Expect (was: Software Defined Networks)

[Stephen Satchell]

I (and another programmer, now at Amazon) migrated our automation from 
TCL/Expect to Python/pexpect.  I've had to write code for those portions 
of Expect that didn't carry over into pexpect.


I also had to build a framework that allowed me to do rule-based 
programming in the same flavor as Expect's "expect" statement, which 
isn't hard but tedious as all get-out.  Maintenance of the code using 
the framework is head and shoulders better than the same tasks in 
Expect.  Particularly when Cisco makes little changes in their 
operations as you move up the revision chain.


On 12/12/19 6:53 PM, Quan Zhou wrote:
I do still use expect(tcl) whole lot at work, it is truly an 
underappreciated tool ever.


On 12/13/19 10:47, Large Hadron Collider wrote:

Tcl still exists, though I don't think they use it for this anymore.

On 19-12-05 10 h 17, Bryan Holloway wrote:


On 12/5/19 6:16 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:

I tell everyone we had SDNs in the 90s.

But we called it “expect scripts”.

:-)

--
TTFN,
patrick



I miss TCL ...

Re: End to End testing

[Ben Bartsch]

+1 for Accedian

If you're looking for more of a homemade solution, I've used the perfSONAR
software suite on some cheap-ish servers running CentOS for 10gig testing.
It's highly configurable.  I had it set up to do scheduled tests so we
could see how the network behaved over time.  The results are logged and
displayed similar to PRTG / Nagios.  https://www.perfsonar.net/



On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 5:49 PM Owen DeLong  wrote:

> Fluke has some nice devices in this area.
>
> Owen
>
>
> On Dec 12, 2019, at 06:53 , Fawcett, Nick via NANOG 
> wrote:
>
> Anyone have any suggestions on devices that I can put at two points in the
> network to test packet loss, latency, jitter etc.  I was thinking of maybe
> engineering my own using a couple of pi’s,  but the downfall is they don’t
> have SFP ports.  I’m looking for something that’s portable and easy to
> configure and drop in.  Thanks.
>
> ~Nick
>
>
> --
> Checked by SOPHOS http://www.sophos.com
>
>
>

Re: Software Defined Networks

[Valdis Klētnieks]

On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 18:47:29 -0800, Large Hadron Collider said:
> Tcl still exists, though I don't think they use it for this anymore.

At least on Fedora, expect 5.45.4 is linked against libtcl8.6.so.


pgpW5_X20d9ag.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Software Defined Networks

[Quan Zhou]

I do still use expect(tcl) whole lot at work, it is truly an 
underappreciated tool ever.


On 12/13/19 10:47, Large Hadron Collider wrote:

Tcl still exists, though I don't think they use it for this anymore.

On 19-12-05 10 h 17, Bryan Holloway wrote:


On 12/5/19 6:16 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:

I tell everyone we had SDNs in the 90s.

But we called it “expect scripts”.

:-)

--
TTFN,
patrick



I miss TCL ...

Re: Software Defined Networks

[Large Hadron Collider]

Tcl still exists, though I don't think they use it for this anymore.

On 19-12-05 10 h 17, Bryan Holloway wrote:


On 12/5/19 6:16 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:

I tell everyone we had SDNs in the 90s.

But we called it “expect scripts”.

:-)

--
TTFN,
patrick



I miss TCL ...

Re: restricted hotel block

[Owen DeLong]

I believe this isn’t anything that the Hotel is doing… It’s NANOG giving 
members a two-week head start on the hotel block and not announcing it to 
non-members until the end of that two weeks so that members get first crack at 
rooms in the hotel block arranged for the conference.

To the best of my knowledge, there’s nothing special about this as far as the 
hotel is concerned… It’s just about timing how NANOG announces it to the 
members and then later to the rest of the world.

Owen


> On Dec 10, 2019, at 09:48 , Josh Luthman  wrote:
> 
> Online reservations?  Yes
> 
> Exclusively only reservations?  Yes
> 
> Restricted to a 2 week window?  No - I'd guess this was to keep it from being 
> so open ended and increase the cost of running the show.
> 
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> 
> 
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 12:35 PM Randy Bush  > wrote:
> is anyone aware of any conference other than nanog which does
> 
> Online Reservations: (Open exclusively to NANOG Members only from
> December 2 - December 16)
> 
> randy

DHS/CISA may get administrative subpoena authority for subscriber information

[Sean Donelan]

https://fcw.com/articles/2019/12/12/cisa-bill-new-authority-johnson.aspx

The Cybersecurity Vulnerability Identification and Notification Act of 
2019 would allow CISA to subpoena subscriber information for enterprise 
devices or systems [...]


Subpoenas would be issued when the director of CISA identifies internet 
connected systems with specific vulnerabilities, is unable to identify the 
entity at risk and "has reason to believe" it relates to critical 
infrastructure. The Senate bill, which was obtained by FCW, adds a 
provision not included in the original DHS proposal specifying that the 
authority cannot not be used for information relating to "personal devices 
and systems, such as consumer mobile devices, home computers, residential 
wireless routers, or residential Internet enabled consumer devices."

[...]

Re: End to End testing

[Owen DeLong]

Fluke has some nice devices in this area.

Owen


> On Dec 12, 2019, at 06:53 , Fawcett, Nick via NANOG  wrote:
> 
> Anyone have any suggestions on devices that I can put at two points in the 
> network to test packet loss, latency, jitter etc.  I was thinking of maybe 
> engineering my own using a couple of pi’s,  but the downfall is they don’t 
> have SFP ports.  I’m looking for something that’s portable and easy to 
> configure and drop in.  Thanks.
>  
> ~Nick
>  
> -- 
> Checked by SOPHOS http://www.sophos.com 

Re: Short-circuited traceroutes on FIOS

[Owen DeLong]

> On Dec 11, 2019, at 09:26 , Saku Ytti  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 at 19:14, Rob Foehl  wrote:
> 
>> Support claims that it was a mistake, but it's also been 15+ months and
>> it's pretty deliberate behavior.  Draw your own conclusions...
> 
> TTL decrement issues are fairly common across multiple vendors and hw,
> can be sw can be hw limit. Common issues for example is if MPLS egress
> PE receives explicit null labeled packet, it may not be able to
> decrement TTL.
> I may lack in imagination, but I struggle to envision a situation
> where people decided to do this and then decided to be sneaky peaky
> about it.

All of those would still result in either a dropped packet or some form of 
erroneous ICMP error message.

Responding to an ICMP ECHO REQUEST with a  TTL of 1 and a destination address 
that isn’t local using
an ICMP ECHO REPLY spoofing the destination address (the observed behavior) 
doesn’t fit any of those
scenarios. It would require some pretty strong creativity and custom code to 
implement.

Owen

Re: Facebook's Middle Mile Infrastructure

[Rod Beck]

Can someone provide a link? I would like to learn more about it.

Regards,

Roderick.


From: NANOG  on behalf of Mike Hammett 

Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 7:57 PM
To: Drew Weaver 
Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: Re: Facebook's Middle Mile Infrastructure

I love it...

FB: Let's tell the presses about all the great things to help improve the 
regional Internet.
ISPs: let's talk.
FB: ...



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
Midwest Internet Exchange
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]
The Brothers WISP
[http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png][http://www.ics-il.com/images/youtubeicon.png]

From: "Drew Weaver" 
To: "nanog@nanog.org" 
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 12:53:44 PM
Subject: Facebook's Middle Mile Infrastructure

Does anyone have any contacts at Facebook that are working on their Middle Mile 
infrastructure project?

All attempts to figure out whom to talk to in that regard have been met with 
failure.

Thanks,
-Drew

FCC proposes $10 Million fine for spoofed robocalls

[Sean Donelan]

On Monday, U.S. FCC Chairman Pai and Canadian CRTC Chairperson Scott made 
the first official cross-border SHAKEN/STIR call.

https://www.fcc.gov/document/pai-scott-make-first-official-cross-border-shakenstir-call


Today, the U.S. FCC announced a proposed nearly $10 million fine for 
spoofed robocalls.

https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-proposes-nearly-10-million-fine-spoofed-robocalls

A U.S. telemarketing firm spoofed the caller-id of a competitor to make 
approximately 47,610 political robocalls shortly before a California State 
Assembly primary election.


I think this case is somewhat unusual for robocall spoofing, because the 
alleged perpetrator, victims, and 'crime scene' occured within the same 
jurisdiction.


While the FCC likes to announce large enforcement actions in splashy 
press releases, its actually bad about collecting fines. The FCC must 
rely on the Justice Department to initiate separate prosecution to 
enforce payment from non-license holders because the FCC can't do that 
itself.  So don't expect anyone to actually pay soon (or ever).

Re: Hulu thinks all my IP addresses are "business class", how to reach them?

[Josh Luthman]

Can you share the contact information for the next person that runs into
this problem?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 2:01 PM Drew Weaver  wrote:

> We’ve had success contacting Hulu and having them mark the tiny range of
> applicable IPs as not being “cloud”.
>
>
>
> *From:* NANOG  *On Behalf
> Of *Eric Fulton
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 5, 2019 2:37 PM
> *To:* Mark Tinka 
> *Cc:* nanog@nanog.org
> *Subject:* Re: Hulu thinks all my IP addresses are "business class", how
> to reach them?
>
>
>
> This happened to us as well.  We've had probably over 100 requests over
> the last few years, but thankfully most of our customers are fine with just
> not purchasing Hulu.  We've only lost below 5 customers from this issue.
>
>
> EF
>
>
>
> Treasure State Internet & Telegraph
>
> 406.204.4777
>
> http://tsi.io
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 3:32 AM Mark Tinka  wrote:
>
>
>
> On 21/Nov/19 12:32, t...@pelican.org wrote:
>
> > If I, as a UK citizen, buy region 2 DVDs at home, take them on my trip
> to the US and watch them on my laptop, no-one is screaming that I'm
> violating someone's geographic distribution rights by doing so.
>
> They would if it was possible to track you. Whenever I played DVD's or
> BD's with my PS3/PS4, I sometimes hit issue because those boxes were
> online, vs. my regular DVD player which wasn't.
>
> Offline DVD tech. is old school.
>
> Because tracking can be done with 2019 tech. due to VoD and its use of
> the Internet, they will scream.
>
> Mark.
>
>

RE: Hulu thinks all my IP addresses are "business class", how to reach them?

[Drew Weaver]

We’ve had success contacting Hulu and having them mark the tiny range of 
applicable IPs as not being “cloud”.

From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Eric 
Fulton
Sent: Thursday, December 5, 2019 2:37 PM
To: Mark Tinka 
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Hulu thinks all my IP addresses are "business class", how to reach 
them?

This happened to us as well.  We've had probably over 100 requests over the 
last few years, but thankfully most of our customers are fine with just not 
purchasing Hulu.  We've only lost below 5 customers from this issue.

EF

Treasure State Internet & Telegraph
406.204.4777
http://tsi.io




On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 3:32 AM Mark Tinka 
mailto:mark.ti...@seacom.mu>> wrote:


On 21/Nov/19 12:32, t...@pelican.org wrote:

> If I, as a UK citizen, buy region 2 DVDs at home, take them on my trip to the 
> US and watch them on my laptop, no-one is screaming that I'm violating 
> someone's geographic distribution rights by doing so.

They would if it was possible to track you. Whenever I played DVD's or
BD's with my PS3/PS4, I sometimes hit issue because those boxes were
online, vs. my regular DVD player which wasn't.

Offline DVD tech. is old school.

Because tracking can be done with 2019 tech. due to VoD and its use of
the Internet, they will scream.

Mark.

Re: Facebook's Middle Mile Infrastructure

[Mike Hammett]

I love it... 

FB: Let's tell the presses about all the great things to help improve the 
regional Internet. 
ISPs: let's talk. 
FB: ... 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "Drew Weaver"  
To: "nanog@nanog.org"  
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 12:53:44 PM 
Subject: Facebook's Middle Mile Infrastructure 

Does anyone have any contacts at Facebook that are working on their Middle Mile 
infrastructure project? 

All attempts to figure out whom to talk to in that regard have been met with 
failure. 

Thanks, 
-Drew 

Facebook's Middle Mile Infrastructure

[Drew Weaver]

Does anyone have any contacts at Facebook that are working on their Middle Mile 
infrastructure project?

All attempts to figure out whom to talk to in that regard have been met with 
failure.

Thanks,
-Drew

Re: Short-circuited traceroutes on FIOS

[Peter Beckman]

On Wed, 11 Dec 2019, Javier J wrote:


If you have static addressing (biz account) then possibly different from
what I have.

In North NJ, 3 different accounts I can verify have ICMP blocked as of
sometime earlier this year or late last year so have to use udp to get a
real traceroute.

Could not be deployed in all areas the same way.


 I noticed this about the same time I installed Ubiquiti gear at home,
 December 2018.

 Until this thread, I thought there was something wrong with my gateway
 router config. I could do UDP/TCP traceroutes, but ICMP kept dying.

 Glad to know it isn't my gateway, but frustrated as hell that Verizon
 decided that a few customers doing less-than-ideal things was enough to
 cut a standard network protocol off at the knees.

---
Peter Beckman  Internet Guy
beck...@angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/
---

Re: Short-circuited traceroutes on FIOS

[Javier J]

> what do you do with a traceroute that looks like this

Tell you to not change IP addresses so that I can do a proper analysis on
it?
Recommend you use something other than windows?
Give you a stock tip?
The possibilities are endless.

(I'm being sarcastic)

It is shitty and I have no clue why ISPs play these games.

Rumor is that with FiOS, that so many gamers or game software was sending
out ICMP requests that it was enough traffic for them to say screw this and
block it. I don't buy that but whatever.
Just annoying.

Oh yeah, and why do I still to this day have to use a HE ipv6 tunnel?


On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 8:55 AM Aaron Gould  wrote:

> Yeah, and what do you do with a traceroute that looks like this….  (ip
> address intentionally changed)
>
>
>
> C:\>tracert -d -w 1 1.2.3.4
>
>
>
> Tracing route to 1.2.3.4 over a maximum of 30 hops
>
>
>
>   1 8 ms 5 ms 5 ms  96.8.191.129
>
>   2 *** Request timed out.
>
>   3 *** Request timed out.
>
>   4 *** Request timed out.
>
>   5 *** Request timed out.
>
>   6 *** Request timed out.
>
>   7 *** Request timed out.
>
>   8 *** Request timed out.
>
>  9 *** Request timed out.
>
> 10 *** Request timed out.
>
> 11 *** Request timed out.
>
> 12 *** Request timed out.
>
> 13 *** Request timed out.
>
> 14 *** Request timed out.
>
> 15 *** Request timed out.
>
> 16 *** Request timed out.
>
> 17   267 ms   202 ms * 1.2.3.4
>
> 18   205 ms   175 ms * 1.2.3.4
>
> 19   160 ms   233 ms * 1.2.3.4
>
> 20   199 ms   201 ms * 1.2.3.4
>
> 21   213 ms   206 ms * 1.2.3.4
>
> 22   165 ms   158 ms * 1.2.3.4
>
> 23   237 ms   158 ms * 1.2.3.4
>
> 24   158 ms   290 ms * 1.2.3.4
>
> 25   158 ms   160 ms   158 ms  1.2.3.4
>
>
>
> Trace complete.
>
>
>
> C:\>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] *On Behalf Of *Etienne-Victor
> Depasquale
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 12, 2019 1:18 AM
> *To:* Valdis Klētnieks
> *Cc:* nanog@nanog.org
> *Subject:* Re: Short-circuited traceroutes on FIOS
>
>
>
> Traceroute is becoming more and more an expert's tool because
> interpretation of its results isn't straightforward.
>
>
>
> I had written a paper last year and mentioned its misuse in academia in
> the context of estimating the number of energy-consuming devices between a
> source and a destination.
>
> Traceroute was being used to count the number of physical router devices
> from the hop count, notwithstanding the use of MPLS in domain cores.
>
> To an external observer, this results in significant underestimation of
> the energy consumption in the path from source to destination.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 12:51 AM Valdis Klētnieks 
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 19:26:09 +0200, Saku Ytti said:
> > On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 at 19:14, Rob Foehl  wrote:
> >
> > > Support claims that it was a mistake, but it's also been 15+ months and
> > > it's pretty deliberate behavior.  Draw your own conclusions...
> >
> > TTL decrement issues are fairly common across multiple vendors and hw,
> > can be sw can be hw limit
>
> Yes, but you need to screw up gloriously on the decrement if you think that
> "I decremented and it's zero now" means "therefor it must have been
> addressed
> to me, so I'll send an ECHO REPLY instead of TTL EXCEEDED".
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Ing. Etienne-Victor Depasquale
> Assistant Lecturer
> Department of Communications & Computer Engineering
> Faculty of Information & Communication Technology
> University of Malta
>
> Web. https://www.um.edu.mt/profile/etiennedepasquale
>

Re: End to End testing

[Yan Filyurin]

I had relatively little experience, but this may fit the requirement.

https://www.rad.com/products/Pluggable-PNFs-SFPs/MiNID-Ethernet-Demarcation-SFP 


There two other vendors that make something similar. 



Also this had positive feedback from some people. 

https://www.sproute.com/ 

And almost anything that markets as “SD-WAN”, but you may have to sort out 
through a lot of vendors. But some run on some pretty cheap under $200 devices. 
 



> On Dec 12, 2019, at 10:35 AM, Dovid Bender  wrote:
> 
> Are you looking to see what happens if latency is added? Have a look at  
> https://iwl.com/products-solutions/products/maxwell-pro 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 9:54 AM Fawcett, Nick via NANOG  > wrote:
> Anyone have any suggestions on devices that I can put at two points in the 
> network to test packet loss, latency, jitter etc.  I was thinking of maybe 
> engineering my own using a couple of pi’s,  but the downfall is they don’t 
> have SFP ports.  I’m looking for something that’s portable and easy to 
> configure and drop in.  Thanks.
> 
>  
> 
> ~Nick
> 
>  
> 
> -- 
> Checked by SOPHOS http://www.sophos.com 

Re: End to End testing

[Dovid Bender]

Are you looking to see what happens if latency is added? Have a look at
https://iwl.com/products-solutions/products/maxwell-pro



On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 9:54 AM Fawcett, Nick via NANOG 
wrote:

> Anyone have any suggestions on devices that I can put at two points in the
> network to test packet loss, latency, jitter etc.  I was thinking of maybe
> engineering my own using a couple of pi’s,  but the downfall is they don’t
> have SFP ports.  I’m looking for something that’s portable and easy to
> configure and drop in.  Thanks.
>
>
>
> ~Nick
>
>
>
> --
> Checked by SOPHOS http://www.sophos.com
>
>

Re: End to End testing

[Dan White]

We've used Accedian MetroNIDs to do this.

On 12/12/19 14:53 +, Fawcett, Nick via NANOG wrote:

Anyone have any suggestions on devices that I can put at two points in the 
network to test packet loss, latency, jitter etc.  I was thinking of maybe 
engineering my own using a couple of pi's,  but the downfall is they don't have 
SFP ports.  I'm looking for something that's portable and easy to configure and 
drop in.  Thanks.

~Nick


--
Checked by SOPHOS http://www.sophos.com


--
Dan White
BTC Broadband
Network Admin Lead
Ph  918.366.0248 (direct)   main: (918)366-8000
Fax 918.366.6610email: dwh...@mybtc.com
http://www.btcbroadband.com

End to End testing

[Fawcett, Nick via NANOG]

Anyone have any suggestions on devices that I can put at two points in the 
network to test packet loss, latency, jitter etc.  I was thinking of maybe 
engineering my own using a couple of pi's,  but the downfall is they don't have 
SFP ports.  I'm looking for something that's portable and easy to configure and 
drop in.  Thanks.

~Nick


-- 
Checked by SOPHOS http://www.sophos.com

RE: Short-circuited traceroutes on FIOS

[Aaron Gould]

Yeah, and what do you do with a traceroute that looks like this….  (ip address 
intentionally changed)

 

C:\>tracert -d -w 1 1.2.3.4

 

Tracing route to 1.2.3.4 over a maximum of 30 hops

 

  1 8 ms 5 ms 5 ms  96.8.191.129

  2 *** Request timed out.

  3 *** Request timed out.

  4 *** Request timed out.

  5 *** Request timed out.

  6 *** Request timed out.

  7 *** Request timed out.

  8 *** Request timed out.

 9 *** Request timed out.

10 *** Request timed out.

11 *** Request timed out.

12 *** Request timed out.

13 *** Request timed out.

14 *** Request timed out.

15 *** Request timed out.

16 *** Request timed out.

17   267 ms   202 ms * 1.2.3.4

18   205 ms   175 ms * 1.2.3.4

19   160 ms   233 ms * 1.2.3.4

20   199 ms   201 ms * 1.2.3.4

21   213 ms   206 ms * 1.2.3.4

22   165 ms   158 ms * 1.2.3.4

23   237 ms   158 ms * 1.2.3.4

24   158 ms   290 ms * 1.2.3.4

25   158 ms   160 ms   158 ms  1.2.3.4

 

Trace complete.

 

C:\>

 

 

 

From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Etienne-Victor 
Depasquale
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 1:18 AM
To: Valdis Klētnieks
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Short-circuited traceroutes on FIOS

 

Traceroute is becoming more and more an expert's tool because interpretation of 
its results isn't straightforward.

 

I had written a paper last year and mentioned its misuse in academia in the 
context of estimating the number of energy-consuming devices between a source 
and a destination. 

Traceroute was being used to count the number of physical router devices from 
the hop count, notwithstanding the use of MPLS in domain cores.

To an external observer, this results in significant underestimation of the 
energy consumption in the path from source to destination.

 

On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 12:51 AM Valdis Klētnieks  
wrote:

On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 19:26:09 +0200, Saku Ytti said:
> On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 at 19:14, Rob Foehl  wrote:
>
> > Support claims that it was a mistake, but it's also been 15+ months and
> > it's pretty deliberate behavior.  Draw your own conclusions...
>
> TTL decrement issues are fairly common across multiple vendors and hw,
> can be sw can be hw limit

Yes, but you need to screw up gloriously on the decrement if you think that
"I decremented and it's zero now" means "therefor it must have been addressed
to me, so I'll send an ECHO REPLY instead of TTL EXCEEDED".




 

-- 

Ing. Etienne-Victor Depasquale
Assistant Lecturer
Department of Communications & Computer Engineering
Faculty of Information & Communication Technology
University of Malta

Web. https://www.um.edu.mt/profile/etiennedepasquale