Not that it's a "Fix" but have you tried rebooting the box? If this is a
bug in the forwarding plane that might clear/rebuild it. And maybe it works
correctly after that.
Friend saw something similar on a Juniper MX with DPC cards that had run
out of FIB space. It would show correctly in all
Via all mechanisms I could find in the router, it thinks the best path is the
direct path, the packets just don't go that way.
The in traffic isn't a concern at this time, just the out (from my
perspective).
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
If you are both connected to the same upstream, but the customer wants
traffic destined to the upstream to go through you (in and out), then they
need to do something on their devices to try and affect the inbound path to
their AS. From the upstream carrier in question they’ll take the best path
Tangentially related to xR1, have any of you started deploying SN
connectors on your 400G head-ends? It looks like a pretty clever
technology, adding discrete connectors per lane, but curious what the
adoption has been thus far.
On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 8:55 AM Mikael Abrahamsson via NANOG
wrote:
That is a very illustrative photo of the state of the internet plant,
even today. I hope you find it!
On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 8:51 AM Bill Woodcock wrote:
>
> > On Apr 4, 2023, at 5:39 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> > Can someone who is familiar with the fiber assets around the union square
> > area
On Tue, 4 Apr 2023, Jared Mauch wrote:
We are willing to do 100G-LR1 if someone asks these days. It lets us be
able to roll it up into 400G optics on our side as appropriate.
I hope the industry moves to 100G-LR1, as doing 2x100GBASE-LR4 in a 400G
port is quite meh when it comes to
> On Apr 4, 2023, at 5:39 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> Can someone who is familiar with the fiber assets around the union square
> area in SF ping me off-list?
Heh. Somewhere, I have photos that Steve Feldman and I took while spelunking
around under there trying to find fiber for the NANOG that
> On Apr 3, 2023, at 4:54 PM, Tony Wicks wrote:
>
> I have been using the QSFP-100G-CWDM4 2k optics for within rack/DC for a
> couple of years now. They are about the same price as SR optics but allow the
> use of simple duplex single mode patches without blasting 10K optics at each
>
We are willing to do 100G-LR1 if someone asks these days. It lets us be able
to roll it up into 400G optics on our side as appropriate.
The big difference in DR/FR is the receiver sensitivity, they are all
compatible optically, so it’s really about the DR/FR being yield rejects for
LR1.
Can someone who is familiar with the fiber assets around the union square area
in SF ping me off-list?
Thanks.
- jared
Hi,
Extreme also supports it, and we use it for conducting statistics against
dst_as/dst_peer_as to perform "traffic engineering" specifically for the
transit paths. dst_as_path can also identify possible future peering situations
or undesirable paths.
BR
Jörg
On 4 Apr 2023, at 16:48, Peter
On 4 Apr 2023, at 21:48, Peter Phaal
mailto:peter.ph...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Export of destination AS-Path is supported in the sFlow extended_gateway
structure.
As a consumer of sFlow, [as well as NetFlow, IPFIX, etc.] I haven’t run into
the use of this option in production, FWIW.
In
Export of destination AS-Path is supported in the sFlow extended_gateway
structure.
/* Extended Gateway Data */
/* opaque = flow_data; enterprise = 0; format = 1003 */
struct extended_gateway {
next_hop nexthop; /* Address of the border router that should
* na...@ics-il.net (Mike Hammett) [Tue 04 Apr 2023, 15:06 CEST]:
1) How common is it to have the additional extensions to include
that data for analysis?
pmacct is a commonly used tool to enrich flow data with such
information.
-- Niels.
On 4 Apr 2023, at 20:04, Mike Hammett
mailto:na...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
2) I have seen flow tools that show the entire AS path. Are they just cherry
picking which platforms they showcase for the best marketing, or are they
enriching the data they receive from "lesser" platforms from an outside
One of the reasons to analyze flow data is to make purchase\peering decisions.
The sFlow standard seems to only include source and destination AS, though I
know some route platforms have extensions to provide additional data.
1) How common is it to have the additional extensions to include
sh ip bgp neighbor advertised-routes shows the only routes being advertised to
Y are the routes that should be advertised to them. I checked a variety of
other peers and have the expected results.
>From my perspective:
Packets come in on port A, supposed to leave on port X, but
On Tue Apr 04, 2023 at 08:54:55AM +1200, Tony Wicks wrote:
> I have been using the QSFP-100G-CWDM4 2k optics for within rack/DC
> for a couple of years now. They are about the same price as SR optics
> but allow the use of simple duplex single mode patches without blasting
> 10K optics at each
18 matches
Mail list logo
