On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 11:16:38AM -0800, F. David Sinn wrote: > Anyone have a good recommendation for code to run on BigIron 4000's to > support IPv6? > > We've been looking at 7.7.02, but have seen some stability issues with > it, so thought it might be good to ask others who may be running other > versions.
Does 7.7.02 support IPv6 then ? We are currently running 7.7.01, but there's no IPv6 support in that release. If there is going to be an IPv6 software release from foundry anytime soon we will only use it if it has decent OSPF and BGP support for IPv6 -- Cliff Albert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 10 16:12:11 2004 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (James MacDonald) Date: Fri Dec 10 16:12:19 2004 Subject: [f-nsp] Rate-limit issues ... Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> anyone ever have an issue where you set the rate-limit committed rate to a value but only get 1/2 that value in testing? We have tried on several bandwidth settings ... always only get 1/2 (exactly) of the configured value. NetIron Stackable ver 07.1.26T13 thanks, Jim ------------------------------ Jim MacDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------ --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/foundry-nsp/attachments/20041210/4c1a6173/attachment.html From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 10 16:31:21 2004 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Rodger) Date: Fri Dec 10 16:31:25 2004 Subject: [f-nsp] V6 code suggestion In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, Cliff Albert wrote: > On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 11:16:38AM -0800, F. David Sinn wrote: > > > Anyone have a good recommendation for code to run on BigIron 4000's to > > support IPv6? > > > > We've been looking at 7.7.02, but have seen some stability issues with > > it, so thought it might be good to ask others who may be running other > > versions. > > Does 7.7.02 support IPv6 then ? We are currently running 7.7.01, but > there's no IPv6 support in that release. > > If there is going to be an IPv6 software release from foundry anytime > soon we will only use it if it has decent OSPF and BGP support for IPv6 It's supported in 7.7.02 and above, most features on jetcore only. Like you, we're running 7.7.01 in production, and have briefly played with 7.8.00b on our development systems. It appears that 7.7.02 also has support for RIPng, OSPFv3, BGP4+. There's a new V6 configuration manual - see http://www.foundrynet.com/services/documentation/srIPv6/index.html Bruce. -- Bruce Rodger |[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key available Network Manager, IT Services |http://www.strath.ac.uk/IT/People/bruce.html The University of Strathclyde | +44 (0)141 548 3300 Glasgow G4 0LN, Scotland. | Fax 553 4100 From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 15 08:34:29 2004 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Willingham) Date: Wed Dec 15 08:34:38 2004 Subject: [f-nsp] Radius and privilege/access levels. Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I am attempting to setup a radius auth server, question I have is what reply-attr/check-attrs do I need to send from my radius server in order to utilize the privileges inside of the switch. I am able to authenticate and login, but I never get the access levels that I have set in radius once logged in, I simply get the default level. I am using freeradius as the radius server, and as I said the auth works fine, I am just unsure of the format/contents of the reply-attrs that need to be sent to the FastIrons/ServerIrons etc. If anyone has any information regarding this I would be exceedingly appreciative. Thanks and have a Wonderful day. John W. From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 15 23:00:38 2004 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Brewer) Date: Wed Dec 15 23:01:23 2004 Subject: [f-nsp] Rate limiting on Foundry switches Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I'm working on an upgrade of our colocation Ethernet infrastructure, and one thing I would like to be able to do is rate limit customers to a particular speed with a granularity of 1 Mbit/s. I want it to work as close as possible to a virtual communications link of the specified speed. For example, an interface limited to 3 Mbit/s should act like a pair of bonded T1s even though it is actually running over a 100BaseT full duplex interface. Apparently this is hard to do, since the only hardware I have seen that can do this well is Cisco IOS's rate-limit and traffic-shape. Anyway, our local Foundry reps said that the Foundry FastIron Edge Switch (FES) could do rate limiting. I configured a FES4802 and found that the "fixed rate-limiting" it supports was unacceptable. Using iperf, I was unable to get TCP performance close to the configured rate, and it got worse as I increased the configured rate-limit. Next I tried the FastIron 4802 (FWS4802) that supports "adaptive rate limiting". Unfortunately, it also did not perform acceptably. Using iperf to test, for TCP traffic I would see substantially lower throughput than the configured rate. For example for a configured rate of 6 Mbit/s I would see 3.2 Mbit/s. Doing UDP tests with iperf showed the expected behavior: throughput that closely tracked the configured rate. It looks like the algorithm the Foundry stuff uses to rate limit hoses TCP performance, presumably because it drops packets in ways that upset the TCP flow control methods. Has anyone gotten acceptable performance for rate limiting from Foundry hardware for this kind of application? If not, any suggestions on hardware that does get this right? Mahalo! -- Robert Brewer ph: 808-532-8246 Assistant Manager, System Department fax: 808-532-8246 LavaNet, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 16 00:01:40 2004 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David J. Hughes) Date: Thu Dec 16 00:01:56 2004 Subject: [f-nsp] Rate limiting on Foundry switches In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hi, I've never tried this with Foundries so can' help with any input there. However, in a previous life, my company delivered rate limited ethernet services in several corporate office buildings. That was with low end Cisco switches. We were happy with the performance. The key was to ensure that there was some burst available. The info below was floated around recently on the Cisco-NSP mailing list for applying a consistent 4mbps CAR setup. Perhaps the logic can be applied to the Foundry. The following line produces a razor sharp 4 meg chart. rate-limit input 4000000 6000000 12000000 conform-action transmit exceed-action drop Value 1. bits per second Value 2. Normal burst bytes = bits per second * 1.5 Value 3. Maximum burst bytes = normal burst bytes * 2 Hope that helps David ... On 16/12/2004, at 2:00 PM, Robert Brewer wrote: > I'm working on an upgrade of our colocation Ethernet infrastructure, > and one thing I would like to be able to do is rate limit customers to > a particular speed with a granularity of 1 Mbit/s. I want it to work > as close as possible to a virtual communications link of the specified > speed. For example, an interface limited to 3 Mbit/s should act like a > pair of bonded T1s even though it is actually running over a 100BaseT > full duplex interface. Apparently this is hard to do, since the only > hardware I have seen that can do this well is Cisco IOS's rate-limit > and traffic-shape. > > Anyway, our local Foundry reps said that the Foundry FastIron Edge > Switch (FES) could do rate limiting. I configured a FES4802 and found > that the "fixed rate-limiting" it supports was unacceptable. Using > iperf, I was unable to get TCP performance close to the configured > rate, and it got worse as I increased the configured rate-limit. > > Next I tried the FastIron 4802 (FWS4802) that supports "adaptive rate > limiting". Unfortunately, it also did not perform acceptably. Using > iperf to test, for TCP traffic I would see substantially lower > throughput than the configured rate. For example for a configured rate > of 6 Mbit/s I would see 3.2 Mbit/s. Doing UDP tests with iperf showed > the expected behavior: throughput that closely tracked the configured > rate. > > It looks like the algorithm the Foundry stuff uses to rate limit hoses > TCP performance, presumably because it drops packets in ways that > upset the TCP flow control methods. > > Has anyone gotten acceptable performance for rate limiting from > Foundry hardware for this kind of application? If not, any suggestions > on hardware that does get this right? Mahalo! > -- > Robert Brewer ph: > 808-532-8246 > Assistant Manager, System Department fax: > 808-532-8246 > LavaNet, Inc. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _______________________________________________ > foundry-nsp mailing list > [email protected] > http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp >
