Mailing List Archive

> It was reported to me that there's a BGP issue in Sprint's Chicago POP.
> Can
> anyone confirm or deny? The issues affecting us started around 3:40 pm
> CT.

This is fourth-hand, but this was posted on the NANOG list:

> Found out from an upstream provider that Sprint might be having some
> major backbone issues right now.

> A number of their backbone routers are down. This is third hand
> information but would seem to make sense considering what we're seeing
> here. We dropped our sprint connection until this clears up but
> reachability to any site that is on their network or uses them for
> transit is iffy at best.

There are also reports they are advertising routes they don't have, possibly because of the backbone outage.

The Internet Health Report (http://www.internetpulse.net/) definitely sees some flakiness.

--
Jim Goltz <jgoltz at mail.nih.gov>
CIT/DCSS/HSB/ASIG
12/2216
DCSS Firewall group on-call: 240-338-2103

Goltz, Jim (NIH/CIT) [E] wrote:
>> It was reported to me that there's a BGP issue in Sprint's Chicago POP.
>> Can
>> anyone confirm or deny? The issues affecting us started around 3:40 pm
>> CT.
>
> This is fourth-hand, but this was posted on the NANOG list:
>
>> Found out from an upstream provider that Sprint might be having some
>> major backbone issues right now.
>
>> A number of their backbone routers are down. This is third hand
>> information but would seem to make sense considering what we're seeing
>> here. We dropped our sprint connection until this clears up but
>> reachability to any site that is on their network or uses them for
>> transit is iffy at best.
>
> There are also reports they are advertising routes they don't have, possibly because of the backbone outage.
>
> The Internet Health Report (http://www.internetpulse.net/) definitely sees some flakiness.
>


Sprint's own performance map is showing 7% to 8% packet loss out of St.
Louis.

https://www.sprint.net/performance/


~Seth

Jim:

My posting about Sprint was from Friday. Our upstream provider re-peered
with them Sunday at 1 am.

Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: Goltz, Jim (NIH/CIT) [E] [mailto:jgoltz@mail.nih.gov]
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 4:03 PM
To: 'Frank Bulk'; outages at outages.org
Subject: RE: [outages] Sprint issue in Chicago?

> It was reported to me that there's a BGP issue in Sprint's Chicago POP.
> Can
> anyone confirm or deny? The issues affecting us started around 3:40 pm
> CT.

This is fourth-hand, but this was posted on the NANOG list:

> Found out from an upstream provider that Sprint might be having some
> major backbone issues right now.

> A number of their backbone routers are down. This is third hand
> information but would seem to make sense considering what we're seeing
> here. We dropped our sprint connection until this clears up but
> reachability to any site that is on their network or uses them for
> transit is iffy at best.

There are also reports they are advertising routes they don't have, possibly
because of the backbone outage.

The Internet Health Report (http://www.internetpulse.net/) definitely sees
some flakiness.

--
Jim Goltz <jgoltz at mail.nih.gov>
CIT/DCSS/HSB/ASIG
12/2216
DCSS Firewall group on-call: 240-338-2103

Funny how when you look at:
https://www.sprint.net/performance/
everything seems OK, but IHR reports differently. ;)

Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: Goltz, Jim (NIH/CIT) [E] [mailto:jgoltz@mail.nih.gov]
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 4:03 PM
To: 'Frank Bulk'; outages at outages.org
Subject: RE: [outages] Sprint issue in Chicago?

> It was reported to me that there's a BGP issue in Sprint's Chicago POP.
> Can
> anyone confirm or deny? The issues affecting us started around 3:40 pm
> CT.

This is fourth-hand, but this was posted on the NANOG list:

> Found out from an upstream provider that Sprint might be having some
> major backbone issues right now.

> A number of their backbone routers are down. This is third hand
> information but would seem to make sense considering what we're seeing
> here. We dropped our sprint connection until this clears up but
> reachability to any site that is on their network or uses them for
> transit is iffy at best.

There are also reports they are advertising routes they don't have, possibly
because of the backbone outage.

The Internet Health Report (http://www.internetpulse.net/) definitely sees
some flakiness.

--
Jim Goltz <jgoltz at mail.nih.gov>
CIT/DCSS/HSB/ASIG
12/2216
DCSS Firewall group on-call: 240-338-2103

--- frnkblk at iname.com wrote:
Funny how when you look at:
https://www.sprint.net/performance/
everything seems OK, but IHR reports differently. ;)
------------------------------------


It's coming and going. Here's a traceroute from my border router to sprint.net from Hawaii across Qwest. But right afterward the site was reachable.

A:WPHU7710# traceroute router 1500 208.24.22.50
traceroute to 208.24.22.50, 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 67.129.94.17 (67.129.94.17) <10 ms <10 ms <10 ms
2 205.171.14.181 (205.171.14.181) 70 ms 70 ms 70 ms
3 67.14.34.18 (67.14.34.18) 70 ms 70 ms 90 ms
4 205.171.233.30 (205.171.233.30) 100 ms 70 ms 70 ms
5 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
6 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
7 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
8 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
9 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
10 144.232.0.108 (144.232.0.108) 150 ms 160 ms 160 ms
11 144.223.33.34 (144.223.33.34) 140 ms 150 ms 130 ms
12 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
13 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
14 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
15 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
16 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
17 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
18 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * ^C



Eventhough the site's now reachable, I can't traceroute to it:

A:WPHU7710# traceroute router 1500 208.24.22.50
traceroute to 208.24.22.50, 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 67.129.94.17 (67.129.94.17) 10 ms <10 ms <10 ms
2 205.171.14.181 (205.171.14.181) 70 ms 70 ms 80 ms
3 67.14.34.18 (67.14.34.18) 70 ms 90 ms 70 ms
4 205.171.233.30 (205.171.233.30) 80 ms 70 ms 70 ms
5 63.146.26.194 (63.146.26.194) 70 ms 70 ms 100 ms
6 144.232.9.59 (144.232.9.59) 80 ms 90 ms 70 ms
7 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
8 144.232.9.65 (144.232.9.65) 100 ms 100 ms 100 ms
9 144.232.20.147 (144.232.20.147) 130 ms 130 ms 130 ms
10 144.232.0.108 (144.232.0.108) 130 ms 130 ms 130 ms
11 144.223.33.34 (144.223.33.34) 130 ms 130 ms 130 ms
12 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
13 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
14 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
15 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
16 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * * *
17 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) * ^C


scott