Hey Adam,
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 at 00:11, Adam Thompson wrote:
> Good luck with tunnelling LACP, no matter what boxes you have - LACP has (de
> facto) hard jitter requirements of under 1msec, or you'll be getting TCP
> resets coming out your ears due to mis-ordered packets.
Can you elaborate on
> On 8 Jul 2020, at 03:23, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
> wrote:
>
> Hi Douglas,
>
> There was, long time ago, something developed by ISC, but I think never
> completed and not updated …
ISC did a DS-LITE implementation called AFTR. This can be found at:
As someone who has spent quite a long time building CGNAT solutions I have some
good news for you, there is an easy solution to your below point that works
exceptionally well. The solution is dual stack IPv6, its trivial to route your
IPv6 to bypass the CGNAT device you are using and pretty
Dear Adam,
yeah, forget about LACP - the bigger problem is all the LLDP and STP stuff,
that gets interpreted at the UNI port. LACP is a bad example - but there are
many other frames and protocols, which must work. Could be that a customer
wants to run MPLS+LDP on his VLL (for whatever reason
Good luck with tunnelling LACP, no matter what boxes you have - LACP has (de
facto) hard jitter requirements of under 1msec, or you'll be getting TCP resets
coming out your ears due to mis-ordered packets.
For your requirements, although I hesitate to recommend them for
enterprise/carrier use,
Hi,
We are having problems with traffic to Edgecast from our netblock getting TCP
Reset. The big thing it seems to be causing problems with is Twitter. Anyone
else experiencing this problem, and does anyone have a contact there ? Their
tier 1 support didn't want to talk to us because we
Dear folks,
have anyone already tried to run VXLAN/EVPN + Bridge Layer 2 Protocol
Tunneling on Cumulus Linux as an replacement for classic MPLS L2VPN/VPWS
(xconnect, l2circuit, VLL) ?
I need to provide transparent Ethernet P2P virtual leased lines to my
customers and these have to support
Watching the growth of terrestrial fiber (and PTP microwave) networks going
inland from the west and east African coasts has been interesting. There's
a big old C-band earth station on the hill above Freetown, Sierra Leone
that was previously the capital's only link to the outside world. Obsoleted
hey there,
Millions of people working from home, I am sure there was a lot of hard
work from network and systems teams to build and upgrade capacity before
and during the covid19 pandemic.
I have a youtube series I am focusing on internet infrastructure and new
normal, I would like to discover
DANOS 2005 seems to support a lot of your requirements.
https://danosproject.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/DAN/pages/320634926/DANOS+2005+Release+Notes
So if you have an x86 box with supported NICS you should be able to get
some decent performance from it.
The major gotcha in this release is I think
Okay,
In my use case it's just a default route being distributed by a router that has
the full routing table to an access router in the same ASN. It's not being sent
to other ASNs or anything of that sort.
I was just curious as to why Cisco sets it to internal and Arista sets it to
invalid.
Hi Douglas,
There was, long time ago, something developed by ISC, but I think never
completed and not updated …
464XLAT is always a solution and becomes much cheaper, than CGN from vendors,
even if you need to replace the CPEs. I’m doing that now with 25.000.000
subscribers … (slowed
Debatable, certainly, as the Origin attribute should probably be considered as
dead/obsolete and therefore it is probably a good practice to always set/reset
it to internal.
A number of networks already do this (including level3 by example).
After all, the origin attribute was only designed to
We are looking for a CGNAT solution open source based.
Yep, I know that basic CGNAT can be done with iptables / nftables, or PF /
IPFILTER / IPFW.
But I only know Open Source CGNAT recipes with predefined public-ports <->
private IPs mapping.
What It brings two types of issues:
A - The need to
You might want to check out the mailops mailing list as well, for people a bit
more into email.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com
- Original Message -
From: "Tobias Fiebig"
To: nanog@nanog.org
Dear all,
I am a researcher at TU Delft in the Netherlands, looking into Security &
Protocol Adoption.
My student Olamide is looking into how well email setups are maintained around
the globe.
For this, we need many people, ideally from smaller providers, i.e., with non
gmail/hotmail/yahoo
Any idea what network protocol(s) used with Starlink?
On Tue, Jul 7, 2020, 5:08 AM Saku Ytti wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 06:35, Harry McGregor
> wrote:
>
> > Once the laser based inter-sat links are running (Starlink 2.0?), it
> should be lower latency vs Fiber.
>
> I understood it's not
Hey,
> I don’t believe that it has a functionality impact but I would like to know
> which one you think follows the RFC more closely.
Debatable, but:
Internal is more accurate if you redistribute default from routing
protocol, such as static.
Unknown is more accurate if you just generate it in
Howdy,
I am using a multi-vendor network and validating the inter-operability.
When I announce a default route to a BGP peer using default-originate applied
to the peer group/neighbor configuration:
in vendor A that route is sent with ORIGIN 0 (internal)
in vendor B that route is sent with
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 06:35, Harry McGregor wrote:
> Once the laser based inter-sat links are running (Starlink 2.0?), it should
> be lower latency vs Fiber.
I understood it's not clear if this will ever happen. In local
constellation it might, but supposedly technology does not currently
On 7/Jul/20 10:07, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> The most noteworthy thing I'm seeing in C band these days, is many
> customers formerly 100% reliant upon it shifting their traffic to
> newly built submarine fiber routes.
Before most of Africa had submarine fibre, a lot of our traffic was
carried on
On 7/Jul/20 08:51, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:
>
> And as Ku is often covering specific regions, often it means rainy
> days for most transponder customers.
> This is why in zones closer to equator, with their long-term monsoon,
> C-Band was only option,
> no idea about now.
In much of
The most noteworthy thing I'm seeing in C band these days, is many
customers formerly 100% reliant upon it shifting their traffic to newly
built submarine fiber routes.
On Mon, Jul 6, 2020, 11:51 PM Denys Fedoryshchenko <
nuclear...@nuclearcat.com> wrote:
> On 2020-07-07 08:32, Eric Kuhnke
On 2020-07-07 08:32, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
"no clouds" is overstating the effect somewhat. I've operated a number
of mission critical Ku band based systems that met four nines of
overall link uptime. The operational effect of a cloud that isn't an
active downpour of rain is negligible. Continual
24 matches
Mail list logo
