Re: [uknof] Full table routers

[Simon Woodhead]

John

This is a good suggestion. We consciously opted for Arista 7050 switches over 
full-table routers a good few  years ago (2016) and made up the difference with 
selective route download. EOS has a really cool feature where a prefix list can 
be set to a HTTP endpoint so we have internal anycast endpoints whereby each 
switch can dynamically update its prefixlist, and those are managed by sflow 
analysis. IIRC the busiest edge has about 5k prefixes installed (plus default) 
and it has worked flawlessly with newly relevant routes being installed in a 
few minutes. We've moved on and up a few generations hardware wise now but the 
basic operation is still the same.

cheers

Simon

photo ( https://simwood.com )

Simon Woodhead
CEO, Simwood

*Phone* +44 330 122 3021 ( tel:+44+330+122+3021 ) | *Mobile* +44 7976 238 487‬ 
( tel:+44+7976+238+487‬ )

*Website* simwood.com ( https://simwood.com ) | *Email* 
simon.woodh...@simwood.com ( simon.woodh...@simwood.com )

linkedin ( https://www.linkedin.com/in/simonwoodhead/ ) twitter ( 
https://twitter.com/simwoodesms )

IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential. 
They are intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you have received this 
email by mistake, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the 
contents to anyone or make copies thereof.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 21:46:08, Will Hargrave < w...@harg.net > wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> Hi John,
> 
> 
> 
> Why not simply accept fewer routes (plus a default) into the existing
> Arista EOS BGP and so the hardware FIB? Then you can actually take
> advantage of the hardware forwarding.
> 
> 
> 
> With this setup you’re using the relatively slow control plane (the Intel
> FM6000 was released a decade ago and I can’t imagine Arista paired it with
> a super-fast SoC…) to route and that won’t work very quickly at all. In
> fact it may not have enough RAM and CPU to effectively deal with a modern
> full table, it would be better to just use a modern 1U server for this.
> 
> 
> 
> Will
> 
> 
> 
> On 28 Jun 2023, at 21:21, John P Bourke wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I may have “an” answer.  I think the Americans call this a “Hail Mary
>> Pass”.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I have a bunch Arista 7150s, which are EOL and a disappointment.  But I
>> found this.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> https:/ / research. kudelskisecurity. com/ 2015/ 10/ 01/ 
>> hacking-arista-appliances-for-fun-and-profit/
>> #comments (
>> https://research.kudelskisecurity.com/2015/10/01/hacking-arista-appliances-for-fun-and-profit/#comments
>> )
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The Arista runs a full Centos 7.6.  You strip out the Arista BGP process
>> and BIRD (or FRR I guess) and you have a route server.  I say route
>> server, because by pulling the Arista BGP process you have no interaction
>> with the RIB.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> BTW – Not dissing Arista.  The 7150 is a bit of a unicorn in their
>> portfolio, using a chipset from Intel which they bought from a startup,
>> which Intel then dropped so Arista understandably did not put a lot of
>> effort into beyond the High Frequency Trading use cases that this low
>> latency switch is good for.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> *From:* Tim Bray < tim@ kooky. org ( t...@kooky.org ) >
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2023 6:56 PM
>> *To:* uknof@ lists. uknof. org. uk ( uknof@lists.uknof.org.uk )
>> *Subject:* Re: [uknof] Full table routers
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 28/06/2023 10:27, John P Bourke wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Any recommendations for full table routers.  We don’t need more than 10G.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I used Debian + FRR on HP proliants.   With startech Nics with intel
>> chipset.    Unusual, but did the trick.  Help that there was a whole
>> stack of the same hardware running services in the same place.    They
>> take a while to boot, but you can make it faster and I think the newer
>> variants are better.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Software wise, takes a bit of getting used to.   Sometimes conflict
>> between FRR and what Debian wants to do for network setup.      Also you
>> can use CAKE :)  Also run any scripts or monitoring you want onboard
>> (like counting the BFD flaps per hour to watch the problems that go away
>> and come back very quickly)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> See also distributions that bundle FRR more specifically for networking
>> rather than a general distribution.
>> 
>> -- Tim Bray Huddersfield, GB tim@ kooky. org ( t...@kooky.org ) +44
>> 7966479015
>> 
> 
>

Re: [uknof] Internet Issues 23/3/2021

[Simon Woodhead]

LINX had some issues on LON1 which caused some sessions to drop for short 
periods. Many providers elected to drop sessions which would have caused 
re-routing and knock on consequences depending on other choices (e.g. adequacy 
of transit provision).

Note the dips about to go out of view on https://portal.linx.net ( 
https://portal.linx.net/ )

W

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:33:54, Paul Bone < paul@pmb.technology > wrote:

> 
> Does anyone actually know what occurred yesterday afternoon to cause havoc
> on the UK internet? Still waiting for RFOs from suppliers but does seem
> rather quiet considering a lot of services were taken out of action.
> 
> 
> 
> Paul Bone
> Network Consultant
>

Re: [uknof] Wanted: Remote Hands at Telehouse North/East. Requires Flexoptix Flexbox

[Simon Woodhead]

Phil Baker is your man Fredy (and bcc’d)

W

On Wed, Feb 3 2021 at 16:52, Fredy Künzler < kuenz...@init7.net > wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> Dear UKNOF Community,
> 
> 
> 
> As traveling to London for foreigners is not an option in the near future,
> in order to have a proper pint or two, we have to find an alternative.
> 
> 
> 
> We need someone who can do remote hands for us at Telehouse North and East
> and work with our engineer in Switzerland, to move all services and links
> from old to new gear, one after the other.
> 
> 
> 
> Daytime job, within about two to three weeks. I suppose all can be done in
> one day. Hardware is already installed. Normal per hour payment
> (invoice required), or free 1gig IP feed for 12 months as a trade :-)
> 
> 
> 
> Must have a Flexbox of Flexoptix to reprogram a handful optics. It should
> support QSFP28 100gig -->
> https://www.flexoptix.net/de/flexoptix-products/flexbox-series-configure-universal-transceivers.html?395=1357=
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please contact my colleague Anita Meyer off list (meyer at init7 dot net)
> with a list of skills and £/€/$ expectation. Recommendations welcome.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Fredy Künzler
> 
> 
> 
> Init7 (Switzerland) Ltd.
> Technoparkstrasse 5
> CH-8406 Winterthur
> https://www.init7.net/
> 
> 
>

Re: [uknof] BT? fibre issue

[Simon Woodhead]

Gamma claim they have a dual break on the East coast and London area. The 
London one may be off-net but I haven’t heard. 

We’ve not seen anyone else affected other than Gamma resellers, just a lot more 
voice traffic!

W

> On 31 Jan 2020, at 18:08, Martin Hepworth  wrote:
> 
> Gamma are affected, but theres also chatter it's bigger trying to get 
> some authoritative info.. 
> 
> -- 
> Martin Hepworth, CISSP
> Oxford, UK
> 
> 
> On Fri, 31 Jan 2020 at 17:54, Simon Woodhead  <mailto:simon.woodh...@simwood.com>> wrote:
> Gamma, Martin.
> 
> > On 31 Jan 2020, at 17:50, Martin Hepworth  > <mailto:max...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > 
> > Seeing lots of chatter on twitter /downdetector about what looks like a big 
> > fiber issue possibly BT related ..
> > 
> > Affecting many ISP data/VOIP etc
> > 
> > anyone  got any details?
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Martin Hepworth, CISSP
> > Oxford, UK
> 

Re: [uknof] BT? fibre issue

[Simon Woodhead]

Gamma, Martin.

> On 31 Jan 2020, at 17:50, Martin Hepworth  wrote:
> 
> Seeing lots of chatter on twitter /downdetector about what looks like a big 
> fiber issue possibly BT related ..
> 
> Affecting many ISP data/VOIP etc
> 
> anyone  got any details?
> 
> 
> -- 
> Martin Hepworth, CISSP
> Oxford, UK

Re: [uknof] JUNOS filter hackery

[Simon Woodhead]

Exactly that Sandy. Thanks :)
Loose uRPF checks for a route back to the source of any packet arriving on an 
interface it is configured on, but in most implementations if that route back 
is actually to null it will drop the packet.
We used this for years on our old Brocade platform and it was really handy 
being able to inject anything at the ExaBGP level to block both source and 
destination across the entire edge. We have a feature request in for Arista as 
loose uRPF doesn’t work the same way to make this useful; I would expect (but 
don’t know) JunOS to be relatively sane.
W

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:58, Sandy Breeze  wrote:
Hi Paul, Rich,
I presume Simon meant that if you in some way injected /reflected your bogon 
feed prefixes into your network with a next-hop that is routed to null, then 
loose uRPF on your peering edge should drop anything arriving on those 
interfaces which is (recursively) destined to null.

Sandy


From: uknof  on behalf of Richard Halfpenny 

Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018 1:50:08 PM
To: Simon Woodhead
Cc: Paul Thornton; uknof@lists.uknof.org.uk
Subject: Re: [uknof] JUNOS filter hackery Hi Paul,
Flowspec and ExaBGP?
You probably can get JUNOS to build dynamically but have never tried that 
specific case.. the most we do is to have a commit script that searches for all 
BGP peer addresses and then opens them up automatically on the control plane 
filter. I doubt you could get it to change on every routing update change (e.g. 
only during config commit) as that would lead to a possible control plane DoS 
situation from a flood of updates.
Rich.
Network Engineering Manager
Exa Networks Ltd :: AS30740
richard.halfpe...@exa.net.uk [richard.halfpe...@exa.net.uk]


On 31 May 2018 at 11:37, Simon Woodhead < simon.woodh...@simwood.com 
[simon.woodh...@simwood.com] > wrote:
Hi Paul
Loose uRPF and ExaBGP are your friends here presuming uRPF behaves the same on 
Junos as others.

W
--


   SIMON WOODHEAD   
   


   Founder and CEO  
   


   simon.woodh...@simwood.com [simon.woodh...@simwood.com]  
   


   [simon.woodh...@simwood.com][simon.woodh...@simwood.com] +44 
330 122 3000   


   www.simwood.com [https://www.simwood.com]
   


   [https://www.simwood.com]
   
Simwood eSMS Limited , Simwood House, Cube M4 Business Park, Old Gloucester 
Road, Bristol, BS16 1FX, United Kingdom 

   
Registered in England 03379831  


   
Simwood Inc. , 301 Union St. #21445, Seattle, WA 98111, United States 
[https://maps.google.com/?q=301+Union+St.+%2321445,+Seattle,+WA+98111,+United+States=gmail=g]
   



   



On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:31, Paul Thornton < p...@prt.org [p...@prt.org] > 
wrote:
Hi folks,

I'm wondering if it is possible to dynamically build a firewall filter
from routes learned via BGP, based on a community or just routes learned
from a peer.

The use case here is to take a Team Cymru BGP bogons feed and build a
"deny anything from these sources" firewall that can then be applied to
both customer and peer interfaces.

This could, of cours

Re: [uknof] JUNOS filter hackery

[Simon Woodhead]

Hi Paul
Loose uRPF and ExaBGP are your friends here presuming uRPF behaves the same 
on Junos as others.


W
--
   
  SIMON WOODHEAD   
  
   
  Founder and CEO  
  
   
  simon.woodh...@simwood.com 
[simon.woodh...@simwood.com] 
   
  
[simon.woodh...@simwood.com][simon.woodh...@simwood.com] +44 330 122 3000   
   
  www.simwood.com 
[https://www.simwood.com]   
   
  [https://www.simwood.com]
  
Simwood eSMS Limited , Simwood House, Cube M4 Business Park, Old Gloucester 
Road, Bristol, BS16 1FX, United Kingdom 
 
Registered in England 03379831  
   
 
Simwood Inc. , 301 Union St. #21445, Seattle, WA 98111, United States   
   
 
   
   
  




On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:31, Paul Thornton  wrote:
Hi folks,

I'm wondering if it is possible to dynamically build a firewall filter
from routes learned via BGP, based on a community or just routes learned
from a peer.

The use case here is to take a Team Cymru BGP bogons feed and build a
"deny anything from these sources" firewall that can then be applied to
both customer and peer interfaces.

This could, of course, be scripted but I'm wondering if there isn't some
kind of magic that we can use to get the router to do it natively.

Thanks

Paul.

--
Paul Thornton

Re: [uknof] EXTERNAL:Re: BT Phone Number renumbering

[Simon Woodhead]

Hi Darren
I wouldn’t presume the industry is anything other than desperate for a sensible 
solution to porting. The present embarrassment is causing massive consumer harm 
and facilitating re-monopolisation when combined with other rocks Ofcom is 
reluctant to look under.
There’s a number of ways of interpreting the last attempt to do so, but that 
industry doesn’t want it is not the correct one IMHO. I believe you’d find a 
lot of support in attempting to do it collaboratively.

Cheers W
--

  SIMON WOODHEAD
  

  Founder and CEO   
  

  simon.woodh...@simwood.com 
[simon.woodh...@simwood.com] 

  
[simon.woodh...@simwood.com][simon.woodh...@simwood.com] +44 330 122 3000   

  www.simwood.com [https://www.simwood.com] 
  

  [https://www.simwood.com] 
  
Simwood eSMS Limited , Simwood House, Cube M4 Business Park, Old Gloucester 
Road, Bristol, BS16 1FX, United Kingdom 
  
Registered in England 03379831  

  
Simwood Inc. , 301 Union St. #21445, Seattle, WA 98111, United States   

  


  



On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:37, Neil J. McRae <n...@domino.org> wrote:
Darren,

I think once upon a time that would have been a valuable thing to do but in 
today’s glorious digital world - let’s face it; phone numbers are the 
telecommunications equivalent of Woolworth’s.



You want a phone number after you’ve tried to whatsapp, facebook messenger or 
email- you google it; you use a phone number often - you store it in your phone 
and forget it; or someone miss-calls you so you can store it, you want to phone 
your grandkids and you use facetime… The only folks who use phone numbers are 
irritating sales people who have your number from linked in and want to know if 
you are going to some bizarre conference in Middlesbrough or that they have a 
solution for GDPR (!)



In my personal view we should be figuring out how we rid the planet of phone 
numbers.



Cheers,

Neil.



On 22/05/2018 09:26, "Darren Storer" < darren.sto...@ofcom.org.uk 
[darren.sto...@ofcom.org.uk] > wrote:



Hi All,



Personally I have always been disappointed by industry resistance to an "all 
call query" (central IN) number portability solution, as implemented in Holland 
(COIN) or even an intermediate "query on release strategy". The lack of a 
central number portability solution makes legislation tricky to keep up with 
and impacts the user experience.

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/content/number-portability 
[https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/content/number-portability]



Regards


Darren








From: uknof <uknof-boun...@lists.uknof.org.uk> on behalf of Neil J. McRae 
<n...@domino.org>
Sent: 22 May 2018 07:47
To: Tim Bray
Cc: uknof@lists.uknof.org.uk
Subject: EXTERNAL:Re: [uknof] BT Phone Number renumbering



Emails like this make me chuckle when we are the biggest VoIP provider in the 
country ;)

We typically don’t port numbers or use premium rate numbers in the way being 
requested on the PSTN for a variety of reasons - the biggest one being the 
ability to make inbound signalling work which requires a lot of effort for 
single numbers and causes billing and other challenges and a lot of these are 
mostly not within our control. And yes we’ve started to path to turn off PSTN.

Neil.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 21 May 2018, at 15:26, Tim Bray <t...@kooky.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 21/05/18 11:24, David Derrick wrote:
>>
>> Why faff about getting the pretty number on the PSTN line? I 

Re: [uknof] Arista

[Simon Woodhead]

Hi Darren

We (Simwood) migrated to Arista last year and it is awesome. We’re using the 
7050SX because we really wanted DirectFlow so compromising on the full-table 
(in FIB - you get it all in RIB) was a given. We rolled our own solution for 
that which was made a lot easier by EOS supported a URL source for 
access-lists. In fact I did a talk at LINX98 on the various other cool things 
the migration has enabled us to do.

Support is awesome - you get a response from a clueful human pretty quickly - 
and the SEs rock too.

We also moved to CloudVision for management of static config (dynamic being 
through the API or http fed ACLs) and it is a game-changer. The ability to have 
‘configlets’ cascade through your hierarchy as appropriate is brilliant  - you 
can change network-wide info once and ensure it is consistent across the estate 
for example. That is also really strong for pushing out the resulting 
config-tasks, including being able to snapshot the network before and after the 
change to highlight any loss of BGP sessions, port-status or mac-address 
visibility. At the other end, being able to cleanly delete a configlet 
containing, say, a peer with BGP config, prefix-list and ACL, and not be left 
with bits of config about the place is powerful too.

I can’t recommend it highly enough.

W


> On 21 Nov 2017, at 13:40, Darren Brown  wrote:
> 
> Hi Guys,
> 
> Does anyone have any experience of Arista products good / bad ? I am 
> specifically looking at the 7280SRA. In addition, does anybody know who the 
> “go to” supplier in the UK would be ?
> 
> Many Thanks
> Darren Brown



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: [uknof] Fibre to remote areas

[Simon Woodhead]

> On 23 Aug 2017, at 10:09, Tim Bray  wrote:
> 
> On 16/08/17 22:19, Neil J. McRae wrote:
>> We have some stupid things such as EO lines that we need to do more to solve 
>> (but requires co-op from others who would rather they keep you on a slower 
>> platform). And yes over time I believe we will move away from ADSL as a 
>> solution. But remember some customers are only just getting ADSL2 now such 
>> are the economics of build.
> 
> I thought EO lines were just a doomed outcome.   But I just yesterday
> ordered an FTTC on what was an exchange only line.  A new cabinet has
> appeared in the BT exchange car park.   It looks very new.
> 
> So a solution is possible.   Albeit, a silly one.  I'm sure VDSL inside
> the building would be easier.

FWIW, I have an 8 mile EO-line to a 20CN (tin hut) exchange which itself is 
many many miles from somewhere sensible. The last mile is over my land up the 
mountain and the line has been dead for 3+ years given we couldn’t get line 
sync on ADSL2 when we tried then. IIRC the Assembly topped up the central 
Government funding with a further £400m for FTTx deployment but I understand a 
stipulation there was that any property more than 400m from a new FTTC cabinet 
got FTTH. So, amazingly, we now have FTTH to the top of a mountain in deepest 
Wales!

Deployment was scarily quick when it happened. The fibre was all strung from 
poles and whilst I only observed the bit over our land (without advice or 
permission presumably as they were using existing poles and way-leaves) they 
did that in less than half an hour, and then the final pole to the house was 
done in under an hour. There was a year or more in between obviously but it 
still shows it can be done and land-owners don’t necessarily need to be 
involved. Given EO lines are generally in this kind of setting they’re probably 
an easier nut to crack than urban HMOs and the distance or remoteness isn’t 
necessarily the bit that makes it expensive.

The only fishy part is that this fibre apparently does not exist as an asset in 
the OR database. In the interim (i.e long after fibre install when I was 
doubting FTTH was ever going to happen) I tried ordering an EAD and the ECCs 
came back as £55k to run new fibre! The surveyor didn’t believe the fibre 
existed until I shows it to him and then couldn’t find it on the system when he 
checked back at the office. I might have bought the fact that there’s some 
transmission issue rendering it unsuitable for EAD but instead I got the 
feeling the tax-payer funding had somehow ring-fenced that fibre as a BTW asset 
rather than OR.

W



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: [uknof] Transit in LD5/4

[Simon Woodhead]

+1. We swapped Level3 for Telia in LD4. Best of all he bunch at the moment 
and human to deal with.


On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 10:07, Neil J. McRae  wrote:
We use telia - very happy.
Cheers, Neil.

Sent from my iPad
On 23 Sep 2016, at 10:36, Personal < dominte...@gmail.com 
[dominte...@gmail.com] > wrote:


Hi guys and girls,

One of the companies I work for is looking to add some transit in Slough 
Ld5, but it needs to be diverse from Docklands, rather than everything 
being backhauled in THN / Equicity. Other than Cogent, NTT, Level3 do you 
have any recommendations?


I got a few quotes from Level3, Telia, Telecom Italia and Zayo saying they 
can supply that. XO said they only have that as an option for their US 
based customers. Has anyone got transit from any experience with the 
aforementioned providers?


This is to replace GTT as they have proven to be a bit unreliable (read 
congested) so we need to find something else.


Catalin


--
Nocsult Ltd
Unified Network Management Solutions

Re: [uknof] Virtualized SBC

[Simon Woodhead]

Hi Ryan

No is the direct answer but I can lend some wider perspective which might be 
helpful.

Can you run media at scale in VMs? 

Assuming we’re talking hypervisor virtualisation and a proper enterprise grade 
hypervisor like vSphere, rather than public cloud, then yes you can with 
caveats. There used to be concerns around CPU scheduling and the introduction 
of jitter but recent versions have dramatically improved that. There is jitter 
just by virtue of using a shared resource but how much depends on contention 
levels; on a platform that is not oversubscribed it is perfectly acceptable and 
not dissimilar to natural jitter levels over typical end-user connectivity. 
VMWare did some testing and research on this at various levels of subscription 
a few years ago which you might find useful: 
http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/techpaper/latency-sensitive-perf-vsphere55.pdf

Most of our media is handled in hardware but where it is handled in software 
that is still on bare-metal with a few exceptions. Those exceptions are, for 
example, fax servers and even our office PBX. Performance from both is 
indistinguishable to bare-metal for practical purposes, albeit at much lower 
volume.

Would I buy an SBC?

No, unless I had specific transport changes (where I didn’t understand one of 
them!) or to give certified compatibility with something non-standard such as 
Lync. For SIP-to-SIP I firmly believe a properly configured open-source stack 
to be superior in _almost_ every way. The only two selling points for a single 
box SBC over an open source stack that I see are:

- ticking the procurement box of a clean point of demarcation deployable right 
on the edge. This is trivial to do on open-source on commodity hardware but you 
can’t give a procurement bod a spec sheet, and to do it properly it won’t be a 
single box solution.

- hardware DSPs. You can obviously get hardware DSPs on a PCI card (we use them 
quite successfully where we can’t bypass media directly to hardware) but it is 
greatly preferable to handle it truly in hardware which an SBC does and they do 
it well.

Do either of those selling points apply to a vSBC?

No! By definition it will not be sitting on the edge, it’ll be sitting quite 
deeply inside the network and rather than being a clean point of demarcation, 
it’ll be dependent on hypervisor security and any trunking (or God forbid 
overlay network) used to reach the virtual NIC. 

Similarly, there is no hardware DSP as there is no hardware. All transcoding 
(and for that matter encryption) will be done in software, in shared resource 
with additional layers underneath.

Now, having said all of that I have in moments of weakness looked at these and 
quizzed vendor SEs. I believe if you feel you need an SBC they can do the job, 
just with the two compromises I mention above. Where I do struggle is on the 
performance claims particularly in terms of concurrent calls. The performance 
stats I’ve seen for similar things (e.g. 50k concurrent!) are trivial to 
achieve in SIP but in terms of media handling feel far closer to basic media 
proxy than a full B2BUA performing encryption and transcoding (all in 
software). Thus before committing I’d be wanting to test with real-world 
traffic and would fully expect throughput to be a fraction of the datasheet 
figure. If that transpires anything like other virtual versions of hardware 
appliances we’ve looked at in other fields I expect you’ll conclude the 
hardware version to be preferable!

Hope that helps!
Simon


> On 7 Apr 2016, at 02:12, Ryan Finnesey  wrote:
> 
> Has any more worked with products similar to 
> http://www.sonus.net/products/session-border-controllers/virtualized-sbc-swe
> 
> What has your experience been?
> 
> Cheers
> Ryan
>   
>