The New Zealand Network Operators' Group
The New Zealand Network Operators' Group (NZNOG) has no king,
president or formal membership. At present it consists of the
subscribers to this mailing list, which anyone is free to join.
Our next annual conference is to be hosted by the WAND group in Hamilton
on February 2nd to 4th, 2005. See http://www.nznog.org/ for more
information, including the Call For Presentations. Offers to present are
due in by 22nd October, and all presenters
should have had their acceptance confirmed by 31st October.
Also see http://auckland.thursdaynightcurry.com/ if you live in or near
Auckland or Wellington.
Operators' Contact List
See http://www.usenet.net.nz/noc/ for operational contact details
for most New Zealand ISP's. These are intended for use by other
network operators, not by most customers.
See http://www.ape.net.nz/ for details of the Auckland Peering
Exchange and those connected there. See http://www.wix.net.nz/ for the
Wellington Internet Exchange.
About This Mailing List
This list has slightly over 700 addresses subscribed. You may only post
to the list from a subscribed address. A number of people subscribe
addresses which do not receive email purely to allow posting from them.
You may choose to receive postings as they come in, or just to receive
daily "digests". See the bottom of the page
http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog/ to change the form in
which you receive postings.
The NZNOG mailing list is provided through a server at The University of
Waikato, and is administered by employees of Alcatel NZ Ltd, Citylink
and Telecom. None of these organisations, nor any administrator, is
responsible for its content.
NZNOG Mailing List Acceptable Use Policy
The NZNOG mailing list exists to provide a forum for the exchange of
technical information and the discussion of implementation issues
that require cooperation among New Zealand network service providers.
In order to continue to provide a useful forum for discussion of
relevant technical issues, users of the list are asked to respect the
1. Discussion will focus on Internet operational and technical
2. Discussion related to meetings of network service providers is
3. Discussion unrelated to these topics is not appropriate.
4. Postings to multiple mailing lists are discouraged.
5. Postings that include foul language, character assassination, and
lack of respect for other participants are unacceptable.
6. Blatant product or service marketing is unacceptable.
7. Postings of a political, philosophical or legal nature are
8. Postings to the list should be in ASCII or MIME encoded as
text/plain. Attachments should not be sent to the list. To
present a document, a suitable URL may be referred to. For
documents of general interest, the use of proprietary file
formats is discouraged.
9. Breaches of list etiquette should be dealt with privately with the
offending list user, and should not result in complaints being
sent to the list.
10. A person repeatedly breaching list etiquette shall receive warnings
from the list administrator. A further breach after the second such
warning within thirty days shall result in the offender being
unsubscribed from the list. Other action may also be taken to block
postings to the list by the offender. Any such unsubscription is to
be immediately announced to the list.
Mailing List Archives
A full archive is available at
Any message sent to the list will be archived and made available on the
web automatically. Changes are not made to the archive on request,
though the administrators remain happy to assist the Office of the
Privacy Commissioner should any complaint be laid with that office.
One way to search the archive is to use google and prefix your search
Subscribing to the List
See http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog to subscribe.
NZNOG Mailing List Owner/Administrator/Muggins
Donald Neal |Palmersdale: Are you in charge here?
Technical Specialist |The Doctor: No, but I'm full of
Operations Engineering | ideas.
Integration & Services Division +-----------------------
Alcatel NZ Ltd - Telecom's network operations manager
"This communication, including any attachments, is confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read
it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not
copy or use any part of this communication or disclose
anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this
communication does not designate an information system for
the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002."
Anybody else observed that bigben gained about 19 years at about 1:25pm
Tue Jan 1 14:54:33 NZDT 2002
$ /usr/sbin/ntpdate -q truechimer.waikato.ac.nz
server 184.108.40.206, stratum 2, offset -0.001089, delay 0.04276
1 Jan 14:49:38 ntpdate: adjust time server 220.127.116.11 offset
$ /usr/sbin/ntpdate -q bigben.clix.net.nz
server 18.104.22.168, stratum 1, offset 619315199.998172, delay 0.03613
1 Jan 14:49:55 ntpdate: step time server 22.214.171.124 offset
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
I'm just wondering if there is any interest at all in having a peering
exchange of some kind in the Wairarapa. I know I've been thinking about
such a beast for a while, but at the moment there's only a couple of
ISP-like entities (that I know of) who might possibly be interested.
WISE Net would be happy to house such a beast if it could be shown that
there was sufficient interest, although I'm not sure we're exactly what
you might call neutral territory :)
So really what I'm asking is, is there anyone else out there? Do you
want to peer with us? With others? Have you got a network you want to
connect to others with in the Wairarapa at a central place?
Raise your hands now, or forever shall your cat5 be under-utilised :)
WISE Net | http://wise.net.nz
There is now an instance of an anycast I-Root name server attached to the WIX.
Those peering with the WIX route servers should be seeing an announcment for
From Wellington I'm seeing RTTs like this:
$ ping 126.96.36.199
PING 188.8.131.52 (184.108.40.206) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 220.127.116.11: icmp_seq=1 ttl=252 time=3.90 ms
64 bytes from 18.104.22.168: icmp_seq=2 ttl=252 time=1.12 ms
64 bytes from 22.214.171.124: icmp_seq=3 ttl=252 time=1.73 ms
64 bytes from 126.96.36.199: icmp_seq=4 ttl=252 time=2.07 ms
64 bytes from 188.8.131.52: icmp_seq=5 ttl=252 time=1.18 ms
64 bytes from 184.108.40.206: icmp_seq=6 ttl=252 time=1.62 ms
64 bytes from 220.127.116.11: icmp_seq=7 ttl=252 time=1.80 ms
64 bytes from 18.104.22.168: icmp_seq=8 ttl=252 time=1.92 ms
64 bytes from 22.214.171.124: icmp_seq=9 ttl=252 time=1.43 ms
--- 126.96.36.199 ping statistics ---
9 packets transmitted, 9 received, 0% packet loss, time 8080ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.125/1.867/3.905/0.782 ms
and from a host in Auckland which doesn't see the announcement I see:
$ ping 188.8.131.52
PING 184.108.40.206 (220.127.116.11): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 18.104.22.168: icmp_seq=0 ttl=55 time=257.7 ms
64 bytes from 22.214.171.124: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=255.9 ms
64 bytes from 126.96.36.199: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=255.9 ms
64 bytes from 188.8.131.52: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=256.8 ms
64 bytes from 184.108.40.206: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=256.2 ms
64 bytes from 220.127.116.11: icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=257.9 ms
64 bytes from 18.104.22.168: icmp_seq=6 ttl=55 time=259.5 ms
64 bytes from 22.214.171.124: icmp_seq=7 ttl=55 time=256.5 ms
64 bytes from 126.96.36.199: icmp_seq=8 ttl=55 time=257.2 ms
--- 188.8.131.52 ping statistics ---
9 packets transmitted, 9 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 255.9/257.0/259.5 ms
Thanks to InternetNZ who funded this and to Packet Clearing House and
Autonomica for making it happen.
I sort of came along late in the 'news' game when the Major Telco's decided
to de-peer.. To that effect,
Does anyone out there have a solid explanation from them as to why they
chose to do what they
Joe, You used to work @ Clear.. Surely you have inside knowledge :)
Sorry if this is old news, if theres a link, post it please.
From: Keith Davidson [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 1 March 2005 14:19
Subject: Re: [nznog] I-Root Server avaiable at the WIX
Hmmm, so the aberrant nature of peering in NZ rears its ugly head... Seems
strange that the telcos would prefer to route offshore at a financial and a
performance cost, rather than peer in NZ and give their users faster speeds
and cost reductions...
>But it still says on Paradises website:
>Citylink Traffic is calculated in the same way as JetStart Traffic,
>exception of traffic delivered through the Wellington Internet
>(WIX), which is completely free!
And there's nothing inaccurate about that is there? They just don't
send any more traffic over WIX - but if they did - it would be free.
Anyway, good to see they aren't letting elegant solutions get in the
way of MORE MONEY!!!
Cheers - N.
NOTICE: This message contains privileged and confidential
information intended only for the use of the addressee
named above. If you are not the intended recipient of
this message you are hereby notified that you must not
disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it.
If you have received this message in error please
notify Allied Telesyn Research Ltd immediately.
Any views expressed in this message are those of the
individual sender, except where the sender has the
authority to issue and specifically states them to
be the views of Allied Telesyn Research.
After much torment this weekend I have managed to get IPv6 running
nicely on a low end Cisco DSL router (Cisco 837). If anyone wants an
IPv6 connection at home (and a /48 block of real world IPv6 address
space) to experiment with, say yourself some grief and start with this.
Now if we can just get a critical mass of users we might be able to
tempt an ISP to offer native connections ... and actually use Joe's IPv6
F root server.
I'm talking about using NAT-PT to allow a native ipv6 network to talk to
an ipv4 network. Without some kind of protocol translation (aka PT)
ipv6 can't talk to ipv4. The reason this has to be done is because you
can't buy an ipv6 connection to an ISP in NZ yet.
From: Cameron Kerr [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Saturday, 26 February 2005 2:27 p.m.
To: Philip D'Ath
Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv6, NAT-PT
On 26/02/2005, at 1:25 PM, Philip D'Ath wrote:
> I'm trying to get NAT-PT support working on a Cisco DSL router to
> support native ipv6 clients behind it. I've done a lot of searching,
> and can't find the answers to what I'm doing wrong. I have two
Why are you using NAT with IPv6? There is very little reason pros for
using IPv6 with NAT, and many cons. Afterall, NAT is just a hack for
IPv4 to prevent address exhaustion. IIRC, ISPs are not to give out
single IP addresses, but rather /64 allocations.
Anyone care to correct me on this?
Telecommunications Teaching Fellow & SysAdmin ckerr(a)cs.otago.ac.nz