Re: Youtube CDN unreachable over IPv6

2016-01-14 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks 
On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 16:04:54 +0100, Seth Mos said:

> lsintra:~# telnet 62.214.62.205 443

> lsintra:~# telnet 2001:1438:1:2::d 443

> Is it possible for Google to realize some form of internal monitoring to
> catch these defunct dual stack nodes?

A traceroute to both would help greatly in determining whether it's really
Google's fault, or if your ipv6 routing is borked.


pgpX3_sOdXMzt.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Inferring the location points of traffic exchange between two networks

2016-01-14 Thread Michael Hallgren 
Le 13/01/2016 18:36, Reza Motamedi a écrit :
> Hi NANOG,
>
> I am researcher at the University of Oregon and my question is rather
> primitive. My research background is in networked systems and Internet
> measurement so I know how things work in theory.
>
> My question is about BGP and what can be inferred from the output of
> different "show" commands, regarding the point of traffic exchange of two
> networks with different ASNs. I tried going through the some samples on
> Juniper and Cisco documentations but I did not get my answer.
>
> Consider the following scenario; Say the point of traffic exchange between
> AS_a and AS_b is in San Francisco and we run "show bgp summary" and "show
> ip bgp "on a BGP router of AS_a in LA. Do we see the peering
> between AS_a and AS_b in San Francisco using any of the two commands. If
> yes is there a way to infer that in fact the traffic is not exchanged
> locally in LA? I think there should be a flag to differentiate records
> showing iBGP vs eBGP.
>
> On the same note, if we issue the commands on a router other than the
> border router in San Fran, is there any difference in the output of show
> commands?
>
> Now how are things different if we actually run the commands on that
> gateway router in SF?


Hi Reza,

A reasonably recent paper discussing AS relationships:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.2417.

Cheers,

mh

>
> Best Regards
> Reza Motamedi (R.M)
> Graduate Research Fellow
> Oregon Network Research Group
> Computer and Information Science
> University of Oregon

Re: Looking for Yahoo eMail contact

2016-01-14 Thread Jonathan Smith 
Wait I thought that was NTF, (No Trouble Found), as it magically cleared
up.  Amazing what was/is done to avoid reporting issues/problems to the PUC
or the like.

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Larry Sheldon  wrote:

> On 1/12/2016 03:47, Marc Storck wrote:
>
>> Today the situation cleared on it’s own as it appears. (at least I
>> haven’t been notified of any human action)
>>
>
> Ancient wire-line telephone and telegraph (aka "data" in the latter days)
> technology, trouble ticket code "CCWT" ("Came Clear While Testing").
>
>
> --
> sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Juvenal)
>

Re: verizon fios bounced a legit private email of mine telling me it was spam and they would not allow it

2016-01-14 Thread Dan Hollis 

This is what's going on at verizon.

http://www.spamhaus.org/news/article/726/

-Dan

On Wed, 13 Jan 2016, Gordon Cook wrote:


dear Nanog

Sorry to bother you,   I am sitting here in shock,   I have been a Verizon to  
FiOS customer for about the past six years at least I think maybe eight.
every now and then the Verizon server will bounce an email back and tell me 
that it’s busy or not functioning but just now it bounced one back and I’m 
sorry I don’t have a screenshot of what it said but it clearly said that it 
considered me to be a spammer.   I may be a lot of things but a spammer I am 
not.  ;-)   when I get an email bounced back Apple OS X  always volunteers to 
use the pair networks server and I always automatically take that choice giving 
it never a second thought.

it also reminded me that there was a limit on the amount of private emails a 
customer could send.

And it said I needed to take the alleged spam and send it to

spamdetector.upd...@verizon.net  and if I remember correctly wait at least an 
hour and then try to send the message again.

Stating very clearly that no human being would talk to me.

what in God’s name is going on?   Please a year and a half or two years ago 
when a route  to Ecuador was being filtered a couple of NANOG folk  knew whom 
to contact and the problem was fixed in record time.   I am hoping   that I 
will experience the same thing.   I should not be a stranger to any old time 
Nanog-ers.   but right now I’m feeling really paranoid!

Re: verizon fios bounced a legit private email of mine telling me it was spam and they would not allow it

2016-01-14 Thread Eric Oosting 
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Christopher Morrow <
morrowc.li...@gmail.com> wrote:

> '4 MILLION IP ADDRESSES!!!'
>

What is that, an /106?

-e


> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Dan Hollis 
> wrote:
> > This is what's going on at verizon.
> >
> > http://www.spamhaus.org/news/article/726/
> >
> > -Dan
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 13 Jan 2016, Gordon Cook wrote:
> >
> >> dear Nanog
> >>
> >> Sorry to bother you,   I am sitting here in shock,   I have been a
> Verizon
> >> to  FiOS customer for about the past six years at least I think maybe
> eight.
> >> every now and then the Verizon server will bounce an email back and
> tell me
> >> that it’s busy or not functioning but just now it bounced one back and
> I’m
> >> sorry I don’t have a screenshot of what it said but it clearly said
> that it
> >> considered me to be a spammer.   I may be a lot of things but a spammer
> I am
> >> not.  ;-)   when I get an email bounced back Apple OS X  always
> volunteers
> >> to use the pair networks server and I always automatically take that
> choice
> >> giving it never a second thought.
> >>
> >> it also reminded me that there was a limit on the amount of private
> emails
> >> a customer could send.
> >>
> >> And it said I needed to take the alleged spam and send it to
> >>
> >> spamdetector.upd...@verizon.net  and if I remember correctly wait at
> least
> >> an hour and then try to send the message again.
> >>
> >> Stating very clearly that no human being would talk to me.
> >>
> >> what in God’s name is going on?   Please a year and a half or two years
> >> ago when a route  to Ecuador was being filtered a couple of NANOG folk
> knew
> >> whom to contact and the problem was fixed in record time.   I am hoping
> >> that I will experience the same thing.   I should not be a stranger to
> any
> >> old time Nanog-ers.   but right now I’m feeling really paranoid!
> >>
> >
>

Re: verizon fios bounced a legit private email of mine telling me it was spam and they would not allow it

2016-01-14 Thread Christopher Morrow 
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Eric Oosting  wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Christopher Morrow
>  wrote:
>>
>> '4 MILLION IP ADDRESSES!!!'
>
>
> What is that, an /106?

FALSE! only ipv4 on fios!! silly people and their 'more than 32 bits'
addresses... ha! fiction I say!!

> -e
>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Dan Hollis 
>> wrote:
>> > This is what's going on at verizon.
>> >
>> > http://www.spamhaus.org/news/article/726/
>> >
>> > -Dan
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, 13 Jan 2016, Gordon Cook wrote:
>> >
>> >> dear Nanog
>> >>
>> >> Sorry to bother you,   I am sitting here in shock,   I have been a
>> >> Verizon
>> >> to  FiOS customer for about the past six years at least I think maybe
>> >> eight.
>> >> every now and then the Verizon server will bounce an email back and
>> >> tell me
>> >> that it’s busy or not functioning but just now it bounced one back and
>> >> I’m
>> >> sorry I don’t have a screenshot of what it said but it clearly said
>> >> that it
>> >> considered me to be a spammer.   I may be a lot of things but a spammer
>> >> I am
>> >> not.  ;-)   when I get an email bounced back Apple OS X  always
>> >> volunteers
>> >> to use the pair networks server and I always automatically take that
>> >> choice
>> >> giving it never a second thought.
>> >>
>> >> it also reminded me that there was a limit on the amount of private
>> >> emails
>> >> a customer could send.
>> >>
>> >> And it said I needed to take the alleged spam and send it to
>> >>
>> >> spamdetector.upd...@verizon.net  and if I remember correctly wait at
>> >> least
>> >> an hour and then try to send the message again.
>> >>
>> >> Stating very clearly that no human being would talk to me.
>> >>
>> >> what in God’s name is going on?   Please a year and a half or two years
>> >> ago when a route  to Ecuador was being filtered a couple of NANOG folk
>> >> knew
>> >> whom to contact and the problem was fixed in record time.   I am hoping
>> >> that I will experience the same thing.   I should not be a stranger to
>> >> any
>> >> old time Nanog-ers.   but right now I’m feeling really paranoid!
>> >>
>> >
>
>

Re: verizon fios bounced a legit private email of mine telling me it was spam and they would not allow it

2016-01-14 Thread Christopher Morrow 
'4 MILLION IP ADDRESSES!!!'

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Dan Hollis  wrote:
> This is what's going on at verizon.
>
> http://www.spamhaus.org/news/article/726/
>
> -Dan
>
>
> On Wed, 13 Jan 2016, Gordon Cook wrote:
>
>> dear Nanog
>>
>> Sorry to bother you,   I am sitting here in shock,   I have been a Verizon
>> to  FiOS customer for about the past six years at least I think maybe eight.
>> every now and then the Verizon server will bounce an email back and tell me
>> that it’s busy or not functioning but just now it bounced one back and I’m
>> sorry I don’t have a screenshot of what it said but it clearly said that it
>> considered me to be a spammer.   I may be a lot of things but a spammer I am
>> not.  ;-)   when I get an email bounced back Apple OS X  always volunteers
>> to use the pair networks server and I always automatically take that choice
>> giving it never a second thought.
>>
>> it also reminded me that there was a limit on the amount of private emails
>> a customer could send.
>>
>> And it said I needed to take the alleged spam and send it to
>>
>> spamdetector.upd...@verizon.net  and if I remember correctly wait at least
>> an hour and then try to send the message again.
>>
>> Stating very clearly that no human being would talk to me.
>>
>> what in God’s name is going on?   Please a year and a half or two years
>> ago when a route  to Ecuador was being filtered a couple of NANOG folk  knew
>> whom to contact and the problem was fixed in record time.   I am hoping
>> that I will experience the same thing.   I should not be a stranger to any
>> old time Nanog-ers.   but right now I’m feeling really paranoid!
>>
>

Re: verizon fios bounced a legit private email of mine telling me it was spam and they would not allow it

2016-01-14 Thread Rafael Possamai 
What a disgrace.

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Dan Hollis  wrote:

> This is what's going on at verizon.
>
> http://www.spamhaus.org/news/article/726/
>
> -Dan
>
>

USPS web/network admin

2016-01-14 Thread Justin Wilson 
Any chance someone responsible for the USPS web-site and access is on here? I 
have a ticket open and was making progress but then it was dropped.




Justin Wilson
j...@mtin.net

---
http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO
xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth

http://www.midwest-ix.com  COO/Chairman

Re: verizon fios bounced a legit private email of mine telling me it was spam and they would not allow it

2016-01-14 Thread Dan Hollis 

complacency. it's a winning formula.

-Dan

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016, Christopher Morrow wrote:


'4 MILLION IP ADDRESSES!!!'

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Dan Hollis  wrote:

This is what's going on at verizon.

http://www.spamhaus.org/news/article/726/

-Dan


On Wed, 13 Jan 2016, Gordon Cook wrote:


dear Nanog

Sorry to bother you,   I am sitting here in shock,   I have been a Verizon
to  FiOS customer for about the past six years at least I think maybe eight.
every now and then the Verizon server will bounce an email back and tell me
that it’s busy or not functioning but just now it bounced one back and I’m
sorry I don’t have a screenshot of what it said but it clearly said that it
considered me to be a spammer.   I may be a lot of things but a spammer I am
not.  ;-)   when I get an email bounced back Apple OS X  always volunteers
to use the pair networks server and I always automatically take that choice
giving it never a second thought.

it also reminded me that there was a limit on the amount of private emails
a customer could send.

And it said I needed to take the alleged spam and send it to

spamdetector.upd...@verizon.net  and if I remember correctly wait at least
an hour and then try to send the message again.

Stating very clearly that no human being would talk to me.

what in God’s name is going on?   Please a year and a half or two years
ago when a route  to Ecuador was being filtered a couple of NANOG folk  knew
whom to contact and the problem was fixed in record time.   I am hoping
that I will experience the same thing.   I should not be a stranger to any
old time Nanog-ers.   but right now I’m feeling really paranoid!

[NANOG-announce] NANOG 66 Update

2016-01-14 Thread Betty Burke <be...@nanog.org> 
NANOGers,

We are beginning our final preparations in support of NANOG 66, February
8-9, 2016 in San Diego, CA. It is our hope the following highlights and
reminders will be of help to you.

The NANOG Program Committee has once again presented a great program.
The NANOG
66 Agenda  is posted, with
updates being provided as warranted.

Consider attending, the Conference Registration
 will increase soon!  Also,
take a moment to join NANOG  or renew your
existing Membership.

• Early Bird Registration starting October 26, 2015

(member $425, non-member $450, student $100)

• Standard Registration starting January 15, 2016

(member $500, non-member $525, student $100)

• Late Registration starting January 23, 2016

(member $575, non-member $600, student $100)

• On-Site Registration starting February 5, 2016

(member $650, non-member $675, student $100)



The conference hotel  (Sheraton
San Diego Hotel & Marina ) has a few
rooms remaining, and the secondary room block hotel, (Hilton San Diego
)
is available. However, both room blocks are set to expire very soon.  Be
sure to get your reservation made ASAP.

We welcome those attendees  and
conference sponsors  already
planning to join us for an exiting NANOG 66 program and the evening social
events.

Also, another reminder, the NANOG Communications
 and Program
 Committee Nominations
are open through noon Eastern February 8, 2016.  The engagement of NANOG
Committee members is very important, please do consider volunteering.

Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact
nanog-supp...@nanog.org  or email directly.

Sincerely,

Betty

Betty J. Burke
NANOG Executive Director
2864 Carpenter Rd., Ste 100
Ann Arbor, MI 48108
+1 866-902-1336
___
NANOG-announce mailing list
nanog-annou...@mailman.nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

RE: SMS gateways

2016-01-14 Thread Matthew Huff 
According to AT sales, the Netgear Beam is a "data-only" device and cannot 
send SMS when I just tried to order one. I wouldn't care what they thought, but 
they won't let me set up a plan that includes text. Anyone have any suggestions?



Matthew Huff | 1 Manhattanville Rd
Director of Operations   | Purchase, NY 10577
OTA Management LLC   | Phone: 914-460-4039
aim: matthewbhuff    | Fax:   914-694-5669

> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Adam Kennedy
> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 1:26 AM
> To: Ray Orsini 
> Cc: John Levine ; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: SMS gateways
> 
> It was some special offer on our AT small business site. Maybe they
> were
> $40 each. I wasn't the one that ordered them but I know they were pretty
> cheap and so far working fine!
> 
> 
> Adam Kennedy | Network & Systems Engineer
> 
> Broadband Networks
> 
> A Watch Communications Company
> 
> PO Box 8 | Rushville, Indiana | 46173
> 
> Tel - 866-586-1518 | Fax - 866-567-3897
> 
> adamkenn...@broadbandnetworks.com
> 
> www.broadbandnetworks.com
> 
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Ray Orsini  wrote:
> 
> > We use those a lot with mobile hotspots. Where did you find them for
> $20?
> > We
> > usually pay about 2x that much for used untis.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ray Orsini – CEO
> > Orsini IT, LLC – Technology Consultants VOICE DATA  BANDWIDTH 
> > SECURITY  SUPPORT
> > P: 305.967.6756 x1009   E: r...@orsiniit.com   TF: 844.OIT.VOIP
> > 7900 NW 155th Street, Suite 103, Miami Lakes, FL 33016
> > http://www.orsiniit.com | View My Calendar | View/Pay Your Invoices |
> > View Your Tickets
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Adam Kennedy
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 12:56 AM
> > To: frnk...@iname.com
> > Cc: John Levine ; nanog@nanog.org
> > Subject: Re: SMS gateways
> >
> > I picked up two of the AT "Beam" USB devices that use the LTE
> network.
> > Netgear is the listed manufacturer and has firmware for the units that
> > makes them usable on Linux. I loaded the driver for those into a
> > Debian box and I'm able to use smstools open source software to send
> > SMS from the unit directly to cell network. The AT Beam's were $20 I
> > think and cost us about $15/mo as additional lines on our corporate
> > plan.
> >
> >
> > Adam Kennedy | Network & Systems Engineer
> >
> > Broadband Networks
> >
> > A Watch Communications Company
> >
> > PO Box 8 | Rushville, Indiana | 46173
> >
> > Tel - 866-586-1518 | Fax - 866-567-3897
> >
> > adamkenn...@broadbandnetworks.com
> >
> > www.broadbandnetworks.com
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 12:52 AM, Adam Kennedy
> > 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I picked up two of the AT "Beam" USB devices that use the LTE
> network.
> > > Netgear is the listed manufacturer and has firmware for the units
> > > that makes them usable on Linux. I loaded the driver for those into
> > > a Debian box and I'm able to use smstools open source software to
> > > send SMS from the unit directly to cell network. The AT Beam's
> > > were $20 I think and cost us about $15/mo as additional lines on our
> corporate plan.
> > >
> > >
> > > Adam Kennedy | Network & Systems Engineer
> > >
> > > Broadband Networks
> > >
> > > A Watch Communications Company
> > >
> > > PO Box 8 | Rushville, Indiana | 46173
> > >
> > > Tel - 866-586-1518 | Fax - 866-567-3897
> > >
> > > adamkenn...@broadbandnetworks.com
> > >
> > > www.broadbandnetworks.com
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:38 PM,  wrote:
> > >
> > >> I plan to continue living in a rural area with a GSM provider that
> > >> will support 2G. =)
> > >>
> > >> Frank
> > >>
> > >> -Original Message-
> > >> From: John Levine [mailto:jo...@iecc.com]
> > >> Sent: Saturday, January 09, 2016 5:24 PM
> > >> To: nanog@nanog.org
> > >> Cc: frnk...@iname.com
> > >> Subject: Re: SMS gateways
> > >>
> > >> In article <006501d14b31$7c478e40$74d6aac0$@iname.com> you write:
> > >> >Surprised no one has mentioned the Multimodem iSMS:
> > >> http://www.multitech.com/brands/multimodem-isms
> > >> >
> > >> >Been using it for 5+ years -- first three years the code wasn't
> > >> >stable,
> > >> needing a reboot every few months,
> > >> >but the latest code has been stable for 2+ years.
> > >>
> > >> It looked interesting until I got to the part where it says it uses
> > >> a 2G GSM modem.  AT has said quite firmly that they will turn off
> > >> their 2G network in 2017, and press reports say that T-Mobile is
> > >> already turning off 2G in favor of LTE.
> > >>
> > >> What do you plan to do instead next year?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >

RE: SMS gateways

2016-01-14 Thread Ray Orsini 
I can confirm that the device can send texts. I use the same 320U and 340U
with AT and T-Mobile sims. Text is actually how they reset your account
password if you need it. I use the prepaid plans.

Regards,

Ray Orsini – CEO
Orsini IT, LLC – Technology Consultants
VOICE DATA  BANDWIDTH  SECURITY  SUPPORT
P: 305.967.6756 x1009   E: r...@orsiniit.com   TF: 844.OIT.VOIP
7900 NW 155th Street, Suite 103, Miami Lakes, FL 33016
http://www.orsiniit.com | View My Calendar | View/Pay Your Invoices | View
Your Tickets



-Original Message-
From: Matthew Huff [mailto:mh...@ox.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 9:46 AM
To: Adam Kennedy ; Ray Orsini 
Cc: John Levine ; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: SMS gateways

According to AT sales, the Netgear Beam is a "data-only" device and cannot
send SMS when I just tried to order one. I wouldn't care what they thought,
but they won't let me set up a plan that includes text. Anyone have any
suggestions?



Matthew Huff | 1 Manhattanville Rd Director of Operations   |
Purchase, NY 10577 OTA Management LLC   | Phone: 914-460-4039
aim: matthewbhuff| Fax:   914-694-5669

> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Adam Kennedy
> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 1:26 AM
> To: Ray Orsini 
> Cc: John Levine ; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: SMS gateways
>
> It was some special offer on our AT small business site. Maybe they
> were
> $40 each. I wasn't the one that ordered them but I know they were
> pretty cheap and so far working fine!
>
>
> Adam Kennedy | Network & Systems Engineer
>
> Broadband Networks
>
> A Watch Communications Company
>
> PO Box 8 | Rushville, Indiana | 46173
>
> Tel - 866-586-1518 | Fax - 866-567-3897
>
> adamkenn...@broadbandnetworks.com
>
> www.broadbandnetworks.com
>
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Ray Orsini  wrote:
>
> > We use those a lot with mobile hotspots. Where did you find them for
> $20?
> > We
> > usually pay about 2x that much for used untis.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ray Orsini – CEO
> > Orsini IT, LLC – Technology Consultants VOICE DATA  BANDWIDTH 
> > SECURITY  SUPPORT
> > P: 305.967.6756 x1009   E: r...@orsiniit.com   TF: 844.OIT.VOIP
> > 7900 NW 155th Street, Suite 103, Miami Lakes, FL 33016
> > http://www.orsiniit.com | View My Calendar | View/Pay Your Invoices
> > | View Your Tickets
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Adam
> > Kennedy
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 12:56 AM
> > To: frnk...@iname.com
> > Cc: John Levine ; nanog@nanog.org
> > Subject: Re: SMS gateways
> >
> > I picked up two of the AT "Beam" USB devices that use the LTE
> network.
> > Netgear is the listed manufacturer and has firmware for the units
> > that makes them usable on Linux. I loaded the driver for those into
> > a Debian box and I'm able to use smstools open source software to
> > send SMS from the unit directly to cell network. The AT Beam's
> > were $20 I think and cost us about $15/mo as additional lines on our
> > corporate plan.
> >
> >
> > Adam Kennedy | Network & Systems Engineer
> >
> > Broadband Networks
> >
> > A Watch Communications Company
> >
> > PO Box 8 | Rushville, Indiana | 46173
> >
> > Tel - 866-586-1518 | Fax - 866-567-3897
> >
> > adamkenn...@broadbandnetworks.com
> >
> > www.broadbandnetworks.com
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 12:52 AM, Adam Kennedy
> > 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I picked up two of the AT "Beam" USB devices that use the LTE
> network.
> > > Netgear is the listed manufacturer and has firmware for the units
> > > that makes them usable on Linux. I loaded the driver for those
> > > into a Debian box and I'm able to use smstools open source
> > > software to send SMS from the unit directly to cell network. The
> > > AT Beam's were $20 I think and cost us about $15/mo as
> > > additional lines on our
> corporate plan.
> > >
> > >
> > > Adam Kennedy | Network & Systems Engineer
> > >
> > > Broadband Networks
> > >
> > > A Watch Communications Company
> > >
> > > PO Box 8 | Rushville, Indiana | 46173
> > >
> > > Tel - 866-586-1518 | Fax - 866-567-3897
> > >
> > > adamkenn...@broadbandnetworks.com
> > >
> > > www.broadbandnetworks.com
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:38 PM,  wrote:
> > >
> > >> I plan to continue living in a rural area with a GSM provider
> > >> that will support 2G. =)
> > >>
> > >> Frank
> > >>
> > >> -Original Message-
> > >> From: John Levine [mailto:jo...@iecc.com]
> > >> Sent: Saturday, January 09, 2016 5:24 PM
> > >> To: nanog@nanog.org
> > >> Cc: frnk...@iname.com
> > >> Subject: Re: SMS gateways
> > >>
> > >> In article <006501d14b31$7c478e40$74d6aac0$@iname.com> you write:
> > >> >Surprised no one has mentioned the Multimodem iSMS:
> > >>

Re: Youtube CDN unreachable over IPv6

2016-01-14 Thread Seth Mos 
Op 6-11-2015 om 19:17 schreef Christopher Schmidt via NANOG:
> Hi all,
> 
> Thanks for the reports.
> 
> To the best of our knowledge, this issue has been resolved at this
> time. If you are still having problems connecting to YouTube CDN
> nodes, please feel free to let me know, and I will investigate
> further.

It's here again since this tuesday.

lsintra:~# host r2---sn-8xgn5uxa-i5he.googlevideo.com
r2---sn-8xgn5uxa-i5he.googlevideo.com is an alias for
r2.sn-8xgn5uxa-i5he.googlevideo.com.
r2.sn-8xgn5uxa-i5he.googlevideo.com has address 62.214.62.205
r2.sn-8xgn5uxa-i5he.googlevideo.com has IPv6 address 2001:1438:1:2::d
lsintra:~# telnet 62.214.62.205 443
Trying 62.214.62.205...
Connected to cache.google.com (62.214.62.205).
Escape character is '^]'.
^]
telnet> quit
Connection closed.
lsintra:~# telnet 2001:1438:1:2::d 443
Trying 2001:1438:1:2::d...
^]quit
^]^[^]^C
lsintra:~#

Is it possible for Google to realize some form of internal monitoring to
catch these defunct dual stack nodes?

Kind regards,

Seth


> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Blair Trosper  
> wrote:
>> This was happening two weeks ago in the Bay Area as well.  It happens quite
>> a lot, actually...search for my old threads.  I gave up trying to get it
>> noticed.
> 
> Blair,
> 
> I'm not aware of a similar issue with IPv6 being unavailable while
> IPv4 is available recently.
> 
> I did not see any threads with information in them with the name
> "Blair" attached in either the October archive
> (http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2015-October/thread.html) or
> the September archive
> (http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2015-September/thread.html)
> .
> 
> If this issue is ongoing, I would be happy to look into this;
> otherwise, I don't believe there is any action I can take to assist at
> this time.
> 
> All the best.
> 
> 
>>> * seth@dds.nl (Seth Mos) [Fri 06 Nov 2015, 09:00 CET]:
 Dear Google,

 It appears that one of the Youtube CDN's (in Europe, NL) is not
 reachable over IPv6 from AS 20844. Can someone get back to us on this,
 the company can't access any of the videos currently, although the
 mainpage loads fine (over IPv6).

 Kind regards,

 Seth

 telnet r6---sn-5hne6n76.googlevideo.com 443
 Trying 2a00:1450:401c:4::b...
 telnet: connect to address 2a00:1450:401c:4::b: Connection timed out
 Trying 74.125.100.203...
 Connected to r6.sn-5hne6n76.googlevideo.com (74.125.100.203).
 Escape character is '^]'.
 Connection closed by foreign host.

 telnet www.youtube.com 443
 Trying 2a00:1450:4013:c01::5d...
 Connected to youtube-ui.l.google.com (2a00:1450:4013:c01::5d).
 Escape character is '^]'.
 Connection closed by foreign host.
>>>
>

Re: Youtube CDN unreachable over IPv6

2016-01-14 Thread Seth Mos 
Op 14-1-2016 om 16:37 schreef valdis.kletni...@vt.edu:
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 16:04:54 +0100, Seth Mos said:
> 
>> lsintra:~# telnet 62.214.62.205 443
> 
>> lsintra:~# telnet 2001:1438:1:2::d 443
> 
>> Is it possible for Google to realize some form of internal
>> monitoring to catch these defunct dual stack nodes?
> 
> A traceroute to both would help greatly in determining whether it's
> really Google's fault, or if your ipv6 routing is borked.
> 

I can reach the rest of the Google IPv6 services over IPv6, the player
loads, but the video stream does not.

I've pasted the traceroute below.

seth@ratchet:~$ traceroute 62.214.62.205
traceroute to 62.214.62.205 (62.214.62.205), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
 1  edge-c2f.coltex.nl (91.227.27.41)  88.901 ms  88.932 ms  89.008 ms
 2  91.227.27.3 (91.227.27.3)  0.522 ms  0.568 ms  0.628 ms
 3  90-145-28-101.network.unet.nl (90.145.28.101)  2.104 ms  3.673 ms
 3.665 ms
 4  dus002isp005.versatel.de (80.249.209.109)  11.773 ms  11.612 ms
11.594 ms
 5  10g-9-4.esn001isp005.versatel.de (62.214.110.234)  12.181 ms
12.306 ms  12.  416 ms
 6  ge-05-01-803.dor002isp005.versatel.de (62.214.111.26)  12.174 ms
ge-5-1-853.  dor002isp006.versatel.de
(62.214.111.30)  12.252 ms ge-05-01-803.dor002isp005.ve
   rsatel.de (62.214.111.26)  12.069 ms
 7  dor2is2.versatel.de (62.214.104.170)  13.174 ms
fra20ip6.versatel.de (62.214  .104.174)
12.954 ms  13.159 ms
 8  10g-9-4.hhb002isp005.versatel.de (62.214.110.110)  18.732 ms
10g-8-4.hhb002i  sp005.versatel.de
(62.214.110.122)  19.051 ms  18.653 ms
 9  * * *

seth@ratchet:~$ traceroute 2001:1438:1:2::d
traceroute to 2001:1438:1:2::d (2001:1438:1:2::d), 30 hops max, 80
byte packets
 1  * * cltx-gw.coltex.nl (2001:67c:226c:ff00::1)  4.302 ms
 2  2001:67c:226c:ff01::3 (2001:67c:226c:ff01::3)  0.418 ms  0.418 ms
 0.451 ms
 3  2a02:120:0:200::3:1 (2a02:120:0:200::3:1)  2.205 ms  2.376 ms
2.360 ms
 4  dus002isp005.versatel.de (2001:7f8:1::a500:8881:1)  11.594 ms
11.364 ms  11.523 ms
 5  2001:1438:0:1::4e2 (2001:1438:0:1::4e2)  12.522 ms
2001:1438:0:1::212 (2001:1438:0:1::212)  12.704 ms 2001:1438:0:1::222
(2001:1438:0:1::222)  12.676 ms
 6  2001:1438:0:1::2a2 (2001:1438:0:1::2a2)  63.452 ms
2001:1438:0:1::2b2 (2001:1438:0:1::2b2)  63.572 ms 2001:1438:0:1::2a2
(2001:1438:0:1::2a2)  63.538 ms
 7  2001:1438:0:1::112 (2001:1438:0:1::112)  13.318 ms  13.225 ms
2001:1438:0:1::522 (2001:1438:0:1::522)  13.087 ms
 8  2001:1438:0:1::92 (2001:1438:0:1::92)  18.879 ms
2001:1438:0:1::172 (2001:1438:0:1::172)  19.088 ms 2001:1438:0:1::92
(2001:1438:0:1::92)  18.959 ms
 9  * * *