Re: ASN oddity in the routing
The two networks are forging AS path and that's why you're seeing their IP addresses announced under African ASNs. On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 8:27 PM Ren C. via NANOG wrote: > Hello, I am unsure if there is a better place to ask. I am learning > working on the enabling RPKI and authoritative IRR validation in my day job. > However, I find some very strange ASN grouped together. I understand > several do not bother with RPKI or IRR, especially many large tier 1, which > don't really care or need about other people's transit, but this is very > small and I do not heard of it before. > > In my logs to see which routes have the broken or malformed , frequently > it is just omission and incorrect, but there are some very odd situations, > but it also appears to be verified in other BGP glass. > Can someone please tell me whether these invalid is a bug in the routing? > Why are there so many Africa networks going through a small Virginia > provider and more than half the IP is bogon, but has an IRR entry for the > wrong provider or it is unrelated? It does not look like the AS is related > at all, and they are not in the same country, but there is a relationship > peering. > > https://bgp.he.net/AS208254#_peers6 > https://bgp.he.net/AS398481#_peers6 > > Thank you > > > > -- > Sent with https://mailfence.com > Secure and private email >
Re: FCC vs FAA Story
Hi Sabri The flight cancellations are already happening, now if weather threatens to make a RA required approach necessary at an airport covered by a 5G NOTAM the flight is frequently cancelled. Have you not noticed that during inclement weather this year the number of cancellations has vastly increased over previous years Airlines have no desire to deal with the ambulance chasers and if they can avoid the possibility by cancellation of flights they will do so. On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 11:48 AM Sabri Berisha wrote: > [replying to both to reduce the number of mails] > > - On Jun 6, 2022, at 5:31 PM, Stephen Sprunk step...@sprunk.org wrote: > > >> On Jun 6, 2022, at 09:55, John R. Levine wrote: > > >> Instead the FAA stuck their fingers in their ears and said no, nothing > can ever > >> change, we can't hear you. Are you surprised the telecom industry is > fed up? > > Of course, I'm not surprised. But, remember one thing: this is the > government > messing up. One branch pitted against the other. As an innocent citizen, I > could > not care less: the government effed up. > > > Exactly. The FAA wants more delays while they do the work they should > have done > > five years ago, but sorry, that’s not how politics works. The number of > daily > > 5G users is orders of magnitude larger than the number of daily airline > users, > > so the FCC *will* win this battle. > > The FCC might win a battle, or even a lot of battles. All it takes is one > downed > aircraft with crying families all over CNN, followed by an NTSB > investigation > which only needs to mention 5G interference with RAs, and I will bet you > $50 that > ambulance chasing lawyers will sue everything and everyone connected to > the 5G > debate that even remotely advocated rolling out 5G over concerns for > passenger > safety. > > Or, of course, the FAA will really play dirty politics and ground aircraft > fitted > with certain RAs during a holiday weekend. Watch how quick public and > political > opinions can shift. Remember, most privacy invading laws usually pass with > the > "for the children" and "against the terrorists" arguments. > > Sorry, this aircraft is fitted with an altimeter which may be subject to 5G > interference, thus we have to cancel your flight. You know, for the > children. > > Thanks, > > Sabri >
ASN oddity in the routing
Hello, I am unsure if there is a better place to ask. I am learning working on the enabling RPKI and authoritative IRR validation in my day job. However, I find some very strange ASN grouped together. I understand several do not bother with RPKI or IRR, especially many large tier 1, which don't really care or need about other people's transit, but this is very small and I do not heard of it before. In my logs to see which routes have the broken or malformed , frequently it is just omission and incorrect, but there are some very odd situations, but it also appears to be verified in other BGP glass. Can someone please tell me whether these invalid is a bug in the routing? Why are there so many Africa networks going through a small Virginia provider and more than half the IP is bogon, but has an IRR entry for the wrong provider or it is unrelated? It does not look like the AS is related at all, and they are not in the same country, but there is a relationship peering. https://bgp.he.net/AS208254#_peers6 https://bgp.he.net/AS398481#_peers6 Thank you -- Sent with https://mailfence.com Secure and private email
Re: [EXTERNAL] FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers
Hi, > On Jun 7, 2022, at 8:54 AM, Livingood, Jason via NANOG > wrote: >> I think peak demand should be flattening in the past year? There’s only so >> much 4k video to consume, so many big games to download? > I doubt it - demand continues to grow at a pretty normal year-over-year rate > and has been doing so for 25+ years. I don't see that sort of trajectory > changing. I’m with Jason. If even a small percentage of the “representative use cases” that came out of the ITU’s Network 2030 Focus Group or other similar efforts comes to pass, bandwidth demand will continue to grow. Regards, -drc signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers
On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 8:55 AM Livingood, Jason wrote: > > > I think peak demand should be flattening in the past year? There's > only so much 4k video to consume, so many big games to download? > > I doubt it - demand continues to grow at a pretty normal year-over-year rate > and has been doing so for 25+ years. I don't see that sort of trajectory > changing. Dennard scaling ended in 2006. The US birthrate is negative. Wage growth is illusory. There are only 16 hours in a day where content can be consumed, and time on the internet is at an all time high. > JL > -- FQ World Domination pending: https://blog.cerowrt.org/post/state_of_fq_codel/ Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers
> is gatekeeping what users MIGHT do, and/or deciding based on corner cases > helpful to this discussion? (this isn't meant as a note directly to dorn, just a convenient place to interject) > Aside from planning based on a formula like Jason Livingood's plan... OR > based on build/deploy/upgrade costs into pricing. most of the rest of the conversation here sounds like gatekeeping: > "Well, who needs that anyway?" Good point. IMO, trying to guess at user needs is a bit of a fool's errand, because user needs are so diverse and constantly changing based on the push-pull of their interests and application capabilities. So I don’t think it is even worth trying. Rather, if you are building a network or giving grants to support that, make sure the network technology is flexible/adaptive to be able to grow capacity over time, and then define some required minimum of per-home capacity based on the trailing CAGR formula I proposed. That'll be good enough & adapts based on user demand/behavior and app availability/capability. JL
Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers
> I think peak demand should be flattening in the past year? There's only so much 4k video to consume, so many big games to download? I doubt it - demand continues to grow at a pretty normal year-over-year rate and has been doing so for 25+ years. I don't see that sort of trajectory changing. JL
Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers
On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 8:24 AM Livingood, Jason via NANOG wrote: > > A related observation – years ago we gave cable modem bootfiles to a group of > customers that had no rate shaping according to their subscription and > compared that to existing customers (with an academic researcher). The > experiment group did not know of the change, so it could not influence their > behavior. We observed that peak demand generally hit a plateau that was well > below available capacity & this was driven by existing applications & > associated user behavior. There’s obviously a chicken-or-egg problem with > capacity & apps to use that capacity, but most ISPs raise end user speeds at > least annually and try to stay ahead of increases in peak demand. I think peak demand should be flattening in the past year? There's only so much 4k video to consume, so many big games to download? My curve seems closer to a doubling of the average usage over 10 years. It would be really radical of me to start yelling "peak bandwidth" a la peak oil without more study... A very informal survey of those that had deployed higher rates on mikrotik stuff at WISPAMERICA had all 5 of the people rolling their eyes and saying avg downloads had gone from 2 to 3Mbit upon doubling or more their allocated bandwidth, and they had no congestive issues on their network peering. There was also a technical limitation in the mikrotik deployment in that they use very short queues by default (50 packets) for either the fifo or (the common) SFQ deployments. Shapers were universally used by this small group, and they were unaware of the sideffects of such short queues. I also took apart a recent ubnt 60Ghz radio's behaviors, and that was FQ'd and also with very short queues... and what looked like ack synthesis... with no options to change the configuration. I am thinking in part the lack of measured WISP "demand" for more bandwidth is in part due to overly short (as opposed to bufferbloated) queues! There's a really long thread over here with the mikrotik userbase going to town on fq_codel and cake: https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?p=937633#p925485 > > > JL > > > > From: NANOG on > behalf of Jim Troutman > Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 at 19:29 > To: Tony Wicks > Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" > Subject: Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers > > > > Some usage data: > > > > On a rural FTTX XGS-PON network with primarily 1Gig symmetric customers, I > see about 1.5mbit/customer average inbound across 7 days, peaks at about > 10mbit/customer, with 1 minute polling. Zero congestion in middle mile, > transit or peering. > > -- FQ World Domination pending: https://blog.cerowrt.org/post/state_of_fq_codel/ Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
10th anniversary of Wireless Emergency Alerts
June 7, 2022 is the 10th anniversary of Wireless Emergency Alerts in the United States. About 30 countries now use the mobile alert protocol (with country specific names). WEA is that thing which makes your phone buzz loudly and vibrate when there is an emergency message in your area. Wildfires, tornadoes, tsunamis, amber alerts, evacuations, etc. One upcoming change, the US is changing the name "Presidential Alert" to "National Alert". This will help tourists and mobile phones in other countries with Prime Ministers. In the US, the National Alert has only been used for tests. Its more common to get Amber Alerts and Imminent Threat Alerts. Another change, for some reason which Apple hasn't explained, Apple is changing how you can opt-in to local test messages. I assume its because carriers got too many complaints from customers which turned on test emergency alerts accident. Test Alerts are disabled by default. Previously, users could enable test emergency alerts with a keypad code. Now Apple requires downloadeding a special Test Alerts profile every year. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202743 Again, normal users do not need Test Emergency Alerts. These are intended for testing by local authorities. I have no idea why Apple is making the change. Android phones are unchanged. Amazon Alexa devices can enable severe weather alerts. Say, “Alexa, tell me when there’s a severe weather alert.” Or change it in the Alexa App under Settings >Notifications >Severe Weather Alerts.
Re: FCC vs FAA Story
[replying to both to reduce the number of mails] - On Jun 6, 2022, at 5:31 PM, Stephen Sprunk step...@sprunk.org wrote: >> On Jun 6, 2022, at 09:55, John R. Levine wrote: >> Instead the FAA stuck their fingers in their ears and said no, nothing can >> ever >> change, we can't hear you. Are you surprised the telecom industry is fed up? Of course, I'm not surprised. But, remember one thing: this is the government messing up. One branch pitted against the other. As an innocent citizen, I could not care less: the government effed up. > Exactly. The FAA wants more delays while they do the work they should have > done > five years ago, but sorry, that’s not how politics works. The number of daily > 5G users is orders of magnitude larger than the number of daily airline users, > so the FCC *will* win this battle. The FCC might win a battle, or even a lot of battles. All it takes is one downed aircraft with crying families all over CNN, followed by an NTSB investigation which only needs to mention 5G interference with RAs, and I will bet you $50 that ambulance chasing lawyers will sue everything and everyone connected to the 5G debate that even remotely advocated rolling out 5G over concerns for passenger safety. Or, of course, the FAA will really play dirty politics and ground aircraft fitted with certain RAs during a holiday weekend. Watch how quick public and political opinions can shift. Remember, most privacy invading laws usually pass with the "for the children" and "against the terrorists" arguments. Sorry, this aircraft is fitted with an altimeter which may be subject to 5G interference, thus we have to cancel your flight. You know, for the children. Thanks, Sabri
Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers
A related observation – years ago we gave cable modem bootfiles to a group of customers that had no rate shaping according to their subscription and compared that to existing customers (with an academic researcher). The experiment group did not know of the change, so it could not influence their behavior. We observed that peak demand generally hit a plateau that was well below available capacity & this was driven by existing applications & associated user behavior. There’s obviously a chicken-or-egg problem with capacity & apps to use that capacity, but most ISPs raise end user speeds at least annually and try to stay ahead of increases in peak demand. JL From: NANOG on behalf of Jim Troutman Date: Monday, June 6, 2022 at 19:29 To: Tony Wicks Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" Subject: Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers Some usage data: On a rural FTTX XGS-PON network with primarily 1Gig symmetric customers, I see about 1.5mbit/customer average inbound across 7 days, peaks at about 10mbit/customer, with 1 minute polling. Zero congestion in middle mile, transit or peering.
Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers
Faster off the line then more open connections are always available putting less strain on providers and endpoints allowing them to serve more people right off the line. But we all know where bandwidth goes... once it's increased. ;) -- J. Hellenthal The fact that there's a highway to Hell but only a stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume. > On Jun 7, 2022, at 09:45, Denis Fondras wrote: > > Le Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 08:12:07AM -0500, Mike Hammett a écrit : >> Would it matter if it took 10 minutes or an hour? >> > > Yes, it means the computer could be off for 50 minutes. > Also everyone who had a connection reset when uploading a big file after 55 > minutes understands why it is good if it only would take 10 minutes. > > Peace of mind is under-rated :) > >> >> What's the OneDrive rate limit? >> >> >> >> >> - >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> Midwest-IX >> http://www.midwest-ix.com >> >> - Original Message - >> >> From: "Tony Wicks" >> To: nanog@nanog.org >> Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 5:36:13 PM >> Subject: RE: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers >> >> >> >>> This whole thread is about hypothetical futures, so it's not hard to >>> imagine downloads filling to available capacity. >>> Mike >> >> So, a good example of how this capacity is used, In New Zealand we have a >> pretty broad fibre network covering most of the population. My niece asked >> me to share my backup copy of her wedding photo’s/video’s the other day. I >> have a 4Gb/s / 4Gb/s XGSPON connection and she’s got a 1Gb/s / 500Mb/s GPON >> connection. I simply dropped a copy of the 5.1G directory into a one drive >> folder and shared it, 10 minutes later (one drive is still limited in how >> fast you can upload) she had it all and she was very happy. With these >> speeds its not even a consideration to think about capacity, everything just >> works.
Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers
Yes, human impatience and peace of mind do matter. But willingness to pay is not unlimited. There is an argument, presented in my paper "The volume and value of information," in the International Journal of Communication in 2012, https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/1570/740 that value is roughly logarithmic in volume (or speed). So going from 100 Mbps to 1 Gbps is like going from 8 to 9, whereas moving from 10 Kbps to 100 Kbps was like going from 4 to 5. Andrew On Tue, 7 Jun 2022, Denis Fondras wrote: Le Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 08:12:07AM -0500, Mike Hammett a écrit : Would it matter if it took 10 minutes or an hour? Yes, it means the computer could be off for 50 minutes. Also everyone who had a connection reset when uploading a big file after 55 minutes understands why it is good if it only would take 10 minutes. Peace of mind is under-rated :) What's the OneDrive rate limit? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: "Tony Wicks" To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 5:36:13 PM Subject: RE: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers This whole thread is about hypothetical futures, so it's not hard to imagine downloads filling to available capacity. Mike So, a good example of how this capacity is used, In New Zealand we have a pretty broad fibre network covering most of the population. My niece asked me to share my backup copy of her wedding photo’s/video’s the other day. I have a 4Gb/s / 4Gb/s XGSPON connection and she’s got a 1Gb/s / 500Mb/s GPON connection. I simply dropped a copy of the 5.1G directory into a one drive folder and shared it, 10 minutes later (one drive is still limited in how fast you can upload) she had it all and she was very happy. With these speeds its not even a consideration to think about capacity, everything just works.
Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers
On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 7:47 AM Denis Fondras wrote: > > Le Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 08:12:07AM -0500, Mike Hammett a écrit : > > Would it matter if it took 10 minutes or an hour? > > > > Yes, it means the computer could be off for 50 minutes. > Also everyone who had a connection reset when uploading a big file after 55 > minutes understands why it is good if it only would take 10 minutes. > > Peace of mind is under-rated :) I have often wished rsync was the default file transfer protocol. > > > > What's the OneDrive rate limit? > > > > > > > > > > - > > Mike Hammett > > Intelligent Computing Solutions > > http://www.ics-il.com > > > > Midwest-IX > > http://www.midwest-ix.com > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: "Tony Wicks" > > To: nanog@nanog.org > > Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 5:36:13 PM > > Subject: RE: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers > > > > > > > > >This whole thread is about hypothetical futures, so it's not hard to > > >imagine downloads filling to available capacity. > > >Mike > > > > So, a good example of how this capacity is used, In New Zealand we have a > > pretty broad fibre network covering most of the population. My niece asked > > me to share my backup copy of her wedding photo’s/video’s the other day. I > > have a 4Gb/s / 4Gb/s XGSPON connection and she’s got a 1Gb/s / 500Mb/s GPON > > connection. I simply dropped a copy of the 5.1G directory into a one drive > > folder and shared it, 10 minutes later (one drive is still limited in how > > fast you can upload) she had it all and she was very happy. With these > > speeds its not even a consideration to think about capacity, everything > > just works. -- FQ World Domination pending: https://blog.cerowrt.org/post/state_of_fq_codel/ Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers
Le Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 08:12:07AM -0500, Mike Hammett a écrit : > Would it matter if it took 10 minutes or an hour? > Yes, it means the computer could be off for 50 minutes. Also everyone who had a connection reset when uploading a big file after 55 minutes understands why it is good if it only would take 10 minutes. Peace of mind is under-rated :) > > What's the OneDrive rate limit? > > > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > Midwest-IX > http://www.midwest-ix.com > > - Original Message - > > From: "Tony Wicks" > To: nanog@nanog.org > Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 5:36:13 PM > Subject: RE: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers > > > > >This whole thread is about hypothetical futures, so it's not hard to imagine > >downloads filling to available capacity. > >Mike > > So, a good example of how this capacity is used, In New Zealand we have a > pretty broad fibre network covering most of the population. My niece asked me > to share my backup copy of her wedding photo’s/video’s the other day. I have > a 4Gb/s / 4Gb/s XGSPON connection and she’s got a 1Gb/s / 500Mb/s GPON > connection. I simply dropped a copy of the 5.1G directory into a one drive > folder and shared it, 10 minutes later (one drive is still limited in how > fast you can upload) she had it all and she was very happy. With these speeds > its not even a consideration to think about capacity, everything just works.
Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers
Vanity is what most of this is about. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: "Michael Thomas" To: "Tony Wicks" , nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 6:13:25 PM Subject: Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers On 6/6/22 4:08 PM, Tony Wicks wrote: * Do you have any stats on what the average usage was before and after the build out? I'd expect it to go up just because but was it dramatic? Well, Back in the FTTC days of ADSL/VDSL (very little cable) as an ISP I seem to remember the average home connection was about 1.2Mb/s. Now its about 3Mb/s so no, the usage itself does not jump dramatically when the bottlenecks went away. A great example of this is the lowest speed on the GPON network recently jumped from 100/20 to 300/100 across the board and as an ISP we barely noticed anything. Before this the two most popular speeds were the 100/20 and 1000/500 plans, 50% of users would order the 1000/500 plan, most without really knowing why but it was only about $20 different so why not. As an ISP the 1G users only used about 10%-20% more overall capacity than the 100/20 users. Excellent, so you're printing money catering to people's vanity :) Mike
Re: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers
Would it matter if it took 10 minutes or an hour? What's the OneDrive rate limit? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: "Tony Wicks" To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 5:36:13 PM Subject: RE: FCC proposes higher speed goals (100/20 Mbps) for USF providers >This whole thread is about hypothetical futures, so it's not hard to imagine >downloads filling to available capacity. >Mike So, a good example of how this capacity is used, In New Zealand we have a pretty broad fibre network covering most of the population. My niece asked me to share my backup copy of her wedding photo’s/video’s the other day. I have a 4Gb/s / 4Gb/s XGSPON connection and she’s got a 1Gb/s / 500Mb/s GPON connection. I simply dropped a copy of the 5.1G directory into a one drive folder and shared it, 10 minutes later (one drive is still limited in how fast you can upload) she had it all and she was very happy. With these speeds its not even a consideration to think about capacity, everything just works.
