Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?
Jay Ashworth wrote: As PON require considerably longer drop cable from a splitters to 4 or 8 subscribers, it can not be cheaper than Ethernet, unless subscriber density is very high. Oh, ghod; we're not gonna go here, again, are we? That PON is more expensive than SS is the reality of an example contained in a document provided by regulatory body (soumu sho) of Japanese government. http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_sosiki/joho_tsusin/policyreports/chousa/bb_seibi/pdf/041209_2_14.pdf. Assume you have 4000 subscribers and total trunk cable length is 51.1Km, which is the PON case with example and trunk cable length will be identical regardless of whether you use PON or SS. The problem of PON is that, to efficiently share a fiber and a splitter, they must be shared by many subscribers, which means drop cables are longer than those of SS. For example, if drop cables of PON are 10m longer in average than that of SS, it's total length is 40km, which is *SIGNIFICANT*. Just as the last miles matter, the last yards do matter. Yes, a PON physical build can be somewhat cheaper, because it multiplexes your trunk cabling from 1pr per circuit to as many as 16-32pr per circuit on the trunk, allowing you to spec smaller cables. That is a negligible part of the cost. Cable cost is not very sensitive to the number of fibers in a cable. Masataka Ohta
Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?
Masataka Ohta wrote: Assume you have 4000 subscribers and total trunk cable length Correction. Though I wrote 4000, it is a population and the number of subscribers are 1150. For example, if drop cables of PON are 10m longer in average than that of SS, it's total length is 40km, which is *SIGNIFICANT*. Total drop cable length is still 11.5km and is *SIGNIFICANT*. Note that when population density is lower, extra drop cable length will be longer that 10m is now a very humble estimation. As for equipment cost, for CO PON 92000 KJPY/1150 SS 182000 KJPY/3100 and for CP PON 33200 KJPY/1150 SS 84600 KJPY/3100 not so different but SS is a little more inexpensive. Masataka Ohta
Re: 2-Channel CWDM Add/Drop with SC/APC connectors
On Thursday, February 07, 2013 08:04:41 PM Chuck Anderson wrote: Years ago I was able to purchase 2-Channel CWDM Plug-In 1-Wavelength Optical Add/Drop Multiplexors from Finisar with SC/APC connectors on them, even though they normally only make the SC/PC version shown here: FWSF-OADM-1-xx-SC http://www.finisar.com/products/passives/MUX-DEMUX/CWDM_OADM-1_Plug-in_Modul e but they won't do the SC/APC version for me now. Does anyone know of a good alternative? for cwdm ADM i dont, sorry. our supplier just has regular multiplexers. [snip] Is it that much harder to terminate the angled connectors? no - its just a different type of pigtail, but adding another splice, will increase the insertion loss slightly. we once ordered a cwdm splitter box at a different than usual place - as always with sc/apc connectors. the supplier changed the pigtails to accomodate our request. unfortunatly he didnt change the bulkheads, which was less than helpfull. kind regards Thilo Thanks, Chuck
Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?
On 13-02-08 03:36, Masataka Ohta wrote: The problem of PON is that, to efficiently share a fiber and a splitter, they must be shared by many subscribers, which means drop cables are longer than those of SS. Pardon my ignorance here, but could you explain why the cables would be physically different in the last mile ? It is my understanding that the last mile of a PON and a point to point would be indentical with individual strands for each home passed, and then a drop between the cable and each home that wishes to connect. Why would this be different in a PON vs Point to Point system ? Wher I see a difference is between the neighbourhood aggregation point and the CO where the PON system will have just 1 strand for 32 homes whereas point to point will have 1 strand per home passed. But the lengths should be the same, shouldn't they ?
Windstream Issues
Is everyone having Windstream issues? Our BGP sessions are down and MPLS network connectivity as of 2/8 @ 3:56 am EST. -Mike
The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
- Well, as it turns out, we don't have that kind of a problem. - You don't? - No, we do not have that kind of a problem in our network. We have plenty of bandwidth available to our customers, thank-you-every-much. - Do you have, just to make an example, about 10 000 customers in a specific area, like an city/county or part of a city/county? - Yes, of course! - Does these customers have at least 10 Mbit/s connection to the Internet? - Yes! Who do you think we are, like stupid! Haha! - Could all those 10 000 customers, just to make it theoretical, hit the 'play'-button on their Internet-connected-TV, at the same time, to watch the latest Quad-HD movie? - Yes. Oh wait a minute now! This is not fair! Damn. We're toast. -- //fredan
Re: Any experience with Grandstream VoIP equipment ?
You should try the voiceops list. Or maybe #natog John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote: I'm in the midst of what would be a comedy of errors if it weren't so annoying. I bought a new Grandstream HT701 VoIP terminal adapter from a guy on eBay who is apparently an official Grandstream reseller. It doesn't work. The guy I bought it from (whose support ends at nobody else has that problem) pointed fingers at Grandstream, whose support has been, well, impressive and not in a good way. I've done packet traces on the LAN with the box, I know what the problem is: there's something wrong with the box so it doesn't respond to the Proxy-Authenticate: challenge from my SIP provider. I know the challenge is OK, I have an old VoIP phone of theirs which works fine, on the same LAN with the same provider and the same configuration. Unfortunately, Grandstream's support staff is apparently unfamilar with packet traces and networks, and after a variety of obviously wrong diagoses (no, it's not a NAT problem, you can see the responses coming back from the remote system, etc.) seems unable to understand that a packet trace is, you know, a trace of the actual packets that have passed by the device's NIC. There's more, but you get the idea. Does anyone else here use their equipment? Is there any way to find support for this stuff who can actually provide support? R's, John -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
Akamai. The actual example is to watch the Super Bowl. :-) fredrik danerklint fredan-na...@fredan.se wrote: - Well, as it turns out, we don't have that kind of a problem. - You don't? - No, we do not have that kind of a problem in our network. We have plenty of bandwidth available to our customers, thank-you-every-much. - Do you have, just to make an example, about 10 000 customers in a specific area, like an city/county or part of a city/county? - Yes, of course! - Does these customers have at least 10 Mbit/s connection to the Internet? - Yes! Who do you think we are, like stupid! Haha! - Could all those 10 000 customers, just to make it theoretical, hit the 'play'-button on their Internet-connected-TV, at the same time, to watch the latest Quad-HD movie? - Yes. Oh wait a minute now! This is not fair! Damn. We're toast. -- //fredan -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Ddos mitigation service
At 11:06 01/02/2013 -0500, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: On Feb 01, 2013, at 10:02 , Paul Stewart p...@paulstewart.org wrote: Akamai (CDN) does scrubbing??? http://www.akamai.com/html/solutions/kona-solutions.html I'm sure there are other things Akamai does in the security sector as well. And now Juniper is possibly getting into the act: http://forums.juniper.net/t5/The-New-Network/Juniper-Networks-Acquires-Webscreen-Systems/ba-p/177177 -Hank
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
Multicast Aled On 8 February 2013 13:42, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote: Akamai. The actual example is to watch the Super Bowl. :-) fredrik danerklint fredan-na...@fredan.se wrote: - Well, as it turns out, we don't have that kind of a problem. - You don't? - No, we do not have that kind of a problem in our network. We have plenty of bandwidth available to our customers, thank-you-every-much. - Do you have, just to make an example, about 10 000 customers in a specific area, like an city/county or part of a city/county? - Yes, of course! - Does these customers have at least 10 Mbit/s connection to the Internet? - Yes! Who do you think we are, like stupid! Haha! - Could all those 10 000 customers, just to make it theoretical, hit the 'play'-button on their Internet-connected-TV, at the same time, to watch the latest Quad-HD movie? - Yes. Oh wait a minute now! This is not fair! Damn. We're toast. -- //fredan -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Masataka Ohta mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp wrote: Jay Ashworth wrote: As PON require considerably longer drop cable from a splitters to 4 or 8 subscribers, it can not be cheaper than Ethernet, unless subscriber density is very high. Oh, ghod; we're not gonna go here, again, are we? That PON is more expensive than SS is the reality of an example contained in a document provided by regulatory body (soumu sho) of Japanese government. http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_sosiki/joho_tsusin/policyreports/chousa/bb_seibi/pdf/041209_2_14.pdf . Sorry, but I can't read Japanese, and the pictures aren't enough to explain the thrust of the document. Also, you keep using the acronym SS. Maybe I'm showing ignorance, but what are you referring to? A little Googling this morning only came up with SS-WDM PON, which is completely different than the PON vs Active debate we've been having. Assume you have 4000 subscribers and total trunk cable length is 51.1Km, which is the PON case with example and trunk cable length will be identical regardless of whether you use PON or SS. The problem of PON is that, to efficiently share a fiber and a splitter, they must be shared by many subscribers, which means drop cables are longer than those of SS. For example, if drop cables of PON are 10m longer in average than that of SS, it's total length is 40km, which is *SIGNIFICANT*. Just as the last miles matter, the last yards do matter. Yes, a PON physical build can be somewhat cheaper, because it multiplexes your trunk cabling from 1pr per circuit to as many as 16-32pr per circuit on the trunk, allowing you to spec smaller cables. That is a negligible part of the cost. Cable cost is not very sensitive to the number of fibers in a cable. Masataka Ohta
Re: Windstream Issues
We are also seeing problem with Windstream that's affecting our link in Sanford.They have major outage going on and there is no ETR given. -Thanks, Viral On 8 February 2013 18:41, Mike Walter mwal...@3z.net wrote: Is everyone having Windstream issues? Our BGP sessions are down and MPLS network connectivity as of 2/8 @ 3:56 am EST. -Mike
Re: Any experience with Grandstream VoIP equipment ?
My experience: we called them the princess phones. They were useful for people who wanted really big buttons, and didn't care if the phones worked half the time. I wouldn't use them unless you have a specific reason to. On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 7:38 AM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote: You should try the voiceops list. Or maybe #natog John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote: I'm in the midst of what would be a comedy of errors if it weren't so annoying. I bought a new Grandstream HT701 VoIP terminal adapter from a guy on eBay who is apparently an official Grandstream reseller. It doesn't work. The guy I bought it from (whose support ends at nobody else has that problem) pointed fingers at Grandstream, whose support has been, well, impressive and not in a good way. I've done packet traces on the LAN with the box, I know what the problem is: there's something wrong with the box so it doesn't respond to the Proxy-Authenticate: challenge from my SIP provider. I know the challenge is OK, I have an old VoIP phone of theirs which works fine, on the same LAN with the same provider and the same configuration. Unfortunately, Grandstream's support staff is apparently unfamilar with packet traces and networks, and after a variety of obviously wrong diagoses (no, it's not a NAT problem, you can see the responses coming back from the remote system, etc.) seems unable to understand that a packet trace is, you know, a trace of the actual packets that have passed by the device's NIC. There's more, but you get the idea. Does anyone else here use their equipment? Is there any way to find support for this stuff who can actually provide support? R's, John -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
RE: Windstream Issues
I have circuits in Nashville, Murfreesboro, and Cleveland - All are up and healthy. -Original Message- From: Mike Walter [mailto:mwal...@3z.net] Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 7:12 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Windstream Issues Is everyone having Windstream issues? Our BGP sessions are down and MPLS network connectivity as of 2/8 @ 3:56 am EST. -Mike
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
A movie is static. The content does not change despite how many times you watch it. Multicast Can be useful for live events, like news or sports. I give you that. -- //fredan
Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?
Hi, If by FTTH you mean the ADSL2+/VDSL offering they packaged as Fibe (yes the named it that). It is available to resellers... /wave - Alain Hebertaheb...@pubnix.net PubNIX Inc. 50 boul. St-Charles P.O. Box 26770 Beaconsfield, Quebec H9W 6G7 Tel: 514-990-5911 http://www.pubnix.netFax: 514-990-9443 On 02/06/13 18:02, Jean-Francois Mezei wrote: On 13-02-06 17:12, Scott Helms wrote: Correct, there are few things that cost nothing, but the point is here that PPPoE has been successful for open access to a far greater degree than any other technology I'm aware of By default, Telus in western Canada has deployed ethernet based DSL for wholesale, although PPPoE is available. Its own customers are ethernet based wth DHCP service. Some of the ISPs have chosen PPPoE since it makes it easier to do usage accounting at the router (since packets are already asscoated with the PPPoE session account). The difference is that Telus had purchased/developed software that made it easy to change the PVC to point a user to one ISP or the other, so changing ISPs is relatively painless. Bell Canada decided to abandon etyernet based DSL and go PPPoE because it didn't want to develop that software. Bell is deploying PPPoE for its FTTH (which is not *yet) available to wholesalers, something I am hoping to help change in the coming months) However, the australian NBN model is far superior because it enables far more flexibility such as multicasting etc. PPPoE is useless overhead if you have the right management tools to point a customer to his ISP. (and it also means that the wholesale infrastructure can be switch based intead of router based).
RE: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
to watch the latest Quad-HD movie Multicast -I'm afraid it has to be unicast so that people can pause/resume anytime they need to go... well you know what I mean adam
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
On 2013-02-08 15:39 , Adam Vitkovsky wrote: to watch the latest Quad-HD movie Multicast -I'm afraid it has to be unicast so that people can pause/resume anytime they need to go... well you know what I mean Works fine too with multicast, for instance with FuzzyCast: https://marcel.wanda.ch/Fuzzycast/ The only little snag with multicast is that it typically is only on the last leg and it fails when a transit or simply multiple domains become involved. Greets, Jeroen
Re: Interesting debugging: Specific packets cause some Intel gigabit ethernet controllers to reset
Hi, Yes I had that issue, it was a firmware problem... and a timed one too :( We had a customer with a few Raid5 of 3 drives, once 1 drive go bad he had about 20m before another drive would. And they where bricked btw, you couldn't just upload the new firmware. Wasn't an happy weekend. - Alain Hebertaheb...@pubnix.net PubNIX Inc. 50 boul. St-Charles P.O. Box 26770 Beaconsfield, Quebec H9W 6G7 Tel: 514-990-5911 http://www.pubnix.netFax: 514-990-9443 On 02/06/13 15:47, Jay Ashworth wrote: - Original Message - From: Kristian Kielhofner k...@kriskinc.com Over the year I've read some interesting (horrifying?) tales of debugging on NANOG. It seems I finally have my own to contribute: http://blog.krisk.org/2013/02/packets-of-death.html The strangest issue I've experienced, that's for sure. FWIW, I had a similar situation crop up a couple of years ago with *five different* Seagate SATA drives: they grew some specific type of bad spot on the drive which, if you even tried to read it, would *knock the drive adapter off line until powercycle*; even a reboot didn't clear it. Nice writeup. Cheers, -- jra
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
to watch the latest Quad-HD movie Multicast -I'm afraid it has to be unicast so that people can pause/resume anytime they need to go... well you know what I mean Works fine too with multicast, for instance with FuzzyCast: https://marcel.wanda.ch/Fuzzycast/ (I did notice that this was developed in 2001 - 2002!) That works if you are only distributing Video on Demands content. 32 seconds after the later, after the initial delay, enough data has been received such that playout can begin So we are back to the b..u..f..f..e..r..i..n..g.. thing, again? If you also want, for example, to have the possibility to distribute software, (static content as well), can you do that with Fussycast? -- //fredan
RE: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
Works fine too with multicast, for instance with FuzzyCast: Well yes but you need to make some compromises on behalf of user experience. And 30sec delay is unacceptable. You can use 10 cheaper VOD servers closer to eyeballs making it 1000 customers abusing the particular portion of the local access/aggregation network. adam
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
On 2013-02-08 16:13 , fredrik danerklint wrote: to watch the latest Quad-HD movie Multicast -I'm afraid it has to be unicast so that people can pause/resume anytime they need to go... well you know what I mean Works fine too with multicast, for instance with FuzzyCast: https://marcel.wanda.ch/Fuzzycast/ (I did notice that this was developed in 2001 - 2002!) You really think people did not have problems with the 1mbit links they had back then? And you really think that we won't have problems with Zillion-HD or whatever they will call it in another 20 years? That works if you are only distributing Video on Demands content. Thus the question becomes, for what would it not work? 32 seconds after the later, after the initial delay, enough data has been received such that playout can begin So we are back to the b..u..f..f..e..r..i..n..g.. thing, again? If you also want, for example, to have the possibility to distribute software, (static content as well), can you do that with Fussycast? and: On 2013-02-08 16:17 , Adam Vitkovsky wrote: And 30sec delay is unacceptable. You can use 10 cheaper VOD servers closer to eyeballs making it 1000 customers abusing the particular portion of the local access/aggregation network. Read the documents and other related literature on that site a little bit further: you can overcome those first couple of seconds by fetching those 'quickly' using unicast. Yes, that does not make it a full multicast solution, but the whole idea of multicast usage in these scenarios: less traffic on the backbone. With this setup you only get the hits for the first couple of seconds and after that they have it all from multicast. And one can of course employ strategies as used currently by for instance UPC's Horizon TV boxes that already 'tune in' to the channel that the user is likely going to zap to next, thus shaving off another few bits there too... Greets, Jeroen
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
You really think people did not have problems with the 1mbit links they had back then? Yes, I do. And you really think that we won't have problems with Zillion-HD or whatever they will call it in another 20 years? I think that this is something I'm trying to say, with the creation of this thread. That works if you are only distributing Video on Demands content. Thus the question becomes, for what would it not work? If you also want, for example, to have the possibility to distribute software, (static content as well), can you do that with Fussycast? As I asked; Static content, like in files (*.zip, *.tar.gz, *.iso, etc...) Read the documents and other related literature on that site a little bit further: you can overcome those first couple of seconds by fetching those 'quickly' using unicast. Since you are back to the Unicast thing, and as you sad the problem with the 1 Mbit/s links, I do think your question whould be: How could we put the cache servers right next to our DSLAM:s, aggregation switches (or what ever you want to place them in your network) and have everything that's static content, cached? I do have an suggestion for how to solve this. See my message yesterday to the mailing list. -- //fredan
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
On 2/8/13 5:23 AM, fredrik danerklint wrote: - Well, as it turns out, we don't have that kind of a problem. - You don't? - No, we do not have that kind of a problem in our network. We have plenty of bandwidth available to our customers, thank-you-every-much. - Do you have, just to make an example, about 10 000 customers in a specific area, like an city/county or part of a city/county? - Yes, of course! - Does these customers have at least 10 Mbit/s connection to the Internet? - Yes! Who do you think we are, like stupid! Haha! - Could all those 10 000 customers, just to make it theoretical, hit the 'play'-button on their Internet-connected-TV, at the same time, to watch the latest Quad-HD movie? The media market has fragmented, so unless we're talking about the first week in February in the US it's not all from one source or 3 or 5. So far the most common delivery format for quad HD content online rings in at around 20Mb/s so you're not delivering that to 10Mb/s customer(s). On the other hand, two weekends ago I bought skyrim on steam and it was delivered, all 5.5GB of it in about 20 minutes. That's not instant gratification but it's acceptable. - Yes. Oh wait a minute now! This is not fair! Damn. We're toast.
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
The media market has fragmented, so unless we're talking about the first week in February in the US it's not all from one source or 3 or 5. Explain further. I did not get that. So far the most common delivery format for quad HD content online rings in at around 20Mb/s so you're not delivering that to 10Mb/s customer(s). Isn't 20 Mbit/s more than 10 Mbit/s? (If so, we're taking about 10 000 customers * 20 Mbit/s = 200 000 Mbit/s or 200 Gbit/s). On the other hand, two weekends ago I bought skyrim on steam and it was delivered, all 5.5GB of it in about 20 minutes. That's not instant gratification but it's acceptable. About 40 - 50 Mbit/s. Not bad at all. Downloading software does not have to be in real-time, like watching a movie, does. -- //fredan
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
On 2013-02-08 17:03 , fredrik danerklint wrote: You really think people did not have problems with the 1mbit links they had back then? Yes, I do. And you really think that we won't have problems with Zillion-HD or whatever they will call it in another 20 years? I think that this is something I'm trying to say, with the creation of this thread. That works if you are only distributing Video on Demands content. Thus the question becomes, for what would it not work? If you also want, for example, to have the possibility to distribute software, (static content as well), can you do that with Fussycast? As I asked; Static content, like in files (*.zip, *.tar.gz, *.iso, etc...) There is a difference in serving FriendsS01E01.mpg, FriendsS020E3.mkv and FriendsS03.iso ??? Video On Demand is pretty static, perfect for distributing with multicast. (now you will run out of multicast groups in IPv4/Ethernet if you have a large amount of small files though, but there are other protocols for that around) [..] I do have an suggestion for how to solve this. See my message yesterday to the mailing list. Ah, I get it, you are trying to get people to acknowledge the non-existence of your tool that does what every transparent HTTP proxy has been doing for years! ;) For that you do not need to do strange DNS-stealing hacks or coordination with various parties, one only has to steal port 80. For instance see this nice FAQ from 2002: http://tldp.org/HOWTO/TransparentProxy.html Fortunately quite a few content providers are moving to HTTPS so that that can't happen anymore. Greets, Jeroen
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
- Original Message - From: fredrik danerklint fredan-na...@fredan.se The media market has fragmented, so unless we're talking about the first week in February in the US it's not all from one source or 3 or 5. Explain further. I did not get that. Joel is saying that the problem you posit: *everyone* wanting to watch the same exact thing at the same exact time, only applies to live TV, and these days, substantially the only thing that can pull anywhere *near* that kind of share is the Super Bowl, which happens to occur the first Sunday in February. Er, Febru-ANY. :-) Isn't 20 Mbit/s more than 10 Mbit/s? (If so, we're taking about 10 000 customers * 20 Mbit/s = 200 000 Mbit/s or 200 Gbit/s). Sure; he was just picking a nit about your specification of the customer loops: those people aren't watching QHD anyway, so no sense in using it as an exemplar. My understanding is there is no appreciable amount of QHD programming available to watch anyway, and certainly nothing a) in English b) that isn't sports. On the other hand, two weekends ago I bought skyrim on steam and it was delivered, all 5.5GB of it in about 20 minutes. That's not instant gratification but it's acceptable. About 40 - 50 Mbit/s. Not bad at all. Downloading software does not have to be in real-time, like watching a movie, does. Real-time is not the constraint you're looking for. To deliver watchable video, the average end-to-end transport bit rate must merely be higher than the program encoding bitrate, with some extra overhead for the lack of real QoS and other traffic on the link; receiver buffers help with this. The only time real-time per se matters is if you're playing the same content on multiple screens and *synchronization* matters. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274
Re: Windstream Issues
We have hosts in their Boston data center, and haven't seen any problems. Jason Faraone wrote: I have circuits in Nashville, Murfreesboro, and Cleveland - All are up and healthy. -Original Message- From: Mike Walter [mailto:mwal...@3z.net] Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 7:12 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Windstream Issues Is everyone having Windstream issues? Our BGP sessions are down and MPLS network connectivity as of 2/8 @ 3:56 am EST. -Mike -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. Yogi Berra
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
Perhaps the solution is to have a 400Gbit/s problem :-) http://newswire.telecomramblings.com/2013/02/france-telecom-orange-and-alcatel-lucent-deploy-worlds-first-live-400-gbps-per-wavelength-optical-link/
Re: Alcatel-Lucent and France Tel deploy 400G for testing
Le 2013-02-07 15:40, Jay Ashworth a écrit : - Original Message - From: Adam Vitkovsky adam.vitkov...@swan.sk Can't find any statement whether the nifty proclaimed 400G wavelength is indeed a single 100GHz channel or just a bundled supper channel The only hint is the total capacity of a fiber of 17.6 Tbps with 44 wavelengths which is roughly the whole 100GHz spaced grid Well, if you click through to his earlier piece, at http://newswire.telecomramblings.com/2013/02/france-telecom-orange-and-alcatel-lucent-deploy-worlds-first-live-400-gbps-per-wavelength-optical-link/ he does explicitly say 400Gb/s per wavelength... Cheers, -- jra Hello, From France Telecom : http://www.orange.com/en/press/press-releases/press-releases-2013/France-Telecom-Orange-and-Alcatel-Lucent-deploy-world-s-first-live-400-Gbps-per-wavelength-optical-link As said by Jay : 400Gbits per wavelength :) Best regards, -- Christophe Lucas http://www.clucas.fr/blog/
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
On (2013-02-08 14:15 +), Aled Morris wrote: Multicast I don't see multicast working in Internet scale. Essentially multicast means core is flow-routing. So we'd need some way to decide who gets to send their content as multicast and who are forced to send unicast. It could create de-facto monopolies, as new entries to the market wont have their multicast carried, they cannot compete pricing wise with established players who are carried. -- ++ytti
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
Can you set something up for the week of the 18th? fredrik danerklint fredan-na...@fredan.se wrote: The media market has fragmented, so unless we're talking about the first week in February in the US it's not all from one source or 3 or 5. Explain further. I did not get that. So far the most common delivery format for quad HD content online rings in at around 20Mb/s so you're not delivering that to 10Mb/s customer(s). Isn't 20 Mbit/s more than 10 Mbit/s? (If so, we're taking about 10 000 customers * 20 Mbit/s = 200 000 Mbit/s or 200 Gbit/s). On the other hand, two weekends ago I bought skyrim on steam and it was delivered, all 5.5GB of it in about 20 minutes. That's not instant gratification but it's acceptable. About 40 - 50 Mbit/s. Not bad at all. Downloading software does not have to be in real-time, like watching a movie, does. -- //fredan
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
I do have an suggestion for how to solve this. See my message yesterday to the mailing list. Ah, I get it, you are trying to get people to acknowledge the non-existence of your tool that does what every transparent HTTP proxy has been doing for years! ;) Where exactly do you put those transparent http proxy servers in your network? For that you do not need to do strange DNS-stealing hacks or coordination with various parties, one only has to steal port 80. There is two thing that The Last Mile Cache does _not_ do; Steal either the DNS nor the port 80 part. (I have to give it to you that it is a DNS solution part involved in TLMC as well as a reverse proxy server). It's an solution which does not force either the CSP (Content Service Provider) nor the ISP to participate in TLMC. It will tough, allow a customer of an ISP (which has to participate in TLMC in the first place) to have it's own cache server at their home. (And yes, the CSP needs to participate as well for it to work). Fortunately quite a few content providers are moving to HTTPS so that that can't happen anymore. If you want your content cached at various ISP:s around the world, encrypt the content, not the session. -- //fredan
Re: 2-Channel CWDM Add/Drop with SC/APC connectors
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 10:55:34AM +0100, Thilo Bangert wrote: On Thursday, February 07, 2013 08:04:41 PM Chuck Anderson wrote: Is it that much harder to terminate the angled connectors? no - its just a different type of pigtail, but adding another splice, will increase the insertion loss slightly. When I looked inside the OADM module, I don't remember seeing any splices, but that may just be because I didn't look inside the optobox itself. I was under the impression that the connectors were not pigtails spliced to the optobox fibers, but rather directly terminated to the fibers emerging from the optobox. I'm not sure the optobox is meant to be opened. So my question is, how hard is it to put a raw angled connector onto a strand of fiber in the field without using factory pre-terminated pigtails? I assume the process would be the same as any other connector: insert strand, cleave, polish, but using an angled sleeve to polish the end at the correct angle? we once ordered a cwdm splitter box at a different than usual place - as always with sc/apc connectors. the supplier changed the pigtails to accomodate our request. unfortunatly he didnt change the bulkheads, which was less than helpfull. Wow, that would be confusing.
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
My understanding is there is no appreciable amount of QHD programming available to watch anyway, and certainly nothing a) in English b) that isn't sports. Why wouldn't you like to solve the problem before it can happen? (I'm talk about static content here, not live events). -- //fredan
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
Again: Akamai. See also Limelight, etc... fredrik danerklint fredan-na...@fredan.se wrote: My understanding is there is no appreciable amount of QHD programming available to watch anyway, and certainly nothing a) in English b) that isn't sports. Why wouldn't you like to solve the problem before it can happen? (I'm talk about static content here, not live events). -- //fredan -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
On 2/8/13 8:23 AM, fredrik danerklint wrote: The media market has fragmented, so unless we're talking about the first week in February in the US it's not all from one source or 3 or 5. Explain further. I did not get that. The superbowl is the first sunday in feb, it pulls a 75 share of the tv market, about the only thing that does so it's a pretty good example of all eyeballs facing the same direction, of course it's also available via terestrial broadcast, satellite, cable RF and so forth . other than that you talking about a couple of hundred of the most popular content items, followed by a very long tail worth of everything else. While I'm pretty sure somebody in my building watches glee for example or downloaded skyfall in the last week, I'm probably the only one to have streamed a canucks hockey game from 2 weeks ago last night in 1080p. So far the most common delivery format for quad HD content online rings in at around 20Mb/s so you're not delivering that to 10Mb/s customer(s). Isn't 20 Mbit/s more than 10 Mbit/s? (If so, we're taking about 10 000 customers * 20 Mbit/s = 200 000 Mbit/s or 200 Gbit/s). 10Mb/s was your number not mine, my crystal ball is total garbage but I don't see delivery 20Mb/s streaming services as a dramatically different problem then delivering 6-8Mb/s streaming services is today. On the other hand, two weekends ago I bought skyrim on steam and it was delivered, all 5.5GB of it in about 20 minutes. That's not instant gratification but it's acceptable. About 40 - 50 Mbit/s. Not bad at all. Downloading software does not have to be in real-time, like watching a movie, does. In both cases it's actually rather convenient if it's as fast as possible, That movie I bought 5 minutes ago from apple I might be streaming to my apple-tv (which has effectively negligible storage), or I might be dumping it on my ipad, in the later case the sooner it arrives the sooner that process is finished and I can unplug it. With the game download, with some exceptions like DLC's I can't start playing until it has arrived so fullfilment is very very important, come back tomorrow when it's done downloading loses you a lot of sales.
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
How does Akamai or Limelight or any other CDN, allow your customers as an ISP to cache the content at their home, in their own cache server? Again: Akamai. See also Limelight, etc... fredrik danerklint fredan-na...@fredan.se wrote: My understanding is there is no appreciable amount of QHD programming available to watch anyway, and certainly nothing a) in English b) that isn't sports. Why wouldn't you like to solve the problem before it can happen? (I'm talk about static content here, not live events). -- //fredan -- //fredan http://tlmc.fredan.se
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
On 2/8/13 9:02 AM, Saku Ytti wrote: On (2013-02-08 14:15 +), Aled Morris wrote: Multicast I don't see multicast working in Internet scale. Essentially multicast means core is flow-routing. So we'd need some way to decide who gets to send their content as multicast and who are forced to send unicast. The market already ruled on who gets to insert MSDP state in your routers. inter-domain multicast to the extent that it exists is between consenting adults. Which is fine, it turns out we don't need it for youtube or justin.tv to exist, and I don't need to signal into the core of the internet to make my small group conferencing app work. It could create de-facto monopolies, as new entries to the market wont have their multicast carried, they cannot compete pricing wise with established players who are carried.
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
About 40 - 50 Mbit/s. Not bad at all. Downloading software does not have to be in real-time, like watching a movie, does. In both cases it's actually rather convenient if it's as fast as possible, Yes. What I would like to have is to allow the access switch, which a customer for an ISP is connected to, to let the customer have 1 Gbit/s of bandwidth if the traffic is to or from the cache servers at their ISP. -- //fredan
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 09 Feb, 2013 Report Website: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net Detailed Analysis: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/ Analysis Summary BGP routing table entries examined: 442644 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 182109 Deaggregation factor: 2.43 Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 217103 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 43259 Prefixes per ASN: 10.23 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 34144 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 15933 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:5751 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:139 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 4.6 Max AS path length visible: 29 Max AS path prepend of ASN ( 35412) 17 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 379 Unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 135 Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs: 3742 Number of 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:3364 Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table:9204 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table: 17 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space:196 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 2615509516 Equivalent to 155 /8s, 229 /16s and 130 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 70.6 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 70.6 Percentage of available address space allocated: 100.0 Percentage of address space in use by end-sites: 94.3 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 156304 APNIC Region Analysis Summary - Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes: 106381 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 33119 APNIC Deaggregation factor:3.21 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 107440 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:43969 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:4818 APNIC Prefixes per ASN: 22.30 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 1238 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:801 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:4.6 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 23 Number of APNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:423 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 718725120 Equivalent to 42 /8s, 214 /16s and 224 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 84.0 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:155461 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation:78762 ARIN Deaggregation factor: 1.97 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 156125 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 70765 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:15450 ARIN Prefixes per ASN:10.11 ARIN Region origin
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
On 2/8/13 9:46 AM, fredrik danerklint wrote: About 40 - 50 Mbit/s. Not bad at all. Downloading software does not have to be in real-time, like watching a movie, does. In both cases it's actually rather convenient if it's as fast as possible, Yes. What I would like to have is to allow the access switch, which a customer for an ISP is connected to, to let the customer have 1 Gbit/s of bandwidth if the traffic is to or from the cache servers at their ISP. You're positing a situation where a cache infrastructure at scale built close to the user has a sufficiently high hit rate for rather large objects to be more cost effective than increasing capacity in the middle of the network as the bandwidth/price curve declines. My early career as an http cache dude makes me a bit suspicious. I'm pretty confident that denser/cheaper/faster silicon is less expensive than deploying boxes of spinning disks closer to the customer(s) than they are today (netflix's cache for example isn't that close to the edge (would support 2-10k simultaneous customers for that one application per box), it aims to get inside the isp however) when you add power/cooling/space/lifecycle-maintenance (I'm a datacenter operator) if it wasn't the CDN's would have pushed even closer to the edge. Of course if you can limit consumer choice then you can push your hit rate to 100% but then you're running a VOD service in a walled garden and there are plenty of those already. That said provide compelling numbers and I'll change my mind.
RE: 2-Channel CWDM Add/Drop with SC/APC connectors
I have seen cwdm Add/Drop muxes that fit in a splice case. May fit what you need. Jensen Tyler Sr Engineering Manager Fiberutilities Group, LLC Suite 500, 222 3rd Ave, SE Cedar Rapids, IA 52401 http://www.fiberutilities.com -Original Message- From: Chuck Anderson [mailto:c...@wpi.edu] Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 11:18 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: 2-Channel CWDM Add/Drop with SC/APC connectors On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 10:55:34AM +0100, Thilo Bangert wrote: On Thursday, February 07, 2013 08:04:41 PM Chuck Anderson wrote: Is it that much harder to terminate the angled connectors? no - its just a different type of pigtail, but adding another splice, will increase the insertion loss slightly. When I looked inside the OADM module, I don't remember seeing any splices, but that may just be because I didn't look inside the optobox itself. I was under the impression that the connectors were not pigtails spliced to the optobox fibers, but rather directly terminated to the fibers emerging from the optobox. I'm not sure the optobox is meant to be opened. So my question is, how hard is it to put a raw angled connector onto a strand of fiber in the field without using factory pre-terminated pigtails? I assume the process would be the same as any other connector: insert strand, cleave, polish, but using an angled sleeve to polish the end at the correct angle? we once ordered a cwdm splitter box at a different than usual place - as always with sc/apc connectors. the supplier changed the pigtails to accomodate our request. unfortunatly he didnt change the bulkheads, which was less than helpfull. Wow, that would be confusing.
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
- Original Message - From: fredrik danerklint fredan-na...@fredan.se allow my customers as an ISP to cache the content at their home. Do you *mean* their home -- an end-user residence? Yes, I do *mean* that. As in you, Jay, should be allowed to run your own cache server in your home (Traffic Server is the one that I'm using in the TLMC concept). Wouldn't you like that? It would do little good; my hit rate on such a cache would be unlikely to be high enough to merit the traffic to keep it charged. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
allow my customers as an ISP to cache the content at their home. Do you *mean* their home -- an end-user residence? Yes, I do *mean* that. As in you, Jay, should be allowed to run your own cache server in your home (Traffic Server is the one that I'm using in the TLMC concept). Wouldn't you like that? It would do little good; my hit rate on such a cache would be unlikely to be high enough to merit the traffic to keep it charged. (Children watching a movie only once? Not a chance. It's more like unlimited number of times and then some more...). So don't set-up an cache server at your home/residence. -- //fredan
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
- Original Message - From: fredrik danerklint fredan-na...@fredan.se It would do little good; my hit rate on such a cache would be unlikely to be high enough to merit the traffic to keep it charged. (Children watching a movie only once? Not a chance. It's more like unlimited number of times and then some more...). DVD's. MythTV So don't set-up an cache server at your home/residence. I probably won't. But it has become unclear what your fundamental premise and argument are, by this point in the game. Is it: it is bad that content providers choose a business and technical model wherein local in-home transparent caching proxies won't work? Cause that's a non-starter. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
How about buy the movies in question, convert them to MP4, install a media server on a local box and configure Xbox, tablet, smart-phone, whatever to access the media server? That is how my 3 year old grandson watches the Bubble Guppies movie umpteen million times during a 4 day stay. Just a thought. Oh, it also affords my wife and I the luxury of having our entire movie collection available for on demand viewing. No searching through cases or disc binders. Just a thought. - Original Message - From: fredrik danerklint fredan-na...@fredan.se To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Friday, February 8, 2013 2:58:42 PM Subject: Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network allow my customers as an ISP to cache the content at their home. Do you *mean* their home -- an end-user residence? Yes, I do *mean* that. As in you, Jay, should be allowed to run your own cache server in your home (Traffic Server is the one that I'm using in the TLMC concept). Wouldn't you like that? It would do little good; my hit rate on such a cache would be unlikely to be high enough to merit the traffic to keep it charged. (Children watching a movie only once? Not a chance. It's more like unlimited number of times and then some more...). So don't set-up an cache server at your home/residence. -- //fredan
Re: Interesting debugging: Specific packets cause some Intel gigabit ethernet controllers to reset
Update with a response to the statement from Intel: http://blog.krisk.org/2013/02/packets-of-death-update.html On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Kristian Kielhofner k...@kriskinc.com wrote: Over the year I've read some interesting (horrifying?) tales of debugging on NANOG. It seems I finally have my own to contribute: http://blog.krisk.org/2013/02/packets-of-death.html The strangest issue I've experienced, that's for sure. -- Kristian Kielhofner -- Kristian Kielhofner
Re: Interesting debugging: Specific packets cause some Intel gigabit ethernet controllers to reset
I just want you to know that this was the best piece of technical debugging I've read in years. Absolutely awesome. Thank you so much for sharing what I can only imagine was an endless series of nightmares. I've done debugging like this before and I can only say: I feel your pain and I wish I documented my previous efforts. Great writing sir. Cheers, Joshua Joshua Goldbard VP of Marketing, 2600hz 116 Natoma Street, Floor 2 San Francisco, CA, 94104 415.886.7923 | j...@2600hz.commailto:j...@2600hz.com On Feb 8, 2013, at 12:50 PM, Kristian Kielhofner k...@kriskinc.commailto:k...@kriskinc.com wrote: Update with a response to the statement from Intel: http://blog.krisk.org/2013/02/packets-of-death-update.html On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Kristian Kielhofner k...@kriskinc.com wrote: Over the year I've read some interesting (horrifying?) tales of debugging on NANOG. It seems I finally have my own to contribute: http://blog.krisk.org/2013/02/packets-of-death.html The strangest issue I've experienced, that's for sure. -- Kristian Kielhofner -- Kristian Kielhofner
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 10:50 -0800, joel jaeggli wrote: On 2/8/13 9:46 AM, fredrik danerklint wrote: About 40 - 50 Mbit/s. Not bad at all. Downloading software does not have to be in real-time, like watching a movie, does. In both cases it's actually rather convenient if it's as fast as possible, Yes. What I would like to have is to allow the access switch, which a customer for an ISP is connected to, to let the customer have 1 Gbit/s of bandwidth if the traffic is to or from the cache servers at their ISP. You're positing a situation where a cache infrastructure at scale built close to the user has a sufficiently high hit rate for rather large objects to be more cost effective than increasing capacity in the middle of the network as the bandwidth/price curve declines. My early career as an http cache dude makes me a bit suspicious. I'm pretty confident that denser/cheaper/faster silicon is less expensive than deploying boxes of spinning disks closer to the customer(s) than they are today (netflix's cache for example isn't that close to the edge (would support 2-10k simultaneous customers for that one application per box), it aims to get inside the isp however) when you add power/cooling/space/lifecycle-maintenance (I'm a datacenter operator) if it wasn't the CDN's would have pushed even closer to the edge. Of course if you can limit consumer choice then you can push your hit rate to 100% but then you're running a VOD service in a walled garden and there are plenty of those already. That said provide compelling numbers and I'll change my mind. The problem with increasing capacity is that it opens up captive eyeballs to innovative services from outside: monopoly operators will prefer to deal with CDN providers the like and keep control. Sincerely, Laurent
Re: The 100 Gbit/s problem in your network
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Laurent GUERBY laur...@guerby.net wrote: The problem with increasing capacity is that it opens up captive eyeballs to innovative services from outside: monopoly operators will prefer to deal with CDN providers the like and keep control. there are ways to offer vod/etc without pulling that content across your 'internet' backbone, of course you'd still have to provide enough capacity at the last L3 device (probably) to get all customers fed, but... at least it's not all aggregated with cat videos from vimeo?
The Cidr Report
This report has been generated at Fri Feb 8 21:13:12 2013 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
01-02-13443327 254928
02-02-13443678 255044
03-02-13443774 254726
04-02-13443962 255027
05-02-1300 255194
06-02-13444683 255265
07-02-13444729 253993
08-02-13444908 254207
AS Summary
43368 Number of ASes in routing system
18002 Number of ASes announcing only one prefix
3071 Largest number of prefixes announced by an AS
AS6389 : BELLSOUTH-NET-BLK - BellSouth.net Inc.
116912864 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').
--- 08Feb13 ---
ASnumNetsNow NetsAggr NetGain % Gain Description
Table 445259 254196 19106342.9% All ASes
AS6389 3071 109 296296.5% BELLSOUTH-NET-BLK -
BellSouth.net Inc.
AS28573 2356 88 226896.3% NET Servicos de Comunicao S.A.
AS17974 2482 465 201781.3% TELKOMNET-AS2-AP PT
Telekomunikasi Indonesia
AS4766 2939 941 199868.0% KIXS-AS-KR Korea Telecom
AS22773 1967 132 183593.3% ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC -
Cox Communications Inc.
AS18566 2081 425 165679.6% COVAD - Covad Communications
Co.
AS10620 2312 681 163170.5% Telmex Colombia S.A.
AS7303 1679 407 127275.8% Telecom Argentina S.A.
AS4323 1604 400 120475.1% TWTC - tw telecom holdings,
inc.
AS4755 1684 583 110165.4% TATACOMM-AS TATA
Communications formerly VSNL
is Leading ISP
AS2118 1114 83 103192.5% RELCOM-AS OOO NPO Relcom
AS7029 2264 1250 101444.8% WINDSTREAM - Windstream
Communications Inc
AS7552 1161 186 97584.0% VIETEL-AS-AP Vietel
Corporation
AS36998 1286 381 90570.4% SDN-MOBITEL
AS18101 1009 170 83983.2% RELIANCE-COMMUNICATIONS-IN
Reliance Communications
Ltd.DAKC MUMBAI
AS7545 1832 1021 81144.3% TPG-INTERNET-AP TPG Internet
Pty Ltd
AS1785 1953 1164 78940.4% AS-PAETEC-NET - PaeTec
Communications, Inc.
AS8151 1520 732 78851.8% Uninet S.A. de C.V.
AS4808 1109 352 75768.3% CHINA169-BJ CNCGROUP IP
network China169 Beijing
Province Network
AS18881 758 26 73296.6% Global Village Telecom
AS14754 941 210 73177.7% Telgua
AS13977 838 123 71585.3% CTELCO - FAIRPOINT
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
AS9808 741 54 68792.7% CMNET-GD Guangdong Mobile
Communication Co.Ltd.
AS855713 52 66192.7% CANET-ASN-4 - Bell Aliant
Regional Communications, Inc.
AS22561 1066 444 62258.3% DIGITAL-TELEPORT - Digital
Teleport Inc.
AS17676 718 97 62186.5% GIGAINFRA Softbank BB Corp.
AS24560 1044 429 61558.9% AIRTELBROADBAND-AS-AP Bharti
Airtel Ltd., Telemedia
Services
AS3356 1103 499 60454.8% LEVEL3 Level 3 Communications
AS3549 1047 448 59957.2% GBLX Global Crossing Ltd.
AS19262 997 404 59359.5% VZGNI-TRANSIT - Verizon Online
LLC
Total 45389123563303372.8% Top 30 total
Possible Bogus Routes
BGP Update Report
BGP Update Report Interval: 31-Jan-13 -to- 07-Feb-13 (7 days) Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072 TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name 1 - AS9498 122743 4.0% 114.9 -- BBIL-AP BHARTI Airtel Ltd. 2 - AS24560 92362 3.0% 88.4 -- AIRTELBROADBAND-AS-AP Bharti Airtel Ltd., Telemedia Services 3 - AS840251328 1.7% 23.5 -- CORBINA-AS OJSC Vimpelcom 4 - AS18207 49601 1.6% 90.8 -- YOU-INDIA-AP YOU Broadband Cable India Ltd. 5 - AS390943487 1.4%1317.8 -- QWEST-AS-3908 - Qwest Communications Company, LLC 6 - AS982936729 1.2% 25.6 -- BSNL-NIB National Internet Backbone 7 - AS29256 33329 1.1% 505.0 -- INT-PDN-STE-AS Syrian Telecommunications Establishment 8 - AS18002 28395 0.9% 134.6 -- WORLDPHONE-IN AS Number for Interdomain Routing 9 - AS45609 27850 0.9% 107.5 -- BHARTI-MOBILITY-AS-AP Bharti Airtel Ltd. AS for GPRS Service 10 - AS45514 22498 0.7% 73.5 -- TELEMEDIA-SMB-AS-AP Bharti Airtel Ltd., TELEMEDIA Services, for SMB customers 11 - AS211821085 0.7% 18.9 -- RELCOM-AS OOO NPO Relcom 12 - AS28573 19649 0.6% 8.2 -- NET Servicos de Comunicao S.A. 13 - AS45528 18907 0.6% 30.2 -- TDN Tikona Digital Networks Pvt Ltd. 14 - AS45271 17141 0.6% 55.5 -- ICLNET-AS-AP 5th Floor, Windsor Building, Off: CST Road 15 - AS763316734 0.5% 80.1 -- SOFTNET-AS-AP Software Technology Parks of India - Bangalore 16 - AS270816719 0.5% 119.4 -- Universidad de Guanajuato 17 - AS755216660 0.5% 14.3 -- VIETEL-AS-AP Vietel Corporation 18 - AS17488 15577 0.5% 23.2 -- HATHWAY-NET-AP Hathway IP Over Cable Internet 19 - AS702914007 0.5% 5.4 -- WINDSTREAM - Windstream Communications Inc 20 - AS17974 13323 0.4% 5.4 -- TELKOMNET-AS2-AP PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS (Updates per announced prefix) Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name 1 - AS328475458 0.2%5458.0 -- LMGINC-ORL - LMG, Inc 2 - AS6174 5795 0.2%2897.5 -- SPRINTLINK8 - Sprint 3 - AS146806061 0.2%2020.3 -- REALE-6 - Auction.com 4 - AS247731716 0.1%1716.0 -- ASN-HH-LB HSH Nordbank AG 5 - AS579181678 0.1%1678.0 -- ACOD-AS ACOD CJSC 6 - AS390943487 1.4%1317.8 -- QWEST-AS-3908 - Qwest Communications Company, LLC 7 - AS596201263 0.0%1263.0 -- GESBG Global Electronic Solutions LTD 8 - AS409465758 0.2%1151.6 -- PROCON - Sat Track 9 - AS41993 0.1% 51.0 -- COMUNICALO DE MEXICO S.A. DE C.V 10 - AS172933489 0.1% 872.2 -- VTXC - VTX Communications 11 - AS221408332 0.3% 833.2 -- T-MOBILE-AS22140 - T-Mobile USA, Inc. 12 - AS57201 587 0.0% 587.0 -- EDF-AS Estonian Defence Forces 13 - AS409311688 0.1% 562.7 -- MOBITV - MobiTV, Inc 14 - AS2 529 0.0% 649.0 -- DHRUBO-AS-AP Dhrubo 15 - AS29256 33329 1.1% 505.0 -- INT-PDN-STE-AS Syrian Telecommunications Establishment 16 - AS2033 3981 0.1% 497.6 -- PANIX - Panix Network Information Center 17 - AS513413104 0.1% 388.0 -- GCS-AS Gigacom Systems Ltd. 18 - AS6507 1129 0.0% 376.3 -- RIOT-NA1 - Riot Games, Inc 19 - AS33976 744 0.0% 372.0 -- AFTONBLADET-SE aftonbladet.se 20 - AS194063998 0.1% 363.5 -- TWRS-MA - Towerstream I, Inc. TOP 20 Unstable Prefixes Rank Prefix Upds % Origin AS -- AS Name 1 - 151.118.254.0/24 14494 0.5% AS3909 -- QWEST-AS-3908 - Qwest Communications Company, LLC 2 - 151.118.255.0/24 14494 0.5% AS3909 -- QWEST-AS-3908 - Qwest Communications Company, LLC 3 - 151.118.18.0/24 14446 0.5% AS3909 -- QWEST-AS-3908 - Qwest Communications Company, LLC 4 - 184.159.130.0/23 10514 0.3% AS22561 -- DIGITAL-TELEPORT - Digital Teleport Inc. 5 - 208.14.186.0/248312 0.3% AS22140 -- T-MOBILE-AS22140 - T-Mobile USA, Inc. 6 - 202.41.70.0/24 7848 0.2% AS2697 -- ERX-ERNET-AS Education and Research Network 7 - 192.58.232.0/247223 0.2% AS6629 -- NOAA-AS - NOAA 8 - 208.92.131.0/245752 0.2% AS40946 -- PROCON - Sat Track 9 - 173.227.147.0/24 5458 0.2% AS32847 -- LMGINC-ORL - LMG, Inc 10 - 196.1.167.0/24 4993 0.1% AS11139 -- CWRIN CW BARBADOS 11 - 12.139.133.0/244951 0.1% AS14680 -- REALE-6 - Auction.com 12 - 194.63.9.0/24 4831 0.1% AS1273 -- CW Cable and Wireless Worldwide plc 13 - 58.184.229.0/244614 0.1% AS9950 -- PUBNETPLUS2-AS-KR DACOM 14 - 209.48.168.0/243972 0.1% AS2033 -- PANIX - Panix Network Information Center 15 - 69.38.178.0/24 3969 0.1%
Re: Any experience with Grandstream VoIP equipment ?
Arris. One failure of 500 deployed so far and call jitter issues disappeared once we switched to the Arris Emta's On Feb 8, 2013, at 5:33 PM, John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote: I wouldn't use them unless you have a specific reason to. That seems to be the consensus. Lucky I didn't pay very much. Any ATAs that people acually like? -- Regards, John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
Re: Any experience with Grandstream VoIP equipment ?
Guess I should clarify that these are Cable Emta's. Not stand alone. On Feb 8, 2013, at 5:33 PM, John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote: I wouldn't use them unless you have a specific reason to. That seems to be the consensus. Lucky I didn't pay very much. Any ATAs that people acually like? -- Regards, John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?
Jason Baugher wrote: In a greenfield build, cost difference for plant between PON and active will be negligible for field-based splitters, non-existent for CO-based splitters. If you choose to have CO-based splitters, you need to have MDF for L1 unbundling, and 1:8 (or 1:4, 1:32 or whatever) optical splitter module for PON, combination of which requires more CO space and money than SS (single star) optical equipment (just MDF). On the CO-side electronics, however... I think it's safe to say that you can do GPON under $100/port. Never ignore space and cost of optical splitters required only for PON. Note that the splitters cost even if they are located in field. Masataka Ohta
Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?
Jean-Francois Mezei wrote: The problem of PON is that, to efficiently share a fiber and a splitter, they must be shared by many subscribers, which means drop cables are longer than those of SS. Pardon my ignorance here, but could you explain why the cables would be physically different in the last mile ? Drop cables are not for last miles, but for last yards. Let's assume 4:1 concentration with PON. Let's also assume that 1150 subscribers are evenly distributed over 51km trunk cable, which means distance between adjacent subscribers is 44.3m. Why would this be different in a PON vs Point to Point system ? If you use SS, you need a closure every 44.3m drop cable length from which will be 5 or 10m. -C---C---C---C---C---C---C- trunk cable | | | | | | | drop cable S S S S S S S S: Subscriber C: Closure OTOH, if you use PON and have 4 drop cables from an in-field splitter, two drop cables needs extra 22.2 m and other two needs extra 66.5 m. C---C- trunk cable || || || || ^ +-+| |+-+ +-+| |+--- | | | | | | | | | drop cable | +--+ +--+ | | +--+ +--+ | | | | | | | | v S S S S S S S S: Subscriber C: Closure In this case, total extra drop cable length for PON is 51km, identical to the trunk cable length. It all depends how (initial and subsequent) subscribers are distributed, but tendency is same. As for cost for closures, while SS needs four times more closures than PON, a closure for SS is simpler and cheaper than that for PON to purchase, install and maintain. Wher I see a difference is between the neighbourhood aggregation point and the CO where the PON system will have just 1 strand for 32 homes whereas point to point will have 1 strand per home passed. But the lengths should be the same, shouldn't they ? Never ignore topology at the last yards. Masataka Ohta
Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?
Masataka Ohta mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp writes: Let's assume 4:1 concentration with PON. Why on earth would we assume that when industry standard is 16 or 32? 16 is a safe number. -r
