Re: DWDM Optics cheaper than CWDM Optics?

[Chuck Anderson]

I've bought their DWDM 80km 10gig and they are working beautifully on
a couple amplified circuits with both Cisco and Juniper routers.  I've
also bought gray optics and DACs.  The only issue I've noted with some
QSFP+ DACs is some kind of programming issue where the serial number
is mis-read by some models of our Juniper switches.  Another oddity is
that each end of some of our DACs have a separate serial number...we
just record both in our inventory tracking system.

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 04:17:14PM +0100, Karl Gerhard wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> fs.com offers DWDM optics that are cheaper than CWDM optics:
> CWDM 80km 10G for 600$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-cwdm-sfp-plus-2425?70-80km
> DWDM 80km 10G for 420$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-dwdm-sfp-plus-2485?70-80km
> 
> This is significant.
> Is this for real? Has anybody bought their DWDM optics?
> 
> Going with DWDM and passive Mux/Demux seems to be cheaper nowadays than going 
> with CWDM.
> 
> Regards
> Karl

Re: DWDM Optics cheaper than CWDM Optics?

[Colton Conor]

Just so you know, FS.com now stocks many of the common optics in Seattle
Washington for next day delivery. So they now are stocking more and more
items in the USA.

When we order an item from China on Monday USA time, we get it it Thursday
morning USA time if its in stock in China!



On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Karl Gerhard  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> fs.com offers DWDM optics that are cheaper than CWDM optics:
> CWDM 80km 10G for 600$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-cwdm
> -sfp-plus-2425?70-80km
> DWDM 80km 10G for 420$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-dwdm
> -sfp-plus-2485?70-80km
>
> This is significant.
> Is this for real? Has anybody bought their DWDM optics?
>
> Going with DWDM and passive Mux/Demux seems to be cheaper nowadays than
> going with CWDM.
>
> Regards
> Karl
>

Re: DWDM Optics cheaper than CWDM Optics?

[Faisal Imtiaz]

Since I am in the middle of doing something similar, I will share my 
observations.

CWDM Advantage:-
 Passive CWDM Muxes are less expensive than the  DWDM counterparts.
 Short Range optics (CWDM) are favorable priced 
 Long Range optics are not so favorably priced.
  ( I guess that is due to production volume).

Deploying a CWDM passive mux solution, can allow you to stack a DWDM mux on the 
1530-1560 CWDM channel.
(one has to pay attention to the loss/attenuation calcs).

If you need to Regen the light.. then there are a lot of solutions (cost 
effective) available for the DWDM channel range
(have not been able to find any kind of amps for CWDM.. if anyone has 
suggestions, I would be open to them).

Amount of channels available on CDWM are limited in qty when compared to what 
is possible with DWDM.

When using long rage optics, pay attention to the equipment you are plugging 
them in.. not all optical ports are capable of supplying the amount of power 
and heat dissipation required.

As to the original question about the quality of optics from FS.COM..
We have no complaints, when there were mistakes made, they stood behind their 
products and corrected them.
I would recommend that you deal with one of their many Sales Rep's vs just 
placing order online.

Their products match the specs they list.. They are also able to do some custom 
stuff which is not listed on their web site..
(i.e. provide muxes which have a lower insertion loss in certain 
configurations).

Regards

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

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

- Original Message -
> From: "Karl Gerhard" 
> To: "nanog list" 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 10:17:14 AM
> Subject: DWDM Optics cheaper than CWDM Optics?

> Hello,
> 
> fs.com offers DWDM optics that are cheaper than CWDM optics:
> CWDM 80km 10G for 600$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-cwdm-sfp-plus-2425?70-80km
> DWDM 80km 10G for 420$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-dwdm-sfp-plus-2485?70-80km
> 
> This is significant.
> Is this for real? Has anybody bought their DWDM optics?
> 
> Going with DWDM and passive Mux/Demux seems to be cheaper nowadays than going
> with CWDM.
> 
> Regards
> Karl

Re: Netflow/sFlow generator for Linux with BGP support

[Stanislaw Datskevich]

Affirmative, works like a charm.

Also the author is very responsive (has even answered to my dumb
questions in the list).


30.01.2017 03:14, Tom Hill пишет:
> On 29/01/17 06:43, Peter Phaal wrote:
>> You might want to try pmacct:
>> http://www.pmacct.net/
> That's definitely a good idea. +1
>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: BGP route processing speed

[Sebastian Spies]

Hey Sriram,

hope, you are doing fine.

my BSc thesis from 2010 might be relevant to what you are looking for.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5kLBHCcFJjFZk5RTUtwbUstbm8/view?usp=sharing

Best,
Sebastian

Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) schrieb:

I am interested in measurements related to BGP route processing speed

(i.e. routing engine capacity in terms of routes or updates processed per 
second).

Folks from AMS-IX did an interesting study in 2012

in their Route Server / IXP environment.

https://ams-ix.net/downloads/ams-ix-route-server-implementations-performance.pdf



Are there other measurement studies available

on this topic, especially in ISP/PE router scenarios,

including BGP policy processing, best path selection, route filtering, etc.?

Will appreciate much if you can share some pointers.



Sriram

Re: DWDM Optics cheaper than CWDM Optics?

[Brandon Martin]

On 01/31/2017 10:17 AM, Karl Gerhard wrote:

Hello,

fs.com offers DWDM optics that are cheaper than CWDM optics:
CWDM 80km 10G for 600$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-cwdm-sfp-plus-2425?70-80km
DWDM 80km 10G for 420$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-dwdm-sfp-plus-2485?70-80km

This is significant.
Is this for real? Has anybody bought their DWDM optics?

Going with DWDM and passive Mux/Demux seems to be cheaper nowadays than
going with CWDM.


I came to the same conclusion a couple years ago.  At the time, CWDM was 
about the same price as DWDM or maybe still just a hair cheaper, but the 
DWDM system is a) so much more capable, and b) typically has better 
tools/monitoring, etc. (if you're using muxponders, etc.) that it made 
sense to just go DWDM.  Given advances in optics, I'm not surprised that 
DWDM is now cheaper than CWDM outright.


Of course, the same may not be true if you're buying a fully engineered 
system from a major vendor.  CWDM can be a little easier to 
engineer...sometimes.


--
Brandon Martin

Re: DWDM Optics cheaper than CWDM Optics?

[Bob Evans]

I have been under the impression for years now that the age of the fiber
may play a roll in which you prefer due to channel spacing needed to cram
in more frequencies. Never really came across a real world situation where
one didn't work as well as the other. There is probably more things to
consider than the fiber's age.

Thank You
Bob Evans
CTO




> Hello,
>
> fs.com offers DWDM optics that are cheaper than CWDM optics:
> CWDM 80km 10G for 600$
> http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-cwdm-sfp-plus-2425?70-80km
> DWDM 80km 10G for 420$
> http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-dwdm-sfp-plus-2485?70-80km
>
> This is significant.
> Is this for real? Has anybody bought their DWDM optics?
>
> Going with DWDM and passive Mux/Demux seems to be cheaper nowadays than
> going with CWDM.
>
> Regards
> Karl
>

RE: DWDM Optics cheaper than CWDM Optics?

[Luke Guillory]

Karl,

I've bought at least 20k in optics from them in the last 2 years, from QSFP 
DAC, QSFP to 10g breakouts and everything in between and the only thing to fail 
was 1 QSFP breakout cable.  A partner of ours uses their DWDM optics and 
passive MUXs while I've used their CWDM with no issues.






Luke Guillory
Network Operations Manager

Tel:985.536.1212
Fax:985.536.0300
Email:  lguill...@reservetele.com

Reserve Telecommunications
100 RTC Dr
Reserve, LA 70084

_

Disclaimer:
The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only for the 
person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential 
and/or privileged material which should not disseminate, distribute or be 
copied. Please notify Luke Guillory immediately by e-mail if you have received 
this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail 
transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information 
could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or 
contain viruses. Luke Guillory therefore does not accept liability for any 
errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of 
e-mail transmission. .

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Karl Gerhard
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 9:17 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: DWDM Optics cheaper than CWDM Optics?

Hello,

fs.com offers DWDM optics that are cheaper than CWDM optics:
CWDM 80km 10G for 600$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-cwdm-sfp-plus-2425?70-80km
DWDM 80km 10G for 420$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-dwdm-sfp-plus-2485?70-80km

This is significant.
Is this for real? Has anybody bought their DWDM optics?

Going with DWDM and passive Mux/Demux seems to be cheaper nowadays than going 
with CWDM.

Regards
Karl

DWDM Optics cheaper than CWDM Optics?

[Karl Gerhard]

Hello,

fs.com offers DWDM optics that are cheaper than CWDM optics:
CWDM 80km 10G for 600$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-cwdm-sfp-plus-2425?70-80km
DWDM 80km 10G for 420$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-dwdm-sfp-plus-2485?70-80km

This is significant.
Is this for real? Has anybody bought their DWDM optics?

Going with DWDM and passive Mux/Demux seems to be cheaper nowadays than going 
with CWDM.

Regards
Karl

Re: Fwd: Any Yahoo DNS admins on list?

[Dan States via NANOG]

Hello Brielle,
The issue has been resolved, I confirmed the Qwest/CenturyLink resolver you 
mentioned is being properly routed.
-- ♜ Dan States - Yahoo DNS Operations

On Monday, January 30, 2017, 7:04:40 PM PST, Dan States  
wrote:Looks like this may be a peering issue, we're investigating.  
Regards
-- ♜ Dan States - Yahoo DNS Operations

On Saturday, January 28, 2017, 4:29:12 AM PST, Stephen Strowes 
 wrote:I assume somebody knows about this thread :-)
S.


-- Forwarded message --
> On Jan 27, 2017, at 6:30 PM, Brielle Bruns  wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> Don't suppose there's a Yahoo admin in the DNS department that can 
> investigate/debug a Geolocation issue?
>
> It appears that Yahoo's Geolocation is putting CenturyLink's IPv6 addresses 
> as being in .BR, causing not only the two CL/Qwest recursive servers 
> (205.171.2.65/205.171.3.65/ 2001:428::1/2001:428::2), but recusive servers 
> hosted on biz customer IPv6 6RD ranges to return non-US Yahoo servers (and be 
> agonizingly slow).
>
> =
> View from local powerdns recursor, dual stacked, but preferring ipv6 for 
> resolving:
>
> root@noc:~# dig mg.mail.yahoo.com @127.0.0.2
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.9.5-9+deb8u9-Debian <<>> mg.mail.yahoo.com @127.0.0.2
> ;; global options: +cmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 50638
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 3, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
>
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;mg.mail.yahoo.com.        IN    A
>
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> mg.mail.yahoo.com.    1349    IN    CNAME    fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. 
> yahoodns.net.
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 300 IN A    200.152.162.161
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 300 IN A    200.152.162.135
>
> ;; Query time: 240 msec
> ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.2#53(127.0.0.2)
> ;; WHEN: Fri Jan 27 17:20:52 MST 2017
> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 116
>
> =
> View from CL/Qwest IPv4 (likely dual stacked) and IPv6 recursors:
>
> root@noc:~# dig mg.mail.yahoo.com @205.171.2.65
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.9.5-9+deb8u9-Debian <<>> mg.mail.yahoo.com @205.171.2.65
> ;; global options: +cmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 8308
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 3, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
>
> ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
> ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;mg.mail.yahoo.com.        IN    A
>
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> mg.mail.yahoo.com.    758    IN    CNAME    fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. 
> yahoodns.net.
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 138 IN A    200.152.162.161
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 138 IN A    200.152.162.135
>
> ;; Query time: 17 msec
> ;; SERVER: 205.171.2.65#53(205.171.2.65)
> ;; WHEN: Fri Jan 27 17:21:35 MST 2017
> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 127
>
>
> root@noc:~# dig mg.mail.yahoo.com @2001:428::1
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.9.5-9+deb8u9-Debian <<>> mg.mail.yahoo.com @2001:428::1
> ;; global options: +cmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 24138
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 3, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
>
> ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
> ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;mg.mail.yahoo.com.        IN    A
>
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> mg.mail.yahoo.com.    464    IN    CNAME    fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. 
> yahoodns.net.
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 214 IN A    200.152.162.161
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 214 IN A    200.152.162.135
>
> ;; Query time: 46 msec
> ;; SERVER: 2001:428::1#53(2001:428::1)
> ;; WHEN: Fri Jan 27 17:23:38 MST 2017
> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 127
>
> =
> Google recursor for reference:
>
> root@noc:~# dig mg.mail.yahoo.com @8.8.8.8
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.9.5-9+deb8u9-Debian <<>> mg.mail.yahoo.com @8.8.8.8
> ;; global options: +cmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 13327
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 5, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
>
> ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
> ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 512
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;mg.mail.yahoo.com.        IN    A
>
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> mg.mail.yahoo.com.    1459    IN    CNAME    fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. 
> yahoodns.net.
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 184 IN A    216.115.100.124
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 184 IN A    208.71.44.31
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 184 IN A    216.115.100.123
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 184 IN A    208.71.44.30
>
> ;; Query time: 27 msec
> ;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8)
> ;; WHEN: Fri Jan 27 17:21:59 MST 2017
> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 159
>
>
>
> For reference, CL/Qwest's IPv6 range for 6RD is 2602::/24.
>
> This appears to be impacting Yahoo, Yahoo Mail, Flickr, etc (aka Yahoo owned 
> properties).
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Brielle Bruns
> The Summit Open Source Development Group
> http://www.sosdg.org    /     http://www.ahbl.org

Re: Fwd: Any Yahoo DNS admins on list?

[Dan States via NANOG]

Looks like this may be a peering issue, we're investigating.  
Regards
-- ♜ Dan States - Yahoo DNS Operations

On Saturday, January 28, 2017, 4:29:12 AM PST, Stephen Strowes 
 wrote:I assume somebody knows about this thread :-)
S.


-- Forwarded message --
> On Jan 27, 2017, at 6:30 PM, Brielle Bruns  wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> Don't suppose there's a Yahoo admin in the DNS department that can 
> investigate/debug a Geolocation issue?
>
> It appears that Yahoo's Geolocation is putting CenturyLink's IPv6 addresses 
> as being in .BR, causing not only the two CL/Qwest recursive servers 
> (205.171.2.65/205.171.3.65/ 2001:428::1/2001:428::2), but recusive servers 
> hosted on biz customer IPv6 6RD ranges to return non-US Yahoo servers (and be 
> agonizingly slow).
>
> =
> View from local powerdns recursor, dual stacked, but preferring ipv6 for 
> resolving:
>
> root@noc:~# dig mg.mail.yahoo.com @127.0.0.2
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.9.5-9+deb8u9-Debian <<>> mg.mail.yahoo.com @127.0.0.2
> ;; global options: +cmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 50638
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 3, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
>
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;mg.mail.yahoo.com.        IN    A
>
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> mg.mail.yahoo.com.    1349    IN    CNAME    fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. 
> yahoodns.net.
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 300 IN A    200.152.162.161
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 300 IN A    200.152.162.135
>
> ;; Query time: 240 msec
> ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.2#53(127.0.0.2)
> ;; WHEN: Fri Jan 27 17:20:52 MST 2017
> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 116
>
> =
> View from CL/Qwest IPv4 (likely dual stacked) and IPv6 recursors:
>
> root@noc:~# dig mg.mail.yahoo.com @205.171.2.65
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.9.5-9+deb8u9-Debian <<>> mg.mail.yahoo.com @205.171.2.65
> ;; global options: +cmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 8308
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 3, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
>
> ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
> ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;mg.mail.yahoo.com.        IN    A
>
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> mg.mail.yahoo.com.    758    IN    CNAME    fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. 
> yahoodns.net.
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 138 IN A    200.152.162.161
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 138 IN A    200.152.162.135
>
> ;; Query time: 17 msec
> ;; SERVER: 205.171.2.65#53(205.171.2.65)
> ;; WHEN: Fri Jan 27 17:21:35 MST 2017
> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 127
>
>
> root@noc:~# dig mg.mail.yahoo.com @2001:428::1
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.9.5-9+deb8u9-Debian <<>> mg.mail.yahoo.com @2001:428::1
> ;; global options: +cmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 24138
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 3, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
>
> ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
> ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;mg.mail.yahoo.com.        IN    A
>
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> mg.mail.yahoo.com.    464    IN    CNAME    fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. 
> yahoodns.net.
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 214 IN A    200.152.162.161
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 214 IN A    200.152.162.135
>
> ;; Query time: 46 msec
> ;; SERVER: 2001:428::1#53(2001:428::1)
> ;; WHEN: Fri Jan 27 17:23:38 MST 2017
> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 127
>
> =
> Google recursor for reference:
>
> root@noc:~# dig mg.mail.yahoo.com @8.8.8.8
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.9.5-9+deb8u9-Debian <<>> mg.mail.yahoo.com @8.8.8.8
> ;; global options: +cmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 13327
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 5, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
>
> ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
> ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 512
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;mg.mail.yahoo.com.        IN    A
>
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> mg.mail.yahoo.com.    1459    IN    CNAME    fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. 
> yahoodns.net.
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 184 IN A    216.115.100.124
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 184 IN A    208.71.44.31
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 184 IN A    216.115.100.123
> fd-geoycpi-uno.gycpi.b. yahoodns.net. 184 IN A    208.71.44.30
>
> ;; Query time: 27 msec
> ;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8)
> ;; WHEN: Fri Jan 27 17:21:59 MST 2017
> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 159
>
>
>
> For reference, CL/Qwest's IPv6 range for 6RD is 2602::/24.
>
> This appears to be impacting Yahoo, Yahoo Mail, Flickr, etc (aka Yahoo owned 
> properties).
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Brielle Bruns
> The Summit Open Source Development Group
> http://www.sosdg.org    /     http://www.ahbl.org