Re: Lima, OH Spectrum/Charter Severe Node/Hop Latency Issues

[Kevin Shymkiw]

ICMP response time from a router/device is not a great way to judge if
there is an issue or not.  The devices generally have control plane
policing and responding to ICMP is not prioritized at all.

I would suggest your engineer setup something on their end of the
connection that you can ping, and start there.

Leverage something like smoke ping to something on their LAN, or even the
public IP on their RG/Modem.

Kevin

On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 15:01 Austin Ayers via NANOG  wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> One of my NetOps engineers resides in Lima, Ohio and they are receiving
> terrible bufferbloat, packet loss, and random disconnects.
>
> I have been pinging 24.33.160.213 (Lima, OH Spectrum/Chart Node) and it's
> rejecting a ton of packets. This has been going on for weeks.
>
> Node having problems: lag-1.limaohid01h.netops.charter.com
>
> NOC seems like they don't care, same with OSP in the field.
>
> There is no reason why this hop (#13) should have up to 613ms ping times.
>
> Thank you,
> Austin
>
>
>

Re: Spectrum (legacy TWC) Infrastructure - Contact Off List

[Kevin Shymkiw]

Clayton,

Did you leverage things like micro trenching for this project?  I may be
mislead, but I thought micro trenching these days has helped drive the cost
of doing this down fairly significantly.

Kevin

On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 17:56 Clayton Zekelman  wrote:

>
> The cost is not low.  Trust me on that.  I've been involved in a pretty
> massive suburban fibre deployment for the past decade... I expect we'll
> make money sometime in the 2030's... in time for me to retire.
>
> At 12:13 PM 02/02/2023, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:
>
> The cost to build physical layer in much of the suburban and somewhat
> rural US is low enough anymore that lots of smaller, independent, ISPs are
> overbuilding the incumbent with fiber and taking a big chunk of their
> customer base because they are local and care.  And making money while
> doing it.Â
>
>
> --
>
> Clayton Zekelman
> Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
> 3363 Tecumseh Rd. E
> Windsor, Ontario
> N8W 1H4
>
> tel. 519-985-8410
> fax. 519-985-8409
>

Re: Random shower thought: GBIC with LC connector...

[Kevin Shymkiw]

> GBIC stands for Great Big Inserted Cartridge

Classic - I needed a good laugh for today :)

On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 9:17 AM Mel Beckman  wrote:
>
> No. GBIC stands for Great Big Inserted Cartridge. LC stands for Little 
> Connector. Thus they are not compatible.
>
> -mel via cell
>
> > On Nov 15, 2022, at 7:59 AM, Warren Kumari  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > Hi there all,
> >
> > While looking through my big box of random optics I suddenly realized that 
> > I'd never seen a GBIC with an LC connector, and I started wondering if 
> > anyone else had / if such a thing actually exists.
> >
> > Yes, I realize that this would be a fairly niche device - if you arrived 
> > somewhere with a device that took GBICs and there was existing fiber with 
> > LC connectors you could just replace the patch cable or use an LC-SC 
> > convertor, but that doesn't really satisfy my curiosity.
> >
> > A quick look through the GBIC MSA / SFF documentation implies that such a 
> > thing *could* probably exist (there is a defined value for the 'LC' 
> > connector), but I wasn't able to actually find any. It might not actually 
> > be compliant with the specs (the document I found only lists SC fiber or 
> > copper (coax with BNC, TNC or DB-9?!)), but that doesn't mean that no-one 
> > made them.
> >
> > So, has anyone seen a regular (30mm/1.2") GBIC with LC connectors? And, if 
> > so, "pics or it didn't happen"... :-)
> >
> > Obviously I don't have an actual use for this, it's just to satisfy my 
> > (OCD) curiosity...
> > W
> >
> >

Re: Juniper MX204 allow oversubscription?

[Kevin Shymkiw]

Adam,

Simply put - No there isn't a way to oversubscribe the front panel.

Juniper has a handy tool to check your port combinations though -
https://apps.juniper.net/home/port-checker/index.html

The lack of being able to oversubscribe has to do with # of lanes to the EA
ASIC, and how those can be broken down.

Kevin

On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 11:04 AM Adam Thompson 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Hoping some Juniper-using folks know:
>
> On the MX204, which comes with 4x100G + 8x10G ports, you can only use 3 of
> the 4 100G ports if you want to use any of the 10G ports at all.
>
> Supposedly this is to prevent oversubscription on what is a 400G-rated
> router.  However, I’m perfectly fine with oversubscription with a 400G
> aggregate throughput cap.
>
> Is there a way to stop the automatic “oh, I’ll disable these other ports
> for you so you don’t oversubscribe the box” behaviour and let all the
> front-panel ports be used at once?
>
> -Adam
>
>
>
> *Adam Thompson*
>
> Consultant, Infrastructure Services
>
> [image: MERLIN]
>
> 100 - 135 Innovation Drive
>
> Winnipeg, MB R3T 6A8
>
> (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only)
>
> https://www.merlin.mb.ca
>
> Chat with me on Teams
> 
>
>
>

Re: Switch for SFP+

[Kevin Shymkiw]

While I am not sure on the optics support - what about a Ubiquiti
EdgeSwitch 16XG?

12x SFP+ ports
4x RJ-45 Ports

https://www.ui.com/edgemax/edgeswitch-16-xg/

It isn't expandable - but maybe 12xSFP+ is enough?

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 5:37 PM Mauro Gasparini 
wrote:

> Good afternoon.
>
> I'm looking for a switch with the following capabilities:
> . transport for more than 20 gbps
> . link aggregation LACP
> . slots for SFP+
> . seamlessly when trunking vlans through the link aggregation.
>
> And essentially that doesn't exceed US$D 2000 and is compatible with
> 10GBASE-ER and/or 10GBASE-ZR modules that are not from the vendor itself
> (e.g. SPFs: Huawei, Mikrotik, Sumitomo, OEMs).
>
> If any of you have a good experience with a device that meets these
> requirements (which are minimal with the exception of price and
> compatibility) ?
>
> Regards.
> Mauro Gasparini
>

Re: Oct. 3, 2018 EAS Presidential Alert test

[Kevin Shymkiw]

Google Pixel2XL on VZW. Didn't receive anything

Kevin

On Wed, Oct 3, 2018, 13:34 Chaim Rieger  wrote:

> IPhone on vzw here. Received
>
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 12:23 Andy Ringsmuth  wrote:
>
>> Did anyone on AT or an iPhone receive the test today? I believe it was
>> supposed to happen at 2:18 EDT, followed by one on broadcast radio at 2:20
>> EDT.
>>
>> I’m in CDT, so 1:18 and 1:20 p.m. CDT.
>>
>> Message was heard on my desk radio at 1:21:35 p.m. CDT but as of the
>> sending of this at 1:52 p.m. CDT, nothing on phones. I have an office full
>> of AT iPhones and not a single one of them alerted.
>>
>> FEMA says https://www.fema.gov/emergency-alert-test
>>
>> "Cell towers will broadcast the WEA test for approximately 30 minutes
>> beginning at 2:18 p.m. EDT. During this time, WEA compatible cell phones
>> that are switched on, within range of an active cell tower, and whose
>> wireless provider participates in WEA should be capable of receiving the
>> test message. Some cell phones will not receive the test message, and cell
>> phones should only receive the message once."
>>
>> My wife, with a Sprint iPhone, received the test.
>>
>>
>> 
>> Andy Ringsmuth
>> 5609 Harding Drive
>> Lincoln, NE 68521-5831
>> (402) 304-0083
>> a...@andyring.com
>>
>>

Re: Satelite Internet Provider

[Kevin Shymkiw]

Edwin,

You could try Isotropic - https://isosat.net/

We have used them in several remote locations and have had great luck with
them.

Kevin

On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 8:28 AM, Ing. Edwin Salazar via NANOG <
nanog@nanog.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would like to know if anyone knows any satellite internet provider for
> the Galapagos Islands in Ecuador that I can contact?
>
> Best regards,
> Edwin Salazar.