January 2005 - NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

RE: [nznog] National BGP routing
by Gordon Smith 19 Jan '05

19 Jan '05

> Why are inconsistent AS-paths bad? Operationally, I mean. (I > hadn't had any operational mishaps in all my years at UUNET > because of inconsistent AS-paths, so I'm wondering if > something else causes an issue now?) > > Technically there is nothing wrong with them. As you > observed, it's simply an organisation multihoming using a > private ASN - hopefully their upstreams are stripping out the > private ASN before they propogate the originated prefixes > further. (Mind you, I find it rare for two ISPs to agree > which private ASN to use for a mutual customer to multihome - > often so much easier to obtain a real one.) > > And yes, people can quite easily use public ASNs. It's simply > a case of an APNIC member obtaining an ASN so their customer > can multihome. And that can't be too hard, right? > > philip > -- > Hi Philip, You're quite right. Technically, you can still be pass traffic to the client's endpoint, although the path selected may not be optimal. What can cause issues is if you then start creating routing policies on your route reflectors based on AS-path, especially if you don't have a direct peer with both of the providers that are carrying that customer's traffic. With multiple peering points, you can end up backhauling the traffic over your own links because the routing decisions passed via your IGP are no longer necessarily optimal e.g. I may wish to pass a 10Mbit stream from a Wellington customer to somewhere else in Wellington, via another provider, but the route reflectors see that destination as having a shorter AS path via Auckland. We don't have a destination AS that a metric can be applied to. We can of course apply different costs to the WAN links (and should have done), but the fine-grained control of traffic isn't achievable because the router can't be given much to go on. Policy routing and tagging is an option, but relies on the destination site, who is not necessarily a customer of ours, informing us of changes in their topology so our rules can be updated. APNIC have always been very good when it comes to getting ASN's; I've always found the justification of additional address space to be an ordeal though :-) In my opinion, it would be far more preferable if APNIC allocated an ASN when a customer was given an independent address assignment. After all, the reason that most want independantly allocated space is to multihome... Cheers, Gordon

3 2

National BGP routing
by Gordon Smith 18 Jan '05

18 Jan '05

I'm sure I can't be the only one that notices the BGP inconsistancies in their route tables.... Seeing the latest NZRR update prompted me to check the BGP tables again... We do not and will not accept route advertisements containing private AS numbers from our peers. The reason we don't is the same reason we don't route RFC1918 space externally... If a customer has their own address space and wants to multi-home, they should also have their own AS. Advertising up private AS numbers that should really remain within the network isn't a solution. Inconsistant AS-paths are bad enough, without creating additional problems... At least we're only seeing 5 class C's being advertised at the APE with inconsistant AS-paths at the moment. Perhaps BGP routing could be a topic for discussion at NZNOG 2005? Cheers, Gordon

3 2

Notification of NZRR Database changes
by NZRR Database Notifications 18 Jan '05

18 Jan '05

Dear Colleague, This is to notify you that some object(s) in NZRR database which you either maintain or are listed as to-be-notified have been added, deleted or changed. These objects are used to configure the various NZIX route servers (http://nzix.net/) so you can expect the relevant servers to be reloaded in the near future. The reloading of the servers is staggered over a period of time so that if you are peering with both servers at an exchange, you can maintain at least one BGP session at all times and consequently a full set of routes. The update causing these changes had the following mail headers: - From: Andy Linton <asjl(a)citylink.co.nz> - Cc: - Subject: - Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 13:40:23 +1300 (NZDT) - Msg-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0501191339480.4620(a)jennings.citylink.co.nz> NZRR Database Notification Department --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS24226 descr: Route set advertised to AS9439 by Catalyst IT - AS24226 members: 202.46.190.0/24^24-29, 202.49.159.0/24^24-29, 202.20.6.0/24^24-29, 202.36.119.0/24^24-29, 210.48.47.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: david.zanetti(a)catalyst.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20041027 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS24226 descr: advertised to AS9439 by Catalyst IT - AS24226 members: 202.20.6.0/24^24-29, 202.36.119.0/24^24-29, 202.46.190.0/24^24-29, 202.49.159.0/24^24-29, 202.78.240.0/21^21-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: netadmin(a)catalyst.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20050119 source: NZRR --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route: 202.20.6.0/24 descr: Route for Catalyst IT - AS24226 origin: AS24226 notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: david.zanetti(a)catalyst.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20041027 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route: 202.20.6.0/24 descr: Route for Catalyst IT - AS24226 origin: AS24226 notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: netadmin(a)catalyst.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20050119 source: NZRR --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route: 202.36.119.0/24 descr: Route for Catalyst IT - AS24226 origin: AS24226 notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: david.zanetti(a)catalyst.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20041027 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route: 202.36.119.0/24 descr: Route for Catalyst IT - AS24226 origin: AS24226 notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: netadmin(a)catalyst.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20050119 source: NZRR --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route: 202.46.190.0/24 descr: Route for Catalyst IT - AS24226 origin: AS24226 notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: david.zanetti(a)catalyst.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20041027 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route: 202.46.190.0/24 descr: Route for Catalyst IT - AS24226 origin: AS24226 notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: netadmin(a)catalyst.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20050119 source: NZRR --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route: 202.49.159.0/24 descr: Route for Catalyst IT - AS24226 origin: AS24226 notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: david.zanetti(a)catalyst.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20041027 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route: 202.49.159.0/24 descr: Route for Catalyst IT - AS24226 origin: AS24226 notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: netadmin(a)catalyst.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20050119 source: NZRR

1 0

Notification of NZRR Database changes
by NZRR Database Notifications 18 Jan '05

18 Jan '05

Dear Colleague, This is to notify you that some object(s) in NZRR database which you either maintain or are listed as to-be-notified have been added, deleted or changed. These objects are used to configure the various NZIX route servers (http://nzix.net/) so you can expect the relevant servers to be reloaded in the near future. The reloading of the servers is staggered over a period of time so that if you are peering with both servers at an exchange, you can maintain at least one BGP session at all times and consequently a full set of routes. The update causing these changes had the following mail headers: - From: Andy Linton <asjl(a)citylink.co.nz> - Cc: rt(a)citylink.co.nz - Subject: [CityLink #1656] New Object for inclusion into the NZRR Route Registry (fwd) - Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:25:41 +1300 (NZDT) - Msg-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0501191224520.4620(a)jennings.citylink.co.nz> NZRR Database Notification Department --- PREVIOUS OBJECT: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS64597 descr: advertised to AS9439 by Araneo - AS64597 members: 202.53.189.128/29, 210.48.101.64/27^27-29, 210.48.101.112/29, 210.48.109.224/27^27-29, 202.174.161.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: jon.brewer(a)araneo.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20041209 source: NZRR REPLACED BY: route-set: AS9439:RS-ROUTES:AS64597 descr: advertised to AS9439 by Araneo - AS64597 members: 202.53.189.128/29, 210.48.101.64/27^27-29, 210.48.101.112/28^28-29, 210.48.109.224/27^27-29, 202.174.161.0/24^24-29 admin-c: RPA1-NZRR tech-c: RPA1-NZRR notify: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net notify: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz notify: jon.brewer(a)araneo.net.nz mnt-by: MAINT-NZRR-NZ changed: rpsl-admin(a)nzix.net 20041209 source: NZRR

1 0

Xtra in the SpamHaus SBL
by Peter Macaulay 17 Jan '05

17 Jan '05

I don't know if anyone from Xtra reads this list - trying to get through to anyone who has even an iota of understanding about this type of thing by phone appears to be almost impossible. Xtra has managed to get itself into the SBL realtime blocklist - http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/sbl.lasso?query=SBL22816 It appears that someone objected to some promotional material sent out by the "House of Travel" travel agent group and has ended up blocking them; this means that one of Xtra's MX (mail exchanger) servers is now blocked by anyone who uses the SBL as a spam filter. If anyone knows anyone at Xtra who can do something about this, could you pass this message on? It's probably inconveniencing a reasonably large number of people. The NZNOG list would be a good place to post this too, I suppose, but I'm not a subscriber. Cheers! -- David -- ------------------ David Harris -+- Pegasus Mail ---------------------- Box 5451, Dunedin, New Zealand | e-mail: David.Harris(a)pmail.gen.nz Phone: +64 3 453-6880 | Fax: +64 3 453-6612 Phrase found in a Soviet Russian-English language guide: "Flying in the TU-114 I felt myself excellently." _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss(a)internetnz.net.nz http://listserver.internetnz.net.nz/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss -- *Peter Macaulay* /Executive Director/ *InternetNZ */Direct +64 4 495 2113 Skype petermacaulay Mobile +64 21 488 485 /

6 5

(OT) Getting to NZNOG '05
by Jeremy Naylor 16 Jan '05

16 Jan '05

Hey guys, For people who want to know about how to get to the NZNOG '05 conference, you might want to catch the Overlander train that Tranz Scenic run. There's 2 every day (1 from Wellington - Auckland & 1 from Auckland - Wellington). You can get more info about these trains if you want to on Tranz Scenic's web site, at: http://www.tranzscenic.co.nz/services/overlander.aspx Hope this helps. Thanks, -- Jeremy Naylor p: +64 21 374 689 e: jeremy.naylor(a)r2.co.nz w: http://www.r2.co.nz/~jeremy w: http://e-living.wellington.net.nz -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 30/12/2004

3 2

RE: [nznog] Alternative DSL?
by Philip D'Ath 16 Jan '05

16 Jan '05

VDSL switches are a good middle ground between Ethernet switches and DSLAMs ... _____ From: Richards, David [mailto:David.Richards(a)ccc.govt.nz] Sent: Monday, 17 January 2005 5:34 p.m. To: jon.brewer(a)araneo.net.nz Cc: nznog Subject: RE: [nznog] Alternative DSL? Any reason why you aren't thinking Ethernet? - Provided the distances are shot. An Ethernet switch is a lot cheaper than a DSLAM. -- David Richards, Senior Network Engineer IT Services Unit - 'Enabling people through technology' Christchurch City Council, New Zealand Phone: +64 3 941 8689 | Fax: +64 3 941 8989 | Mobile: +64 27 242 7689 email: David.Richards(a)ccc.govt.nz

1 0

OT - Linux Systems Administrator
by Edward Yardley 16 Jan '05

16 Jan '05

**OFF TOPIC** Hi All, Any Linux Systems Administrators looking for work in Wellington please contact me off list or call me on (04) 499-1276. This is a new role, will involve establishing security (intrusion detection), Red Hat environment. Kind Regards Edward. ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

6 7

Re: [nznog] 02.net
by Lamar - 02.Net Internet Services 16 Jan '05

16 Jan '05

As Neil pointed out, 02.Net has not gone bust and is still trading. Due to the recent IPNET issue with Telecom, we decided for the money actually made on dialup services and the level of support required that we would no longer continue providing this service. As for Craig's statement about "unable to sell any services.." this is incorrect our Dialup (and all other services) are still working until customers swap over to Orcon (who are contacting customers with our permission). In short, we're getting out of dialup internet because there is no money in continuing these types of services. We are focusing more on corporate and higher speed products, with a lesser level of support required. So, you will still see us around. Any questions or queries can be sent directly through to myself. -- Regards, Lamar (02.Net's Director). >>From the 02.net.nz website... > >>If you are an Internet customer of 02.Net, due to circumstances > outside of our >>control, 02.Net is unable to continue supply of Dialup services at > this time. We >>are working to get this resolved. However, in the meantime Auckland > based ISP >>Orcon Internet Limited have taken over our Dialup customer database. >> >>Orcon will be in contact with Internet customers to advise a change in > dialup >>numbers. However, the statements that Orcon's helpdesk are giving out > of 02.Net >>Internet Services Limited going bust are incorrect. We are trying to > contact the >>Orcon helpdesk manager to get this resolved. >> >>If you have any questions relating to this or any other matters, > please feel free >>to call us on 0800 4 02NET (0800 4 02638) > > Craig - Sure it may be the case, but they have stated specifically on > their web-page that they haven't gone bust. Surely it's not worth making > such statements unless you actually know what's happening? > > Cheers - Neil Gardner. > > > >>>> "Craig Spiers" <craig(a)concept.net.nz> 17/01/2005 1:49:46 p.m. >>> > Maybe of interest to some people on the list.. > > > > 02.net.nz appears to have gone bust - well not gone bust as such, but > is > unable to sell any services.. > > > > > > > NOTICE: This message contains privileged and confidential > information intended only for the use of the addressee > named above. If you are not the intended recipient of > this message you are hereby notified that you must not > disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. > If you have received this message in error please > notify Allied Telesyn Research Ltd immediately. > Any views expressed in this message are those of the > individual sender, except where the sender has the > authority to issue and specifically states them to > be the views of Allied Telesyn Research. > > _______________________________________________ > NZNOG mailing list > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog >

1 0

Alternative DSL?
by Jonathan Brewer 16 Jan '05

16 Jan '05

Questions for NZNOG: In a new apartment building with CAT5 run from each unit to a central closet, installed by the developers, who owns the CAT5? If the CAT5 is the property of the building body corporate, is it permissable for an alternative network operator to install their own mini-DSLAM, and provide alternative DSL to building occupants? If this unit is not using Telecom lines, does it need to be Telepermit approved? If competitive DSL is run over spare pairs (not in use by TelecomNZ), will there be any implications for residents who subscribe to JetStream? Am I going to end up in pain for asking these questions? Cheers, Jon

3 2