* Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org [2014-04-26 22:56]:
the situation was created by the openbsd team, not the ieee, the ietf or
iana.
that's nothing short of a lie.
The openbsd foundation raised $153,000 this year. Why not invest $2500 of
this and fix the problem?
good luck finding another
inside a VRF, but the MPLS standards wg seems content with status quo.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6
The WG is pretty close to wrap this up (back to the 3rd WGLC very soon).
But frankly admitting, dual-stacking facilitated more issues than I expected
early on.
Mark,
about leveraging SR to push native IPv6 support into MPLS,
Segment routing (SR) could/would certainly work with single-stack v6 and enable
MPLS forwarding.
Cheers,
Rajiv
On May 5, 2014, at 3:36 AM, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
On Monday, May 05, 2014 09:27:37 AM
On Tuesday, May 06, 2014 11:27:09 AM Rajiv Asati (rajiva)
wrote:
Segment routing (SR) could/would certainly work with
single-stack v6 and enable MPLS forwarding.
Certainly, but based on the Paris meeting, it was not high
up on the agenda.
So we will, likely, have to rely on other solutions
Hi Song Li,
As far as I know there are 2 mechanisms that should prevent this
situation you describe from happening:
- Not advertising routes that are not in the RIB
Once AS1's peering with AS3 comes back up, the route through AS3 is
learned and preferred. Therefore the route via AS2 is
From: Mark Tinka [mailto:mark.ti...@seacom.mu]
On Tuesday, May 06, 2014 11:27:09 AM Rajiv Asati (rajiva)
wrote:
Segment routing (SR) could/would certainly work with single-stack v6
and enable MPLS forwarding.
Certainly, but based on the Paris meeting, it was not high up on the
I was also going to recommend the EdgeRouter Pro as it has dual SFP ports and
the Vyatta/Linux stuff works quite well.
I suspect you will be very surprised with the quality experience. If you've
not used Vyatta, it's very JunOS-like.
- Jared
On May 5, 2014, at 8:14 PM, Cryptographrix
I was also going to recommend the EdgeRouter Pro as it has dual SFP =
ports and the Vyatta/Linux stuff works quite well.
I suspect you will be very surprised with the quality experience. If =
you've not used Vyatta, it's very JunOS-like.
Does anyone have any practical experience with the
Hi Dennis,
I think there are two possible convergence results:
1/ AS3 accepted route 16.1/16(2 4 5) from AS1, then it will withdraw
announce of 16.1/16(5) towards AS1. And AS1 will remain 16.1/16 (2 4 5).
2/ AS1 accepted route 16.1/16(3 5) from AS3, then it withdraw 16.1/16(2
4 5), and AS3
It uses a Cavium Octeon processor which does have dedicated HW packet
processing. A moderate number of prefixes won't slow it down doing vanilla
forwarding, not sure about 2 million though... I believe they have recently
optimized some of the FW stuff to take advantage of the HW as well.
It also has support for some type of ipv4 and ipv6 offload.
On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 3:01 AM, Joe Greco jgr...@ns.sol.net wrote:
I was also going to recommend the EdgeRouter Pro as it has dual SFP =
ports and the Vyatta/Linux stuff works quite well.
I suspect you will be very surprised
I suggest you work your way down :-)
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ip/border-gateway-protocol-bgp/13753-25.html
Dennis Hagens
Song Li schreef op 5/6/14 1:42 PM:
Hi Dennis,
I think there are two possible convergence results:
1/ AS3 accepted route 16.1/16(2 4 5) from AS1, then it
On Tue, 06 May 2014 11:58:58 +0800, Song Li said:
I have one bgp convergence problem which confused me. The problem is as
follows:
You may want to Google for 'BGP Wedgie'.
https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog31/presentations/griffin.pdf
http://www.rfc-base.org/txt/rfc-4264.txt
Once you
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:22:37 +0200, Henning Brauer said:
* Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org [2014-04-26 22:56]:
the situation was created by the openbsd team, not the ieee, the ietf or
iana.
that's nothing short of a lie.
Umm.. remind me who chose the conflicting value and shipped product
On Apr 26, 2014, at 1:55 PM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:
the situation was created by the openbsd team, not the ieee, the ietf or
iana. You squatted on an existing oui assignment used by an equivalent
protocol and in doing this, you created a long term problem with no
possible
I have one bgp convergence problem which confused me. The problem is as
follows:
++
| AS5 |
+--+16.1/16 |
| +-+--+
||
+---+--+ |
| AS4 | |
| |
Hi all,
I am wondering if maybe we should make some kind of concerted effort to remind
folks about the IPv4 routing table inching closer and closer to the 512K route
mark.
We are at about 94/95% right now of 512K.
For most of us, the 512K route mark is arbitrary but for a lot of folks who may
On 06/05/2014 16:39, Drew Weaver wrote:
In case anyone wants to check on a 6500, you can run: show platform
hardware capacity pfc and then look under L3 Forwarding Resources.
to fix the problem on sup720/rsp720:
Router(config)#mls cef maximum-routes ip 768
This requires a reload to take
On Tue, 6 May 2014, Drew Weaver wrote:
Hi all,
I am wondering if maybe we should make some kind of concerted effort to remind
folks about the IPv4 routing table inching closer and closer to the 512K route
mark.
We are at about 94/95% right now of 512K.
For most of us, the 512K route mark
On 5/6/2014 11:39 AM, Drew Weaver wrote:
Hi all,
I am wondering if maybe we should make some kind of concerted effort to
remind folks about the IPv4 routing table inching closer and closer to the
512K route mark.
We are at about 94/95% right now of 512K.
For most of us, the 512K route
-Original Message-
From: Nick Hilliard [mailto:n...@foobar.org]
Sent: Tuesday, May 6, 2014 12:11 PM
To: Drew Weaver; 'nanog@nanog.org'
Subject: Re: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for 6500/7600
routers.
This problem also affects ASR9000 boxes running typhoon line
On 06/05/2014 18:01, Drew Weaver wrote:
I believe you mean This problem also affects ASR9000 boxes running
...trident... line cards. Please confirm?
er, yes, trident cards, not typhoon cards.
typhoon cards are not affected by this.
Nick
Dan,
You can contact me offline, I'll connect you with postmasters.
-Shawn
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 4:50 PM, goe...@anime.net wrote:
If there is anyone from linkedin.com abuse around please let me know.
I've been trying for 2 months to get an abuse issue resolved.
-Dan
I would like to see Cisco send something out...
-Original Message-
From: Drew Weaver drew.wea...@thenap.com
Sent: 5/6/2014 11:42 AM
To: 'nanog@nanog.org' nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for
6500/7600routers.
Hi all,
I am wondering if maybe
Tell them to stop emailing us for their free trial while you're at it! ;)
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
Original message
From: Shawn Zandi szme...@gmail.com
Date: 05/06/2014 11:33 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: goe...@anime.net
Cc: NANOG list nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re:
On 6 May 2014 07:56, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:22:37 +0200, Henning Brauer said:
* Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org [2014-04-26 22:56]:
the situation was created by the openbsd team, not the ieee, the ietf or
iana.
that's nothing short of a lie.
Umm.. remind me
You could also go Supermicro, and build out a 1U with SFP/Copper
connections and put VyOS/vyatta as a linux based routing platform
going that way you'll be strictly CPU/software bound though (Intel
wrote up this interesting report:
And since those puppies are going to need a reload after adjustment make sure
your not exposed to the component decay issue for cards manufactured between
2005-2010 or you could have a interesting night.
We've hit that issue on three different 7600 chassis.
Darin
-Original Message-
--- gary.buhrmas...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Gary Buhrmaster gary.buhrmas...@gmail.com
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 11:59 PM, Deepak Jain dee...@ai.net wrote:
Any recommendation for a residential CPE that supports dual
SFP uplinks snip
Have you looked at the EdgeRouter Pro? 2 SFP links,
routing
Constantine,
On May 6, 2014, at 11:54 AM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com wrote:
As a final note of course, when we petitioned IANA, the IETF body
regulating official internet protocol numbers, to give us numbers for
CARP and pfsync our request was denied. Apparently we had failed
There is currently a doc for the ASR9k. We're working on getting on for
6500 as well.
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/routers/asr-9000-series-aggregation-services-routers/116999-problem-line-card-00.html
On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 1:34 PM, bedard.p...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to
On 6 May 2014 12:31, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
Constantine,
On May 6, 2014, at 11:54 AM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com
wrote:
As a final note of course, when we petitioned IANA, the IETF body
regulating official internet protocol numbers, to give us numbers for
I just recently got four sets off eBay. Purportedly genuine Cisco. A
shade over $100. Raid the departmental beer fund. :)
-r
Vlade Ristevski vrist...@ramapo.edu writes:
It would probably be a good time to upgrade the memory on my 7206
NPE-G1 as well (512MB). I was going to replace the
On May 6, 2014 12:32 PM, Darin syn...@live.com wrote:
And since those puppies are going to need a reload after adjustment make
sure your not exposed to the component decay issue for cards manufactured
between 2005-2010 or you could have a interesting night.
We've hit that issue on three
Constantine,
On May 6, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com wrote:
Protocol 112 was assigned by IANA for VRRP in 1998.
When did OpenBSD choose to squat on 112?
If you don't use it, you lose it.
Are you suggesting no one is running VRRP? Surprising given RFC 5798.
On 5/6/2014 10:39 AM, Drew Weaver wrote:
Just something to think about before it becomes a story the community
talks about for the next decade.
Like we have for the last two?
--
Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics
of
On 4/4/2014 11:32 PM, Andrew D Kirch wrote:
So, if there's more than 4 billion ants... what are they going to do?
get larger ants.
(and the responses have now covered both pro forma responses.)
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
On 6 May 2014 15:17, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
Constantine,
On May 6, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com wrote:
Protocol 112 was assigned by IANA for VRRP in 1998.
When did OpenBSD choose to squat on 112?
If you don't use it, you lose it.
Are you
On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Scott Weeks sur...@mauigateway.com wrote:
I wouldn't worry. A fancy GUI without intelligent engineering and
design leveraged is just more rope for everyone to hang themselves
with, esp. when something in the GUI inevitably doesn't work quite
like it's supposed
On Tue, 6 May 2014, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 4/4/2014 11:32 PM, Andrew D Kirch wrote:
So, if there's more than 4 billion ants... what are they going to do?
get larger ants.
No, no. The solution is far simpler than that, and would probably give a
good example of real-world population
On May 6, 2014, at 9:11 PM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6 May 2014 15:17, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
Constantine,
On May 6, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com
wrote:
Protocol 112 was assigned by IANA for VRRP in 1998.
When
On 6 May 2014 18:51, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
On May 6, 2014, at 9:11 PM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6 May 2014 15:17, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote:
Constantine,
On May 6, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Constantine A. Murenin muren...@gmail.com
So, then the only problem, perhaps, is that noone has apparently
bothered to explicitly document that both VRRP and CARP use
00:00:5e:00:01:xx MAC addresses, and that the xx part comes from the
Virtual Router IDentifier (VRID) in VRRP and virtual host ID
(VHID) in CARP, providing a colliding
Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
Your point being?
That the BSD community sometimes doesn't play well with others,
and certainly won't fess up when they make a mistake and cause
collateral damage.
The BSD community is larger than OpenBSD, and larger than Theo's
ego, much to said
44 matches
Mail list logo
