- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

internet research
by Jamie Baddeley 04 Feb '15

04 Feb '15

Folks, https://internetnz.nz/internet-research-forum I'd imagine there's some folks in the NZNOG community that might be interested in this. jamie

7 7

Recordings of 2015, and license
by Nick 02 Feb '15

02 Feb '15

I almost hesitate to bring it up again, last time there appeared to be no consensus about it, but... Do we know what, if any, license the recordings of this years NZNOG are? In theory, it should have been stipulated in the contract with the recording/streaming company, along with the speakers agreements. Cheers, Nick -- Nick 'Zaf' Clifford

1 0

Re: [nznog] racks for beer.
by Mark Frater 01 Feb '15

01 Feb '15

I have racks, not beer. 900D x 600W x 42U high. Contact me off list if interested. Mark From: Rob McDonald [mailto:r(a)l2.co.nz] Sent: Monday, 2 February 2015 12:08 p.m. To: Mark Frater Subject: Re: [nznog] racks for beer. You want racks or you got racks? On 2/02/2015 10:38 AM, "Mark Frater" <mark.frater(a)compass.net.nz<mailto:mark.frater(a)compass.net.nz>> wrote: Will swap 19" racks for beer. (No sides or doors - the racks I mean). Contact me if you're keen. Mark Frater Head of Design Compass Communications Limited _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz<mailto:NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz> http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

1 0

Re: [nznog] Suggestions for router with 3G external antenna for remote site comms
by Laurence Bullivant 01 Feb '15

01 Feb '15

Afternoon, If you want something rock stable then i recommend the Cisco 88Xg series. They are fixed interface devices with either xDSL/HSNS/Ethernet WAN ports and inbuilt dual SIM 3G. They have dual antennas with N-Type connecters for low loss external antennas if needed. We have deployed these in the past for 3G failover on xDSL connections and they have always been extremely reliable. -Laurence Bullivant laurence(a)bullivant.co.nz On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Darren Moss <Darren.Moss(a)webhostnz.co.nz> wrote: > Hi All, > > We have a bunch of regional sites (weather probes) that run some > equipment, 2 PCs and are connected to the internet. > > At the moment it's dongle city which I would like to change over to > something a little better :) > > I am looking for suggestions on a decent (business grade) router with 3G > capability an external antenna connection. > > At each site, the equipment sits in a rack, inside a hut and signal > strength is reasonable (3/5). > > My thinking is to deploy a basic Cisco router with a 3G WIC then an > external antenna on the same mast where we collect weather data. > > Happy to hear suggestions and input. > > Many thanks > > > > Darren. > > _______________________________________________ > NZNOG mailing list > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog > >

1 0

Re: [nznog] racks for beer.
by Mark Frater 01 Feb '15

01 Feb '15

Will swap 19" racks for beer. (No sides or doors - the racks I mean). Contact me if you're keen. Mark Frater Head of Design Compass Communications Limited

1 0

Thanks NZNOG
by Terry Manderson 31 Jan '15

31 Jan '15

Hi NZNOGers, I'd just like to say thanks. Thanks for the hospitality extended to an Aussie. Thanks for a really nice 2 days of thought provoking and interesting speakers. Thanks to the current trustees for making it happen, and thanks to the sponsors for all the schwaag and subsiding the event (as they always do!). Mostly I'd like to give thanks to the exiting trustees Neil and Dean. Like previous trustees Joe and Andy they have given much of themselves, of their time, and their expertise to make the Internet a better place through NOG coordination. I know this first hand in my role with AusNOG. It's a tireless beast. Often without thanks. It chews up personal lives and makes employers look at you with raised eyebrows. People often comment "why bother", and question your sanity. But ultimately what you have done makes the Internet better, and each person who takes it on and makes such efforts to this amazing concoction of technology contributes to an entire world of "better". And it's with that sincere goal which you have both plainly embodied, that I offer you MY thanks and my appreciation for all you have done. You deserve more than just this email, more than the beer I will buy you when next we meet ... you deserve the recognition for those selfless efforts. Well done. Cheers Terry

3 2

Suggestions for router with 3G external antenna for remote site comms
by Darren Moss 31 Jan '15

31 Jan '15

Hi All, We have a bunch of regional sites (weather probes) that run some equipment, 2 PCs and are connected to the internet. At the moment it's dongle city which I would like to change over to something a little better :) I am looking for suggestions on a decent (business grade) router with 3G capability an external antenna connection. At each site, the equipment sits in a rack, inside a hut and signal strength is reasonable (3/5). My thinking is to deploy a basic Cisco router with a 3G WIC then an external antenna on the same mast where we collect weather data. Happy to hear suggestions and input. Many thanks Darren.

4 3

RFC 4084 Terminology for Describing Internet Connectivity
by Brian E Carpenter 29 Jan '15

29 Jan '15

As Dean requested http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4084 Regards Brian

1 0

Operators and the IETF
by Brian E Carpenter 29 Jan '15

29 Jan '15

Following up on the lightning talk I just gave in Rotorua: The IETF is concerned that we're not getting enough operator input at the time it counts: when specifications are being developed, years before they come out in software or hardware. There's been an effort to investigate the reasons for this problem, prior to trying to fix it. Everybody involved in Internet operations is welcome - indeed needed - to contribute. Full length presentation: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/91/slides/slides-91-opsawg-0.pdf IETF draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-opsawg-operators-ietf Mailing list (anyone can join): http://snozzages.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/synergy Internet Society page: https://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/operators-and-the-ietf/ How to get started with the IETF without further ado: http://www.ietf.org/newcomers.html Regards Brian Carpenter

2 1

Two interesting links from APNIC
by Dean Pemberton 29 Jan '15

29 Jan '15

IPv6 deployment status within NZ by ISP http://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/NZ DNSSEC deployment status within NZ by ISP http://stats.labs.apnic.net/dnssec/NZ

1 0

Lightning talks
by Richard Nelson 29 Jan '15

29 Jan '15

We still have space to fit in a couple more lightning talks if anyone else has one to present. Richard.

1 0

NZNOG Video Feed?
by Tristram Cheer 29 Jan '15

29 Jan '15

Is R2 or someone livestreaming NZNOG this year? Tristram Cheer Network Architect - Most problems are the result of previous solutions... [Visit our Website]<http://www.uber.co.nz/> 09 438 5472 Ext 803 | 022 412 1985 | PO Box 5083, Whangarei, 0140 t(a)uber.co.nz<mailto:t(a)uber.co.nz> | www.ubergroup.co.nz<http://www.ubergroup.co.nz> [http://uber.co.nz/uploads/signatures/fb-s-v4.png]<http://ubergroup.co.nz/fb> [http://uber.co.nz/uploads/signatures/twitter-s-v4.png] <https://twitter.com/#!/ubergroupltd>

4 4

nznog 2015: Pic of who won puzzle
by Lin Nah 29 Jan '15

29 Jan '15

Since not all are on twitter, here's the pic of one of the group who won the puzzle. Not sure if the guys next to the winner is part of the group or just happened to be there. Go Wireless NZ @gowifi <https://twitter.com/gowifi> tweeted: Wohoo! Completed puzzle!! Great job guys! #nznog <https://twitter.com/search?q=%23nznog> http://ow.ly/i/8qIVj Tweet: https://twitter.com/gowifi/status/560597249663582208

2 1

Lightning talks
by Richard Nelson 28 Jan '15

28 Jan '15

If you want to present a lightning talk tomorrow in the conference, please send me an email or talk to me in a break. Talks should be around 5 minutes long and may or may not require presentation slides. If you have slides, upload them to owncloud.face.co.nz with username/password of nznog15. Put them in the Lightningtalks folder. Richard.

2 1

Beers tonight courtesy of vibe
by Callum Barr 27 Jan '15

27 Jan '15

Come down to Brew in eat street, rotovegas, meet and greet the vibe team and sample many fantastic beverages. We're here now until we expire. Call me if you get lost Callum +64275672746 -- Callum Barr me(a)callumb.com

1 0

bufferbloat talk at nznog friday
by Dave Taht 26 Jan '15

26 Jan '15

I am curious as to what aspects of bufferbloat I should cover more deeply in my upcoming talk at nznog this friday? http://www.nznog.org/home/2015-papers Most of my own personal focus has been on speeding up the edge of the internet, and now wifi, while I have a feeling I should touch upon more on island-to-world connectivity and satellite connectivity issues for this audience. We've given plenty of talks in the past. See talks by van jacobson, jim gettys, jesper dangaurd-bauer, Stephen hemminger, Eric Dumazet, Toke Hoiland Jorgensen, here: http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/cerowrt/wiki/Bloat-videos And the manifesto for FQ+AQM here: https://gettys.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/low-latency-requires-smart-queuing-… So... To what extent do NZNOG folk already grok the causes and cures for bufferbloat? I'm perfectly willing to drop my usual detailed explanation of how tcp bandwidth probing works and talk abut new stuff going on, and wifi, if desired... talk more to bandwidth management and traffic engineering tools, etc. ... there is someone here today doing mikrotik training, and as yet only mikrotik only supports SFQ, not fq_codel. http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=89221 http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=63594 I have a pair of slides on the differences between SFQ and fq_codel. ... And so on. I'm here all week... I've borrowed a NZ vm, run a few experiments worldwide, am fiddling with some parameters... -- Dave Täht http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks

4 12

IPv6 support across NZ ISPs
by Lindsay Hill 26 Jan '15

26 Jan '15

After last year's IPv6 issues, I was wondering what the status is of IPv6 support across NZ ISPs. I couldn't find that data in any one place, so I've been pulling it together myself, into a Google Sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KmhVGN_vPzerUzhpya8lBxdgHc1rCyuWIsY… This is primarily focused around residential ISPs, and the status of their IPv6 support for 'regular' customers. I'm interested in three things: * Is IPv6 supported - fully or trial? * What prefix lengths are given to customers * Are static allocations available?" I've got data on 11 ISPs so far, with requests out for another 3. This covers the majority of end-user connections in NZ. There are of course many more niche ISPs, and I'm happy to add their info. You can see that support is generally poor, which is probably why Google says we're only doing ~0.6% IPv6 traffic. Comments + Updates welcome. Once I've got a bit more data, this will probably go into a more permanent home. If we get enough data, we could break out into residential vs business vs co-location IPv6 support. I am aware of at least a couple of ISPs that are doing IPv6 trials, and when they go live, it will significantly shift the overall IPv6 penetration rate in NZ. But those trials are still mostly internal only, and you can only get on them if you know the right people. If the regular public can't get onto those trials, then I think they should be listed as "Unsupported" - too many ISPs have made noises about running trials years ago, but never got around to actually launching. You know who you are.

16 31

Re: [nznog] Chorus EUBA + IPV6
by Scott Pettit 26 Jan '15

26 Jan '15

On 26/01/15 21:37, "Brent Marquis" <Brent.Marquis(a)chorus.co.nz> wrote: >>Only affect PPPoE->PPPoA translation >This also means that IPv6 over VDSL (PTM) should be fine. >From: nznog-bounces(a)list.waikato.ac.nz >[mailto:nznog-bounces(a)list.waikato.ac.nz] On Behalf Of Simon Allard >To summarise: >IPV6 doesn’t work on Chorus EUBA on some line card types >Only affect PPPoE->PPPoA translation >PPPoE end to end is fine. >Chorus say IPV6 not supported on EUBA >Customer numbers effected are smallish. Just to clarify, if a customer uses PVC 0/110 (Ethernet), there is no issue, right? We have lots of sites on EUBA using 0/110 and haven’t had any problems with IPv6, ditto for WVS. -Scott -- [https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/e2emailsig/unnamed.png] Scott Pettit | Director +64 9 9502222 | SPettit(a)end2end.co.nz End 2 End Limited +64 9 9502220 205/100 Parnell Road, Parnell, Auckland 1052, New Zealand http://www.end2end.co.nz The content of this message and any attachments may be privileged, confidential or sensitive and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorised used is prohibited. Views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where stated otherwise with appropriate authority. All pricing provided is valid at the time of writing only and due to factors such as the exchange rate, may change without notice. Sales are made subject to our Terms & Conditions, available on our website or on request.

5 6

APE route flapping
by Tim Price 26 Jan '15

26 Jan '15

Hi All, Some of you may have noticed that there is some route flappage going on this morning and some of your Domestic/APE facing routing processes may be going haywire. It is probably an appropriate time to check your session route limits on APE and raise them to ~6000. Massey and Vocus; I note that your APE sessions are flapping with Vocus’s route updates causing the lions share of my issues this morning: http://nzix.net/cgi-bin/lg.cgi?query=bgp&protocol=IPv4&addr=neighbors+192.2 03.154.123&router=rs1.ape.nzix.net http://nzix.net/cgi-bin/lg.cgi?query=bgp&protocol=IPv4&addr=neighbors+192.2 03.154.62&router=rs1.ape.nzix.net Cheers, Tim.

1 0

Re: [nznog] IPv6 support across NZ ISPs [SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED]
by HENDERSON MIKE, MR 26 Jan '15

26 Jan '15

Unfortunately, "those who have bothered to implement it" appear to be commercially inconsequential in the residential and mobile broadband markets. According to Andrew Cushen's recent blog post (at http://tinyurl.com/nvdxgh2) Spark, Vodafone and Callplus (= Orcon and Slingshot) between them own 94% of the residential broadband market, and of them Orcon says it has a 'trial' IPv6 offering, all the others Just Say No. Vodafone, Spark and two Degrees of course own 100% of the mobile broadband market, and none of them appear to offer IPv6. I'm afraid that v6 traffic is going to continue to be down amongst the noise until either Vodafone or Spark come to the IPv6 party Regards Mike Disclaimer: opinions expressed are mine and may not represent the position of my employer From: nznog-bounces(a)list.waikato.ac.nz [mailto:nznog-bounces(a)list.waikato.ac.nz] On Behalf Of Pete Mundy Sent: Monday, 26 January 2015 5:37 p.m. To: nznog Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv6 support across NZ ISPs Agreed! Back-pats to those who have bothered to implement it. I know I base my purchasing decisions on it's availability. FWIW we went through a process of finding co-lo package providers that would provide IP space, bandwidth and physical hosting for our PBX equipment around 12 months ago and one of the pre-requisites was the ability to provision us IPv6 space. I was disappointed to find that only 3 of the 10 NZ providers we approached were able to offer it! Most said "it's on the roadmap, but not yet". Some just said "no". In the end we selected two of the providers that could, and we are very happy with the service from both. Hat tips to both Vibe and Unleash/Solarix; your IPv6 support was a significant part of what got you our custom :) Server colo (or VPS') are a different market than home DSL or UFB, but I think it could be interesting & useful to have some sort of matrix of IPv6 availability in that sector too. And 'business' UFB/HSNS/VSDL etc too for that matter. I do hope my 30% hit rate isn't an accurate indicator... Pete On 26/01/2015, at 10:38 AM, Alastair Johnson <aj(a)sneep.net<mailto:aj(a)sneep.net>> wrote: Nice work by FX. Keep it up. (and good work to the others that are offering IPv6 as compiled by Lindsay's list - also good work) The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not necessarily the official views or opinions of the New Zealand Defence Force. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have received this message in error, please Email or telephone the sender immediately.

1 0

CloudFlare at AKL-IX doing some traffic!
by Michael Fincham 24 Jan '15

24 Jan '15

Hey all, Looks like ClareFlare have started moving some traffic at AKL-IX: <http://monitor.akl-ix.nz/cacti/graph.php?local_graph_id=18&rra_id=all> I look forward to seeing what happens next on this graph :) -- Michael Fincham

2 1

They're adding a "leap second" at Noon, Wednesday, 1 July 2015 NZ Standard Time {SECURITY=UNCLASSIFIED}
by HENDERSON MIKE, MR 15 Jan '15

15 Jan '15

Folks, Some of you may not have noticed this in the post-Christmas doze ... What will happen is that on 30th June [UTC time] the clock will go 23:59:59 > 23:59:60 > 00:00:00, instead of 23:59:59 > 00:00:00, i.e. an extra 'leap' second is inserted. It will cause the odd issue or two, depending on your environment and operating system.. For example, if you should happen to use RHEL you could start here https://access.redhat.com/articles/15145 There were certainly issues in other Linux distributions (including Oracle Linux and SLES) last time this happened on 30th June / 1st July 2012. Regards Mike ________________________________________ Press Coverage: This year will be slightly longer after the Paris Observatory announced that it was adding a "leap second" at midnight [UTC] on June 30 http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/extra-second-to-be-added-to-2015-… Note: Midnight [UTC] on June 30 2015 is Noon, Wednesday, 1 July 2015 NZ Standard Time Official Announcement: INTERNATIONAL EARTH ROTATION AND REFERENCE SYSTEMS SERVICE (IERS) SERVICE INTERNATIONAL DE LA ROTATION TERRESTRE ET DES SYSTEMES DE REFERENCE SERVICE DE LA ROTATION TERRESTRE DE L'IERS OBSERVATOIRE DE PARIS 61, Av. de l'Observatoire 75014 PARIS (France) Tel. : 33 (0) 1 40 51 22 26 FAX : 33 (0) 1 40 51 22 91 e-mail : services.iers(a)obspm.fr<mailto:services.iers(a)obspm.fr> http://hpiers.obspm.fr/eop-pc Paris, 5 January 2015 Bulletin C 49 To authorities responsible for the measurement and distribution of time UTC TIME STEP on the 1st of July 2015 A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of June 2015. The sequence of dates of the UTC second markers will be: 2015 June 30, 23h 59m 59s 2015 June 30, 23h 59m 60s 2015 July 1, 0h 0m 0s The difference between UTC and the International Atomic Time TAI is: from 2012 July 1, 0h UTC, to 2015 July 1 0h UTC : UTC-TAI = - 35s from 2015 July 1, 0h UTC, until further notice : UTC-TAI = - 36s Leap seconds can be introduced in UTC at the end of the months of December or June, depending on the evolution of UT1-TAI. Bulletin C is mailed every six months, either to announce a time step in UTC or to confirm that there will be no time step at the next possible date. Daniel Gambis Head Earth Orientation Center of IERS Observatoire de Paris, France http://datacenter.iers.org/eop/-/somos/5Rgv/latest/16<http://datacenter.iers..org/eop/-/somos/5Rgv/latest/16> The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not necessarily the official views or opinions of the New Zealand Defence Force. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have received this message in error, please Email or telephone the sender immediately.

2 1

APNIC Consultations at Conference - Wednesday
by Richard Nelson 14 Jan '15

14 Jan '15

Hostmaster consultations ------------------------ APNIC is offering free, individual Hostmaster consultation sessions at the NZNOG Conference. These will be available on Wednesday Jan 28. At these sessions you can ask about: - How to request IPv4, IPv6, and AS numbers from APNIC - How to transfer IPv4 addresses and AS numbers - Current policies for IP and AS number management in the APNIC region - How to maintain and update your resource registration record in the APNIC Whois Database - Any individual issues you might have To register for the Hostmaster consultations, please email: elly(a)apnic.net

1 0

New prefixes on WIX
by Tim Price 13 Jan '15

13 Jan '15

Heads up that ~700 new prefixes just appeared then vanished from WIX route reflector 2. This momentarily pushed the route totals up over 2000 which may have reset a few BGP sessions for anyone limiting their received prefixes to 2000 on that session. Cheers, Tim.

1 0

python network trace analysis tutorial at NZNOG 2014
by Nevil Brownlee 13 Jan '15

13 Jan '15

Hi all: I'm giving a tutorial on "analysing network traces with python" at NZNOG 2015. The tutorial will cover how to use my python-libtrace module, with lots of example python programs. However, the examples I can think up easily are mostly trivial. It would help me a lot to know what kinds of trace analysis ISPs would actually find useful! If/when you collect packet traces, what kinds of information or analysis would you like to get from them? Any suggestions would be much appreciated - please email me off-list, nevil(a)auckland.ac.nz Cheers, Nevil -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Nevil Brownlee Computer Science Department Phone: +64 9 373 7599 x88941 The University of Auckland FAX: +64 9 373 7453 Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand

1 0

Fwd: Re: [mailop] Wildcarding of AHBL public DNSbl lists on Jan 1st
by Thom Hooker 04 Jan '15

04 Jan '15

(Apologies if you've seen this notification from the mailop list already. ) See the post below re: the AHBL RBL wildcarding certain zones today. There are NZ ASs in the latest CSV lists in the link below (Vodafone NZ, ICONZ, HD & NZ Wireless), this change may affect mail flows. Regards Thom -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [mailop] Wildcarding of AHBL public DNSbl lists on Jan 1st Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 16:26:34 -0700 From: Brielle Bruns <bruns(a)2mbit.com> To: mailop(a)mailop.org On 12/26/14 4:00 PM, Frank Bulk (iname.com) wrote: > Thanks, that's helpful. > > I'm not sure how many IPs you have, but Cymru's service might be an option: >https://www.team-cymru.org/Services/ip-to-asn.html > > I found some other options: >http://quaxio.com/bgp/ >http://ipinfo.io/ >http://dev.maxmind.com/geoip/legacy/geolite/ (usage described here: >https://stackoverflow.com/questions/13110386/ip-to-asn-mapping-algorithm) > Thanks. I threw together a shell script that handles the conversion for me based on the geoiplookup tool and the output is going here: http://www.ahbl.org/queries/ I have to generate the lists manually for now, but it should help those looking to figure out who on their network is doing queries. -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org /http://www.ahbl.org _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop(a)mailop.org http://chilli.nosignal.org/mailman/listinfo/mailop _____________________________________________________________________________ This email has been filtered by SMX. For more info visit http://smxemail.com _____________________________________________________________________________

1 0

BCP / Guidance on IPv6 prefix size to provide to customers
by Alexander Neilson 02 Jan '15

02 Jan '15

I wondered if anyone on here had any guidance on any current BCP (or BCOP) or some general guidance on IPv6 allocations to customers (I am speaking here only for casual day to day allocations to customers) Looking through email archives and discussions that have seen around there was fairly vigorous discussions but no real resolutions. I have seen suggestions of /48, /50, /56. I am inclined to allocate /56’s to each customer (providing 256 /64’s). I don’t want to prevent customers from having the flexibility to do what they need / want to do nor stymie future use cases. If there is some good guidance on a need for /48’s then I will look at it and will use those if needed. Also, is current operating practice amongst others for all links to be /64’s even for p2p links? It seems a lot of documentation / reference texts are a few years old now and some providers have told me that this advice is no longer current but I haven’t yet seen this codified. My /32 allocation is provisionally as follows: 16 bits of /56 allocations - 65,535 customer allocations 8 bits for internal (leaves me 255 /64’s for p2p links between routers) Currently using PPPoE for IPv4 authentication for bulk customers and bespoke routed configurations for the rest. I intend to continue the PPPoE at this stage and just provide dual stack to every customer when connecting. I am still open to any input people have or feedback about what contributed to their deployments. I have looked into archives but was unable to find clear guidance that wasn’t discussed at length to be out of date / disputed so I am primarily looking for what the current best practice is so I can take advantage of the best advise for rolling out the deployment (I know we are late to this party but better late than never) Regards Alexander Alexander Neilson Neilson Productions Limited alexander(a)neilson.net.nz 021 329 681 022 456 2326

7 13

Re: [nznog] Whole of Domain Web Harvest 2015
by emma h 23 Dec '14

23 Dec '14

for those wishing to block, the apache rewrite rule is; RewriteEngine on RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http:/your.domain.co.nz [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} ^(.*)NLNZ_IAHarvester2015(.*)$ RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://tinyurl.com/NLNZ-IAHarvester2015 merry festivus. -- em

2 1

AUI 10BaseT transceiver
by Gareth Fletcher 23 Dec '14

23 Dec '14

Hi team Is anyone near Auckland CBD/Ponsonby and have one of these they'd be willing to part with this afternoon/next week? We seem to have trashed all ours years ago... Please reply off-list, with beer of choice of course :) Cheers! Gareth

1 0

Whole of Domain Web Harvest 2015
by Jay Gattuso 23 Dec '14

23 Dec '14

Hi NZNoggers, I write to let you know of our intent to commence the next NZ Whole of Domain web harvest on the 12th of Jan 2015. The crawl will take approximately 3 weeks to complete. We will be following the same model as previous years, with the Internet Archive acting on our behalf to undertake the crawl. We will be adhering to robots.txt in the main, however when content blocked by robots.txt is embedded in a page that’s not blocked by robots.txt we will attempt to capture that content. The metadata the crawler will be using is:- metadata.userAgentTemplate=Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; NLNZ_IAHarvester2015 +(a)OPERATOR_CONTACT_URL@) metadata.operatorContactUrl=https://natlib.govt.nz/publishers-and-authors/web-harvesting/domain-harvest The contact URL gives some information that describes why we are doing this, and what we’re doing. If you have any questions or concerns, please drop me a line – I’ll be monitoring this email address over the Xmas period. Many thanks, Jay Jay Gattuso | Digital Preservation Analyst | Preservation, Research and Consultancy National Library of New Zealand | Te Puna Mātauranga o Aotearoa PO Box 1467 Wellington 6140 New Zealand | +64 (0)4 474 3064 jay.gattuso(a)dia.govt.nz<mailto:jay.gattuso(a)natlib.govt.nz>

1 0

Fwd: Estonian IPv6 deployment report
by Brian E Carpenter 22 Dec '14

22 Dec '14

An example from far away... -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Estonian IPv6 deployment report Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2014 17:27:23 +0200 From: Tarko Tikan <tarko(a)lanparty.ee> To: IPv6 Ops list <ipv6-ops(a)lists.cluenet.de> hey, Some time ago, many people noticed rapid IPv6 deployment growth in Estonia (from 0% to 5% in 4 weeks). We at 3249/Elion/Estonian Telecom were behind this, other operators don't have any serious IPv6 deployments at the moment. We rolled out v6 to everyone (both business and residential customers) with last-gen CPE, there was no hop-in our hop-out program - aim was to do it perfectly and without customers even noticing. I'm happy to say that we achieved this goal :) To satisfy general interest, I promised small (somehow it turned out longer than I expected) technical writeup how we enabled v6 for our subscribers. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask and I do my best to answer them. You can also skip the technical content and there are some statistics below. Our access network is mix of DSL/GPON/wimax/p2p-ETH and broadband service is deployed in shared service vlans. IPv6 traffic shares vlan with IPv4. Service vlans are transported over MPLS metro network using pseudowires and terminated in geo-clustered Alcatel 7750 BNG routers. Each subscriber is allocated up to 4 mixed v4 and v6 IP hosts. For v4 we are using the usual DHCP, for IPv6 we are using DHCPv6 with IA_PD only, no IA_NA is provided. Unfortunately DHCPv6 provides no way to signal IPv6 default-route thus we have to fall back to RA for default-route. RA does not include any on-link prefixes or DNS information. RAs are L2 unicasted to CPE MAC so no other CPE in service vlan picks up those RAs. To ensure rapid switchover between BNG routers, we are signalling virtual link-local address as default-route. We are using ALU internal DHCP/DHCPv6 servers to allocate leases but we also signal IP information from radius (in such case BNG "fakes" DHCP server) for static IP customers. Provided IPv6 prefix is always /56 and we keep the old lease for 24h even if the CPE is turned off (actual lease time is 30min). Unfortunately, IPv6 LDRA is not available on most of our access platforms so we have to rely on IPv4 session information for authentication. This linking is done in the radius server during subscriber authentication (excellent radiator + quite awful SQL queries :) - if subscriber has IPv4 session (that has been authenticated using DHCP opt82), same MAC address is allowed to have IPv6 session on exactly the same virtual BNG port. IPv4 and v6 session are both tied to same subscriber and share shapers, QOS etc. We were able to enable IPv6 only on our last-gen Inteno CPEs. They run modified OpenWrt and because it's linux - everything is possible :) In CPE, /56 is divided up to /64s, first one is currently reserved but we will configure it on loopback interface and use it for CPE management. Second /64 is configured on LAN and third is configured on public wifi SSID (if you choose to enable this option). In the LAN, IPv6 config is provided by RAs, we also support RDNSS and stateless DHCPv6 for DNS. There is also ingress IPv6 firewall in the CPE and configuration is modifiable by user. To make deployment as smooth as possible, we rolled out IPv6 capable CPE software first. Then, during the BNG platform refresh, we deployed L2 ACLs that dropped all IPv6 traffic based on 0x86dd ethertype. We then deployed IPv6 config to all BNGs and could verify everything before single v6 lease was handed out to the subscribers. Then, interface by interface, we replaced L2 ACL with one that only allowed 0x86dd for certain, supported, OUIs. This is the current situation and we are investigating ways to support 3rd party CPEs - main problem is unreliable IPv6 config in CPEs. Many don't enable DHCPv6 (or enable NA but no PD) but still pick up default-route from RA and happily signal it to LAN. Some others hammer our BNGs with NA request every 0.1 seconds etc. As statistics go, there are 30000+ active IPv6 subscribers (almost 15% of our customer base, based on our public numbers), 81% of them have have at least one IPv6 enabled device in the LAN, 70% have more than one. Most IPv6 traffic is generated by Google+Youtube, Facebook and Akamai. Not bad for a country with 1.3M people. Next up: mobile network :) -- tarko

2 1

Primary access method
by Brian E Carpenter 21 Dec '14

21 Dec '14

Hi, In answer to a ticket entitled "Not getting an IPv6 prefix today", here is what the help desk told me: > Currently XXX have IPv6 services turned off due to some ongoing investigations > with this service. > > Once this is turned back on you will be able to get an IPv6 address again. and in response to my follow-up bleat > As IPv6 is not the Primary access method we offer on our connections this does > not need to be updated on the network status page. > > IPv6 is not a fully released product therefore it is still going through testing > and this is why we are currently unable to apply static IPv6 address (I didn't ask about a static address and don't want one.) This morning, I still have no IPv6 service and the XXX status page still says "OK - No Known Network Problems". Now, since I've had stable IPv6 service for a long time and it often gives me better response times than IPv4, I was a bit annoyed by this. Isn't it time that people consider IPv6 to be the primary access method, and IPv4 to be a legacy solution? Grumble. I need to fire up SixXs again, then. Brian

9 14

Akamai at APE
by Scott Pettit 19 Dec '14

19 Dec '14

Hoping someone knows/can share more info about the Akamai APE peer. It's been there a couple of months now but I can't find any announcement or info in regards to what those caches are serving. I'm seeing a small amount of largely corporate-ish content coming off it (e.g. Cisco.com content seems to come from there) but wondered whether it also provides media content like iTunes movies? Does anyone have detail on how large it is and what it's there for? -Scott

2 1

Multicast traffic replication issue
by Ben Cornish 18 Dec '14

18 Dec '14

Hi All, Curious if anyone has seen this issue previously or could offer any advice on the issue: We have a VLL/EOMPLS with Pipe from Sydney to NZ which then utilises a City Link QinQ service across town in Auckland. We've had an issue ongoing for some time and it only relates to multicast traffic traversing the path. Essentially this issue started when we couldn't establish a OSPF session over the link - yet all other traffic flows as expected. When we broke this link down to basics (laptop either end) we send one multicast packet in the Sydney end - we then receive that same packet 97 times out the Auckland end. (Over the Pipe and City link path) We see this issue when we ping 224.0.0.5 over the link and get that same exact packet 97 times on the other end. We've seen this when doing WireShark captures on the port. The captures show the exact same packet 97 times (ie same payload/sequence number). Pipe seem to be running out of ideas to track the issue. Being a EoMPLS circuit I doubt the issue is on the Pipe side but more on the City Link side. When CityLink were engaged in the issue they did what they referred to as an RFC test - as I understand it, unicast testing only and never engaged further. This issue only seems to effect link local multicast traffic - ie 224.0.0.x/24 All other traffic appears to flow normally/as expected. Obviously we are chasing pipe to test each side individually to work out who is doing the packet replication - however I am curious if anyone has had issues forming OSPF sessions over a City link service ?? Or if anyone can offer advice or seen a similar issue ? My brain boggles thinking how this is even possible or what would cause it. Ben Cornish General Manager [Description: Description: cid:image001.png(a)01CCB4C2.B40A97F0] Over the Wire Pty Ltd - An Impirical Company Level 3, 24 Little Edward St, Spring Hill QLD 4000 t +61 7 3847 9292 m +61 417 617 204 e ben.cornish(a)overthewire.com.au<mailto:ben.cornish(a)overthewire.com.au> www.overthewire.com.au<http://www.overthewire.com.au/>

3 4

Call for Presentations - DNS-OARC Spring Workshop, May 2015
by Sebastian Castro 18 Dec '14

18 Dec '14

NOTE: Previous message contained the right information, but with the subject referring to the wrong year. Apologies for the noise. The next OARC Spring Workshop will take place in Amsterdam on May 9th and 10th, the weekend before RIPE70. OARC is requesting proposals for presentations, with a preference for DDoS attack reports and mitigation techniques. Reports and field stories can cover DNS-based DDoS attacks, attacks to DNS infrastructure or side effects suffered by cache resolver operators. This workshop intends to build from previous strong OARC workshops, where operational content and research is welcome. Presentations from DNS operators are particularly welcome, as well as from DNS researchers. All DNS-related subjects are accepted, introduction to new tools, visualizations, DNSSEC and novel uses of the DNS. If you are an OARC member, and have a sensitive topic you would like to present for members-only, we will accommodate those talks too. Adopting practice from other conferences, a timeslot for lighting talks will be available for short presentations (5 to 10 minutes). Workshop Milestones * 18 December 2014, Call for Presentations posted * 8 January 2015, Open for submissions * 5 March 2015, Deadline for submission * 26 March 2015, Final Program published * 7 May 2015, Final deadline for slideset submission Details for abstract submission will be published here: https://indico.dns-oarc.net//conferenceCFA.py?confId=21 The workshop will be organized on different tracks, depending on the topics and the timing of each presentation. If you are interested in a lightning talk, let us know at the time of submission. You can contact the Programme Committee: https://www.dns-oarc.net/oarc/programme via <submissions(a)dns-oarc.net> if you have questions or concerns. Sebastian Castro, for the OARC Programme Committee OARC is also seeking sponsorship for this workshop, please contact <sponsor(a)dns-oarc.net> if your organization is interested in becoming a sponsor. (Please note that OARC is run on a non-profit basis, and is not in a position to reimburse expenses or time for speakers at its meetings.) -- Sebastian Castro Technical Research Manager .nz Registry Services (New Zealand Domain Name Registry Limited) desk: +64 4 495 2337 mobile: +64 21 400535

1 0

Call for Presentations - DNS-OARC Spring Workshop, May 2014
by Sebastian Castro 18 Dec '14

18 Dec '14

The next OARC Spring Workshop will take place in Amsterdam on May 9th and 10th, the weekend before RIPE70. OARC is requesting proposals for presentations, with a preference for DDoS attack reports and mitigation techniques. Reports and field stories can cover DNS-based DDoS attacks, attacks to DNS infrastructure or side effects suffered by cache resolver operators. This workshop intends to build from previous strong OARC workshops, where operational content and research is welcome. Presentations from DNS operators are particularly welcome, as well as from DNS researchers. All DNS-related subjects are accepted, introduction to new tools, visualizations, DNSSEC and novel uses of the DNS. If you are an OARC member, and have a sensitive topic you would like to present for members-only, we will accommodate those talks too. Adopting practice from other conferences, a timeslot for lighting talks will be available for short presentations (5 to 10 minutes). Workshop Milestones * 18 December 2014, Call for Presentations posted * 8 January 2015, Open for submissions * 5 March 2015, Deadline for submission * 26 March 2015, Final Program published * 7 May 2015, Final deadline for slideset submission Details for abstract submission will be published here: https://indico.dns-oarc.net//conferenceCFA.py?confId=21 The workshop will be organized on different tracks, depending on the topics and the timing of each presentation. If you are interested in a lightning talk, let us know at the time of submission. You can contact the Programme Committee: https://www.dns-oarc.net/oarc/programme via <submissions(a)dns-oarc.net> if you have questions or concerns. Sebastian Castro, for the OARC Programme Committee OARC is also seeking sponsorship for this workshop, please contact <sponsor(a)dns-oarc.net> if your organization is interested in becoming a sponsor. (Please note that OARC is run on a non-profit basis, and is not in a position to reimburse expenses or time for speakers at its meetings.) -- Sebastian Castro Technical Research Manager .nz Registry Services (New Zealand Domain Name Registry Limited) desk: +64 4 495 2337 mobile: +64 21 400535

1 0

Re: [nznog] New IXs in NZ - discussion
by Stu Fleming 17 Dec '14

17 Dec '14

Coming very late to the party on this, but I wanted to wait until announcements (both press and BGP) were out there: On 11 November 13:18, Tim Hoffman <tim(a)hoffman.net.nz> >We've had some interesting announcements of Megaport and IX Australia building internet >exchanges into NZ over the last week or so. I've been a bit surprised at how little chatter there >has been around this on the list. I've just completed standing up our (WICNZ AS38437) peering with APE and hope to complete megaport IX peering in the next couple of days. We're peering IPv4 and IPv6 on both. Our peering record is at http://www.peeringdb.com/view.php?asn=38437 NOC contact: Stu 021 993 125 stewart(a)wic.co.nz I've noted with interest the migration away from Sky Tower to 220 Queen St in particular and the healthy participation by a large number of operators on APE. See below for how you can help me :-) >It's interesting looking at the differences between the 3 IXs we're about to have. >Citylink, who have the critical mass of all the peers, are in the most locations, and are the most >expensive. They've also got a product set around metro ethernet, dark fibre, and have a CDN >running. And they're doing some interesting things around a "SDN driven IX". An announcement in the last few days which seems to have been overlooked on NOG is the relaunch of the Dunedin Peering Exchange: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1412/S00637/citylink-tech-boost-for-dunedi… As you will probably all know (to varying degrees of snark), Dunedin won the Chorus Gigatown competition, providing gigabit speeds on UFB at the retail level. As such, we're expecting higher than normal traffic volumes and hopefully an associated increase in exchanges between providers. I would strongly encourage any operator with a presence in Dunedin to connect to the Dunedin Exchange when it becomes available. We're committed to peering there and hope to see others connecting! Regards, Stu

1 0

Re: [nznog] FW: Primary access method
by Scott Pettit 17 Dec '14

17 Dec '14

> On 17/12/14 11:20 pm, "Joel van Velden" <joel(a)tpnz.co.nz> wrote: >There is no NZ ISP that fully supports IPv6 on DSL/UFB that I am aware >of. We (vorco.net) do support IPv6 on all connections and it's on by default. All customers are assigned a static /56 via DHCPv6 PD, so all that's required is enabling it on the CPE and it is a "production" feature. We officially test and support it on Cisco 867VAE, all 880's, 890's and anything upwards of that and provide template config for these. We have also tested and know it works with Netcomm NF4V (on firmware RB017 and RB019) but don't provide support for those. We've gone to great lengths to pester anyone we connect to with broken IPv6 and as at right now are not aware of any outstanding issues. -Scott

1 0

Re: [nznog] Primary access method
by Pete Mundy 17 Dec '14

17 Dec '14

On 18/12/2014, at 12:20 PM, Joel van Velden <joel(a)tpnz.co.nz> wrote: > There is no NZ ISP that fully supports IPv6 on DSL/UFB that I am aware of. Let's change that awareness then! :) http://www.sinch.co.nz/support-centre.html Very first question on their list: "Can I get IPv6?" Answer: "I'm so glad you asked, yes all our plans are IPv6 enabled." That statement makes me think they seem pretty supportive. *disclaimer - I am not a customer of Sinch, nor have I ever used their products. I simply had their service pointed out to me recently, and I think I maybe I'll get a test circuit from them sometime next year. Pete

1 0

AKL-IX and domestic vs. international
by Dave Mill 11 Dec '14

11 Dec '14

Hi all (Note, I'm not trying to place blame at any party here. Just interested in people's thoughts on this situation) We, Inspire/AS17705, recently peered at AKL-IX. I was interested in using this peering exchange as much as possible so we have tended to prefer AKL-IX routes over any other peering exchange (though we still prefer bi-lats, private interconnects, etc, over AKL-IX). Simple stuff.. We learnt a lot of routes off AKL-IX. We started sending traffic out via. AKL-IX. Cue customer complaints. In general, we were sending all traffic to AS4826/Vocus out via AKL-IX. I believe if another ISP had Vocus as an international provider the traffic would ingress that ISP via their international pipe. This led to one customer having packet loss over a VPN (I'd assume the far end had congested international) and another customer getting billed for this traffic as international. We ceased learning Vocus routes from the AKL-IX. Problem solved... Except, this doesn't really sound ideal to me. If Vocus are announcing routes to AKL-IX (their choice) I would like to be free to use them. What should we be doing in a situation like this? What should Vocus be doing? Am I just making a mountain out of a molehill here and should I just shut-up and leave my current fix in place? Cheers Dave

6 12

Cloudflare on the APE
by Jamie Baddeley 07 Dec '14

07 Dec '14

With N4L joining the APE the fun keeps coming.. New CDN in town and it's a win for NZ. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1412/S00034/ape-brings-the-world-closer-to… At an operational level I'm sure the CloudFlare guys will provide an update soon. regards jamie

19 31

Re: [nznog] Licence NZNOG video recordings
by Richard Naylor 02 Dec '14

02 Dec '14

At 01:48 p.m. 2/12/2014, Nick wrote: >A woefully inadequate search of the archives does not produce an >answer to this, so tempting all fate, I submit a possibly list >relevant query... > >What is the copyright licencing on the r2 recordings of NZNOG? Each >page clearly displays their copyright, which is fair and makes >sense, but there appears to be no distribution licence (eg Creative Commons?) The copyright is held by R2 (2011) Ltd and all rights are reserved. We use that statement whenever a client fails to advise what rights they would like to assert. This is to protect the client's interests despite their ignorance - if that makes sense. We have only 2 clients who (usually) advise what rights to assert and they are usually a form of CC. On the funny side - even Creative Commons NZ don't advise, even after 7 years of waiting, so we hold the rights on their launch in NZ ! http://www.r2.co.nz/20071027/

7 7

Megaport event in Auckland
by Denver Maddux 02 Dec '14

02 Dec '14

Hi all, Just a heads up that Megaport will be hosting a small get together next week in Auckland. Date: Tuesday, 9 December Time: 3:00 - 5:00pm Venue: Gallery 1, Pullman Hotel Auckland Cnr Princes St and Waterloo Quadrant, Auckland City 1010 Our event will highlight: - What is Megaport? - What is MegaDirect? - What is MegaIX? - How does it work? - Who is on it? - How can I connect? - Come and meet the team! Whilst most of you probably understand the Megaport model it would be great for at least me to just meet some of you. And I’m buying drinks just after the session. :) Along with me, Mitchell Warden, Michael Glynn, and Joshua Munro will be leading the session from Megaport. If anyone is interested in attending, shoot me a direct email and I’ll make sure your name is on the list. Thanks, Denver Maddux Megaport

2 2

Fwd: Operators and the IETF - Thank You and Next Steps
by Jamie Baddeley 02 Dec '14

02 Dec '14

of interest to folks? Brian - I saw your name mentioned in dispatches - would be keen to get your perspective as an active Kiwi IETF'er. cheers jamie ---------- Forwarded message ---------- *From: *Chris Grundemann <grundemann(a)isoc.org> *Subject: **Operators and the IETF - Thank You and Next Steps* *Date: *3 December 2014 11:14:58 am NZDT *To: *DL Deploy360 Team <deploy360(a)isoc.org> Hello! Thanks again for completing the Internet Society’s “Operators and the IETF <http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/projects/operators-and-the-ietf/>” survey! For those of you who are interested, this message provides some follow up information. I want to make sure that you’re all aware of what we’ve done with the data we collected, what we plan to do next, and how you can get (or stay) involved should you want to. We collected, analyzed, and synthesized all of the responses collected in the first 6 months of 2014. This is currently published in an IETF Internet-Draft <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-opsawg-operators-ietfaft-opsawg-operators…> . The results were further condensed into a presentation that was given during the OpsAWG meeting at IETF 91. You can view the video <http://recordings.conf.meetecho.com/Playout/watch.jsp?recording=IETF91_OPSA…> (the Operators and the IETF bit starts at about 01:07:00) and check out the slides <http://www.slideshare.net/Deploy360/operators-ietf-ietf91> if you like. For more information on what all happened in relation to this effort during the most recent IETF meeting, check out this blog post <http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/blog/2014/11/operators-and-the-iet…> . As for next steps, we have a couple things in mind. Several of us are going to try to start hosting an “IETF help desk” at the major NOG/NOF meetings around the world. First up to try are NANOG 63, APRICOT 2014, and RIPE 70. This desk will have an IETF banner on it and be manned by volunteers with IETF clue. The idea is to answer folks’ questions on the spot, providing easier access to the IETF process for everyone. The helpdesk and all other future efforts to bring these two communities closer together and help ensure that operational realities inform the development of key technologies will be (at least initially) discussed on a new mailing list: http://snozzages.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/synergy I highly encourage anyone receiving this message to sign up, if you’d like to be involved in this continuing discussion. Either way, thank you for your participation thus far! Cheers, ~Chris -- Chris Grundemann Director, Deployment & Operationalization Internet Society (ISOC)

2 1

IPv6 troubleshooting for Residential ISP Helpdesks - a document
by Dean Pemberton 02 Dec '14

02 Dec '14

Andy just poked this under my nose. Great looking resource! They are looking for feedback if you've got any. ---------- At IPv6 WG session in London, we discussed the most recent version of the "IPv6 Troubleshooting for Residential ISP Helpdesks" document. The proposed plan of action was to reach the consensus on the technical details of the document and then publish it (as combined IPv6 WG and BCOP TF effort). This email announces the working group last call for the "IPv6 Troubleshooting for Residential ISP Helpdesks" document. Please read the most recent version of it: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/groups/tf/bcop/ipv6-troubleshooting-for-residenti… and provide your comments to the list *until 23:59 Fri Dec 19th 2014*. ---------

1 0

Cooling Pads for Juniper SRX?
by Skeeve Stevens 01 Dec '14

01 Dec '14

Hi all, I have an issue with some Juniper SRX100's overheating. I've seen them get hot before, especially placed on something similar (i.e. another SRX100)... and given warnings of overheating, but never shut down.... but this situation is different. These SRX100's are shutting down as they are reaching a core temperature of 70c as they are located in racks that are outside in the sun and on particularly hot days - around 32c-36c they overheat and turn themselves off. Some might say this is understandable... and I sort of agree. Although their operating system says they are good to 40c, that doesn't really seem to be the case. The SRX110's are a little more tolerant given they are bigger units - but have the same operating environmentals (along with the EX2200-C). But at the moment I have the SRX100's and would prefer not to swap them out as it will cost significantly. Then one of my staff had (what I think) a good idea today... to use cooling pads... maybe like the ones you use for laptops or something. So I am wondering if anyone has been some solid - not $20 junk or such.. but something that runs off mains, and works well 24x7x365 - maybe even something that only kicks in once a certain temperature has been reached. I thought if anywhere, a couple of these mailing lists might have had some experience with these kinds of things - especially for those who have built regional pops and have had to cool some equipment. Thanks all! ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd skeeve(a)eintellegonetworks.co.nz ; www.eintellegonetworks.co.nz Phone: +612 8014 7398; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; <http://twitter.com/networkceoau> linkedin.com/in/skeeve twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering

1 0

Licence NZNOG video recordings
by Nick 01 Dec '14

01 Dec '14

A woefully inadequate search of the archives does not produce an answer to this, so tempting all fate, I submit a possibly list relevant query... What is the copyright licencing on the r2 recordings of NZNOG? Each page clearly displays their copyright, which is fair and makes sense, but there appears to be no distribution licence (eg Creative Commons?) Cheers, Nick -- Nick 'Zaf' Clifford

1 0

Spots available on NZITF DDoS training next week in Wellington
by Dean Pemberton 30 Nov '14

30 Nov '14

Hi All, Wellington is going to be the centre of all things Security next week, with Kiwicon happening on the 11th and 12th. In advance of that NZITF have Krassi Tzvetanov (currently at A10 Networks previously at Cisco) visiting that week and running some training while he is here on the 10th December. We don't normally open training up to non-NZITF members, but as this is on DDoS Mitigation and some NZNOG'ers are liable to be in town anyway for Kiwicon, I thought I'd pass the info on. This training will cover different types of DoS attacks that are currently popular and will explain in detail how they work and how in some cases the underlying technology is exploited to produce the desired effect by the attacker. More details available here. http://nzitf.org.nz/pdf/141228-DDoS-Mitigation.pdf Regards, Dean

1 0

Re: [nznog] Letter to Network Operators 24 Nov 2014
by Ray Taylor 30 Nov '14

30 Nov '14

Dean that's a brilliant idea They should definitely be *required* to make a presentation in rotorua and have a q&a session. Ray Taylor Taylor Communications ray(a)ruralkiwi.com Ph 021-483-280 Network status 06-929-9082 Description: header_logo

1 0

FW: Letter to Network Operators 24 Nov 2014
by Ray Taylor 29 Nov '14

29 Nov '14

I am assuming this refers to notifications about equipment changes, vendor suppliers etc? It may come as a surprise to these people but most network operators create standards and stick to them! Ray Taylor Taylor Communications <mailto:ray(a)ruralkiwi.com> ray(a)ruralkiwi.com Ph 021-483-280 Network status 06-929-9082 Description: header_logo From: TICSA [mailto:TICSA(a)ncsc.govt.nz] Sent: Monday, 24 November 2014 3:21 p.m. To: TICSA Subject: Letter to Network Operators 24 Nov 2014 Dear Network Operator Please find attached a letter to all network operators. This letter shares our surprise at the low number of notifications received from registered network operators to date. We want to reinforce that we are here to support you in meeting your obligations under the TICSA. We thank those network operators who have actively engaged with us under the TICSA since May. Kind regards >From the TICSA Team _____ This electronic message, together with any attachments, contains information that is provided in confidence and may be subject to legal privilege. Any classification markings must be adhered to. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not peruse, disclose, disseminate, copy or use the message in any way. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return email and then destroy the original message. The Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) accepts no responsibility for changes to this e-mail, or to any attachments, after its transmission from GCSB. Thank you. _____ This email has been filtered by SMX. For more information visit smxemail.com <http://smxemail.com/>

8 8

Re: [nznog] Network for Learning APE Peering
by Peter Lambrechtsen 28 Nov '14

28 Nov '14

Let's not forget that N4L is run by Spark Digital aka Gen-I and is completely separate infrastructure from the Retail broadband stack. For all intensive purposes they are separate companies. > -------- Original message -------- > From: Tony Wicks <tony(a)wicks.co.nz> > Date: 29/11/2014 8:59 AM (GMT+12:00) > To: "'nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz'" <NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz> > Subject: Re: [nznog] Network for Learning APE Peering > > > Yes, and it also goes to highlight that there is no reason whatsoever why the rest could not be peered ! > > > >Subject: Re: [nznog] Network for Learning APE Peering > > > > > > >That'll be a royal truck-load of daytime traffic moving from domestic transit links to peering links! > > > > >I think much kudos should go to the N4L team for bringing some 5000+(*) addresses of Spark's IP space into being openly peered at APE. This is a fantastic move! > > > > >Well done guys :)

1 0

Network for Learning APE Peering
by Clayton Hubbard 28 Nov '14

28 Nov '14

Hi Noggers.. Network for Learning has just completed peering with APE. If you provide services to schools in NZ and have any suboptimal routing, please contact me off-list to investigate. Thanks, *Clayton Hubbard* Senior Engineer, The Network for Learning Ltd D: 09 972 2906 | M: 022 043 0155 | W: http://www.n4l.co.nz A: Suite 306, Geyser Building, 100 Parnell Road, Parnell, Auckland 1052 P: PO Box 37118, Parnell, Auckland 1151 <http://www.n4l.co.nz> <https://twitter.com/@N4LNZ/> <https://www.facebook.com/NetworkForLearning> <https://plus.google.com/104649004276520409744/about> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/the-network-for-learning-ltd-n4l->

3 2

Re: [nznog] FW: Letter to Network Operators 24 Nov 2014
by Revel N 25 Nov '14

25 Nov '14

Completely agree. My interpretation of the guidance is the same (i.e. "continuing to use the exact same systems as were decided on and deployed prior to 11 May would not require a notice and replacing dead hardware with the same thing doesn't require this notice either"). As such, I'd be surprised if there had been a large number of submissions from every operator within 6 months. On 26 November 2014 at 12:00, <nznog-request(a)list.waikato.ac.nz> wrote: > Send NZNOG mailing list submissions to > nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > nznog-request(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > > You can reach the person managing the list at > nznog-owner(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of NZNOG digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: FW: Letter to Network Operators 24 Nov 2014 > (Alexander Neilson) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:12:41 +1300 > From: Alexander Neilson <alexander(a)neilson.net.nz> > To: Dave Mill <dave(a)mill.net.nz> > Cc: "nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz" <nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz> > Subject: Re: [nznog] FW: Letter to Network Operators 24 Nov 2014 > Message-ID: <3B4DF5F6-1C93-4023-AE3E-D5D483D7CC0A(a)neilson.net.nz> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > What I think is missing here is where providers have a standard system > they have used with the same hardware before May 11th. > > These were decisions made beforehand, no change to deployment, or not > covered by an area of specified security interest. > > How many people on this list would have changed the manufacturer / type of > equipment used in the NOC / core network that meets the threshold in 6 > months? > > IANAL > > However from my lay reading of the guidance and exemptions continuing to > use the exact same systems as were decided on and deployed prior to 11 May > would not require a notice and replacing dead hardware with the same thing > doesn?t require this notice either. > > So I am not sure that a low number of notifications is an odd thing unless > people had major changes to their core and a short run time to make these > changes. > > Others may want to chime in with their experiences. > > Regards > Alexander > > Alexander Neilson > Neilson Productions Limited > > alexander(a)neilson.net.nz > 021 329 681 > 022 456 2326 > > > On 25/11/2014, at 11:51 am, Dave Mill <dave(a)mill.net.nz> wrote: > > > > I'm actually surprised that our GCSB overlords haven't done something > like this sooner. To me it seems pretty obvious that not all network > providers are using/following the new guidelines. And much better an email > like this one than a proper slap by the NCSC/GCSB. > > > > To explain my logic without giving too much away. > > > > We are a small ISP. We have submitted proposals under this new law. Lets > call our number of proposals X. > > > > At a technical conference recently the GCSB were able to share with us > their rough total number of proposals. That number was also reasonably > obvious from the proposal numbering system the NCSC use. Lets call this > number Y. > > > > Y wasn't that much bigger than X. I'm talking 5 or 6 times bigger from > memory. > > > > We have spent a lot of time and effort in following this new > legislation. I think its only fair that others do also (lets not debate > whether we needed the legislation here). And with the numbers talked about > so far I think its pretty clear that some organisations out there aren't > following this new legislation. > > > > At the very least (based on Ray's comments) most network operators > should be submitting at least 5 - 10 standard builds each IMHO. > > > > Cheers > > Dave > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 8:30 PM, Ray Taylor <ray(a)ruralkiwi.com <mailto: > ray(a)ruralkiwi.com>> wrote: > > I am assuming this refers to notifications about equipment changes, > vendor suppliers etc? > > > > It may come as a surprise to these people but most network operators > create standards and stick to them! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ray Taylor > > > > Taylor Communications > > > > ray(a)ruralkiwi.com <mailto:ray(a)ruralkiwi.com> > > > > > > Ph 021-483-280 > > > > Network status 06-929-9082 > > > > > > > > <image001.png> > > > > > > > > From: TICSA [mailto:TICSA(a)ncsc.govt.nz <mailto:TICSA(a)ncsc.govt.nz>] > > Sent: Monday, 24 November 2014 3:21 p.m. > > To: TICSA > > Subject: Letter to Network Operators 24 Nov 2014 > > > > > > > > Dear Network Operator > > > > > > > > Please find attached a letter to all network operators. This letter > shares our surprise at the low number of notifications received from > registered network operators to date. We want to reinforce that we are here > to support you in meeting your obligations under the TICSA. > > > > > > > > We thank those network operators who have actively engaged with us under > the TICSA since May. > > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards > > > > From the TICSA Team > > > > > > > > > > > > This electronic message, together with any attachments, contains > information that is provided in confidence and may be subject to legal > privilege. Any classification markings must be adhered to. If you are not > the intended recipient, you must not peruse, disclose, disseminate, copy or > use the message in any way. If you have received this message in error, > please notify us immediately by return email and then destroy the original > message. > > The Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) accepts no > responsibility for changes to this e-mail, or to any attachments, after its > transmission from GCSB. Thank you. > > > > This email has been filtered by SMX. For more information visit > smxemail.com <http://smxemail.com/> > > _______________________________________________ > > NZNOG mailing list > > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz <mailto:NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz> > > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog < > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > NZNOG mailing list > > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog > >

1 0

ntp.net.nz Update
by Josh Simpson 24 Nov '14

24 Nov '14

Hi NZNOG, Time for an update with regards to ntp.net.nz servers. On the morning of Saturday Nov 22, ntp3.ntp.net.nz failed with a similar issue to that of ntp2.ntp.net.nz, this happened just a few weeks short of the new ntp2 go live. Due to this event we have pushed the new ntp2 appliance into service as well as reconfiguring another new appliance that was to be ntp4 as a ntp3 replacement. Both of these went live on Nov 22 at 18:06 hours, along with reverting the DNS ntp2 -> ntp3 redirection changes that were made in the July 14th email. As part of this the IP addresses for ntp2 and ntp3 have changed to the following ntp2.ntp.net.nz: 202.46.178.18 ntp3.ntp.net.nz: 202.46.179.18 ntp2 was unavailable via IPv6 prior to the failure, we have plans to resolve this in the near future. ntp3 is now unavailable via IPv6 due to the short time span of the work on Saturday, we hope to have this resolved in the coming weeks. We will update the list when IPv6 is back up and running. If you had previously used the IP addresses in your configs be sure to update them. We do recommend using the DNS names specified at https://ntp.net.nz to avoid this issue in the future. If you need any further information, please contact us at support(a)nzrs.net.nz Cheers Josh -- Josh Simpson Systems Administrator .nz Registry Services M: +64 21 783 399 P: +64 4 555 0124 GPG: 6516 B4EA 413B CAED 57B5 0956 124C 8AC3 A362 8080 www.nzrs.net.nz

2 1

Network Monitoring VPS in exchange for VPS from us in return.
by daniel＠glovine.com.au 23 Nov '14

23 Nov '14

Hi Noggers, I was wondering if a couple of providers whom wouldn't mind swapping a small VPS for a small VPS from us, in order for us to run a couple of external network monitoring tools from, Looking for providers whom are on MegaPort Sydney IX Looking for providers whom are on NSW IX Looking for providers whom are not on Vocus transit These requirements above are not all necessary to meet, a mix would be handy and dandy :D, Would even consider providers in QLD, Perth, Melbourne Pritty much Australia wide even NZ is a consideration If you wouldn't mind and you are interested please shoot me an off-list reply for further details and discussions TIA Daniel

1 0

FW: FW: Letter to Network Operators 24 Nov 2014
by Ray Taylor 23 Nov '14

23 Nov '14

Unclassified Have forwarded to you Ray Taylor Taylor Communications <mailto:ray(a)ruralkiwi.com> ray(a)ruralkiwi.com Ph 021-483-280 Network status 06-929-9082 Description: header_logo From: Rob McDonald [mailto:r(a)l2.co.nz] Sent: Monday, 24 November 2014 8:38 p.m. To: Ray Taylor Subject: Re: [nznog] FW: Letter to Network Operators 24 Nov 2014 Hey Ray, Is the text of the actual letter under any confidentiality? If not would you forward it to me? Im quite interested. Could be a gem considering the terse nature of the email. Cheers R On 24/11/2014 8:31 PM, "Ray Taylor" <ray(a)ruralkiwi.com> wrote: I am assuming this refers to notifications about equipment changes, vendor suppliers etc? It may come as a surprise to these people but most network operators create standards and stick to them! Ray Taylor Taylor Communications ray(a)ruralkiwi.com Ph 021-483-280 Network status 06-929-9082 Description: header_logo From: TICSA [mailto:TICSA(a)ncsc.govt.nz] Sent: Monday, 24 November 2014 3:21 p.m. To: TICSA Subject: Letter to Network Operators 24 Nov 2014 Dear Network Operator Please find attached a letter to all network operators. This letter shares our surprise at the low number of notifications received from registered network operators to date. We want to reinforce that we are here to support you in meeting your obligations under the TICSA. We thank those network operators who have actively engaged with us under the TICSA since May. Kind regards >From the TICSA Team _____ This electronic message, together with any attachments, contains information that is provided in confidence and may be subject to legal privilege. Any classification markings must be adhered to. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not peruse, disclose, disseminate, copy or use the message in any way. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return email and then destroy the original message. The Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) accepts no responsibility for changes to this e-mail, or to any attachments, after its transmission from GCSB. Thank you. _____ This email has been filtered by SMX. For more information visit smxemail.com <http://smxemail.com/> _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

1 0

Generating a default route
by Dylan Hall 20 Nov '14

20 Nov '14

Hi all, I'm curious what other people are doing to generate a default route. The config I'm familiar with lists a set of networks, and if any of them are present then the default route is created. Is that how everyone does it? How are people choosing the set of networks? Do you just use Google and Facebook, after all, if they're present that's pretty much the whole internet? Do you use networks that your transit supplier originates? How many networks do you rely on? If I've lost 50% of my full route table in a fault, am I better off not generating default and letting my multi-homed customers use their backup supplier? Comments welcome on and off list :) Thanks, Dylan

1 0

Outdoor Plant Cabinet
by Alexander Neilson 20 Nov '14

20 Nov '14

Hey All We have been caught a little short on availability of our normal outside plant cabinet and I thought I might pop a call out to the list to see if anyone had advice or a spare lying around We are looking for a cabinet with front and back doors, 13RU internal 19” usable rack space (or an 18/19 RU one door rack) We need 600mm depth for the design. Does anyone have a cabinet sitting spare meeting these requirements or a company they have worked with for external cabinets who may have one in their showroom that could be mobilised or has space on a production line. We are looking for availability in 2-3 weeks so quite a tight timeframe. I can offer beer as a finders fee for successful outcome (plus we can buy a cabinet if someone has it spare at their place) *note not asking for loaner cabinets as the plan is to set in a concrete pad where the mounting pole is* Regards Alexander Alexander Neilson Neilson Productions Limited alexander(a)neilson.net.nz 021 329 681 022 456 2326

1 0

Netflix launch in NZ (and Australia) March 2015
by Jesse Archer 18 Nov '14

18 Nov '14

https://pr.netflix.com/WebClient/getNewsSummary.do?newsId=1751 Will be interesting to see if they turn up on Megaport IX Auckland, Auckland IX or APE. *Jesse Archer* *General Manager*Full Flavour *p. *07 929 7111 *ddi*. 07 281 1391 *s*. Skype username "myfullflavour" *e*. jesse(a)fullflavour.co.nz <jesse(a)fullflavourmedia.co.nz> *w*. fullflavour.co.nz <http://t.sigopn02.com/e1t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7lC8dDMPbW2n0x6l2B9nMJW7t5XZs2zqjsKN…> *a. *Tauranga Business Centre, 50 Devonport Road, Tauranga *a*. PO Box 16306, Bethlehem 3176, New Zealand

6 6

Re: [nznog] Netflix launch in NZ (and Australia) March 2015
by Jesse Archer 18 Nov '14

18 Nov '14

Netflix will supply the appliances. http://oc.nflxvideo.net/docs/OpenConnect-Deployment-Guide.pdf Expect to have 1-2Gbps between Sydney & NZ tied up each night for 10 hours filling the caches with content. *Jesse Archer* *General Manager*Full Flavour *p. *07 929 7111 *ddi*. 07 281 1391 *s*. Skype username "myfullflavour" *e*. jesse(a)fullflavour.co.nz <jesse(a)fullflavourmedia.co.nz> *w*. fullflavour.co.nz <http://t.sigopn02.com/e1t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7lC8dDMPbW2n0x6l2B9nMJW7t5XZs2zqjsKN…> *a. *Tauranga Business Centre, 50 Devonport Road, Tauranga *a*. PO Box 16306, Bethlehem 3176, New Zealand On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Simon Allard <Simon.Allard(a)callplus.co.nz> wrote: > Netflix does have its own CDN which they deploy in ISP networks. Looks > like the ISP supplies the hardware and they supply the software. > > > > https://openconnect.itp.netflix.com/ > > > > In the past they have never let anyone outside of the regions they service > use these. So will be interesting to see what they expect of NZ/AU ISP’s > now. > > > > Do we need to deploy CDN nodes? or will they come in with their own CDN > and peer? How will they handle non-peering ISP’s? > > > > March isn’t that far away with a big nice brownout/blackout period in the > middle. > > > > > > > > *From:* nznog-bounces(a)list.waikato.ac.nz [mailto: > nznog-bounces(a)list.waikato.ac.nz] *On Behalf Of *Jesse Archer > *Sent:* Wednesday, 19 November 2014 11:56 a.m. > *To:* nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > *Subject:* [nznog] Netflix launch in NZ (and Australia) March 2015 > > > > https://pr.netflix.com/WebClient/getNewsSummary.do?newsId=1751 > > Will be interesting to see if they turn up on Megaport IX Auckland, > Auckland IX or APE. > > > > > > > *Jesse Archer * > *General Manager *Full Flavour > > *p. *07 929 7111 *ddi*. 07 281 1391 > *s*. Skype username "myfullflavour" > *e*. jesse(a)fullflavour.co.nz <jesse(a)fullflavourmedia.co.nz> > *w*. fullflavour.co.nz > <http://t.sigopn02.com/e1t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7lC8dDMPbW2n0x6l2B9nMJW7t5XZs2zqjsKN…> > *a. *Tauranga Business Centre, 50 Devonport Road, Tauranga > *a*. PO Box 16306, Bethlehem 3176, New Zealand > > > > Simon Allard // > Senior Network Architect > > *D:* 09 550 2790* M:* 020 100 0790* F:* > > > > www.callplus.co.nz | www.slingshot.co.nz | www.flip.co.nz | > www.orcon.net.nz > > > This message and any attachments contain privileged and confidential > information. If you > are not the intended recipient of this message, you are hereby notified > that any use, > dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this message is prohibited. > If you have received this message in error please notify the sender > immediately via email > and then destroy this message and any attachments. > >

1 0

New IXs in NZ - discussion
by Bevan Slattery 17 Nov '14

17 Nov '14

Hi Joe, [snip] IX Australia are the only independent Internet Exchange operator in Australasia, with 16 years experience running exchanges throughout the region. Unlike all other Internet Exchanges in the region, we are not for profit, and seek to serve our members, not our shareholders. We're already very far down the path of bringing some very interesting content providers and large NSPs online. [/snip] Interesting to see IX-Australia following Megaport lead again and it¹s great to see competition. However, a few points regarding your statement above: 1. It is a misrepresentation to say that WAIA/IX-Australia is the only independent provider of IX Services in Australasia 2. Its generally known that IX-Australia provides services to organisations that aren¹t members of WAIA/IX-Australia. which apart from a contravention of its constitution means the statement above isn¹t quite factually correct. Can you confirm WAIA only provide services to registered members under its constitution? I can think of a handful that aren¹t. 3. The constitution of WAIA only provides for WAIA/IX Australia to service Australia, so I¹m not sure whether the announcement is simply a reaction to Megaports announcement, not approved by members/amended in the constitution or part of a plan to expand (not foreshadowed at the recent AGM which would have been the time to amend the constitution?) 4. WAIA is Incorporated in WA which actually only really provides for the delivery of services in Western Australia (there is a pathway to delivering nationally through Incorporation under ASIC), but certainly is not able to provide services outside of Australia. Operation outside of Australia may lead to issues regarding WAIA¹s incorporated status. Despite some persistent rumours that IX-Australia is perhaps being taken advantage of by a particular commercial carrier to hinder Megaports success, I would like to think otherwise, but this reaction to step outside the legal operational jurisdiction makes me think there is merit to same. So ultimately, from a Network Operations perspective it would be helpful to understand whether WAIA as an Incorporated Association in Western Australia is legally able to operate outside of Australia in the first instance though (even if the Constitution allowed it which I don¹t think it does). Your clarification to the list would be helpful. Cheers [b] WAIA 2013 Constitution https://www.waia.asn.au/node/83

3 4

Megaport Auckland
by Denver Maddux 17 Nov '14

17 Nov '14

Hi NZNOGers, First off, I’m new to the NZNOG list, but far from new to NOGs in general. I’ve recently stepped into the CEO role at Megaport and expect to be more actively engaging the community regionally as we expand the business into New Zealand, but I’ve been a long-time active member of NANOG, GPF, EPF, and APF groups. I’ve been trying to catch-up on the NZNOG list via the archives over the past couple of weeks to get some context for the community and I’m really happy to see how active the list has been as of late. Second, I wanted to just drop a note that Megaport is now live in 220 Queen St. As many of you have seen, we are partnered with Vibe in NZ, but users can also sign up directly with Megaport now in The Data Centre. This is for the full index of Megaport services, including IX, as has been heavily discussed on this list recently. We will also be expanding into Datacom Orbit Dr in the next month or so. http://www.megaport.com Feel free to email me direct if you have questions, or flames. :) Denver Maddux CEO Megaport denver.maddux(a)megaport.com<mailto:denver.maddux(a)megaport.com>

2 1

Reminder of NZNOG list AUP
by Simon Lyall 12 Nov '14

12 Nov '14

Just a reminder to everyone that the list AUP includes: 6. Blatant product or service marketing is unacceptable. so please try not to overdo it. The full AUP is here: http://www.nznog.org/mailing-list Simon. NZNOG list co-moderator. -- Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.simonlyall.com/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar

12 13

New IXs in NZ - discussion
by Tim Hoffman 12 Nov '14

12 Nov '14

All, We’ve had some interesting announcements of Megaport and IX Australia building internet exchanges into NZ over the last week or so. I’ve been a bit surprised at how little chatter there has been around this on the list. I thought I’d put some thoughts down (as someone who has worked for a bunch of networks in NZ and is now overseas working for big content) with hope of kicking off a discussion. At a 10,000 foot view, New Zealand has had a reasonably successful operation of IXs over the last 10-15 years. All of y’all except for the two big operators openly peer. This is awesome! However, as has been discussed in other posts recently; 1/ More and more of the internet is becoming about connectivity from CDNs to users. 2/ More and more CDNs are coming to New Zealand and Australia 3/ Trans-tasman capacity isn’t hugely expensive Addressing points (1) and (2), as content comes into New Zealand, we have to remember that on a global scale, New Zealand is absolutely tiny. It’s a hard business case to get a POP there as a content provider. Content providers that do come are likely just going to put in a single location - Auckland. So while WIX may make sense for ISPs in NZ peering with each other, for the bulk of the *interesting* content on the internet that you can get through peering, you’re going to have to get it in Auckland. Networks have outages, planned works, etc. So assuming that most of NZ’s interesting content is in Auckland (with a bit more over the Tasman, which isn’t too expensive to get to these days), it makes sense to have multiple (redundantly built and managed) ways of getting at this content. It’s interesting looking at the differences between the 3 IXs we’re about to have. Citylink, who have the critical mass of all the peers, are in the most locations, and are the most expensive. They’ve also got a product set around metro ethernet, dark fibre, and have a CDN running. And they’re doing some interesting things around a “SDN driven IX”. Megaport, who have placed huge focus on their “Virtual Cross Connect” product and being able to configure this on the fly, but also have run a pretty successful IX. IX Australia, who are very IX focused, and have gone to great pains to ensure that that’s their only product, making them the most “independent”. IX Australia also have public graphs of traffic levels through their IX (i.e. for NSW-iX http://monitor.nsw.ix.asn.au/cacti/graph_image.php?action=view&local_graph_… <http://monitor.nsw.ix.asn.au/cacti/graph_image.php?action=view&local_graph_…>) - which is commendable (it would be nice to see Megaport and Citylink follow suit on this one) I suspect you’re going to find that most of the content will try to get to all 3. It’s my hope that most of the bigger ISPs try to get to all three, then the smaller ones can go to a couple, get most NZ routes reliantly over peering, and then transit the rest if it has to happen. It would be disappointing if we didn’t see the top 5-6 IXs + all the content providers on all of them. Also it’ll be important to ensure that the result isn’t just that we have 3 split IX communities, all with different content/users on them without crossover, as this would cause a huge barrier to entry to smaller players if they have to connect to all 3. For the community, having this competition is going to be a win. It won’t kill APE, which has huge critical mass, and has done a great job in it’s long history, but will ensure that all 3 IXs keep each other honest. What will be interesting to see is who turns up at which IX and how they all grow together. What’s everyone else’s thoughts? It would be interesting particularly if there is anyone from Citylink, or any of the big ISPs, who could comment on their take on these developments in the market and where they will be peering? Cheers, Hoff

16 19

Non Commercial request for Hardware (learning kit)
by Alexander Neilson 11 Nov '14

11 Nov '14

Hey All Sorry if this is rude of me to ask and I apologise if so. Does anyone have old routers / switches / firewalls / spare parts or modules for same lying around that are still function (or slightly broken) that they are looking at flicking on or long term loaning? I am looking for any gear that would help me get greater exposure to other hardware / configurations and that can be used in my home lab. I currently have a single Cisco 2821 that was pulled from production, and a Cisco Catalyse 2900XL plus on long term loan I have two Juniper J2320’s. The 2821 has a very loud dying fan that I would like to replace (flatmates aren’t so understanding about my learning noises) and I would like to get some more experience with Cisco and other manufacturers. I do also have a copy of GNS3 that I will be trying to use more but I have always preferred to grab actual physical hardware and wire it up and play around with configs etc. I am wellington based so hardware locally would be a bonus but if its something exciting to learn I would probably try save up shipping. Also I don’t have massive space so while some hardware would be awesome to experience I will likely decline for space reasons. Thank you all in advance. Apologies for any noise on the list. Off list replies are probably best. Please note for future people seeing this in the archive, if you want to take a look / have a play any of the hardware I receive would be available for learning loan to others. Regards Alexander Alexander Neilson Neilson Productions Limited alexander(a)neilson.net.nz 021 329 681 022 456 2326

2 1

Load balance appliances
by Jodi Thomson 11 Nov '14

11 Nov '14

Hi All Just wondering what people are using these days for dedicated load balance appliances. Last ones I had anything to do with were the Alteon Ace Directors going back 7-8 yrs so am a little out of touch with whats in use today. Cheers Jodi -- Jodi Thomson Systems & Networks Big Noise Group Ltd 501 Heretaunga Street West, Hastings 4122 Cell (021) 903712 Ph: (06) 876 9661 Fax: (06) 876 9668 Skype: jodit1 Web : http://www.bignoisegroup.com

6 8

Filming a server room
by Ross Ozarka 10 Nov '14

10 Nov '14

Hello members of NZNOG, My name is Ross Ozarka. I'm a filmmaker who is making a documentary about wire. I'm collecting shots of wires put to different uses, and I'd love to show off the wiring of a server room. The shoot will take about ten minutes, and whoever lets me film their server room will receive an Associate Producer credit. Takers, please get in touch with me at ross.ozarka(a)gmail.com so we can set up a day that works best for you. Warm Regards, Ross Ozarka

1 0

UFB 1 gig plans for retail and impact they have
by Barry Murphy 08 Nov '14

08 Nov '14

Hey guys, I just wondered what people thought of the implications around 1gbps residential / business plans now becoming more and more common. I¹m seeing requests from wholesalers and retail asking about this gigatown thing and how they can get a 1Gbps service, especially unlimited. While I know 1gbps is not too common yet, the 200mbps plan is becoming more and more common and it won¹t be long before there is pressure to do 1gbps I know the unlimited part is easy to justify to the client around Œinternational & domestic¹ transit pricing, but some ask why can we not do user to user or peering traffic at 1gbps. I¹m not sure if it¹s still true, but I recall from the Chorus documentation that you could LAG a maximum of 8x10g circuits in a handover region and that was the max, so theoretically 80gbps handover. For the sake of ease and because 10Gbps holes are not cheap in high end routers like ALU 7750 SR-7¹s which we run, we will consider the average provider has a single 10g or maybe 2 per region right now. If you had say 10 or 20 users on the 1Gbps plan or even 100-200 users on the 200mbps plan and they had misconfigured routers (consider they could do 200mbps upload) opening them up to the likes of DNS amplifications etc. Now those users are maxing out the upload capacity of the handover, you have no ability to QoS the malicious users as the QoS would need to come before hitting the handover, I.e. On the CPE. Suddenly everyone on the handover is impacted from a handful of users that wanted the faster speed just because it was available and affordable. The only way to stop the attack affecting everyone would be to isolate and disconnect the end users causing the damage, be it IPOE or PPPoE, if the user was on a direct /30 IP then things are even harder to manage. The DNS amplifications that hurt Spark for a whole weekend, I can only assume was caused by such a large amount of affected devices filling up the handovers and also because it was targeted at their DNS. Imagine an attack of that magnitude, 10s of thousands of end users on 200 or even 100mbps circuits filling up a 10gig or even at this point a 80gbps handover LAG. When you talk about regional handovers up and down the country then the problem gets worse as you then obviously need to backhaul that capacity to Auckland before getting out to the internet, so this also has to be considered too. Any thoughts on the matter. Many thanks Kind regards, Barry Murphy / Chief Operating Officer +64 27 490 9712 / barry(a)vibecommunications.co.nz <http://www.vibecommunications.co.nz/> <https://www.facebook.com/VibeCom> <https://twitter.com/vibecomnz> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/1941512> Office: +64 9 222 0000 / Fax: 0800 842 326 Unit A7, 1 Beresford Square, Auckland, New Zealand Web: www.vibecommunications.co.nz <http://www.vibecommunications.co.nz/> / Peering: AS45177 <http://www.peeringdb.com/view.php?asn=45177> This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002.

19 36

Network Operators Around the World Demonstrate Their Commitment to a Secure and Resilient Internet
by Dean Pemberton 06 Nov '14

06 Nov '14

This Interesting release via ISOC kinda fits in with the recent conversation around how to protect the Internet from edge originating ause. Any comment from New Zealand Network Operators (thats all of you!) as to whether you see a benefit in this initiative? Anyone want to publically add their name to the list of operators who "have taken one or several of the expected actions defined by the MANRS framework." Interested in peoples thoughts on this. ---------- Mutually Agreed Norms for Routing Security (MANRS) recommendations provide a coordinated approach to improve global routing system [Washington, D.C., USA and Geneva, Switzerland] - 6 November 2014 - Leading network operators around the world today announced that they have implemented a package of recommended measures that help improve the security and resilience of the global Internet. Working together, network operators have developed a tightly defined set of concrete actions to improve the global Internet routing system. The recommendations, called Mutually Agreed Norms for Routing Security (MANRS), recognize the interdependent nature of the global routing system and integrate best current practices related to routing security and resilience. More network operators from across the globe are encouraged to sign onto the movement and participate by visiting the website at www.manrs.org <http://www.manrs.org> and completing the signup form. Organized by the Internet Society, and building on the demonstrated success of coordinated industry activities such as World IPv6 Day and World IPv6 Launch, MANRS represents a significant step forward towards building a more resilient and secure Internet infrastructure. "The security of the Internet as a network of networks often relies on specific collaborative action. This initiative increases the security of the Internet by improving resiliency and stability of the underlying routing infrastructure," commented Olaf Kolkman, the Internet Society's Chief Internet Technology Officer. "Participating network operators committed to the MANRS initiative are taking actions that address problems with incorrect routing information and spoofed traffic, demonstrating their collective responsibility to a healthy and secure Internet ecosystem. We encourage and look forward to other network operators around the world publicly taking these steps." Participating network operators have taken one or several of the expected actions defined by the MANRS framework. These include preventing propagation of incorrect routing information, preventing traffic with spoofed IP addresses, and facilitating global operational communication and coordination between network operators. Committed network operators are: ● CERNET ● Claranet ● Comcast ● KPN ● Level 3 ● NTT ● RUNNet ● SpaceNet ● SURFnet Several of the participating network operators commented on their actions and today's announcement: "Adherence to MANRS is an important commitment that operators make back to the Internet community. Together we aim to remove the havens from which miscreants maintain the freedom and anonymity to attack our network and our customers." - David Freedman, Claranet Group "Comcast is committed to helping drive improvements to the reliability of the Internet ecosystem. We are thrilled to be engaged with other infrastructure participants across the spectrum and around the globe in pursuit of these goals." - Jason Livingood, Vice President, Internet Services, Comcast "Good network routing practice is the fundamental requirement for trust between providers, and ultimately creates a safer and stronger Internet for customers. KPN is committed to providing secure and trustworthy communications, and by joining partners in MANRS, we continue to improve security and resiliency for all." - Jaya Baloo, Chief Information Security Officer, KPN "As one of the most connected Internet providers in the world, security of the Internet is top-of-mind at Level 3 Communications. We are dedicated to supporting and protecting the Internet ecosystem and work each day to safeguard customers' critical communications. The Internet is a shared responsibility, and only through these important collaborative efforts can we continue to ensure the protection of this collective infrastructure." - Dale Drew, Senior Vice President, Chief Security Officer at Level 3 Communications "SURFnet is a big supporter of these initiatives to make the Internet more secure. Committing to the actions as outlined in the MANRS document will make routing on the Internet safer. This impacts every day usage of the Internet and helps with a free, open, and more secure Internet for all users." - Erik Huizer, CTO, SURFnet For more information about MANRS and the Routing Resilience Manifesto visit: http://www.manrs.org <http://www.manrs.org>

3 2

AKL-IX Launching Soon
by Joe Wooller 06 Nov '14

06 Nov '14

Hey All, It looks like NZ is the place to be! I am proud to announce that we have launched a new Internet Exchange in Auckland NZ, AKL-IX! We have just put a place holder page up with some information at http://www.akl-ix.nz <http://www.akl-ix.nz/> IX Australia are the only independent Internet Exchange operator in Australasia, with 16 years experience running exchanges throughout the region. Unlike all other Internet Exchanges in the region, we are not for profit, and seek to serve our members, not our shareholders. We're already very far down the path of bringing some very interesting content providers and large NSPs online. We seek further participants who wish to take part during our start-up phase of operation. During the start-up phase no charges will apply to participants. We are in the process of connecting a number of peers currently. Peers will need to be present at 220 Queen St as this is our first live site. Interested parties can contact peering(a)akl-ix.nz to learn how to take part. For a list of participants will be available on the above website and on PeeringDB (http://bit.ly/1vRAvgZ <http://bit.ly/1vRAvgZ>) If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Regards Joe

2 2

Who's looking at peering on the new Intellipath / Megaport IX service?
by Jesse Archer 06 Nov '14

06 Nov '14

I see www.Intellipath.co.nz just launched. Anyone else looking at coming on-board? http://www.reseller.co.nz/article/558524/megaport-partners-vibe-break-down-… We've ordered a port at MDR and will VxC to a couple of other networks we do a lot of traffic to. The Megaport IX service in Auckland looks like a credible alternative to Citylink's APE - depends on who comes on-board. I'd be happy if Callplus & Mediaworks on-boarded. *Jesse Archer* *General Manager*Full Flavour *p. *07 929 7111 *ddi*. 07 281 1391 *s*. Skype username "myfullflavour" *e*. jesse(a)fullflavour.co.nz <jesse(a)fullflavourmedia.co.nz> *w*. fullflavour.co.nz <http://t.signauxsept.com/e1t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7lC8dDMPbW2n0x6l2B9nMJW7t5XZs2zqj…> *a. *Tauranga Business Centre, 50 Devonport Road, Tauranga *a*. PO Box 16306, Bethlehem 3176, New Zealand

4 3

Chorus UBA price changes for 1st December 2014
by Barry Murphy 05 Nov '14

05 Nov '14

Hey guys, What are other telcos opinions on the proposed chorus price changes that are to take effect on 1st December 2014? Reduction of naked services and increased of clothed services on UBA, yet none of the pricing is 'confirmed' and nor is the POTS reduction pricing. How can the commerce commission or Telecommunications minister allow for something so big to happen so close to a brown out date and with such short notice. It's now the 6th of November and with the proposed changes happening in about 24 days surely it's against their T&C's to give such short notice. We have been provided with 'draft' but that is just not good enough to give to downstream customers and wholesalers, questions we ask go unanswered meaning we can't advise customers of pricing before its out of draft. We had a meeting booked in with Chorus 'Billing resource' to explain the changes, yet this has just been cancelled because things are not yet confirmed internally. My account manager just called me while I was typing this email and said "they still haven't confirmed things internally as they don't know how they are to implement things into their systems". He also advises we are the first customer in the queue to have a billing resource meting to discuss the changes. I then proceeded to ask about the pricing of ADSL install +-$270 vs VDSL install +-$170 and he is even unsure. Just wondering how well or badly other Telcos in the same position are taking this. Cheers Kind regards, Barry Murphy / Chief Operating Officer +64 27 490 9712 / barry(a)vibecommunications.co.nz<mailto:barry(a)vibecommunications.co.nz> [3sparks llc]<http://www.vibecommunications.co.nz/> [Vibe Communications] <https://www.facebook.com/VibeCom> [Vibe Communications] <https://twitter.com/vibecomnz> [Vibe Communications] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/1941512> Office: +64 9 222 0000 / Fax: 0800 842 326 Unit A7, 1 Beresford Square, Auckland, New Zealand Web: www.vibecommunications.co.nz<http://www.vibecommunications.co.nz/> / Peering: AS45177<http://www.peeringdb.com/view.php?asn=45177> This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002.

3 3

Re: [nznog] UFB 1 gig plans for retail and impact they have
by Mark Foster 04 Nov '14

04 Nov '14

Blocking outbound port 25 blocks the vast majority of non authenticated smtp. The remainder being authenticated (or channelled via the same service provider, who can trace you by your IP, dynamic or not), provides some accountability and makes spam much easier to trace... acknowledging that much spam comes from compromised machines on residential grade connectivity (on port 25). Blocking port 25 outbound (with an opt out option) makes sense if you can't quickly deal with offenders on your network (as often seems to be the case with big players). This doesnt the provide those players with an excuse to under-resource abuse@ (as the remaining spam is finding another way out) but this does seem to happen regardless... so its not even close to a silver bullet but it does helo more than hinder. Mark. Sent from a mobile device. -------- Original message -------- From: Steve Holdoway <steve(a)greengecko.co.nz> Date:05/11/2014 14:56 (GMT+12:00) To: Peter Lambrechtsen <Peter.Lambrechtsen(a)spark.co.nz> Cc: nznog <nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz> Subject: Re: [nznog] UFB 1 gig plans for retail and impact they have On Wed, 2014-11-05 at 14:14 +1300, Peter Lambrechtsen wrote: > Have to say that blocking inbound port 25 and 53 is highly recommended > for all RSPs. Plus blocking outbound port 25 to only SMTP servers you > run if you wanted a sense of if customers are using their connections > for mass spamming. With an opt out of course. Given that mail servers also listen on 587 ( thanks billg ) and 465, isn't blocking just 25/tcp just a bit pointless? Steve -- Steve Holdoway BSc(Hons) MIITP http://www.greengecko.co.nz Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/steveholdoway Skype: sholdowa _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

3 2

Re: [nznog] An 'end to end' Internet (was Re: UFB 1 gig plans for retail and impact they have)
by Scott Weeks 03 Nov '14

03 Nov '14

--- mcdonald.richards(a)gmail.com wrote: From: McDonald Richards <mcdonald.richards(a)gmail.com> I should point out that I mean it purely as an "any service to any service from any host to any host" type of scenario :) Maybe I should have phrased it as the days of unfiltered and unfettered provision of default residential services is coming to an end. ------------------------------------------ I hope not. That'd be the beginning of the slow death of the internet innovation we have seen over the past couple of decades. We will be the new dinosaur. Maybe the homenet WG in IETF will come up with something. <crossing fingers> scott > _______________________________________________ > NZNOG mailing list > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog > > _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

1 0

Re: [nznog] UFB 1 gig plans for retail and impact they have
by Scott Weeks 03 Nov '14

03 Nov '14

--- ben(a)meh.net.nz wrote: From: Ben <ben(a)meh.net.nz> My biggest concern ATM over DDOS, is when IPV6 starts becoming widely used - a lot of people use NAT as a firewall, and when they implement IPV6 don't protect their hosts properly. --------------------------------------------- Homenet in the IETF is attempting to address that among other things in the home networks: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/homenet/charter <quote> End-to-end communication is both an opportunity and a concern as it enables new applications but also exposes nodes in the internal networks to receipt of unwanted traffic from the Internet. Firewalls that restrict incoming connections may be used to prevent exposure, however, this reduces the efficacy of end-to-end connectivity that IPv6 has the potential to restore. Home networks need to provide the tools to handle these situations in a manner accessible to all users of home networks. Manual configuration is rarely, if at all, possible, as the necessary skills and in some cases even suitable management interfaces are missing. The purpose of this working group is to focus on this evolution, in particular as it addresses the introduction of IPv6, by developing an architecture addressing this full scope of requirements: o prefix configuration for routers o managing routing o name resolution o service discovery o network security </quote> scott _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

2 1

Re: [nznog] CloudFlare Peering Blog
by McDonald Richards 02 Nov '14

02 Nov '14

Mobile in Australia is an oligarchy. Since the collapse of ISPone there seems to be an active effort being put in by the 3 mobile carriers (Telstra, Optus, VHA) to protect their margins and make it as difficult as possible for MVNOs to start up. Prepaid plans should not be that expensive - I have had worse experiences in Germany. Your home Internet is a different story. The caps exist to support the limited resource. Unlimited has been tried and is always abused. The wholesale access charges within Australia require ISP's set limits or it's the same as everyone leaving their taps running and lights on. Cloudflare's experience with Australian bandwidth pricing will be related to the costs charged by the tier 1 carriers (Optus, Telstra and AAPT [note: AAPT may have started peering; I am a little out of the game there now]). They will be seeking direct access to eyeballs and being charged for the privilege, much the same as the issues Netflix is facing with eyeball carriers in the USA. On the cost front, the underlying delivery cost for some of these networks is higher, as they try to keep consistent pricing across all regions of Australia. People in small towns pay the same prices as people in the largest cities. The country is big and the population density is low. Contrast that to Europe, and carriers there have a much easier time making money. Despite all of this, negotiating peering (paid or otherwise) in Europe with their incumbent carriers is just as difficult and costly as in Australia :) - unless you are Cloudflare-size and have hit that critical mass of outbound content that makes you attractive to these incumbents. Macca On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 8:04 PM, Petri Ojala <petri.ojala(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > We spend our winter in Sydney. While not directly related to the carrier > bandwidth costs, my mobile charges will triple and broadband internet cost > will be seven fold. > > In addition to the increased costs the services will be slower and I’m > getting data caps, which I don’t have in Europe. The offerings are > crippled by mandatory landlines, 24-month contracts and various other > requirements and fees. While one can get Telstra Cable without a minimum > contract, it comes with a mandatory landline that has penalties if > terminated too early. I won’t even go into details about the customer > experience getting the broadband.. > > I think it tells a story if CloudFare pays the same amount for Australia > as they do for all of Europe. I was actually thinking about buying Telstra > stock simply because it’s de-facto monopoly in the country and not much > light at the other end of the tunnel. > > Petri > > On 3 November 2014 at 10:14:21, McDonald Richards ( > mcdonald.richards(a)gmail.com) wrote: > > Keep in mind that this refers to "Benchmark pricing" with $10 being the > benchmark for the USA. > > Do your own math and draw conclusions from that extrapolation :) > > Macca > > On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Dean Pemberton <nznog(a)deanpemberton.com> > wrote: > >> Interesting article from CloudFlare... >> >> >> http://blog.cloudflare.com/the-relative-cost-of-bandwidth-around-the-world/ >> >> While NZ isn't mentioned I'm picking we get lumped in with Australia >> for which they have this to say... >> >> "Australia >> >> Australia is the most expensive region in which we operate, but for an >> interesting reason. We peer with virtually every ISP in the region >> except one: Telstra. Telstra, which controls approximately 50% of the >> market, and was traditionally the monopoly telecom provider, charges >> some of the highest transit pricing in the world — 20x the benchmark >> ($200/Mbps). Given that we are able to peer approximately half of our >> traffic, the effective bandwidth benchmark price is $100/Mbps. >> >> To give you some sense of how out-of-whack Australia is, at CloudFlare >> we pay about as much every month for bandwidth to serve all of Europe >> as we do to for Australia. That’s in spite of the fact that >> approximately 33x the number of people live in Europe (750 million) >> versus Australia (22 million). >> >> If Australians wonder why Internet and many other services are more >> expensive in their country than anywhere else in the world they need >> only look to Telstra. What's interesting is that Telstra maintains >> their high pricing even if only delivering traffic inside the country. >> Given that Australia is one large land mass with relatively >> concentrated population centers, it's difficult to justify the pricing >> based on anything other than Telstra's market power. In regions like >> North America where there is increasing consolidation of networks, >> Australia's experience with Telstra provides a cautionary tale." >> _______________________________________________ >> NZNOG mailing list >> NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz >> http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog >> > > _______________________________________________ > NZNOG mailing list > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog > >

2 2

CloudFlare Peering Blog
by Dean Pemberton 02 Nov '14

02 Nov '14

Interesting article from CloudFlare... http://blog.cloudflare.com/the-relative-cost-of-bandwidth-around-the-world/ While NZ isn't mentioned I'm picking we get lumped in with Australia for which they have this to say... "Australia Australia is the most expensive region in which we operate, but for an interesting reason. We peer with virtually every ISP in the region except one: Telstra. Telstra, which controls approximately 50% of the market, and was traditionally the monopoly telecom provider, charges some of the highest transit pricing in the world — 20x the benchmark ($200/Mbps). Given that we are able to peer approximately half of our traffic, the effective bandwidth benchmark price is $100/Mbps. To give you some sense of how out-of-whack Australia is, at CloudFlare we pay about as much every month for bandwidth to serve all of Europe as we do to for Australia. That’s in spite of the fact that approximately 33x the number of people live in Europe (750 million) versus Australia (22 million). If Australians wonder why Internet and many other services are more expensive in their country than anywhere else in the world they need only look to Telstra. What's interesting is that Telstra maintains their high pricing even if only delivering traffic inside the country. Given that Australia is one large land mass with relatively concentrated population centers, it's difficult to justify the pricing based on anything other than Telstra's market power. In regions like North America where there is increasing consolidation of networks, Australia's experience with Telstra provides a cautionary tale."

3 2

Call for Papers - APRICOT 2015
by Dean Pemberton 02 Nov '14

02 Nov '14

Asia Pacific Regional Internet Conference on Operational Technologies (APRICOT) 24th February - 6th March 2015, Fukuoka, Japan https://2015.apricot.net CALL FOR PAPERS =============== The APRICOT 2015 Programme Committee is now seeking contributions for Presentations and Tutorials for APRICOT 2015. We are looking for presenters who would: - Offer a technical tutorial on an appropriate topic; - Participate in the technical conference sessions as a speaker; - Convene and chair panel sessions of relevant topics. Please submit on-line at: http://papers.apricot.net/user/login.php?event=19 CONFERENCE MILESTONES --------------------- Call for Papers Opens: 1 November 2014 First Draft Program Published: 6 December 2014 Final Deadline for Submissions: 7 February 2015 Final Program Published: 14 February 2015 Final Slides Received: 21 February 2015 PROGRAMME MATERIAL ------------------ The APRICOT Programme is organised in three parts, including workshops, tutorials and the conference. Topics for tutorials and the conference must be relevant to Internet Operations and Technologies: - IPv4 / IPv6 Routing and operations - IPv6 deployment and transition technologies - Internet backbone operations - ISP and Carrier services - IXPs and Peering - Research on Internet Operations and Deployment - Japan Internet - Software Defined Networking / Network Function Virtualisaton - Network security issues (NSP-SEC, DDoS, Anti-Spam, Anti-Malware) - DNS / DNSSEC - Internet policy (Security, Regulation, Content Management, Addressing, etc) - Access and Transport Technologies, including Cable/DSL, 3G/LTE, wireless, metro ethernet, fibre, MPLS - Content & Service Delivery (Multicast, Voice, Video, "telepresence", Gaming) and Cloud Computing CfP SUBMISSION -------------- Draft slides for both tutorials and conference sessions MUST be provided with CfP submissions otherwise the Programme Committee will be unable to review the submission. For work in progress, the most current information available at time of submission is acceptable. All draft and complete slides must be submitted in PDF format only. Final slides are to be provided by the specified deadline for publication on the APRICOT website. Prospective presenters should note that the majority of speaking slots will be filled well before the final submission deadline. The PC will retain a limited number of slots up to the final submission deadline for presentations that are exceptionally timely, important, or of critical operational importance. Please submit on-line at: http://papers.apricot.net/user/login.php?event=19 Any questions or concerns should be addressed to the Programme Committee by e-mail at: pc-chairs at apricot.net We look forward to receiving your presentation proposals. Mark Tinka, Raphael Ho & Dean Pemberton Co-Chairs, APRICOT Programme Committee

1 0

Cableways rack - offer me beer and it's yours (Auckland)
by David Robb 28 Oct '14

28 Oct '14

I have a surplus-to-requirements cableways rack available to a good home. It’s in Auckland (Blockhouse Bay), and you have to come and pick it up. https://paradise.gen.nz/stuff/rack.jpg If you want to give me money for it, that’d be great, if the best offer is someone who’ll just take it away, that’ll do. Thanks, David

1 0

Moving Phone Lines
by Skeeve Stevens 28 Oct '14

28 Oct '14

Hey all, I have a site in Albany NZ that is merging with a site in the city. They have multiple indials - could be ISDN, I am not sure... they also have multiple 0800's and another 0508 number. We aren't really sure how these are delivered and by who. Does anyone know how I could find this out? ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd skeeve(a)eintellegonetworks.co.nz ; www.eintellegonetworks.co.nz Phone: +612 8014 7398; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; <http://twitter.com/networkceoau> linkedin.com/in/skeeve twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering

2 1

NZNOG Power Leads and Multiboards
by Mark Foster 28 Oct '14

28 Oct '14

Hi Folks I'm trying to track down the NZNOG pool of power leads and multiboards; i'm hoping to borrow these if possible. Queries to the NZNOG conference team don't seem to be going anywhere and i'm not sure who the organisers for this year are, to ping them personally. Does anyone know the wherabouts of these? Offlist responses perhaps most appropriate. Thanks Mark.

1 1

openvz vm's
by Tony Wicks 24 Oct '14

24 Oct '14

I've noticed openvz VM's on several different international hosing providers have all dropped out at once (currently down), anyone else seeing this ? cheers

3 3

Vodafone VSI / Spark SecureME
by Tom Henderson 22 Oct '14

22 Oct '14

Hi All I'm interested in some feedback (off list) from anyone using either Vodafone VSI or Spark's SecureME offerings. We're currently looking into both of these for a group of hospitality outlets. Cheers Tom Henderson IT Manager | Pack & Company | 027 461 4403 | 09 929 2750 | tom(a)pack.co.nz -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must not disclose, copy, or distribute any information contained in or attached to it, or take any action/inaction based on it. Please contact us immediately, and delete this email from your system. Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and not of Pack & Company (NZ) Limited (the "Company"), however any intellectual property contained in or attached to this email is the property of the Company. Thank you.

1 0

Unwanted Traffic Removal Service (UTRS)
by Dean Pemberton 15 Oct '14

15 Oct '14

The latest useful community service from Team Cymru ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: John Kristoff <jtk(a)cymru.com> [ Apologies if you have seen this elsewhere already - jtk ] Friends and colleagues, Last week I briefly discussed a new project we've recently launched and for which invited participation from the NANOG 62 attendees. This is a not so subtle wider request for consideration. UTRS is essentially a community RTBH that people have suggested to us would be a good service to provide, so we're giving it a go. The lightning talk page has the slide deck I presented: <https://www.nanog.org/meetings/abstract?id=2436> I've also put some additional technical detail here: <http://www.cymru.com/jtk/misc/utrs.html> There was a brief discussion, mostly criticism and that is fine, that took place on the NANOG list you may wish to review. If you have an assigned ASN and this sounds like something you or your network would like to take advantage of, drop me a line, I'd sure like to hear about it. If you think this is a terrible idea and want to express all that is wrong with it, tell me that too, I can take it. Even if you're unsure if you would ultimately deploy it in production, but are interested in testing it, do contact me. We won't expend energy on this project and will drop it if we there isn't sufficient interest from the community, but enough trial users would be encouraging. Kindly, John

1 0

Facebook NOC
by Stan Rivett 14 Oct '14

14 Oct '14

Hi guys Has anyone had any luck communicating with Facebook network operations in the past? They appear to be filtering our shiny new /22 and it is making clients somewhat grumpy. Cheers Stan Rivett ------------------ Netspeed Data Ltd PO Box 5691 Dunedin P: +64 3 481 7245 C: +64 21 323 841 ------------------

1 0

Is there anyone on the list using mikrotik hardware to receive UFB Handovers from Chorus?
by Alexander Neilson 10 Oct '14

10 Oct '14

Hey Everyone We have just stood up our first Chorus UFB Handovers in Auckland and Wellington and while the Mikrotik’s are showing the interfaces as running Chorus are telling me their end is “operationally down”. I have tried changing all the settings I have on my end and they are still reporting the same result. I have tried alternative optics, checked light levels with a meter, and even had a Chorus tech out to take a look. Chorus originally pointed to the SFP+ being the issue, now they are saying the config is wrong on my device and that they aren’t “seeing layer two”. I have asked them for any errors on the port or similar and they haven’t reported any to me. I am a little stumped here and would appreciate the advice of anyone doing either 1G or 10G HO Links for UFB with Chorus who could provide any input or any idea of issues they have seen with the configs that would help me diagnose this issue and resolve it. Thank you for your time. Regards Alexander Alexander Neilson Neilson Productions Limited alexander(a)neilson.net.nz 021 329 681 022 456 2326

5 7

Re: [nznog] UFB Upload Issues
by Peter Ensor 09 Oct '14

09 Oct '14

The change in the CFI to DEI occurred between the 802.1q 2005 and the 2011 versions. In 802.1q 2005 section 9.6 Octet 1 bit 5 was defined for use as CFI (Canonical Format Indicator) whereas in the 2011 version of the standard (also shown in section 9.6), this bit has been redefined as the DEI (Discard Eligible Indicator) bit. The diagram is for a single .Q tag but I assume it also applies to additional tags. Cheers, Peter. > From: Nathan Ward [mailto:nznog(a)daork.net] > Sent: Thursday, 9 October 2014 1:26 p.m. > To: Brent Marquis; Dave Mill; Don Stokes > Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > Subject: Re: [nznog] UFB Upload Issues > > > On 9 October 2014 at 1:09:42 pm, Brent Marquis > (brent.marquis(a)chorus.co.nz(mailto:brent.marquis(a)chorus.co > .nz))<mailto:brent.marquis(a)chorus.co.nz(mailto:brent.marqu > is(a)chorus.co.nz))> wrote: > > > Sorry for the quick reply to myself! > > > > It actually seems like Don might not be 100% correct. > > > > I don?t have IEEE access to get the .1q standard? But > Wikipedia suggests it has been updated in 2005 for CFI to > be DEI: > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.1ad > > > > Drop eligible indicator (DEI): a 1-bit field. (formerly > CFI[note > 1](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.1Q#cite_note-2)[2 > ](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.1Q#cite_note-3)) > May be used separately or in conjunction with PCP to > indicate frames eligible to be dropped in the presence of > congestion.[3](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.1Q#ci > te_note-4) > > > With the note suggesting ? ?IEEE 802.1Q-2005 clause 9.6? > > > > If it?s on Wikipedia, it must be true?. Right? J > > The quote above is from the 802.1q page. If you read the > page you link to, the 802.1ad page, you get: > > In IEEE 802.1ad the CFI is replaced by a Drop Eligibility > Indicator (DEI), increasing the functionality of the PCP > field. > > Key bit is ?802.1ad?, not 802.1q. Using 0x88a8 vs > 0x8100/0x9100 is signalling that you?re using 802.1ad vs. > stacked 802.1q, so should set this bit appropriate to the > tag type. I?m with Don on this one - the frame type bits > signal how to interpret the following bits, you can?t just > swap them around. > > People should really just use 0x88a8 - those who aren?t, > can I ask why not? Is it because you?re trying to tunnel > it over a switch that doesn?t support 802.1ad or > something? I?m not saying it?s wrong, I?m interested in > understanding the situations in which you might do this. > > -- > Nathan Ward > This communication, including any attachments, is > confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not > the intended recipient, you should not read it - please > contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use > any part of this communication or disclose anything about > it. Thank you. No confidentiality or privilege is waived > or lost by any mis-transmission or error. Please note that > this communication does not designate an information > system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act > 2002. > >

3 2

Taking down `rpki-validator.lab.hotplate.co.nz' for a bit
by Michael Fincham 08 Oct '14

08 Oct '14

Hi all, I've noticed a few NZNOGish looking addresses hitting this service periodically, even though an automated upgrade to the rpki-ca package broke the database updates some months ago :) Thanks for checking it out, folks who did, and I hope you found it useful! Just a quick note to let everyone know I'm taking the validator app down for a bit until I have time to fix it and find it a new home (I'm currently paying for a whole VM for it to live on which seems a little unnecessary given it's partially broken). In the mean time, BGPmon has a (much more comprehensive) service you can query via WHOIS: <http://www.bgpmon.net/securing-bgp-routing-with-rpki-and-roas/> -- Michael

2 1

Re: [nznog] UFB Upload Issues (Ewen McNeill)
by Peter Ensor 08 Oct '14

08 Oct '14

Just for clarification, a 802.1ad (TPID = 88a8) does not need to have both a SVLAN and CVLAN. It is allowed to only be a single VLAN tag. This will occur when a an untagged packet ingresses a BS3/3a/4 type service at the UNI (Upstream frame). This frame will be wrapped with a SVLAN but because it did not contain any original CVLAN tag, there will not be any CVLAN tag in the packet that egresses the UFB Handover connection. My reading is that on a 802.1ad interface. the TPID = 88a8 indicates that it is a SVLAN whereas a TPID = 8100 would indicate that it is CVLAN or QinQ. Since both TPID's now use the DEI bit (since the 2011 standard) I'm not sure how else the two frames would be different. Cheers, Peter. Hi Brent, On 9/10/14 16:03, Brent Marquis wrote: > It just gets slightly more confusing. [...] > Which would mean your interpretation is that CFI on 802.1q only applies > if there is also an 88a8 802.1ad tag preceding it. Based on looking at the 802.1Q-2005 specification and 802.1ad-2005 specification that Nathan linked to, it seems to me that the intent of both 802.1Q-2005 and 802.1ad-2005 was that ethertype=0x8100 would mean "interpret the header as a 802.1Q VLAN Tag/802.1ad CVLAN Tag", both of which have the same bit pattern, and semantics -- including a CFI bit rather than a DEI bit. This is section 9.6 in both specifications (which makes sense since 802.1ad was based on 802.1Q). By contrast, in 802.1ad there is a SVLAN tag, with a separate ethertype (0x88a8), which is the same except that it has a DEI bit in the same bit position that 802.1Q/802.1ad has the CFI bit. This is section 9.7 in the 802.1ad specification. It seems to me that the intent was: if ethertype=0x8100 then bit is interpreted as CFI, else if ethertype=0x88a8 then bit is interpreted as DEI. Which gives an unambiguous interpretation, without needing any context (much easier for an ASCI implementation). So I'm pleased IEEE seem to have thought of this problem in advance and tried to avoid ambiguity. However, setting DEI on an 802.1ad frame with ethertype 0x88a8, then changing the ethertype of the outer tag to 0x8100 ("for compatibility" :-) ) seems to either (a) require force-clearing that bit to avoid confusion, or (b) lead to a potential for misinterpretation that causes traffic to be discarded. > IMO, our interface is .1ad and we dont believe being nice and tweaking > the ethertype at RSP request changes that :) but let me see what I can > find out from our Vendor. FWIW, it appears to me that sending two 0x8100 tags stacked is not 802.1ad, but some "pre-standard" double tagging. Even if the frames started out 802.1ad compliant. 802.1ad seems to require a SVLAN tag (0x88a8) around a CVLAN tag (0x8100). Although it appears the difference mostly only matters for the interpretation of this one bit (DEI or CFI). If Chorus is going to offer 0x8100-double-tagging (ie, two 0x8100 tags stacked, pre-802.1ad Q-in-Q) it seems like it'd maximise compatibility if you were able to clear bit 5 (CFI on 0x8100/DEI on 0x88a8) of the tag in that specific case (ie, two stacked 0x8100 tags). Ewen PS: For reference, Nathan's links: http://www.stephan-robert.ch/attachments/File/TIN08/802-1Q-2005.pdf https://github.com/yhaz/homeenv/blob/master/specs/802.1ad-2005.pdf beware the 802.1ad one is a revision 4 draft (they went to revision 6 before the release AFAICT: http://www.ieee802.org/1/pages/802.1ad.html) if you want to argue with vendors it might pay to get the official standard from IEEE directly.

2 1

APRICOT 2015 Programme Committee - call for volunteers
by Dean Pemberton 08 Oct '14

08 Oct '14

Hi everyone, The APRICOT 2015 Programme Committee is responsible for the solicitation and selection of suitable presentation and tutorial content for the APRICOT 2015 conference (http://2015.apricot.net/) The APIA Board selects a new Programme Committee each year and is now seeking nominations from the community. As part of APIA's partnership with APNIC, the PC will be responsible for building the technical & operational content for both APRICOT in Fukuoka, Japan in February/March 2015 and the APNIC 40 Conference in September 2015. Eligible PC candidates are those who have attended APRICOT & APNIC conferences in the recent past, have broad technical knowledge of Internet operations, and have reasonable familiarity with the format of APRICOT & APNIC conferences. Having constructive opinions and ideas about how the programme content might be improved is of high value too. PC members are expected to work actively to solicit content for the two events and review submissions for technical merit. The PC meets by conference call, weekly in frequency during the three months prior to each event. If you are interested in joining the PC and meet the above eligibility criteria, please send a brief note to "apia-sec at apia.org". The note should include affiliation (if any) and contact details (including e-mail address), and a brief description of why you would make a good addition to the PC. PC members receive complimentary registration for the event they helped assemble the programme for. The APIA Board will accept nominations received by the end of Friday 24 October, 2014, and will announce the new PC shortly thereafter. Many thanks! Mark Tinka, Raphael Ho & Dean Pemberton (APRICOT 2015 PC Chairs)

1 0

Re: [nznog] UFB Upload Issues
by Brent Marquis 08 Oct '14

08 Oct '14

Hi Craig, Yes, I spotted that this morning, hence we need some document updates - my understanding (it's not my document) is that specific wording hung around from an old version of the document and it was intended to point out that we will not utilise DEI/colour marking from RSPs into our network. Thanks, Brent BrentMarquis Layer 2 Network Specialist T +6448964169 M +64272290923 E Brent.Marquis(a)chorus.co.nz -----Original Message----- From: Craig Whitmore [mailto:lennon(a)orcon.net.nz] Sent: Thursday, 9 October 2014 10:44 a.m. To: Brent Marquis; nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: RE: [nznog] UFB Upload Issues Maybe I'm a little confused but reading the TUG it says DEI is not used /aware? Page 48 of the Chorus NGA TUG it states... Canonical Format Indicator (CFI) or Discard Eligible Indicator (DEI) is set to 0. DEI applies to the 802.1ad outer tag and is not used, i.e. NGA is not colour-aware. ???? -----Original Message----- From: nznog-bounces(a)list.waikato.ac.nz [mailto:nznog-bounces(a)list.waikato.ac.nz] On Behalf Of Brent Marquis Sent: Thursday, 9 October 2014 9:44 a.m. To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] UFB Upload Issues Thanks for pushing all that info back into the list. I know of 1 RSP which has Juniper equipment that seems to be discarding CFI/DEI=1. I guess some switches need a bit of config to recognise CFI as DEI or to re-write it entirely (luckily there haven't been any hardware issues yet) This communication, including any attachments, is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mis-transmission or error. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002.

1 0

Call for Papers NZNOG 2015
by Richard Nelson 05 Oct '14

05 Oct '14

It turns out that June is much too early to issue the CFP for NZNOG next January. So here it is again. We are negotiating with some interesting international speakers but we rely on submissions from the local community to make the programme interesting. Remember there is a prize of a trip to Japan. Richard. -------- The NZNOG organising committee invites papers for its 13th annual conference, to be hosted at the Distinction Hotel, Rotorua, New Zealand from 26 - 30th January 2015. There will the three day Workshops 26 – 28 January, a day of tutorials on 28 January with the main conference on 29 – 30 January. The best local conference paper as judged by the trustees in association with the programme committee will win a trip to APRICOT 2015, to be held jointly with APAN 39 in Fukuoka, Japan, from February 24th to March 6th 2015. Umm that’s right, an all[1] expenses paid trip to JAPAN!!!! It's a real thing. Two people have won this in previous years and to be honest they seemed pretty happy with the prize. Conference objective: The NZNOG conference, workshops and tutorials are a once-a-year opportunity for individuals and organisations involved in Internet operations to meet and share the latest in Internet operations, technologies practices and receive high quality training. The event is unique in New Zealand and attracts technical, skilled individuals with a genuine interest in Internet operations and Internetworking technologies. Submit a paper: Presenters are invited to submit abstracts of their paper for consideration by Monday 20th October. Abstracts should be no more than one page long and provide a summary of your networking-related subject matter. Please note that full slide decks will be required by late November. To submit your paper please e-mail: talks(a)nznog.org When considering a presentation, remember that the NZNOG audience is mainly comprised of technical network operators and engineers with a wide range of experience levels from beginners to multi-year experience. There is a strong orientation to offer core skills and basic knowledge in SIGs and to address issues relevant to the day-to-day operations of ISPs and network operators in the conference sessions. Note: The inclusion of a title, bio, topic, abstract, and slides with proposals is not compulsory but will help us determine the quality of your proposal and increase the likelihood it will be accepted. The organising committee will evaluate proposals based on fit with the conference’s objective and its ability to stimulate lively discussions around the current state of New Zealand networking. The best local paper will be judged by a selection of the trustees and the programme committee. It will be expected the best paper is submitted by the winner for presentation at APRICOT. More details on paper submission can be found at http://www.nznog.org/call-for-papers For more information about the conference visit www.nznog.org or contact: talks(a)nznog.org [1] where 'all' means Return Flights, Accommodation and Conference Fees. You still need to pay for things like food and entertainment. Most of what you need to eat/drink is covered in the conference though. We're also open to cases of special needs should you win. --------

1 0

Shell Shock - Bash vulnerability - CVE-2014-6271
by Dean Pemberton 28 Sep '14

28 Sep '14

Hi all, This isn't normally a security vuln release list but this one looks pretty bad A newly discovered vulnerability (CVE-2014-6271) in the Bash command-line interpreter poses a critical security risk to Unix and Linux systems. It allows remote code execution. NZITF is responding to this remote execution exploit, with a News page that we will be keeping up to date - http://www.nzitf.org.nz/news.html . We are also reaching out to technical and security community points of contact to raise awareness to the issue and ensure necessary action is taken (hence this email to you). Please note, no patch is yet available for Mac OSX. However, many other patches are available. So Patch, Patch, Patch. Regards, Dea

21 35

2degrees
by Matthew Harrison - PrimoWireless Ltd 24 Sep '14

24 Sep '14

Can someone from 2degrees please contact me off list. Regards, Matthew Harrison The Top Dog Please excuse the shortness of my email as it was sent from my phone.

2 1

Whole of Domain Web Harvest 2014 - Robots.txt
by Jay Gattuso 23 Sep '14

23 Sep '14

Hi Noggers, We are looking at undertaking another Whole of Domain (WOD) web harvest during this financial year. (I will be in touch with you with the specifics once we have some of the timings formalised with the crawl contractor, the Internet Archive. I wanted to ask for your views on adherence to robots.txt. We have three options that are hypothetically available to us, each with various merits. 1) Strictly adhere - will miss some artefacts required to replay a site correctly 2) Adhere but follow embeds - (allows us to get linked images, css, some json etc) 3) Ignore - most fulsome crawl. On the last WOD (in 2013) we used option (2), and I wanted to test if this was still the right option to choose. We aim to capture the most complete snapshot of the NZ web possible so it is available to future generations. This Robots issues directly affects the completeness of the crawl we can undertake. If we choose the wrong option, there is a risk of a, reduced crawl coverage, and frustrated web content operators. I'm really keen to make sure we are able to capture the most complete WOD we can, and seek your opinions on the above, on or off list. Many thanks, Jay Jay Gattuso | Digital Preservation Analyst | Preservation, Research and Consultancy National Library of New Zealand | Te Puna Mātauranga o Aotearoa PO Box 1467 Wellington 6140 New Zealand | +64 (0)4 474 3064 jay.gattuso(a)dia.govt.nz<mailto:jay.gattuso(a)natlib.govt.nz>

6 5

Did DNS replies for outlook.office365.com increase in size on Friday?
by Michael Fincham 23 Sep '14

23 Sep '14

Hi all, Out of curiosity - did anyone else see the DNS replies for outlook.office365.com scoot over 512 bytes on Friday? An ANY query from here currently returns a 740 byte answer. Trying to determine if Microsoft changed something on their end or my customer's router unexpectedly lost the ability to deal with large DNS replies 8^) -- Michael

3 4

2U swap for DR
by Rob McDonald 22 Sep '14

22 Sep '14

Hello all, I'm canvassing (soliciting??) for people interested to swap a few U and a few Mbps for a DR / monitoring server. People who just want to sell me rack space and data in a one way arrangement need not apply, I can research that myself. We are based in Auckland, but realise that all the sites we have available to put our monitoring and DR server are also in Auckland, with very similar network paths. To keep it on topic, to the winning referral goes the beer! Cheers Rob *Rob McDonald | *Director Level 2 Systems Ltd *M:* +64 21 902 929 *eFax:* +64 9 974 4734 *W:* http://www.L2.co.nz <http://www.l2.co.nz/>

1 0

Spark Lightbox question
by Tony Wicks 20 Sep '14

20 Sep '14

Hi guys, does anyone know the traffic path (or source IP's) for the Spark Lightbox service ? Interested to know if they are handing the traffic over APE or not. I really hope someone has not done something very stupid and put the streaming servers in Sydney and expect all the ISP's to pay to haul the traffic in internationally. [root(a)dalek ~]# traceroute lightbox.co.nz traceroute to lightbox.co.nz (54.252.86.48), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 103-9-40-81.flip.co.nz (103.9.40.81) 1.355 ms 1.415 ms 1.408 ms 2 v503-ae1.icore1-e.flip.co.nz (103.9.41.35) 0.278 ms 0.280 ms 0.277 ms 3 v503-ae1.icore1-w.flip.co.nz (103.9.41.34) 0.290 ms 0.290 ms 0.284 ms 4 ten-1-0-0-250.bdr01.akl05.akl.VOCUS.net.nz (175.45.102.9) 0.254 ms 0.250 ms 0.245 ms 5 ten-0-2-0-3.cor01.alb01.akl.VOCUS.net.nz (114.31.202.88) 24.333 ms 24.328 ms 24.316 ms 6 ten-0-0-0-2.cor03.syd03.nsw.VOCUS.net.au (114.31.199.116) 23.842 ms 23.783 ms ten-0-3-0-2.cor03.syd03.nsw.VOCUS.net.au (114.31.202.85) 24.037 ms 7 ten-1-1-0.bdr03.syd03.nsw.VOCUS.net.au (175.45.72.116) 23.760 ms ten-2-1-0.bdr03.syd03.nsw.VOCUS.net.au (114.31.192.43) 23.733 ms 23.730 ms 8 16509.syd.equinix.com (202.167.228.131) 23.716 ms 23.986 ms 23.991 ms 9 54.240.192.77 (54.240.192.77) 24.736 ms 25.515 ms 24.739 ms 10 54.240.192.107 (54.240.192.107) 24.727 ms 24.841 ms 24.755 ms 11 ec2-54-252-0-1.ap-southeast-2.compute.amazonaws.com (54.252.0.1) 25.549 ms ec2-54-252-0-5.ap-southeast-2.compute.amazonaws.com (54.252.0.5) 25.781 ms ec2-54-252-0-1.ap-southeast-2.compute.amazonaws.com (54.252.0.1) 26.035 ms 12 * * * 13 * * * cheers

4 3

Call for NZ Provider
by Daniel Watson 20 Sep '14

20 Sep '14

Gday Noggers, I am currently seeking any NZ providers whom would meet the following requirements, Being able to rent dedicated servers at reasonable market pricing, Being able to provide us a BGP session on IPv4 & IPv6 to advertise our own IP's Being able to set up a VyOS VM to act as our router via a direct BGP session to said provider If you can meet these requirements, I am eger to meet you :D Please respond off-list if you can meet this requirement Regards, Daniel Watson Network Administrator / Network Operations Manager E Daniel(a)GloVine.com.au<mailto:Daniel(a)GloVine.com.au> W www.GloVine.com.au<http://www.GloVine.com.au> "No trees were harmed in the making of this email, however a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced."

1 0

[OT] APC Suppliers / Reps
by Alexander Neilson 18 Sep '14

18 Sep '14

Hey Noggers. Beer for the OT Taking a look at the APC Website and their Distributors I can only see acquire listed for NZ. I have no experience with them as a supplier, can others provide me with experiences offline? Also is there anyone else in NZ who supplies APC gear / is an APC Rep / Expert who would be able to help with planning some purchases? I have a couple of small DC’s to fit out (starting small but planning to improve management features on it as well). Any contact details would be much appreciated. Regards Alexander Alexander Neilson Neilson Productions Limited alexander(a)neilson.net.nz 021 329 681 022 456 2326

2 1