NANOG Digest, Vol 63, Issue 29

Sun Apr 7 02:27:37 UTC 2013

In MPLS network when we speak of utilization is 50% between 2 points in a circuit , What does it mean and how can I measure it ?

Sent from my BlackBerry® via Smartfren EVDO Network

-----Original Message-----
From: nanog-request at nanog.org
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2013 02:11:21 
To: <nanog at nanog.org>
Reply-To: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: NANOG Digest, Vol 63, Issue 29

Send NANOG mailing list submissions to
	nanog at nanog.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	nanog-request at nanog.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	nanog-owner at nanog.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of NANOG digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: 30% packet loss between cox.net and hetzner.de, possibly
      at tinet.net (Denys Fedoryshchenko)
   2. Verizon DSL moving to CGN (cb.list6)
   3. Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN (Joshua Smith)
   4. Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN (Oliver Garraux)
   5. Re: ICMP Redirect on Resolvers (Jimmy Hess)
   6. Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN (Derek Ivey)
   7. Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN (Constantine A. Murenin)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2013 03:09:00 +0300
From: Denys Fedoryshchenko <denys at visp.net.lb>
To: "Constantine A. Murenin" <mureninc at gmail.com>
Cc: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: 30% packet loss between cox.net and hetzner.de, possibly
	at tinet.net
Message-ID: <d453f32ec9779702cd8bc18dd6f9ead4 at visp.net.lb>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

On 2013-04-07 02:20, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:

> 
> Although hetzner.de claims that this whole loss is outside of their 
> own
> network, I'm inclined to deduce that the loss might actually be
> concentrated on their own KPN / eurorings.net router --
> kpn-gw.hetzner.de (134.222.107.21), and perhaps occurs only
> in one direction.
I think too. Btw as i said, have host on tinet, and it is 100% clear 
from EC2.
So seems tinet is fine for sure.

HOST: ip-10-203-61-X                                Snt   Rcv Loss%   
Best Gmean   Avg  Wrst StDev
   1.|-- ip-10-203-60-2.ec2.internal                 60    60  0.0%    
0.3   0.6   1.1  19.1   2.7
   2.|-- ip-10-1-36-21.ec2.internal                  60    60  0.0%    
0.4   0.6   0.8   9.3   1.3
   3.|-- ip-10-1-34-0.ec2.internal                   60    60  0.0%    
0.4   0.7   1.0  14.5   2.0
   4.|-- 100.64.20.43                                60    60  0.0%    
0.4   0.6   0.6   2.0   0.2
   5.|-- ???                                         60     0 100.0    
0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0
   6.|-- ???                                         60     0 100.0    
0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0
   7.|-- ???                                         60     0 100.0    
0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0
   8.|-- 100.64.16.157                               60    60  0.0%    
0.5   2.4   9.7  68.8  16.1
   9.|-- 72.21.222.154                               60    60  0.0%    
1.5   1.9   2.6  36.4   4.8
  10.|-- 72.21.220.46                                60    60  0.0%    
1.5   2.1   3.3  59.2   7.6
  11.|-- xe-7-2-0.was10.ip4.tinet.net                60    60  0.0%    
1.6   2.1   2.6  17.2   3.1
  12.|-- xe-0-1-0.fra23.ip4.tinet.net                60    60  0.0%   
92.2  92.8  92.8 104.3   1.9
  13.|-- ge-1-1-0.pr1.g310.fra.de.eurotransit.net    60    60  0.0%   
92.2  93.1  93.2 112.8   3.3
  14.|-- ???                                         60     0 100.0    
0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0
last hop icmp blocked, it is my host

> 
> Although there is no traffic loss from he.net if you try to traceroute
> the router itself (I'm not sure what that means, though, other than a
> potential attack vector from exposing a router globally like that):
I don't think there is attack vector, proper control plane ACL will 
make them safe.

> I've been a fan of hetzner.de, but I think it's staggering that
> they won't do anything about this huge and persistent packet loss.
Indeed, i noticed that transfers from EC2 are terrible last days to 
Hetzner.

Maybe worth to open topic at www.webhostingtalk.com ?

> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Constantine.

---
Denys Fedoryshchenko, Network Engineer, Virtual ISP S.A.L.

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 18:24:10 -0700
From: "cb.list6" <cb.list6 at gmail.com>
To: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Verizon DSL moving to CGN
Message-ID:
	<CAD6AjGTMz-rpx8UOX7QNpqr8x3ESQEo34m+6EpNquumnzDLRdA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Interesting.

http://www22.verizon.com/support/residential/internet/highspeedinternet/networking/troubleshooting/portforwarding/123897.htm

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 21:32:47 -0400
From: Joshua Smith <juicewvu at gmail.com>
To: "nanog at nanog.org" <nanog at nanog.org>
Subject: Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN
Message-ID: <5C944EFC-CD47-4569-9452-5133B5F780E9 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=us-ascii

Very interesting indeed. Way to do the right thing here Verizon. This may be the first time I've been happy to be a Comcast customer. 

-- 
Josh Smith
kD8HRX

email/jabber: juicewvu at gmail.com
Phone: 304.237.9369(c)

Sent from my iPad

On Apr 6, 2013, at 9:24 PM, "cb.list6" <cb.list6 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Interesting.
> 
> http://www22.verizon.com/support/residential/internet/highspeedinternet/networking/troubleshooting/portforwarding/123897.htm

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 21:41:43 -0400
From: Oliver Garraux <oliver at g.garraux.net>
To: "nanog at nanog.org" <nanog at nanog.org>
Subject: Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN
Message-ID:
	<CAD_uLpO5CyGCrOUdk5WRbYRnMUf4K9PFeWi6ZSWmzwJDTxTBhA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Good to see that they are providing a way for users to opt out.  I'm hoping
that other ISP's will do the same when they implement CGN.

Oliver

-------------------------------------

Oliver Garraux
Check out my blog:  blog.garraux.net
Follow me on Twitter:  twitter.com/olivergarraux

On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 9:32 PM, Joshua Smith <juicewvu at gmail.com> wrote:

> Very interesting indeed. Way to do the right thing here Verizon. This may
> be the first time I've been happy to be a Comcast customer.
>
> --
> Josh Smith
> kD8HRX
>
> email/jabber: juicewvu at gmail.com
> Phone: 304.237.9369(c)
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> On Apr 6, 2013, at 9:24 PM, "cb.list6" <cb.list6 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Interesting.
> >
> >
> http://www22.verizon.com/support/residential/internet/highspeedinternet/networking/troubleshooting/portforwarding/123897.htm
>
>

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 20:43:34 -0500
From: Jimmy Hess <mysidia at gmail.com>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
Cc: North American Network Operators Group <nanog at nanog.org>
Subject: Re: ICMP Redirect on Resolvers
Message-ID:
	<CAAAwwbWNvMsPb_h-cfxDWYUSC2i1_3pFfJfK7Kx_cN3ajBnn5Q at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 4/6/13, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu <Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu> wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 10:38:06 -0400, shawn wilson said:

 case, you shouldn't see any valid ICMP redirects.  They're there mostly so
> things kind-of-sort-of work even if you botch it (so for instance, even if
> you whiff your default route accidentally, you can still ssh in from Tokyo and
> fix  > it).

For ICMP redirects to do anything useful,  a valid route has to
actually be there already, on the default gateway....

Perhaps you are thinking of proxy arp? :)

-- 
-JH

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2013 21:42:00 -0400
From: Derek Ivey <derek at derekivey.com>
To: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN
Message-ID: <5160CEE8.6010404 at derekivey.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"

It would be nice to get an update from them regarding their IPv6 plans. 
Their IPv6 support page still says they will start deploying "3Q12" :(.

On 4/6/2013 9:32 PM, Joshua Smith wrote:
> Very interesting indeed. Way to do the right thing here Verizon. This may be the first time I've been happy to be a Comcast customer.
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4249 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20130406/03a6630f/attachment-0001.bin>

------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 19:11:14 -0700
From: "Constantine A. Murenin" <mureninc at gmail.com>
To: "cb.list6" <cb.list6 at gmail.com>
Cc: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN
Message-ID:
	<CAPKkNb5QLynunmMkcLusMgDHGb9C1RhH0Hv+YWt+SigvWdowtA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252

On 6 April 2013 18:24, cb.list6 <cb.list6 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Interesting.
>
> http://www22.verizon.com/support/residential/internet/highspeedinternet/networking/troubleshooting/portforwarding/123897.htm

<blockquote>

> What is  CGN - and How to opt-out The number and types of devices using the Internet have increased dramatically in recent years and, as a result, address space for these devices is being rapidly exhausted. Today?s technology for IP addresses is referred to as IPv4 (Internet Protocol version 4). The IP addresses aligned with IPv4 are expected to be depleted at some point in the near future. The next generation of IP address space is IPv6, which will enable far more addresses to be assigned than IPv4. Unfortunately, most servers and other Internet devices will not be speaking IPv6 for a while, so IPv4 will remain standard for some time to come.
>
> During this transitional period, in select areas for High Speed Internet residential customers, Verizon will be implementing Carrier Grade Network Address Translation (CGN or Carrier Grade NAT). Verizon FiOS and Verizon Business customers are not impacted at this time by the change. This transition will enable Verizon to continue serving customers with IPv4 internet addresses. CGN will not impact the access, reliability, speed, or security of Verizon?s broadband services. However, there are some applications such as online gaming, VPN access, FTP service, surveillance cameras, etc., that may not work when broadband service is provided via a CGN.
>
> For our customers utilizing these types of applications, Verizon provides the ability to "opt out ?of CGN. To "opt out" you must:
>
>     Be a Residential customer with High Speed Internet Service. There is no need to ?opt-out? if you are a FiOS or Business customer.
>     Have already been transitioned to the Carrier Grade Network by Verizon. If you are a Residential High Speed Internet customer and are unable to opt-out, it is likely that you have not yet been transitioned to CGN.
>
>
> To "opt out" of CGN sign onto your My Verizon account and select "Opt out of Carrier Grade Network".

</blockquote>

I like how, according to the document, Verizon must first break your
connectivity, prior to you being able to opt-out. :-)

Also:

> select "Opt out of Carrier Grade Network"

Smart wording. :-)

Frankly, I'm surprised to see this news.  I thought Verizon had better
things to do that plan any kind of upgrades or changes to something
that everyone thought they consider dead anyways.

C.

End of NANOG Digest, Vol 63, Issue 29
*************************************