- mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

www.micemn.net links

by Jonathan Stewart

Hi, I was browsing the www.micemn.net site, and tripped over some 404s. On this page: http://micemn.net/resources.html The link to PeeringDB is broken, since peeringDB went to 2.0. The correct link is: https://www.peeringdb.com/ix/446 On this page: http://micemn.net/history.html The link to Cologix 511 is broken. It seems it should be: http://www.cologix.com/data-centers/minneapolis/min1/ Hope this message reaches the right people, Jonathan

May 27, 2016

Re: Route Server BGP communities (& OS upgrades) - 5/22/2016

by Andrew Hoyos

> On May 22, 2016, at 11:40 PM, Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> wrote: > > This maintenance is complete. > > *) Community phase1 support with MICE community stripping at the end > *) OS patches & software updates. Fully up to date now. Thanks Doug! This will be super helpful for the community (pun intended)! -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com

May 23, 2016

Re: Route Server BGP communities (& OS upgrades) - 5/22/2016

by Mike Horwath

On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 11:40:57PM -0500, Doug McIntyre wrote: > This maintenance is complete. Awesome! -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

May 23, 2016

Re: Route Server BGP communities (& OS upgrades) - 5/22/2016

by Doug McIntyre

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 11:11:38AM -0500, Doug McIntyre wrote: > I plan on implementing this MICE site wide on Sunday, 5/22/2016, starting at > around 10:00PM - 11:59PM. This maintenance is complete. *) Community phase1 support with MICE community stripping at the end *) OS patches & software updates. Fully up to date now. Everything looks good to me, number of routes roughly the same start to finish, traffic load is swinging down, but it does this time of night as well. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

May 23, 2016

Re: Route Server BGP communities (& OS upgrades) - 5/22/2016

by Richard Laager

I've pushed the changes. I did reword the descriptions, and added some explanatory prose, with examples. Feedback and/or patches are always welcome. http://micemn.net/technical.html I wonder if I should break out the port configuration stuff and the communities into separate pages. I'm not sure which is worse: a longer page or another level of pages/links. -- Richard

May 19, 2016

interesting anti-spam technique

by Mike Horwath

That died about 15 years ago :) ... <HTML><BODY><BIG>Sender Address Authentication </BIG> This email address is protected by a system that requires a simple, one-time authentication of new senders. To authenticate your email address and immediately deliver your email, <A href="http://m.USGOauth.net/_val?:cleared-this-variable-so-it-isn't-resent">click this link</A> There is no need to re-send your original email as long as you click the link within one week. If you have trouble making the link work, please notify system administrators by replying to this email. Refer to the message headers below if you have questions about the authenticity of this notification. =============================================================================== <PRE> Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 17:49:57 +0000 From: Chris Wopat <wopat(a)WISCNET.NET> ... LISTSERV didn't catch this unfortunately. I have released the email in question. I really didn't think anyone used callback verification anymore and was surprised. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

May 18, 2016

Re: Route Server BGP communities (& OS upgrades) - 5/22/2016

by Mike Horwath

> On May 18, 2016, at 11:34, Matthew Beckwell <matthewb(a)AITECH.NET> wrote: > > Doug & Chih, Thanks for your efforts on this. > > Mike H, can you post to MICE-ANNOUNCE? Of course! -- Mike Horwath via iPad.

May 18, 2016

Re: Route Server BGP communities (& OS upgrades) - 5/22/2016

by Steve Howard

May 18, 2016

Re: Route Server BGP communities (& OS upgrades) - 5/22/2016

by Chris Wopat

The idea is to ONLY clear these specific action communities, leaving all other communities alone. -- Chris Wopat Network Engineer, WiscNet wopat(a)wiscnet.net 608-210-3965

May 18, 2016

Re: Route Server BGP communities (& OS upgrades) - 5/22/2016

by Andrew Hoyos

Chris is referring to deleting the communities that the route server is using to take action (i.e.: it should be transparent in that regard and not leak communities). The original example I had sent on how to do this in Bird has this as part of it as well, and would be considered standard and best practice. These shouldn’t be leaked back and forth between participants. see: https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/labs/bird/wikis/Route_server_with_community_base… function bgp_out(int peeras) { if !bgp_out_comm(peeras) then return false; # Remove IXP related communities bgp_community.delete([(0,*)]); bgp_community.delete([(myas,*)]); bgp_ext_community.delete([(ro,0,*)]); bgp_ext_community.delete([(ro,myas,*)]); return true; } -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com > On May 18, 2016, at 1:00 PM, Steve Howard <showard(a)paulbunyan.net> wrote: > > Like I said. Perhaps I don't understand the question... > > I understand the statement "If an IX participant wants to control traffic directly with another peer, they would work with that participant to use their possibly pre existing action communities." But, how will that work if all communities are cleared by the route servers? Or are you saying only strip the communities that the route server uses to take action? > > > On 05/18/2016 12:49 PM, Chris Wopat wrote: >> The route servers are performing the action of not advertising. It shouldn't be on all IX participants to perform action on these communities or they wouldn't work as intended. >> >> If an IX participant wants to control traffic directly with another peer, they would work with that participant to use their possibly pre existing action communities. >> >> -- >> Chris Wopat >> Network Engineer, WiscNet >> wopat(a)wiscnet.net 608-210-3965 >> >> From: Steve Howard <showard(a)PAULBUNYAN.NET> >> Sent: May 18, 2016 12:23 PM >> To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Route Server BGP communities (& OS upgrades) - 5/22/2016 >> >> On 05/18/2016 12:03 PM, Chris Wopat wrote: >>> On 05/18/2016 11:53 AM, Doug McIntyre wrote: >>>> Would you want the export function to >>>> clear any communities it had at the end? (Something that is NOT done >>>> right now). >>> >>> Yes, I would consider it standard practice to clear action communities after the action was taken so they don't propagate/leak beyond AS 53679. >>> >>> IX members may wish to filter them on import as well [1]. Both is probably the most sane outcome. >>> >>> [1] - ras's BGP community presentation is always good to review - https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog40/presentations/BGPcommunities.pdf >>> >>> >> >> Perhaps I don't understand the specific question? But, I would prefer that the communities not be stripped. If they are stripped, how would we pass action communities onto other MICE members that require action on their networks? Perhaps just strip out the 53679:* communities would be a better choice? >> >> To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: >> http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 >> >> >> To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: >> http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 >> > > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 >

May 18, 2016