On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 4:15 PM J. Hellenthal via NANOG
wrote:
> Wtf kinda one word response is that lol
>
You missed the *very* important second line of the response, which makes
the first, one-word line meaningful.
Go back and read it again. ;)
Matt
>
> --
> J. Hellenthal
>
> The fact
On 27/02/2020 00:30, Patrick Schultz wrote:
>
> I've also seen employees leaving companies and their addresses being
> rerouted to the support mailbox.
>
That's a very interesting point. I had not considered it as a possible
cause of this problem.
--
Mark Rousell
I've also seen employees leaving companies and their addresses being rerouted
to the support mailbox.
--
Patrick
Am 27.02.2020 um 01:25 schrieb Mark Rousell:
> On 26/02/2020 16:24, Randy Bush wrote:
>> act...@nanog.org seems to no longer exist. how should i be whining
>> about the following?
On 26/02/2020 16:24, Randy Bush wrote:
> act...@nanog.org seems to no longer exist. how should i be whining
> about the following?
>
> From: Electric Forest Festival
> Subject: Forest HQ Has Received Your Message: Re: Hi-Rise Building Fiber
> Suggestions
> To: ra...@psg.com
> Date: Wed, 26 Feb
Wtf kinda one word response is that lol
--
J. Hellenthal
The fact that there's a highway to Hell but only a stairway to Heaven says a
lot about anticipated traffic volume.
> On Feb 26, 2020, at 15:03, Selphie Keller wrote:
>
>
> postfix =)
>
> /^From: .*@electricforestfestival\.com/
postfix =)
/^From: .*@electricforestfestival\.com/ DISCARD
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 at 09:54, Christopher Morrow
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:46 AM Mike Hammett wrote:
>
>> I send to nanog-ow...@nanog.org, but I never hear back.
>>
>>
>>
> I had sent this privately but I
Randy Bush wrote on 26/02/2020 16:14:
We use plenty of multi-mode, but only in the data centre, between our
own kit, for racks within the same cage.
so you have to stock both single and multi? hmmm
in-cabinet multimode can make sense, as long as you keep the stock types
contained, i.e.
Randy Bush writes:
> since we're at this layer, should i worry about going 3m with dacs at
> low speed, i.e. 10g? may need to do runs to neighbor rack.
No, 3m is totally fine for passive DAC, never had any issues with those.
(5m should also be fine, we just have less experience with that because
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:39 PM j k wrote:
>
> In Ashburn, VA, Dynamic user, with Ubiquity router performing a proper DHCPv6
> request for over 3 years. Documented on my Security Onion server showing no
> response.
>
Yea, it's clearly enabled 'somewhere' (most likely on a few select
edge
In Ashburn, VA, Dynamic user, with Ubiquity router performing a proper
DHCPv6 request for over 3 years. Documented on my Security Onion server
showing no response.
Joe Klein
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:07 PM Christopher Morrow
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:42 PM Brian Ellwood wrote:
> >
> this is from 2yrs ago. there's no evidence this is either progressing or
> actually working for anything but some test sets.
Correct, hence, “It’s coming (TM)”
However, if you read the thread or even jumped to the end there was a post
Yesterday 12:48 pm where a residential user in that test
I got a note its available for DYNAMIC residential customers only, not
yet for people with static ips.
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 13:07:11 -0500,
Christopher Morrow wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:42 PM Brian Ellwood wrote:
> >
> >
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:42 PM Brian Ellwood wrote:
>
> https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r32136440-Networking-IPv6-working
this is from 2yrs ago.
there's no evidence this is either progressing or actually working for
anything but some test sets.
> Enjoy the read
>
> TLDR they are doing some
nah. We do up to 10m on knockoff 40G DACs in production. It's no problem.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:44 AM Randy Bush wrote:
> since we're at this layer, should i worry about going 3m with dacs at
> low speed, i.e. 10g? may need to do runs to neighbor rack.
>
> randy
>
Once upon a time, Coy Hile said:
> I'd expect that from the ToR -> Servers would be MMF, but that other
> infrastructure cabling would be SMF.
> Even using aftermarket optics, putting single-mode transceivers in
> every server and access port would quickly become cost-prohibitive,
> would it not?
since we're at this layer, should i worry about going 3m with dacs at
low speed, i.e. 10g? may need to do runs to neighbor rack.
randy
https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r32136440-Networking-IPv6-working
Enjoy the read
TLDR they are doing some test deployments in:
- Ashburn, VA
- Richmond/Midlothian, VA
- Spotsylvania, VA
- Waltham, MA
“It’s Coming (TM)"
—
Brian Ellwood
Senior Systems Engineer
INOC Data Centers
O: 518-689-4350
get ready to wait and keep waiting
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:11 PM j k wrote:
> Does anyone have a contact at Verizon FIOS?
>
> Please respond off list.
>
> V/R,
>
> Joe Klein
>
> "inveniet viam, aut faciet" --- Seneca's Hercules Furens (Act II, Scene 1)
> "I never lose. I either win or learn"
On 26/Feb/20 19:09, Mike Hammett wrote:
> When you're buying thousands or tens of thousands, you're also not
> shopping off of the FiberStore web site.
Not necessarily :-).
Mark.
On 26/Feb/20 18:56, Brandon Martin wrote:
> On the fixed side, I have enough trouble convincing folks that APC
> and UPC plugs are different
On that note, I migrated our network from DC to AC in 2007, and that was
a major philosophical drama.
At current job, all Transport kit runs DC for
When you're buying thousands or tens of thousands, you're also not shopping off
of the FiberStore web site.
Also, DACs are even cheaper.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Tinka"
Does anyone have a contact at Verizon FIOS?
Please respond off list.
V/R,
Joe Klein
"inveniet viam, aut faciet" --- Seneca's Hercules Furens (Act II, Scene 1)
"I never lose. I either win or learn" - Nelson Mandela
On 26/Feb/20 18:33, Mike Hammett wrote:
> 1G
> ---
> MM $6/ea
> SM $7/ea
>
> 10G
> ---
> MM $18/ea
> SM $24/ea
> DAC $9.50-$18/pair (length dependent)
>
> 25G
> ---
> MM $39/ea
> SM $59/ea
> DAC $23-$51/pair (length dependent)
>
>
>
> Not a significant price difference from SM to MM, but DAC is
On 26/Feb/20 18:30, Warren Kumari wrote:
> Of course, sometimes you don't have the option of SM - you are
> connecting some someone else than they only do MM, or you are
> connecting to a piece of kit which doesn't have replaceable optics, or
> you have legacy cabling which is MM, or... but,
On 2/26/20 11:43 AM, Filip Hruska wrote:
Some NICs don't support SM optics, so even if you would like to run SM
everywhere, it's not necessarily possible depending on the equipment.
For example, I had issues with some SolarFlare cards which happily take
10G-SR MM but won't take 10G-LR SM.
Is
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:46 AM Mike Hammett wrote:
> I send to nanog-ow...@nanog.org, but I never hear back.
>
>
>
I had sent this privately but I thought/think: nanog-admin@
I could totally be wrong :)
> On 26 Feb 2020, at 11:33, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
> I'm certain someone from Flex has NANOG chatter on "Promiscuous Mode" :-).
Yes :)
f
It really depends on what you're interconnecting.
Some NICs don't support SM optics, so even if you would like to run SM
everywhere, it's not necessarily possible depending on the equipment.
For example, I had issues with some SolarFlare cards which happily take 10G-SR
MM but won't take 10G-LR
I send to nanog-ow...@nanog.org, but I never hear back.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
- Original Message -
From: "Randy Bush"
To: "North American Network Operators' Group"
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020
1G
---
MM $6/ea
SM $7/ea
10G
---
MM $18/ea
SM $24/ea
DAC $9.50-$18/pair (length dependent)
25G
---
MM $39/ea
SM $59/ea
DAC $23-$51/pair (length dependent)
Not a significant price difference from SM to MM, but DAC is even cheaper.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent
On 26/Feb/20 18:30, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> i wish flexoptix did 400g DACs. we have two boxes from the same ODM
> with interfaces whose sole pupose is to interconnect the two boxes,
> and the optics are coded for different vendors. unbelievable.
I'm certain someone from Flex has NANOG chatter
On 26/Feb/20 18:19, Coy Hile wrote:
>
> I'd expect that from the ToR -> Servers would be MMF, but that other
> infrastructure cabling would be SMF.
I've been designing in-data-centre cabling between routers with MM since
2007. Back then, there was a real material saving in doing that,
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:20 AM Coy Hile wrote:
>
> On 2020-02-26 11:14, Randy Bush wrote:
> >> We use plenty of multi-mode, but only in the data centre, between our
> >> own kit, for racks within the same cage.
> >
> > so you have to stock both single and multi? hmmm
> >
> > randy
>
> I'd
> What is more important to us is that the optics are multi-rate. And
> even more important now, is that our 3rd party optics suppliers can
> allow us to code and re-code optics to our heart's content.
i wish flexoptix did 400g DACs. we have two boxes from the same ODM
with interfaces whose sole
On 2/25/20 10:48 PM, Abhi Devireddy wrote:
L2 rings IMHO seem pretty brittle. I know there are L2 ring products
like Juniper BTI, which use ERPS and not strictly STP/RSTP to move
blocking ports, and those seem a little better although it's mostly
statically configured.
For a strict ring
On 26/Feb/20 18:14, Randy Bush wrote:
> so you have to stock both single and multi? hmmm
Optics are dirt cheap. We don't pay the equipment vendors for their
flavour :-).
That said, stocking MM and SM is cheaper than stocking just SM, because
we can reliably predict when/where we shall use
act...@nanog.org seems to no longer exist. how should i be whining
about the following?
From: Electric Forest Festival
Subject: Forest HQ Has Received Your Message: Re: Hi-Rise Building Fiber
Suggestions
To: ra...@psg.com
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 16:15:25 +
Electric Forest 2020 will take
On 2020-02-26 11:14, Randy Bush wrote:
We use plenty of multi-mode, but only in the data centre, between our
own kit, for racks within the same cage.
so you have to stock both single and multi? hmmm
randy
I'd expect that from the ToR -> Servers would be MMF, but that other
infrastructure
At the very minimum use bidirectional modules so you will have four
channels. That way you would only have 15 switches on a chain. Also be sure
to configured your STP weight so the cut will be in the middle. So one
fiber will normally be transmitting to 7 switches, the other fiber to the
other 8
> We use plenty of multi-mode, but only in the data centre, between our
> own kit, for racks within the same cage.
so you have to stock both single and multi? hmmm
randy
On 26/Feb/20 17:43, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:
> On that note would you gents recommend single-mode or multimode fiber for
> buildings?
Single-mode, for sure. More predictable characteristics when you climb
up the capacity scale, e.g., 10Gbps to 40Gbps to 100Gbps.
We use plenty of
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 4:55 PM wrote:
> On that note would you gents recommend single-mode or multimode fiber for
> buildings?
>
> adam
>
>
Single mode fiber for all new installs. There are only few uses cases where
multimode still saves a little money (100G optics) but otherwise there are
only
They know about it and when their system admins get in it will be
corrected. It's interesting because all of their other sites (e.g.
https://he.net) has a wild card that is valid till 2021.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 10:44 AM Steve Jones
wrote:
> The *.he.net cert expired today so the looking
Only single mode ever.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
- Original Message -
From: adamv0...@netconsultings.com
To: "Joel Jaeggli" , "Norman Jester"
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020
On 26/Feb/20 04:32, Norman Jester wrote:
> The idea is to cut the fiber at each floor and insert a switch and daisy
> chain the switches together using one pair, and using the other pair as the
> failover side of the ring going back to the source so if one device fails it
> doesn’t take the
> Joel Jaeggli
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 4:46 AM
>
> > There are two fiber pairs running up the building riser. I need to put a POE
> switch on each floor using this fiber.
>
> You didn’t specify if the existing fiber is single or multi-mode however
>
On that note would you gents
If you can go fully dynamically routed, Layer 3 only, this problem
becomes much, much easier to solve given the constraints you mention.
Among others, Ruckus switches will stack over fiber, but nowhere near
30 units. I think the max is 12 and I would not recommend going over
8.
If you need L2,
fiber.
> > > The idea is to cut the fiber at each floor and insert a switch and
> daisy chain the switches together using one pair, and using the other pair
> as the failover side of the ring going back to the source so if one device
> fails it doesn’t take the whole string down.
> >
The *.he.net cert expired today so the looking glass is inaccessible from
chrome if anyone here has a contact to rectify
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 4:46 AM
> To: Norman Jester
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Feb 25, 2020, at 18:34, Norman Jester wrote:
> >
> > I’m in the process of choosing hardware for a 30 story building. If
> > anyone has experience with this I’d appreciate any tips.
> >
> > There
Hey Norman,
I'm in the middle of a construction project where we've got 50 data rooms in
one building.
I've researched a lot of different options and we ended up with just home runs.
A couple of items to consider and think about:
1. Have you looked into the incremental additional costs
Hi,
My name is Joseph Severini, and I am a PhD student in the Computer
Science Department at Carnegie Mellon University.
I’m working on a research project to identify common operational
challenges in modern enterprise computer networks. I’ve put together a
survey to identify these challenges by
It's okay though, because we freed up UDP/53 by moving DNS to TCP/443,
so then we can move HTTPS to UDP/53.
On 2/21/20 6:37 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
First we moved the entire internet to TCP/443.
Now we propose moving it all to UDP/53.
What’s next? Why not simply eliminate port numbers
I would use single fiber CWDM muxing and OADM, then you can get it down to
7-8 switches per fiber. CWDM single fiber has a max of 9 channels and the
optics are typically less expensive.
Erich Kaiser
The Fusion Network
er...@gotfusion.net
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 7:43 AM Mike Hammett wrote:
>
After 30 add/drops you may lose too much power. There is a minimum 1.4dB per
passthru and 1.3dB per add/drop, 3.5dB per MUX at the ends.
With these SFP+ modules:
https://www.fs.com/products/31238.html
it looks like you would have a 19-20 dB budget to work with. You may be able
to get 10
DWDM can be done fairly cheap. Some combination of MUXes and OADM modules along
the way. One possible solution is:
First floor: https://www.fs.com/products/35887.html
Every floor between: https://www.fs.com/products/70427.html
Top floor: https://www.fs.com/products/35887.html
Every floor
> On 2/25/20 6:32 PM, Norman Jester wrote:
> I’m in the process of choosing hardware
> for a 30 story building. If anyone has experience with this I’d appreciate
> any tips.
>
> There are two fiber pairs running up the building riser. I need to put a POE
> switch on each floor using this fiber.
57 matches
Mail list logo
