Wifi Carrier Off-load (T-Mobile ? )
Hello, Is there any one here on Nanog list that has experience or information on how to setup T-Mobile Wifi Carrier Off-load ? (Passpoint), for enterprise use ? (I am familiar with and working with Google Orion, I am needing to do the same for T-Mobile) Will greatly appreciate any or all info. Thanks. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom
BellSouth.NET / Email
Hello All, Any one here who may be able to point us in the right direction.. We need to have a Bellsouth.net email address setup / re-activated ... So that a Cloud Account can be recovered. Open to any and or all suggestions.. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom http://www.snappytelecom.net Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net<mailto:supp...@snappytelecom.net>
Re: Equinix Dallas IXP ? Down ?
Thank you ..looks like a localized issue only affecting out port. Regards, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Tel: 305-663-5518 ext 232 (sent from mobile device) From: Kaiser, Erich Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2020 9:59:21 AM To: Tom Beecher Cc: Faisal Imtiaz ; nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Equinix Dallas IXP ? Down ? No issues here. Erich Kaiser The Fusion Network On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 8:48 AM Tom Beecher wrote: I see no issues on 2 separate Equinix Dallas connections. On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 9:16 AM Faisal Imtiaz mailto:fai...@snappytelecom.net>> wrote: Hello, Quick question, is there known issue with Equinix Dallas IXP ? (Or it is just our connection ? Seeing all peers down). Thanks. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom http://www.snappytelecom.net Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net<mailto:supp...@snappytelecom.net<mailto:supp...@snappytelecom.net>>
Equinix Dallas IXP ? Down ?
Hello, Quick question, is there known issue with Equinix Dallas IXP ? (Or it is just our connection ? Seeing all peers down). Thanks. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom http://www.snappytelecom.net Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net<mailto:supp...@snappytelecom.net>
Re: What NMS do you use and why?
Having done a full circle on the number of network monitoring packages, dealing with pro's and con's, we ended up with using Check_mk, moreover OMD http://omdisto.org We found (OMD) this to be a very powerful combination of different packages, each can shine for it's own strength and other compliments it for for the weaknesses ! Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom http://www.snappytelecom.net Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Colton Conor" > To: "nanog list" > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2018 9:49:12 AM > Subject: What NMS do you use and why? > We are looking for a new network monitoring system. Since there are so many > operators on this list, I would like to know which NMS do you use and why? Is > there one that you really like, and others that you hate? > For free options (opensouce), LibreNMS and NetXMS come highly recommended by > many wireless ISPs on low budgets. However, I am not sure the commercial > options available nor their price points.
Embratel / Claro AS4230
Hello All, Looking for a Technical Contact / IP NOC Engineer for EmbraTel/Claro AS4230 ? We are seeing some of the routes we are announcing not showing up in there route tables. (170.80.188.0/24 and 170.80.190.0/24 and 170.80.191.0/24) Off list contact will be great. Thanks Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom http://www.snappytelecom.net Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics
You can see the CWDM mux listed on their site, and they will also make custom mux for you. Let me know if you need a Sales Contact for them.. My last set of muxes from them were custom muxes and they were able to get me a configuration with a lower insertion loss than what is listed on their website. ( I paid a small premium for that feature, which I was very happy to). Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Colton Conor" <colton.co...@gmail.com> > To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > Cc: "Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net>, "Luke Guillory" > <lguill...@reservetele.com>, "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 7:14:53 PM > Subject: Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics > Do you have any idea if fiberstore has one with both a monitor and 1310 > wideband > port? I would want both. > Seeing as how they don't charge extra for an expansion port, but do for other > special ports I am thinking of just using the expansion port. > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Faisal Imtiaz < fai...@snappytelecom.net > > wrote: >>>>From the sounds of it, no one knows the real difference between the >>>>expansion >> >>port, 1310 port, and 1550 port >> Hmm.. not sure how you are reading this... >> I believe that there is no 'standard' and as such the actual filter on the >> mux/demux you are using may vary by mfg. >> I can confirm what is an expansion port... (pass everything thru that is not >> being filtered by the mux/demux ) >> I can also confirm that Fiberstore 1310nm port (not to be confused with the >> CWDM >> 1310 port) will pass all 4 wavelengths for 40g/100g optics. >> I don't have experience with the 1550nm port. >>>>For real world applications, I would assume the monitor port would be to >>>>plug in >>>>a handheld meter, and see which channels are coming through that node >>>>without >> >>breaking the ring. >> Correct that is what it is designed for. it allows a fraction of light >> (I am >> guessing would also cause an increase in insertion loss figure). >>>> Not sure if their would be a monitor port for both directions is you were >>>> using >> >> a OADM? >> If you look at the OADM's e.g. like a Cisco CWDM OADM with monitor ports, you >> will see that they are on both sides east & west. >> Regards. >> Faisal Imtiaz >> Snappy Internet & Telecom >> 7266 SW 48 Street >> Miami, FL 33155 >> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 >> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net >>> From: "Colton Conor" < colton.co...@gmail.com > >>> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" < fai...@snappytelecom.net > >>> Cc: "Mike Hammett" < na...@ics-il.net >, "Luke Guillory" < >>> lguill...@reservetele.com >, "nanog list" < nanog@nanog.org > >>> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 4:14:19 PM >>> Subject: Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics >>> Thanks for the answers. From the sounds of it, no one knows the real >>> difference >>> between the expansion port, 1310 port, and 1550 port. For real world >>> applications, I would assume the monitor port would be to plug in a handheld >>> meter, and see which channels are coming through that node without breaking >>> the >>> ring. Not sure if their would be a monitor port for both directions is you >>> were >>> using a OADM? >>> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Faisal Imtiaz < fai...@snappytelecom.net > >>> wrote: >>>> Answers in-line ... >>>> Faisal Imtiaz >>>> Snappy Internet & Telecom >>>> 7266 SW 48 Street >>>> Miami, FL 33155 >>>> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 >>>> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net >>>>> From: "Colton Conor" < colton.co...@gmail.com > >>>>> To: "Mike Hammett" < na...@ics-il.net > >>>>> Cc: "Luke Guillory" < lguill...@reservetele.com >, "nanog list" < >>>>> nanog@nanog.org >, "Faisal Imtiaz" < fai...@snappytelecom.net > >>>>> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 3:30:37 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics >>>>> I guess that is the real
Re: Comparing Backbone providers from support POV
Hi Bassem, All three of them are excellent Networks with Extensive Resource and excellent Technical Staff Behind them. I am not sure if you are going to be able to find enough of a difference in their Support to make a decision based on it. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Bassem Fawzi" <bfa...@noor.net> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Cc: "core" <c...@noor.net> > Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 5:08:53 AM > Subject: Comparing Backbone providers from support POV > Hello All, > > This is Bassem and this is my first participation in nanog. > > We are planning to get a new 10G circuit and we are comparing the IPT service > of > three backbone providers that met our technical and financial requirements, > Now > to take all aspects into consideration we need to compare them from the > support > point of view. > > The three providers are NTT,GTT and Telia so if any one have dealt with them > before and can help us rate their support it would be Great. > > Many thanks. > > -- > Best regards, > > Bassem Fawzy > Network engineer – Core Team > City Stars Capital 5 A4 > Omar Ibn El Khattab St. > Heliopolis, Cairo, Egypt > Mobile GSM: +2 01006580139 > Land Line: +2 02 16700 EXT:139 > FAX:+2 02 37482816 > Email: bfa...@noor.net
Re: Some advice on IPv6 planning and ARIN request, please
> Agreed with the /48 but ARIN doesn't appear to agree with our justification > for a /36 thus far. > > I am not sure how you have been communicating with ARIN, my experience with them strongly suggest that after you put in your request, pickup the phone and call them, speak to the analyst assigned to your request.. Have a polite conversation with them, and ask them .. how to go about accomplishing what you are needing... You are going to be in for a very pleasant surprise. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom
Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics
Bench test of the system, with the muxes... sorry for the large pictures :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Luke Guillory" <lguill...@reservetele.com> > To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net>, "Colton Conor" > <colton.co...@gmail.com> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 3:13:10 PM > Subject: RE: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics > Faisal, > > How would he inject his current 4x10 40g into the mux which is currently on a > single LC cable? > > > > > > Luke Guillory > Network Operations Manager > > Tel:985.536.1212 > Fax:985.536.0300 > Email: lguill...@reservetele.com > > Reserve Telecommunications > 100 RTC Dr > Reserve, LA 70084 > > _ > > Disclaimer: > The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only for the > person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential > and/or privileged material which should not disseminate, distribute or be > copied. Please notify Luke Guillory immediately by e-mail if you have received > this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail > transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information > could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, > or > contain viruses. Luke Guillory therefore does not accept liability for any > errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result > of > e-mail transmission. . > > -Original Message- > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz > Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 2:02 PM > To: Colton Conor > Cc: nanog list > Subject: Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics > > Answers in-line below. > > > > If you look at the CWDM Muxes (8 or 9 channel) you will notice a common > configuration of > >Upgrade Port (expansion port) + 1450 or 1470 to 1610nm > >in the DWDM muxes you will see them listed as # of Port + 1310 pass thru >channel. > > These are exactly what you are looking for . :)
Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics
>>From the sounds of it, no one knows the real difference between the expansion >>port, 1310 port, and 1550 port Hmm.. not sure how you are reading this... I believe that there is no 'standard' and as such the actual filter on the mux/demux you are using may vary by mfg. I can confirm what is an expansion port... (pass everything thru that is not being filtered by the mux/demux ) I can also confirm that Fiberstore 1310nm port (not to be confused with the CWDM 1310 port) will pass all 4 wavelengths for 40g/100g optics. I don't have experience with the 1550nm port. >>For real world applications, I would assume the monitor port would be to plug >>in a handheld meter, and see which channels are coming through that node >>without breaking the ring. Correct that is what it is designed for. it allows a fraction of light (I am guessing would also cause an increase in insertion loss figure). >> Not sure if their would be a monitor port for both directions is you were >> using a OADM? If you look at the OADM's e.g. like a Cisco CWDM OADM with monitor ports, you will see that they are on both sides east & west. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Colton Conor" <colton.co...@gmail.com> > To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > Cc: "Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net>, "Luke Guillory" > <lguill...@reservetele.com>, "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 4:14:19 PM > Subject: Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics > Thanks for the answers. From the sounds of it, no one knows the real > difference > between the expansion port, 1310 port, and 1550 port. For real world > applications, I would assume the monitor port would be to plug in a handheld > meter, and see which channels are coming through that node without breaking > the > ring. Not sure if their would be a monitor port for both directions is you > were > using a OADM? > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Faisal Imtiaz < fai...@snappytelecom.net > > wrote: >> Answers in-line ... >> Faisal Imtiaz >> Snappy Internet & Telecom >> 7266 SW 48 Street >> Miami, FL 33155 >> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 >> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net >>> From: "Colton Conor" < colton.co...@gmail.com > >>> To: "Mike Hammett" < na...@ics-il.net > >>> Cc: "Luke Guillory" < lguill...@reservetele.com >, "nanog list" < >>> nanog@nanog.org >, "Faisal Imtiaz" < fai...@snappytelecom.net > >>> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 3:30:37 PM >>> Subject: Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics >>> I guess that is the real question. Besides the client ports that are clearly >>> identified by channel number on Muxes, what channels can the special ports >>> handle? >>> http://www.fs.com/products/43723.html It has 4 special service port options: >>> 1. Expansion Port (Based on what I am seeing, I think this would be to stack >>> another mux if you needed more channels. So I assume it allows all channels >>> to >>> be added besides the client channels?) >> Exactly... this is basically a pass thru port, i.e. what is not getting >> mux/demux should get passed thru (keep the insertion loss in mind). >>> 2. Monitor Port (I think this is just a tap that you would hook a monitor >>> up to, >>> and be able to see all channels coming through with a meter. I assume not a >>> good idea to add/drop channels through this port)? >> I don't use this port, but supposedly it will pass a fraction 5% of the light >> from the main port so that it can be monitored. May be someone else can offer >> some practical use for this port. >>> 3. 1310nm Port (Labeled as 1310, but clearly allows more than just 1310 >>> since >>> tutorial is saying it supports QSFP+ which is 1270 - 1330 nm, so what range >>> does it really support or is there no a range?) >> Not sure about the range question, but this is the port for having the >> 40g/100g >> QSFP+ pass thru >>> 4. 1550nm Port (Labeled as 1550nm, but I wonder if its like the 1330nm?) >> I have not had the need to explore this in detail, but from my initial >> understanding, this can be used for ZR (long range optics) and or to stack a >> DWDM Mux >>> Would you recommend a monitor port on every mux you buy? >> As I shared above, I don't. &
Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics
I tried to send some pictures, but looks like the message got stuck for moderator. Here is a link to pictures what Colton is trying to accomplish (my bench test :) ) https://1drv.ms/a/s!Ar2zoQlxIvI1gdV9tYj96YUDWElu6w Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Luke Guillory" <lguill...@reservetele.com> > To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > Cc: "Colton Conor" <colton.co...@gmail.com>, "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 3:47:29 PM > Subject: RE: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics > Gotcha, figured I misread it. Sorry it's Monday. > > > > -Original Message- > From: Faisal Imtiaz [mailto:fai...@snappytelecom.net] > Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 2:45 PM > To: Luke Guillory > Cc: Colton Conor; nanog list > Subject: Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics > > Let me try to explain better... > > All Single Mode Fiber 40g Optics are using 4 cwdm channels ... > > If you use a cwdm mux/demux with and expansion port and it is only > mux/de-muxing > 1450 to 1610 (i.e. not using the 1270-1330) you can use the expansion port to > connect the 40g Optics > > If you have a CWDM or DWDM Mux, with a specific 1310 pass thru port (Wide-band > etc... check the specs) then you can plug the 40g Optics on to that port and > it > will pass the 4 channels thru it. > > e.g. with the cwdm mux (see picture in previous post) ..you end up with 1x40g > (lane) + 8 or 9 10g (cwdm lanes). > > > > Regards. > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > > - Original Message - >> From: "Luke Guillory" <lguill...@reservetele.com> >> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> >> Cc: "Colton Conor" <colton.co...@gmail.com>, "nanog list" >> <nanog@nanog.org> >> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 3:39:00 PM >> Subject: RE: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics > >> And how would he pass his current 40g through that mux? Unless I'm >> misreading your email which I took as he can use his current setup >> along with a 40g 1310, though I'm thinking you're saying he can use >> 1310 40g with colored up 10gs alongside of it. >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Faisal Imtiaz [mailto:fai...@snappytelecom.net] >> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 2:27 PM >> To: Luke Guillory >> Cc: Colton Conor; nanog list >> Subject: Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics >> >> Bench test of the system, with the muxes... >> >> sorry for the large pictures :) >> >> Faisal Imtiaz >> Snappy Internet & Telecom >> 7266 SW 48 Street >> Miami, FL 33155 >> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 >> >> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net >> >> - Original Message - >>> From: "Luke Guillory" <lguill...@reservetele.com> >>> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net>, "Colton Conor" >>> <colton.co...@gmail.com> >>> Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> >>> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 3:13:10 PM >>> Subject: RE: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics >> >>> Faisal, >>> >>> How would he inject his current 4x10 40g into the mux which is >>> currently on a single LC cable? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Luke Guillory >>> Network Operations Manager >>> >>> Tel:985.536.1212 >>> Fax:985.536.0300 >>> Email: lguill...@reservetele.com >>> >>> Reserve Telecommunications >>> 100 RTC Dr >>> Reserve, LA 70084 >>> >>> _ >>> _ >>> ___ >>> >>> Disclaimer: >>> The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only >>> for the >>> person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain >>> confidential and/or privileged material which should not disseminate, >>> distribute or be copied. Please notify Luke Guillory immediately by >>> e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this >>> e
Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics
Let me try to explain better... All Single Mode Fiber 40g Optics are using 4 cwdm channels ... If you use a cwdm mux/demux with and expansion port and it is only mux/de-muxing 1450 to 1610 (i.e. not using the 1270-1330) you can use the expansion port to connect the 40g Optics If you have a CWDM or DWDM Mux, with a specific 1310 pass thru port (Wide-band etc... check the specs) then you can plug the 40g Optics on to that port and it will pass the 4 channels thru it. e.g. with the cwdm mux (see picture in previous post) ..you end up with 1x40g (lane) + 8 or 9 10g (cwdm lanes). Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Luke Guillory" <lguill...@reservetele.com> > To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > Cc: "Colton Conor" <colton.co...@gmail.com>, "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 3:39:00 PM > Subject: RE: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics > And how would he pass his current 40g through that mux? Unless I'm misreading > your email which I took as he can use his current setup along with a 40g 1310, > though I'm thinking you're saying he can use 1310 40g with colored up 10gs > alongside of it. > > > > -Original Message- > From: Faisal Imtiaz [mailto:fai...@snappytelecom.net] > Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 2:27 PM > To: Luke Guillory > Cc: Colton Conor; nanog list > Subject: Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics > > Bench test of the system, with the muxes... > > sorry for the large pictures :) > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > > - Original Message - >> From: "Luke Guillory" <lguill...@reservetele.com> >> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net>, "Colton Conor" >> <colton.co...@gmail.com> >> Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> >> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 3:13:10 PM >> Subject: RE: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics > >> Faisal, >> >> How would he inject his current 4x10 40g into the mux which is >> currently on a single LC cable? >> >> >> >> >> >> Luke Guillory >> Network Operations Manager >> >> Tel:985.536.1212 >> Fax:985.536.0300 >> Email: lguill...@reservetele.com >> >> Reserve Telecommunications >> 100 RTC Dr >> Reserve, LA 70084 >> >> __ >> ___ >> >> Disclaimer: >> The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only >> for the >> person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain >> confidential and/or privileged material which should not disseminate, >> distribute or be copied. Please notify Luke Guillory immediately by >> e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this >> e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to >> be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, >> corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain >> viruses. Luke Guillory therefore does not accept liability for any >> errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result >> of >> e-mail transmission. . >> >> -Original Message- >> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Faisal >> Imtiaz >> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 2:02 PM >> To: Colton Conor >> Cc: nanog list >> Subject: Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics >> >> Answers in-line below. >> >> >> >> If you look at the CWDM Muxes (8 or 9 channel) you will notice a >> common configuration of >> >>Upgrade Port (expansion port) + 1450 or 1470 to 1610nm >> >>in the DWDM muxes you will see them listed as # of Port + 1310 pass thru >>channel. >> > > These are exactly what you are looking for . :)
Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics
Answers in-line ... Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Colton Conor" <colton.co...@gmail.com> > To: "Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> > Cc: "Luke Guillory" <lguill...@reservetele.com>, "nanog list" > <nanog@nanog.org>, > "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 3:30:37 PM > Subject: Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics > I guess that is the real question. Besides the client ports that are clearly > identified by channel number on Muxes, what channels can the special ports > handle? > http://www.fs.com/products/43723.html It has 4 special service port options: > 1. Expansion Port (Based on what I am seeing, I think this would be to stack > another mux if you needed more channels. So I assume it allows all channels to > be added besides the client channels?) Exactly... this is basically a pass thru port, i.e. what is not getting mux/demux should get passed thru (keep the insertion loss in mind). > 2. Monitor Port (I think this is just a tap that you would hook a monitor up > to, > and be able to see all channels coming through with a meter. I assume not a > good idea to add/drop channels through this port)? I don't use this port, but supposedly it will pass a fraction 5% of the light from the main port so that it can be monitored. May be someone else can offer some practical use for this port. > 3. 1310nm Port (Labeled as 1310, but clearly allows more than just 1310 since > tutorial is saying it supports QSFP+ which is 1270 - 1330 nm, so what range > does it really support or is there no a range?) Not sure about the range question, but this is the port for having the 40g/100g QSFP+ pass thru > 4. 1550nm Port (Labeled as 1550nm, but I wonder if its like the 1330nm?) I have not had the need to explore this in detail, but from my initial understanding, this can be used for ZR (long range optics) and or to stack a DWDM Mux > Would you recommend a monitor port on every mux you buy? As I shared above, I don't. > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Mike Hammett < na...@ics-il.net > wrote: >> Verify pass-through frequencies for the 1310 (or equivalent) for the passive >> mux >> in question. This would only work for a single channel. >> - >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> Midwest-IX >> http://www.midwest-ix.com >> From: "Luke Guillory" < lguill...@reservetele.com > >> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" < fai...@snappytelecom.net >, "Colton Conor" < >> colton.co...@gmail.com > >> Cc: "nanog list" < nanog@nanog.org > >> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 2:13:10 PM >> Subject: RE: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics >> Faisal, >> How would he inject his current 4x10 40g into the mux which is currently on a >> single LC cable? >> Luke Guillory >> Network Operations Manager >> Tel: 985.536.1212 >> Fax: 985.536.0300 >> Email: lguill...@reservetele.com >> Reserve Telecommunications >> 100 RTC Dr >> Reserve, LA 70084 >> _ >> Disclaimer: >> The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only for the >> person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential >> and/or privileged material which should not disseminate, distribute or be >> copied. Please notify Luke Guillory immediately by e-mail if you have >> received >> this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail >> transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information >> could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, >> or >> contain viruses. Luke Guillory therefore does not accept liability for any >> errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result >> of >> e-mail transmission. . >> -Original Message- >> From: NANOG [mailto: nanog-boun...@nanog.org ] On Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz >> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 2:02 PM >> To: Colton Conor >> Cc: nanog list >> Subject: Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics >> Answers in-line below. >> If you look at the CWDM Muxes (8 or 9 channel) you will notice a common >> configuration of >> Upgrade Port (expansion port) + 1450 or 1470 to 1610nm >> in the DWDM muxes you will see them listed as # of Port + 1310 pass thru >> channel. >> These are exactly what you are looking for . :)
Re: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics
Answers in-line below. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Colton Conor" <colton.co...@gmail.com> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 2:26:55 PM > Subject: DWDM Mux/Demux using 40G Optics > We are building a 40G metro ring using 40-Gigabit Ethernet QSFP+ > Transceivers. Specifically, we are using Juniper JNP-QSFP-40G-LR4. This is > a QSFP+ Transceiver with a LC duplex head. We only have one pair of single > mode dark fibers around the ring. Our distance between nodes around the > ring are all less than 10KM, so we can use standard optics. > > We go out of one JNP-QSFP-40G-LR4 and into another JNP-QSFP-40G-LR4. There > are no passive muxes involved. This is working great for 40G. > > My understanding is a JNP-QSFP-40G-LR4 is really a transceiver with a CWDM > mux built into it. The spec sheet shows it sends 4 10G channels: > > https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/release-independent/junos/topics/reference/specifications/optical-interface-qfx-support.html > > Lane wavelength > Lane 0–1264.5 nm through 1277.5 nm > Lane 1–1284.5 nm through 1297.5 nm > Lane 2–1304.5 nm through 1317.5 nm > Lane 3–1324.5 nm through 1337.5 nm > > YES this is correct and goes for pretty much all of the SMF QSFP+ 40g Optics. (they utilize 4 cwdm channels) > This setup is working fine, but now we want to do more than 40G around the > ring. To my knowledge there are no other 40G QSFP+ transceivers that use > four other channel/lanes than the ones already being used, so they only way > to go higher than 40G is to stack 10G or 100G channels ontop of the fiber > pair using a passive mux. > Typically you would stack 40G + 10g Channels or 100G+10g Channels (100g optics would be using 4 channels as well). > 100G is too expensive for the time being, so we are looking to add 10G > channels to a ring that already have one 40G channel using the QSFP+. Yep, that would be the cost effective way to do it. > > I was reading this tutorial, and it mentions "there is a 1310 nm port > integrated in a 40 channels DWDM Mux/Demux system. The 1310nm added port is > a Wide Band Optic port (WBO) added to other specific DWDM wavelengths in a > module. When we run out of all channels in a DWDM Mux/Demux system, we can > add the extra optics via this 1310nm port." > http://www.fs.com/upgrade-to-500g-with-40ch-dwdm-mux-demux-system-aid-493.html > > What I can't seem to understand is they are mentioning that this 1310 port > can pass QSFP+ signals, so it sounds like its really a 1270nm through > 1330nm port? Is this what they mean by Wide Band Optic port (WBO)? > Yes that would be correct, 1310nm is simple nomenclature when used with 40g/100g QSFP+ SMF optics > We don't need 40 10G channels plus a 40G for a total of 440G. More than > likely we are looking at a 8 channel mux/demux, and 1 40G port for a total > of 120G. > > I don't care if we do CWDM vs DWDM, but I assume it will be hard to find a > CWDM mux that has one LC dupluex input for 1270nm through 1330nm channels? If you look at the CWDM Muxes (8 or 9 channel) you will notice a common configuration of Upgrade Port (expansion port) + 1450 or 1470 to 1610nm in the DWDM muxes you will see them listed as # of Port + 1310 pass thru channel. These are exactly what you are looking for . :) > > Maybe I should just ditch the 40G QSFP+ optics and use all 10G optics, but > the switches I am using have 48 10G SFP+ ports and 6 QSFP+ ports built in. > I know there are 40G breakout cables, but the whole point of 40G is to > aggregate VLAN/circuits. > > Has anyone done this before? Am in the process of lighting a number of locations in this manner...
Americas II Landing Station (Hollywood, Florida).
Hello, I am looking for a contact who may be able to help us with getting more info (on getting space/power) so that we can terminate our Dark Fiber transport there. Not sure who is responsible for this facility, most of the Tel# I am finding are disconnected. Many Thanks in advance. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
Re: google ipv6 routes via cogent
Just Google for it.. this is probably one of the oldest running Klan dispute in the industry.. http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/10/22/peering-disputes-migrate-to-ipv6/ Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Aaron" <aar...@gvtc.com> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2017 10:49:56 AM > Subject: google ipv6 routes via cogent > Hi, I'm new to the nanog list, hope this isn't out of scope for what is > usually discussed here. > > > > Cogent is telling me that I can't route through cogent to get to google ipv6 > routes (particularly the well known dns addresses 2001:4860:4860::88xx) > because google decided not to advertise those route to one of their mutual > peers. > > > > Anyone know anything about this ? .and why it happened and when it will be > resolved ? > > > > -Aaron
Re: DWDM Optics cheaper than CWDM Optics?
Since I am in the middle of doing something similar, I will share my observations. CWDM Advantage:- Passive CWDM Muxes are less expensive than the DWDM counterparts. Short Range optics (CWDM) are favorable priced Long Range optics are not so favorably priced. ( I guess that is due to production volume). Deploying a CWDM passive mux solution, can allow you to stack a DWDM mux on the 1530-1560 CWDM channel. (one has to pay attention to the loss/attenuation calcs). If you need to Regen the light.. then there are a lot of solutions (cost effective) available for the DWDM channel range (have not been able to find any kind of amps for CWDM.. if anyone has suggestions, I would be open to them). Amount of channels available on CDWM are limited in qty when compared to what is possible with DWDM. When using long rage optics, pay attention to the equipment you are plugging them in.. not all optical ports are capable of supplying the amount of power and heat dissipation required. As to the original question about the quality of optics from FS.COM.. We have no complaints, when there were mistakes made, they stood behind their products and corrected them. I would recommend that you deal with one of their many Sales Rep's vs just placing order online. Their products match the specs they list.. They are also able to do some custom stuff which is not listed on their web site.. (i.e. provide muxes which have a lower insertion loss in certain configurations). Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Karl Gerhard" <karl_g...@gmx.at> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 10:17:14 AM > Subject: DWDM Optics cheaper than CWDM Optics? > Hello, > > fs.com offers DWDM optics that are cheaper than CWDM optics: > CWDM 80km 10G for 600$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-cwdm-sfp-plus-2425?70-80km > DWDM 80km 10G for 420$ http://www.fs.com/c/cisco-dwdm-sfp-plus-2485?70-80km > > This is significant. > Is this for real? Has anybody bought their DWDM optics? > > Going with DWDM and passive Mux/Demux seems to be cheaper nowadays than going > with CWDM. > > Regards > Karl
Re: External BGP Controller for L3 Switch BGP routing
Thank you for all the on-list and off-list replies.. The project I was looking for was/is called SIR.. (SDN Internet Router) and the original presentation was done by David Barroso.. Thanks to everyone who responded ! Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Tore Anderson" <t...@fud.no> > To: "Saku Ytti" <s...@ytti.fi> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 1:40:47 AM > Subject: Re: External BGP Controller for L3 Switch BGP routing > Hi Saku, > >> > https://www.redpill-linpro.com/sysadvent/2016/12/09/slimming-routing-table.html >> >> --- >> As described in a prevous post, we’re testing a HPE Altoline 6920 in >> our lab. The Altoline 6920 is, like other switches based on the >> Broadcom Trident II chipset, able to handle up to 720 Gbps of >> throughput, packing 48x10GbE + 6x40GbE ports in a compact 1RU chassis. >> Its price is in all likelihood a single-digit percentage of the price >> of a traditional Internet router with a comparable throughput rating. >> --- >> >> This makes it sound like small-FIB router is single-digit percentage >> cost of full-FIB. > > Do you know of any traditional «Internet scale» router that can do ~720 > Gbps of throughput for less than 10x the price of a Trident II box? Or > even <100kUSD? (Disregarding any volume discounts.) > >> Also having Trident in Internet facing interface may be suspect, >> especially if you need to go from fast interface to slow or busy >> interface, due to very minor packet buffers. This obviously won't be >> much of a problem in inside-DC traffic. > > Quite the opposite, changing between different interface speeds happens > very commonly inside the data centre (and most of the time it's done by > shallow-buffered switches using Trident II or similar chips). > > One ubiquitous configuration has the servers and any external uplinks > attached with 10GE to leaf switches which in turn connects to a 40GE > spine layer with. In this config server<->server and server<->Internet > packets will need to change speed twice: > > [server]-10GE-(leafX)-40GE-(spine)-40GE-(leafY)-10GE-[server/internet] > > I suppose you could for example use a couple of MX240s or something as > a special-purpose leaf layer for external connectivity. > MPC5E-40G10G-IRB or something towards the 40GE spines and any regular > 10GE MPC towards the exits. That way you'd only have one > shallow-buffered speed conversion remaining. But I'm very sceptical if > something like this makes sense after taking the cost/benefit ratio > into account. > > Tore
Re: Common Reliable Out Of Band Management Options at Carrier Hotels
I think you will have a tough time finding a universal solution that will fit for all DataCenters (speaking in the context of OOB communication method). Traditional connections via Ethernet / T1 /Phone lines will cost you a fair amount (monthly service and cross-connect). In some of the DataCenters you can use a cellular (M2M ) based solution.. (use something like a cradle point or other similar functioning devices) In many of our DC we will exchange (bidirectional) OOB connection with another network (which is multi-homed). Quite a few of the DC's also provide Courtesy Wifi for customer's use .. it is possible to configure an OOB to use that connection.. (takes a bit of creativity). Since part of our network is using Fixed Wireless Technologies, we are pretty familiar with Mikrotik Routerboards they have a number of small, inexpensive devices which allow for very flexible configurations (including devices with USB ports that support USB Cellular dongles). Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom - Original Message - > From: "Darin Herteen" <syn...@live.com> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 4:59:02 PM > Subject: Common Reliable Out Of Band Management Options at Carrier Hotels > Greetings list, > > > We are exploring standardizing our Out Of Band options across our network and > various off-net locations and the question was brought up "What about carrier > hotels? What constraints might present themselves at those locations?" > > > Assuming each hotel we are located in can provide either Ethernet or DSL I'm > guessing that is going to come a cost (cross-connects, rack space etc..) that > might end up being cost prohibitive. > > > So my inquiry is... What does the list find to be a reasonably priced yet > reliable solution in carrier hotels for OOB? Or is that contradictory :) > > > Thoughts on Cellular? > > > Any experience/insight would be appreciated. > > > Thanks, > > > Darin
External BGP Controller for L3 Switch BGP routing
Hello, A while back there was a discussion on how to do optimized (dynamic) BGP routing on a L3 switch which is only capable of handing a subset of BGP Routing table. Someone has pointed out that there was a project to do just that, and had posted a link to a presentation on a European operator (Ireland ? ) who had done some code to take Exabgp and create such a setup.. (I am going by memory... )... Needless to say I am trying to find that link, or name of that project. Anyone who can help in refreshing my memory with the link (my search skill are failing to find that presentation !) would be greatly appreciated. Many Thanks in Advance. Faisal Imtiaz
Re: DWDM on 250 Km dark fiber without re-amplification
I agree with what Baldur suggested.. Only thing I would point out that .. Hardly anyone installs 200km fiber runs without having some sort of a Regen facility. While you can push the signal over the 200km link, in the long run you may be better off see if there a Regen facility (typically 70/80km) that you can use to re-generate the light. Best of luck. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom - Original Message - > From: "Baldur Norddahl" <baldur.nordd...@gmail.com> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2016 2:30:40 PM > Subject: Re: DWDM on 250 Km dark fiber without re-amplification > Hello > > I have not done this as our links are not that long. However in theory > this is how I would do it. There are nice integrated solutions that will > do it as a black box, but someone else will have to tell you about that. > I am using Fiberstore as a reference because they have the necessary > components with pricing directly online, but there is of course multiple > alternatives. > > So first off forget about 40G and 100G. This will be N x 10G and N can > be as large as 96 channels. 100G would be the same equipment (possibly > without dispersion compensation) but with each 100G stream as four 25G > wavelengths. However the optics are very expensive and hard to get for > 40G and 100G while 10G is relatively cheap and easy. > > You need the following components: > > http://www.fs.com/support/dwdm-edfa-amplifier-for-long-haul-applications-100 > > They list all you need with a nice drawing. Get the components from them > or someone else. The nice integrated solutions are just these components > in a box. > > They only list the solution as 200 km. You will have to send them a mail > and ask if they can do 225 km. > > Also you need to check that the black fiber provider allows amplified > signals at this level. Not everyone do. Normally the signals are not > that dangerous, but with this a unaware tech can go blind if he is > unlucky. It is not clear if the Fiberstore equipment automatically turns > of the laser in the case of a fiber cut and that might also be a > requirement. > > Regards, > > Baldur > > > > Den 24/12/2016 kl. 01.14 skrev Jeremy: >> Hi all, >> >> First, i'm sorry for my english, i'm french and i don't have a good >> level in this language. But i want some informations and i'm sure, >> someone will be give the good anwser about my question. >> >> So, i'm regarding to rent a dual dark fiber in France, the estimated >> distance is 225 Km, but i know there are a lot of optical switching on >> the highway where it's fiber is installed (in theory, all 80 Km). So, >> i used the bad scenario, in adding 25 Km on my need. >> >> I would like to buy a amplificator and multiplexer DWDM to add some >> 10Gb/s waves on this dark fiber. I've see that the amplification is >> better on 100 Gb/s synchronised ports, but we don't have enoug >> capacity on our router to add 100 Gb/s interfaces. >> >> So, someone has installed this type of hardware on a dark fiber >> without regeneration on 250 Km of distance ? >> If yes, with what kind of hardware ? If you are commercial for this >> hardware, please contact me in private message. >> >> Thanks you for your time, >> Jérémy >> AS197922
Re: Level3 / Cogent / NetFlix BGP Assistance
Have you considered connecting to the nearest peering exchange ? where you can
potentially off-load all of this traffic from your paid IP Transit ?
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
- Original Message -
> From: "Sam Norris" <s...@sandiegobroadband.com>
> To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org>
> Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2016 12:14:57 PM
> Subject: Level3 / Cogent / NetFlix BGP Assistance
> Hey all,
>
>
>
> In early October our traffic levels from NetFlix went from about half Level3
> and
> half Cogent - pretty well balanced - to all on Level3. Standard multihomed
> BGP
> setup with minimal TE if I can help it. I am starting to run into problems
> with
> a full gigabit port on Level3 and only 100-200mbps on Cogent at that colo. I
> tried padding, I even tried 65000:2906 bgp community, but it seems like if our
> level3 port is up NetFlix chooses it solely. How can I load balance NetFlix
> traffic across my two ports so that I am not paying for overages and/or forced
> to up to a 10G port immediately? I have 3 other providers at that colo and
> cannot find any mix of bgp tricks to get some of it thru our other providers.
>
>
>
> I notice AS2906 has a localpref of 86 - odd ...
>
>
>
> The 108.175.47.0/24 block seems to be using as 2906 so I thought a 65000:2906
> wouldn't announce those prefixes to them at all. I have about 10 prefixes
> being
> announced so I could implement a no-export on some of them to load balance but
> that doesn't work.
>
>
>
> Thx,
>
> Sam
>
>
>
>
>
> BGP routing table entry for 108.175.47.0/24
>
>
>
> Paths: (2 available, best #1)
>
> 2906
>
> AS-path translation: { 108.175.47.0/24 }
>
> ear3.LosAngeles1 (metric 10)
>
>Origin IGP, metric 30334, localpref 86, valid, internal, best
>
>Community: 2906:51081 North_America Lclprf_86 United_States Level3_Peer
> Los_Angeles Level3:10984
>
>Originator: ear3.LosAngeles1
>
> 2906
>
> AS-path translation: { 108.175.47.0/24 }
>
> ear3.LosAngeles1 (metric 10)
>
>Origin IGP, metric 30334, localpref 86, valid, internal
>
>Community: 2906:51081 North_America Lclprf_86 United_States Level3_Peer
> Los_Angeles Level3:10984
>
> Originator: ear3.LosAngeles1
Re: Acquiring unused IP range. Some questions
> My question is, what do they and we need to do to accomplish that in > the proper way, so that the internet at large would accept the advertisement > from a different ASN, The internet in terms of IP Prefix advertisements is a 'Trust' based system. > and not view as some sort of hijacking, etc. The difference between Hijacking vs a valid advertisement is the simple LOA document a.k.a having permission to do so.. > I am guessing they may need to update some RADB or something like that, but > i’ll be > honest my knowledge of how those things work and their complete function is > pretty slim. Only if you are using it for yourself or if your upstream is using it to create their prefix Filter lists. RADB is not the only RRDB provider, ARIN also provides this service > This would be a short term thing as we expect the purchase process to complete > pretty quickly, but it would be advantageous to us to be able to advertise the > space immediately. We just want to make sure we start off on the right foot. > All you need is permission from the IP block owner (LOA) and the appropriate upstream filters to be setup or opened. Which could be a manual process (provide them a copy of the LOA) or could be a 'Trust' based using RRDB Record which someone has to create and update. Best of luck. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom - Original Message - > From: "William McLendon" <wimcl...@gmail.com> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 5:43:57 PM > Subject: Acquiring unused IP range. Some questions > Hi everyone, > > we are about to acquire a block of IP’s from another organization that has > unused space, and being fairly new to these procedures, I was hoping for some > guidance. > > We have already been pre-approved by ARIN for the block size we are acquiring, > and finalizing the deal with the current owner of the address space. First > question is, once they initiate the transfer request to transfer the IP range > to us, how long does that typically take for ARIN to complete? > > Secondly, our relationship with the IP block owner is a very good one, such > that > I think they would be ok with us advertising this block before we technically > own it. My question is, what do they and we need to do to accomplish that in > the proper way, so that the internet at large would accept the advertisement > from a different ASN, and not view as some sort of hijacking, etc. I am > guessing they may need to update some RADB or something like that, but i’ll be > honest my knowledge of how those things work and their complete function is > pretty slim. > > This would be a short term thing as we expect the purchase process to complete > pretty quickly, but it would be advantageous to us to be able to advertise the > space immediately. We just want to make sure we start off on the right foot. > > > Thanks, > > Will
Re: ISP License in the USA?
http://www.commlawgroup.com/#hashslider1 or Kris Tomey 's Info:- > Law Office > 1725 I Street, NW, Suite 300 > Washington, DC 20006 > > Phone: 202.250.3413 > Fax: 202.517.9175 > k...@lokt.net > > LoKT Consulting > 1425 Leimert Blvd., Suite 404 > Oakland, CA 94602 > > Phone: 510.285.8010 > Fax: 510.868.8418 > k...@lokt.net > or Stephen E. Coran Lerman Senter, PLLC 2000 K Street, N.W., Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20006-1809 (202) 416-6744 - office (202) 669-3288 -mobile sco...@lermansenter.com Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Ryan Finnesey" <r...@finnesey.com> > To: "Eric Flanery (eric)" <e...@flanery.us> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Sunday, June 5, 2016 12:31:56 PM > Subject: RE: ISP License in the USA? > Would you mind sharing some of the telecommunications focused law firms? I am > about to start a company that is going back into the CLEC/ISP/VoIP Business > and > I am going to have to establish relationships with a few law firms. > > -Original Message- > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Eric Flanery (eric) > Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 2:55 PM > Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org> > Subject: Re: ISP License in the USA? > > There is no such thing as an 'ISP license' in the US. I have a hard time > imagining Texas of all places would have such a requirement. > > Depending on what exactly you are doing, there are various and highly varied > requirements, such as acquiring a SPIN number for E-Rate, filing FCC > 477 if you do broadband, FCC 499 if you do VoIP (CLEC and ETC also apply > there), > a FRN if you do pretty much anything FCC-related, various sorts of licenses > for > most radio/microwave systems (excepting part 15 stuff), CALEA, open internet, > etc... > > COALS _could_ apply _if_ you are running a cable TV system that also delivers > data services, but it isn't an 'ISP thing'. > > More to the point... > > I wouldn't take US legal advice from any consultant not familiar with US law, > or > really any non-lawyer consultant at all. I wouldn't take it from NANOG either; > while it's a tremendous technical resource, it is not your attorney. > > There are a number of telecommunications focused law firms out there, with > knowledgeable lawyers. It would be a good idea to establish a relationship > with > one, if you intend to enter the increasingly complex legal minefield of being > an ISP. > > --Eric > > On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Dan White <dwh...@olp.net> wrote: > >> Not familiar with the process, but look at E-rate if you want to >> provide service to schools, libraries and health providers. >> >> >> On 05/31/16 13:14 -0500, Lorell Hathcock wrote: >> >>> NANOG: >>> >>> Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an >>> ISP license to operate in the United States. (Like they have in >>> other countries like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive >>> personal experience.) >>> >>> I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I >>> don't know of a license that we are required to have to route IP >>> traffic to end customers. >>> >>> I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state. But it is not a >>> requirement to pass traffic. >>> >>> He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar. >>> >>> Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal >>> license for a small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to >>> end users (commercial and/or residential). >>> >>> I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem >>> to kick in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a >>> license. >>> >> >> -- >> Dan White >> BTC Broadband
Re: ISP License in the USA?
>>> > He is suggesting COALS . as in lumps of coals, is what you are going to get on christmas from him, if he does not get this gig ! :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom - Original Message - > From: "Lorell Hathcock" <lor...@hathcock.org> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 2:14:17 PM > Subject: ISP License in the USA? > NANOG: > > > > Our owner has hired a consultant who insists that we should have an ISP > license to operate in the United States. (Like they have in other countries > like Germany and in Africa where he has extensive personal experience.) > > > > I am asking him to tell me which license we should have because I don't know > of a license that we are required to have to route IP traffic to end > customers. > > > > I am familiar with CLEC status filed with our state. But it is not a > requirement to pass traffic. > > > > He is suggesting COALS with which I am completely unfamiliar. > > > > Can anyone tell me if there is a Texas state and/or USA Federal license for > a small operator to pass IP traffic from the internet to end users > (commercial and/or residential). > > > > I am aware that there are some CALEA requirements of ISPs that seem to kick > in once a CALEA request is made, but is that different from a license. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Lorell Hathcock
Re: Netflix IP Space
I would suggest that you contact their NOC for the appropriate answer, since they don't advertise all of their prefixes out of all locations, plus they also use geo coding as well to determine from where they are going to stream the customer from. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom - Original Message - > From: "Alistair Mackenzie" <magics...@gmail.com> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org>, uk...@lists.uknof.org.uk > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2016 8:04:47 AM > Subject: Netflix IP Space > Hi All, > > Does anyone on either lists have a list of Netflix's IP space that they are > using for streams and "unblocker" detection? > > We are doing policy based VPN and Netflix needs to be excluded from this to > work around their restrictions. > > They are on AWS so not as easy as just finding their ASN... > > Thanks, > Alistair
Re: B5-Lite
Best place to ask this question would be the WISPA list (public one or Member's list). Plus you can ask ask this question on Facebook, WISPA Pictures or Mimosa Group ! Lots of good info there. Like all fixed wireless, in unlicensed freq...there are if's and's or but's Depending on your particular link, and what problem you are trying to solve, the Mimosa's would be a logical and good upgrade path from Ubiquiti M5 radios Weather you use B5-lite or B5's would depend on a few factors. :) Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Jared Mauch" <ja...@puck.nether.net> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 7:05:55 PM > Subject: B5-Lite > Anyone deployed this radio in production in the US? I’m curious to hear from > people who are using it, looking at replacing some UBNT hardware with it on > some PTP links, going from the M-series class devices to something more > modern. > > Thanks, > > - Jared
Re: carrier grade fax boards?
When you use the terms 'SIP' and 'Fax/Board' in the same sentence, it sort of becomes an oxymoron. In the analog world, we used to use 'Carrier grade' Fax/boards made by BrookTrout which was then acquired by Dialogic. (Truefax line), and there were a couple of others.. mostly these were cards with large amount of DSP's used for fax processing multiple channels on digital links (BRI/PRI/T1's etc). Since SIP is a 'communication protocol' which works with IP, there is no need for 'Fax/Board', since all everything needed can be done via software. The only reason one may need Hardware is to convert SIP to traditional TDM (POTS line or PRI/T1/E1 etc). Most of us are used to referring to these devices as IAD's. Having said that, what are you looking to do ? Traditional TDM fax or SIP based FOIP ? :) Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom - Original Message - > From: "Ryan Finnesey" <r...@finnesey.com> > To: "Valdis Kletnieks" <valdis.kletni...@vt.edu> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 2:41:23 AM > Subject: RE: carrier grade fax boards? > Fax hardware/boards that other members have used within service provider > environments to deliver services to their end users . > > -Original Message- > From: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu [mailto:valdis.kletni...@vt.edu] > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 2:36 AM > To: Ryan Finnesey <r...@finnesey.com> > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: carrier grade fax boards? > > On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 04:30:23 -, Ryan Finnesey said: >> I was wondering if anyone had any recommendations on carrier grade fax >> boards that are SIP based? > > What would "carrier grade" even *mean* for a fax board?
Re: Software for circuit documentation
Anyone used these folks ? Any feedback ? http://www.i-doit.com/ Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Mel Beckman" <m...@beckman.org> > To: "Eric Kuhnke" <eric.kuh...@gmail.com> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 1:41:00 PM > Subject: Re: Software for circuit documentation > I’ve been meaning to get pricing for Ericsson’s Adaptive Inventory (formerly > Granite) for a mid-sized ISP client. It’s world-class, but it may turn out to > be insanely expensive. I’m also investigating cloud solutions. Most of the > legacy commercial products are stuck in the LEC/CLEC inventory regime of T1s, > T3s, and circuit grooming, with little support for MPLS, IPv6, or SLA > management. Those are the big pain points today for most ISPs grappling with > provisioning complexity. > > -mel > > >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 10:09 AM, Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> mediawiki set up for individual user accounts, https only access, in >> internal tool IP space/ACL/firewalled. >> >> First develop a hierarcically organized 'blank' template you can copy and >> paste for each POP, and then fill it out. Works great for large scale fiber >> patch panel assignments/crossconnect tracking, listings of equipment in a >> POP, MPLS XCs, etc. It only works properly if the persons making each OSI >> layer 1 change edit the wiki after each change (or the NOC/neteng staff >> directing the field technicians edit it at the same time as updating a work >> ticket). >> >> One of the great advantages is that it's near infinitely flexible in how >> you can lay out and arrange the page, and tracks each and every change made >> by ever user. In case of a mistake it's easy to revert to an earlier >> version. >> >> I am not so sure about its use for OSP fiber tracking which gets into the >> territory of GIS software and customized vector based diagramming software. >> >> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Manuel Marín <m...@transtelco.net> wrote: >> >>> Dear Nanog community >>> >>> We are looking for a network inventory software to document logical >>> circuits and fibers. We have been using Racktables for cross connects and >>> racks documentation and works great, but we did find a way to document >>> MPLS, Eline/ELAN, OTN, SONET, IP circuits, external plant (fibers), etc. >>> >>> I would appreciate if you can share what you use for documentation. >>> >>> Thank you and have a great day >>> >>> Regards
Re: 10G-capable customer router recommendations?
double check the spec sheets, EP-s16 is a switch not a router.. the smaller units are switch + routers. Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Jared Geiger" <ja...@compuwizz.net> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2016 9:20:25 PM > Subject: Re: 10G-capable customer router recommendations? > Maybe the EdgePoint EP-S16 device from Ubiquiti. It has 2 SFP+ ports on it. > I don't know the status of hardware offload support though. > > https://dl.ubnt.com/datasheets/edgemax/EdgePoint_DS.pdf > https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgepoint/ > > > On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Doug McIntyre <mer...@geeks.org> wrote: > >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 01:18:10PM -0700, David Sotnick wrote: >> > I was recently asked to set up networking at a VIP's home where he has >> > Comcast "Gigabit Pro" service, which is delivered on a 10G-SR MM port on >> a >> > Comcast-supplied Juniper ACX-2100 router. >> > >> > Which customer router would you suggest for such a setup? It needs to do >> > IPv4 NAT, DHCP, IPv4+IPv6 routing and have a decent L4 firewall (that >> also >> > supports IPv6). >> >> FortiNet 600D? >> 36Gbps throughput with dual SFP+ port and several 1Gbps ports. >> Specs say full NGFW throughput is 2.4Gbps (ie. you turn on all the knobs).
Re: 10G-capable customer router recommendations?
Hope you all realize a few minor details:- Mikrotik is a ROS (Router Operating System), based on linux. Mikrotik also makes hardware called RouterBoards. Having said that... Mikrotik ROS runs on X86 platforms (such as Lanner or axiomtek) Similarly you can also run linux on the Routerboard platforms. Having said that... Lanner & Axiomtek etc x86 appliances have one pcie slot, where you can install the NIC of your choice. Dual 10g SFP+ Intel Card or 2/4/6 port Hotlava Card, or Chelsio etc. You can mix and match to suite your needs. Don't like RouterBoard or CCR's, no problem you can run MT ROS on an X86 Platform of your choice. These days you can even run it on a VM solution... Don't like MT ROS, no problem feel free to run your choice of OS, and routing daemons. Want a high performance x86 Firewall... inexpensive.. look at Server-U, ask them about their custom solution with Chelsio Cards. Don't like any of the above, feel free to by a Box with a Name on it (Brocade, Cisco, Juniper etc etc).. Yes, each platform has it's advantages, and it's short comings, and no one solution fits all needs. (Want to tow your boat, get a Hummer, want to go fast, get a ferrari don't try to tow you boat with a ferrari, or race in the streets with a hummer !) :) Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom - Original Message - > From: "Ken Chase" <m...@sizone.org> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 8:24:56 PM > Subject: Re: 10G-capable customer router recommendations? > Does that lanner even do SFP+? Dont see it listed in the specs. Looks like > 4210 > has > 2x SFP+, though their 'performance' level products look more in line with > 'useful'. > > http://www.lannerinc.com/products/x86-network-appliances/x86-rackmount-appliances/fw-8877 > > As for the microtics, wonky user interface, so very unciscolike (i guess thats > my problem - but the GUI thing feels like a toy), but for their midrange > models > I found > their bgp convergence times pretty poor on their low end cpus... > > What do you put on the lanner? OpenBGPd? Quagga? Also looking for a 10G > solution > here, low power (than a full ASR stack..) is my goal for 5-6 full bgp feeds. > > /kc > > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 07:45:39PM -0400, Michael Brown said: > >Not *exactly* what you're asking for, but a Lanner appliance > > >(???http://www.lannerinc.com/products/network-appliances/x86-rackmount-network-appliances/nca-5210) > >might suit your needs. > > > >M. > > > >?? Original Message ?? > >From: David Sotnick > >Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 16:19 > >To: NANOG > >Subject: 10G-capable customer router recommendations? > > > >Hello masters of the Internet, > > > >I was recently asked to set up networking at a VIP's home where he has > >Comcast "Gigabit Pro" service, which is delivered on a 10G-SR MM port on a > >Comcast-supplied Juniper ACX-2100 router. > > > >Which customer router would you suggest for such a setup? It needs to do > >IPv4 NAT, DHCP, IPv4+IPv6 routing and have a decent L4 firewall (that also > >supports IPv6). > > > >The customer pays for "2Gb" service (Comcast caps this at 2G+10% = 2.2Gbps) > >and would like to get what he pays for (*cough*) by having the ability to > >stream two 1Gbps streams (or at least achieve > 1.0Gbps). > > > >I'm tempted to get another ACX-2100 and do a 4x1Gb LACP port-channel to the > >customer switch, or replace the AV-integrator-installed Cisco SG300-52P > >(Cisco switch with e.g. an EX-3300 with 10Gb uplinks). > > > >Thanks in advance for your suggestions. > > > >-Dave > > Ken Chase - m...@sizone.org
Re: Microwave link capacity
There is no simple answer to your question Fixed Wireless technology has come a long way, and there maybe a lot of different variety of products available, however when you start your product selection for a particular project, it is not un-common to find one constrained in terms of resources. While one cane make a statement such as .. You can shoot 1gig, 20 miles however that comes with a lot of cavats... i.e. What mfg makes equipment that can do this ? Do you need one set of radios or are you stacking multiple radios ? Do you have the required Freq and Channel available ? and a few other things.. How big is the antenna required for this ? Is the Tower Strong Enough to withstand the wind loading ? What would it take to strengthen the tower ? All of these above details can send you down the path, into a rabbit hole which may or may not be constrained. Then there are different ways to mitigate these constraints .. (making the hop shorter.. ie. and intermediary repeater site.. etc etc etc ). Delivering 1gig + long distance is not an easy slam dunk task. While Fiber can be a lot of work to put in the ground for 20 miles, it is generally considered to be the better option, because there is a lot of headroom for expanding capacity. Fixed Wireless, can be deployed quickly, and may possibly be less expensive however there is no headroom for expanding capacity (if the link is designed as per specs of 1gig Capacity). Hope that makes sense. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom - Original Message - > From: "Jean-Francois Mezei" <jfmezei_na...@vaxination.ca> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 1:52:47 PM > Subject: Re: Microwave link capacity > On 2016-04-07 08:28, Bryan Fields wrote: > >> Microwave has it's place, but the 20 mile, >1gb links are marketing more than >> anything. > > > So existing long distance links to reach rural communities are not good > candidates to upgrade from old microwave that handles just phone to > something that can serve broadband for the town ? > > > If existing towers are further apart than what is realistic for higher > capacity links, then upgrading would involve new towers at which point, > the economics might point to fibre.
GCN / DigiCell or Columbus Communications ?
Hello, We are looking for 10g wave between Puerto Rico to Trinidad (Maparippe). Please contact me off list. Thanks. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
Re: Someone Please Help Me Understand
Eric, There is no simple cut and dry way of troubleshooting such a situation, other than need to look at the problem in multiple different ways.. It also helps in being able to do some comparative test/results with another nearby network... It is also not un-common to have to shutdown a peer v.s prepend.. when troubleshooting. One has to keep in mind that many of the IP Transit networks use local pref for customer routes, thus nullifying (ignore) the AS prepends. Each provider is different, HE does not have a published set of communities, thus effectively do not allow their customers to do any significant traffic engineer.. (anyone from HE, if I am wrong, please feel free to correct me). Level3 by default overrides any AS prepends with local pref, but does allow it's customers to use communities to override those settings. >>. I am not trying to publically shame or air dirty laundry, I am just trying >>to > understand the situation more. CDNs bring a whole new level I have yet to > comprehend with multicast DNS and GeoIP responses... Understood, I have been there so I can relate. Nanog is a great place to learn, even when asking dumb questions, folks here have been very supportive in explaining, and every now and then one sees a sarcastic reply, but overall I cannot say I have ever had anyone treat me in a condescending manner. My humble suggestion is that you start with simple stuff first .. i.e. bgp traffic engineering before trying to wrap your head around multicast DNS and GeoIP response... I often find the answer to complex issues to be in the simple stuff, which often gets overlooked ! :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Eric Rogers" <ecrog...@precisionds.com> > To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Monday, April 4, 2016 8:46:41 AM > Subject: RE: Someone Please Help Me Understand > Thanks Faisal, > > I appreciate the time you took and the detail you have placed. I did try > prepending our HE connection thinking it was an issue via HE, and we started > going out Level3, and it also went to Dallas with nearly the same packet loss. > I don't know what the return path is/was, but through another provider, it > also showed major packet loss. That leads me to believe that FB is/was having > issues in Dallas. Maybe on their peering port? I have since found out they > don't peer through the route servers, but only directly through the exchanges > (direct peering relationship). I have since submitted a peering request to FB > and also submitted a request to their NOC to look at the packet loss and why > we > are getting Dallas IPs. I have not received a response to either. > > I can use the community strings to manipulate our announcement of our routes, > but won't DNS tell the browser what IP to ultimately get the data? > > I am not trying to publically shame or air dirty laundry, I am just trying to > understand the situation more. CDNs bring a whole new level I have yet to > comprehend with multicast DNS and GeoIP responses... > > Eric Rogers > PDS Connect > www.pdsconnect.me > (317) 831-3000 x200 > > > -Original Message- > From: Faisal Imtiaz [mailto:fai...@snappytelecom.net] > Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2016 8:27 PM > To: Eric Rogers > Cc: nanog list > Subject: Re: Someone Please Help Me Understand > > Hi Eric, > > With this type of connectivity you have to pay attention to Traffic > Engineering... > > And when I say, traffic engineering, I mean both ways.. how you are sending > traffic to them along with how they are sending traffic to you... (sometimes a > bit more challenging to do). > > I will give you two specific example, just to illustrate the point... > > We are located in the east coast, we have ip transit to Cogent network, via > one > intermediary ASN. > We also have IP Transit with GTT and Hibernia networks. > We also have direct peering on multiple Peering Fabrics. > > 1st cases... > We have our outbound traffic engineered to prefer direct routes.. e.g. when > sending traffic to Cogent, we send it out via the intermediary ASN to Cogent. > However when traffic is coming back from Cogent they see our prefixes via > intermediary ASN as well as Hibernia Networks, since Hibernia networks is a > lower ASN, they prefer that route > So, one can say, no big deal, except, Hibernia Networks connects to Cogent on > the West Coast !... so our return traffic is going from the east coast to west > coast and them back to east coast > So one can easily say
Re: Someone Please Help Me Understand
Hi Eric, With this type of connectivity you have to pay attention to Traffic Engineering... And when I say, traffic engineering, I mean both ways.. how you are sending traffic to them along with how they are sending traffic to you... (sometimes a bit more challenging to do). I will give you two specific example, just to illustrate the point... We are located in the east coast, we have ip transit to Cogent network, via one intermediary ASN. We also have IP Transit with GTT and Hibernia networks. We also have direct peering on multiple Peering Fabrics. 1st cases... We have our outbound traffic engineered to prefer direct routes.. e.g. when sending traffic to Cogent, we send it out via the intermediary ASN to Cogent. However when traffic is coming back from Cogent they see our prefixes via intermediary ASN as well as Hibernia Networks, since Hibernia networks is a lower ASN, they prefer that route So, one can say, no big deal, except, Hibernia Networks connects to Cogent on the West Coast !... so our return traffic is going from the east coast to west coast and them back to east coast So one can easily say... Houston we have a problem !... 2nd Case.. We are peered with some networks at Telx TIE, via one of our (intermediary) ASN...So while we can send traffic over to that network via our ASN, however that networks sees our prefixes via our (intermediary) ASN as Hibernia as well Hibernia being a lower ASN, they send traffic back to us via them... In both cases we use communities to take corrective action Moral of the story is. just because you have multiple peers, and peer with folks on the Peering Fabric, the default configuration of BGP will not AUTOMAGICALY optimize the paths in your favor And thus the condition you describe will be the result... Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Eric Rogers" <ecrog...@precisionds.com> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 1:54:40 PM > Subject: Someone Please Help Me Understand > Ok, I'm trying to learn, so bear with me. > > > > We are an ISP in Indianapolis that has full routes from 3 different > providers HE.Net in Columbus OH being one. We also are peered with 2 > peering exchanges, including EquinixIX in Chicago. The problem is > Instagram and Facebook (same company, I know) for our customers seems > very slow. > > > > This is where I need a way to troubleshoot/understand more. I did a > traceroute to the IP that is serving the pictures, and it resolves to > the FBCDN servers in Dallas, and is showing packet loss and pings once > it hits Dallas, and are in the 1xxs of ms. > > > > Tracing route to instagram-p3-shv-01-dfw1.fbcdn.net [31.13.66.52] > > over a maximum of 30 hops: > > > > 1 4 ms 3 ms 4 ms 10.7.0.1 > > 220 ms43 ms42 ms inmtvlobs-rtr-01.dynamic.pdsconnect.me > [192.69.57.1] > > 325 ms47 ms29 ms > inmtvlmwt-rtr-01.infrastructure.pdsconnect.me [192.69.48.162] > > 446 ms32 ms58 ms > inindyhen-core1.infrastructure.pdsconnect.me [192.69.48.193] > > 536 ms53 ms51 ms ge2-4.core1.cmh1.he.net [184.105.32.1] > > 647 ms41 ms75 ms 10ge1-2.core1.chi1.he.net > [184.105.222.165] > > 757 ms57 ms53 ms 100ge14-1.core2.chi1.he.net > [184.105.81.97] > > 857 ms73 ms84 ms 100ge12-1.core1.mci3.he.net > [184.105.81.209] > > 975 ms73 ms 102 ms 10ge15-6.core1.dal1.he.net > [184.105.222.10] > > 1093 ms 103 ms92 ms eqix-da1.facebook.com [206.223.118.176] > > 11 102 ms 101 ms * psw01c.dfw1.tfbnw.net [173.252.65.196] > > 1292 ms97 ms 105 ms msw1aq.01.dfw1.tfbnw.net [204.15.21.89] > > 13 110 ms * 98 ms instagram-p3-shv-01-dfw1.fbcdn.net > [31.13.66.52] > > > > Since I am peered with the route servers in EquinixIX Chicago, shouldn't > the data be coming from there, or at least hit their routers? In my > trace, it shows HE to Chicago, then to Dallas. How does FB decide what > IP the content gets displayed from, and is there anything I can do as a > provider? If it is DNS, I can obviously clear the cache to see if it > gets new IPs. If I'm not getting FB peering IPs in Chicago, do I need > to peer directly? Should I get FaceBook involved? > > > > Eric Rogers > > PDS Connect > > (317) 831-3000 x200
Peer1 Colo Facility ?
Hello, Anyone with Peer1 Colo Facility (sales) ? Can you please contact me off list ? Thanks. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
Looking for Transport 5g/10g between Miami to Fortaleza, Brazil
Hello all, Anyone who can provide this, can you please contact me off list ? Thanks. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
Re: Softlayer / Blocking Cuba IP's ?
Thanks, But this just exasperates their Stupidity and in-correct assumption that somehow allowing internet communications is equal to doing business with these countries. They need to get better legal advisers, may be people who can think and actually understand what is the internet... so that they know the difference (in their own words) The United States prohibits most commercial transactions Tcp/IP connections are NOT COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS !!! So what are we going to see from them next .. A Posted Policy at the Entrance to the DataCenter " Due to US Economic Sanctions.. We will not allow entry to people who speak Spanish (Cuba),Farsi (Iran), Korean, and Arabic (Sudan) but if you are Sudanese and speak Dinka, you will be allowed" Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom - Original Message - > From: "Frank Bulk" <frnk...@iname.com> > To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 7:57:27 PM > Subject: RE: Softlayer / Blocking Cuba IP's ? > Official statement here: > https://knowledgelayer.softlayer.com/faq/softlayer-network-wide-ip-blocking > > Frank > > -Original Message- > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+frnkblk=iname@nanog.org] On Behalf Of > Faisal Imtiaz > Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 5:21 PM > To: Carlos A. Carnero Delgado <carloscarn...@gmail.com> > Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org> > Subject: Re: Softlayer / Blocking Cuba IP's ? > > Ola Carlos, > > I am very familiar with Govt. instituted restrictions, and yes, people always > find ways to get around it. I cannot speak for the Cuban Gov. nor for the US > Gov. as to what they decide to do and when. > > What was/is irksome about Softlayer's decision is the following:- > > 1) Unilateral implementation of a restricted policy without any notification. > > 2) The broad stroke implementation of a Gov Policy that does not apply to the > communication service they applied the policy to. > > i.e. As much as we all dislike Dictatorial Behavior, and we fully recognize > Softlayer is a Private Entity, who can exercise it's right to act > Dictatorially, Such behavior in the overall community (Internet) is frowned > upon and (as it should) have a long term negative affect to business. > > Saludos. > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > >> From: "Carlos A. Carnero Delgado" <carloscarn...@gmail.com> >> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> >> Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> >> Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 6:08:42 PM >> Subject: Re: Softlayer / Blocking Cuba IP's ? > >> Hi, > >> (disclaimer: I'm Cuban national, living in Cuba, and a long time lurker in >> this >> great list) > >> 2016-02-19 15:27 GMT-05:00 Faisal Imtiaz < fai...@snappytelecom.net > : > >>> Considering the fact that such a block was just put in place about a week >>> ago ? >>> Last time I checked, blocking any part of the world is not part of any legal >>> requirements on any Global Service Provider ? other than a 'company policy' >>> ? > >> Being denied access to services, as a Cuban national, is something that we've >> all experienced here and we (sadly) have come to accept it as a fact of life. >> Sometimes we resort to proxies/VPNs in order to conceal our origin -- and by >> a >> similar token, sometimes, our destination ;). > >> However, there are a couple of things that have made me wondering how >> arbitrary >> decisions can be. I think sometimes it just boils down to specific provider >> policies that try to (maybe rightfully) cover their bottoms in the light of >> the >> law. For instance, I can't hide the fact that I have access to Gmail; but at >> the same time there are many Google properties and services than I can't. >> There >> are many companies, global companies, that I can't access, and others are >> open >> to us which are, paradoxically, completely based on the US and under US law >> (won't name them publicly to avoid potential damage). > >> Any way, I'm going back to lurk mode. However, feel free to ask anything, >> on- of >> offlist. And I thank you all for this wonderful resource. > > Carlos.
Re: Softlayer / Blocking Cuba IP's ?
Ola Carlos, I am very familiar with Govt. instituted restrictions, and yes, people always find ways to get around it. I cannot speak for the Cuban Gov. nor for the US Gov. as to what they decide to do and when. What was/is irksome about Softlayer's decision is the following:- 1) Unilateral implementation of a restricted policy without any notification. 2) The broad stroke implementation of a Gov Policy that does not apply to the communication service they applied the policy to. i.e. As much as we all dislike Dictatorial Behavior, and we fully recognize Softlayer is a Private Entity, who can exercise it's right to act Dictatorially, Such behavior in the overall community (Internet) is frowned upon and (as it should) have a long term negative affect to business. Saludos. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Carlos A. Carnero Delgado" <carloscarn...@gmail.com> > To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 6:08:42 PM > Subject: Re: Softlayer / Blocking Cuba IP's ? > Hi, > (disclaimer: I'm Cuban national, living in Cuba, and a long time lurker in > this > great list) > 2016-02-19 15:27 GMT-05:00 Faisal Imtiaz < fai...@snappytelecom.net > : >> Considering the fact that such a block was just put in place about a week >> ago ? >> Last time I checked, blocking any part of the world is not part of any legal >> requirements on any Global Service Provider ? other than a 'company policy' ? > Being denied access to services, as a Cuban national, is something that we've > all experienced here and we (sadly) have come to accept it as a fact of life. > Sometimes we resort to proxies/VPNs in order to conceal our origin -- and by a > similar token, sometimes, our destination ;). > However, there are a couple of things that have made me wondering how > arbitrary > decisions can be. I think sometimes it just boils down to specific provider > policies that try to (maybe rightfully) cover their bottoms in the light of > the > law. For instance, I can't hide the fact that I have access to Gmail; but at > the same time there are many Google properties and services than I can't. > There > are many companies, global companies, that I can't access, and others are open > to us which are, paradoxically, completely based on the US and under US law > (won't name them publicly to avoid potential damage). > Any way, I'm going back to lurk mode. However, feel free to ask anything, on- > of > offlist. And I thank you all for this wonderful resource. > Carlos.
Re: Softlayer / Blocking Cuba IP's ?
Yep, this is a classic case of Corporate Stupidity, "We don't want to deal with any possibility of an exposure, so we are going to take a self initiated actions to make our network becomes a cordoned off island' Oops, the fact that we are a communications service provider where such rules don't apply seems to get lost since no one wants to stick their neck out or use some brain cells for thinking things thru.. Anyhow, for those who are wondering how this has a trickle down affect ! Well our customer is one of the few licensed charter flight operators to Cuba... There has to be information exchange in regards to these flights and passengers before the they are allowed to travel/ take off etc etc... So, out of the blue, after years and years of everything working, suddenly emails flowing thru spam filtering service hosted on Softlayer Cloud, totally blocked any / all emails from Cuba from coming thru... We just spent last 10 days tracking everything down !! Happy Friday to everyone ! Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom > From: "Collin Anderson" <col...@averysmallbird.com> > To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 4:04:00 PM > Subject: Re: Softlayer / Blocking Cuba IP's ? > Being as Softlayer is owned by IBM and headquartered in Virginia, they are > pretty bound by U.S. sanctions policy, although this is obviously > overcompliance. Essentially if there was to be a prohibited customer and a > threat of enforcement, they want to be able to say they took extreme steps to > prevent use of their network in those countries. > This is also unfortunately a common sanctions compliance practice by service > providers -- GoDaddy had done so for years until recently and Google continues > to for GAE and GCE. Apparently Softlayer's network change was put into place a > couple of weeks ago, and covers all the comprehensively sanctioned countries > -- > Iran, Cuba, Syria, North Korea and Sudan (should block Crimea as well in that > case). > It's not clear that their customers know they are blocked from something like > 150 million potential users, and you are right, in fact the Cuba sanctions > regulations were modified last month to expand authorizations on such > transaction. It's extremely counterproductive and in direct contradiction to > well established policy on Internet access in sanctioned countries. > On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Faisal Imtiaz < fai...@snappytelecom.net > > wrote: >> Hello All, >> This is a shout out to Softlayer Network Admin / Policy folks... >> We just went thru a painful process to find out that Softlayer has recently >> decided to block Cuba IP Address Space(on their cloud services). >> I am not a politician, nor any kind of a policy expert, However I have a >> questions for the SoftLayer folks... >> On What basis, legal requirement, logic, have they taken on the >> responsibility >> to implement such a Block ? >> Considering the fact that such a block was just put in place about a week >> ago ? >> Last time I checked, blocking any part of the world is not part of any legal >> requirements on any Global Service Provider ? other than a 'company policy' ? >> Also, the Last time I checked the US Cuba relations are getting better not >> worse! >> Would love to know what was the reasoning behind such action ! >> Thank you. >> Faisal Imtiaz >> Snappy Internet & Telecom > -- > Collin David Anderson > averysmallbird.com | @cda | Washington, D.C.
Softlayer / Blocking Cuba IP's ?
Hello All, This is a shout out to Softlayer Network Admin / Policy folks... We just went thru a painful process to find out that Softlayer has recently decided to block Cuba IP Address Space(on their cloud services). I am not a politician, nor any kind of a policy expert, However I have a questions for the SoftLayer folks... On What basis, legal requirement, logic, have they taken on the responsibility to implement such a Block ? Considering the fact that such a block was just put in place about a week ago ? Last time I checked, blocking any part of the world is not part of any legal requirements on any Global Service Provider ? other than a 'company policy' ? Also, the Last time I checked the US Cuba relations are getting better not worse! Would love to know what was the reasoning behind such action ! Thank you. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom
Re: UDP Amplification DDoS - Help!
Not quite sure what kind of info / confirmation you are looking for... There are lots of articles (do a google search) on this topic as well as mitigation ... e.g. http://blog.nexusguard.com/ssdp-ddos-attacks/ & https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp38 Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom - Original Message - > From: "Mitch Dyer" <md...@development-group.net> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Monday, February 8, 2016 6:14:06 PM > Subject: UDP Amplification DDoS - Help! > Hello, > > Hoping someone can point me in the right direction here, even just confirming > my > suspicions would be incredibly helpful. > > A little bit of background: I have a customer I'm working with that is > downstream of a 1Gb link that is experiencing multiple DDoS attacks on a daily > basis. Through several captures I've seen what appear to be a mixture of SSDP > and DNS amplification attacks (though not at the same time). The attack itself > seems to target the PAT address associated with a specific site, if we change > the PAT address for the site, the attack targets the new address at the next > occurance. We've tried setting up captures and logging inside the network to > determine if the SSDP/DNS request originate within the network but that does > not appear to be the case. > > We've reached out for some assistance from the upstream carrier but they've > only > been able to enforce a 24-hour block. > > I'm hoping someone with some experience on this topic would be able to shed > some > light on a better way to attack this or would be willing to confirm that we > are > simply SOL without prolonged assistance from the upstream carrier. > > Thanks in advance for any insight. > > Mitch
Re: Peering Exchange
Hi Colton, There are three ways to peer with another entity on any exchange. 1) peer via the exchange provided route-servers. 2) peer directly with other members the exchange's provided IP address. 3) peer via a private vlan service provided by the exchange. To setup # 1, you have to ask the peering exchange provider to setup the bgp session with you for your asn. You will get all the routes from those who have chosen to peer via the route server. To setup # 2, just ask the appropriate person/entity listed in the peeringdb for that entity, the desire/willingness to establish a direct bpg peering session. Most common is to do # 1 and/or # 2. Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Colton Conor" <colton.co...@gmail.com> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 10:21:37 PM > Subject: Peering Exchange > If a service provider or enterprise orders collocation at an Equinix Global > Internet Exchange Point, and orders a port on the exchange from Equinix, > then what happens? How does a provider actually peer with the peers on the > exchange? > > Lets assume the SP or enterprise already has an ANS, transit from multiple > providers, and a BGP router that can accept and hold full routes. > > You can see the members of the exchange on peeringdb.com. Many of the > members say their policy is Open with little to no traffic requirements. So > does just ordering a port to the exchange automatically connect you with > all of these open providers, or do you have to contact each on individually?
Re: SMS gateways
There are multiple ways to skin this cat !. No, not familiar with this product... However.. 1) You know that you can send sms messages via email to pretty much any cell phone. 2) Personal Preference, if I was doing so, I would do it with a small mikrotik router + usb cell modem, very inexpensive, especially when combined with a M2M plan. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Scott Fisher" <littlefish...@gmail.com> > To: "John Levine" <jo...@iecc.com> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2016 3:34:42 PM > Subject: Re: SMS gateways > Does anyone having experience getting this to work on US networks? > > http://www.smsfoxbox.it/en/foxbox-lx800-gateway-100.html/ > > I am interested on getting this working with our Nagios notifications. > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:40 PM, John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote: >>>Thanks for those pointers. The "mega bill" problem is one I have to avoid. We >>>used to use ISDN as backup to T1 circuits, >>>but had to abandon that after some wayward fail-overs resulted in $5000 phone >>>bills. I'll check the plan overage terms >>>carefully! >> >> Sounds like an excellent application for a $10/mo prepaid plan on >> something like Tracfone. If disaster strikes and you need a lot of >> data one month, you can add extra credit directly from the phone. >> > > > > -- > Scott
Re: SMS gateways
Yep, agreed in certain situations a hardware gateway is more useful. That is what I listed as item #1. A small Mikrotik Router + USB Cell Stick of your choice. make for a very inexpensive, flexible gateway. http://mum.mikrotik.com/presentations/CO10/day1/03-arnis_3g.pdf (quiet a few options for different form-factors) http://mum.mikrotik.com/presentations/US11/us11-brian.pdf Regards :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Scott Fisher" <littlefish...@gmail.com> > To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > Cc: "John Levine" <jo...@iecc.com>, "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2016 3:55:07 PM > Subject: Re: SMS gateways > I am well aware of email-to-sms, but that is dependant on links/infrastructure > that you are monitoring. (Think of it like having your Nagios system running > on > the same hypervisor as your other production gear. What happens if the > hypervisor drops? How would you know? ) > The hardware sms gateway allows for true oob notifications. > On Thursday, January 7, 2016, Faisal Imtiaz < fai...@snappytelecom.net > > wrote: >> There are multiple ways to skin this cat !. >> No, not familiar with this product... >> However.. >> 1) You know that you can send sms messages via email to pretty much any cell >> phone. >> 2) Personal Preference, if I was doing so, I would do it with a small >> mikrotik >> router + usb cell modem, very inexpensive, especially when combined with a >> M2M >> plan. >> Regards. >> Faisal Imtiaz >> Snappy Internet & Telecom >> 7266 SW 48 Street >> Miami, FL 33155 >> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 >> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net >> - Original Message - >> > From: "Scott Fisher" < littlefish...@gmail.com > >> > To: "John Levine" < jo...@iecc.com > >> > Cc: "nanog list" < nanog@nanog.org > >> > Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2016 3:34:42 PM >> > Subject: Re: SMS gateways >> > Does anyone having experience getting this to work on US networks? >> > http://www.smsfoxbox.it/en/foxbox-lx800-gateway-100.html/ >> > I am interested on getting this working with our Nagios notifications. >> > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:40 PM, John Levine < jo...@iecc.com > wrote: >> >>>Thanks for those pointers. The "mega bill" problem is one I have to >> >>>avoid. We >> >>>used to use ISDN as backup to T1 circuits, >> >>>but had to abandon that after some wayward fail-overs resulted in $5000 >> >>>phone >> >>>bills. I'll check the plan overage terms >> >>>carefully! >> >> Sounds like an excellent application for a $10/mo prepaid plan on >> >> something like Tracfone. If disaster strikes and you need a lot of >> >> data one month, you can add extra credit directly from the phone. >> > -- >> > Scott > -- > Scott
Re: interconnection costs
Hi Reza, There is some terminology and view point confusion... First of all, it is Network(s) which connect with Other Networks using AS #, not AS's which connect with each other. (In a particular view (Routing) it could be said that AS's connect with each other). Second, A connection (interconnection) is just that...as simple as a piece of cable that is connecting two routers together (routers are next to each other)In a complex example, the two routers can be in different parts of the world. Today we take Colo Providers for granted, in realty they merely provide " Rent a Data Center" + "Rent other services on demand". Originally these folks used to make their money by renting space, power, cooling etc.. However they have figured out over the years that they can make a lot more money by 'renting' a piece of wire, and lately they trend is to extract as much money they possibly can for renting these wires as they can get These are the x-connect charges... Other have pointed out that 'peering' comes in many flavors, and it can be argued that IP Transit (aka internet access) is the top of the paid peering interconnection type. There are a number of 'Eco-systems' in play if you want to look at the whole picture. There are Last Mile network, Middle Mile Networks, Long Haul Networks, Data Center(s), Peering Fabric's etc. Today connectivity decisions are influenced by Location, Cost of getting to that Location, and Cost of having Presence at that location. Which in turning out to be more and more dictated by Long Haul connectivity providers and mostly by the terms and conditions of the Colo Providers. Older Colo's where lots of major carriers are present, tend to be the most arrogant, expensive and challenging companies to do business with, however their competitors who tend to be far more reasonable and cooperative to work with, are lacking in their list of 'Networks' that one can connect with...thus forcing difficult decisions. Another interesting thing to note is that Different Markets have Different Colo Folks holding the 'premier' position, and they pretty much all act that way in those markets, the same operator in other markets where they don't have a lead position are much more reasonable to work with, (and there are always some exceptions). So from a network (ISP) operator's perspective the following appears to be options listed in graduating manner. 1) Buy IP Transit from who every is available (Typically a very limited choice if any, and pretty much no negotiating leverage) 2) Buy Middle Mile transport to nearest Data Center in Town. (Better options than 1, unless the D.C. is a major one, otherwise still limited options) 3) Buy Long Haul to nearest Major Data Center...(Better options then 2, costs get to be interesting). 4) Buy Long Haul to nearest Major Data Center and establish a POP at the DC 5) Buy Long Haul to nearest Major Data Center and establish a POP at that DC and extend your connections to other DC for connectivity (because who you want to connect to is not present in the other Data Center). 6) Buy Multiple Long Haul to different Major Data Center and establish POP and connectivity etc etc etc. So after painting this picture... What costs do you want to analyze ? Not everyone is building networks in the same manner.. :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom - Original Message - > From: "Reza Motamedi" <motam...@cs.uoregon.edu> > To: "Baldur Norddahl" <baldur.nordd...@gmail.com> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 7:39:11 PM > Subject: Re: interconnection costs > Aren't availability, guaranteed service and remote hands an incentive to do > peering inside a third party colocation? > > I see very large numbers for xconnects for instance in Equnix [ > https://blog.equinix.com/2013/08/equinix-cross-connects-hit-11/] and it > made me believe buying xconnect is still a normal practice. > > Best Regards > Reza Motamedi (R.M) > Graduate Research Fellow > Oregon Network Research Group > Computer and Information Science > University of Oregon > > On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Baldur Norddahl <baldur.nordd...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On 23 December 2015 at 20:05, Reza Motamedi <motam...@cs.uoregon.edu> >> wrote: >> >>> In Private peering however the AS pays the colo provider for the xconnect >>> per ASes that it wants to peer with. The cost of transit would be >>> additional if the peering is in fact a transit and not settlement free. >>> >> >> You are still assuming there is a colo. But perhaps the most common case >> is a multihomed company buying transit from two independent service
Re: interconnection costs (off list)
Salam Reza, You are asking an interesting set of questions, it might be easier to answer the over a phone call conversation (at least fro our perspective, being a small ISP/NSP ). I can write to you a lengthy reply, but am not sure if I will be able to convey to you the information properly. The way you have posed the question, indicates to me that you are taking a particular view of a 'network', which is not the same view I hold. I am not sure if your view is more prevalent or our view as a service provider. Regardless I think it would make for an interesting conversation. Feel free to call me at your convenience. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Reza Motamedi" <motam...@cs.uoregon.edu> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 11:44:06 AM > Subject: interconnection costs > Hi NANOG > > We are a group of researchers and our focus is on the economy of > interconnection in the Internet. My question is mainly about the various > costs of an AS establishing a connection with another AS, including the > costs charged by the colocation providers. I am familiar with most of the > connection options such as public peering on IXP, and private peering > through xconnects. My understanding is that in addition to the cost of > transit that the smaller AS pays to the larger AS, in the former you pay a > monthly fee to establish a link to the switching fabric and then you can > connect to as many ASes that are member in the IXP, and in the later you > need to pay for as many xconnects that you need to connect to as many ASes > that you plan to peer with. Obviously in both cases there is the cost of > being in the colocation and renting a rack or whatever. What are the other > costs involved? How should the AS reach the colocation center in the first > place? I don't think every network can dig a hole an lay cables. Who should > they pay to get from one PoP to another? Do ASes have to pay for xconnect > to connect their PoP in a data center to the rest of their network? > > I think there is no single answer as different businesses may have > different pricing models. I hope the discussion can help me understand the > whole ecosystem a little bit better. > > > Best Regards > Reza Motamedi (R.M) > Graduate Research Fellow > Oregon Network Research Group > Computer and Information Science > University of Oregon
Re: interconnection costs (off list)
or More like getting too old to remember completing the edit of mail to: field ! LOL! Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 2:38:21 PM > Subject: Re: interconnection costs (off list) > Faisal is new to the Internet. ;-) > > > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > > Midwest Internet Exchange > http://www.midwest-ix.com > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > To: "Reza Motamedi" <motam...@cs.uoregon.edu> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 1:31:11 PM > Subject: Re: interconnection costs (off list) > > Ouch... so much for off list .. :( > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > > - Original Message - >> From: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> >> To: "Reza Motamedi" <motam...@cs.uoregon.edu> >> Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> >> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 2:28:13 PM >> Subject: Re: interconnection costs (off list) > >> Salam Reza, >> >> You are asking an interesting set of questions, it might be easier to answer >> the >> over a phone call conversation (at least fro our perspective, being a small >> ISP/NSP ). I can write to you a lengthy reply, but am not sure if I will be >> able to convey to you the information properly. >> >> The way you have posed the question, indicates to me that you are taking a >> particular view of a 'network', which is not the same view I hold. I am not >> sure if your view is more prevalent or our view as a service provider. >> >> Regardless I think it would make for an interesting conversation. Feel free >> to >> call me at your convenience. >> >> Regards. >> >> Faisal Imtiaz >> Snappy Internet & Telecom >> 7266 SW 48 Street >> Miami, FL 33155 >> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 >> >> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net >> >> - Original Message - >>> From: "Reza Motamedi" <motam...@cs.uoregon.edu> >>> To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> >>> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 11:44:06 AM >>> Subject: interconnection costs >> >>> Hi NANOG >>> >>> We are a group of researchers and our focus is on the economy of >>> interconnection in the Internet. My question is mainly about the various >>> costs of an AS establishing a connection with another AS, including the >>> costs charged by the colocation providers. I am familiar with most of the >>> connection options such as public peering on IXP, and private peering >>> through xconnects. My understanding is that in addition to the cost of >>> transit that the smaller AS pays to the larger AS, in the former you pay a >>> monthly fee to establish a link to the switching fabric and then you can >>> connect to as many ASes that are member in the IXP, and in the later you >>> need to pay for as many xconnects that you need to connect to as many ASes >>> that you plan to peer with. Obviously in both cases there is the cost of >>> being in the colocation and renting a rack or whatever. What are the other >>> costs involved? How should the AS reach the colocation center in the first >>> place? I don't think every network can dig a hole an lay cables. Who should >>> they pay to get from one PoP to another? Do ASes have to pay for xconnect >>> to connect their PoP in a data center to the rest of their network? >>> >>> I think there is no single answer as different businesses may have >>> different pricing models. I hope the discussion can help me understand the >>> whole ecosystem a little bit better. >>> >>> >>> Best Regards >>> Reza Motamedi (R.M) >>> Graduate Research Fellow >>> Oregon Network Research Group >>> Computer and Information Science > > > University of Oregon
Re: interconnection costs (off list)
Ouch... so much for off list .. :( Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Faisal Imtiaz" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > To: "Reza Motamedi" <motam...@cs.uoregon.edu> > Cc: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 2:28:13 PM > Subject: Re: interconnection costs (off list) > Salam Reza, > > You are asking an interesting set of questions, it might be easier to answer > the > over a phone call conversation (at least fro our perspective, being a small > ISP/NSP ). I can write to you a lengthy reply, but am not sure if I will be > able to convey to you the information properly. > > The way you have posed the question, indicates to me that you are taking a > particular view of a 'network', which is not the same view I hold. I am not > sure if your view is more prevalent or our view as a service provider. > > Regardless I think it would make for an interesting conversation. Feel free to > call me at your convenience. > > Regards. > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > > - Original Message - >> From: "Reza Motamedi" <motam...@cs.uoregon.edu> >> To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> >> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 11:44:06 AM >> Subject: interconnection costs > >> Hi NANOG >> >> We are a group of researchers and our focus is on the economy of >> interconnection in the Internet. My question is mainly about the various >> costs of an AS establishing a connection with another AS, including the >> costs charged by the colocation providers. I am familiar with most of the >> connection options such as public peering on IXP, and private peering >> through xconnects. My understanding is that in addition to the cost of >> transit that the smaller AS pays to the larger AS, in the former you pay a >> monthly fee to establish a link to the switching fabric and then you can >> connect to as many ASes that are member in the IXP, and in the later you >> need to pay for as many xconnects that you need to connect to as many ASes >> that you plan to peer with. Obviously in both cases there is the cost of >> being in the colocation and renting a rack or whatever. What are the other >> costs involved? How should the AS reach the colocation center in the first >> place? I don't think every network can dig a hole an lay cables. Who should >> they pay to get from one PoP to another? Do ASes have to pay for xconnect >> to connect their PoP in a data center to the rest of their network? >> >> I think there is no single answer as different businesses may have >> different pricing models. I hope the discussion can help me understand the >> whole ecosystem a little bit better. >> >> >> Best Regards >> Reza Motamedi (R.M) >> Graduate Research Fellow >> Oregon Network Research Group >> Computer and Information Science > > University of Oregon
Zayo / Sales Rep.
Hello, Any Zayo Sales Rep. can you please contact me off list. Thanks. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
Re: Transit Options in the UK?
Suggestion Hibernia Networks ? Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom - Original Message - > From: "Gary T. Giesen" <ggiesen+na...@giesen.me> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 4:49:53 PM > Subject: Transit Options in the UK? > I have a customer who's trying to decide whether to renew their existing > transit contract or not for a POP they have in the UK and wondering what's > good for transit options out there. > > Looking for: > > - Good peering/reachability to other networks (I've already started perusing > the LINX peer list) > - Decent BGP community set (at a minimum RTBH and local pref, obviously the > richer the better) > - v6 support > - Own the last mile a bonus > > Can anyone offer any recommendations? > > Cheers, > > GTG
Re: SMS Gateway
If you don't mind integrating a solution (for greater flexibility) Take a look at the Mikrotik router + Cellular Modem + M2M Plan. e.g. http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Cellular_SIMcom_modems_01 http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Option_Globetrotter_HSDPA_USB_Modem http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Tools/Sms http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Monitoring_Network_thru_SMS_Alerts https://aacable.wordpress.com/2012/11/22/howto-enable-mikrotik-to-sendreceive-sms-using-gsm-modem/ BTW. One of the folks who is a subject matter expert on Mikrotik + Cell Modem etc is Brian Vargas of Baltic Networks. etc etc etc... Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Graham Johnston" <johnst...@westmancom.com> > To: "nanog list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 10:53:58 AM > Subject: SMS Gateway > Today we use a product from MultiTech Systems call MultiModem iSMS to send SMS > text messages from our monitoring system to our on call staff. This is a 2G > product and we need to replace it soon. I know there are more generic cellular > modems that can do texting if you are willing to put in the effort, the > product > we use currently though has a simple HTTP based API specifically to send SMS. > Is anybody out there using something similar that can work on 3G or 4G > networks? > > Graham Johnston > Network Planner > Westman Communications Group > 204.717.2829 > johnst...@westmancom.com<mailto:johnst...@westmancom.com> > P think green; don't print this email.
Re: Peering + Transit Circuits
Let me start backwards... To me 'peering' is sharing internal routes and downstream customer routes,and not external ones. IP transit is all of the external routes including internal routes downstream customer routes Having said that. if one is control of what IP Prefixes get advertised to whom... how exactly someone (peers) 'steal' transit ? (If one is not managing the filters well then yes it is possible, but that would be a configuration error ?) Maybe I am naive, to my Peering routes (relationships) are a subset of IP Transit Routes (relationships) Based on above belief... Then Item # 3, becomes the choice of the OP where one can make one of two starting assumptions... We will trust everything coming in and change what we don't like... or We will not trust anything coming in, and change (accept) what we like. Items # 1 2, would be a function of network design, technical requirements (maintenance window) etc etc.. easier to deal with a distributed edge vs all in one when one has to bring anything down for any reason.. I am open to learning and being corrected if any of the above is wrong ! Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Tim Durack tdur...@gmail.com To: cisco-...@puck.nether.net, nanog list nanog@nanog.org Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 8:29:31 AM Subject: Peering + Transit Circuits Question: What is the preferred practice for separating peering and transit circuits? 1. Terminate peering and transit on separate routers. 2. Terminate peering and transit circuits in separate VRFs. 3. QoS/QPPB ( https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog42/presentations/DavidSmith-PeeringPolicyEnforcement.pdf ) 4. Don't worry about peers stealing transit. 5. What is peering? Your comments are appreciated. -- Tim:
Re: Peering + Transit Circuits
Thank you to everyone who has offered different explanations.. Yes, all it take is one party pooper to spoil a good party... So now the question is (public or private) what is the best practices to protect the network ? :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: John Osmon jos...@rigozsaurus.com To: nanog list nanog@nanog.org Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 8:30:45 PM Subject: Re: Peering + Transit Circuits On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:27:53PM +, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: Thanks for the explanation, I am still trying to figure out the realistic business case where doing something like this would make sense to any party. (unless purely malicious or in error). I'm sure others will reply as well, but in case it helps someone googling in years to come... Let's look at ParasiteNet, a content heavy network with three BGP peerings: - Transit provider A via 100Mbps - Transit provider B via 100Mbps - Peer P via 1GBps (who also buys from provider B at 10G) If ParasiteNet needed to push more than 100Mbps to provider B, they might be tempted to route the traffic to peer P, even though peer P didn't advertise those routes. ParasiteNet gets a free ride if peer P doesn't notice what is going on (until they need more than 100Mbps inbound). I've been told of an occurance of this when a private network started peering with an edu network. Once the link was up, an absurd amount of traffic went across the link -- all destined for the Internet rather than the edu network. When the edu network shutdown the link, they were threatened with lawsuits...
Re: Peering + Transit Circuits
Thanks for the explanation, I am still trying to figure out the realistic business case where doing something like this would make sense to any party. (unless purely malicious or in error). Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom From: Pshem Kowalczyk pshe...@gmail.com To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net, Tim Durack tdur...@gmail.com Cc: nanog list nanog@nanog.org, cisco-...@puck.nether.net Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 7:00:35 PM Subject: Re: Peering + Transit Circuits It's actually quite easy. Provider1 is present at Exchange1 and Exchange2, so is Provider2. Provider2 doesn't want to pay for the traffic between Exchange1 and Exchange2, so it points a static route for all prefixes it has in Exchange2 via Provider1's IP address in Exchange1 and does the same in Exchange2. Provider1's router receives traffic, checks where it should go (Exchange2) and it forwards the traffic. So the traffic flows like this: Provider2 (Exchange1) - Provider1 - (Exchange2) Provider2, all due to static routes. kind regards Pshem On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 at 10:38 Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: Let me start backwards... To me 'peering' is sharing internal routes and downstream customer routes,and not external ones. IP transit is all of the external routes including internal routes downstream customer routes Having said that. if one is control of what IP Prefixes get advertised to whom... how exactly someone (peers) 'steal' transit ? (If one is not managing the filters well then yes it is possible, but that would be a configuration error ?) Maybe I am naive, to my Peering routes (relationships) are a subset of IP Transit Routes (relationships) Based on above belief... Then Item # 3, becomes the choice of the OP where one can make one of two starting assumptions... We will trust everything coming in and change what we don't like... or We will not trust anything coming in, and change (accept) what we like. Items # 1 2, would be a function of network design, technical requirements (maintenance window) etc etc.. easier to deal with a distributed edge vs all in one when one has to bring anything down for any reason.. I am open to learning and being corrected if any of the above is wrong ! Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Tim Durack tdur...@gmail.com To: cisco-...@puck.nether.net , nanog list nanog@nanog.org Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 8:29:31 AM Subject: Peering + Transit Circuits Question: What is the preferred practice for separating peering and transit circuits? 1. Terminate peering and transit on separate routers. 2. Terminate peering and transit circuits in separate VRFs. 3. QoS/QPPB ( https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog42/presentations/DavidSmith-PeeringPolicyEnforcement.pdf ) 4. Don't worry about peers stealing transit. 5. What is peering? Your comments are appreciated. -- Tim:
Re: Peering + Transit Circuits
Hi Bob, Your point is completely understood... so the next question becomes what are these best practices methods ? :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Bob Evans b...@fiberinternetcenter.com To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Cc: Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net, nanog list nanog@nanog.org Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 7:36:00 PM Subject: Re: Peering + Transit Circuits Thank You Bob Evans CTO Thank you for the explanation.. However wouldn't a few other other attributes of the traffic show up . e.g. you would have asymmetric traffic.. going out via us, but coming back via a totally another path ? Patrick is correct in the approach you should take. If you don't have much traffic to being with - yes, you are correct that you'll notice a bounce. However, you should build a network so that your average traffic level can grow without having to check things manually. The more you automate the more you and your network are worth. This way you can simply upgrade ports at IX locations in a second without worrying about traffic levels and having to establish new or change existing policies. Thank You Bob Evans CTO BTW, my comment We will trust everything coming in was in ref. to QOS tags. However, if you have a router at the IX which has _only_ peer routes and your routes, that solves the problem. If I send you a packet for Comcast, your peering router will drop it and send an ICMP Network Unreachable. In this scenario, the peering router is feeding routes to a Route Reflector ? and not taking in full routes from the route reflector ? But standard network hygiene will stop those. If there are any resources you could point to for these, I would be much obliged.. Thanks Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net To: nanog list nanog@nanog.org Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 7:12:23 PM Subject: Re: Peering + Transit Circuits Assume you and I are at an IX and peer. Suppose I send you traffic for Comcast. I can do this, even if you do not send me prefixes for Comcast. It requires me to manually configure things, but I can do it. Put another way, you said We will trust everything coming in�. I am saying that perhaps you should not. As Comcast is not one of your customers, you will have to send the packets out your transit provider. You do not get paid when I give you the packets, and you probably pay your transit provider to get to Comcast. So I have gotten something for free, and you are paying for it - i.e. stealing. Normally a router gets a packet and sends it on its way without looking at the source. However, if you have a router at the IX which has _only_ peer routes and your routes, that solves the problem. If I send you a packet for Comcast, your peering router will drop it and send an ICMP Network Unreachable. No filters to manage, no RIRs to sync, nothing to code, etc. There are evil ways around this if you do not configure your router properly (e.g. send you a prefix for Comcast with next-hop set to inside your network). But standard network hygiene will stop those. And as has been stated, this doesn’t have anything to do with URPF either. (Not sure why Nick brought that up, he’s smart enough to know what URPF is and runs an exchange himself, so I think he just brain-farted. Happens to us all.) Hope that made it more clear. -- TTFN, patrick On Aug 18, 2015, at 6:35 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: Let me start backwards... To me 'peering' is sharing internal routes and downstream customer routes,and not external ones. IP transit is all of the external routes including internal routes downstream customer routes Having said that. if one is control of what IP Prefixes get advertised to whom... how exactly someone (peers) 'steal' transit ? (If one is not managing the filters well then yes it is possible, but that would be a configuration error ?) Maybe I am naive, to my Peering routes (relationships) are a subset of IP Transit Routes (relationships) Based on above belief... Then Item # 3, becomes the choice of the OP where one can make one of two starting assumptions... We will trust everything coming in and change what we don't like... or We will not trust anything coming in, and change (accept) what we like. Items # 1 2, would be a function of network design, technical requirements (maintenance window) etc etc.. easier to deal with a distributed edge vs all in one when one has to bring anything down for any reason.. I am open to learning and being corrected if any of the above is wrong ! Faisal Imtiaz
Re: Peering + Transit Circuits
Thank you for the explanation.. However wouldn't a few other other attributes of the traffic show up . e.g. you would have asymmetric traffic.. going out via us, but coming back via a totally another path ? BTW, my comment We will trust everything coming in was in ref. to QOS tags. However, if you have a router at the IX which has _only_ peer routes and your routes, that solves the problem. If I send you a packet for Comcast, your peering router will drop it and send an ICMP Network Unreachable. In this scenario, the peering router is feeding routes to a Route Reflector ? and not taking in full routes from the route reflector ? But standard network hygiene will stop those. If there are any resources you could point to for these, I would be much obliged.. Thanks Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Patrick W. Gilmore patr...@ianai.net To: nanog list nanog@nanog.org Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 7:12:23 PM Subject: Re: Peering + Transit Circuits Assume you and I are at an IX and peer. Suppose I send you traffic for Comcast. I can do this, even if you do not send me prefixes for Comcast. It requires me to manually configure things, but I can do it. Put another way, you said We will trust everything coming in”. I am saying that perhaps you should not. As Comcast is not one of your customers, you will have to send the packets out your transit provider. You do not get paid when I give you the packets, and you probably pay your transit provider to get to Comcast. So I have gotten something for free, and you are paying for it - i.e. stealing. Normally a router gets a packet and sends it on its way without looking at the source. However, if you have a router at the IX which has _only_ peer routes and your routes, that solves the problem. If I send you a packet for Comcast, your peering router will drop it and send an ICMP Network Unreachable. No filters to manage, no RIRs to sync, nothing to code, etc. There are evil ways around this if you do not configure your router properly (e.g. send you a prefix for Comcast with next-hop set to inside your network). But standard network hygiene will stop those. And as has been stated, this doesn’t have anything to do with URPF either. (Not sure why Nick brought that up, he’s smart enough to know what URPF is and runs an exchange himself, so I think he just brain-farted. Happens to us all.) Hope that made it more clear. -- TTFN, patrick On Aug 18, 2015, at 6:35 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: Let me start backwards... To me 'peering' is sharing internal routes and downstream customer routes,and not external ones. IP transit is all of the external routes including internal routes downstream customer routes Having said that. if one is control of what IP Prefixes get advertised to whom... how exactly someone (peers) 'steal' transit ? (If one is not managing the filters well then yes it is possible, but that would be a configuration error ?) Maybe I am naive, to my Peering routes (relationships) are a subset of IP Transit Routes (relationships) Based on above belief... Then Item # 3, becomes the choice of the OP where one can make one of two starting assumptions... We will trust everything coming in and change what we don't like... or We will not trust anything coming in, and change (accept) what we like. Items # 1 2, would be a function of network design, technical requirements (maintenance window) etc etc.. easier to deal with a distributed edge vs all in one when one has to bring anything down for any reason.. I am open to learning and being corrected if any of the above is wrong ! Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Tim Durack tdur...@gmail.com To: cisco-...@puck.nether.net, nanog list nanog@nanog.org Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 8:29:31 AM Subject: Peering + Transit Circuits Question: What is the preferred practice for separating peering and transit circuits? 1. Terminate peering and transit on separate routers. 2. Terminate peering and transit circuits in separate VRFs. 3. QoS/QPPB ( https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog42/presentations/DavidSmith-PeeringPolicyEnforcement.pdf ) 4. Don't worry about peers stealing transit. 5. What is peering? Your comments are appreciated. -- Tim:
Re: Inexpensive software bgp router that supports route tags?
FYI, Mikrotik is software (ROS) you can run it on an x86 platform (physical or virtual machine). Not sure about the API and BGP, but they have extensive support for scripting. Additionally check the Mikrotik Forums for other user developed API/Interfaces... Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: David H ispcoloh...@gmail.com To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2015 11:19:45 AM Subject: Inexpensive software bgp router that supports route tags? Hi all, I was wondering if anyone can recommend a software (preferable), or hardware-based router with an API, that supports BGP with tags on advertised routes? I want to use it for a RTBH feed and having it in software would make certain things easier to automate. I tried Quagga/Zebra but it doesn't support tags. I see Mikrotik hardware routers have an API, but I can't tell if the API supports adding BGP networks, so I need to investigate that further. I can go hardware if I have to, with some ssh/expect scripts, but thought there may be other options that are easier. Thanks, David
Re: Thoughts On Cheap Chinese xDSL Testers
We have some sunrise telecom test set's which we don't use any more. Will be willing the sell them, let me know off list. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Lyndon Nerenberg lyn...@orthanc.ca To: North American Network Operators' Group nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 8:50:43 PM Subject: Thoughts On Cheap Chinese xDSL Testers I've been poking around looking for an inexpensive xDSL circuit tester to do some measurements on my home DSL line, in opposition to the telco. $2K+ is not in the budget, so I'm curious about the accuracy of the $300 Chinese units kicking around eBay (e.g. the ST332B). Anyone out there have experience with them? Are they even remotely close to accurate? --lyndon
Re: NTT-HE earlier today (~10am EDT)
Hi Jared, This is neat !, for someone who recently started working the IRR's, I can tell you that it has been very difficult finding all info in one location. What you shared is pretty neat !, and I would like to clean up the records associated with our prefixes. Can you suggest some practical tips on getting older 'stale' records cleaned up from the different registries ? (i.e. records created for us by others, in a former time-frame). Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net To: Mike Leber mle...@he.net Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 5:51:18 PM Subject: Re: NTT-HE earlier today (~10am EDT) Greetings, We are aware of this issue and as is usual we filter customers based on their registered routes. This creates some unique challenges that we have been speaking about publicly and privately with various groups. I have started the process (yay telco-speak) to fix this. It would be helpful if networks would take a look at what routes they have registered in the various IRRs as well as if their AS-SETs expand out to something quite large. We have seen many customers import objects that then import their other upstream networks. We have found the IRR Explorer tool helpful to look at who has registered our IP space and to police these registrations with the various IRRs out there. http://irrexplorer.nlnog.net/ http://irrexplorer.nlnog.net/prefix/184.105.213.86 The stability of the routing ecosystem is something that I personally care a lot about and have privately given Mike and others my cell number to allow them to follow-up. As is often operators end up chasing problems after the fact, and this appears to be no exception. *sigh* - Jared On Jun 29, 2015, at 5:18 PM, Mike Leber mle...@he.net wrote: NTT's customer Sofia Connect leaked our routes to NTT. NTT accepted these routes instead of properly filtering their customer announcements. As a network of non-trivial size, announcing over 75,000 customer routes which is nearly 15% of the IPv4 routing table, we'd expect the common courtesy of having our ASN included in their customer facing AS-PATH filters, as we extend this same courtesy to other networks of this size (such as AS2914). Mike. On 6/29/15 2:04 PM, Jim Popovitch wrote: Hello, I haven't seen anything to explain this, so I'm asking a larger audience. Did anyone notice any unusual NTT or HE routing this AM? Here's what I saw: 2.|-- xe-0-1-0-17.r04.atlnga05.us.bb.gin.ntt.net 0.0%200.8 0.7 0.6 0.9 0.1 3.|-- ae-2.r20.atlnga05.us.bb.gin.ntt.net 0.0%204.6 6.2 0.5 13.6 4.8 4.|-- ae-4.r22.asbnva02.us.bb.gin.ntt.net 0.0%20 15.3 15.0 13.9 15.8 0.7 5.|-- ae-4.r20.frnkge04.de.bb.gin.ntt.net 0.0%20 127.3 106.7 98.5 127.3 11.1 6.|-- ae-2.r02.frnkge04.de.bb.gin.ntt.net 0.0%20 126.8 126.0 125.7 126.8 0.2 7.|-- ae-1.r00.sofibu01.bg.bb.gin.ntt.net 0.0%20 131.1 130.0 128.7 131.4 1.2 8.|-- 83.217.227.42 80.0%20 148.5 146.0 144.2 148.5 2.0 9.|-- ip-48-93.sofia-connect.net 90.0%20 184.5 163.8 143.1 184.5 29.3 10.|-- ???100.0200.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.|-- 10ge5-4.core1.vie1.he.net 75.0%20 160.7 150.4 143.9 160.7 6.3 12.|-- 10ge1-4.core1.prg1.he.net 80.0%20 158.4 159.5 157.9 161.1 1.6 13.|-- 10ge10-12.core1.fra1.he.net75.0%20 154.5 159.2 145.9 174.4 10.7 14.|-- 100ge5-2.core1.par2.he.net 75.0%20 187.9 172.9 157.1 187.9 11.1 15.|-- 100ge7-1.core1.nyc4.he.net 78.9%19 147.2 146.2 144.6 147.5 1.4 16.|-- 100ge7-2.core1.chi1.he.net 78.9%19 165.6 172.1 165.6 183.5 8.0 17.|-- 10ge15-2.core1.den1.he.net 89.5%19 201.3 204.7 201.3 208.1 4.8 -Jim P.
Re: Whats' a good product for a high-density Wireless network setup?
The thing you need to watch out for with Ubiquiti is that they don't support DFS, so the entire U-NII-2 channel space is off limits for 5 GHz. Huh Please verify your facts before making blanket statements which are not accurate ... Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Ray Soucy r...@maine.edu To: Sina Owolabi notify.s...@gmail.com Cc: nanog@nanog.org list nanog@nanog.org Sent: Friday, June 19, 2015 7:07:01 PM Subject: Re: Whats' a good product for a high-density Wireless network setup? I know you don't want to hear this answer because of cost but I've had good luck with Cisco for very high density (about 1,000 clients in a packed auditorium actively using the network as they follow along with the presenter). The thing you need to watch out for with Ubiquiti is that they don't support DFS, so the entire U-NII-2 channel space is off limits for 5 GHz. That's pretty significant because you're limited to 9 x 20 MHz channels or 4 x 40 MHz channels. Keeping the power level down and creating small cells is essential for high density, so with less channels your hands are really tied in that case. Also, avoid the Zero Handoff marketing nonsense they advertise; I'm sure it can work great for a low client residential area but it requires all APs to share a single channel and depends upon coordinating only one active transmitter at a time, so it simply won't scale. I don't have experience with other vendors at large scale or high density. I don't think what you're talking about is really high density anymore though. That's just normal coverage. Wireless is a lot more complicated than selecting a vendor, though. If you know what you're doing even Ubiquiti could work decently, but if you don't even a Cisco solution won't save you. You really need to be on top of surveying correctly and having appropriate AP placement and channel distribution. On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Sina Owolabi notify.s...@gmail.com wrote: Hi We are profiling equipment and design for an expected high user density network of multiple, close nit, residential/hostel units. Its going to be 8-10 buildings with possibly a over 1000 users at any given time. We are looking at Ruckus and Ubiquiti as options to get over the high number of devices we are definitely going to encounter. How did you do it, and what would you advise for product and layout? Thanks in advance! -- Ray Patrick Soucy Network Engineer University of Maine System T: 207-561-3526 F: 207-561-3531 MaineREN, Maine's Research and Education Network www.maineren.net
Re: Whats' a good product for a high-density Wireless network setup?
With that many users I cannot recommend Ubiquiti, Ruckus would be the way to go. Really ? Considering you are referring to Company Names, each with a full product line of low end to high end products ? I often remind folks that Chevrolet, makes both the Corvette as well as the Chevette :) Actual implementations, and deployments suggest that Companies offer products that can serve such an environment when implemented correctly. While they each have their strengths and nuances, the key is proper implementation... Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Tyler Mills tylermi...@gmail.com To: Sina Owolabi notify.s...@gmail.com, nanog@nanog.org list nanog@nanog.org Sent: Friday, June 19, 2015 2:24:00 AM Subject: Re: Whats' a good product for a high-density Wireless network setup? With that many users I cannot recommend Ubiquiti, Ruckus would be the way to go. On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 1:58 AM Sina Owolabi notify.s...@gmail.com wrote: Hi We are profiling equipment and design for an expected high user density network of multiple, close nit, residential/hostel units. Its going to be 8-10 buildings with possibly a over 1000 users at any given time. We are looking at Ruckus and Ubiquiti as options to get over the high number of devices we are definitely going to encounter. How did you do it, and what would you advise for product and layout? Thanks in advance! -- Tyler W. Mills Infrastructure and Network Engineer Atlanta, GA.
Re: eBay is looking for network heavies...
'pathping' . learned something new today... Did not know such a command existed in windows.. Been working with computers for over 30 years, while I don't care as to what it says about how much I know, but it sure reminds me that that their is always something more that one can learn ! Thank You. :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: James Laszko jam...@mythostech.com To: Mike Hale eyeronic.des...@gmail.com Cc: NANOG Operators' Group nanog@nanog.org Sent: Friday, June 5, 2015 9:57:38 PM Subject: Re: eBay is looking for network heavies... I asked one of my guys to tracert in windows for something and he executed pathping. I have never seen that in 25 years Go figure! James Laszko Mythos Technology Inc jam...@mythostech.com Sent from my iPhone On Jun 5, 2015, at 18:40, Mike Hale eyeronic.des...@gmail.com wrote: We need a pool on what percentage of readers just googled traceroute. On Jun 5, 2015 6:28 PM, na...@cdl.asgaard.org wrote: On 5 Jun 2015, at 17:45, Łukasz Bromirski wrote: On 06 Jun 2015, at 02:26, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote: On Jun 5, 2015, at 7:13 PM, John Fraizer j...@op-sec.us wrote: Head of line for CCIE / JNCIE but knowledge and experience trumps a piece of paper every time! Can you please put these at the back of the line? My experience is that the cisco certification (at least) is evidence of the absence of actual troubleshooting skills. (or my standards of what defines “expert” are different than the rest of the world). Jared, don’t generalize. True - there are people that are ‘paper’ CCIE/JNCIEs - but let’s not start a rant unless you've met tens of CCIEs/JNCIEs and all of them didn’t know a jack. About troubleshooting. 't We had one CCIE at a previous job who just didn't click no matter how much we tried to train on the architecture. Eventually in one backbone event, he kept saying that the problem couldn't be with a given router because traceroute worked. When it was pointed out that the potential fault wouldn't cause traceroute to fail, we got a very puzzled look. We then asked him to explain how traceroute worked. He spectacularly failed. It became a tongue-in-cheek interview question. What was boggling was the number of *IE's that failed trying to explain traceroute's mechanics. My test, as crass as it is. If your CV headlines with a JCIE/CCIE, I am pretty certain that you have very little real-world experience. If it's a footnote somewhere, that's ok. Christopher — CCIE #15929 RS/SP, CCDE #2012::17 (not that I’d know anything about troubleshooting of course) -- 李柯睿 Avt tace, avt loqvere meliora silentio Check my PGP key here: http://www.asgaard.org/cdl/cdl.asc Current vCard here: http://www.asgaard.org/cdl/cdl.vcf keybase: https://keybase.io/liljenstolpe
Re: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial?
If you wish to do outbound traffic engineering, and want to take advantage of best paths to different networks (outbound), then you have to take full routes. Or putting it another way Taking full routes offers the most flexibility, anything else would be a compromise (an acceptable compromise) to overcome some existing resource limitations... Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Maqbool Hashim maqb...@madbull.info To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 4:36:34 AM Subject: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial? Hi, We are an enterprise that are eBGP multihoming to two ISPs. We wish to load balance in inbound and outbound traffic thereby using our capacity as efficiently as possible. My current feeling is that it would be crazy for us to take a full Internet routing table from either ISP. I have read this document from NANOG presentations: https://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=ssource=webcd=1cad=rjauact=8ved=0CCoQFjAAurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nanog.org%2Fmeetings%2Fnanog41%2Fpresentations%2FBGPMultihoming.pdfei=cyRnVb--FeWY7gbq4oHoAQusg=AFQjCNFsMx3NZ0Vn4bJ5zJpzFz3senbaqgbvm=bv.93990622,d.ZGU The above document reenforces my opinion that we do not need full routing tables. However I was seeking some clarity as there are other documents which suggest taking a full routing table would be optimal. I guess it depends on our criteria and requirements for load balancing: - Just care about roughly balancing link utilisation - Be nice to make some cost savings We have PI space and two Internet routers one for each ISP. Either of our links is sufficient to carry all our traffic, but we want to try and balance utilisation to remain within our commits if possible. I am thinking a rough approach for us would be: - Take partial (customer) routes from both providers - Take defaults from both and pref one Maybe we can refine the above a bit more, any suggestions would be most welcome! Many Thanks
Re: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial?
BGP traffic engineering is kind of like Soda Prefer. that folks have Some like Pepsi, some Like Coke, some don't care as long as it is Cold and fizzy. Depending on who your two providers are, you may be happy with just taking full routes, and doing some creative routing (i.e. setting up static routes for outbound for specific prefixes, not the most elegant solution). Remember, BGP allows for Asymmetric routing, as such with default routes, you will have traffic coming in from both providers (by default) and traffic going out via one of them (by default). At the end of the day you are most likely to make a decision based on what is your cost for having a more powerful router, and how much 'creative routing' you want to / need to do. (My Personal opinion, is that it is a 50/50 decision to upgrade hardware just to take full routing tables.. however if there are other reasons or needs, that can sway the decision in one direction or the other). :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Maqbool Hashim maqb...@madbull.info To: Joseph Jackson jjack...@aninetworks.net, nanog@nanog.org Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2015 8:09:02 AM Subject: RE: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial? Hi, No the current devices can't support full table (well not from both providers) we would need to upgrade. Really in terms of cost saving just want to make sure to not get charged overages because we utilise too much of one link and not enough of another. I don't think the shortest AS path will be of that much concern or noticeable for most destinations. We do however have a set of remote sites which communicate over the Internet to our central sites where the transit providers are. Just general Internet at the remote sites- but traffic from remote sites to central sites would be the most important. I am just not sure of exactly how to define the partial routing table criteria to our two providers. Should we just take routes for each provider and their peers and a default from both? The main reason for not taking a full routing table is the cost/inconvenience of upgrading existing hardware. Thanks -Original Message- From: Joseph Jackson [mailto:jjack...@aninetworks.net] Sent: 31 May 2015 12:41 To: Maqbool Hashim; nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial? Can your devices support a full table? You can load balance outbound traffic easily with out doing a full table. THo that won't be the shortest AS path. In regards to cost savings how were you thinking of doing so? Does one provider charge more? Just use the cheaper provider. -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Maqbool Hashim Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 3:37 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial? Hi, We are an enterprise that are eBGP multihoming to two ISPs. We wish to load balance in inbound and outbound traffic thereby using our capacity as efficiently as possible. My current feeling is that it would be crazy for us to take a full Internet routing table from either ISP. I have read this document from NANOG presentations: https://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=ssource=webcd=1cad=rjauact=8ved=0CCoQFjAAurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nanog.org%2Fmeetings%2Fnanog41%2Fpresentations%2FBGPMultihoming.pdfei=cyRnVb--FeWY7gbq4oHoAQusg=AFQjCNFsMx3NZ0Vn4bJ5zJpzFz3senbaqgbvm=bv.93990622,d.ZGU The above document reenforces my opinion that we do not need full routing tables. However I was seeking some clarity as there are other documents which suggest taking a full routing table would be optimal. I guess it depends on our criteria and requirements for load balancing: - Just care about roughly balancing link utilisation - Be nice to make some cost savings We have PI space and two Internet routers one for each ISP. Either of our links is sufficient to carry all our traffic, but we want to try and balance utilisation to remain within our commits if possible. I am thinking a rough approach for us would be: - Take partial (customer) routes from both providers - Take defaults from both and pref one Maybe we can refine the above a bit more, any suggestions would be most welcome! Many Thanks
Re: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial?
Interesting... is the cost associated with full tables just for the Hardware or is the service provider charging extra for the full table. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Maqbool Hashim maqb...@madbull.info To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2015 8:10:51 AM Subject: RE: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial? Thanks, So we just need to take a decision on whether we want to pay the price for a full routing table, whether it gives us enough value for the expenditure. -Original Message- From: Faisal Imtiaz [mailto:fai...@snappytelecom.net] Sent: 31 May 2015 13:06 To: Maqbool Hashim Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial? If you wish to do outbound traffic engineering, and want to take advantage of best paths to different networks (outbound), then you have to take full routes. Or putting it another way Taking full routes offers the most flexibility, anything else would be a compromise (an acceptable compromise) to overcome some existing resource limitations... Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Maqbool Hashim maqb...@madbull.info To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 4:36:34 AM Subject: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial? Hi, We are an enterprise that are eBGP multihoming to two ISPs. We wish to load balance in inbound and outbound traffic thereby using our capacity as efficiently as possible. My current feeling is that it would be crazy for us to take a full Internet routing table from either ISP. I have read this document from NANOG presentations: https://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=ssource=webcd=1cad=rj auact=8ved=0CCoQFjAAurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nanog.org%2Fmeetings%2Fna nog41%2Fpresentations%2FBGPMultihoming.pdfei=cyRnVb--FeWY7gbq4oHoAQu sg=AFQjCNFsMx3NZ0Vn4bJ5zJpzFz3senbaqgbvm=bv.93990622,d.ZGU The above document reenforces my opinion that we do not need full routing tables. However I was seeking some clarity as there are other documents which suggest taking a full routing table would be optimal. I guess it depends on our criteria and requirements for load balancing: - Just care about roughly balancing link utilisation - Be nice to make some cost savings We have PI space and two Internet routers one for each ISP. Either of our links is sufficient to carry all our traffic, but we want to try and balance utilisation to remain within our commits if possible. I am thinking a rough approach for us would be: - Take partial (customer) routes from both providers - Take defaults from both and pref one Maybe we can refine the above a bit more, any suggestions would be most welcome! Many Thanks
Re: Capacity/transit costs vs growth
Telco's cost structure model is very different from Cable Co's. Additionally the way they are regulated is also very different. Based on the additional details you have shared, you are saying that Bell charges $1016/100meg of Colo to Colo Transport ? Now you also need to add a bit more info, like. What type of transport is this ? (Layer 1).. TDM (OC3/OCX) ? SONET ? or Ethernet ? Is this connectivity flat rate ? or distance sensitive ? Keep in mind that the Cost Efficiency in conjunction with Increase in Traffic is/has been only for Ethernet Transport not in the TDM or SONET when you move from 1gbps to 10gbps to 40gbps links, what sort of price/gnps reduction do you get ? 20% ? 30% ? While the question may be simple, the answer is more of a What if type When you move from 1gbps Ethernet Switches, to 10gbps Ethernet Switches you can easily spend between $5,000 to $25,000 for each Ethernet Switch. So, if you have only 2gbps of traffic, i.e. 1gpbs infrastructure is out of capacity, you have the spend the money for 10gpbs switches, and the cost of the upgrade has to be justified via the increase in traffic of only 1gbs. I think you should be making the case of total Revenues generated due to increase in traffic to the same location, thus the justification of the need to reduce the per 100meg rate. I highly doubt if anyone here can give you any reasonable number on what is the cost of per 1G connection when using 10G infrastructure..simply because 10G infrastructure has different meaning (cost wise) to different folks. I don't doubt for a moment that you can get consensus that 10gb infrastructure can move 10gbs of traffic at a lower per unit cost, but how much lower will be a very subjective number. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Jean-Francois Mezei jfmezei_na...@vaxination.ca To: Nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 7:54:57 PM Subject: Re: Capacity/transit costs vs growth On 15-05-27 19:20, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: The above hypothesis why imply that the 20% linear increase is not fair, vs directly making the case that the base rate, set in some point in the past is not fair/appropriate anymore ? These rates cover aggregation between an end user's CO and a central CO where an ISP connects. For instance, a Toronto based ISP can serve all of Bell Canada's DSL footprint by connecting to the Adelaide Street CO in Toronto. BUT, Bell charges $1016 per 100mbps to carry traffic between that point and the CO serving an end user. (for Cable, I am not 100% sure if it include the fibre to the node, or just aggregation to the CMTS). there is a separate fixed fee for the last mile infrastructure. The point i am trying to make that that during the period where usage increase, the cost per gbps decreases, so it shgould not be a 1:1 relationship over time. Currently, the CRTC sets 1:1 relationship over 10 years. So having *rough* idea of decreases in per gbps of capacity over the years would help me make the point that the current rate structure is flawed. (I don't need precise at this point, just rough ideas). Different slant to question: when you move from 1gbps to 10gbps to 40gbps links, what sort of price/gnps reduction do you get ? 20% ? 30% ?
Re: Capacity/transit costs vs growth
But if this happens over a period where there have been improvements in equipment/efficiency, then one would think the increase in costs would be less than 20%. The above hypothesis why imply that the 20% linear increase is not fair, vs directly making the case that the base rate, set in some point in the past is not fair/appropriate anymore ? Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Jean-Francois Mezei jfmezei_na...@vaxination.ca To: Nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 5:36:23 PM Subject: Capacity/transit costs vs growth I am looking for some rough estimates of the ratio of capacity (equipment) pricing declines versus average increase in end user capacity. For instance, say end user average capcity usage increases 50% over 3 years, would the ISP's costs also increase by 50% ? Or would increased efficency of equipment result in a 50% decrease in capacity costs yielding roughly the same total cost to the service provider ? So I am looking are some sort of ratio of gross costs increases/decreases relative to end user usage increase in usage over time. Context: Wholesale services in Canada are priced linearly and there is a process trying to convince the CRTC to review them ASAP. So if average use grows from 1mbps during peak to 1.2mbps, we are looking at 20% increase in costs in a linear pricing scheme. But if this happens over a period where there have been improvements in equipment/efficiency, then one would think the increase in costs would be less than 20%. So I am looking for any and all information that can help convince the regulator that current linear increase is not right and needs a review. any help appreciated.
Re: Measuring DNS Performance Graphing Logs
Zayed, What issues did you run into when trying to monitor Bind with Cacti ? here is a nice write up on this: http://gregsowell.com/?p=4763 If you don't find yourself getting far with this, then you can always use the Captain James T. Kirk's way of solving Kobayashi Maru (Use powerdns instead of bind, powerdns has stats built in). Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Zayed Mahmud zayed.mah...@gmail.com To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 7:15:41 AM Subject: Re: Measuring DNS Performance Graphing Logs Thanks a lot to Denis Fondras, Zachary, Andrew Smith, Christopher Morrow for your valuable advice. I've tried cacti but failed to get desired logs. i've also tried bind graph...but it consumes too much memory in the long run. can u suggest some suitable tools that i can measure the performance of the dns servers? like what shud b active and what shud not be in general safe dns server practice and check against my own settings or whatever the tool can query, something like nmap. this would be really helpful. i just need to make a report about my dns servers for my boss...and i'm clueless what to point out and what not to or how to evaluate it's performance. i'm running bind9 under unix environment. thanks in advance. On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:34 PM, Zayed Mahmud zayed.mah...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! This is my first message to NANOG's mailing list. I hope someone can help me. I was wondering which tool(s) can I use to measure the performance of my 3 DNS servers (1 primary, 1 secondary, 1 solely cacheDNS)? From the stats I would like to know if my DNS server is serving as it should be or if any of it's options are set inappropriately and others alike. I looked for a while but could not find any. Any help would be highly appreciated. I am running bind9 on UNIX platform. Question 2) I would also like to know how can I graph my DNS logs? And how can I integrate it to my CACTI server as well? I couldn't find any suitable plugin. Any suggestion? -- -- Best Regards, *Zayed Mahmud* *Senior Core IP Network Team,* *Banglalion Communications Limited, Bangladesh.* -- -- Best Regards, *Zayed Mahmud.*
Re: Low Cost 10G Router
Well said Eddie, It would be worth pointing out that on CCR's each port also has a core dedicated to it, a benefit of such a design is that each port is able to handle a much higher PPS rate, and if there is a DDOS attack on one port, it will not bring down the rest of the ports / router etc. (disclaimer, if the router is setup properly, without all traffic going thru the CPU etc etc). Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Eddie Tardist edtard...@gmail.com To: North American Network Operators Group nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 6:34:11 PM Subject: Re: Low Cost 10G Router On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net wrote: Well, the cores on a many-core CPU aren't going to have the torque that a Xeon would. They're also still working on the software. It has gotten a ton better over the life of the CCRs thus far. BGP is still atrocious on the CCRs, but that's because the route update process isn't multithreaded. It won't be multithreaded in the next major version either, but they will have done some programming voodoo (all programming is voodoo to me) to reign in the poor performance issues with full tables. https://youtu.be/ihZiAC-Rox8?t=37m8s I honestly don't know why most people gets impressed by the number of Tylera cores on CCR and think it's a good thing. Your torque point makes much sense to me. A few cores with decent clock and Xeon or Rangeley torque is just better. Adding that much weak tylera cores with low clock only results in much more context switching, much more CPU Affinity needs. Multithreading the relevant grained bit of code will also lead to more context switching, but for threads now instead of processes. As I understand the architecture of those solutions, I don't see why a bgp daemon mono threaded is a problem. Ok, multithreaded would give a better full routing convergence. But once the routing table is loaded it does not matter how many threads the bgp process will use. The dirty work on Linux (RouterOS kernel for that matter) will be done on the forward information table, on the packet forwarding code and specially on softirq (interrupt requests). This is where the bottleneck seems to be, IMHO. Linux is not good at multithreaded packet forwarding and not good specially at handling interrupt requests on multi-queue NICs. So, RouterOS is not good as well. Therefore that several dozens cheap and weak tylera cores powering CCR boxes is absolutely not friendly for Linux core and RouterOS itself. I'm better served off with a smaller amount of cores with better clock and better torque as Mr Hammett mentioned (I liked the expression usage yes) and that's why a Linux or a BSD box with a couple Xeon CPUs will perform better than CCR. Sometimes as someone mentioned a couple i7 cores will outperform a CCR box as well. More torque, yeah. Less context switching and time sharing wasted. However this horizontal scalar number of tylera cores on the CCR is good for marketing. After all you are buying a 36 CPU box paying a couple hundred bucks. Impressive, hum? Well not for me. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com - Original Message - From: Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Cc: North American Network Operators Group nanog@nanog.org Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 9:06:26 PM Subject: Re: Low Cost 10G Router So this new $1295 Mikrotik CCR1036-8G-2S+EM has a 36 core Tilera CPU with 16GB of ram. Each core is running at 1.2Ghz? I assume that Mikrotik is multicore in software, so why does this box not outperform these intel boxes that everyone is recommending? Is it just a limitation of ports? On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: I've seen serious, unusual performance bottlenecks in Mikrotik CCR, in some cases not even achieving a gigabit speeds on 10G interfaces. Performance drops more rapidly then Cisco with smaller packet sizes. -mel beckman Folks often forget that Mikrotik ROS can also run on x86 machines. Size your favorite hardware (server) or network appliance with appropriate ports, add MT ROS on a CF card, and you are good to go. We use i7 based network appliance with dual 10g cards (you can use a quad 10g card, such as those made by hotlav). with a 2gig of ram, you can easily do multiple (4-5 or more full bgp peers), and i7 are good for approx 1.2mill pps. Best of luck. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom
Re: Low Cost 10G Router
I've seen serious, unusual performance bottlenecks in Mikrotik CCR, in some cases not even achieving a gigabit speeds on 10G interfaces. Performance drops more rapidly then Cisco with smaller packet sizes. -mel beckman Folks often forget that Mikrotik ROS can also run on x86 machines. Size your favorite hardware (server) or network appliance with appropriate ports, add MT ROS on a CF card, and you are good to go. We use i7 based network appliance with dual 10g cards (you can use a quad 10g card, such as those made by hotlav). with a 2gig of ram, you can easily do multiple (4-5 or more full bgp peers), and i7 are good for approx 1.2mill pps. Best of luck. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom
Re: Updated prefix filtering
Not sure if you missed it.. there was a discussion on this topic in the recent past... I am taking the liberty of re-posting below.. you may find it useful. -- Hi Freddy, As Paul has mentioned, you could check the David's project - SIR, look at his presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1njanXhQqM We've also developed a platform for the BGP monitoring and routing optimization which could solve your problem. It would inject to the border routers only TOP X prefixes with which you exchange most of the traffic. The added value would be that route orders point to best performing transit (low latency, 0 packet loss) per distant prefix. If you are interested to know more about our software please contact me off-list. -- Regards, Pawel Rybczyk Regional Manager BORDER 6 sp. z o.o. pawel.rybc...@border6.com office: +48 22 242 89 51 (ext.103) mobile: +48 664 300 375 == Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Chaim Rieger chaim.rie...@gmail.com To: NANOG list nanog@nanog.org Sent: Friday, May 8, 2015 6:41:34 PM Subject: Updated prefix filtering Best example I’ve found is located at http://jonsblog.lewis.org/ http://jonsblog.lewis.org/ I too ran out of space, Brocade, not Cisco though, and am looking to filter prefixes. did anybody do a more recent or updated filter list since 2008 ? Offlist is fine. Oh and happy friday to all.
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
MultiMode Fiber Connectivity... (850nm) Power Question
Hello, I was looking for feedback on the following question:- When connecting two MM SFP/SFP+/XFP 's together...(short range). What should be the best practice receive power range ? Is it true that if the rx power is higher than (x?) then it shortens the life of the optics ? (assumption being made here is that MAX Rx Power is not being exceed as per the spec sheets of the optics) Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
Re: MultiMode Fiber Connectivity... (850nm) Power Question
Thank you guys (Bob, Brandon Eric) for the prompt answer. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Bob Evans b...@fiberinternetcenter.com To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Cc: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 4:06:23 PM Subject: Re: MultiMode Fiber Connectivity... (850nm) Power Question Thank You Bob Evans CTO Hello, I was looking for feedback on the following question:- When connecting two MM SFP/SFP+/XFP 's together...(short range). What should be the best practice receive power range ? Is it true that if the rx power is higher than (x?) then it shortens the life of the optics ? Yes, but thats only true about single mode frequencies not multimode (MM) because those are not as powerful. All MM is expected to go a very limited distance, so levels are never high. We have MM 3 foot jumpers between gear running for years. (assumption being made here is that MAX Rx Power is not being exceed as per the spec sheets of the optics) Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
Re: MultiMode Fiber Connectivity... (850nm) Power Question
Thanks Justin... Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Justin M. Streiner strei...@cluebyfour.org To: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 12:41:23 PM Subject: Re: MultiMode Fiber Connectivity... (850nm) Power Question On Wed, 11 Feb 2015, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: I was looking for feedback on the following question:- When connecting two MM SFP/SFP+/XFP 's together...(short range). What should be the best practice receive power range ? SX (1G) / SR (10G) / SR10 (100G) gear generally has a receive threshold that's higher than the maximum launch power. They are designed for short-reach applications (in-building, data center, etc), so no attenuation is needed. Is it true that if the rx power is higher than (x?) then it shortens the life of the optics ? (assumption being made here is that MAX Rx Power is not being exceed as per the spec sheets of the optics) On short-reach optics, this should never be a problem. On long-reach optics, receiver saturation will generally result in link errors/flaps, and possibly high rx power warnings (depending on the gear on the receiving end), however, these can be addressed using in-line attenuators. On very long-reach optics, such as ZX (1G) and ER/ZR (10G), it is possible to damage the receivers with too hot of a signal because they are designed for long spans and a certain amount of distance-based attenuation is factored into the optical power budget. jms
Re: Low cost WDM gear
Kenneth, I am sorry, but it sounds like you made a mistake in not calculating loss of the devices in the path, and are blaming a Mfg for the mistake... They clearly list the insertion loss for the different muxes in the specs on their website. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com To: Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br Cc: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 2:04:10 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear Hi Enviado, I cannot recommend FiberStore as I had a bad experience with them. I needed to cover only 3km from A to B side. When using 10km optics, I saw a loss of over 5db with their passive mux inserted into the path which created a total loss of over -20db which is outside of the tolerances for our equipment with 10km SFP+. Using another vendors low insertion loss mux corrected our issue. I am sure if you are using an 80km optic, you may be able to tolerate a higher insertion loss to cover 60km. I also notice that their CDWM optics averaged about 3db less in power output when compared to other vendors. Thanks Kenneth On Feb 07, 2015, at 10:33 AM, Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br wrote: Hi kenneth... which the distance do you have from side A to side B when you using passive solutions from fiberstore( mux and demux)? I buy this mux and demux(4 channels single fiber) and only make a test about 60km( mux side A and demux on side B) with sfp+10gb for 80km... ( only see ddm on my ex3300( about -19db for 60km). Test switch access with ssh and pinging tests... What kind os issue do you have? For distances less than 60km is this solution good? Thanks!!! Enviado via iPhone Grupo Connectoway Em 07/02/2015, às 14:55, Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com escreveu: Mike, I just replaced a bunch of FiberStore WDM passive muxes with OSI Hardware equipment. The FiberStore gear was a huge disappointment (excessive loss, poor technical support, refusal to issue refund without threatening legal action, etc.). I have had good results from the OSI equipment so far. I run passive muxes for CWDM (8 - 16 channels). On Feb 07, 2015, at 09:51 AM, Manuel Marín m...@transtelco.net wrote: Hi Mike I can recommend a couple of vendors that provide cost effective solutions. Ekinops Packetlight. On Saturday, February 7, 2015, Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net wrote: I know there are various Asian vendors for low cost (less than $500) muxes to throw 16 or however many colors onto a strand. However, they don't work so well when you don't control the optics used on both sides (therefore must use standard wavelengths), obviously only do a handful of channels and have a distance limitation. What solutions are out there that don't cost an arm and a leg? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- TRANSTELCO| Manuel Marin | VP Engineering | US: *+1 915-217-2232* | MX: *+52 656-257-1109* CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this information, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. AVISO DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: Esta comunicación es sólo para el uso de la persona o entidad a la que se dirige y puede contener información privilegiada, confidencial y exenta de divulgación bajo la legislación aplicable. Si no es el destinatario de esta información, se le notifica que cualquier uso, difusión, distribución o copia de la comunicación está estrictamente prohibido.
Re: Low cost WDM gear
Mike, Lighting up dark fiber is very similar to doing fixed wireless links (which you are familiar with). There are different components involved in making a solutions work for each of the problems you have stated there is solution, and yes you have to calculate the loss and match power / optics to make it work. FYI.. all CWDM/DWDM Muxes are passive ... :) Active components (can be external or integrated). If you want to do a direct run, from DC to DC using the Dark Fiber, you will need to have signal regeneration (or you may be able to get away with amps). It is commonly expected for the transport provider to hand off the live circuit using standard SFP/SFP+, which means that they have to use a 'media converter' of some sorts to covert from Colorized Light to Standard 1330 or 880nm hand off. If you want more info, hit me off list. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net To: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 2:32:14 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear Multiple 10G, yes. I'll reach out to the vendors mentioned to see how they line up, but it looks like I need to look into amps for the passive gear. There's 8 huts between the two ends, so no shortage of opportunities to amplify the signal. I'll know more about that when I get the amount of loss along the route. Most people I know leasing circuits are doing so because dark isn't available or is otherwise ass expensive due to above shortage. The last quote I got for dark out of a useful facility was like $2M. 100+ miles was like $200k, the last 10 miles or whatever was the balance. Even $100k for gear (two sides and some amps) pales in comparison to $2k+ a month for the next 20 years for a single channel. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Phil Bedard bedard.p...@gmail.com To: Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net, NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 1:17:48 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear Is this for 10G? I'm kind of assuming 10G. What kind of equipment is being plugged into these? 300km is way beyond what you'll get with a passive solution, it's definitely in the long-haul terrtory. If you are launching out of a router the best pluggable optic you can generally get is rated at 80km, 10GBase-ZR, but even a passive mux at each end shaves some of that distance off. 300km is going to require amplifiers at intervals across the span. Who is providing the fiber? I'd start talking to traditional transport vendors. Ekinops as mentioned is probably decent at a lower price, Adva works well and isn't all that expensive, even Cisco has gear reasonably priced. If you want to cover 300km on a fiber span though cheap isn't really a word I would describe. It's why people lease circuits. :) Phil On 2/7/15, 18:04, Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net wrote: One particular route I'm looking at is 185 miles, so of the options presented 300 km is closest. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com To: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com Cc: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 12:02:11 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear would be good for mike to define 'long distances' here, is it: 2km 30km 300km 3000km Probably the 30-60k range is what you mean by 'long distances' but... clarity might help. On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com wrote: Mike, I just replaced a bunch of FiberStore WDM passive muxes with OSI Hardware equipment. The FiberStore gear was a huge disappointment (excessive loss, poor technical support, refusal to issue refund without threatening legal action, etc.). I have had good results from the OSI equipment so far. I run passive muxes for CWDM (8 - 16 channels). On Feb 07, 2015, at 09:51 AM, Manuel Marín m...@transtelco.net wrote: Hi Mike I can recommend a couple of vendors that provide cost effective solutions. Ekinops Packetlight. On Saturday, February 7, 2015, Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net wrote: I know there are various Asian vendors for low cost (less than $500) muxes to throw 16 or however many colors onto a strand. However, they don't work so well when you don't control the optics used on both sides (therefore must use standard wavelengths), obviously only do a handful of channels and have a distance limitation. What solutions are out there that don't cost an arm and a leg? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- TRANSTELCO| Manuel Marin | VP Engineering | US: *+1 915-217-2232* | MX: *+52 656-257-1109* CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the use
Re: Low cost WDM gear
If you pay close attention to the Spec Sheets, on power output, insertion loss, sensitivity, and do the proper calculation for your link, then using anyone's products, passive or active will work unless the devices do not meet specified specs. If you don't do your homework, cals on the design, loss, and just buy stuff based on whatever, then it does not matter who the mfg. is, you are very very likely to be surprised in a bad way. :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br To: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com Cc: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:24:43 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear What others vendors do you using? Here in Brazil only PADTEC have this passive solution... Some days ago Digitel contact me to show your multiplex solution... Is a active solution... We import this from fiberstore, but i don't know others vendors to buy 10G sfp+ cwdm and this mux/demux... Enviado via iPhone Grupo Connectoway Em 07/02/2015, às 16:04, Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com escreveu: Hi Enviado, I cannot recommend FiberStore as I had a bad experience with them. I needed to cover only 3km from A to B side. When using 10km optics, I saw a loss of over 5db with their passive mux inserted into the path which created a total loss of over -20db which is outside of the tolerances for our equipment with 10km SFP+. Using another vendors low insertion loss mux corrected our issue. I am sure if you are using an 80km optic, you may be able to tolerate a higher insertion loss to cover 60km. I also notice that their CDWM optics averaged about 3db less in power output when compared to other vendors. Thanks Kenneth On Feb 07, 2015, at 10:33 AM, Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br wrote: Hi kenneth... which the distance do you have from side A to side B when you using passive solutions from fiberstore( mux and demux)? I buy this mux and demux(4 channels single fiber) and only make a test about 60km( mux side A and demux on side B) with sfp+10gb for 80km... ( only see ddm on my ex3300( about -19db for 60km). Test switch access with ssh and pinging tests... What kind os issue do you have? For distances less than 60km is this solution good? Thanks!!! Enviado via iPhone Grupo Connectoway Em 07/02/2015, às 14:55, Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com escreveu: Mike, I just replaced a bunch of FiberStore WDM passive muxes with OSI Hardware equipment. The FiberStore gear was a huge disappointment (excessive loss, poor technical support, refusal to issue refund without threatening legal action, etc.). I have had good results from the OSI equipment so far. I run passive muxes for CWDM (8 - 16 channels). On Feb 07, 2015, at 09:51 AM, Manuel Marín m...@transtelco.net wrote: Hi Mike I can recommend a couple of vendors that provide cost effective solutions. Ekinops Packetlight. On Saturday, February 7, 2015, Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net wrote: I know there are various Asian vendors for low cost (less than $500) muxes to throw 16 or however many colors onto a strand. However, they don't work so well when you don't control the optics used on both sides (therefore must use standard wavelengths), obviously only do a handful of channels and have a distance limitation. What solutions are out there that don't cost an arm and a leg? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- TRANSTELCO| Manuel Marin | VP Engineering | US: *+1 915-217-2232* | MX: *+52 656-257-1109* CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this information, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. AVISO DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: Esta comunicación es sólo para el uso de la persona o entidad a la que se dirige y puede contener información privilegiada, confidencial y exenta de divulgación bajo la legislación aplicable. Si no es el destinatario de esta información, se le notifica que cualquier uso, difusión, distribución o copia de la comunicación está estrictamente prohibido.
Re: Low cost WDM gear
More power to you I always get a chuckle out of statements such as ... Compared FiberStore to another Vendor... It was pointed out to me long time ago when someone said.. My Chevy is better than a Ford Someone pointed out, hey, which Chevy ? the Chevette ? or the Corvette ? and Which Ford the Fiesta or Mustang ? Every mfg. has a lots and lots of products, and they are always getting improved... One has to pay attention to the specs.. even the same model products at different times don't have the same specs ! :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Cc: Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br, NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:49:16 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's why I engage the engineering resources on their end to make sure the chosen candidate will support the use case. I have now performed an A/B comparison and the FiberStore gear is inferior. Excessive loss on the mux and optics. On Feb 07, 2015, at 12:44 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: If you pay close attention to the Spec Sheets, on power output, insertion loss, sensitivity, and do the proper calculation for your link, then using anyone's products, passive or active will work unless the devices do not meet specified specs. If you don't do your homework, cals on the design, loss, and just buy stuff based on whatever, then it does not matter who the mfg. is, you are very very likely to be surprised in a bad way. :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br To: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com Cc: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:24:43 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear What others vendors do you using? Here in Brazil only PADTEC have this passive solution... Some days ago Digitel contact me to show your multiplex solution... Is a active solution... We import this from fiberstore, but i don't know others vendors to buy 10G sfp+ cwdm and this mux/demux... Enviado via iPhone Grupo Connectoway Em 07/02/2015, às 16:04, Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com escreveu: Hi Enviado, I cannot recommend FiberStore as I had a bad experience with them. I needed to cover only 3km from A to B side. When using 10km optics, I saw a loss of over 5db with their passive mux inserted into the path which created a total loss of over -20db which is outside of the tolerances for our equipment with 10km SFP+. Using another vendors low insertion loss mux corrected our issue. I am sure if you are using an 80km optic, you may be able to tolerate a higher insertion loss to cover 60km. I also notice that their CDWM optics averaged about 3db less in power output when compared to other vendors. Thanks Kenneth On Feb 07, 2015, at 10:33 AM, Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br wrote: Hi kenneth... which the distance do you have from side A to side B when you using passive solutions from fiberstore( mux and demux)? I buy this mux and demux(4 channels single fiber) and only make a test about 60km( mux side A and demux on side B) with sfp+10gb for 80km... ( only see ddm on my ex3300( about -19db for 60km). Test switch access with ssh and pinging tests... What kind os issue do you have? For distances less than 60km is this solution good? Thanks!!! Enviado via iPhone Grupo Connectoway Em 07/02/2015, às 14:55, Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com escreveu: Mike, I just replaced a bunch of FiberStore WDM passive muxes with OSI Hardware equipment. The FiberStore gear was a huge disappointment (excessive loss, poor technical support, refusal to issue refund without threatening legal action, etc.). I have had good results from the OSI equipment so far. I run passive muxes for CWDM (8 - 16 channels). On Feb 07, 2015, at 09:51 AM, Manuel Marín m...@transtelco.net wrote: Hi Mike I can recommend a couple of vendors that provide cost effective solutions. Ekinops Packetlight. On Saturday, February 7, 2015, Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net wrote: I know there are various Asian vendors for low cost (less than $500) muxes
Re: Low cost WDM gear
Maybe, your experience was the pivotal event that became a turning point in their customer service attitudes... :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Cc: Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br, NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 4:24:18 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear Point taken on the specs.. Still doesn't excuse poor customer service and tech support. I never expect to be told that no refund will be issued when I am dissatisfied with the product. A request for RMA because something is not working as expected should not have to be escalated to the President of the company. Other than that I am sure FiberStore is a great company :-) On Feb 07, 2015, at 01:17 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: My point is.. ... The thing to rely on is/are the Specs. If the Specs are right or specs are wrong, that is what determines the product's mfg shortcoming (defect). Mfg. Engineers are people, just like you and me and people can make mistakes... Being an Engineer, when I ask someone to do the design work, I ask them to explain it, and this way I double check their work Yes Mfg. Engineers are known to F***up too. While it is expected to be disappointed when something does not work.. and having a bad taste for dealing with that mfg, claiming that all of that mfg products are bad is a whole different issue. I deal with FiberStore, my experience have been very different, when stuff purchased from them, did not meet the specs, they took it back no questions asked. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Cc: Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br, NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 4:01:29 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's true up to a point. Specs are only as good as the entity providing the data. I can tell you a few stories about specs and some MAJOR fails by a major network equipment manufacturer failing to meet advertised specs. When you engage the engineering folks to assist in a build, they should know the true specs of their gear better than anyone else. If they say for a certain distance that A+B will work, then that is exactly what I expect. That is pretty basic. On Feb 07, 2015, at 12:56 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: More power to you I always get a chuckle out of statements such as ... Compared FiberStore to another Vendor... It was pointed out to me long time ago when someone said.. My Chevy is better than a Ford Someone pointed out, hey, which Chevy ? the Chevette ? or the Corvette ? and Which Ford the Fiesta or Mustang ? Every mfg. has a lots and lots of products, and they are always getting improved... One has to pay attention to the specs.. even the same model products at different times don't have the same specs ! :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Cc: Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br, NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:49:16 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's why I engage the engineering resources on their end to make sure the chosen candidate will support the use case. I have now performed an A/B comparison and the FiberStore gear is inferior. Excessive loss on the mux and optics. On Feb 07, 2015, at 12:44 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: If you pay close attention to the Spec Sheets, on power output, insertion loss, sensitivity, and do the proper calculation for your link, then using anyone's products, passive or active will work unless the devices do not meet specified specs. If you don't do your homework
Re: Low cost WDM gear
My point is.. ... The thing to rely on is/are the Specs. If the Specs are right or specs are wrong, that is what determines the product's mfg shortcoming (defect). Mfg. Engineers are people, just like you and me and people can make mistakes... Being an Engineer, when I ask someone to do the design work, I ask them to explain it, and this way I double check their work Yes Mfg. Engineers are known to F***up too. While it is expected to be disappointed when something does not work.. and having a bad taste for dealing with that mfg, claiming that all of that mfg products are bad is a whole different issue. I deal with FiberStore, my experience have been very different, when stuff purchased from them, did not meet the specs, they took it back no questions asked. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Cc: Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br, NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 4:01:29 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's true up to a point. Specs are only as good as the entity providing the data. I can tell you a few stories about specs and some MAJOR fails by a major network equipment manufacturer failing to meet advertised specs. When you engage the engineering folks to assist in a build, they should know the true specs of their gear better than anyone else. If they say for a certain distance that A+B will work, then that is exactly what I expect. That is pretty basic. On Feb 07, 2015, at 12:56 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: More power to you I always get a chuckle out of statements such as ... Compared FiberStore to another Vendor... It was pointed out to me long time ago when someone said.. My Chevy is better than a Ford Someone pointed out, hey, which Chevy ? the Chevette ? or the Corvette ? and Which Ford the Fiesta or Mustang ? Every mfg. has a lots and lots of products, and they are always getting improved... One has to pay attention to the specs.. even the same model products at different times don't have the same specs ! :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Cc: Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br, NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:49:16 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's why I engage the engineering resources on their end to make sure the chosen candidate will support the use case. I have now performed an A/B comparison and the FiberStore gear is inferior. Excessive loss on the mux and optics. On Feb 07, 2015, at 12:44 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: If you pay close attention to the Spec Sheets, on power output, insertion loss, sensitivity, and do the proper calculation for your link, then using anyone's products, passive or active will work unless the devices do not meet specified specs. If you don't do your homework, cals on the design, loss, and just buy stuff based on whatever, then it does not matter who the mfg. is, you are very very likely to be surprised in a bad way. :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br To: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com Cc: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:24:43 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear What others vendors do you using? Here in Brazil only PADTEC have this passive solution... Some days ago Digitel contact me to show your multiplex solution... Is a active solution... We import this from fiberstore, but i don't know others vendors to buy 10G sfp+ cwdm and this mux/demux... Enviado via iPhone Grupo Connectoway Em 07/02/2015, às 16:04, Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com escreveu: Hi Enviado, I cannot recommend FiberStore as I had a bad experience with them. I needed to cover only 3km from A to B side. When using 10km optics, I saw
Re: Low cost WDM gear
Agreed, and to add one more little point.. Now they have DWDM CWDM Muxes which have an even lower insertion loss .. (new products, currently not listed on the website). Like they say This is not your Father's Oldsmobile... Nothing hardly stands stills or remains the same in this business... :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Simon Lockhart si...@slimey.org To: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 4:06:46 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's why I engage the engineering resources on their end to make sure the chosen candidate will support the use case. I have now performed an A/B comparison and the FiberStore gear is inferior. Excessive loss on the mux and optics. Just for comparison sake, I should say that we've bought passive DWDM muxes and SFP+'s from FibreStore, and we've had good experiences. At the lower end of the market, production quality can definitely vary, which means significant variances in optical losses. When we ordered from FibreStore, we specified the Optical Loss values that we were able to accept. They tested the muxes before shipping, and selected the ones which fitted our requirements. Out of all the SFP's we bought, there were one or two DoA. FibreStore replaced this without issue. I think the important thing to remember (particularly when buying cheap) is that you need to know what you're buying, and what the risks are. With this in mind, it's possible to save money and get a decent product with some careful specification and management of the purchasing process. If you're not too sure what you're after, then I'd suggest spending more money and buying from a supplier who's more set up to hand-hold you through the process. Simon
Re: Low cost WDM gear
BTW, I hope you realize that FiberStore is not a mfg. but a Seller/broker. they have to rely on the specs provided to them from the MFG. In the Far East, mfg, distribution, sales is organized is a slightly different manner than the West. :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Cc: Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br, NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 4:01:29 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's true up to a point. Specs are only as good as the entity providing the data. I can tell you a few stories about specs and some MAJOR fails by a major network equipment manufacturer failing to meet advertised specs. When you engage the engineering folks to assist in a build, they should know the true specs of their gear better than anyone else. If they say for a certain distance that A+B will work, then that is exactly what I expect. That is pretty basic. On Feb 07, 2015, at 12:56 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: More power to you I always get a chuckle out of statements such as ... Compared FiberStore to another Vendor... It was pointed out to me long time ago when someone said.. My Chevy is better than a Ford Someone pointed out, hey, which Chevy ? the Chevette ? or the Corvette ? and Which Ford the Fiesta or Mustang ? Every mfg. has a lots and lots of products, and they are always getting improved... One has to pay attention to the specs.. even the same model products at different times don't have the same specs ! :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Cc: Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br, NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:49:16 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's why I engage the engineering resources on their end to make sure the chosen candidate will support the use case. I have now performed an A/B comparison and the FiberStore gear is inferior. Excessive loss on the mux and optics. On Feb 07, 2015, at 12:44 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: If you pay close attention to the Spec Sheets, on power output, insertion loss, sensitivity, and do the proper calculation for your link, then using anyone's products, passive or active will work unless the devices do not meet specified specs. If you don't do your homework, cals on the design, loss, and just buy stuff based on whatever, then it does not matter who the mfg. is, you are very very likely to be surprised in a bad way. :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Rodrigo 1telecom rodr...@1telecom.com.br To: Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com Cc: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:24:43 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear What others vendors do you using? Here in Brazil only PADTEC have this passive solution... Some days ago Digitel contact me to show your multiplex solution... Is a active solution... We import this from fiberstore, but i don't know others vendors to buy 10G sfp+ cwdm and this mux/demux... Enviado via iPhone Grupo Connectoway Em 07/02/2015, às 16:04, Kenneth McRae kenneth.mc...@me.com escreveu: Hi Enviado, I cannot recommend FiberStore as I had a bad experience with them. I needed to cover only 3km from A to B side. When using 10km optics, I saw a loss of over 5db with their passive mux inserted into the path which created a total loss of over -20db which is outside of the tolerances for our equipment with 10km SFP+. Using another vendors low insertion loss mux corrected our issue. I am sure if you are using an 80km optic, you may be able to tolerate a higher insertion loss to cover 60km. I also notice that their CDWM optics averaged about 3db less in power
Re: Provider to Blend with Level3
We approach this in the following empirical manner. 1) Who is available to you easily and within the budget. 2) Where is the other side of the network connectivity consumers ? i.e. do you need good connectivity to Cable Network ? ATT Broadband ? Europe ? Mexico ? Latin America ? 3) What is the bulk of the traffic type ? Consumer (Video / You Tube ? Netflix ? ) Business ? etc based on the answers to above, I would look at the bgp.he.net to see each options upstream connectivity, and check with peeringdb to see what could be their peering relationships finding one that does not have a directly Level3 relationship would be preferred. Also, don't forget to do traffic engineering to nullify the Level3 traffic engineering, (They prefer to keep traffic on-net even if there are better paths available out of their network). Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com To: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Friday, February 6, 2015 12:26:55 PM Subject: Provider to Blend with Level3 We have a network that is single homed with Level3 at this time in Dallas. They already have BGP and their own ASN and IP setup. Who would you recommend for a second provider in Dallas to blend with Level3? Assuming Level3 and this other provider would be the only two in the blend for a long time to come? Client was talking to TWT, but now that they are being bought by Level3 that doesn't make much sense.
Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations
Under 30sec (more like 15 to 20) on an i7 based Mikrotik for full BGP Tables. Faisal Imtiaz - Original Message - From: Ken Chase m...@sizone.org To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 10:29:28 PM Subject: Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations Hows convergence time on these mikrotik/ubiquity/etc units for a full table? /kc -- Ken Chase - m...@sizone.org Toronto
Re: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations
Hi Micah, There is a segment in the Hardware Side of the industry that produces Network Appliances. (Folks such as Axiomtek, Lanner Electronics, Caswell Networks, Portwell etc etc) These appliances are commonly used as a commercial (OEM) platform for a variety of uses.. Routers, Firewalls, Specialized network applications etc. Our internal testing ( informal), matches up with the commonly quoted PPS handling by the different product vendors who incorporate these appliances in their network product offerings. i3/i5/i7 (x86) based network appliances will forward traffic as long as pps does not exceed 1.4million (In our testing we found the pps to be limiting factor and not the amount of traffic being moved) (will easily handle 6G to 10G of traffic Core2duo (x86) based network appliances will forward traffic as long as pps does not exceed 600, pps (will easily handle 1.5G to 2G of traffic) Atom based (x86) network appliances will forward traffic as long as pps does not exceed 250,000 pps. Of course, if you start to bog down the router with lots of NAT/ACL/ Bridge Rules (i.e. the CPU has to get involved in traffic management) then your actual performance will be degraded. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: micah anderson mi...@riseup.net To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 5:53:54 PM Subject: scaling linux-based router hardware recommendations Hi, I know that specially programmed ASICs on dedicated hardware like Cisco, Juniper, etc. are going to always outperform a general purpose server running gnu/linux, *bsd... but I find the idea of trying to use proprietary, NSA-backdoored devices difficult to accept, especially when I don't have the budget for it. I've noticed that even with a relatively modern system (supermicro with a 4 core 1265LV2 CPU, with a 9MB cache, Intel E1G44HTBLK Server adapters, and 16gig of ram, you still tend to get high percentage of time working on softirqs on all the CPUs when pps reaches somewhere around 60-70k, and the traffic approaching 600-900mbit/sec (during a DDoS, such hardware cannot typically cope). It seems like finding hardware more optimized for very high packet per second counts would be a good thing to do. I just have no idea what is out there that could meet these goals. I'm unsure if faster CPUs, or more CPUs is really the problem, or networking cards, or just plain old fashioned tuning. Any ideas or suggestions would be welcome! micah
Re: AS6713 (aka IAM / MOROCCO TELECOMS) peering contact
How about Queens English ... Oyi ! Or the American Spoken English ... Yo ! or Spanglish... Oyime ? Give it up ! next we will be discussing how to write emails in dots and dashes ! :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Meagan darqch...@darqchild.com To: Clayton Zekelman clay...@mnsi.net Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2014 4:07:46 PM Subject: Re: AS6713 (aka IAM / MOROCCO TELECOMS) peering contact Singular They! :D On Dec 27, 2014, at 2:35 PM, Clayton Zekelman clay...@mnsi.net wrote: That is why the better pronoun choice would have been 'you', not 'he' or 'she'. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 27, 2014, at 1:47 PM, Javier J jav...@advancedmachines.us wrote: What if they don't identify as a he or a she? On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Clayton Zekelman clay...@mnsi.net wrote: What if the peering team member is a she? Should she not contact you if so? Sent from my iPhone On Dec 26, 2014, at 5:48 PM, Youssef Bengelloun-Zahr yous...@720.fr wrote: Hello, If someone from IAM peering team is watching, could he please get in touch OFF-list please ? Best regards. -- Youssef BENGELLOUN-ZAHR !DSPAM:549f0a5f299111688636950!
Re: vendor-locking optical modules (Question re: IBM G8124E)
Hello, Since we are on the topic of vendor locked optics. Does anyone know if the IBM G8124 TOR Switches have a hidden menu option to over-ride the vendor lock optics ? We are seeing something interesting... we have a couple of these in production networks, apparently one switch will accept only IBM Optics, while the other will accept any I am not able to find anything which can explain the different behavior on the two switches. If anyone can offer an insights that would be greatly appreciated. Many Thanks in advance. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Chuck Anderson c...@wpi.edu To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, December 6, 2014 8:37:01 AM Subject: Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules On Sat, Dec 06, 2014 at 11:51:56AM +0200, Saku Ytti wrote: a) one particular optic had slow i2c, vendor polled it more aggressively than it could respond. Vendor polling code didn't handle errors reading from i2c, but instead crashed whole linecard control-plane. Vendor claimed it's not bug, because it didn't happen on their optic. I tried to explain to them, they cannot guarantee that I2C reads won't fail on their own optics, and it's serious problem, but was unable to convince them to fix it. Now I am in possession of good bunch of SFP I can stick to your routers in colo, have them crash, and you won't have any clue why they crashed. b) particular vendor had bug in their SFP microcontroller where after 2**31 1/100 of a seconds had passed, it started to write its uptime to a location where DDM temperature measurements are read. This was obvious from graphs, because it went linearily from -127 ... 127, then jumped back to -127. These optics when seated on Vendor1 caused no problems, when seated on Vendor2 they caused link flapping, even two boxes away! (A-B-C, A having problematic optic, B-C might flap). Coincidentally Vendor2 is same as in case a), they didn't consider this was bug in their code. This was particularly funny, if you rebooted 100 boxes in a maintenance window, then the bug would trigger at same moment after 2**31 1/100th of a second, causing potentially major outage. Who is Vendor2?
Re: Buying IP Bandwidth Across a Peering Exchange
Hi Colton, The primary challenge in buying IP Transit across a Peering Exchange is not so much of a technical configuration challenge, but rather a 'how do we keep track of how much IP Transit you are using' ..a billing challenge. and additionally, one is making the assumption that there is capacity to do so on the IP Transit Providers Peering Port Connection. While it is possible to deal with such issue, but you need someone willing and able to do so, on the other side. I think the way most providers would do this would be to get a rack and power with Equinix. Pay a cross connect fee from the wave provider to our rack. Pay for an exchange port (which includes a cross connect to the exchange) for the 5GBPS of traffic going to Netflix, Google, etc. And then pay for yet another cross connect going to HE.net's cage to get pure IP from them. - Yes, you are right, this is the traditional way of doing so, and yes, it can get expensive.. For this exact reason, folks such as us and others who are willing to provide access via their existing resources at different facilities. We are facilitating flexible connectivity needs of folks who are running remote (from major metro areas) such as yours, in Miami, Atlanta, and I know others who are doing so in Equinox Chicago, one in Texas and a couple of the West Coast. Feel free to ping me off list if you are interested in additional details. Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com To: Ammar Zuberi am...@fastreturn.net Cc: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 2:51:47 PM Subject: Re: Buying IP Bandwidth Across a Peering Exchange The exchange in question is Equinix. Their sales team is leading me to believe there are multiple exchange products. One where you can peer with providers (Google, Netflix for example) and then one where you can create virtual private layer 2 vlans between providers. Then there is also the traditional cross connect fee of $350 if you want to go from one cage/rack to the other. So in a situation where we are getting a 10Gig transport wave to Equinix, we would ideally like to split this wave's use to 5Gbps of traffic going to the peering exchange for traffic going directly to Google, Netflix, and other CDN's, and then 5Gbps of pure IP transit going to a low cost provider like HE.net. Of course providers like HE.NET are also peers on the peering exchange, so it seems possible that we could just opening a peering conenction with them. I think the way most providers would do this would be to get a rack and power with Equinix. Pay a cross connect fee from the wave provider to our rack. Pay for an exchange port (which includes a cross connect to the exchange) for the 5GBPS of traffic going to Netflix, Google, etc. And then pay for yet another cross connect going to HE.net's cage to get pure IP from them. If I can buy transit directly I avoid the expenses of having to pay for space, power, another router/switch, plus a second cross connect. Thats quite a bit of money saved. Are exchanges really that unreliable compared to a traditional cross connect? On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Ammar Zuberi am...@fastreturn.net wrote: Hi Conor, I know this is possible since Hurricane Electric does it for IPv6 transit, however, I'm not sure if it violates any exchange rules or if it's even a good idea. On 25 Nov 2014, at 10:47 pm, Colton Conor colton.co...@gmail.com wrote: I know typically peering exchanges are made for peering traffic between providers, but can you buy IP transit from a provider on an exchange? An example, buy a 10G port on an exchange, peer 5Gbps of traffic with multiple providers on the exchange, and buy 5Gbps of IP transit from others on the exchange? Some might ask why not get a cross connect to the provider. It is cheaper to buy an port on the exchange (which includes the cross connect to the exchange) than buy multiple cross connects. Plus we are planning on getting a wave to the exchange, and not having any physical routers or switches at the datacenter where the exchange/wave terminates at. Is this possible?
Re: Outbound traffic on a circuit?
It is un-usual but not un-believable or ridiculous. There are some context questions you will have to ask / answer ... 1) Are you getting 'A Deal' (or a 'steal of a deal' ?) 2) Looks like your upstream has some constraints that they are protecting themselves from. It will help in understanding what that constraint is. 3) What kind of circuit is this ? IP Transit ? or some other flavor of connectivity. 4) Is this condition real or left over some other template contract they copied from ? :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Justin Wilson li...@mtin.net To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 3:40:56 PM Subject: Outbound traffic on a circuit? I am looking at an order for a well known upstream provider. They are handing me a circuit at a data center. The contract reads if we use more than 50% of the outbound the price gets re-priced and almost doubles. How many folks have ran into this? Justin -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net http://www.mtin.net http://www.mtin.net/blog Managed Services xISP Solutions Data Centers http://www.thebrotherswisp.com Podcast about xISP topics http://www.midwest-ix.com Peering Transit Internet Exchange
Re: A case against vendor-locking optical modules
Vendor Lock's... this is nothing new, it has been in practice since the beginning of the IT / Computer Industry... We have seen this with Cables (old old days, Vax/PDP 11/ IBM Mainframes, well into the PC cycle), Floppy Drives, Hard Drivers etc etc etc... To the best of my knowledge, none of this was ever won by argument with the vendor...This always changed with time... When more and more people started deploying generic / non oem items, the vendors were forced to either turn a blind eye or forced to reconsider... The big carrot or stick, the vendors always held with the Customers / Consumers, was the warranty and or support. If history has any advice to offer, it would be, if you are not dependent on warranty or support issues from the Vendor, then go forward, do what you please, .. :) Regards. Faisal Imtiaz - Original Message - From: Steve Naslund snasl...@medline.com To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 1:20:09 PM Subject: RE: A case against vendor-locking optical modules Let talk about the 800 pound gorilla in the room and the #1 reason to hate vendor locked optics. Some vendors (yes, Cisco I'm looking at you) want to charge ridiculously high prices for optic that are identical to generic optics other than the vendor lock. Maybe a better tactic would be to have the vendor explain to you why the vendor lock is necessary. You are after all the customer and don't owe them any explanations. Steven Naslund Chicago IL -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Jérôme Nicolle Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 12:12 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: A case against vendor-locking optical modules Hello, I'm having a discussion with Arista, trying to explain to them why I _can't_ buy any hardware unable to run with compatible optical modules. My points are : - I need specific modules, mostly *WDM and BiDi, some still unavailable in their product line - I run at least two other vendors on every locations and can't stack up every spare optics for each of them, neither could remote-hands safely re-program optics to match a specific vendor when needed. - I have an established relationship with a trusted optics supplier, providing support, warranty and re-coding hardware for their entire (impressive) lineup. And this supplier is still 2-5x times cheaper than any vendor-labeled optics even with NFR-like discounts. Based on these points, I discourage every customers of ever using locked-in equipments, and forbid them on my own network. Of course, Arista can't be pleased because their hardware never stepped chord in my customer's networks. But they seem to deliberatly miss my points every time the subject comes up. What are other arguments against vendor lock-in ? Is there any argument FOR such locks (please spare me the support issues, if you can't read specs and SNMP, you shouldn't even try networking) ? Did you ever experience a shift in a vendor's position regarding the use of compatible modules ? Thanks ! -- Jérôme Nicolle +33 6 19 31 27 14
Re: I am about to inherit 26 miles of dark fiber. What do I do with it?
WoW !.. that was a rather cruel and un-called for ! How does that saying go.Don't say anything, if you cannot say anything nice ! Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Fletcher Kittredge fkitt...@gwi.net To: Lorell Hathcock lor...@hathcock.org Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:56:08 PM Subject: Re: I am about to inherit 26 miles of dark fiber. What do I do with it? The below is a really sad story. Condolences on the coming trainwreck. I hope you get someone on staff or on consult that understands outside plant architecture, because it is much more important and complex topic than you seem to realize. On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 9:18 PM, Lorell Hathcock lor...@hathcock.org wrote: All: A job opportunity just came my way to work with 26 miles of dark fiber in and around a city in Texas. The intent is for me to deliver internet and private network services to business customers in this area. I relish the thought of starting from scratch to build a network right from the start instead of inheriting and fixing someone else's mess. That being said, what suggestions does the group have for building a new network using existing dark fiber? MPLS backbone? Like all businesses these days, I will likely have to build the lit backbone as I add customers. So how would you recommend scaling the network? I have six strands of SMF that connect within municipal facilities. Each new customer will be a new build out from the nearest point. Because of having only six strands, I don't anticipate selling dark fiber. I believe I need to conserve fibers so that it would be lit services that I offer to customers. I would like to offer speeds up to 10 GB. Thoughts are appreciated! Sincerely, Lorell Hathcock -- Fletcher Kittredge GWI 8 Pomerleau Street Biddeford, ME 04005-9457 207-602-1134
Re: I am about to inherit 26 miles of dark fiber. What do I do with it?
I would suggest that you do some rapid field deployment education in regards to fiber networks. You might consider joining WISPA and or FISPA (two industry associations), where you have folks building out fiber networks, who are very willing to share their experience and tell you what is working and what is not working. Working with Dark fiber can be as simple as you like, or as complicated as you want it to be. However this is one area that it is not un-common to make things appear a lot more expensive and complicated then what they have to be... Depending on what you are inheriting, and what you have to be responsible for, I would suggest that you spend some time on the web, local library, and some of the OSP related publications to get a good understanding of what is done and whybefore just falling for industry jargon. I should be fun... :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Lorell Hathcock lor...@hathcock.org To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:18:15 PM Subject: I am about to inherit 26 miles of dark fiber. What do I do with it? All: A job opportunity just came my way to work with 26 miles of dark fiber in and around a city in Texas. The intent is for me to deliver internet and private network services to business customers in this area. I relish the thought of starting from scratch to build a network right from the start instead of inheriting and fixing someone else's mess. That being said, what suggestions does the group have for building a new network using existing dark fiber? MPLS backbone? Like all businesses these days, I will likely have to build the lit backbone as I add customers. So how would you recommend scaling the network? I have six strands of SMF that connect within municipal facilities. Each new customer will be a new build out from the nearest point. Because of having only six strands, I don't anticipate selling dark fiber. I believe I need to conserve fibers so that it would be lit services that I offer to customers. I would like to offer speeds up to 10 GB. Thoughts are appreciated! Sincerely, Lorell Hathcock
Re: Shipping bulk hardware via freight
My suggestion would be to leave the packing shipping to professionals Take it to you local UPS store or similar, they can pack it and ship it ( 1u switches, no big deal, but the 10u chassis, most likely best if they are palatalized) Doing it any other way would be greatly dependent on what facilities are available to you.. i.e. can you palatalize it ? Shrink wrap it and have a freight carrier pick it up.. (the are picky about doing that from a location that does not have dock height warehouse / ramp. You might be able to find a consolidator freight forwarder who may have the facilities to palatalize and shrink wrap.. You can also take the do it your-self approach, get / find some pallets, buy some strapping, and shrink wrap rolls, while not hard to do. but make sure you have the resources to do so (pallet jack, space, tools etc). Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Jason 8...@tacorp.us To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, November 5, 2014 1:02:08 PM Subject: Shipping bulk hardware via freight I'm interested in talking with someone who has experience shipping hardware that has been pulled from a working environment. The assumption is that it would not use a normal carriers such as UPS of Fedex, but via private freight. Assuming that 20 x 1U switches and a handful of 10U chassis's were to be shipped, has anyone found a productive way to package them in something other than the boxes they come in? Has anyone tried to crate / pallet pack them or something more efficient? If so, please contact me offline if you are willing to share your experience. Jason
Re: IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation for Loopback Address
In the BCOP, this is noted so that those who suboptimally address their p-t-p links with /64s can be consistently suboptimal by doing the same with their loopbacks, I am trying to understand what is sub-optimal about doing so...Waste of Ipv6 space ? or some other technical reason ? (is a /64 address are a 'sinkhole' the only reason ? ) Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom - Original Message - From: Roland Dobbins rdobb...@arbor.net To: nanog@nanog.org list nanog@nanog.org Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 2:00:21 AM Subject: Re: IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation for Loopback Address On Oct 11, 2014, at 12:41 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: For Router Loopback Address what is wisdom in allocating a /64 vs /128 ? In the BCOP, this is noted so that those who suboptimally address their p-t-p links with /64s can be consistently suboptimal by doing the same with their loopbacks, so that *all* their interfaces are sinkholes. But the BCOP also talks about /128s. -- Roland Dobbins rdobb...@arbor.net // http://www.arbornetworks.com Equo ne credite, Teucri. -- Laocoön
Re: IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation for Loopback Address
A follow up question on this topic.. For Router Loopback Address what is wisdom in allocating a /64 vs /128 ? (the BCOP document suggests this, but does not offer any explanation or merits of one over the other). Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom
Re: IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation are you giving out
Selection of a default prefix is easy. Here are the steps. 4. Keeping in mind 4.1 Prefixes longer than somewhere around /48 to /56 may be excluded from the global routing table 4.1a Prefix cutouts of any size (including /48) from inside your /32 or larger block may be excluded from the global routing table. Folks who are multihomed and thus need to advertise their own block with BGP should be referred to ARIN for a direct assignment. Folks who aren't multihomed, well, until given evidence otherwise I claim there are no single-homed entities who will use 65,000 LANs, let alone more. = This brings up another interesting question... We operate Two separate networks in two geographical locations (Two ASN), we have a single /32 allocation from ARIN. Question: Should we be asking ARIN for another /32 so that each network has it's own /32 or should be break out the /32 into /36 and use these in each of the geographies ? Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom
Re: IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation are you giving out
Question: Should we be asking ARIN for another /32 so that each network has it's own /32 or should be break out the /32 into /36 and use these in each of the geographies ? Depends on your needs… Either is a viable solution, depending on your circumstances. ARIN has an MDN policy which would facilitate your acquisition of a second /32. Thank you Owen, just got off the phone with ARIN, it should be a fairly simple process for us, and we will follow the advice of using a /32 for each geographical location. The overall discussion has been a very interesting one, and it would appear that the majority of the forward looking opinion is to allocate /48 to customers, and don't do any smaller subnet allocation. We will take this advice and re-evaluate our policies. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - From: Owen DeLong o...@delong.com To: Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net Cc: William Herrin b...@herrin.us, nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2014 12:20:14 PM Subject: Re: IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation are you giving out On Oct 9, 2014, at 7:31 AM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappytelecom.net wrote: Selection of a default prefix is easy. Here are the steps. 4. Keeping in mind 4.1 Prefixes longer than somewhere around /48 to /56 may be excluded from the global routing table 4.1a Prefix cutouts of any size (including /48) from inside your /32 or larger block may be excluded from the global routing table. Folks who are multihomed and thus need to advertise their own block with BGP should be referred to ARIN for a direct assignment. Folks who aren't multihomed, well, until given evidence otherwise I claim there are no single-homed entities who will use 65,000 LANs, let alone more. = This brings up another interesting question... We operate Two separate networks in two geographical locations (Two ASN), we have a single /32 allocation from ARIN. Question: Should we be asking ARIN for another /32 so that each network has it's own /32 or should be break out the /32 into /36 and use these in each of the geographies ? Depends on your needs… Either is a viable solution, depending on your circumstances. ARIN has an MDN policy which would facilitate your acquisition of a second /32. Owen
