Re: Zayo vs Coent

[Nick W]

I actually went through this exercise recently with Cogent, Zayo, and two
other providers. The requests were all made via email at roughly the same
time. HE was by far the quickest (I think under an hour), with Cogent being
about half a day initially (but they did miss a BGP session, which was
fixed within a few hours of notifying them), and Zayo taking about 3 days,
with a follow up call around the 2 day mark.

>From an outage standpoint: I've had three outages with Zayo, the first
being the most painful (left hand doesn't talk to right hand), the second
was brief and they provided an RFO same-day, and the third being similar to
the first, but resolved quicker because I was able to reference details
from the first. I've never had total outages with Cogent on my transit, but
I have on transport, and they were relatively quick to respond, resolve, or
provide details from third-party providers each time. From a quality
standpoint, I "feel" like the Zayo transit is better, but maybe that's
because I pay more for it. I think from a peering standpoint, I tend to see
better paths through Zayo. I've seen Cogent send traffic way out of region
for several content providers - causing customers to complain about high
latency to Google.

Nick



On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 3:09 PM John Von Essen  wrote:

> Zayo is probably a tad better in the network quality, but… Zayo’s NCC is
> awful when it comes to fixing or resolving anything, even something as
> simply as add a default route to my BGP session. And its takes forever,
> like a whole day waiting in queue. Cogent, you can call, and 15 minutes
> your done.
>
> -John
>
> > On Nov 9, 2018, at 1:18 PM, Dovid Bender  wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are in a facility where my only options are Cogent or Zayo. We plan
> on getting a 10G connection for a web crawler using v4 only. Looking for
> feedback on either or (keeping the politics out of it).
> >
> > TIA.
> >
> > Dovid
> >
>
>

Re: What NMS do you use and why?

[Nick W]

LibreNMS + Weathermap for graphs, real-time, and alerting. Vaping for a
simple Up/Degraded/Down dashboard (great replacement for
Multiping/PingPlotter on a TV). Elastiflow for netflow.

I really really want to like OpenNMS, and would love to use it daily; I
feel like it could handle many integrations well, but have never had the
time to dedicate to fully diving into it. I have used it in the past for
small setups (monitoring ~100 remotely managed routers/firewall) and it did
well, after getting past some learning curves. I keep coming back to it
every 6 months or so and trying the latest version.

On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 9:51 AM Colton Conor  wrote:

> We are looking for a new network monitoring system. Since there are so
> many operators on this list, I would like to know which NMS do you use and
> why? Is there one that you really like, and others that you hate?
>
> For free options (opensouce), LibreNMS and NetXMS come highly recommended
> by many wireless ISPs on low budgets. However, I am not sure the commercial
> options available nor their price points.
>
>
>

Re: Contact for Frontiernet - AS5650

[Nick W]

Did you ever get a response from someone at Frontier? I sent a peering
request yesterday and got a response today.

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Ryan DiRocco <
ryan.diro...@totalserversolutions.com> wrote:

> Yes, just a typo on here, I have been sending to the right contact :)
>
>
>
> Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
>
>
>  Original message 
> From: Marshall Eubanks 
> Date: 9/15/17 10:38 PM (GMT-05:00)
> To: Ryan DiRocco 
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Contact for Frontiernet - AS5650
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 9:50 PM, Ryan DiRocco  totalserversolutions.com>
> wrote:
> Can anyone put me in touch with a contact from Frontiernet regrading
> peering off-list?
>
> I've been contacting per...@frontiernet.net >> since
> 02/2017 without response and have sat on hold for the noc for 1+ hour
> multiple times without answer ;)
>
>
> I suspect this is just an email typo, but it's listed with two "e"s.
>
> Contact Information
>
>   *   Maintenance:  isis...@frontiernet.net >
>
>   *   Peering: peer...@frontiernet.net
>   *
>
> Regards
>
>
> Any help greatly appreciated!
>
>
>
>

Re: Creating a Circuit ID Format

[Nick W]

More information for AT circuit IDs, could give some ideas:
http://etler.com/docs/AT/ATTCCGTab11.pdf

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:41 PM, Tim Pozar  wrote:

> Could start looking at the AT/Telecordia standards for this sort of
> thing...
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuit_ID
> http://www.centurylink.com/wholesale/systems/WebHelp/
> reference/circuit_id_formats_guide.htm
>
> On 8/21/17 1:26 PM, Colton Conor wrote:
> > We are building a new fiber network, and need help creating a circuit ID
> > format to for new fiber circuits. Is there a guide or standard for fiber
> > circuit formats? Does the circuit ID change when say a customer upgrades
> > for 100Mbps to 1Gbps port?
> >
> > What do the larger carriers do? Any advice on creating a circuit ID
> format
> > for a brand new fiber network?
> >
> >
> >  Originally we ran a CLEC using a LECs copper, and our circuit ID was
> > historically a telephone number for DSL circuits. The ILEC had a complex
> > method for assigning circuit IDs.
> >
> > I am sure anything will work as long as you keep track of it, but any
> > advice would be great!
> >
>

Re: EdgeRouter Infinity as medium-sized "IXP Peering Router"?

[Nick W]

1.9.7 definitely applies to Infinity:

ER-8-XG:
https://dl.ubnt.com/firmwares/edgemax/v1.9.7/ER-e1000.v1.9.7+hotfix.1.5005858.tar
(SHA256:b1a16900e3fbe1eef3876548ac7eda12a95ef849d4328f22b478459e2a506b92)



On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 9:07 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:

> Forgot reply all...
>
> That does not apply to the infinity. Those shipped with 1.9.8dev.
>
>
> On Aug 8, 2017 8:03 PM, "Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> wrote:
>
> > 1.9.7+hotfix.1 is the currently available stable. 1.9.1.1 was released on
> > May 1st.
> >
> > https://community.ubnt.com/t5/EdgeMAX-Updates-Blog/EdgeMAX-
> > EdgeRouter-software-security-release-v1-9-7-hotfix-1/ba-p/2019161
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > Mike Hammett
> > Intelligent Computing Solutions
> > http://www.ics-il.com
> >
> > Midwest-IX
> > http://www.midwest-ix.com
> >
> > - Original Message -
> >
> > From: "Nick W" <nickdwh...@gmail.com>
> > To: nanog@nanog.org
> > Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 10:55:28 PM
> > Subject: Re: EdgeRouter Infinity as medium-sized "IXP Peering Router"?
> >
> > Tried the Infinity, unsuccessfully. Several of them. Ended up pulling
> them
> > all, sitting in my homelab for now. Multiple full tables, nothing fancy
> for
> > firewall or QOS, but ran into issues with random ribd/bgpd crashes and
> > kernel panics. I've submitted a lot of logs and core dumps to UBNT. I
> would
> > personally stay away from them until they are out of beta, and possibly
> > even another 6-12 months after that.
> >
> > The current stable EdgeMax version (1.9.1.1) is relatively stable, but
> > using an outdated ZebOS (1.2.0?) with a number of issues (MPLS, OSPF,
> BGP)
> > - nothing too major, but can be annoying. Probably okay for what you
> > described. Depending on how much throughput you need, an ERPro, or
> Mikrotik
> > would probably be fine. If you need 10G, load up VyOS on some cheap
> servers
> > with an Intel or Solarflare card... probably cheaper than a beta Infinity
> > or Mikrotik.
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Job Snijders <j...@instituut.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear NANOG,
> > >
> > > Some friends of mine are operating a nonprofit (on shoe string) and
> > looking
> > > to connect some CDN caches to an IX fabric. A BGP speaking device is
> > needed
> > > between the caches and the BGP peers connected to the fabric. The BGP
> > > speaker is needed to present the peers on the IX with a unified view of
> > the
> > > assemblage of CDN nodes.
> > >
> > > I was wondering whether anyone was experience with the "EdgeRouter
> > Infinity
> > > XG" device, specifically in the role of a simple peering router for a
> > > couple of tens of thousands of routes. (I'd point default to the left
> and
> > > take just the on-net routes on the right to reduce the table size
> > > requirement).
> > >
> > > I hope the device can do at least 2xLACP trunks, has a sizable FIB, is
> > > automatable (supports idempotency), can forward IMIX at line-rate,
> *flow,
> > > and exposes some telemetry via SNMP.
> > >
> > > Any note sharing would be appreciated!
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > >
> > > Job
> > >
> >
> >
>

Re: EdgeRouter Infinity as medium-sized "IXP Peering Router"?

[Nick W]

Tried the Infinity, unsuccessfully. Several of them. Ended up pulling them
all, sitting in my homelab for now. Multiple full tables, nothing fancy for
firewall or QOS, but ran into issues with random ribd/bgpd crashes and
kernel panics. I've submitted a lot of logs and core dumps to UBNT. I would
personally stay away from them until they are out of beta, and possibly
even another 6-12 months after that.

The current stable EdgeMax version (1.9.1.1) is relatively stable, but
using an outdated ZebOS (1.2.0?) with a number of issues (MPLS, OSPF, BGP)
- nothing too major, but can be annoying. Probably okay for what you
described. Depending on how much throughput you need, an ERPro, or Mikrotik
would probably be fine. If you need 10G, load up VyOS on some cheap servers
with an Intel or Solarflare card... probably cheaper than a beta Infinity
or Mikrotik.

On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Job Snijders  wrote:

> Dear NANOG,
>
> Some friends of mine are operating a nonprofit (on shoe string) and looking
> to connect some CDN caches to an IX fabric. A BGP speaking device is needed
> between the caches and the BGP peers connected to the fabric. The BGP
> speaker is needed to present the peers on the IX with a unified view of the
> assemblage of CDN nodes.
>
> I was wondering whether anyone was experience with the "EdgeRouter Infinity
> XG" device, specifically in the role of a simple peering router for a
> couple of tens of thousands of routes. (I'd point default to the left and
> take just the on-net routes on the right to reduce the table size
> requirement).
>
> I hope the device can do at least 2xLACP trunks, has a sizable FIB, is
> automatable (supports idempotency), can forward IMIX at line-rate, *flow,
> and exposes some telemetry via SNMP.
>
> Any note sharing would be appreciated!
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Job
>

Anyone Competent within ATT ASE (On Demand)?

[Nick W]

I have an ASEOD change order (disconnect from EVC, then add to new EVC)
that is effectively stuck and has taken 4 of my circuits down. I'm unable
to initiate new changes to the affected circuits. I've got 2 tickets open,
escalated to level 6, spoken with 2 different ENOC people, and no one seems
to be able to do anything or help me, and no one knows how to get a hold of
anyone that can actually work on On Demand circuits. Been at this for 12
hours now...

This network automation stuff is fun, eh? Except when you outsource the
people that fix it, and they apparently don't work on weekends... or don't
exist at all.


Thanks,
Nick

Re: Sprint 3G/4G PPTP VPN connectivity

[Nick W]

I have my EVO 4G connected right now over PPTP. I have seen issues
previously, but it seems like it varies from cell tower to cell tower.


On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Drew Weaver drew.wea...@thenap.com wrote:

 Has anyone been able to pull any magic off that allows PPTP connectivity
 over sprint's 3G/4G wireless network?

 I assume they're just filtering it flat out, but before I contact them I
 wanted to see if anyone has found a resolution on their own.

 I have several Nexus S 4G devices which are unable to get PPTP connections
 over 3G/4G but if you enable WIFI it comes up instantly.

 I've been researching this off and on all weekend but wondered if anyone
 else had run into this issue.

 thanks,
 -Drew