honestly i haven't any problem with EVC, Cisco documentation is maybe better??
;-))thank you all guys
> From: mark.ti...@seacom.mu
> To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] qfabric 1536k mac address?
> Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 09:21:36 +0200
> CC: superburr
On Friday, January 03, 2014 09:09:53 AM giovanni rana wrote:
> Well, thanks a lot eugeniu, got it now, it's not easy to
> change your mind about L2 mechanism because they haven't
> been changed for years within standard switches.
Tell me what you think when you come across Cisco's EVC
solution :
Well, thanks a lot eugeniu, got it now, it's not easy to change your mind about
L2 mechanism because they haven't been changed for years within standard
switches.
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 23:45:29 +0200
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] qfabric 1536k mac address?
From: eu...@imacandi.net
To:
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:18 PM, giovanni rana wrote:
> Ahahah that was just an example ;)) And of course i can put another
> standard L2 switch between the hosts and the qfx3500 which aggregates all
> the hosts and goes to the qfx3500 with a single 10ge port, if I don't mind
> about oversubscr.
mac1 to mac65536 which are all pointing to nodeA can be
aggregated/merged all together, because they can point to a remote unique node
instead to a local port, but this doesn't mean they take less entries (or less
"space") in the mac address table compared to normal entries.
tha
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 8:10 PM, giovanni rana wrote:
> I do, but how big is my DC is not relevant, like being flat or non flat
> does not matter...Since the data sheet clearly says 1.536.000 Mac addresses
> are supported, I need to understand if we are talking of unique Mac
> addresses or that's a
2 Jan 2014 19:10:06 +0200
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] qfabric 1536k mac address?
From: eu...@imacandi.net
To: superburri...@hotmail.com
CC: bd...@comlinx.com.au; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:20 PM, giovanni rana wrote:
Even in the case you mentioned the node shall be able to ke
If the QFabric controllers can do anything it's scale up the number of MACs
that can be learned across the fabric. Their solution was novel before SDN and
I guess it's to their credit that they are not trying to market the QFabric
that way now ;)
rgds,
--r
On Jan 2, 2014, at 9:10 AM, E
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:20 PM, giovanni rana wrote:
> Even in the case you mentioned the node shall be able to keep a table
> where there's an index Made by 1536k entries. I can understand that some
> memory can be saved by using a vpls style approach, but if I got 1536k VMs
> with unique and Mac
ia qfabric? Public docs does not
clarify enough this aspects. Thanks for your answer!
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] qfabric 1536k mac address?
> From: bd...@comlinx.com.au
> Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 18:39:51 +1000
> CC: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> To: superburri...@hotmail.com
>
> At a
At a guess I'd say it's because in Q-Fabric, the "MAC-learning" is performed by
a similar to a VPLS instance per VLAN rather than traditional per-switch CAM
tables.
I imagine this allows for better scalability/optimisation.
The switch CAM would then only need to worry about L2-adjacent QF nod
Hi, during the evaluation of a new data center architecture, how can qfabric
support so many Mac addresses? The qfx3500 node supports only 128k Mac tables,
how can they get 1536k as declared in the data sheet? Is it because of an
optimized use of mac-vlan pairs?
Thanks for any answer and happy
On 2/27/11 11:55 AM, "Keegan Holley" wrote:
>On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
>
>> On (2011-02-24 17:15 -0800), Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>>
>> > that activity can be simple as front-running large orders (which take
>> > longer to fill) with small ones, an elaborate algorithm is not
>>> Stefan Fouant, CISSP, JNCIEx2
>>> <http://www.shortestpathfirst.net/> www.shortestpathfirst.net
>>> GPG Key ID: 0xB4C956EC
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Chris Evans [mailto:chrisccnpsp...@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Wednes
e that
>>> latency is more than just a "buzz" word.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Stefan Fouant, CISSP, JNCIEx2
>>> <http://www.shortestpathfirst.net/> www.shortestpathfirst.net
>>> GPG Key ID: 0xB4C956EC
>>>
>>>
&g
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On (2011-02-24 17:15 -0800), Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>
> > that activity can be simple as front-running large orders (which take
> > longer to fill) with small ones, an elaborate algorithm is not
> > necessarily a requirement. I'm kind of down on th
@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
I sat through my first presentation of this sometime last year, and
while I can imagine what I'd use it for, the current ex82xx virtual
chassis builds a large enough diameter core for my immediate needs.
Getting rid of blade server chassis and
On 2/26/11 10:33 PM, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 10:06:45PM -0800, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>> you'll find no tcam in your high-end MX style platforms and ultimately
>> the power requirements for large amounts of cam will doom the current
>> iterations of tcam technology. 80
On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 10:06:45PM -0800, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> you'll find no tcam in your high-end MX style platforms and ultimately
> the power requirements for large amounts of cam will doom the current
> iterations of tcam technology. 800w per slot devices are bad enough
> 2kw per slot devi
nt, CISSP, JNCIEx2
>> <http://www.shortestpathfirst.net/> www.shortestpathfirst.net
>> GPG Key ID: 0xB4C956EC
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Chris Evans [mailto:chrisccnpsp...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 11:55 PM
>> To: Stefan Fouant
On 2/26/11 5:53 AM, Clarke Morledge wrote:
> Guys, I know we've probably beaten this thread to death, but I'd like to
> get back to Keegan's original question on the thread: so what exactly
> is Qfabric?
>
> Stefan's description that it improves on TRILL by eliminating the
> forwarding table look
Guys, I know we've probably beaten this thread to death, but I'd like to
get back to Keegan's original question on the thread: so what exactly is
Qfabric?
Stefan's description that it improves on TRILL by eliminating the
forwarding table lookup along the path is intriguing. Doug's suggestion
gt;
> Stefan Fouant, CISSP, JNCIEx2
> <http://www.shortestpathfirst.net/> www.shortestpathfirst.net
> GPG Key ID: 0xB4C956EC
>
>
>
> From: Chris Evans [mailto:chrisccnpsp...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 11:55 PM
> To: Stefan Fouant
> Cc: Juniper-Nsp List;
On (2011-02-25 11:31 -0800), Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> network infrastructure is a very small portion of the capital outlay for
> one of these operations so refreshing equipment to take advantage of
> small opportunities is easy to justify...
>
> That said, once you've gone cut-through, shed all the
On 2/25/11 5:42 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On (2011-02-24 17:15 -0800), Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>
>> that activity can be simple as front-running large orders (which take
>> longer to fill) with small ones, an elaborate algorithm is not
>> necessarily a requirement. I'm kind of down on the market utility
]
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 11:15 PM
To: Jensen Tyler
Cc: Jeff Cadwallader; Doug Hanks; Juniper-Nsp List
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
This sounds more like a configuration problem than a latency problem.
Windows Vista/2008 and higher will auto-tune TCP window size to take advantage
of
fic through a
> node where the L2/L3 pieces meet (like VPLS to a node where the IRB interface
> is..)
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Doug Hanks
> To: Chris Evans ; Stefan Fouant
>
> Cc: Juniper-Nsp List
> Sent: Thu, February 24, 2011
On (2011-02-24 17:15 -0800), Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> that activity can be simple as front-running large orders (which take
> longer to fill) with small ones, an elaborate algorithm is not
> necessarily a requirement. I'm kind of down on the market utility of
> such activity but it's not presently i
ether.net
> [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jeff Cadwallader
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 11:31 AM
> To: Doug Hanks
> Cc: Juniper-Nsp List
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
>
> I deal with a lot of those issues also and usually when I ask what do they
> mean
On 2/24/11 2:31 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On (2011-02-24 14:59 -0600), Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
>
>> latency in and of itself, just that you are "better than the other guy"
>> so you can out-trade him). When it comes to microseconds of latency in
>> the forwarding plane of a switch/router, I'm
2011
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
I honestly wonder how many caveats there is going to be. Everything sounds
great on paper from every vendor
On Feb 24, 2011 5:28 PM, "Derick Winkworth" wrote:
> Also integrated L2/L3 forwarding so that you don't hairpin traffic through
a
meet (like VPLS to a node where the IRB
interface
> is..)
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Doug Hanks
> To: Chris Evans ; Stefan Fouant
>
> Cc: Juniper-Nsp List
> Sent: Thu, February 24, 2011 11:15:53 AM
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
>
>
On (2011-02-24 14:59 -0600), Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> latency in and of itself, just that you are "better than the other guy"
> so you can out-trade him). When it comes to microseconds of latency in
> the forwarding plane of a switch/router, I'm far less convinced that
> this is a real is
ry 24, 2011 11:15:53 AM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
A lot of our customers require low latency: financial, higher education, HPC
environments and utility.
Juniper has taken the time to solve more than just the low latency problem.
We're trying to solve larger problems such as how do you
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:55:10AM -0500, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> I heard about someone building a microwave link btw CHI and NYC due to
> the lower latency compared to fiber and technology that they are able
> to attain. This is valuable for the high frequency traders, which
> while they opera
Sounds like the bandwidth-delay product really hampered SMB.
From: Jensen Tyler [mailto:jty...@fiberutilities.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 11:31 AM
To: Chris Evans
Cc: Juniper-Nsp List; Doug Hanks; Jeff Cadwallader
Subject: RE: [j-nsp] Qfabric
This test was over our Private Fiber WAN
.
Performance is perception.
From: Chris Evans [mailto:chrisccnpsp...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 1:11 PM
To: Jensen Tyler
Cc: Juniper-Nsp List; Doug Hanks; Jeff Cadwallader
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
I don't know what hardware you are using but even our older gear isn&#
ge-
> From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:
juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jeff Cadwallader
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 11:31 AM
> To: Doug Hanks
> Cc: Juniper-Nsp List
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
>
> I deal with a lot of those issues also and
Hanks; Juniper-Nsp List
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
I would have taken that as an excuse to use NFS. I've never done such testing
but 30% is horrendous.
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Jensen Tyler
mailto:jty...@fiberutilities.com>> wrote:
In my tests I have seen as much as a
.net [mailto:
> juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jeff Cadwallader
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 11:31 AM
> To: Doug Hanks
> Cc: Juniper-Nsp List
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
>
> I deal with a lot of those issues also and usually when I ask what do they
&
This isn't designed to be placed as an aggregated PE device. I would
definitely say use an MX in this situation ;)
From: Keegan Holley [mailto:keegan.hol...@sungard.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 9:56 AM
To: Doug Hanks
Cc: Chris Evans; Juniper-Nsp List
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
not
milliseconds(mostly layer 2).
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jeff Cadwallader
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 11:31 AM
To: Doug Hanks
Cc: Juniper-Nsp List
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
I deal wit
ts 18 ports of copper and 36
> ports of 1Gb fiber today.
>
> Doug
>
> From: Chris Evans [mailto:chrisccnpsp...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 9:24 AM
> To: Doug Hanks
> Cc: Juniper-Nsp List; Stefan Fouant
> Subject: Re: RE: [j-nsp] Qfabric
>
>
>
Stefan Fouant
Subject: Re: RE: [j-nsp] Qfabric
Yeah and that's great. As 90% of the installs are still gige copper where is
that offering? :)
On Feb 24, 2011 12:17 PM, "Doug Hanks"
mailto:dha...@juniper.net>> wrote:
> A lot of our customers require low latency: fi
I deal with a lot of those issues also and usually when I ask what do they
mean by low latency the response comes back with sub-25ms. My data center is
all 1-2ms max on an aging platform.
The other question I have is what happens to that entire logical device when
it fails in spectacular ways.
I
On 02/24/11 12:24, Chris Evans wrote:
> Yeah and that's great. As 90% of the installs are still gige copper where
> is that offering? :)
> On Feb 24, 2011 12:17 PM, "Doug Hanks" wrote:
>> A lot of our customers require low latency: financial, higher education,
> HPC environments and utility.
>>
ague of its own.
Doug
From: Chris Evans [mailto:chrisccnpsp...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 5:05 PM
To: Doug Hanks
Cc: juniper-nsp; Keegan Holley
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
I think its a sexy solution however it falls short in areas to meet our needs.
I think Juniper has some
--
> From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:
juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Chris Evans
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 8:55 PM
> To: Stefan Fouant
> Cc: Juniper-Nsp List
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
>
> Low latency is a buzz word. Who rea
r-Nsp List
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
Low latency is a buzz word. Who really needs it? Very few applications
really need it. I work in the financial industry and the only place we have
a use case for low latency is in the investment bank context.. its like 20
switches out of the thousands we ha
shortestpathfirst.net
>> GPG Key ID: 0xB4C956EC
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Chris Evans [mailto:chrisccnpsp...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 11:55 PM
>> To: Stefan Fouant
>> Cc: Juniper-Nsp List; Ben Dale
>> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
st.net
> GPG Key ID: 0xB4C956EC
>
>
>
> From: Chris Evans [mailto:chrisccnpsp...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 11:55 PM
> To: Stefan Fouant
> Cc: Juniper-Nsp List; Ben Dale
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
>
>
>
> Low latency is a buzz word. Who
You are entitled to your opinion but I still disagree. In general its a
thing people think they need because they don't really understand their
application. 95% of the market doesn't care.
If latency is absolutely critical then you would be chosing Arista for
example. Even with this new hardware
On Feb 24, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:03:30AM -0500, Stefan Fouant wrote:
>>
>> No offense, but you are dead wrong on this issue. I come in contact
>> with organizations every single day who have mission critical data
>> requirements and laten
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:03:30AM -0500, Stefan Fouant wrote:
>
> No offense, but you are dead wrong on this issue. I come in contact
> with organizations every single day who have mission critical data
> requirements and latency is a VERY big requirement for many of these
> organizations. A
ans [mailto:chrisccnpsp...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 11:55 PM
> To: Stefan Fouant
> Cc: Juniper-Nsp List; Ben Dale
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
>
>
>
> Low latency is a buzz word. Who really needs it? Very few applications
> really need it. I work
CIEx2
<http://www.shortestpathfirst.net/> www.shortestpathfirst.net
GPG Key ID: 0xB4C956EC
From: Chris Evans [mailto:chrisccnpsp...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 12:15 AM
To: Stefan Fouant
Cc: juniper-nsp; Keegan Holley
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
We are deploying nexus
SP, JNCIEx2
> www.shortestpathfirst.net
> GPG Key ID: 0xB4C956EC
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
>> boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ben Dale
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 9:41 PM
>> To: Juniper-Nsp
Now what i know about VDX it does not do "single forwarding table lookup" to
decide the egress node.
Regards
Abhijeet.C
From: Stefan Fouant
To: Chris Evans ; Keegan Holley
Cc: juniper-nsp
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 7:34 AM
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
It's m
We are deploying nexus kit at this point as it meets our needs. Vpc concepts
brings fully active forwarding paths to all links just in a different way.
Being able to manage a fabric from a single control plane has its positives
but also has huge negatives. Having a single control plane for the who
gt;> but this is truly something which is going to revolutionize data centers
as
>> we know it for some time to come.
>>
>> Stefan Fouant, CISSP, JNCIEx2
>> GPG Key ID: 0xB4C956EC
>>
>> Sent from my HTC EVO.
>>
>> - Reply message -
>&
> GPG Key ID: 0xB4C956EC
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
>> boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ben Dale
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 9:41 PM
>> To: Juniper-Nsp List
>> Subj
ld take this feedback to the
>> engineering teams for their input. We already have our account team doing
>> so, but another path of contact is always beneficial.
>>
>>
>> On Feb 23, 2011 7:35 PM, "Doug Hanks" wrote:
>> > First phase of Stratus. It's awesome.
>
23, 2011 7:35 PM, "Doug Hanks" wrote:
>> > First phase of Stratus. It's awesome.
>> >
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:
>> juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Keegan Holley
>
5k isn't a fabric in the sense of comparing it to the Stratus just yet. It
does have fully forwarding traffic paths though when using vpc...
On Feb 23, 2011 8:26 PM, "Keegan Holley" wrote:
> I didn't think the 5k solution was a full fabric in that some of the
> redundant links are still blocked b
> -Original Message-
> From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
> boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ben Dale
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 9:41 PM
> To: Juniper-Nsp List
> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Qfabric
>
> My understanding of the Brocade VDX is
t; so, but another path of contact is always beneficial.
>
>
> On Feb 23, 2011 7:35 PM, "Doug Hanks" wrote:
> > First phase of Stratus. It's awesome.
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:
> jun
t this is truly something which is going to revolutionize data centers as
>> we know it for some time to come.
>>
>> Stefan Fouant, CISSP, JNCIEx2
>> GPG Key ID: 0xB4C956EC
>>
>> Sent from my HTC EVO.
>>
>> - Reply message -
>> From: "Chr
e to come.
>
> Stefan Fouant, CISSP, JNCIEx2
> GPG Key ID: 0xB4C956EC
>
> Sent from my HTC EVO.
>
> - Reply message -
> From: "Chris Evans"
> Date: Wed, Feb 23, 2011 7:28 pm
> Subject: [j-nsp] Qfabric
> To: "Keegan Holley"
> Cc:
red in the whitepapers, but
this is truly something which is going to revolutionize data centers as we know
it for some time to come.
Stefan Fouant, CISSP, JNCIEx2
GPG Key ID: 0xB4C956EC
Sent from my HTC EVO.
- Reply message -
From: "Chris Evans"
Date: Wed, Feb 23, 2011 7:2
nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
> [mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Keegan Holley
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 4:10 PM
> To: juniper-nsp
> Subject: [j-nsp] Qfabric
>
> Does anyone know what Qfabric is yet? After the video where Pradeep Sindhu
>
I didn't think the 5k solution was a full fabric in that some of the
redundant links are still blocked by spanning tree. Am I mistaken?
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Chris Evans wrote:
> Its junipers answer to nexus 5k 2k soltuion with larger scalability
> essentially.
> It has a big fabric
Keegan Holley
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 4:10 PM
> To: juniper-nsp
> Subject: [j-nsp] Qfabric
>
> Does anyone know what Qfabric is yet? After the video where Pradeep Sindhu
> spends 1:45 talking about how they are going to change the world and 0:45
> talking abo
t;Doug Hanks" wrote:
> > First phase of Stratus. It's awesome.
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:
> juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Keegan Holley
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 20
2011 7:35 PM, "Doug Hanks" wrote:
> First phase of Stratus. It's awesome.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:
juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Keegan Holley
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 4:10 P
First phase of Stratus. It's awesome.
-Original Message-
From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Keegan Holley
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 4:10 PM
To: juniper-nsp
Subject: [j-nsp] Qfabric
Does anyone know what Qf
Its junipers answer to nexus 5k 2k soltuion with larger scalability
essentially.
It has a big fabric interconnect at the core and some routing engines that
control edge switches acting like remote line cards.
On Feb 23, 2011 7:23 PM, "Keegan Holley" wrote:
> Does anyone know what Qfabric is yet? A
Does anyone know what Qfabric is yet? After the video where Pradeep Sindhu
spends 1:45 talking about how they are going to change the world and 0:45
talking about the technology I gave up trying to cut through the marketing
buffer. It sounds like their implementation or answer to trill with some
77 matches
Mail list logo
