CenturyLink

[rubensk at gmail.com (Rubens Kuhl)]

On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 9:24 PM Yang Yu <yang.yu.list at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 12:05 AM Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer at nic.fr>
> wrote:
> > Is this problem also responsible for the 911 outage? If so, the
> > post-mortem analysis is not useful only for CenturyLink customers but
> > for everyone on the west coast.
>
> Looks like most time.nist.gov servers (3 x NIST sites on AS49) are
> single homed on CenturyLink, anyone noticed NTP issues yesterday?
>
> https://tf.nist.gov/tf-cgi/servers.cgi


NIST could take a hint from the ntp.br project:

pool.ntp.br has address 200.186.125.195 => CenturyLink

pool.ntp.br has address 200.20.186.76 => RNP (Local academic network)

pool.ntp.br has address 200.160.7.193 => NIC.br (Local ccTLD, IX, NTP and
other services)

pool.ntp.br has address 200.160.7.186 => NIC.br

pool.ntp.br has address 200.160.7.209 => NIC.br

pool.ntp.br has address 200.160.0.8 => NIC.br (distributed in different
buildings, rack clusters, NTP hierarchy)

pool.ntp.br has IPv6 address 2001:12ff::8

pool.ntp.br has IPv6 address 2001:12ff:0:7::186
pool.ntp.br has IPv6 address 2001:12ff:0:7::193 (unfortunately there is
lack of IPv6 diversity at this point)

a.st1.ntp.br  200.160.7.186 2001:12ff:0:7::186 => NIC.br
b.st1.ntp.br 201.49.148.135 => STF (Local Supreme Court)
c.st1.ntp.br 200.186.125.195 => CenturyLink
d.st1.ntp.br 200.20.186.76 => RNP (Rio)
a.ntp.br 200.160.0.8 e 2001:12ff::8 => NIC.br
b.ntp.br 200.189.40.8 => Globenet Fortaleza (Cable Landing Station)
c.ntp.br 200.192.232.8 => RNP (Brasilia)
gps.ntp.br 200.160.7.193 e 2001:12ff:0:7::193 => NIC.br

Perhaps what happened in NIST was a bad governmental RFP not requiring
diversity ?


Rubens
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20181229/f818ae05/attachment.html>