date:20160826

Re: [AFMUG] (OSPF + ibgp) / formerly Mikrotik OSPF weirdness

2016-08-26 Thread Faisal Imtiaz

Jessie, 

I appreciate the candid and detailed answer. I was trying to separate the 
technical facts from personal preference. I often say that we all design and 
manage our networks based on our fears and how we found a solution around a 
problem. I am not picking on anyone, and myself is included in the group. 
Sometimes the root cause of the issue that we see is due to some poor 
implementation or poor choice many layers deep. I like to dive down into the 
details to try to analyze it. 

Thank you for sharing. 

FWIW, are are also running iBGP/eBGP + Route Reflector,in our Data Center 
network (multiple Data Centers, distributed Edge), and OSFP in the rest of the 
network, including the Wireless POP's. 

We did a lot of PPPoe for our DSL Subs, and it is almost done .. (We were using 
Redback Routers for this). 

Regards. 

Faisal Imtiaz 
Snappy Internet & Telecom 
7266 SW 48 Street 
Miami, FL 33155 
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net 

> From: "Jesse DuPont" 
> To: af@afmug.com
> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2016 11:36:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] (OSPF + ibgp) / formerly Mikrotik OSPF weirdness

> For me, it was a bit of an experiment, but I have ended up liking it. Yes, it
> does add some overhead, but I didn't have to add routers to be the route
> reflectors - I just chose two routers which provided good geographic 
> redundancy
> balanced with being as well-connected as possible to the rest of the routers
> and checked the "route reflect to peers" box. Route reflecting is really no
> more intensive than just BGP peering; probably most already know this, but the
> only different between a route reflector and a non-route reflector is that at
> route reflector is allowed to break the iBGP rule of not disseminating routes
> learned from one peer to another peer.

> One of the things I really like about using BGP for access prefixes is that I
> don't have to mess with filters or using non-backbone areas and area-ranges to
> summarize pools used for things like PPPoE. It's nice that more recent 
> versions
> of MikroTik automate adding the U route of a summarized area-range after the
> first connected route shows up, but with BGP, I simply add the prefix to
> Networks and it's done.

> Another advantage, albeit a "band-aid" one is that if I'm having some link
> quality issue that is ultimately causing OSPF to lose adjacency (packet loss
> causing dropped Hello's, for example, or some jackass carrier providing a
> circuit that upgrades their platform and they don't read the release notes and
> multicast gets dropped...), I can deploy a small handful of static routes to
> improve stability slightly until I can resolve the issue (just a small time
> saver).

> Obviously, none of this functionality REQUIRES the use of BGP and it can all 
> be
> done using OSPF. Indeed, while I'm using OSPF + iBGP in my WISP, the telco I'm
> also the network architect/engineer at uses only OSPF as the IGP and we have
> thousands of internal OSPF routes and dozens of routers in the backbone area
> (along with others in non-backbone areas) and it's extremely stable. I think
> its easy to misinterpret problems which manifest themselves as OSPF issues, 
> but
> are really just OSPF reacting to some other condition; the canary in the coal
> mine, if you will.

>  If you're having issues with OSPF losing adjacencies or changing from
> full to down or full to init, you've got some problem with the link. Period.
> OSPF is not the problem. OSPF has been stable in MikroTiks since 3.x.

> Jesse DuPont

> Network Architect
> email: jesse.dup...@celeritycorp.net
> Celerity Networks LLC

> Celerity Broadband LLC
> Like us! facebook.com / celeritynetworksllc

> Like us! facebook.com /celeritybroadband
> On 8/26/16 1:16 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:

>> So just for the sake of a technical discussion...

>> In your opinion, what is the merit of such a config (osfp + ibgp) ?

>> It can be argued that such a config,
>> a) Still depends on OSPF functioning.
>> b) Layer an additional dynamic protocol on top of it (ibgp)
>> c) Requires additional Routers (route reflectors).

>> If the merit of such an approach is to manage manage OSFP behavior in a more
>> granular fashion, Why not use the those features as they are available in 
>> OSPF
>> / Best Practices...
>> (OSFP best practices, suggest that, don't advertise connected or static 
>> routes,
>> setup all interfaces as passive, and control prefix advertisements via the
>> network section of OSPF).

>> OSPF also tends to be the most common denominator (protocol) across different
>> mfg. Bgp being the 2nd.

>> Regards

>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Snappy Internet & Telecom
>> 7266 SW 48 Street
>> Miami, FL 33155
>> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

>> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net

>>> From: "Jesse DuPont" 
>>> To: af@afmug.com
>>> Sent: Friday, August 26 , 2016

Re: [AFMUG] (OSPF + ibgp) / formerly Mikrotik OSPF weirdness

2016-08-26 Thread Jesse DuPont


  
  
For me, it was a bit of an experiment, but I have ended up liking
it. Yes, it does add some overhead, but I didn't have to add routers
to be the route reflectors - I just chose two routers which provided
good geographic redundancy balanced with being as well-connected as
possible to the rest of the routers and checked the "route reflect
to peers" box. Route reflecting is really no more intensive than
just BGP peering; probably most already know this, but the only
different between a route reflector and a non-route reflector is
that at route reflector is allowed to break the iBGP rule of not
disseminating routes learned from one peer to another peer.

One of the things I really like about using BGP for access prefixes
is that I don't have to mess with filters or using non-backbone
areas and area-ranges to summarize pools used for things like PPPoE.
It's nice that more recent versions of MikroTik automate adding the
U route of a summarized area-range after the first connected route
shows up, but with BGP, I simply add the prefix to Networks and it's
done.

Another advantage, albeit a "band-aid" one is that if I'm having
some link quality issue that is ultimately causing OSPF to lose
adjacency (packet loss causing dropped Hello's, for example, or some
jackass carrier providing a circuit that upgrades their platform and
they don't read the release notes and multicast gets dropped...), I
can deploy a small handful of static routes to improve stability
slightly until I can resolve the issue (just a small time saver).

Obviously, none of this functionality REQUIRES the use of BGP and it
can all be done using OSPF. Indeed, while I'm using OSPF + iBGP in
my WISP, the telco I'm also the network architect/engineer at uses
only OSPF as the IGP and we have thousands of internal OSPF routes
and dozens of routers in the backbone area (along with others in
non-backbone areas) and it's extremely stable. I think its easy to
misinterpret problems which manifest themselves as OSPF issues, but
are really just OSPF reacting to some other condition; the canary in
the coal mine, if you will.

 If you're having issues with OSPF losing adjacencies or
changing from full to down or full to init, you've got some problem
with the link. Period. OSPF is not the problem. OSPF has been stable
in MikroTiks since 3.x.


  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Jesse DuPont

  Network
  Architect
  email: jesse.dup...@celeritycorp.net
  Celerity Networks LLC
  Celerity
  Broadband LLC
Like us! facebook.com/celeritynetworksllc
  Like us! facebook.com/celeritybroadband
  

  

On 8/26/16 1:16 PM, Faisal Imtiaz
  wrote:


  
So just for the sake of a technical discussion... 


In your opinion, what is the merit of such a config (osfp +
  ibgp) ?


It can be argued that such a config, 
  a) Still depends on OSPF functioning.
  b) Layer an additional dynamic protocol on top of it
  (ibgp)
  c) Requires additional  Routers (route reflectors).


If the merit of such an approach is to manage manage OSFP
  behavior in a  more granular fashion,  Why not use the those
  features as they are available in  OSPF / Best Practices...
   (OSFP  best practices, suggest that, don't advertise
  connected or static routes, setup all interfaces as passive,
  and control prefix advertisements via the network section of
  OSPF).


OSPF also tends to be the most common denominator
  (protocol) across different mfg.  Bgp being the 2nd.


Regards


Faisal Imtiaz
  Snappy Internet & Telecom
  7266 SW 48 Street
  Miami, FL 33155
  Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
  
  Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email:
  supp...@snappytelecom.net




  From: "Jesse DuPont"

To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2016 12:03:58 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik OSPF weirdness
  


  Right, PTP and loopback prefixes are distributed with
OSPF (and possibly management subnets for radios) and
"access" network prefixes (customer-facing) are distributed
via iBGP.
I have two of my routers configured as BGP route reflectors
and all other routers peer with only these two; this solves
the full mesh and

Re: [AFMUG] (OSPF + ibgp) / formerly Mikrotik OSPF weirdness

2016-08-26 Thread David Milholen

I have 38 and on our newest deployments we have done this and yes each
time I learn how to do a little enhancement on the overall routing.

It also seems to be great for dual stacking

On 8/26/2016 5:18 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote:

Of course not, but if you learn these designs and techniques you will
implement things correctly the first time.

On Aug 26, 2016 5:16 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm"
> wrote:

Lol I don't think my 25 router setup is large scale

On Aug 26, 2016 5:12 PM, "Josh Reynolds" > wrote:

Deploying OSPF in a Large Scale Network

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t=web=j=http://andrei.clubcisco.ro/cursuri/4prc/scaling/BRKRST-2310.pdf=0ahUKEwiroJ2ujODOAhVsAsAKHRx7Dl4QFggtMAQ=AFQjCNEJn-_gYdPmCsRFvbE4AOdnVEQhgg=2fJL8eTFDdjNdc3TQ6EGGg

On Aug 26, 2016 5:07 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm"
>
wrote:

Ironically I was coming in to ask about ospf and ibgp. I
just figured out how to use ospf filters, so I have to
confess I have a slight chub. But it turned out the way
ospf was propagating pathways for some static space was
causing a 100mb link to run at 10. We pulled the trigger
on the bgp project for our provider circuits so that's
happening, but when it does my cobblefuckery will end up
wreaking havoc with ospf. What is the benefit of ospf over
ibgp for internal distribution. We run the same routers
everywhere so if the edge can take whole routes, shouldn't
every site?

On Aug 26, 2016 4:23 PM, "Bruce Robertson" > wrote:

As you grow, you'll find it won't scale well.

On 08/26/2016 02:21 PM, George Skorup wrote:

I do redist with OSPF. It works fine if you know what
you're doing. MT OSPF used to act really stupid until
ROS v6.27 or thereabouts.

On 8/26/2016 2:16 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:

So just for the sake of a technical discussion...

In your opinion, what is the merit of such a config
(osfp + ibgp) ?

It can be argued that such a config,
a) Still depends on OSPF functioning.
b) Layer an additional dynamic protocol on top of
it (ibgp)
c) Requires additional Routers (route reflectors).

If the merit of such an approach is to manage manage
OSFP behavior in a more granular fashion, Why not
use the those features as they are available in
OSPF / Best Practices...
(OSFP best practices, suggest that, don't
advertise connected or static routes, setup all
interfaces as passive, and control prefix
advertisements via the network section of OSPF).

OSPF also tends to be the most common denominator
(protocol) across different mfg. Bgp being the 2nd.

Regards

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518
Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net

*From: *"Jesse DuPont"

*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Friday, August 26, 2016 12:03:58 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik OSPF weirdness

Right, PTP and loopback prefixes are distributed
with OSPF (and possibly management subnets for
radios) and "access" network prefixes
(customer-facing) are distributed via iBGP.
I have two of my routers configured as BGP route
reflectors and all other routers peer with only
these two; this solves the full mesh and
provides redundancy.

*Jesse DuPont*

Network Architect
email:

Re: [AFMUG] snakes on a tower

2016-08-26 Thread Mathew Howard

That would be a very unpleasant thing to find... and here I thought
squirrels were bad...

On Aug 26, 2016 8:39 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:

> http://www.cnet.com/news/snakes-on-a-cell-tower-t-
> mobile-photo-full-of-nope/
>

Re: [AFMUG] OT I want one

2016-08-26 Thread David Milholen


Wut da Wut!

Thats sooo cool!



On 8/26/2016 2:28 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xo0CiJjTGJE


--

[AFMUG] snakes on a tower

2016-08-26 Thread Ken Hohhof

http://www.cnet.com/news/snakes-on-a-cell-tower-t-mobile-photo-full-of-nope/

Re: [AFMUG] Join Us! Baicells Technologies Roadshow in DallasSeptember 20th

2016-08-26 Thread CBB - Jay Fuller

i have associates that hear from them often.  i hear from baicells often.  i am 
happy.

  - Original Message - 
  From: Ken Hohhof 
  To: af 
  Sent: Friday, August 26, 2016 2:19 PM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Join Us! Baicells Technologies Roadshow in 
DallasSeptember 20th

  Have we heard a single thing about his previous employer since he left?  Are 
they still trucking along as before just without someone to shout about it 
here, or did they fall off the edge of the earth?

  From: Mathew Howard 
  Sent: Friday, August 26, 2016 2:12 PM
  To: af 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Join Us! Baicells Technologies Roadshow in Dallas 
September 20th

  He didn't beat anyone up at the last one... I was kind of disappointed :P

  On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 12:21 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm 
 wrote:

Will Patrick be beating anyone up?

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Rick Harnish  
wrote:

  Our Dallas road show is approximately 25 days away - register today!

  Baicells Road Show - Dallas, TX

  WHEN & WHERE

  ·  Tuesday, September 20, 2016

  ·  9:30 am to 1:30 pm

  ·  Addison Conference & Theatre Center: 15650 Addison Rd, Addison, TX 
75001

  ·  Coffee, light breakfast refreshments, and full lunch provided. 

  WHY ATTEND?

  ·  Learn about Baicells products from our executives and discuss the 
future of wireless broadband

  ·  Engage with our guest speaker, Steve Coran from Lerman Senter, as 
he speaks about the CBRS 3.55-3.7 GHz band updates 

  ·  Hear firsthand how our Wave 2 trials went this summer

  ·  Provide operator insight into future product enhancements

  Respectfully,

  Rick Harnish

  Director of WISP Markets

  Baicells Technologies, N.A.

  Mobile: +1.972.922.1443

  Email: rick.harn...@baicells.com

  Follow us on Facebook for the latest news

-- 

If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as 
part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.

1 2 >

1 - 100 of 125 matches

Mail list logo