RE: SD-WAN for enlightened
Too many to list. I don’t know who is “winning” in market share right now, as I am sure each vendor tracks their wins differently. There are definitely a few making more noise than others. Doug Marschke CTO <http://www.sdnessentials.com> www.sdnessentials.com JNCIE-SP #41, JNCIE-ENT #3 415-902-5702 (cell) 415-340-3112 (office) From: Colton Conor [mailto:colton.co...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2017 6:26 PM To: Doug Marschke <d...@sdnessentials.com> Cc: Kasper Adel <karim.a...@gmail.com>; NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: SD-WAN for enlightened So who are the big SD-WAN players out there? On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:31 AM, Doug Marschke <d...@sdnessentials.com <mailto:d...@sdnessentials.com> > wrote: Hello Kasper, I will do my best to answer your SD-WAN question, but as you mentioned it is a buzzword that has a bit of confusion in its definitions. I would say that a SD-WAN solution should have the following elements: 1.) Ability to manage multiple WAN connection and choose the path based on user and machine criteria (The Hybrid WAN) 2.) A controller to manage the polices and operations of the SD-WAN devices 3.) Analytics on the network and application level 4.) A software overlay that abstracts and secures the underlying networks Currently there are a lot of solutions out there by many vendors. Some do all of these and some a subset, so it make the landscape a bit confusing. Lots of times vendors use SD-WAN when they are really just talking about Hybrid WAN (multiple connections) or WAN optimization. Doug Marschke CTO www.sdnessentials.com <http://www.sdnessentials.com> JNCIE-SP #41, JNCIE-ENT #3 415-902-5702 (cell) 415-340-3112 (office) -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org <mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org> ] On Behalf Of Kasper Adel Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 1:14 PM To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org <mailto:nanog@nanog.org> > Subject: SD-WAN for enlightened Hi, I'm not sure if the buzzword SD-WAN is used to compensate for another buzzword that got over-utilized (SDN) or it is a true 'new and improved' way of doing things that has some innovation into it. I heard different explanation from different vendors: 1) appliances (+ controller) placed in-line to put traffic in tunnels based on policy, with some DPI and traffic tagging...(to do performance/policy based routing) over an expensive link (MPLS) and a cheap one (broadband) with some 'firewall-like' filtering capabilities. 2) same as above, with a flavor of 'machine learning' to find a pattern for traffic to optimize utilization. 3) a controller that instantiates and tears down tunnels from 'classic routers' based on external policies and Network based features to do performance based routing over an expensive link (MPLS) and a cheap one (broadband) with encryption. Is the above a decent high-level summary? Has anyone tried any of these solutions, any general feedback ? Cheers, Kim
RE: SD-WAN for enlightened
Hello Kasper, I will do my best to answer your SD-WAN question, but as you mentioned it is a buzzword that has a bit of confusion in its definitions. I would say that a SD-WAN solution should have the following elements: 1.) Ability to manage multiple WAN connection and choose the path based on user and machine criteria (The Hybrid WAN) 2.) A controller to manage the polices and operations of the SD-WAN devices 3.) Analytics on the network and application level 4.) A software overlay that abstracts and secures the underlying networks Currently there are a lot of solutions out there by many vendors. Some do all of these and some a subset, so it make the landscape a bit confusing. Lots of times vendors use SD-WAN when they are really just talking about Hybrid WAN (multiple connections) or WAN optimization. Doug Marschke CTO www.sdnessentials.com JNCIE-SP #41, JNCIE-ENT #3 415-902-5702 (cell) 415-340-3112 (office) -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Kasper Adel Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 1:14 PM To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: SD-WAN for enlightened Hi, I'm not sure if the buzzword SD-WAN is used to compensate for another buzzword that got over-utilized (SDN) or it is a true 'new and improved' way of doing things that has some innovation into it. I heard different explanation from different vendors: 1) appliances (+ controller) placed in-line to put traffic in tunnels based on policy, with some DPI and traffic tagging...(to do performance/policy based routing) over an expensive link (MPLS) and a cheap one (broadband) with some 'firewall-like' filtering capabilities. 2) same as above, with a flavor of 'machine learning' to find a pattern for traffic to optimize utilization. 3) a controller that instantiates and tears down tunnels from 'classic routers' based on external policies and Network based features to do performance based routing over an expensive link (MPLS) and a cheap one (broadband) with encryption. Is the above a decent high-level summary? Has anyone tried any of these solutions, any general feedback ? Cheers, Kim
RE: Cumulus List
I can help..contact me off list. Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® 4, an ATT 4G LTE smartphone Original message From: Skeeve Stevens skeeve+na...@eintellegonetworks.com Date: 02/10/2015 5:44 PM (GMT-08:00) To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Cumulus List Hi all, I am looking to get a better understanding of some features of Cumulus Linux their pre-sales is a bit inundated, but I am wondering if there is a Cisco-NSP or something similar out there for Cumulus... Thanks :) ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - Founder Chief Network Architect* eintellego Networks Pty Ltd Email: ske...@eintellegonetworks.com ; Web: eintellegonetworks.com Phone: 1300 239 038 ; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; Skype: skeeve Facebook: eintellegonetworks http://facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; Twitter: eintellego https://twitter.com/eintellego LinkedIn: /in/skeeve http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve ; Expert360: Profile https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9 The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - Cisco - Cumulus Linux - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering
RE: OSPF vs IS-IS
I know we are just talking about the core, but out of curiosity will you have any MPLS/BGP VPNS that you may want to run the IGP over. In this case, OSPF may make a little more sense. However if you are really just talking the core, I would agree with the rest of the list, as the decoupling of IP has some advantages and does the TLV structure. Doug Marschke Chief Operating Officer JNCIE-ER #3, JNCIE-M #41, JNCI (415) 704-5005 (office) (415) 902-5702 (cell) (415)-358-4059 (fax) www.proteus.net -Original Message- From: CJ [mailto:cjinfant...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 5:24 AM To: jim deleskie Cc: nanog@nanog.org; Jeffrey S. Young Subject: Re: OSPF vs IS-IS You guys are making a lot of good points. I will check into the Doyle book to formulate an opinion. So, I am completely new to the SP environment and OSPF is what I have learned because I have ever only had experience in the enterprise. It seems that from this discussion, IS-IS is still a real, very viable option. So, IS-IS being preferred...realistically, what is the learning curve? CJ On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 7:57 AM, jim deleskie deles...@gmail.com wrote: If a network is big enough big / complex enough that you really need to worry about performance of mesh groups or tweaking areas then its big enough that having a noc eng page you out at 2am when there is an issue doesn't really scale. I'm all for ISIS, if I was to build a network from scratch I'd likely default to it. I'm just say, new features or performance aside the knowledge of your team under you will have much more impact on how your network runs then probably any other factor. I've seen this time and time again when 'new tech' has been introduced into networks, from vendors to protocols. Most every time with engineers saying we have smart people they will learn it / adjust. Almost every case of that turned into 6 mts of crap for both ops and eng while the ops guys became clueful in the new tech, but as a friend frequently says Your network, your choice. -jim On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Jeffrey S. Young yo...@jsyoung.net wrote: On 12/08/2011, at 12:08 AM, CJ cjinfant...@gmail.com wrote: Awesome, I was thinking the same thing. Most experience is OSPF so it only makes sense. That is a good tip about OSPFv3 too. I will have to look more deeply into OSPFv3. Thanks, -CJ On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 9:34 AM, jim deleskie deles...@gmail.com wrote: Having run both on some good sized networks, I can tell you to run what your ops folks know best. We can debate all day the technical merits of one v another, but end of day, it always comes down to your most jr ops eng having to make a change at 2 am, you need to design for this case, if your using OSPF today and they know OSPF I'd say stick with it to reduce the chance of things blowing up at 2am when someone tries to 'fix' something else. -jim On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:29 AM, William Cooper wcoope...@gmail.com wrote: I'm totally in concurrence with Stephan's point. Couple of things to consider: a) deciding to migrate to either ISIS or OSPFv3 from another protocol is still migrating to a new protocol and b) even in the case of migrating to OSPFv3, there are fairly significant changes in behavior from OSPFv2 to be aware of (most notably authentication, but that's fodder for another conversation). -Tony This topic is a 'once a month' on NANOG, I'm sure we could check the archives for some point-in-time research but I'm curious to learn if anyone maintains statistics? It would be interesting to see statistics on how many service providers run either protocol. IS-IS has, for some years, been the de facto choice for SP's and as a result the vendor and standardisation community 'used to' develop SP features more often for IS-IS. IS-IS was, therefore, more 'mature' than OSPF for SP's. I wonder if this is still the case? For me, designing an IGP with IS-IS is much easier than it is with OSPF. Mesh groups are far easier to plan (more straightforward) easier to change than OSPF areas. As for junior noc staff touching much of anything to do with an ISP's IGP at 2am, wake me up instead. jy -- CJ http://convergingontheedge.com http://www.convergingontheedge.com
