Re: Amazon Peering

[Luca Salvatore via NANOG]

Yup, super professional of them.

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 11:36 AM Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Oh, you ordered cross connects for a PNI and they stopped responding
> mid-project? Isn't that nice!
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> ----------
> *From: *"Luca Salvatore via NANOG" 
> *To: *"North American Network Operators' Group" 
> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 30, 2019 9:45:29 AM
> *Subject: *Re: Amazon Peering
>
> Similar experiences here with Amazon.  Initially had semi-regular
> responses from their peering team, they issued LOAs, I ordered the
> x-connects and then radio silence for months.
> At the point now where I'm disconnecting x-connects since it's a waste of
> money.
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 10:49 AM Brooks Swinnerton 
> wrote:
>
>> I also saw sessions come up this weekend, no routes yet though.
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 4:56 PM Tom Beecher  wrote:
>>
>>> Mike-
>>>
>>> Definitely moving forward now. Someone from Amazon was working with my
>>> peering group and things started coming up this weekend, so it seems like
>>> they're catching up pretty good now.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 2:45 PM Mike Hammett  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Let us know your success as well. I'll hold off following up on my
>>>> requests until I see that other people are successful. I don't want to
>>>> contribute to flooding them with requests.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>
>>>> Midwest-IX
>>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *From: *"Tom Beecher" 
>>>> *To: *"Jason Lixfeld" 
>>>> *Cc: *"North American Network Operators' Group" 
>>>> *Sent: *Thursday, January 24, 2019 1:38:51 PM
>>>> *Subject: *Re: Amazon Peering
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Jason. I'll have my peering team take another crack at reaching
>>>> out and see what happens. Appreciate it!
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 2:21 PM Jason Lixfeld 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We circled back with them yesterday on a request we made in late
>>>>> November where at the time they said they wouldn’t be turned up until 2019
>>>>> due to holiday network change freeze.
>>>>>
>>>>> They responded within about 4 hours, thanked us for our patience and
>>>>> understanding and said we should expect them to be turned up in about 6
>>>>> weeks, which is apparently their typical timing.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 24, 2019, at 2:13 PM, Tom Beecher  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I hate to necro-thread , but has anyone seen any movement from Amazon
>>>>> on this? I just got a Strongly Worded Message about it, and according to 
>>>>> my
>>>>> peering team , it's been radio silence for months.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 12:32 PM JASON BOTHE via NANOG <
>>>>> nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a note I received on Oct18 when checking on a peering request
>>>>>> submitted on Aug7..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “Apologies for the delays here. We have temporarily frozen IX peering
>>>>>> as we revise some of our automation processes. I’m hopeful this will be
>>>>>> unblocked by early November. Thank you for your continued patience.”
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 24, 2018, at 10:59, Darin Steffl 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems wasteful for Amazon to connect to an IX but then ignore
>>>>>> peering requests for a year.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They have 40G of connectivity but are unresponsive. I'll try emailing
>>>>>> all the other contacts listed in peeringdb.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018, 10:38 AM Mike Hammett >>>>>
>>>>>>> I've e-mailed my contacts there a couple times on people's behalf.
>>>>>>> No response yet.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It seems like a lot of organizations need 1 more person in their
>>>>>>> peering departments.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Midwest-IX
>>>>>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> *From: *"Darin Steffl" 
>>>>>>> *To: *"North American Network Operators' Group" 
>>>>>>> *Sent: *Friday, November 23, 2018 10:21:51 PM
>>>>>>> *Subject: *Amazon Peering
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hey all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does anyone have a direct contact to get a peering session
>>>>>>> established with Amazon at an IX? I sent a peering request Dec 2017 and 
>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>> more times this Sept and Nov with no response.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I sent to peer...@amazon.com and received one automated response
>>>>>>> back so I know they received my email but nothing since.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Darin Steffl
>>>>>>> Minnesota WiFi
>>>>>>> www.mnwifi.com
>>>>>>> 507-634-WiFi
>>>>>>> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
>>>>>>> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>

Re: Amazon Peering

[Luca Salvatore via NANOG]

Similar experiences here with Amazon.  Initially had semi-regular responses
from their peering team, they issued LOAs, I ordered the x-connects and
then radio silence for months.
At the point now where I'm disconnecting x-connects since it's a waste of
money.

On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 10:49 AM Brooks Swinnerton 
wrote:

> I also saw sessions come up this weekend, no routes yet though.
>
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 4:56 PM Tom Beecher  wrote:
>
>> Mike-
>>
>> Definitely moving forward now. Someone from Amazon was working with my
>> peering group and things started coming up this weekend, so it seems like
>> they're catching up pretty good now.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 2:45 PM Mike Hammett  wrote:
>>
>>> Let us know your success as well. I'll hold off following up on my
>>> requests until I see that other people are successful. I don't want to
>>> contribute to flooding them with requests.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>> Midwest-IX
>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>>
>>> --
>>> *From: *"Tom Beecher" 
>>> *To: *"Jason Lixfeld" 
>>> *Cc: *"North American Network Operators' Group" 
>>> *Sent: *Thursday, January 24, 2019 1:38:51 PM
>>> *Subject: *Re: Amazon Peering
>>>
>>> Thanks Jason. I'll have my peering team take another crack at reaching
>>> out and see what happens. Appreciate it!
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 2:21 PM Jason Lixfeld 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 We circled back with them yesterday on a request we made in late
 November where at the time they said they wouldn’t be turned up until 2019
 due to holiday network change freeze.

 They responded within about 4 hours, thanked us for our patience and
 understanding and said we should expect them to be turned up in about 6
 weeks, which is apparently their typical timing.

 On Jan 24, 2019, at 2:13 PM, Tom Beecher  wrote:

 I hate to necro-thread , but has anyone seen any movement from Amazon
 on this? I just got a Strongly Worded Message about it, and according to my
 peering team , it's been radio silence for months.


 On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 12:32 PM JASON BOTHE via NANOG 
 wrote:

> This is a note I received on Oct18 when checking on a peering request
> submitted on Aug7..
>
> “Apologies for the delays here. We have temporarily frozen IX peering
> as we revise some of our automation processes. I’m hopeful this will be
> unblocked by early November. Thank you for your continued patience.”
>
> On Nov 24, 2018, at 10:59, Darin Steffl 
> wrote:
>
> It seems wasteful for Amazon to connect to an IX but then ignore
> peering requests for a year.
>
> They have 40G of connectivity but are unresponsive. I'll try emailing
> all the other contacts listed in peeringdb.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018, 10:38 AM Mike Hammett 
>> I've e-mailed my contacts there a couple times on people's behalf. No
>> response yet.
>>
>> It seems like a lot of organizations need 1 more person in their
>> peering departments.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> Midwest-IX
>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>
>> --
>> *From: *"Darin Steffl" 
>> *To: *"North American Network Operators' Group" 
>> *Sent: *Friday, November 23, 2018 10:21:51 PM
>> *Subject: *Amazon Peering
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> Does anyone have a direct contact to get a peering session
>> established with Amazon at an IX? I sent a peering request Dec 2017 and 
>> two
>> more times this Sept and Nov with no response.
>>
>> I sent to peer...@amazon.com and received one automated response
>> back so I know they received my email but nothing since.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Darin Steffl
>> Minnesota WiFi
>> www.mnwifi.com
>> 507-634-WiFi
>>  Like us on Facebook
>> 
>>
>>

>>>

Re: What are people using for IPAM these days?

[Luca Salvatore via NANOG]

Netbox. Open source IPAM and DCIM built by DigitalOcean
https://github.com/digitalocean/netbox

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 5:50 PM Eric Kuhnke  wrote:

> Either phpipam or nipap.
>
> Both use fairly standard database backends and db schema (usually something
> as simple as mariadb listenong on localhost only, on the same VM that is
> the apache2 or nginx + php stack), allowing you to scale up to external
> tools that do read only queries of the IP database for other purposes.
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 1:48 PM, Mike Lyon  wrote:
>
> > Title says it all... Currently using IPPlan, but it is kinda antiquated..
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mike
> >
> > --
> > Mike Lyon
> > mike.l...@gmail.com
> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon
> >
>

Re: Curiosity about AS3356 L3/CenturyLink network resiliency (in general)

[Luca Salvatore via NANOG]

To answer your specific question - In the regions we use 3356 (NYC and
SFO/Bay Area) 3356 have been solid. I’d even say they have less issues than
the other usual tier 1 providers... for example 1299 had a hell of a week
last week around SFO was 3356 was stable.

Can’t comment on what I’d say are small regions like Tampa though.

On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 5:56 PM David Hubbard 
wrote:

> Yes, I do, as stated in my initial email.  My inquiry is about whether
> this level of downtime, and lack of redundancy for a given region, is
> normal for 3356.  There are some markets where diverse paths are not so
> easy to acquire.
> 
> From: Robert DeVita 
> Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2018 5:36:23 PM
> To: David Hubbard; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Curiosity about AS3356 L3/CenturyLink network resiliency (in
> general)
>
> If this is a know issue and has happened before and point to point
> circuits aren’t effected you always have the opportunity to diversify your
> own network and get private lines back to Miami, Jax, Atlanta or Dallas to
> create your own diversity don’t you?
>
> Robert DeVita
> Managing Director
> Mejeticks
> c. 469-441-8864
> e. radev...@mejeticks.com
> _
> From: David Hubbard 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 12:03 PM
> Subject: Curiosity about AS3356 L3/CenturyLink network resiliency (in
> general)
> To: 
>
>
> I’m curious if anyone who’s used 3356 for transit has found shortcomings
> in how their peering and redundancy is configured, or what a normal
> expectation to have is. The Tampa Bay market has been completely down for
> 3356 IP services twice so far this year, each for what I’d consider an
> unacceptable period of time (many hours). I’m learning that the entire
> market is served by just two fiber routes, through cities hundreds of miles
> away in either direction. So, basically two fiber cuts, potentially 1000+
> miles apart, takes the entire region down. The most recent occurrence was a
> week or so ago when a Miami-area cut and an Orange, Texas cut (1287 driving
> miles apart) took IP services down for hours. It did not take point to
> point circuits to out of market locations down, so that suggests they even
> have the ability to be more redundant and simply choose not to.
>
> I feel like it’s not unreasonable to expect more redundancy, or a much
> smaller attack surface given a disgruntled lineman who knows the routes
> could take an entire region down with a planned cut four states apart.
> Maybe other regions are better designed? Or are my expectations
> unreasonable? I carry three peers in that market, so it hasn’t been
> outage-causing, but I use 3356 in other markets too, and have plans for
> more, but it makes me wonder if I just haven't had the pleasure of similar
> outages elsewhere yet and I should factor that expectation into the design.
> It creates a problem for me in one location where I can only get them and
> Cogent, since Cogent can't be relied on for IPv6 service, which I need.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
>

Re: mrtg alternative

[Luca Salvatore via NANOG]

Look into AKiPS.. Some of the guys from Statseeker made it better :-)

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Anurag Bhatia  wrote:

> +1 for Cacti.
>
>
> I tried zenoss & observium but still Cacti is more cool in terms of
> tweaking templates as well as the tree mode for easy quick representation.
>
>
>
> Thanks for starting this cool thread. Will help in getting links to some of
> other cool projects which we don't hear around.
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 10:36 PM, Alan Buxey 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for Statseeker. Ease of use etc (price depends on eg site size etc).
> > Can do lots on just one mid server unlike some other bloaty solutions out
> > there.  But we also still use MRTG for some local bespoke measurements
> >
> > PS you can get a free Eval of statseeker. Obnote, don't work for them
> just
> > a fairly happy customer
> >
> > alan
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Anurag Bhatia
> anuragbhatia.com
>



-- 
Luca Salvatore
Manager, Network Team | DigitalOcean
Phone: +1 (929) 214-7242