Inaccessible network from Verizon, accessible elsewhere.

[morrowc.lists at gmail.com (Christopher Morrow)]

On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Matthew Huff <mhuff at ox.com> wrote:
> Consumer fios. Verizon forums are full of posts about it. Too tired this evening to worry about it.

:( I'll have to do some testing when I get near a consumer fios
then... So, they squash all DNS NOT to their complexes, that seems
rather dastardly of them... considering they deployed that hateful
paxfire/nominum garbage on their recursive servers :(

-chris

> On Dec 11, 2011, at 10:48 PM, "Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 10:28 PM, Matthew Huff <mhuff at ox.com> wrote:
>>> I'm seeing the same thing from my home lan via fios. I've run a recursive dns server for years and can't reach the roots. Had to switch to using verizon's dns servers as forwarders.
>>>
>>
>> business or consumer fios?
>> 3 ?G0-9-4-7.WASHDC-LCR-22.verizon-gni.net (130.81.104.180) ?6.662 ms
>> 6.739 ms ?6.788 ms
>> 4 ?so-14-0-0-0.RES-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net (130.81.22.56) ?6.852 ms
>> 15.384 ms ?8.184 ms
>> 5 ?0.ae2.BR1.IAD8.ALTER.NET (152.63.32.158) ?12.857 ms ?12.927 ms ?13.004 ms
>> 6 ?dcp-brdr-03.inet.qwest.net (63.146.26.105) ?12.429 ms ?7.847 ms ?6.464 ms
>> 7 ?lap-brdr-03.inet.qwest.net (67.14.22.78) ?89.140 ms ?88.929 ms ?89.032 ms
>> 8 ?63.146.26.70 (63.146.26.70) ?94.879 ms ?94.580 ms ?93.120 ms
>> 9 ?sl-crs1-kc-0-0-0-2.sprintlink.net (144.232.18.112) ?58.520 ms
>> 58.330 ms ?58.186 ms
>> 10 ?144.232.25.193 (144.232.25.193) ?49.950 ms
>> sl-crs1-oma-0-9-2-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.2.177) ?49.962 ms
>> sl-crs1-oma-0-8-0-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.8.171) ?47.687 ms
>> 11 ?sl-crs1-oro-0-3-3-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.25.207) ?84.416 ms
>> 83.266 ms sl-crs1-oro-0-12-3-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.25.73) ?84.667
>> ms
>> 12 ?124.215.199.122 (124.215.199.122) ?195.590 ms * *
>>
>> all of this seems to point at some kddi.net rouer gobbling packets,
>> no? (since pretty much everyone's got the same terminating hop) - also
>> note that while some folks traverse L3, my route is via qwest...
>>
>> it's interesting that 701 isn't picking their other peer (sprint) here
>> directly, no?
>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> On Dec 11, 2011, at 8:07 PM, "Brandon Kim" <brandon.kim at brandontek.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I too am now experiencing issues. I cannot get to www.cisco.com and various websites.
>>>> Some websites work lightning quick, some take a long time to load, and some just don't load at all.....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 09:55:40 +0900
>>>>> From: randy at psg.com
>>>>> To: nanog at nanog.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: Inaccessible network from Verizon, accessible elsewhere.
>>>>>
>>>>> from home lan
>>>>>
>>>>> % traceroute gw-li377.linode.com
>>>>> traceroute to gw-li377.linode.com (106.187.34.1), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
>>>>> 1 ?192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1) ?1.471 ms ?0.725 ms ?0.555 ms
>>>>> 2 ?tokyo10-f03.flets.2iij.net (210.149.34.72) ?7.241 ms ?6.651 ms ?6.939 ms
>>>>> 3 ?tokyo10-ntteast0.flets.2iij.net (210.149.34.157) ?5.573 ms ?6.109 ms ?5.346 ms
>>>>> 4 ?tky001lip20.iij.net (210.149.34.97) ?6.410 ms ?7.471 ms ?7.934 ms
>>>>> 5 ?tky001bb10.iij.net (58.138.100.209) ?6.670 ms ?9.251 ms ?5.866 ms
>>>>> 6 ?tky009bf00.iij.net (58.138.80.17) ?6.730 ms
>>>>> ? ?tky008bf02.iij.net (58.138.80.13) ?7.021 ms
>>>>> ? ?tky009bf00.iij.net (58.138.80.17) ?8.593 ms
>>>>> 7 ?tky001ix05.iij.net (58.138.82.2) ?9.767 ms
>>>>> ? ?tky001ix05.iij.net (58.138.82.6) ?6.101 ms
>>>>> ? ?tky001ix01.iij.net (58.138.80.106) ?8.420 ms
>>>>> 8 ?203.181.102.61 (203.181.102.61) ?19.514 ms
>>>>> ? ?203.181.102.21 (203.181.102.21) ?6.054 ms
>>>>> ? ?203.181.102.61 (203.181.102.61) ?11.478 ms
>>>>> 9 ?otejbb203.kddnet.ad.jp (118.155.197.129) ?7.457 ms
>>>>> ? ?otejbb203.kddnet.ad.jp (59.128.7.129) ?7.835 ms
>>>>> ? ?otejbb204.kddnet.ad.jp (59.128.7.130) ?7.824 ms
>>>>> 10 ?cm-fcu203.kddnet.ad.jp (124.215.194.180) ?15.860 ms ?16.401 ms
>>>>> ? ?cm-fcu203.kddnet.ad.jp (124.215.194.164) ?17.519 ms
>>>>> 11 ?124.215.199.122 (124.215.199.122) ?7.892 ms * ?11.984 ms
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>