Re: Router for Metro Ethernet

[Da Shi]

plz dont go with 3825/3845 unless you need it for voice etc.   we have
clients run 3825/3845 and they don't work properly beyond 50mbps with
traffic shaping.




On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:12 AM, Tony Varriale  wrote:
> Cisco rates it at 256mbps which places it above a NPE-400.
>
> The 3825 says 179mbps on their spec sheet.  Not sure where you are getting
> your numbers but they are way off.
>
> All of those numbers are straight forwarding with nothing turned on and 64
> byte packets.  That way you get a nice idea of what the CPU can do.
>
> tv
> - Original Message - From: "Bill Stewart" 
> To: 
> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 1:27 PM
> Subject: Re: Router for Metro Ethernet
>
>
>> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Dylan Ebner 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> However, this router also has 2 100mb connections from local lans that it
>>> is also terminiating.
>>> For our 100mb metro e connections we use 3845s. The 100 mb service
>>> terminates into NM-GEs, which have a faster throughput than the hwics.
>>
>> Be careful using 3845s for 100 Mbps connections or above - Cisco rates
>> them at 45 Mbps (and 3825 at half of that) but last time I checked
>> doesn't make any promises at faster than T3.  They're being
>> conservative about it, but one thing that really can burn the
>> horsepower is traffic shaping, which you need with some MetroE
>> carriers.
>>
>>
>> --
>> 
>>            Thanks;     Bill
>>
>> Note that this isn't my regular email account - It's still experimental so
>> far.
>> And Google probably logs and indexes everything you send it.
>>
>
>
>

Re: Router for Metro Ethernet

[Tony Varriale]

Cisco rates it at 256mbps which places it above a NPE-400.

The 3825 says 179mbps on their spec sheet.  Not sure where you are getting 
your numbers but they are way off.


All of those numbers are straight forwarding with nothing turned on and 64 
byte packets.  That way you get a nice idea of what the CPU can do.


tv
- Original Message - 
From: "Bill Stewart" 

To: 
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: Router for Metro Ethernet


On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Dylan Ebner  
wrote:
However, this router also has 2 100mb connections from local lans that it 
is also terminiating.
For our 100mb metro e connections we use 3845s. The 100 mb service 
terminates into NM-GEs, which have a faster throughput than the hwics.


Be careful using 3845s for 100 Mbps connections or above - Cisco rates
them at 45 Mbps (and 3825 at half of that) but last time I checked
doesn't make any promises at faster than T3.  They're being
conservative about it, but one thing that really can burn the
horsepower is traffic shaping, which you need with some MetroE
carriers.


--

Thanks; Bill

Note that this isn't my regular email account - It's still experimental so 
far.

And Google probably logs and indexes everything you send it.

[NANOG-announce] The Evolution of NANOG

[Steve Feldman]

Dear members of the NANOG community,

Since its inception in 1994, the North American Network Operators  
Group (NANOG) has had its meetings and activities organized under the  
auspices of Merit, providing an incredible service to the North  
American region, and in fact, to the global Internet engineering  
community.  The value of this work can not be easily overstated – it  
is likely that, absent Merit’s involvement, the pace of global  
Internet development would have significantly slowed and that the high  
levels of Internet performance that we all enjoy today would not have  
come to pass.

Several periods of evolution have marked the Merit/NANOG  
relationship.  The most significant inflections have been the sharp  
growth in NANOG attendance in the late 1990s, the increasing  
importance of the NANOG mailing list as a method of inter-carrier  
communication, the utilization of NANOG meetings as a conduit of  
communications between major government entities and the  
Internetworking community, and the 2004-2005 Charter Process where  
NANOG took a significant step towards self-governance while remaining  
a Merit activity.

Through the successive evolutions, Merit has stayed loyal to the  
ideals of NANOG, providing staff to administer conferences; administer  
servers to host presentations, mailing lists, and archives from the  
early days of the Internet; funds to pay for all of NANOG’s  
activities; and, equally as important, entering into contract  
obligations on NANOG’s behalf for meeting venue hotels, at times  
taking on significant contract liability.  Since the beginning of this  
relationship, one constant has been the gratitude of NANOG’s  
membership and governance communities towards Merit for their  
dedication, hard work and financial commitment.

Starting from the ratification of the 2005 NANOG Charter, the  
membership of NANOG has worked hard to establish self-governance  
institutions including our Steering Committee, Program Committee,  
Communications Committee, and Marketing Working Group.  These  
institutions have acquired experience and resilience over the past  
five years and matured to the point of self-governance.

The Steering Committee believes the time has come for NANOG to  
continue its natural evolution toward an independent organization.  We  
are therefore beginning the process of creating a non-profit, tax- 
exempt entity that will produce NANOG conferences, administer the  
NANOG mailing list, and expand our educational mission.  A re- 
structuring of the NANOG/Merit
relationship allows each organization to focus on the direct needs of  
its respective constituency.

This effort is still in the preliminary stages.  Our intention is to  
work jointly with Merit to devise a transition plan and a transition  
timeline before NANOG 49 in June of this year.  This transition will  
be gradual and designed to ensure a seamless handover of  
responsibility to the new entity, minimizing changes seen by the  
community as a whole.  The governance and committee structure will be  
left largely intact, with our current charter converted into a set of  
governing bylaws.  We expect to hold a community vote to ratify the  
new bylaws and structure during the annual October election.

We expect there will be many questions and concerns raised regarding  
this process, and suggest that the nanog-futures mailing list is the  
appropriate venue for discussion.  (See 
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures 
  for subscription information.)  We also encourage you to share  
reactions directly with the Steering Committee.  In the next few days,  
the Communications Committee will create and post a Frequently Asked  
Questions page.  We will also hold an extended community meeting  
during NANOG 49 to review progress and discuss the transition.

One thing that won’t change throughout the course of this next  
evolution is the gratitude of the NANOG membership for the hard work  
and support that the Merit board, staff, and member institutions have  
provided to us over the course of the last 16 years.

For the NANOG leadership,

  Steve Feldman (Steering Committee chair)
  Patrick W. Gilmore (SC member)
  Sylvie LaPerrière (SC member)
  Joe Provo (SC member)
  Robert Seastrom (SC member)
  Duane Wessels (SC member)
  David Meyer (Program Committee chair)
  Tom Daly (PC vice chair)


___
NANOG-announce mailing list
nanog-annou...@nanog.org
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-announce

RE: conference bandwidth (Whistler)

[Dennis Burgess]

Don't forget to contact the local WISP, they may have big pipes already
in the area!   

---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net
LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training - Author of "Learn RouterOS" 

-Original Message-
From: matthew zeier [mailto:m...@velvet.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 4:33 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: conference bandwidth (Whistler)

I'll be hosting a 500 person conference in Whistler this July.  The
hotel we're looking at only has a 30Mbps pipe from Telus.

Looking for recommendations on someone who can get me 100Mbps for a
week.

- mz

14/8 and 223/8 allocated to APNIC

[Leo Vegoda]

Hi,

The IANA IPv4 registry has been updated to reflect the allocation
of two /8 IPv4 blocks to APNIC in April 2010: 14/8 and
223/8. You can find the IANA IPv4 registry at:

http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.xml
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.xml
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.txt

Please update your filters as appropriate.

The IANA free pool contains 20 unallocated unicast IPv4 /8s.

Regards,

Leo Vegoda
Number Resources Manager, IANA
ICANN

Re: conference bandwidth (Whistler)

[Tim Lampman]

Probably your only options for something short term like that would be 
telus or shaw.
I would contact them both directly or perhaps go through the account 
that has the hotel connection.


matthew zeier wrote:

I'll be hosting a 500 person conference in Whistler this July.  The hotel we're 
looking at only has a 30Mbps pipe from Telus.

Looking for recommendations on someone who can get me 100Mbps for a week.

- mz

  



--
Tim Lampman
Co-Owner/CTO
*Broadline Networks Inc.*
57 Colborne Street West, Brantford, ON, N3T 1K6
*p.* 1-866-546-8486
*c.* 905-746-3114
www.broadlinenetworks.com  | 
t...@broadlinenetworks.com 

conference bandwidth (Whistler)

[matthew zeier]

I'll be hosting a 500 person conference in Whistler this July.  The hotel we're 
looking at only has a 30Mbps pipe from Telus.

Looking for recommendations on someone who can get me 100Mbps for a week.

- mz

Re: Router for Metro Ethernet

[Rubens Kuhl]

On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Holmes,David A  wrote:
> We use Cisco 3750 L3 switches for Metro Ethernet connectivity. The 3750
> SFPs can run at wire speed up to 1 GiGE. The 3750s are very reliable,
> and have good, follow-the-sun technical support in case of problems.
> Some caveats:
>
> 1. only the ME version supports MPLS, in case you want to overlay an
> MPLS TE/VPN network on a Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) ELAN raw Ethernet
> service.

The MPLS implementation of Cisco 3750 Metro is buggy enough to the
point that I recommend it to all my friend's competitors (TM of Randy
Bush).

On the other side, Cisco ME6500 has MPLS (with some limitations
usually accepted with L3 switches) and it works pretty good. It's not
cheap, though.



Rubens

Re: Mikrotik RouterOS

[Positively Optimistic]

We use mikrotik in several enterprise networks and on our carrier ethernet
network.   We use their routerboard products as CPE in a lot of customer
environments.

They have a failure rate..  as does Cisco, Adtran, etc.   IMHO, any device
that depends on a wall wart for a power supply, is subject to occasional
failure..  However, we've had as many adtran total access products fail as
we've had mikrotik routerboards fail..

The powerrouter product that Dennis has referred to, although he may be more
biased than I, is a solid product that I personally feel is carrier grade.
Especially with redundant power or a DC power option..   I'm far from an
expert in cisco or mikrotik, however, to accomplish the same end result with
Cisco that is possible with Mikrotik, the cost is exponentially greater,..




Disclaimer..
I have zero financial interest in Mikrotik. Simply a loyal customer.


On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 5:05 AM, Bjørn Mork  wrote:

> Grzegorz Janoszka  writes:
> > On 12-4-2010 21:44, Gustavo Santos wrote:
> >> its was an old bug, that had been fixed for a while..
> >
> > You should still keep in mind Mikrotik is just Linux, with all its
> > (dis)advantages, plus some scripts and weird CLI.
>
> Just like IOS XE...
>
>
>
> Bjørn
>
>

Re: Router for Metro Ethernet

[Brandon Ewing]

On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 11:06:56AM -0700, Holmes,David A wrote:
> We use Cisco 3750 L3 switches for Metro Ethernet connectivity. The 3750
> SFPs can run at wire speed up to 1 GiGE. The 3750s are very reliable,
> and have good, follow-the-sun technical support in case of problems.

If you do not need MPLS, and do not need the StackWise ports on 3750s, the
3560 is the same switch, minus the stackwise ports, and ~33% cheaper.

-- 
Brandon Ewing(nicot...@warningg.com)


pgpH5qUIrhfYD.pgp
Description: PGP signature

RE: Router for Metro Ethernet

[Holmes,David A]

We use Cisco 3750 L3 switches for Metro Ethernet connectivity. The 3750
SFPs can run at wire speed up to 1 GiGE. The 3750s are very reliable,
and have good, follow-the-sun technical support in case of problems.
Some caveats:

1. only the ME version supports MPLS, in case you want to overlay an
MPLS TE/VPN network on a Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) ELAN raw Ethernet
service.
2. If you are using IP multicast, make sure that the Metro Ethernet
provider supports PIM snooping, otherwise (S,G) directed multicast
packets will be flooded out all service provider ports that connect to
your devices, emulating a 1993-style Ethernet hub. 

-Original Message-
From: Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:swm...@swm.pp.se] 
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 9:43 PM
To: Jeffrey Negro
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Router for Metro Ethernet

On Mon, 12 Apr 2010, Jeffrey Negro wrote:

> In our case I believe we would be dealing with just static routes and
a
> lines of ACL.  Do you think the routing protocols are your largest
resource
> usage in your scenario, or is it also just simple routing as well?

Get a used 3550 or a new 3400ME or something. Sounds likeyuou'll get by 
just fine using an L3 switch.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se

RE: Router for Metro Ethernet

[Dennis Burgess]

They just added IPv6 over PPP Support in v5 too :)  

---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, Mikrotik Certified Trainer, MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE,
MTCTCE, MTCUME 
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net
LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training - Author of "Learn RouterOS"


-Original Message-
From: Owen DeLong [mailto:o...@delong.com] 
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 11:13 PM
To: frnk...@iname.com
Cc: nanog@nanog.org; 'Bill Stewart'
Subject: Re: Router for Metro Ethernet

I stand corrected on the Mikrotik... Apparently, while not well
documented, they
do, indeed support IPv6 and their Wiki even includes tunnel
configuration
information.

Apologies to Mikrotik (and some encouragement to add this to your
main-line
documentation).


Owen

On Apr 12, 2010, at 8:56 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:

> We run a 3845 at over 300 Mbps and it's less than 50% CPUmost
times less
> than 30%.  No BGP, just OSPF.
> 
> Frank
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Bill Stewart [mailto:nonobvi...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 1:27 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Router for Metro Ethernet
> 
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Dylan Ebner 
> wrote:
>> However, this router also has 2 100mb connections from local lans
that it
> is also terminiating.
>> For our 100mb metro e connections we use 3845s. The 100 mb service
> terminates into NM-GEs, which have a faster throughput than the hwics.
> 
> Be careful using 3845s for 100 Mbps connections or above - Cisco rates
> them at 45 Mbps (and 3825 at half of that) but last time I checked
> doesn't make any promises at faster than T3.  They're being
> conservative about it, but one thing that really can burn the
> horsepower is traffic shaping, which you need with some MetroE
> carriers.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Thanks; Bill
> 
> Note that this isn't my regular email account - It's still
experimental so
> far.
> And Google probably logs and indexes everything you send it.
> 
> 

RE: Router for Metro Ethernet

[Dennis Burgess]

Actually, the latest version 5 adds IP6 over PPP, I don't know where you
got that they are not capable of routing IPv6.  Just have to install the
V6 package.

---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, Mikrotik Certified Trainer, MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE,
MTCTCE, MTCUME 
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net
LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training - Author of "Learn RouterOS"


-Original Message-
From: Owen DeLong [mailto:o...@delong.com] 
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 8:42 PM
To: Dennis Burgess
Cc: Jeffrey Negro; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Router for Metro Ethernet

Yes, but, according to the Mikrotik web site they appear to be obsolete
and incapable of routing IPv6.

Owen

On Apr 12, 2010, at 10:32 AM, Dennis Burgess wrote:

> a PowerRouter at http://www.mikrotikrouter.com can handle several
> hundred meg without issues.  
> 
> ---
> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, Mikrotik Certified Trainer, MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE,
> MTCTCE, MTCUME 
> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net
> LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training - Author of "Learn RouterOS"
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeffrey Negro [mailto:jne...@billtrust.com] 
> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 12:29 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Router for Metro Ethernet
> 
> Before I get taken for a ride by salespeople, I figured it would be
best
> to
> ask the experts of Nanog
> 
> My company is currently in talks to bring an ethernet circuit into our
> headquarters, initially committing around 40Mbps.  The ISP will be
> providing
> ethernet handoff, but I do not want their managed router offering
> (Adtran
> 4430) since it is pricey, non-redundant and I'd rather manage it
myself.
> My
> question is about hardware.  Can I assume that I can use something
like
> a
> Cisco 2000 series router with two built in fast/gig ethernet ports,
> without
> a WIC?  and since both sides are ethernet would the routing throughput
> be
> near fast ethernet speed?  This is my first dealing with metro
ethernet
> offerings, and I don't want to assume that the Cisco throughput rates
> listed
> for T1/ADSL etc. are the same for a metro ethernet as the WAN.
> 
> Any and all suggestions on the hardware would be greatly appreciated.
> Thank
> you in advance!

Re: Router for Metro Ethernet

[Owen DeLong]

On Apr 13, 2010, at 6:44 AM, Jeremy Parr wrote:

> On 13 April 2010 00:12, Owen DeLong  wrote:
>> I stand corrected on the Mikrotik... Apparently, while not well documented, 
>> they
>> do, indeed support IPv6 and their Wiki even includes tunnel configuration
>> information.
>> 
>> Apologies to Mikrotik (and some encouragement to add this to your main-line
>> documentation).
> 
> For better or worse, the Wiki *IS* their mainline documentation.

Fair enough... My point is that 
http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Category:Manual#list

Contains no mention whatsoever of IPv6.

If you go, for example, to the Static IP Addressing page from there, there is 
also
no mention of IPv6.

It would be nice if they made IPv6 easier to find in the same places you would
find the corresponding IPv4 information.

Owen

Trusted Community Representatives

[Joe Abley]

Colleagues,

ICANN and VeriSign, with the support of the US Department of Commerce, continue 
to work towards DNSSEC deployment in the root zone of the DNS. ICANN is looking 
for Trusted Community Representatives (TCRs) to help us carry out various 
technical security operations.

An announcement can be found here: 


You can submit an expression of interest here: 

DNSSEC key ceremonies are carried out in English. TCRs must therefore have a 
good understanding of written and spoken English.

Regards,


Joe

Re: Router for Metro Ethernet

[Jeremy Parr]

On 13 April 2010 00:12, Owen DeLong  wrote:
> I stand corrected on the Mikrotik... Apparently, while not well documented, 
> they
> do, indeed support IPv6 and their Wiki even includes tunnel configuration
> information.
>
> Apologies to Mikrotik (and some encouragement to add this to your main-line
> documentation).

For better or worse, the Wiki *IS* their mainline documentation.

Re: Mikrotik RouterOS

[Bjørn Mork]

Grzegorz Janoszka  writes:
> On 12-4-2010 21:44, Gustavo Santos wrote:
>> its was an old bug, that had been fixed for a while..
>
> You should still keep in mind Mikrotik is just Linux, with all its
> (dis)advantages, plus some scripts and weird CLI.

Just like IOS XE...



Bjørn