Think of them like a switch …. optical external bypass systems used to protect against failure etc...
> On Nov 29, 2016, at 10:25 PM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote: > > Are these spliced into your network like a router, or a switch? The ability > to bypass them leads me to believe they are like a L2 switch. > <> > From: Af [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>] On > Behalf Of Josh Reynolds > Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 3:51 PM > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Traffic Shaping Appliance > > Yes you can, they also support tons of queueing methods, including fq_codel. > > On Nov 24, 2016 2:03 PM, "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Does anyone know what queuing method (and buffer size) Procera (or Sandvine >> or Saisei, etc.) use? >> >> I remember asking Procera at a show 1-2 years ago if they had programmable >> queue depth and the answer seemed to be no. I was thinking they could >> implement traffic shaping rather than policing, but it didn’t sound like it. >> >> I ask for 2 reasons. The downstream network wouldn’t need to handle the >> bursts, since they would be smoothed out. And I suspect some of these >> misbehaving CDN servers are ignoring packet drops as a congestion indication >> unless accompanied by increased round trip latency indicating buffer fill. >> The rate limiting methods we use currently on our routers don’t introduce >> much delay, and some of the CDNs don’t seem to implement congestion >> avoidance until the packet drop rate hits about 45%. <> >> >> >> From: Af [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>] On >> Behalf Of Paul Stewart >> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 6:12 PM >> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Traffic Shaping Appliance >> >> Was just an option that was recommended at that timeframe…. not happening >> now I’m told >> >> >>> On Nov 23, 2016, at 5:23 PM, Wireless Administrator <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> Procera was/is for sale! >>> >>> Ouch …. >>> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X-e1TJBzzQ >>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X-e1TJBzzQ> >>> >>> From: Af [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>] On >>> Behalf Of Ken Hohhof >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 1:58 PM >>> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Traffic Shaping Appliance >>> >>> One other thing, the specs on the Procera hardware (I assume it’s basically >>> a rackmount server) require a datacenter or at least controlled >>> environment, the temperature range is pretty narrow. >>> >>> Even some towers where we have shelter space, I can’t guarantee the >>> temperature specs they want. >>> >>> >>> From: Af [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>] On >>> Behalf Of Paul Stewart >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 12:52 PM >>> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Traffic Shaping Appliance >>> >>> Procera isn’t licensed per user .. it’s licensed based on throughput and >>> features >>> >>> >>>> On Nov 23, 2016, at 1:51 PM, Kurt Fankhauser <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> OK, I think Procera and Sandvine both have a per user cost (maybe a couple >>>> dollars per user) and Procera has a cost for purchasing upfront. My box >>>> which can do a gig of traffic cost $18,000 with the first year of >>>> signature updates and it is like $2500 annually after that. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Wireless Administrator <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> Kurt, >>>>> We use PPPoE/Radius to set basic Queues on the Access Servers but want to >>>>> do shaping at an application level. Ntop reports are showing an >>>>> increasing number of things getting out of control. Windows updates >>>>> %#@?! for one. >>>>> >>>>> Steve >>>>> >>>>> From: Af [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>] On >>>>> Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 1:44 PM >>>>> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Traffic Shaping Appliance >>>>> >>>>> Are you are just looking to shape general traffic to a client (like give >>>>> someone a 1.5Mbps plan) then you could use Mikrotik and simple queues >>>>> which is very in-expensive. If you want to do some shaping on an >>>>> application like only streaming or Windows Updates and stuff like that >>>>> then that's where things start to get expensive. I am using the Procera >>>>> myself for that and although I havn't tried any of the other brands you >>>>> mention I am very happy with the Procera. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Wireless Administrator <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> We’re in the market for a traffic shaping appliance and have had a look >>>>> at Procera so far. I have a list of vendors/products a have assembled >>>>> over time that I was going to look into: >>>>> >>>>> Saisei >>>>> NetEqualizer >>>>> Packeteer (Bluecoat) >>>>> NetEnforcer (Allot) >>>>> Network Composer (Cymphonix) >>>>> Exinda >>>>> >>>>> Anyone care to share experiences on this subject? >>>>> >>>>> Steve B.
