SMF Tie Cable Standards for Data Center Applications
In our new data center builds we're transitioning from MMF to SMF for the tie cabling between networking gear in the MDF/IDF racks to the server racks. Today those interconnects are short (under 100 meters) 10GE and 40GE-LX4 over MMF. We’re transitioning to SMF to support services beyond that, such as 100GBASE-LR4. Would G.652.D be the right specification for the infrastructure tie cabling? Are there other considerations around this? Thank you
Building a technical library
Looking to develop a technical library for about 15 staff members all under the same roof. Subject matter would focus around Juniper/Junos, TCP/IP, dwdm, python, java, and expand from there. The O'reilly Safari service looks rather comprehensive, although at $400/user there may be more value buying hard copies and own them outright (or at least until they walk away). Are there other online resources that offer a good value? Other experiences weighing the pros and cons? Thanks, Chris
Looking for a Consolidated Communications (AS5742) contact
Hoping to speak with a Consolidated Communications (AS5742) engineer regarding routing in Illinois region towards Gaikai (AS33353). Thanks, Chris Costa
Re: Looking for a Consolidated Communications (AS5742) contact
Oops, sorry. Didn't think those other requests got through the moderator. :) On Feb 6, 2015 6:18 PM, Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net wrote: Yeah, but it's the same guy looking for the same people for the same issue. I know it sucks to have things not working right, but they're probably not here. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com To: NANOG nanog@nanog.org Sent: Friday, February 6, 2015 8:10:58 PM Subject: Re: Looking for a Consolidated Communications (AS5742) contact - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett na...@ics-il.net This is the third or fourth request I've seen lately. I'm assuming they don't have anyone on here. Not necessarily. Some people reply privately, so as not to come out of the closet. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
eBGP Graceful-Restart and GR Helper Mode with external networks.
Is there a BCOP (or substantiated opinion) for negotiating eBGP Graceful-Restart and Graceful-Restart Helper-Mode with external networks? Implementation looks varied across a few larger transit providers, and in some cases implemented inconsistently within the same provider. Seeing most IX peers with GR disabled, although I don't see they've disabled GR Helper Mode. Apparently, Junos (12.3, at least) doesn't offer disabling GR Helper Mode for BGP. Thanks.
Pad 1310nm cross-connects?
What are the opinions/views on attenuating short, 1310nm LR cross-connects. Assume 20m cable length and utilizing the same vendor optics on each side of the link. Considering the LR transmit spec doesn't exceed the receiver's high threshold value do you pad the receiver closer to the median RX range to avoid potential receiver burnout over time, or just leave it un-padded? Thanks
Re: Peering Exchange Configurations
Some ResearchEducation type peering exchanges, like Pacific Wave http://www.pacificwave.net/ , support ipv4 multicast forwarding. As an exchange operator you'd want to support PIM-Snooping and the ability to disable DR-Flooding to control those flows just to the networks that joined them. Chris -- Chris Costa CENIC cco...@cenic.org On Apr 8, 2010, at 9:29 AM, Joe Abley wrote: 4) Do exchanges typically support the following address families? IPv4 Multicast IPv6 Unicast IPv6 Multicast
Re: Using /31 for router links
We recently did a backbone router upgrade and the vendor surprisingly didn't support /31's. We had to renumber all those interconnects and peering sessions to /30's. That wasn't fun! On Jan 22, 2010, at 4:53 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: Joe Provo wrote: On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 04:08:28PM -0800, Seth Mattinen wrote: In the past I've always used /30's for PTP connection subnets out of old habit (i.e. Ethernet that won't take unnumbered) but now I'm considering switching to /31's in order to stretch my IPv4 space further. Has anyone else does this? Good? Bad? Based on the bit of testing I've done this shouldn't be a problem since it's only between routers. rfc3021 is over 9 years old, so should be no suprise that it works well. :-) I'm never surprised anymore by something that should work turning out to have some obscure quirk about it, so I figured it was worth asking. ;) ~Seth
