Re: [AFMUG] OT Movie Review

[CBB - Jay Fuller]

Saw Hotel Artemis last night I felt it needed another hour of storyline.

Have not made it to Ocean's 8 yet... my MoviePass is getting a good workout 
though

Sent from my smartphone

- Reply message -
From: "Jaime Solorza" 
To: "Animal Farm" 
Subject: [AFMUG] OT Movie Review
Date: Sat, Jun 9, 2018 8:10 PM

We watched Death Wish with Bruce Willis at homeit's okay
Jaime Solorza


On Sat, Jun 9, 2018, 7:02 PM Chuck McCown  wrote:




Oceans 8

 

Meh

 

OK, Movie Pass made me not regret paying for it.

Just was not funny like the other Ocean movies. 

Re: [AFMUG] OT Movie Review

[Jaime Solorza]

We watched Death Wish with Bruce Willis at homeit's okay

Jaime Solorza

On Sat, Jun 9, 2018, 7:02 PM Chuck McCown  wrote:

> Oceans 8
>
> Meh
>
> OK, Movie Pass made me not regret paying for it.
> Just was not funny like the other Ocean movies.
>

[AFMUG] OT Movie Review

[Chuck McCown]

Oceans 8

Meh

OK, Movie Pass made me not regret paying for it.
Just was not funny like the other Ocean movies.  

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik / Mimosa Ethernet Errors

[Chuck McCown]

Surge suppressors can certainly cause this.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 9, 2018, at 2:58 PM, George Skorup  wrote:
> 
> What suppressors?
> 
>> On 6/9/2018 3:23 PM, Jason McKemie wrote:
>> I have a A5C that is giving me grief.  I'm getting hundreds of Rx FCS errors 
>> on the Mikrotik when I'm running gigabit, if I force it to 100 fdx, the Rx 
>> FCS errors stop, but Rx Code errors start incrementing instead.  I've always 
>> gotten some amount of Rx FCS errors from Mimosa A5/A5C units, but not nearly 
>> this many.  It's starting to have an effect on service on the sector.
>> 
>> Any ideas what I should look at?  Some people were claiming that putting 
>> something like a Netonix in between the Mimosa and the Mikrotik solved their 
>> issues, but I'm wondering if the surge suppressors are creating an issue as 
>> well.
>> 
>> -Jason
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik / Mimosa Ethernet Errors

[George Skorup]

The easiest way to tell is obviously to take the SS out and see if the 
errors stop. And as Chuck has said in the past, an SS can get wounded. 
Definitely seen that. In fact, just the other day I had two 450 sectors 
with link losses, falling back to 10Mbps, etc. and quite a lot of 
errors. Took the Rev D SS's out and the errors were gone. Replaced them 
with new Rev E's I happened to have in my truck and they're running fine 
(100Mbps and Canopy sync). The Rev D's did their job.


On 6/9/2018 4:42 PM, Jason McKemie wrote:
They are Chuck's suppressors and I'm pretty sure they are an older 
revision as well, so that could be a contributing factor.


On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 4:14 PM, George Skorup 
mailto:george.sko...@cbcast.com>> wrote:


Guess I should correct my grammar and say which suppressor(s)?

And follow that up with the assumption that you're using Chuck's
suppressors? The only one that produced no errors for me is the
CAT6-APC which is just gas tubes, no diodes. He asked me to test
one more thing with the Rev G GigE-APC, but I just haven't had the
time to get out to a site and do it.

I am using some Rev D and E GigE-APCs on Canopy and ePMP at
100Mbps and sync pulses present and those work fine. Gigabit is
the real pain in the ass. Gigabit + Canopy sync is even more of a
pain in the ass. I've got old Rev A (or B? I don't remember)
GigE-APCs and GigE-POE-APCs that work fine at gigabit and no sync
pulse, mostly AirFibers and some Exalt radios on those.

The CAT6-APC is probably what we'll move forward with for
everything since it'll be the most universal and offer decent
protection. Actually probably better than decent. I think Chuck
said the clamp voltage is around 90-100 volts. The cheap stuff
might die, but it's cheap so who cares.


On 6/9/2018 3:58 PM, George Skorup wrote:

What suppressors?

On 6/9/2018 3:23 PM, Jason McKemie wrote:

I have a A5C that is giving me grief.  I'm getting
hundreds of Rx FCS errors on the Mikrotik when I'm running
gigabit, if I force it to 100 fdx, the Rx FCS errors stop,
but Rx Code errors start incrementing instead.  I've
always gotten some amount of Rx FCS errors from Mimosa
A5/A5C units, but not nearly this many.  It's starting to
have an effect on service on the sector.

Any ideas what I should look at?  Some people were
claiming that putting something like a Netonix in between
the Mimosa and the Mikrotik solved their issues, but I'm
wondering if the surge suppressors are creating an issue
as well.

-Jason

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik / Mimosa Ethernet Errors

[Jason McKemie]

They are Chuck's suppressors and I'm pretty sure they are an older revision
as well, so that could be a contributing factor.

On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 4:14 PM, George Skorup 
wrote:

> Guess I should correct my grammar and say which suppressor(s)?
>
> And follow that up with the assumption that you're using Chuck's
> suppressors? The only one that produced no errors for me is the CAT6-APC
> which is just gas tubes, no diodes. He asked me to test one more thing with
> the Rev G GigE-APC, but I just haven't had the time to get out to a site
> and do it.
>
> I am using some Rev D and E GigE-APCs on Canopy and ePMP at 100Mbps and
> sync pulses present and those work fine. Gigabit is the real pain in the
> ass. Gigabit + Canopy sync is even more of a pain in the ass. I've got old
> Rev A (or B? I don't remember) GigE-APCs and GigE-POE-APCs that work fine
> at gigabit and no sync pulse, mostly AirFibers and some Exalt radios on
> those.
>
> The CAT6-APC is probably what we'll move forward with for everything since
> it'll be the most universal and offer decent protection. Actually probably
> better than decent. I think Chuck said the clamp voltage is around 90-100
> volts. The cheap stuff might die, but it's cheap so who cares.
>
>
> On 6/9/2018 3:58 PM, George Skorup wrote:
>
>> What suppressors?
>>
>> On 6/9/2018 3:23 PM, Jason McKemie wrote:
>>
>>> I have a A5C that is giving me grief.  I'm getting hundreds of Rx FCS
>>> errors on the Mikrotik when I'm running gigabit, if I force it to 100 fdx,
>>> the Rx FCS errors stop, but Rx Code errors start incrementing instead.
>>> I've always gotten some amount of Rx FCS errors from Mimosa A5/A5C units,
>>> but not nearly this many.  It's starting to have an effect on service on
>>> the sector.
>>>
>>> Any ideas what I should look at?  Some people were claiming that putting
>>> something like a Netonix in between the Mimosa and the Mikrotik solved
>>> their issues, but I'm wondering if the surge suppressors are creating an
>>> issue as well.
>>>
>>> -Jason
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik / Mimosa Ethernet Errors

[George Skorup]

Guess I should correct my grammar and say which suppressor(s)?

And follow that up with the assumption that you're using Chuck's 
suppressors? The only one that produced no errors for me is the CAT6-APC 
which is just gas tubes, no diodes. He asked me to test one more thing 
with the Rev G GigE-APC, but I just haven't had the time to get out to a 
site and do it.


I am using some Rev D and E GigE-APCs on Canopy and ePMP at 100Mbps and 
sync pulses present and those work fine. Gigabit is the real pain in the 
ass. Gigabit + Canopy sync is even more of a pain in the ass. I've got 
old Rev A (or B? I don't remember) GigE-APCs and GigE-POE-APCs that work 
fine at gigabit and no sync pulse, mostly AirFibers and some Exalt 
radios on those.


The CAT6-APC is probably what we'll move forward with for everything 
since it'll be the most universal and offer decent protection. Actually 
probably better than decent. I think Chuck said the clamp voltage is 
around 90-100 volts. The cheap stuff might die, but it's cheap so who cares.


On 6/9/2018 3:58 PM, George Skorup wrote:

What suppressors?

On 6/9/2018 3:23 PM, Jason McKemie wrote:
I have a A5C that is giving me grief.  I'm getting hundreds of Rx FCS 
errors on the Mikrotik when I'm running gigabit, if I force it to 100 
fdx, the Rx FCS errors stop, but Rx Code errors start incrementing 
instead.  I've always gotten some amount of Rx FCS errors from Mimosa 
A5/A5C units, but not nearly this many.  It's starting to have an 
effect on service on the sector.


Any ideas what I should look at?  Some people were claiming that 
putting something like a Netonix in between the Mimosa and the 
Mikrotik solved their issues, but I'm wondering if the surge 
suppressors are creating an issue as well.


-Jason

Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik / Mimosa Ethernet Errors

[George Skorup]

What suppressors?

On 6/9/2018 3:23 PM, Jason McKemie wrote:
I have a A5C that is giving me grief.  I'm getting hundreds of Rx FCS 
errors on the Mikrotik when I'm running gigabit, if I force it to 100 
fdx, the Rx FCS errors stop, but Rx Code errors start incrementing 
instead.  I've always gotten some amount of Rx FCS errors from Mimosa 
A5/A5C units, but not nearly this many.  It's starting to have an 
effect on service on the sector.


Any ideas what I should look at?  Some people were claiming that 
putting something like a Netonix in between the Mimosa and the 
Mikrotik solved their issues, but I'm wondering if the surge 
suppressors are creating an issue as well.


-Jason

Re: [AFMUG] OSPF - How large can a flat network grow?

[Brough Turner]

Thanks all, this is a very useful discussion.
And I'm particularly encouraged by Paul Stewart's comments!

As Eric Kuhnke remarked, by flat I meant all routers in OSPF area 0. We do
use a single layer two network with multiple vlans within each apartment
building or condo complex, but it's all routed between buildings or
building complexes, usually with at least two paths to each complex. The
network I described is the largest of several fiber-fed,
radio-interconnected networks that have private ASNs, iBGP in between and
BGP confederation so each network's default route is upstream on its fiber
but any network can failover via radio during a fiber outage.

In the largest network (the one with 600+ routers) the only measurable
issue I can see today is the time for routes to propagate. If I add a route
or I throw traffic in one part of the network onto a backup path, the route
change can take 2-3 seconds to appear on a router that is far removed from
where the change happened. But that's the only issue I can see during
normal operation.

We have had occasions (luckily not very often) when someone has introduce
an address conflict.  Besides screwing up a specific existing customer,
this typically causes a route flap which is visible in Winbox looking at
IP, Routes - the relevant portion of the table jumps up and down by one
route at a rate of about 2-3 seconds.

Thanks,
Brough

Brough Turner
netBlazr Inc. – Free your Broadband!
Mobile:  617-285-0433   Skype:  brough
netBlazr Inc.  | Google+
 | Twitter
 | LinkedIn
 | Facebook
 | Blog
 | Personal website




On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 3:16 PM, Paul Stewart  wrote:

> I’ve done a lot of work with that model in the past and it works very well
> …. Extremely flexible what you can then do for multi-service handoff as
> well 😉
>
>
>
> -p
>
>
>
> *From: *Af  on behalf of Carl Peterson <
> cpeter...@portnetworks.com>
> *Reply-To: *
> *Date: *Friday, June 8, 2018 at 1:52 PM
>
> *To: *
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] OSPF - How large can a flat network grow?
>
>
>
> I've been thinking a lot about the flat -> routed transition lately and my
> current thinking is that we over reacted and just went to routers
> everywhere.  We have been trimming back a lot and moving to running QinQ
> over VPLS where every sub has their own CVLAN in an SVLAN.  As I get more
> comfortable with it, I'm thinking about expanding it and dropping more of
> the "core" locations with routers.  Instead of A--B--C all with routers, we
> would drop the router at B and just run B with a primary and secondary VPLS
> circuit, say primary through A and secondary through C.  Saves a ton on
> enclosures, batteries etc.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Paul Stewart 
> wrote:
>
> Can’t comment on “small iron” routers as limited experience but can tell
> you with larger gear (which in theory has a lot more CPU/processing
> capability) that large OSPF networks (100k routes) exist and work just
> fine.  One company I consulted for a number of years ago had over 600k
> routes in OSPF .. seriously … and yes they did experience some issues but
> they were not big enough issues to warrant changing til a few years later
> when they migrated everything to ISIS anyways.  That’s the most extreme
> example and not one I personally recommend 😉
>
>
>
> As others have mentioned, it’s a hard question to answer as there is no
> “one size fits all” … often it’s more about how the network is designed
> then specific sizes of routes or numbers of routers…
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Af  on behalf of Eric Kuhnke <
> eric.kuh...@gmail.com>
> *Reply-To: *
> *Date: *Thursday, June 7, 2018 at 6:06 PM
> *To: *
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] OSPF - How large can a flat network grow?
>
>
>
> Also worth mentioning that a lot of OSPF documentation available on the
> Internet, makes assumptions that were valid in 2002 or so...  When a
> typical router had a lot less DRAM and CPU. Such as a Cisco 3725/3745 or
> even something smaller like a 2621.
>
>
>
> Probably still true if you're trying to do OSPF on very small Mikrotiks
> but not as much of a concern in the modern era. The main bottleneck in
> routing platforms is FIB size and RAM for BGP tables, not so much OSPF.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 1:15 PM, Dennis Burgess 
> wrote:
>
> This is a “unanswerable” question.  In honesty, you can have 20k routes in
> OSPF and it be responsive so the routing platform does not have a limit.
> The number of routers, is another issue, if you have 500 routers all fiber
> connected and they don’t go up/down much, then no big deal, however, if
> they do go up down quite a bit or you don’t know how to manage them, then
> yes this can be a factor. The last thing is convergence time, if you have
> l

[AFMUG] Mikrotik / Mimosa Ethernet Errors

[Jason McKemie]

I have a A5C that is giving me grief.  I'm getting hundreds of Rx FCS
errors on the Mikrotik when I'm running gigabit, if I force it to 100 fdx,
the Rx FCS errors stop, but Rx Code errors start incrementing instead.
I've always gotten some amount of Rx FCS errors from Mimosa A5/A5C units,
but not nearly this many.  It's starting to have an effect on service on
the sector.

Any ideas what I should look at?  Some people were claiming that putting
something like a Netonix in between the Mimosa and the Mikrotik solved
their issues, but I'm wondering if the surge suppressors are creating an
issue as well.

-Jason

Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

[chuck]

I should say, slowly shipping small quantities to beta test customers.  

From: ch...@wbmfg.com 
Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2018 2:02 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

I already have that.  We are slowly shipping small quantities.  Ramping up.
Adding the single pol and adding the Andrew valuline adapter.  

From: Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2018 1:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

So you won’t have a dual pol adapter?


Jeff Broadwick 
CTIconnect

312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@cticonnect.com

On Jun 9, 2018, at 3:02 PM,   wrote:


  Working on REMEC rectangular to AF11X adapters today.  Only one polarization 
will be used.  But at least the antenna can get reused.  

  From: Jaime Solorza 
  Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2018 12:58 PM
  To: Animal Farm 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

  Que pasa , calabasa?


  Jaime Solorza

  On Sat, Jun 9, 2018, 12:01 PM  wrote:

Received one minute before you sent it.  

From: Jason McKemie 
Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2018 11:59 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

Received here about 1pm central.

On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 12:57 PM, TJ Trout  wrote:

Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

[chuck]

I already have that.  We are slowly shipping small quantities.  Ramping up.
Adding the single pol and adding the Andrew valuline adapter.  

From: Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2018 1:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

So you won’t have a dual pol adapter?


Jeff Broadwick 
CTIconnect

312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@cticonnect.com

On Jun 9, 2018, at 3:02 PM,   wrote:


  Working on REMEC rectangular to AF11X adapters today.  Only one polarization 
will be used.  But at least the antenna can get reused.  

  From: Jaime Solorza 
  Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2018 12:58 PM
  To: Animal Farm 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

  Que pasa , calabasa?


  Jaime Solorza

  On Sat, Jun 9, 2018, 12:01 PM  wrote:

Received one minute before you sent it.  

From: Jason McKemie 
Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2018 11:59 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

Received here about 1pm central.

On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 12:57 PM, TJ Trout  wrote:

Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

So you won’t have a dual pol adapter?

Jeff Broadwick
CTIconnect
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@cticonnect.com

> On Jun 9, 2018, at 3:02 PM,   wrote:
> 
> Working on REMEC rectangular to AF11X adapters today.  Only one polarization 
> will be used.  But at least the antenna can get reused. 
>  
> From: Jaime Solorza
> Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2018 12:58 PM
> To: Animal Farm
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific
>  
> Que pasa , calabasa?
> 
> Jaime Solorza
>  
>> On Sat, Jun 9, 2018, 12:01 PM  wrote:
>> Received one minute before you sent it. 
>>  
>> From: Jason McKemie
>> Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2018 11:59 AM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific
>>  
>> Received here about 1pm central.
>>  
>>> On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 12:57 PM, TJ Trout  wrote:
>> 
>>  

Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

[chuck]

Working on REMEC rectangular to AF11X adapters today.  Only one polarization 
will be used.  But at least the antenna can get reused.  

From: Jaime Solorza 
Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2018 12:58 PM
To: Animal Farm 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

Que pasa , calabasa?


Jaime Solorza

On Sat, Jun 9, 2018, 12:01 PM  wrote:

  Received one minute before you sent it.  

  From: Jason McKemie 
  Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2018 11:59 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

  Received here about 1pm central.

  On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 12:57 PM, TJ Trout  wrote:

Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

[Jaime Solorza]

Que pasa , calabasa?

Jaime Solorza

On Sat, Jun 9, 2018, 12:01 PM  wrote:

> Received one minute before you sent it.
>
> *From:* Jason McKemie
> *Sent:* Saturday, June 9, 2018 11:59 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific
>
> Received here about 1pm central.
>
> On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 12:57 PM, TJ Trout  wrote:
>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

[chuck]

Received one minute before you sent it.  

From: Jason McKemie 
Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2018 11:59 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

Received here about 1pm central.

On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 12:57 PM, TJ Trout  wrote:

Re: [AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

[Jason McKemie]

Received here about 1pm central.

On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 12:57 PM, TJ Trout  wrote:

>

[AFMUG] Test 6/9 @ 11:00 Pacific

[TJ Trout]