Re: Failover IPv6 with multiple PA prefixes (Was: IPv6 fc00::/7 - Unique local addresses)
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote: On Nov 3, 2010, at 5:21 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 17:01:32 PDT, Owen DeLong said: On Nov 3, 2010, at 3:43 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: Actually PI is WORSE if you can't get it routed as it requires NAT or it requires MANUAL configuration of the address selection rules to be used with PA. It's very easy to get PIv6 routed for free, so, I don't see the issue there. It may be very easy to get it routed for free *now*. Will it be possible to get PIv6 routed for free once there's 300K entries in the IPv6 routing table? Or zillions, as everybody and their pet llama start using PI prefixes? (Hey, if you managed to get PI to use instead of using an ULA, and routing it is free, may as well go for it, right?) Hopefully by the time it gets to that point we'll have finally come up with a scaleable routing paradigm. Certainly we need to do that anyway. I'm not sure why we chose not to do that with IPv6 in the first place. because: 1) there were only going to be a limited number of ISP's b) every end site gets PA only iii) no need for pi d) all of the above
Re: Failover IPv6 with multiple PA prefixes (Was: IPv6 fc00::/7 - Unique local addresses)
On Nov 3, 2010, at 11:02 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote: On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote: On Nov 3, 2010, at 5:21 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 17:01:32 PDT, Owen DeLong said: On Nov 3, 2010, at 3:43 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: Actually PI is WORSE if you can't get it routed as it requires NAT or it requires MANUAL configuration of the address selection rules to be used with PA. It's very easy to get PIv6 routed for free, so, I don't see the issue there. It may be very easy to get it routed for free *now*. Will it be possible to get PIv6 routed for free once there's 300K entries in the IPv6 routing table? Or zillions, as everybody and their pet llama start using PI prefixes? (Hey, if you managed to get PI to use instead of using an ULA, and routing it is free, may as well go for it, right?) Hopefully by the time it gets to that point we'll have finally come up with a scaleable routing paradigm. Certainly we need to do that anyway. I'm not sure why we chose not to do that with IPv6 in the first place. because: 1) there were only going to be a limited number of ISP's b) every end site gets PA only iii) no need for pi d) all of the above I understand how they rationalized the cop-out. Now, getting back to the real world... Owen
Re: Verizon off-list contact requested
If you're going to start a new thread on a mailing list your best bet is to copy the list address to your address book, and create a new message. By replying to another message and changing the topic your message shows up buried under the thread you replied to. This is particularly bad when you're trying to get someone's attention (as you are here). :) hth, Doug -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Re: Verizon off-list contact requested
On 11/3/10 6:51 PM, Edward A. Trdina III wrote: Hello- Would someone with clue within the Verizon team contact me off-list, please? I'm not seeing rDNS entries for new fios ip addresses. You should probably start a new thread rather than burying your request inside a really long one that someone who could help could be ignoring. (Hint: changing the subject doesn't do that.) ~Seth
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
What can I say... awesome... :-) You should definitely send some pictures, if you can upload them via thicknet :-) On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote: On Tuesday, November 02, 2010 04:55:02 pm Michael Sokolov wrote: Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo carlosm3...@gmail.com wrote: Not only token ring. I know of some coaxial ethernets that were running as late as 2007. The network I am using to compose and post this message right now is a coaxial Ethernet. Oh man I still have some 10Base-5 segments in production. At least I'm using a 7507 with an AUI Ethernet interface processor to drive them, now, instead of the three Proteon P4200's (software to P5600, with IP, EGP, RIP, OSPF, XNS, DNA, X.25, etc) that were used prior. The three P4200's hooked up to each other with ProNET-80 over fiber (using the P3280 counterrotating ring unit). Kindof cool to have floppies with the JNC copyright on themsoftware release R8.1, 02/06/91. Last time I checked, two of the P4200's still booted up. 2MB of RAM with a 68020 at 16MHz. Sounds like a Cisco AGS. The fiber portion is now 1000Base-SX and LX, but rather than rewire some areas, we just pop some older switches with AUI 'uplinks' and use the thicknet, which still runs well (as well as thicknet can) after all these years. Some of the areas the thicknet traverses would be a difficult rewire, thanks to 'right-sized' conduit and vampire taps. And if it ain't broke. ProNet-80.TokenRing on steroids. Worked better than the IBM 8220 TR-Fiber boxes, even using the old mini-BNC connectors. -- -- = Carlos M. Martinez-Cagnazzo http://cagnazzo.name =
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
Much of Maine is not covered by broadband and companies are still using dialup routers. Much of the US (70%) is not covered by broadband and the only internet connection is dialup. --Curtis On 11/3/2010 11:13 AM, Gary Baribault wrote: And you live in a cabin in the woods, pedal a generator to get the router up and the router is connected to a 56K Dial-up morem? ;-) Gary B Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzocarlosm3...@gmail.com wrote: Hats off!! You should post some pictures! As in ASCII art pictures? Because my life revolves around ASCII text and I abhor anything that isn't ASCII text, I do not own a camera of any kind, never have and likely never will. MS
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
On 11/2/2010 3:49 PM, Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote: Are there still any commercial X.25 nets in operation? I had some peripheral involvement with Tymnet in the MCI/Concert conversion, and hear it shut down sometime in 2003-4. http://www.ram.nl/nl/aanbieder_van_mobiele_datacommunicatie/diensten/netwerkdiensten?read_more=1323735124421760482 also: yep. commercial x.25 based packet radio networks, and the wired parts to keep them together, are still around. (the non-commercial ones also ofcourse ;) The last I knew all the ATM (Automated Teller Machines) all ran on X.25 --Curtis
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
I sure am glad to see that I'm not the only crazy/dinosaur lurking on this list! It really gives me hope for the future! Of course to do this job right, a good memory help, and being crazy is nearly a prerequisite to last! :-) Gary B On 11/04/2010 10:52 AM, Curtis Maurand wrote: On 11/2/2010 3:49 PM, Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote: Are there still any commercial X.25 nets in operation? I had some peripheral involvement with Tymnet in the MCI/Concert conversion, and hear it shut down sometime in 2003-4. http://www.ram.nl/nl/aanbieder_van_mobiele_datacommunicatie/diensten/netwerkdiensten?read_more=1323735124421760482 also: yep. commercial x.25 based packet radio networks, and the wired parts to keep them together, are still around. (the non-commercial ones also ofcourse ;) The last I knew all the ATM (Automated Teller Machines) all ran on X.25 --Curtis
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
On Nov 4, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Curtis Maurand wrote: On 11/2/2010 3:49 PM, Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote: Are there still any commercial X.25 nets in operation? I had some peripheral involvement with Tymnet in the MCI/Concert conversion, and hear it shut down sometime in 2003-4. http://www.ram.nl/nl/aanbieder_van_mobiele_datacommunicatie/diensten/netwerkdiensten?read_more=1323735124421760482 also: yep. commercial x.25 based packet radio networks, and the wired parts to keep them together, are still around. (the non-commercial ones also ofcourse ;) The last I knew all the ATM (Automated Teller Machines) all ran on X.25 No. I configured ATMs over Frame Relay over a decade ago. Although I would be surprised if some ATMs did not use X.25 to this day. Most do run SNA - or at least did. -- TTFN, patrick
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
On 11/4/10 9:09 AM, Gary Baribault wrote: I sure am glad to see that I'm not the only crazy/dinosaur lurking on this list! It really gives me hope for the future! Of course to do this job right, a good memory help, and being crazy is nearly a prerequisite to last!:-) I know several people locally who still do legacy setups, and they make pretty decent money, given the fact that many of the people who have intimate knowledge of the mainframe era and such are long gone. One of my former customers used to use 10Base2 in their factory to do an ethernet link across the production floor that couldn't be done cheaply with fiber and that regular ethernet would have interference problems. Me, I've got PhoneNet and LocalTalk wiring for when I do work on my classic Macs. My cute little SE/30 can route MacIP at a blistering 230kbps for these older systems. I've also got these really nice SCSI to Ethernet adapters which comes in handy when all else fails. :) As for legacy technology, I've got a Cisco 7507 loaded to the gills with every type of interface card we could get (never know when you might need a channelized T3 for something), a 6009 loaded with 10/100 interfaces, 7204 (in use) for routing T1s, a 1600 series routing another T1, a 1000 sitting on the shelf as a spare for the 1600... Oh, and then there's the Netopia R9100s and R5300s back from the late 90s/early 2000s... There's always a place for old technology, esp. when newer technology falls flat on its face so often. :-) -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org/ http://www.ahbl.org
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
This is bringing back memories of DecNet and LAT, not good ones either. ;) On 11/04/2010 12:38 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote: On 11/4/10 9:09 AM, Gary Baribault wrote: I sure am glad to see that I'm not the only crazy/dinosaur lurking on this list! It really gives me hope for the future! Of course to do this job right, a good memory help, and being crazy is nearly a prerequisite to last!:-) I know several people locally who still do legacy setups, and they make pretty decent money, given the fact that many of the people who have intimate knowledge of the mainframe era and such are long gone. One of my former customers used to use 10Base2 in their factory to do an ethernet link across the production floor that couldn't be done cheaply with fiber and that regular ethernet would have interference problems. Me, I've got PhoneNet and LocalTalk wiring for when I do work on my classic Macs. My cute little SE/30 can route MacIP at a blistering 230kbps for these older systems. I've also got these really nice SCSI to Ethernet adapters which comes in handy when all else fails. :) As for legacy technology, I've got a Cisco 7507 loaded to the gills with every type of interface card we could get (never know when you might need a channelized T3 for something), a 6009 loaded with 10/100 interfaces, 7204 (in use) for routing T1s, a 1600 series routing another T1, a 1000 sitting on the shelf as a spare for the 1600... Oh, and then there's the Netopia R9100s and R5300s back from the late 90s/early 2000s... There's always a place for old technology, esp. when newer technology falls flat on its face so often. :-)
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 8:15 AM, Gary Baribault g...@baribault.net wrote: OK, I haven't taken it back out of the box, but anyone still have 8 bit ISA Arcnet with thin coax? Sorry no, but I have a Commodore 64 1200/75 baud modem, real collectors item... -- http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
On Nov 4, 2010, at 3:28 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote: On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 8:15 AM, Gary Baribault g...@baribault.net wrote: OK, I haven't taken it back out of the box, but anyone still have 8 bit ISA Arcnet with thin coax? Sorry no, but I have a Commodore 64 1200/75 baud modem, real collectors item... If it doesn't have an acoustic coupler, it's not a real collector's item. :) -- TTFN, patrick
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
Curtis Maurand wrote: Much of Maine is not covered by broadband and companies are still using dialup routers. Much of the US (70%) is not covered by broadband and the only internet connection is dialup. That is kinda bad, but to put it into perspective, you have free, or at least one flat fee local calls in the US. Which is just the subscription you pay each month (between $20-$30 per month for basic local call connectivity). In most if not all European countries (and likely most other countries too) you pay a fee per time unit (say per minute) for local calls. Which makes it prohibitively expensive to have an always on dialup connection, or even more than a couple of hours a day. I used an always on dialup connection for years here in the USA and I liked it a lot, seeing as I came from a pay per minute for local calls country. Greetings, Jeroen -- http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: On Nov 4, 2010, at 3:28 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote: Sorry no, but I have a Commodore 64 1200/75 baud modem, real collectors item... If it doesn't have an acoustic coupler, it's not a real collector's item. :) Damn you got me there, almost put it up on ebay hoping to get a good price ;-) -- http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Justin M. Streiner strei...@cluebyfour.org wrote: The only example of a technology that comes to mind straight away that truly died out is/was SMDS, though I'm sure there are are a few others. From what I remember, only a handful of telcos offered SMDS back in its heyday (mid-90s), and most, if not all of those no longer offer it. I recall seeing some tariff filings from Verizon some time ago where they were planning to shut the service off because the customers that used it had been migrated to other technologies and some of their vendors had already dropped support for it. My workplace migrated the last customer off SMDS maybe about 2 or 3 years ago, but most of them were moved several years before that. My understanding is Vz could no longer buy gear to support SMDS and pretty much had to cannibalize existing equipment to keep it running. At one point when we still had 40-some customers on one SMDS DS3 hub circuit, we had an outage that spanned 3 days (fortunately into a weekend). Vz seemed to have only a few techs who were clueful on smds and, unless we were working with one of them, very often our techs would have to instruct Vz what to do (typically reloading all the addresses would restore service, IIRC).
GRE Tunnels and MPLS
Beginning work on our implementation of MPLS for the backbone network. I've run into difficulty with our GRE tunnels. The GRE Tunnel sits on our co-lo router (a Cisco 7600), and it uses a route-map to push our 10.x modem traffic to our DHCP servers. This is because the backbone is not complete and DHCP traffic needs to traverse the internet. What I have found is that when I enable basic MPLS on the co-location interfaces that head back to the individual systems, DHCP traffic still works, but ICMP and other 10.x traffic dies. There is also an intermittent problem with DHCP when it is enabled, where not all DISCOVERS are answered. I've tried everything I can think of, including adjusting MTU and TCP MSS. It only seems to impact when the co-location router has a GRE tunnel on one buffer, which it terminates, and then it has to encapsulate traffic with an MPLS tag before sending out of the other buffer. Theoretically, it should work, but I can't figure out if there is some problem with MPLS' interaction with the tunnel. Has anyone encountered something similar? Sincerely, Brian A . Rettke RHCT, CCDP, CCNP, CCIP Network Engineer, CableONE Internet Services
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
On Thu, 4 Nov 2010, Jay Farrell wrote: My workplace migrated the last customer off SMDS maybe about 2 or 3 years ago, but most of them were moved several years before that. My understanding is Vz could no longer buy gear to support SMDS and pretty much had to cannibalize existing equipment to keep it running. At one point when we still had 40-some customers on one SMDS DS3 hub circuit, we had an outage that spanned 3 days (fortunately into a weekend). Vz seemed to have only a few techs who were clueful on smds and, unless we were working with one of them, very often our techs would have to instruct Vz what to do (typically reloading all the addresses would restore service, IIRC). Where I used to work, we had lots of dial POPs on SMDS, for good reasons at the time. When we re-did our dial architecture around 2000-2001 to move away from physical POPs, we got rid of the SMDS service. From what I remember, the month-to-month pricing after the contract ended was pretty ugly, so that was another incentive to dump it. jms
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
On 11/4/10 1:22 PM, Jason LeBlanc wrote: This is bringing back memories of DecNet and LAT, not good ones either. LAT... I think I've seen one network with that in actual use - I believe it was coupled with uniplex and IBM 5250 serial terminals (going back to the mid 90s). I now finally understand why the sysadmin there (a woman, which was rare in a male dominated field) was always exhausted, stressed, and wanting to throw terminals out the front door. :) -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org/ http://www.ahbl.org
Re: Token ring? topic hijack: was Re: Mystery open source switching
On Mon, 2010-11-01 at 11:21 -0400, Greg Whynott wrote: you recently converted from token ring to ethernet? i had no idea there was still token ring networks out there, or am i living in a bubble? Look in your car... If you have a recent vehicle (especially one with integrated nav, multimedia radio and comms), it is likely that the system interconnect is handled over Media Oriented System Transport (MOST) which is a variation on traditional token-ring. -- /*=[ Jake Khuon kh...@neebu.net ]=+ | Packet Plumber, Network Engineers /| / [~ [~ |) | | | | for Effective Bandwidth Utilisation / |/ [_ [_ |) |_| NETWORKS | +==*/
Re: GRE Tunnels and MPLS
Do you have recir enabled ? If not, good one to enable and check for status of issue. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/mpls/command/reference/mp_m1.html#wp1012208 If you do not enable tunnel-MPLS recirculation, the IPv4 and IPv4-tunneled packets that need to be labeled (for example, the packets that are encapsulated with an MPLS header) will be corrupted when they are transmitted from the Cisco 7600 series router. Shimol On 11/4/10 4:00 PM, Rettke, Brian wrote: Beginning work on our implementation of MPLS for the backbone network. I've run into difficulty with our GRE tunnels. The GRE Tunnel sits on our co-lo router (a Cisco 7600), and it uses a route-map to push our 10.x modem traffic to our DHCP servers. This is because the backbone is not complete and DHCP traffic needs to traverse the internet. What I have found is that when I enable basic MPLS on the co-location interfaces that head back to the individual systems, DHCP traffic still works, but ICMP and other 10.x traffic dies. There is also an intermittent problem with DHCP when it is enabled, where not all DISCOVERS are answered. I've tried everything I can think of, including adjusting MTU and TCP MSS. It only seems to impact when the co-location router has a GRE tunnel on one buffer, which it terminates, and then it has to encapsulate traffic with an MPLS tag before sending out of the other buffer. Theoretically, it should work, but I can't figure out if there is some prob lem with MPLS' interaction with the tunnel. Has anyone encountered something similar? Sincerely, Brian A . Rettke RHCT, CCDP, CCNP, CCIP Network Engineer, CableONE Internet Services
