You are announcing IP space that doesn't belong to you, for which you are
not in possession of an LOA (or any IRR entry/etc) and the phone numbers in
your ARIN whois entries are disconnected.
First tier customer service person at the one functioning phone number has
no pathway to escalate.
On 9/1/23 21:52, Mike Hammett wrote:
It doesn't help the OP at all, but this is why (thus far, anyway), I
overwhelmingly prefer wavelength transport to anything switched. Can't
have over-subscription or congestion issues on a wavelength.
Large IP/MPLS operators insist on optical transport
On 9/1/23 15:55, Saku Ytti wrote:
Personally I would recommend turning off LSR payload heuristics,
because there is no accurate way for LSR to tell what the label is
carrying, and wrong guess while rare will be extremely hard to root
cause, because you will never hear it, because the person
It doesn't help the OP at all, but this is why (thus far, anyway), I
overwhelmingly prefer wavelength transport to anything switched. Can't have
over-subscription or congestion issues on a wavelength.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX
On 9/1/23 15:59, Mike Hammett wrote:
I wouldn't call 50 megabit/s an elephant flow
Fair point.
Mark.
Yes adaptive load balancing very much helps but the weakness is it is normally
only fully supported on vendor silicon not merchant silicon. Much of the
transport edge is merchant silicon due to the per packet cost being far lower
and the general requirement to just pass not manipulate packets.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Fri, 2023-09-01 at 10:16 -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
> and i just have to wonder about sending passords over the net in
> cleartext in 2023. really?
>
> randy
For those that wish to do something about it...
$ ~/mailman/debian/patches$ cat
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Global
IPv4 Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, SAFNOG
UKNOF, TZNOG, MENOG, BJNOG, SDNOG, CMNOG, LACNOG and the RIPE Routing WG.
Daily listings are sent to
What cleartext ? Opportunistic encryption and/or DANE FTW.
Rubens
On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 2:19 PM Randy Bush wrote:
>
> and i just have to wonder about sending passords over the net in
> cleartext in 2023. really?
>
> randy
On 9/1/23 12:16 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
and i just have to wonder about sending passords over the net in
cleartext in 2023. really?
There's a reason that I have configured all the Mailman mailing lists to
not send me monthly password reminders.
I do wish that such was the default. Sadly it
and i just have to wonder about sending passords over the net in
cleartext in 2023. really?
randy
On Fri, 1 Sept 2023 at 18:37, Lukas Tribus wrote:
> On the hand a workaround at the edge at least for EoMPLS would be to
> enable control-word.
Juniper LSR can actually do heuristics on pseudowires with CW.
--
++ytti
On Fri, 1 Sept 2023 at 15:55, Saku Ytti wrote:
>
> On Fri, 1 Sept 2023 at 16:46, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
> > Yes, this was our conclusion as well after moving our core to PTX1000/10001.
>
> Personally I would recommend turning off LSR payload heuristics,
> because there is no accurate way for LSR to
The initial and recurring packet loss occurs on any flow of more than ~140
Mbit. The fact that it’s loss-free under that rate is what furthers my opinion
it’s config-based somewhere, even though they say it isn’t.
From: NANOG on behalf
of Mark Tinka
Date: Friday, September 1, 2023 at 10:13
On 9/1/23 15:44, Mike Hammett wrote:
and I would say the OP wasn't even about elephant flows, just about a
network that can't deliver anything acceptable.
Unless Cogent are not trying to accept (and by extension, may not be
able to guarantee) large Ethernet flows because they can't balance
I wouldn't call 50 megabit/s an elephant flow
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Tinka"
To: "Mike Hammett" , "Saku Ytti"
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Friday,
On Fri, 1 Sept 2023 at 16:46, Mark Tinka wrote:
> Yes, this was our conclusion as well after moving our core to PTX1000/10001.
Personally I would recommend turning off LSR payload heuristics,
because there is no accurate way for LSR to tell what the label is
carrying, and wrong guess while rare
On 9/1/23 15:29, Saku Ytti wrote:
PTX and MX as LSR look inside pseudowire to see if it's IP (dangerous
guess to make for LSR), CSR/ASR9k does not. So PTX and MX LSR will
balance your pseudowire even without FAT.
Yes, this was our conclusion as well after moving our core to PTX1000/10001.
and I would say the OP wasn't even about elephant flows, just about a network
that can't deliver anything acceptable.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com
- Original Message -
From: "Saku Ytti"
To:
On Fri, 1 Sept 2023 at 14:54, Mark Tinka wrote:
> When we switched our P devices to PTX1000 and PTX10001, we've had
> surprisingly good performance of all manner of traffic across native
> IP/MPLS and 802.1AX links, even without explicitly configuring FAT for
> EoMPLS traffic.
PTX and MX as LSR
On 9/1/23 10:50, Saku Ytti wrote:
It is a very plausible theory, and everyone has this problem to a
lesser or greater degree. There was a time when edge interfaces were
much lower capacity than backbone interfaces, but I don't think that
time will ever come back. So this problem is systemic.
Eugeniu Patrascu writes:
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 12:56 PM Bjørn Mork wrote:
>
>> But there's obviously not been enough thought applied to realize that
>> optional transitive attributes must be considered evil by default. They
>> can only be used after extremely careful parsing.
>>
>
> Yeah, no.
On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 11:54:57AM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> it's not really. If the receiving BGP stack understands the attribute,
> then it should be parsed as default, i.e. carefully. Unfortunately,
> junos slipped up on this and didn't validate the input correctly,
> which is a parsing
Bjørn Mork wrote on 01/09/2023 10:52:
But there's obviously not been enough thought applied to realize that
optional transitive attributes must be considered evil by default. They
can only be used after extremely careful parsing.
This is the BGP version of
select * from mytable where field =
On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 12:56 PM Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Nick Hilliard writes:
> > Bjørn Mork wrote on 01/09/2023 08:17:
> >> Sounds familiar.
> >>
> https://supportportal.juniper.net/s/article/BGP-Malformed-AS-4-Byte-Transitive-Attributes-Drop-BGP-Sessions?language=en_US
> >> You'd think a lot of
Nick Hilliard writes:
> Bjørn Mork wrote on 01/09/2023 08:17:
>> Sounds familiar.
>> https://supportportal.juniper.net/s/article/BGP-Malformed-AS-4-Byte-Transitive-Attributes-Drop-BGP-Sessions?language=en_US
>> You'd think a lot of thought has gone into error handling for
>> optional
>>
Bjørn Mork wrote on 01/09/2023 08:17:
Sounds familiar.
https://supportportal.juniper.net/s/article/BGP-Malformed-AS-4-Byte-Transitive-Attributes-Drop-BGP-Sessions?language=en_US
You'd think a lot of thought has gone into error handling for optional
transitive attributes since then, but...
A
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 at 23:56, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> The best working theory that several people I know in the neteng community
> have come up with is because Cogent does not want to adversely impact all
> other customers on their router in some sites, where the site's upstreams and
> links to
Mike Lyon writes:
> https://blog.benjojo.co.uk/post/bgp-path-attributes-grave-error-handling?fbclid=IwAR13ePY43Vf3u4X8PDyCDT39DtyXczAKkv6CGXOQbcQv90Y3aIAmTkJxn7k_aem_Ad0hzj2Mh_WlbFZug-vGdlJJdXr2Xo0RFIsPwAU2GviPz6xZDib76YHwFuzU7E0_sJk=Zxz2cZ
Sounds familiar.
29 matches
Mail list logo
