On Jan 9, 2013, at 1:18 PM, Leo Bicknell bickn...@ufp.org wrote:
In a message written on Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 06:39:28PM +0100, Mikael
Abrahamsson wrote:
IPMI is exactly what we're going for.
For Vendors that use a PC motherboard, IPMI would probably not be
difficult at all! :)
I
From: Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:swm...@swm.pp.se]
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013, Matthew Petach wrote:
Thank goodness ethernet never has problems with negotiation going
awry,
and coming up with mismatched duplexes, and vendors never had to
implement no negotiation-auto in their configs because
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013, Matthew Petach wrote:
Thank goodness ethernet never has problems with negotiation going awry,
and coming up with mismatched duplexes, and vendors never had to
implement no negotiation-auto in their configs because you couldn't
count on everyone's implementations working
On 13/01/2013 07:42, Matthew Petach wrote:
PS--while we're at it, can I have a pony?
The day that we see good quality trouble-free OOB on all networking kit
that everyone is happy about will be the day that vendors shower us with
ponies for all. I'm quite sure of it.
Nick
On 1/13/13 12:12 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013, Matthew Petach wrote:
Thank goodness ethernet never has problems with negotiation going
awry, and coming up with mismatched duplexes, and vendors never had
to implement no negotiation-auto in their configs because you
On Jan 10, 2013, at 9:35 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
I don't think roland was really saying that normal netflow from a device in
production pushing a few hundred gbps of traffic would be
appropriate to ship out the OOB network... or I hope that wasn't his point. I
don't think oob
On 1/10/13, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:
On 10/01/2013 13:51, Jared Mauch wrote:
- rs232: please no. it's 2013. I don't want or need a protocol which
was designed for access speeds appropriate to the 1980s.
[snip]
Maybe stop with rs232 versus Ethernet, and implement _both_ as
On 12/01/2013 18:54, Jimmy Hess wrote:
The year on the calendar has little to do with the usefulness of
rs232, there has been no thorough replacement for every situation.
Tell that to Juniper who appear to think that running an RE console at 9600
baud is actually OK in a emergency situation in
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:
I want OOB with ethernet, MDIX, 100base-TX or 1000base-TX, with DHCP client
support. With a cherry.
and auto configuration that works? :) reliably? with your
switch/router upstream? :)
On Jan 12, 2013, at 2:10 AM, Nikolay Shopik sho...@inblock.ru wrote:
I had reverse tunnel from one of our DC's over a 3/4g usb dongle that
had a measured availability of less than 50% which oddly I didn't
consider acceptable.
How is that possible?
Nothing stops you from having the device
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Christopher Morrow
morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:
I want OOB with ethernet, MDIX, 100base-TX or 1000base-TX, with DHCP client
support. With a cherry.
and auto configuration that works? :)
Also getting POTS line in your pop sometimes get tricky. 2G/3G modems
with cheap plans cost like 10$/month (dunno about US though), thats
almost same as POTS line.
On 10/01/13 20:18, William Herrin wrote:
Dial up with PPP and then cross the ethernet? Drop off a cellular
modem with IP service
- Original Message -
From: William Herrin b...@herrin.us
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Randy Whitney
randy.whit...@verizon.com wrote:
Nothing beats POTS in a broad power outage scenario. Numerous power
outages
have taken down mobile service completely while the POTS lines
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
Oh, I dunno, Bill. Sure there are lots more RSUs than there used to be,
but at least it's not all *that* hard to tell if you're connected to one.
Much easier than, say, finding out if both sides of your loop have been
- Original Message -
From: William Herrin b...@herrin.us
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
Oh, I dunno, Bill. Sure there are lots more RSUs than there used to be,
but at least it's not all *that* hard to tell if you're connected to one.
Much
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
You are suggesting that it is *at all* difficult for a technically competent
end-user to determine whether a given new POTS line will go to a CO or to an
RSU?
Well, let me treat this as an opportunity to learn. How does one
On 1/11/13 02:44 , Nikolay Shopik wrote:
Also getting POTS line in your pop sometimes get tricky. 2G/3G modems
with cheap plans cost like 10$/month (dunno about US though), thats
almost same as POTS line.
They don't generally have public IPs (that can be arranged). verizon 4G
cards have ipv6
: OOB core router connectivity wish list
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
You are suggesting that it is *at all* difficult for a technically competent
end-user to determine whether a given new POTS line will go to a CO or to an
RSU?
Well, let me treat
: William Herrin b...@herrin.us
To: Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com
Cc: NANOG nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 2:30:48 PM
Subject: Re: OOB core router connectivity wish list
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
You are suggesting that it is *at all
nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 4:09:25 PM
Subject: Re: OOB core router connectivity wish list
The issue wasn't diversity, it was is my POTS on Central Battery; sorry for
the comparative red herring.
- jra
Walter Keen walter.k...@rainierconnect.net wrote:
I work
A POTS circuit necessarily terminates on a piece of gear with a specific CLLI,
generally discernable at order time.
What that gear will be, and if it's in a CO with a real battery plant is also
known in advance.
And, to tie it back on topic, the odds of a core router being in a place where
systems.
- Original Message -
From: Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com
To: Walter Keen walter.k...@rainierconnect.net, William Herrin
b...@herrin.us
Cc: NANOG nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 4:09:25 PM
Subject: Re: OOB core router connectivity wish list
The issue
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
The issue wasn't diversity, it was is my POTS on Central Battery; sorry
for the comparative red herring.
The issue was: is my POTS going to survive an extended regional power
outage that my cellular/DSL/cable modem doesn't,
On 12.01.2013 3:44, Joel jaeggli wrote:
On 1/11/13 02:44 , Nikolay Shopik wrote:
Also getting POTS line in your pop sometimes get tricky. 2G/3G modems
with cheap plans cost like 10$/month (dunno about US though), thats
almost same as POTS line.
They don't generally have public IPs (that can
CMP this is what we need.
+1000
On Jan 10, 2013, at 2:15 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
That is task for on-band interfaces, which attach to your forwarding-logic.
No it isn't, any more than SNMP is a task for those interfaces.
To export flow, you need port to be connected to your forwarding hardware,
not control-plane and
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
No it isn't, any more than SNMP is a task for those interfaces.
Well, then what you're looking for is not what we're looking for (?). You
seem to want the type of classic mgmt ethernet currently residing on high
end router platforms (on the RP)
On Jan 10, 2013, at 6:15 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
I definitely do not want SNMP and netflow on my disaster recovery OOB network.
Of course you do - else you're deaf, dumb, and blind at precisely the time you
most need complete network visibility, i.e., during a disruptive event of some
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
Of course you do - else you're deaf, dumb, and blind at precisely the
time you most need complete network visibility, i.e., during a
disruptive event of some sort.
You and me seem to talk about different types of disasters. In my type of
disaster,
On (2013-01-10 10:48 +), Dobbins, Roland wrote:
No it isn't, any more than SNMP is a task for those interfaces.
Sending flowrecords to your slow ppc CPU just to allow export in non-HW
interface is silly, when HW can export it directly, without ever hitting
your control-plane.
Polling SNMP
On Jan 9, 2013, at 11:18 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
[P1]: It should be possible to transfer data using tftp, ftp and scp (ftp
client on the OOB device, scp being used to transfer data *to* the device
(OOB being scp server).
For security and performance reasons, FTP has no
On Jan 9, 2013, at 12:34 PM, Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi wrote:
Having RS232 or USB console on forwarding-plane is not OOB. And even OOB
version of these is of limited value, you can't send images over them, you
can't multiplex over them and RS232 OOB 'server' costs more than switch. So
you get
On (2013-01-10 08:57 -0500), Jared Mauch wrote:
I am very much against USB consoles. there can be a whole plethora of issues
involved from OS-level to the device-level. When I'm on the console, things
have already gone bad. I don't need to find out if the vendor has the right
I absolutely agree that USB is a bad way to go with this, as well as web
management.
I have no interest in trying to use some terrible web app to bring a
network back up when simple 300 baud would suffice. I've got no problem
with telnet/ssh, although I hate the idea of needing to know an ip
On 10/01/2013 13:51, Jared Mauch wrote:
We have encountered cases where a vendor TFTP implementation + latency
from the ROMMON can take a few hours to load images. I'm for ditching
TFTP and replacing it with HTTP. This forces them to put in a TCP
stack, and hopefully something that can
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:
- netflow: seriously, this is not an appropriate sort of port of
exporting
netflow. this is a your RP is toast recovery mechanism, at which point
netflow is probably long gone.
it's possible that roland was
I don't think you can get ethernet and transport out-of-the-area in
some places at a reasonable cost, so having serial-console I think is
still a requirement.
TDM is disappearing quickly in at least some parts of the world. We
may not be quite there yet, but I think it's entirely reasonable to
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, Christopher Morrow wrote:
- rs232: please no. it's 2013. I don't want or need a protocol which
was designed for access speeds appropriate to the 1980s.
I don't think you can get ethernet and transport out-of-the-area in
some places at a reasonable cost, so
On Jan 10, 2013, at 9:35 AM, Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
- rs232: please no. it's 2013. I don't want or need a protocol which
was designed for access speeds appropriate to the 1980s.
I don't think you can get ethernet and transport out-of-the-area in
some
On (2013-01-10 09:35 -0500), Christopher Morrow wrote:
I don't think you can get ethernet and transport out-of-the-area in
some places at a reasonable cost, so having serial-console I think is
still a requirement.
I don't understand this point.
Where does your RS232 port go? It goes to
On Jan 10, 2013, at 9:51 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, Christopher Morrow wrote:
- rs232: please no. it's 2013. I don't want or need a protocol
which
was designed for access speeds appropriate to the 1980s.
I don't think you can get
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:44 AM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
I don't think you can get ethernet and transport out-of-the-area in
some places at a reasonable cost, so having serial-console I think is
still a requirement.
TDM is disappearing quickly in at least some parts of the world. We
may
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, Christopher Morrow wrote:
- rs232: please no. it's 2013. I don't want or need a protocol
which
was designed for access speeds appropriate to the 1980s.
I don't think you can get
On (2013-01-10 09:54 -0500), Jared Mauch wrote:
I don't think you can get ethernet and transport out-of-the-area in
some places at a reasonable cost, so having serial-console I think is
still a requirement.
Some of the POTS carriers are trying to jettison their equipment before the
end
On 01/10/2013 07:02 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
On Jan 10, 2013, at 9:51 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
I certainly want to use something more modern, having run Xmodem to load images
into devices or net-booted systems with very large images in the past…
I've seen all sorts of
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Randy Carpenter wrote:
My main requirements would be:
1. Something that is *not* network (ethernet or otherwise) (isn't
that the point of OOB?)
I don't understand this at all. Why can't an
On 1/10/2013 11:18 AM, William Herrin wrote:
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Randy Carpenter wrote:
My main requirements would be:
1. Something that is *not* network (ethernet or otherwise) (isn't
that the point of OOB?)
I
On (2013-01-10 11:41 -0500), Randy Whitney wrote:
Nothing beats POTS in a broad power outage scenario. Numerous power
outages have taken down mobile service completely while the POTS
lines stayed up as it carries its own power by design.
Is your RS232 Modem POTS powered?
If POP is
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Randy Whitney
randy.whit...@verizon.com wrote:
Nothing beats POTS in a broad power outage scenario. Numerous power outages
have taken down mobile service completely while the POTS lines stayed up as
it carries its own power by design.
Carries it from somewhere
On Jan 10, 2013, at 11:52 AM, Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi wrote:
On (2013-01-10 11:41 -0500), Randy Whitney wrote:
Nothing beats POTS in a broad power outage scenario. Numerous power
outages have taken down mobile service completely while the POTS
lines stayed up as it carries its own power by
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Randy Whitney randy.whit...@verizon.comwrote
Nothing beats POTS in a broad power outage scenario. Numerous power
outages have taken down mobile service completely while the POTS lines
stayed up as it carries its own power by design.
--
Randy
It's been a
Why is Satellite not a good OOB option?
From my Galaxy Note II, please excuse any mistakes.
Original message
From: William Herrin b...@herrin.us
Date: 01/10/2013 8:20 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: OOB core router
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Warren Bailey
wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com wrote:
Why is Satellite not a good OOB option?
inside iron boxes satellite signal is 'hard'.
getting a roof mounted antenna is extra cost/complexity.
or so some thinking goes.
On 10/01/2013 16:52, Saku Ytti wrote:
If POP is powerless, where will be POTS powered RS232 Modem connect to?
To the same power feed as the router you're trying to rescue. If that feed
has no power, it's time to take out the gerbil wheel.
Nick
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Warren Bailey
wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com wrote:
Why is Satellite not a good OOB option?
Sometimes it is, and a larger colo could probably make another few
nickles selling connections to an OOB access network which included,
as one of the ways in, a
From: Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com
Date: 01/10/2013 9:24 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: Warren Bailey wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com
Cc: b...@herrin.us,rcar...@network1.net,nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: OOB core router connectivity wish list
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Warren Bailey
On (2013-01-10 12:08 -0500), Jared Mauch wrote:
Not sure about you, but I've used the ability for a POTS line to either ring
or give me a modem tone to determine the power status at the site.
So the modem is not PSTN powered, so if it responds, pop must be powered?
Wouldn't any old CPE on any
I have a Cyclades acs-48 console server. Direct power and Ethernet drop from
the ceiling with a public ip. In my subnet, but not through my routers/switches
or pdus. Completely out of band, except for relying on colo power/net, which if
that's not up then oob is worthless to me anyway.
I have
On (2013-01-10 11:52 -0600), Charles N Wyble wrote:
I have every device hooked to this. Pdus, routers, switches, vm, storage
servers. That allows me to get console and power cycle every device.
What more would I want? Dialup means I need to be in a place I can hook up a
modem. Not too
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
Not sure about you, but I've used the ability for a POTS line to either
ring or give me a modem tone to determine the power status at the site.
- Jared
When I worked in the BBN NOC, we used the customers fax line
On (2013-01-09 15:37 +0100), Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
equipment already have an mgmt ethernet port, but usually this can't
do everything, meaning today one has to have OOB ethernet *and*
OOB serial which just brings more pain than before.
The key difference is, that those are not OOB at all,
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
I have together with some other people, collected a wish list for OOB
support, mainly aimed for core routers.
Hi Mikael,
I generally agree but have several quibbles:
[P1]: The IP address of the OOB port should be set
On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
I would like to post it here to solicit feedback on it. Feel free to use it
to tell your vendor account teams you want this if you feel it useful. I've
already sent it to one vendor.
Ethernet/Serial/USB management is useful, but I would not be in
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:18 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
About the only time you'd strictly *need* dynamic configuration in an
OOB is when directly connecting it to a commodity Internet link. If
you're willing to give your poorly secured and rarely updated OOB a
public IP address,
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Christopher Morrow
morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:18 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
About the only time you'd strictly *need* dynamic configuration in an
OOB is when directly connecting it to a commodity Internet link. If
On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:18 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
About the only time you'd strictly *need* dynamic configuration in an
OOB is when directly connecting it to a commodity Internet link. If
you're willing to give your poorly
On (2013-01-09 11:18 -0500), William Herrin wrote:
(a) This is a P2 not a P1. Asking the OOB to be critically dependent
on an external network element is dubious to begin with but even if
desired it's usable without.
Agreed that P2 suffices. Usage scenario is installing fresh router. You
On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Saku Ytti wrote:
Agreed. IPv4 would be priority for most.
Today yes. In 2-4 years when this might be a reality, I don't want IPv4
only device. I rather go for IPv6 only immediately.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
I think this list goes too far, and has a decent chance of introducing
other fun failure modes as a result. The goal of OOB is generally
to gain control of a misbehaving device. Now, misbehaving can
take many forms, from the device actually being ok and all of it's
circuits going down (fiber
On (2013-01-09 09:12 -0800), Leo Bicknell wrote:
So while I agree with the list of features in large part, I'm not sure I
agree with the concept of having some sort of ethernet interface that
allows all of this out of band. I think it will add cost, complexity,
and a lot of new failure
On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Leo Bicknell wrote:
of the device, not unlike an IPMI device on a server. Using IPMI
IPMI is exactly what we're going for.
In this ideal world, the deployment model is simple. A small OOB
device would be deployed (think like a Cisco 1900, or Juniper SRX
220), connected
On 1/9/2013 9:12 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
I think this list goes too far, and has a decent chance of introducing
other fun failure modes as a result. The goal of OOB is generally
to gain control of a misbehaving device. Now, misbehaving can
take many forms, from the device actually being ok and
In a message written on Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 06:39:28PM +0100, Mikael
Abrahamsson wrote:
IPMI is exactly what we're going for.
For Vendors that use a PC motherboard, IPMI would probably not be
difficult at all! :)
I think IPMI is a pretty terrible solution though, so if that's your
target I do
On (2013-01-09 10:18 -0800), Leo Bicknell wrote:
I also still think there's a lot of potential here to take gigantic
steps backwards. Replacing a serial console with a Java applet in
a browser (a la most IPMI devices) would be a huge step backwards.
Today it's trival to script console
It might help clarify things if you added two (hopefully) short sections:
One discussing how to get off the ground.
How do I get my ssh key on a factory-reset box?
Another discussing security.
There may be conflicting requirements for different usage scenarios.
--
These are my
On Jan 9, 2013, at 9:37 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
http://swm.pp.se/oob.txt
Flow telemetry export - many of these so-called 'management' ports can't be
used to export flow, oddly enough.
---
Roland Dobbins
My main requirements would be:
1. Something that is *not* network (ethernet or otherwise) (isn't that the
point of OOB?)
2. Something that is standard across everything, and can be aggregated easily
onto a console server or the like
I don't really see what is wrong with with keeping the
Once upon a time, Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net said:
Likewise OS vendors are increasingly dropping support for installing OSes via
serial port (RHEL, VMWare, etc.)
At leaset with RHEL, you can make your own boot image that gets rid of the
asinine splash screen (which is the only
Uplogix has a pretty rad solution..
From my Galaxy Note II, please excuse any mistakes.
Original message
From: Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net
Date: 01/09/2013 7:07 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: OOB core router
- Original Message -
Once upon a time, Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net said:
Likewise OS vendors are increasingly dropping support for
installing OSes via serial port (RHEL, VMWare, etc.)
At leaset with RHEL, you can make your own boot image that gets rid
of the asinine
On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Randy Carpenter wrote:
My main requirements would be:
1. Something that is *not* network (ethernet or otherwise) (isn't that the
point of OOB?)
I don't understand this at all. Why can't an OOB network be ethernet
based towards the equipment needing management?
2.
- Original Message -
On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Randy Carpenter wrote:
My main requirements would be:
1. Something that is *not* network (ethernet or otherwise) (isn't
that the point of OOB?)
I don't understand this at all. Why can't an OOB network be ethernet
based towards the
On (2013-01-09 23:17 +), Dobbins, Roland wrote:
Flow telemetry export - many of these so-called 'management' ports can't be
used to export flow, oddly enough.
That is task for on-band interfaces, which attach to your forwarding-logic.
OOB is separate component, really only relying on same
On (2013-01-09 22:05 -0500), Randy Carpenter wrote:
1. Something that is *not* network (ethernet or otherwise) (isn't that the
point of OOB?)
No. This is not what OOB means. Out-of-band means not fate-sharing your
production network. OOB networks are networks, running ethernet,
frame-relay,
I completely disagree. The ability for serial to go over POTS makes it
ridiculously cheap compared to building a reliable ethernet connection over
hundreds or thousands of miles.
This is identical to ethernet. You need external device then, dial-up
modem or CPE, no difference.
The
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, Randy Carpenter wrote:
How do I connect to it from many miles away when the network is down? I
have connected to a misbehaving border device at a remote network via
dial-up before, and was able to get it back up and running. I would not
have been able to do that if the
86 matches
Mail list logo
