- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

the ALT.ROOTS an introduction
by !Dr. Joe Baptista 17 Jun '01

17 Jun '01

Hi: I've recently noticed some discussion here on alt.roots. A topic of some interest to me. Don Stokes wishes they would go away, however i know they are here to stay. The ALT.ROOTS started as an experiment. The question was could the root be removed from DOC USG control (Department of Commerce, United States Government) and is it possible to expend namespace - and if so - what are the technical limitations. The experiment is now over. The ALT.ROOTS or expanded namespace works very well and the technical limitations to the growth of the root file are no different then the technical limitations seen at the .com zone file level. Now the ALT.ROOTS are experiencing a social experiment which seems to be working. They are co-ordinating the allocation of namespace in a reasonably open fashion. Some commercial ventures in fact now offer expanded root services. Certainly there have been some problems - but the expanded namespace is evolving at a rapid pace and i anticipate in excess of one million top level domains by next year. Much of this is due to various european ISP's who are activily co-ordinating local government resources to establish claims to namespace for specific and general purpose top level domains. I would actively encourage any ISP in NZ to participate. However - I advise some precautions when selecting a root provider or in listing your tlds on various root services. I speak from experience. I recently took control and shutdown about 80% of all root service traffic to the Open Root Server Confederation (ORSC). This affected organizations like znet.com - a large ISP in California, various University of California computer labs and sites, including the university president's office. Other affected parties included some ISP called Grasshoppernet, most of croatia (yes - i mean the country), and the Ministry of Education for the Grand Dutchy of Luxemburge. There were many others but these were the most interesting I found in my logs. My decision to shut down the roots was due mainly to bad planning on the part of the root operator. We enterted into an agreement with a Diebold Incorporated to provide arpa (network) infrastructure. During the period that Diebold used the arpas they made arrangements with the ORSC root operator to establish two roots on our networks. When our agreement expired we relocated our networks and examined them for traffic. We found alot of dns traffic for the old ORSC roots. As some of you may know - once a root is established it becomes a permanent fixture on the internet. Roots are pointed to using their internet protocol addresses. This put us in a sticky position. We were now in control of every answer to every question by every user attached to our infrastructure. As some of you may know a root service is a trusted service and the abuse of this trust can result in violation of a networks integrity. Our immediate concern was the what if question. What if a hacker who knew our sites once carried a root server - and understood the power of root - decided to break in and take over the root. They could essentially redirect traffic while capturing user password, names, addresses, credit card information - etc. etc. etc. This is a scary position to be left in and i'm sure you can all appreciate that. So as to avoid any potential liability we collapsed the root and redirected users attempting to access port 80 on any host to one web page which provided them with assistance on reconfiguring their computers or networks. So in picking a root I think it is very important to find one in which the infrastructure is captured by the root operator. This means that the IP numbers used to identify the root are stable and under the administrative control of the root operator - or secured by legal agreement. Many ALT.ROOT lack this. The ORSC has no legal obligation in place to provide service, they are not for profit, the ALTERNIC was established by a known felon and operate some of their infrastructure on @Home IP addresses, the OPENNIC is the same with network hardware addresses being outside their immediate control. So with roots operating on @Home infrastructure the possibility that an old but still active root can fall into the wrong hands is an uncomfortable probability. There is only one commercial root service - the largest of which is pacificroot and they have captured infrastructure. CINICS in france is building infrastructure for french governments and associations at various levels. So the push is on and the momentum unleashed. The only question is who do you trust when you don't have a report card on the players. And I include the USG root system in that question of trust. They have the same power to redirect users as I had when I made the decision to close down portions of the ORSC root infrastructure. And I find that power to be scarier in the hands of one government entity then i do in the hands of a nauty hacker. Those of you who want to explore alt roots can find more data at the Independent Root Operator's Network http://root-dns.org/ regards joe baptista The dot.GOD Registry, Limited The Executive Plaza, Suite 908 150 West 51st Street Tel: 1 (208) 330-4173 Manhattan Island NYC 10019 USA Fax: 1 (208) 293-9773 --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

6 9

Re: Orcon's Ranges
by Simon Blake 17 Jun '01

17 Jun '01

Mmm, most likely. I need to go on a subscription drive - you'll get routes only from the these peers at the mo: Plain (192.203.154.12) 4 9559 0/0 0/0 0/0 0.01 Active Actrix (192.203.154.16) 4 9872 0/23 1/0 1/0 0.91 Established QSI (192.203.154.28) 4 9727 9/21 0/0 1/0 0.91 Established Telstra (192.203.154.32) 4 4763 0/0 0/0 0/0 0.01 Active IHUG (192.203.154.36) 4 7657 43/29 0/0 1/0 0.91 Established AOL (192.203.154.44) 4 4770 19/13 0/0 1/0 0.91 Established Zivo (192.203.154.45) 4 9495 4/19 0/0 1/0 0.91 Established Attica (192.203.154.46) 4 9790 3/20 0/0 1/0 0.91 Established WalkWire (192.203.154.49) 4 17412 1/29 0/0 1/0 0.91 Established Quest (192.203.154.64) 4 64512 0/23 0/0 1/0 0.91 Established Orcon (192.203.154.66) 4 17746 3/58 0/0 3/2 0.49 Established Some ISP's don't peer with the route servers, for a variety of reasons. I'm expecting that to change as the number of peers increase, as I put in place some more automated procedures for updating the route servers, and as I place some more pressure on the ISP's. Which is a long winded way of saying, nobody is obligated to peer with the route servers, you still may need to negotiate some bilateral arrangements. Anybody else who wants to peer with the route servers on APE, please sing out. Cheers Si On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Craig Whitmore wrote: > I'm seeing...Is that all? > > Thanks > Craig > > * 138.235.0.0 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > * 192.173.16.0/21 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > * 202.6.84.0 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > * 202.12.70.0 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > * 202.14.100.0 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > *> 202.27.100.0/22 192.203.154.45 0 9560 9495 i > *> 202.36.45.0 192.203.154.45 0 9560 9495 i > * 202.37.85.0 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > * 202.37.140.0/22 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > * 202.37.144.0/21 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > * 202.37.197.0 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > * 202.37.200.0/22 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > * 202.37.224.0/21 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > * 202.49.144.0 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > * 202.50.16.0/20 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > *> 202.78.128.0/21 192.203.154.45 0 9560 9495 i > *> 202.89.128.0/19 192.203.154.28 0 9560 9727 i > * 202.180.64.0/19 192.203.154.46 0 9560 9790 i > * 202.180.64.0/18 192.203.154.46 0 9560 9790 i > * 202.180.96.0/19 192.203.154.46 0 9560 9790 i > *> 203.96.120.0/23 192.203.154.45 0 9560 9495 i > * 203.99.65.0 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 9511 > i > * 203.99.66.0 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 9511 > i > * 203.99.71.0 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 9511 > i > * 210.48.0.0/17 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 i > *> 210.54.0.0/22 192.203.154.44 0 9560 4770 17427 > i > * 210.55.254.0 192.203.154.46 0 9560 9727 9790 > i > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Simon Blake" <simon(a)citylink.co.nz> > To: "Craig Whitmore" <lennon(a)orcon.net.nz> > Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 1:51 PM > Subject: Re: Orcon's Ranges > > > > Hokay, .1 is peering, I'm seeing this from you: > > > > magellan MRTd# sh bgp neigh 192.203.154.66 route in > > > > Peer 192.203.154.66 ip unicast 11 routes > > P Pref Time Destination Next Hop If > > B 0 00:09:22 202.27.188.128/25 192.203.154.66 eth0 > > B 0 00:09:22 210.54.13.0/24 192.203.154.66 eth0 > > B 0 00:09:22 210.54.142.0/23 192.203.154.66 eth0 > > B 0 00:09:22 210.54.148.0/22 192.203.154.66 eth0 > > B 0 00:09:22 210.55.8.0/24 192.203.154.66 eth0 > > B 0 00:09:22 210.55.12.0/24 192.203.154.66 eth0 > > B 0 00:09:22 210.55.13.0/24 192.203.154.66 eth0 > > B 0 00:09:22 210.55.14.0/24 192.203.154.66 eth0 > > B 0 00:09:22 210.55.15.0/24 192.203.154.66 eth0 > > B 0 00:09:22 210.55.18.0/24 192.203.154.66 eth0 > > B 0 00:09:22 210.55.199.0/24 192.203.154.66 eth0 > > > > So, looks pretty good, you should be getting assorted stuff from the other > > ISP's viz the route server now. I'll have .2 going later in the > > afternoon. > > > > Cheers > > Si > > > > On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Craig Whitmore wrote: > > > > > Hi Simon. Here are the prefix lists for Orcon. We will also be > advertising > > > Datacom's Ranges to APE (via our AS Number) > > > > > > Do we peer with rs1.ape.net.nz and rs2.ape.net.nz with APE's (9560) > > > Number... > > > > > > Orcon: As 17746 IP : 192.203.154.6 > > > > > > ip prefix-list ORCON-networks description Orcon Internet > <noc(a)orcon.net.nz> > > > ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 5 permit 202.27.188.128/25 > > > ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 10 permit 210.54.13.0/24 > > > ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 15 permit 210.54.142.0/23 > > > ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 20 permit 210.54.148.0/23 > > > ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 25 permit 210.55.8.0/24 > > > ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 30 permit 210.55.12.0/24 > > > ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 35 permit 210.55.13.0/24 > > > ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 40 permit 210.55.14.0/24 > > > ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 45 permit 210.55.15.0/24 > > > ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 50 permit 210.55.18.0/24 > > > ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 55 permit 210.55.199.0/24 > > > > > > ip prefix-list DATACOM-networks description Datacom Network > > > <noc(a)orcon.net.nz> > > > ip prefix-list DATACOM-networks seq 5 permit 202.14.20.0/22 > > > ip prefix-list DATACOM-networks seq 10 permit 202.27.76.0/23 > > > ip prefix-list DATACOM-networks seq 15 permit 202.27.140.0/22 > > > ip prefix-list DATACOM-networks seq 20 permit 210.27.250.0/24 > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0

Peering with Orcon Internet
by Craig Whitmore 17 Jun '01

17 Jun '01

Any ISP wanting to Peer with Orcon Internet Directly @ APE please let me know to arrange it. Thanks Craig Whitmore Orcon Internet http://www.orcon.net.nz -------------------------------------------------------------------- APE IP: 192.203.154.66 AS:17746 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks description Orcon Internet <noc(a)orcon.net.nz> ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 5 permit 210.55.12.0/24 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 10 permit 210.55.13.0/24 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 15 permit 210.55.14.0/24 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 20 permit 210.55.15.0/24 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 25 permit 210.55.18.0/24 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 30 permit 210.54.13.0/24 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 35 permit 210.54.142.0/23 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 40 permit 210.54.148.0/23 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 45 permit 210.55.8.0/24 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 50 permit 210.55.199.0/24 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 55 permit 202.14.20.0/22 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 60 permit 202.27.76.0/23 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 65 permit 202.27.140.0/22 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 70 permit 210.27.250.0/24 ip prefix-list ORCON-networks seq 75 permit 202.27.188.128/25

2 1

Public providers and ASN on WIX
by Simon Blake 17 Jun '01

17 Jun '01

Matthew Grant from Plain was asking who the WIX route servers pee with, I figured the results may be of interest to others peering or considering peering on WIX: neighbor 202.7.0.1 remote-as 9439 neighbor 202.7.0.1 description Citylink neighbor 202.7.0.49 remote-as 2687 neighbor 202.7.0.49 description AT-T ! neighbor 202.7.0.65 remote-as 7714 ! neighbor 202.7.0.65 description Netlink1 neighbor 202.7.0.76 remote-as 9736 neighbor 202.7.0.76 description Domainz neighbor 202.7.0.78 remote-as 9718 neighbor 202.7.0.78 description Chello neighbor 202.7.0.129 remote-as 9343 neighbor 202.7.0.129 description Actrix neighbor 202.7.0.130 remote-as 9872 neighbor 202.7.0.130 description Actrix-LH neighbor 202.7.0.177 remote-as 9495 neighbor 202.7.0.177 description Clearview neighbor 202.7.0.192 remote-as 4768 neighbor 202.7.0.192 description Clear neighbor 202.7.0.241 remote-as 7657 neighbor 202.7.0.241 description IHUG neighbor 202.7.1.1 remote-as 4770 neighbor 202.7.1.1 description ICONZ neighbor 202.7.1.49 remote-as 9436 neighbor 202.7.1.49 description Globe-Net neighbor 202.7.1.65 remote-as 9445 neighbor 202.7.1.65 description Saturn neighbor 202.7.1.110 remote-as 4740 neighbor 202.7.1.110 description Voyager neighbor 202.7.1.129 remote-as 9345 neighbor 202.7.1.129 description Paradise neighbor 202.7.1.176 remote-as 9503 neighbor 202.7.1.176 description Comnet neighbor 202.7.1.193 remote-as 9338 neighbor 202.7.1.193 description NLNZ neighbor 202.7.1.241 remote-as 9325 neighbor 202.7.1.241 description Xtra neighbor 202.7.1.244 remote-as 9559 neighbor 202.7.1.244 description Plain Cheers Si --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

3 2

XTRA, blacklisted by 'mail.com' --- WHY?
by Chris Wedgwood 17 Jun '01

17 Jun '01

At present, some of my outband email is sent through XTRA's mail-server(s) as they block outgoing SMTP access when you are inflicted with Jetstream/Jetstart through Xtra. Not that I really mind all that much, it works pretty much flawlessly and Xtra are arguably being good people by blocking nasty evil users from injecting spam into other peoples open-relays (perhaps they block other ports too --- maybe someone from Xtra can comment?). Now, this just occured, which again doesn't really bother me in this instance, but I am curious as to _why_ this was blocked. The DSN I received says this: Reporting-MTA: dns; balthamel.xtra.co.nz Arrival-Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 23:13:47 +1200 Received-From-MTA: dns; tapu (210.55.42.93) Final-Recipient: RFC822; <wapterix(a)mail.com> Action: failed Status: 5.1.3 Remote-MTA: dns; mail-com-bk.mr.outblaze.com (205.158.62.36) Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 553 5.3.0 Mail from 203.96.92.15 refused. Blacklisted. yet when I check the common 'blacklisting' mechanisms I find nothing: tapu:~$ rblcheck 203.96.92.15 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by blackholes.mail-abuse.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by dialups.mail-abuse.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by relays.mail-abuse.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by inputs.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by outputs.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by manual.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by spamsources.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by untestable-netblocks.orbs.org 203.96.92.15 not RBL filtered by spamsource-netblocks.orbs.org so I wonder what else is out there that is used to blacklist evil people? And why is Xtra in this list? --cw --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

5 5

Lots of broken mail at Xtra
by Martin D Kealey 14 Jun '01

14 Jun '01

Has anyone else noticed a recent downturn in mail deliverability for domains hosted by Xtra? In particular, in the last month I have had 3 mailing lists royally screwed by having various clients of Xtra decide to disregard the envelope addressee and send the mail back into the list injection point. The common features in all cases have been the primary MX is mta.xtra.co.nz the mail is collected from there using a POP client the mail is then fed to an Exchange Server The first one was the worst because they were on a full-time IP connection, which meant that the mail loop just went berserk; to make it worse they had changed the domain, and therefore there was *no* identifying information in the list to figure out what had gone wrong. The others since have been easier because they've been on various dial-up connections (and therefore slower) and have had useful identifying information in the report headers. Is this a problem with Xtra, or is there a new (broken) version of Exchange that is flavour of the month for installing? -Martin -- CAUTION: The information contained in this message is consequential and subject to legacy provenance. If you are the intended recipient you are hereby notified that reading this message is permitted. If you have not received this message please notarise the sender and destroy the originator. Help Microsoft stamp out software piracy: give Linux to a friend today... --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

16 29

Orcon APE connection - FIXED :-)
by Seeby Woodhouse - Orcon 13 Jun '01

13 Jun '01

Hi there everyone Our connection to APE now works properly :-) The problem was a faulty Fibre to Ethernet tranciever at Clear's end of the link. We have been doing tests for several hours, and the link looks stable enough to start putting traffic on. We are interested in peering with as many people as possible up here - because after all - that's what APE is for. I will post our ASN, prefixes etc tomorrow Cheers Seeby Orcon Internet - www.orcon.net.nz --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Re: Orcon APE connection woes
by Seeby Woodhouse - Orcon 13 Jun '01

13 Jun '01

Hmm we have forced full-duplex and turned off auto-negotiation on our Catalyst 5000 switch - but we have also tried all the other settings possible. Clear have told us to set it to 10Mbps Full-Duplex - so that's what it is at present. Cheers Seeby Orcon Internet - www.orcon.net.nz ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian Quinn" <iquinn(a)juniper.net> To: "Seeby Woodhouse - Orcon" <seeby(a)orcon.net.nz> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 6:42 PM Subject: RE: Orcon APE connection woes > > I had some problems recently that were marginally similar. Although I had > the speed and duplex settings configured, it didn't come right until I > turned off auto negotiation as well (eg no negotiation or something along > those lines). > > No idea if it's your problem - just seems familiar. > > Good luck :-) > > Regards / Ian > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Seeby Woodhouse - Orcon [mailto:seeby(a)orcon.net.nz] > > Sent: Wednesday, 13 June 2001 6:27 p.m. > > To: NZNOG Mailing List > > Subject: Orcon APE connection woes > > > > > > Hi there everyone > > > > Orcon has just had a 10Mbit IPExpress connection to APE > > completed, and I > > have been fighting with it all day. > > > > If we ping anyone on APE, then we get around 2/3's of the > > pings through, and > > 1/3 are dropped. > > This happens in a pattern of 1/3 drop, 2/3 get through. > > > > I talked with Clear and they said that it could be the > > IPExpress connection > > re-negotiating because of what is on our end, so we have been > > playing with > > the settings on our Catalyst 5000 switch - we have forced the > > port to our > > IPExpress connection full duplex / half duplex / 100mb / 10mb > > but they all > > seem to give the same results. > > > > Clear has advised us to set our equipment to 10Mbit full > > duplex - so that's > > what it is at present. > > > > The connection from IPExpress is then VLan'd from our > > Catalyst switch into > > our core Cisco 7505 router. > > > > A ping report of 300 pings to ihug.ape.net.nz looks like this > > > > --------------------------------------------------- > > ORCON7505#ping > > Protocol [ip]: > > Target IP address: ihug.ape.net.nz > > Repeat count [5]: 300 > > Datagram size [100]: > > Timeout in seconds [2]: > > Extended commands [n]: > > Sweep range of sizes [n]: > > Type escape sequence to abort. > > Sending 300, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 192.203.154.36, timeout > > is 2 seconds: > > ........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..........!!!!! > > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...........!!!!!!!!!!! > > !!!!!!!!!!!!...........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...........!!!!!!!!!!! > > !!!!!!!!!...........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > !!..........!!!!!!!! > > Success rate is 65 percent (197/300), round-trip min/avg/max > > = 1/3/24 ms > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > Can anyone shed any light on this? > > > > Is this related the the spanning tree problems that have been > > happening up > > at APE recently? > > Or should we be hassling Clear about the service..... > > > > Cheers > > Seeby > > > > Orcon Internet - www.orcon.net.nz > > > > > > --------- > > To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > > where the body of your message reads: > > unsubscribe nznog > > > --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

4 6

Zfree Delibratley slowing down access to Orcon's network
by Seeby Woodhouse - Orcon 13 Jun '01

13 Jun '01

It seems that Zfree is delibratley slowing down Internet access to some of Orcon's internal network. If we test by dialing up using a Zfree account, most of our network is blazingly fast, however access to our Mail server and FreeHost server is painfully slow. (mail.orcon.net.nz and freehost.orcon.net.nz) Last time we informed them of this problem, the issue mysteriously went away - but now it is back again a week later. I suspect that Zfree is delibratley rate-shaping the amount of traffic that can go to our mail server and our freehost server from their network to prevent people from accessing them. It is quite frustrating when it is our helpdesk that is recieving all the calls (because theirs is 0900), when it is actually their problem - especially when the customers that are calling us are not actually using us for dialup. Any system administrators for Clear got something to say about this? ;-) -- Cheers Seeby Orcon Internet - www.orcon.net.nz --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

2 1

Re: Orcon APE connection woes
by Seeby Woodhouse - Orcon 12 Jun '01

12 Jun '01

Hi there Tim I don't want to put any traffic over to APE until this link is working properly. As you know, BGP won't detect packet loss, so it is still better to keep sticking all our Traffic via Telecom until this issue is resolved. As soon as the link works reliably - then we will want to peer with everyone that we can. Hopefully we'll be able to get sub 10ms pings to most ISP's in the country at the end of this ;-) Cheers Seeby Orcon Internet - www.orcon.net.nz ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Philips" <tim.philips(a)attica.co.nz> To: "Seeby Woodhouse - Orcon" <seeby(a)orcon.net.nz> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 6:52 PM Subject: Re: Orcon APE connection woes > On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Seeby Woodhouse - Orcon wrote: > > Seeby, > > We have had this problem before. Well are still having it with our > Tangent 100Mb. I will see what I can find. Would you like to peer with > us also once your link is up and running. > > If you do provide us with a prefix list and I or one of the other guys > will sort it all out. > > > Hi there everyone > > > > Orcon has just had a 10Mbit IPExpress connection to APE completed, and I > > have been fighting with it all day. > > > > If we ping anyone on APE, then we get around 2/3's of the pings through, and > > 1/3 are dropped. > > This happens in a pattern of 1/3 drop, 2/3 get through. > > > > I talked with Clear and they said that it could be the IPExpress connection > > re-negotiating because of what is on our end, so we have been playing with > > the settings on our Catalyst 5000 switch - we have forced the port to our > > IPExpress connection full duplex / half duplex / 100mb / 10mb but they all > > seem to give the same results. > > > > Clear has advised us to set our equipment to 10Mbit full duplex - so that's > > what it is at present. > > > > The connection from IPExpress is then VLan'd from our Catalyst switch into > > our core Cisco 7505 router. > > > > A ping report of 300 pings to ihug.ape.net.nz looks like this > > > > --------------------------------------------------- > > ORCON7505#ping > > Protocol [ip]: > > Target IP address: ihug.ape.net.nz > > Repeat count [5]: 300 > > Datagram size [100]: > > Timeout in seconds [2]: > > Extended commands [n]: > > Sweep range of sizes [n]: > > Type escape sequence to abort. > > Sending 300, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 192.203.154.36, timeout is 2 seconds: > > ........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..........!!!!! > > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...........!!!!!!!!!!! > > !!!!!!!!!!!!...........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...........!!!!!!!!!!! > > !!!!!!!!!...........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > !!..........!!!!!!!! > > Success rate is 65 percent (197/300), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/3/24 ms > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > Can anyone shed any light on this? > > > > Is this related the the spanning tree problems that have been happening up > > at APE recently? > > Or should we be hassling Clear about the service..... > > > > Cheers > > Seeby > > > > Orcon Internet - www.orcon.net.nz > > > > > > --------- > > To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > > where the body of your message reads: > > unsubscribe nznog > > > > -- > Thanks, > Tim Philips > --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

1 0