Re: GEO location issue with google
I've had similar trouble. Google thought we were in Israel, even months after filling in the form on the page Jonathan linked to, on several occasions. This was years after being allocated the address block by RIPE. We eventually got it sorted dead quick by implementing Self-published IP Geolocation Data and asking n...@google.com to use it. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-google-self-published-geofeeds-02 On Friday 07 February 2014 15:20:40 Praveen Unnikrishnan wrote: Hi, We are an ISP based in UK. We have got an ip block from RIPE which is 5.250.176.0/20. All the main search engines like yahoo shows we are based in UK. But Google thinks we are from Saudi Arabia and we redirected to www.google.com.sahttp://www.google.com.sa instead of googlw.co.uk. I have sent lot of emails to google but no luck. All the information from google are in Arabic and youtube shows some weird videos as well. Could anyone please help me to sort this out? Would be much appreciated for your time. Praveen Unnikrishnan Network Engineer PMGC Technology Group Ltd T: 020 3542 6401 M: 07827921390 F: 087 1813 1467 E: p...@pmgroupuk.commailto:p...@pmgroupuk.com [cid:image001.png@01CF2418.27F29CA0] [cid:image002.jpg@01CE1663.96B300D0] www.pmgroupuk.comhttp://www.pmgroupuk.com/ | www.pmgchosting.com http://www.pmgchosting.com/ How am I doing? Contact my manager, click heremailto:sha...@pmgroupuk.com?subject=How's%20Praveen%20doing?. [cid:image003.jpg@01CE1663.96B300D0] PMGC Managed Hosting is now live! After a successful 2012, PMGC continues to innovate and develop by offering tailored IT solutions designed to empower you through intelligent use of technologies. www.pmgchosting.comhttp://www.pmgchosting.com/. PMGC Technology Group Limited is a company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 7974624 (3/F Sutherland House, 5-6 Argyll Street, London. W1F 7TE). This message contains confidential (and potentially legally privileged) information solely for its intended recipients. Others may not distribute copy or use it. If you have received this communication in error please contact the sender as soon as possible and delete the email and any attachments without keeping copies. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company or its associated companies unless otherwise specifically stated. All incoming and outgoing e-mails may be monitored in line with current legislation. It is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that emails are virus free before opening. PMGC(r) is a registered trademark of PMGC Technology Group Ltd. -- Mike Williams
MENOG 14 in Dubai
Hi everyone, In the spirit of keeping each of the NOG communities in touch with activities going on in each other's regions, the MENOG Program Committee is hoping that some of you would be interesting in joining the Middle East operations community for their 14th meeting in Dubai at the end of March. If you are interested in presenting at the conference or participating in the Peering Forum, or are planning to pass through Dubai enroute to other events, please consider submitting a presentation proposal: http://papers.menog.org/user/login.php?event=7 The programme committee is looking forward to your contributions; the submission deadline is just 2 weeks away now. MENOG 14 is being held at the Grosvenor House Hotel in Dubai Marina - the conference takes place on the 30th March, the MENOG Peering Forum on the 31st March, and tutorials are on 1st April. Workshops take place from 23rd to 27th March. More info at http://www.menog.org/meetings/menog-14. Thanks and hopefully see you in Dubai! philip (on behalf of the MENOG Coordination Team) --
RE: GEO location issue with google
Hi Jonathan, I have been submitting this issue to google with that same reporting location issue page for last 4months. But it's still redirecting me to the different page.. :( Praveen Unnikrishnan Network Engineer PMGC Technology Group Ltd T: 020 3542 6401 M: 07827921390 F: 087 1813 1467 E: p...@pmgroupuk.commailto:p...@pmgroupuk.com [cid:image004.png@01CF265F.DD8E68C0] [cid:image002.jpg@01CE1663.96B300D0] www.pmgroupuk.comhttp://www.pmgroupuk.com/ | www.pmgchosting.com http://www.pmgchosting.com/ How am I doing? Contact my manager, click heremailto:sha...@pmgroupuk.com?subject=How's%20Praveen%20doing?. [cid:image003.jpg@01CE1663.96B300D0] PMGC Managed Hosting is now live! After a successful 2012, PMGC continues to innovate and develop by offering tailored IT solutions designed to empower you through intelligent use of technologies. www.pmgchosting.comhttp://www.pmgchosting.com/. PMGC Technology Group Limited is a company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 7974624 (3/F Sutherland House, 5-6 Argyll Street, London. W1F 7TE). This message contains confidential (and potentially legally privileged) information solely for its intended recipients. Others may not distribute copy or use it. If you have received this communication in error please contact the sender as soon as possible and delete the email and any attachments without keeping copies. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company or its associated companies unless otherwise specifically stated. All incoming and outgoing e-mails may be monitored in line with current legislation. It is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that emails are virus free before opening. PMGC(r) is a registered trademark of PMGC Technology Group Ltd. From: Jonathan Lassoff [mailto:j...@thejof.com] Sent: 08 February 2014 06:36 To: Praveen Unnikrishnan Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: GEO location issue with google Here's the FAQ on this topic: https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/873?hl=en It links to a contact form where you can ask for some redress. Cheers, jof On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Praveen Unnikrishnan p...@pmgroupuk.commailto:p...@pmgroupuk.com wrote: Hi, We are an ISP based in UK. We have got an ip block from RIPE which is 5.250.176.0/20http://5.250.176.0/20. All the main search engines like yahoo shows we are based in UK. But Google thinks we are from Saudi Arabia and we redirected to www.google.com.sahttp://www.google.com.sahttp://www.google.com.sa instead of googlw.co.ukhttp://googlw.co.uk. I have sent lot of emails to google but no luck. All the information from google are in Arabic and youtube shows some weird videos as well. Could anyone please help me to sort this out? Would be much appreciated for your time. Praveen Unnikrishnan Network Engineer PMGC Technology Group Ltd T: 020 3542 6401 M: 07827921390 F: 087 1813 1467 E: p...@pmgroupuk.commailto:p...@pmgroupuk.commailto:p...@pmgroupuk.commailto:p...@pmgroupuk.com [cid:image001.png@01CF2418.27F29CA0] [cid:image002.jpg@01CE1663.96B300D0] www.pmgroupuk.comhttp://www.pmgroupuk.comhttp://www.pmgroupuk.com/ | www.pmgchosting.comhttp://www.pmgchosting.com http://www.pmgchosting.com/ How am I doing? Contact my manager, click heremailto:sha...@pmgroupuk.commailto:sha...@pmgroupuk.com?subject=How's%20Praveen%20doing?. [cid:image003.jpg@01CE1663.96B300D0] PMGC Managed Hosting is now live! After a successful 2012, PMGC continues to innovate and develop by offering tailored IT solutions designed to empower you through intelligent use of technologies. www.pmgchosting.comhttp://www.pmgchosting.comhttp://www.pmgchosting.com/. PMGC Technology Group Limited is a company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 7974624 (3/F Sutherland House, 5-6 Argyll Street, London. W1F 7TE). This message contains confidential (and potentially legally privileged) information solely for its intended recipients. Others may not distribute copy or use it. If you have received this communication in error please contact the sender as soon as possible and delete the email and any attachments without keeping copies. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company or its associated companies unless otherwise specifically stated. All incoming and outgoing e-mails may be monitored in line with current legislation. It is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that emails are virus free before opening. PMGC(r) is a registered trademark of PMGC Technology Group Ltd. inline: image002.jpginline: image003.jpginline: image004.png
Re: GEO location issue with google
I have had my best luck with getting google to correct geo-loc issues by sending it in as a business end user instead of as an ISP. If you have a user who is being affected directly by the incorrect geo-loc data (My store is showing in the wrong country), Google takes that much more seriously than the issue affecting dynamically assigned blocks. Need coffee…perhaps unclear. Message me off list and I can explain a little better. On Feb 10, 2014, at 6:59 AM, Praveen Unnikrishnan p...@pmgroupuk.com wrote: Hi Jonathan, I have been submitting this issue to google with that same reporting location issue page for last 4months. But it's still redirecting me to the different page.. :( Praveen Unnikrishnan Network Engineer PMGC Technology Group Ltd T: 020 3542 6401 M: 07827921390 F: 087 1813 1467 E: p...@pmgroupuk.commailto:p...@pmgroupuk.com [cid:image004.png@01CF265F.DD8E68C0] [cid:image002.jpg@01CE1663.96B300D0] www.pmgroupuk.comhttp://www.pmgroupuk.com/ | www.pmgchosting.com http://www.pmgchosting.com/ How am I doing? Contact my manager, click heremailto:sha...@pmgroupuk.com?subject=How's%20Praveen%20doing?. [cid:image003.jpg@01CE1663.96B300D0] PMGC Managed Hosting is now live! After a successful 2012, PMGC continues to innovate and develop by offering tailored IT solutions designed to empower you through intelligent use of technologies. www.pmgchosting.comhttp://www.pmgchosting.com/. PMGC Technology Group Limited is a company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 7974624 (3/F Sutherland House, 5-6 Argyll Street, London. W1F 7TE). This message contains confidential (and potentially legally privileged) information solely for its intended recipients. Others may not distribute copy or use it. If you have received this communication in error please contact the sender as soon as possible and delete the email and any attachments without keeping copies. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company or its associated companies unless otherwise specifically stated. All incoming and outgoing e-mails may be monitored in line with current legislation. It is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that emails are virus free before opening. PMGC(r) is a registered trademark of PMGC Technology Group Ltd. From: Jonathan Lassoff [mailto:j...@thejof.com] Sent: 08 February 2014 06:36 To: Praveen Unnikrishnan Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: GEO location issue with google Here's the FAQ on this topic: https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/873?hl=en It links to a contact form where you can ask for some redress. Cheers, jof On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Praveen Unnikrishnan p...@pmgroupuk.commailto:p...@pmgroupuk.com wrote: Hi, We are an ISP based in UK. We have got an ip block from RIPE which is 5.250.176.0/20http://5.250.176.0/20. All the main search engines like yahoo shows we are based in UK. But Google thinks we are from Saudi Arabia and we redirected to www.google.com.sahttp://www.google.com.sahttp://www.google.com.sa instead of googlw.co.ukhttp://googlw.co.uk. I have sent lot of emails to google but no luck. All the information from google are in Arabic and youtube shows some weird videos as well. Could anyone please help me to sort this out? Would be much appreciated for your time. Praveen Unnikrishnan Network Engineer PMGC Technology Group Ltd T: 020 3542 6401 M: 07827921390 F: 087 1813 1467 E: p...@pmgroupuk.commailto:p...@pmgroupuk.commailto:p...@pmgroupuk.commailto:p...@pmgroupuk.com [cid:image001.png@01CF2418.27F29CA0] [cid:image002.jpg@01CE1663.96B300D0] www.pmgroupuk.comhttp://www.pmgroupuk.comhttp://www.pmgroupuk.com/ | www.pmgchosting.comhttp://www.pmgchosting.com http://www.pmgchosting.com/ How am I doing? Contact my manager, click heremailto:sha...@pmgroupuk.commailto:sha...@pmgroupuk.com?subject=How's%20Praveen%20doing?. [cid:image003.jpg@01CE1663.96B300D0] PMGC Managed Hosting is now live! After a successful 2012, PMGC continues to innovate and develop by offering tailored IT solutions designed to empower you through intelligent use of technologies. www.pmgchosting.comhttp://www.pmgchosting.comhttp://www.pmgchosting.com/. PMGC Technology Group Limited is a company registered in England and Wales. Registered number: 7974624 (3/F Sutherland House, 5-6 Argyll Street, London. W1F 7TE). This message contains confidential (and potentially legally privileged) information solely for its intended recipients. Others may not distribute copy or use it. If you have received this communication in error please contact the sender as soon as possible and delete the email and any attachments without keeping copies. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the
ARIN PPC Agenda for NANOG 60 Tuesday AM session Now Available
NANOG 60 Attendees - Tomorrow morning there will be a Public Policy Consultation regarding a sizable number of potential changes to address policy at ARIN. Please find attached the list of policy proposals to be discussed; the session begins at 9:30 AM and all attendees are welcome! Text of each proposed changes is available at: https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/ There is also a PPC Discussion Guide available with all of the draft policies, the ARIN policy development process, and the current policy manual available here: https://www.arin.net/ppcnanog60 Thank you, and look forward to seeing everyone tomorrow! /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN Begin forwarded message: From: ARIN i...@arin.netmailto:i...@arin.net Subject: [arin-announce] ARIN PPC Agenda for NANOG 60 Now Available Date: February 4, 2014 at 2:08:08 PM EST To: arin-annou...@arin.netmailto:arin-annou...@arin.net Don't forget to mark your calendar and join us for ARIN's Public Policy Consultation (PPC), which will be held during NANOG 60 in Atlanta, Georgia on Tuesday, 11 February 2014, from 9:30 - 1:00 PM. The policy consultation is part of ARIN's Policy Development Process, and it is an open public discussion of Internet number resource policy. Registered NANOG 60 attendees do not need to register to participate in this session. ARIN welcomes members of the NANOG community who will not be in Atlanta to register as remote participants. If you plan to attend and are not registered for NANOG you must register for the ARIN PPC at the https://www.arin.net/ppcregister There is no registration fee for this half-day ARIN session, and it does not provide you entry to any other NANOG programming or social events. Current policy proposals up for discussion at this meeting are: Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2013-8: Subsequent Allocations for New Multiple Discrete Networks Draft Policy ARIN-2013-7: NRPM 4 (IPv4) Policy Cleanup Draft Policy ARIN-2014-1: Out of Region Use Draft Policy ARIN-2014-2: Improving 8.4 Anti-Flip Language Draft Policy ARIN-2014-3: Remove 8.2 and 8.3 and 8.4 Minimum IPv4 Block Size Requirements Draft Policy ARIN-2014-4: Remove 4.2.5 Web Hosting Policy Draft Policy ARIN-2014-5: Remove 7.2 Lame Delegations Draft Policy ARIN-2014-6: Remove 7.1 (Maintaining IN-ADDRs) Draft Policy ARIN-2014-7: Section 4.4 Micro Allocation Conservation Update Proposals (193, 199 and 201) That first item is a Recommended Draft Policy; the ARIN Advisory Council recommends it as fair and technically sound policy. The Drafts and Proposals are works in progress. Text available at: https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/ or in the PPC Discussion Guide: https://www.arin.net/ppcnanog60 ARIN will offer a webcast, live transcript, and Jabber chat options for remote participants. Registered remote participants can submit comments and questions to the discussions during the meeting. Register to attend in person or remotely today! Regards, Communications and Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ___ ARIN-Announce You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Announce Mailing List (arin-annou...@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-announce Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1 card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on this list have them deployed. If you or a customer have these deployed, how much bandwidth have you seen them handle? This will be handling dorm traffic at a college so it's mostly download. The 7206 handles our 300 Mbps circuit just fine, but we are moving it to our 600Mbps circuit. At peak we've seen the following numbers for that circuit: 30 second input rate 559982000 bits/sec, 55809 packets/sec 30 second output rate 55429000 bits/sec, 32598 packets/sec 267756984712 packets input, 25152556755 bytes, 0 no buffer This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. Answers on and off list are appreciated. Thanks, -- Vlad
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On 02/10/2014 04:17 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1 card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on this list have them deployed. If you or a customer have these deployed, how much bandwidth have you seen them handle? This will be handling dorm traffic at a college so it's mostly download. The 7206 handles our 300 Mbps circuit just fine, but we are moving it to our 600Mbps circuit. At peak we've seen the following numbers for that circuit: 30 second input rate 559982000 bits/sec, 55809 packets/sec 30 second output rate 55429000 bits/sec, 32598 packets/sec 267756984712 packets input, 25152556755 bytes, 0 no buffer This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. This depends on multiple variables. The 7200 is a single-CPU platform where CPU can go sky-high when using features like ACL's, QoS, IPv6 and you name it.. Also, changing from IOS 12.4 to 15 increased our CPU usage with another 10%+. Stick to the bare minimum of features you really need and you will be fine. Regards, Remco Bressers Signet B.V.
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
I have one but I never ran that much BW thru mine. But the CPU usage is what will kill you. Also the entire platform is rate for 1.8Gbs aggregated which mean depending on which interface you have, and which bus they are connected to, 900Mbps might be its limit. - Alain Hebertaheb...@pubnix.net PubNIX Inc. 50 boul. St-Charles P.O. Box 26770 Beaconsfield, Quebec H9W 6G7 Tel: 514-990-5911 http://www.pubnix.netFax: 514-990-9443 On 02/10/14 10:30, Remco Bressers wrote: On 02/10/2014 04:17 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1 card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on this list have them deployed. If you or a customer have these deployed, how much bandwidth have you seen them handle? This will be handling dorm traffic at a college so it's mostly download. The 7206 handles our 300 Mbps circuit just fine, but we are moving it to our 600Mbps circuit. At peak we've seen the following numbers for that circuit: 30 second input rate 559982000 bits/sec, 55809 packets/sec 30 second output rate 55429000 bits/sec, 32598 packets/sec 267756984712 packets input, 25152556755 bytes, 0 no buffer This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. This depends on multiple variables. The 7200 is a single-CPU platform where CPU can go sky-high when using features like ACL's, QoS, IPv6 and you name it.. Also, changing from IOS 12.4 to 15 increased our CPU usage with another 10%+. Stick to the bare minimum of features you really need and you will be fine. Regards, Remco Bressers Signet B.V.
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
We're still on the 12.4 train. I do use an ACL with less than 100 entries which handle BCP38 and block a few bad actors and private IPs on the Internet. I will be moving the BCP38 ACL closer to the hosts before the upgrade so the ACL will be a bit shorter in the future. We won't be doing any QOS or IPv6 on it but it does take a full BGP table. I just need it to last another year or two out of it if possible. I believe this platform goes End of Support in Spring 2016. On 2/10/2014 10:30 AM, Remco Bressers wrote: On 02/10/2014 04:17 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1 card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on this list have them deployed. If you or a customer have these deployed, how much bandwidth have you seen them handle? This will be handling dorm traffic at a college so it's mostly download. The 7206 handles our 300 Mbps circuit just fine, but we are moving it to our 600Mbps circuit. At peak we've seen the following numbers for that circuit: 30 second input rate 559982000 bits/sec, 55809 packets/sec 30 second output rate 55429000 bits/sec, 32598 packets/sec 267756984712 packets input, 25152556755 bytes, 0 no buffer This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. This depends on multiple variables. The 7200 is a single-CPU platform where CPU can go sky-high when using features like ACL's, QoS, IPv6 and you name it.. Also, changing from IOS 12.4 to 15 increased our CPU usage with another 10%+. Stick to the bare minimum of features you really need and you will be fine. Regards, Remco Bressers Signet B.V. -- Vlade Ristevski Network Manager IT Services Ramapo College (201)-684-6854
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On 2/10/14, 7:17 AM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1 card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on this list have them deployed. If you or a customer have these deployed, how much bandwidth have you seen them handle? This will be handling dorm traffic at a college so it's mostly download. The 7206 handles our 300 Mbps circuit just fine, but we are moving it to our 600Mbps circuit. At peak we've seen the following numbers for that circuit: 30 second input rate 559982000 bits/sec, 55809 packets/sec 30 second output rate 55429000 bits/sec, 32598 packets/sec 267756984712 packets input, 25152556755 bytes, 0 no buffer This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. I wouldn't expect a g1 to do much more than half a gig... https://supportforums.cisco.com/servlet/JiveServlet/download/561469-9512/routerperformance.pdf Answers on and off list are appreciated. Thanks, signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
Both the inside and outside interfaces are on the same NPE-G1 card. Thanks, On 2/10/2014 10:40 AM, Alain Hebert wrote: I have one but I never ran that much BW thru mine. But the CPU usage is what will kill you. Also the entire platform is rate for 1.8Gbs aggregated which mean depending on which interface you have, and which bus they are connected to, 900Mbps might be its limit. - Alain Hebertaheb...@pubnix.net PubNIX Inc. 50 boul. St-Charles P.O. Box 26770 Beaconsfield, Quebec H9W 6G7 Tel: 514-990-5911 http://www.pubnix.netFax: 514-990-9443 On 02/10/14 10:30, Remco Bressers wrote: On 02/10/2014 04:17 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1 card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on this list have them deployed. If you or a customer have these deployed, how much bandwidth have you seen them handle? This will be handling dorm traffic at a college so it's mostly download. The 7206 handles our 300 Mbps circuit just fine, but we are moving it to our 600Mbps circuit. At peak we've seen the following numbers for that circuit: 30 second input rate 559982000 bits/sec, 55809 packets/sec 30 second output rate 55429000 bits/sec, 32598 packets/sec 267756984712 packets input, 25152556755 bytes, 0 no buffer This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. This depends on multiple variables. The 7200 is a single-CPU platform where CPU can go sky-high when using features like ACL's, QoS, IPv6 and you name it.. Also, changing from IOS 12.4 to 15 increased our CPU usage with another 10%+. Stick to the bare minimum of features you really need and you will be fine. Regards, Remco Bressers Signet B.V. -- Vlad
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On 02/10/2014 04:43 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We're still on the 12.4 train. I do use an ACL with less than 100 entries which handle BCP38 and block a few bad actors and private IPs on the Internet. I will be moving the BCP38 ACL closer to the hosts before the upgrade so the ACL will be a bit shorter in the future. We won't be doing any QOS or IPv6 on it but it does take a full BGP table. I just need it to last another year or two out of it if possible. I believe this platform goes End of Support in Spring 2016. On 2/10/2014 10:30 AM, Remco Bressers wrote: On 02/10/2014 04:17 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1 card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on this list have them deployed. If you or a customer have these deployed, how much bandwidth have you seen them handle? This will be handling dorm traffic at a college so it's mostly download. The 7206 handles our 300 Mbps circuit just fine, but we are moving it to our 600Mbps circuit. At peak we've seen the following numbers for that circuit: 30 second input rate 559982000 bits/sec, 55809 packets/sec 30 second output rate 55429000 bits/sec, 32598 packets/sec 267756984712 packets input, 25152556755 bytes, 0 no buffer This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. This depends on multiple variables. The 7200 is a single-CPU platform where CPU can go sky-high when using features like ACL's, QoS, IPv6 and you name it.. Also, changing from IOS 12.4 to 15 increased our CPU usage with another 10%+. Stick to the bare minimum of features you really need and you will be fine. Full routing and ACL 100+ entries? I would ditch the 7200+NPE-G1 or upgrade to an NPE-G2.. Regards, Remco Bressers Signet B.V.
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
Thanks for the link. When I looked at it, the PPS and bandwidth didn't really match what I see on my network so I'm curious to see what people are actually seeing. It looks like their test is done using very small packets (64K). Our traffic is mostly web with a lot of Video (netflix , Hulu, youtube, Flash etc) so we're dealing with a lot less packets that are much larger. Based on the numbers I posted, we' would be at the BW limit without even coming close the PPS limit (if we were running the traffic through the 7206). On 2/10/2014 10:41 AM, joel jaeggli wrote: On 2/10/14, 7:17 AM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1 card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on this list have them deployed. If you or a customer have these deployed, how much bandwidth have you seen them handle? This will be handling dorm traffic at a college so it's mostly download. The 7206 handles our 300 Mbps circuit just fine, but we are moving it to our 600Mbps circuit. At peak we've seen the following numbers for that circuit: 30 second input rate 559982000 bits/sec, 55809 packets/sec 30 second output rate 55429000 bits/sec, 32598 packets/sec 267756984712 packets input, 25152556755 bytes, 0 no buffer This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. I wouldn't expect a g1 to do much more than half a gig... https://supportforums.cisco.com/servlet/JiveServlet/download/561469-9512/routerperformance.pdf Answers on and off list are appreciated. Thanks, -- Vlad
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
The ACL is a recent addition and we can probably do away with it. I didn't notice a significant increase in CPU or drops since adding it. But we usually peak at about 200Mbps on this link. The full routing table is a must since we're dual homed. On 2/10/2014 10:55 AM, Remco Bressers wrote: On 02/10/2014 04:43 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We're still on the 12.4 train. I do use an ACL with less than 100 entries which handle BCP38 and block a few bad actors and private IPs on the Internet. I will be moving the BCP38 ACL closer to the hosts before the upgrade so the ACL will be a bit shorter in the future. We won't be doing any QOS or IPv6 on it but it does take a full BGP table. I just need it to last another year or two out of it if possible. I believe this platform goes End of Support in Spring 2016. On 2/10/2014 10:30 AM, Remco Bressers wrote: On 02/10/2014 04:17 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1 card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on this list have them deployed. If you or a customer have these deployed, how much bandwidth have you seen them handle? This will be handling dorm traffic at a college so it's mostly download. The 7206 handles our 300 Mbps circuit just fine, but we are moving it to our 600Mbps circuit. At peak we've seen the following numbers for that circuit: 30 second input rate 559982000 bits/sec, 55809 packets/sec 30 second output rate 55429000 bits/sec, 32598 packets/sec 267756984712 packets input, 25152556755 bytes, 0 no buffer This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. This depends on multiple variables. The 7200 is a single-CPU platform where CPU can go sky-high when using features like ACL's, QoS, IPv6 and you name it.. Also, changing from IOS 12.4 to 15 increased our CPU usage with another 10%+. Stick to the bare minimum of features you really need and you will be fine. Full routing and ACL 100+ entries? I would ditch the 7200+NPE-G1 or upgrade to an NPE-G2.. Regards, Remco Bressers Signet B.V. -- Vlad
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On 02/10/2014 04:30 PM, Remco Bressers wrote: On 02/10/2014 04:17 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1 card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on this list have them deployed. If you or a customer have these deployed, how much bandwidth have you seen them handle? This will be handling dorm traffic at a college so it's mostly download. The 7206 handles our 300 Mbps circuit just fine, but we are moving it to our 600Mbps circuit. At peak we've seen the following numbers for that circuit: 30 second input rate 559982000 bits/sec, 55809 packets/sec 30 second output rate 55429000 bits/sec, 32598 packets/sec 267756984712 packets input, 25152556755 bytes, 0 no buffer This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. This depends on multiple variables. The 7200 is a single-CPU platform where CPU can go sky-high when using features like ACL's, QoS, IPv6 and you name it.. Also, changing from IOS 12.4 to 15 increased our CPU usage with another 10%+. Stick to the bare minimum of features you really need and you will be fine. I do share the same thoughts as Remco. We've actually several NPE-G1 in production environments with full BGP feed. We saw a decrease in forwarding performance since 12.4T and up. We also recently disabled some features like netflow and ip inspection, which seemed relatively CPU intensive. I do remember we were able to forward around ~700Mbps of 1500 bytes traffic with old IOS images and no ACLs.
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On 2/10/14, 7:43 AM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We're still on the 12.4 train. I do use an ACL with less than 100 entries which handle BCP38 and block a few bad actors and private IPs on the Internet. I will be moving the BCP38 ACL closer to the hosts before the upgrade so the ACL will be a bit shorter in the future. We won't be doing any QOS or IPv6 on it but it does take a full BGP table. I just need it to last another year or two out of it if possible. I believe this platform goes End of Support in Spring 2016. yeah so you'll probably make it on a pure pps basis. On 2/10/2014 10:30 AM, Remco Bressers wrote: On 02/10/2014 04:17 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1 card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on this list have them deployed. If you or a customer have these deployed, how much bandwidth have you seen them handle? This will be handling dorm traffic at a college so it's mostly download. The 7206 handles our 300 Mbps circuit just fine, but we are moving it to our 600Mbps circuit. At peak we've seen the following numbers for that circuit: 30 second input rate 559982000 bits/sec, 55809 packets/sec 30 second output rate 55429000 bits/sec, 32598 packets/sec 267756984712 packets input, 25152556755 bytes, 0 no buffer This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. This depends on multiple variables. The 7200 is a single-CPU platform where CPU can go sky-high when using features like ACL's, QoS, IPv6 and you name it.. Also, changing from IOS 12.4 to 15 increased our CPU usage with another 10%+. Stick to the bare minimum of features you really need and you will be fine. Regards, Remco Bressers Signet B.V. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Looking for some guidance on creating route objects for ARIN
I am trying to get the routing objects database. However I am getting back failures for the messages that I send in. I am wondering is it possible to get route objects created for the two /24s that I was given from my carriers allocations? If so what is the process to update the route objects database? I have my MNTNERID for my company, but when I use that to try and update the objects and attach them to my AS I am getting a failure. TIA Joe Jenkins
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On 2/10/14, 7:57 AM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: Thanks for the link. When I looked at it, the PPS and bandwidth didn't really match what I see on my network so I'm curious to see what people are actually seeing. It looks like their test is done using very small packets (64K). Our traffic is mostly web with a lot of Video (netflix , Hulu, youtube, Flash etc) so we're dealing with a lot less packets that are much larger. Based on the numbers I posted, we' would be at the BW limit without even coming close the PPS limit (if we were running the traffic through the 7206). so those pps numbers are worst case (small packet) but the acl count /distribution and so on are going to impact what you actually get in the downward direction. On 2/10/2014 10:41 AM, joel jaeggli wrote: On 2/10/14, 7:17 AM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1 card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on this list have them deployed. If you or a customer have these deployed, how much bandwidth have you seen them handle? This will be handling dorm traffic at a college so it's mostly download. The 7206 handles our 300 Mbps circuit just fine, but we are moving it to our 600Mbps circuit. At peak we've seen the following numbers for that circuit: 30 second input rate 559982000 bits/sec, 55809 packets/sec 30 second output rate 55429000 bits/sec, 32598 packets/sec 267756984712 packets input, 25152556755 bytes, 0 no buffer This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. I wouldn't expect a g1 to do much more than half a gig... https://supportforums.cisco.com/servlet/JiveServlet/download/561469-9512/routerperformance.pdf Answers on and off list are appreciated. Thanks, signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
RE: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
600Mb is going to be really pushing it. I doubt it will be able to handle that kind of throughput. Even with G2 I would think you would be pushing it. -Original Message- From: Remco Bressers [mailto:re...@signet.nl] Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 9:56 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput On 02/10/2014 04:43 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We're still on the 12.4 train. I do use an ACL with less than 100 entries which handle BCP38 and block a few bad actors and private IPs on the Internet. I will be moving the BCP38 ACL closer to the hosts before the upgrade so the ACL will be a bit shorter in the future. We won't be doing any QOS or IPv6 on it but it does take a full BGP table. I just need it to last another year or two out of it if possible. I believe this platform goes End of Support in Spring 2016. On 2/10/2014 10:30 AM, Remco Bressers wrote: On 02/10/2014 04:17 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: We are looking to double the bandwidth on one of our circuits from 300Mbps to 600Mbps. We currently use a Cisco 7206VXR with an NPE-G1 card. These seem like very popular routers so I'm hoping a few people on this list have them deployed. If you or a customer have these deployed, how much bandwidth have you seen them handle? This will be handling dorm traffic at a college so it's mostly download. The 7206 handles our 300 Mbps circuit just fine, but we are moving it to our 600Mbps circuit. At peak we've seen the following numbers for that circuit: 30 second input rate 559982000 bits/sec, 55809 packets/sec 30 second output rate 55429000 bits/sec, 32598 packets/sec 267756984712 packets input, 25152556755 bytes, 0 no buffer This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. This depends on multiple variables. The 7200 is a single-CPU platform where CPU can go sky-high when using features like ACL's, QoS, IPv6 and you name it.. Also, changing from IOS 12.4 to 15 increased our CPU usage with another 10%+. Stick to the bare minimum of features you really need and you will be fine. Full routing and ACL 100+ entries? I would ditch the 7200+NPE-G1 or upgrade to an NPE-G2.. Regards, Remco Bressers Signet B.V.
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On 10/02/2014 15:30, Remco Bressers wrote: This depends on multiple variables. The 7200 is a single-CPU platform where CPU can go sky-high when using features like ACL's, QoS, IPv6 and you name it.. Also, changing from IOS 12.4 to 15 increased our CPU usage with another 10%+. Stick to the bare minimum of features you really need and you will be fine. in fact, the npe-g1 uses a BCM1250 which is a dual CPU unit but vanilla IOS is not able to use the second CPU for packet forwarding. Unsubstantiated rumour claimed that modular IOS (QNX kernel) could push about 1.6x the throughput of vanilla IOS, as it was smp capable. Pity it was never released. Nick
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On 02/10/2014 08:05 AM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: The ACL is a recent addition and we can probably do away with it. I didn't notice a significant increase in CPU or drops since adding it. But we usually peak at about 200Mbps on this link. The full routing table is a must since we're dual homed. You don't necessarily need the full routing table for dual home, only for outgoing load balance. You can have BGP, filter your routes away, just leave a default gateway and still have dual homing. Your outgoing traffic will work as if it were active-standby, though. My 0.02.
cert's routeviews mirror
Someone asked me for the link... http://routeviews-mirror.cert.org/ John Kemp h...@routeviews.org
Re: Looking for some guidance on creating route objects for ARIN
On 2/10/14 9:08 AM, Joseph Jenkins wrote: I am trying to get the routing objects database. However I am getting back failures for the messages that I send in. I am wondering is it possible to get route objects created for the two /24s that I was given from my carriers allocations? If so what is the process to update the route objects database? I have my MNTNERID for my company, but when I use that to try and update the objects and attach them to my AS I am getting a failure. What are you sending (passwords redacted), to whom, and what failure message are you receiving? -- -- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - j...@impulse.net Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On 10.02.2014 21:58, Nick Hilliard wrote: Unsubstantiated rumour claimed that modular IOS (QNX kernel) could push about 1.6x the throughput of vanilla IOS, as it was smp capable. Pity it was never released. You mean IOS XR? Which was never released for software based routers, right? as it QNX in core.
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On Monday, February 10, 2014 05:17:09 PM Vlade Ristevski wrote: This is the interface that connects to our provider. As you can see its almost all download traffic. Our ASR1002 handles it without a sweat but I'm a little skeptical of whether the 7206 will hold up. An NPE-G2 has a better chance of handling 600Mbps. Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On Monday, February 10, 2014 05:40:04 PM Alain Hebert wrote: Also the entire platform is rate for 1.8Gbs aggregated which mean depending on which interface you have, and which bus they are connected to, 900Mbps might be its limit. I've done 900Mbps on an NPE-G2 with 95% CPU utilization and no packet drops, in a core router role. An NPE-G1 won't do that. Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
selective blackholing: implementation, usage effectiveness
Dear fellow networkers, Through this tutorial-styled email I'd like to introduce the concept, usage and implementation of selective blackholing through the BGP protocol to the community. This email contains some python code, example router configurations references to RIPE Atlas data to demonstrate effectiveness. Selective Blackholing is a DDoS damage control mechanism which is (compared to scrubbing or conventional blackholing) cheaper and more effective from the perspective of both the Service Provider and the End-User. In today's internet DDoS attacks are common-place, and the balance is not particularly fair: very expensive on the receiver-side and very cheap for the evil-doer (think DNS-, NTP- and SNMP-amplification attacks). I propose a method which is effective for businesses with a scoped radius of interaction with their customers. To elaborate on what 'scoped' (read: selective) means: a Dutch herring-shop owner will see most legitimate visitors come from within the Netherlands; a Dallas, TX based Automotive Bulletin Board will see most conversions from visitor to part-buyer come from visitors within the United States. If we look at today's DDoS mitigation solutions (scrubbers: expensive hardware or subscription services, or BGP blackhole: all or nothing reachability)... it seems intuitive that a lot of business-owners would care more about traffic from visitors in the surrounding 1000 kilometers (or from the same country), than say (for the duration of the attack) traffic sourced from other continents. In this document we sequentially number any line of router config or python code, to allow for easy references. Let's focus on the implementation following four features: * discard traffic sourced outside 'this' country (5580:664) * discard traffic sourced outside 'this' continent (5580:660) * discard traffic sourced outside a 1000 km radius from 'here' (5580:663) * discard traffic sourced outside a 2500 km radius from 'here' (5580:662) The 'this' and 'here' designators refer to the point of interconnection with any given customer: 'this' and 'here' for a customer connecting to AS5580 in Amsterdam, would respectable be Netherlands, Europe, 'most of West Europe', 'most of West + Central Europe'. It is important to understand that all proposed mechanisms are designed to perform uniformly in terms of intended usage regardless of location of interconnection, so for a Dutch customer 5580:664 means 'discard any traffic for my prefix received on PEs outside the Netherlands' but for an Dallas, TX based customer BGP community '5580:663' would mean 'discard traffic destined to my prefix on routers located outside a 1000 km radius around Dallas'. The 1000 km and 2500 km distances referenced throughout this document mean the distance between AS 5580 network devices as calculated with a haversine formula with the GPS coordinates of devices as input. The haversine formula is an equation giving great-circle distances between two points on a sphere from their longitudes and latitudes. Actual length of datapath or optical paths is not taken into consideration, nor is a peering partner's home country a factor. To create the above described features we need a simplistic CMDB database, some python code, static inbound iBGP route-map and semi-dynamic customer facing inbound route-map. For illustration purposes we assume a fictional ISP with a POP in the following cities: Tokyo, San Jose, Dallas, New York, London, Amsterdam and Stockholm. +---+---+--+---+-+ | router | continent | country | metro | latitude, longitude | |name |id | ISO31661 | id | | +---+---+--+---+-+ | r1.tky.jp | 3 | 392| 46 | 35.65671, 139.80342 | | r1.sjo.us | 1 | 840| 29 | 37.44569,-122.16111 | | r1.dal.us | 1 | 840| 33 | 32.80096, -96.81962 | | r1.nyc.us | 1 | 840| 26 | 40.71780, -74.00885 | | r1.lon.uk | 2 | 276| 23 | 51.51173, -0.00197 | | r1.ams.nl | 2 | 528| 20 | 52.35600, 4.95068 | | r1.sto.se | 2 | 752| 22 | 59.36264, 17.95560 | +---+---+--+---+-+ Table 1. Simplistic CMDB Based on the above CMDB table we can construct the following device specific configuration snippets. Within these snippets we adhere to the concept that edge devices are smart and core devices dumb. At the edge of the network we accept BGP Communities from customers, which we translate through a process of testing branching from 'something the customer understands' to 'something the network understands'. r1.tky.jp: 001. ip community-list THIS:METRO seq 5 permit 65123:30046 002. ip community-list THIS:COUNTRY seq 5 permit 65123:392 003. ip community-list THIS:CONTINENT seq 5 permit 65123:3000
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On Monday, February 10, 2014 05:43:04 PM Vlade Ristevski wrote: We're still on the 12.4 train. I do use an ACL with less than 100 entries which handle BCP38 and block a few bad actors and private IPs on the Internet. I will be moving the BCP38 ACL closer to the hosts before the upgrade so the ACL will be a bit shorter in the future. Be sure to enable Turbo ACL's for best ACL processing optimization on this platform. Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On 10/02/2014 19:44, Nikolay Shopik wrote: You mean IOS XR? Which was never released for software based routers, right? as it QNX in core. no, I meant modular IOS, not XR. This was an attempt to run a non bare-metal IOS. The kernel was based on qnx (http://goo.gl/9RSwHn), and cisco released it for the C6500 on the SXH and SXI code train. It turned out not to be much of a success in the end - very little of use was modularised, and it was canned after two minor code train releases. A bit sad really, because it never had enough time to mature. It was never released for any other platform. IOS-XE was a better implementation of non bare-metal ios Nick
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On Monday, February 10, 2014 06:08:42 PM Nicolas Chabbey wrote: I do remember we were able to forward around ~700Mbps of 1500 bytes traffic with old IOS images and no ACLs. The trick is some of those additional features are better optimized in more modern IOS releases (SRE, 15S). Quagmire. Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On Monday, February 10, 2014 07:58:16 PM Nick Hilliard wrote: in fact, the npe-g1 uses a BCM1250 which is a dual CPU unit but vanilla IOS is not able to use the second CPU for packet forwarding. Unsubstantiated rumour claimed that modular IOS (QNX kernel) could push about 1.6x the throughput of vanilla IOS, as it was smp capable. Pity it was never released. Haha, you remind me of PXF (although that was the NSE-100 and NSE-150). Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Looking for some guidance on creating route objects for ARIN
Nevermind, someone already jumped in and helped me. Thanks though for the email. Joe Jenkins 909.636.2097 On Feb 10, 2014, at 11:43 AM, Jay Hennigan j...@west.net wrote: On 2/10/14 9:08 AM, Joseph Jenkins wrote: I am trying to get the routing objects database. However I am getting back failures for the messages that I send in. I am wondering is it possible to get route objects created for the two /24s that I was given from my carriers allocations? If so what is the process to update the route objects database? I have my MNTNERID for my company, but when I use that to try and update the objects and attach them to my AS I am getting a failure. What are you sending (passwords redacted), to whom, and what failure message are you receiving? -- -- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - j...@impulse.net Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On Mon, 10 Feb 2014, Vlade Ristevski wrote: Answers on and off list are appreciated. At 700-800 megabit/s aggregated througput (in+out), you're very clsoe to the max performance envelope of the G1. If you're going down this route, be prepared to purchase new hardware at short notice in case your traffic increases faster than you anticipated. -- Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
routeviews+BGPmon resources
The NANOG60 Talk:
https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/monday.general.olschanowsky.routeviews.33.pdf
BGPmon Homepage
http://bgpmon.netsec.colostate.edu/
BGPmon Mailing List
http://www.netsec.colostate.edu/mailman/listinfo/bgpmon
BGPmon v7.3.3 Download
http://bgpmon.netsec.colostate.edu/index.php/download
BGPmon CPAN Modules e.g.
http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/B/BG/BGPMON/
BGPmon-core
BGPmon-Archiver
BGPmon-AnalyticsDB
BGPmon-CPM
RouteViews BGPmon Dedicated Instances
(rv2) livebgp-route-views2.routeviews.org
(rv3) livebgp-route-views3.routeviews.org
(rv6) livebgp-route-views6.routeviews.org
(paix) livebgp-paix.routeviews.org
(linx) livebgp-linx.routeviews.org
RouteViews BGPmon Consolidating Instances
(rv2+3+6) livebgp.routeviews.org
(paix+linx) livebgpix.routeviews.org
RouteViews MRT Archives
{http,ftp}://archive.routeviews.org/
rsync –list-only archive.routeviews.org::routeviews
rsync –av archive.routeviews.org::routeviews/bgpdata .
If you plan on utilizing one of the BGPmon live feeds for
an extended period, we would appreciate an e-mail. Please
let us know your intended usage and the subnet you will
be coming in from. For the RouteViews Instances, mail to
h...@routeviews.org. For general BGPmon questions,
bgp...@netsec.colostate.edu.
The RouteViews Instances are considered a test platform.
So while we do monitor, we are still debugging and doing
updates. Feel free to ask if you have questions or comments.
John Kemp
RouteViews Network Engineer
h...@routeviews.org
2014.02.10 NANOG60 day 1 notes...ish
I was going to put my notes from today's talk up at http://nanog.cluepon.net/index.php/Past_Events but discovered the site seems to have gone read-only, and my login doesn't work anymore. If people know what happened to the logins for that site, I'd be happy to add notes for today's talks to the page. Thanks! Matt
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
Cisco once implemented and released this feature to use the second core of the NPE-G1, most notably to manage the BRAS en/decapsulations tasks for LAC/LNS/PTA (PPPoE, L2TP...), effectively offering such 1.6 factor. It was called MPF, and was released in special 12.3-YM IOS (in 2004/2005 I guess). The first core was still running normal IOS while the second core was running a dedicated microcode (acting as some sort of data plane). However several features were not available, and it was quite buggy and unstable (unless you only used the very minimum features implemented in the MPF microcode: no MSS adjust, no ACL for PPP sessions...). It was quickly deprecated anyway. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps341/prod_end-of-life_notice0900aecd8067dd9f.html Le 10 févr. 2014 à 21:38, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu a écrit : On Monday, February 10, 2014 07:58:16 PM Nick Hilliard wrote: in fact, the npe-g1 uses a BCM1250 which is a dual CPU unit but vanilla IOS is not able to use the second CPU for packet forwarding. Unsubstantiated rumour claimed that modular IOS (QNX kernel) could push about 1.6x the throughput of vanilla IOS, as it was smp capable. Pity it was never released. Haha, you remind me of PXF (although that was the NSE-100 and NSE-150). Mark.
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
Are you suggesting getting the default gateway from both providers or getting the full table from one and using the default as a backup on the other (7206)? Thanks, On 2/10/2014 1:27 PM, Octavio Alvarez wrote: On 02/10/2014 08:05 AM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: The ACL is a recent addition and we can probably do away with it. I didn't notice a significant increase in CPU or drops since adding it. But we usually peak at about 200Mbps on this link. The full routing table is a must since we're dual homed. You don't necessarily need the full routing table for dual home, only for outgoing load balance. You can have BGP, filter your routes away, just leave a default gateway and still have dual homing. Your outgoing traffic will work as if it were active-standby, though. My 0.02. -- Vlad
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
On 02/10/2014 06:05 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: Are you suggesting getting the default gateway from both providers or getting the full table from one and using the default as a backup on the other (7206)? Whatever suits you best. Test and see. I'd just receive the full table anyway but filter them out, letting only the default routes go into the RIB. This should streamline your FIB. As I say, you lose outbound load balancing and your redundancy becomes all-or-nothing, but you save a few cycles. Again, I wouldn't recommend any of this because of the drawbacks, but along with other recommendations that others have made, like Turbo ACLs, it may buy you some time.
Re: 7206 VXR NPE-G1 throughput
Or assuming your using an Ethernet of some sort as your upstream connections you could grab something like a CCR from mikrotik for $1k and sleep easy knowing you're only using 6% of it's capacity. Sent from my iPhone On 11/02/2014, at 3:52 pm, Octavio Alvarez alvar...@alvarezp.ods.org wrote: On 02/10/2014 06:05 PM, Vlade Ristevski wrote: Are you suggesting getting the default gateway from both providers or getting the full table from one and using the default as a backup on the other (7206)? Whatever suits you best. Test and see. I'd just receive the full table anyway but filter them out, letting only the default routes go into the RIB. This should streamline your FIB. As I say, you lose outbound load balancing and your redundancy becomes all-or-nothing, but you save a few cycles. Again, I wouldn't recommend any of this because of the drawbacks, but along with other recommendations that others have made, like Turbo ACLs, it may buy you some time.
NANOG Attendees: Flight cancellations on Wednesday
Just a heads up to those attending NANOG in Atlanta. Delta has already cancelled 500 flights for wednesday, and will likely be canceling more. http://www.delta.com/content/www/en_US/traveling-with-us/alerts-and-advisories/Southeast-Winter-Weather.html You may want to check your reservations on your respective airlines, and reschedule flights and extend your hotel stay here, before everything is sold out. In my particular case, the flights for thursday to my home town were already almost entirely sold out. Regards, -Phil
