Re: Fixing Google geolocation screwups
On Apr 8, 2015 7:19 AM, Rob Seastrom r...@seastrom.com wrote: Blair Trosper blair.tros...@gmail.com writes: MaxMind (a great product) I've heard anecdotal accounts of MaxMind intentionally marking all address blocks assigned to a VPN vendor as open proxy even when advised repeatedly that the disputed addresses (a) had no VPN services running on them either inbound or outbound, and (b) in fact were web servers for the company's payment system, or mail servers for their corporate email. I would wonder if these apps didn't have issues that allowed web proxy to the world. Maybe MaxMind is doing something wrong or maybe they're seeing the result of malicious activities and classifying from that.
Re: Fixing Google geolocation screwups
Blair Trosper blair.tros...@gmail.com writes: MaxMind (a great product) I've heard anecdotal accounts of MaxMind intentionally marking all address blocks assigned to a VPN vendor as open proxy even when advised repeatedly that the disputed addresses (a) had no VPN services running on them either inbound or outbound, and (b) in fact were web servers for the company's payment system, or mail servers for their corporate email. Kind of reminiscent of dealing with certain RBLs for whom personal beef was enough reason to list an address. So, folks might want to temper the great product comment with this anti-endorsement. -r
Re: Fixing Google geolocation screwups
We operate IPv6 tunnel broker tb.netassist.ua, so /48 from our /32 is spread all around the world. Google change geo of our WHOLE /32 from time to time to another cute random place ;) One time Google decided we are in IRAN and block a lot of content as not available in your country o_O Unfortunately, there is no magic button to fix it, as well as no human contact in Google to discuss it. I'm still trying to find a good solution, but not found it. On 04/08/15 01:26, John Levine wrote: A friend of mine lives in Alabama and has business service from att. But Google thinks he's in France. We've checked for various possibilities of VPNs and proxies and such, and it's pretty clear that the Goog's geolocation for addresses around 99.106.185.0/24 is screwed up. Bing and other services correctly find him in Alabama. Poking around I see lots of advice about how to use Google's geolocation data, but nothing on how to update it. Anyone know the secret? TIA Regards, John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies, Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
Re: Fixing Google geolocation screwups
That all said: Restricting content based on location is complete and utter nonsense in 2015. The world is global, people want to pay for content and the content owners just don't allow people to pay for it. Globalisation is for your corporate lords and masters to buy labour and raw materials where they're cheap. If mere peons try to buy goods and services in the same way, expect to be crushed by the best legislation money can buy :( Regards, Tim.
Re: Fixing Google geolocation screwups
On 2015-04-08 13:31, Max Tulyev wrote: We operate IPv6 tunnel broker tb.netassist.ua, so /48 from our /32 is spread all around the world. Google change geo of our WHOLE /32 from time to time to another cute random place ;) One time Google decided we are in IRAN and block a lot of content as not available in your country o_O Unfortunately, there is no magic button to fix it, as well as no human contact in Google to discuss it. I'm still trying to find a good solution, but not found it. Do check: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-google-self-published-geofeeds-02 That draft also contains folks to kick who wrote it. Or more details on how SixXS uses that: https://www.sixxs.net/faq/misc/?faq=geolocation It is a hard problem unfortunately as there are a variety of reasons why content owners perform Geolocation (language detection / Content restrictions etc). For most organizations Geolocation all comes down to IP Protection (Stupid Property aka Content, not Internet Protocol). Hence, if you have a /32 IPv6 assigned to the Ukraine (which is already considered a shady country by most unfortunately for you) and then start offering VPN services, you'll likely just end up blocked in most of these IP protecting networks as folks just think you are trying to circumvent their great and awesome IP Protection strategies. That stated, properly providing a WHOIS entry for each prefix (inetnum/inet6num) is a good idea as that kind of indicates that that prefix is fixed in that location and not just moving around. As for Google, well, they have the method described above, but as they are primarily a HTTP company, they could just detect Language setting by the HTTP Accept-Language header. For YouTube etc they are in the same boat as everybody else: IP Protection. (property not network). In the end, having a prefix per country/region is the correct way to go. Do make sure though that you do not show any foreign address in the whois data (even if that is the correct entity that the prefix is registered under) otherwise that whole prefix will suddenly be blocked by for instance Netflix as it is foreign... Though Netflix always considers VPNs as a bad thing, ignoring the fact that for some folks that is the only real way to get a reasonable Internet experience. That all said: Restricting content based on location is complete and utter nonsense in 2015. The world is global, people want to pay for content and the content owners just don't allow people to pay for it. We all know what the end result of that is ;) Greets, Jeroen
Re: Cisco's IOS-XE and PCEP implementation
Here is Cisco's reply! “Given PCEP’s main use-case is inter-area TE tunnels (or SDN controller in TE environment) and ASR1K is not marketed for TE, support is unlikely” What is .. not marketed for TE?! All in all, I don't mind replacing them with some cheaper, powerful, flexible and SDN-ready juniper MX that are marketed for TE. Mohamed Kamal Core Network Sr. Engineer On 4/5/2015 10:42 PM, Mohamed Kamal wrote: and hence being implemented on IOS-XR within the Cisco environment today I disagree! .. Engineering is all about optimization, and using an ASR1k (which is being marketed as an edge/PE router) in my edge doesn't mean that my network is not a high-scale environment, it does mean that it fits my needs in this location, where other IOS-XR (ASR9k) fits in others. Plus, PCEP is no magic, Juniper's MX series starting from the vMX is supporting PCEP. They didn't claim that, a higher-scale environment is being required for this. the demand for online calculation has increased - either due to dependencies for new TE path-instantiating protocols (e.g., SR), or more complex constraints that cannot be well met by offline calculation or CSPF That's why PCEP support should be added to the road-map in the near future. Mohamed Kamal Core Network Sr. Engineer On 4/5/2015 8:33 PM, Rob Shakir wrote: On 30 March 2015 at 15:42:59, Mohamed Kamal (mka...@noor.net) wrote: I'm wondering, why there is no MPLS-TE PCE support for IOS-XE till now?! Should I be getting a 9k/CRS on the edge to implement an automatic tool to build MPLS-TE tunnels! In general, PCE(P) implementations have been limited. IMHO the last 10 years of RSVP-TE management has generally been done with auto-mesh tools, or in-house driven offline path calculation tools (e.g., WANDL, Cariden, Aria…). As such, the demand for online calculation has increased - either due to dependencies for new TE path-instantiating protocols (e.g., SR), or more complex constraints that cannot be well met by offline calculation or CSPF (e.g., path-diversity with disjoint head-end PEs). This demand is mainly coming in higher-scale environments - and hence being implemented on IOS-XR within the Cisco environment today. I expect this is why IOS-XE is lagging. There are certainly requests for support - but as Mark says, you’ll need to interface with your account team to figure out when code will be available for your platform. As to whether you should buy an IOS XR device for your edge, I’m not sure what kind of logic would mean that device selection is solely based on PCEP support :-). I would certainly look more into the existing “automatic” tools, and possibilities for offline calculation in the interim period. r.
Re: Cisco's IOS-XE and PCEP implementation
Yes, indeed! Things like VPLS, full-features ESI and PCEP exist on IOS-XR but not IOS and IOS-XE! ISSU and HA operates differently between IOS-XE and NX-OS! Their claim is not even logical, the ASR1k is supporting 600 TE tunnels head-end, and up-to 10k midpoint! So, if I had an average of 30 ASR1k in the edge, each with 500 TE, there will be over 15000 TE tunnels in the core which will be creating a need for automatic tool such as NorthStar of Juniper! Mohamed Kamal Core Network Sr. Engineer On 4/8/2015 4:11 PM, Phil Bedard wrote: One of the downsides to having four (at least) different control plane operating systems across your product lines. Phil From: Mohamed Kamal mailto:mka...@noor.net Sent: 4/8/2015 5:13 AM To: NANOG mailto:nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Cisco's IOS-XE and PCEP implementation Here is Cisco's reply! “Given PCEP’s main use-case is inter-area TE tunnels (or SDN controller in TE environment) and ASR1K is not marketed for TE, support is unlikely” What is .. not marketed for TE?! All in all, I don't mind replacing them with some cheaper, powerful, flexible and SDN-ready juniper MX that are marketed for TE. Mohamed Kamal Core Network Sr. Engineer On 4/5/2015 10:42 PM, Mohamed Kamal wrote: and hence being implemented on IOS-XR within the Cisco environment today I disagree! .. Engineering is all about optimization, and using an ASR1k (which is being marketed as an edge/PE router) in my edge doesn't mean that my network is not a high-scale environment, it does mean that it fits my needs in this location, where other IOS-XR (ASR9k) fits in others. Plus, PCEP is no magic, Juniper's MX series starting from the vMX is supporting PCEP. They didn't claim that, a higher-scale environment is being required for this. the demand for online calculation has increased - either due to dependencies for new TE path-instantiating protocols (e.g., SR), or more complex constraints that cannot be well met by offline calculation or CSPF That's why PCEP support should be added to the road-map in the near future. Mohamed Kamal Core Network Sr. Engineer On 4/5/2015 8:33 PM, Rob Shakir wrote: On 30 March 2015 at 15:42:59, Mohamed Kamal (mka...@noor.net) wrote: I'm wondering, why there is no MPLS-TE PCE support for IOS-XE till now?! Should I be getting a 9k/CRS on the edge to implement an automatic tool to build MPLS-TE tunnels! In general, PCE(P) implementations have been limited. IMHO the last 10 years of RSVP-TE management has generally been done with auto-mesh tools, or in-house driven offline path calculation tools (e.g., WANDL, Cariden, Aria…). As such, the demand for online calculation has increased - either due to dependencies for new TE path-instantiating protocols (e.g., SR), or more complex constraints that cannot be well met by offline calculation or CSPF (e.g., path-diversity with disjoint head-end PEs). This demand is mainly coming in higher-scale environments - and hence being implemented on IOS-XR within the Cisco environment today. I expect this is why IOS-XE is lagging. There are certainly requests for support - but as Mark says, you’ll need to interface with your account team to figure out when code will be available for your platform. As to whether you should buy an IOS XR device for your edge, I’m not sure what kind of logic would mean that device selection is solely based on PCEP support :-). I would certainly look more into the existing “automatic” tools, and possibilities for offline calculation in the interim period. r.
Re: Fixing Google geolocation screwups
Globalisation only works if network abuse and network contacts follow best practice and engage. Else trade blocks and network country blocks are done and remain in place until certain countries ethically/practically do the right thing. Colin On 8 Apr 2015, at 13:17, Tim Franklin t...@pelican.org wrote: That all said: Restricting content based on location is complete and utter nonsense in 2015. The world is global, people want to pay for content and the content owners just don't allow people to pay for it. Globalisation is for your corporate lords and masters to buy labour and raw materials where they're cheap. If mere peons try to buy goods and services in the same way, expect to be crushed by the best legislation money can buy :( Regards, Tim.
Re: Fixing Google geolocation screwups
shawn wilson ag4ve...@gmail.com writes: On Apr 8, 2015 7:19 AM, Rob Seastrom [[r...@seastrom.com]] wrote: Blair Trosper [[blair.tros...@gmail.com]] writes: MaxMind (a great product) I've heard anecdotal accounts of MaxMind intentionally marking all address blocks assigned to a VPN vendor as open proxy even when advised repeatedly that the disputed addresses (a) had no VPN services running on them either inbound or outbound, and (b) in fact were web servers for the company's payment system, or mail servers for their corporate email. I would wonder if these apps didn't have issues that allowed web proxy to the world. Maybe MaxMind is doing something wrong or maybe they're seeing the result of malicious activities and classifying from that. That was not the conclusion that one would draw from their replies. -r
RE: Cisco's IOS-XE and PCEP implementation
One of the downsides to having four (at least) different control plane operating systems across your product lines. Phil -Original Message- From: Mohamed Kamal mka...@noor.net Sent: 4/8/2015 5:13 AM To: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Cisco's IOS-XE and PCEP implementation Here is Cisco's reply! “Given PCEP’s main use-case is inter-area TE tunnels (or SDN controller in TE environment) and ASR1K is not marketed for TE, support is unlikely” What is .. not marketed for TE?! All in all, I don't mind replacing them with some cheaper, powerful, flexible and SDN-ready juniper MX that are marketed for TE. Mohamed Kamal Core Network Sr. Engineer On 4/5/2015 10:42 PM, Mohamed Kamal wrote: and hence being implemented on IOS-XR within the Cisco environment today I disagree! .. Engineering is all about optimization, and using an ASR1k (which is being marketed as an edge/PE router) in my edge doesn't mean that my network is not a high-scale environment, it does mean that it fits my needs in this location, where other IOS-XR (ASR9k) fits in others. Plus, PCEP is no magic, Juniper's MX series starting from the vMX is supporting PCEP. They didn't claim that, a higher-scale environment is being required for this. the demand for online calculation has increased - either due to dependencies for new TE path-instantiating protocols (e.g., SR), or more complex constraints that cannot be well met by offline calculation or CSPF That's why PCEP support should be added to the road-map in the near future. Mohamed Kamal Core Network Sr. Engineer On 4/5/2015 8:33 PM, Rob Shakir wrote: On 30 March 2015 at 15:42:59, Mohamed Kamal (mka...@noor.net) wrote: I'm wondering, why there is no MPLS-TE PCE support for IOS-XE till now?! Should I be getting a 9k/CRS on the edge to implement an automatic tool to build MPLS-TE tunnels! In general, PCE(P) implementations have been limited. IMHO the last 10 years of RSVP-TE management has generally been done with auto-mesh tools, or in-house driven offline path calculation tools (e.g., WANDL, Cariden, Aria…). As such, the demand for online calculation has increased - either due to dependencies for new TE path-instantiating protocols (e.g., SR), or more complex constraints that cannot be well met by offline calculation or CSPF (e.g., path-diversity with disjoint head-end PEs). This demand is mainly coming in higher-scale environments - and hence being implemented on IOS-XR within the Cisco environment today. I expect this is why IOS-XE is lagging. There are certainly requests for support - but as Mark says, you’ll need to interface with your account team to figure out when code will be available for your platform. As to whether you should buy an IOS XR device for your edge, I’m not sure what kind of logic would mean that device selection is solely based on PCEP support :-). I would certainly look more into the existing “automatic” tools, and possibilities for offline calculation in the interim period. r.
Re: Fixing Google geolocation screwups
On 04/08/15 14:56, Jeroen Massar wrote: That stated, properly providing a WHOIS entry for each prefix (inetnum/inet6num) is a good idea as that kind of indicates that that prefix is fixed in that location and not just moving around. [skip] Do make sure though that you do not show any foreign address in the whois data (even if that is the correct entity that the prefix is registered under) Seems that it is contrary to each other ;) I thought to do something like automated whois query on tunnel destination and put that (geo)data to each /48 inet6num tunnelled. But as I don't believe it will help, so priority of that task is low and not yet realized.
100Gb/s TOR switch
Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter
Re: 100Gb/s TOR switch
The Juniper QFX10002-36Q has 36 40GbE Ports. They can be broken out to up to 144 10GbE ports, or 1/3 of them can be used for 100GbE. So, if you use 6 100GbE ports and still have 72 10GbE ports. I have not seen one of these yet in person, but it is the smallest form factor I know of that has that sort of capacity, particularly on the 100GbE. thanks, -Randy - On Apr 8, 2015, at 3:01 PM, Piotr piotr.1...@interia.pl wrote: Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter
Re: Consumer products with baked-in VLAN tagging
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 3:59 AM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote: On 05/04/2015 03:32, Robert Seastrom wrote: As you may know if you've played around with recent Apple Airports (Express at least) in bridge mode with guest network turned on, they seem to know about 802.1q and have fairly reasonable or at least defensible behavior out of the box - that is to say they move the native SSID as untagged, and the guest SSID tagged 802.1q VLAN 1003. This behavior does not appear to be field-modifyable. I do wish they had bufferbloat-fighting queue managment on the ISP side, it is otherwise pretty good hardware. Do they also supply that vlan to the ethernet? How is their ipv6 with comcast? Didn't know about that trick. I'm going to immediately enable vlan 1003 on the cisco switch that my express is connected to. Nick -- Dave Täht We CAN make better hardware, ourselves, beat bufferbloat, and take back control of the edge of the internet! If we work together, on making it: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/onetswitch/onetswitch-open-source-hardware-for-networking
Re: 100Gb/s TOR switch
I did see these switches at SC14. http://www.corsa.com/products/dp6440/ Thanks, -Roy Hockett Network Architect, ITS Communications Systems and Data Centers University of Michigan Tel: (734) 763-7325 Fax: (734) 615-1727 email: roy...@umich.edu On Apr 8, 2015, at 3:01 PM, Piotr piotr.1...@interia.pl wrote: Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter
Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE
I work at a state REN and we are seeking a lead for a new edge device for on prem deployment at customer sites. We currently deploy two classes of routers-- a high end and a low end. Both the high end and the low end use some of the standard edge features: MPLS-TE, MBGP, flowspec, vrf, PIM, etc. We deliver full tables over these devices to the customers that need them. We recently finished a new ethernet procurement and have a large number of sites (~200) moving from 1Gbps in bandwidth to 1-10Gb in bandwidth. Our currently deployed low-end router can't handle these speeds and we can't afford to place our high end router at 200+ sites. So, we're looking for a middle tier router to deploy. Something with 2+ SFP+ ports, software that can handle the aforementioned features, and something with an API that we can leverage for programmatic management. So far we've not found anything that checks all the boxes. Layer 3 switches seem like obvious choices, but lack some of the features and RIB/FIB we need at the edge. Other devices like the Juniper MX5/10 certainly meet the requirements, but are priced way beyond what we can afford. Any suggestions for devices we might have overlooked? Preferably in the less than 10K per unit price point. If such a magical device exists. -Dan
Re: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE
Mikrotik for OS, and Hardware choice would be to use an X86 appliance (Lanner Electronics, Axiomtek etc) You should be able to get a cost effective box that will meet your performance requirements. As to feature set, while most of them are their you should do some testing to see if feature set meets your requirements. Most folks often forget that Mikrotik is OS and they also make Hardware (a variety of sizes for a variety of needs), and the OS can be deployed on standard or custom hardware server or appliances. You can always go the 'Custom' Linux Route, using x86 boxes with your own distro, too bad that Vyatta OS took a different route under Brocade.. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Daniel Rohan dro...@gmail.com To: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2015 6:46:40 PM Subject: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE I work at a state REN and we are seeking a lead for a new edge device for on prem deployment at customer sites. We currently deploy two classes of routers-- a high end and a low end. Both the high end and the low end use some of the standard edge features: MPLS-TE, MBGP, flowspec, vrf, PIM, etc. We deliver full tables over these devices to the customers that need them. We recently finished a new ethernet procurement and have a large number of sites (~200) moving from 1Gbps in bandwidth to 1-10Gb in bandwidth. Our currently deployed low-end router can't handle these speeds and we can't afford to place our high end router at 200+ sites. So, we're looking for a middle tier router to deploy. Something with 2+ SFP+ ports, software that can handle the aforementioned features, and something with an API that we can leverage for programmatic management. So far we've not found anything that checks all the boxes. Layer 3 switches seem like obvious choices, but lack some of the features and RIB/FIB we need at the edge. Other devices like the Juniper MX5/10 certainly meet the requirements, but are priced way beyond what we can afford. Any suggestions for devices we might have overlooked? Preferably in the less than 10K per unit price point. If such a magical device exists. -Dan
Re: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE
No MPLS though, if that is a requirement. On 04/08/2015 05:11 PM, Tim Raphael wrote: VyOS is a community fork of Vyatta and is still being developed very actively and it pushing ahead with many new features! It's pretty stable too imo. http://vyos.net/wiki/Main_Page Regards, Tim Raphael On 9 Apr 2015, at 8:14 am, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: Mikrotik for OS, and Hardware choice would be to use an X86 appliance (Lanner Electronics, Axiomtek etc) You should be able to get a cost effective box that will meet your performance requirements. As to feature set, while most of them are their you should do some testing to see if feature set meets your requirements. Most folks often forget that Mikrotik is OS and they also make Hardware (a variety of sizes for a variety of needs), and the OS can be deployed on standard or custom hardware server or appliances. You can always go the 'Custom' Linux Route, using x86 boxes with your own distro, too bad that Vyatta OS took a different route under Brocade.. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Daniel Rohan dro...@gmail.com To: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2015 6:46:40 PM Subject: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE I work at a state REN and we are seeking a lead for a new edge device for on prem deployment at customer sites. We currently deploy two classes of routers-- a high end and a low end. Both the high end and the low end use some of the standard edge features: MPLS-TE, MBGP, flowspec, vrf, PIM, etc. We deliver full tables over these devices to the customers that need them. We recently finished a new ethernet procurement and have a large number of sites (~200) moving from 1Gbps in bandwidth to 1-10Gb in bandwidth. Our currently deployed low-end router can't handle these speeds and we can't afford to place our high end router at 200+ sites. So, we're looking for a middle tier router to deploy. Something with 2+ SFP+ ports, software that can handle the aforementioned features, and something with an API that we can leverage for programmatic management. So far we've not found anything that checks all the boxes. Layer 3 switches seem like obvious choices, but lack some of the features and RIB/FIB we need at the edge. Other devices like the Juniper MX5/10 certainly meet the requirements, but are priced way beyond what we can afford. Any suggestions for devices we might have overlooked? Preferably in the less than 10K per unit price point. If such a magical device exists. -Dan
Re: Consumer products with baked-in VLAN tagging
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Robert Seastrom r...@seastrom.com wrote: I'd really like to try these native IPv6 tests with my Verizon FIOS at home, but I think I already know the outcome... you are cracking me up. srsly. v6 on fios? that'll be the day.
Re: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE
VyOS is a community fork of Vyatta and is still being developed very actively and it pushing ahead with many new features! It's pretty stable too imo. http://vyos.net/wiki/Main_Page Regards, Tim Raphael On 9 Apr 2015, at 8:14 am, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: Mikrotik for OS, and Hardware choice would be to use an X86 appliance (Lanner Electronics, Axiomtek etc) You should be able to get a cost effective box that will meet your performance requirements. As to feature set, while most of them are their you should do some testing to see if feature set meets your requirements. Most folks often forget that Mikrotik is OS and they also make Hardware (a variety of sizes for a variety of needs), and the OS can be deployed on standard or custom hardware server or appliances. You can always go the 'Custom' Linux Route, using x86 boxes with your own distro, too bad that Vyatta OS took a different route under Brocade.. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Daniel Rohan dro...@gmail.com To: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2015 6:46:40 PM Subject: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE I work at a state REN and we are seeking a lead for a new edge device for on prem deployment at customer sites. We currently deploy two classes of routers-- a high end and a low end. Both the high end and the low end use some of the standard edge features: MPLS-TE, MBGP, flowspec, vrf, PIM, etc. We deliver full tables over these devices to the customers that need them. We recently finished a new ethernet procurement and have a large number of sites (~200) moving from 1Gbps in bandwidth to 1-10Gb in bandwidth. Our currently deployed low-end router can't handle these speeds and we can't afford to place our high end router at 200+ sites. So, we're looking for a middle tier router to deploy. Something with 2+ SFP+ ports, software that can handle the aforementioned features, and something with an API that we can leverage for programmatic management. So far we've not found anything that checks all the boxes. Layer 3 switches seem like obvious choices, but lack some of the features and RIB/FIB we need at the edge. Other devices like the Juniper MX5/10 certainly meet the requirements, but are priced way beyond what we can afford. Any suggestions for devices we might have overlooked? Preferably in the less than 10K per unit price point. If such a magical device exists. -Dan
Re: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE
Is it a necessity to terminate the layer 3 at the edge? You could get a 10Gbps switch and move it all back to a central location where you have your high end routers. It would then be terminated as a VLAN and be a router on a stick kind of topology. Could be a cheaper way to do it without taking MPLS all the way out to the edge. As Tim said above, I too was thinking about the Juniper ACX. The 5048/5096 model could suit your needs. They are primarily designed as layer 1(TDM)/2 backhaul devices and i'm not sure they can do a full table. They do have full JunOS MPLS features. Could be a way to use MPLS-TE to move the layer 2 back to a core location and terminate later 3 there. Would give you some flexibility over just doing ethernet stuff as I mentioned in the first paragraph. Hamish On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Daniel Rohan dro...@gmail.com wrote: I work at a state REN and we are seeking a lead for a new edge device for on prem deployment at customer sites. We currently deploy two classes of routers-- a high end and a low end. Both the high end and the low end use some of the standard edge features: MPLS-TE, MBGP, flowspec, vrf, PIM, etc. We deliver full tables over these devices to the customers that need them. We recently finished a new ethernet procurement and have a large number of sites (~200) moving from 1Gbps in bandwidth to 1-10Gb in bandwidth. Our currently deployed low-end router can't handle these speeds and we can't afford to place our high end router at 200+ sites. So, we're looking for a middle tier router to deploy. Something with 2+ SFP+ ports, software that can handle the aforementioned features, and something with an API that we can leverage for programmatic management. So far we've not found anything that checks all the boxes. Layer 3 switches seem like obvious choices, but lack some of the features and RIB/FIB we need at the edge. Other devices like the Juniper MX5/10 certainly meet the requirements, but are priced way beyond what we can afford. Any suggestions for devices we might have overlooked? Preferably in the less than 10K per unit price point. If such a magical device exists. -Dan
Re: 100Gb/s TOR switch
Hello Piotr, You can always take a look at : - Arista : http://www.arista.com/en/products/7280e-series - Brocade : http://www.brocade.com/products/all/switches/product-details/vdx-6940-switch/index.page HTH. BR. Le 8 avr. 2015 à 21:01, Piotr piotr.1...@interia.pl a écrit : Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter
Re: 100Gb/s TOR switch
When will Tomahawk switches be available? On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Marian Ďurkovič m...@bts.sk wrote: Wait for switches with BCM Tomahawk ASICs. They'll support exactly what you're looking for. M. On Wed, 08 Apr 2015 21:01:59 +0200, Piotr wrote Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter
Re: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE
Mikrotik? I believe they support all these features other than maybe flowspec, and you can get a box with a 10G SFP+ port for around $500. On 8 April 2015 at 23:46, Daniel Rohan dro...@gmail.com wrote: I work at a state REN and we are seeking a lead for a new edge device for on prem deployment at customer sites. We currently deploy two classes of routers-- a high end and a low end. Both the high end and the low end use some of the standard edge features: MPLS-TE, MBGP, flowspec, vrf, PIM, etc. We deliver full tables over these devices to the customers that need them. We recently finished a new ethernet procurement and have a large number of sites (~200) moving from 1Gbps in bandwidth to 1-10Gb in bandwidth. Our currently deployed low-end router can't handle these speeds and we can't afford to place our high end router at 200+ sites. So, we're looking for a middle tier router to deploy. Something with 2+ SFP+ ports, software that can handle the aforementioned features, and something with an API that we can leverage for programmatic management. So far we've not found anything that checks all the boxes. Layer 3 switches seem like obvious choices, but lack some of the features and RIB/FIB we need at the edge. Other devices like the Juniper MX5/10 certainly meet the requirements, but are priced way beyond what we can afford. Any suggestions for devices we might have overlooked? Preferably in the less than 10K per unit price point. If such a magical device exists. -Dan
Re: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE
Correct. But hopefully not far off now that there are x86 packages for simple MPLS operations. With a bit of luck an RSVP or LDP implementation isn't far behind. Regards, Tim Raphael On 9 Apr 2015, at 9:14 am, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: No MPLS though, if that is a requirement. On 04/08/2015 05:11 PM, Tim Raphael wrote: VyOS is a community fork of Vyatta and is still being developed very actively and it pushing ahead with many new features! It's pretty stable too imo. http://vyos.net/wiki/Main_Page Regards, Tim Raphael On 9 Apr 2015, at 8:14 am, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: Mikrotik for OS, and Hardware choice would be to use an X86 appliance (Lanner Electronics, Axiomtek etc) You should be able to get a cost effective box that will meet your performance requirements. As to feature set, while most of them are their you should do some testing to see if feature set meets your requirements. Most folks often forget that Mikrotik is OS and they also make Hardware (a variety of sizes for a variety of needs), and the OS can be deployed on standard or custom hardware server or appliances. You can always go the 'Custom' Linux Route, using x86 boxes with your own distro, too bad that Vyatta OS took a different route under Brocade.. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Daniel Rohan dro...@gmail.com To: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2015 6:46:40 PM Subject: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE I work at a state REN and we are seeking a lead for a new edge device for on prem deployment at customer sites. We currently deploy two classes of routers-- a high end and a low end. Both the high end and the low end use some of the standard edge features: MPLS-TE, MBGP, flowspec, vrf, PIM, etc. We deliver full tables over these devices to the customers that need them. We recently finished a new ethernet procurement and have a large number of sites (~200) moving from 1Gbps in bandwidth to 1-10Gb in bandwidth. Our currently deployed low-end router can't handle these speeds and we can't afford to place our high end router at 200+ sites. So, we're looking for a middle tier router to deploy. Something with 2+ SFP+ ports, software that can handle the aforementioned features, and something with an API that we can leverage for programmatic management. So far we've not found anything that checks all the boxes. Layer 3 switches seem like obvious choices, but lack some of the features and RIB/FIB we need at the edge. Other devices like the Juniper MX5/10 certainly meet the requirements, but are priced way beyond what we can afford. Any suggestions for devices we might have overlooked? Preferably in the less than 10K per unit price point. If such a magical device exists. -Dan
Re: 100Gb/s TOR switch
Wait for switches with BCM Tomahawk ASICs. They'll support exactly what you're looking for. M. On Wed, 08 Apr 2015 21:01:59 +0200, Piotr wrote Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter
Re: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE
Woops, missed the full tables requirement there.. Never mind. On Apr 8, 2015 4:18 PM, Tim Jackson jackson@gmail.com wrote: Cisco ASR902 or Juniper ACX.. On Apr 8, 2015 3:48 PM, Daniel Rohan dro...@gmail.com wrote: I work at a state REN and we are seeking a lead for a new edge device for on prem deployment at customer sites. We currently deploy two classes of routers-- a high end and a low end. Both the high end and the low end use some of the standard edge features: MPLS-TE, MBGP, flowspec, vrf, PIM, etc. We deliver full tables over these devices to the customers that need them. We recently finished a new ethernet procurement and have a large number of sites (~200) moving from 1Gbps in bandwidth to 1-10Gb in bandwidth. Our currently deployed low-end router can't handle these speeds and we can't afford to place our high end router at 200+ sites. So, we're looking for a middle tier router to deploy. Something with 2+ SFP+ ports, software that can handle the aforementioned features, and something with an API that we can leverage for programmatic management. So far we've not found anything that checks all the boxes. Layer 3 switches seem like obvious choices, but lack some of the features and RIB/FIB we need at the edge. Other devices like the Juniper MX5/10 certainly meet the requirements, but are priced way beyond what we can afford. Any suggestions for devices we might have overlooked? Preferably in the less than 10K per unit price point. If such a magical device exists. -Dan
Re: 100Gb/s TOR switch
If referring to cavium xpa's hitting the oem's lines, next year or so I'm guessing. Bob Watson On Apr 8, 2015, at 9:01 PM, Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com wrote: From which vendors? On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Furst, John-Nicholas jofu...@akamai.com wrote: If you can wait, you will see the market flooded with 32x100G with the ability to down-clock to 40g / breakout to 4x10g in the Q3/Q4 timeframe ;) John-Nicholas Furst Hardware Engineer Office: +1.617.274.7212 Akamai Technologies 150 Broadway Cambridge, MA 02142 On 4/8/15, 3:37 PM, Hockett, Roy roy...@umich.edu wrote: I did see these switches at SC14. http://www.corsa.com/products/dp6440/ Thanks, -Roy Hockett Network Architect, ITS Communications Systems and Data Centers University of Michigan Tel: (734) 763-7325 Fax: (734) 615-1727 email: roy...@umich.edu On Apr 8, 2015, at 3:01 PM, Piotr piotr.1...@interia.pl wrote: Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter
RE: 100Gb/s TOR switch
I think Brocade has one already announced. It might be based off the Trident2+ though, I can't remember. Either way, in 6 months everyone will have 1RU switches with 100G uplinks like they have 40G now. Phil -Original Message- From: Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com Sent: 4/8/2015 9:58 PM To: Marian Ďurkovič m...@bts.sk Cc: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: 100Gb/s TOR switch When will Tomahawk switches be available? On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Marian Ďurkovič m...@bts.sk wrote: Wait for switches with BCM Tomahawk ASICs. They'll support exactly what you're looking for. M. On Wed, 08 Apr 2015 21:01:59 +0200, Piotr wrote Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter
Re: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE
Cisco ASR902 or Juniper ACX.. On Apr 8, 2015 3:48 PM, Daniel Rohan dro...@gmail.com wrote: I work at a state REN and we are seeking a lead for a new edge device for on prem deployment at customer sites. We currently deploy two classes of routers-- a high end and a low end. Both the high end and the low end use some of the standard edge features: MPLS-TE, MBGP, flowspec, vrf, PIM, etc. We deliver full tables over these devices to the customers that need them. We recently finished a new ethernet procurement and have a large number of sites (~200) moving from 1Gbps in bandwidth to 1-10Gb in bandwidth. Our currently deployed low-end router can't handle these speeds and we can't afford to place our high end router at 200+ sites. So, we're looking for a middle tier router to deploy. Something with 2+ SFP+ ports, software that can handle the aforementioned features, and something with an API that we can leverage for programmatic management. So far we've not found anything that checks all the boxes. Layer 3 switches seem like obvious choices, but lack some of the features and RIB/FIB we need at the edge. Other devices like the Juniper MX5/10 certainly meet the requirements, but are priced way beyond what we can afford. Any suggestions for devices we might have overlooked? Preferably in the less than 10K per unit price point. If such a magical device exists. -Dan
Re: 100Gb/s TOR switch
From which vendors? On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Furst, John-Nicholas jofu...@akamai.com wrote: If you can wait, you will see the market flooded with 32x100G with the ability to down-clock to 40g / breakout to 4x10g in the Q3/Q4 timeframe ;) John-Nicholas Furst Hardware Engineer Office: +1.617.274.7212 Akamai Technologies 150 Broadway Cambridge, MA 02142 On 4/8/15, 3:37 PM, Hockett, Roy roy...@umich.edu wrote: I did see these switches at SC14. http://www.corsa.com/products/dp6440/ Thanks, -Roy Hockett Network Architect, ITS Communications Systems and Data Centers University of Michigan Tel: (734) 763-7325 Fax: (734) 615-1727 email: roy...@umich.edu On Apr 8, 2015, at 3:01 PM, Piotr piotr.1...@interia.pl wrote: Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter
RE: 100Gb/s TOR switch
Everyone. These should also support 25/50G Ethernet. Phil -Original Message- From: Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com Sent: 4/8/2015 10:01 PM To: Furst, John-Nicholas jofu...@akamai.com Cc: nanog@nanog.org nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: 100Gb/s TOR switch From which vendors? On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Furst, John-Nicholas jofu...@akamai.com wrote: If you can wait, you will see the market flooded with 32x100G with the ability to down-clock to 40g / breakout to 4x10g in the Q3/Q4 timeframe ;) John-Nicholas Furst Hardware Engineer Office: +1.617.274.7212 Akamai Technologies 150 Broadway Cambridge, MA 02142 On 4/8/15, 3:37 PM, Hockett, Roy roy...@umich.edu wrote: I did see these switches at SC14. http://www.corsa.com/products/dp6440/ Thanks, -Roy Hockett Network Architect, ITS Communications Systems and Data Centers University of Michigan Tel: (734) 763-7325 Fax: (734) 615-1727 email: roy...@umich.edu On Apr 8, 2015, at 3:01 PM, Piotr piotr.1...@interia.pl wrote: Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter
Re: Consumer products with baked-in VLAN tagging
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Robert Seastrom r...@seastrom.com wrote: On Apr 8, 2015, at 1:58 PM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote: I do wish they had bufferbloat-fighting queue managment on the ISP side, it is otherwise pretty good hardware. Again, I LOVE the apple gear - with stuart cheshire the godfather of the bufferbloat movement I would have expected apple to use these new algos long ago. They have sufficient infrastructure to do a better UI and distributed internet test infrastructure than anyone except google. I suck at UIs. Apples are great. They could fix bufferbloat on all their edge hardware in a matter of days. As you're well aware since your name is in the acknowledgements, there's been some effort in this direction at CL. And sometimes I wish it wasn't. If the problem gets solved in the CMTS and the CM, what the router does is kind of beside the point Sore points here, sorry for the noise on your thread. Been at this for 4.5 years now. Comcast, closer to 7. I am getting older, waiting. A) I have seen no public sign of progress from the CMTS makers that they are implementing any fixes. The only public sign of a fix came from ARRIS´s CTO 2 years back, and they got a nice improvement (4 way set associative hashing) in to SFQ but got their AQM horribly wrong. http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/trimfat/Cloonan_Presentation.pdf http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/trimfat/Cloonan_Paper.pdf I would certainly like it if the CMTS makers made a public announcement as to their plans and schedules for addressing bufferbloat on their side. After fixing the uplinks with a fq+aqm, the downlinks also tend to be seriously overbuffered, and any sufficiently long download (one just slightly longer than speedtest!) can trigger unacceptable latency. If their fixes require new hardware it will be a decade before we see them in the field. Thus - it seems better to continue fixing bloat on users equipment, and not waiting for them and their ISPs downstream to get off their duffs. (and multiple cable ISPs are desperate to try anything! anything! that will get bufferbloat off there list of problems especially for their business customers) Someone here feel free to bug Arris, Cisco, and casa-systems as to their CMTS update plans and schedule. B) sfq_codel was the algorithm that won the benchmarks before the numbers got extensively jiggled to favor docsis-pie. The test results were ultimately gamed, the sfq_codel implementation de-optimized ridiculously, and the tests absurdly weighted, to make the pie algorithm come out (barely) on top, in simulation. I have tried not to be too publicly bitter about this. Follow up tests using the algorithm in the real world shows it performing worse on a wider variety of workloads than fq_codel. I STILL support docsis-pie! as it is vastly better than what exists today, but have taken refuge in the fact that the docsis 3.1 CM specification also allows for better fq/aqm technologies to be in the box. C) Since the docsis-3.1 evaluations, of course, fq_codel has swept the aftermarket firmware market, is now the default qdisc in fedora 22, arch and other linuxes, shipped in ubnt´s edgerouters, and in vyos, part of click, and available across the board in all linux distributions... and a derivative (sch_fq) serves up over 25% of the internet traffic in the world... ... and there is not one single sign of a pie deployment in the real world. I look forward, very much, to my first docsis 3.1 modem to play with... and I do hope some CM maker pays attention to the alternate AQM portion of the DOCSIS 3.1 specification, some CMTS maker fixes their gear where I live, and I can quit this task and go back to making spacecraft. But, until then... We hack. Upcoming is a refinement of fq_codel, now under test, which I hope we will also get into BSD and things like pfsense later this year. Let me know offlist if you are interested. In this chart I included current docsis 3.0 behavior here (and you can´t take the extra bandwidth in the default as real, it is set to native for that portion of the graph, I do have emulated results to show around - but you can take the latency as real!) : http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/cake3-fixed/baseline.png Cake works to manage inbound rates at 115Mbit/12Mbit (a now common cable rate) on cheap hardware, so anyone that wants to, can fix their network for themselves on their own gateways and firewalls. We hope to shave more cpu off of it as we finalize the algorithm. I can´t wait til CMs and CMTSes showed up. :) Aside from the huge induced latency problems, I honestly quite like cable internet, and the ipv6 stuff - aside from being dynamically renumbered at the drop of a hat - is pretty good also. I can´t wait til I can buy a static /48. (unless we've progressed to wanting to do it on the wireless side too). Yes! we have progressed to that side. Our datasets (mlabs, others) show that once downlink bandwidth cracks
Re: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Tim Raphael raphael.timo...@gmail.com wrote: Correct. But hopefully not far off now that there are x86 packages for simple MPLS operations. With a bit of luck an RSVP or LDP implementation isn't far behind. Just sitting around whining and waiting for someone else to do the job is nowhere near as effective as chipping in and helping... or funding the efforts that exist. -- Dave Täht Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware** https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/N8mZ5F5iSPU
Re: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE
Dan, The new asr920 by cisco would fit 4x10g SFP+ and 24 ports SFP or copper 1g line rate about 6 k list without license . You can leverage netconf yang model as its cisco edge or other flavor choice You can unicast if you want more data as we've done EFI and evaluated them in our labs Bob Watson On Apr 8, 2015, at 7:15 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: Mikrotik for OS, and Hardware choice would be to use an X86 appliance (Lanner Electronics, Axiomtek etc) You should be able to get a cost effective box that will meet your performance requirements. As to feature set, while most of them are their you should do some testing to see if feature set meets your requirements. Most folks often forget that Mikrotik is OS and they also make Hardware (a variety of sizes for a variety of needs), and the OS can be deployed on standard or custom hardware server or appliances. You can always go the 'Custom' Linux Route, using x86 boxes with your own distro, too bad that Vyatta OS took a different route under Brocade.. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Daniel Rohan dro...@gmail.com To: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2015 6:46:40 PM Subject: Multi-gigabit edge devices as CPE I work at a state REN and we are seeking a lead for a new edge device for on prem deployment at customer sites. We currently deploy two classes of routers-- a high end and a low end. Both the high end and the low end use some of the standard edge features: MPLS-TE, MBGP, flowspec, vrf, PIM, etc. We deliver full tables over these devices to the customers that need them. We recently finished a new ethernet procurement and have a large number of sites (~200) moving from 1Gbps in bandwidth to 1-10Gb in bandwidth. Our currently deployed low-end router can't handle these speeds and we can't afford to place our high end router at 200+ sites. So, we're looking for a middle tier router to deploy. Something with 2+ SFP+ ports, software that can handle the aforementioned features, and something with an API that we can leverage for programmatic management. So far we've not found anything that checks all the boxes. Layer 3 switches seem like obvious choices, but lack some of the features and RIB/FIB we need at the edge. Other devices like the Juniper MX5/10 certainly meet the requirements, but are priced way beyond what we can afford. Any suggestions for devices we might have overlooked? Preferably in the less than 10K per unit price point. If such a magical device exists. -Dan
RE: 100Gb/s TOR switch
That is correct, I didn’t mean that it supports all three. Only one of the three combinations. Regards, Kirill -Original Message- From: Randy Carpenter [mailto:rcar...@network1.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2015 4:23 PM To: Klimakhin, Kirill Cc: Piotr; nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: 100Gb/s TOR switch 7700 2 slot looks to only support 1 line card, so 48x10 *or* 12x100 thanks, -Randy - On Apr 8, 2015, at 3:16 PM, Klimakhin, Kirill kirill.klimak...@corebts.com wrote: Cisco Nexus 7700 2 slot chassis supports 48 x 10 Gbps, 24 x 40 Gbps, and 12 x 100 Gbps. It is 3RU. Part number is N77-C7702. -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Piotr Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2015 3:02 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: 100Gb/s TOR switch Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter Important Notice: This email message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the named addressee, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Core BTS. Core BTS specifically disclaims liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Important Notice: This email message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the named addressee, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Core BTS. Core BTS specifically disclaims liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.
RE: 100Gb/s TOR switch
Cisco Nexus 7700 2 slot chassis supports 48 x 10 Gbps, 24 x 40 Gbps, and 12 x 100 Gbps. It is 3RU. Part number is N77-C7702. -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Piotr Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2015 3:02 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: 100Gb/s TOR switch Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter Important Notice: This email message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the named addressee, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Core BTS. Core BTS specifically disclaims liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.
Re: 100Gb/s TOR switch
If you can wait, you will see the market flooded with 32x100G with the ability to down-clock to 40g / breakout to 4x10g in the Q3/Q4 timeframe ;) John-Nicholas Furst Hardware Engineer Office: +1.617.274.7212 Akamai Technologies 150 Broadway Cambridge, MA 02142 On 4/8/15, 3:37 PM, Hockett, Roy roy...@umich.edu wrote: I did see these switches at SC14. http://www.corsa.com/products/dp6440/ Thanks, -Roy Hockett Network Architect, ITS Communications Systems and Data Centers University of Michigan Tel: (734) 763-7325 Fax: (734) 615-1727 email: roy...@umich.edu On Apr 8, 2015, at 3:01 PM, Piotr piotr.1...@interia.pl wrote: Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter
Re: 100Gb/s TOR switch
25/50/100 stuff should start coming out around soon, as well, which may drive pricing down even more. thanks, -Randy - On Apr 8, 2015, at 3:43 PM, Furst, John-Nicholas jofu...@akamai.com wrote: If you can wait, you will see the market flooded with 32x100G with the ability to down-clock to 40g / breakout to 4x10g in the Q3/Q4 timeframe ;) John-Nicholas Furst Hardware Engineer Office: +1.617.274.7212 Akamai Technologies 150 Broadway Cambridge, MA 02142 On 4/8/15, 3:37 PM, Hockett, Roy roy...@umich.edu wrote: I did see these switches at SC14. http://www.corsa.com/products/dp6440/ Thanks, -Roy Hockett Network Architect, ITS Communications Systems and Data Centers University of Michigan Tel: (734) 763-7325 Fax: (734) 615-1727 email: roy...@umich.edu On Apr 8, 2015, at 3:01 PM, Piotr piotr.1...@interia.pl wrote: Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter
Re: 100Gb/s TOR switch
7700 2 slot looks to only support 1 line card, so 48x10 *or* 12x100 thanks, -Randy - On Apr 8, 2015, at 3:16 PM, Klimakhin, Kirill kirill.klimak...@corebts.com wrote: Cisco Nexus 7700 2 slot chassis supports 48 x 10 Gbps, 24 x 40 Gbps, and 12 x 100 Gbps. It is 3RU. Part number is N77-C7702. -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Piotr Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2015 3:02 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: 100Gb/s TOR switch Hi, There is something like this on market ? Looking for standalone switch, 1/2U, ca 40 ports 10Gb/s and about 4 ports 100Gb/s fixed or as a module. regards, Peter Important Notice: This email message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the named addressee, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Core BTS. Core BTS specifically disclaims liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.
Re: Consumer products with baked-in VLAN tagging
On Apr 8, 2015, at 1:58 PM, Dave Taht dave.t...@gmail.com wrote: I do wish they had bufferbloat-fighting queue managment on the ISP side, it is otherwise pretty good hardware. As you're well aware since your name is in the acknowledgements, there's been some effort in this direction at CL. If the problem gets solved in the CMTS and the CM, what the router does is kind of beside the point (unless we've progressed to wanting to do it on the wireless side too). Do they also supply that vlan to the ethernet? You mean to the southbound ethernet when running as a router instead of to the northbound ethernet while running as a bridge? No idea. That's not my normal use case. How is their ipv6 with comcast? Beats me. No Comcast handy to test with. I *can* tell you that a freshly factory reset Airport Express 802.11n (2nd Generation) aka A1392 - the currently for sale $99 one - does pretty much exactly what you would hope when plugged into a freshly rebooted cablemodem on Another Pretty Darned Big MSO. That is to say, it gets a PD /64 and you're off to the races with native IPv6 on the wireless side. No warranties expressed or implied, but it seems to do what it says on the tin. A similar test with a freshly factory reset Airport Extreme 802.11n (3rd Generation) aka A1301 is disappointing; default configuration is IPv6 link local only and although there is a knob to put it into native/automatic IPv6 configuration it doesn't work as advertised. But hey, it was discontinued five and a half years ago at this point so what do you want? I figured that a test with an even older example I have sitting around in the junk box (A1143) would be similarly unsatisfying. I'd really like to try these native IPv6 tests with my Verizon FIOS at home, but I think I already know the outcome... -r
