On Fri, 15 May 2009 22:20:28 EDT, David Storandt said:
> - Vyatta was proposed as an alternative system, probably best
> architected out of the mainstream traffic flows (no hardware
> forwarding), say a BGP route reflector or GBE edge router, similar
> argument to a 7200/G[1|2]. I can't say I'm fa
Hi community,
I am planning to implement MPLS with C3750ME. As i know C3750ME is full support
MPLS viaES port, is it?
the IOS is c3750me-i5k91-mz.122-40.SE.bin. The application will be AToM(L2 VPN).
Prior to configure MPLS or OSPF, i need to make the link up first. My problem
is IP point-to-p
ASR is embedded linux solution with Quantum Processor architect if I
remember correctly.
So it uses IOS-XE, which is a little bit different from standard IOS.
If you have some room for budget, you can check Foundry MLX/XMR series
router.
It is more geared toward Ethernet Service Router.
But if y
New architectures might be helpful to achieve such throughput e.g.
Myricom pci-e Gen2 10GE cards on new Intel Nehalem based servers.
-Azher
Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:25:12PM -0400,
> valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>> Did you check PCI bus bandwidth? T
In a message written on Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:25:12PM -0400,
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> Did you check PCI bus bandwidth? That's probably going to be the biggest
> constraint on "a few 10GBE interfaces" if they all get going full blast.
> Remember that each packet is going to burn bandwidt
So I figure a summary is an order, with a whole array of choices
pitched so far...
- Sup720-3BXL works for light-duty premium ISP services, decent CPU
for BGP and an Ethernet hardware throughput monster. Decent enough for
our deployment scenario at least. No obvious solution for the
FlexWAN/OC3 bu
This 100-line document contains 62% of what you need to know to avoid
annoying 10,000 people in your email to the NANOG list. It also contains
pointers to another 23%. Please take 5 minutes to read it before
you post [again].
General Information
===
About NANOG:http://
Yeah, as long as you're using the NSE-150 and are using features supported by
the PXF such that it's not punting to the RP, the performance is really good.
--am
Brian Feeny wrote:
I have used the 7304 in the past and was happy with it. In fact I still
have a 6-port DS3 module for a 7304 whi
> We need true full routes and more CPU horsepower for crunching BGP
> (+12 smaller peers + ISIS). OC3 interfaces are going to be mandatory,
> one each at two locations. Oh yeah, we're still a larger startup
> without endless pockets. Power, rack space, and SmartNet are not
> concerns at any locati
Thanks everyone for the answers...
It came down to a point where, just sticking a male-to-male null modem
in between made this work at 9600 =)
I guess sometimes solutions are way easier than we may think, heh.
Mehmet
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Dylan Ebner wrote:
> We use Cyclades (avoce
You may also take a look at the Cisco ASR1000 line... Supposedly a
middle step between 7200 and 7600 router sizing..
> -Original Message-
> From: Arie Vayner [mailto:arievay...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 1:34 PM
> To: David Storandt
> Cc: NANOG list
> Subject: Re: NPE-G2 v
I would not like to punt another vendor's equipment but have you looked
at the MX-480 or MX-960. You would not have to worry about CPU
limitations and it is an Internet core box capable of handling all the
protocols.
Kesva
-Original Message-
From: nanog-requ...@nanog.org [mailto:nanog-re
David,
My 1st advice would be to look also at the other features/capabilities you
require, and not just at "feeds and speeds".
Some examples for functionality could be:
- QOS
- NetFlow
- DDoS resistance
In general the 6500 and the 12000 are hardware based platforms, with the
12000 being more dis
I have used the 7304 in the past and was happy with it. In fact I
still have a 6-port DS3 module for a 7304 which I need to find a home
for if anyone has the need.
The 7304 originally had its own specific modules that went into it.
But they also sell carrier card for it so you can use s
I am yet another that uses and loves Cyclades in my data center. The new ACS
6000 series is what I have now, which is quite nice due to the software pin
switching they have on that unit, this means no more special cisco dongles.
Also part of the reason for my use of the ACS is for the integration o
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net
For historical data, please see http://thyme.apnic.net.
If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith .
Routing
We use Cyclades (avocent) devices in our data center. They have worked
great for us. Very reliable. Modem dial-in gives us great remote
capabilities if we have a major outage. We had troubles initially
getting them to work because the cable adapters were never pinned
correctly for Cisco. We ended u
On May 14, 2009, at 10:07 PM, Mans Nilsson wrote:
Subject: Re: you're not interesting, was Re: another brick in the
wall[ed garden] Date: Fri, May 15, 2009 at 09:58:32AM +1000 Quoting
Mark Andrews (mark_andr...@isc.org):
And what's the next protocol that is going to be stomped on?
I would love to use the RSP720-3CXL, but cost and the PA OC3 are the
difficulties.
If the RSP720s will run in a 6500 chassis, great! We wouldn't have to
purchase new chassis and the increased downtime for the swap-out.
RSP720 don't support the older bus-only FlexWAN either with the OC3 PA
we're u
Cisco 7304 may not adequate for service provider.
It's CPU/IO-controller is tied together, and doesn't provide much of
benefit.
Cisco 7200/7300 is enterprise solution pretty much, and doesn't support
distributed CEF.
If you are considering SUP720-3BXL, why not considering RSP720-3CXL ?
Alex
Aa
We ran into a similar quandary and have about the same amount of traffic as your
network. When purchasing gear a year ago we decided against 7200's with an
NPE-G2 as insufficient for the load. Have you looked at the 7304?
The Cisco 7304 with an NSE-150 processing engine on it offloads a lot of
We're running several six 65xx Sup720-3BXL with 3 full transit views and
some 40-odd peers. We use two NPE-G1s for reflectors and some policy
manipulation. Also running MPLS in the core to allow for traffic
engineering and EoMPLS between certain services located in different
locations.
We're pu
We've never pushed a NPE-G2 to 800Mb/s before but I would think they
would topple over... hopefully someone on here could confirm my
statement?
Moving the BGP to the 12008's would be my choice with PRP-2 processors
if the budget fits we're faced with a similar upgrade next year
possibly moving
dstora...@teljet.com (David Storandt) wrote:
> Our engineering team has settled on three $20k/node options:
> - Sup720-3BXLs with PS and fan upgrades
Still quite slow CPU wise. RSP's are supposed to be a lot faster
and actually usable.
> - Sup2s as switches + ISIS + statics and no BGP, push BGP
We're stuck in an engineering pickle, so some experience from this
crew would be useful in tie-breaking...
We operate a business-grade FTTx ISP with ~75 customers and 800Mbps of
Internet traffic, currently using 6509/Sup2s for core routing and port
aggregation. The MSFC2s are under stress from 3x
At least if facebook is going to reach the list, please
RSVP here:
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/event.php?eid=86529812115&ref=ts
--
Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from ja...@puck.nether.net
clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
Hi Nanog,
I invited you to join Facebook a while back and wanted to remind you that once
you join, we'll be able to connect online, share photos, organize groups and
events, and more.
Thanks,
Martin
To sign up for Facebook, follow the link below:
http://www.facebook.com/p.php?i=681923447&k=RVM
Have you heard of or tried Cyberswitching for remote power management? The
DualCom series provide remote SNMP and a WebUI control of all the outlets and
you can also query them for how many amps each outlet is pulling. Their
DualCom series does support 120-240 VAC as well as supporting IEC C13
Subject: Re: you're not interesting, was Re: another brick in the wall[ed
garden] Date: Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:10:26AM +0100 Quoting John R. Levine
(jo...@iecc.com):
>>> And what's the next protocol that is going to be stomped on?
>>
>> Anything except http; at which point everything will mo
On May 15, 2009, at 4:45 AM, Elmar K. Bins wrote:
I am concerned about remote power control, though. If you know your
datacenter, you can get all kinds of remote-controlled power strips.
With us, we don't always know beforehand what kind of power the DCs
will have, and I'd like the exact same eq
It is working fine now. Seems like a temporary failure from Google .. for 2
consecutive days? errmm!
I can see many tweets to verify that it was indeed not working for many
people too.
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Joel Esler wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Nitin Sharma wrote:
>
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Nitin Sharma wrote:
> I can reach Google News through icmp traceroutes, but the HTTP response
> says
> "Server Error".Anyone seeing this too?
>
All fine here.
--
joel esler | Sourcefire | gtalk: jes...@sourcefire.com | 302-223-5974 |
http://twitter.com/joeles
I can reach Google News through icmp traceroutes, but the HTTP response says
"Server Error".Anyone seeing this too?
Skywing writes:
> You are brave indeed to trust your packets over the air without a VPN or
> tunnel of some sort.
TSIG is like IPSEC's AH but for DNS. Being untrusting is how I
managed to find out about these shenanigans in the first place. I
don't care particularly about hiding the payload
This report has been generated at Fri May 15 21:17:19 2009 AEST.
The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router
and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table.
Check http://www.cidr-report.org for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
Date
BGP Update Report
Interval: 13-Apr-09 -to- 14-May-09 (32 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS3130 136562 2.3% 529.3 -- RGNET-3130 RGnet/PSGnet
2 - AS845269624 1.2%
Anything traversing the edge. They are all revenue targets.
Best,
Martin
On 5/14/09, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> In message <20090514223605.88104.qm...@simone.iecc.com>, John Levine writes:
>> >Dear Sprint EVDO people,
>> >
>> >Your man-in-the-middle hijacking of UDP/53 DNS queries against
>> >na
And what's the next protocol that is going to be stomped on?
Anything except http; at which point everything will move to http, and
the firewalls are again useless.
Um, if you think that http on consumer networks is transparent, I have
some really bad news for you.
Regards,
John Lev
jvar...@crypticstudios.com (Jake Vargas) wrote:
> > I stumbled across these, which look like decent alternatives to getting
> > a 2511 from eBay: http://www.perle.com/products/Terminal-Server.shtml
> >
> > The 48-port 1U terminal server with redundant power looks particularily
> > nice.
> >
> >
> I stumbled across these, which look like decent alternatives to getting
> a 2511 from eBay: http://www.perle.com/products/Terminal-Server.shtml
>
> The 48-port 1U terminal server with redundant power looks particularily
> nice.
>
> I've no experience with Perle, though. Anyone else?
>
I use
Mehmet Akcin writes:
> It's always cool to have console access to routers/switches and
> nowadays they are going from RS-232 to RJ-45 as a standart. I have got
> Avocent DSR 2035 which is a KVM+Serial console (all in one).. but
> while I was able to have it work against servers via KVM or/and Ser
41 matches
Mail list logo
