Those ip addresses I send were only sample, its 5 page :D and not only
those addresses.
And you are looking to target 128.141.X.Y its mine and I change it because
of mailing list, maybe attackers are here.
You must check the sources not destination.
Thanks
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Jeroen
I see these type of reflection/amplification attacks pretty frequently.
Some games (mostly older games) are exploitable in this manner. The
attacker sends a short spoofed request, and the game server sends back a
huge chunk of data aimed at you. The chances of you finding the actual
source are
On (2013-01-30 21:06 -0500), David Miller wrote:
> According to Juniper, the MX uses separate memory for v4 and v6.
Where do they state this? MX is ambiguous, what matters is linecard HW.
> The numbers that I have seen for MX80 are:
I.e. trio. No. Trio uses flat RLDRAM, and any IPv6 route insta
Hi everybody,
Last two days I was under an interesting attack which comes from multiple
sources to three of my ADSL users destination.
The attack make router to ran out of CPU and we had to reload it to solve.
I ask those three users and they said we are only game players and all of
them were kids,
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Miles Fidelman wrote:
It's a matter of economies of scale. If everyone has to light their own
fiber, you haven't saved that much. If the fiber is lit, at L2, and
charged back on a cost-recovery basis, then there are tremendous
economies of scale. The examples that come to
Why do you always assume we're talking about carriers, or the evil telcos,
RBOC's, etc? I'm talking about small to medium-sized service providers
looking to expand services to compete against the Comcast's and AT&T's of
the world that can practically give away Internet because they already own
> Some in the industry are pushing the idea of reaching deeper into the
> customer's network to provide more value, to generate more revenue and
how sadly desperate. crawl up the stack.
carriers who whine about content going over the top need to get their
heads out of the somethingorother. if
> When I get a Cisco router with an integrated CSU and the telco sends a
> loop-up my device does it. No reason the same can't be done with
> ethernet, other than no demand today.
But your router isn't where the Telco's responsibility ends. It ends
back at the card with the blinky-lights on it, u
On Jan 30, 2013, at 5:11 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> [ One of a batch of replies to today's traffic; I was busy yanking a
> 750GB drive out of the grave all day. --jra ]
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Owen DeLong"
>
> [ me: ]
>>> It rings true to me, in general, and I would go that
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:22:43PM -0500, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> VZF's ONTs can't even do *ARP* right, or at least they couldn't as of
> last March. We expect them to do v6?
Perfect! We don't *need* ARP for v6!
Working in a mixed TDM and IP world, it's such a stark difference between
freely available RFCs and $900 per pop Telcordia docs.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Jason Baugher"
>
> > I can't vouch for these yet, since I haven't us
Saw this on the BBC web site thought about this discussion:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21260007
Ticketmaster dumps 'hated' Captcha verification system
The world's largest online ticket retailer is to stop requiring users to
enter hard-to-read words in order to prove they are human.
(B
- Original Message -
> From: "Jason Baugher"
> I can't vouch for these yet, since I haven't used one so far.
> http://www.calix.com/systems/p-series/calix_residential_services_gateways.html
Yeah; see my other reply a few minutes ago.
> It looks to be a Broadband Forum spec,
> http://en.
The box Jason was telling me about was the Calix 836GE, which, Leo, will make
you happy cause it's a router/wifi/bridge with what looks to me like a
Duplex-LC connector on the back.
Its companion is their E7-20, a 20-slot chassis that will do (presently)
480 home-run ports or 10k GPONs in what loo
I can't vouch for these yet, since I haven't used one so far.
http://www.calix.com/systems/p-series/calix_residential_services_gateways.html
It looks to be a Broadband Forum spec, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TR-069.
I'm not using it yet either, but find it interesting.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at
- Original Message -
> From: "Jason Baugher"
> Calix is producing an Active Ethernet ONT combined with residential
> gateway router. I believe it also supports TR-069 for remote management.
I'll check it out. Thanks. I assume that's TR-TSY-069, a Telcordia
standard?
> One other thing
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 08:27:27PM -0500, Jay
> Ashworth wrote:
> > You're assuming there, I think, that residential customers will have
> > mini-GBIC ports on their routers, which has not been my experience. :-)
>
> The
In message <8c10ded0-0980-4c76-8307-4f4f139d6...@yahoo.com>, David Barak writes
:
>
> On Jan 30, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > Firstly fix your mail client. What's this "'" garbage in text/plain?
> >
> That's yahoo web mail on an iPhone, sorry.
>
> > Deployment Update
> >
> > P
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, David Barak wrote:
On Jan 30, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
The update you sent is lovely, except I can tell you that the one (also
an Arris, running DOCSIS 3.0) which was installed in late October in my
house in Washington simply does not run v6 with the pre-inst
- Original Message -
> From: "Justin M. Streiner"
> I know Verizon is rolling out v6 in some areas of their FiOS footprint.
> The router they provided supports it, but what I got from their customer
> service people was that they ran into some sort of issue with their TV
> set-top boxes w
- Original Message -
> From: "Leo Bicknell"
> The Cable Modem is in many ways very similar to a FTTH ONT. It takes
> one media (cable, fiber), does some processing, provides some security
> and a test point to the provider, and then hands off ethernet to the
> customer. A majority of cust
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, David Barak wrote:
Comcast removed the "no IPv6" excuse? That removal somehow skipped my
house in Washington DC where they installed (last October) a router
which does not even support it (an Arrus voice gateway- the one where
you can't turn of the crummy 2.4g wireless ra
In a message written on Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:00:47PM -0500, Jay Ashworth
wrote:
> > That can be fixed in other ways. It would be easy to make a standard
> > SNMP mib or something that the service provider could poll from the
> > customer gateway, and service providers could require compatable
>
In a message written on Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 09:37:24AM -0500, Art Plato wrote:
> While I agree in principle. The reality is, from my perspective is that the
> entities providing the services will fall back to the original position that
> prompted us to build in the first place. Provide a minimal
- Original Message -
> From: "Leo Bicknell"
> In a message written on Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 08:27:27PM -0500, Jay
> Ashworth wrote:
> > You're assuming there, I think, that residential customers will have
> > mini-GBIC ports on their routers, which has not been my experience.
> > :-)
>
>
In a message written on Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 08:27:27PM -0500, Jay Ashworth
wrote:
> You're assuming there, I think, that residential customers will have
> mini-GBIC ports on their routers, which has not been my experience. :-)
They don't today because there is no demand for such a feature. My
- Original Message -
> From: "joel jaeggli"
> We're totally at the wrong end of the usability specrum if we even have
> to ask questions like this. you can tell of a cable modem is online or
> not at a glance.
*You* can tell.
That does not mean the *customer* can tell. That was the poi
Some in the industry are pushing the idea of reaching deeper into the
customer's network to provide more value, to generate more revenue and more
stickiness. Don't stop at the ONT, use something like TR-069 to manage the
customer's gateway device.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 7:50 PM, joel jaeggli wr
- Original Message -
> From: "Art Plato"
> That is actually one of the big picture scenarios we are reviewing,
> with the ISP component being the last to go if there is a fair and
> competitive market the arises for our constituents. We won't allow the
> return of the old monopoly play th
- Original Message -
> From: "Art Plato"
> My director believes that we would better serve our community by being
> the layer 1 or 2 provider rather than the service provider. While I
> agree in principle. The reality is, from my perspective is that the
> entities providing the services w
I am looking for a contact at Cogent's route management team if you have
one?
Todd
--
Regards TSG
"Ex-Cruce-Leo"
//Confidential Mailing - Please destroy this if you are not the intended
recipient.
- Original Message -
> From: "Jason Baugher"
> right-of-way, property tax incentives, etc... There's nothing wrong
> with
> the concept of a single entity building out the infrastructure for
> others
> to lease on a wholesale basis, I just don't think that entity should
> be a
> governmen
- Original Message -
> From: "Leo Bicknell"
> To put that in patch panel racks, 10,368 households * 6 fibers per
> house (3 pair) / 864 per rack = 72 racks of patch panels. Using a
> relatively generous for 2-post patch panels 20sq feet per rack it
> would be 1,440 sq feet of colo space t
- Original Message -
> From: "Jason Baugher"
> There is much talk of how many fibers can fit in a duct, can be brought
> into a colo space, etc... I haven't seen much mention of how much space the
> termination in the colo would take, such as splice trays, bulkheads, etc...
> Someone earl
- Original Message -
> From: "William Herrin"
> As long as they support open peering they can probably operate at
> layer 3 without harm. Tough to pitch a muni on spending tax revenue
> for something that's not a complete product usable directly by the
> taxpayers.
That's one problem, ye
On Jan 30, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> Firstly fix your mail client. What's this "'" garbage in text/plain?
>
That's yahoo web mail on an iPhone, sorry.
> Deployment Update
>
> Published on Tuesday, October 23, 2012
>
> IPv6 has been launched on all Arris DOCSIS 3.0 C4 CMTSes,
On 1/30/2013 5:16 PM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Christopher Rogers wrote:
>
>> Does anyone have any sort of performance numbers for the jnpr MX10 series
>> running dual stack ipv4/ipv6? I'm specifically interested in how many
>> BGP
>> prefixes it can handle in dual stack
- Original Message -
> From: "Jean-Francois Mezei"
> On 13-01-29 22:03, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>
> > The _muni_ should not run any equipment colo of any kind. The muni
> > MMR should be fiber only, and not even require so much as a generator
> > to work. It should not need to be staffed 24x
- Original Message -
> From: "Jean-Francois Mezei"
> On 13-01-29 19:39, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>
> > It rings true to me, in general, and I would go that way... but
> > there is
> > a sting in that tail: Can I reasonably expect that Road Runner will
> > in fact
> > be technically equipped a
On 1/30/13 5:01 PM, Jake Khuon wrote:
On Wed 30 Jan 2013 16:58:28 PST, John Osmon wrote:
Does anyone make an ONT with a blinky light that you can toggle on/off
remotely? It'd be great to say:
Go look at the "it works" light.
If the remote tech can control the light, the end user would have
- Original Message -
> From: "Leo Bicknell"
> I don't know of any residential telco services (pots, ISDN BRI, or
> DSL) that has an active handoff they can test to without a truck
> roll.
FiOS and anyone else who's doing triple play from an ONT. :-)
> I don't know of any cable services
- Original Message -
> From: "Leo Bicknell"
> In a message written on Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 07:11:56PM -0800, Owen
> DeLong wrote:
> > I believe they should be allowed to optionally provide L2 enabled
> > services of various
> > forms.
>
> Could you expand on why you think this is necessa
- Original Message -
> From: "Leo Bicknell"
> In a message written on Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 02:14:46PM -0800, Owen
> DeLong wrote:
> > The MMR should, IMHO be a colo facility where service providers can
> > lease racks if they choose. The colo should also be operated on a cost
> > recovery
[ One of a batch of replies to today's traffic; I was busy yanking a
750GB drive out of the grave all day. --jra ]
- Original Message -
> From: "Owen DeLong"
[ me: ]
> > It rings true to me, in general, and I would go that way... but
> > there is
> > a sting in that tail: Can I reasonabl
On Wed 30 Jan 2013 16:58:28 PST, John Osmon wrote:
Does anyone make an ONT with a blinky light that you can toggle on/off
remotely? It'd be great to say:
Go look at the "it works" light.
If the remote tech can control the light, the end user would have a
better idea that the upstream provid
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 07:53:34PM -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:
[...]
> It really isn't. You'd be surprised how many uncompensated truck rolls
> are eliminated every day by being able to talk to the ONT from the
> help desk and tell the subscriber "Well, I can manage your ONT and
> it's pretty clear t
In message <1359591223.5270.yahoomailmob...@web31809.mail.mud.yahoo.com>, David
Barak writes:
> Comcast removed the "no IPv6" excuse? That removal somehow skipped my house
> in Washington DC where they installed (last October) a router which does not
> even support it (an Arrus voice gateway-
Comcast removed the "no IPv6" excuse? That removal somehow skipped my house in
Washington DC where they installed (last October) a router which does not even
support it (an Arrus voice gateway- the one where you can't turn of the
crummy 2.4g wireless radio) and none of the folks I've spoken to
Hi
Could someone from TWC contact me off list please. Trying to diagnose
an issue where TWC customers can not reach my network.
Much appreciated
//Emil
In message <51099c0f.5040...@mtcc.com>, Michael Thomas writes:
> On 01/30/2013 01:51 PM, Cutler James R wrote:
> > On Jan 30, 2013, at 12:43 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> >
> >> As a product of having a motorola sb6121 and a netgear wndr3700 both of wh
> ich I bought at frys I have ipv6 in my house w
On 01/30/2013 01:51 PM, Cutler James R wrote:
On Jan 30, 2013, at 12:43 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
As a product of having a motorola sb6121 and a netgear wndr3700 both of which I
bought at frys I have ipv6 in my house with dhcp pd curtesy of commcast. If it
was any simpler somebody else would h
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Christopher Rogers wrote:
Does anyone have any sort of performance numbers for the jnpr MX10 series
running dual stack ipv4/ipv6? I'm specifically interested in how many BGP
prefixes it can handle in dual stacked mode. I've got an environment
currently taking 4 full ipv4 t
Sorry Owen, but I live in Illinois. Government corruption is a way of life
here.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> On Jan 30, 2013, at 6:33 AM, Jason Baugher wrote:
>
> > There is much talk of how many fibers can fit in a duct, can be brought
> > into a colo space, etc.
>The other thing I find interesting about this entire thread is the
>assumption by most that a government entity would do a good job as a
>layer-1 or -2 provider and would be more efficient than a private company.
>Governments, including municipalities, are notorious for corruption, fraud,
>waste -
On Jan 30, 2013, at 1:47 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> On Jan 30, 2013, at 6:24 AM, William Herrin wrote:
>>> As long as they support open peering they can probably operate at
>>> layer 3 without harm. Tough to pitch a muni on spending tax r
On Jan 30, 2013, at 12:43 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> As a product of having a motorola sb6121 and a netgear wndr3700 both of which
> I bought at frys I have ipv6 in my house with dhcp pd curtesy of commcast. If
> it was any simpler somebody else would have had to install it.
>
Except that Appl
On 1/30/13 6:33 AM, Jason Baugher wrote:
> The other thing I find interesting about this entire thread is the
> assumption by most that a government entity would ...
could we agree that contract management is a problem inherent and not
abandon an engineering discussion, which includes economics, t
On Jan 30, 2013, at 1:36 PM, Jean-Francois Mezei
wrote:
> On 13-01-30 15:49, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
>> 1. They are not allowed to sell L3+ services.
>> 2. They are not allowed to own any portion of any L3+ service provider.
>> 3. They must sell their L1/L2 services to any L3+ service provi
Does anyone have any sort of performance numbers for the jnpr MX10 series
running dual stack ipv4/ipv6? I'm specifically interested in how many BGP
prefixes it can handle in dual stacked mode. I've got an environment
currently taking 4 full ipv4 tables and a smattering of prefixes coming
from a p
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2013, at 6:24 AM, William Herrin wrote:
>> As long as they support open peering they can probably operate at
>> layer 3 without harm. Tough to pitch a muni on spending tax revenue
>> for something that's not a complete product usabl
On 13-01-30 15:49, Owen DeLong wrote:
> 1.They are not allowed to sell L3+ services.
> 2.They are not allowed to own any portion of any L3+ service provider.
> 3.They must sell their L1/L2 services to any L3+ service provider on
> equal terms.
This is the problem we have in Can
On Jan 30, 2013, at 6:24 AM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Jean-Francois Mezei"
>>
>>> It is in fact important for a government (municipal, state/privince or
>>> federal) to stay at a last mile layer 2 s
The smarter way to do this is to assign a /64 to each host and route
to it instead of exporting any L2 issues beyond the TOR switch.
In general, WLANs don't scale to large numbers of clients particularly
well for a variety of reasons that have little to do with ND. More
APs with smaller range are
On Jan 30, 2013, at 7:29 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 08:33:35AM -0600, Jason Baugher
> wrote:
>> There is much talk of how many fibers can fit in a duct, can be brought
>> into a colo space, etc... I haven't seen much mention of how much space the
>> t
Although not technically private, this is where we see ourselves getting to if
a good competitive environment fosters from the construction of the
infrastructure. Again, we can't abandon our citizens to a one provider
monopoly, but if a true competitive environment arose we would be quite conten
On Jan 30, 2013, at 6:33 AM, Jason Baugher wrote:
> There is much talk of how many fibers can fit in a duct, can be brought
> into a colo space, etc... I haven't seen much mention of how much space the
> termination in the colo would take, such as splice trays, bulkheads, etc...
> Someone earlie
Scott,
Thanks for the warning. I am planning on having those dialogues with any
potential vendors, as well as ask them for active references.
Art.
- Original Message -
From: "Scott Helms"
To: "Art Plato"
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 1:54:06 PM
Subject: Re: Will
Art,
In that case its even harder. Before you even consider doing open
access talk to your FTTx vendor and find out how many they have done
using the same architecture you're planning on deploying. Open access
in an active Ethernet install is actually fairly straight forward but
on a PON system
The Australian NBN plan evolved because, when the Australian government put
out the original RFP, the incumbent telcos wanted anti-competitive
commitments in exchange for their build-out efforts (sound familiar here in
the USA?). The Australian government deemed the original telco RFP replies
as "n
I guess I should have clarified. We are looking at an FTTP overbuild.
Eventually eliminating the HFC. FTTP makes more sense long term. We are also
the local electric utility.
- Original Message -
From: "Scott Helms"
To: "Art Plato"
Cc: "Peter Kristolaitis" , nanog@nanog.org
Sent:
That is actually one of the big picture scenarios we are reviewing, with the
ISP component being the last to go if there is a fair and competitive market
the arises for our constituents. We won't allow the return of the old monopoly
play that existed back then. This is too vital for the growth o
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Doug Barton wrote:
On 1/28/2013 7:27 AM, Eugeniu Patrascu wrote:
- configure IPv6 firewall rules (mostly a mirror of the IPv4 rulesets)
Hopefully that did not included filtering ICMPv6? :)
The level of IPv6 support in firewalls has been all over the place, even
from v
Having worked with lots of other municipalities who do the same thing, I
think you're 100% right. The L1/L2 solutions are nice to think of, but I
don't think in the end it actually works in the real world.
The only time a municipality operating in the L1 space has worked well from
my experience is
There isn't any reason that you couldn't offer ALL of those services.
Spin off the layer 1 & 2 services as a separate entity as far as finance
& legal is concerned, then treat the muni ISP as just another customer
of that entity, with the same pricing and service that's offered to
everyone el
On 11/28/12 4:17 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:04 AM, Tony Hain wrote:
Getting the cpe vendors to ship in quantity requires the ISP engineering organizations to
say in unison "we are deploying IPv6 and will only recommend products that pass
testing".
Do you see any evidenc
I am the administrator of a Municipally held ISP that has been providing
services to our constituents for 15 years in a competitive environment with
Charter. We aren't here to eliminate them, only to offer an alternative. When
the Internet craze began back in the late 1990's they made it clear t
Ah, I said nothing about involving $BigTelcoCableCo. There are smaller
companies that will do these projects, as long as they make business sense.
Muni's can do things to make it more attractive, such as not charging for
right-of-way, property tax incentives, etc... There's nothing wrong with
the c
On 1/30/13 8:05 AM, Jason Baugher wrote:
Oh, so all the fault belongs to the financial institutions, and there is no
corruption within the government agencies themselves. Right.
More like it's turtles all the way down.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 9:58 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
On 1/30/13 6:33 AM
Oh, so all the fault belongs to the financial institutions, and there is no
corruption within the government agencies themselves. Right.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 9:58 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> On 1/30/13 6:33 AM, Jason Baugher wrote:
>
>> There is much talk of how many fibers can fit in a duct,
On 1/30/13 6:33 AM, Jason Baugher wrote:
There is much talk of how many fibers can fit in a duct, can be brought
into a colo space, etc... I haven't seen much mention of how much space the
termination in the colo would take, such as splice trays, bulkheads, etc...
Someone earlier mentioned being
On 1/30/13 6:39 AM, Harald Koch wrote:
On 30 January 2013 02:39, Jussi Peltola wrote:
High density virtual machine setups can have 100 VMs per host. Each VM
has at least a link-local address and a routable address. This is 200
groups per port, 9600 per 48 port switch.
um - let's compare apples
In a message written on Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 08:33:35AM -0600, Jason Baugher
wrote:
> There is much talk of how many fibers can fit in a duct, can be brought
> into a colo space, etc... I haven't seen much mention of how much space the
> termination in the colo would take, such as splice trays, bu
Mick O'Rourke wrote:
> In the potentially interestingly and perhaps not so positive - one of the
> common EDNS tests via Google pub DNS fails.
Google Public DNS's upstream behaviour is different depending on
whether its client demonstrate knowledge of DNSSEC:
Large EDNS buffer size with client
On 30 January 2013 02:39, Jussi Peltola wrote:
> High density virtual machine setups can have 100 VMs per host. Each VM
> has at least a link-local address and a routable address. This is 200
> groups per port, 9600 per 48 port switch.
um - let's compare apples to apples here - 100 VMs per host,
There is much talk of how many fibers can fit in a duct, can be brought
into a colo space, etc... I haven't seen much mention of how much space the
termination in the colo would take, such as splice trays, bulkheads, etc...
Someone earlier mentioned being able to have millions of fibers coming
thro
In the potentially interestingly and perhaps not so positive - one of the
common EDNS tests via Google pub DNS fails.
https://www.dns-oarc.net/oarc/services/replysizetest
;; ANSWER SECTION:
rs.dns-oarc.net. 58 IN CNAME rst.x479.rs.dns-oarc.net.
rst.x479.rs.dns-oarc.net. 57 IN CNAME rst.x488.x479.
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Jean-Francois Mezei"
>
>> It is in fact important for a government (municipal, state/privince or
>> federal) to stay at a last mile layer 2 service with no retail
>> offering. Wholesale only.
>>
>> Not o
This is very positive - I hope more recursive resolvers start to adopt
DNSSEC as well.
Jason
On 1/29/13 3:05 AM, "Mansoor Nathani" wrote:
>I guess its only a matter of time before they start validating all
>requests. And more importantly returning SERVFAIL for invalid hosts.
>
>Mansoor
>
>On
Greetings:
I work for a REN and we are looking for advice on a route recorder. We
have been working with Packet Design and I absolutely love their product
RouteExplorer (well, everything except the price tag). I was wondering if
anyone out there in NANOG land had any suggestions or recommendatio
Cisco also now has the Nexus 6001 but I don't know of its ability to do
BGP or support things like Netflow. 48x10GE+4x40GE in 1RU. Also likely
doesn't have huge packet buffers. From: Piotr
Sent: 1/30/2013 5:32
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC
Someone use this s
W dniu 2013-01-30 12:59, Ingo Flaschberger pisze:
Am 30.01.2013 11:30, schrieb Piotr:
2.
Hp 5900 af 48xg
large buffer options - configurable buffers
gpl 30k$
small: Memory and processor
512 MB flash, 2 GB SDRAM; packet buffer size: 9 MB
http://h17007.www1.hp.com/us/en/products/switches/HP
On Wed, 2013-01-30 at 10:33 +, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> On 30/01/2013 10:24, Karl Auer wrote:
> > Hm. If you have 100 VMs per host and 48 hosts on a switch, methinks you
> > should probably invest in the finest switches money can buy, and they
> > will have no problem tracking that state.
>
> Wh
On 30/01/2013 10:24, Karl Auer wrote:
> Hm. If you have 100 VMs per host and 48 hosts on a switch, methinks you
> should probably invest in the finest switches money can buy, and they
> will have no problem tracking that state.
What make+model switches would these be, did you say?
Nick
Someone use this switches ?
1.
Alacatel lucent omniswitch OS6900-X40
Deep packet buffers for simultaneous
high-burst absorption in all ports
gpl 28k$
2.
Hp 5900 af 48xg
large buffer options - configurable buffers
gpl 30k$
What is, exactly, buffer size ? I can't find in documentation
best,
On Wed, 2013-01-30 at 09:39 +0200, Jussi Peltola wrote:
> High density virtual machine setups can have 100 VMs per host.
OK, I see where you are coming from now.
Hm. If you have 100 VMs per host and 48 hosts on a switch, methinks you
should probably invest in the finest switches money can buy, an
95 matches
Mail list logo
