companies still insist on, or deploy new systems that rely on paper LOA for IP and ASN resources? How can this be considered more trustworthy than RIR based IRR records? And I'm not even talking about old companies, I have a situation right now where a VPS provider I'm using will no

Re: BGP Monitoring

Whoa, its nice to see that Allesandro is still around. It was sad to see when Isolario.it quietly went offline. Also I would point out in CAIDA's general direction https://bgpstream.caida.org/ (should fit OP bill). CAIDA was first to show how much geeky fun might be had by monitoring (and

Re: BGP Monitoring

I believe PacketVis is Massimo Candela , based on https://ripe85.ripe.net/archives/video/987/ On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 at 18:24, Denis Fondras via NANOG wrote: > > Le Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 07:12:57PM +0100, Job Snijders via NANOG a écrit : > > On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 05:41:12PM +, Ray Orsini via

Re: BGP Monitoring

Le Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 07:12:57PM +0100, Job Snijders via NANOG a écrit : > On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 05:41:12PM +, Ray Orsini via NANOG wrote: > > What tools are you using to monitor BGP announcements and route changes? > > The wonderful BGP.tools already has been mentioned a few times. > >

Re: BGP Monitoring

On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 05:41:12PM +, Ray Orsini via NANOG wrote: > What tools are you using to monitor BGP announcements and route changes? The wonderful BGP.tools already has been mentioned a few times. Another excellent option is https://Packetvis.com, I find their RPKI monitoring

Re: BGP Monitoring

Hi, On Mon, 26 Feb 2024, at 5:41 PM, Ray Orsini via NANOG wrote: > What tools are you using to monitor BGP announcements and route changes? https://bgp.tools is excellent - and amazingly fast at BGP and IRR notifications: https://bgp.tools/pricing Ian

Re: BGP Monitoring

bgp.tools On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 9:54 AM Mehmet wrote: > I love bgp.tools ;) good product > > On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 12:49 Ben Cox via NANOG wrote: > >> [Full Disclosure, the bgp.tools guy will of course tell you to use >> bgp.tools] >> >> Unsure what the etiquette for self promotion is on

Re: BGP Monitoring

I love bgp.tools ;) good product On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 12:49 Ben Cox via NANOG wrote: > [Full Disclosure, the bgp.tools guy will of course tell you to use > bgp.tools] > > Unsure what the etiquette for self promotion is on this mailing list, > but I would happily recommend bgp.tools (the

Re: BGP Monitoring

[Full Disclosure, the bgp.tools guy will of course tell you to use bgp.tools] Unsure what the etiquette for self promotion is on this mailing list, but I would happily recommend bgp.tools (the service I run). It supports the development of the BGP toolkit at the same time. For myself (since I

BGP Monitoring

What tools are you using to monitor BGP announcements and route changes? [OIT Website] Ray Orsini Chief Executive Officer OIT, LLC [cid:915068ae-ac24-488b-95e0-65fd40ea5afb] 305.967.6756 x1009| [cid:6f566813-2e6f-4b77-86fb-6dcf7b370a8a] 305.571.6272

Re: Network chatter generator

On 2024-02-23 17:33, Brandon Martin wrote: > Before I go to the trouble of making one myself, does anybody happen to > know of a pre-canned program to generate realistic and scalable amounts > of broadcast/broad-multicast network background "chatter" seen on > typical consumer and business

Re: TFTP over anycast

On Feb 22, 2024, at 10:47, Javier Gutierrez wrote:Hi, I'm working on some DR design and we want to not only have this site as a DR but also performing some active/active for some of the services we hosts and I was wondering if someone had some experience with using anycast for TFTP or DHCP