[note I cc'd nanog@bbnplanet.com not nanog@merit.edu]
This was NOT appropriate.
I left Planet 2 months ago so please don't tell me what is appropriate.
THe thread should never have happened on NANOG.
The conclusion within the ticket is INACCURATE AND WRONG.
Where would you suggest I post a reply to a NANOG question.... Also,
if you folks can't properly diagnose an issue on your own network,
that's not my problem.
You should probably not quote confidential work tickets from a
non-BBN
email address.
The updates were sent to me as I forwarded the original complaint to
ops@bbnplanet.com so there is no confidentiality issue.
Worst of all, your lines exceeded 80 columns. Please get in line.
.....awww why even bother...It's nice to see Planet has nothing better
to do than complain about message formatting though - must be nice. I
just don't have the time to reformat every message that I forward, or
even worry about it to be honest.
In the interest of fairness, my next post will be the closing
resolution for this ticket as Planet sees it.
--Tim
--jhawk
> Received: from mail.bbnplanet.com by mail.bbnplanet.com id aa14564;
> 15 Jul 97 18:37 EDT
> Received: from merit.edu by mail.bbnplanet.com id aa14368; 15 Jul
97 18:36 EDT
> Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
> by merit.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA26672;
> Tue, 15 Jul 1997 18:27:27 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: by merit.edu (bulk_mailer v1.5); Tue, 15 Jul 1997
18:27:01 -0400
> Received: (from majordom@localhost)
> by merit.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA26639
> for nanog-outgoing; Tue, 15 Jul 1997 18:27:00 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: from send2.rocketmail.com (web1.rocketmail.com
[205.180.57.67])
> by merit.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA26634
> for <nanog@merit.edu>; Tue, 15 Jul 1997 18:26:54 -0400 (EDT)
> Message-ID: <19970715222442.3671.rocketmail@send2.rocketmail.com>
> Received: from [206.171.210.204] by web1; Tue, 15 Jul 1997
15:24:42 PDT
> Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 15:24:42 -0700 (PDT)
> From: "Timothy M. Lyons" <tlyons@rocketmail.com>
> Reply-To: tlyons@techie.com
> Subject: Fwd: #127669/2 (1site) appl:A site in Germany reports
routing proble...
> To: nanog@merit.edu
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Sender: owner-nanog@merit.edu
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Ticket Number: 127669 Ticket Status: open
> > Ticket Type: unplanned/e2e Scope/Source:
1site/email
> > Ticket Owner: na/na Ticket Opener: pbrown
> > Ticket Opened: 07-15-1997 14:32 GMT Problem Started: 07-15-1997
> 14:32 GMT
> >
> > Svc/Site ID #: 178044
> > Svc/Site Name: appl
> >
> > Original Description:
> >
> > A site in Germany reports routing problems resulting in
> difficulties
> > reaching www.apple.com.
> >
> > Coming from either 194.97.200.30 or 195.254.23.1 and going to
> > www.apple.com traces seem to be delayed around paloalto.
Winfried
> Haug from
> > the source reports their AS is 5549 and the first Net is
announces
> as a /16
> > from their former upstream, they have 194.97.192.0/18. The
> second block
> > has no super-route, but is splitted between themselves and
another
> ISP, they
> > have 195.254.0.0/17. Traces attached.
> >
> > ***Note #2 07-15-1997 15:30:58 GMT Author: tpruneau
> >
> > Appears to be a problem in UUNet
> >
> > Winfried
> >
> > The hop where your trace showed a jump in time is a link
between
> UUNet and BBN
> >
> > > > 13 C128.bbnplanet.net (137.39.250.14) 244.497 ms
205.937 ms
> > > 184.169 ms
> > > > 14 * * *
> > > > 15 * paloalto-br2.bbnplanet.net (4.0.1.10) 2755.807 ms *
> >
> > 137.39.250.14 is actually on the UUNet router (bbn has no
control
> over that
> > router)
> >
> > I checked the stats for the link between those two routers for
> the last 24
> > hours and it is fine
> > pkt/ bytes kbits util %
> drops
> > discards errors
> > sec /pkt /sec avg max 95th
%
> 95th
> > % 95th % 95th
> > rcvd: 3005.3 366.6 8814.9 5.69 13.68 7.47 0.00
> 0.00 0.00
> > 0.00 0.00 0.00
> > sent: 1583.7 380.9 4826.3 3.11 13.93 4.93 0.00
> 0.00 0.00
> > 0.00 0.00 0.00
> >
> >
> > I did a ping test accross that link and it is also fine
> >
> > paloalto-br2/su-b#pingTarget IP address: 4.0.1.37
> > Repeat count [5]: 1000
> > Datagram size [100]: 1500
> > Sending 1000, 1500-byte ICMP Echoes to 4.0.1.37, timeout is 2
> seconds:
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > Success rate is 100 percent (1000/1000), round-trip
min/avg/max =
> 1/2/112 ms
> >
> >
> > Tracing back to you appears to show loss at the london link
> > paloalto-br2/su-b#trace 194.97.200.22
> >
> > Type escape sequence to abort.
> > Tracing the route to Pfullingen2.seicom.net (194.97.200.22)
> >
> > 1 paloalto-br1.bbnplanet.net (4.0.1.37) 4 msec 0 msec 4 msec
> > 2 paix.bbnplanet.net (4.0.1.58) 904 msec 116 msec 16 msec
> > 3 br1.pao1.alter.net (198.32.176.2) 12 msec 44 msec 40 msec
> > 4 431.atm10-0.cr1.pao1.alter.net (137.39.13.142) [AS 701] 36
> msec 40 msec
> > 56 msec
> > >>>> 5 * *
> > 197.Hssi4-0.BR1.LND1.Alter.Net (137.39.71.138) [AS 701]
2576
> msec
> > 6 Fddi5-0.CR2.LND1.Alter.Net (146.188.30.226) [AS 702] 2580
msec
> 2564 msec
> > 2588 msec
> > 7 *
> > 367.Hssi5-0.CR2.FFT1.Alter.Net (146.188.3.85) [AS 702] 2644
> msec 2616 msec
> > 8 Fddi0-0.GW1.FFT1.Alter.Net (146.188.31.227) [AS 702] 2712
msec
> 2648 msec
> > 2624 msec
> > 9 *
> > TopNet-gw.customer.ALTER.NET (146.188.128.22) [AS 702] 2676
> msec *
> > 10 frankfurt.topnet.de (194.97.110.186) [AS 5539] 2724 msec *
> 2656 msec
> > 11 *
> > Frankfurt.seicom.NET (194.97.192.41) [AS 5549] 2688 msec
2720
> msec
> > 12 * *
> > Frankfurt.seicom.NET (194.97.193.6) [AS 5549] 2660 msec
> > 13 Stuttgart.seicom.NET (194.97.193.9) [AS 5549] 2724 msec
2660
> msec 2864
> > msec
> > 14 Pfullingen.seicom.NET (194.97.192.249) [AS 5549] 2744 msec
> 2736 msec
> > 2684 msec
> >
> >
> >
> > I recomend you take this up with your ISP and have them persue
the