FCC Broadband advisory working group in disaster response and recovery

[Sean Donelan]

The FCC has announced the members of the Broadband Deployment Advisory 
Committee working group on disaster response and recovery.


Chair:
Red Grasso, FirstNet State Point of Contact
North Carolina Department of Information Technology

Vice-Chair:
Jonathan Adelstein, President & Chief Executive Officer*
Wireless Infrastructure Association

Members:
Andrew Afflerbach, Chief Executive Officer and Director of Engineering, 
CTC Technology and Energy

National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors
Allen Bell, Distribution Support Manager, Georgia Power Company*
Southern Company
Megan Bixler, Technical Program Manager for Communications Center and 911 
Services

Association of Public Safety Communications Officials
Skyler Ditchfield, Chief Executive Officer
GeoLinks
Patrick Donovan, Senior Director, Regulatory Affairs
CTIA
Tony Fischer, Director, Information Technology
City of Germantown, Tennessee
Monica Gambino, Vice President, Legal
Crown Castle
Larry Hanson, Executive Director*
Georgia Municipal Association
David Hartshorn, Chief Executive Officer
Geeks Without Frontiers
Greg Hauser, Communications Branch Manager/Statewide Interoperability 
Coordinator,

North Carolina Emergency Management Division
National Emergency Management Association
Kurt Jacobs, Corporate Director, Emerging Technology & Solutions
JMA Wireless
Richard Kildow, Director of Business Continuity & Emergency Management
Verizon
Frank Korinek, Director of Government Affairs
Motorola
Wyatt Leehy, Information Technology Manager
Great Plains Communications
David Marshack, Telecommunications Regulatory Lead
Loon
Jim Matheson, Chief Executive Officer*
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association
Kelly McGriff, Vice President & Deputy General Counsel*
Uniti Group
Wendy Moser, Commissioner, Colorado Public Utilities Commission
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners
Alexandra Fernandez Navarro, Commissioner
Puerto Rico Public Service Regulatory Board
John O’Connor, Director, National Coordinating Center for Communications
Department of Homeland Security
Eddie Reyes, Prince William County Emergency Communications Center
National Public Safety Telecommunications Council
Rikin Thaker, Vice President, Telecommunications and Spectrum Policy*
Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council
Pete Tomczak, Manager, Spectrum Coordination and Clearance
FirstNet
Rocky Vaz, Director of Emergency Management
City of Dallas, Texas
Joseph Viens, Senior Director of Government Affairs
Charter
Debra Wulff, Public Safety Director
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation

Re: Brocade SLX Internet Edge

[Blake Hudson]

Chris Welti wrote on 11/1/2018 10:03 AM:

Nicolas Fevrier has a very detailed blog post on how Cisco handles the prefixes 
on their Broadcom Jericho based NCS 5500 gear.
https://xrdocs.io/cloud-scale-networking/tutorials/2017-08-03-understanding-ncs5500-resources-s01e02/

I'm pretty sure the principle is more or less the same for the Jericho based 
platforms on Arista and Extreme.

Best regards,
Chris


I love the nitty gritty detail in this author's post and I'm glad he 
concludes by stating clearly that while the base card (spec sheet says: 
"On-chip tables for 256K IPv4 or 64K IPv6 routes" and "On-chip tables 
for 786K IPv4 host routes, MAC, and labels") can actually hold a full 
BGP table today when configured appropriately, Cisco still recommends 
the scale cards for that application (spec sheet says: "FIB scale up 2M 
IPv4 or 512K IPv6 routes" and "On-chip tables for 786K IPv4 host routes, 
MAC, and labels").


I do have to wonder about the internal expansion of each /23 route into 
two /24 routes in their FIB algorithm, as I would have thought Cisco 
would have attempted to go the opposite way, but I'm sure Cisco has 
their reasons.

Re: Brocade SLX Internet Edge

[Mike Hammett]

Some of it is Extreme, some of it is Arris. 

The only issue I've had with anything Brocade\Foundry is lack of features in 
older platforms. They've always been solid for me. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "Daniel Corbe"  
To: "Julien Goodwin"  
Cc: "nanog list"  
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 9:51:14 PM 
Subject: Re: Brocade SLX Internet Edge 

I’m just going to echo what a few others have been saying. Brocade (now 
Extreme) have come a long way since the Foundry days; and the SLX isn’t 
based on the old Netiron code. The platform is a completely different 
animal. 

I’ve been a happy Brocade customer for a while now. 

Re: Brocade SLX Internet Edge

[Chris Welti]

Nicolas Fevrier has a very detailed blog post on how Cisco handles the prefixes 
on their Broadcom Jericho based NCS 5500 gear.
https://xrdocs.io/cloud-scale-networking/tutorials/2017-08-03-understanding-ncs5500-resources-s01e02/

I'm pretty sure the principle is more or less the same for the Jericho based 
platforms on Arista and Extreme.

Best regards,
Chris

On 01.11.18 15:31, Saku Ytti wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> They all do in principle the same thing. There are memories for
> longest path lookup and memories for exact lookup. I believe the trick
> is to put specific prefix size, like /24 to exact lookup table,
> relieving the LPM table stress greatly. Then in parallel ask both, and
> take more specific result.
> 
> There are variation to this, like having multiple separate exact match
> tables, and populating each with different prefix size, and so forth.
> 
> Juniper on PTX is doing something quite different, they are asking
> on-chip bloom filter about hint on where to query, reducing query
> count they need to do towards high latency off-chip memory.
> 
> MX is doing yet something different, having JNPR proprietary memory
> ASIC (no longer plain (RL)DRAM).
> 
> ASR9k is still just TCAM (for all ezchip generations, unsure about 
> lightspeed).
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 15:26, Colton Conor  wrote:
>>
>> I think Extreme is doing the same thing with their Extreme OptiScale™ that 
>> Arista is doing with their Arista FlexRoute™ and EOS NetDB™. They are both 
>> using Broadcom Jericho /Qurman with extenal TCAM, but still has a hardware 
>> limitiation on route table size. Then in software they filer right?
>>
>> Question is who has a better solution Arista or Extreme for this?
>>
>> Also, the question is can any whitebox vendors do the same thing, with the 
>> same Broadcom switch you can buy for around $9k new.
>>
>> Another question, could you even consider these with the Juniper MX204 
>> coming in at $20k?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 8:04 AM Kevin Burke  
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks for everyone who responded on and off list.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As a small company that is happy to still be in business the pricing is too 
>>> good to ignore.  A “gently used” ASR-9006 is something like $45k for one 
>>> plus a shelf spare.  A brand new SLX 9540 is something like $30k for one 
>>> plus a shelf spare.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There were some common things.  Software is behind where we would like.  
>>> The occasional bug like that SSH one.  Also there are some relatively 
>>> common features like IPv6 outbound ACL and BGP MED that aren’t there.  This 
>>> stuff isn't a showstopper but I will take this a sign of things to come.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As for the notes about full tables.  Different vendors seem to have used 
>>> different techniques to get past the hard FIB limit that we are all used 
>>> to.  I had the same question when pawing through the spec sheets.  So I 
>>> asked the sales rep:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> “We can support 1.5M routes…..
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> These platforms support all of the requirements detailed above for Internet 
>>> routing. In particular, they support a table size of 1.5 million IP routes 
>>> today, ensuring headroom for the next 5-7 years. This scale is made 
>>> possible through our new technology called Extreme OptiScale™ for Internet 
>>> Routing that optimizes programmable hardware and software capabilities to 
>>> accelerate innovation and deliver investment protection.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.extremenetworks.com/extreme-networks-blog/internet-routing-in-the-enterprise/”
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kevin Burke
>>>
>>> 802-540-0979
>>>
>>> Burlington Telecom - City of Burlington
>>>
>>> 200 Church St, Burlington, VT 05401
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Kevin Burke
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 4:02 PM
>>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>>> Subject: Brocade SLX Internet Edge
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Does anyone have any success with the Brocade SLX 9540 or similar?  Its 
>>> going to be taking full BGP tables from two Tier1's and some peering.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The specs and sales rep says its fine, but the price makes me think its too 
>>> good to be true.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We are trying to shepherd an old Cat 6509 out of our core.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kevin Burke
>>>
>>> 802-540-0979
>>>
>>> Burlington Telecom - City of Burlington
>>>
>>> 200 Church St, Burlington, VT 05401
> 
> 
> 

Re: Brocade SLX Internet Edge

[Saku Ytti]

Hey,

They all do in principle the same thing. There are memories for
longest path lookup and memories for exact lookup. I believe the trick
is to put specific prefix size, like /24 to exact lookup table,
relieving the LPM table stress greatly. Then in parallel ask both, and
take more specific result.

There are variation to this, like having multiple separate exact match
tables, and populating each with different prefix size, and so forth.

Juniper on PTX is doing something quite different, they are asking
on-chip bloom filter about hint on where to query, reducing query
count they need to do towards high latency off-chip memory.

MX is doing yet something different, having JNPR proprietary memory
ASIC (no longer plain (RL)DRAM).

ASR9k is still just TCAM (for all ezchip generations, unsure about lightspeed).
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 15:26, Colton Conor  wrote:
>
> I think Extreme is doing the same thing with their Extreme OptiScale™ that 
> Arista is doing with their Arista FlexRoute™ and EOS NetDB™. They are both 
> using Broadcom Jericho /Qurman with extenal TCAM, but still has a hardware 
> limitiation on route table size. Then in software they filer right?
>
> Question is who has a better solution Arista or Extreme for this?
>
> Also, the question is can any whitebox vendors do the same thing, with the 
> same Broadcom switch you can buy for around $9k new.
>
> Another question, could you even consider these with the Juniper MX204 coming 
> in at $20k?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 8:04 AM Kevin Burke  
> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for everyone who responded on and off list.
>>
>>
>>
>> As a small company that is happy to still be in business the pricing is too 
>> good to ignore.  A “gently used” ASR-9006 is something like $45k for one 
>> plus a shelf spare.  A brand new SLX 9540 is something like $30k for one 
>> plus a shelf spare.
>>
>>
>>
>> There were some common things.  Software is behind where we would like.  The 
>> occasional bug like that SSH one.  Also there are some relatively common 
>> features like IPv6 outbound ACL and BGP MED that aren’t there.  This stuff 
>> isn't a showstopper but I will take this a sign of things to come.
>>
>>
>>
>> As for the notes about full tables.  Different vendors seem to have used 
>> different techniques to get past the hard FIB limit that we are all used to. 
>>  I had the same question when pawing through the spec sheets.  So I asked 
>> the sales rep:
>>
>>
>>
>> “We can support 1.5M routes…..
>>
>>
>>
>> These platforms support all of the requirements detailed above for Internet 
>> routing. In particular, they support a table size of 1.5 million IP routes 
>> today, ensuring headroom for the next 5-7 years. This scale is made possible 
>> through our new technology called Extreme OptiScale™ for Internet Routing 
>> that optimizes programmable hardware and software capabilities to accelerate 
>> innovation and deliver investment protection.
>>
>>
>>
>> https://www.extremenetworks.com/extreme-networks-blog/internet-routing-in-the-enterprise/”
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Kevin Burke
>>
>> 802-540-0979
>>
>> Burlington Telecom - City of Burlington
>>
>> 200 Church St, Burlington, VT 05401
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Kevin Burke
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 4:02 PM
>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>> Subject: Brocade SLX Internet Edge
>>
>>
>>
>> Does anyone have any success with the Brocade SLX 9540 or similar?  Its 
>> going to be taking full BGP tables from two Tier1's and some peering.
>>
>>
>>
>> The specs and sales rep says its fine, but the price makes me think its too 
>> good to be true.
>>
>>
>>
>> We are trying to shepherd an old Cat 6509 out of our core.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Kevin Burke
>>
>> 802-540-0979
>>
>> Burlington Telecom - City of Burlington
>>
>> 200 Church St, Burlington, VT 05401



-- 
  ++ytti

Re: Brocade SLX Internet Edge

[Colton Conor]

I think Extreme is doing the same thing with their Extreme OptiScale™ that
Arista is doing with their Arista FlexRoute™ and EOS NetDB™. They are both
using Broadcom Jericho /Qurman with extenal TCAM, but still has a hardware
limitiation on route table size. Then in software they filer right?

Question is who has a better solution Arista or Extreme for this?

Also, the question is can any whitebox vendors do the same thing, with the
same Broadcom switch you can buy for around $9k new.

Another question, could you even consider these with the Juniper MX204
coming in at $20k?



On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 8:04 AM Kevin Burke 
wrote:

> Thanks for everyone who responded on and off list.
>
>
>
> As a small company that is happy to still be in business the pricing is
> too good to ignore.  A “gently used” ASR-9006 is something like $45k for
> one plus a shelf spare.  A brand new SLX 9540 is something like $30k for
> one plus a shelf spare.
>
>
>
> There were some common things.  Software is behind where we would like.
> The occasional bug like that SSH one.  Also there are some relatively
> common features like IPv6 outbound ACL and BGP MED that aren’t there.  This
> stuff isn't a showstopper but I will take this a sign of things to come.
>
>
>
> As for the notes about full tables.  Different vendors seem to have used
> different techniques to get past the hard FIB limit that we are all used
> to.  I had the same question when pawing through the spec sheets.  So I
> asked the sales rep:
>
>
>
> “We can support 1.5M routes…..
>
>
>
> *These platforms support all of the requirements detailed above for
> Internet routing. In particular, they support a table size of 1.5 million
> IP routes today, ensuring headroom for the next 5-7 years. This scale is
> made possible through our new technology called Extreme OptiScale™ for
> Internet Routing that optimizes programmable hardware and software
> capabilities to accelerate innovation and deliver investment protection.*
>
>
>
>
> https://www.extremenetworks.com/extreme-networks-blog/internet-routing-in-the-enterprise/
> 
> ”
>
>
>
>
>
> Kevin Burke
>
> 802-540-0979
>
> Burlington Telecom - City of Burlington
>
> 200 Church St, Burlington, VT 05401
>
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Kevin Burke
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 4:02 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Brocade SLX Internet Edge
>
>
>
> Does anyone have any success with the Brocade SLX 9540 or similar?  Its
> going to be taking full BGP tables from two Tier1's and some peering.
>
>
>
> The specs and sales rep says its fine, but the price makes me think its
> too good to be true.
>
>
>
> We are trying to shepherd an old Cat 6509 out of our core.
>
>
>
>
>
> Kevin Burke
>
> 802-540-0979
>
> Burlington Telecom - City of Burlington
>
> 200 Church St, Burlington, VT 05401
>

RE: Brocade SLX Internet Edge

[Kevin Burke]

Thanks for everyone who responded on and off list.



As a small company that is happy to still be in business the pricing is too 
good to ignore.  A "gently used" ASR-9006 is something like $45k for one plus a 
shelf spare.  A brand new SLX 9540 is something like $30k for one plus a shelf 
spare.



There were some common things.  Software is behind where we would like.  The 
occasional bug like that SSH one.  Also there are some relatively common 
features like IPv6 outbound ACL and BGP MED that aren't there.  This stuff 
isn't a showstopper but I will take this a sign of things to come.



As for the notes about full tables.  Different vendors seem to have used 
different techniques to get past the hard FIB limit that we are all used to.  I 
had the same question when pawing through the spec sheets.  So I asked the 
sales rep:


"We can support 1.5M routes.

These platforms support all of the requirements detailed above for Internet 
routing. In particular, they support a table size of 1.5 million IP routes 
today, ensuring headroom for the next 5-7 years. This scale is made possible 
through our new technology called Extreme OptiScale(tm) for Internet Routing 
that optimizes programmable hardware and software capabilities to accelerate 
innovation and deliver investment protection.

https://www.extremenetworks.com/extreme-networks-blog/internet-routing-in-the-enterprise/"





Kevin Burke

802-540-0979

Burlington Telecom - City of Burlington

200 Church St, Burlington, VT 05401

-Original Message-
From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Kevin Burke
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 4:02 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Brocade SLX Internet Edge



Does anyone have any success with the Brocade SLX 9540 or similar?  Its going 
to be taking full BGP tables from two Tier1's and some peering.



The specs and sales rep says its fine, but the price makes me think its too 
good to be true.



We are trying to shepherd an old Cat 6509 out of our core.





Kevin Burke

802-540-0979

Burlington Telecom - City of Burlington

200 Church St, Burlington, VT 05401

Re: Brocade SLX Internet Edge

[Jörg Kost]

Hi,

I do have some 9540s near exchange points, but they are not 100% 
productive right now, basically waiting for the next software release 
this month and a maintenance window. In my eyes the device is filling 
the gap between the CES/CER series and the MLX/SLX9850. It will be also 
interesting  where Bro Extreme is going to position the new, 
bigger (?) brother 9640 next year.


Our 9540s take full feeds right now without moaning:

show ip route summary
IP Routing Table - 717510 entries:
  Number of prefixes:
  /0: 1   /8: 14   /9: 11   /10: 35   /11: 98   /12: 291   /13: 567   
/14: 1130   /15: 1932   /16: 13357   /17: 7876   /18: 13735   /19: 25102 
  /20: 38379   /21: 45371   /22: 89251   /23: 73451   /24: 406788   
/25: 2   /26: 9   /27: 22   /28: 35   /29: 36   /30: 8   /32: 9


And for this to work, you need

- the latest release, 18r.1.00, better 18r.2.00 (End of Nov 18) because 
of DEFECT00085 (prefix filter list)


- buy / activate the trust-based advanced features license for MPLS, 
BGP-EVPN, CE2.0, Optiscale, basically on cli:

=> license eula accept

- activate Optiscale Routing in the configuration

=> profile route route-enhance hw_opt on v4_fib_comp on v6_fib_comp on
	=> shall scale to 1.5M IPv4 & 140k IPv6 routes (the 256k IPv4 / 64k 
IPv6 information is old)


With the advanced license you are also eligible to spin up a Linux VM 
for additional tools, monitoring et al on a reserved cpu core.


The software part of the SLX feels like a mixture of Brocade NOS 
(port-channel, vlan, switchport, … ) and Netiron components (router 
configuration, …) while the hardware is pretty much inspired by the 
VDX line.


Therefore some SNMP tools like LibreNMS recognize the SLX as VDX because 
of fancy wildcards in the hardware model type and I am still looking to 
write some patches for this.


Regards
Jörg

On 31 Oct 2018, at 21:01, Kevin Burke wrote:

Does anyone have any success with the Brocade SLX 9540 or similar?  
Its going to be taking full BGP tables from two Tier1's and some 
peering.


The specs and sales rep says its fine, but the price makes me think 
its too good to be true.


We are trying to shepherd an old Cat 6509 out of our core.


Kevin Burke
802-540-0979
Burlington Telecom - City of Burlington
200 Church St, Burlington, VT 05401