According to RIPE RIS, AS26347 announced a bunch of prefixes again.
- http://www.ris.ripe.net/dashboard/26347
First suspicious announcement was started 2013-03-06 07:52:40 UTC, and
last seen 2013-03-06 08:33:56 UTC. 195 prefixes total.
It seems these unauthorized announcements have the same
Hi Mat,
I see the same thing, we learn the prefix from the route-server in LAX:
tel...@r1.lax1.usshow ip bgp routes detail 90.201.80.0/20
Number of BGP Routes matching display condition : 1
Status A:AGGREGATE B:BEST b:NOT-INSTALLED-BEST C:CONFED_EBGP D:DAMPED
E:EBGP H:HISTORY I:IBGP
On Mar 5, 2013, at 9:55 PM, Cameron Byrne cb.li...@gmail.com wrote:
So all meaningful growth (mobile, cloud, internet of things...) must happen
on IPv6 ...
or relatively expensive IPv4 addresses from the black market and / or NATs
Cameron -
I agree with the intent, but just for clarity,
Doubt it all you want. Once it's gone, it stops generating support calls, or
they become very short:
C: Hi, my application isn't working through my NAT.
TSR: Hi… Get IPv6, we don't support NAT any more.
TSR: Is there anything else I can help you with today?
C: Hi, my application isn't
They're doing this to our routes in any2 in LA as well.
...
-Original Message-
From: Job Snijders [mailto:job.snijd...@atrato.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 4:04 AM
To: Matsuzaki Yoshinobu
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Dreamhost/AS26347 unauthorized bgp announcement
Hi Mat,
Hi all,
I tried contacting Coresite/Any2 to have somebody login to the routeserver and
doublecheck
which peer is actually announcing this NLRI. Because there is a remote
possibility that the
route-server is being manipulated by a third party and dreamhost is a victim
here.
After the usual
On Wed, 6 Mar 2013, Mukom Akong T. wrote:
I believe if anyone who can phrase the IPv4 Exhaustion Problem + IPv6
Solution in very specific terms of the business model of the company will
implicitly inspire confidence in execs that they know what they are talking
about.
I don't think the
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Antonio Querubin t...@lavanauts.org wrote:
I don't think the business case is the issue. It is the timeline over
which the sense of urgency becomes important enough for most execs to take
seriously. That's still a large unknown.
Why should they care about
On 2013-03-04 08:09, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 2:31 AM, Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi wrote:
I know lot of vendors are fuzzing with 'codenomicon' and they appear
not to
have flowspec fuzzer.
i suspect they fuzz where the money is ...
number of users of bgp?
number of users
Hi Guys,
Sorry to see this come up again. We are no announcing the prefix in
question. I am happy to work with you to investigate.
dh_admin@gar-bdr-01 show route advertising-protocol bgp 206.223.143.122
inet.0: 447113 destinations, 1801741 routes (447105 active, 8 holddown, 0
hidden)
Prefix
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:29 PM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote:
On 3/5/2013 8:20 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Mar 5, 2013, at 7:55 PM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote:
On 3/5/2013 7:15 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Mar 5, 2013, at 6:46 PM, Mukom Akong T. mukom.ta...@gmail.com
.-- My secret spy satellite informs me that at 2013-03-06 12:59 AM
Matsuzaki Yoshinobu wrote:
According to RIPE RIS, AS26347 announced a bunch of prefixes again.
- http://www.ris.ripe.net/dashboard/26347
First suspicious announcement was started 2013-03-06 07:52:40 UTC, and
last seen
On 03/05/2013 05:41 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
I think it's also important to cover the following topics somewhere in the
process:
1. This will affect the entire organization, not just the IT department and
will definitely impact all of apps, sysadmin, devops, operations, and
Folks,
We'd a user account compromised a couple of weeks ago, spam naturally.
We're not getting any response from Gmail's set of contacts, so if
anyone has a working Gmail contact, phone or mail, that they're
willing to share off-list, I'd appreciate it.
Eric Brunner-Williams
On Mar 5, 2013, at 9:55 AM, Mukom Akong T. mukom.ta...@gmail.com wrote:
[…]
b) To you who are managers, what else do you need your engineers to address
in order for you to be convinced?
How long will it take to complete the project?
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Cameron Byrne cb.li...@gmail.com wrote:
So, your position, which is substantiated my Microsoft's / Windows
Phone's / Skype's lack of IPv6 support , is that nobody cares until
we run out of IPv4.
That is clearly reducto ad absurdum and does not resemble
We have recently been having some serious speed issues with YouTube on our home
connections, which are all Time Warner Cable.
Some searching on forums and such revealed a work around:
Block 206.111.0.0/16 at the router.
This makes speeds go from ~1 Mb/s to the full connection speed (30 Mb/s in
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
Matthew wrote:
[...]
1. Decreased application complexity:
Yeah. After IPv4 goes entirely away. Which is a long, long, LONG time from
now. Until then…
I don't think so. I think IPv4's demise as a supported internet
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Mukom Akong T. mukom.ta...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 12:09 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
1. What is the real dollar cost of doing the project (including both
up-front and currently indefinite ongoing costs of dual stack. And
don't
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net wrote:
We have recently been having some serious speed issues with YouTube on our
home connections, which are all Time Warner Cable.
Some searching on forums and such revealed a work around:
Block 206.111.0.0/16 at the
On Wed, 6 Mar 2013, George Herbert wrote:
The mindshare shift is happening, but the change won't snowball until
IT admins - in bulk - really get it.
and keeping in mind that the bulk still don't get ipv4, either, (how
many times a day do I explain to someone what a /xx is, and how you'd fill
- Original Message -
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Randy Carpenter
rcar...@network1.net wrote:
We have recently been having some serious speed issues with YouTube
on our home connections, which are all Time Warner Cable.
Some searching on forums and such revealed a work
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 12:30 PM, david raistrick dr...@icantclick.org wrote:
On Wed, 6 Mar 2013, George Herbert wrote:
The mindshare shift is happening, but the change won't snowball until
IT admins - in bulk - really get it.
and keeping in mind that the bulk still don't get ipv4, either,
On 3/6/2013 9:20 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:29 PM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote:
On 3/5/2013 8:20 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Mar 5, 2013, at 7:55 PM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote:
On 3/5/2013 7:15 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Mar 5, 2013, at 6:46
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net wrote:
- Original Message -
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Randy Carpenter
rcar...@network1.net wrote:
We have recently been having some serious speed issues with YouTube
on our home connections, which are all
From: Matthew Kaufman [mailto:matt...@matthew.at]
They suggest that IPv4 support is needed *in conjunction with* IPv6
support for 5-8 years.
That's a long time if you're developing software... so, basically, no...
no cost or effort saving if you were to do this work today. In fact, 2x
the
I'd like to help, too, I'm from a TWC business class site with 650 Mbps
bandwidth and still regularly poor performance with YouTube.
-Rick
Sent from my iPhone 4S
On Mar 6, 2013, at 4:10 PM, Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Randy Carpenter
I don't think it's just Time Warner. Definitely looks like XO. I have
Verizon FiOS and it was pretty bad for me as well (not sure if it still is
since I'm not home right now). There's also atleast two threads in the
Verizon FiOS section on Broadband Reports:
Can any one provide traceroutes to youtube to see if there is any
correlation between last mile providers?
-Grant
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Derek Ivey de...@derekivey.com wrote:
I don't think it's just Time Warner. Definitely looks like XO. I have
Verizon FiOS and it was pretty bad for
I just got home and tested with quite a few 1080p videos. No issues over
my Hurricane Electric IPv6 tunnel. I did notice frequent stops to buffer
on my FiOS IPv4 connection. I have a 50 Mbps down connection and don't
even come close to maxing it when watching Youtube videos.
Here are a few
3 traces all indicated the last hub are 80~100ms faster than the
second last hub. Interesting.
Min
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:07 PM, Derek Ivey de...@derekivey.com wrote:
I just got home and tested with quite a few 1080p videos. No issues over my
Hurricane Electric IPv6 tunnel. I did notice
The 1st one gets slow at XO and the 2nd and 3rd get slow at Sprint.
Now the interesting one with XO is that it is routed in a /30 that is
assigned to Google by XO.
network:Class-Name:network
network:ID:NET-XO-NET-d1302a54
network:Auth-Area:209.48.0.0/15
network:Network-Name:XO-NET-d1302a54
On Mar 6, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Jeroen van Aart jer...@mompl.net wrote:
On 03/05/2013 05:41 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
I think it's also important to cover the following topics somewhere in the
process:
1. This will affect the entire organization, not just the IT department and
will
One thing to keep in mind is that youtube may be anycast. Google's
distributed file system is pretty amazing and it could be traffic to one
specific datacenter that is possibly slow.
-Grant
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Min qiu.mi...@gmail.com wrote:
I use FIOS. In my case, I suspected two
I use FIOS. Here is my result:
HostLoss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1. Wireless_Broadband_Router.home0.0% 165 285.1 563.9 68.2 2007. 376.1
2. L100.WASHDC-VFTTP-127.verizon-gn 0.0% 165 299.8 560.3 59.1 2021. 384.4
3.
Why are your response times so high at your first hop? Are you maxing
out your connection or connected to your router over wireless?
Derek
On 3/6/2013 9:58 PM, Min wrote:
I use FIOS. Here is my result:
HostLoss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1.
yes, i'm use wireless at home.
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:03 PM, Derek Ivey de...@derekivey.com wrote:
Why are your response times so high at your first hop? Are you maxing out
your connection or connected to your router over wireless?
Derek
On 3/6/2013 9:58 PM, Min wrote:
I use FIOS.
That looks like your problem right there. Have you tried connecting via
ethernet instead and seeing how Youtube performs?
On 3/6/2013 10:09 PM, Min wrote:
yes, i'm use wireless at home.
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:03 PM, Derek Ivey de...@derekivey.com wrote:
Why are your response times so high
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 18:48 -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Mar 6, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Jeroen van Aart jer...@mompl.net wrote:
Adapting your current software to IPv6, that could be more tricky.
Although if you use the right IPv6 aware libraries and functions it
could be relatively easy in code.
I've been seeing the same thing and was thinking it was me.
Just to add to some of the results here...
Verizon FIOS
132 ms 3 ms 5 ms l100.cmdnnj-vfttp-27.verizon-gni.net
[98.110.113.1]
233 ms 6 ms 7 ms g0-3-3-7.cmdnnj-lcr-22.verizon-gni.net
[130.81.183.186]
3
On Mar 6, 2013, at 10:30 PM, Robert M. Enger en...@enger.us wrote:
1) You can use wireshark or other monitor to determine the IP address that
your video stream is originating from.
I just used the Developer Tools in Google Chrome to figure this out.
2) Upstream traceroutes to that
I think your trace routes are just to their web servers. You need to figure out
where the actual videos are being streamed from. I used the Developer Tools
(Network tab) in Google Chrome to figure this out. The FQDNs will probably look
like the ones in my trace routes.
Derek
On Mar 6, 2013,
1) You can use wireshark or other monitor to determine the IP address that your
video stream is originating from.
2) Upstream traceroutes to that address are probably not of that much interest.
The downstream path (carrying the video from the server to your house) can
follow a different
Not sure how to avoid the legal entanglements my employer has placed in the
IT teams path but I'll try to provide a real-world example without
breaking confidentially agreements we all were required to sign for
continued employment at a very large US-based bank.
Our senior IT team had proposed a
Yup... This might be more helpful.
I went to r19.sn-p5qlsm7d.c.youtube.com for better comparison.
Verizon FIOS
1 8 ms 4 ms 4 ms l100.cmdnnj-vfttp-27.verizon-gni.net
[98.110.113.1]
2 9 ms 6 ms 7 ms g0-3-3-6.cmdnnj-lcr-22.verizon-gni.net
[130.81.182.44]
310
On Mar 7, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Jerry Klonaper wrote:
It wasn't due to the lack of selling to executives, as this thread contends
can be done, but due to the lack of any business case that could be found.
Is the deployment in such a state that rollout can be resumed if/when it's
deemed a
On Mar 6, 2013, at 11:31 PM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Mar 7, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Jerry Klonaper wrote:
It wasn't due to the lack of selling to executives, as this thread contends
can be done, but due to the lack of any business case that could be found.
Is the
On Mar 7, 2013, at 11:36 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
I would pitch it as follows: We need to at least have IPv6 access to
troubleshoot/understand customers that have dual-stack technology.
That's a great point, but my guess is that the suits will say that since none
of their customers are using
I know only too well that Verizon's peering with Cogent in the DC/IAD
area is beyond saturated. Looking at the traceroute you have below it
would appear to be the same problem:
5 0.xe-10-0-0.BR2.IAD8.ALTER.NET (152.63.38.165) 15.007 ms 15.109 ms
14.975 ms
6 144.232.8.209 (144.232.8.209)
Jumping into the bandwagon here to help out.
Here's the result from RIT to r19.sn-p5qlsm7d.c.youtube.com, going through
at least 4 hops through XO territory.
traceroute to r19.sn-p5qlsm7d.c.youtube.com (208.117.251.184), 30 hops max,
60 byte packets
1 rit-west1-gw-014-vlan453.rit.edu
RIT is probably on a commercial circuit and from what i have seen on this
chain so far, it is only affecting home/consumer users. At MSOE (msoe.edu)
i dont show any latency but we are on TWTC. Anyone chime in if that is
wrong.
-Grant
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:46 PM, Mark Jeremy mej...@rit.edu
On Mar 6, 2013, at 3:13 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
...
I'm sorry, but a lot of organizations' response to IPv6 has been Ok,
desktops will need an overlay of it for some websites in AP next year,
so we'll do that. And we need an IPv6 front end visibility for our
52 matches
Mail list logo
