- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

RE: [nznog] TC & T Possible Peering changes
by Gordon Smith 30 May '04

30 May '04

One thing that noone seems to have noticed yet, is that using TCNZ for transit in this way is virtually impossible due to the manner in which they route traffic. TCNZ use BGP communities to tag and filter, as did Clear before them. So ingress and egress paths are filtered at the exchange points. I don't know if Telecom have started using communities to manipulate traffic paths yet, but if they haven't, I'd say it's only a matter of time. The peering argument is a political one rather than a technical one. In my opinion, "unauthorised transit" is nothing more than a convenient excuse. If it did actually happen, perhaps they'd be better odd re-visiting filtering policies. Just my .02c worth :-) Cheers, Gordon

2 1

Re: [nznog] Indian government plans Internet exchanges
by Keith Davidson 28 May '04

28 May '04

Others wrote: > > Someone with some spare hands on their time needs to lobby > > the government to make peering in NZ legislation. > > > > Although TNZ and TCNZ will be wearing a lot of the network > > costs in terms of trunking traffic up and down the country, > > they also have most of the customers - so I think that's fair > > and justified. > > Yes it is good idea. > > So why not also make the Govt responsible for the trunking between > peering sites as well? > ISPs could still organise private peering for priority traffic in this > scenario. Is this an issue that nznog feels InternetNZ should pick up on? Keith Davidson President - InternetNZ

4 7

RE: [nznog] TC & T Possible Peering changes
by Donald Neal 28 May '04

28 May '04

> On Behalf Of Russell Fulton > Sent: Friday, 28 May 2004 1:56 p.m. > To: nznog > Subject: Re: [nznog] TC & T Possible Peering changes > > > On Fri, 2004-05-28 at 13:46, Don Gould wrote: > [...] > > * Why don't the IX have clear policies on this issue? > > Perhaps a better question is "When are the IXs going to > establish clear > policies on this issue?" > > Russell. Perhaps they already have a clear (no pun intended) policy - they're not responsible for what routes you advertise. - Donald Neal All opinions mine only. Donald Neal | Alphabet - ancient Technical Specialist | Greek lottery. Operations Engineering | [Martin Neal] Integration & Services Division +----------------------- Alcatel NZ Ltd - Telecom's network operations manager ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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 2

RE: [nznog] Indian government plans Internet exchanges
by Seeby Woodhouse 28 May '04

28 May '04

What a good idea. Someone with some spare hands on their time needs to lobby the government to make peering in NZ legislation. Although TNZ and TCNZ will be wearing a lot of the network costs in terms of trunking traffic up and down the country, they also have most of the customers - so I think that's fair and justified. If they are worried about people using their networks as a free national backbone via the peering points, there are ways to allow peering but prevent being used as free transit... Cheers Seeby -----Original Message----- From: Andy Linton [mailto:asjl(a)citylink.co.nz] Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 9:33 AM To: nznog Subject: [nznog] Indian government plans Internet exchanges This URL points to the incoming Indian governments 10 point agenda form IT - http://www.ciol.com/content/news/2004/104052609.asp In particular, see point 5: 5. Plan to connect all ISPs in India to a national internet exchange in order to achieve efficient internet traffic routing, cost reduction and improve quality of service for the Internet users in India. Four Internet exchanges points to be fully operationalised. Small and big ISPs to route their traffic through this exchange to ensure the security of domestic traffic. Currently, 25 ISPs are connected. ---- Note the reasons for doing this especially "improve quality of service for the Internet users". _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

7 6

RE: [nznog] TC & T Possible Peering changes
by Barry Murphy 27 May '04

27 May '04

Ok, But I still fail to see how this works. 1./ I buy my international pipe through telstra 2./ I buy my national pipe through telstra 3./ I try connect to nzdating.com but because iconz doesn't per with telstra, I use international and not 'national' and my pictures load SLOWLY!!! *phones helpdesk to complain about slow browsing* I'd freak. Whats T&T going to do to provide 'national' connectivity? Is it only national if the remote ISP peers with T. Is national defined as being within T's network only? That sucks BIG time. Somebodys been playing with their calculator to long and doesn't understand the internet to be able to make decisions like this. B My thoughts alone. -----Original Message----- From: Craig Spiers [mailto:craig(a)concept.net.nz] Sent: Friday, 28 May 2004 4:02 p.m. To: 'Barry Murphy'; 'Don Gould'; 'neil gardner' Cc: 'nznog' Subject: RE: [nznog] TC & T Possible Peering changes I think this is a stupid idea, how would you control who pays for what percentage of the link? What about the larger networks who utilise 50% of the shared link? Better to just get your own link and be done with it.. :) -----Original Message----- From: Barry Murphy [mailto:barry(a)unix.co.nz] Sent: Friday, 28 May 2004 3:59 p.m. To: 'Don Gould'; 'neil gardner' Cc: 'nznog' Subject: RE: [nznog] TC & T Possible Peering changes Why would everyone have to peer with T&T? 1./ Why don't all the ISP's currently peering at APE & WIX chip in a little and purchase a link between APE and both T or T. 2./ Assuming the traffic is flat rate and they don't charge you big time for the link, ISP's have domestic BW again 3./ Any traffic coming from T or T should go international, until such time as T or T purchase links to APE or your provider. I know this scenario is going to use up international bandwidth, but hey, outgoing bandwidth isn't as important as incoming. T&T customers will suffer the most. Barry -----Original Message----- From: Don Gould [mailto:don(a)bowenvale.co.nz] Sent: Friday, 28 May 2004 1:46 p.m. To: neil gardner Cc: nznog Subject: Re: [nznog] TC & T Possible Peering changes That's a really good question... 'bring it on'... Small claims wouldn't take much to defend and I'd suggest that's a fight the isp wants to loose (without it costing them to much in traffic so a smaller customer would be prefered). Start getting cases like this turning up in the court system and you've got leverage for a number of government agencies to take actions. However what's this question really about? Like you Neil I've been reading thru the endless banter and a few other questions come to mind... * Who are these ISPs that are using T&T for transit that shouldn't be? Why are we not also focusing on the limited number of these folk who are wrecking things for everyone else? ...or am I about to be told to shut up and keep quiet because I'm showing ignorance by not knowing that everyones doing it?! * Why don't the IX have clear policies on this issue? Why is the core of each IX not dealing to this? IX are generally a community venture, why haven't the IX set up to protect the community interest against these rogue users? Don't get me wrong, I'm not picking sides here, I've just been following the discussion and it seems to me that people are keeping quiet on some issue - perhaps I'm just stating the obvious and as a list newbi I'm just not up with all the politics yet? Someone called for someone with time to take the issue up with some lobying.... I'd put up a hand and have a look but as I see it at present the arguments suggest that the industry got what was coming to is... please don't abuse and flame me for that comment, I'm just saying it as I see it based on what's been presented in this discussion todate. Cheers Don _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

3 2

TC & T Possible Peering changes
by neil gardner 27 May '04

27 May '04

Goodness there has been a lot of stuff to wade through. I'm quite familiar with the benefits of peering and the (revenue) reasons that the big players want to change, but could someone please definitively answer this question... Will the proposed changes by Telstra mean that a large number of people currently paying different rates for National and International traffic will suddenly find that their ISP starts defining an awful lot more geographically national servers as International traffic? If this is indeed the case, have the various ISPs gotten their T&C well enough defined to defend against someone going to the small claims court and disputing a bill where traffic is obviously from a national server, even if it has transited an international link - since the ISP (may have) made a deliberate choice to route that traffic in a non-optimal fashion? Cheers - Neil G NOTICE: This message contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify Allied Telesyn Research Ltd immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender has the authority to issue and specifically states them to be the views of Allied Telesyn Research.

8 8

Re: [nznog] TC & T Possible Peering changes
by neil gardner 27 May '04

27 May '04

>>> Juha Saarinen <juha(a)saarinen.org> 28/05/2004 2:06:47 p.m. >>> You're kidding right? We have T&Cs that speak of "best effort service" with no guarantee as to any aspect of delivery. I kid not... This quote is taken (almost at Random) from Paradise... "JetStart Traffic is calculated depending on the location of the site the traffic is coming from or going to. Any traffic to or from New Zealand sites (national traffic) is charged at 1/10th of the normal traffic charge, while traffic to or from a site outside New Zealand (international traffic) is charged at the full traffic rate." That tells me (in my mind) that traffic from a site in New Zealand will be charged at 1/10th of the normal rate. No normal home user should be expected to understand that just because of a spat between 2 National ISPs, Traffic from me here in Chch to a server in Wellington might go via Sydney and therefore be classed as International Traffic. Interestingly, as Paradise have that written right now, it doesn't matter. The way they have used the word "Site" in that context would clearly convey to a reasonable person that they mean the end server, not the last or most remote hop... So even if my traffic to and from Trademe goes via Timbuktu, the "Site" is Trademe, and it's a "New Zealand sites (national traffic)" (sic) Cheers - N. NOTICE: This message contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify Allied Telesyn Research Ltd immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender has the authority to issue and specifically states them to be the views of Allied Telesyn Research.

3 2

RE: [nznog] Indian government plans Internet exchanges
by Regan Murphy 27 May '04

27 May '04

> Someone with some spare hands on their time needs to lobby > the government to make peering in NZ legislation. > > Although TNZ and TCNZ will be wearing a lot of the network > costs in terms of trunking traffic up and down the country, > they also have most of the customers - so I think that's fair > and justified. Yes it is good idea. So why not also make the Govt responsible for the trunking between peering sites as well? ISPs could still organise private peering for priority traffic in this scenario. -- Regan

3 2

RE: [nznog] Indian government plans Internet exchanges
by Gordon Smith 27 May '04

27 May '04

> -----Original Message----- > From: Craig Whitmore [mailto:lennon(a)orcon.net.nz] > Sent: Friday, 28 May 2004 12:33 p.m. > To: 'NZNOG Mailing List' > Subject: RE: [nznog] Indian government plans Internet exchanges > > > Why don't they just (like a lot of other people do), Advertise their > Auckland networks via APE only and their Wellington Networks > via WIX only. > Then they wouldn't be providing transit down the country. > > Advertising the Entire Clear Network via APE and the Entire > Clear Networks > via WIX is the problem. > Thanks > Craig > The use of BGP communities would help solve their problems regarding routing ingress and egress points. Pity it isn't more widely used..... Transits can be filtered by community tag within an AS, and most major vendors support using bgp communities in this way

1 0

Indian government plans Internet exchanges
by Andy Linton 27 May '04

27 May '04

This URL points to the incoming Indian governments 10 point agenda form IT - http://www.ciol.com/content/news/2004/104052609.asp In particular, see point 5: 5. Plan to connect all ISPs in India to a national internet exchange in order to achieve efficient internet traffic routing, cost reduction and improve quality of service for the Internet users in India. Four Internet exchanges points to be fully operationalised. Small and big ISPs to route their traffic through this exchange to ensure the security of domestic traffic. Currently, 25 ISPs are connected. ---- Note the reasons for doing this especially "improve quality of service for the Internet users".

5 4

netlantis news
by Pascal Gloor 26 May '04

26 May '04

Hello ppl, as you probably have noticed, netlantis is down since a while. Netlantis had critical performance problems and we decided to re-write some of the core scripts to improve the DB update. While doing this we had some new ideas about how to process the updates and much more has been re-written. There are no new features for the users, just the core-system works on a different way and all the BGP updates queuing problems will be gone. "What's new then ?" netlantis is running now since several weeks its own BGP daemon called (guess) nbgpd. So far it works well and has pretty nice performance (able to handle up to 500 full BGP sessions (tested up to 100)). "nbgpd" is dumping updates into files (per peer, per timestamp) in its own (simple) binary format. The updates are then sent to "ndb" (netlantis DB manager) which is a fast "routing table status file updater". This also runs since several weeks. the last difficulty is to convert this "ndb" format for the SQL database (to handle all the web/whois/telnet queries). So far we wrote the MySQL (MyISAM format) data file properly. "So? why isnt it up yet ????" We still have a last part to finish, writing the MySQL (MyISAM format) index file. Once this step completed, netlantis will come back up! "What's the difference for the lambda user??" Reliable informations! Until now, "global cisco bug upgrade worldwide in the world" made netlantis to go booom due to the high load of bgp updates. This will no more happen. We expect to have a delay to "real-time" of about 10 to 15 minutes, with few or many BGP updates, it wont matter! "Well, I dont care about your internal stuff, when will it be back????" We expect to bring netlantis back during the next week. We will inform you then. Best Regards, Pascal Gloor _ ______________ ___ _ ________________ / |/ / __/_ __/ / / _ | / |/ /_ __/ _/ __/ / / _/ / / / /__/ __ |/ / / / _/ /_\ \ /_/|_/___/ /_/ /____/_/ |_/_/|_/ /_/ /___/___/.org ... where all the routes meet

1 0

Location of Tangent/Vector Fibre in Auckland, Hopetoun Street
by Paul Adshead 26 May '04

26 May '04

Does anyone know the current extents of the Tangent/Vector fibre in Auckland? More specifically how far away is it from the Ponsonby end of Hopetoun Street. I'm trying to find out how far away it is and whether it's an option or not, but Vector are being difficult... Regards, Paul Adshead Network & Systems OTL Software Ltd www.otl.co.nz

4 4

Alternative to Running Cable down SH1
by Tikiri Wickramasingha 25 May '04

25 May '04

On Tue, 2004-05-25 at 01:53, Craig Spiers wrote: <snip> > > > > We could all possibly grab every redundant 10mbit hub in NZ and connect them > down SH1 through the north island and call it CountryLink ? > > Add up all those offcuts of Cat5 plus these redundant hubs, we could start > our own national ISP with VoIP ;) > A bit more viable - has anyone checked out the Helios project. Granted it crashed but NASA is prototyping a few newer and better ones. NASA Helios - remotely piloted, solar powered, extreme high altitude aircraft capable of carying a payload simillar to a small satelite. Uses Fuel Cells to store power generated by solar panels. It is designed to stay in the air forever. Wing Span approximately the size of a B-52 Bomber. Cost if I rememebr right was a couple million dollars. But that is a fraction of what running fibre all the way down SH1 would cost. Here is the link http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/ > > _______________________________________________ > NZNOG mailing list > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

6 7

Peering.
by Simon Lyall 25 May '04

25 May '04

Little story here by Juha: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3568316&thesection=busin… Looks like Telecom and Telstra are trying to put on a squeeze in order to make a couple more thousand per month. I'm a little surprised at the timing, Telecom has a bit of an advantage right now since it's got a monopoly on ADSL bandwidth but bitstream is only a few months away (allegedly) so it's going to be a lot easier for ADSL customers to switch pretty soon. Telstra doesn't even have that sort of leverage. I'd advise companies that are currently not connected to WIX or APE and are instead replying on the two companies above to deliver their National bandwidth to keep close tabs on things. If it suddenly costs ISPs thousands of dollars to send traffic to your site then the ISP (or whatever) is going to start looking hard are their benefits in the relationship (and remember this thousands is going to Telecom/Telstra not you). People like TVNZ . The Herald, TV3 etc who want to deliver bandwidth intensive content should take note especially. ISPs won't be able to afford to let customers watch your content all day if they are paying real money for a Telecom or Telstra circuit. And the circuit they do buy will be as small as possible. And remember if you connect to APE or WIX you have the choice of additional International bandwidth suppliers which will at least give you the chance to negotiate your next International bill down a little even if you stay with your existing Telco. It's a shame that Telecom and Telstra are basicly telling the Xtra and Paradise customers that the customers access to fast National content is less important than making a few thousand extra ( $50,000 tops, maybe ) on National bandwidth charges. Much as some sites don't offer bandwidth intensive services to International users they might be soon forced to not offer them to some (or all) National users. -- Simon J. Lyall. | Very Busy | Mail: simon(a)darkmere.gen.nz "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.

20 38

hfr
by Thomas 25 May '04

25 May '04

hope you've all got your orders in http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps5763/index.html maybe citylink could buy a few for the collisionnet network. although the stm-256 modules only seem to have short-haul optics. bah humbug thomas

1 0

Allied Telesys Media Converter
by Drew Broadley 25 May '04

25 May '04

Hi all, Does someone happen to have a used Allied Telesys twin-fibre (100base-FX) to rj45 (100base-TX) media converter for lend or sale? We are having issues with our telstraclear circuit link and telstraclear keep throwing us the same brand different model converter. We have had issues with two media converters now and I wish to experiment with another brand (specifically Allied Telesys, as word of advice from a technician at Inspire who solved their issues) Can you please contact me off list or onlist to discuss any others that have had the same problems with these Transition media convertors. Cheers, Drew

2 1

Re: [nznog] Peering.
by Brian Gibbons 24 May '04

24 May '04

>From: "Drew Broadley" <drew(a)corrupt.co.nz> >We could all possibly grab every redundant 10mbit hub >in NZ and connect them down SH1 through the north island >and call it CountryLink ? OK, CityLink now runs CountryLink, and every NZ ISP is connected via a single peering exchange. CountyLink should then write to TelestraClear explaining the change in topology and how much it is going to cost TelstraClear to connect to CountryLink for "Domestic Peering", a per MB charge would seem appropriate. Cheers BG

7 8

Re: [nznog] Peering.
by Richard Naylor 24 May '04

24 May '04

At 03:28 p.m. 25/05/2004 +1200, Paul Brislen wrote: >If you (Customer A) set up a video server in Invercargil >(JuhaDownCountry.com) that for whatever reason got a lot of traffic, the >telcos would have to install new capacity/servers/gear/etc to cope with the >demand and they would need to recoup that cost from you, Customer A. being the owner of several video servers I can reply on this one. If you use the model they mention then Peter Jackson would have to pay the Embassy to screen his movies as well as the Embassy charging the public to watch. To give you a very real example. LOTR-3 Premiere. We got paid nothing for webcasting the event. Based on the extra traffic that went to TCL, they earned $250,000 in 5 hours of webcast. Not small change. TCNZ would have earned around $500,000 had they peered properly. The others probably earned around another $250,000 Had we not anycast LOTR-3 we would have had to pay our ISP. We deliberately engineered it to avoid that possibility, having accidentally generated a huge bill the year before. Yes a telco would have to install capacity to my server, but if they peer properly its for the traffic requests generated by their customers that runs over that peering link. Its exactly why all my servers are at exchanges, so that ISPs can get to the content with the least effort and cost. rich

2 1

Re: [nznog] Peering.
by Richard Naylor 24 May '04

24 May '04

At 05:16 p.m. 25/05/2004 +1200, Juha Saarinen wrote: >You're kidding? no - its for real >Oh hang on, you mean that TCL charged their customers some $250k, etc, not >that you paid them to send the data to their customers? looking at the incremental traffic flows and using TCL traffic charges, we estimate they earned $250k in 5 hours. We didn't get paid. But the beer from TV3 was nice ;-) rich

1 0

RE: [nznog] Peering.
by Regan Murphy 24 May '04

24 May '04

> Looks like Telecom and Telstra are trying to put on a squeeze > in order to make a couple more thousand per month. > > I'm a little surprised at the timing, Telecom has a bit of an > advantage right now since it's got a monopoly on ADSL > bandwidth but bitstream is only a few months away (allegedly) > so it's going to be a lot easier for ADSL customers to switch > pretty soon. > > Telstra doesn't even have that sort of leverage. If TelstraClear put a bit of time and effort into selling their services and retaining existing customers than putting all their fight into peering and local loop unbundling they would be a lot better off than they are now I'm sure. I have heard from several people who have had trouble buying products from them - both voice and data (business) - and have had endless troubles finding someone to return their calls. The unlucky ones to have actually bought their products from TelstraClear then have trouble getting service out of the Account Reps which seem to turnover several times a year... Clear was a great company but unfortunately they have been ruined. -- Regan

4 3

RE: [nznog] Peering.
by Craig Spiers 24 May '04

24 May '04

Let's call it.. CollisionNet :) -----Original Message----- From: Drew Broadley [mailto:drew(a)corrupt.co.nz] Sent: Tuesday, 25 May 2004 1:51 p.m. To: Brian Gibbons Cc: Craig Spiers; 'Juha Saarinen'; 'Jeremy Brooking'; 'nznog' Subject: Re: [nznog] Peering. Brian Gibbons wrote: >>From: "Craig Spiers" <craig(a)concept.net.nz> If telstraclear, was to >>stop peering at APE, and remove 'ports and connections to there' >>wouldn't that limit them to only having 'domestic' data inside their >>own network? >> >> > >This looks more like an attempt to change NZ from a Peering model to a >Tiered model, perhaps Telstra think they have the best backbone in NZ >and might be able to monopolise on it :) > >I am not completely familiar with the WIX/APE Topology, is there a >dedicated circuit between the two to carry domestic traffic? > >If not, is it possible that domestic traffic could traverse both APE >and WIX via TCL peering circuits to each? > We could all possibly grab every redundant 10mbit hub in NZ and connect them down SH1 through the north island and call it CountryLink ? Add up all those offcuts of Cat5 plus these redundant hubs, we could start our own national ISP with VoIP ;)

2 1

Re: [nznog] Peering.
by Jeremy Brooking 24 May '04

24 May '04

Craig Spiers wrote: > Let's call it.. CollisionNet :) > For SH1... Thats rather appropriate :)

1 0

Xtra de-peering in Wellington.
by Simon Blake 20 May '04

20 May '04

Just an FYI, For those that may be wondering why they're getting increased load on links in and out of APE, Xtra withdrew all routes and dropped their BGP session to WIX at about 11am this morning. This left a few parties delivering content to Xtra customers high and dry, and does little for the stability of the Interweb in NZ, which is a shame. Hopefully, the folks at TCNZ will see the light shortly, and turn it back on. Cheers Si

2 3

Port filtering by NZ ISPs?
by Neil Gardner 19 May '04

19 May '04

Hi guys - I'm trying to conduct some penetration testing on some networking equipment and I was finding that some ports were being filtered when someone else at the company was using an **** dialup account to try some things. A call to the **** helpdesk yielded exactly the results I expected so I was hoping someone here could give a more intelligent answer. I'd really like to find out what various ISPs are filtering from dialup or other pools - please email me directly if you have anything to offer. I am happy to sign and fax back NDAs if required and the info would be used for nothing but checking against our own test results or selecting ISPs for use during testing. Cheers - Neil G

1 0

Spam Legislation Workshop
by David Farrar 18 May '04

18 May '04

Hi all, You may have seen that the Government has released a discussion document on anti-spam legislation for New Zealand. As part of the consultation on any legislation, InternetNZ has arranged with the Government for an industry workshop on Thursday 24 June in Wellington for interested members of the Internet, business, legal and educational communities. The aim is to help make any legislation as effective and useful as possible. A formal invite has gone out snail mail to ISPs and others. I thought I'd mention it here also, so people can pass it on informally to anyone appropriate within their organisation etc. The draft programme for the workshop, a registration form, and a link to the Government's discussion document are all on InternetNZ's website at www.internetnz.net.nz. Cheers DPF -- David Farrar e-mail: david(a)farrar.com blog: http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz msn: dpf666(a)hotmail.com icq: 29964527

3 4