Re: Friday's Random Comment - About: Arista and FIB/RIB's

On 29 April 2016 at 22:25, Nick Hilliard wrote: > Baldur Norddahl wrote: > > With two uplinks that is highly unlikely to the point of being > impossible. > > There is no topology change upstream that can cause a situation where it > is > > not possible to do a high degree of

NOC AS1836 green.ch AG

Hi, I need direct contact with NOC of AS1836. Can you help me ? Kind regards, Marco Paesani Skype: mpaesani Mobile: +39 348 6019349 Success depends on the right choice ! Email: ma...@paesani.it

Re: NOC AS1836 green.ch AG

Hi Arnold, nobody answer at 'peer...@green.ch' for this reason I write here on NANOG. Ciao, Marco Paesani Skype: mpaesani Mobile: +39 348 6019349 Success depends on the right choice ! Email: ma...@paesani.it 2016-05-03 20:41 GMT+02:00 Arnold Nipper : > On 03.05.2016

SV: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

Hello all. Yes I can confirm that we also had the issue with the asr1001s. For us the router was fine until we upgraded it. When we rebooted it after the upgrade it ran out of memory when populating 2 full feeds. When we contacted TAC they confirmed that indeed it was a memory problem and

CFP: DNS Track at NANOG 67

Greetings, For our upcoming meeting in Chicago I'm looking for folks willing to give brief presentations during a proposed DNS Track. Possible topics include: - Operational experiences - New & interesting software features - Protocol advancements - Research results - Performance & compliance

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

> On 03 May 2016, at 22:31, William Herrin wrote: > > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Gustav Ulander > wrote: >> Yes I can confirm that we also had the issue with the asr1001s. >> For us the router was fine until we upgraded it. When >> we

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Łukasz Bromirski wrote: > On 03 May 2016, at 22:31, William Herrin wrote: >> IMO, you should not accept that answer from the TAC. An IOS release >> that crashes with two 600k BGP feeds in 4 gigs of RAM is badly >> defective. >

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

Łukasz Bromirski wrote on 5/3/2016 4:13 PM: On 03 May 2016, at 22:31, William Herrin wrote: On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Gustav Ulander wrote: Yes I can confirm that we also had the issue with the asr1001s. For us the router was fine

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

William Herrin wrote: > IMO, you should not accept that answer from the TAC. An IOS release > that crashes with two 600k BGP feeds in 4 gigs of RAM is badly > defective. I suspect the time the OP would spend raging down the phone would be better spent sourcing a third party memory upgrade to 8G

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Gustav Ulander wrote: > Yes I can confirm that we also had the issue with the asr1001s. > For us the router was fine until we upgraded it. When > we rebooted it after the upgrade it ran out of memory > when populating 2 full feeds.

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

William Herrin wrote: > I respectfully disagree. Sourcing more ram won't fix the next bit of > sloppiness with the software. Or the one after that. Once the manager > of that team starts to accept poor code quality, the only thing with a > chance of fixing it is strong customer push-back. You

RE: Arista Routing Solutions

> We're going to be getting some Arista gear soon and this issue came > up. They made the same noises and vague overtures of "well, you > *might* have problems with TAC if you go with 3rd party optics"... > until I said "Oh really- well, that's a deal breaker, we can't really > even consider

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

Blake, > On 04 May 2016, at 00:23, Blake Hudson wrote: > > Łukasz Bromirski wrote on 5/3/2016 4:13 PM: >>> On 03 May 2016, at 22:31, William Herrin wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Gustav Ulander >>> wrote:

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

I know this thread has been primarily about memory to hold the routing tables, but how well does it do with the BGP convergence time?? which could be the other killer with multiple full route tables. ​ Carlos Alcantar Race Communications / Race Team Member 1325 Howard Ave. #604, Burlingame,

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote: > William Herrin wrote: >> And it is poor code quality. Even slicing and dicing the ram in odd >> ways, there's just no excuse for an order-of-magnitude increase in ram >> required to run the same algorithms on the same data. >

Re: NOC AS1836 green.ch AG

On 03.05.2016 20:05, Marco Paesani wrote: > I need direct contact with NOC of AS1836. > Can you help me ? Have a look at PeeringDB [0], Marco! Ciao, Arnold [0] https://peeringdb.com/net/232 -- Arnold Nipper email: arn...@nipper.de phone: +49 6224 5593407 2 mobile: +49 172 2650958

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

I turned up a full ip4 feed on an RP1 today. Took approximately 5 minutes to fill the rib and probably another 5 minutes to push to the fib. The CLI responsiveness was noticeably slowed during this process, but the router didn't drop traffic. I'm guessing a second feed would involve fewer rib

RE: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

Mike, I just did this with a ASR1001. I had to upgrade it to 8gb of ram (I got the real Cisco stuff for ~ $500). Before the router would crash when loading the tables. Right now, I have full tables from two providers: router1#show ip bgp summary BGP router identifier 192.55.82.2, local AS

Re: hotel

Same here - only availability is from Monday 13th to Thursday 16th On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > excuse puking on list but the path to nanog admin action seems dead > > Date: Sun, 01 May 2016 13:48:10 +0900 > From: Randy Bush > To: action

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Eric Sabotta wrote: > I just did this with a ASR1001. I had to upgrade it to 8gb of ram > (I got the real Cisco stuff for ~ $500). Before the router would > crash when loading the tables. Hi Eric, Something very fishy there because: >

Re: Fwd: hotel

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 1:22 AM, Randy Bush wrote: > > I tried booking earlier today, had the same issue and called in. I was > > told they were now full, and only non-block rooms were available (@ > > > $500/night). > > find a non-exhorbitant fall-back? The Sheraton Grand

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

Mike wrote on 5/2/2016 9:43 PM: On 05/02/2016 07:35 PM, Eric Sabotta wrote: Mike, I just did this with a ASR1001. I had to upgrade it to 8gb of ram (I got the real Cisco stuff for ~ $500). Before the router would crash when loading the tables. Right now, I have full tables from two

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

got a quagga router in my life where bgpd+zebra takes up 1gig for 4.5 full tables. Rest of the OS easily lives in 1 gig (could probably be much less.) big-vendor solutions always seem much bloatier - same deal on power usage. just a data point. /kc -- Ken Chase - m...@sizone.org Toronto

Re: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Mike wrote: > I have an ASR1000 router with 4gb of ram. The specs say I can get '1 > million routes' on it, but as far as I have been advised, a full table of > internet routes numbers more than 530k by itself, so taking 2 full

Re: NOC AS1836 green.ch AG

On 03/05/16 21:23, Marco Paesani wrote: > Hi Arnold, > nobody answer at 'peer...@green.ch' for this reason I write here on NANOG. > Ciao, > > > Marco Paesani > > > Skype: mpaesani > Mobile: +39 348 6019349 > Success depends on the right choice ! > Email: ma...@paesani.it > Marco. As I've

Re: NOC AS1836 green.ch AG

Fredrik Korsbäck wrote: > As I've told you when you hunted me down the last time through backside > channels.. I can only hope you meant "back channels". Nick

SV: BGP peering strategies for smaller routers

Hello. Yea its a bit strange that we would need to add memory to the platform just because we upgraded the image. But since we were in kind of a tight spot we opted to upgrade it and then move away from the platform in that role. //Gustav -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: William

[NANOG-announce] NANOG 67 Announcements

NANOGers, We are beginning our final preparations in support of NANOG 67 taking place June 13-15, 2016 in Chicago, IL. The meeting will be held at the Fairmont Chicago Millennium Park. In addition, prior to the start of NANOG 67, The NANOG Program