[146349] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Anyone seen this kind of problem? SIP traffic not getting to
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Harlow)
Wed Nov 9 14:15:00 2011
From: Sean Harlow <sean@seanharlow.info>
In-Reply-To: <B24A2F7EC1495447B32D350F6B4DF63802729A3BDC5E@EXVMBX017-1.exch017.msoutlookonline.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 14:13:49 -0500
To: Preston Parcell <preston.parcell@viawest.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I saw the problems starting around 09:30 Eastern and continuing past =
17:00. Looking through ticket notes I had missed when writing my =
previous reply it seems that a fix was confirmed around 22:30 which =
involved a faulty piece of equipment being replaced. I do not have =
specifics on what went wrong and when it was actually fixed though.
----------
Sean Harlow
sean@seanharlow.info
On Nov 9, 2011, at 2:04 PM, Preston Parcell wrote:
> What was the timeframe for your issues? Just curious since we saw some =
strangeness last night.
>=20
>=20
> Preston=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean Harlow [mailto:sean@seanharlow.info]=20
> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 12:00 PM
> To: Jay Nakamura
> Cc: NANOG
> Subject: Re: Anyone seen this kind of problem? SIP traffic not getting =
to destination but traceroute does
>=20
> I can't say I have a specific answer to your question, but yesterday I =
was seeing major packet loss on outbound audio from all my VoIP =
customers using Qwest and going in to servers on L3. It's entirely =
possible that SIP was also being lost, just the audio was the more =
notable and pressing issue. It seems to be resolved at this point, but =
we have not yet heard from Qwest what the actual problem was.
>=20
> This was with sites in Northeast Ohio and the Chicago area connecting =
to servers in New York and LA for what it's worth.
> ----------
> Sean Harlow
> sean@seanharlow.info
>=20
> On Nov 9, 2011, at 1:47 PM, Jay Nakamura wrote:
>=20
>> We ran into a strange situation yesterday that I am still trying to=20=
>> figure out. We have many VoIP customers but yesterday suddenly =
select=20
>> few of them couldn't reach the SIP provider's network from our=20
>> network.
>>=20
>> I could traceroute to the SIP providers server from the affected=20
>> clients' IP just fine. I confirmed that the SIP traffic was leaving=20=
>> our network out the interface to the upstream provider and the SIP=20
>> provider says they couldn't see the SIP traffic come into their =
border=20
>> router.
>>=20
>> SIP traffic coming from SIP provider to the affected customer came=20
>> through fine. It's just Us -> SIP server was a problem.
>>=20
>> I thought there may be some strange BGP issue going on but we had=20
>> other customers within the same /24 as the affected customers and =
they=20
>> were connecting fine.
>>=20
>> The traffic at the time traversed
>>=20
>> Our network -> Qwest/century link -> Level 3 -> SIP provider
>>=20
>> I changed the routing around so it would go through our other=20
>> upstream, AT&T, and it started working. With AT&T, the route was
>>=20
>> Our network -> AT&T -> Level 3 -> SIP provider
>>=20
>> So my questions is, is it possible there is some kind of filter at=20
>> Qwest or Level 3 that is dropping traffic only for udp 5060 for =
select=20
>> few IPs? That's the only explanation I can come up with other than=20=
>> the whole Juniper BGP issue 2 days ago left something in between in a=20=
>> strange state? I read the post about XO doing filtering on transit=20=
>> traffic, I haven't seen anyone say Level 3 or Qwest is doing the =
same.
>>=20
>=20
>=20
