Applications of MPLS in the metro area

Hello ! I'm looking for what a network operator would consider a realistic reference deployment of MPLS within the metro area network. By "realistic reference", I'm asking about what a network operator would consider to be a typical, perhaps most common, application of MPLS technology. >From a

RE: Applications of MPLS in the metro area

For the ISP and Carrier Ethernet network I run, I use MPLS for various things. It provides wonderful segmentation of different communities (customers and uses). I use MPLS ELINE (p2p) extensively for Cellular Backhaul I use MPLS ELAN (mp2mp) in various places for emulating LAN’s over

RE: Applications of MPLS in the metro area

Hi, So where the books talk about PEs -think of your metro nodes here (basically converting the metro into an MPLS network -or making it part of your existing MPLS core) (you might not have a classic design where PEs hang off of P-Core nodes and might have just rings of PEs in your metro area)

Abuse Desks

I noticed over the weekend that a Fail2Ban instance's complain function wasn't working. I fixed it. I've noticed a few things: 1) Abusix likes to return RIR abuse contact information. The vast majority are LACNIC, but it also has kicked back a couple for APNIC and ARIN. When I look up the

RE: Applications of MPLS in the metro area

Yeah, I forgot earlier but I’m using EVPN/MPLS for DC interconnections now also, for nicely integrating L2/L3 and host/machine level route preference MPLS in some ways is reminiscent of the ability to fire-off Smart-PVC’s (SPVC/P) over an ATM (asynchronous transfer mode) network, and thus

CGNAT Solutions

Afternoon, I run a small ISP in Tennessee. COVID has forced a lot of people to work from home. I am starting to run low on IP's and need to consider CGNAT. I do have IPV6 space, but we all know that until we force everyone to move to IPV6, we need to keep IPV4 up and running. I could buy more

Re: Abuse Desks

Please don't use this kind of crap to send automated "we received 3 login attempts on our SSH box..wa" emails. This is why folks don't have abuse contacts that are responsive to real issues anymore. Matt On 4/28/20 11:57 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: > I noticed over the weekend that a

Pearson VUE Contact...

Greetings Team, Anyone from the aforementioned organization on this forum? I raised a query via their Customer Service Team but havent heard back from them. Warm regards, Michael Bullut. --- *Cell:* *+254 723 393 114.**Skype Name:* *Michael Bullut.* *Blog: http://www.kipsang.com/

Re: Applications of MPLS in the metro area

I started poking around to learn more about these use cases and came across this interesting extract : "Juniper Networks® ACX Series Universal Metro Routers are Juniper’s response to a shift in metro

Re: CGNAT Solutions

Take a look at DANOS for CG-NAT as a free solution or Netgate's TNSR has a CG-NAT feature https://www.tnsr.com/features On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 2:57 PM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG < nanog@nanog.org> wrote: > I will say it is much better to consider 464XLAT with NAT64, if the CPEs > allow it.

RE: CGNAT Solutions

Hi John, I run a small/medium ISP in Texas. A few years ago, needing to do the same thing you are speaking of, I lab evaluated the Cisco ASR9k VSM-500 and Juniper MX104 MS-MIC-16G… in the end I went with Juniper. No regrets, been good and holding strong. I’ve scaled it way beyond what I

RE: Applications of MPLS in the metro area

Yeah, I use the heck out of the ASCX5048, it is the mpls edge of my resi/busi mpls ftth network… Lines/terminology can get blurry…But, I would say that I will do my best to get mpls into every nook and cranny of my network, where/when it makes sense. Forgive the atm analogy again, but

Re: CGNAT Solutions

On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 12:12 PM John Alcock wrote: > I run a small ISP in Tennessee. I am starting to run low on IP's and need to > consider CGNAT. Hi John, How small is small? Up to a certain size regular NAT with enough logging to trace back abusers will tend to work fine. if we're talking

Re: CGNAT Solutions

Just go with Linux and iptables. It is by far the cheapest option and it just works. tir. 28. apr. 2020 21.13 skrev John Alcock : > Afternoon, > > I run a small ISP in Tennessee. COVID has forced a lot of people to work > from home. I am starting to run low on IP's and need to consider CGNAT.

Re: CGNAT Solutions

I will say it is much better to consider 464XLAT with NAT64, if the CPEs allow it. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8683/ I’m right now doing a deployment for 25.000.000 customers of an ISP (GPON, DLS and cellular mix), all the testing has been done, and all doing fine. I’ve done

Re: Abuse Desks

On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 08:45:12PM -0700, Dan Hollis wrote: > On Tue, 28 Apr 2020, Matt Corallo via NANOG wrote: > > Please don't use this kind of crap to send automated "we received 3 login > > attempts on our SSH box..wa" emails. > > This is why folks don't have abuse contacts that are

Re: CGNAT Solutions

On 4/28/20 4:53 PM, William Herrin wrote: How small is small? Up to a certain size regular NAT with enough logging to trace back abusers will tend to work fine. if we're talking single-digit gbps, it may not be worth the effort to consider the wonderful world of CGNAT. Depending on how many

Re: Abuse Desks

On Tue, 28 Apr 2020, Matt Corallo via NANOG wrote: Please don't use this kind of crap to send automated "we received 3 login attempts on our SSH box..wa" emails. This is why folks don't have abuse contacts that are responsive to real issues anymore. Thats what SBL is for. -Dan