Re: Moving fibre trunks: interruptions?

The the USA, we have tornadoes, hurricanes, nasty wind and lightning, ice accumulation on lines, and idiot squirrels that like to eat fiber. Buried fiber over time will end up being cheaper than aerial once you factor in maintenance and repair. Add to that the additional cost of pole studies,

Re: Max Prefix Out, was Re: Verizon 701 Route leak?

> well, I was thinking that you can survey your customers to know their > approximate inbound number, you can implement a max-prefix in from them > with that (ideally you're already doing that). > > You can figure out the output from you as well in a similar fashion. > > In either case you're

Re: Max Prefix Out, was Re: Verizon 701 Route leak?

> On Sep 2, 2017, at 12:41 PM, Job Snijders wrote: > > Coloclue (AS 8283): > >For every peering partner, data is fetched from the PeeringDB API >and the fields visible here https://www.peeringdb.com/asn/2914 as >'IPv4 Prefixes' and 'IPv6 Prefixes' are used as

Re: Moving fibre trunks: interruptions?

Le 02/09/2017 à 21:25, Baldur Norddahl a écrit : > That depends on the country. Here in Denmark it is not possible to get > rights to put up any aerial at all. The cost difference is irrelevant when > you have no option but to put it in the ground. > > Not only is there no new aerial installations

Re: Moving fibre trunks: interruptions?

That depends on the country. Here in Denmark it is not possible to get rights to put up any aerial at all. The cost difference is irrelevant when you have no option but to put it in the ground. Not only is there no new aerial installations here but the old ones are taken down. Very little is left

Re: Moving fibre trunks: interruptions?

Aerial's not that rare in Europe (rural areas, sometimes even close to metro). Cheers, mh Le 01/09/2017 à 21:52, Rod Beck a écrit : > I don't think there is virtually any aerial in Europe. So given the cost > difference why is virtually all fiber buried on this side of the Atlantic? > > >

Re: Moving fibre trunks: interruptions?

On 2017-09-01 18:38, Ricky Beam wrote: > Buried stuff requires a great deal of planning, permitting, and insurance. Are cables in railway right of way considered "burried stuff" from the point of view of all the regulatory approvals since it is on private land (railway's) ? I take it that it

Re: Max Prefix Out, was Re: Verizon 701 Route leak?

On Sat, Sep 02, 2017 at 12:08:41PM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > I think you'll find that some of your peers will make an educated > > guess and set an inbound limit anyway. Actively requesting that no > > limit is applied may make one part of a fringe minority. > > This is a quick survey

Re: Max Prefix Out, was Re: Verizon 701 Route leak?

(from earlier randy) > you just assumed that the transitive closure of everybody's cones > implement and propagate count. ain't gonna happen. well, I was thinking that you can survey your customers to know their approximate inbound number, you can implement a max-prefix in from them with that

Re: Max Prefix Out, was Re: Verizon 701 Route leak?

On Sat, Sep 02, 2017 at 04:27:03PM +0900, Randy Bush wrote: > > I am not sure what the issue here is. If I can tell my peering > > partner a recommended maximum prefix value for them to set on their > > side, surely I can configure that same value on my side as the upper > > outbound limit. > >

Re: Max Prefix Out, was Re: Verizon 701 Route leak?

> i have 142 largish bgp customers, a large enough number that the > number of prefixes i receive from them varies annoyingly. how do > i reasonably automate setting of my outbound prefix limit? First, it seems you know the inbound so automating the outbound is simple

Re: Max Prefix Out, was Re: Verizon 701 Route leak?

On Sat, 2 Sep 2017 at 05:41, Randy Bush wrote: > >>> i have 142 largish bgp customers, a large enough number that the number > >>> of prefixes i receive from them varies annoyingly. how do i reasonably > >>> automate setting of my outbound prefix limit? > >> > >> First, it seems