Bogon ASN Filter Policy

Dear fellow network operators, In July 2016, NTT Communications' Global IP Network AS2914 will deploy a new routing policy to block Bogon ASNs from its view of the default-free zone. This notification is provided as a courtesy to the network community at large. After the Bogon ASN filter policy

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thu, June 2, 2016 15:45, Christopher Morrow wrote: > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Jeff McAdams wrote: >> Yes. I had a member of an account team for a networking vendor express >> extreme skepticism when discussing IP address plans and work I had >> done. When describing

Re: Turning Off IPv6 for Good (was Re: Netflix VPN detection - actual engineer needed)

On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 23:47:59 -0400, Paul Ferguson wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 There is an epic lesson here. I'm just not sure what it is. :-) - - ferg https://youtu.be/SlA9hmrC8DU?t=2m25s

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thursday, June 2, 2016, William Herrin wrote: > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Mike Hammett > wrote: > >> do we REALLY think it's still just /marketing problem/ that keeps v6 > >> deployment on the slow-boat? > > Yes. > > I have a confession:

Re: craigslist.com admin

Have been getting reports of the same thing. Went to the craigslist help forums where some people there decided to call us a fake ISP because we don't hand out publics to every customer. They were VERY rude and hopefully none of them were employees. They said our customers can't use craigslist if

Re: craigslist.com admin

Would be really stupid if they were blocking all users behind NATs. BTW if I enter craigslist.com, it redirects me to "prague.craigslist.cz" (makes sense, I'm from CZ and close to Prague), but it uses an invalid SSL certificate. --- Filip On 06/02/2016 10:45 PM, Darin Steffl wrote: Have

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thu, June 2, 2016 13:31, Christopher Morrow wrote: > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: >> Yes. >> > ​REALLY??? I mean REALLY? people that operate networks haven't haven't > had beaten into their heads: 1) cgn is expensive > 2) there is no more ipv4 (not

Re: craigslist.com admin

On Thu, 02 Jun 2016 14:11:57 -0700, Todd Crane said: > According to bgp.he.net and ARIN, craigslist has 2620:7E::/44 which is > announced on several transits. Curious as to what they use it for if not > Web, MX, or DNS. Well, for starters, they could put a quad-A in the DNS for

Re: craigslist.com admin

On Thu, 02 Jun 2016 15:45:33 -0500, Darin Steffl said: > Have been getting reports of the same thing. Went to the craigslist help > forums where some people there decided to call us a fake ISP because we > don't hand out publics to every customer. They were VERY rude and hopefully > none of them

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

>responded, "Why not just get more IPv4 addresses? Just go back to >IANA[sic] for more if you don't have enough already." I can't say I'm surprised. Within the past year we've had mail from people here on NANOG who haven't gotten the memo that Network Solutions and Verisign are not the same

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Jeff McAdams wrote: > On Thu, June 2, 2016 13:31, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: > > >> Yes. > >> > > ​REALLY??? I mean REALLY? people that operate networks haven't haven't > >

Re: Bogon ASN Filter Policy

I personally applaud this effort as initiatives like this that help prevent the global propagation of Bogons and other "bad things" only serves to help us all. With that said, notice went out to potentially affected GTT / AS3257 customers this week that by the end of June we too will be

Re: craigslist.com admin

According to bgp.he.net and ARIN, craigslist has 2620:7E::/44 which is announced on several transits. Curious as to what they use it for if not Web, MX, or DNS. —Todd > On Jun 2, 2016, at 2:00 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: > > apparently Craigslist doesn't have an IPv6 presence yet

Re: craigslist.com admin

On Thu, 02 Jun 2016 17:11:57 -0400, Todd Crane wrote: ... Curious as to what they use it for if not Web, MX, or DNS. Same thing as Earthlink, apparently. (answer: nothing. at. all.)

Re: Google GeoIP issue

If you have peering relationship with Google, you can use the isp.google.com portal to self-publish geo information on your netblocks. At least you can in theory. By their own admission, they have never checked the self-published URL that I configured over a month ago. YMMV. -richard On Thu,

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thu 2016-Jun-02 11:05:54 -0700, Leo Bicknell wrote: Warning: Hat = Enterprise Network Admin Sarcasm = High ... Sadly, I wish all these answers were some sort of carachture of reality, but I think they are too many folks reality. IOW: http://ipv6excuses.com/ /

Re: Turning Off IPv6 for Good (was Re: Netflix VPN detection - actual engineer needed)

On 2016-06-01 11:41 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote: > Turns out it has nothing to do with my IPv4 connectivity. Neither of > my ISPs has native IPv6 connectivity, so both require tunnels (one of > them to HE.net, one to the ISPs own tunnel broker), and both appear to > be detected as a non-permitted

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

Rubens, good day. Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 01:32:29PM -0300, Rubens Kuhl wrote: > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Ca By wrote: > > > > > https://blogs.akamai.com/2016/06/preparing-for-ipv6-only-mobile-networks-why-and-how.html > > > > Wherein akamai explains a detailed study

Re: AW: AW: Verizon and Level3 DNS flush

On Jun 2, 2016, at 3:42 PM, Jürgen Jaritsch wrote: > it IS expected behavior that traffic will switch over to the new DNS. Altering routing and/or adding capacity/capabilities to the existing infrastructure is generally better, whenever possible, due to the

AW: AW: Verizon and Level3 DNS flush

Hi Roland, the difference between old and new DNS are way more capacity and extra DDoS protection ... it IS expected behavior that traffic will switch over to the new DNS. best regards Jürgen Jaritsch Head of Network & Infrastructure ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs GmbH Telefon:

Re: AW: Verizon and Level3 DNS flush

On Jun 2, 2016, at 1:24 AM, Jürgen Jaritsch wrote: > and that's the reason why we had to move over to a new NS set. Which the attackers (or their attack tools) will immediately discern, & shift their targeting accordingly. Playing games like this with addressing

AW: AW: AW: Verizon and Level3 DNS flush

> Altering routing and/or adding capacity/capabilities to the existing > infrastructure is generally better Yes ... but as mentioned in one of the off-list replies: the original DNS are from a 3rd party and they had no chance to expand resources ... best regards Jürgen Jaritsch Head of

IPv6 is better than ipv4

https://blogs.akamai.com/2016/06/preparing-for-ipv6-only-mobile-networks-why-and-how.html Wherein akamai explains a detailed study showing ipv6 is "well over 10%" faster than ipv4 on mobile, and they reference corroborating studies from Linkedin and Facebook. Fair to ask your business 1) does

Re: Google GeoIP issue

Heya, Im in the same boat if anyone from google wants to be a dear and help out. Cheers, > On Jun 1, 2016, at 6:28 PM, Chris Boyd wrote: > > I too am having a similar problem. Used the remediation link at > https://support.google.com/websearch/contact/ip and it’s

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Ca By wrote: > > https://blogs.akamai.com/2016/06/preparing-for-ipv6-only-mobile-networks-why-and-how.html > > Wherein akamai explains a detailed study showing ipv6 is "well > over 10%" faster than ipv4 on mobile, and they reference

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Daniel Corbe wrote: > Maybe we should let people believe that IPv6 is faster than IPv4 even if > objectively that isn’t true. Perhaps that will help speed along the > adoption process. ​do we REALLY think it's still just /marketing

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thursday, June 2, 2016, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Daniel Corbe > wrote: > >> Maybe we should let people believe that IPv6 is faster than IPv4 even if

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

Just a thought - ipv4 includes older more rural connections such as 1M DSL out in the sticks. That weighs the average connection time down. v6 being capable on modern 4G wireless and fiber connections makes the average faster. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

> On Jun 2, 2016, at 12:13 PM, Ca By wrote: > > On Thursday, June 2, 2016, Josh Luthman wrote: > >> Just a thought - ipv4 includes older more rural connections such as 1M DSL >> out in the sticks. That weighs the average connection time down.

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

I would be surprised if more than 10% - 20% of networks have received effective marketing on IPv6. Look at how many network operators that don't "get" basic network security alerts like "There is a long since patched vulnerability being actively exploited on the Internet right now. Your

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Ca By wrote: > > > On Thursday, June 2, 2016, Christopher Morrow > wrote: > >> >> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Daniel Corbe >> wrote: >> >>> Maybe we should let people believe that IPv6 is

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

Yes. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: "Christopher Morrow" To: "Daniel Corbe" Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thursday, June

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: > Yes. > > ​REALLY??? I mean REALLY? people that operate networks haven't haven't had beaten into their heads: 1) cgn is expensive 2) there is no more ipv4 (not large amounts for large deployments of new thingies) 3)

RE: IPv6 is better than ipv4

CenturyTel in this area provides IPv6 to DSL customers. Thank you, - Nich > -Original Message- > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman > Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 10:43 AM > To: Christopher Morrow > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: IPv6 is better

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Ca By wrote: > > https://blogs.akamai.com/2016/06/preparing-for-ipv6-only-mobile-networks-why-and-how.html > > Wherein akamai explains a detailed study showing ipv6 is "well > over 10%" faster than ipv4 on mobile, and they reference

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thursday, June 2, 2016, Josh Luthman wrote: > Just a thought - ipv4 includes older more rural connections such as 1M DSL > out in the sticks. That weighs the average connection time down. v6 being > capable on modern 4G wireless and fiber connections makes the

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

Warning: Hat = Enterprise Network Admin Sarcasm = High In a message written on Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 01:31:43PM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote: > ​REALLY??? I mean REALLY? people that operate networks haven't haven't had > beaten into their heads: > 1) cgn is expensive Wazzat?

IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thursday, June 2, 2016, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Ca By wrote: > >> >> >> On Thursday, June 2, 2016, Christopher Morrow >> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Daniel

Re: IPv6 is better than ipv4

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: >> do we REALLY think it's still just /marketing problem/ that keeps v6 >> deployment on the slow-boat? > Yes. I have a confession: I don't use IPv6. I don't use IPv6 at home because: 1. My Verizon FiOS link does not support