Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 01:13:15PM -0800, George Herbert wrote: I don't know that the discussion is a NANOG-centric one from here on in, but it's good to have raised the idea. Something optical, like a 10 GBit/s SR version of TOSLINK would be nice.
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
On 21 December 2012 09:59, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote: Something optical, like a 10 GBit/s SR version of TOSLINK would be nice. Good luck with that! :-) Referring back to the original question and the reference to Raspberry Pi... The latest HDMI has Ethernet capability and the connector is already on the Pi, so there's a possible (future) solution that would work for all manner of consumer applications - even ones that don't need video or audio - just use the network capability of HDMI. Aled
RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
From: Warren Bailey [mailto:wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com] I'm shocked there hasn't been a whisper of amphenol. As an rf guy, I vote all connectors move to sma or bnc. I can then justify the cost of a Walmart 10 foot cable for 25 dollars.. And if we gold plate them, we can charge a premium. ;) Let's just use MTC thermocouple connectors everywhere and be done with it. Jamie
RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
Are you talking about the N connectors with those 802.3 transceiver cables, BNC connectors (10Base5), or an Type RJ45 (10Base-T) telco style connector? I couldn't find anyone selling multi-step thicknet strippers in the late 1980s, so I had to use a Xacto knife to prepare thicknet cable and then crimp about 20 N connectors. Data General donated 8 workstations and CAD circuit-design software to our University. The workstations used N-style transceivers instead of those with vampire taps. What a nightmare! )-; matthew black california state university, long beach -Original Message- From: Michael Thomas [mailto:m...@mtcc.com] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 10:20 AM To: NANOG list Subject: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? I was looking at a Raspberry Pi board and was struck with how large the ethernet connector is in comparison to the board as a whole. It strikes me: ethernet connectors haven't changed that I'm aware in pretty much 25 years. Every other cable has changed several times in that time frame. I imaging that if anybody cared, ethernet cables could be many times smaller. Looking at wiring closets, etc, it seems like it might be a big win for density too. So why, oh why, nanog the omniscient do we still use rj45's? Mike
RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
http://www.blackbox.com/Store/Detail.aspx/Ethernet-Transceiver-Cable-Office-Environment-PVC-IEEE-802-3-Right-Angle-Connector-3-ft-0-9-m/LCN216%C4%820003 Only $55.95 for a 3-foot transceiver cable. What was more surprising is that Black Box is still around. matthew black california state university, long beach -Original Message- From: Michael Thomas [mailto:m...@mtcc.com] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 10:20 AM To: NANOG list Subject: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? I was looking at a Raspberry Pi board and was struck with how large the ethernet connector is in comparison to the board as a whole. It strikes me: ethernet connectors haven't changed that I'm aware in pretty much 25 years. Every other cable has changed several times in that time frame. I imaging that if anybody cared, ethernet cables could be many times smaller. Looking at wiring closets, etc, it seems like it might be a big win for density too. So why, oh why, nanog the omniscient do we still use rj45's? Mike
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
Some of us still have a stock of legacy gear and cables - things like v35 cables for connecting to CSU/DSUs, and even the occasional AUI hub. :) You wouldn't believe how much people will pay for legacy computer gear when they need it to keep their business going. -- Brielle Sent from my iPhone On Dec 21, 2012, at 7:57 AM, Matthew Black matthew.bl...@csulb.edu wrote: http://www.blackbox.com/Store/Detail.aspx/Ethernet-Transceiver-Cable-Office-Environment-PVC-IEEE-802-3-Right-Angle-Connector-3-ft-0-9-m/LCN216%C4%820003 Only $55.95 for a 3-foot transceiver cable. What was more surprising is that Black Box is still around. matthew black california state university, long beach -Original Message- From: Michael Thomas [mailto:m...@mtcc.com] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 10:20 AM To: NANOG list Subject: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? I was looking at a Raspberry Pi board and was struck with how large the ethernet connector is in comparison to the board as a whole. It strikes me: ethernet connectors haven't changed that I'm aware in pretty much 25 years. Every other cable has changed several times in that time frame. I imaging that if anybody cared, ethernet cables could be many times smaller. Looking at wiring closets, etc, it seems like it might be a big win for density too. So why, oh why, nanog the omniscient do we still use rj45's? Mike
Re: IP Address Management IPAM software for small ISP
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 09:09:40PM -0600, Beavis wrote: +1 for ipplan http://iptrack.sourceforge.net/ May I suggest Netmagis http://netmagis.org ? Pierre P.S.: I'm one of the authors
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
Tom Morris bluen...@gmail.com wrote: Boy would I ever love an ethernet connector that works like Apple's MagSafe... I guess a magsafe ethernet connector would have too much noise (owing to poor quality connection) to provide decently high bandwidth. This thread reminds me of http://fanf.livejournal.com/96172.html Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/ Forties, Cromarty: East, veering southeast, 4 or 5, occasionally 6 at first. Rough, becoming slight or moderate. Showers, rain at first. Moderate or good, occasionally poor at first.
RE: Contact person for doh.state.fl.us
Hi, Thanks for the contact info. There is a slight detail that you may have missed (I'm pretty sure it is not our reputation that is an issue). 1/256th part of the internet is being blocked. We are not the owner of 46.0.0.0/8. David P.S. The honeypot stuff was a typo by someone at a fair. He entered a .nl domain when it should have been .com ; the .nl domain was given to honeypot. The same contact was also registered later with the .com extension. Sometimes stupidity overcomes malice. -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: asko...@gmail.com [mailto:asko...@gmail.com] Namens Alex Brooks Verzonden: donderdag 20 december 2012 13:54 Aan: MailPlus| David Hofstee Onderwerp: Re: Contact person for doh.state.fl.us Hi, On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 9:46 AM, MailPlus| David Hofstee da...@mailplus.nl wrote: Hi, Does anyone know a contact for doh.state.fl.us? I tried to contact them after we received this interesting line of logfile: 554 5.7.1 46.31.52.10 (in 46.0.0.0/8) is blacklisted. received from mx5201.doh.state.fl.us (74.174.235.12) Thanks in advance, David Hofstee MailPlus B.V. Netherlands Well, it's informationtechnol...@doh.state.fl.us but if you're blacklisted that's not going to help you. Fist off, this is probably because they think you are spamming. Have a look at http://www.projecthoneypot.org/ip_46.31.52.11 and http://ip.robtex.com/46.31.52.11.html#blacklists Once you have sorted that out, then you can try getting in touch if they haven't unblocked you. Try ringing +1-850-245-4233 and asking to speak to the 'service desk' about an 'email issue'. If that doesn't work, try +1-850-245-4975 then +1-850-245-5813. These are all numbers for their IT service; the first is the main number, then infrastructure support, then application support. If that doesn't work, nicholas.pl...@dms.myflorida.com is involved in the management of the Florida Government's links to the Internet; he should be able to forward you to the right people. As a last resort, you can try their IT contractor, Hayes Computer Services on +1-850-297-0551. I wish you the best of luck, do post back and let everyone know if you get in touch. Alex
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
You didn't include RJ11 in your question it goes back further. One reason is that as we push the limits of cable from CAT3 (10meg) to CAT5 (100meg) to 5E (gig) to 6 (not sure what that was for) to 7 (10gig), the cable doesn't get any smaller. We're dealing with higher and higher frequencies of changes on the wire. This makes cross talk and interference a bigger problem, so the twists and insulation are more important to try to protect from those issues (sometimes shielding). So the cable hasn't gotten any smaller. The connector works well enough and allows for these distances to be maintained. Some vendors have found ways to maintain the twists farther into the RJ45 by essentially using traces and not just lining the 8 wires up in parallel but stacking them in a staggered fashion... Obviously, a new connector could have been found, but why haven't we changed the C13 that HP came up with (at least I think they did) back in the 50s? Its still the defacto standard for all computer input power. As a matter of fact, most NEMA specs haven't changed since they were created... If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The only problem with the RJ45 is the hook. E On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Brielle Bruns br...@2mbit.com wrote: Some of us still have a stock of legacy gear and cables - things like v35 cables for connecting to CSU/DSUs, and even the occasional AUI hub. :) You wouldn't believe how much people will pay for legacy computer gear when they need it to keep their business going. -- Brielle Sent from my iPhone On Dec 21, 2012, at 7:57 AM, Matthew Black matthew.bl...@csulb.edu wrote: http://www.blackbox.com/Store/Detail.aspx/Ethernet-Transceiver-Cable-Office-Environment-PVC-IEEE-802-3-Right-Angle-Connector-3-ft-0-9-m/LCN216%C4%820003 Only $55.95 for a 3-foot transceiver cable. What was more surprising is that Black Box is still around. matthew black california state university, long beach -Original Message- From: Michael Thomas [mailto:m...@mtcc.com] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 10:20 AM To: NANOG list Subject: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? I was looking at a Raspberry Pi board and was struck with how large the ethernet connector is in comparison to the board as a whole. It strikes me: ethernet connectors haven't changed that I'm aware in pretty much 25 years. Every other cable has changed several times in that time frame. I imaging that if anybody cared, ethernet cables could be many times smaller. Looking at wiring closets, etc, it seems like it might be a big win for density too. So why, oh why, nanog the omniscient do we still use rj45's? Mike
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
On 12/21/2012 04:08 AM, Aled Morris wrote: Good luck with that! :-) Referring back to the original question and the reference to Raspberry Pi... The latest HDMI has Ethernet capability and the connector is already on the Pi, so there's a possible (future) solution that would work for all manner of consumer applications - even ones that don't need video or audio - just use the network capability of HDMI. Aled Interesting. I'd turn this back the other way though: in this day and age, why do we have any interconnection/bus that isn't just ethernet/IP? IP, as we all know, doesn't imply global reachability. What we far too often do with specialized IO channels is recreate networking, usually poorly. That too would solve the Raspberry Pi problem. Mike, naming being one big issue which is getting short-shrift in homenet
Re: IP Address Management IPAM software for small ISP
On Dec 20, 2012, at 10:01 PM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote: On 12/20/12, Charles N Wyble charles-li...@knownelement.com wrote: Zenoss works very well as a cmdb. Zenoss is very visually appealing, but a monitoring system for network hosts, not a CMDB. In particular, except through extensive custom programming, I see no mechanism to manage CIs with it or query for facts... Zenoss doesn't seem to have any way you can represent or, query, or model a fact that a certain IP address terminates in Vlan X, on device Y, with default gateway IP G that has NSAP ID H, and device Y lives in building A room 1 aisle 2 rack 4 rack slot number 5, fed by breakers 186 and 237, with upstream Ethernet cable ID #G296R plugged into port 39 on patch panel 2, which lands on Switch K port Gig8/44. Networks have many items of importance that are not hosts, also, and are not readily modelled using SNMP. Much less the application layer, physical SW installs or logical groupings layer, or a virtual hosts or internal cloud stack layer. Or tie ins to the release management or DevOps control layer. I know this is NANOG, but configuration control runs a ways up the stack... A proper CMDB will have to be able to take a much bigger picture. Not to slight Zenoss; it's good at what it does do. But that's not a CMDB. That is not to suggest that products that handle a limited slice of the stack in a more organized manner are not valuable. Every little bit helps, in the current absence of a delivered off-the-shelf comprehensive product. But if you've ever watched a comprehensive product run, partnered with a systems deploy tool with all the business logic on physical anti-affinity for power, rack, network layers, ... Provisioning a 1000+ node, 60+ server types app environment into a data center with one command line, selected, booted, network side VLANs allocated and configured, apps installed, apps configured, and ready for traffic... The data to be able to pull that off can be gathered and can be managed and used effectively. That's the power of a real, comprehensive CMDB. George William Herbert Sent from my iPhone
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com wrote: At which point the 8P8C connectors on desktops and laptops changes from RJ45 to SFP+ cage with LC connector, or direct-attach SFP+ between laptop andactive fabric extender in the nearby wall jack; fed by fiber, with 10G-SR optical... Don't bet on fiber to the desktop making any inroads before Amp's patents on their Lightcrimp Plus system expire. They're the only ones to get close to making field termination of fiber a casual task with a low barrier to entry and they're dead set on making the Iomega mistake. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/ Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Tony Finch d...@dotat.at wrote: I guess a magsafe ethernet connector would have too much noise (owing to poor quality connection) to provide decently high bandwidth. I don't see why a magsafe connection would be any more or less noisy than an rj45. They both follow the same principle: spring tension to hold the contacts together. The main issues with magsafe are: 1. You can't have very many pins before the power of the magnet necessary to overcome the spring tension approaches the ridiculous. 2. Past about two magsafe connections to a machine, cable tangle will cause them to frequently pull loose. 3. RJ45 implements spring tension the simple and cheap way. Magsafe does it the complicated and expensive way. You can pretty much forget about field termination. Want some entertainment? Read this article on repairing a magsafe connector: http://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Repairing+MagSafe+Connector/1753/1 Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/ Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:34 AM, eric clark cabe...@gmail.com wrote: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The only problem with the RJ45 is the hook. That's what cable boots are for. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/ Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
Please, no connectors that do not lock into place. Is plugging in the RJ-45 that much of a task? Most portable devices are going wireless in any case so they are not an issue. The RJ-45 has worked OK for me. The AUI connectors have a special place in networking hell. What an incredibly horrible mechanical design they were? The flip side of the question is why you think the RJ-45 should change. You could argue that you don't usually need all eight wires but every time we tried that argument someone came up with a compelling reason to use more wires. I like that it is very standard. In the fiber world it is a continuous issue of hybrid patch cords dealing with ST,SC,LC and all the other variants out there. It would be a huge nightmare if the same thing happened with copper Ethernet. I am also not a huge fan of the USB connector because I have seen a lot of those break and there is no positive retention. Magnetic is cute but has no place in a datacenter and even with desktops I can picture a lot of support calls because someone bumps a wire that knocks the mag connector out of place. I really hate dongles of all types but I guess you don't really have a choice with devices so physically thin that you can't get the jack in there. I think I will keep the RJ for now. Steven Naslund -Original Message- From: Aled Morris [mailto:al...@qix.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 12:38 PM To: Michael Thomas Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? On 20 December 2012 18:20, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote ethernet connectors haven't changed that I'm aware in pretty much 25 years. 15-pin D-type AUI connectors with slide latches? BNC for thinwire? I do agree though, something more like mini-USB would be more appropriate for home Ethernet use. Aled
Re: Fiber only in DataCenters?
On 12/17/2012 9:22 AM, joel jaeggli wrote: If the facility is big enough the utility of twisted pair becomes quite limited, both due to distance and differing electrical potential, multibuilding campuses in particular make this is a nonstarter. For twisted-pair Ethernet: Distance yes. Differing electrical potential no. It is a balanced pair, transformer coupled at both ends. As long as AC common-mode pickup doesn't saturate the transformer core, it just works. In one facility I'm in, I'm over 300 meters from each of the MMRs, with the results that the OOB for the serial console server for out equipment located out there in the MMR's being on serial over fiber transceivers connected by om4 multimode. RS232 serial is another story. Here the potential difference between the ends is a big deal. (I've even seen burned-through PC boards from what happens when pin 7 has 220 VAC flowing from one device to the other) But you can just run Ethernet out to the console server and plug it in next to the gear with the serial port to fix this. Matthew Kaufman
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote: I'd turn this back the other way though: in this day and age, why do we have any interconnection/bus that isn't just ethernet/IP? The need for isochronous transmission and more bandwidth. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/ Forties, Cromarty: East, veering southeast, 4 or 5, occasionally 6 at first. Rough, becoming slight or moderate. Showers, rain at first. Moderate or good, occasionally poor at first.
RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
The only thing I would change about RJ-45 is a longer tab (but make it optional) for when you care more about ease of removal than cable tangles. Polycom phones are hell to try and unplug the RJ-45, for example. -Original Message- From: Naslund, Steve [mailto:snasl...@medline.com] Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 11:43 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Please, no connectors that do not lock into place. Is plugging in the RJ-45 that much of a task? Most portable devices are going wireless in any case so they are not an issue. The RJ-45 has worked OK for me. The AUI connectors have a special place in networking hell. What an incredibly horrible mechanical design they were? The flip side of the question is why you think the RJ-45 should change. You could argue that you don't usually need all eight wires but every time we tried that argument someone came up with a compelling reason to use more wires. I like that it is very standard. In the fiber world it is a continuous issue of hybrid patch cords dealing with ST,SC,LC and all the other variants out there. It would be a huge nightmare if the same thing happened with copper Ethernet. I am also not a huge fan of the USB connector because I have seen a lot of those break and there is no positive retention. Magnetic is cute but has no place in a datacenter and even with desktops I can picture a lot of support calls because someone bumps a wire that knocks the mag connector out of place. I really hate dongles of all types but I guess you don't really have a choice with devices so physically thin that you can't get the jack in there. I think I will keep the RJ for now. Steven Naslund -Original Message- From: Aled Morris [mailto:al...@qix.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 12:38 PM To: Michael Thomas Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? On 20 December 2012 18:20, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote ethernet connectors haven't changed that I'm aware in pretty much 25 years. 15-pin D-type AUI connectors with slide latches? BNC for thinwire? I do agree though, something more like mini-USB would be more appropriate for home Ethernet use. Aled
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
On 12/21/2012 09:29 AM, Tony Finch wrote: Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote: I'd turn this back the other way though: in this day and age, why do we have any interconnection/bus that isn't just ethernet/IP? The need for isochronous transmission and more bandwidth. That's why G*d invented RTP, of course. And all of these buses are slow by the time they're popular enough to worry about. In any case, delete the ethernet part if you want to still play with the mac/phy. Mike
Re: IP Address Management IPAM software for small ISP
Racktables does support IPv6. http://demo.racktables.org/ Login: admin PW: admin On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Eric A Louie elo...@yahoo.com wrote: Racktables = no IPv6. Bummer, and it does more than what I need. Netdot looks very interesting. It didn't show up when I searched for IPAM. I'll have to evaluate it, to see if it does any kind of wireless documentation (frequency, modulation, etc) Any Netdot users out there who want to comment? Much appreciated, Eric From: Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org To: Aftab Siddiqui aftab.siddi...@gmail.com Cc: Eric A Louie elo...@yahoo.com; NANOG Operators' Group nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thu, December 13, 2012 2:25:10 AM Subject: Re: IP Address Management IPAM software for small ISP On 13/12/2012 10:10, Aftab Siddiqui wrote: nevertheless, IPPlan, PHPIP, PHPIPAM are good enough as per the need. The first one I assume should serve your purpose for both v4 and v6. I've had a lot more success with Racktables and Netdot, both of which are really good at what they do. Racktables in particular. Nick
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
Once upon a time, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com said: That's why G*d invented RTP, of course. And all of these buses are slow by the time they're popular enough to worry about. In any case, delete the ethernet part if you want to still play with the mac/phy. Well, the reply was sent in response to somebody talking about HDMI. HDMI 1.4 can carry over 8 gigabits per second, so to re-use ethernet PHY (and still be copper) you'd have to go with 10GBaseT. The cheapest 10GBaseT card I see at a glance is over $400, while I can find Blu-Ray players with HDMI 1.4 (and oh yeah, an optical drive, video decoder, etc.) for under $100. I'm sure some of that price difference is related to manufacturing volume, but I don't think it is that big of a percentage. I will say that one nice thing about having different connectors for different protocols (on consumer devices anyway) is that you don't have to worry about somebody plugging the Internet into the Video 1 port and wondering why they aren't getting a picture. -- Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
Re: Fiber only in DataCenters?
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote: On 12/17/2012 9:22 AM, joel jaeggli wrote: If the facility is big enough the utility of twisted pair becomes quite limited, both due to distance and differing electrical potential, multibuilding campuses in particular make this is a nonstarter. For twisted-pair Ethernet: Distance yes. Differing electrical potential no. It is a balanced pair, transformer coupled at both ends. As long as AC common-mode pickup doesn't saturate the transformer core, it just works. ...Up to certain limits of DC / ground differential between the ends, at which one can cause sparks anyways. Yes, the POTS telcos use 48V in the same or lower quality wire pairs, and the various CatN wires should be able to take it, and the connectors. I'm not sure whether the sparks were from 110 or 220 V of differential, but I saw sparks. In one facility I'm in, I'm over 300 meters from each of the MMRs, with the results that the OOB for the serial console server for out equipment located out there in the MMR's being on serial over fiber transceivers connected by om4 multimode. RS232 serial is another story. Here the potential difference between the ends is a big deal. (I've even seen burned-through PC boards from what happens when pin 7 has 220 VAC flowing from one device to the other) But you can just run Ethernet out to the console server and plug it in next to the gear with the serial port to fix this. Matthew Kaufman Ah, yes, those magic smokes. -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
Weekly Routing Table Report
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, AusNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, LacNOG, TRNOG, CaribNOG and the RIPE Routing Working Group. Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net For historical data, please see http://thyme.rand.apnic.net. If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith pfsi...@gmail.com. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 22 Dec, 2012 Report Website: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net Detailed Analysis: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/ Analysis Summary BGP routing table entries examined: 438165 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 180937 Deaggregation factor: 2.42 Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 215621 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 42906 Prefixes per ASN: 10.21 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 33973 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 15870 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:5700 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:138 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 4.5 Max AS path length visible: 31 Max AS path prepend of ASN ( 28730) 25 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 1211 Unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 437 Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs: 3595 Number of 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:3233 Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table:8730 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table: 15 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space:175 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 2620290828 Equivalent to 156 /8s, 46 /16s and 119 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 70.8 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 70.8 Percentage of available address space allocated: 100.0 Percentage of address space in use by end-sites: 94.1 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 154819 APNIC Region Analysis Summary - Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes: 105281 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 32772 APNIC Deaggregation factor:3.21 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 106205 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:43419 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:4807 APNIC Prefixes per ASN: 22.09 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 1243 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:792 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:4.5 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 23 Number of APNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:389 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 716469376 Equivalent to 42 /8s, 180 /16s and 116 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 83.7 APNIC AS Blocks4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079, 55296-56319, 58368-59391, 131072-133119 APNIC Address Blocks 1/8, 14/8, 27/8, 36/8, 39/8, 42/8, 43/8, 49/8, 58/8, 59/8, 60/8, 61/8, 101/8, 103/8, 106/8, 110/8, 111/8, 112/8, 113/8, 114/8, 115/8, 116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8, 120/8, 121/8, 122/8, 123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8, 133/8, 150/8, 153/8, 163/8, 171/8, 175/8, 180/8, 182/8, 183/8, 202/8, 203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8, 219/8, 220/8, 221/8, 222/8, 223/8, ARIN Region Analysis Summary Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes:156086 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation:78438 ARIN Deaggregation factor: 1.99 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 156771 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 70691 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:15356 ARIN Prefixes per ASN:10.21 ARIN Region origin
Re: Fiber only in DataCenters?
On Dec 21, 2012, at 10:54 , George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote: On 12/17/2012 9:22 AM, joel jaeggli wrote: If the facility is big enough the utility of twisted pair becomes quite limited, both due to distance and differing electrical potential, multibuilding campuses in particular make this is a nonstarter. For twisted-pair Ethernet: Distance yes. Differing electrical potential no. It is a balanced pair, transformer coupled at both ends. As long as AC common-mode pickup doesn't saturate the transformer core, it just works. ...Up to certain limits of DC / ground differential between the ends, at which one can cause sparks anyways. Yes, the POTS telcos use 48V in the same or lower quality wire pairs, and the various CatN wires should be able to take it, and the connectors. I'm not sure whether the sparks were from 110 or 220 V of differential, but I saw sparks. Sparks come from voltage, but wire tolerance is entirely a matter of amperage. A 24ga cat-6 wire can take millions of volts as long as you keep the amperage low enough. Owen
JunOS IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP
I've got a peer who wishes me to send my IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP. I'm running around in circles with JTAC trying to find out how to do this in JunOS. Does anyone have a snippet they can send me?
Re: Fiber only in DataCenters?
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote: On Dec 21, 2012, at 10:54 , George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote: On 12/17/2012 9:22 AM, joel jaeggli wrote: If the facility is big enough the utility of twisted pair becomes quite limited, both due to distance and differing electrical potential, multibuilding campuses in particular make this is a nonstarter. For twisted-pair Ethernet: Distance yes. Differing electrical potential no. It is a balanced pair, transformer coupled at both ends. As long as AC common-mode pickup doesn't saturate the transformer core, it just works. ...Up to certain limits of DC / ground differential between the ends, at which one can cause sparks anyways. Yes, the POTS telcos use 48V in the same or lower quality wire pairs, and the various CatN wires should be able to take it, and the connectors. I'm not sure whether the sparks were from 110 or 220 V of differential, but I saw sparks. Sparks come from voltage, but wire tolerance is entirely a matter of amperage. A 24ga cat-6 wire can take millions of volts as long as you keep the amperage low enough. Owen In the ultimate limit, Insulator breakdown voltage is measured in V/mm, but in this case it was almost certainly not that, and merely a case of excessive amps at sufficient volts to give a nice large watts. The subsequent facility power get-well was not cheap. I have also, independently, melted and partly vaporized multiple cubic centimeters of 8 ga wire with a (purely accidental, I assure you) short of 12 volts from a serial stack of D-cell sized NiCd rechargeable batteries. The same works well with an old car 12 V battery and any conductor up to wrenches (not recommended at home...). What's the old saying? Volts hurt, Amps kill? -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
Re: JunOS IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP
I would push back on that request, any issues with V4 also impact V6. Segmentation is this case is good. Mike On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Pete Ashdown pashd...@xmission.com wrote: I've got a peer who wishes me to send my IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP. I'm running around in circles with JTAC trying to find out how to do this in JunOS. Does anyone have a snippet they can send me?
Re: JunOS IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP
http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos94/swconfig-routing/example-configuring-ipv6-bgp-routes-over-ipv4-transport.html Check out the above for setting both address families under a single peer. Pete Ashdown pashd...@xmission.com wrote: I've got a peer who wishes me to send my IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP. I'm running around in circles with JTAC trying to find out how to do this in JunOS. Does anyone have a snippet they can send me? -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: JunOS IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP
On Dec 21, 2012, at 1:45 PM, Pete Ashdown wrote: I've got a peer who wishes me to send my IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP. I'm running around in circles with JTAC trying to find out how to do this in JunOS. Does anyone have a snippet they can send me? I would say don't do this. You are likely to experience software defects that are unique to this configuration which IMHO is far less common than a peer per v4/v6 transport. It will also show they aren't doing any 'kinky' engineering to get you IPv6. While some folks may disagree, the ability to connect you to an edge device that does dual-stack will provide you better service. - Jared
Re: JunOS IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP
Itis just informational rather than real peering. Akamai CDN. On 12/21/2012 12:45 PM, Jared Mauch wrote: On Dec 21, 2012, at 1:45 PM, Pete Ashdown wrote: I've got a peer who wishes me to send my IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP. I'm running around in circles with JTAC trying to find out how to do this in JunOS. Does anyone have a snippet they can send me? I would say don't do this. You are likely to experience software defects that are unique to this configuration which IMHO is far less common than a peer per v4/v6 transport. It will also show they aren't doing any 'kinky' engineering to get you IPv6. While some folks may disagree, the ability to connect you to an edge device that does dual-stack will provide you better service. - Jared
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
On 21 December 2012 18:22, Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote: I will say that one nice thing about having different connectors for different protocols (on consumer devices anyway) is that you don't have to worry about somebody plugging the Internet into the Video 1 port and wondering why they aren't getting a picture. I do agree but I also think that for HDMI Ethernet your TV (which is the device with lots of HDMI sockets) will act as an Ethernet switch, so there shouldn't be any Ethernet enabled vs. Video Enabled ports. Now of course that means you probably need Spanning Tree in your domestic appliances. Aled
Re: JunOS IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP
In a message written on Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 11:45:24AM -0700, Pete Ashdown wrote: I've got a peer who wishes me to send my IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP. I'm running around in circles with JTAC trying to find out how to do this in JunOS. Does anyone have a snippet they can send me? A believe you got the snippet, but I wanted to expand on why this is a bad idea. From a protocol perspective, BGP can create one session over a particular transport (IPv4, or IPv6 typically) and then exchange routes for multiple address families (IPv4 unicast, IPv4 multicast, IPv6 unicast, IPv6 multicast, or even all sorts of fun MPLS stuff). From a network management perspective doing so can complicate things immensely. Today networks want to deploy IPv6 without impacting their IPv4 network. Adding IPv6 AFI to an IPv4 transport session will tear it down, impacting IPv4 customers. Tomorrow, when IPv4 transport fails, IPv6 customers are also impacted by the failure of the transport, even though there may be no IPv6 routing issues. There is also a chance that IPv6 forwarding fails, but the routing information lives on running the traffic into a black hole since the routing information isn't sharing the failed transport. In the future, IPv4 will be removed from the network. If all of the transport is IPv4, those sessions will have to be torn down and new ones built with IPv6 transport before the IPv6 only network can live on. I believe the vast majority, approaching 100% of larger ISP's move IPv4 routes over IPv4 transport, and IPv6 routes over IPv6 transport, treating the two protocols as ships in the night. It elminates all three problems I've listed above at the grand expense of your router having to open/track 2 TCP connections rather than one; a trivial amount of overhead compared to the routes being exchanged. Of course, there are people who like to be different, sometimes for good reasons, often not... :) -- Leo Bicknell - bickn...@ufp.org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ pgp9VvGPsfgIy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
On 12/21/2012 12:00 PM, Aled Morris wrote: On 21 December 2012 18:22, Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote: I will say that one nice thing about having different connectors for different protocols (on consumer devices anyway) is that you don't have to worry about somebody plugging the Internet into the Video 1 port and wondering why they aren't getting a picture. I do agree but I also think that for HDMI Ethernet your TV (which is the device with lots of HDMI sockets) will act as an Ethernet switch, so there shouldn't be any Ethernet enabled vs. Video Enabled ports. Now of course that means you probably need Spanning Tree in your domestic appliances. In this day and age exactly how hard is this? Since it's all linux under the hood, isn't it just a brctl away? Mike
RE: Fiber only in DataCenters?
It takes a lot of voltage to cause an arcing spark. I would suspect static buildup along the way and bad grounding. Even a big facility with a good ground should not have enough voltage differential between grounding points to cause sparks. Having the right size rack grounding should give you a very low resistance to ground from any point. The most common problem I have seen in large facilities is multiple grounds that are not tied together or cables that are grounded at multiple points causing a loop current. It is critical that everything have a single ground, that includes racks, electrical distribution, cable tray, etc. Most Cat X cables are unshielded and do not have a ground conductor so you must have equipment at the same potential at both ends or you will get loop current for sure. As far as voltage in Cat X cables, the real factor is the current carrying capacity of a particular wire gage. It does not really matter whether it is Cat 6 or a coat hanger, current capacity is a function of cable cross section and what material it is made of. Copper has a specific resistance as do all other metals. A copper cable needs to have enough cross section to dissipate the heat generated by its resistance. A less conductive material requires more cross section to dissipate the increased heat. At extremely high voltages things become more complex because of the skin affect that causes the power to move through the outer parts of the cable more than the inner parts. These levels are not a factor in communications cables. The main factor for fiber over copper in data centers is all about cost. Most servers include copper connections and fiber costs something extra. For switches, the cost of the optics is significant. Fiber does help prevent damage due to surges or electrical faults but if these are a problem in your datacenter you have bigger fish to fry. Steven Naslund -Original Message- From: George Herbert [mailto:george.herb...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 12:54 PM To: Matthew Kaufman Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Fiber only in DataCenters? On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote: On 12/17/2012 9:22 AM, joel jaeggli wrote: If the facility is big enough the utility of twisted pair becomes quite limited, both due to distance and differing electrical potential, multibuilding campuses in particular make this is a nonstarter. For twisted-pair Ethernet: Distance yes. Differing electrical potential no. It is a balanced pair, transformer coupled at both ends. As long as AC common-mode pickup doesn't saturate the transformer core, it just works. ...Up to certain limits of DC / ground differential between the ends, at which one can cause sparks anyways. Yes, the POTS telcos use 48V in the same or lower quality wire pairs, and the various CatN wires should be able to take it, and the connectors. I'm not sure whether the sparks were from 110 or 220 V of differential, but I saw sparks. In one facility I'm in, I'm over 300 meters from each of the MMRs, with the results that the OOB for the serial console server for out equipment located out there in the MMR's being on serial over fiber transceivers connected by om4 multimode. RS232 serial is another story. Here the potential difference between the ends is a big deal. (I've even seen burned-through PC boards from what happens when pin 7 has 220 VAC flowing from one device to the other) But you can just run Ethernet out to the console server and plug it in next to the gear with the serial port to fix this. Matthew Kaufman Ah, yes, those magic smokes. -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
HDMI is also extremely distance limited. At those kinds of distances you probably would have no problem running 8 gbps over a Cat 6 with RJ-45s as well. I don't know how many people remember it but 1G used to be real expensive as well. In a few years you will see the 10 gbps D-Link switches at Best Buy for $40. Bottom line is that vendor know that people who need 10G speeds can afford to pay for the privilege. The important thing about consumer connectors is that plugging a cable in the wrong place should not blow anything up. You can use an RJ45 for anything you want as long as plugging that into an Ethernet port or console port doesn't smoke anything. There is not much magical about an HDMI cable, it is was just a way for the home entertainment equipment makers to avoid having your mom hooking up multiple component video, multichannel audio, and Ethernet and flooding their support phones. For datacenters there is no such push because there is no telling how many connections you need to a server and there are geeks like us to figure out the piles of wires. Steven Naslund -Original Message- From: Chris Adams [mailto:cmad...@hiwaay.net] Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 12:22 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Once upon a time, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com said: That's why G*d invented RTP, of course. And all of these buses are slow by the time they're popular enough to worry about. In any case, delete the ethernet part if you want to still play with the mac/phy. Well, the reply was sent in response to somebody talking about HDMI. HDMI 1.4 can carry over 8 gigabits per second, so to re-use ethernet PHY (and still be copper) you'd have to go with 10GBaseT. The cheapest 10GBaseT card I see at a glance is over $400, while I can find Blu-Ray players with HDMI 1.4 (and oh yeah, an optical drive, video decoder, etc.) for under $100. I'm sure some of that price difference is related to manufacturing volume, but I don't think it is that big of a percentage. I will say that one nice thing about having different connectors for different protocols (on consumer devices anyway) is that you don't have to worry about somebody plugging the Internet into the Video 1 port and wondering why they aren't getting a picture. -- Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
Distance, data rate required, bandwidth (like RF signals), analog signals and timing that Ethernet does not provide. I suppose that you cable box could encode everything as Ethernet/IP to send it to your TV but it would take lots of processing horsepower to encode/decode. Your stereo could take the analog output going to your speakers and encode it as a digital Ethernet/IP signal but then you would need to decode and amplify it at the speaker. Some signals are better off as analog or RF end to end. Your FM radio antenna is going to be pretty expensive if you want to use Ethernet between it and your stereo receiver. Steven Naslund -Original Message- From: Tony Finch [mailto:d...@dotat.at] Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 11:30 AM To: Michael Thomas Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote: I'd turn this back the other way though: in this day and age, why do we have any interconnection/bus that isn't just ethernet/IP? The need for isochronous transmission and more bandwidth. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/ Forties, Cromarty: East, veering southeast, 4 or 5, occasionally 6 at first. Rough, becoming slight or moderate. Showers, rain at first. Moderate or good, occasionally poor at first.
Re: JunOS IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP
protocols bgp {
group akamai {
neighbor x.x.x.x {
family inet {
unicast;
}
family inet6 {
unicast;
}
}
}
}
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Pete Ashdown pashd...@xmission.comwrote:
I've got a peer who wishes me to send my IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP.
I'm running around in circles with JTAC trying to find out how to do this
in JunOS. Does anyone have a snippet they can send me?
RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
I have noticed that too. However it is not the RJ-45 connector's fault. It is the morons that insist on recessing connectors in places where you can't get your finger on the tab. I like the patch cords that have the kind of loop/spring thing for a tab that does not catch on everything and that way you don't need the boot over the tab. Another pet peeve of mine is connector boots that harden up over time so it is nearly impossible to flex the tab to remove the cable. Also, how about the 48 port 6500 blades and trying to remove the cables near the blade extraction tabs. G. Steven Naslund -Original Message- From: Eric Wieling [mailto:ewiel...@nyigc.com] Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 11:30 AM To: Naslund, Steve; nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? The only thing I would change about RJ-45 is a longer tab (but make it optional) for when you care more about ease of removal than cable tangles. Polycom phones are hell to try and unplug the RJ-45, for example. -Original Message- From: Naslund, Steve [mailto:snasl...@medline.com] Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 11:43 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Please, no connectors that do not lock into place. Is plugging in the RJ-45 that much of a task? Most portable devices are going wireless in any case so they are not an issue. The RJ-45 has worked OK for me. The AUI connectors have a special place in networking hell. What an incredibly horrible mechanical design they were? The flip side of the question is why you think the RJ-45 should change. You could argue that you don't usually need all eight wires but every time we tried that argument someone came up with a compelling reason to use more wires. I like that it is very standard. In the fiber world it is a continuous issue of hybrid patch cords dealing with ST,SC,LC and all the other variants out there. It would be a huge nightmare if the same thing happened with copper Ethernet. I am also not a huge fan of the USB connector because I have seen a lot of those break and there is no positive retention. Magnetic is cute but has no place in a datacenter and even with desktops I can picture a lot of support calls because someone bumps a wire that knocks the mag connector out of place. I really hate dongles of all types but I guess you don't really have a choice with devices so physically thin that you can't get the jack in there. I think I will keep the RJ for now. Steven Naslund -Original Message- From: Aled Morris [mailto:al...@qix.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 12:38 PM To: Michael Thomas Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? On 20 December 2012 18:20, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote ethernet connectors haven't changed that I'm aware in pretty much 25 years. 15-pin D-type AUI connectors with slide latches? BNC for thinwire? I do agree though, something more like mini-USB would be more appropriate for home Ethernet use. Aled
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
Some companies such as Apple have completely removed Ethernet ports from their Pro line laptops. Other vendors, such as ASUS, have thin laptops with collapsing Ethernet ports that tuck into the case. On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.comwrote: I have noticed that too. However it is not the RJ-45 connector's fault. It is the morons that insist on recessing connectors in places where you can't get your finger on the tab. I like the patch cords that have the kind of loop/spring thing for a tab that does not catch on everything and that way you don't need the boot over the tab. Another pet peeve of mine is connector boots that harden up over time so it is nearly impossible to flex the tab to remove the cable. Also, how about the 48 port 6500 blades and trying to remove the cables near the blade extraction tabs. G. Steven Naslund -Original Message- From: Eric Wieling [mailto:ewiel...@nyigc.com] Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 11:30 AM To: Naslund, Steve; nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? The only thing I would change about RJ-45 is a longer tab (but make it optional) for when you care more about ease of removal than cable tangles. Polycom phones are hell to try and unplug the RJ-45, for example. -Original Message- From: Naslund, Steve [mailto:snasl...@medline.com] Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 11:43 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Please, no connectors that do not lock into place. Is plugging in the RJ-45 that much of a task? Most portable devices are going wireless in any case so they are not an issue. The RJ-45 has worked OK for me. The AUI connectors have a special place in networking hell. What an incredibly horrible mechanical design they were? The flip side of the question is why you think the RJ-45 should change. You could argue that you don't usually need all eight wires but every time we tried that argument someone came up with a compelling reason to use more wires. I like that it is very standard. In the fiber world it is a continuous issue of hybrid patch cords dealing with ST,SC,LC and all the other variants out there. It would be a huge nightmare if the same thing happened with copper Ethernet. I am also not a huge fan of the USB connector because I have seen a lot of those break and there is no positive retention. Magnetic is cute but has no place in a datacenter and even with desktops I can picture a lot of support calls because someone bumps a wire that knocks the mag connector out of place. I really hate dongles of all types but I guess you don't really have a choice with devices so physically thin that you can't get the jack in there. I think I will keep the RJ for now. Steven Naslund -Original Message- From: Aled Morris [mailto:al...@qix.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 12:38 PM To: Michael Thomas Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? On 20 December 2012 18:20, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote ethernet connectors haven't changed that I'm aware in pretty much 25 years. 15-pin D-type AUI connectors with slide latches? BNC for thinwire? I do agree though, something more like mini-USB would be more appropriate for home Ethernet use. Aled
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
Some companies such as Apple have completely removed Ethernet ports from their Pro line laptops. carrying a dongle sucks. but i understand the geometry problem. randy
RE: NANOG Digest, Vol 59, Issue 80
Voltage causes sparks, but... Maybe you got the spark when you disconneted the wire. In that case, you likely have a ground loop carrying current and a long wire. When you disconnect the wire, the current wants to keep flowing due to loop inductance. This causes the voltage spike and hence the spark. Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 14:14:29 -0600 From: Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.com To: George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: Fiber only in DataCenters? Message-ID: 2a76e400ac84b845aac35aa19f8e7a5d0db3e...@munexbe1.medline.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii It takes a lot of voltage to cause an arcing spark. I would suspect static buildup along the way and bad grounding. Even a big facility with a good ground should not have enough voltage differential between grounding points to cause sparks. Having the right size rack grounding should give you a very low resistance to ground from any point. The most common problem I have seen in large facilities is multiple grounds that are not tied together or cables that are grounded at multiple points causing a loop current. It is critical that everything have a single ground, that includes racks, electrical distribution, cable tray, etc. Most Cat X cables are unshielded and do not have a ground conductor so you must have equipment at the same potential at both ends or you will get loop current for sure. As far as voltage in Cat X cables, the real factor is the current carrying capacity of a particular wire gage. It does not really matter whether it is Cat 6 or a coat hanger, current capacity is a function of cable cross section and what material it is made of. Copper has a specific resistance as do all other metals. A copper cable needs to have enough cross section to dissipate the heat generated by its resistance. A less conductive material requires more cross section to dissipate the increased heat. At extremely high voltages things become more complex because of the skin affect that causes the power to move through the outer parts of the cable more than the inner parts. These levels are not a factor in communications cables. The main factor for fiber over copper in data centers is all about cost. Most servers include copper connections and fiber costs something extra. For switches, the cost of the optics is significant. Fiber does help prevent damage due to surges or electrical faults but if these are a problem in your datacenter you have bigger fish to fry. Steven Naslund -- Jakob Heitz.
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.comwrote: I have noticed that too. However it is not the RJ-45 connector's fault. It is the morons that insist on recessing connectors in places where you can't get your finger on the tab. I like the patch cords that have the kind of loop/spring thing for a tab that does not catch on everything and that way you don't need the boot over the tab. Another pet peeve of mine is connector boots that harden up over time so it is nearly impossible to flex the tab to remove the cable. Also, how about the 48 port 6500 blades and trying to remove the cables near the blade extraction tabs. G. Yes, the tabs you refer to are the best. I have never done business with this company, but that have a good picture for reference. http://www.computercablestore.com/10_FT_Booted_Cat5e_Networ_PID49403.aspx The full boots can be so thick that they won't fit into a high-density switch. If you're in a cold environment they go from difficult to compress to damn near impossible. More than once I've used a knife to cut a hardened boot off a cable so it's usable again. Jason
The Cidr Report
This report has been generated at Fri Dec 21 21:13:09 2012 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date PrefixesCIDR Agg
14-12-12440081 251672
15-12-12439802 251907
16-12-12439907 252026
17-12-12439983 251974
18-12-12439300 252062
19-12-12440076 252503
20-12-12440600 252771
21-12-12440351 252566
AS Summary
43021 Number of ASes in routing system
17901 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix
3473 Largest number of prefixes announced by an AS
AS7029 : WINDSTREAM - Windstream Communications Inc
115356896 Largest address span announced by an AS (/32s)
AS4134 : CHINANET-BACKBONE No.31,Jin-rong Street
Aggregation Summary
The algorithm used in this report proposes aggregation only
when there is a precise match using the AS path, so as
to preserve traffic transit policies. Aggregation is also
proposed across non-advertised address space ('holes').
--- 21Dec12 ---
ASnumNetsNow NetsAggr NetGain % Gain Description
Table 440782 252620 18816242.7% All ASes
AS6389 3121 137 298495.6% BELLSOUTH-NET-BLK -
BellSouth.net Inc.
AS28573 2249 70 217996.9% NET Servicos de Comunicao S.A.
AS17974 2488 450 203881.9% TELKOMNET-AS2-AP PT
Telekomunikasi Indonesia
AS4766 2926 925 200168.4% KIXS-AS-KR Korea Telecom
AS7029 3473 1608 186553.7% WINDSTREAM - Windstream
Communications Inc
AS22773 1947 171 177691.2% ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC -
Cox Communications Inc.
AS18566 2081 423 165879.7% COVAD - Covad Communications
Co.
AS10620 2268 651 161771.3% Telmex Colombia S.A.
AS7303 1674 397 127776.3% Telecom Argentina S.A.
AS4323 1601 402 119974.9% TWTC - tw telecom holdings,
inc.
AS4755 1660 555 110566.6% TATACOMM-AS TATA
Communications formerly VSNL
is Leading ISP
AS2118 1052 53 99995.0% RELCOM-AS OOO NPO Relcom
AS7552 1148 221 92780.7% VIETEL-AS-AP Vietel
Corporation
AS7545 1821 945 87648.1% TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Internet
Pty Ltd
AS18101 1017 170 84783.3% RELIANCE-COMMUNICATIONS-IN
Reliance Communications
Ltd.DAKC MUMBAI
AS8151 1581 738 84353.3% Uninet S.A. de C.V.
AS1785 1940 1157 78340.4% AS-PAETEC-NET - PaeTec
Communications, Inc.
AS4808 1123 352 77168.7% CHINA169-BJ CNCGROUP IP
network China169 Beijing
Province Network
AS13977 856 118 73886.2% CTELCO - FAIRPOINT
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
AS18881 740 40 70094.6% Global Village Telecom
AS855716 53 66392.6% CANET-ASN-4 - Bell Aliant
Regional Communications, Inc.
AS9808 680 30 65095.6% CMNET-GD Guangdong Mobile
Communication Co.Ltd.
AS17676 712 92 62087.1% GIGAINFRA Softbank BB Corp.
AS3356 1118 504 61454.9% LEVEL3 Level 3 Communications
AS3549 1053 444 60957.8% GBLX Global Crossing Ltd.
AS22561 1041 443 59857.4% DIGITAL-TELEPORT - Digital
Teleport Inc.
AS19262 999 404 59559.6% VZGNI-TRANSIT - Verizon Online
LLC
AS24560 1037 452 58556.4% AIRTELBROADBAND-AS-AP Bharti
Airtel Ltd., Telemedia
Services
AS22047 579 22 55796.2% VTR BANDA ANCHA S.A.
AS4804 632 96 53684.8% MPX-AS Microplex PTY LTD
Total 45333121233321073.3% Top 30
BGP Update Report
BGP Update Report Interval: 13-Dec-12 -to- 20-Dec-12 (7 days) Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072 TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name 1 - AS840239344 2.0% 27.5 -- CORBINA-AS OJSC Vimpelcom 2 - AS390938045 1.9%4755.6 -- QWEST-AS-3908 - Qwest Communications Company, LLC 3 - AS982937060 1.9% 42.7 -- BSNL-NIB National Internet Backbone 4 - AS29124 35162 1.8%1004.6 -- SU29-AS ISP Gorcom 5 - AS12768 33148 1.7% 338.2 -- ER-TELECOM-AS CJSC ER-Telecom Holding 6 - AS29256 24612 1.3%1447.8 -- INT-PDN-STE-AS Syrian Telecommunications Establishment 7 - AS23685 22669 1.2% 985.6 -- CAT-HUTCH-AS-AP Hutchison CAT Wireless Multimedia Ltd, 8 - AS163717517 0.9% 208.5 -- DNIC-AS-01637 - Headquarters, USAISC 9 - AS730317366 0.9% 4.9 -- Telecom Argentina S.A. 10 - AS29614 16767 0.9% 698.6 -- GHANATEL-AS 11 - AS29049 14790 0.8% 45.0 -- DELTA-TELECOM-AS Delta Telecom LTD. 12 - AS475514020 0.7% 12.3 -- TATACOMM-AS TATA Communications formerly VSNL is Leading ISP 13 - AS17974 13252 0.7% 7.8 -- TELKOMNET-AS2-AP PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia 14 - AS597212186 0.6% 86.4 -- DNIC-ASBLK-05800-06055 - DoD Network Information Center 15 - AS270811439 0.6% 83.5 -- Universidad de Guanajuato 16 - AS958310668 0.5% 9.0 -- SIFY-AS-IN Sify Limited 17 - AS24560 10611 0.5% 11.0 -- AIRTELBROADBAND-AS-AP Bharti Airtel Ltd., Telemedia Services 18 - AS453810468 0.5% 22.8 -- ERX-CERNET-BKB China Education and Research Network Center 19 - AS755210203 0.5% 9.2 -- VIETEL-AS-AP Vietel Corporation 20 - AS478010086 0.5% 17.9 -- SEEDNET Digital United Inc. TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS (Updates per announced prefix) Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name 1 - AS2033 8850 0.5%8850.0 -- PANIX - Panix Network Information Center 2 - AS240578307 0.4%8307.0 -- AIGL-AS-AP PT. AIA FINANCIAL, Insurance company, Indonesia 3 - AS390938045 1.9%4755.6 -- QWEST-AS-3908 - Qwest Communications Company, LLC 4 - AS6174 5655 0.3%2827.5 -- SPRINTLINK8 - Sprint 5 - AS267995486 0.3%2743.0 -- DKR - DKR CAPITAL 6 - AS6197 2633 0.1%2633.0 -- BATI-ATL - BellSouth Network Solutions, Inc 7 - AS146805076 0.3%1692.0 -- REALE-6 - Auction.com 8 - AS374301538 0.1%1538.0 -- vdctelecom 9 - AS29256 24612 1.3%1447.8 -- INT-PDN-STE-AS Syrian Telecommunications Establishment 10 - AS6629 5698 0.3%1424.5 -- NOAA-AS - NOAA 11 - AS416741387 0.1%1387.0 -- ALVARION-AS Alvarion SRL 12 - AS172933879 0.2%1293.0 -- VTXC - VTX Communications 13 - AS1562 2556 0.1%1278.0 -- DNIC-ASBLK-01550-01601 - DoD Network Information Center 14 - AS579181138 0.1%1138.0 -- ACOD-AS ACOD CJSC 15 - AS43192 0.2% 88.0 -- COMUNICALO DE MEXICO S.A. DE C.V 16 - AS29124 35162 1.8%1004.6 -- SU29-AS ISP Gorcom 17 - AS23685 22669 1.2% 985.6 -- CAT-HUTCH-AS-AP Hutchison CAT Wireless Multimedia Ltd, 18 - AS9950 1850 0.1% 925.0 -- PUBNETPLUS2-AS-KR DACOM 19 - AS37263 877 0.0% 877.0 -- UNIVEDU 20 - AS158253062 0.2% 765.5 -- UNSPECIFIED TOP 20 Unstable Prefixes Rank Prefix Upds % Origin AS -- AS Name 1 - 151.118.18.0/24 12670 0.6% AS3909 -- QWEST-AS-3908 - Qwest Communications Company, LLC 2 - 151.118.254.0/24 12645 0.6% AS3909 -- QWEST-AS-3908 - Qwest Communications Company, LLC 3 - 151.118.255.0/24 12644 0.6% AS3909 -- QWEST-AS-3908 - Qwest Communications Company, LLC 4 - 209.48.168.0/248850 0.4% AS2033 -- PANIX - Panix Network Information Center 5 - 202.14.255.0/248307 0.4% AS24057 -- AIGL-AS-AP PT. AIA FINANCIAL, Insurance company, Indonesia 6 - 12.30.238.0/24 5480 0.3% AS26799 -- DKR - DKR CAPITAL 7 - 192.58.232.0/245419 0.3% AS6629 -- NOAA-AS - NOAA 8 - 194.63.9.0/24 4558 0.2% AS1273 -- CW Cable and Wireless Worldwide plc 9 - 12.139.133.0/244280 0.2% AS14680 -- REALE-6 - Auction.com 10 - 69.38.178.0/24 4173 0.2% AS19406 -- TWRS-MA - Towerstream I, Inc. 11 - 202.171.192.0/20 3583 0.2% AS4788 -- TMNET-AS-AP TM Net, Internet Service Provider 12 - 81.200.3.0/24 3379 0.2% AS29124 -- SU29-AS ISP Gorcom 13 - 81.200.23.0/24 3035 0.1% AS29124 -- SU29-AS ISP Gorcom 14 - 81.200.8.0/24 3020 0.1% AS29124 -- SU29-AS ISP Gorcom 15 - 81.200.4.0/24 3019 0.1% AS29124 -- SU29-AS ISP Gorcom 16 - 81.200.1.0/24 3013 0.1% AS29124 -- SU29-AS ISP
RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? (Ramdom thoughts)
I have seen the sixty or so messages about this and have marveled how many can major on the minutia and ignore the obvious which Brielle brings out. First, Ethernet connectors have changed - Thicknet (RG8) with transceiver cables, thinnet, and now CAT series cables. Yep, I have bored in the vampire taps and crimped thinnet. In another venue I work we still have millions maybe billions of lines of COBOL code. Why? Because it works. Because the cost of conversion to something else is prohibitive. It is being done by attrition and I might say, painfully. One organization I am aware of was to have been extracted from the tar baby of its COBOL code that was originally written in 1968 in COBOL D before Y2K had to fix all of that to run properly over the millennium. And one company I am aware of had to convert its COBOL F to COBOL II to get there. I haven't followed it since 2003 but they were still working on getting free from COBOL then when I was offered a job helping them extricate from the mess. I was having too much fun with WAN's. BTW, I am retiring 2/28/13 - if anyone has a COBOL and/or CICS job out there with the right location and situation I may be interested. I am fantastic as translating COBOL into a language JAVA coders can understand. I write JAVA, I do not call JAVA coders programmers. Programming is the next thing to retirement. And RJ-45 has some of the same characteristics. It works. There are trillions of them out there in use and on equipment (the corresponding jacks). There are millions of techs who can put them on. Well, maybe that is going a little too far. I have seen too many techs who claim to know how who should be hung with their cabling. They are used for everything so nearly every wiring discipline knows them. There are millions of sets of tools to attach them. I just saw an installation where a ham radio transmitter was set up in a hospital in case everything else fails and they put the transmitter at the roof, ran a 20 foot pre-made coaxial cable with PL259's to the antenna and two CAT-5's down to the operator area where they put the control. The transceiver allows separation of the control head and the transceiver. The one cat 5 carries the controls - the connectors on the units are RJ-45. The other CAT-5? They made one pair out of the CAT5, tied 4 wires together to get enough copper to handle the speaker. Reason? The hospital wiring staff did not know how to put on a PL259 on RG-213. (Similar to RG-8). But they could run CAT-5 and put on RJ-45's. So to change we have to provide training, tools, adapters (another nightmare), labor to convert and for what? There is no other connector I am aware of and I haven't heard of any serious contender from anyone here. That means 30 million dollars development (my estimate) and five years till we get the beta models. And for what? I can't see any way we could get more than a 20% higher density, even ignoring noise and crosstalk issues. And even if we can get 50% more would it be worth it? Answer, MAYBE in some very specialized and/or badly designed situations (concentrating too much copper in one place rather than distributing to close up switches with fiber) where a higher density would be of value, yes. But now we create another set of adapters. I am a Ham Radio Operator - Extra Class. I work with Emergency Communications. Having one more connector type is one more big headache. Yes, if there is a real advantage, fine. Most ham hand held transceivers went from the venerable and solid BNC to the SMA a few years ago. They screw a 18 inch antenna on an SMA! Guess what? They break when you are lucky, otherwise they go intermittent. And just to make it more interesting one of the Chinese suppliers of very inferior HT's uses an SMA male on the radio, not an SMA female like everyone else. So now instead of having three antenna connector types in general use, N, PL259, BNC, each with their strengths and weaknesses and reasons to use in certain places, we have 5 with no serous reason for two of them. Note that HT's have used BNC and SMA, mobiles and bases are generally N, PL259 with a few BNC. I have standardized on bas/mobile at PL259 and SMA male for HT to maintain sanity. And to be able to work with others who have a dukes mixture I carry a small box of adapters. The IT industry trail is littered with computer languages that were written to fix some non-existent problem and all that did was create more confusion. Many claimed to allow anyone to code programs, something that is true but when you use people who really do not know how to program you produce tons of shit code that is nasty to make changes to - and maintenance of programs is usually 90% of life cycle costs. It is the same in a wire room when you let someone who doesn't know how to properly place wire do it. PASCAL is one example I can cite. It had absolutely no advantage over several other languages existing at the time but
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 03:48:04PM -0600, Jason Baugher wrote: On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.comwrote: I have noticed that too. However it is not the RJ-45 connector's fault. It is the morons that insist on recessing connectors in places where you can't get your finger on the tab. I like the patch cords that have the kind of loop/spring thing for a tab that does not catch on everything and that way you don't need the boot over the tab. Another pet peeve of mine is connector boots that harden up over time so it is nearly impossible to flex the tab to remove the cable. Also, how about the 48 port 6500 blades and trying to remove the cables near the blade extraction tabs. G. Yes, the tabs you refer to are the best. I have never done business with this company, but that have a good picture for reference. http://www.computercablestore.com/10_FT_Booted_Cat5e_Networ_PID49403.aspx The full boots can be so thick that they won't fit into a high-density switch. If you're in a cold environment they go from difficult to compress to damn near impossible. More than once I've used a knife to cut a hardened boot off a cable so it's usable again. Jason And that's the main reason I never order cables with boots on them. They're mostly just unnecessary headaches. (BTW, you forgot to mention them slipping loose and just pulling away from the connector or the tab slipping out from under the rubber and making the cable all the more difficult to remove.) -Wayne --- Wayne Bouchard w...@typo.org Network Dude http://www.typo.org/~web/
RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
Steve, something I hadn't thought about is the fiber mess. I see that in other areas as I mentioned in another answer. In the fiber world it is a continuous issue of hybrid patch cords dealing with ST,SC,LC and all the other variants out there. It would be a huge nightmare if the same thing happened with copper Ethernet. Ralph Brandt -Original Message- From: Naslund, Steve [mailto:snasl...@medline.com] Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 11:43 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? Please, no connectors that do not lock into place. Is plugging in the RJ-45 that much of a task? Most portable devices are going wireless in any case so they are not an issue. The RJ-45 has worked OK for me. The AUI connectors have a special place in networking hell. What an incredibly horrible mechanical design they were? The flip side of the question is why you think the RJ-45 should change. You could argue that you don't usually need all eight wires but every time we tried that argument someone came up with a compelling reason to use more wires. I like that it is very standard. In the fiber world it is a continuous issue of hybrid patch cords dealing with ST,SC,LC and all the other variants out there. It would be a huge nightmare if the same thing happened with copper Ethernet. I am also not a huge fan of the USB connector because I have seen a lot of those break and there is no positive retention. Magnetic is cute but has no place in a datacenter and even with desktops I can picture a lot of support calls because someone bumps a wire that knocks the mag connector out of place. I really hate dongles of all types but I guess you don't really have a choice with devices so physically thin that you can't get the jack in there. I think I will keep the RJ for now. Steven Naslund -Original Message- From: Aled Morris [mailto:al...@qix.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 12:38 PM To: Michael Thomas Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed? On 20 December 2012 18:20, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote ethernet connectors haven't changed that I'm aware in pretty much 25 years. 15-pin D-type AUI connectors with slide latches? BNC for thinwire? I do agree though, something more like mini-USB would be more appropriate for home Ethernet use. Aled
Re: JunOS IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP
I would push back for a slightly different reason... Any inability to forward IPv6 might not impact the IPv4 peering session and you might run into a situation where the peering session stays up and continues exchanging routes, but the traffic cannot pass (or cannot pass in one direction which is even more fun to diagnose). Owen On Dec 21, 2012, at 11:19 , harbor235 harbor...@gmail.com wrote: I would push back on that request, any issues with V4 also impact V6. Segmentation is this case is good. Mike On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Pete Ashdown pashd...@xmission.com wrote: I've got a peer who wishes me to send my IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP. I'm running around in circles with JTAC trying to find out how to do this in JunOS. Does anyone have a snippet they can send me?
Re: JunOS IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote: I would push back for a slightly different reason... Any inability to forward IPv6 might not impact the IPv4 peering session and you might run into a situation where the peering session stays up and continues exchanging routes, but the traffic cannot pass (or cannot pass in one direction which is even more fun to diagnose). Owen The OP mentioned this was just for Akamai (for their DNS mapping). BGP isn't used for forwarding path.
Re: JunOS IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP
One reason that may force others down this track comes from exceeding the # of configurable BGP sessions on a box (think chassis switches). It does add a good bit of complexity in the initial roll-out but it's really not all that bad once you get used to it. The one piece that seems to make it a little easier is that you get a consolidated view on some devices, where the prefix counts are shown for both address families under the same show ip bgp neighbor display. david. On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org wrote: In a message written on Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 11:45:24AM -0700, Pete Ashdown wrote: I've got a peer who wishes me to send my IPv6 announcements over IPv4 BGP. I'm running around in circles with JTAC trying to find out how to do this in JunOS. Does anyone have a snippet they can send me? A believe you got the snippet, but I wanted to expand on why this is a bad idea. From a protocol perspective, BGP can create one session over a particular transport (IPv4, or IPv6 typically) and then exchange routes for multiple address families (IPv4 unicast, IPv4 multicast, IPv6 unicast, IPv6 multicast, or even all sorts of fun MPLS stuff). From a network management perspective doing so can complicate things immensely. Today networks want to deploy IPv6 without impacting their IPv4 network. Adding IPv6 AFI to an IPv4 transport session will tear it down, impacting IPv4 customers. Tomorrow, when IPv4 transport fails, IPv6 customers are also impacted by the failure of the transport, even though there may be no IPv6 routing issues. There is also a chance that IPv6 forwarding fails, but the routing information lives on running the traffic into a black hole since the routing information isn't sharing the failed transport. In the future, IPv4 will be removed from the network. If all of the transport is IPv4, those sessions will have to be torn down and new ones built with IPv6 transport before the IPv6 only network can live on. I believe the vast majority, approaching 100% of larger ISP's move IPv4 routes over IPv4 transport, and IPv6 routes over IPv6 transport, treating the two protocols as ships in the night. It elminates all three problems I've listed above at the grand expense of your router having to open/track 2 TCP connections rather than one; a trivial amount of overhead compared to the routes being exchanged. Of course, there are people who like to be different, sometimes for good reasons, often not... :) -- Leo Bicknell - bickn...@ufp.org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
Once upon a time, Wayne E Bouchard w...@typo.org said: And that's the main reason I never order cables with boots on them. They're mostly just unnecessary headaches. (BTW, you forgot to mention them slipping loose and just pulling away from the connector or the tab slipping out from under the rubber and making the cable all the more difficult to remove.) I have seen one good use for boots. Somebody had a cable (that was in a position that made it difficult to replace or re-crimp) that had a RJ45 with a bad tab. It wasn't broken off, but it wouldn't really latch into the jack. So, they pulled the boot back slightly and slipped the bump of the boot _under_ the tab, and that held it up and the cable stayed in. -- Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
Re: why haven't ethernet connectors changed?
On 12/21/12, Naslund, Steve snasl...@medline.com wrote: I have noticed that too. However it is not the RJ-45 connector's fault. It is the morons that insist on recessing connectors in places where you can't get your finger on the tab. I like the patch cords that have the Likely any connector with a latching retention mechanism requiring a manual release will have this kind of problem in space-constrained situations.A small flat edge screwdriver, spudger, or similar instrument can work wonders, since they are much longer than fingers. I suppose a fancier connector would involve a more robust metal spring, and a push-button release; or unlock through some method such as push in and slide. The terminal connectors are tiny; human hands are large by comparison, so when clearances are tight, in a recessed area, or in the case of a densely populated panel with many terminal ports, operating the retention mechanism by hand won't be fun. It could have been avoided byeliminating tabs in the connector design, and requiring a spring-loaded mechanism to release the connector, such as that done with USB and thunderbolt ports. This would also get rid of the problem of connector Tabs accidentally getting broken off, when the tab becomes snagged; which boots solve, but create other problems in the process. The ubiquity of the modular connector... has pluses such as low cost; no patent owner charging a mint per unit to license the connector; industry familiarity; device compatibility; (more or less) compatibility with older Cat5 media; 10/100/1000 nics. kind of loop/spring thing for a tab that does not catch on everything and that way you don't need the boot over the tab. Another pet peeve of mine is connector boots that harden up over time so it is nearly impossible to flex the tab to remove the cable. Also, how about the 48 Prefab patch cables with a boot that is permanently attached to the connector, and cannot be easily pulled off if necessary to get at the tab someone should ban those cables from the market. Until they do... you may sometimes just have to cut off the 'nub' on the boot, with angle cutters to get at the tab; or apply pliers/other forceful tools to the boot/connector (at risk of damaging the actual port). A nice thing about the 8P8C terminal connectors is that the connectors are cheap, so the cabling can be reterminated, or prefab cable replaced with a fresh one later, to solve booting issues. I would still say they make sense and shouldn't be redesigned just for one kind of device; wherever 8-pair UTP cabling is the physical media. Steven Naslund -- -JH
