NANOG Mailing List

The North American Network Operators' Group discusses fundamental Internet infrastructure issues such as routing, IP address allocation, and containing malicious activity.

List Archives

Latest Posts

[NANOG] Re: Verizon (Fios) Packet Loss | Philadelphia Metro Area | Possible Routing Issue? Ross Tajvar via NANOG (Mar 29)
Sounds like congestion if it's worse at peak times. Looking at the latency
numbers will tell you if it's actually going to DC and back.

[NANOG] Verizon (Fios) Packet Loss | Philadelphia Metro Area | Possible Routing Issue? alexander.lembesis--- via NANOG (Mar 29)
Hello, fellow NANOG members,

Is there anyone from Verizon on the list that could take a look at a possible routing issue on the Fios network that
could be causing loss? I have two locations, each with 1G service.
Location 1 is in Quakertown, PA & has a dynamic IP on the 96.227.54.0/24 block
Location 2 is in Chalfont, PA & has a dynamic IP on the 108.16.195.0/24 block
They are ~11miles apart as the crow flies. I have some EdgeConnect...

[NANOG] Re: IPv6 Legacy IP Warning Stickers Gary Sparkes via NANOG (Mar 28)
Armstrong here. They've been announcing v6 forever, but for customers? Nope.

-----Original Message-----
From: brent saner via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2025 3:43 AM
To: North American Network Operators Group <nanog () lists nanog org>
Cc: brent saner <brent.saner () gmail com>
Subject: [NANOG] Re: IPv6 Legacy IP Warning Stickers

Eastern PA RCN/Astound customer here; I'm betting...

[NANOG] Turnkey-ish Datacenter in Austin Izaac via NANOG (Mar 28)
Just in case any Texans are looking for some quick build out, I spotted
this while looking for something else:

https://realestatesales.gov/asset-details/?property_id=10

Open house on Tues 01APR.

[NANOG] Weekly Global IPv4 Routing Table Report Routing Table Analysis Role Account via NANOG (Mar 28)
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Global
IPv4 Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.

The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, SAFNOG
UKNOF, TZNOG, MENOG, BJNOG, SDNOG, CMNOG, LACNOG and the RIPE Routing WG.

Daily listings are sent to bgp-stats () lists apnic net.

For historical data, please see https://thyme.apnic.net.

If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith...

[NANOG] Re: IPv6 Legacy IP Warning Stickers Justin Streiner via NANOG (Mar 28)
Verizon Fios customer here (Western PA). Given that Verizon's "Learn about
Fios" page still says that customers who get a /56 will be able to deploy
up to *56* LANs, it doesn't give me a ton of confidence that Fios will be
dual-stacked network-wide any time soon. I've had Fios service in one
place or another since 2012, and it's been "real soon now" since then.

I continue to call their customer service...

[NANOG] Re: IPv6 Legacy IP Warning Stickers William Herrin via NANOG (Mar 28)
I'm not sure why a modern ISP would fail to at least deploy the
minimum for IPv6: 6rd is easy enough to implement and if you don't
_automatically_ enable it for customers then it doesn't have to be as
efficient as your IPv4 offering.

Regards,
Bill Herrin

[NANOG] Re: IPv6 Legacy IP Warning Stickers brent saner via NANOG (Mar 28)
Eastern PA RCN/Astound customer here; I'm betting it's all service areas.
We don't have it either.

[NANOG] Re: Are IXP route server operators filtering routes that lack authenticated route objects Barry O'Donovan (Open Solutions) via NANOG (Mar 27)
Hi all,

Malte’s email below is on point. The one addition I’d make is that most
IXPs are not / would not use "non-authenticated IRRs” by default but
rather on member request where they specify the IRRDB to query. This
typically only happens for larger international networks rather than
regional ones where they’d only be a member of a single RIR.

Also, IRR data should only come into play after RPKI validation returns...

[NANOG] ** Reminder! NANOG 94 Call for Presentations + More Nanog News via NANOG (Mar 27)
*** Reminder! NANOG 94 Call for Presentations*
------------------------------------------------------------
*Transform Your Research, Ideas, and Best Practices into a NANOG Talk*

NANOG 94 will spotlight Data Center Operations, but we encourage proposals
on any relevant topic. To be considered, please submit your presentation
proposal—along with draft slides—by Monday, April 28.

*MORE INFO <https://nanog.org/program/call-presentations/...

[NANOG] Re: IPv6 Legacy IP Warning Stickers Lucien Hoydic via NANOG (Mar 27)
Add RCN Chicago (Now Astound), to the list of companies that don't support IPV6.

I'm not "Astound"ed by their lack of support for modern technology

[NANOG] Re: IPv6 Legacy IP Warning Stickers Colin Stanners (lists) via NANOG (Mar 27)
As an example, MikroTik RouterOS has, just 2 months ago, finally added IPv6
FastTrack (a certain type of hardware offloading) in their beta software.
Until now, FastTrack was IPv4 only, so for much of their routers' usage
cases, the maximum IPv4 throughput would be 3-4x faster than IPv6. That
massive performance difference still applies to the shipping software of
units being purchased today....

[NANOG] Re: IPv6 Legacy IP Warning Stickers Andrew Latham via NANOG (Mar 27)
Brandon

I don't disagree and hope more consumer demand helps alter things. I would
like to have
the option to use IPv6 if I want. One ISP at the street has some IPv6 in
their peerings but
none to customers which means it is possible. Another ISP at the street
looks to be using
CGNAT for customers on FTTH with zero IPv6 peering.

And for those secretly taking bets yesterday. The work at the street did
knock me offline
for most of the day. :(...

[NANOG] Re: Are IXP route server operators filtering routes that lack authenticated route objects Rubens Kuhl via NANOG (Mar 27)
Note that authenticating is not exclusive to RIR IRRs. TC does that
too, using RIR/NIR published objects.

Rubens

[NANOG] Re: Are IXP route server operators filtering routes that lack authenticated route objects Malte Tashiro via NANOG (Mar 27)
In the RIPE Connect-WG there are efforts to establish a BCP document to only use RIR IRRs for filtering.

As part of this there was a presentation at RIPE 88 [0] where someone from DE-CIX showed an impact analysis.
Their takeaway is that dropping RADB would result in a loss of 11% of /24s and 250 Gbps traffic at peak, i.e., a
significant amount. Other non-RIR IRRs contribute only a small amount.

There is a follow-up mail thread with lots of...

More Lists

Dozens of other network security lists are archived at SecLists.Org.